Biden 2024.

[LeeG]

you mean like ohil bolger was back when he posted to the forum

yes your right he could be a total crackpot down
my point is he's not just an anonymous troll to dismiss like we have dozens of russbots
he's for real in his origination, he's not a creation solely here to detail conversation

Folks sure do like their Russbot stories. 74 million voted for TFG. They all can’t be misinformed and deluded like many of the the Jan6 rioters claim to be. Like my Republican drinking buddies back in Annapolis said. “Maybe he’ll shake things up”. Isn’t that the problem with professional politicians? They want to shake things up using the system but if you really want to shake things up you just drive your truck right into a crowd. Or elect a crook who can’t tell the truth on any day ending in y. I mean look at Scott Pruitt, that’s the guy for shaking up the EPA!

[Dunphy Snipe]

Lee, I do not admit there are not facts and proof supporting charges of voter fraud. There's plenty of it, and it will come out. The fact is "truth" is suppressed and distorted at every level, even in some Republican circles. Instead of facts and proofs we were fed the Russian collision story in 2016 and Hunters lap top is Russian disinformation in 2020. When you can't talk about election fraud, or hunter Biden's (and Joe's) foreign contacts and sources of income, or the real dangers of COVID vaccinations, on twitter or Face book without being banned as a kook, the "facts" you say you are looking for, are a little hard to come by. You won't find them on MSMBC I can assure you.

We had sort of a half hearted election investigation in WI. Maybe copies of the interim report are available on line. At a minimum, it showed election laws were circumvented and things happened in the 2020 election that never happened in WI before. The investigation, for whatever reason, was never allowed to be completed, and I believed it's official status is, "paused". I heard State Supreme Court Justice Gableman, the chairman of the investigation committee, speak, and I can assure you he believes there was extensive election fraud in WI. The truth about election fraud, however, won't be allowed to come out in the main stream media until after the mid terms and the committee chairmanships are flipped in congress. People like Senator Ron Johnson will get to the bottom of it, but we'll have to wait. That's just where we are in our country.

Jim

[David G]

admittedly i've fouled a few off. . .

You don't promulgate or repeat lies, misdirection, idiocy, and nonsense.

Except for the 95% of your posts that do so strictly in fun.

[LeeG]

He’s all yours boys. Remember the truth will come out. There’s plenty of it and it’s being suppressed. Lots of suppressed truth Republican investigators and election officials couldn’t find. That’s how you know it’s suppressed. So many were in on it. My future historians told me just as they told Rumsfled, unknown unknowns, unknown unknowns, follow the clues, follow the clues. Do your own research.

[David G]

[Dunphy Snipe]

Lee, you still haven't told me what you thought of the Russian collusion story in 2016 or the Hunter Biden lap top is Russian disinformation narrative in 2020. I think it should matter to a seeker of truth like yourself.

The point I'm trying to make is that the sources you listen to are sometimes wrong, and therefore I think it's a mistake to set yourself as being able to devine what is true and what isn't. I'm just staying the truth about the 2020 election is coming out. What's wrong with that? You have your "facts" and "proofs" that say everything about the election was on the up and up. I'm okay with you believing that. Probably everyone you know believes that. I'm just saying lots of people, like half the country, see things differently. I believe in our constitution and its ability to self correct. I'm willing to wait for the system to play out. Why argue about it or belittle others for their point of view? We'll see soon enough who was right and who wasn't.

Jim

[skuthorp]

Your politics is surely broken when neither party seem to have any succession planning and you may, again, end up with two tired old men (I can say that, I'm older), one of them obviously corrupt as the only likely candidates so far for the second time around. And then there is the subject of civic education, sadly lacking here too but at least there is some, and our young people seem to be about educating themselves on the subject (women more than men). I do hope that is mirrored in the US.

[Dunphy Snipe]

It looks like maybe we are in a little pause here--which is great, because I may have already said everything I wanted to say about the subjects we have been discussing.

As mentioned, I have posted a few times here and there when I thought I had something to contribute, and I do have two wooden sailboats. The reality is I was a bit intimidated by the collective boat wisdom on display here to start a "build thread" of my own. I have virtually no skills or experience in boat building, or in in my case, wooden boat repairs. My boats though are interesting I think. They are wooden plank built snipes manufactured in Oshkosh in the late 1930's. I discovered John Rose (a member here I think) on the internet, and we developed a correspondence spanning many years. With John's encouragement, I've been in the process (for years) of restoring one of my snipes to be a replica of John Crosby's famous racing snipe, "Also". Crosby, as many of you probably know, was the original designer and founder of the Snipe class. When he needed a new snipe in the late 1930's, he went to Dunphy Boats in Oshkosh. The boat he took back to New York to race with was very similar to my two boats. According to John Rose, there are just 4 Dunphy snipes like mine that are known to still exist, and I have 2 of them. One of my snipes I've had since high school days, and it's restored (sort of) and in sailing condition.

So that's a little background of my "Wooden Boat Forum" experience. I've been browsing this forum for years before officially joining. In all those years, i never ventured down into the Bilge. Maybe in retrospect, it was a mistake to go there. It's a club, and I'm discovering, I'm not a member.

Jim

[SKIP KILPATRICK]

[George Jung]

I've no doubt DS 'deeply believes' the confabulation woven here. Unbelievable; and sure, Ron Johnson will 'get to the bottom of it'. One of the most dishonest, despicable folk in congress; sure, that'll happen.

'So what's the harm', Paul?

Giving a platform, encouraging this claptrap - implies it's a reasonable, an honest, perspective - with 'facts' and everything.

Giving oxygen to this subversive crap is dangerous, damaging, corrupting.

[Canoez]

OUT . TO . LUNCH

Really.

[LeeG]

Lee, you still haven't told me what you thought of the Russian collusion story in 2016 or the Hunter Biden lap top is Russian disinformation narrative in 2020. I think it should matter to a seeker of truth like yourself.

The point I'm trying to make is that the sources you listen to are sometimes wrong, and therefore I think it's a mistake to set yourself as being able to devine what is true and what isn't. I'm just staying the truth about the 2020 election is coming out. What's wrong with that? You have your "facts" and "proofs" that say everything about the election was on the up and up. I'm okay with you believing that. Probably everyone you know believes that. I'm just saying lots of people, like half the country, see things differently. I believe in our constitution and its ability to self correct. I'm willing to wait for the system to play out. Why argue about it or belittle others for their point of view? We'll see soon enough who was right and who wasn't.

Jim

Jim, I haven’t opined on those issues because they’re diversions and mischaracturizations of Trumps failings as a president.

I think Trump is oligarch friendly. He sees them as his community more than schlubs like me and certainly more than Christians like you. His son acknowledged that Russian “investors” brought them needed cash when banks wouldn’t. Trump’s own lawyers admitted in a deposition in the late early 90’s they had to have two of them in the room with Trump as he was known to play fast and loose with the facts. Or as Barr recently said wrt the voter fraud lie “disconnected from reality”. Remember Trump Inc paid $25 million to settle claims against his crooked Trump U. The guy is a crook.
So while Trump was running for president his representatives were floating the idea of offering Putin a $50 million penthouse to get a hotel built. You know, like threatening to withold military aid from Ukraine so as to get dirt on Hunter Biden.

I don’t divine what is right or wrong, I check for consistency in different sources and interpretations from experts and make a judgement. Given your performance on this thread I’ll pick my method over your reliance on future historians and unsupported assertions.

Why argue about the undermining of our institutions of democracy and national security? Why argue about women’s access to abortion?

I have a question for you Jim. No ridicule, straight question. Are you aligned with dominionism?

[Toxophilite]

I read somewhere that they should make buying a gun for a male as difficult as getting an abortion for a women.

It seemed eminently sensible

Here it is. Personally I don't feel men have the right to dictate to women what they do with their bodies

"I want any young men who want to buy a gun to be treated like young women who seek an abortion. Think about it: a mandatory 48-hours waiting period, written permission from a parent or a judge, a note from a doctor proving that he understands what he is about to do, time spent watching a video on individual and mass murders, traveling hundreds of miles at his own expense to the nearest gun shop, and walking through protestors holding photos of loved ones killed by guns, protestors who call him a murderer. After all, it makes more sense to do this for young men seeking guns than for young women seeking an abortion. No young woman needing reproductive freedom has ever murdered a roomful of strangers."

[George Jung]

Jim, I haven’t opined on those issues because they’re diversions and mischaracturizations of Trumps failings as a president.

I think Trump is oligarch friendly. He sees them as his community more than schlubs like me and certainly more than Christians like you. His son acknowledged that Russian “investors” brought them needed cash when banks wouldn’t. Trump’s own lawyers admitted in a deposition in the late early 90’s they had to have two of them in the room with Trump as he was known to play fast and loose with the facts. Or as Barr recently said wrt the voter fraud lie “disconnected from reality”. Remember Trump Inc paid $25 million to settle claims against his crooked Trump U. The guy is a crook.
So while Trump was running for president his representatives were floating the idea of offering Putin a $50 million penthouse to get a hotel built. You know, like threatening to withold military aid from Ukraine so as to get dirt on Hunter Biden.

I don’t divine what is right or wrong, I check for consistency in different sources and interpretations from experts and make a judgement. Given your performance on this thread I’ll pick my method over your reliance on future historians and unsupported assertions.

Why argue about the undermining of our institutions of democracy and national security? Why argue about women’s access to abortion?

I have a question for you Jim. No ridicule, straight question. Are you aligned with dominionism?

And that one is outta here... outta the park!

Nice synopsis and assessment.

[johnw]

Johnw, the Steel Dossier has been totally debunked! None of it was true, and Hilary staffers colluded with the Russians to put it together. This was a part of the also debunked Muller investigation. The FBI knew the Steel Dossier was fabricated at the very start of the Mueller investigation but pretended as though it was serious and needed to be looked into. To equate the fabricated Steel Dossier with the very real and verifiable Hunter lap top is just a stunning leap into fantasy.

As to the Democrat abortion legislation, it was my understanding that unlike Roe V Wade, it would effectively remove any and all state and federal restriction on abortion. i will research that more, and of course apologize if I am mistaken.

Jim
,

I look forward to your apology. I have no doubt, based on the other things you believe, that you have been indoctrinated by sources that said what you have said.

As to the Steele dossier, that's the point, isn't it? The mainstream press hesitated to publicize the dossier because it would certainly harm Trump if they covered it before the election, and might be proven to be bogus. Same with the Hunter Biden laptop. They treated both issues with the same caution. We know the provenance of the laptop is a bit strange, we don't know for certain whether it is bogus. Perhaps we will know in time, though I'm fairly certain your view of it won't change regardless of the evidence.

[Dunphy Snipe]

Well, I must tell you, I have no idea what dominionism is. And Toxophilite, you are completely missing my point that there are always two distinct individuals involved in every abortion. BOTH have rights. An unborn child--maybe she'll be a woman some day with a decision to make about a pregnacy--has a right to life just as surely as her mother does. Just like a black African slave 200 years ago had a right to be free and equal, an unborn child has a right to live. To think of abortion as a fairness issue or to raise the question of why should a women be treated differently than a man, is just a rationalization that covers the moral issues involved. An abortion takes a life. That's what makes that decision different. I've made that point several time now, and I guess I'm done on that topic.

Jim

[Toxophilite]

Well, I must tell you, I have no idea what dominionism is. And Toxophilite, you are completely missing my point that there are always two distinct individuals involved in every abortion. BOTH have rights. An unborn child--maybe she'll be a woman some day with a decision to make about a pregnacy--has a right to life just as surely as her mother does. Just like a black African slave 200 years ago had a right to be free and equal, an unborn child has a right to live. To think of abortion as a fairness issue or to raise the question of why should a women be treated differently than a man, is just a rationalization that covers the moral issues involved. An abortion takes a life. That's what makes that decision different. I've made that point several time now, and I guess I'm done on that topic.

Jim

Sure, and gun violence is epidemic in the states.Children are being killed en masse.
And people claim gun ownership is a right.

Guns take lives, probably way more than abortion ever has.
Why should they be a right? and abortion shouldn't??

that's the point I was making
Why is it so easy to by killing devices in a country with epidemic gun violence and so difficult to get an abortion?

Anyway you have no right to tell women what they should do with their bodies. You are clearly a man and don't have to have a thing growing inside you for 9 months, nor a lifelong impact on your body.

Besides, Is there a lack of humans in this world?

There are so many of us that we are happily killing each other, all the animals, and the planet we inhabit for short term financial gain.

We are not that special. It is only our vanity and arrogance and imaginations that assume we are so special.
Why is human life more special than any other life?

The slavery/abortion comparison is nonsense by the way.

[bobbys]

Jim, I haven’t opined on those issues because they’re diversions and mischaracturizations of Trumps failings as a president.

I think Trump is oligarch friendly. He sees them as his community more than schlubs like me and certainly more than Christians like you. His son acknowledged that Russian “investors” brought them needed cash when banks wouldn’t. Trump’s own lawyers admitted in a deposition in the late early 90’s they had to have two of them in the room with Trump as he was known to play fast and loose with the facts. Or as Barr recently said wrt the voter fraud lie “disconnected from reality”. Remember Trump Inc paid $25 million to settle claims against his crooked Trump U. The guy is a crook.
So while Trump was running for president his representatives were floating the idea of offering Putin a $50 million penthouse to get a hotel built. You know, like threatening to withold military aid from Ukraine so as to get dirt on Hunter Biden.

I don’t divine what is right or wrong, I check for consistency in different sources and interpretations from experts and make a judgement. Given your performance on this thread I’ll pick my method over your reliance on future historians and unsupported assertions.

Why argue about the undermining of our institutions of democracy and national security? Why argue about women’s access to abortion?

I have a question for you Jim. No ridicule, straight question. Are you aligned with dominionism?

.

Crook?.
Thats a lie.

Trump has never been convicted of a crime..

The case you cite is a settlement agreed on by both parties.

Liberals here throw out falsehoods every day.

It may pander to the choir but still mis information .

[LeeG]

Alvin, have you ever seen the word “or” used?

[Dunphy Snipe]

Oh my Toxophilite. So guns are killing people now. It's people using guns that are killing people. People are pulling the triggers! One of the reasons people are killing people is because we live in a culture where we celebrate a women's right to kill her unborn child. When life is not respected, it is more easily taken--but I repeat myself.

Sadly, there is very little I can say to a person who can refer to an unborn child as a, "Thing growing inside you". As to the slavery/abortion comparison being nonsense, why would a person today who doesn't consider and unborn child to be fully human deserving of the right to live be so different from a southern slave holder 200 years ago considering his Black African slave as inferior and not entitled to aspire to be free and equal. Both involve respect for life. I think the comparison is worth considering, and I think too that the country's views on abortion are shifting, just like they did on slavery. You of course don't have to agree, nor would I expect you to.

Finally, I do want to get back to Johnw on the, "Women's protection Act", but otherwise, I think I'm done on abortion.

Jim

[David G]

[Joe (SoCal)]

.

Crook?.
Thats a lie.

Trump has never been convicted of a crime..

The case you cite is a settlement agreed on by both parties.

Liberals here throw out falsehoods every day.

It may pander to the choir but still mis information .

1 Did Mr Biden legitimately win the 2020 presidential election? If not, why not?
2. What do you think of the attempt to interfere by force with the electoral vote count on January 6, 2021? If you approve, explain.

[David G]

[Dunphy Snipe]

Some of you have had to change your minds based on the EVIDENCE now available on things like the Steel Dossier-- the Mueller Investigation-- Hunter Biden's lap top-- the idea the 2016 election was stolen--and the assurances we were given that COVID vaccines are 94% effective in preventing infection and transmission. One would hope the experience would have awakened just a little curiosity about some of the other things we've been told to believe. I know it's long shot thinking people can change.

Believing a lie is never a good look though.

Jim

[skuthorp]

Some have gone beyond the point where they can admit a mistake, it has become part of their belief system and they cannot admit any other possibility. And pressure from outside, proven facts even, just back them further into a corner and make them more angry and extreme.

[Keith Wilson]

Some of you have had to change your minds based on the EVIDENCE now available on things like the Steel Dossier-- the Mueller Investigation-- Hunter Biden's lap top-- the idea the 2016 election was stolen--and the assurances we were given that COVID vaccines are 94% effective in preventing infection and transmission. One would hope the experience would have awakened just a little curiosity about some of the other things we've been told to believe. I know it's long shot thinking people can change. Believing a lie is never a good look though.

- Hunter Biden's laptop, the Steele dossier, and Mueller's report are all utterly irrelevant.
- Mr Trump won the 2016 election because he got more electoral votes, despite the fact that roughly three million fewer people voted for him. Like it or not, that's the way our system works.
- I'm not going to argue about vaccines here on this thread with you (although I'm not surprised you'd bring them up). My wife works in a large Level 1 trauma hospital, and if I expressed myself as I would like I'd probably get banned. But again, it's utterly irrelevant to the 2020 election.
- Yes, people can be wrong. This is not news, and it applies to you as well as everyone else. You appear to be trying to distract from the central point.

You have written in support of an attempt to overthrow American democracy, to overturn the results of a presidential election by force. Neither you nor anyone else has has shown any evidence at all of the massive electoral fraud that Mr Trump imagines occurred. Believing a lie is never a good look. Attempting a coup on the basis of that lie is beyond despicable.

[Paul Pless]

Some of you have had to change your minds based on the EVIDENCE now available. . .

i used to be a southern christian conservative with strong libertarian leanings
i've had both a change of mind and a change of heart
i'm a better person for it

reality has a liberal bias. . .

[Dunphy Snipe]

Good morning Johnw. I've had a chance to look over the provisions of the Women's Health Care Act more carefully. I do admit that my opinions on this matter were shaped by what I heard from others rather than from actual personally acquired information. What I found is that the bill creates a statuary right to abortion up to the point of viability--considered to be the 24 week period in a pregnancy--and beyond that point, "If the provider, using good faith medical judgement, determines that the procedure is necessary for the preservation of life OR HEALTH of the person who is pregnant".

I understand why you felt my assertion that the recent Democrat sponsored abortion legislation provided unrestricted access to abortion up to the very point of birth. The legislation really doesn't say that, and I apologize for saying that it did. That being said, people opposed to abortion have focused in on the little two word phrase, "or health" to justify characterizing the bill as extending the right to an abortion out to the very point of birth.

In actual practice, states that have a "For the health of the mother" provision in their abortion laws do allow abortions, for just about anyone who wants one, up to the time of birth It's the old "partial birth abortion" controversy. Some states allow it and others don't. The Women's Health Protection Act would force all states to allow partial birth abortions. The bill would also supersede all other state policies and restrictions on abortions put into place through the state's regular legislative process.

Versions of this bill have been around since 2013, and in each congressional session it has failed to pass. Even many people that are pro choice oppose partial birth abortions and limiting individual states from imposing their own legislatively passed abortion restriction.

So bottom line, I was wrong about some technical aspects of the bill, but not wrong about it being out of step with where we are on abortion and opposed by a majority of voters in our country.

Jim

[Rigadog]

You can't fix stupid

[LeeG]

.

Crook?.
Thats a lie.

Trump has never been convicted of a crime..

The case you cite is a settlement agreed on by both parties.

Liberals here throw out falsehoods every day.

It may pander to the choir but still mis information .

You did this the last time and still didn’t get your dictionary out. Crooked, crook means criminal OR dishonest. Dishonest Alvin. Someone who isn’t straight up, they’re not honest. They can be a criminal OR they are dishonest. Not Criminal AND dishonest. TFG is dishonest to the nth degree. So I did not lie and you have shown yourself numerous times unable to reason much beyond a sixth grade level. Nothing wrong with that but like Jim aka Dunphy Snipe if you cannot support your assertions you’re simply yelling like a child “I’m right, I’m right, I’m right”.

Hey, remember the Trump Foundation? Forced to close for fraudulent operations.

[George Jung]

Good morning Johnw. I've had a chance to look over the provisions of the Women's Health Care Act more carefully. I do admit that my opinions on this matter were shaped by what I heard from others rather than from actual personally acquired information. What I found is that the bill creates a statuary right to abortion up to the point of viability--considered to be the 24 week period in a pregnancy--and beyond that point, "If the provider, using good faith medical judgement, determines that the procedure is necessary for the preservation of life OR HEALTH of the person who is pregnant".

I understand why you felt my assertion that the recent Democrat sponsored abortion legislation provided unrestricted access to abortion up to the very point of birth. The legislation really doesn't say that, and I apologize for saying that it did. That being said, people opposed to abortion have focused in on the little two word phrase, "or health" to justify characterizing the bill as extending the right to an abortion out to the very point of birth.

In actual practice, states that have a "For the health of the mother" provision in their abortion laws do allow abortions, for just about anyone who wants one, up to the time of birth It's the old "partial birth abortion" controversy. Some states allow it and others don't. The Women's Health Protection Act would force all states to allow partial birth abortions. The bill would also supersede all other state policies and restrictions on abortions put into place through the state's regular legislative process.

Versions of this bill have been around since 2013, and in each congressional session it has failed to pass. Even many people that are pro choice oppose partial birth abortions and limiting individual states from imposing their own legislatively passed abortion restriction.

So bottom line, I was wrong about some technical aspects of the bill, but not wrong about it being out of step with where we are on abortion and opposed by a majority of voters in our country.

Jim

It's really surprising - but you are wrong .... again. Either by choice, or simply don't know any better. There is not 'abortion up until the time of birth'. If, for some medically emergent reason, a pregnancy had to be ended because of the mothers severe health issues (think eclampsia), and the pregnancy had entered a time period of being able to survive outside the womb - there would be an emergency C-section, and support of a premature infant.

Stop lying about this.

[Canoez]

Some of you have had to change your minds based on the EVIDENCE now available on things like the Steel Dossier-- the Mueller Investigation-- Hunter Biden's lap top-- the idea the 2016 election was stolen--and the assurances we were given that COVID vaccines are 94% effective in preventing infection and transmission. One would hope the experience would have awakened just a little curiosity about some of the other things we've been told to believe. I know it's long shot thinking people can change.

Believing a lie is never a good look though.

Jim

Nor is repeating lies and misinformation.

[Paul Pless]

Nor is repeating lies and misinformation.

dude

[Norman Bernstein]

Good morning Johnw. I've had a chance to look over the provisions of the Women's Health Care Act more carefully. I do admit that my opinions on this matter were shaped by what I heard from others rather than from actual personally acquired information.

Yup... listening to the RWW media will do that to you.

What I found is that the bill creates a statuary right to abortion up to the point of viability--considered to be the 24 week period in a pregnancy--and beyond that point, "If the provider, using good faith medical judgement, determines that the procedure is necessary for the preservation of life OR HEALTH of the person who is pregnant".

I'm having a hard time understanding the objection to this provision. Are you suggesting that the life of the fetus is more important than the life of the mother?

I understand why you felt my assertion that the recent Democrat sponsored abortion legislation provided unrestricted access to abortion up to the very point of birth. The legislation really doesn't say that, and I apologize for saying that it did. That being said, people opposed to abortion have focused in on the little two word phrase, "or health" to justify characterizing the bill as extending the right to an abortion out to the very point of birth.

And those people would be grievously wrong.

In actual practice, states that have a "For the health of the mother" provision in their abortion laws do allow abortions, for just about anyone who wants one, up to the time of birth

Yet another unsubstantiated allegation. You're suggesting that there are doctors willing to kill completely viable babies, merely upon the request of the mother? This is an allegation that DEMANDS proof or evidence.

It's the old "partial birth abortion" controversy. Some states allow it and others don't. The Women's Health Protection Act would force all states to allow partial birth abortions.

You might want to ask an actual obstetrician id the phrase 'partial birth abortion' has any actual medical meaning.

The bill would also supersede all other state policies and restrictions on abortions put into place through the state's regular legislative process.

That's what federal laws are supposed to do: prevent states from imposing discriminatory laws upon US citizens.

So bottom line, I was wrong about some technical aspects of the bill, but not wrong about it being out of step with where we are on abortion and opposed by a majority of voters in our country.

Your belief that the country is majority opposed to abortion is a beief borne of faith, not fact. It's clear you BELIEVE it to be true, but you can't point to any actual fact or evidence that it is true, and you simply reject whatever facts and evidence, like reputable polls, are saying.

This is exactly why 30+ million Americans believe the 'big lie'.... they so desperately WANT to believe it... and the 100's of election experts who say that there is no proof of the big lie are ignored.

Let me tell you what this kind of fanaticism does. A young woman, in her 8th month of pregnancy, received the news from her doctor (via ultrasound and other tests) that her fetus was dead, and there would be a late term stillbirth. The decaying fetus was threatening the life of the mother, making her very sick.... but the Catholic hospital she was in, refused to allow the doctors to perform an abortion. She laid there in agony for many hours until natural processes induced the delivery of a dead baby.

How does that correspond to your 'moral objections'?

[David G]

C’mon, Trumpers, how much longer will you fall for the con? Oh, that long . . . | Opinion


“Everybody plays the fool”

-- The Main Ingredient, 1972


I won’t bother reasoning with you.

As I’ve said before in this space, it’s my opinion that you folks who support Donald Trump are, by definition, incapable of that function, so it’s foolish to even try. You may think that’s harsh. I think it’s time-saving.

But I do have a question for you: Don’t you feel kind of stupid right now? Doesn’t the revelation that it was all a con leave you feeling like a sucker? Doesn’t simple human pride have you smarting, at least a little bit?

Or maybe you have no idea what I’m talking about. After all, Fox “News” and other elements of the conservative media omniplex have studiously avoided giving much attention to the hearings of the House select committee investigating the attempted coup of Jan. 6, 2021. For the rest of us, they’ve become must-see TV, but you’ve likely been shielded from them.

So you may not have heard Monday’s revelation that not even members of Trump’s own inner circle — his daughter, his aides, his attorney general — believed his absurd claim that he was cheated out of the 2020 election. Lawyer Eric Herschmann thought it was “nuts.” Attorney General William Barr feared your guy was “detached from reality.”

But — and here’s the part that relates to you — even though his own people told him quite clearly that there was no election fraud, he still told you something else: a bizarre fable about a vast and byzantine conspiracy involving Democrats, Republicans, poll workers, truck drivers, a polling machine manufacturer and — who knows? — maybe Bigfoot on the grassy knoll.

We all know how that lie brought thousands of you to the National Mall in the attack on the U.S. Capitol. What is less often discussed is that he also used this lie to tap folks like you for donations to the tune of a quarter of a billion dollars.

It bears repeating: a quarter . . . of a billion . . . dollars.

As the committee established in a video presentation, you were told in relentless email solicitations that your money was needed to stop the so-called “left wing mob” from stealing the election. Your donations, he claimed, would go to something called the Official Election Defense Fund. But as Trump officials now admit, no such fund ever existed. Your money went elsewhere, including to the “Trump Hotel Collection.”

So yeah, to quote Denzel Washington in “Malcolm X”: “You been had! You been took! You been hoodwinked! Bamboozled!”

That should make you angry, but it probably doesn’t. Over 40 years of research has firmly established an odd fact about us humans. If we are deeply invested in a belief, we find it almost impossible to admit — even to ourselves — that we are wrong. Indeed, if confronted with incontrovertible proof that we’ve made a mistake, we’ll double down on the mistake rather than embrace the truth.

Which is scary, because who has ever been more deeply invested in anything than you are in Trump? But as it says in the wise old song quoted above, “Falling in love is such an easy thing to do, and there’s no guarantee that the one you love is gonna love you.”

Donald Trump doesn’t love you. He is a con man from Queens who cares about nothing that doesn’t line his pockets or fatten his ego. Hundreds of you are now imprisoned or facing indictment because of him. And he’s taken you for a quarter of a billion dollars, besides. But sure, you go right on believing in him. Everybody plays the fool.

Some of us more than others.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/c-mon-tru...191640700.html