Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Tuesday, June 12, 2018

Of Significance — Or Not?

Photo credit: from the AP on June 11, 2018

Related reading, from the Daily Beast, dated 6/12/2018: Trump’s Singapore Summit Was a Bust—for the U.S.

Pastorius of Infidel Bloggers Alliance commented as follows on the above article and echoes my own thoughts on what happened in Singapore on June 12, 2018:
It seems to me this article raises some legitimate concerns.

However, the Daily Beast, and others who would criticize the Summit, certainly celebrated the last 20 years of paying off Kim in exchange for his sparkling personality.

Trump took us a step forward. This could be the beginning of a new and better era.

Or, knowing Trump, it could be the beginning of the end of Kim, IF he chooses to go the road of threats and bellicosity.

83 comments:

  1. IMO, how President Trump differs from other POTUSES who tried to reign in North Korea: this POTUS WILL launch.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Libyan thing should be a game changer... The U.S. can and will kill dictators and that should put a chill down his spine. Plus this is the son. a 34 year old that I can't imagine wants to live this way for the next 40 years. He was educated in Switzerland so he knows there is a world outside NK.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bunkerville,
      And I noted that President Trump showed Kim the limousine. Interesting.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, Trump is tough on dictators.

      Just ask Duterte or the Saudi royal family or Putin.

      Delete
    3. Mr. Trump is only "tough" on malignant morons, blundering fools, maniacal fanatics, and snotty, belligerent, mocking, taunting, sarcastic, ne'er-do-wells who accomplish nothing constructive or praiseworthy.

      Delete
    4. I didn't realize Trump hated FreeThinke that much.

      Delete
  3. Replies
    1. I thought this was BIZARRE and totally IRRELEVANT to the problem of securing a brighter, safer FUTURE for the work –– the only thing I fund ti criticize about President Trump's remarkable effort in the Singapore Summit..

      Ever since I learned way back in fifth grade how the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt sacrificed thousands of lives building monstrusly elaborate TOMBS for themselves, –– and then read Jessica Mitford's scathing, eye opening book The American Way of Death ––, I have felt that making any kind of elaborate fuss over DEAD BODIES is frankly a SILLY WASTE of time, energy ad resources that might better be used to aid the LIVING.

      The stench of putrid fish rotting on skeletal remains could provide no legitimate comfort to mourners left behind. Our bodies are but HUSKS. Our SPIRITS are the true essence of who we are. One the spirit leaves the body, the body, itself, soon becomes nothing but stinking GARBAGE.

      Delete
    2. FT,
      For some of us, getting back the remains of our heroes matters.

      Delete
    3. WHY? Bodily remains are nothing but GARBAGE.

      Our SOULS are all that matter, and they are INCORPOREAL.

      Why be a slave to supersition, and outmoded, inappropriate customs?

      Just thi[nk of faukner's infamous short story A Rose for Emily, and you should easily see EXACTLY what I am driving at.

      Delete
  4. L'il Kim got to strut on the world stage and gain legitimacy and gave up nothing.
    The Great Negotiator didn't mention word one about NK's human rights violations but that's not something he cares about.

    In return the Great Negotiator cancelled U.S./SK joint exercises. True, they can be resumed if NK gets frisky but tRump got played. No way around it.

    I am optimistic that punches weren't thrown and this is a first step. Not much was revealed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Name someone besides Trump that North Korea "gained legitimacy" with...

      Delete
  5. Anybody who thought what they signed was the 'be all and end all' is kidding himself. This is a START. I believe Trump is right when asked in an interview last night about Kim and his hideous oppression and murders of his own people...he said "This is what he knows...he learned all this from his father and grandfather." Not that it's an excuse but I'd had that very thought before I heard him say that...
    Also, Trump added that a few things got agreed upon after the paperwork for the signing had been prepared...we haven't seen that yet, and it could be hooey, but I'm hoping that's the case.

    Kim walking around like a bigshot was disturbing to those of us who know how bad NoKo is, but for Trump to suggest that this little punk might make history in moves toward world peace flattered his little punk ego and, while I hate that stuff, it could appeal to him enough to do something good.
    Relationships help...this is the first time a pres got this close to NoKo........it can't hurt. I disagree that it was a 'bust'; I find that shortsighted and even stupid.
    And y'all know I'm no big fan of Trump rhetoric.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Replies
    1. Do you have a reason why the mistake should be repeated.

      Delete
    2. Ducky, NOW you say it was a mistake? :-)

      Delete
    3. I felt it was a mistake at the time of the award.

      Delete
  7. Given nK history, the signed memorandum is rather meaningless. But it doesn’t hurt either. I’m decidedly not pleased (nor is our military, South Korea and Japan) at the abrupt cancellation of joint military exercises, and the narrative that they are ‘provocative’.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's being reported that neither South Korea nor the U.S. military was informed in advance of the announcement.

      Delete
  8. Z... you and many of your commenters were very angry and dismissive when candidate and then Pres Obama suggested sitting down for talks with presidents of places like Iran, Venezuela and North Korea... you said those dictators could never be trusted so it was fruitless and idiotic to even consider talking to them.

    Do conservatives still hold that same view now? Should Trump have elevated Kim on the world stage? Can Kim be trusted?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Comments should NEVER be made PERSONAL, Preacherino.

      Delete
    2. Should Trump have elevated Kim on the world stage?

      Good question. Even Obama didn’t fawn over murderous dictators like we witnessed yesterday. Kim wanted international legitimacy. He got it, without sacrificing a thing.

      Delete
    3. Let me help you out here Dave.
      Obama's approach always consisted of apologizing for the US being a wicked meanie followed by bribes. The bribes were taken with no results. His attempts at showing strength consisted of the same thing and endless lines in the sand. He was a terrible negotiator and an unashamed butt kisser who always assumed he could win over our enemies with cash -no strings attached- or his "imaginary" force of presence and personality. So basically you're comparing apples to bananas.

      We didn't want the Obama clown to makes us a bigger laughing stock in the world than we had already become.

      @ CI, Obama didn't fawn over anyone except Obama and assorted Leftist nut cases. He also did absolutely nothing about the Norks or the Chinese. Trumps praises mean absolutely nothing. The next day he will lambast anyone he sees fit if they displease. You might say they have a short shelf life and everyone knows it.

      Delete
    4. Warren, sorry I didn't see your retort before posting mine below....about Obama's apology tour and what a difference that is to good negotiation. Great comment on your part.

      Dave and Ducky: I look at this Kim thing and Trump's ridiculous fawning over him as NEGOTIATION. I'm thinking that little Rocket Punk (gee, the Left was outraged that Trump "insulted" Kim a few months back with the Rocket Man term, but now they're slamming him for flattering him!?) is being flattered out of his mind...Trump even said he could see condos built on the NoKo shores..!! anybody who really knows my blog knows I am NOT a Trump-rhetoric fan and this didn't thrill me until I got to thinking : Let Kim think he'll be rich, have prestige, and have his country get rich from capitalism if he actually does disband all nuke work....I'd say flattery on Trump's part then will have been a very good ploy.

      Delete
  9. They have two choices -peace - war. I'm betting they choose peace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kid,
      Perhaps Kim is wary enough of Trump to choose peace.

      Delete
    2. VERY NAIVE for liberals to think they've got the whole picture of that meeting...or for us to think the same....they talked a long time with only 2 interpreters (tho Trump and Kim seemed to chat alone later, did you notice that? ) With the kinds of schools he attended (not having done well at all) I'd bet he speaks pretty good English. Anyway...let's wait and see what happens before insulting the whole thing so ideologically, right?

      Delete
  10. Warren... the view of the GOP, including bloggers on this thread, was that any netting between the US and a dictator would be waste of time because Kim could never be trusted. John Bolton said at the time it was “fanciful” to believe Kim could ever be trusted. VP candidate said any meeting should be seen as coddling a murderous dictator. Conservatives writ large, including Sean Hannity, believed that such a meeting would confer legitimacy on a regime that killed family and citizens to maintain control of a populace as they starved to death.

    We don’t have to speculate on this, we have a written record. Their statements might have made to Obama, but clearly it was believed that any meeting would be wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, Dave, whither has that approach with Kim brought us? NK is now clearly a state that threatens the world. What should the world so? Sit back and let him launch, successfully, an armed missile or a missile with a nuclear warhead?

      Delete
    2. The US has been at war with North Korea since 1950; our cessation of hostilities didn’t end the war, it only imposed a halt to the fighting. If ever there was an example of diplomatic failure, this is it. Note: it was the diplomatic incompetence of the Truman administration that led to the war in the first place.

      Now, suddenly, we are talking productively with North Korea ... not because of Bill Clinton, or numerous trips to kiss Kim’s ass by Jimmy Carter, or anything that George Bush did ... or the great Hussein. No, it was because lowly old businessman Donald Trump wanted to make a deal on behalf of the US and its Asian partners.

      There is a lot going on behind closed doors that we don’t know about. For example, there is no way that North Korea can protect its extensive coastal areas from foreign invasion without the help of China’s military. There is no economic benefit to China to have to shore up North Korea’s armed forces. It makes sense to me that China may have told Kim, “You’re on your own.” Not because China really cares what happens to North Korea, but because China has other things on its mind (South China Sea). Now, if China told Kim that he stands alone, then North Korea suddenly has the motivation to begin talks with the US alliance. From that perspective, we can argue that annual joint military operations involving the US, South Korea, and Japanese forces has served its purposes.

      What I find amazing is that so many people on the left and right are happy celebrate Truman’s diplomatic failures by maintaining a state of war between North Korea and the US alliance.

      Delete
    3. Mustang,
      I'm so glad that you took time to weigh in here! You have more knowledge than we of that particular region of the world.

      What is frosting everyone's behind is that President Trump and his team are brokering this diplomacy with North Korea.

      Delete
    4. AOW... off topic but... you used frosting in your comment. I remember my parents using the term "wouldn't that frost you". So often we use phrases like that solely because we grew up with them. Do you, as a teacher, have any idea as to the idea behind "frosting"?

      Delete
    5. Speaks mg of frosting, in a sense......one doesn't even have to imagine what the hue and cry would be, had the last Administration rolled out the cult trailer by "Destiny Pictures" [John Bolton and the NSC].

      But then again, when POTUS whines that the American media is out country's "biggest enemy"...hours after meeting with and fawning over a murderous Dictator....we know we’ve jumped the shark as a nation.

      Delete
    6. Dave,
      I don't know where the phrase originated. Google search was of little help.

      I learned the phrase from my husband, who hails from Southern California (but lived in Virginia, Texas, and South Caroline when he was in boarding school for high school). I did not learn the phrase from my parents, but I might have heard it from my older cousin Jack, who was a barber here in Northern Virginia.

      Delete
  11. We should not forget that, somehow, President Trump has brought home four Americans detained in Norther Korea. Which other POTUS has had such success with Kim?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At least ten prisoners were released during the Obama administration.

      None were near death.

      Delete
    2. Right. Trump should have flown over to NoKo and fed Otto Warmbier and others....horrible that he didn't. All his fault...

      Delete
    3. The point is that North Korea has used prisoners as leverage for some time and this is standard procedure. Trump has not achieved anything unique.

      Delete
  12. Donald Trump And Kim Jong-Un Sign A Historic Agreement At Their Summit In Singapore – But All The Mainstream Media Can Do Is Whine And Complain

    First two paragraphs from the above link:

    Donald Trump just did what no other president in U.S. history was able to do. He actually sat down with the leader of North Korea, and at the conclusion of the approximately four hour summit meeting they both signed an agreement which calls for the United States to provide “security guarantees” to North Korea and which calls for the “complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula”. It was a truly historic day and a truly historic outcome, and yet all the mainstream media in the United States could do was whine and complain. Throughout their coverage, mainstream media reporters continually tried to put an anti-Trump spin on things. They claimed that the agreement did not have the “specific wording” that experts were looking for, they pointed out that other agreements in the past have failed, and they continually insisted that the Trump administration was giving Kim Jong-Un too much respect.

    Even when something positive was reported, it had to be immediately followed up with a downer.


    It seems to me that we shouldn't be leaping to either praise or derision, but rather that we should wait and watch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was reading a NYT article earlier, which according to the author, Trump should be charged with high treason. I never saw that coming. You’re right, though ... we must wait and see how all this shakes out.

      Delete
  13. AOW... I’m not arguing the idea of meeting with enemies is wrong. In fact then candidate Obama suggested it when he ran the first time for president and I felt it was a good idea.

    I’m just trying to figure out when, how and why conservstives changed their mind on this.

    I’ve always heard from the right that no matter what, we should not deal with NoKo because they always liars are not to be trusted.

    Is that still true today? Or has something changed? Or was the prior belief and policy solely rooted in the politics of who was in the White House?

    I personally hope we get some sort of mutually verifiable agreement, an official end to the war and maybe the Pueblo back. But I doubt the Chinese will allow all that to happen. Chances are they don’t want an enemy on their front porch...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At least be honest enough to peel back the onion, Dave. So, by claiming Obama was interested in talking to North Korea, do you mean his “strategic patience” policy, which allowed North Korea to proceed in the development of miniaturized nuclear weapons? This is not opinion; it is fact.

      Perhaps Obama did believe that remaining silent about rogue behaviors was the right thing to do. His policy may have been well-intentioned —even principled, if by using that word, one suggests a policy that worked against the interests of the American people and our allies in the region. My guess is that “strategic patience” caused a lot of levity among our detractors, as did the Cairo Speech, which prompted tens of thousands of deaths and millions of people displaced during the so-called Arab Spring.

      As to your question about when conservatives changed their point of view ... are you such an ideologue that you think there is only one opinion on the right side of the political spectrum? What you may have actually heard from conservatives, had you been listening, is that there is no benefit to having a conversation with North Korea if they do not perceive that diplomatic overtures serve their own best interest. Remember, Bill Clinton had a one-sided discussion with North Korea —offered up all kinds of concessions and a lot of cash, and how did that work out? The North Koreans proved themselves “untrustworthy” to honor the ill-conceived ideas of Clinton. I suspect that the Norks remain un-trustworthy ... so we should be prepared for the possibility that these talks will fail. Not even “trust but verify” works with North Korea. But to reiterate, not all conservatives are of one mind.

      Delete
    2. Then just what has moved Kim to meet with Trump? That seems to be lacking in the discussion.

      Has Trump found a way to convince Kim to denuclearize? Nothing really points to that.
      Have Obama's sanctions contributed to making Kim desire concessions in return for investment? South Korea may be more critical than the U.S. to that question.

      What we do know is that the Kim family is concerned with retaining power and isn't likely to be dislodged soon.

      Delete
  14. Sam, I have no idea what Obama's plan was. Whatever it was, as during the Clinton, Bush and his admins, NoKo advanced on the nuclear front in spite of all three of those presidents saying it was not gonna happen.

    As for my views, gosh, most folks who know me would never call me an ideologue. I have no idea whether talking to Kim will work, but Trump, and many commentators I've heard and read are right. The "old" way of dealing with him certainly has not worked to contain his ambitions.

    To quote you, that's "not opinion; it is fact."

    I just feel it's a tad disingenuous for the very people, like Hannity for instance, to claim flatly that even talking to Kim was idiotic when a Dem proposed the idea, but spectacular and real leadership when a Republican suggested it.

    Your points are conservatives are well taken, but I don't think you'd find that kind of nuance coming from conservatives regarding Obama meeting with Kim, or for that matter, his handshake with Castro. He was roundly criticized for coddling Castro and giving them legitimacy for a simple handshake.

    I don't recall any conservatives voicing disagreement or the possibility of any flexibility on those views back then.

    BTW... I appreciate the civility of your response.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. So glad you're not an ideologue :-) I see no ideology in your comment! (Sarcasm)

      Obama also got roundly called out for bowing so very low to the King of Saudi Arabia. I think the difference in treatment of Obama and Trump by Cons is partly ideological and partly practical; Obama's apology tours didn't go over well with Conservatives; we don't enjoy apologizing to regimes like Egypt for anything we've done, etc etc. Or sending billions of dollars (cash) to Iran at night in boxes.... So, ya...probably it's not fair for cons. to applaud Trump for striving for less nukes on the planet and not be thrilled that Obama apologized so often for us?

      Delete
  15. Z... we've been down this road before. I'm just not as rigid as some of you believe. I've written enough over the years to have a record that I couldn't outrun if I tried, and most ppl would say yes, I lean left, but on many issues, also lean right.

    Regarding Obama, it was during the campaign, before he took office, that ppl like Hannity, Palin and others, all people you have supported in the past, called out Obama for even thinking of meeting with Kim. That was before Saudi Arabia or his trip to Egypt.

    There's just no way to see this.

    For his "apology tour" again, as I've stated many times before, please show me the words "America is sorry" or America apologizes" during any of his speeches. It is a matter of record though that President Reagan apologized to Americans of Japanese descent for our treatment of them during WWII. It was when we paid them a $20,000 reparations for what we had done.

    For an apology to be an apology, it needs to be explicit. Obama said we made mistakes in the Middle East. That's a fact and hard to rebut. But it is reality. And hardly an apology.

    For about the 100th time, I hope that NoKo disarms and that we can get a peaceful resolution to the Korean War. Trump has opened a door that no admin in 30 years has been able to crack. A little like Nixon with China. I hope in 5 or 10 years, as we look back, we'll be happy with the result.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Dave, please don't speak for me, you did it above this thread, too, and it just shows you don't read GeeeZ because you're wrong. I can't stand Hannity and haven't been able to listen to Palin since a week or two after she was nominated. And I was vocal about it.

    By the way, EVERYBODY wants NoKo to disarm, that's no badge of liberal honor to say you hope it does.... yes, I hope this goes like Nixon in China...he's certainly getting the same hateful media crap Nixon got. I'm not a fan of his rhetoric, but I sure am wearying of the leftist barrage of unbelievable hate and misinformation and conjecture.

    Re the APOLOGY TOUR, nobody has to say I AM SORRY to apologize, not according to the WSJ:

    "Mr. Obama told the French (the French!) that America "has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive" toward Europe. In Prague, he said America has "a moral responsibility to act" on arms control because only the U.S. had "used a nuclear weapon." In London, he said that decisions about the world financial system were no longer made by "just Roosevelt and Churchill sitting in a room with a brandy" -- as if that were a bad thing. And in Latin America, he said the U.S. had not "pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors" because we "failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas.""

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Z... those statements Obama made are all facts. He never said the US apologizes. Acknowledgement is a long way from apology.

      BTW... regarding Obama bowing, do you have any problems with President Trump saluting a North Korean general in the presence of Kim?

      Or is he, like Obama before him, just showing cultural respect?

      Delete
    2. Well said Dave. Historical record is not apologizing.

      Delete
    3. Most presidents don't go to other countries with a laundry list of what WE did 'wrong,' (according to them.) Clearly, many would see none of what Obama said as only 'historic' and not apologetic or putting more responsibility on us than needed. Sad that anybody wouldn't see that...truly sad. I remember watching Bill Clinton live on Paris television when I lived there, speaking at a Labor meeting Tony Blair attended...sitting behind Clinton as Clinton bashed George Bush from one side to the other...even Blair had the decency to look absolutely stunned at such a dishonorable, ungracious ex president, as I sat stunned and embarrassed for our country. It's apparently just something Democrats DO. Whatever.

      Delete
    4. Then you have some understanding of when others are stunned and embarrassed at many of Trumps antics, unbefitting of an adult, much less a POTUS.

      Delete
    5. Z,
      Most presidents don't go to other countries with a laundry list of what WE did 'wrong,' (according to them.)

      Yep.

      It figures that Clinton would bash the POTUS on foreign soil.

      Delete
    6. It figures that Clinton would bash the POTUS on foreign soil.

      True, but geography and borders hasn't stopped Trump from taking to Twitter to bash....well, almost anybody.

      Delete
  17. The noxious earworm that haunts us night and day driving us mad with endless chatter about The Mueller Witch Hunt –– a despicable, totally dishonest, –– plainly SUBVERSIVE –– tactic created our of whole cloth, then vigorously promoted by evil, power-mad, treasonous men and endlessly trumpeted round the clock every day by the ENEMEDIA ever since it became evident that Mr. Trump COULD win the election.

    This nucleus of a deadly form of THOUGHT CANCER only INTENSIFIED then METASTASIZED as soon as he DID win supposedly against all odds.

    We've heard about little –– almost NOTHING –– ELSE, since.

    I was not all that enamored of Mr. Trump when he first threw his proverbual hat into the proverbial ring, but at this point I am absolutely BESOTTED by him, because his vast army of detractors are SO vicious, SO vile, SO blind to goodness, wisdom and truth,, SO wicked –– and SO incredibly STUPID –– Mr. Trump has become a great HERO simply for standing up to them with aplomb, while repelling the myriad slings and arrows that come his way every hour of every day.

    The guy is a latter day COLOSSUS. I have come to see him as Our Last Best Hope –– possiby our ONLY hope..

    If Mr. TRUMP fails, our NATION fails, our FREEDOM will be lost, and the United states of America, as founded, will soon be swept into the dustbin of history.

    Our descendants will all be SLAVES to the monstrous Soviet-style Peoples Republik Mondial governed by ruthless, heartless, super-rich, godless, unprincipled Oligarchs.


    For those reasons I will no longer tolerate anyone who says a single WORD against him, because that person has made himself my mortal enemy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like there’d be repercussions.....intriguing.

      So, is there a sign up sheet or some way to ensure a top spot on the list?

      Your verbal fellatio however, is fascinating. Please don’t stop.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. A partial restatement from my statement above:

      "[A]t this point I am absolutely BESOTTED by[Mr.Trump], because his vast army of detractors are SO vicious, SO vile, SO blind to goodness, wisdom and truth, SO wicked –– and SO incredibly STUPID –– Mr. Trump has become a great HERO simply for standing up to them with aplomb, while repelling the myriad slings and arrows that come his way every hour of every day."

      The portion I have boldened is a near-perfect description of you.

      Delete
    4. That was sad, I expected something more entertaining.

      But you do illustrate slavish sycophancy perfectly.

      Delete
    5. And you exemplify a dreary BEETLE-SHELLED CYNICISM and an insolent, sarcastic, fundamentally negative, caustic, derogatory, sour-mouthed, witless, humorless, approach to every subject you address.

      I'm much rather be who I am than to be in any way like you.

      Delete
    6. Of course you'd yawn. You give every evidence of having been effectively brain dead all your life.

      If you ever saw yourself as you really are, you'd probably feel an irrepressible urge to commit suicide. If so, I certainly wouldn't lift a finger to discourage you.

      ];^}>

      Delete
    7. A predictable response and predictably irrelevant.

      Can you go back to your crossed arms. Foot stamping harrumphing and impotent threats? The entertainment value of that is the only reason you matter.

      Otherwise, your just another brown-shirted sycophant.

      Delete
    8. A loud, obnoxiously odoriferous BRONX CHEER –– and a thundering fusillade of NYA NYA nya NYA NYA's! –– to you too, you JERK!

      I QUIT. You've wasted too much of my precious time already. Bozo.

      You're strictly in your own from now on. I hope you enjoy jerking off in public. The Titterfest it's bound to engender should make quite a spectacle.

      Buh BYE!

      Delete
    9. “I’m on my own”?

      That’s downright adorable. You exist for my entertainment. If you were as smart as you think you are.......you would have figured that out by now.

      Delete
    10. I have had little or nothing to do with you for years –– ever since you emerged as the vicious bully you really are. I have given you a wide berth, yet you still feel enttled to attack me personally without provocation. You have no honor. You are also a witless boor, and have nothing to offer but sarcasm, derision, defeatism, and sneering contempt –– total negativity.

      I'm sure your wife and children –– if you have a family –– must hate your guts. I can only pity them. You are one of the growing multitude who thrive on being an object of loathing. In that regard you are in the same category as Canardo, This One, Dervish Sanders, Rational Nation, O(C)T(O)P(U)S, Jerry Critter and the other denizens of Aggressive Corruptions.

      Delete
    11. You seem confused........you appear to think that I care a whit about you or your impotent, foot stomping rage. You exist for my entertainment. Period.

      That you are forced to try and project about my family, proves what an utter oxygen thief you really are. Please don’t stop though......your the court jester.

      Delete
    12. BTW you Statist tool......sieg heil. Sycophant.

      Delete
    13. Gentlemen!

      Enough feuding. This feuding is an exercise in futility. You've both said all that you need to say about this feud topic (ad hominmen, which means that Warren and I may well go back and delete everything you've both typed in).

      Delete
  18. OT - AOW, I was saddened to see Nick Freitas come in 2nd in Tuesday's GOP primary. Do you have any faith in Corey Stewart?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CI,
      I need to do some research on Corey Stewart. Frankly, I don't trust what the WaPo has reported about him.

      Delete
    2. PS: One of my dear friends (15 years younger than I) is a staunch supporter of Stewart. My friend is very politically savvy. I'll check with him, too.

      Delete
    3. Fair enough, I've not been impressed with much that I've heard coming from Stewart. RINO is in the eye of the beholder, but I can count on one hand, the number of nationally elected Republicans that actually stand for limited government. Freitas would have been a welcome addition to that small club.

      Delete
    4. CI,
      I'd love to see Tim Kaine be forced out.

      Delete
  19. I'm not familiar with the candidates you cite, but anyone who has ANY faith at all in the Establishment GOP is mentally deficient and morally unfit for adult citizenship.

    It was as much a joy to see loudmouthed anti-Trumper, Mark Sanford get trounced by Conservative Trump supporter Katie Arrington in North Carolina as it was to see Dave Brat kick the living tar out of Eric Cantor a while back.

    Now to find ardent Trum supportiers to unseat Mitch McConnell, and beat the living daylights out of that jug-eared menace Paul Ryan.

    The GOP has an entire forest of dead wood that needs to be cleared out and set ablaze. May the midterm of 2018 be the site of many bonfires across the land.

    A RINO is even deadlier than a D'Rat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FT,
      The GOP has an entire forest of dead wood that needs to be cleared out and set ablaze. May the midterm of 2018 be the site of many bonfires across the land.

      A RINO is even deadlier than a D'Rat.


      I couldn't agree more!

      Delete
    2. Thank you, Ma'am!

      And a cheery Good Morning to you!

      May this day be bright with blessings for us all.

      Delete
  20. I'm coming to believe there may be substance to the meeting.

    The fact that military maneuvers are going to be suspended even if it was done in a ham fisted fashion does remove a threat to the North Korean regime which may foster disarmament.

    If the military threat is removed and Kim decides to emulate China economically progress can be made.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The very fact that the meeting OCCURRED at ALL has tremendous substanceand significance in and of itself, Ducky.

      It appears to signal a TECTONIC SHIFT in international relations.

      The general unwillingness to give creidt where credit is due i nthe case of Mr. Trump and others making every effort to effect constructive change is evdence of profound bigotry fueled by sheer stupidity. I'm glad you may be beginning to see the light.

      Welcome to the side of the angels!

      };^)>

      Delete
    2. FT,
      The very fact that the meeting OCCURRED at ALL has tremendous substanceand significance in and of itself, Ducky.

      It appears to signal a TECTONIC SHIFT in international relations.


      At this point, I think the same.

      Delete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective