Trump’s unhinged remarks to the CIA

January 22, 2017 • 1:00 pm

Yesterday, one day after their inauguration, Vice-Pr*s*d*nt Pence and Pr*s*d*nt Trump addressed the CIA at their headquarters in Langley, perhaps to assure them that the new administration was on board with them. (Trump had been critical of our intelligence agencies during the campaign.)

Politico has posted the full text of both men’s remarks to the CIA, and you should read it if a.) you need confirmation of how clueless Trump is (Pence’s words were pretty tame) or b.) you want a good laugh. I’d use the word “insane,” but that’s considered ableist.

For what we see here is nothing more than a “Trump mind dump.” It’s as if he hadn’t prepared anything, was slightly stoned, and just decided to talk as if he were on a reality show. Not only that, but once again he decided to go after the press. His target was Time Magazine, which had apparently criticized him for removing a bust of Martin Luther King, Jr. from the Oval Office. Trump says that was untrue, but why the hell did he even bring it up (as well as his general dislike of the media) at a CIA briefing?

I’ll give just two excerpts from The Donald’s remarks. The first refers to Representative Mike Pompeo (a Republican from Kansas), whom Trump has nominated to be head of the CIA. Pompeo, by the way, has told Congress that, if confirmed, he would consider bringing back “enhanced interrogation methods (aka torture), including waterboarding.

Note that the speech is punctuated with laughter, which, given the fact that it wasn’t funny, means that the CIA is full of either Trumpies or toadies.

Here are Trump’s words to the CIA:

But Mike [Pompeo] was literally — I had a group of — what, we had nine different people? Now, I must say, I didn’t mind cancelling eight appointments. That wasn’t the worst thing in the world. But I met him and I said, he is so good. Number one in his class at West Point.

Now, I know a lot about West Point. I’m a person that very strongly believes in academics. In fact, every time I say I had an uncle who was a great professor at MIT for 35 years who did a fantastic job in so many different ways, academically — was an academic genius — and then they say, is Donald Trump an intellectual? Trust me, I’m like a smart persona. (Laughter.) And I recognized immediately. So he was number one at West Point, and he was also essentially number one at Harvard Law School. And then he decided to go into the military. And he ran for Congress. And everything he’s done has been a homerun. People like him, but much more importantly to me, everybody respects him. And when I told Paul Ryan that I wanted to do this, I would say he may be the only person that was not totally thrilled — right, Mike? Because he said, I don’t want to lose this guy.

But you will be getting a total star. You’re going to be getting a total gem. He’s a gem. (Applause.) You’ll see. You’ll see. And many of you know him anyway. But you’re going to see. And again, we have some great people going in. But this one is something — is going to be very special, because this is one, if I had to name the most important, this would certainly be perhaps — you know, in certain ways, you could say my most important. You do the job like everybody in this room is capable of doing. And the generals are wonderful, and the fighting is wonderful. But if you give them the right direction, boy, does the fighting become easier. And, boy, do we lose so fewer lives, and win so quickly. And that’s what we have to do. We have to start winning again.

If I bolded everything that was unseemly in that statement (“the fighting is wonderful,” etc.), it would all be bolded. But wait–there’s more! This followed the remarks above:

You know, when I was young and when I was — of course, I feel young. I feel like I’m 30, 35, 39. (Laughter.) Somebody said, are you young? I said, I think I’m young. You know, I was stopping — when we were in the final month of that campaign, four stops, five stops, seven stops. Speeches, speeches, in front of 25,000, 30,000 people, 15,000, 19,000 from stop to stop. I feel young.

After that one expects to hear something like, “I’ll be here all week, folks. Be sure to try the roast beef!”

Then he takes on the media. Why on earth did he add stuff like this? Read it carefully, as it’s larded with narcissism.

And the reason you’re my first stop is that, as you know, I have a running war with the media. They are among the most dishonest human beings on Earth. (Laughter and applause.) And they sort of made it sound like I had a feud with the intelligence community. And I just want to let you know, the reason you’re the number-one stop is exactly the opposite — exactly. And they understand that, too.

. . . We had another one [a supposed lie by the media] yesterday, which was interesting. In the Oval Office there’s a beautiful statue of Dr. Martin Luther King. And I also happen to like Churchill, Winston Churchill. I think most of us like Churchill. He doesn’t come from our country, but had a lot to do with it. Helped us; real ally. And, as you know, the Churchill statue was taken out — the bust. And as you also probably have read, the Prime Minister is coming over to our country very shortly. And they wanted to know whether or not I’d like it back. I say, absolutely, but in the meantime we have a bust of Churchill.

So a reporter for Time magazine — and I have been on there cover, like, 14 or 15 times. I think we have the all-time record in the history of Time Magazine. Like, if Tom Brady is on the cover, it’s one time, because he won the Super Bowl or something, right? (Laughter.) I’ve been on it for 15 times this year. I don’t think that’s a record, Mike, that can ever be broken. Do you agree with that? What do you think?

But I will say that they said — it was very interesting — that Donald Trump took down the bust, the statue, of Dr. Martin Luther King. And it was right there. But there was a cameraman that was in front of it. (Laughter.) So Zeke — Zeke from Time Magazine writes a story about I took down. I would never do that because I have great respect for Dr. Martin Luther King. But this is how dishonest the media is.

Now, the big story — the retraction was, like, where? Was it a line? Or do they even bother putting it in? So I only like to say that because I love honesty. I like honest reporting.

Certainly he does, so long as the “honesty” is favorable to himself.

Oy!

h/t: Matthew Cobb

Slight hiatus due to illness: discussion thread

January 22, 2017 • 11:16 am

What I thought was a mild cold has developed into a bad cold, and though it didn’t reach the flu stage, I suspect I’ve got one of those viruses that’s on the spectrum. (I did get my flu shot last fall, as all of you should have.)

At any rate, after a day in bed I’m on the mend, and if the laws of physics are salubrious, I’ll be posting again tomorrow. In the meantime, Greg has promised to put up one post today, and if you’ve come over here and don’t find anything, my apologies.

I suggest—and this is an experiment—that readers may want to have a discussion thread: bring up those things that are on your mind (politics, science, whatever); and we’ll see if this works.

As for me, unshaven and unwashed, I’m throwing on my clothes, driving to the store, and loading up on juice and soup.

Onwards and upwards.

 

Sunday: Hili dialogue

January 22, 2017 • 7:01 am

by Grania

 

Good morning everyone. Jerry is poorly so I am putting up the Hili Dialogue for him. I’m hoping he will rally later on. Andrzej and Małgorzata are also ill so it is a credit to their perseverance that we have a dialogue this morning.

Today is the anniversary of the decision in Roe v Wade. Who would have dreamed that four decades later the debate would still rage over this issue?

It’s also the birthday of Michael Hutchence, lead singer of INXS (pronounced In Excess for those of you who have never heard of it before) who died at the very young age of 37.

It’s also the anniversary of the death (1964) of Marc Blitzstein, American composer most famous for his 1937 musical The Cradle Will Rock which was shut down when it was first performed for being “too radical” as it was pro-union and anti corporate greed.

Anyway, with that onto the doings in Poland.

A: Did you eat Malgorzata’s ham?
Hili: Give her some cheese.

dsc00002j

In Polish:

Ja: Ty zjadłaś Małgorzaty szynkę?
Hili: Postaw jej ser.

As a lagniappe:

A cartoon by Gustavo Viselner, sent in by reader Josh Lincoln.
image

It’s National Squirrel Appreciation Day!

January 21, 2017 • 2:00 pm

How could I forget? Well, I am still feeding my gang 3 times per day: sunflower seeds, pecans, and peanuts.

Be good to your squirrels, even though there are some nasty people on the Internet who want to hurt them.  And you can get bonus points here if you do something nice for a squirrel. Send a photo of your sciurophile activities
and, if there’s a really good one (has to be taken today or tomorrow), I’ll send out a copy of Faith Versus Fact with a squirrel drawn in it.

squirrel-2Here’s a new photo freom reader Diana MacPherson:

Black Eastern Gray Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), Sheltered from Winter Weather, Eats a Nut

black-eastern-gray-squirrel-%28sciurus-carolinensis%29%2c-sheltered-from-winter-weather%2c-eats-a-nut

h/t: Nicole

Welcome to the Regressive Left in the Trump era: no “safe spaces” for those you oppose

January 21, 2017 • 1:15 pm

I was saddened to hear about the violence in D.C. this weekend, with over 100 people arrested and substantial damage to property.  If a march is to succeed, it should be nonviolent, as was the case with the civil rights and Vietnam marches in the Sixties (yes, I know there was some violence).  If the Left is to keep the moral high ground, we simply can’t go around physically attacking those whose views we don’t like. In fact it’s ironic, because when progressives do this, they’re implicitly denying someone a REAL safe space: a space to be free to express your opinions and remain physically safe. “Safety” refers to freedom from physical attack or illegal harassment, not to freedom from hearing views you don’t like.

As a conscientious objector, I’ve always adhered to the nonviolent philosophies of Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi, for if you start violence, you lose credibility.

Here’s a white supremacist, Richard Spencer, getting punched in D.C. during the anti-Trump rallies:

Spencer is odious, but he doesn’t deserve to be punched. And yet here’s atheist Dan Arel, whose behavior has become increasingly bizarre, defending that punch on Twitter: 

https://twitter.com/danarel/status/822628038462607360

Stephen Knight (“Godless Spellchecker”) weighs in:

And a few other unhinged tweets by Arel:

https://twitter.com/danarel/status/822819738220777482

https://twitter.com/danarel/status/822645608766930944

I guess Arel thinks that gives us license to punch anyone we don’t like. I no longer have any use for Arel, even though at one time he wrote a good book on godless parenting.

But wait, there’s more!

https://twitter.com/danarel/status/822715039433900032

More excuses for violence; this one is particularly pernicious:

c2rokzfxaaaqxl2

Dave Rubin chimes in with a tw**t by CNN correspondent Jake Tapper, probably referring to Rosie O’Donnell’s claim that Barron Trump was autistic (no evidence for that, I think):

One more from Rubin:

Peter Boghossian decries the violence:

screen-shot-2017-01-21-at-12-52-19-pm

More people defending the violence against Spencer:

screen-shot-2017-01-21-at-12-53-49-pm

And Sarah Silverman strikes back:

screen-shot-2017-01-21-at-1-02-34-pm

We were all worried about Trump supporters creating violence if Hillary Clinton won, but here we have exactly the opposite outcome.  Let’s knock off the violence, the punching, and the destruction, folks. It’s neither productive nor progressive. Even a white supremacist deserves to have his say without being physically attacked.

Yet another accommodationist book

January 21, 2017 • 10:15 am

Yes, it’s called Let there be SCIENCE: Why God loves Science and Science Needs God. The first part of the title presumes, without evidence, that there is a God, and the second part is just bogus: science operates best by ignoring God, operating as if gods did not exist. It’s appropriate that the book is coming out on April Fools’ Day of this year.

The authors? Amazon says this:

Tom McLeish is a physics professor, chair of the Royal Society’s education committee, and an Anglican lay reader. He is the author of Faith and Wisdom in Science. David Hutchings is a physics teacher.

Chair of the Royal Society’s education committee? What the bloody hell is a theist doing in that position?

Why, do you suppose, that people are always trying to comport religion with science instead of, say, religion with business or with sports? It’s obvious! Science and religion are both areas that make truth statements about the universe, and are in that sense competitors. But only science has a valid way of adjudicating its findings, and thus is infinitely superior to religion, which has no way to justify its “truths.” (Evidence: all religions have different truth statements about the universe, and they can’t be reconciled.)

At any rate, here’s part of the Amazon blurb, which is pretty truthful about science but tells two big lies about Christianity. (Any why are they comporting science with Christianity instead of some other religions?)

Too often, it would seem, science has been presented to the outside world as a robotic, detached, unemotional enterprise. Too often, Christianity is dismissed as being an ancient superstition. In reality, neither is the case. Science is a deeply human activity, and Christianity is deeply reasonable.

I suspect someone’s been reading Plantinga. Christianity is no more reasonable than Hindu mythology or the pantheon of Greek Gods.

51g8k4uevrl-_sx333_bo1204203200_

From the book’s website, we learn about the “fatal glass of beer“. Beware of the dregs!

screen-shot-2017-01-21-at-9-45-13-am

. . . and we get this palaver:

Like its background text, Faith and Wisdom in Science (good for further reading by the way), it’s main task is to blow away the myth that science and orthodox Christian faith are in any necessary conflict now, or at any time in history.

On the contrary, we find that throughout the ages, the faith required to do science, that our minds might just be up to the job of perceiving the inner structures of the universe, as well as its cosmic glories, is motivated by the same ‘Faith’ that dares to suppose that those very minds reflect in some way that of their Creator.

Furthermore, we find that the reason to do science is also theologically grounded.  Historically, the great scientists at the start of the early modern period when experimental science got off the ground, had a worked out theological reason for acquiring knowledge of the natural world.

There is of course no “religious-like faith” required to do science; there is confidence that the scientific toolkit—what I call “science broadly conceived”—will help us find truths about the cosmos and solve problems like curing diseases and landing rockets on comets. And unlike faith, which is belief without evidence, the confidence in science is there because, as they say, “Science works, bitches!” In other words, there’s evidence that science approaches the apprehension of truth. (See my article on this issue here.) In contrast, the faith that supposes that God created our minds is garden-variety religious faith: confident belief without sufficient evidence to command assent from all reasonable people (that’s philosopher Walter Kauffman’s definition).

Finally, while it may be true that some scientists like Newton had theological reasons for studying the natural world, that was by no means always true, even in the past: think of the ancient Greeks. And even if it were true, scientists no longer have religious reasons for doing science; in fact, most of us are atheists. We do science because we’re curious, because some of us want to help society or the afflicted, and so on; and the best way to do that, we’ve found, is to take no notice of gods.

h/t: Matthew Cobb

Caturday felid trifecta: Sneaky cat barks like dog until caught, girl gets replacement for her late cat, and a sledding moggie

January 21, 2017 • 9:15 am

I may have shown this before, but it’s worth seeing again. Here’s a sneaky cat showing that it can bark like a dog; when caught, though, it reverts to kitty noises:

*********

From the reliable ailurophile site Love Meow, we have the story of nine-year-old Marley and her new kitten:

Last summer Marley had just turned nine when her mother, Nikki Frost, brought home something that she had been longing for since the day she lost her best friend Simon the black cat.

“Marley’s a big animal lover. She’s always putting her change in the donation cans at the pet supply store, and we already have two dogs, two cats and a guinea pig in our family,” Frost told Love Meow.

“Our elderly black cat Simon had passed away the year before and she’d been asking for a kitten since.”

With two cats, the family was not looking for another one until Ella the kitten came along.

“Ella was actually found under a friend’s porch with a sibling, their mother believed to have been killed on the road,” Frost told Love Meow.

They were bottle fed and when they were ready for adoption, Frost happened to meet her that day. “I had no intention of bringing another cat home, but… sometimes you just know these things are meant to be.”

She brought little Ella home and placed her in Marley’s room, waiting for her daughter to return. “Marley had NO IDEA, she had come home from a friend’s house and the rest is history!”

Here’s Marley receiving her kitten an; it’s a heartwarmer:

Ella has grown by leaps and bounds since this summer. The two buddies share a very special bond. “Ella is a great cat, very friendly and cuddly.”

Something was missing in Marley’s heart after she lost Simon. Little Ella the rescue kitten came to her home to fill her heart with joy.

980x

*********

Here’s Weston the cat, who appears to enjoy sledding. For more of Weston and his buddy’s adventures, see the Facebook page “Westin and Ellinore: Adventure Cats“.

h/t: Bob T. and another reader whose name I’ve lost (sorry!)