I originally intended this to be my main posting for today. But events in Orlando this morning overtook my sense of priority and captured my poelitical endeavors (See “AR-15 Assault Rifle”). Be that as it may, I seriously recommend Barbara Boxer’s book, “The Art of Tough”.
As politiholic, I read books political
Ups my systolic when some leave me critical
I’m hyperbolic with those hypocritical
Then there are those that are gems in the rough
And one of those writings is “The Art of Tough”
Senator Boxer’s new autobiography
Thoughtful reporting, historic photography
Poems political crafted delightfully
I recommend it; it’s full of great stuff
Five stars: Barbara Boxer’s book, “The Art of Tough”
6/12/16
This is a topic close to my heart cheers. Thanks
I adore it when folks come together and share opinions, great blog, keep it up.
Really fine post, I surely adore this site, keep on it.
I see many interesting articles here. Your site can go viral easily,
you need some initial traffic only. How to get initial traffic?
Search for: Masitsu’s tricks
Thanks, but no thanks
I adore it when people come together and share
views, great blog, keep it up.
Thanks and welcome
Great info. Lucky me I reach on your own website by accident,
I bookmarked it.
Thanks and welcome
EXCEPTIONAL Post.thanks for share..more delay.
I needed to thank you for this excellent read!! I undoubtedly enjoying every little bit
of it I have you bookmarked to take a look at new stuff
you post.
Thanks, Sabba Rabba
You should participate in a competition for one of the
finest sites on the internet. I am going to recommend
this site!
Thanks, Sabba Rabba
I have not yet looked up Barbara Boxer’s book. But, in combination with today’s news in the Washington Post that Trumpledee (or was it Trumpledum?) has revoked the Post’s credentials to cover him directly, the book title evokes for me the dark art of pseudo-tough – perhaps (those who have read the book can tell me whether) in contrast to the true art of the tough. The news article also evoked for me Sabba-Rabba’s wisdom imparted once to me to watch what people say about others (including me/you) for hints about what they value and are sensitive to in themselves as great weaknesses in spite of their (covertly) self-perceived value. Some excerpts from the Washington Post article follow; imagine (or consider) that Trump, in the quotations, is talking about others in terms of what he is covertly sensitive to in himself (you can access the whole article here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/trump-revokes-post-press-credentials-calling-the-paper-dishonest-and-phony/2016/06/13/f9a61a72-31aa-11e6-95c0-2a6873031302_story.html?hpid=hp_regional-hp-cards_rhp-card-lifestyle%3Ahomepage%2Fcard ):
“Based on the incredibly inaccurate coverage and reporting of the record setting Trump campaign, we are hereby revoking the press credentials of the phony and dishonest Washington Post,” read a post on Trump’s Facebook page.
Another post said, “I am no fan of President Obama, but to show you how dishonest the phony Washington Post is, they wrote, ‘Donald Trump suggests President Obama was involved with Orlando shooting’ as their headline. Sad!”
Trump was referring to an article that posted online Monday afternoon that was headlined, “Donald Trump seems to connect President Obama to Orlando shooting.” Its original headline, which Trump accurately cited in his Facebook post, was changed after about an hour. The newspaper changed it on its own, before Trump’s complaint.
…
Trump repeated his assertion about Amazon and The Post [of Jeff Bezos, owner of The Post, using his ownership to deflect scrutiny of Amazon’s taxes] – for which he has presented no evidence – in a brief press statement on Monday.
“We no longer feel compelled to work with a publication which has put its need for ‘clicks’ above journalistic integrity,” the statement said. “They have no journalistic integrity, and write falsely about Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump does not mind a bad story, but it has to be honest. …”
Thanks, Ken for the comment. In addition to seeing one’s own motivations in other’s behaviors, you have surfaced another of Trumpledee’s talents, which I shall address in a poelitic as soon as I can compose it: “The Art of Innuendo”.
Since you intend to write on ‘innuendo’, you may want to consider these articles also in today’s Post – one by Jenna Johnson, focusing directly on “How Trump spreads conspiracies and innuendoes” (the headline in the print edition), at https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-lot-of-people-are-saying-how-trump-spreads-conspiracies-and-innuendo/2016/06/13/b21e59de-317e-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html, and the other by Dana Milbank, at https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/that-something-going-on-is-trump-fanning-the-flames-of-bigotry/2016/06/13/835ea26a-31a2-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html, which is on the same page as the other one I pointed out. Milbank points out Trump’s habit of preserving formal deniability of having said what he said by stating that other people (not him) are saying things – and sometimes even, as Johnson points out, by saying that he won’t say it (e.g., “I’m not going to say it, because I’m not allowed to say it, because I want to be politically correct … [Ken: yeah, right]. So I refuse to say that I cannot stand her screaming into the microphone all the time” – in the meantime saying it).
Another article in the Washington Post today made me think of the psychological side of Trump’s behavior — not that it helps, but it’s interesting to consider. It’s an article about what stimulates people to do massacres, but I couldn’t help when reading it to consider it as also applicable to what stimulates Trump to spew his hate-laden speech — with lesser immediate consequences than shooting people directly, but perhaps with generally greater eventual consequences of spurring on those who do the shooting or other hateful acts: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/06/14/inside-the-hate-filled-mind-of-a-mass-murderer/
Thanks again, Ken (hmm, that rhymes). Senator Chris Murphy (D. Connecticut) just started a filibuster favoring gun legislation. This may be a first where the filibuster is in favor of legislation rather than opposing legislation. I think that its worth a poelitic.