Objectively intelligent.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I disagree. We stayed because the military so wanted to stay, and for them it wasn't about the money.

How do you divorce the military from the defense contractors? Aren't the people in charge of both in the same circles? I see the profiteers influencing the military.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

Afghanistan has ended in exactly the way one would have expected from a foreign policy proposition endorsed by both Trump and Biden.

Also, while I left the GOP six years ago, it is times like these that serve as a reminder as to why I can never go Libertarian.

I'm not sure what you mean there, but here is the country's foremost libertarian predicting - to the year - when we'd leave Afghanistan, and that it could never end well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrHm4phj5RQ

(Say what you will of Ron Paul... Personally, I find him an astute thinker until he starts talking about going back on the gold standard, at which point I have to remind myself, "This guy's incredibly smart in re: 75% of his commentary, but batshit insane as to the other 25%." But within that 75% of sane stuff he says, the dude is often brutally accurate, and this speech is very much within that 75%.)

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You don't find that posture at all extreme? I have an extremely low opinion of Bezos. But do I shop at Whole Foods? Yes. I think the Catholic Church is a reprehensible organization. Do I boycott Catholic weddings or refuse to be in the presence of clergy? No. Would I buy a My Pillow if I needed a pillow and it was the best or fastest one I could find? Of course. I'm uncomfortable with Chik Fil A's owner's homophobic views. Do I refuse to allow my child to order Doordash from the place? Of course not.

I would never select a Trump hotel from an array of equally priced choices because I'm suspect of the brand. I'd guess it'd be somehow defective (Legionaires' Disease in the air ducts, the poached salmon being two weeks old, etc.). But would I boycott it on the basis that Trump was connected to it? No.

If we're going to become sane as a country, this extreme picking sides shit has to be abandoned. I don't expect the right to do it anytime soon because they're fucking insane. But people like us should be bigger than it. We ought to reacquaint ourselves with concepts of pragmatism and circumspect thinking.

That kind of thinking has allowed me to look at Afghanistan, see a tragedy, but also a tragedy that is unavoidable and not the fault of the current President. Could he have pulled out in a more effective manner? Yes. But that's a minor error in relation to the bigger errors that caused us to be involved in nation building in the first place. Rather than pick a side in the debate being framed by the media - Is this or is not Biden's Saigon? - the better view is to see where Joe fucked up a little bit, but view it dispassionately in context. The blame, if we must look to that (and we vicious shitty Americans always do) lies with many, many people over many, many years. The buck here does not stop with Joe. Unless you've picked the anti-Biden side -- that same kind of binary thinking that'd cause one to boycott a hotel because of its connection to a President.

Meh. Do you have a reason TO go to a trump property? Usually I go somewhere because I think the food will be good, the company pleasant, the environment cheery... Why would I hang out in places with bad, overpriced food that's a magnet for assholes and noted mostly for being gauche?

The brand and the man overlap. Both pretty much the same. Why go to a Trump property if there is an Applebees anywhere nearby, why vote for Trump if you can have any other village idiot on the ballot?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Meh. Do you have a reason TO go to a trump property? Usually I go somewhere because I think the food will be good, the company pleasant, the environment cheery... Why would I hang out in places with bad, overpriced food that's a magnet for assholes and noted mostly for being gauche?

The brand and the man overlap. Both pretty much the same.

I totally agree with that sentiment. I've never looked at staying at one because I imagine they'd be overpriced, faux gold-plated disasters. I also would not want to say I was staying at a place what conjures his image.

But would I refuse to stay at one because of his politics? No.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

Not that the issue has come up, but heck no, I would not stay there (or visit the lounge). Yuck.

Exactly. There are too many options. The only way is if I were in some small shit hole town where there is only 1 hotel. But of course that isn't where you find Trump hotels.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Exactly. There are too many options. The only way is if i were in some small shit hole town where there is only 1 hotel. But of course that isn't where you find Trump hotels.

A closer question might be something like Turnberry, which existed long before he arrived. Were I the type to go on a Scotting golfing trip, I wouldn't rule out playing a round there because of him (but I am not a golfing type).

But between the sketch man and the sketch brand, no thanks if there are other choices.

Also weird the Sebby sees the guy who tried the coup as just another politician.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

A closer question might be something like Turnberry, which existed long before he arrived. Were I the type to go on a Scotting golfing trip, I wouldn't rule out playing a round there because of him (but I am not a golfing type).

But between the sketch man and the sketch brand, no thanks if there are other choices.

Also weird the Sebby sees the guy who tried the coup as just another politician.

I don't. I think he was a crazy and deranged politician.

I think the pathetic attempted "coup" was an embarrassing spectacle. A pack of deluded dead-enders engaging in hideous behavior for which the lot of them should be jailed, if not deported to Antarctica.

The narrative that nationalist terrorism is an enormous and imminent danger to the republic strikes me as understandable, but also way overblown and in some instances cynically pushed by politicians who wish to use it to expand surveillance of opposition and of citizens generally. If you look closely, the GOP resists the argument that January 6 should be investigated, but they don't seem to resist the idea that enhanced spying on US citizens is a problem. The GOP, the people who brought us the current rampant domestic spying via the "Patriot Act," are salivating over getting that kind of power when they're back in control. Because they're going to need it, as they'll soon be a permanent minority party that can only succeed by manipulating voting rules, which data accrued from spying can help them do more effectively.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I totally agree with that sentiment. I've never looked at staying at one because I imagine they'd be overpriced, faux gold-plated disasters. I also would not want to say I was staying at a place what conjures his image.

But would I refuse to stay at one because of his politics? No.

So it's not really an interesting question, most of us stay away because the hotels, like him, have no appeal.

The more interesting question would be: would you take business from the Trump organization. Most of us are interested in getting business, and take business from people we don't agree with on much.

Frankly, I would not (even if I didn't have a conflict). Maybe when I was young and building a practice I might have taken that risk, I don't know. But now? No, I wouldn't touch his work. But it's more about not doing business with someone who is slimey and dishonest than anything else. I represent some pretty conservative people out there.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So it's not really an interesting question, most of us stay away because the hotels, like him, have no appeal.

The more interesting question would be: would you take business from the Trump organization. Most of us are interested in getting business, and take business from people we don't agree with on much.

Frankly, I would not (even if I didn't have a conflict). Maybe when I was young and building a practice I might have taken that risk, I don't know. But now? No, I wouldn't touch his work. But it's more about not doing business with someone who is slimey and dishonest than anything else. I represent some pretty conservative people out there.

As he's not know for paying, it's a pretty easy question too.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So it's not really an interesting question, most of us stay away because the hotels, like him, have no appeal.

The more interesting question would be: would you take business from the Trump organization. Most of us are interested in getting business, and take business from people we don't agree with on much.

Frankly, I would not (even if I didn't have a conflict). Maybe when I was young and building a practice I might have taken that risk, I don't know. But now? No, I wouldn't touch his work. But it's more about not doing business with someone who is slimey and dishonest than anything else. I represent some pretty conservative people out there.

I'd get a big ass retainer.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I'd get a big ass retainer.

Take a multi-million dollar retainer, get the credit, hand off the matter.

Maybe.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So it's not really an interesting question, most of us stay away because the hotels, like him, have no appeal.

The more interesting question would be: would you take business from the Trump organization. Most of us are interested in getting business, and take business from people we don't agree with on much.

Frankly, I would not (even if I didn't have a conflict). Maybe when I was young and building a practice I might have taken that risk, I don't know. But now? No, I wouldn't touch his work. But it's more about not doing business with someone who is slimey and dishonest than anything else. I represent some pretty conservative people out there.

Not a chance. He’s like a Jersey strip mall developer. Pay slow, demand haircuts even when they win, look for any angle to sue you if they lose. And worse, he’s the kind who litigates purely for advantage, bringing shitty cases he can’t win just to harm competitors or adversaries.

I’ve worked for enough of his kind for three lifetimes. At 35, yeah I’d do it. Now, I’d be hard pressed not to wish him a really slow form of ALS.

His kind should be barred from all courthouses.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Not a chance. He’s like a Jersey strip mall developer. Pay slow, demand haircuts even when they win, look for any angle to sue you if they lose. And worse, he’s the kind who litigates purely for advantage, bringing shitty cases he can’t win just to harm competitors or adversaries.

I’ve worked for enough of his kind for three lifetimes. At 35, yeah I’d do it. Now, I’d be hard pressed not to wish him a really slow form of ALS.

His kind should be barred from all courthouses.

At an early point in my career I was trying to build a referral network by going to local bar association dinner meetings. I walked into one and noticed it was packed. Every table was full, except one. There were 8 chairs and just one older woman. So I sat next to her.

She said “everyone in this room now hates you.” “Huh?” She explained she was married to a state court Judge who divorced her. She felt she got hosed, so she went to law school to find out what happened.

Eventually she hired a second firm to sue the firm that represented her in the divorce for malpractice. Eventually she hired a third firm to sue the second firm.

By the time I met her she was on the fifth-

Someone walks in your office and says “I want to hire you to sue the firm I hired to sue the firm that I hired to sue the firm that I hired to sue my divorce attorney.”

How the fuck do you take that case?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

Fuck you.

That is all.

I know you're not GOP anymore, but I enjoyed this one:

https://twitter.com/DougJBalloon/sta...171943940?s=20

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

At an early point in my career I was trying to build a referral network by going to local bar association dinner meetings. I walked into one and noticed it was packed. Every table was full, except one. There were 8 chairs and just one older woman. So I sat next to her.

She said “everyone in this room now hates you.” “Huh?” She explained she was married to a state court Judge who divorced her. She felt she got hosed, so she went to law school to find out what happened.

Eventually she hired a second firm to sue the firm that represented her in the divorce for malpractice. Eventually she hired a third firm to sue the second firm.

By the time I met her she was on the fifth-

Someone walks in your office and says “I want to hire you to sue the firm I hired to sue the firm that I hired to sue the firm that I hired to sue my divorce attorney.”

How the fuck do you take that case?

You’re a desperate scumbag?