Eric, a couple of weeks ago you asked your readers to vote if a convicted felon could run for office. I have different take on the question. A convicted felon can only appear on ballots in states that allow convicted felons to vote
Really--I just saw him on screen recently but obviously an old screenshot. I really liked him and he evolved well as a musician over the years. It may have been a documentary on Norms Rare Vintage Guitars which I would highly recommend. Thx Zorn
don't know if this is a candidate for tune of the week, but i highly recommend the Playing for Change version of The Weight, vintage 2020, featuring Robbie R & Ringo S - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph1GU1qQ1zQ
Regarding whether the current president has a mandate, I’d let people say ‘yes’, because it is not just the margin of victory. It is the fact that Republicans won control of both houses of Congress as well. That is better than winning 60% but not controlling the House.
Apart from epic corruption, selling out his "base" to oligarchs, pardoning murderers and people who engage in sedition, breaking up peaceful families, and reinforcing white privilege, what exactly is this mandate for?
You beat me to it. Not only that, when did his political opposition lose the ability to have a voice? You know I keep saying he sounds like Hitler. Actually the USSR and China are just as good, where there is only one legal political party.
a couple definitions of 'mandate' i found online - an official order or commission to do something; the authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election.
trump obviously doesn't have the 1st of these. and altho i'm loath to acknowledge it, he might have a 'mandate' by the 2nd.
if he does have a mandate - POTUS [narrow margin], senate, house [narrower margin] - i'm hoping & confident he & his pack of elected & appt'd lemmings/rats will p*ss it away before the 2022 midtem elections.
Late to the mandate party ... I think "mandate" (and pardon, as well) have to be taken in context of the times. Nothing is normal any longer, nothing is as it used to be, including standard definitions of words. In general I don't see Trump's win as a mandate by the numbers at all. About 89 million eligible voters (36%) didn't even bother to vote. It's also difficult to use the word mandate when there were so many factors that played into this presidential election (and the past two, too): Misinformation/disinformation, abysmal media coverage for years and the proliferation of "information" sources with no criteria for understanding their credibility, one candidate who has been "running" non-stop since 2015 vs. one candidate who campaigned for 100 days (with a portion of voters asking as November approached Huh? Did Biden drop out? Who replaced him?), the economy and voters' wacky perceptions of how the economy and capitalism work, misogyny, race, cultural issues, the decade-long drumbeat of voter supression, fraud that never existed, lies, lies, more lies, the completely UN-informed ... the list goes on. I can't believe that a fair number of voters who voted for Trump really truly voted for his policies that clearly outlined hate, fear, cruelty, revenge. Policies that would ensure immigrant families would be torn apart, women's rights would be dismantled, the LGBTQ community would be upended. Do Trump voters - including the college-age boys on campus - have any idea where they'll get their grants and loans once Trump erases the Department of Education? Does the Trump-supporting Latino Chicago businessman who met with Tom Homan about work permits for his Mexican community understand what White Christian Nationalism means for his people? Do the anti-vax young moms who think an RFK appointment will save their kids from autism also think that Trump's shutting down of HHS communications to the public and his order to stop working with WHO will be in the best interests of their kids, themselves, or anyone else? Does his base understand that any Trump tax break isn't going to help them but will make his rich buddies richer? I don't think half of Trump's voters knew what they were voting for - even though it all was laid out in Project 2025 if they'd paid attention. Of course there were those who did know - and like - what they were voting for. But, no, we just can't use the word mandate.
"A year from now, when groceries don't cost less and gas doesn't cost less, we're going to remind you all that you traded the lives and dignity of your wives, daughters, sisters and mothers for the promise of cheaper goods that you're not going to get. Then we're going to remind you that we have always known it was never about the economy. We see you. We've always seen you. We've always known what it is about. — Unknown" The tone and content of this anonymous quote sound very much like the great Tennessee Brando's song "Cheaper eggs." (www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWu0v8ktUxg)
I was wondering where Chuck Goudie was! There were stories recently that I thought seemed up his alley but had other personnel reporting them. Disney let a good one slip away
I don't think "he slipped away". I think he was sort of forced to quit, but why, we may never know. Maybe he pissed off that out of control, egomaniacal Cheryl Burton, who also managed to get Mark Giangreco fired over a harmless joke.
Here's where I really can't stand her. Jimmy Kimmel pre-records dozens & dozens of promos for his show earlier that night, saying the local news anchor's names. Every time Burton intros that little segment near the end of the 10 PM news, she goes "Hey Jimmy", likes she's actually talking to him, when in fact he recorded that a few hours earlier. The appalling phoniness of it is disgusting. Plus I can't stand her clothing, it's obvious she spends a small fortune on it, or does the station pay for it?
She needs to find clothes that fit or have them tailored. She's bursting out of those tops! When I worked in TV news anchors and reporters got a clothing allowance but it was miniscule (around 1999-2000 it was $200/year for reporters, $400 for anchors in Grand Rapids, MI, the 38th news market in US). There was a contract with a local salon for regular hair cuts/color. And don't get me started on the consultants they brought in regularly to tell everyone what to wear and how to do their hair. An announcement that the consultants were coming in always brought a groan from the newsroom morning meeting.
Burton is the sole reason I switched my local TV news loyalty from channel 7 to channel 9, and have been content ever since. All of the WGN anchors and reporters are professional and engaging, and even make it possible to put up with the pornographic elements that seem to be a requirement of local news reporting. The only one I could do without is Jared Payton, who has always grated on my nerves.
SO agree. Frederick's of Hollywood loves her clothing choices. BOTH Cheryls on that station are irritating and a blot on women unlike Karen Jordan, Judy Hsu.
I must say, while I like miniskirts on good looking women, I consistently crack up over Cheryl Scott's every night, no matter how cold it is, that's all she wears. I'm sure the consultants & the station have told her to wear that all the time. I really doubt she wears that outside this time of the year.
We generally watch ABC for both local and national news. EVERY time Chuck Goudie is on, my husband says something along the lines of "why the heck is he still on the air?" I'll have to tell him Goudie no longer is.
I'm wary of curbing presidential pardons. The Founders wanted checks / balances between the 3 branches of government, sort of like rock, paper, scissors. The pardon power is the executive branch's check on the judicial branch.
Yeah when it comes to Modern America we should absolutely do what a bunch of syphilitic slave owners who didn't see women and non-whites as full people wanted.
1. All progress is incremental. They took the first step. They at least got power away from one hereditary king and expanded it to white males. It's been expanding since, using the framework they designed.
2. The pardon power has proved itself. If Biden hadn't used it, we might have the situation where the rioters are pardoned while the committee members (like Liz Chaney) go to prison.
3. We saw that Trump is vindictive, with the removal of Milley's portrait. Without the pardon, they may instead have had him arrested on day 1.
There's another point to be made. No matter what the rules are, they will be violated. It's a fact of life. It happens every minute and second of every day. Our political system has regressed into those being in charge doing what they want, regardless of the rules. There are ways around everything. Suppose EZ's ideas were put in, no matter how unrealistic it might seem. Deals can be made to get certain people off. The problem is not rules. It's people. And now with Trump in charge, the rules are being changed to please him. What's good for the country and ALL citizens no longer matters.
I agree with most of your advice for being old (I'm 77) but would take issue with your organ recital complaint, especially if one is reciting one's organ problems with other old folks. The fact is how we are doing physically is as important to us now as who we were dating and how the babies were pooping in the old days. At my age I spend a lot of time taking people to various doctors when I'm not going myself. I really want to know how that cataract operation went because mine is down the line. Please tell me if the hip replacement really is easier than the knee was and if eating earlier has helped you sleep better.
The piece of advice that I would add to your list: don't let anybody tell you how to be old. You want to keep the damn land line and eat at 4 just do it. No apologies.
Bravo. Am finding that my friends often have great recommendations for doctors and care as well as important information on how to deal with certain problems. Beats talking about the latest teen-bopper performer :)
I think Melanoma's hat was modeled on the shape of the Pizza Hut logo.
Yesterday, someone published that their father worked at the New York Military Academy, where the fat traitor was sent, by his parents to cure him of being a bully, which actually turned him into a bigger bully. But somehow the father saved a paper from the school that has his IQ at 73, actual moron level.
If that paper is accurate, it explains a lot about him!
None of us needed to see that paper to know that The Orange Menace is extremely stupid. His documented inability to learn ANYTHING is astounding in its completeness. Batteries, tariffs, the Bible, eggs, etc. are all beyond his ability to understand.
He is bizarrely incurious about anything. He gets his "facts" from random sources which are always lies, whether about showers that don't work, toilets that don't flush or dishwashers that can't wash dishes, despite the fact that he's never actually used a home dishwasher in his life, probably can't even figure out how to open the door. He just blathers on & on about stuff he doesn't know anything about. Never forget drinking bleach or sticking a UV light up your ass to cure Covid. Without a doubt, the finest or maybe the worst example of the Dunning Kruger symptoms ever seen.
I agree with most of your advice for being old (I'm 77) but would take issue with your organ recital complaint, especially if one is reciting one's organ problems with other old folks. The fact is how we are doing physically is as important to us now as who we were dating and how the babies were pooping in the old days. At my age I spend a lot of time taking people to various doctors when I'm not going myself. I really want to know how that cataract operation went because mine is down the line. Please tell me if the hip replacement really is easier than the knee was and if eating earlier has helped you sleep better.
The piece of advice that I would add to your list: don't let anybody tell you how to be old. You want to keep the damn land line and eat at 4 just do it. No apologies.
in a mixed bag of quips this week [typical - i thought 5 were worth voting for, which is good] - i found several to be gut-busting hilarious. my fave [currently in 3rd place: darkest roast.
“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.” If DJT has enough of the Supreme Court and Congress and electorate convinced that he won in 2020, he has functionally already shattered this constitutional amendment, and can claim that he thus is free to pursue reelection in 2028 and any election year that follows for as long as he lives. He was elected in 2016. He was, according to his version of events, elected in 2020. It doesn't say "shall be sworn in for the office" or "shall serve in the office," so the fact it was Biden who was sworn in after the 2020 election and who served is immaterial to the Liar in Chief. That the Congress certified his election in the 2024 contest, when a (relatively skimpy) plurality of those (relatively few) in the electorate who took the time to vote voted for him, and that the Chief Justice swore him in, none of them ever successfully requiring that he first concede his loss in 2020 as a condition of being admitted constitutionally to the ballot in 2024, demonstrates that he has, indeed, won over the only entities that could prevent him from treating that office his for as long as he wants it. He must not annex Canada. I've never been tempted to renounce the land of my birth for another, although I know, like, and respect some people who have, but if DJT prevails, . . .
Definitely! While he won't be the next president, it's possible there won't be another presidential election; that is, the US could be a dictatorship by then.
Or consider the following 2028 scenario. JD Vance runs for President with Trump as his VP running mate. JD wins. He resigns. Trump was not "elected to the office of the President" for a third time. Hat tip to Gerald Ford.
At least Ford was a generally decent, honorable guy. Trouble for Trump with the Vance plot: JDV seems as power-mad as any of the rest of them, and young enough to keep the new plutocracy in power for decades. Trust him to resign? Why?
Yes, JDV was probably a bad example on my part for this scenario. But what percentage of the GOP would vote for a Joe Schmoe candidate with Trump as the running mate and the implicit understanding that they'd be voting for a third Trump term? We'll see. As Marc Martinez notes below, it probably won't happen, but a lot of things that I thought were unlikely have been happening.
Don't know why not. To be clear, I'm not hoping for this scenario. I just believe it's possible under the Constitution. Happy to be corrected. I remember having a conversation about two years ago with someone who expressed doubt about whether a convicted felon could serve as President........
This is the Putin/Medvedev approach. But it requires the temp to be a complete stooge. Medvedev obtained both substantial wealth and also had many examples of other stooges that 'fell out of windows' when they disappointed Putin. While entertaining, I don't see that scenario working out.
But I can see a Trump scion in the VP slot or maybe even challenging for the top spot after Trump tries kicking Vance to the curb.
In any case, if the Dems can get out of their own way and run a good candidate, they should be able to win, given the usual swings of the political pendulum. I expect the mid-terms will go in the Dem direction.
I have a countdown calendar on my phone that I look at from time to time. I agree one shouldn't wish time away, but I also am a glass half full guy. I always have things on there to look forward to. Vacations, a friend's retirement, etc. Love, laughter, social life are the things that populate it mostly. Not wishing away time, but rather focusing on fun.
I also use it to track long ago, significant events. For instance, my father died when I was 18. I came home to the ambulance in the driveway and life was never the same. It's my oldest logged event, 17,580 days ago it now says.
It's in the Apple Store, but the problem is, it looks strikingly similar to many others. All my Subscription says is "Event Countdown - Calendar App" Premium. There are many, so you may want to try the free versions. But do find one that does charge a bit as they then support it going forward. I had an old one that stopped working and I had to recreate the information.
A long time ago I had a Casio calculator that one could use to count the days between dates. I used it often and my most interesting calculation was when I discovered I had known my husband longer than I had not known him.
Regarding amending the Constitution. As you say, it is a long, arduous, nearly impossible process, but on top of that, as we've seen in recent years, it is subject to the interpretation of the Supreme Court, who can simply wave it off with some verbal gymnastics and a stroke of a pen, given the right people appointed to those posts.
As we're putting more and more years between now and the ratification of the Constitution, it becomes more and more of a religious scripture: written in an archaic language, under a context that is becoming increasingly murky and difficult to relate to, outdated in a few respects. The language is becoming increasingly ambiguous, thus giving rise to splitting sects who point to the same text while justifying very different attitudes.
Maybe on the approaching the country's 250'th anniversary, we should adopt an updated "new translation" version of the Constitution, clarifying the language for today's context and incorporating lessons from history. I am absolutely aware that this is basically an impossibility. I don't know what the solution is, I just wish people smarter than me would work on the problem.
In the meantime, it seems that all government institutions have failed. Voting is the only way left for us to have competent ethical people with character and integrity in power, and I think we have failed at that too.
I completely understand that threat and it's one reason it won't happen any time soon. The problem of the Constitution's ambiguity remains though, and will only get worse with time.
I take an opposing view. Yes, the Constitution seems vague. Actually I call it flexible, adaptable to changing times. Take the Second Amendment for example. There is no way the authors could anticipate modern weaponry. Under the Second, we can control our love for every citizen being heavily armed- if we so chose. Unfortunately it has been interpreted to mean that there are no limitations. Does it need to be changed? Be careful what you wish for. The changes could be put in according to which side holds political sway at the time. We could either end up with a total ban, which would lead to a situation like Prohibition and an underground gun network of gun manufacturers and buyers. Or we could go total freedom and let everyone roam the streets with machine guns.This can be said for any amendment. No, I don't think anyone should have blanket pardon power. That's giving an awful lot of power to just one person in a country of over 300 million. But be careful how it's done. The party in power could give all the control to itself, which I see as no better. How about we give the power to the judiciary and get it out of the hands of elected politicians who do nothing that doesn't please their constituencies?
That's kind of my point - like the Bible, you can read and interpret the Constitution any way you feel like. This is what Republicans have figured out - laws are interpreted and enforced by people. Put the right people on the courts and at the heads of agencies and it doesn't matter one bit what some text was intended to say when it was written, you can do whatever you want with the country.
Byron Allen's mass firing of weather reporters at his local TV stations was brutal. All to use his Weather Channel to replace them. He came off as a nice-ish guy when he was on TV himself but he is a ruthless business man.
Yes please on that amendment. But please allow me to lend you some of my extra outrage--I have plenty to spare--so you can equally condemn both the Biden and Trump pardons. The Jan 6 pardons are so awful they don't need more condemnation here. But Biden's are awful too, cancerous to the entire judicial system which means cancerous to the rule of law. He himself said so four years ago when speculating on whether Trump would issue preemptive pardons as he finished his first term. Soon we'll have presidents routinely pardoning their entire administrations and families down to the third cousins on their way out the door--and then what motivation will there be to NOT commit crimes while serving in government? Plus, we learn more each day that Biden was not up to governing starting on Day One, and the slide was precipitous. Which means we have no idea who even decided on that pardon list.
Four stars! I wanted to super-like your comments. I was also shocked at the time frames of the pardons, some of which went back to 2013. I had also been thinking about the many historical examples of supporters and financiers that got favor.
I have mixed feelings about Biden’s pardons. I think the time frame was to extend it back pre-Trump. I didn’t like the pardons, but then I thought what if he didn’t, and Trump, who has demonstrated his vindictiveness when he was last President, does the unthinkable. There’s little doubt Trump would go after at least the J6 committee people. Congress is already investigating the investigators. Trump yanked the clearances of former intel people who signed a letter expressing their opinion. He had the IRS go after the two former top FBI officials. He fired Vindman’s brother who was not involved in the impeachment process.
So while I didn’t like Biden’s pardons, I completely understand the basis for them.
Eric, a couple of weeks ago you asked your readers to vote if a convicted felon could run for office. I have different take on the question. A convicted felon can only appear on ballots in states that allow convicted felons to vote
I love the tune of the week. The Band were great.
I didnt' realize that he was the last founding member. Wasn't Robbie a founder?
Yes, and he died in August of 2023 at age 80.
Really--I just saw him on screen recently but obviously an old screenshot. I really liked him and he evolved well as a musician over the years. It may have been a documentary on Norms Rare Vintage Guitars which I would highly recommend. Thx Zorn
don't know if this is a candidate for tune of the week, but i highly recommend the Playing for Change version of The Weight, vintage 2020, featuring Robbie R & Ringo S - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph1GU1qQ1zQ
Regarding whether the current president has a mandate, I’d let people say ‘yes’, because it is not just the margin of victory. It is the fact that Republicans won control of both houses of Congress as well. That is better than winning 60% but not controlling the House.
Apart from epic corruption, selling out his "base" to oligarchs, pardoning murderers and people who engage in sedition, breaking up peaceful families, and reinforcing white privilege, what exactly is this mandate for?
revenge
49.6% is not a mandate no matter how you try to define it. It’s not even a majority.
You beat me to it. Not only that, when did his political opposition lose the ability to have a voice? You know I keep saying he sounds like Hitler. Actually the USSR and China are just as good, where there is only one legal political party.
It was a sweep, but not a mandate. Compare, say, Lyndon Johnson 1964.
a couple definitions of 'mandate' i found online - an official order or commission to do something; the authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election.
trump obviously doesn't have the 1st of these. and altho i'm loath to acknowledge it, he might have a 'mandate' by the 2nd.
if he does have a mandate - POTUS [narrow margin], senate, house [narrower margin] - i'm hoping & confident he & his pack of elected & appt'd lemmings/rats will p*ss it away before the 2022 midtem elections.
So when the GOP replace the elephant with the cringing chicken?
Late to the mandate party ... I think "mandate" (and pardon, as well) have to be taken in context of the times. Nothing is normal any longer, nothing is as it used to be, including standard definitions of words. In general I don't see Trump's win as a mandate by the numbers at all. About 89 million eligible voters (36%) didn't even bother to vote. It's also difficult to use the word mandate when there were so many factors that played into this presidential election (and the past two, too): Misinformation/disinformation, abysmal media coverage for years and the proliferation of "information" sources with no criteria for understanding their credibility, one candidate who has been "running" non-stop since 2015 vs. one candidate who campaigned for 100 days (with a portion of voters asking as November approached Huh? Did Biden drop out? Who replaced him?), the economy and voters' wacky perceptions of how the economy and capitalism work, misogyny, race, cultural issues, the decade-long drumbeat of voter supression, fraud that never existed, lies, lies, more lies, the completely UN-informed ... the list goes on. I can't believe that a fair number of voters who voted for Trump really truly voted for his policies that clearly outlined hate, fear, cruelty, revenge. Policies that would ensure immigrant families would be torn apart, women's rights would be dismantled, the LGBTQ community would be upended. Do Trump voters - including the college-age boys on campus - have any idea where they'll get their grants and loans once Trump erases the Department of Education? Does the Trump-supporting Latino Chicago businessman who met with Tom Homan about work permits for his Mexican community understand what White Christian Nationalism means for his people? Do the anti-vax young moms who think an RFK appointment will save their kids from autism also think that Trump's shutting down of HHS communications to the public and his order to stop working with WHO will be in the best interests of their kids, themselves, or anyone else? Does his base understand that any Trump tax break isn't going to help them but will make his rich buddies richer? I don't think half of Trump's voters knew what they were voting for - even though it all was laid out in Project 2025 if they'd paid attention. Of course there were those who did know - and like - what they were voting for. But, no, we just can't use the word mandate.
"A year from now, when groceries don't cost less and gas doesn't cost less, we're going to remind you all that you traded the lives and dignity of your wives, daughters, sisters and mothers for the promise of cheaper goods that you're not going to get. Then we're going to remind you that we have always known it was never about the economy. We see you. We've always seen you. We've always known what it is about. — Unknown" The tone and content of this anonymous quote sound very much like the great Tennessee Brando's song "Cheaper eggs." (www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWu0v8ktUxg)
I was wondering where Chuck Goudie was! There were stories recently that I thought seemed up his alley but had other personnel reporting them. Disney let a good one slip away
I don't think "he slipped away". I think he was sort of forced to quit, but why, we may never know. Maybe he pissed off that out of control, egomaniacal Cheryl Burton, who also managed to get Mark Giangreco fired over a harmless joke.
Cheryl Burton annoys the heck out of me. How she still has a job is a mystery to me.
Here's where I really can't stand her. Jimmy Kimmel pre-records dozens & dozens of promos for his show earlier that night, saying the local news anchor's names. Every time Burton intros that little segment near the end of the 10 PM news, she goes "Hey Jimmy", likes she's actually talking to him, when in fact he recorded that a few hours earlier. The appalling phoniness of it is disgusting. Plus I can't stand her clothing, it's obvious she spends a small fortune on it, or does the station pay for it?
She needs to find clothes that fit or have them tailored. She's bursting out of those tops! When I worked in TV news anchors and reporters got a clothing allowance but it was miniscule (around 1999-2000 it was $200/year for reporters, $400 for anchors in Grand Rapids, MI, the 38th news market in US). There was a contract with a local salon for regular hair cuts/color. And don't get me started on the consultants they brought in regularly to tell everyone what to wear and how to do their hair. An announcement that the consultants were coming in always brought a groan from the newsroom morning meeting.
Burton is the sole reason I switched my local TV news loyalty from channel 7 to channel 9, and have been content ever since. All of the WGN anchors and reporters are professional and engaging, and even make it possible to put up with the pornographic elements that seem to be a requirement of local news reporting. The only one I could do without is Jared Payton, who has always grated on my nerves.
SO agree. Frederick's of Hollywood loves her clothing choices. BOTH Cheryls on that station are irritating and a blot on women unlike Karen Jordan, Judy Hsu.
I must say, while I like miniskirts on good looking women, I consistently crack up over Cheryl Scott's every night, no matter how cold it is, that's all she wears. I'm sure the consultants & the station have told her to wear that all the time. I really doubt she wears that outside this time of the year.
At the rate we're losing real journalists we might as well be living on the Truman Show.
We generally watch ABC for both local and national news. EVERY time Chuck Goudie is on, my husband says something along the lines of "why the heck is he still on the air?" I'll have to tell him Goudie no longer is.
chuck goudie is no spring chicken - he must be ~69-70 yrs old. station may have mandatory retirement.
but also, in the broadcast tv biz, you're hired to be fired - which may be consistent with GSC's opinion.
I'm wary of curbing presidential pardons. The Founders wanted checks / balances between the 3 branches of government, sort of like rock, paper, scissors. The pardon power is the executive branch's check on the judicial branch.
Yeah when it comes to Modern America we should absolutely do what a bunch of syphilitic slave owners who didn't see women and non-whites as full people wanted.
1. All progress is incremental. They took the first step. They at least got power away from one hereditary king and expanded it to white males. It's been expanding since, using the framework they designed.
2. The pardon power has proved itself. If Biden hadn't used it, we might have the situation where the rioters are pardoned while the committee members (like Liz Chaney) go to prison.
3. We saw that Trump is vindictive, with the removal of Milley's portrait. Without the pardon, they may instead have had him arrested on day 1.
There's another point to be made. No matter what the rules are, they will be violated. It's a fact of life. It happens every minute and second of every day. Our political system has regressed into those being in charge doing what they want, regardless of the rules. There are ways around everything. Suppose EZ's ideas were put in, no matter how unrealistic it might seem. Deals can be made to get certain people off. The problem is not rules. It's people. And now with Trump in charge, the rules are being changed to please him. What's good for the country and ALL citizens no longer matters.
I agree with most of your advice for being old (I'm 77) but would take issue with your organ recital complaint, especially if one is reciting one's organ problems with other old folks. The fact is how we are doing physically is as important to us now as who we were dating and how the babies were pooping in the old days. At my age I spend a lot of time taking people to various doctors when I'm not going myself. I really want to know how that cataract operation went because mine is down the line. Please tell me if the hip replacement really is easier than the knee was and if eating earlier has helped you sleep better.
The piece of advice that I would add to your list: don't let anybody tell you how to be old. You want to keep the damn land line and eat at 4 just do it. No apologies.
Bravo. Am finding that my friends often have great recommendations for doctors and care as well as important information on how to deal with certain problems. Beats talking about the latest teen-bopper performer :)
Uh oh! An emoticon!
I think Melanoma's hat was modeled on the shape of the Pizza Hut logo.
Yesterday, someone published that their father worked at the New York Military Academy, where the fat traitor was sent, by his parents to cure him of being a bully, which actually turned him into a bigger bully. But somehow the father saved a paper from the school that has his IQ at 73, actual moron level.
If that paper is accurate, it explains a lot about him!
None of us needed to see that paper to know that The Orange Menace is extremely stupid. His documented inability to learn ANYTHING is astounding in its completeness. Batteries, tariffs, the Bible, eggs, etc. are all beyond his ability to understand.
He is bizarrely incurious about anything. He gets his "facts" from random sources which are always lies, whether about showers that don't work, toilets that don't flush or dishwashers that can't wash dishes, despite the fact that he's never actually used a home dishwasher in his life, probably can't even figure out how to open the door. He just blathers on & on about stuff he doesn't know anything about. Never forget drinking bleach or sticking a UV light up your ass to cure Covid. Without a doubt, the finest or maybe the worst example of the Dunning Kruger symptoms ever seen.
And doesn’t she look proud and happy. Not.
I agree with most of your advice for being old (I'm 77) but would take issue with your organ recital complaint, especially if one is reciting one's organ problems with other old folks. The fact is how we are doing physically is as important to us now as who we were dating and how the babies were pooping in the old days. At my age I spend a lot of time taking people to various doctors when I'm not going myself. I really want to know how that cataract operation went because mine is down the line. Please tell me if the hip replacement really is easier than the knee was and if eating earlier has helped you sleep better.
The piece of advice that I would add to your list: don't let anybody tell you how to be old. You want to keep the damn land line and eat at 4 just do it. No apologies.
in a mixed bag of quips this week [typical - i thought 5 were worth voting for, which is good] - i found several to be gut-busting hilarious. my fave [currently in 3rd place: darkest roast.
My favorite was the bus driver.
“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.” If DJT has enough of the Supreme Court and Congress and electorate convinced that he won in 2020, he has functionally already shattered this constitutional amendment, and can claim that he thus is free to pursue reelection in 2028 and any election year that follows for as long as he lives. He was elected in 2016. He was, according to his version of events, elected in 2020. It doesn't say "shall be sworn in for the office" or "shall serve in the office," so the fact it was Biden who was sworn in after the 2020 election and who served is immaterial to the Liar in Chief. That the Congress certified his election in the 2024 contest, when a (relatively skimpy) plurality of those (relatively few) in the electorate who took the time to vote voted for him, and that the Chief Justice swore him in, none of them ever successfully requiring that he first concede his loss in 2020 as a condition of being admitted constitutionally to the ballot in 2024, demonstrates that he has, indeed, won over the only entities that could prevent him from treating that office his for as long as he wants it. He must not annex Canada. I've never been tempted to renounce the land of my birth for another, although I know, like, and respect some people who have, but if DJT prevails, . . .
He'll be dead or in the memory care ward for the demented by then!
One can only hope!
Definitely! While he won't be the next president, it's possible there won't be another presidential election; that is, the US could be a dictatorship by then.
Or consider the following 2028 scenario. JD Vance runs for President with Trump as his VP running mate. JD wins. He resigns. Trump was not "elected to the office of the President" for a third time. Hat tip to Gerald Ford.
Given his already advanced age and decreased mental state, we can hope he will not be available.
At least Ford was a generally decent, honorable guy. Trouble for Trump with the Vance plot: JDV seems as power-mad as any of the rest of them, and young enough to keep the new plutocracy in power for decades. Trust him to resign? Why?
Yes, JDV was probably a bad example on my part for this scenario. But what percentage of the GOP would vote for a Joe Schmoe candidate with Trump as the running mate and the implicit understanding that they'd be voting for a third Trump term? We'll see. As Marc Martinez notes below, it probably won't happen, but a lot of things that I thought were unlikely have been happening.
I guess an interesting question is whether you CAN run for VP if you’ve been elected President twice.
Don't know why not. To be clear, I'm not hoping for this scenario. I just believe it's possible under the Constitution. Happy to be corrected. I remember having a conversation about two years ago with someone who expressed doubt about whether a convicted felon could serve as President........
Violates the sense of the limit to two elected terms, but not the better: good, sobering point.
"letter", not better. (Time to divorce either this phone or my typing finger.)
This is the Putin/Medvedev approach. But it requires the temp to be a complete stooge. Medvedev obtained both substantial wealth and also had many examples of other stooges that 'fell out of windows' when they disappointed Putin. While entertaining, I don't see that scenario working out.
But I can see a Trump scion in the VP slot or maybe even challenging for the top spot after Trump tries kicking Vance to the curb.
In any case, if the Dems can get out of their own way and run a good candidate, they should be able to win, given the usual swings of the political pendulum. I expect the mid-terms will go in the Dem direction.
I have a countdown calendar on my phone that I look at from time to time. I agree one shouldn't wish time away, but I also am a glass half full guy. I always have things on there to look forward to. Vacations, a friend's retirement, etc. Love, laughter, social life are the things that populate it mostly. Not wishing away time, but rather focusing on fun.
I also use it to track long ago, significant events. For instance, my father died when I was 18. I came home to the ambulance in the driveway and life was never the same. It's my oldest logged event, 17,580 days ago it now says.
I like that approach/attitude. I might want to try the app. What's it called?
It's in the Apple Store, but the problem is, it looks strikingly similar to many others. All my Subscription says is "Event Countdown - Calendar App" Premium. There are many, so you may want to try the free versions. But do find one that does charge a bit as they then support it going forward. I had an old one that stopped working and I had to recreate the information.
A long time ago I had a Casio calculator that one could use to count the days between dates. I used it often and my most interesting calculation was when I discovered I had known my husband longer than I had not known him.
Regarding amending the Constitution. As you say, it is a long, arduous, nearly impossible process, but on top of that, as we've seen in recent years, it is subject to the interpretation of the Supreme Court, who can simply wave it off with some verbal gymnastics and a stroke of a pen, given the right people appointed to those posts.
As we're putting more and more years between now and the ratification of the Constitution, it becomes more and more of a religious scripture: written in an archaic language, under a context that is becoming increasingly murky and difficult to relate to, outdated in a few respects. The language is becoming increasingly ambiguous, thus giving rise to splitting sects who point to the same text while justifying very different attitudes.
Maybe on the approaching the country's 250'th anniversary, we should adopt an updated "new translation" version of the Constitution, clarifying the language for today's context and incorporating lessons from history. I am absolutely aware that this is basically an impossibility. I don't know what the solution is, I just wish people smarter than me would work on the problem.
In the meantime, it seems that all government institutions have failed. Voting is the only way left for us to have competent ethical people with character and integrity in power, and I think we have failed at that too.
There are many people who agree with you that the constitution needs a re-write, new Convention, or overhaul: Almost all of them have bad intentions.
I completely understand that threat and it's one reason it won't happen any time soon. The problem of the Constitution's ambiguity remains though, and will only get worse with time.
I take an opposing view. Yes, the Constitution seems vague. Actually I call it flexible, adaptable to changing times. Take the Second Amendment for example. There is no way the authors could anticipate modern weaponry. Under the Second, we can control our love for every citizen being heavily armed- if we so chose. Unfortunately it has been interpreted to mean that there are no limitations. Does it need to be changed? Be careful what you wish for. The changes could be put in according to which side holds political sway at the time. We could either end up with a total ban, which would lead to a situation like Prohibition and an underground gun network of gun manufacturers and buyers. Or we could go total freedom and let everyone roam the streets with machine guns.This can be said for any amendment. No, I don't think anyone should have blanket pardon power. That's giving an awful lot of power to just one person in a country of over 300 million. But be careful how it's done. The party in power could give all the control to itself, which I see as no better. How about we give the power to the judiciary and get it out of the hands of elected politicians who do nothing that doesn't please their constituencies?
That's kind of my point - like the Bible, you can read and interpret the Constitution any way you feel like. This is what Republicans have figured out - laws are interpreted and enforced by people. Put the right people on the courts and at the heads of agencies and it doesn't matter one bit what some text was intended to say when it was written, you can do whatever you want with the country.
Byron Allen's mass firing of weather reporters at his local TV stations was brutal. All to use his Weather Channel to replace them. He came off as a nice-ish guy when he was on TV himself but he is a ruthless business man.
They chickened out -- https://nypost.com/2025/01/24/business/allen-media-hits-pause-on-plan-to-replace-local-meteorologists-with-weather-channel-feed/ though, honestly, I've never really seen the necessity/utility of each TV station having its own weathercaster. They all use the same data.
The Last Waltz starring The Band is one of the great concert movies. This is the opening to the movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki3zzZ-GsGI
Yes please on that amendment. But please allow me to lend you some of my extra outrage--I have plenty to spare--so you can equally condemn both the Biden and Trump pardons. The Jan 6 pardons are so awful they don't need more condemnation here. But Biden's are awful too, cancerous to the entire judicial system which means cancerous to the rule of law. He himself said so four years ago when speculating on whether Trump would issue preemptive pardons as he finished his first term. Soon we'll have presidents routinely pardoning their entire administrations and families down to the third cousins on their way out the door--and then what motivation will there be to NOT commit crimes while serving in government? Plus, we learn more each day that Biden was not up to governing starting on Day One, and the slide was precipitous. Which means we have no idea who even decided on that pardon list.
Four stars! I wanted to super-like your comments. I was also shocked at the time frames of the pardons, some of which went back to 2013. I had also been thinking about the many historical examples of supporters and financiers that got favor.
I have mixed feelings about Biden’s pardons. I think the time frame was to extend it back pre-Trump. I didn’t like the pardons, but then I thought what if he didn’t, and Trump, who has demonstrated his vindictiveness when he was last President, does the unthinkable. There’s little doubt Trump would go after at least the J6 committee people. Congress is already investigating the investigators. Trump yanked the clearances of former intel people who signed a letter expressing their opinion. He had the IRS go after the two former top FBI officials. He fired Vindman’s brother who was not involved in the impeachment process.
So while I didn’t like Biden’s pardons, I completely understand the basis for them.