Recommended Posts

 

Trump -

“Just remember, what you are seeing and what you are reading is not what’s happening. Just stick with us, don’t believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news.”

Orwell -

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

“There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always—do not forget this, Winston—always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking into the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.”

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too intelligent for Trump to have said it. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and it gets worse,  Vlad and the Ruskies are getting offended with anyone not supporting the haloed leader, or should that be their appointed one.... WTF.....honestly can it get any more bizarre? Oh wait it probably will......

Russia slams US general, says he 'discredited' Trump

160315184142-ryan-browne-headshot-small-

By Ryan Browne, CNN

 

Updated 1959 GMT (0359 HKT) July 24, 2018

 
 
 
 
160519123905-joseph-votel-march-9-2016-e
 

Washington (CNN)The Russian Ministry of Defense slammed US Gen. Joseph Votel Tuesday, accusing America's top military commander in the Middle East of discrediting President Donald Trump's position after Votel expressed hesitancy about working with Russia in Syria.

"With his statements, General Votel not only discredited the official position of his supreme commander-in-chief, but also exacerbated the illegality under international law and US law of the military presence of American servicemen in Syria," the Russian Ministry said in a statement published on social media in response to an interview Votel gave to ABC News.
"I would want to make sure that this isn't something that we stepped into lightly," Votel, the commander of US Central Command, said when asked about the idea of the US and Russia working together to facilitate the return of refugees.
"I am not recommending that. And that would be a pretty big step at this point," Votel added.
On Friday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confirmed that the issue of refugee return had been discussed during last week's meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin but did not say that any agreements had been reached.
"There was a discussion between President Trump and President Putin about the resolution in Syria and how we might get the refugees back. The President shared with me the conversations that they'd had. It is important to the world that at the right time, through a voluntary mechanism, these refugees are able to return to their home country," Pompeo told reporters at the United Nations.
"There's lots of work to do to figure out how to implement that, but the United States certainly wants to be part of help achieving that resolution in Syria, make no mistake about it," he added.
Votel told reporters at the Pentagon that he had received no new direction following the Trump-Putin meeting and Trump has also appeared to suggest that while many issues related to the region had been discussed, the implementation of any agreements would not take place until a second meeting between Trump and Putin.
The UN estimates that over 5 million Syrians have fled that country since the outbreak of the civil war there in 2011.
On Tuesday, Secretary of Defense James Mattis also confirmed that the US was not cooperating with Russia in Syria while speaking with Pompeo in Palo Alto, California, alongside their Australian counterparts.
"In regard to Syria, what we do with the Russian Federation is we de-conflict our operations, we do not coordinate them," Mattis said.
"We will not be doing anything additional until the secretary of state and the President have further figured out at what point we're going to start working alongside our allies with Russia in the future, that has not happened yet and it would be premature for me to go into any more detail at this point because we're not doing any more than this," he added.
The Russian ministry's statement on Votel also criticized the US presence in Syria, saying that "US forces are left with only one option to stay in Syria -- to engage in cooperation with Russia and the country's legal leadership in the process of assisting the return of refugees and temporarily displaced persons to their homes."
On Monday, the House and Senate armed services committees released the final version of their compromise defense bill for 2019 that once again renewed a prohibition on "military-to-military cooperation" with Russia.

CNN's Alla Eshchenko contributed reporting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coincidently, Rachel Maddow is going through a litany of Orwellian manipulation of recent political news as we speak. Fascinating stuff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Navig8tor said:

Oh and it gets worse,  Vlad and the Ruskies are getting offended with anyone not supporting the haloed leader, or should that be their appointed one.... WTF.....honestly can it get any more bizarre? Oh wait it probably will......

Russia slams US general, says he 'discredited' Trump

160315184142-ryan-browne-headshot-small-

By Ryan Browne, CNN

 

Updated 1959 GMT (0359 HKT) July 24, 2018

 
 
 
 
160519123905-joseph-votel-march-9-2016-e
 

Washington (CNN)The Russian Ministry of Defense slammed US Gen. Joseph Votel Tuesday, accusing America's top military commander in the Middle East of discrediting President Donald Trump's position after Votel expressed hesitancy about working with Russia in Syria.

"With his statements, General Votel not only discredited the official position of his supreme commander-in-chief, but also exacerbated the illegality under international law and US law of the military presence of American servicemen in Syria," the Russian Ministry said in a statement published on social media in response to an interview Votel gave to ABC News.
"I would want to make sure that this isn't something that we stepped into lightly," Votel, the commander of US Central Command, said when asked about the idea of the US and Russia working together to facilitate the return of refugees.
"I am not recommending that. And that would be a pretty big step at this point," Votel added.
On Friday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confirmed that the issue of refugee return had been discussed during last week's meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin but did not say that any agreements had been reached.
"There was a discussion between President Trump and President Putin about the resolution in Syria and how we might get the refugees back. The President shared with me the conversations that they'd had. It is important to the world that at the right time, through a voluntary mechanism, these refugees are able to return to their home country," Pompeo told reporters at the United Nations.
"There's lots of work to do to figure out how to implement that, but the United States certainly wants to be part of help achieving that resolution in Syria, make no mistake about it," he added.
Votel told reporters at the Pentagon that he had received no new direction following the Trump-Putin meeting and Trump has also appeared to suggest that while many issues related to the region had been discussed, the implementation of any agreements would not take place until a second meeting between Trump and Putin.
The UN estimates that over 5 million Syrians have fled that country since the outbreak of the civil war there in 2011.
On Tuesday, Secretary of Defense James Mattis also confirmed that the US was not cooperating with Russia in Syria while speaking with Pompeo in Palo Alto, California, alongside their Australian counterparts.
"In regard to Syria, what we do with the Russian Federation is we de-conflict our operations, we do not coordinate them," Mattis said.
"We will not be doing anything additional until the secretary of state and the President have further figured out at what point we're going to start working alongside our allies with Russia in the future, that has not happened yet and it would be premature for me to go into any more detail at this point because we're not doing any more than this," he added.
The Russian ministry's statement on Votel also criticized the US presence in Syria, saying that "US forces are left with only one option to stay in Syria -- to engage in cooperation with Russia and the country's legal leadership in the process of assisting the return of refugees and temporarily displaced persons to their homes."
On Monday, the House and Senate armed services committees released the final version of their compromise defense bill for 2019 that once again renewed a prohibition on "military-to-military cooperation" with Russia.

CNN's Alla Eshchenko contributed reporting.

FACT: Responsibility for the debacle that is Syria today including the refugee crisis lies squarely with the people you worship as listed above and NOT with the great orange waazoo.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh to be a Fly on the wall in the private one on one meeting.

The poor translator is probably paranoid knowing how kindly Vlad treats people that become inconvenient,  probably moving to another country and changing their  name as we speak, politely declining any govt suggested witness protection and forgetting how to speak Russian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FACT: Responsibility for the debacle that is Syria today including the refugee crisis lies squarely with the people you worship as listed above and NOT with the great orange waazoo.  

Sorry Mickey I don't worship anyone and all of the above mentioned are bit players in a tragedy started by Assad against his own people.

The great orange waazoo on the other hand is in way over his head as evidenced by the continuous debacle this week alone. that is his contribution to international foreign policy, those that do not learn their history are destined to repeat it and when the waazoo (calling him Great and Orange will only inflate his ego) does not even read....well it gets a little concerning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of fucking idiots

think they can make a point

with others ideas and can't

even make their cut and pastes

readable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

What kind of fucking idiots

think they can make a point

with others ideas and can't

even make their cut and pastes

readable?

saorsa, for one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of fucking idiot screams in technicolor?

saorsa are you a trump apologist that is suddenly over screaming at everyone in Black and White? - you do realize that with what Trumpsky is quoted as saying in this thread  don't listen, don't question, just believe in me ( yes me..... the  pathological liar, philanderer and sociopath) -pretty soon he will be asking you to take a sip of his Kool aid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mickey Rat said:

FACT: Responsibility for the debacle that is Syria today including the refugee crisis lies squarely with the people you worship as listed above and NOT with the great orange waazoo.  

We were all waiting for you to show- your  employers are not going to take kindly to you falling asleep at the keyboard......

I know this probably seems like a backwater (leetle sailing joke there) to you, but it beats real work, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Russians are some of Trumps biggest supporters and the moron Trumpeters at home can't comprehend the implications of that?

Could anyone write this as fiction?

Trump makes Kim Philby look like a patriot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SaorsaTrump.thumb.jpg.807b7e02a56e36fdfa26987e72f6afb7.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mickey Rat said:

FACT: Responsibility for the debacle that is Syria today including the refugee crisis lies squarely with the people you worship as listed above and NOT with the great orange waazoo.  

Navig8r worships George W. Bush??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mickey Rat said:

FACT: Responsibility for the debacle that is Syria today including the refugee crisis lies squarely with the people you worship as listed above and NOT with the great orange waazoo.  

MickRat.jpg.bad7bb2735d62e74dc9b2d8523e75fc1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The white house and Russian official media has now edited out the section of the officla record where Putin confirmed that he and his admin supported the election of Trump

this  story

and also confirmed on the annoying rachel maddow show in her "wander all around the houses" style of journalism

Mr Trump says do not believe what you hear or read - believe trump not the truth..stick with him

Doublespek is alive and well in your country

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak

I for one dis not believe that I would ever see such a thing

America..... where are you guys going?

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

What kind of fucking idiot screams in technicolor?

saorsa are you a trump apologist that is suddenly over screaming at everyone in Black and White? - you do realize that with what Trumpsky is quoted as saying in this thread  don't listen, don't question, just believe in me ( yes me..... the  pathological liar, philanderer and sociopath) -pretty soon he will be asking you to take a sip of his Kool aid.

Actually, I read the threads, it's just annoying that cut and paste without eliminating the formatting fills an entire screen with a sentence or two.

I am not complaining about what thoughts of others they are posting, or their right to do so without oringinal input.  Simply their lack of competence.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Actually, I read the threads, it's just annoying that cut and paste without eliminating the formatting fills an entire screen with a sentence or two.

that's a problem on your end, moron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Really?  It seems easy enough to fix.
 
 

Oh and it gets worse,  Vlad and the Ruskies are getting offended with anyone not supporting the haloed leader, or should that be their appointed one.... WTF.....honestly can it get any more bizarre? Oh wait it probably will......

Russia slams US general, says he 'discredited' Trump

160315184142-ryan-browne-headshot-small-

By Ryan Browne, CNN

 

Updated 1959 GMT (0359 HKT) July 24, 2018

 

Washington (CNN)The Russian Ministry of Defense slammed US Gen. Joseph Votel Tuesday, accusing America's top military commander in the Middle East of discrediting President Donald Trump's position after Votel expressed hesitancy about working with Russia in Syria.

"With his statements, General Votel not only discredited the official position of his supreme commander-in-chief, but also exacerbated the illegality under international law and US law of the military presence of American servicemen in Syria," the Russian Ministry said in a statement published on social media in response to an interview Votel gave to ABC News.
"I would want to make sure that this isn't something that we stepped into lightly," Votel, the commander of US Central Command, said when asked about the idea of the US and Russia working together to facilitate the return of refugees.
"I am not recommending that. And that would be a pretty big step at this point," Votel added.
On Friday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confirmed that the issue of refugee return had been discussed during last week's meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin but did not say that any agreements had been reached.
"There was a discussion between President Trump and President Putin about the resolution in Syria and how we might get the refugees back. The President shared with me the conversations that they'd had. It is important to the world that at the right time, through a voluntary mechanism, these refugees are able to return to their home country," Pompeo told reporters at the United Nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

I hope that those who annoy me find it annoying.

High aspirations, you've got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If democrats ride a blue wave in November its cause of the Russians and if it happens again in 2020...can elections be declared null and void due to a hostile country interfering?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, VhmSays said:

If democrats ride a blue wave in November its cause of the Russians and if it happens again in 2020...can elections be declared null and void due to a hostile country interfering?

As long as they pay for their ads, Facebook, Google and the other advertising billionaires won't mind.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

As long as they pay for their ads, Facebook, Google and the other advertising billionaires won't mind.

Don't forget the NRA and any other entity pouring money into GOP coffers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Don't forget the NRA and any other entity pouring money into GOP coffers.

As well as the ad space that Soros and the Clinton Foundation fund.   Do you want all money out, or just the money supporting a message you oppose? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

As well as the ad space that Soros and the Clinton Foundation fund.   Do you want all money out, or just the money supporting a message you oppose? 

All the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Don't forget the NRA and any other entity pouring Russian money into GOP coffers.

FIFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mickey Rat said:
1 hour ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

As well as the ad space that Soros and the Clinton Foundation fund.   Do you want all money out, or just the money supporting a message you oppose? 

All the money.

All the money.  Especially from foreign governments.  Specifically because the IRS made it possible for donations to be completely anonymous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

Don't forget the NRA and any other entity pouring money into GOP coffers.

Or the unions or yada yada yada.

The problem isn't just that the other guys are spending money on ads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Or the unions or yada yada yada.

The problem isn't just that the other guys are spending money on ads.

Do you view Unions and the Russian government in the same light regarding contributions to American political contributions?

I don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Do you view Unions and the Russian government in the same light regarding contributions to American political contributions?

I don't.

I view everyone not an individual in the same light when it comes to contributions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

I view everyone not an individual in the same light when it comes to contributions.

Well, in my example, one of the entities is American.

The other, not so much. 

Your equal outrage over contributions by Unions and the Russian government is duly noted. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Well, in my example, one of the entities is American.

The other, not so much. 

Your equal outrage over contributions by Unions and the Russian government is duly noted. 

But, neither is an individual.

Oh, add in anyone outside the constituency.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Oh, add in anyone outside the constituency.

so in your view a candidate could be in a situation where they couldn't donate to their own campaign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

so in your view a candidate could be in a situation where they couldn't donate to their own campaign

No.

Perhaps you are getting confused by NY choosing Hillary to run for senate even though she had been living In Arkansas and DC.  She moved to NY when Moynihan offered her a seat.  She did actually take up residency before running so it became here constituency.  I don't believe she ever put any of her own money into her campaign though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

No.

Perhaps you are getting confused by NY choosing Hillary to run for senate even though she had been living In Arkansas and DC.  She moved to NY when Moynihan offered her a seat.  She did actually take up residency before running so it became here constituency.  I don't believe she ever put any of her own money into her campaign though.

poke him and out sputters the incoherent Hillary hate.

I'm not confused at all. Congress members must be inhabitants of the state they represent on their election so there is no requirement for most of the 435 members of the US house to live in their constituency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

poke him and out sputters the incoherent Hillary hate.

I'm not confused at all. Congress members must be inhabitants of the state they represent on their election so there is no requirement for most of the 435 members of the US house to live in their constituency.

There should be.  And there should be a lot more of them.  At least 3000 or so living within sight of their constituents.  But, that was another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sean said:

 

Trump -

“Just remember, what you are seeing and what you are reading is not what’s happening. Just stick with us, don’t believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news.”

Orwell -

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

That really is an amazing statement. Good call. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

poke him and out sputters the incoherent Hillary hate.

What hate jibs? I read that several times. No hate. I havent checked but it just sounded like factual statements. My guess is it's an inconvenient truthity.

[Rant on:] All of us need to stomp on and stamp out whataboutism! [Rant off.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony of Americans complaining about interference in their election, given the history of the US interfering in foreign elections, is not lost. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

What hate jibs? I read that several times. No hate. I havent checked but it just sounded like factual statements. My guess is it's an inconvenient truthity.

[Rant on:] All of us need to stomp on and stamp out whataboutism! [Rant off.]

that wasn't whatboutism, that was shouting squirrel.

Hillary was a carpetbagger, no shit. Did an ok job for new york from what I saw. Most of DC has little link to their home state; something like 2 dozen don't even claim residency in their constituency. Remember Dick Cheney suddenly becoming a Wyoming resident 4 days before W picked him as Vice-President because they can't come from the same state? Did you care?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

that wasn't whatboutism, that was shouting squirrel.

Hillary was a carpetbagger, no shit. Did an ok job for new york from what I saw. Most of DC has little link to their home state; something like 2 dozen don't even claim residency in their constituency. Remember Dick Cheney suddenly becoming a Wyoming resident 4 days before W picked him as Vice-President because they can't come from the same state? Did you care?

I do care and it bums me that our so- called leaders allow this. But mentioning Cheney's deal is whataboutism, in my view. We're all guilty of it but it's a waste time and bandwidth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic.

How many changes has this administration made now to former presidential access and accountability..and transparency?

Lesee, there's the lack of pressers, the visitors book, the recent with holding of readouts of communications with foreign heads of state.

Image result for trump star 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mickey Rat said:

FACT: Responsibility for the debacle that is Syria today including the refugee crisis lies squarely with the people you worship as listed above and NOT with the great orange waazoo.  

Well, that’s quite the stretch, let’s say shitty opinion rather than lie.

however, does this statement intend to show that you support the current Russian executive over American generals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, bugger said:

The irony of Americans complaining about interference in their election, given the history of the US interfering in foreign elections, is not lost. 

Yeah..it's somewhat eye rolling

But I suppose that in this case,  they have to prove interference before they can top the cake with the collusion icing..and a treason cherry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bugger said:

The irony of Americans complaining about interference in their election, given the history of the US interfering in foreign elections, is not lost. 

No, no, no. No. If Russia interferes with the American election, yeah, we should complain. Anyone should complain about that, us or Tuvalu. But that isn't news. That's dog bites man. It's when half of us don't complain, that's man bites dog, and that's news or it should be news.

Half of them don't complain about their election being hacked by the Russians? (Half being a loose term, probably closer to a third.)

Why is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

FACT: Responsibility for the debacle that is Syria today including the refugee crisis lies squarely with the people you worship as listed above and NOT with the great orange waazoo.  

Sorry Mickey I don't worship anyone and all of the above mentioned are bit players in a tragedy started by Assad against his own people.

The great orange waazoo on the other hand is in way over his head as evidenced by the continuous debacle this week alone. that is his contribution to international foreign policy, those that do not learn their history are destined to repeat it and when the waazoo (calling him Great and Orange will only inflate his ego) does not even read....well it gets a little concerning.

But the important thing is that Trump had a chance to win a second Nobel PP by solving the Syria mess and he did not take it. I guess he was being generous and wanted someone else to have chance to win.

Trivia question - How many people have won two Nobel prizes (not only Peace)? Who is the only person to win two Nobels without sharing either with other people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linus Pauling won two. He had both alone. Pretty smart guy. I take lots of vitamin C every day due to him.

Curiously, my wife & I were discussing that very thing a couple of hours ago.

I think Marie Curie won twice as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Trivia question - How many people have won two Nobel prizes (not only Peace)? Who is the only person to win two Nobels without sharing either with other people?

Marie Curie was the first.  Physics in 1903 (with her husband and Becquerel) and Chemistry in 1906.

I know there are others, in addition to Pauling, but I am not in a position to look them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a great whataboutism. But I'm not slipping on that slippery slope.

Nope. Nay. Negatory, good buddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/24/2018 at 6:54 PM, Ease the sheet. said:

Fuck, mikey will be all over this thread like stupidity on the Internet.

Does it upset you that a Yank has read more Orwell than you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2018 at 12:25 PM, Navig8tor said:

Sorry Mickey I don't worship anyone and all of the above mentioned are bit players in a tragedy started by Assad against his own people.

The cool aide. This guy has found it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mikewof said:

Does it upset you that a Yank has read more Orwell than you?

Not all, in fact its rather impressive. 

However,  it disappoints me that orwells message gets diluted when you confuse historical facts with orwells opinions.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Marie Curie was the first.  Physics in 1903 (with her husband and Becquerel) and Chemistry in 1906.

I know there are others, in addition to Pauling, but I am not in a position to look them up.

Interestingly there were four with Pauiing and Curie being the famous ones. Pauling was special because he got his in science and for peace. To mention Trump in the same sentence as these giants of society is ludicrous - and don't bother mentioning Obama. It was a bad joke that he got his PP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Not all, in fact its rather impressive. 

However,  it disappoints me that orwells message gets diluted when you confuse historical facts with orwells opinions.

Example?

I'm pretty sure that I don't do that.

One thing to remember is that Orwell wasn't just a novelist, he was a newspaper reporter. His post-WWII essays, and his documentaries like Wigan's Pier, Homage to Catalonia and Burmese Days (to lesser degrees) are as close to historical fact as most any period source. In fact, Wigans has a level of detail that you could never find in most history books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Interestingly there were four with Pauiing and Curie being the famous ones. Pauling was special because he got his in science and for peace. To mention Trump in the same sentence as these giants of society is ludicrous - and don't bother mentioning Obama. It was a bad joke that he got his PP. 

I thought that the only competition Obama had for the "WTF" Nobel award was Milton Friedman.

The committee must have had a real shortage of candidates when they awarded those two.

Does anyone actually know what the reason was for giving Obama his? I sort of assumed it was simply for becoming POTUS while black and breaking the ultimate racism bar.

I doubt that was the official reason though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Interestingly there were four with Pauiing and Curie being the famous ones. Pauling was special because he got his in science and for peace. To mention Trump in the same sentence as these giants of society is ludicrous - and don't bother mentioning Obama. It was a bad joke that he got his PP. 

The rationale behind the Obama prize was that the prize can't be awarded posthumously, and there was general concern at the time outside of the USA to his longevity ... not unreasonable given what happened to the earlier generation of civil rights leaders.

The prize isn't just based on good work, it's based on impact. And Obama's impact was unrivaled. (Even I have to admit that, and I'm critical of Obama's drone war.)

One other issue, is that the committee is now concerned with how the prize is considered for people who are historically overlooked. That was less of a concern with Obama, but it was a concern ... history is unforgiving when it comes to overlooking impactful people for the prize. The extreme egg-on-face example of course is Lise Meitner, who not only never received the prize, but had it essentially stolen and awarded to Otto Hahn. But that was the flavor of the day ... a Jew might get the prize, a woman might get the prize, but a woman Jew would have a hard time getting the prize, even if she discovered nuclear fission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Example?

I'm pretty sure that I don't do that.

One thing to remember is that Orwell wasn't just a novelist, he was a newspaper reporter. His post-WWII essays, and his documentaries like Wigan's Pier, Homage to Catalonia and Burmese Days (to lesser degrees) are as close to historical fact as most any period source. In fact, Wigans has a level of detail that you could never find in most history books.

Hmm..The road to Wigan Pier??

a tad overblown IMHO..historically factual? Well my family are/were Miners in the Cumberland and Nottingham mines way back to the mid 19th C (and prolly before)

Poor they were, but I dont think they ever lived in the conditions Orwell described..maybe some miners lived like that..many did not.

My memories of their homes (Maryport) (Basford) were two up two down terraces with a scullery out back and a large veggie garden 

Abstract

George Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) has long been considered an important semi-documentary source for living and working conditions in the north-west of England during the 1930s. Yet exactly how important – and how accurate and useful – the book is has never been determined. This article examines its historicity, both in its detailed coverage of such aspects of life as housing, diet and rates of pay and in its vignettes of particular people and scenes. A comparison is made with the complete text of 'The Road to Wigan Pier Diary', in the Orwell archive at University College London, which, contrary to popular belief, is shown to be not a first version of the final book but a real working diary. The results shed light not only upon society during the depression but upon Orwell's methods as a social commentator and upon the reliability of his work as historical source material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Hmm..The road to Wigan Pier??

a tad overblown IMHO..historically factual? Well my family are/were Miners in the Cumberland and Nottingham mines way back to the mid 19th C (and prolly before)

Poor they were, but I dont think they ever lived in the conditions Orwell described..maybe some miners lived like that..many did not.

My memories of their homes (Maryport) (Basford) were two up two down terraces with a scullery out back and a large veggie garden 

Did you read the book? His key point of documenting those lives wasn't in documenting the poverty, but rather the rapidly dissipating coal mining middle class. He was clear about the beauty of those simple lives, and how technology and dependent economies were making them obsolete. Remember, "a dark and satanic mill ought to look like a dark and satanic mill, and not like a temple of mysterious and splendid gods."

Orwell was a reporter, he was commissioned to write that book as a documentary and that's what he did, and then some. You claim it's not factual? With what part do you object?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/feb/20/orwell-wigan-pier-75-years

He originally intended to go to Rochdale, home of Jack Hilton, a working-class writer whom he greatly admired. Hilton, a lifelong socialist, advised him to head for Wigan, where an incoming southerner would see the full magnitude of the depressed north. Ever since, Wiganers have regretted Hilton's advice, while cannily turning the infamy of Orwell's depiction to the advantage of their town. My grandfather was a Wigan miner whose bare skin, perma-tattooed with blue spiders' webs from the coal dust, frightened me as a child on summer days on Morecambe Bay shore. Orwell said the miners' marbled skin looked like Roquefort cheese, which would have meant nothing to them. He also condemned Lancashire cheese as "flabby", which only goes to show how food fashions change.

Grandad and his workmates couldn't understand why Orwell chose to dwell so relentlessly on the negative, the impact of which altogether erased his praise of the heroism of miners working underground in appalling and dangerous conditions.

Orwell's depiction of his sordid lodgings above a tripe shop – with an unemptied chamber pot beneath the breakfast table – makes great copy but tells us little about the living conditions of most Wiganers. It is an article of faith in the town that he only moved to live with the Forrests because of their low reputation and that his previous lodgings were too clean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Did you read the book? His key point of documenting those lives wasn't in documenting the poverty, but rather the rapidly dissipating coal mining middle class. He was clear about the beauty of those simple lives, and how technology and dependent economies were making them obsolete. Remember, "a dark and satanic mill ought to look like a dark and satanic mill, and not like a temple of mysterious and splendid gods."

Orwell was a reporter, he was commissioned to write that book as a documentary and that's what he did, and then some. You claim it's not factual? With what part do you object?

Orwells description of living conditions would have been an enormous insult to my Aunties, Bell, May, Annie and others.

They were poor but within the limitations of the scullery and a bath a week, scrupulously clean..their cakes a marvel and their kids well nourished..even my dad. Orwell was a great writer but suffered from the same snobberies and false  empathy that  most middle class lefties did and still do.

It's been a long time since I read Wigan Pier (But I can remember the title correctly :rolleyes:) but to my knowledge, non of the men in my family ever walked 8 miles before dawn and crawled on their hands and knees another 8 to make their few bob a day.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shortforbob said:

Orwells description of living conditions would have been an enormous insult to my Aunties, Bell, May, Annie and others.

They were poor but within the limitations of the scullery and a bath a week, scrupulously clean..their cakes a marvel and their kids well nourished..even my dad. Orwell was a great writer but suffered from the same snobberies and false  empathy that  most middle class lefties did and still do.

I've read that book about twenty times. I'm not sure the part that you find offensive to the memory of your relatives. What is it, specifically?

He visited a couple genuinely poor families, and he noted some genuinely poor "outsiders" like the single guy who couldn't afford cooking fuel, or notably the girl he saw from the train who was trying to unfoul a drain pipe with a stick ... but he was clear to document the typical Northern coal mining family as being relatively comfortable, from the aspirins, to betting a few pennies on the horses, or buying comforts like tea and chips. In fact, in his documents, the baths for the miners were often more frequent than once-per-week, in some cases -- if the company built a shower at the minehead --- at the end of every shift.

And do you have an example of his "snobberies and false empathy"? He was again, clear that these are "bindweeds" that he made a point to find ...

You forget your Latin and Greek within a few months of leaving school—I studied Greek for eight or ten years, and now, at thirty-three, I cannot even repeat the Greek alphabet—but your snobbishness, unless you persistently root it out like the bindweed it is, sticks by you till your grave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's so awful about unfouling a drain with a stick I might ask?

Read the article from the Guardian.

Like I said, I read Wigan Pier prolly 30 years ago..it's a great book..but even at the time it jarred with my..(and my Fathers) first hand memories.

My Dad loved Orwell..and Tressell but he was sad and insulted by many of Orwell's observations.

And he grew up the illegitimate son of a miners daughter in the depression..in Maryport NW england..in the 1930's and lived and grew up in one of those two up two down terraces..left school at 14 and became a housepainter.

A real socialist.

I'm  simply disputing your assertion that

"One thing to remember is that Orwell wasn't just a novelist, he was a newspaper reporter. His post-WWII essays, and his documentaries like Wigan's Pier, Homage to Catalonia and Burmese Days (to lesser degrees) are as close to historical fact as most any period source. In fact, Wigans has a level of detail that you could never find in most history books."

Orwell cherry picked the worst ..makes good reading..but accurate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Orwell's documentary style was impressionist, he wrote in a way that drew pictures in one's mind.

He exaggerated that picture to illustrate it.

Kinda like the other George(Lucas) did with space travel.

Orwell was a writer with a message and that message  frequently got in the way the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Orwell's documentary style was impressionist, he wrote in a way that drew pictures in one's mind.

He exaggerated that picture to illustrate it.

Kinda like the other George(Lucas) did with space travel.

Orwell was a writer with a message and that message  frequently got in the way the truth.

exactly.

 

(and he was a master, I can still see the huddle of Tramps, rotating centre out to keep warm in the fog at midnight on Trafalgar Square? (The Clergymans Daughter)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

33499326_1778954408863680_7691747662143422464_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

33499326_1778954408863680_7691747662143422464_n.jpg

well done..Mo's very first literary contribution :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

well done..Mo's very first literary contribution :D

Though I'm not sure it means what he thinks it means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.9news.com.au/world/2018/07/26/15/19/journalist-banned-from-white-house-press-conference-after-asking-trump-about-lawyer-and-russia

Journalist banned from Trump press conference after asking about lawyer and Russia

even Fox news is protesting

 

CNN reporter banned: Fox joins outcry after exclusion from White House event

Fox News stands ‘in strong solidarity’ after Kaitlan Collins excluded from meeting of Donald Trump and Jean-Claude Juncker

A CNN reporter has been excluded by the White House from a press event after asking Donald Trump about Vladimir Putin’s postponed visit and the Michael Cohen tapes.

The ban on White House reporter Kaitlan Collins sparked outcry from traditional rival Fox News and the White House Correspondents Association, which called the decision “wrong-headed, and weak”.

Collins was barred from a Rose Garden event free to all press after asking what she was told were “inappropriate” questions at an earlier gathering. Collins had asked about the audio recording – featuring Trump discussing paying former Playboy model Karen McDougal – during a picture-taking session in the Oval Office as Trump met Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president.

CNN said in a statement that Collins was told by White House communications director Bill Shine and press secretary Sarah Sanders that her questions had been “inappropriate” and that she could not attend an event during which Trump and Juncker announced a joint working dialogue on trade.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jul/26/cnn-reporter-banned-trump-white-house-event-kaitlan-collins

“This decision to bar a member of the press is retaliatory in nature and not indicative of an open and free press. We demand better,” CNN said.

 

Trump has frequently complained about CNN’s coverage of his presidency, saying he feels it is unfair.

In a statement that did not name Collins, Sanders said a reporter had shouted questions and refused to leave at the conclusion of an Oval Office press event “despite repeatedly being asked to do so”.

“Subsequently, our staff informed her she was not welcome to participate in the next event, but made clear that any other journalist from her network could attend,” Sanders said.

Jay Wallace, president of Fox News, which is frequently praised by Trump, expressed support for CNN. “We stand in strong solidarity with CNN for the right to full access for our journalists as part of a free and unfettered press,” Wallace said in a statement.

Olivier Knox, president of the White House Correspondents Association (WHCA), denounced the White House decision. “We strongly condemn the White House’s misguided and inappropriate decision today to bar one of our members from an open press event after she asked questions they did not like,” Knox said in a statement.

“This type of retaliation is wholly inappropriate, wrong-headed, and weak. It cannot stand.

“Reporters asking questions of powerful government officials, up to and including the president, helps hold those people accountable. In our republic, the WHCA supports the prerogative of all reporters to do their jobs without fear of reprisal from the government,” Knox said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Orwell's documentary style was impressionist, he wrote in a way that drew pictures in one's mind.

He exaggerated that picture to illustrate it.

Kinda like the other George(Lucas) did with space travel.

Orwell was a writer with a message and that message  frequently got in the way the truth.

He did that for his novels. Have you confused his novels with his documentaries?

His documentaries and essays were the results of an experienced and professional newspaperman. They were truth. He stood by them as commissioned.

They were so truthful that even his novels (!) had to be edited in some cases (like Burmese Days) before being published in the UK for fear of legal action for his characters being too close to actual overseas British officials. And even in those novels (which are part autobiographical, like Down and Out in Paris and London) you can still find the detritus of the censor's pen, like when a Parisian waiter curses "idiot, species of idiot!" Those are not the words that he wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

What's so awful about unfouling a drain with a stick I might ask?

Read the article from the Guardian.

Like I said, I read Wigan Pier prolly 30 years ago..it's a great book..but even at the time it jarred with my..(and my Fathers) first hand memories.

My Dad loved Orwell..and Tressell but he was sad and insulted by many of Orwell's observations.

And he grew up the illegitimate son of a miners daughter in the depression..in Maryport NW england..in the 1930's and lived and grew up in one of those two up two down terraces..left school at 14 and became a housepainter.

A real socialist.

I'm  simply disputing your assertion that

"One thing to remember is that Orwell wasn't just a novelist, he was a newspaper reporter. His post-WWII essays, and his documentaries like Wigan's Pier, Homage to Catalonia and Burmese Days (to lesser degrees) are as close to historical fact as most any period source. In fact, Wigans has a level of detail that you could never find in most history books."

Orwell cherry picked the worst ..makes good reading..but accurate?

It seems that you never read Wigans Pier, it would be nearly impossible to forget his passage of seeing the girl in the yard from the train, because it was the pivotal point of that book where he smashes the notion of the comfortable and well-off that poverty is somehow easier on those within it ...

At the back of one of the houses a young woman was kneeling on the stones, poking a stick up the leaden waste-pipe which ran from the sink inside and which I suppose was blocked. I had time to see everything about her—her sacking apron, her clumsy clogs, her arms reddened by the cold. She looked up as the train passed, and I was almost near enough to catch her eye. She had a round pale face, the usual exhausted face of the slum girl who is twenty-five and looks forty, thanks to miscarriages and drudgery; and it wore, for the second in which I saw it, the most desolate, hopeless expression I have ever-seen. It struck me then that we are mistaken when we say that ‘It isn’t the same for them as it would be for us,’ and that people bred in the slums can imagine nothing but the slums. For what I saw in her face was not the ignorant suffering of an animal. She knew well enough what was happening to her—understood as well as I did how dreadful a destiny it was to be kneeling there in the bitter cold, on the slimy stones of a slum backyard, poking a stick up a foul drain-pipe.

 

Perhaps read the book before judging it as being a work of fiction?

Your relatives lived life better than some of the people in his accounts, worse than others in his accounts? Got it. That doesn't invalidate his accounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

exactly.

 

(and he was a master, I can still see the huddle of Tramps, rotating centre out to keep warm in the fog at midnight on Trafalgar Square? (The Clergymans Daughter)

You do know that Clergyman's Daughter -- despite his personal experiences as a teacher -- is a fictional novel, right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

thought Orwell captured some peoples warped idea of luxury quite well in Down & Out in Paris & London as well as Burmese Days.

I don't remember Down & Out quite that way but it's been decades. I remember vividly his depictions of being poor. I remember quite well his description of being poor as being expensive. But I don't remember anything about luxury. I've re-read 1984 and Animal Farm recently but I 'll have to re-read Down & Out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Olsonist said:

I don't remember Down & Out quite that way but it's been decades. I remember vividly his depictions of being poor. I remember quite well his description of being poor as being expensive. But I don't remember anything about luxury. I've re-read 1984 and Animal Farm recently but I 'll have to re-read Down & Out.

I'll be called a commie for it, but here

Take cleanliness, for example. The dirt in the Hôtel X, as soon as one penetrated into the service quarters, was revolting. Our cafeterie had year-old filth in all the dark corners, and the bread-bin was infested with cockroaches. Once I suggested killing these beasts to Mario. ‘Why kill the poor animals?’ he said reproachfully. The others laughed when I wanted to wash my hands before touching the butter. Yet we were clean where we recognized cleanliness as part of the

 boulot. We scrubbed the tables and polished the brasswork regularly, because we had orders to do that; but we had no orders to be genuinely clean, and in any case we had no time for it. We were simply carrying out our duties; and as our first duty was punctuality, we saved time by being dirty.

Similarly with the

 plongeur. He is a king compared with a rickshaw puller or a gharry pony, but his case is analogous. He is the slave of a hotel or a restaurant, and his slavery is more or less useless. For, after all, where is the real need of big hotels and smart restaurants? They are supposed to provide luxury, but in reality they provide only a cheap, shoddy imitation of it. Nearly everyone hates hotels. Some restaurants are better than others, but it is impossible to get as good a meal in a restaurant as one can get, for the same expense, in a private house. No doubt hotels and restaurants must exist, but there is no need that they should enslave hundreds of people. What makes the work in them is not the essentials; it is the shams that are supposed to represent luxury. Smartness, as it is called, means, in effect, merely that the staff work more and the customers pay more; no one benefits except the proprietor, who will presently buy himself a striped villa at Deauville. Essentially, a ‘smart’ hotel is a place where a hundred people toil like devils in order that two hundred may pay through the nose for things they do not really want. If the nonsense were cut out of hotels and restaurants, and the work done with simple efficiency, plongeurs might work six or eight hours a day instead often or fifteen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I remember that passage. It’s a little different now. Ex GF ran a restaurant and was well schooled in the biz. Paris Cordon Bleu trained. Paris apprenticed. Food safety training and govt inspection is pretty universal. She spent time keeping up on that infinitely more than recipes and what we think of as cooking.

Nutbertarians don’t talk about that kind of regulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mikewof said:

It seems that you never read Wigans Pier

 

Perhaps read the book before judging it as being a work of fiction?

Your relatives lived life better than some of the people in his accounts, worse than others in his accounts? Got it. That doesn't invalidate his accounts.

It's Wigan Pier..The Road to Wigan Pier..named after the town of Wigan..not some mythical bloke called Wigan that owned an amusement park on a pier.

Wigan (/ˈwɪɡən/ WIG-ən) is a town in Greater Manchester, England, on the River Douglas, 7.9 miles (13 km) south-west of Bolton, 10 miles (16 km) north of Warrington and 16 miles (25.7 km) west-northwest of Manchester.

 

And I was Born in a matchbox on the side of the road...there were ten of us.

that doesnt mean that it's historically accurate to say in north west england, people live in matchboxes on the side if the road...10 to a room.

I don't understand why you cant understand why the working class denizens of the north and working class contemporary writers would find Wigan Pier belittling, patronizing, insulting ...not to mention making their home a byword for a slum for all eternity.

But then you never do try to understand the working class do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

Yeah, I remember that passage. It’s a little different now. Ex GF ran a restaurant and was well schooled in the biz. Paris Cordon Bleu trained. Paris apprenticed. Food safety training and govt inspection is pretty universal. She spent time keeping up on that infinitely more than recipes and what we think of as cooking.

Nutbertarians don’t talk about that kind of regulation.

I'd say your GF ran a good restaurant. I've enough current experience with food distribution to tell you the spirit if not the letter is still true in some places. A milk man who'd regularly leave the pallet of milk in the store ambient room because they didn't have storage space...

I'm sure it also left a mental mark because I read it ~10 years ago in the developing world where westerners had the same demanding idea of luxury and the developing world had even laxer standards of cleanliness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She did. But she totally got nuked in 2008. She’d ran it as a sole proprietorship. Creditors just wrote it off but the State of CA took everything, car, everything except her house. Can’t remember about the Feds.

I look at restaurants very differently as a result. It’s not hard to cook better than all but the best restaurants. Most are all and only about presentation. A good foodie is about taste.

The people who work in restaurants are a lot like marine professionals: a lot of substance abuse. Ratatouille didn’t get into that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

It's Wigan Pier..The Road to Wigan Pier..named after the town of Wigan..not some mythical bloke called Wigan that owned an amusement park on a pier.

Wigan (/ˈwɪɡən/ WIG-ən) is a town in Greater Manchester, England, on the River Douglas, 7.9 miles (13 km) south-west of Bolton, 10 miles (16 km) north of Warrington and 16 miles (25.7 km) west-northwest of Manchester.

 

And I was Born in a matchbox on the side of the road...there were ten of us.

that doesnt mean that it's historically accurate to say in north west england, people live in matchboxes on the side if the road...10 to a room.

I don't understand why you cant understand why the working class denizens of the north and working class contemporary writers would find Wigan Pier belittling, patronizing, insulting ...not to mention making their home a byword for a slum for all eternity.

But then you never do try to understand the working class do you?

I've spent sufficient months in that area of England to realize that the economics of the place aren't dramatically different from a lot of other similar places in the USA.

You wrote that Orwell's account wasn't "factual" and that Orwell demonstrated "snobberies and false empathy". I asked you for some specifics of these things, and you then try to change the subject and force me to justify my "working class" credentials. How could I possibly understand anything about this elusive "working class" given that my only foray from my elite 1% world, is when I have my butler buy my favorite brand of crack cocaine from the street dealer?

There ... now you don't have to actually read the book to try to find support for your argument. I just saved you 20-some hours of reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mikewof said:

I've spent sufficient months in that area of England to realize that the economics of the place aren't dramatically different from a lot of other similar places in the USA.

You wrote that Orwell's account wasn't "factual" and that Orwell demonstrated "snobberies and false empathy". I asked you for some specifics of these things, and you then try to change the subject and force me to justify my "working class" credentials. How could I possibly understand anything about this elusive "working class" given that my only foray from my elite 1% world, is when I have my butler buy my favorite brand of crack cocaine from the street dealer?

There ... now you don't have to actually read the book again  to try to find support for your argument. I just saved you 20-some hours of reading.

FTFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2018 at 1:14 AM, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

that wasn't whatboutism, that was shouting squirrel.

Hillary was a carpetbagger, no shit. Did an ok job for new york from what I saw. Most of DC has little link to their home state; something like 2 dozen don't even claim residency in their constituency. Remember Dick Cheney suddenly becoming a Wyoming resident 4 days before W picked him as Vice-President because they can't come from the same state? Did you care?

I'm actually not as concerned about someone actually living in their constituency and running for office.  However, What I am concerned about is the campaign money that floods in from OUTSIDE their constituency.  Only the people who that critter will represent should have a say in who ends up representing them.  And yes, those people should have a physical presence in that constituency.  And that includes corporate people too.  If there is not a physical presence in that constituency, corporations should have no $ay in that election.  

If I were king for a day, my rule would be:  If you have no actual stake in the 13th District in Iowa or the State of Michigan - you get zero say in those elections.

OF, FOR and BY the People needs to start meaning something again.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2018 at 1:14 AM, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Remember Dick Cheney suddenly becoming a Wyoming resident 4 days before W picked him as Vice-President because they can't come from the same state?

BTW - you DO know that dick was a US congressman (R-WY) for like 5 terms, right???  It wasn't like he picked WY by throwing a dart at a board.  

On a related side note:  I had to escort cheney around for a couple of hours while he visited our Sq.  Weird dude!  Shaking hands with him was like holding a wet, dead fish.  <shudder>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites