Making this thread in advance for Carleas to document his journey to and on Trump’s Inauguration. He is the only one openly admitting to living in DC, so his point of view matters a lot.
I live near DC, ~30 mins away
I probably will be farthest away, hence my excuse for not attending.
North, West, South? How far from Crystal City?
Incorrect, can you go to Baltimore and pick Iambigious u and just start shaking him?
Okay, I expect live updates from Incorrect and Carleas, pics occasionally of local happenings, even if it is just you vomiting on the street or watching TV, if you can. This is history in the making.
I am wondering which Supreme Court Justice will do the swearing in?
I live in downtown DC, Foggy Bottom, about a mile from the White House. I’ll be on leave during the inauguration, but I doubt I’d be able to get to work anyway. So I’ll be going. And whatever else it is, it’s historic, and I’m not going to sit it out just because I’m certain Trump is the least qualified and least well informed president we’ve ever had, and I’m ashamed as an American that he is the face of our once-great nation.
That last bit is super conservative sounding. This has been a weird year.
Five more days till the Eagle Rises!
foxbusiness.com/politics/201 … sters.html
Good news to those in the DC area, a motorcycle gang will be providing security for Trump’s Inauguration!
I can’t wait for the DNC to bring up some obscure law or tradition that says Trump isn’t really president because his tie didn’t match the color of the Bible’s bookmark or something. At least one will say that because he swore on a Bible, only Christians have to obey the law.
If he isn’t sworn in by a supreme court justice- only thing they can pull at this point… other than a trigger of course. If all 8 reject him, then merely relying on a federal judge won’t work.
That reminds me…
[b]Yes, Trump triumphed. And in less than a month week his rhetoric will be eyeball to eyeball with the reality of actually being the president.
So, sure, gloat to your hearts content, Mr. Objectivist.
But don’t forget that you may well be setting yourself up for some rather significant embarrassment down the road.
In other words, if Trump’s foreign policy is a disaster, or the economy goes into a tailspin, or he fails to come through on his campaign promises, or [like Obama] he fails to drain the swamp and to bring us “change we can believe in”, then you’ll have a lot of explaining to do.
I recommend that you begin to practice coming up with excuses as to why, even though the Republicans will soon own and operate Wall Street, K Street, the White House and the Congress, it is really still the Democrats/Liberals who are to blame for any and all the fuckups.[/b]
On the other hand, this is probably the same clever ploy the conservatives used back in January of 2009.
And then in January of 2013.
Oh shit. So you’re saying we’ve got at least one more Hollywood PSA coming of very concerned movie stars imploring the Supreme Court to put a stop to this?
Which was the non-objectivist candidate?
You’re so transparent.
No, Hollywood doesn’t study history. I’ve seen Gladiator and 300, certain they suck at history. But that’s literally the only option left to the left.
Also, besides President Arthur above, Martin Van Burden had his niece, who other than hair color, looks literally identical to Ivanka Trump, to play as hostess to political meetings. I made a thread a while back about this.
If they can convince the eight justices not to swear in, Trump may technically not be the President. They can reject any court pick he made, informing other judges that those positions remain vacant, not recognize any law he signed in, or the validity of any repeal of Obama’s Executive Orders, or recognize Trump’s, while invalidating on the side of the states any need to comply with his actions.
America Samoa would effectively be without a sovereign.
Somebody needs to tell Ben Affleck about this immediately. He’s Batman, you know.
That’s not my point though, is it?
No, my point is in making a distinction between those who embraced Trump or Clinton or Sanders or Johnson or Stein because they believed [objectively] it was the obligation of all rational and virtuous folks to embrace them, and those who recognize instead the extent to which [subjectively, subjunctively] dasein and conflicting goods may well be important factors in regard to choices like this.
That’s the part that you [and folks like Turd] refuse to explore further with me, isn’t it?
That’s the part you just sweep under the rug by labelling me the “copy/paste” guy.
And that’s before we get to part where the Marxists would lump both Trump and Clinton together into their own rendition of “political economy”. The part not fit for “idealists”.
How so?
Let’s choose a particular value judgment [ideal] that is near and dear to you and explore the extent to which someone either is or is not being “transparent” in discussing it.
Except that everybody who’s paid attention to you knows that if Clinton or Sanders or Stein would have won, you wouldn’t have written anything like this. You posture as if you’re treating all sides equally when somebody calls you on your bullshit, but you’re as partisan as anyone.
But not folks like PK. That kind of certainty has always ever been just fine with you.
Yeah like that birth certificate thing. All these people are crazy.
3 days