Calling Liz Warren “Pocahontas” Is a Good Thing

 

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and President Donald Trump.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren is known for lying about being Native American to get a job at Harvard, but she’s not the first “Fauxcahontas” I’ve come across. As some on Ricochet know, I was once in the cheese business. About 20 to 25 percent of my business was with the DOD. They bought what was commonly referred to as commodity cheese. Think gasoline. For the most part gasoline is gasoline is gasoline as long as it meets certain standards. If an intersection has four gas stations, everything being equal, you buy from the one with the lowest price. The cheese that the DOD bought was like that.

The contracts were given to the lowest bidder, period. Bids were priced to the tenth of one cent. If two bidders were tied, the contract was rebid. Ties were fairly common. My gross markup was often about 10 percent. This gives you an idea how competitive it could be. I usually had a dedicated crew of about 30 souls including truck drivers assigned to this segment of the business. As competitive as it could be, I still thought it was worth it. They bought large volumes which helped my buying power and they paid well (most of the time).

All was well until sometime in the late ’80s. That is when affirmative action was introduced to the bidding process. In all their wisdom, Congress gave “minority ” bidders a 10 percent advantage. Even after its introduction, I got my share of business. It wasn’t something that could easily be replicated.

Then in about ’92/’93, I began losing every bid and so did all my competitors except for a new one. It was a minority bidder in Wisconsin identified as a female Native American. This went on for months. I had no choice but to institute the first-ever layoff at my business. This company came out of nowhere. Rumors started up, claiming that things were not as they appeared. Deliveries were not being made in a timely manner, if at all. The owner did not appear to be Native American. I hired a private detective.

I turned out that the owner wasn’t Native American — in fact, she wasn’t American at all. She and her husband were Russians. They were allowed in the US because they claimed religious persecution. They were Jewish, perhaps, at least that was their claim. What they really were was crooks. They had rented a small, bankrupt cheese plant and got favorable terms from the local government and bank. They defrauded their bank, were borrowing against their DOD contract, and not delivering the entire amount so they could pocket the difference.

You ask how this could happen. It took a long time to sort out. The minority status was self-reported and the DOD was not allowed to challenge the claim. Even with my PI report, they were forbidden to intervene, even as their logistics system was in chaos. After a certain time, if a bidder didn’t deliver, they could rebid the contract but, as crazy as it sounds, the minority bidder also could rebid — and did. I finally bit the bullet and got my congressman, Rick Santorum, involved.

I never found out how he did it, but Santorum got it straight quick. Within two weeks, I was getting contracts again. After a couple of years, the Native American Russians went to jail. Meanwhile, I had 30 displaced people whose lives were totally disrupted. They all had family. Two divorces were blamed on the layoff. I lost half of my team and had to hire and train new employees. All because of a Fauxcahontas or a Lieawatha.

Sen. Liz Warren probably didn’t affect as many lives, but she took someone’s position who was more worthy than her. She undoubtedly filled young skulls full of leftist mush at Harvard. Her very Senate seat is fake owing to deception. She is a thief and a liar. I have more respect for someone who shoplifts at a convenience store. If I had the same opportunity as President Trump, I would call her a lot worse than Pocahontas.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 124 comments.

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

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    My client needed to be heard, not to be corrected for her outrage over the word “Pocahontas.”

    The EEOC prosecuted Trump for overtly discriminary renting practices. See the case of “United States of America v. Fred C. Trump, Donald Trump and Trump Management, Inc.”

    The way you described, it sounded as if you brought it up, and she was willing to talk about it. In any case, why not help her, by letting her know that he had not insulted her people? What purpose is served by perpetuating divisive myths? Then again, perhaps I misunderstood what was going on in your office at the time.

    As for Trump being accused of racial discrimination in an unrelated matter, that doesn’t seem relevant. It seems as if you’re admitting you don’t really have a case with the Pocahontas thing.

    I hadn’t seen my client for a couple of weeks as she lives over 100 miles from the County Seat. (Coconino County is larger than New Jersey and Connecticut combined.) She was eager to tell a non-Native like me how hurtful Trump’s comments were, and she showed me her Facebook post that Trump’s “comment was totally uncalled for and disrespectful.” Yes, she was hurt and offended by Trump.

    Well. Anyone offended by Trump has lots of company. So she’s got that going for her

    She is not only offended, she is angry, and motivated to be sure to vote in the off-year 2018 elections.  Our Republican legistlature intentionally set the election for state-wide offices to be on off-election years given that the electorate in non-Presidential years is more conservative.  That has served us well.  But with Trump angering so many people, he is sparking a huge democratic turnout.

    • #91
  2. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Mike LaRoche (View Comment):
    If Trump ever mentions half-froggy, half-frito bandito, mackerel-snapping, heteronormative Texan imperialists, that’ll make my day.

    Does anyone know Trump’s speechwriters? We need to get this inserted into a speech pronto.

    That would be something.

    • #92
  3. Mim526 Member
    Mim526
    @Mim526

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):
    I had a Navajo client in the office yesterday and asked if Trump calling Warren “Pocahontas” was a slur to her.

    This question as framed by @garyrobbins suggests a particular viewpoint, I think.  It would be interesting to know what the answer would have been to “what do you think about Elizabeth Warren claiming Native American heritage for employment purposes and Donald Trump calling her Pocahontas because of it?”

    I spent many hours for a part of my childhood with Native American friends from various Southwest/Plains tribes and try to keep in touch.  All but two voted for Donald Trump.  My friends work hard, some at their own businesses.  Some still have family on a reservation.  They are proud of their heritages, and if there’s any one stereotype I’ve noticed them disliking it’s the view some outsiders have of all “Indians” as government freeloaders.

    As with any segment of American society, there are differing views.

    Interesting first-hand account of doing business with fed govt.  Thanks for the post, @phcheese.

    • #93
  4. Robert McReynolds Inactive
    Robert McReynolds
    @RobertMcReynolds

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Our membership tiers are named for Washington, Lincoln, Coolidge, Mrs. Thatcher and Reagan. Can you imagine them ever using a racial slur?

    That you call it a racial slur doesn’t make it a racial slur. Are you sure by calling the quip a racial slur you aren’t making a racial slur? They’re so delicately PC they can’t see the humor in referring to a faux native American with a real native American name everybody recognizes and uses? Definitely a racial slur.

    You may have missed what I had previous said. I live in a county that is 30% Native. I had a Navajo client in the office yesterday and asked if Trump calling Warren “Pocahontas” was a slur to her. She said that it was and showed me her Facebook post. She was not being PC. She was being human, and felt diminished by Trump.

    Yeah we saw this statement on your post yesterday–or whenever–and do you know how much of that 30% was voting Republican before Trump? Do you have any evidence that they voted GOP in the previous two presidential elections? Until you provide such proof counselor, I am afraid this line of argument is merely speculation and thus overruled.

    Good point, but not totally relevant. In the 1990’s the Navajo Nation was in AZ-6. Our Republican member of Congress repeatedly spoke elequently about our “First Americans” and their love of country and their very high representation in our Armed Forces. He never carried the Navajo Nation, but he lost it be a much more narrow margin that a usual Republican would have, and that margin was swamped by conservatives in the rest of the Congressional District.

    That’s what happened when we lost to Obama in 2008 (and 2012). It was not that Obama carried the black vote by a higher percentage, it is that in 2008, the black turnout was higher than the white turnout for the first time.

    At the rate Trump is going, he is going to hugely inflate turnout in the Navajo Nation, leading to statewide Republicans losing.

    Wow as a lawyer you have a rough time with facts. Black turnout was not higher than white turnout. It was ten percentage points higher than it had been in 04.

    Also I find it hard to believe that there would be the number of Navajo voters to affect statewide elections. I am willing to be proven wrong on that point, but for now I am not buying it.

    • #94
  5. PHCheese Inactive
    PHCheese
    @PHCheese

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Our membership tiers are named for Washington, Lincoln, Coolidge, Mrs. Thatcher and Reagan. Can you imagine them ever using a racial slur?

    That you call it a racial slur doesn’t make it a racial slur. Are you sure by calling the quip a racial slur you aren’t making a racial slur? They’re so delicately PC they can’t see the humor in referring to a faux native American with a real native American name everybody recognizes and uses? Definitely a racial slur.

    You may have missed what I had previous said. I live in a county that is 30% Native. I had a Navajo client in the office yesterday and asked if Trump calling Warren “Pocahontas” was a slur to her. She said that it was and showed me her Facebook post. She was not being PC. She was being human, and felt diminished by Trump.

    Yeah we saw this statement on your post yesterday–or whenever–and do you know how much of that 30% was voting Republican before Trump? Do you have any evidence that they voted GOP in the previous two presidential elections? Until you provide such proof counselor, I am afraid this line of argument is merely speculation and thus overruled.

    Good point, but not totally relevant. In the 1990’s the Navajo Nation was in AZ-6. Our Republican member of Congress repeatedly spoke elequently about our “First Americans” and their love of country and their very high representation in our Armed Forces. He never carried the Navajo Nation, but he lost it be a much more narrow margin that a usual Republican would have, and that margin was swamped by conservatives in the rest of the Congressional District.

    That’s what happened when we lost to Obama in 2008 (and 2012). It was not that Obama carried the black vote by a higher percentage, it is that in 2008, the black turnout was higher than the white turnout for the first time.

    At the rate Trump is going, he is going to hugely inflate turnout in the Navajo Nation, leading to statewide Republicans losing.

    Wow as a lawyer you have a rough time with facts. Black turnout was not higher than white turnout. It was ten percentage points higher than it had been in 04.

    Also I find it hard to believe that there would be the number of Navajo voters to affect statewide elections. I am willing to be proven wrong on that point, but for now I am not buying it.t

    Is it as a lawyer  hehas trouble with facts or because he is a lawyer. If not careful this post could deteriorate into lawyer jokes.

    Anyone hear the one about a Arizona Trump hating lawyer that went in a cowboy bar? He——

    • #95
  6. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Our membership tiers are named for Washington, Lincoln, Coolidge, Mrs. Thatcher and Reagan. Can you imagine them ever using a racial slur?

    That you call it a racial slur doesn’t make it a racial slur. Are you sure by calling the quip a racial slur you aren’t making a racial slur? They’re so delicately PC they can’t see the humor in referring to a faux native American with a real native American name everybody recognizes and uses? Definitely a racial slur.

    You may have missed what I had previous said. I live in a county that is 30% Native. I had a Navajo client in the office yesterday and asked if Trump calling Warren “Pocahontas” was a slur to her. She said that it was and showed me her Facebook post. She was not being PC. She was being human, and felt diminished by Trump.

    Yeah we saw this statement on your post yesterday–or whenever–and do you know how much of that 30% was voting Republican before Trump? Do you have any evidence that they voted GOP in the previous two presidential elections? Until you provide such proof counselor, I am afraid this line of argument is merely speculation and thus overruled.

    Good point, but not totally relevant. In the 1990’s the Navajo Nation was in AZ-6. Our Republican member of Congress repeatedly spoke elequently about our “First Americans” and their love of country and their very high representation in our Armed Forces. He never carried the Navajo Nation, but he lost it be a much more narrow margin that a usual Republican would have, and that margin was swamped by conservatives in the rest of the Congressional District.

    That’s what happened when we lost to Obama in 2008 (and 2012). It was not that Obama carried the black vote by a higher percentage, it is that in 2008, the black turnout was higher than the white turnout for the first time.

    At the rate Trump is going, he is going to hugely inflate turnout in the Navajo Nation, leading to statewide Republicans losing.

    Wow as a lawyer you have a rough time with facts. Black turnout was not higher than white turnout. It was ten percentage points higher than it had been in 04.

    Also I find it hard to believe that there would be the number of Navajo voters to affect statewide elections. I am willing to be proven wrong on that point, but for now I am not buying it.

    Facts are stubborn things.  “Black voters turned out at higher rate than white voters in 2012 and 2016.”  April 29, 3013.  Article by Rachel Weinberg in the Washington Post.

    Fred Barnes has written that a third of the Democratic votes in Virginia were to “send a message” to the Republican Party.

    • #96
  7. She Member
    She
    @She

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Our membership tiers are named for Washington, Lincoln, Coolidge, Mrs. Thatcher and Reagan. Can you imagine them ever using a racial slur?

    That you call it a racial slur doesn’t make it a racial slur. Are you sure by calling the quip a racial slur you aren’t making a racial slur? They’re so delicately PC they can’t see the humor in referring to a faux native American with a real native American name everybody recognizes and uses? Definitely a racial slur.

    You may have missed what I had previous said. I live in a county that is 30% Native. I had a Navajo client in the office yesterday and asked if Trump calling Warren “Pocahontas” was a slur to her. She said that it was and showed me her Facebook post. She was not being PC. She was being human, and felt diminished by Trump.

    Yeah we saw this statement on your post yesterday–or whenever–and do you know how much of that 30% was voting Republican before Trump? Do you have any evidence that they voted GOP in the previous two presidential elections? Until you provide such proof counselor, I am afraid this line of argument is merely speculation and thus overruled.

    Good point, but not totally relevant. In the 1990’s the Navajo Nation was in AZ-6. Our Republican member of Congress repeatedly spoke elequently about our “First Americans” and their love of country and their very high representation in our Armed Forces. He never carried the Navajo Nation, but he lost it be a much more narrow margin that a usual Republican would have, and that margin was swamped by conservatives in the rest of the Congressional District.

    That’s what happened when we lost to Obama in 2008 (and 2012). It was not that Obama carried the black vote by a higher percentage, it is that in 2008, the black turnout was higher than the white turnout for the first time.

    At the rate Trump is going, he is going to hugely inflate turnout in the Navajo Nation, leading to statewide Republicans losing.

    Wow as a lawyer you have a rough time with facts. Black turnout was not higher than white turnout. It was ten percentage points higher than it had been in 04.

    Also I find it hard to believe that there would be the number of Navajo voters to affect statewide elections. I am willing to be proven wrong on that point, but for now I am not buying it.

    Facts are stubborn things. “Black voters turned out at higher rate than white voters in 2012 and 2016.” April 29, 3013. Article by Rachel Weinberg in the Washington Post.

    Fred Barnes has written that a third of the Democratic votes in Virginia were to “send a message” to the Republican Party.

    Gary, please review the facts in this article, relative to black versus white voter turnout in 2016.

    And please provide a link (that isn’t behind a paywall) to the Rachel Weinberg article, which according to your statement she won’t write for another 996 years.  I haven’t been able to find it yet with a simple Google search.

     

    • #97
  8. TheSockMonkey Inactive
    TheSockMonkey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Yes, she was hurt and offended by Trump.

    I don’t doubt that she was hurt or offended, but to blame Trump for that is simply unreasonable. She was hurt and offended because she misunderstood what he was saying, and most likely because she has been influenced by the non-stop, race-baiting campaign by the Left, to make Donald Trump into a racist monster. Which is not say he’s without any tinge of racism. Still, Trump’s flaws don’t excuse the Left’s insistence on finding racial division and hatred where it doesn’t exist. They don’t excuse the media from using Trump’s attack on a racially-appropriating senator as an opportunity to make Native Americans feel as if they were being attacked or insulted by Trump.

    The Left’s racism and race-baiting is to blame for the racial unrest and tension that we see today. Why are so many never-Trump Republicans so eager to join them in this project?

    • #98
  9. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):
    Why are so many never-Trump Republicans so eager to join them in this project?

    Because Trump is uncouth.

    • #99
  10. PHCheese Inactive
    PHCheese
    @PHCheese

    Arahant (View Comment):

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):
    Why are so many never-Trump Republicans so eager to join them in this project?

    Because Trump is uncouth.

    As was General Patton, did not make him a bad General.  I am not a fan of oncouth either but this war.

    • #100
  11. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    PHCheese (View Comment):
    As was General Patton, did not make him a bad General. I am not a fan of oncouth either but this war.

    I’m on your side, brother, but for some, the distaste seems to run deep. They act like Andrew Jackson, Warren Harding, and LBJ never existed.

    • #101
  12. TheSockMonkey Inactive
    TheSockMonkey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Arahant (View Comment):

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):
    Why are so many never-Trump Republicans so eager to join them in this project?

    Because Trump is uncouth.

    One very interesting aspect of all of this is that, if Trump had all the couth of Bush, Romney, and Pence, he would still be accused of racism, misogyny, and other forms of bigotry.

    America just re-elected a black president a few years ago, and yet now we’re accused of being a nation run by white supremacy.

    The race card has been overcharged.

    • #102
  13. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    She (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Our membership tiers are named for Washington, Lincoln, Coolidge, Mrs. Thatcher and Reagan. Can you imagine them ever using a racial slur?

    That you call it a racial slur doesn’t make it a racial slur. Are you sure by calling the quip a racial slur you aren’t making a racial slur? They’re so delicately PC they can’t see the humor in referring to a faux native American with a real native American name everybody recognizes and uses? Definitely a racial slur.

    You may have missed what I had previous said. I live in a county that is 30% Native. I had a Navajo client in the office yesterday and asked if Trump calling Warren “Pocahontas” was a slur to her. She said that it was and showed me her Facebook post. She was not being PC. She was being human, and felt diminished by Trump.

    Yeah we saw this statement on your post yesterday–or whenever–and do you know how much of that 30% was voting Republican before Trump? Do you have any evidence that they voted GOP in the previous two presidential elections? Until you provide such proof counselor, I am afraid this line of argument is merely speculation and thus overruled.

    Good point, but not totally relevant. In the 1990’s the Navajo Nation was in AZ-6. Our Republican member of Congress repeatedly spoke elequently about our “First Americans” and their love of country and their very high representation in our Armed Forces. He never carried the Navajo Nation, but he lost it be a much more narrow margin that a usual Republican would have, and that margin was swamped by conservatives in the rest of the Congressional District.

    That’s what happened when we lost to Obama in 2008 (and 2012). It was not that Obama carried the black vote by a higher percentage, it is that in 2008, the black turnout was higher than the white turnout for the first time.

    At the rate Trump is going, he is going to hugely inflate turnout in the Navajo Nation, leading to statewide Republicans losing.

    Wow as a lawyer you have a rough time with facts. Black turnout was not higher than white turnout. It was ten percentage points higher than it had been in 04.

    Also I find it hard to believe that there would be the number of Navajo voters to affect statewide elections. I am willing to be proven wrong on that point, but for now I am not buying it.

    Facts are stubborn things. “Black voters turned out at higher rate than white voters in 2012 and 2016.” April 29, 3013. Article by Rachel Weinberg in the Washington Post.

    Fred Barnes has written that a third of the Democratic votes in Virginia were to “send a message” to the Republican Party.

    Gary, please review the facts in this article, relative to black versus white voter turnout in 2016.

    And please provide a link (that isn’t behind a paywall) to the Rachel Weinberg article, which according to your statement she won’t write for another 996 years. I haven’t been able to find it yet with a simple Google search.

    That was a great article.  It points out that if the black turnout had increased to 2008 and 2012 levels in Philadelphia, Detroit and Milwaukee, Trump would not have had that razor thin 100,000 margin in those three states.  It also shows that instead of trying to create knockouts in Iowa and Arizona, Hillary would have been well served to shore up her “blue wall” that cracked and fell in 2016.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2013/04/29/black-turnout-was-higher-than-white-turnout-in-2012-and-2008/?utm_term=.a6a959baa940.  I misspelled the author’s last name.  It is Weiner.

    The first three paragraphs are:

    “The Associated Press is out with a study of the 2012 election concluding that the black voter turnout rate exceeded the white turnout rate for the first time. It’s almost certainly true that black turnout was higher than white turnout last fall — but that also was true in 2008.

    “Using census data and exit polling, the AP found that black voters were 13 percent of the electorate even though they make up only 12 percent of the population. White voters represented 72 percent of the electorate, outperforming their 71.1 percent share of the population, but not to the same degree they have in past elections. The total percent of voters in each ethnic group who turned out is not included. Census data on voter turnout will be released in May.

    “The AP does give exact numbers for 2008 turnout — 66.1 percent for whites and 65.2 percent for blacks. But Michael McDonald, a professor at George Mason University who specializes in analyzing voter turnout, has crunched the numbers differently. If you exclude people who did not respond to the census, the black turnout rate also surpassed white turnout four years ago, 76.6 percent to 73.6 percent.”

    • #103
  14. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):
    Why are so many never-Trump Republicans so eager to join them in this project?

    Because Trump is uncouth.

    One very interesting aspect of all of this is that, if Trump had all the couth of Bush, Romney, and Pence, he would still be accused of racism, misogyny, and other forms of bigotry.

     

    True, however we would have laughed it off.  I, for one, am not laughing it off, as Trump is clearly out of the bounds of normal or acceptable behavior.

    • #104
  15. PHCheese Inactive
    PHCheese
    @PHCheese

    As soon as someone says “clearly ” it’s usually not even close. I remember that from the classes on the law as an undergraduate.

    • #105
  16. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    PHCheese (View Comment):
    As soon as someone says “clearly ” it’s usually not even close. I remember that from the classes on the law as an undergraduate.

    So you believe that Trump is within the bounds of normal or acceptable behavior?

    • #106
  17. TheSockMonkey Inactive
    TheSockMonkey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    True, however we would have laughed it off. I, for one, am not laughing it off, as Trump is clearly out of the bounds of normal or acceptable behavior.

    And this, apparently, justifies false allegations of bigotry, to make Trump seem even less normal and acceptable than he truly is, along with any number of other ways to undermine the president of one’s own party.

    If we’re truly concerned that Trump is indulging in unacceptable behavior, like racism, the correct response is not to make false accusations. The boy has cried wolf too many times.

    They told us it was racist when he alleged that some Mexican illegals were rapists. When we go back and watch the speech, it was not a racist comment.

    They told us it was racist to question Barack Obama’s birth certificate, as if no white candidate’s birthplace or citizenship had ever been questioned. As if citizenship were determined by race. This was likewise false.

    They told us he was mocking Native Americans, by calling someone “Pocahontas.” In fact, he was ridiculing a white woman who claimed to be Native American.

    They told us he was a racist for criticizing people who happen to be black. In fact, he criticizes all manner of people, for any trivial thing.

    They told us he was a racist for failing to send a dead murderer to GITMO.

    They told us he was a racist for applying “extreme vetting” to nations which his (black) predecessor had also singled out as problematic.

    The race card has been overcharged, cut up with scissors, and put throught the shredder. No one will take that card, anymore. No one can take allegations of white racism seriously, anymore, because too many people have done what you’ve done too many times. Too many false allegations.

    That’s how you get Trump.

    • #107
  18. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):
    That’s how you get Trump.

    This is it! Of course! I should have seen it before. Gary is actually working on Trump’s re-election campaign!

    • #108
  19. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Arahant (View Comment):

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):
    That’s how you get Trump.

    This is it! Of course! I should have seen it before. Gary is actually working on Trump’s re-election campaign!

    I love the levity that you provide.

    • #109
  20. PHCheese Inactive
    PHCheese
    @PHCheese

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    PHCheese (View Comment):
    As soon as someone says “clearly ” it’s usually not even close. I remember that from the classes on the law as an undergraduate.

    So you believe that Trump is within the bounds of normal or acceptable behavior?

    Clearly, no wait that opinion is like a beauty contest. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I get your opinion and respect it. But it was in, actuality, a binary election. Trump won, Hillary lost. I see no impeachable actions on his part. It’s time you move on, dead horses begin to stink after a year. Don’t make me tell that Arizona lawyer going into a cowboy bar joke.

    • #110
  21. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I love the levity that you provide.

    I’m a results man, Gary. I try not to be fooled by what people say, but rather see the results they create. That’s why I like Trump. What he says (and tweets) is distraction, but most of his results are pretty good. That’s far better than the typical politician whose words are great, but his actions are not so great.

    Every time you go on about Trump, you drive marginal people into his camp. Were my words levity? Perhaps. There’s an old phrase, “Many a true word is spoken in jest.” Maybe I just reverse that to “Many a funny word is spoken in truth.”

    • #111
  22. TheSockMonkey Inactive
    TheSockMonkey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I love the levity that you provide.

    I’m a results man, Gary. I try not to be fooled by what people say, but rather see the results they create. That’s why I like Trump. What he says (and tweets) is distraction, but most of his results are pretty good. That’s far better than the typical politician whose words are great, but his actions are not so great.

    Very true. The pastor of my church is very conservative – as in, his moral concerns about Trump start with his serial monogamy – and he was talking to an anti-Trump mutual friend. The preacher’s advice was, essentially, ignore what Trump says; look at what he does. I had never seen it that way before, and I thought it was very good advice.

    His actions don’t excuse some of the things he’s said, but if we’re to blame him for the latter, we must credit him for the good things he does.

    • #112
  23. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I love the levity that you provide.

    I’m a results man, Gary. I try not to be fooled by what people say, but rather see the results they create. That’s why I like Trump. What he says (and tweets) is distraction, but most of his results are pretty good. That’s far better than the typical politician whose words are great, but his actions are not so great.

    Very true. The pastor of my church is very conservative – as in, his moral concerns about Trump start with his serial monogamy – and he was talking to an anti-Trump mutual friend. The preacher’s advice was, essentially, ignore what Trump says; look at what he does. I had never seen it that way before, and I thought it was very good advice.

    His actions don’t excuse some of the things he’s said, but if we’re to blame him for the latter, we must credit him for the good things he does.

    Trump has done a good job on judges and regulations.  Or, rather, he is listening to the right people about them.

    • #113
  24. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Mike LaRoche (View Comment):
    If Trump ever mentions half-froggy, half-frito bandito, mackerel-snapping, heteronormative Texan imperialists, that’ll make my day.

    Does anyone know Trump’s speechwriters? We need to get this inserted into a speech pronto.

    How about his tweetwriter?

    • #114
  25. Matt Balzer Member
    Matt Balzer
    @MattBalzer

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I love the levity that you provide.

    I’m a results man, Gary. I try not to be fooled by what people say, but rather see the results they create. That’s why I like Trump. What he says (and tweets) is distraction, but most of his results are pretty good. That’s far better than the typical politician whose words are great, but his actions are not so great.

    Very true. The pastor of my church is very conservative – as in, his moral concerns about Trump start with his serial monogamy – and he was talking to an anti-Trump mutual friend. The preacher’s advice was, essentially, ignore what Trump says; look at what he does. I had never seen it that way before, and I thought it was very good advice.

    His actions don’t excuse some of the things he’s said, but if we’re to blame him for the latter, we must credit him for the good things he does.

    Trump has done a good job on judges and regulations. Or, rather, he is listening to the right people about them.

    An inverted evil advisors situation? I don’t believe I’ve ever seen that suggested before.

    • #115
  26. Matt Balzer Member
    Matt Balzer
    @MattBalzer

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Mike LaRoche (View Comment):
    If Trump ever mentions half-froggy, half-frito bandito, mackerel-snapping, heteronormative Texan imperialists, that’ll make my day.

    Does anyone know Trump’s speechwriters? We need to get this inserted into a speech pronto.

    How about his tweetwriter?

    They can do 280 character tweets now so it’s at least possible.

    • #116
  27. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Trump has done a good job on judges and regulations. Or, rather, he is listening to the right people about them.

    So far he has done well with his Ex-Im appointment. I wish you would have done just as well on that issue.

    • #117
  28. Tom Meyer, Common Citizen Contributor
    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen
    @tommeyer

    This article was much better than its title suggested.

    • #118
  29. PHCheese Inactive
    PHCheese
    @PHCheese

    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen (View Comment):
    This article was much better than its title suggested.

    Thanks Tom, my next post title will be Don’t Judge A Book By It’s Book By It’s Cover. As boring as cheese sounds there were a lot of adventures and misadventures in the naked city.

    • #119
  30. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    One additional question just now occurred to me:  What would have happened if you and all the other legitimate bidders had claimed Native American status.  The DoD wasn’t allowed to challenge it, so what could have gone wrong so long as you fulfilled your contracts?

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.