Trump, Conservatism, and Me

 

Greetings, Gentlemen and Gentle Ladies of Ricochet. I’ve been away for a while, I know.

Some of you wrote to the editors to ask what happened to me and whether they should be worried. I was touched by that. You’ve heard, then, that I’ve been working on my book, which is coming along well. But in truth, that’s not the only reason I’ve been away.

About a week ago, the Blue Yeti, who also noticed my absence, sent me a message to ask if I was okay. I was on the verge of writing, “Oh, yes, I’m fine, I’m just working on my book,” but then I stopped myself and thought, “Why not tell him the truth? It is, after all, the truth.” And so I did.

I wrote back and said that I was horrified by Trump. That I’m heartbroken for my country and for what I thought were our ideals, our decency. That it seemed to me the United States was experiencing the political equivalent of a psychotic break, one that has at best turned America into the punchline of a joke, and at worst will end the American experiment altogether. That I was exhausted from arguing about Trump. That I’ve already lived through this presidency once, in Turkey — although it took years for Erdoğan to sound the way Trump already does — and didn’t want to chronicle this story twice in my life.

“I’m outraged by Trump and what’s become of conservatism,” I wrote,

I’m depressed by all of it and sad that I’ve devoted so much of my life to a political ideology that in the end looks as corrupt to me as socialism. This hasn’t seemed like an appropriate thing to share with our entire membership, so I’ve been keeping quiet before saying anything rash — either to our members or to you. But I’ve been feeling this way now for long enough that I probably just need to say it.

So the answer, really, is that I’m not so okay. I’m quite depressed. A large part of it is an overdue reflection about my role in all of this, and a realization that whatever I believe about politics, it has no place in the conservative movement as it now exists.

The Yeti asked if he could call me. We spoke for a while. He started by trying to reassure me that I wasn’t responsible for Donald Trump’s election. This on the one hand is obviously true; but on the other, I’m not sure I can escape the responsibility for this disaster that every American shares, whether or not we supported him or voted for him. We’ve all, together, created — or failed to do enough to prevent — the conditions such that a phenomenon like this might emerge. We all share some part of the blame for allowing our country to descend into nihilism and despair; we all contributed, in some way, to the hollowing out of civic virtue, to the eradication of gravitas and dignity from the public sphere, to the conflation of reality television with reality, to the dumbing-down and the commercialization of everything, to mindless and unprincipled partisanship, to the cultivation of the imperial presidency. We are all all in some part responsible, even if our only contribution was doing too little to prevent it.

And in my case, the contribution was greater. I didn’t mean to, but I did. Ricochet, after all, was part of a gullible media that offered Trump five billion dollars’ worth of free advertising because we assumed his candidacy was just a terrific joke and great for site traffic. “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS,” Les Moonves said. I can’t say our editorial approach was more foresighted.

I’m not so full of my own sense of importance as to believe what I write has much influence over anything, but it’s a fact that for the past few decades I’ve supported myself by writing by writing about, and for, politicians and audiences who called themselves conservatives. I believed I shared a set of assumptions and values with conservative readers, or at least, I believed their assumptions and values closer to mine than those of the American left. But it turns out that a substantial cohort of those people did not share my assumptions and values. And a significant number of them are now given over to isolationism, protectionism, nativism, authoritarianism, and sheer craziness. Or outright nihilism. Not to mention opportunism. I want no part of that.

Newt Gingrich, arguing that Margaret Thatcher was the model for the Trump presidency, recently buttressed this claim by allusion to my book about Thatcher, which made me cringe. As I replied in the American Interest, the idea is utterly unserious; that he could assert this is profoundly disturbing for what it says about how little the truth matters to anyone in this perfervid political climate:

I was glad to see my largely forgotten book mentioned, but at the same time I was baffled—because the comparison is ludicrous. Readers who doubt this may consult the online Thatcher archives, which contain every known statement made by Margaret Thatcher between 1945 and 1990; or take my word for it for $12.10 on Amazon. They will find nothing to suggest that Thatcher and Trump are similar in any relevant aspect, be it their political ideals, beliefs, moral values, temperament, style, experience, intellect, competence, decorum, or probity.

What does it mean, then, when a respected senior American politician makes this argument in a respected American newspaper? We’re not, after all, talking about an archaic figure known to us only through a disputed Delphic verse. Margaret Thatcher is very nearly a contemporary. She died in 2013. What she believed is as well known as the formula for the area of a triangle. It would be one thing if the newly Trumpesque Gingrich had in his article renounced Margaret Thatcher and her ideals. That would have been surprising, to be sure, but it would have at least made sense. But this is not what he did: He instead made his actual memories of Thatcher vanish in an act of mental thaumaturgy, and returned from his underground dungeon lair with a shape-changed new version of history.

I told the Blue Yeti all about this, and told him that basically, I’d prefer never to write about politics again. I’m exhausted with it, growingly cynical, and deeply pessimistic. When I finished, I expected him to say that he was sorry to hear it, and to accept my resignation.

But instead, he asked me to write about what I’d just told him, all of it. He said I wasn’t alone in feeling this way, and told me that more people than I realized shared my sentiments. I don’t quite remember what he said next, except that he seemed sincere in thinking I should write about this, and adamant that my point of view was one that should still be represented here. He said that if the Trump presidency implodes, or explodes, someone will have to make the case for classical liberalism and the vigorous virtues, since the conservatives who’ve eagerly hopped in bed with the Id in the White House won’t seem particularly credible after that. He suggested — kindly — that I pull myself together.

I figured he was probably right. “Pull yourself together and get back to work” is, usually, good general advice.

So, are there any more of you out there who are feeling like me? Or will I have to do this single-handedly? I will, I guess, if I have to, but it would be nice to know I’m not alone.

Published in General

Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 380 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Herbert Member
    Herbert
    @Herbert

    Hypatia (View Comment):
    Yes, and what has he done that’s so “low”?

    Mocked disabled people, trashed pow’s, bragging about avoiding std’s as being his own personal Vietnam, given to conspiracy theories such Birtherism, 9/11 trutherism, anti-vaccinationisn, denier of American Exceptionalism.  Multiple accusations of sexual assault and rape.   But it’s not just what he has done,  it’s his temperament…. he spends time at POTUS attacking people for perceived or actual slights. He has no core convictions, making him susceptible to manipulation from those around him.

    • #301
  2. Guruforhire Inactive
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    Damocles (View Comment):

    Tenacious D (View Comment):
    The thing that disturbs me about the Trump presidency, more than any actions he’s taken, is this appetite among some of his supporters to purge people from the conservative movement for insufficient loyalty. Revolutions that quickly turn on their own do not generally end well, historically speaking. We also have people promoting Alinskyite tactics on the right as a way to start winning more. Let’s take care not to turn into Jacobins.

    Do you recall who Claire voted for? Have you read her twitter feed? Did you see the one about starting a new political party? These people are not being purged, they’re actively trying to start an alternative movement.

    The people complaining about “being purged” were openly planning purges right here on Ricochet, famously one of the Commentary Podcasts.

    • #302
  3. Damocles Inactive
    Damocles
    @Damocles

    JLock (View Comment):

    I was out of line completely — my apologies. Just don’t want to see Claire beat about for confessing her heart. The people who are honest about where they differ with you are not dangerous. Its the ones lying about agreeing with you that are worrisome.

    Then you should be in a Facebook group or something where you can commiserate together. I’m not interested in a site where contributors just spew out their emotional insecurities caused by their crumbling world view.  There’s plenty of other venues (where I don’t have to pay) for that.

    Is it cruel to say this? I hope Claire starts to feel better, but her contributions lessen the overall value of this site.

    • #303
  4. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    PHenry (View Comment):
    The more I read the reactions of never Trumpers to this election, the more I am convinced that the main objection from the right to Trump as president revolves around ‘character’.
    They are convinced he is a moral reprobate, and as such, consider it humiliating that he could win as a Republican.

    Some vote for politicians based upon policy and ideology. Some vote based upon trust, respect, and honor. (Most, of course, vote for the lessor of two evils. ).

    Those who are tied up in emotional and moral judgements of character will never accept this man. He is just too ‘gauche’ for their sensibilities. They are literally embarrassed to be associated with such a low sort. So I suspect we will be subjected to the same endless attempt to disassociate themselves with the man for as long as he is in office, despite any accomplishments.

    Fine. When I vote for a president, I don’t vote for a pope. But some, I guess, do.

    Good luck ever finding a politician that lives up to that standard.

    I am guessing some of the concern is less about morals and more about control -while things needed to be addressed that have been loosely run, every executive order rolled out like a lightning bolt. Some had to be contained or rolled back. The media needs a connection with the WH –  good or bad, not censored. etc. etc.

    • #304
  5. Herbert Member
    Herbert
    @Herbert

    Damocles (View Comment):
    Is it cruel to say this? I hope Claire starts to feel better, but her contributions lessen the overall value of this site.

    I whole heartedly disagree.   What lessens the value of the site is the attempt by some to enforce groupthink.

    • #305
  6. JLock Inactive
    JLock
    @CrazyHorse

    Damocles (View Comment):

    JLock (View Comment):

    I was out of line completely — my apologies. Just don’t want to see Claire beat about for confessing her heart. The people who are honest about where they differ with you are not dangerous. Its the ones lying about agreeing with you that are worrisome.

    Then you should be in a Facebook group or something where you can commiserate together. I’m not interested in a site where contributors just spew out their emotional insecurities caused by their crumbling world view. There’s plenty of other venues (where I don’t have to pay) for that.

    Is it cruel to say this? I hope Claire starts to feel better, but her contributions lessen the overall value of this site.

    I like different opinions. Well-articulated ones. It hones critical thinking. If I was the type who paid just to be pandered to I would be reading the NYTimes. Part of the richness of Rico is the smart, differing opinions. But I’ve reconciled the idea that people who thoughtfully criticize the President aren’t criticizing me — and whether wrong or right —  are genuinely concerned about the Country.

    • #306
  7. Trinity Waters Member
    Trinity Waters
    @

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Hypatia (View Comment):
    Yes, and what has he done that’s so “low”?

    Mocked disabled people, trashed pow’s, bragging about avoiding std’s as being his own personal Vietnam, given to conspiracy theory’s such Birtherism, 9/11 trutherism, anti-vaccinationisn, denier of American Exceptionalism. Multiple accusations of sexual assault and rape. But it’s not just what he has done, it’s his temperament…. he spends time at POTUS attacking people for perceived or actual slights. He has no core convictions, making him susceptible to manipulation from those around him.

    Cut and paste?

    • #307
  8. Damocles Inactive
    Damocles
    @Damocles

    Percival (View Comment):

    Guruforhire (View Comment):

    Quit social media. I consider this a blanket recommendation.

    I see. No room for any opinion other than yours.

    Can I still post cat videos, or do do those run counter to your sagacious suzerainty of human expression?

    You can follow my lead:

    • everything should be happy talk.  I love to see pictures of your babies, pets, family gatherings, and nitwits engaging in calamitous misadventures.
    • specifically, no political talk and no talking about how stupid other people are.
    • Exception #1: anybody who has ever changed my diaper.  I gladly listen to their observations about chemtrails, the Trilateral commission, and how the Kennedys are space aliens in disguise.
    • Exception #2: my brother, because it upset my mom when she found out I had unfollowed him.

    Results: Total Facebook happiness!

    • #308
  9. JLock Inactive
    JLock
    @CrazyHorse

    As someone who was practically disowned by my family for even considering voting for Trump — the reality is what swung the direction to him were swing voters. Ones who voted against Republicans in 08 and 12. Independents like me. We normally sit on the fence in non-crap elections — and this one was horrific. This may feel like a national movement to you because it was such a successful and sweeping one within the party — but the Nation voted strictly down party lines.

    The bleak, stark, and naked truth is these criticisms don’t mean anything to those voters. President Trump’s behavior does. And if he continues to saturate the news with petulance — Republicans will find themselves in a very bad place soon.

    • #309
  10. Douglas Pratt Coolidge
    Douglas Pratt
    @DouglasPratt

    We’ve been conditioned to replace religion with politics, so we can get our dopamine fixes from the latest outrage.

    In order to win and keep power, the Left turns its candidates into Messiahs. I don’t vote for Messiahs. I vote for ordinary, fallible human beings. I don’t expect to agree with them, admire them or even like them all the time.

    Calm down, everybody. There is a lot more to life than politics…or there damn well should be.

    • #310
  11. Damocles Inactive
    Damocles
    @Damocles

    Guruforhire (View Comment):

    The people complaining about “being purged” were openly planning purges right here on Ricochet, famously one of the Commentary Podcasts.

    Check out the Conservative Reconstructionists group.  It’s comedy gold listening to their plans regarding what to do with Trump supporters post-election.

    After the election, the first step will be to isolate the Trumpist infection. We reiterate our principles, we also state that we are longer “Reflex Republicans”. The Party has to choose between us or the Trumpist-Nationalist-Fascists (TNFs) : we won’t sit under the same “Big Tent” with them, no more than we would with the Hard Left. But we have to become an entity that is seen to as distinct from the GOP, and that we won’t be taken for granted. The TNFs and Conservatives are incompatible, and the GOP MUST be forced to choose.And if we are excluded, we will carry on by forming a new party that restores the fundamental role of our ideas.

    Nobody seemed to consider that the Trumpist-Nationalist-Facists might win!

    • #311
  12. Herbert Member
    Herbert
    @Herbert

    Trinity Waters (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Hypatia (View Comment):
    Yes, and what has he done that’s so “low”?

    Mocked disabled people, trashed pow’s, bragging about avoiding std’s as being his own personal Vietnam, given to conspiracy theory’s such Birtherism, 9/11 trutherism, anti-vaccinationisn, denier of American Exceptionalism. Multiple accusations of sexual assault and rape. But it’s not just what he has done, it’s his temperament…. he spends time at POTUS attacking people for perceived or actual slights. He has no core convictions, making him susceptible to manipulation from those around him.

    Cut and paste?

    Help yourself, just give me attribution

    • #312
  13. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    JLock (

    -snip Part of the richness of Rico is the smart, differing opinions. But I’ve reconciled the idea that people who thoughtfully criticize the President aren’t criticizing me — and whether wrong or right — are genuinely concerned about the Country.

    I think this is true – for some.

    I think it’s true – for some – that they don’t miss an opportunity to criticize President Trump because they can’t handle the fact they were wrong  And not just wrong about winning the election, about whether he could be a good, or even okay, president. (Opinion: the most destructive, as there’s a chance he’ll be pecked to death by ducks and kneecapped by the right and become the lousy president these people predicted)

    I think it’s true for others that President Trump does not have an acceptable resume, therefore it’s not to be born that he has reached such lofty  heights. Apparently that air is only to be breathed by those deemed acceptable, and President Trump doesn’t qualify. So he needs to be knocked off his perch, regardless of the consequences

    Some have noted his temperament and behavior as “unpresidential”. Well, maybe that term will get broadened to include behaviors that work. As Scott Adams noted, people who have been wrong about everything thus far are the ones who say PT should stop tweeting

    And BTW, I’m only talking about people who lean right/conservative. Those on the left have issues of their own

     

    • #313
  14. Damocles Inactive
    Damocles
    @Damocles

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Damocles (View Comment):
    Is it cruel to say this? I hope Claire starts to feel better, but her contributions lessen the overall value of this site.

    I whole heartedly disagree. What lessens the value of the site is the attempt by some to enforce groupthink.

    “by some” ? Do these mysterious groupthink-enforcers happen to have names?

    And by groupthink do you mean “Contributors should not be abusing their position by using the site to blow out their emotional pipes?”

    • #314
  15. Damocles Inactive
    Damocles
    @Damocles

    Annefy (View Comment):
    As Scott Adams noted, people who have been wrong about everything thus far are the ones who say PT should stop tweeting

    • #315
  16. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Damocles (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):
    As Scott Adams noted, people who have been wrong about everything thus far are the ones who say PT should stop tweeting

    I would change the word “democrats” in the first panel. PT is criticized by many and they certainly aren’t all Ds.

    (I read Scott Adams’ blog and listen to his periscopes but often miss his comics. Thanks for posting )

    • #316
  17. JLock Inactive
    JLock
    @CrazyHorse

    Annefy (View Comment):

    JLock (

    I think this is true – for some.

    I think it’s true – for some – that they don’t miss an opportunity to criticize President Trump because they can’t handle the fact they were wrong And not just wrong about winning the election, about whether he could be a good, or even okay, president. (Opinion: the most destructive, as there’s a chance he’ll be pecked to death by ducks and kneecapped by the right and become the lousy president these people predicted)

    I think it’s true for others that President Trump does not have an acceptable resume, therefore it’s not to be born that he has reached such lofty heights. Apparently that air is only to be breathed by those deemed acceptable, and President Trump doesn’t qualify. So he needs to be knocked off his perch, regardless of the consequences

    Some have noted his temperament and behavior as “unpresidential”. Well, maybe that term will get broadened to include behaviors that work. As Scott Adams noted, people who have been wrong about everything thus far are the ones who say PT should stop tweeting

    And BTW, I’m only talking about people who lean right/conservative. Those on the left have issues of their own

    Annefy always puts me in my place.

    • #317
  18. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    I wonder if Amanda Carpenter is still putting her pro-Trump enemies list together. Come on, sweet cheeks, put me on it.

    • #318
  19. JLock Inactive
    JLock
    @CrazyHorse

    For me, the disappointment of the weekend was heightened by how relieved I was by the tenor and content of his SOTU. I thought: Alright! Here we go! This is a Commander-In-Chief! And all that seemed squandered on some twitter nonsense. The angriest I get at the guy is when he can’t get out of his own way.

    • #319
  20. Herbert Member
    Herbert
    @Herbert

    Damocles (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Damocles (View Comment):
    Is it cruel to say this? I hope Claire starts to feel better, but her contributions lessen the overall value of this site.

    I whole heartedly disagree. What lessens the value of the site is the attempt by some to enforce groupthink.

    “by some” ? Do these mysterious groupthink-enforcers happen to have names?

    And by groupthink do you mean “Contributors should not be abusing their position by using the site to blow out their emotional pipes?”

    When conservatism takes a hit, isn’t some emotionalism expected by those who consider themselves conservatives?  Seems to be a reasonable reaction to me.

    • #320
  21. Matt Bartle Member
    Matt Bartle
    @MattBartle

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    All of us–even Trump fans–are in mourning.

    I’ve been thinking about this, and while I initially rejected the idea that I was “in mourning,” I think now I would concede that point with some qualifications. I’m also thinking of Susan’s post some time ago about giving up on America.

    I would love to live in the America of the Founders and the Constitution, but we don’t. As someone else said, we never have. The Progressives have been chiseling away at that for 100 years, and have succeeded to a large extent. I had always thought that we could get back on the right track if we tried, but Obama’s reelection caused me to despair of that. That was real mourning, in 2012.

    So 2016 was just the question of whether more nails would be pounded into America’s coffin, with glee, by President Hillary and the press and academia and Hollywood, or whether someone, anyone, would be in a position to push back. I did not expect that person to be Trump, but damned if that isn’t what we got. A guy who doesn’t despise me or the America I would like to have.

    It ain’t the Founders, or Reagan, but it’s something. And it turns out the guy we got has more pushing-back stamina than anyone else. More sheer cussedness than anyone else in Washington. That’s cause for celebration, not mourning!

    • #321
  22. Hypatia Member
    Hypatia
    @

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Hypatia (View Comment):
    Yes, and what has he done that’s so “low”?

    Mocked disabled people,

     

    (no he didn’t, that is disproven; there’s video of him making the same gestures while imitating perfectly able-bodied people who had changed their stories)

    trashed pow’s,

     

    (no he didn’t; he stated a fact about McCain.   Plus McCain was trashing Trump, so…)

    bragging about avoiding std’s as being his own personal Vietnam, given to conspiracy theories such Birtherism,

     

    (Can you blame him, or even Hillary who also used this, for “birtherism” when the blurb for Omega’s own book sez he was born in Kenya?)

    9/11 trutherism,

    (Disagree.  Although, Bush was n’t “behind” 9/11, but he and Blair sure failed to get ahead of it. )

    anti-vaccinationisn,

     

    (i have a distinct memory of him saying, “everybody’s going to get the vaccines”)

     

    denier of American Exceptionalism.

    (So, uh he thinks all countries were once great and can be great again?)

    Multiple accusations of sexual assault and rape.

     

    (Yuh and none that stuck.)

     

    But it’s not just what he has done,

     

    (oh, I see…..)

     

    it’s his temperament…. he spends time at POTUS attacking people for perceived or actual slights. He has no core convictions, making him susceptible to manipulation from those around him.

    ((Says  you.   Although that is borne out by his spectacular failures in real estate development and other ventures….not.)!

     

    • #322
  23. Damocles Inactive
    Damocles
    @Damocles

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Damocles (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Damocles (View Comment):
    Is it cruel to say this? I hope Claire starts to feel better, but her contributions lessen the overall value of this site.

    I whole heartedly disagree. What lessens the value of the site is the attempt by some to enforce groupthink.

    “by some” ? Do these mysterious groupthink-enforcers happen to have names?

    And by groupthink do you mean “Contributors should not be abusing their position by using the site to blow out their emotional pipes?”

    When conservatism takes a hit, isn’t some emotionalism expected by those who consider themselves conservatives? Seems to be a reasonable reaction to me.

    You keep talking in generalities.  I think Claire’s contributions are not worth paying for.

    Feel free to melt down all you like!

    • #323
  24. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Damocles (View Comment):

    Guruforhire (View Comment):

    The people complaining about “being purged” were openly planning purges right here on Ricochet, famously one of the Commentary Podcasts.

    Check out the Conservative Reconstructionists group. It’s comedy gold listening to their plans regarding what to do with Trump supporters post-election.

    After the election, the first step will be to isolate the Trumpist infection. We reiterate our principles, we also state that we are longer “Reflex Republicans”. The Party has to choose between us or the Trumpist-Nationalist-Fascists (TNFs) : we won’t sit under the same “Big Tent” with them, no more than we would with the Hard Left. But we have to become an entity that is seen to as distinct from the GOP, and that we won’t be taken for granted. The TNFs and Conservatives are incompatible, and the GOP MUST be forced to choose.And if we are excluded, we will carry on by forming a new party that restores the fundamental role of our ideas.

    Nobody seemed to consider that the Trumpist-Nationalist-Facists might win!

    Just a thought: I often accuse the left of projection. They accuse us of doing what they themselves would do if in same position.

    The above quote makes me think projection does not only belong to the left. Mind expanded. Thank you.

     

    • #324
  25. Lazy_Millennial Inactive
    Lazy_Millennial
    @LazyMillennial

    Damocles (View Comment):
    You keep talking in generalities. I think Claire’s contributions are not worth paying for.

    You don’t pay for the main feed, you pay to comment and for the member feed

    • #325
  26. Suspira Member
    Suspira
    @Suspira

    The level of anger here is troubling. We’re tearing apart our side (meaning those who share a few broad principles that might be called conservative). Yes, Trump is divisive. It’s how he rolls. We’re going to be fractured for the foreseeable future, but can’t we be tolerant, too? Let the Left roll the tumbrels, not us.

    • #326
  27. Douglas Pratt Coolidge
    Douglas Pratt
    @DouglasPratt

    Suspira (View Comment):
    The level of anger here is troubling. We’re tearing apart our side (meaning those who share a few broad principles that might be called conservative). Yes, Trump is divisive. It’s how he rolls. We’re going to be fractured for the foreseeable future, but can’t we be tolerant, too? Let the Left roll the tumbrels, not us.

    Hear, hear. Divisiveness is a strategy. So is outrage. Stand back, pop some corn, and watch the storm.

    • #327
  28. goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Curt North (View Comment):
    I think if you voted for Hillary, you kinda surrender any ownership of the label “conservative”, and in fact you read the election so wrong you might want to look into another line of work.

    Amen.

    • #328
  29. TempTime Member
    TempTime
    @TempTime

    JLock (View Comment):

    No [redacted] its the starting intergovernmental feuds without having the full breadth of evidence to do so. Don’t you see by doing the right things so brutally wrong he endangers these principles perhaps for generations?

    Did you not create the PDT PIT for this level of writing?  Referring to the  ” No, you ……… ” comment.  Worry not for tomorrow, [for doing so] only destroys today’s peace.

    And, “brutally wrong”… is just a little overwrought.

    And, intergovernmental feuds have been going on since the beginning of government agencies.

    [edit]

     

    • #329
  30. JLock Inactive
    JLock
    @CrazyHorse

    TempTime (View Comment):

    JLock (View Comment):

    No [redacted] its the starting intergovernmental feuds without having the full breadth of evidence to do so. Don’t you see by doing the right things so brutally wrong he endangers these principles perhaps for generations?

    Did you not create the PDT PIT for this level of writing? Referring to the ” No, you ……… ” comment. Worry not for tomorrow it only destroys today’s peace.

    And, “brutally wrong”… is just a little overwrought.

    And, intergovernmental feuds have been going on since the beginning of government agencies.

    I apologized for this crap comment.

    • #330
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.