NRO's The Corner: Obamacare ‘like a house on fire’ with more flammable parts yet to come

etc.

Reagan’s policies helped the poor and struggling above all

* citation needed

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

no thanks

How is Jay Nordlinger not dead from a fatal wedgie?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C4pX3lEVYAASzTp.jpg

smdh

mmm

ewww

nerdlinger surprisingly reasonable here?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/444924/six-quick-points-flynn-affair-and-trump-kremlin-allegations

1) A line is developing on the right — it is even embraced by the president himself: General Flynn was the victim of unpatriotic saboteurs within the government. Okay. Why did the president fire him? Why didn’t the president stick with this victim of unpatriotic saboteurs? The president didn’t have to fire him, you know. Flynn could be at his side today — and forever, or as long as the Trump presidency lasts. Oddly, Trump is crying foul play. Almost as though he had nothing to do with Flynn’s ouster. When he was the ouster. Just yesterday, his press secretary, Sean Spicer, said, “We’ve been reviewing and evaluating this issue with respect to General Flynn on a daily basis for a few weeks trying to ascertain the truth. The evolving and eroding level of trust as a result of this situation and a series of other questionable incidents is what led the president to ask General Flynn for his resignation.” “Other questionable incidents.” That is an intriguing phrase. Anyway, the line now is that Flynn is a victim? I find this hard to square. 2) The president has tweeted, “This Russian connection non-sense is merely an attempt to cover-up the many mistakes made in Hillary Clinton’s losing campaign.” Could be. Or could be that there were contacts between Trump officials and Russian officials during the campaign — contacts that warrant an inquiry. 3) Apparently, General Flynn, through his conduct, was made vulnerable to Russian blackmail. This is undesirable, to say the least. 4) The reaction to the Flynn affair, and to Trump-Kremlin allegations, has been extreme, many people say. A “freakout.” It is also true, I think, that, just as you can overreact, you can underreact. (Under-freak?) Going nuts is stupid; so is being blasé. 5) It’s often useful to ask, “What if the shoe were on the other foot? What if it were the other party doing it, not my party? What would I think and say?” If Democrats had an identical relationship to the Putin regime, what would Republicans say? And since when are Democrats so national security–conscious? Bill O’Reilly said to Trump, “Putin’s a killer.” Trump replied, “There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, you think our country’s so innocent?” If a Democratic president had said the same — can you imagine the Republican reaction? 6) Campaigning in October, Trump said, “WikiLeaks! I love WikiLeaks.” The crowd cheered. Trump continued, “It’s amazing how nothing is secret today.” He meant that positively.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

Yes. that is a reasonable set of statements, based upon a reasonable set of judgments. a person needs to be pretty far gone into fantasy or insanity never to reach a reasonable conclusion.

NRO has been disappointing if not desolate lately, uploading culture war clickbait so they don't have to think about Trump.

first line from Jonah's latest:

"Most informed people understand that this is a remarkably stupid time to be alive."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445307/tonight-really-big-moment-repeal-and-replace-effort

Uh, I think you linked to a different piece. A nice line from the link is:

It is not reassuring to hear President Trump declare, “Nobody knew health care could be so complicated.” Er, yes, Mr. President, just about anyone who spent more than ten minutes looking at the issues involved could see that coming.

It appears that Jonah is willing to go down proudly flying the flag of defiance. That's ok by me. Anything that brings confusion upon the enemy is ok by me. Even if it's pouting and face-pulling from the paleo-right.

maybe i misunderstand but afaik paleo-right == nationalists/nativists/isolationists i.e. Trump supporters. jonah == neocon.

sorry. my taxonomy of dreadful people is a bit weak at times.

Jonah doesn't, though. On TV he's a weasel.

he twists himself in knots pleasing every side.

https://i.redd.it/8etpq46df6ky.png

he said, flashing his badge

I posted this elsewhere: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/446417/susan-rice-unmasking-trump-associates-allegations#comments

worst of the worst this guy

'vdhanson' is the worst fucking twitter handle,
c'mon son

I be like venereal like Hanson

at least he had the decency to kick off paragraph two with a benghazi ref so i could go and do something more useful with my time than read the rest, like slam my nuts in a dresser drawer

The Un-Nutting of Bizarro

by VICTOR DAVIS HANSON April 6, 2017 12:38 PM @VDHANSON

The House Intelligence Committee fights, the Susan Rice revelations, the stale Russian collusion story, the Gorsuch battle, the Bannon battles, the end of the filibuster, etc. are all different fronts of the same existential struggle: the unlikely Trump victory is unpalatable for the Left and its dangerous ramifications for the entire progressive project must be stopped by any means necessary.

I think it was understandable (though I might disagree with that decision) — after acting on whistleblower information and bringing the non-Russian-related intercepts, unmasking, and leaking to the attention of the committee and the country that otherwise likely would never have seen the light of day — that Chairman Devin Nunes both stays on as chair on the Intelligence Committee, but like Jeff Sessions in the matter of the Justice Department, temporarily recuses himself from directly investigating the various charges. In this entire hysteria, Nunes has acted ethically and was done an injustice by those who acted unethically and who will now only be emboldened.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

nuts, meet drawer

again :(

I think it was understandable (though I might disagree with that decision) — after acting on whistleblower information and bringing the non-Russian-related intercepts, unmasking, and leaking to the attention of the committee and the country that otherwise likely would never have seen the light of day — that Chairman Devin Nunes both stays on as chair on the Intelligence Committee, but like Jeff Sessions in the matter of the Justice Department, temporarily recuses himself from directly investigating the various charges.

Anyone who could publish such an ugly-ass, confusing, tangled up sentence and proudly attach his name to it, is neither a good writer nor a clear thinker.

P.S. @VDHANSON eh? When I was young, V.D. carried a very specific meaning.

It's related to the Mmmbop Virus

what aimless said x 10,00. not only is VDH smoke screening for the Putin-puppet, this jerk can't even write a coherent sentence. how er appropriate.

Well, he's of a type -- old Central Valley dude out here, complaining about everyone not like him. Been doing that for years, and now that his last big fantasy seems to be crashing badly, so is he.

what aimless said x 10,00. not only is VDH smoke screening for the Putin-puppet, this jerk can't even write a coherent sentence. how er appropriate.

― Dogshit Critic (m coleman), Thursday, April 6, 2017

I couldn't resist commenting.

aww..

Eons ago — like 2009 — I saw the word “bleg” a lot. It means, I think, to ask for information via a blog. I don’t see the word much anymore. But in any case: Can you help a brother out?

I begin my Impromptus today with the idea of a “Thank you,” “Thank you” society. America is such a society. The double “thank you” is inherent to capitalism. You want something, and you’re willing and able to pay for it.

You hand the money over. The other guy says, “Thank you.” He hands over the goods. You say, “Thank you.”

It’s “Thank you,” “Thank you.” Everybody wins. Nobody gets the shaft.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

Heartwarming.

Nobody gets the shaft except the people who aren't able to pay for the things they need but hey! It's "Thank you," "Thank you."

To be fair to Jay Nordlinger, that was surely inspired by the cranky right-wing thing going around a week or two ago by somebody who was super-mad about people thanking the clerk after they purchased something -- YOU are keeping THEIR STORE afloat with YOUR MONEY, YOU owe them NO THANKS!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-_z8P1XoAIvLIO.jpg

each forum gets the walter white it deserves

Well, it IS Williamson, he looks the part.

Can you help a brother out?

No thank you

Thanks for the Google lesson, Ramesh.

Dennis Prager remarks that most women, if asked, will embrace the label ”feminist.” The remark inspired me to do a few minutes of Googling.

A Vox poll from 2015 found that only 18 percent of respondents considered themselves feminists. I didn’t find a breakdown by sex, but women were 52 percent of the sample. Even if every man in the poll rejected the label, there’s no way a majority of women accepted it.

A YouGov poll from 2016 found that only 32 percent of women said yes to the label, while 45 percent said no.

But a Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation poll from last year found higher rates of self-identification as feminist, perhaps because it gave respondents both the options of “strong feminist” and “feminist” (as well as “not a feminist,” “anti-feminist,” and “no opinion”). In that poll, 17 percent of women chose “strong feminist” and 43 percent chose “feminist.”

I conclude that it is fair to say that whether most American women consider themselves feminists is at least open to dispute.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

that's about three hairs' breadth from opening a piece with 'webster's english dictionary defines <topic of this column> as...'

A quick Google search defines "feminism" as one of Taylor Swift's squad goals

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447746/donald-trump-self-inflicted-wounds-conservative-cognitive-dissonance-untenable

The comments are not as brainless as I expecte.

a bunch of NRinOs

The same theory of law, order, and personal responsibility without excuses that his attorney general has decided is good for petty drug offenses ought to be good for the conduct of the Oval Office, too.

tell'em, Mordy!

it's a quote from the article

god conservatives with a conscience have to be the most delusional bullshitters of all

"Any one of a basic array of conservative virtues — intellectual humility, deference to custom, acceptance of time-honored norms — would have spared Trump the last week’s news"