In senectus* veritas
* As I strongly suspected might happen, Latin scholars have come to my rescue. They’ve told me that the word “senectus” is incorrect and instead it should be “senectute.”
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
If the country can listen to that and still vote for Joe Biden, then it collectively deserves what happens after
I am right now wishing I didn’t live in a riot prone area.
At this point, he’s campaigning for Trump.
I guess I can figure out what he is trying to say. Can’t say for sure without more context. Unless of course, it was a fraudian, er, Freudian, slip.
Unfortunately, if he is elected his words will be significant.
My wife feels sorry for him. She blames Jill and others around him for not pulling him back. I do not share that sentiment. I am only sorry that so many can even contemplate him as Presidentl
I sincerely hope that the Trump campaign puts this a 30 second video and plays it incessantly. End with the tag line of don’t let the Democrats steal this election, vote Trump vote Republican.
I will be asking my Democratic friend what he thinks of this video. Here in Michigan at least we can change our vote on election day. All the other states this really sucks for the emotional voter.
I had several conversations with people I don’t normally speak with that are usually liberal in outlook. I would say that several of them will vote for Trump but are too embarrassed to admit it. I feel a shift is coming and like the last election will break big for Trump. But I am still knocking door, being a poll challenger and an ambassador for explaining my reasons for voting for Trump.
My dear (truly) liberal Democratic friends concede that Biden is unfit for the presidency but assure themselves (and me) that he will “assemble a good team around him,” that he “knows how to fill in his own gaps,” and that “he’ll listen.” The only thing to add is that they make these statements “without evidence” — which may be putting it too kindly, since there is so much evidence to the contrary for each of my friends’ assertions. In any case, they assume they’re voting for President Kamala Harris, and they are thrilled about that.
RBG is and will continue to vote for Harris/Biden.
Well done, Joe Biden.
Finally. (As they say, “The Truth will out.”)
But you know what? It won’t make a spot of difference….
It may even EMPOWER his base that their candidate is ABLE to speak deep, heart-felt—brutal—Truths: “See, he DOES tell the Truth!! You bast***s can’t harp on THAT LINE any more…”
It will NOT MATTER if the demonkraps continue to hold the House and take the Senate. The first order of business would then be IMPEACHMENT and CONVICTION of Trump.
Then they will Trump up something on Pence, and Nancy will be POTUS.
If Biden wins, within a month he will step down for Harris to become POTUS.
Either way, the US is fundamentally changed — Supreme Court will be packed and we will get two new states (DC and Puerto Rico). And the one party government will be like we have in California.
There’s a reason they hide him away in his basement as much as possible.
“Oh that Joe, what a wag, what a card, what a joker!”
Either that, or maybe just maybe it’s time to throw Hunter under the bus:
“Hunter has always been an inventive, resourceful, entrepreneurial boy. Full of ideas. Always a pleasure to be around. Make no mistake, we love our dear son, always have and always will; but to our immense surprise and profound regret, his independent streak and irrepressible character have led him to decisions that we—this time—simply cannot countenance. And so with great, great sorrow, we must voice our firm disavowal of the direction that his characteristically well-honed business intuition has, unaccountably, taken him. We have no doubt that this is a passing phase and look forward to working with him in the future….”
(That Joe! He is SUCH a card….)
To Edward: It wouldn’t be enough for the Democrats to “take the Senate” to convict and remove the president after impeachment. They need a two-thirds vote, not a simple majority.
That is literally too good to be true. What did he think he was saying? Even if it’s a leak from some private online meeting, I would be skeptical he’d phrase it like that. Well, maybe not, as it’s Biden, and he’s always been like this. Senility has only made it more obvious.
I’m guessing that sometime today they’ll claim he meant the greatest vote fraud prevention organization. But I don’t believe that one, either, since Democrats and vote fraud have been synonymous for quite some time.
There is a massive, well organized voting fraud operation created by Obama and Eric Holder. It’s been nearly a full-time job for Holder these past few years. The push for 100 percent voting by mail, motor-voter combined with granting drivers licenses to non citizens, no signature verification on mailed in ballots, refusal to purge voter rolls of those who have died or moved away (which means hundreds of thousands of ballots mailed to nonexistent voters) and ballot harvesting schemes which allow the chain of custody for ballots to be violated by party functionaries (also facilitates vote buying) ….. all of these are being pushed by Holder and company from coast-to-coast.
Quelle surprise! Brian Stelter made a total ass of himself on NPR this morning! Interviewed by reliably-lefty Lulu Hispano-Suiza, he completely gassed the opportunity to say anything relevant to her questions, a couple of which were borderline actually interesting, like whether the media did itself any favors in going to war with Trump.
I hope Lulu had a good lie-down after the show, to recover from her brush with self-awareness. Anyway, Stelter made sure she didn’t fall in.
MollyG: “In any case, they assume they’re voting for President Kamala Harris, and they are thrilled about that.”
I believe that, yet it’s notable that Kamala dropped out early in the Dem primaries. Didn’t she drop BEFORE the Iowa caucus? I don’t recall that she ever got into double digits of support.
She’s won elections as a Dem in CA, but otherwise evidence of popularity is wanting ….
CharlieR, terrific comment.
In a land full of idiots and free-riders, an idiot will be king.
In the most recent issue of the “Claremont Review,” Angelo Codevilla wrote the following:
“Consider the 2020 election. In July, the Democratic National Committee engaged some 600 lawyers to litigate the outcome, possibly in every state. No particular outcome of such litigations is needed to set off a systemic crisis. The existence of the litigations themselves is enough for one or more blue state governors to refuse to certify that state’s electors to the Electoral College, so as to prevent the college from recording a majority of votes for the winner. In case no winner could be confirmed by January’s Inauguration Day, the 20th Amendment provides that Congress would elect the next president. Who doubts that, were Donald Trump the apparent winner, and were Congress in Democratic hands, that this would be likelier than not to happen?”
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/the-election-to-end-all-elections/
Maybe this is the fraud that Biden was talking about?
“My dear (truly) liberal Democratic friends concede that Biden is unfit for the presidency but assure themselves (and me) that he will “assemble a good team around him,” that he “knows how to fill in his own gaps,” and that “he’ll listen.””
I can recall hearing and reading similar sentiments about George W. Bush in 2000. Not explicitly that he was unfit but acknowledgements (even from some supposed conservatives) that W. wasn’t exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer but he’d have great people around him. We all saw how that turned out.
2020 is shaping up to be a history-changing election. Trump won in 2016 despite being massively outspent and his campaign having essentially no ground game. Trump is much closer to financial parity this time around and has a massive ground game going against a Democrat who is literally campaigning less and worse than Hillary in 2016. No matter who wins, a lot of long-held political truths are going to be revealed as complete fiction.
Mike
If CharlieR is correct, this may in fact be the reason why the Democrats are not perturbed in the slightest by Biden’s obvious unsuitability (or Harris’s for that matter).
Nor are they perturbed by Trump’s popularity, nor by the 24/7 MSCM lies, by Obama’s and Hillary’s massive corruption nor by the massive collusion by the media and the Democratic Party to obstruct justice, nor by the extraordinary and unprecedented multi-dimensional coverups that have been ongoing, nor by the violence that their antifa/BLM shock troops have been perpetrating across the country.
If it is true, then they have absolutely nothing to worry about.
It has the ring of validity because the Democrats are not at all worried.
It seems, and I believe this has been said before, that if the Democrats are not happy with the result of the election, then they will put all their efforts into disputing those results (using the lawfare described in CharlieR’s post above) so as to hog-tie the process, to hold up the process, to essentially nullify the entire election using so-called “judicial” means (cf. Judge Sullivan)—“justice” being their determined rationale (which is, of course, injustice).
If the result is not to their liking.
In such a way, they will perhaps—likely(?)—try to prevent Trump from winning his second term and only relent if the Republicans sacrifice Trump so that the GOP can assume power in 2021 (my mere speculation).
It is quite likely that this is something along the lines of what many (here, at least) fear.
It is, of course, speculation on my part. But given the Democratic Party’s continuing, flagrant war against DJT, and against the country, and its laws, it doesn’t seem far-fetched that this will be their demented—and no doubt disastrous—end-game.
If this is the case, then William Barr and all of Trump’s allies MUST be prepared for just this kind of subversion; must be ready to challenge the Democratic Party challenges; must be ready for recounting and re-recounting.
Must be ready for much more besides (but what?).
Time is running out, but Trump’s a fighter and he has people he can count on. They will have to be creative. And determined.
Honey badgers.
You go to war with the army you have. In 2000 it was Bush vs Gore. As a thought experiment, in whose world would you expect Mr. Inconvenient Truth to have been better on 9/11/2000. Or that J F’in Kerry was a better choice in 2004? Oh, I forgot about Darth Cheney. Sheesh.
If there were a video showing Bidet Sr. actually murdering a small child, his supporters – demokrats – would still vote for the guy.
They would merely claim it was a photo-shopped video and Bidet and the media would all claim it was Russian disinformation.
As for Bidet’s voter fraud comments, it will of no consequence to demokrats; they will still vote for the guy. They will claim he just misspoke, etc.
Yes, but what did he really say?
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/joe-biden-brags-about-assembling-most-extensive-inclusive-voter-fraud-organization
Years ago, friends of mine attended a funeral and sat behind the deceased’s ex-wife (long divorced and mother of his two children). As the eulogy rambled on, the speaker – intending to praise the man as dedicated to his work, a real workaholic – accidentally referred to him as an alcoholic.
At which point the ex-wife turned around in her pew to face my friends and whisper, “That’s the first thing he’s gotten right this afternoon.”
I suggest that this is the first thing Biden’s gotten right since declaring his candidacy.
“As a thought experiment, in whose world would you expect Mr. Inconvenient Truth to have been better on 9/11/2000. Or that J F’in Kerry was a better choice in 2004? Oh, I forgot about Darth Cheney. Sheesh.”
Given the overwhelming majority of the people central to pushing the war in the Bush Administration would NOT have been part of a Gore Administration or Kerry Administration, there is in fact very good reason to think that either Gore or Kerry might have been better choices to handle the situation…especially considering the paucity of Bush the Younger’s accomplishments overall in office. Of course, Gore and Kerry would have done terrible stuff which Bush didn’t.
There’s also at least some reason to believe John McCain might have made better choices in the aftermath of 9/11 because, while McCain could be plenty belligerent when it comes to foreign policy, he also had some personal history that might have made him hesitant about a Middle East war. And, again, at least some of the Neocon pushers of the Iraq War likely wouldn’t have been part of a McCain Administration.
I do have to congratulate you, om, for at least moving past the “EVERYTHING ABOUT THE IRAQ WAR WAS JUST FINE!!!!!” delusion of denial to now implicitly acknowledging that…yeah, George W. Bush kind of eff’ed that up royally.
Mike
Cornflour: “In case no winner could be confirmed by January’s Inauguration Day, the 20th Amendment provides that Congress would elect the next president.”
I’ve read that if a given state does NOT certify its electors by a certain date (sometime in Nov, I think), then that state’s vote is ignored.
Dems need to be VERY careful in their planning or Trump will win a “landslide” of Electoral College votes like 90-45 LOL.
Projection of your own opinions onto me is not a strong argument. LOL
Cue Wizard of Oz soundtrack, bring on the Scarecrow, “if I only had a brain.”
Saying that Gore or Kerry could have been better for the world. Wow, just wow. Fantastic and revealing. Just how deep does this extend, on second thought, please don’t share. TMI
Wow.
om…beyond the Iraq War, a tax cut, and appointing John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, what precisely did George W. Bush DO for America and the world?
The Iraq War = disaster.
Tax cut = good, but counterbalanced by Bush the Younger’s utter failure to do anything about government spending, the debt or deficit, or the looming economic catastrophe that struck at the end of his administration.
John Roberts and Alito = the later good and the former bad but the bad is the Chief Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court.
So, if Gore or Kerry had been elected, we would have certainly gotten a second awful Justice and likely no tax cut. On the other hand, we probably would not have gone into Iraq and might have maintained some budget discipline, which would have made handling the global financial meltdown easier. And as I said, there’s a lot of bad things Gore and Kerry would have done that Bush didn’t do.
One of us is revealing his intellectual limitations in these exchanges. It ain’t me.
Mike
Bunge:
Roberts has been a profound disappointment. No disagreement there
So in your imaginary world where Gore won all of the ills that happened during George Bush’s presidency didn’t occur and unicorn farts fueled the economy and …..
These are your “intellectual” musings. Keep these “wows” coming. It’s like letting Joe Biden talk without interruption. 🙂
The Iraq War = disaster.
Would you prefer Uday or Qusay?
Well, glad he cleared that up.
Joe, here is what I believe for myself and tell everyone that works for me: if people do not clearly understand what you are saying, it is your fault. Endeavor to do better. Note: I do not think he is capable of doing better.
At this point the only reason a voter of sound mind would vote for Joe Biden is because of the intense and overwhelming hatred they have for Donald Trump.
Bunge:
Not that Gore’s behavior during the FL vote counting debacle might have been a prediction of his approach to governance and respect for the constitution? Or that Kerry’s history during the Vietnam war might have been a prediction of his suitability as a president (Swift Boat For Truth etc.). Or Kerry’s more recent actions trying to actively undermine President Trump’s foreign policy? Something about a leopard changing it’s spots?
Naw those are not suitable thoughts for an “intellectual.”
Time to do some painting, house projects take precedence over deep thinking.
Keep smiling! 🙂
“Would you prefer Uday or Qusay?”
I think the appropriate question is to ask the Iraqi people now happy they are that somewhere around 200,000 civilians were killed in the violence and brutal mismanagement following the Iraq invasion.
Mike
om, first you need to calm down. Writing multiple replies to one post is one of the classic internet signs that you know you’re losing the argument.
Second, no one can meaningfully engage with you until and unless you make an actual argument. Let me give you an example:
“Gore’s terrible environmental policies would have devastated the U.S. economy and caused more actual harm to Americans than the Iraq War.”
That’s a proposition which can be analyzed and debated. No one can do anything when you just grunt out “GORE BAD! KERRY BAD!” I already wrote that Gore and Kerry would likely have done bad things Bush didn’t do. Repeating what I’ve already stated as though it’s a meaningful response makes you look like an idiot.
om, I hate to break it to you but this is the impression you leave with your posts here:
1. You’re not very bright.
2. You’re not very well informed or well educated.
3. You are completely oblivious to #1 and #2.
4. You are pointlessly argumentative.
Mike
Not to entirely re-litigate the entire thing, but the Iraq War showed that it doesn’t pay to continually defy and threaten the US — because who knows, we might get a bug up our nose about it and blow up your country and kill everyone in your government. We’re unpredictable like that.
The post-war at least proved to ourselves that no, lots of people in the world don’t pine for American-style freedom and democracy no matter how much of the heavy lifting we do for them. I think it was a worthwhile experiment that maybe we need to repeat every century, but, for now anyway, we know not to try that again. Punitive expeditions it is then until 2100 or so, hope the “anti-war” libs are happy with that.
I would encourage us here to avoid hassles and arguments about the past, and contemplate the immediate future. Which is the theme Neo set with the Biden “Most fraudulent ever” video.
America is disappearing into a deep dark hole as best I can see. How are you going to deal with, respond to, Democratic tyranny?
I can but pray for national salvation. But maybe we are the new Sodom and Gomorrah; we have certainly done enough to earn that status.
Don’t look back! Look forward!
I think the appropriate question is to ask the Iraqi people now happy they are that somewhere around 200,000 civilians were killed in the violence and brutal mismanagement following the Iraq invasion.
About 13% of the civilian deaths from 2003 to 2010 were attributable to the Coalition or Iraqi state forces. NB, we’ve had only a residue of troops in Iraq since the end of 2011.
Binge:
Projecting your thoughts and emotions on others is weak.
You appear to have very strong negative emotions about GWB and seem to want to play an imaginary alternative history game. Not my circus, not my monkeys. I just find it funny (or strange) how your thoughts play out.
As to my grunts about those esteemed statesmen that you brought into your argument, well, dance with those you brought to the dance. Time has
given a fuller picture of their character. It hasn’t been flattering IMO.
Bunge:
Sorry, I didn’t intend to call you “Binge.” This smart phone keyboard is not my friend. It may be a spelling autocorrect feature.
At the risk of being a grammar pedant, if the allusion is to the Latin maxim, “In vino veritas” (in wine there is truth),you want to note that “vino” is the ablative form of “vinum” because it is the object of the preposition, “in”. So you want the ablative form of “senectus” (old age) which would be “senectute”. Thus, “In senectute veritas” Quod erat desideratum.
“About 13% of the civilian deaths from 2003 to 2010 were attributable to the Coalition or Iraqi state forces.“
Dude, you are smarter than this. That’s like me breaking both your legs and then insisting I’m not responsible for any of the pain and expense of your hospital stay and rehab. Is your ego really so fragile that admitting “Yeah, that Iraq War thing did not go at all like we thought” is really too painful to accept?
Mike
Bunge:
Not to be argumentative but facts are a thing and opinions another:
“MBunge on October 25, 2020 at 1:35 pm said:
“My dear (truly) liberal Democratic friends concede that Biden is unfit for the presidency but assure themselves (and me) that he will “assemble a good team around him,” that he “knows how to fill in his own gaps,” and that “he’ll listen.””
I can recall hearing and reading similar sentiments about George W. Bush in 2000. Not explicitly that he was unfit but acknowledgements (even from some supposed conservatives) that W. wasn’t exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer but he’d have great people around him. We all saw how that turned out.”
Which I responded:
“om on October 25, 2020 at 1:50 pm said:
You go to war with the army you have. In 2000 it was Bush vs Gore. As a thought experiment, in whose world would you expect Mr. Inconvenient Truth to have been better on 9/11/2000. Or that J F’in Kerry was a better choice in 2004? Oh, I forgot about Darth Cheney. Sheesh.”
What was “We all saw how that turned out.” supposed to mean. A clue about your opinion? I’ve read many of your opinions about GWB BTW.
So yes I posed a question (with an incorrect year) for you and you have expanded and opined voluminously about your alternative history with Gore and Kerry, and McCain, but not Romney (yet).
Name calling isn’t a strong argument. You might want to calm down. Others have sensed a disturbance in the force. 🙂
Bunge:
I don’t care about your opinions of about my intellectual capacity or infirmity but you are expanding your skills to assess others who may not appreciate it.
Be careful, they may not “understand” your “talents.”
Senectute, not senectus. Ablative. You can’t just splice foreign words together without grammar.
This is off topic (though the topic has drifted). I had the interesting thought “What if Trump lost 🙁 but Republicans kept the Senate and regained the House?”
I suppose no one has discussed this that I’ve heard, because it’s not thought to be likely.
Trump ought to add that to every one of his commercials. Don’t comment on it, just let it speak for itself.
Hi, Oliver. I haven’t been keeping track of the House election developments, so I’m not sure how unlikely it is; but it’s an interesting scenario. Would it not be something like what existed in some of the Obama years? I suppose and assume that Harris et al. would work on yet more ways to end-run around Congress in such a case. Thus, I suppose my speculative answer to your question would be that we end up getting pushed toward a more monarchical/administrative hegemony again. But of course, events could intervene at any time….
Not entirely OT: another change story
I will not live in a closet for any reason.
I voted Republican almost a straight ticket for the first time in my life.
I am a progressive artist/writer/activist with an impressive 25+ year record of fighting the good fight on a plethora of issues including abortion clinic escort, rape crisis counselor, regular crisis counselor, a decade in Palestinian Solidarity, holding local police accountable in the shooting of two young black men, homelessness, cannabis and chronic pain advocacy.
In this “stunning and brave” essay I will tell you why I made this decision.
https://candacemercer.medium.com/why-i-voted-trump-a-coming-out-story-822da82d757d
om, again, calm down so you can respond with just one post.
I don’t know what grade-level you read at but your comprehension skills don’t appear to be very strong. Go back and read what I wrote.
I didn’t mention Gore. I didn’t make any reference to Gore. I didn’t make any allusion to Gore. YOU are the one who introduced the Bush/Gore comparison into the discussion. YOU did that.
I did criticize George W. Bush in a manner so obvious that even someone as blinkered as you could understand that. You apparently didn’t like that but instead of defending Bush by, you know, actually defending Bush, you introduced the Gore comparison as an excuse. You implicitly admitted that Bush was bad but also implied Gore would be worse.
I, again forgetting what a knumbskull you are, tried to move the argument from implication to clear statements of fact. There is a pretty good and solid argument to be made that President Al Gore would not have invaded Iraq and that would have had positive results for both America and the world.
Is that contention open to challenge? Yes. One could certainly dispute my proposition intelligently and constructively. You didn’t do that. You just grunted “GORE BAD!”
None of that matters, of course. I somehow hurt your little feelings and you feel compelled to quarrel with me over whatever excuse your tiny brain can come up with. And I openly confess, I’m not very good at dealing with dumb people who keep trying to pick fights with me.
Mike
Hello, Marisa. At first I thought that was your own change story, but then I realized that you’re pointing us to this additional essay from someone else. But maybe I misunderstood and you actually are Candy Mercer! Either way, it was an interesting read.
Thanks Marisa for your extraordinary article. What an incredible journey.
It’s probably THE MOST extraordinary, most courageous article written on this topic that I’ve ever read.
(Maybe I should delete “on this topic”.)
Wishing you all things good.
Thanks once again.
Thank you, Y81. I was a bit tilted as well.
Anyway, I think the clear attempt is to say, In old age, [there is; exists the] truth — in like form to the old saw, in vino veritas, in wine, [there is dissolved; exists the] truth, I’d surmise.
Anyway, Latin neophytes, Y81 is right. As the truth-in-wine comparison makes clear, you wouldn’t write “in vinum veritas”; you’d relate this Latin clause’s “in,” if intending to mean the English “in,”* to the ablative of vinum, which is “vino” in that case.
_____________________
*When the Latin “in” is followed by a noun in the accusative case, such as “memoriam” (versus the nominative memoria; like senectus, and vinum), the intended meaning would then be the English “into”: persons and pets we love or know of thus pass into, rather than in memory, the Latin-speaking Romans figured by their speech. So, all words stated in Latin have to be on the same case-meaning, grammatical page, as it were. English, by contrast, uses syntax to convey a sentence’s semantic intent, in addition primarily to meaning-tailored words. Again, for intended meaning-construction: if Latin, case-agreeing grammar; if English, diction and syntax.
“Russian collusion”?
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/putin-defends-bidens-becomes-visibly-irritated-when-asked-about-35-million-moscow-payment
It’s all beginning to make sense.
There’s enough rope to go around for the entire Biden/Clinton nexus.
And Obama?
Are the tables turning?
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/10/25/big-tech-panicking-trumps-grassroots-maga-army-working-around-platform-controls/
H/T Instapundit
(If nothing else, the first screen grab in the link is worth taking a peek: “A right-wing offensive is underway to discredit social media companies just days before the election” — no, this is not the Babylon Bee…)
I meant to include above this excellent source as a reference-guide: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/senectus
See there, after the adjective senectus, the noun senectus; its proper form in our case, senectute, is stated under Single (number), at Ablative (case).
But maybe in Sleepy Joe’s case, the correct form might be senectutibus, under Plural, at Ablative; for he seems to be at least dual in number, if not more, some of the time: believing himself on occasion to be elsewhere, say, in Vermont, rather than actually in New Hampshire; or running for the US Senate now, rather than the presidency, then. . . . You know the thing, man.
The Candace Mercer piece is extraordinary.
Honesty, very little self pity.
Back in the day, I was a “full time commie, antiwar revolutionary” (the pay/benefits are terrible, btw). I experienced a transition similar to Ms Mercer during the Reagan years and eventually graduated college, became a productive citizen at age 34.
Her piece brings it all back!
I’m constantly surprised how many of us now inhabit conservative blogs LOL.
}}} MollyG:they assume they’re voting for President Kamala Harris, and they are thrilled about that.
Yeah, that’s my general presumptions. Still “Orange Man Bad”, and screw the consequences of electing someone so unsuitable for the job.
And yeah, I had substantial worries about Trump regarding his capacity (though it was still orders of magnitude better than either Obama or Hillary), but, as with Bush II, he’s done the job well enough in very trying circumstances. His overall inability to rein in government spending is my biggest concern… and Harris/Biden certainly won’t be better in that regard.
}}} Then they will Trump up something on Pence, and Nancy will be POTUS.
That’s not the way it works, Edward.
The only situation in which Nancy becomes PotUS is if both Trump and Pence die/are killed in office.
The claims otherwise derive from total ignorance of what that part of the rules for succession actually deal with. When we entered the Atomic Age, it became possible for a large number of officials to be wiped out in a sudden blow, so a succession order was defined, which is long enough that hopefully one of them remains alive. A sudden mass-kill (via ABC attack) is the only relevant situation in which that applies.
This is how we got Ford/Rockefeller after Nixon.
Agnew (Veep) resigned after being accused of improprieties. Ford was nominated, and acked, as Nixon’s new veep. Nixon resigned after Watergate. Ford became PotUS, and Rockefeller was nominated to replace him.
The same process would occur, here. Pence would become PotUS, nominate a veep, and then, even if they did something with Pence, that person would become PotUS.
Bunge:
Well that was a very long agglomeration of opinions, a fine heaping Stew o Spite. How does one grunt in a sentence?
It seems that you don’t tolerate opinions that diverge from yours. Those views seem to elicit an aggressive response. Those who don’t agree with Bunge are, insert disparagement of the day.
Meanwhile…
https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/20/trump-resistance-plans-mass-mobilization-after-election-to-shut-down-the-country-if-biden-doesnt-win/
H/T Instapundit
But of course. The logical conclusion of all the grand tantrums that the Democratic Party has thrown since the 2016 elections, Hillary Clinton leading the way with her fake “Russia Collusion” scheme, oh-so-cleverly adopted by Obama, Biden and Co. (with Brennan and Comey playing dual concert masters).
Time for Trump to declare that law enforcement is also “an idea”.
And now Putin has said Biden has done nothing wrong. Russian collusion is a good thing? 🙂
Thanks, Marisa for a compelling and ultimately uplifting personal story. I have passed it on to my reading list.
As for the personal feud that is going on in this (and previous) posts — it is past time to retire that fight. The two of you are absolutely the only readers who are enjoying it.
In re to that source for senectute, and senectutibus, provided above (today at 5:12 AM), the number-column I describe is of course titled Singular, rather than “Single”; and this correction ends my discussion — it’s about time — of the (already ridiculously overwrought) matter. No more!
Mugged by Latin….
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/10/breaking-exclusive-text-messages-show-vp-biden-wife-brother-key-family-members-aware-concerned-colluded-suppress-hunters-actions-around-certain-minor/
A president has to know when NOT listen to his/her advisors and also when to fire them.
A president should be elected on the policies he/she wishes to implement and selects his/her team of advisors to best carry out that agenda as well as to suggest policies.
This is entirely different then having the advisors determine the policies to be followed and determining how they are to be implemented.
Joe Bidet is too senile to know what to do or how to do it. His advisors will be selected for him by ??????? and during the very short time of his presidency (he will be replaced by Harris within his first term) he will be their puppet.
That being said, the consequences of his senility are meaningless to those who will vote for him. They do not care, nor do they bother to think beyond first base.
I cannot figure out why om is rejecting bunge for behavior om routinely engages in.
Ymar is written as something else in om world.
Just wait for it
Pillowc wont succeed as president. But if election misfires to jan 20th, who acts as president if both admins are not elected?
If you want to get the vastness of Yammer’s thoughts visit the Bookworm Room comment section.
Bookworm is a good egg but her comments section is not moderated so you will get the unfiltered yammering. Bunge would like it there?
Bookworm’s Blog has Bookworm rules.
Did you know you are writing more now per page than peak ymar?
My aura can and has changed yours.
Ask me what else a course in miracles can do to your life fate.
Trump wins a fair vote – fraud is the only way Biden wins.
I think.
But because I expect quite a bit of attempted fraud by Dems, unless there is massive Trump victories it will be close. And the lawyers will be talking.
Silly what-if verbal fights about Iraq remind me that Iraqis did, in fact, have a free and fair election. With millions showing up and getting their fingers painted so that few could commit fraud or vote again. [They seemed very very glad to be rid of Saddam and his two murderous sons (and I was too). Without yet knowing the adjustment pains & deaths to come – which were far far worse than most pro-war folk (like I was) expected.]
“Fair” elections are not that hard, but are not “fair” to those who won’t follow the rules, and there have to be some rules.
It also reminded me about how the Sunnis and Shiite have often had tribal hatred, despite both being Arab Muslim – with Sunni Kurds not being Arab. So “democratic” Iraq was inevitably going to be messy. Bryan Lovely made a great and important comment:
The post-war at least proved to ourselves that no, lots of people in the world don’t pine for American-style freedom and democracy no matter how much of the heavy lifting we do for them.
American style freedom is based on individual rights, each person’s individual moral actions, every person’s Free Will choices.
Not groups. Not identity groups. Not tribes.
The terrible change the Dems are pushing in America is to end the American melting pot assimilation, so that we can all be Americans, with our disagreements. Instead Dems want most of us to be in one victim group or another.
The anti-Trump hatred of today is actually a cover for a tribal anti-Rep hatred that Dems are supporting – see how many “Feminist supporting” Democrats support AC Barrett in joining the US SC. The Dem tribe is dominant over the “Fem” tribe. See how any Black Reps are denigrated and insulted as not really Black. The Dem tribe over the Black tribe.
See how any gay Reps are denigrated, Dem tribe over gay tribe.
And it’s far easier to get agreement between lots of people on who or what to hate, rather than who to support, or which policy is best, in detail.
Trump haters should be asked: “aren’t you embarrassed by this to support Biden?”
Yammer is what Yammer does.
Ymar is as Ymar will be, I am, YHsVH.
The reason why your toxic emotions have died down is due to the power of a miracle, and of the aura of love.
Tom+Grey on October 26, 2020 at 3:05 pm
“American style freedom is based on individual rights, each person’s individual moral actions, every person’s Free Will choices.
Not groups. Not identity groups. Not tribes.”
This is apparently derived from the role of the Church in early/mid European history to reduce or restrict consanguineous marriage. See for example:
http://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/whatever-happened-to-european-tribes/ or
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/book-review-the-weirdest-people-in-the-world-audacious-surprising/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=third
R2L
Very interesting. Cultures matter after all. Interesting that the progressives and leftists are all about unlearning what has worked to tamp down destructive tribalistic and cultic pathologies.
Marisa on October 26, 2020 at 1:38 am said:
Not entirely OT: another change story
…
n this “stunning and brave” essay I will tell you why I made this decision.
https://candacemercer.medium.com/why-i-voted-trump-a-coming-out-story-822da82d757d
* * *
Just to clarify:
Marisa is quoting the opening lines of Candace Mercer’s video.
It’s the same video Nancy B linked on the Biden voters thread, from a copy on another site.
* * *
Nancy+B. on October 26, 2020 at 7:50 am said:
Sarah Hoyt posted a link to this “Walkaway” article on Instapundit:
https://archive.vn/cDYRy
She credits Jonathan Haidt with giving her a glimpse into the minds of conservatives. She also mentions Jordan P.
* * *
If you haven’t seen it yet, there are lot’s of links and discussions going around the internet.