So regarding the latest allegations about Platner, of course his defenders are making hay out of the political affiliations of Lyndsey Fifield, and are trying to brush off the accusations as just another political hit job.
Unfortunately, I know many people (including women) whose default response to any accusations of DV or SA against politicians is, "I assume they're all lies, they don't affect my voting decisions at all, it's just too easy for a political operative to find some floozy willing to make up a He Said She Said story".
Others, of course, have the same skeptical attitude towards allegations against their political allies, but are quick to assume the worst of their political opponents.
So what would you say are your own standards for judging whether such allegations are credible?
“Believe ALL women” (unless they accuse Democrats)
Note. In no way do I want to imply that Republicans don’t make excuses and make the same charges of “political smears and hit jobs “however Biden was the one that said to believe all women—-a trope that Biden supported until he got accused of bad behavior. Amazing how that works isn’t it? I would think that even Biden would’ve been intelligent enough to know that such statements are double edged swords and can easily cut both ways.
John -- I personally can't see our president completing his term due to his health issues, at the same token, if we aquire a Democratic as house speaker and Trump was replaced by Vance, do you forsee a more stable Congress, or will that happen if Rubio were to be elected? I do have hope.
John: Republican politics of the day remind me of two quotes. From Jim Valvano: “Survive and advance.” From my first business mentor: “Just tell me what the game is, and I’ll play it.” I know you have expressed extreme disappointment in many Republican officials selling their souls to bow at the feet of Trump and his MAGA acolytes, but isn’t this the game they must play to survive and advance and remain in the arena of conservative public policy? I’m thinking of Marco Rubio in particular, who seems to have deftly balanced his own basic American statesmanship with the requisite gushing over his boss. I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying it is.
It seems to me that VDH (a pretty smart guy) would have everyone dismiss obvious Trump self-serving character and personality flaws and use of public office for personal enrichment and revenge as mostly inconsequential when weighted against his policies and achievements. The office of POTUS is important to our people, our nation and the world well beyond the measure of policies, facts and figures. I believe a critique of all aspects of a presidents behavior, deportment, civility is justified. Should not we expect, even demand, our president be the best of what we hope a Lady or Gentleman should be at all times, at all places, in all circumstances?
I wish someone would make a list of the positive things Trump has done for the country and a list of the negative, though that's about all I hear without having to dig deep into various outlets that I don't have time for. I'll go with Hansen's historically accurate comments as I get my fill of nothing but negative. Thank you for taking the time to answer people's intellectually phrased questions
Sir John— two things. First of all thank you for clearing things up. Sadly I find it difficult to often find accurate information, which is why I often ask you. Which brings me to my next question, since I don’t know that I will be able to locate accurate information on this topic.
Sir John—-Why is Trump so awesome ?
If you don’t care to answer that question here then perhaps you and Sir Bernie would enjoy discussing in the NO BS ZONE the reasons why Trump is so awesome, and how he earned the title of “Awesome Trump!”
The Empire eagerly anticipates your response, along with a $250 Trump bill, the renaming of Idaho to the “Great State of Trumpaho” and Trump’s face permanently on Mt. Rushmore, which would then be renamed “Mt. Trumpmore “ or better yet….
Just a footnote; I visited Taiwan in 1988 for business. When Chiang Kai-shek escaped China for Taiwan he took the treasures of China with him. Roughly 2,972 crates of the most important artifacts were ultimately moved to Taiwan including books, documentation, and art. At that time, we were provided a tour of the national museum which housed just a fraction of the artifacts and art. It is the most valuable collection in the world and worth billions. The art includes carved jade which was century's old and in mint condition. Hand carved walnuts displaying villages. Much of the art took several generations to complete. In 2022 the government reported three ceramic pieces that were damaged. The value of just those three pieces was $77 million.
I have had the blessing to see many world museums, and this one knocks your socks off. To see art that was in such perfect condition from a couple thousand years was astonishing.
I believe, in my opinion, that the China treasure in Taiwan is part of China's desire to take Taiwan outside of other desires by the mainland. It is China's history.
I'm really confused by Trump's comments about Taiwan. But that's just one of the many confusing remarks he makes.
If you are an art lover, Taiwan should be on your bucket list. Outside of that - not much else to see in Taiwan.
Trump likes to side with the big, strong countries like China and Russia. If truth be known, I bet he couldn't care less about little 'ole Taiwan-- he wants and favours deals with China. His modus operandi. Conflict of interest here?
Thanks for the VDH comments. Your honesty was pure JAD as always but because of that I wonder if you perhaps 'short' him some. His assessment of Trump's approach with the Iran situation is particularly eye catching. What I read was highly focused on the process and I found it highly pragmatic. But yes he sees Trump in a much different light than do a lot. Given his intellectual background he can't be ignored.
Yes too, there was a heath issue that now appears to be resolved.
Like I said, I'm not as familiar with him as I am other commentators. I'm just going by what relatively little I've seen.
>>His assessment of Trump's approach with the Iran situation is particularly eye catching. What I read was highly focused on the process and I found it highly pragmatic.
I think the process has turned out to be quite bad (and I say that as someone who supported Trump's launch of the war).
Mike Nelson (I've interviewed him a number of times, including here) has been more accurate in his analysis of the Iran War than just about anyone, and I think his most recent piece on the topic paints a very clear picture:
Mike Nelson comments: interesting read, nothing inaccurate but an assessment lacking the objectivity I see in VDH comments. Nowhere did I read Mike to say that Trump will fail, he just said this dodo has done nothing right with Iran and his ass is way out on a limb with not a lot of support and some who have supported are turning away. True. But it's not over. VDH thinks it will end well. It would be foolish to bet against that. But I agree, right now Trump is getting his head handed to him.
I took a little time today to better familiarize myself with Hanson's thoughts on Trump's handling of Iran, and also his handling or Russia/Ukraine (yikes!).
As I've detected in a number of your responses to me over time, it seems that you believe being 'objective' on Trump is reliably giving him every possible benefit of the doubt, even well past the point of absurdity.
I've followed Mike's analysis throughout the Iran War, and have seen him shift from being extremely supportive and optimistic of the operation to increasingly dismayed over the clear lack of vision, and wishy-washiness, that have created the unforced errors he described in the piece I referenced (which have left the president teetering on offering the Iranian regime big, Obama-esque concessions).
I have seen no such nuance in VDH's analysis of Iran. Instead, I've seen my previous impression of him validated.
Glad you took the time to review VDH's points of view.
You and Mike have done enough analysis to conclude that DJT is a complete disaster. Nowhere have I contended that either are wrong; I just don't buy it entirely. Neither does VDH. When he changes his mind, so will I.
BTW....where is the data that says Trump is considering concessions to Iran similar to Obama? Damn John, my recollection is that Trump essentially blames Obama for the entire nuclear mess in Iran.
A week ago, as was widely reported, the Trump administration was considering giving Iran $300 billion as part of their negotiations (Obama gave Iran $1.7 billion).
So regarding the latest allegations about Platner, of course his defenders are making hay out of the political affiliations of Lyndsey Fifield, and are trying to brush off the accusations as just another political hit job.
Unfortunately, I know many people (including women) whose default response to any accusations of DV or SA against politicians is, "I assume they're all lies, they don't affect my voting decisions at all, it's just too easy for a political operative to find some floozy willing to make up a He Said She Said story".
Others, of course, have the same skeptical attitude towards allegations against their political allies, but are quick to assume the worst of their political opponents.
So what would you say are your own standards for judging whether such allegations are credible?
“Believe ALL women” (unless they accuse Democrats)
Note. In no way do I want to imply that Republicans don’t make excuses and make the same charges of “political smears and hit jobs “however Biden was the one that said to believe all women—-a trope that Biden supported until he got accused of bad behavior. Amazing how that works isn’t it? I would think that even Biden would’ve been intelligent enough to know that such statements are double edged swords and can easily cut both ways.
John -- I personally can't see our president completing his term due to his health issues, at the same token, if we aquire a Democratic as house speaker and Trump was replaced by Vance, do you forsee a more stable Congress, or will that happen if Rubio were to be elected? I do have hope.
John: Republican politics of the day remind me of two quotes. From Jim Valvano: “Survive and advance.” From my first business mentor: “Just tell me what the game is, and I’ll play it.” I know you have expressed extreme disappointment in many Republican officials selling their souls to bow at the feet of Trump and his MAGA acolytes, but isn’t this the game they must play to survive and advance and remain in the arena of conservative public policy? I’m thinking of Marco Rubio in particular, who seems to have deftly balanced his own basic American statesmanship with the requisite gushing over his boss. I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying it is.
John, I like the way your brain works and your ability to clearly express your thoughts.
Thanks Benn. I appreciate that.
It seems to me that VDH (a pretty smart guy) would have everyone dismiss obvious Trump self-serving character and personality flaws and use of public office for personal enrichment and revenge as mostly inconsequential when weighted against his policies and achievements. The office of POTUS is important to our people, our nation and the world well beyond the measure of policies, facts and figures. I believe a critique of all aspects of a presidents behavior, deportment, civility is justified. Should not we expect, even demand, our president be the best of what we hope a Lady or Gentleman should be at all times, at all places, in all circumstances?
I wish someone would make a list of the positive things Trump has done for the country and a list of the negative, though that's about all I hear without having to dig deep into various outlets that I don't have time for. I'll go with Hansen's historically accurate comments as I get my fill of nothing but negative. Thank you for taking the time to answer people's intellectually phrased questions
Sir John— two things. First of all thank you for clearing things up. Sadly I find it difficult to often find accurate information, which is why I often ask you. Which brings me to my next question, since I don’t know that I will be able to locate accurate information on this topic.
Sir John—-Why is Trump so awesome ?
If you don’t care to answer that question here then perhaps you and Sir Bernie would enjoy discussing in the NO BS ZONE the reasons why Trump is so awesome, and how he earned the title of “Awesome Trump!”
The Empire eagerly anticipates your response, along with a $250 Trump bill, the renaming of Idaho to the “Great State of Trumpaho” and Trump’s face permanently on Mt. Rushmore, which would then be renamed “Mt. Trumpmore “ or better yet….
“Mt. MORE TRUMP!”
His Utmost Excellency, The Emperor, has spoken
Just a footnote; I visited Taiwan in 1988 for business. When Chiang Kai-shek escaped China for Taiwan he took the treasures of China with him. Roughly 2,972 crates of the most important artifacts were ultimately moved to Taiwan including books, documentation, and art. At that time, we were provided a tour of the national museum which housed just a fraction of the artifacts and art. It is the most valuable collection in the world and worth billions. The art includes carved jade which was century's old and in mint condition. Hand carved walnuts displaying villages. Much of the art took several generations to complete. In 2022 the government reported three ceramic pieces that were damaged. The value of just those three pieces was $77 million.
I have had the blessing to see many world museums, and this one knocks your socks off. To see art that was in such perfect condition from a couple thousand years was astonishing.
I believe, in my opinion, that the China treasure in Taiwan is part of China's desire to take Taiwan outside of other desires by the mainland. It is China's history.
I'm really confused by Trump's comments about Taiwan. But that's just one of the many confusing remarks he makes.
If you are an art lover, Taiwan should be on your bucket list. Outside of that - not much else to see in Taiwan.
Trump likes to side with the big, strong countries like China and Russia. If truth be known, I bet he couldn't care less about little 'ole Taiwan-- he wants and favours deals with China. His modus operandi. Conflict of interest here?
Thanks for the VDH comments. Your honesty was pure JAD as always but because of that I wonder if you perhaps 'short' him some. His assessment of Trump's approach with the Iran situation is particularly eye catching. What I read was highly focused on the process and I found it highly pragmatic. But yes he sees Trump in a much different light than do a lot. Given his intellectual background he can't be ignored.
Yes too, there was a heath issue that now appears to be resolved.
>>I wonder if you perhaps 'short' him some.
Like I said, I'm not as familiar with him as I am other commentators. I'm just going by what relatively little I've seen.
>>His assessment of Trump's approach with the Iran situation is particularly eye catching. What I read was highly focused on the process and I found it highly pragmatic.
I think the process has turned out to be quite bad (and I say that as someone who supported Trump's launch of the war).
Mike Nelson (I've interviewed him a number of times, including here) has been more accurate in his analysis of the Iran War than just about anyone, and I think his most recent piece on the topic paints a very clear picture:
https://thedispatch.com/article/trump-iran-quagmire-allies-voters-congress/?gift_key=8c2d7f3b1ea22d77&gift_ref=3938132&utm_source=giftlink&utm_campaign=membergift&utm_medium=copy_link
Don't know Mike Nelson John. Will look. Thanks for the link. VDH's comments always seem highly objective to me, hope Mike's are the same.
Mike Nelson comments: interesting read, nothing inaccurate but an assessment lacking the objectivity I see in VDH comments. Nowhere did I read Mike to say that Trump will fail, he just said this dodo has done nothing right with Iran and his ass is way out on a limb with not a lot of support and some who have supported are turning away. True. But it's not over. VDH thinks it will end well. It would be foolish to bet against that. But I agree, right now Trump is getting his head handed to him.
I took a little time today to better familiarize myself with Hanson's thoughts on Trump's handling of Iran, and also his handling or Russia/Ukraine (yikes!).
As I've detected in a number of your responses to me over time, it seems that you believe being 'objective' on Trump is reliably giving him every possible benefit of the doubt, even well past the point of absurdity.
I've followed Mike's analysis throughout the Iran War, and have seen him shift from being extremely supportive and optimistic of the operation to increasingly dismayed over the clear lack of vision, and wishy-washiness, that have created the unforced errors he described in the piece I referenced (which have left the president teetering on offering the Iranian regime big, Obama-esque concessions).
I have seen no such nuance in VDH's analysis of Iran. Instead, I've seen my previous impression of him validated.
Glad you took the time to review VDH's points of view.
You and Mike have done enough analysis to conclude that DJT is a complete disaster. Nowhere have I contended that either are wrong; I just don't buy it entirely. Neither does VDH. When he changes his mind, so will I.
BTW....where is the data that says Trump is considering concessions to Iran similar to Obama? Damn John, my recollection is that Trump essentially blames Obama for the entire nuclear mess in Iran.
A week ago, as was widely reported, the Trump administration was considering giving Iran $300 billion as part of their negotiations (Obama gave Iran $1.7 billion).
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/emerging-us-iran-mou-said-to-reference-possible-300b-postwar-investment-fund-to-aid-tehrans-reconstruction/