Trump’s I coulda
Terry talking to his Brother Charly: “You shoulda looked out for me a little bit. You shoulda taken care of me, just a little bit, so I wouldn’t have to take them dives for the short-end money…I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am.:” “On The Water Front”
Coulda Trump rush faster than a walk to the Green? “I coulda had class. I coulda been a hero if I had rushed in there. I coulda been somebody instead of a bum, which I am.”
Trump’s Coulda: “You don’t know until you’re tested but I think I really believe I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon and I think most of the people in this room would have done that, too,”
Bone Spur’s the Deputy coulda: “They really weren’t exactly Medal of Honor winners,”
Trump’s critique on the news arming teachers: “When the press covered it, the headline was ‘Trump wants all teachers to have guns, Trump wants teachers to have guns.’”
Trump on highly trained good guys with guns coulda: “I don’t want teachers to have guns. I want highly-trained people that have a natural talent, like hitting a baseball or hitting a golf ball or putting.”
Trump’s critique of people who really have to work coulda: “How come some people always make the four-footer, and some people, under pressure, can’t even take their club back?”
Mr. Trump will always be other “people coulda” and will go down as an “I coulda been” a great president in the history of presidents.
He really is hopeless; a self made cartoon. He just cannot keep his mouth shut. He started out correctly: you don’t really know ’til you’re tested. Should have stopped right there. Turns out the deputy has an explanation which is being looked into. Wisdom waits ’til it knows what it’s talking about. Wisdom is foreign to Trump.
Hi Jack:
I hope all is well in Chicagoland. May be down there soon with Craig. Lunch perhaps?
No one does know what they would do. I thin though, if one could hear cries for help, one would move to help. Trump is a blight on America and an embarrassment.
Only a draft dodger would have said that. Those who have served on the battle field know what hell looks like. This kid and his military assault weapon turned that school building into hell. Rushing into hell with only a pistol is a recipe for death. Had Trump been there – he was have run far far away. Talk is cheap – we want to see action in the form of sensible gun laws.
pgl:
The courage is simply not there for politicians to buck the NRA. We all know where Republicans stand in this fray; however, I have not seen a bunch of Democrats go on public TV and demand a law similar to the one that expired in 2004. It was easy to go on Public TV when it was one of them they were trying to get rid of even though Franken asked for an investigation. No investigation, it might reveal something, just leave. Not now, this is the NRA. The same as talking about bullet-spewing-weapon, when, when, is it appropriate to take a stand?
Our Republican and Democrat politicians are boneiless hypocrites. A bunch of couldas and wouldas. Where is one Democratic Leader who will make a stand, risk everything, and come out damning the gun lobby and the Repub refusal to do anything? Gillibrand? Sanders? Booker? Harris? Warren? Biden? The silence is deafening.
The ground swell is there with angry young people rising up. This is like the sixties all over again. Where is the leader amongst us to move this ground swell of courage forward?
Trump would not be allowed anywhere near me or the people I play golf with.
You can learn an awful lot about a person’s character with how he acts on a golf course in terms of integrity and honesty. Trump is a serial cheater and liar about golf, which is reprehensible to true golfers and just adds to his total lack of character.
EM:
What a surprise EM that you would not want to be around Trump.
Run asks: “The ground swell is there with angry young people rising up. This is like the sixties all over again. Where is our leader amongst us to move this ground swell of courage forward.” Since the groundswell consists mostly of non-voters today, what makes you think they will vote when they actually become voters? To be clear, they must not just be old enough; but, they actually have to vote.
A good statement CoRev and my answer:
July 2016; there were 4.2 million sixteen year olds and another 4.2 million seventeen year olds in the US or potentially 8.4 million new voters come 2020. You better hope they do not vote in 2020 when they are eligible to vote in a national election. I believe they are angry enough to vote and make a difference.
Trump, Republicans, and the NRA have given them a reason to vote.
Trump would have run in there right behind his fan boy Ted Nugent.
Run, Your comment requires another response:
“You better hope they do not vote in 2020 …
Trump, Republicans, and the NRA have given them a reason to vote.”
History shows us that the young demographic seldom votes to the extent either party wishes. Moreover, current Democratic Leadership and their policies provide little incentive to vote for them. Unless the platform changes from “HateTrump” it will be hard to turn them out.
From a poster at EV:
Julio said in reply to Fred C. Dobbs…
Hey, he might have run in. I hear there were girls changing in the gym.
Funny . . .
For what it’s worth, there is a fair amount of gun control effort going on in individual states (not the old Confederacy, of course) which may seep through to the federal government although the resistance there is formidable.
Jack:
I did read Easterbrook’s opinion and saw the SCOTUS refusal. 🙂
JackD. yes that is the way to go
Just put it on the ballot in every state(that allows them, and move to allow them in all states). Screw the GOP and the NRA, go to the people.
“One area where Wilkinson and dozens of federal judges haven’t been reversed in the past decade or so is on the proper scope of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. If these judges somehow had a say in the gun policy debate, or if their legal opinions were a blueprint to chart the path forward, they’d probably tell Parkland student activists and the millions across America desiring stricter gun laws that the Constitution is no impediment to reform. In fact, they might even say that all-out bans on assault-style weapons — the kind accused gunman Nikolas Cruz used in his rampage at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida — are perfectly in harmony with the law as it exists today. No need to wait for a broken Congress or an apathetic president to do something. States and localities can lead the way today. And they have.
Chalk it up to one of the most controversial, if inconclusive, Supreme Court decisions of all time. In 2008, Justice Antonin Scalia led a five-justice majority to recognize, for the first time in American history, that “law-abiding, responsible citizens” have a right to own a handgun “in defense of hearth and home.” But Scalia’s own opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller — his greatest originalist achievement, in the view of many — left ample room for the regulation of firearms. In a passage that has become a thorn in the side of gun-rights enthusiasts, Scalia warned that people shouldn’t read too much into the fundamental right that he had just helped announce. Among other caveats and restrictions, Scalia wrote, “longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms” were still fair game.
A number of states and localities took Scalia at his word. In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, legislators there and in New York sprang to action and passed stringent bans on assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines — the very kind Adam Lanza, the school shooter, had in his possession at the time of the rampage. The statutory schemes were broad, defining assault weapons as any semiautomatic rifle with at least one “military-style feature” — a definition that rendered the arsenal of prohibited weapons decidedly large. In Connecticut, the ban singled out 183 specific firearms by make and model. Court challenges were of no use. Both laws survived judicial scrutiny, and the Supreme Court didn’t bother reviewing the statutes’ constitutionality. In a one-line order, the court refused to add the case to its docket.”
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/the-second-amendment-is-no-barrier-to-stricter-gun-laws.html
EM
A former playground of mine when a teen: Highland Park, IL was one of those who was allowed to keep their ban as Easterbrook and one other judge of the 7th District COA decided in favor of Highland Park. SCOTUS refused to review it.
I have to say that this armed teacher thing may be the single most stupid idea I have ever encountered. I mean, damn!
“I teach high school literature at a private school in the South. In the months after Sandy Hook, in response to conversations over school safety, the higher-ups at my school decided they wanted to consider arming teachers. They invested in The Draco Group—an agency that, according to its website, specialized in “security consultation, assessment, and guidance.” The rumor was that they were ex-Israeli special forces. And let me tell you firsthand: The whole experiment was more absurd than I can even say…..
Based upon evaluations from the first training session, a crack team of faculty was selected to proceed with “Level 2.” They included a middle-school English teacher, a twentysomething accountant and administrator, the student activities director, and a sweater-vested math teacher with 35 years of classroom experience. Together they would comprise the Orange Hats—the first-ever school rapid response team tasked with neutralizing possible threats, so named for the orange beanies they’d wear to identify themselves as the “good guys with guns,” looking they could have been plucked straight from The Life Aquatic. The rest of us were up for possible promotion after more training, but until then our responsibilities were to consist of basic medical response and managing lockdown procedures……
But as the semester came to a close, problems arose. Ariel’s team came with a considerable price tag, and budget cuts threatened the necessity of an armed presence on campus. To further complicate matters, one of the Orange Hats was let go, leading to an unforeseen dilemma that raised the question “how do you fire someone with a gun?” (The answer was: very carefully.) In the end, the process to arm and train teachers at school turned to be too costly and assumed far too much: namely, that that lifelong educators would be able to transition into a versatile oppositional force for a heavily armed assailant. The rapid response team was disbanded and, barring security staff, all weapons on campus were banned.”
https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/02/im-a-teacher-who-went-through-firearm-training-and-it-was-an-absurd-disaster.html
I’m thinking this would be about the normal result
EM:
Unarmed good guys without weapons did more to save students. Good guys with guns is a myth.