Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, December 01, 2016

Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post: Commentators such as Jack Shafer argue the media should ignore President-elect Donald Trump's outlandish tweets -- because they are outlandish and because they distract us from things Trump wants us to ignore. ... [W]e would argue that there is no more important story than the continuous stream of evidence of the president-elect's irrationality and instability. Hillary Clinton certainly thought that was relevant to the campaign (it was); the mental and intellectual status of the man we elected should be of even greater concern. ... How are we to trust the decision-making of a president so easily waylaid by nonsense?

Advertisement

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Does Trump's lack of attention span and refusal to read make him susceptible to conspiracy theories? Can he continue his willful indifference to reality and still govern? Do his personal grievances interfere with his ability to function as president? Who, if anyone, can reason with a man this irrational? ...

In sum, no one can assess at this stage whether Trump tweets strategically or compulsively, whether he means what he tweets or simply tweets to blow off steam, and whether he understands the importance of a president's words. Perhaps clarity will come with time. For now, however, his utterances on Twitter and elsewhere give critical insight into the mind-set of the least prepared man ever to win the presidency.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Watch for North Korea to test Trump early in his term.

#1 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2016-11-30 02:54 PM | Reply

North Korea? Who cares?

Better to watch China and Russia.

#2 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-12-01 11:18 AM | Reply

The Electoral College must not ignore Trump's infantile unstable behavior.

www.washingtonpost.com

#3 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-12-01 11:44 AM | Reply

The scary version of this four-year dumpster fire:
-Pence runs things while The Gripper rants and bounces between New York and Palm Beach, while spending way too much time operating his real estate business
-Half the cabinet goes nuts selling infrastructure to their friends, shoving tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy through Congress, and often stepping into large piles of dog droppings. The other half of the cabinet pursues conspiracy theories and moves the nation close to war with Russia/China/France/South Dakota.
-The Trumpkins insert themselves into policy and national security debates and planning, far beyond their knowledge, understanding or security clearance.
-Congress sees a green light to savage the poor, LGBT and those with darker skin.
-Our foreign enemies act in a provocative manner and no one in the US does anything until its too late, then we under-react, putting at risk our allies.
-The Gripper's approval rating, already below 50%, falls to a number lower than that earned by W in his final months.
-Protesters start burning flags, some getting shot in the process.
-US corporations conduct a concerted shake-down of the states and Feds, winning every time.
-Voters register in record numbers, ready to replace this cabal with nearly anyone.

Stay tuned--it's going to be scary, painful and long-lasting...

#4 | Posted by catdog at 2016-12-01 12:07 PM | Reply

Carrier A/C already played him.

Can Putin be far behind?

#5 | Posted by 726 at 2016-12-01 12:27 PM | Reply

How does that ignorant neocon ---- Rubin even have a job anymore?

Seriously, the mainstream media wheels out these tired neocon whiners day after day pretending that they don't smell like the collective pile of dog ---- that they once were and continue to be.

#6 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 12:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The last time we put an insecure rich warmonger in the white house, we suffered a horrible attack because our enemies correctly calculated they could lure him into a war. Dubya's response to 9/11 was exactly what bin laden wanted it to be, and every dollar and life wasted to this day is another victory for bin laden.

Buckle up people. Trump's moronic supporters have set us down a path that's going to get a lot of people killed.

#7 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 01:38 PM | Reply

The Electoral College must not ignore Trump's infantile unstable behavior.

www.washingtonpost.com

#3 | Posted by nutcase

Exactly. The electoral college exists to keep the people from electing a dangerous lunatic.

Well the people have now done that. If the electoral college makes him president, then the electoral college has proven it has no reason to exist any more.

#8 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 01:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Exactly. The electoral college exists to keep the people from electing a dangerous lunatic.
Well the people have now done that. If the electoral college makes him president, then the electoral college has proven it has no reason to exist any more.

#8 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

The problem is your side would say that about pretty much any Republican. It would be no different if Rubio or Cruz had been the candidate.

The states have voted and Trump is our next president. I suggest you find a way to deal with it. I wanted anyone but Trump or Hillary and that didn't happen. Trump won, so now I have to deal with it.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-12-01 01:47 PM | Reply

jj keeps assuming counts are legitimate. They most definitely are not and Rethugs and Wussies refuse to investigate. The basis for this opinion is small (~7%) differences between some exit polls and actual counts. These always occur in computerized tallying systems, never in optical penciled paper readers. As yet incomplete auditing to date reveal excess votes than registered voters to explain Trump's "rigged" victory. The much greater problem is systematic elimination of young and minority voters in Rethug controlled States. Finally provisional ballots are discarded without being counted.

#10 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-12-01 01:56 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

"Dubya's response to 9/11 was exactly what bin laden wanted it to be"

I would argue that Gore/Loserman woulda done the same exact thing, only there wouldn't have been the silly cowboy swagger and the inane "with us or against us" rhetoric to go along with it.

#11 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 01:56 PM | Reply

The states have voted and Trump is our next president.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-12-01 01:47 PM | Reply

Analogous situation: Adapting to the fact that your new step-father is an ax murderer.

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2016-12-01 01:58 PM | Reply

The problem is your side would say that about pretty much any Republican. It would be no different if Rubio or Cruz had been the candidate.

The states have voted and Trump is our next president. I suggest you find a way to deal with it. I wanted anyone but Trump or Hillary and that didn't happen. Trump won, so now I have to deal with it.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ

Really? Did "my side" say that about Bush, or his daddy, or reagan?

No. We're saying about the guy who has made several declarations about parts of the constitution that he feels can be ignored, has massive conflicts of interest, and is clearly mentally unstable.

The CITIZENS voted but citizens don't matter in our constitution. Only the electoral college matters, and they can do whatever they want. That's the law.

#13 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 02:02 PM | Reply

"The electoral college exists to keep the people from electing a dangerous lunatic"

It exists to keep the balance between state and federal power, per Alex Hamilton's original concern in the Federalist Papers (don't ask me to remember which one)-- something that has been pretty much moot for the past century. Over the past 100+ years, the electoral college exists primarily as a conduit to measure clear-cut victory, i.e. you get to 270, then you win, no ifs, ands or buts.

IMHO, it should be done away with and Hillary should be president, but it exists and now she can focus on her memoirs (which I won't read).

#14 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 02:02 PM | Reply

I would argue that Gore/Loserman woulda done the same exact thing, only there wouldn't have been the silly cowboy swagger and the inane "with us or against us" rhetoric to go along with it.

#11 | Posted by pumpkinhead

Dubya used 9/11 to launch a 6 trillion dollar, 500,000 dead massive ground invasion of a nonaggressive country in order to avenge his daddy.

You think Al Gore would have done the same thing?

If al gore was elected, 9/11 might not even have occurred. Smart enemies attack when the time is right. They wait til you have a stupid leader who will react in the stupid way you want them to.

#15 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 02:04 PM | Reply

"You think Al Gore would have done the same thing?"

Yes. The neoconservative political faction that overlaps both the republican and democrat party would have found a way to push it to fruition. Dubya didn't make his decision in a monomaniac vacuum, you know. There were plenty of those around him who wanted to attack Iraq--even though Saddam never threatened to kill their daddies.

"If al gore was elected, 9/11 might not even have occurred"

I highly doubt that. A 9/11 type event would have happened sooner or later. The justification mght have been slightly different however.

"Smart enemies attack when the time is right"

You are assuming that Al Qaeda had the capability of always being smart in their decision making. I have found that, throughout history, if someone bases their worldview and decisions on holy scripture, wise decisions by and large eventually go by the wayside.

#16 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 02:18 PM | Reply

"Adapting to the fact that your new step-father is an ax murderer"

The difference between a possible ax murderer and an actual ax murderer is quite significant, y'know.

#17 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 02:20 PM | Reply

The media embraces Trumps instabilities.

It's quite profitable for them.

#18 | Posted by ClownShack at 2016-12-01 02:25 PM | Reply

For example.

Look how well Trump news does here on the DR.

Hillary wouldn't have drawn half the attention.

#19 | Posted by ClownShack at 2016-12-01 02:26 PM | Reply

Yes. The neoconservative political faction that overlaps both the republican and democrat party would have found a way to push it to fruition. Dubya didn't make his decision in a monomaniac vacuum, you know. There were plenty of those around him who wanted to attack Iraq--even though Saddam never threatened to kill their daddies.

#16 | Posted by pumpkinhead

Yes, but dubyas was surrounded by oil men and warhawks. Same people who are now surrounding trump.

Oil men start oil wars.

Al gore was not an oil man.

And even IF 9/11 still happened, to think he would invade IRAQ is insane. That was a blunder exclusive to dubya and his crew of greedy sociopaths. Saying al gore would have done the same thing is a lame attempt to get the stink of iraq off the republicans where it fully and obviously belongs.

#20 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 02:26 PM | Reply

"It's quite profitable for them"

Agreed. Never ever mis-underestimate the earning power of the age-old political position of "itoldyaso"

#21 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 02:27 PM | Reply

Hillary wouldn't have drawn half the attention.

#19 | Posted by ClownShack

Because news about her wouldn't be half as horrible.

If you don't want to hear horrible stuff about trump, just stick to fake republican news sources for the next 4 years.

#22 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 02:27 PM | Reply

At least we can say that if Gore had served two Saudi Officials who funded and supported 9-11 hi-jackers and binLaden family members would not have been provided a get out of the country plane ride while everyone else in the United States was grounded. At the very least these escapees should have been interviewed by the FBI before departure.

#23 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-12-01 02:36 PM | Reply

" And even IF 9/11 still happened, to think he would invade IRAQ is insane"

Here are Al Gore's words soon after 9-11. He gives both a clear legal and moral justification for forced regime change. One can clearly see him making the same statements if he had become president--

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

"No international law can prevent the United States from taking actions to protect its vital interests, when it is manifestly clear that there is a choice to be made between law and survival..."

"That action can be justified within the framework of international law rather than outside it."


Let's not forget-- Gore supported the 1991 Republican war resolution against Iraq when many other democrats (82%) opposed it.

Al Gore might not have invaded Iraq in spring 2003. Best guess is that he might have waited 6 more months until his fist was already stuck in the Afghanistan tar baby and he could have written a fancy-assed justification for expanding the fight westward.

www2.gwu.edu
en.wikipedia.org

#24 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 02:37 PM | Reply

Here are Al Gore's words soon after 9-11. He gives both a clear legal and moral justification for forced regime change. One can clearly see him making the same statements if he had become president--

#24 | Posted by pumpkinhead

His statements were based on the fake intel that bush's boys were shoveling on congress. Saying he would have created the same smokescreen and taken the same actions is ridiculous and you know it.

Repubs own iraq. And they'll own whatever trump does.

That won't stop them from trying to blame democrats again. "Well how come democrats LET us do it!?"

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 02:49 PM | Reply

"His statements were based on the fake intel that bush's boys were shoveling on congress"

--------. All you need to look at is his boss Clinton's record from the previous 8 years. Clinton was illegally bombing Iraq long before Bush brought it back into style.

Remove your ------- partisan blinders, baby.

#26 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 03:20 PM | Reply

The Iraq Liberation At of 1998, signed into law by Bill Clinton, laid the groundwork for Bush's folly five years later and helped justify the invasion-- quoted in the Iraq war resolution of October, 2002.

"Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that
Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened
vital United States interests and international peace and security,
declared Iraq to be in ``material and unacceptable breach of its
international obligations'' and urged the President ``to take
appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant
laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its
international obligations''

en.wikipedia.org

#27 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 03:27 PM | Reply

--------. All you need to look at is his boss Clinton's record from the previous 8 years. Clinton was illegally bombing Iraq long before Bush brought it back into style.

Remove your ------- partisan blinders, baby.

#26 | Posted by pumpkinhead

If you can't tell the difference between a few bombings and a 5 trillion dollar ground invasion then you're the one with blinders on.

#28 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 03:36 PM | Reply

Come back when you have a real argument, softly.

#29 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 03:48 PM | Reply

Getting back to the subject, can Jennifer Rubin please jump from that diving board of a nose of hers, into that ugly hole between her teeth and just permanently sink to the bottom with all the other neoconservative bottom feeders?

#30 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 03:54 PM | Reply

I have no problem pointing out Trumps behavior.

My problem is the people doing the "pointing", wouldn't do the same under Clinton.

I want the press to be the 4th Estate. But when they are in the tank for a candidate it loses some of its relevance. Perhaps they will recognize that, but for me its too late, wail away, most people aren't listening anymore.

#31 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2016-12-01 03:58 PM | Reply

Come back when you have a real argument, softly.

#29 | Posted by pumpkinhead

In other words, "i got nothing"

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 04:02 PM | Reply

I want the press to be the 4th Estate. But when they are in the tank for a candidate it loses some of its relevance. Perhaps they will recognize that, but for me its too late, wail away, most people aren't listening anymore.

#31 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Then you must want public funded press paid for by taxes, no?

Because otherwise the press is corporate, and corporations have an agenda.

However the right wing solution of saying "I dont trust any facts or info except the ones I get from rightwing propaganda sites" is what lead to a con man becoming president.

#33 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 04:04 PM | Reply

"My problem is the people doing the "pointing", wouldn't do the same under Clinton"

If God meant for finger pointers to see their own culpability in many of the things they continuously rant on about, he would have made huma fingernails out of reflective glass.

#34 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 04:07 PM | Reply

In other words, "i got nothing""

You're right-- you don't.

I post all the facts. I post all the links. You just... post.

#35 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2016-12-01 04:08 PM | Reply

I post all the facts. I post all the links. You just... post.

#35 | Posted by pumpkinhead

Yeah. "Al gore wouldve invaded iraq" Nice fact.

Your username fits.

#36 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2016-12-01 05:34 PM | Reply

9/11 was an inside job orchestrated by the Bush Administration.

#37 | Posted by ClownShack at 2016-12-01 08:23 PM | Reply

The problem is your side would say that about pretty much any Republican. It would be no different if Rubio or Cruz had been the candidate.

No way.

I would have accepted Rubio.

I'd have hated Cruz but gotten over it.

Other Repubs, Kasich in particular, would have gotten my sincere support (I was actually rooting for Kasich but figured he was too rational to win in today's GOP...).

Trump is a different strain of plague all together.

#38 | Posted by jpw at 2016-12-01 09:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If Trumps instability is irrelevant, then our elections are meaningless.

#39 | Posted by kudzu at 2016-12-02 06:09 AM | Reply

^Facts are already meaningless, according to Jan Brewer Jr.

#40 | Posted by e1g1 at 2016-12-02 08:15 AM | Reply

This thread is full of people trying to expose Liberal hypocrisy. The problem is, doing it to Liberals is worthless. Their hypocrisy is so great they can't even see their own hypocrisy. It's so great, it almost equals the apathy of Conservatives. The sad part is Conservatives choose apathy for greater causes (not saying they are right, just saying they are for something greater than the single cause) whereas Liberals don't choose hypocrisy, it's just part of who they are.

#41 | Posted by humtake at 2016-12-02 11:29 AM | Reply

#41 Yes, we know, all liberals are hypocrites who don't know it, and all conservatives, by golly, aren't hypocrites at all, ever.

#42 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2016-12-02 11:36 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable

-->
Drudge Retort