in trying to keep the hate flowing into “more and better, or, if not better, at least more” updates, i have admit that i flipped out about Donald Trump regarding the first article below and went into this long-winded and incredibly-profane rant about Donald Trump. the sad part is, i used some very colorful terms of reference for him, but i’ve kind of lost track of them now that i have calmed down, and that’s an absolute shame.
anyway, we’re raging against some common targets of hate here today: Donald Trump and Michael Bloomberg. to keep the topics 100% redundant, i’ve mixed in an update about an Amish story we covered a few weeks back. enjoy!
Donald Trump just wants us all to keep him in mind for the “most punchable face in America” title, even if he knows, deep down, that Sean Penn has him beaten
Donald Trump mentions his reality television show to complain about being called a reality television personality
let me preface this remark by saying that, with all due respect, the Republican attempts to find a presidential candidate have been something along the lines of a fiasco, and this just reminds me of how much i wish we had NOTHING to do or say about the 2012 election until, you know, 2012. but, hey, once again we find Donald Trump trying to make himself an extra couple of dollars by getting involved in this GOP mess once again. a couple of people, at least, seem to understand that this is ridiculous:
“At least two Republican presidential hopefuls are declining to participate in a debate moderated by real estate mogul Donald Trump. Texas Rep. Ron Paul and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman will both skip the debate, citing concerns about the seriousness of the event.”
now, i think this is maybe a little insulting, but ultimately deserved, as, you know, Donald Trump is a goddamn reality television host and danced around the idea of running for president, throwing out outrageous and/or self-promoting remarks before bowing out prior to having to file financial documents that might prove what a liar he is about his net worth. BUT I DIGRESS. the point is that “concerns about the seriousness of the event” seem legitimate. i’ll let Ron Paul handle this:
“The selection of a reality television personality to host a presidential debate that voters nationwide will be watching is beneath the office of the Presidency and flies in the face of that office’s history and dignity,” Jesse Benton, Ron Paul’s national campaign chairman, said in a statement. He added, “Mr. Trump’s participation as moderator will distract from questions and answers concerning important issues such as the national economy, crushing federal government debt, the role of the federal government, foreign policy, and the like. To be sure, Mr. Trump’s participation will contribute to an unwanted circus-like atmosphere … Mr. Trump’s selection is also wildly inappropriate because of his record of toying with the serious decision of whether to compete for our nation’s highest office, a decision he appeared to make frivolously,” Benton said.
so there isn’t much more to say on THAT point; i’m pretty sure Paul hit all the buttons, with the possible of exception of “Trump’s rank hypocrisy on matters of international trade,” “Trump consistently lying about his net worth, business acumen and success at anything other than inheriting money from his father” and the whole deal with Trump’s hair.
now, there’s basically two ways Trump could have taken this type of response: a) be childish about it, or b) take this opportunity to stress how serious Trump takes his role in this debate, how unfortunate it is that Paul and/or Huntsman won’t be there, and, you know, be the bigger man about it. so, of course, Trump went with choice A.
“As I said in the past and will reiterate again, Ron Paul has a zero chance of winning either the nomination or the Presidency,” Trump said in a statement to CNN. “My poll numbers were substantially higher than any of his poll numbers, at any time, and when I decided not to run, due to the equal time provisions concerning my hit show The Apprentice, I was leading the Republican field.””
so let’s hit the main problems here:
01. the fact that Trump says Paul, who i’m not a great fan of, but who is currently polling second or third (depending on the poll) has “a zero chance of winning.” now, i know i have implied that Trump is not the business whiz he claims, but if you equate “consistently drawing around 20% support” with “0% chance of winning,” it might explain some things about Trump.
02. it did not take me long to find examples of Trump, who DID once poll well in the Republican field, having poll numbers equal to or worse than Paul’s “at any time.” for example, here is Donald Trump falling to a fifth-place tie at 8% with… Ron Paul.
03. has there been any evidence that Donald Trump dropped out of the race “due to the equal time provisions?” because i recall his statements at the time being more along the lines of “business is my greatest passion, and I am not ready to leave the private sector.” now, true, the two ARE related –Trump is in the business of making money by being Donald Trump– but it sounds like he wants to claim he HAD to not run, as opposed to recognizing at the time that he could not run successfully.
04. it’s furthermore clearly a lie that he was leading the Republican field when he decided not to run. see also: that fifth-place tie with Paul thing.
05. Trump makes sure to mention “concerning my hit show The Apprentice” despite the fact that this is a major argument of Paul’s as to why Trump is not serious. i officially award this point to Paul.
of course, Trump was not finished:
“Few people take Ron Paul seriously and many of his views and presentation make him a clown-like candidate,” Trump said. “I am glad he and Jon Huntsman, who has inconsequential poll numbers or a chance of winning, will not be attending the debate and wasting the time of the viewers who are trying very hard to make a very important decision.”
again, “few people” as in “as many as were supporting Trump when Trump fled the race.” but the real question is going to be who else participates in this debate. see, if Bachmann or Santorum are there, there’s no way you can claim to only have people with consequential poll numbers here, as Bachmann’s have dropped and Santorum polls on par with Romney… and neither, if you ask me, have a chance of winning. and yet the man polling SECOND in Iowa won’t be there for Trump’s debate in Iowa because he has inconsequential poll numbers?
Trump should probably also not call other people “clown-like.” pot, kettle, all that. let’s just close with the remarks from Huntsman’s campaign:
“We have declined to participate in the ‘Presidential Apprentice’ Debate with The Donald,” Huntsman spokesman Tim Miller said in a statement. “The Republican Party deserves a serious discussion of the issues so voters can choose a leader they trust to defeat President Obama and turn our economy around.”
well, at least they’re recognizing the authority of the court by removing their hats. that’s something
FBI arrests 7 Amish men on beard-destruction charges
let me just take a brief interlude here to talk about a topic i touched on somewhat recently: a rogue band of Amish gentleman who were apparently stealing beards from rival Amish for purposes of general humiliation. it would be remiss of me, however, to not point out a colleague’s response to this story: “are none of these gentlemen aware that beards grow back?” anyway, it seemed like there was no easy way to make this story more ridiculous, but here we go:
“FBI agents on Wednesday raided an Ohio compound and arrested seven Amish men on hate charges in connection with haircutting attacks on other members of the usually isolated Christian religion.”
yes, that’s right: hate charges. now, i don’t want to make light of these serious anti-beard charges, but doesn’t it seem a little weird that Amish-on-Amish crime qualifies as a hate crime?
“The early morning arrests opened a window in the world of the Amish, who are known for shunning modern conveniences, using horses and buggies rather than cars, and preferring to deal with their problems within their traditional and ordered communities, without going to outside civil authorities. …All are charged with conspiring to carry out a series of assaults over the last few months on Amish men and women, cutting off their beards and head hair with scissors and battery-powered clippers. The acts were especially heinous to the Amish who believe there is a biblical injunction to shaving when men marry.”
although let me remind the audience that these charges had the Amish beard-thieves having non-Amish people drive them around, as well as the aforementioned use of battery-powered clippers… so i am not sure how much longer we can claim the Amish “shun modern conveniences” with a straight face. also, there’s no distinction in the religion between “voluntarily shaving” and “having your beard stolen by force?” this seems unnecessarily strict. if a married Amish man’s house catches fire and his beard is burned off, is that also “especially heinous?”
“If convicted, the suspects face up to life in prison, the government said.”
…for stealing beards. sorry, for the HATE CRIME of stealing beards. nope, still seems weird.
anyway, the motivation for this attack seems to have been the excommunication of Mullet’s group, described as “a schismatic group with some of the attributes of a cult,” and the rest of the Amish, whose beards the Mullet team seeks to seize. there do seem to be some clear ways in which Mullet’s group qualifies as a cult:
“Mullet, as head of the splinter group, excommunicated those who left… Samuel Mullet Sr. has forced extreme punishments and physical injury to those in the community who defy him, including forcing members to sleep for days at a time in a chicken coop… Mullet “has been ‘counseling’ the married women in the Bergholz clan and taking them into his home so that he may cleanse them of the devil with acts of sexual intimacy.”
and let’s be honest: it’s not really a cult unless the leader has come up with some elaborate and/or illogical explanation that requires him to sex up all your wives and/or daughters. “uh… see, your daughters are acting wild because of the devil… so i better fuck them until that’s resolved.”
“Mullet said that he didn’t order the haircutting but didn’t stop his sons and others from carrying it out. He said the goal of the haircutting was to send a message to local Amish that they should be ashamed of themselves for the way they were treating Mullet and his community, according to the court papers.”
you know… something tells me that this defense of “i didn’t tell them to do it, but i didn’t stop them from doing it, as i approve of the message it sends” is going to result in something less than a total acquittal.
you just know Bloomberg is thinking, “okay, you may have a very fancy uniform, but the one i had made for myself as commander-in-chief of New York City is MUCH fancier”
Mayor Bloomberg continues to generally be a self-important asshole
so let’s keep the theme of “seriously hating on political figures” going for the week. i don’t think it’s any secret i have a low opinion of Mayor Bloomberg, largely because of his incredibly deceitful ways with MAIG, as well as the whole “rules limiting terms should only apply to mayors who are not Bloomberg” thing. but it helps me greatly when he makes self-promoting remarks like these:
“Trying to offer some idea of the scope of New York’s workforce, Bloomberg got a bit carried away with himself. “I have my own army in the NYPD, which is the seventh largest army in the world,” he said.”
so let’s start with this. it’s not the seventh-largest army in the world, Bloomberg, it’s your police force. while i understand (and often complain about) the fact that many police have militarized themselves to the point of THINKING they’re in the military… they’re not. would Bloomberg seriously compare the NYPD to what appears to be the seventh-largest army in the world, Turkey? i know Americans have a high opinion of themselves, but my money’s on the slightly more heavily-equipped 620000 members of the Turkish Armed Forces.
also, this is a complete lie. if the NYPD has roughly 35000 officers, 4500 auxiliary officers and 5100 school safety agents, then their force of 44600 is outnumbered by something like 70 countries if you ONLY count active-duty personnel (remember again: seventh-place Turkey has 620000 ACTIVE-DUTY members of their armed forces). so there’s also that. and since the lie is less about what the NYPD can do and more about self-praise… well, i think this says something about Bloomberg.
“I have my own state department, to Foggy Bottom’s annoyance.”
yeah, i cannot imagine why the federal government would be annoyed with the fact that the mayor of a city claims to have “his own state department.” surely most mayors would be within their rights to interfere in the realm of international affairs? of course, Bloomberg neither elaborates or has a track record of being honest thus far, so maybe there’s really no reason for them to be annoyed.
“We have the UN in New York, so we have entree into the diplomatic world that Washington does not have.”
so either Bloomberg thinks he has access to diplomacy that the federal government does not have which, as a member of the UN security council, they clearly do, or he thinks he has access to diplomacy that the CITY of Washington, DC doesn’t have … which makes me have to remind him where all those embassies and diplomats can be found. either way, more nonsense!
my major question at this point is if all these New Yorkers are aware they elected a man who’s mentally handicapped to the mayoral office.
“Bloomberg also got in a sharp dig at Albany, one of his least favorite places on the planet. Speaking of the difficulty he’s had getting higher-mileage standards for taxicabs, the mayor said turning to Albany for help wasn’t much of an option. “Our state is so in the pocket of some of the entrenched interests. They won’t force anybody to help us in this energy dependence that we have.””
so i’m trying to remember how Bloomberg made all that money he has… and then i remembered that it was things like “investment banking” and “financial news and information services media company.” surely he has no connection to entrenched interests! this is where i would laugh if the audacity of this remark wasn’t so goddamn depressing.
next week (or whenever the update comes out, whatever), we’ll think about doing something a little less angry… although i have to admit that, since it’s the holiday season, that’s unlikely. but we’ll see!