How in the world can the so-called right be so totally wrong? Enough about the fake religiosity, dishonesty, self-serving voter suppression, blindness and stupidity by those referred to as the right. The bloody Jan. 6 insurrection has been called everything from just tourists, to harmless expression of political discontent, while they have fought every which way to prevent the Jan. 6 Committee from getting to the truth of what the educated, informed majority has called a serious breach of national security, bordering on treason.
It was clearly instigated by Donald J. Trump, who naturally was frightened by losing presidential protection against all he had done, before and during his undeserved stay in the White House. And now, it got even worse. Much, much worse.
Right-wingers are ganging up to protect and support their cult leader Trump, and even more so, the more obvious it becomes that he is a traitor who has stolen sensitive documents, lied about it, and who knows yet with whom he has shared national secrets. The FBI is attacked, both verbally and physically for doing their job, while top Republicans are trying to impeach AG Garland for doing the most important job ever to face him and the DOJ.
Trump even lies about President Obama, claiming he did the same, while he correctly worked legally with the National Archives to transfer carefully selected documents to the Presidential Library in Chicago! How much worse can it get before the country regains stability?
Blah, blah, blah, another day, more of Jorg’s “orange-man bad” garbage about our great President Trump. Hey Jorg, instead of your tunnel vision, why don’t you discuss a few other topics? How about our great President Trump slaying the dynasties of Bush, Cheney, McCain, and Clinton, with yesterday’s ousting of your favorite RINO on the kangaroo court known as the Unselect Committee? How about your favorite Alaskan, Sarah Palin, advancing to the general election (shout out to Wilfred, my favorite Alaskan, who doesn’t appear to have been on the ballot)? How about Bill O’Reilly, who audience-wise, is now more popular than when he was on Fox? How about a Houston school district approving $2 million for rifles, shields, ammo, and radios? How about a Florida county adding AR-15s to schools for classroom defense? Unlike Chuck Schumer, these school districts care about school safety. Just a few topics outside your one-track mind…
So, apparently, according the Trump lovers, it's ok to be a liar, cheater and criminal law breaker like Trump. And like a child, since Jorg supports the rule of law in America, you resort to calling him names. Purely childish!
I guess Mike O missed pretty much all of Jorg’s correspondence where Jorg calls other people names and initiates ad hominem attacks. It’s cute that Mike O is trying to defend Jorg’s honor, although misguided and under the false impression Jorg has credibility. Hey Mike O, why don’t you get your new friend Jorg to list a treasonous Biden accomplishment? He can’t. If memory serves, neither can you.
Terence Y: Pay attention to the news, and don't let Fox confuse you! If you haven't grasped yet, what a crook Trump is, and what kind of multiple trouble he is in, I don't think anything can help you. If nothing else, just hang in there, and try to see what eventually happens.
Today’s LTE is a truncated version of the opinion piece you published on your blog post two days ago. I responded to your post in an email as I have learned rebuttals submitted to your blog post that refute your viewpoint are summarily deleted.
We’ll hit some high points now…
In you view, the “bloody Jan. 6 insurrection” was “clearly instigated by Donald Trump.” Before going any further, let me say I’m sure we can agree everyone who breached the Capitol, damaged federal property or stole any federal property should be fairly prosecuted. Now for a question… how many people died during the “bloody” Capitol riots and what was the cause of death? Another question… What evidence… not hearsay or DNC conjecture… supports your claim re: instigation?
Following the Mar-a-Lago raid, you claimed that FBI agents and their families were being attacked. Yes, it appears Ricky Shiffer tried to breach the FBI offices in Cincinnati. However, it also appears he was readying himself to do something unhinged before the Mar-a-Lago raid. Do you remember the riots in 2020? Major cities torched, over a billion dollars in property damage, and 25 persons killed. “Mostly peaceful” protesters spray painting “ACAB” on anything that didn’t move, and some of them chanting, “What do we want? Dead cops!” The DNC held their convention that same summer and their nominee said nothing. Following the 2020 summer of rioting, the National Police Association reported for 2021 a nearly 60% increase in the murdering of police officers. Next question… who was attacking and killing those police officers? Last question… who is attacking FBI agents and their families?
Barack Obama and transparency? We’ll get to that a little later...
The evidence that Trump instigated the Jan. 6 attack on our nation's capitol, is plain to see for everyone. Trump is guilty of 'inciting a riot'; 'conspiracy'; and, 'aiding and abetting'. My education and background is in Law, and Law Enforcement. I know your background is not in those fields. Simply listening to and watching Trump's rallies and comments the days before, and the day of, Jan. 6, you will hear him incite the crowd of supporters. He repeatedly says the word "fight", raises his fist, which is a sign of violence, and says the phrase "fight like h..l". Video and audio recordings don't lie Ray. That's not hearsay. You may need to look that word up. As as usual, all Trump supporters use 'deflection' by bringing up something totally unrelated to the Jan. 6 attack, like the BLM riots, whenever they realize that they are wrong. Good luck with that one!
You wrote yesterday that your, "... education and background is in Law, and Law Enforcement." That sounds very open ended. What does your statement mean? With that in mind, I wrote that everyone... let me repeat that... everyone who breached the Capitol, vandalized federal property or stole federal property should be fairly prosecuted.
We can say with some confidence that a person is guilty after they have been fairly prosecuted and convicted. However, before any indictment or court process, you have leapt forward to a guilty finding of Donald Trump for inciting a riot and conspiracy... and while this matter may conclude with a guilty verdict, we're not there. You'll note, I did not include the aiding and abetting issue mentioned in your comments. That may be an easier case to make... and like I said... everyone who participated in the Capitol riots should be fairly prosecuted. However, it will take more than a video featuring repetition of the word "fight" to make a case for aiding and abetting. As an aside, you would not have to look very far to find file footage of your favorite Democratic Party representatives exhorting their constituents to fight for or against a policy.
Let's get back to evidence of instigation. Select Committee members wanted to prove their claims that Trump was angry and wanted to go to the Capitol after making his remarks at The Ellipse. What was the centerpiece of that claim? Testimony by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson recounting things she said she was told but did not witness. This is where Trump lunging from a backseat to grab the steering wheel story started. The persons who were present in the vehicle contradicted Hutchinson's hearsay version of those events.
Jorg detests Trump followers... that is his prerogative. However, when he makes unsupported claims about the "bloody Jan. 6 insurrection," he should be able to tell us how many people died and the cause of death. I asked him... no response. He also claimed that FBI agents and their families were being attacked. When asked for examples... no response. In his LTE, Jorg has suggested that persons on the right side of the political aisle are dangerous. Yet, he offers nothing to substantiate his claims. Then, he avoids making any comment about the death and destruction caused by very left activists. It is not deflection to ask him for something to support his claims.
Jorg did not answer any of the questions posed in my rebuttal to his LTE. Would you like to do so?
As you know, I am not a fan of recent Democratic Party presidents, however, I am not a dyed in the wool Trump supporter. I called Joe Biden’s 2020 election win before major news outlets, I have spoken out against Trump’s style of communications via Twitter as well as the false and exaggerated information in his Tweets, and I have publicly stated that I hope the RNC selects someone other than Trump in 2024.
That being said, don’t you think we should treat government officials regardless of party… the same?
You finished your LTE with some comments about Barack Obama and the transfer of documents to his presidential library in Chicago. Barack fashioned himself the most transparent president… ever. As an aside, it’s mildly amusing that you criticize the right for being untruthful. However, you go silent on… if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor… if you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan… health care premiums will go down.
As promised, let’s look at Barack and transparency...
In the last two years of Barack's presidency, according to the AP and reported by PBS, his administration set records for censoring or outright denying access to documents requested under FOIA guidelines... Additionally, CBS reported the Obama administration spent a record 36 million dollars defending against lawsuits filed to obtain records…
Did Barack Obama's staff cooperate with the National Archives folks in transferring documents to the feds after Barack left office? Yes. Does that mean all documents associated with Barack's presidency were handled in the same way during and after his eight years in office?
Is there a reason to suspect the Obama administration just may not be as transparent as it pretended to be? Real Clear Politics reported in Barack's last year in office, “In the middle of directing the difficult task of transferring the historically important records of the Obama administration into the National Archives, the archivist in charge, David Ferriero, ran into a serious problem: A lot of key records are missing.”
Switching gears temporarily… how were Hillary's tens of thousands of emails on a private server handled? Did FBI agents show up with guns drawn for a predawn raid at Chappaqua?
Don’t you think we should treat government officials regardless of party… the same?
Ray - unless you really like to submit LTE's in great detail, why waste your precious writing skills on Jorg? You will never be able to change his mind. I am convinced that he is actually messing with some of us. His relentless attacks on Trump have become comical, if not irrational, for some time.
Ray, are you really going to go to the old deflection of Hillary and her emails? She broke no laws as demonstrated by her full day in testifying without resorting to taking the 5th. Trump, on the other hand, kept top secret documents for 18 months after leaving office despite requests he return these documents on many occasions. He committed serious crimes in doing so. Did the FBI agents have guns drawn on their visit? Were you there? Do you know the dangers of a Secret Service response however possibly accidental?.
I asked Jorg, "Don’t you think we should treat government officials regardless of party… the same?" Same question to you.
It's not deflection to compare and contrast the treatment of Democratic Party officials and politicians against the treatment of Republicans.
Most of my friends are liberal... that makes sense for someone living in a Blue county in a very Blue state. Two days ago, while enjoying an adult beverage with a former co-worker, our conversation turned to current events and the Mar-a-Lago raid. I was surprised that my friend had no idea about the FBI's shenanigans re: obtaining FISA warrants. He asked me for some information, and this is what I sent him:
The FBI and FISA warrants... here's a link to a CNN article: https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/17/politics/fisa-court-slams-fbi-conduct/index.html Did the FBI provide false information and withhold information to bolster its request to spy on Trump aide Carter Page as part of its Russian collusion investigation? Here's just one excerpt...
Federal judge Rosemary Collyer wrote, "The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable."
I concluded with... This is not wild-eyed, right wing extremist rhetoric. The source is CNN... CNN is not a fan of Donald Trump. OK... did Trump and his associates early on deny connections to Russia in a misleading way? Yes. Did those connections translate to Russian collusion? No. Did Democrats feed false information about the Trump campaign to the FBI? Yes. Could the FBI corroborate the information coming from Democrats? No. Did the FBI use uncorroborated information to obtain surveillance warrants as part of its ongoing investigation into the Trump campaign? Yes. Does it look like the FBI favors Democrats?
You asked whether agents had guns drawn then asked if I was present during the search warrant service. Well, no... I was not Florida last week. I'm guessing you were not there either. I'm also guessing you watched some video of the event. Let me ask... in those videos, did agents have their weapons holstered or were the weapons "at the ready?"
I submitted a rebuttal to Jorg's LTE yesterday. In that post, I asked him some questions about his claims. He has not responded. Would you like to answer those questions?
That brings us back to Hillary. It's not deflection. Hillary authorized use of a personal server that processed thousands of emails. Maybe some of those emails were recipes and yoga routines but those emails also included classified documents. The FBI director exonerated Hillary before he interviewed her. Skrrrrip! (sound of stylus on vinyl) No predawn search warrant served at Chapa
Ray: You are using the tired old trick of bringing up unrelated issues, like “what about this” and “what about that” ad infinitum, - to which I/we have no obligation to respond. It is like bringing up the Vikings, or Mao Zedong, in a discussion about Hitler and the Nazi atrocities during WWII. You even bring up President Obama’s “lie” about keeping your doctor! My goodness, how many times have I tried to explain this to one of the densest ones on this site, that this misunderstanding was not a lie, but what the ACA was designed to do, among other things, and that Obama was told would be the case, while various concessions and changes had to be made in the last minute to get the whole thing through. My goodness, how clean Obama must be, if one has to stoop that low to get something on him. Anything!
Jorg... it's simply not "whataboutism" to ask you for examples of FBI agents and their families being attacked after the Mar-a-Lago raid. You made that claim, and apparently you are unable to support it.
Unrelated issues? Vikings... Mao Zedong... WWII? In this thread? Where?
You hold up your favorite president, Barack Obama, as the paragon of virtue. That's OK. You then deride Donald Trump as a liar... I do not disagree with you... however... "you can keep your doctor" was just plain deception. MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, Barack's chief architect for Obamacare, said that the admin had to lie to the "stupid" American people to get the ACA legislation passed. One of two possibilities... Barack was fully aware of the lie or he was asleep at the switch. Your choice. Why is questioning the background on a piece of legislation of that magnitude stooping low?
So, I guess we will not get any answers to questions about your LTE.
Ray: If you write something that makes sense, that is related to my post and submitted through the blog, I will publish it, even if you disagree in a meaningful and informative manner. But, as you should know now, I won’t accept long-winded, verbose rantings about your own favorite repeats that go out on tangents.
Others have responded to most of your comments on this site, so just let me say that you don’t seem very well informed about the latest events, possibly because you trust Fox, which is not a news channel, but a farse. I recommend MSNBC, which is factual, well researched and informative, besides trustworthy.
So, when will I see worthy comments to my latest blog posts, submitted through the appropriate channel?
You don't like "long-winded, verbose rantings?" OK...
I submitted a rebuttal to your 8-15 blog post in the form of an email. Let me know what you consider to be long winded, verbose and tangential… and I will submit something through “the appropriate channel.”
So... I'm not well informed because you believe I trust Fox? I hate to disappoint you but that is not the case. In this thread, I have cited the AP, PBS, CBS and CNN... you know, those right wing news outlets.
I'm glad you rejoined the conversation. That gives me a chance to ask you to respond to the questions you have skipped over: How many people died during the “bloody” Capitol riots and what was the cause of death? What evidence… not hearsay or DNC conjecture… supports your claim re: instigation? Who was attacking and killing police officers in record numbers during 2021? Who is attacking FBI agents and their families following the Mar-a-Lago raid? Don’t you think we should treat government officials regardless of party… the same?
I noted that you posted another anti-religious opinion piece on your blog site yesterday. I feel sorry that Rep. Adam Kinzinger has suffered a family dispute that involves the family’s religious convictions. I disagree with his earlier comments about religion and politics in America, but there is no question he is a man of faith. Adam is not running for re-election in November, but it is not because… as he told MSNBC… he has been kicked out of his tribe. He left the tribe.
Ray: Didn't you see what I just wrote about your incessant "what-aboutism"? I'm not wasting time responding to all you bring up, unrelated to what I initially wrote. Since you sent me an e-mail about a potential post comment to my blog, I will respond likewise, and not through this site.
Sorry, Jorg... "Don't you follow the news at all?" is not an answer.
There are right wing outliers out there. They mistrust the government and would like to do harm to our institutions which include law enforcement. No doubt. Ricky Shiffer in Cincinnati is a good example. The mirror images of those those outliers are the left wing activists described by me earlier in this thread. We saw some of their harm in the death and destruction in our cities two years ago. The right wing extremists do not represent Republicans just as the left wing extremists do not represent Democrats.
Let's look at your opinion piece published on 8-15. You wrote, "Republicans are ganging up to protect and support their cult leader Trump... FBI agents and their families are attacked..." So, it's pretty simple, Jorg... who is attacking FBI agents and their families? When and where is this happening? You made the claim, and I'm asking you for examples. Again, suggesting that someone follow the news is not an answer.
You dismiss queries about your dubious claims by relegating them to "what aboutisms." OK... here's one for you. What about your claims re: the "bloody January 6 insurrection"? When asked about the causalities on that day... you go silent. Jorg, how "bloody" was it? Other than rioters, who suffered death or injury at the Capitol?
It was only three weeks ago your LTE, "Disagree with grace" appeared in the DJ. You condemned inappropriate and degrading rhetoric. I agreed with you (twice). You wrapped up your LTE this way, "Let’s upgrade to a more respectable and agreeable level, folks. OK?"
Then, three days ago, you post an opinion piece that refers to Republicans as dishonest and stupid. What happened to eschewing inappropriate and degrading rhetoric?
I emailed you a rebuttal. Every point in that email has appeared in this thread. I have posed direct questions to your opinion piece.
You claim the January 6 riot was a "bloody insurrection." Tell us how. No response. You claim Republicans are attacking FBI agents and their families. Tell us when and where. No response.
I suggested that you identify what you consider to be long-winded, verbose and tangential material in my email rebuttal so I could submit it through your "appropriate channel." And I did get a response. Here it is... Sorry, Ray, nothing of interest here for my blog. Nothing that responds directly to what I wrote, - only more "what-abouts" that I won't waste time and blog space on. And, please keep your blog comments out of the DJ Opinion site!
Ray: You don't need me to feed you the news. It is out there, in the media, so pay attention. It is no hidden secret that FBI agents and their families are being threatened, and that the Jan. 6 insurrection was bloody.
Btw.: You can't claim credit for realizing early that Biden had won, and that Trump lost, the US presidency. You had to be pretty stupid to buy the big lie about a rigged 2020 election, or very dishonest to claim that you did believe it, without a shred of evidence. And for a foreign adversary, Trump would be the #1 choice, so why rig the election against him, rather than for him, like what very likely was done in 2016?
There you go again… labeling someone who does not agree with your viewpoint as stupid and dishonest. What happened to your theme of “disagree with grace”?
Whoa… whoa… whoa… you said FBI agents and their families were being attacked… physically… now, according to you, they are being “threatened.” There is a difference. We can agree that threats against public officials (which includes law enforcement)… actually, threats against anyone… is serious and unacceptable. However, in this day and age, we can unfortunately expect ramped up threats following a high visibility event like the Mar-a-Lago raid. Those threats are likely being made by the right-wing extremist types described in my 2:35 pm post… not by workaday Republicans as you have asserted.
Jorg, for the record, I did not “buy the big lie about a rigged 2020 election.” As you recall, the November 3 election results were not immediately settled. However, three days later, I said, in these pages, Joe Biden won the 2020 election. Seven major news networks made that same call four days after the election. So, yes, I can claim credit “for realizing early that Biden had won, and that Trump lost, the US presidency.”
This LTE should not ask why is the right so wrong, but rather... why does Jorg bring us sorg?
After reading this thread, I have but one thing to say.
"I love the smell of napalm in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill bombed for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn’t find one of ’em, not one stinkin' dink body. The smell, you know that gasoline smell, the whole hill. Smelled like victory."
Wilfred, thanks for that classic… The bigger question is whether you have a preference for the original, Redux, or Final Cut? Maybe in 7 years, we’ll see a 50th anniversary Final, Final Cut? BTW, you’re not auditioning for a role on Life Below Zero, are you?
As for most movies, call me an "originalist". Hehe
I have not watched any of the Alaska shows. And I won't be auditioning for them. But I have fished in wicked seas, frozen my lower extremities in glacial rivers and slept under the stars on spruce limb beds. I don't imagine tv shows depict the reality of it. LOL
Fellow commentators: Do you see more clearly now what I meant by abolishing the outdated Electoral College, and let the majority decide the presidency? Not only would we have avoided the unnecessary, unwinnable, and bloody wars initiated by the Bush jr. administration, partly based on blatant lies, but we would also have avoided the massive trouble Trump has caused, the extent of which is mind boggling and expanding daily? What on flat Earth is the justification for such a costly, archaic idea that even the Founding Fathers questioned the value of, but accepted as a compromise at the time to get the republic off its shaky feet.
Short & Sweet, Ray! Does that mean that you agree there is no advantage of the EC that justifies the high cost, - in human life, money, national safety and world reputation? So Done with that Dialog!
Nope. It's the same stuff you post over and over again. When your viewpoint is refuted... you go silent. "SS,DD" is the only thing that needs to be said.
Jorg... and everyone else on this thread... have a great weekend!
Ray: For the slow learners who still haven’t grasped what kind of serious trouble we are in, repetition may be the key. May be not. Perhaps you can explain to all of us where I am wrong with any of the main points I have tried to make lately. Please be specific and relate directly to what I have said here, on this site.
Sorry, Jorg... I missed your comment published last night.
I submitted a rebuttal to your post last week, and that rebuttal included questions challenging claims made in your post by you without explanation or substantiation... questions that still remain unanswered. This is a pattern we have seen over and over again...
Do you remember your "Radical Republican" credo published last year? Re: that post, I commented:
Jorg submitted another anti-Trump rant on May 7 disguised as what he called a "Radical Republican" cult credo. It is exactly what we have come to expect from the left wing. During the back and forth generated by his letter and other readers' comments, I acknowledged that the former president exaggerates, shapes facts and sometimes just makes up things. However, what I find extremely curious is the left wing's silence on exaggeration, shaping of facts and outright fabrication that comes from the left side of the aisle as well as the MSM. In response to Jorg's latest diatribe, I responded with a "Progressive Democrat" credo. It used the same items listed in Jorg's credo with a twist... they were applied to the left but cited real examples from current issues and events. I invited a rebuttal... crickets. I asked again for a response... more crickets. So, I penned an LTE that appeared in the DJ on May 14 that called out such rants for what they are... disrespectful and divisive.
The author of the original Republican credo finally did emerge and join the conversation, but unsurprisingly his comments did not offer any explanation for the point-by-point refutation of his earlier rant masquerading as rhetoric."
Jorg... I responded point-by-point to your credo posted last year. Crickets. A pattern is emerging.
Just a couple of months ago, you told me there were "several" books that better explain why the Electoral College should be eliminated than what you have published. When pressed, you could not suggest one title. You finally offered Eric Holder's, "Our Unfinished March" as the book that could better explain your position on the EC. It didn't. I read the book and provided you a detailed summary why Holder's book... focused on individual voting rights... did not provide the explanation you promised. Your response? Crickets, again.
Now, you want me to state my disagreement with last week's post and provide reasons for disagreeing... again. Sorry. Why would I do so only to hear a resounding chorus of crickets?
Ray: That doesn’t do it! All I ask is for you to refer to a single statement in my latest LTE that you disagree with, not what you have stated in the past. Just one clear example, and make it brief and to the point! I know you can do it!
None of the books I had recently read and listed for you last year, did primarily address the Electoral College problem, but all had more or less, direct or indirect references. Eric Holder’s book “Our Unfinished March”, however, contains several direct references, which I listed for your benefit. Read the text instead of just the index.
Jorg... so much for a restful Sunday morning. The afternoon will be different.
In my previous post this morning... "I submitted a rebuttal to your post last week, and that rebuttal included questions challenging claims made in your post by you without explanation or substantiation... questions that still remain unanswered."
Why is it that you skip over and ignore direct questions that challenge your claims that Republicans, as a political party, are responsible for the "bloody" events on January 6 or that Republicans are physically attacking FBI agents and the agents' families? These questions were asked four days ago... crickets. If you would like to continue the discussion of your post, please respond.
No comment about your "credo"?
With respect to the Holder book... in our exchange about the book, I asked you for references to support your position re: the EC. You sent me a list that appeared to be "borrowed" from the book's index.
I wrote, "... tossing a chronological list of pages my way without comment does not speak to arguments against the EC as you have suggested. You see, Jorg, I am taking notes as I work through Holder's book. I made a note about his mention of the EC on page 40. It talks about how delegates were selected back in the day. It is not an indictment of the larger EC system. You'll have to try harder. I also made a note about Holder's mention of the EC on page 18. Guess what, Jorg? That page number is not listed in the index. I am reading for context and understanding."
Oh, it gets better. I continued, "Holder's book is not grist for the mill for you to grind on the EC. His book, according to you, is supposed to explain your argument against the EC. It doesn't. Just because you both would like to abolish the EC does not create a nexus between Holder's largely historical treatment of the EC and your ranting about presumed voter suppression. Holder himself tells prospective readers what his book his about on the book jacket and in the introduction. BTW... the EC is mentioned only once... on 16th page of that 17 page introduction."
Then I wrote, "I am becoming weary (again) of you failing to address rebuttals of your claims. In the previous email sent by me, I asked for a revised list of the page numbers appearing in the index that support your argument against the EC. No answer."
Lastly, I sent you a very, very detailed summary of Holder's book. BTW... he does not turn his direct attention to abolishing the EC until page 198 of a 222 page book. Did you refute anything in that summary? Nope.
I feel confident in saying we all appreciate the quality of your research. And your grace is rarely matched. As I have previously shared with you, we all have a role to play. So, once again, I thank God for the sacrificial lambs He provides.
I had silently pledged to myself to stay away from the DJ comments section this afternoon, but I will always respond to your remarks if I am able. Thank you for your kind words.
Our Scandinavian friend certainly is a unique fellow. I can appreciate his passion for his political orientation, but his frequent use of pejoratives and purposeful evasiveness are very, very frustrating. Nevertheless, I have invited him to lunch in the past and that invitation will remain open. Going forward, I will endeavor to focus on positions not personalities, and leave ad hominem posts to those who are comfortable with them.
Wow... only 79 days until the midterm elections. Hopefully, the only "October surprise" we'll see will be an early blanket of snow around your home.
Hey... did I miss something? Anchorage's mayor vetoed the use of federal money for low-income housing... and the city may bus homeless folks to Centennial Park Campground as the weather gets colder? Camping outside during the winter in Alaska? Is Anchorage's mayor Dave Bronson related to actor Charles Bronson? He sounds like a tough guy...
Mayor Bronson and the Anchorage Assembly both have plans to shelter the homeless. Being homeless in Alaska is not for the faint of heart. But resources are made available. IMHO, the Mayor thinks like a businessman, not a politician.
Yes sir, fireweed has gone to seed, and foliage is turning color. We are losing more than 5 1/2 minutes of daylight per day. WINTER IS COMING. But so are two cords of split seasoned birch. [smile]
Poor Jorg - painted into a corner and now trying to change the subject with his Electoral College bellyaching. Bellyaching which would be soothed if Jorg took a class in American Government.
Terence Y: However, I wonder what in American Government 101 made you believe that there is no connection between the Electoral College and all the trouble we have had over the last 20 years, or so. Only thanks to the Democratic, majority elected administrations that followed the Republican minority selected mis-ads, were we rescued from going straight over the cliff, an edge we’re still balancing on after the last, trumped up one. What a fitting last name for lying Donald!
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(59) comments
Why even have courts? Jorg has the answer and the solution. He sounds like a kid who did not get his choice of ice cream.
How RIGHT you are, Dirk!
Blah, blah, blah, another day, more of Jorg’s “orange-man bad” garbage about our great President Trump. Hey Jorg, instead of your tunnel vision, why don’t you discuss a few other topics? How about our great President Trump slaying the dynasties of Bush, Cheney, McCain, and Clinton, with yesterday’s ousting of your favorite RINO on the kangaroo court known as the Unselect Committee? How about your favorite Alaskan, Sarah Palin, advancing to the general election (shout out to Wilfred, my favorite Alaskan, who doesn’t appear to have been on the ballot)? How about Bill O’Reilly, who audience-wise, is now more popular than when he was on Fox? How about a Houston school district approving $2 million for rifles, shields, ammo, and radios? How about a Florida county adding AR-15s to schools for classroom defense? Unlike Chuck Schumer, these school districts care about school safety. Just a few topics outside your one-track mind…
Thank you very much, Terence Y, for such a subtle, well phrased support of my points! RIGHT you are, - again!
Thank you very much, Jorg, for such an overt endorsement of my post proving your tunnel vision. RIGHT I am, again!
I'll change his moniker from Bagdad Jorg to Tantrum Jorg.
So, apparently, according the Trump lovers, it's ok to be a liar, cheater and criminal law breaker like Trump. And like a child, since Jorg supports the rule of law in America, you resort to calling him names. Purely childish!
Mike O - do you really know what Jorg supports? Selective application of the Rule of Law? You are kidding and you are calling me childish?
I guess Mike O missed pretty much all of Jorg’s correspondence where Jorg calls other people names and initiates ad hominem attacks. It’s cute that Mike O is trying to defend Jorg’s honor, although misguided and under the false impression Jorg has credibility. Hey Mike O, why don’t you get your new friend Jorg to list a treasonous Biden accomplishment? He can’t. If memory serves, neither can you.
Terence Y: Pay attention to the news, and don't let Fox confuse you! If you haven't grasped yet, what a crook Trump is, and what kind of multiple trouble he is in, I don't think anything can help you. If nothing else, just hang in there, and try to see what eventually happens.
Another brick in the wall TY.
Psychobabble, MO.
Hello, Jorg
Today’s LTE is a truncated version of the opinion piece you published on your blog post two days ago. I responded to your post in an email as I have learned rebuttals submitted to your blog post that refute your viewpoint are summarily deleted.
We’ll hit some high points now…
In you view, the “bloody Jan. 6 insurrection” was “clearly instigated by Donald Trump.” Before going any further, let me say I’m sure we can agree everyone who breached the Capitol, damaged federal property or stole any federal property should be fairly prosecuted. Now for a question… how many people died during the “bloody” Capitol riots and what was the cause of death? Another question… What evidence… not hearsay or DNC conjecture… supports your claim re: instigation?
Following the Mar-a-Lago raid, you claimed that FBI agents and their families were being attacked. Yes, it appears Ricky Shiffer tried to breach the FBI offices in Cincinnati. However, it also appears he was readying himself to do something unhinged before the Mar-a-Lago raid. Do you remember the riots in 2020? Major cities torched, over a billion dollars in property damage, and 25 persons killed. “Mostly peaceful” protesters spray painting “ACAB” on anything that didn’t move, and some of them chanting, “What do we want? Dead cops!” The DNC held their convention that same summer and their nominee said nothing. Following the 2020 summer of rioting, the National Police Association reported for 2021 a nearly 60% increase in the murdering of police officers. Next question… who was attacking and killing those police officers? Last question… who is attacking FBI agents and their families?
Barack Obama and transparency? We’ll get to that a little later...
Ray;
The evidence that Trump instigated the Jan. 6 attack on our nation's capitol, is plain to see for everyone. Trump is guilty of 'inciting a riot'; 'conspiracy'; and, 'aiding and abetting'. My education and background is in Law, and Law Enforcement. I know your background is not in those fields. Simply listening to and watching Trump's rallies and comments the days before, and the day of, Jan. 6, you will hear him incite the crowd of supporters. He repeatedly says the word "fight", raises his fist, which is a sign of violence, and says the phrase "fight like h..l". Video and audio recordings don't lie Ray. That's not hearsay. You may need to look that word up. As as usual, all Trump supporters use 'deflection' by bringing up something totally unrelated to the Jan. 6 attack, like the BLM riots, whenever they realize that they are wrong. Good luck with that one!
Mike
You wrote yesterday that your, "... education and background is in Law, and Law Enforcement." That sounds very open ended. What does your statement mean? With that in mind, I wrote that everyone... let me repeat that... everyone who breached the Capitol, vandalized federal property or stole federal property should be fairly prosecuted.
We can say with some confidence that a person is guilty after they have been fairly prosecuted and convicted. However, before any indictment or court process, you have leapt forward to a guilty finding of Donald Trump for inciting a riot and conspiracy... and while this matter may conclude with a guilty verdict, we're not there. You'll note, I did not include the aiding and abetting issue mentioned in your comments. That may be an easier case to make... and like I said... everyone who participated in the Capitol riots should be fairly prosecuted. However, it will take more than a video featuring repetition of the word "fight" to make a case for aiding and abetting. As an aside, you would not have to look very far to find file footage of your favorite Democratic Party representatives exhorting their constituents to fight for or against a policy.
Let's get back to evidence of instigation. Select Committee members wanted to prove their claims that Trump was angry and wanted to go to the Capitol after making his remarks at The Ellipse. What was the centerpiece of that claim? Testimony by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson recounting things she said she was told but did not witness. This is where Trump lunging from a backseat to grab the steering wheel story started. The persons who were present in the vehicle contradicted Hutchinson's hearsay version of those events.
Jorg detests Trump followers... that is his prerogative. However, when he makes unsupported claims about the "bloody Jan. 6 insurrection," he should be able to tell us how many people died and the cause of death. I asked him... no response. He also claimed that FBI agents and their families were being attacked. When asked for examples... no response. In his LTE, Jorg has suggested that persons on the right side of the political aisle are dangerous. Yet, he offers nothing to substantiate his claims. Then, he avoids making any comment about the death and destruction caused by very left activists. It is not deflection to ask him for something to support his claims.
Jorg did not answer any of the questions posed in my rebuttal to his LTE. Would you like to do so?
Jorg
As you know, I am not a fan of recent Democratic Party presidents, however, I am not a dyed in the wool Trump supporter. I called Joe Biden’s 2020 election win before major news outlets, I have spoken out against Trump’s style of communications via Twitter as well as the false and exaggerated information in his Tweets, and I have publicly stated that I hope the RNC selects someone other than Trump in 2024.
That being said, don’t you think we should treat government officials regardless of party… the same?
You finished your LTE with some comments about Barack Obama and the transfer of documents to his presidential library in Chicago. Barack fashioned himself the most transparent president… ever. As an aside, it’s mildly amusing that you criticize the right for being untruthful. However, you go silent on… if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor… if you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan… health care premiums will go down.
As promised, let’s look at Barack and transparency...
In the last two years of Barack's presidency, according to the AP and reported by PBS, his administration set records for censoring or outright denying access to documents requested under FOIA guidelines... Additionally, CBS reported the Obama administration spent a record 36 million dollars defending against lawsuits filed to obtain records…
Did Barack Obama's staff cooperate with the National Archives folks in transferring documents to the feds after Barack left office? Yes. Does that mean all documents associated with Barack's presidency were handled in the same way during and after his eight years in office?
Is there a reason to suspect the Obama administration just may not be as transparent as it pretended to be? Real Clear Politics reported in Barack's last year in office, “In the middle of directing the difficult task of transferring the historically important records of the Obama administration into the National Archives, the archivist in charge, David Ferriero, ran into a serious problem: A lot of key records are missing.”
Switching gears temporarily… how were Hillary's tens of thousands of emails on a private server handled? Did FBI agents show up with guns drawn for a predawn raid at Chappaqua?
Don’t you think we should treat government officials regardless of party… the same?
Ray - unless you really like to submit LTE's in great detail, why waste your precious writing skills on Jorg? You will never be able to change his mind. I am convinced that he is actually messing with some of us. His relentless attacks on Trump have become comical, if not irrational, for some time.
You're catching on, Dirk!
Ray, are you really going to go to the old deflection of Hillary and her emails? She broke no laws as demonstrated by her full day in testifying without resorting to taking the 5th. Trump, on the other hand, kept top secret documents for 18 months after leaving office despite requests he return these documents on many occasions. He committed serious crimes in doing so. Did the FBI agents have guns drawn on their visit? Were you there? Do you know the dangers of a Secret Service response however possibly accidental?.
Good morning, Rel
I asked Jorg, "Don’t you think we should treat government officials regardless of party… the same?" Same question to you.
It's not deflection to compare and contrast the treatment of Democratic Party officials and politicians against the treatment of Republicans.
Most of my friends are liberal... that makes sense for someone living in a Blue county in a very Blue state. Two days ago, while enjoying an adult beverage with a former co-worker, our conversation turned to current events and the Mar-a-Lago raid. I was surprised that my friend had no idea about the FBI's shenanigans re: obtaining FISA warrants. He asked me for some information, and this is what I sent him:
The FBI and FISA warrants... here's a link to a CNN article: https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/17/politics/fisa-court-slams-fbi-conduct/index.html Did the FBI provide false information and withhold information to bolster its request to spy on Trump aide Carter Page as part of its Russian collusion investigation? Here's just one excerpt...
Federal judge Rosemary Collyer wrote, "The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable."
I concluded with... This is not wild-eyed, right wing extremist rhetoric. The source is CNN... CNN is not a fan of Donald Trump. OK... did Trump and his associates early on deny connections to Russia in a misleading way? Yes. Did those connections translate to Russian collusion? No. Did Democrats feed false information about the Trump campaign to the FBI? Yes. Could the FBI corroborate the information coming from Democrats? No. Did the FBI use uncorroborated information to obtain surveillance warrants as part of its ongoing investigation into the Trump campaign? Yes. Does it look like the FBI favors Democrats?
You asked whether agents had guns drawn then asked if I was present during the search warrant service. Well, no... I was not Florida last week. I'm guessing you were not there either. I'm also guessing you watched some video of the event. Let me ask... in those videos, did agents have their weapons holstered or were the weapons "at the ready?"
I submitted a rebuttal to Jorg's LTE yesterday. In that post, I asked him some questions about his claims. He has not responded. Would you like to answer those questions?
That brings us back to Hillary. It's not deflection. Hillary authorized use of a personal server that processed thousands of emails. Maybe some of those emails were recipes and yoga routines but those emails also included classified documents. The FBI director exonerated Hillary before he interviewed her. Skrrrrip! (sound of stylus on vinyl) No predawn search warrant served at Chapa
Ray: You are using the tired old trick of bringing up unrelated issues, like “what about this” and “what about that” ad infinitum, - to which I/we have no obligation to respond. It is like bringing up the Vikings, or Mao Zedong, in a discussion about Hitler and the Nazi atrocities during WWII. You even bring up President Obama’s “lie” about keeping your doctor! My goodness, how many times have I tried to explain this to one of the densest ones on this site, that this misunderstanding was not a lie, but what the ACA was designed to do, among other things, and that Obama was told would be the case, while various concessions and changes had to be made in the last minute to get the whole thing through. My goodness, how clean Obama must be, if one has to stoop that low to get something on him. Anything!
Jorg... it's simply not "whataboutism" to ask you for examples of FBI agents and their families being attacked after the Mar-a-Lago raid. You made that claim, and apparently you are unable to support it.
Unrelated issues? Vikings... Mao Zedong... WWII? In this thread? Where?
You hold up your favorite president, Barack Obama, as the paragon of virtue. That's OK. You then deride Donald Trump as a liar... I do not disagree with you... however... "you can keep your doctor" was just plain deception. MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, Barack's chief architect for Obamacare, said that the admin had to lie to the "stupid" American people to get the ACA legislation passed. One of two possibilities... Barack was fully aware of the lie or he was asleep at the switch. Your choice. Why is questioning the background on a piece of legislation of that magnitude stooping low?
So, I guess we will not get any answers to questions about your LTE.
Ray: If you write something that makes sense, that is related to my post and submitted through the blog, I will publish it, even if you disagree in a meaningful and informative manner. But, as you should know now, I won’t accept long-winded, verbose rantings about your own favorite repeats that go out on tangents.
Others have responded to most of your comments on this site, so just let me say that you don’t seem very well informed about the latest events, possibly because you trust Fox, which is not a news channel, but a farse. I recommend MSNBC, which is factual, well researched and informative, besides trustworthy.
So, when will I see worthy comments to my latest blog posts, submitted through the appropriate channel?
Jorg
You don't like "long-winded, verbose rantings?" OK...
I submitted a rebuttal to your 8-15 blog post in the form of an email. Let me know what you consider to be long winded, verbose and tangential… and I will submit something through “the appropriate channel.”
So... I'm not well informed because you believe I trust Fox? I hate to disappoint you but that is not the case. In this thread, I have cited the AP, PBS, CBS and CNN... you know, those right wing news outlets.
I'm glad you rejoined the conversation. That gives me a chance to ask you to respond to the questions you have skipped over: How many people died during the “bloody” Capitol riots and what was the cause of death? What evidence… not hearsay or DNC conjecture… supports your claim re: instigation? Who was attacking and killing police officers in record numbers during 2021? Who is attacking FBI agents and their families following the Mar-a-Lago raid? Don’t you think we should treat government officials regardless of party… the same?
I noted that you posted another anti-religious opinion piece on your blog site yesterday. I feel sorry that Rep. Adam Kinzinger has suffered a family dispute that involves the family’s religious convictions. I disagree with his earlier comments about religion and politics in America, but there is no question he is a man of faith. Adam is not running for re-election in November, but it is not because… as he told MSNBC… he has been kicked out of his tribe. He left the tribe.
Ray: Didn't you see what I just wrote about your incessant "what-aboutism"? I'm not wasting time responding to all you bring up, unrelated to what I initially wrote. Since you sent me an e-mail about a potential post comment to my blog, I will respond likewise, and not through this site.
Jorg
You asked at 10:32 am... answered at 10:37 am.
Hi, Jorg
While we're waiting for answers to questions about your 8-17 LTE... let's just skip moving this conversation to your blog site. Let's keep it here...
Ray: You asked: "who is attacking FBI agents and their families?" Don't you follow the news at all?
Sorry, Jorg... "Don't you follow the news at all?" is not an answer.
There are right wing outliers out there. They mistrust the government and would like to do harm to our institutions which include law enforcement. No doubt. Ricky Shiffer in Cincinnati is a good example. The mirror images of those those outliers are the left wing activists described by me earlier in this thread. We saw some of their harm in the death and destruction in our cities two years ago. The right wing extremists do not represent Republicans just as the left wing extremists do not represent Democrats.
Let's look at your opinion piece published on 8-15. You wrote, "Republicans are ganging up to protect and support their cult leader Trump... FBI agents and their families are attacked..." So, it's pretty simple, Jorg... who is attacking FBI agents and their families? When and where is this happening? You made the claim, and I'm asking you for examples. Again, suggesting that someone follow the news is not an answer.
You dismiss queries about your dubious claims by relegating them to "what aboutisms." OK... here's one for you. What about your claims re: the "bloody January 6 insurrection"? When asked about the causalities on that day... you go silent. Jorg, how "bloody" was it? Other than rioters, who suffered death or injury at the Capitol?
Jorg...
It was only three weeks ago your LTE, "Disagree with grace" appeared in the DJ. You condemned inappropriate and degrading rhetoric. I agreed with you (twice). You wrapped up your LTE this way, "Let’s upgrade to a more respectable and agreeable level, folks. OK?"
Then, three days ago, you post an opinion piece that refers to Republicans as dishonest and stupid. What happened to eschewing inappropriate and degrading rhetoric?
I emailed you a rebuttal. Every point in that email has appeared in this thread. I have posed direct questions to your opinion piece.
You claim the January 6 riot was a "bloody insurrection." Tell us how. No response. You claim Republicans are attacking FBI agents and their families. Tell us when and where. No response.
I suggested that you identify what you consider to be long-winded, verbose and tangential material in my email rebuttal so I could submit it through your "appropriate channel." And I did get a response. Here it is... Sorry, Ray, nothing of interest here for my blog. Nothing that responds directly to what I wrote, - only more "what-abouts" that I won't waste time and blog space on. And, please keep your blog comments out of the DJ Opinion site!
Wow.
Ray: You don't need me to feed you the news. It is out there, in the media, so pay attention. It is no hidden secret that FBI agents and their families are being threatened, and that the Jan. 6 insurrection was bloody.
Btw.: You can't claim credit for realizing early that Biden had won, and that Trump lost, the US presidency. You had to be pretty stupid to buy the big lie about a rigged 2020 election, or very dishonest to claim that you did believe it, without a shred of evidence. And for a foreign adversary, Trump would be the #1 choice, so why rig the election against him, rather than for him, like what very likely was done in 2016?
Jorg
There you go again… labeling someone who does not agree with your viewpoint as stupid and dishonest. What happened to your theme of “disagree with grace”?
Whoa… whoa… whoa… you said FBI agents and their families were being attacked… physically… now, according to you, they are being “threatened.” There is a difference. We can agree that threats against public officials (which includes law enforcement)… actually, threats against anyone… is serious and unacceptable. However, in this day and age, we can unfortunately expect ramped up threats following a high visibility event like the Mar-a-Lago raid. Those threats are likely being made by the right-wing extremist types described in my 2:35 pm post… not by workaday Republicans as you have asserted.
Jorg, for the record, I did not “buy the big lie about a rigged 2020 election.” As you recall, the November 3 election results were not immediately settled. However, three days later, I said, in these pages, Joe Biden won the 2020 election. Seven major news networks made that same call four days after the election. So, yes, I can claim credit “for realizing early that Biden had won, and that Trump lost, the US presidency.”
This LTE should not ask why is the right so wrong, but rather... why does Jorg bring us sorg?
Ray, Terence,
After reading this thread, I have but one thing to say.
"I love the smell of napalm in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill bombed for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn’t find one of ’em, not one stinkin' dink body. The smell, you know that gasoline smell, the whole hill. Smelled like victory."
Thanks, Wilfredo... one of my favorite bits of movie dialogue... and totally applicable to this thread.
Wilfred, thanks for that classic… The bigger question is whether you have a preference for the original, Redux, or Final Cut? Maybe in 7 years, we’ll see a 50th anniversary Final, Final Cut? BTW, you’re not auditioning for a role on Life Below Zero, are you?
Good morning, Terence
"Redux" for me...
Good morning my friends,
As for most movies, call me an "originalist". Hehe
I have not watched any of the Alaska shows. And I won't be auditioning for them. But I have fished in wicked seas, frozen my lower extremities in glacial rivers and slept under the stars on spruce limb beds. I don't imagine tv shows depict the reality of it. LOL
Yep - if the Left was running the show we'd all be happier woke Communists.
Ed - You confuse me with that huge flag of China flying in your front yard.
Oh, Ed, one of your very best so far! I am so impressed!
Fellow commentators: Do you see more clearly now what I meant by abolishing the outdated Electoral College, and let the majority decide the presidency? Not only would we have avoided the unnecessary, unwinnable, and bloody wars initiated by the Bush jr. administration, partly based on blatant lies, but we would also have avoided the massive trouble Trump has caused, the extent of which is mind boggling and expanding daily? What on flat Earth is the justification for such a costly, archaic idea that even the Founding Fathers questioned the value of, but accepted as a compromise at the time to get the republic off its shaky feet.
SS,DD... Same Stuff, Different Day
Short & Sweet, Ray! Does that mean that you agree there is no advantage of the EC that justifies the high cost, - in human life, money, national safety and world reputation? So Done with that Dialog!
Nope. It's the same stuff you post over and over again. When your viewpoint is refuted... you go silent. "SS,DD" is the only thing that needs to be said.
Jorg... and everyone else on this thread... have a great weekend!
Ray: For the slow learners who still haven’t grasped what kind of serious trouble we are in, repetition may be the key. May be not. Perhaps you can explain to all of us where I am wrong with any of the main points I have tried to make lately. Please be specific and relate directly to what I have said here, on this site.
Been there... done that.
Ray: Neither been there, nor done that, as far as I can see.
Jorg... au contraire
Ray: So, show me a single example where you responded directly to one of my statements in the LTE above, and proved me wrong! Where? When?
Sorry, Jorg... I missed your comment published last night.
I submitted a rebuttal to your post last week, and that rebuttal included questions challenging claims made in your post by you without explanation or substantiation... questions that still remain unanswered. This is a pattern we have seen over and over again...
Do you remember your "Radical Republican" credo published last year? Re: that post, I commented:
Jorg submitted another anti-Trump rant on May 7 disguised as what he called a "Radical Republican" cult credo. It is exactly what we have come to expect from the left wing. During the back and forth generated by his letter and other readers' comments, I acknowledged that the former president exaggerates, shapes facts and sometimes just makes up things. However, what I find extremely curious is the left wing's silence on exaggeration, shaping of facts and outright fabrication that comes from the left side of the aisle as well as the MSM. In response to Jorg's latest diatribe, I responded with a "Progressive Democrat" credo. It used the same items listed in Jorg's credo with a twist... they were applied to the left but cited real examples from current issues and events. I invited a rebuttal... crickets. I asked again for a response... more crickets. So, I penned an LTE that appeared in the DJ on May 14 that called out such rants for what they are... disrespectful and divisive.
The author of the original Republican credo finally did emerge and join the conversation, but unsurprisingly his comments did not offer any explanation for the point-by-point refutation of his earlier rant masquerading as rhetoric."
Jorg... I responded point-by-point to your credo posted last year. Crickets. A pattern is emerging.
Just a couple of months ago, you told me there were "several" books that better explain why the Electoral College should be eliminated than what you have published. When pressed, you could not suggest one title. You finally offered Eric Holder's, "Our Unfinished March" as the book that could better explain your position on the EC. It didn't. I read the book and provided you a detailed summary why Holder's book... focused on individual voting rights... did not provide the explanation you promised. Your response? Crickets, again.
Now, you want me to state my disagreement with last week's post and provide reasons for disagreeing... again. Sorry. Why would I do so only to hear a resounding chorus of crickets?
It's Sunday... a day of rest. Let's both rest.
Ray: That doesn’t do it! All I ask is for you to refer to a single statement in my latest LTE that you disagree with, not what you have stated in the past. Just one clear example, and make it brief and to the point! I know you can do it!
None of the books I had recently read and listed for you last year, did primarily address the Electoral College problem, but all had more or less, direct or indirect references. Eric Holder’s book “Our Unfinished March”, however, contains several direct references, which I listed for your benefit. Read the text instead of just the index.
Jorg... so much for a restful Sunday morning. The afternoon will be different.
In my previous post this morning... "I submitted a rebuttal to your post last week, and that rebuttal included questions challenging claims made in your post by you without explanation or substantiation... questions that still remain unanswered."
Why is it that you skip over and ignore direct questions that challenge your claims that Republicans, as a political party, are responsible for the "bloody" events on January 6 or that Republicans are physically attacking FBI agents and the agents' families? These questions were asked four days ago... crickets. If you would like to continue the discussion of your post, please respond.
No comment about your "credo"?
With respect to the Holder book... in our exchange about the book, I asked you for references to support your position re: the EC. You sent me a list that appeared to be "borrowed" from the book's index.
I wrote, "... tossing a chronological list of pages my way without comment does not speak to arguments against the EC as you have suggested. You see, Jorg, I am taking notes as I work through Holder's book. I made a note about his mention of the EC on page 40. It talks about how delegates were selected back in the day. It is not an indictment of the larger EC system. You'll have to try harder. I also made a note about Holder's mention of the EC on page 18. Guess what, Jorg? That page number is not listed in the index. I am reading for context and understanding."
Oh, it gets better. I continued, "Holder's book is not grist for the mill for you to grind on the EC. His book, according to you, is supposed to explain your argument against the EC. It doesn't. Just because you both would like to abolish the EC does not create a nexus between Holder's largely historical treatment of the EC and your ranting about presumed voter suppression. Holder himself tells prospective readers what his book his about on the book jacket and in the introduction. BTW... the EC is mentioned only once... on 16th page of that 17 page introduction."
Then I wrote, "I am becoming weary (again) of you failing to address rebuttals of your claims. In the previous email sent by me, I asked for a revised list of the page numbers appearing in the index that support your argument against the EC. No answer."
Lastly, I sent you a very, very detailed summary of Holder's book. BTW... he does not turn his direct attention to abolishing the EC until page 198 of a 222 page book. Did you refute anything in that summary? Nope.
Crickets.
It's Sunday... rest.
Ray,
I feel confident in saying we all appreciate the quality of your research. And your grace is rarely matched. As I have previously shared with you, we all have a role to play. So, once again, I thank God for the sacrificial lambs He provides.
Wilfredo...
I had silently pledged to myself to stay away from the DJ comments section this afternoon, but I will always respond to your remarks if I am able. Thank you for your kind words.
Our Scandinavian friend certainly is a unique fellow. I can appreciate his passion for his political orientation, but his frequent use of pejoratives and purposeful evasiveness are very, very frustrating. Nevertheless, I have invited him to lunch in the past and that invitation will remain open. Going forward, I will endeavor to focus on positions not personalities, and leave ad hominem posts to those who are comfortable with them.
Wow... only 79 days until the midterm elections. Hopefully, the only "October surprise" we'll see will be an early blanket of snow around your home.
Hey... did I miss something? Anchorage's mayor vetoed the use of federal money for low-income housing... and the city may bus homeless folks to Centennial Park Campground as the weather gets colder? Camping outside during the winter in Alaska? Is Anchorage's mayor Dave Bronson related to actor Charles Bronson? He sounds like a tough guy...
Ray,
Mayor Bronson and the Anchorage Assembly both have plans to shelter the homeless. Being homeless in Alaska is not for the faint of heart. But resources are made available. IMHO, the Mayor thinks like a businessman, not a politician.
Yes sir, fireweed has gone to seed, and foliage is turning color. We are losing more than 5 1/2 minutes of daylight per day. WINTER IS COMING. But so are two cords of split seasoned birch. [smile]
Poor Jorg - painted into a corner and now trying to change the subject with his Electoral College bellyaching. Bellyaching which would be soothed if Jorg took a class in American Government.
Terence Y: You don't even see the relation between how wrong the Right is, and the Electoral College? Sorry, way beyond me to explain it to you!
Terence Y: However, I wonder what in American Government 101 made you believe that there is no connection between the Electoral College and all the trouble we have had over the last 20 years, or so. Only thanks to the Democratic, majority elected administrations that followed the Republican minority selected mis-ads, were we rescued from going straight over the cliff, an edge we’re still balancing on after the last, trumped up one. What a fitting last name for lying Donald!
Jorg...
SS,DD
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.