I'm going to tell you something that's truly going to blow your mind David. Are you ready? My writing output is not defined by your personal preferences. And especially not by your paper-thin skin when it comes to criticism of your favourite orange idiot.
I still have plenty to say on the topics of sex and race. If you'd rather hide under a blanket every time you see the word "Trump" in a title, that's fine. But that's not ALL I have to say. And never has been.
Trump is the president of the United States. His incompetence is creating upheaval across the world, and this is a place where we talk about the things happening, whether it's the inanity of certain racial policies or the insanity of certain aspects of gender ideology or the insanity of a narcissistic moron wreaking havoc across the world.
If you don't like it when I treat the topics you DO like with the sane scrutiny as the topics you don't, if you'd rather wrap yourself in a cocoon where nobody ever criticises Trump, that's up to you. But that's not a problem I can help you with I'm afraid.
I'm going to say something that will blow YOUR surprisingly cliched, paper-thin skinned mind. Are you ready? I spend most of my social media day arguing with Cult45.
Your 4 paragraph rant built on the assumption that the world is only divided into two 100% agree/disagree camps belies everything you say you are when it comes to discussion with your readers.
I'm just pointing out that you're not very good at it. I could tune into Lawrence McDonald or an AOC tweet and get better critique. I just subscribed because I though you were smarter than this hysteria. But I guess I found out differently when I dared to push back a little on a Gaza column.
Also, just because I like to check IтАЩm not imagining things, I went back and revisited our conversation on Gaza. Can you tell me where the тАЬhysteriaтАЭ is? Is it possible youтАЩre reacting to a faulty memory of how that conversation actually went?
I donтАЩt have any idea where you got the idea that I think the world is divided into 100% agree/disagree camps. But I donтАЩt. And actually, I think I live up to my values on discussion pretty well.
But I donтАЩt tolerate rudeness very well. And donтАЩt feel much obligation to try.
If you disagree with something IтАЩve said, thatтАЩs fine. Tell me what it is, argue in good faith, and IтАЩm very happy to engage politely.
But leave snarky, rude comments under every article that criticises Trump (note that I decided to simply ignore it at first), and yes, youтАЩll discover that my politeness is a choice, and IтАЩm actually quite capable of giving as good as I get.
Every? Again, thin skinned. My main pushback was on Gaza, and I was not the rude one.
Bubba, if I had the outrage you assume, I would have left more than a 2 sentence reply. I'm not outraged, I'm bored. This is not a column that invites discussion, it's a pretty closed end rant that's not terribly readable or interesting. And your assumption about my love of Trump can only come from the prison of 2 ideas, because it's NOTHING I've ever said.
If I subscribed to a golf channel and they spent a large part of their offerings on celebrity pro-ams, I would have a similar reaction to paying to watch baseball players golf.
I hate his tariff policy. They've cost me plenty. Tariffs impose taxes on a domestic population to protect politically favored, inefficient industries with a bad business model. Trade deficits are not even something real economists care about. If you want to write something that doesn't sound like everyone else's freak out, check out the insanity of the US tariffs on Madagascar.
тАЬ Every? Again, thin skinned. My main pushback was on Gaza, and I was not the rude one.тАЭ
IтАЩve linked that conversation above. Could you point to where I was rude?
Nowhere in the description of this website does it say itтАЩs a race and trans issues only Substack. In fact, politics is right there in the list of topics I cover. And itтАЩs hard not to notice that your snarky comments only started appearing under Trump articles. You can show your bias with more than just declarative statements.
I didnтАЩt say you were outraged, I said you were rude. Which you were. I ignored that rudeness last time, I thought IтАЩd address it this time before it became a trend, youтАЩre welcome to stop being rude any time you want. YouтАЩll never find a conversation here where I open with rudeness or swearing or demands, I donтАЩt think itтАЩs unreasonable to expect that in return.
Lastly, your closing paragraph here is truly baffling. YouтАЩre literally commenting on an article where I specifically call out the insanity of US tariffs on Madagascar. Am I missing something??
ЁЯдгЁЯдгЁЯдгHoly crap, okay man. So you're dismissing an article you're now claiming you didn't even read, and that contains exactly the kind of analysis you say you wanted, as "boring" and "shit you can get anywhere."
In fact, given that I haven't seen anybody else talking about Madagascar specifically, I strongly suspect you heard about the insanity of the Madagascar tariffs from me, and then forgot where you heard it.
What, exactly, am I supposed to do with this? You're admitting the source of your issue isn't the article itself (again, the content of the article is what you're claiming to want), so what am I supposed to attribute your reaction to except the fact that I'm criticising Trump? I'm all ears for alternative explanations.
That said, now that I've gone back and read the whole thing, there actually are some nuggets buried in the slag of unnecessary hyperbole. If you'd let them speak for themselves without all the cliched Orange Rich Man Bad And Oh Did I Mention He's Rich stuff, I would have gotten to them. It is MUCH better, however, than Lawrence O'Donnell.
If only we'd started here, eh? Would have saved us both some time and energy. Although, as I said below, I'm curious where you think I was hyperbolic.
Trump's wealth is obviously relevant when we're talking about his impact on the economy. That's not hyperbole, nor did I exaggerate it. [Edit: In fact, having gone back and had another look, I barely even mentioned his wealth at all!! There's literally just one mild allusion to it. Seriously! What exactly are you reacting to?!! Because it sure seems like your problem is criticism of "the orange man"ЁЯШЕ]
I just used it to demonstrate a defining characteristic of Trump and the flaw in much of his decision making, namely that he doesn't think about how his actions will affect ordinary people, aka ~90% of Americans, and this is a real problem for a president.
Add in his narcissism and his genuinely mind-blowing ignorance and I think it's the kind of thing that's worth talking/writing about.
The GDP of Madagascar is 15.8 billion. The GDP of Fort Myers-Cape Coral in Florida is 50 billion. In 2023 the per capita income of people in Madagascar was $506 a year. That is, people there earn $1.38 cents a day. It is one of the poorest countries on earth.
We have a trade deficit with them so we are imposing a tariff. That is odious. We cannot have a trade equilibrium with them and this has nothing to do with their imposition of tariffs on us. They could impose a 100% tariff on us and that will mean nothing to us.
Madagascar's main exports are vanilla, cloves, nickel, and textiles, with vanilla being a particularly significant global export, especially to France. So, they will always sell to us more than we can ever sell to them simply because people in Madagascar cannot afford virtually anything we have to sell! The trade deficit with them is not due to Madagascar imposing trade barriers on us. As it is almost always the case, the reasons why there are trade imbalances are multiple and they are not due to тАЬcheating.тАЭ
In fact, the trade deficit with Madagascar is very good for us because we get vanilla, cloves, cobalt, titanium, nickel, and textiles from them.
Nope, I saw it on National Review, AND a friend of mine posted a rather long analysis of it. I got about halfway through yours when my eyes glazed over at the hyperbole. Maybe I said something similar once before. I really don't remember.
Oh, okay, fair enough. The fact that Madagascar's alleged tariff rate was so high immediately drew my eye. I guess it was the same for others. That still doesn't address the silliness of attacking an article you haven't read. Or your motivations for attacking it that have nothing to do with Trump criticism.
And please, feel free to point out the hyperbole that made you're eyes "glaze over," I'm pretty sure everything in the article is well referenced fact.
I subscribed because of your brilliant takes on race and sex. This shit I can get anywhere, and from people who actually know the subject matter.
I'm going to tell you something that's truly going to blow your mind David. Are you ready? My writing output is not defined by your personal preferences. And especially not by your paper-thin skin when it comes to criticism of your favourite orange idiot.
I still have plenty to say on the topics of sex and race. If you'd rather hide under a blanket every time you see the word "Trump" in a title, that's fine. But that's not ALL I have to say. And never has been.
Trump is the president of the United States. His incompetence is creating upheaval across the world, and this is a place where we talk about the things happening, whether it's the inanity of certain racial policies or the insanity of certain aspects of gender ideology or the insanity of a narcissistic moron wreaking havoc across the world.
If you don't like it when I treat the topics you DO like with the sane scrutiny as the topics you don't, if you'd rather wrap yourself in a cocoon where nobody ever criticises Trump, that's up to you. But that's not a problem I can help you with I'm afraid.
I'm going to say something that will blow YOUR surprisingly cliched, paper-thin skinned mind. Are you ready? I spend most of my social media day arguing with Cult45.
Your 4 paragraph rant built on the assumption that the world is only divided into two 100% agree/disagree camps belies everything you say you are when it comes to discussion with your readers.
I'm just pointing out that you're not very good at it. I could tune into Lawrence McDonald or an AOC tweet and get better critique. I just subscribed because I though you were smarter than this hysteria. But I guess I found out differently when I dared to push back a little on a Gaza column.
Also, just because I like to check IтАЩm not imagining things, I went back and revisited our conversation on Gaza. Can you tell me where the тАЬhysteriaтАЭ is? Is it possible youтАЩre reacting to a faulty memory of how that conversation actually went?
https://commentary.steveqj.com/p/dont-worry-i-suspected-you-would/comment/47857108
I donтАЩt have any idea where you got the idea that I think the world is divided into 100% agree/disagree camps. But I donтАЩt. And actually, I think I live up to my values on discussion pretty well.
But I donтАЩt tolerate rudeness very well. And donтАЩt feel much obligation to try.
If you disagree with something IтАЩve said, thatтАЩs fine. Tell me what it is, argue in good faith, and IтАЩm very happy to engage politely.
But leave snarky, rude comments under every article that criticises Trump (note that I decided to simply ignore it at first), and yes, youтАЩll discover that my politeness is a choice, and IтАЩm actually quite capable of giving as good as I get.
Every? Again, thin skinned. My main pushback was on Gaza, and I was not the rude one.
Bubba, if I had the outrage you assume, I would have left more than a 2 sentence reply. I'm not outraged, I'm bored. This is not a column that invites discussion, it's a pretty closed end rant that's not terribly readable or interesting. And your assumption about my love of Trump can only come from the prison of 2 ideas, because it's NOTHING I've ever said.
If I subscribed to a golf channel and they spent a large part of their offerings on celebrity pro-ams, I would have a similar reaction to paying to watch baseball players golf.
I hate his tariff policy. They've cost me plenty. Tariffs impose taxes on a domestic population to protect politically favored, inefficient industries with a bad business model. Trade deficits are not even something real economists care about. If you want to write something that doesn't sound like everyone else's freak out, check out the insanity of the US tariffs on Madagascar.
тАЬ Every? Again, thin skinned. My main pushback was on Gaza, and I was not the rude one.тАЭ
IтАЩve linked that conversation above. Could you point to where I was rude?
Nowhere in the description of this website does it say itтАЩs a race and trans issues only Substack. In fact, politics is right there in the list of topics I cover. And itтАЩs hard not to notice that your snarky comments only started appearing under Trump articles. You can show your bias with more than just declarative statements.
I didnтАЩt say you were outraged, I said you were rude. Which you were. I ignored that rudeness last time, I thought IтАЩd address it this time before it became a trend, youтАЩre welcome to stop being rude any time you want. YouтАЩll never find a conversation here where I open with rudeness or swearing or demands, I donтАЩt think itтАЩs unreasonable to expect that in return.
Lastly, your closing paragraph here is truly baffling. YouтАЩre literally commenting on an article where I specifically call out the insanity of US tariffs on Madagascar. Am I missing something??
Oops, I guess I was just so bored I didn't get that far. But I'd sure like links to my multiple Trump defenses.
ЁЯдгЁЯдгЁЯдгHoly crap, okay man. So you're dismissing an article you're now claiming you didn't even read, and that contains exactly the kind of analysis you say you wanted, as "boring" and "shit you can get anywhere."
In fact, given that I haven't seen anybody else talking about Madagascar specifically, I strongly suspect you heard about the insanity of the Madagascar tariffs from me, and then forgot where you heard it.
What, exactly, am I supposed to do with this? You're admitting the source of your issue isn't the article itself (again, the content of the article is what you're claiming to want), so what am I supposed to attribute your reaction to except the fact that I'm criticising Trump? I'm all ears for alternative explanations.
That said, now that I've gone back and read the whole thing, there actually are some nuggets buried in the slag of unnecessary hyperbole. If you'd let them speak for themselves without all the cliched Orange Rich Man Bad And Oh Did I Mention He's Rich stuff, I would have gotten to them. It is MUCH better, however, than Lawrence O'Donnell.
If only we'd started here, eh? Would have saved us both some time and energy. Although, as I said below, I'm curious where you think I was hyperbolic.
Trump's wealth is obviously relevant when we're talking about his impact on the economy. That's not hyperbole, nor did I exaggerate it. [Edit: In fact, having gone back and had another look, I barely even mentioned his wealth at all!! There's literally just one mild allusion to it. Seriously! What exactly are you reacting to?!! Because it sure seems like your problem is criticism of "the orange man"ЁЯШЕ]
I just used it to demonstrate a defining characteristic of Trump and the flaw in much of his decision making, namely that he doesn't think about how his actions will affect ordinary people, aka ~90% of Americans, and this is a real problem for a president.
Add in his narcissism and his genuinely mind-blowing ignorance and I think it's the kind of thing that's worth talking/writing about.
Ismael Hernandez
The GDP of Madagascar is 15.8 billion. The GDP of Fort Myers-Cape Coral in Florida is 50 billion. In 2023 the per capita income of people in Madagascar was $506 a year. That is, people there earn $1.38 cents a day. It is one of the poorest countries on earth.
We have a trade deficit with them so we are imposing a tariff. That is odious. We cannot have a trade equilibrium with them and this has nothing to do with their imposition of tariffs on us. They could impose a 100% tariff on us and that will mean nothing to us.
Madagascar's main exports are vanilla, cloves, nickel, and textiles, with vanilla being a particularly significant global export, especially to France. So, they will always sell to us more than we can ever sell to them simply because people in Madagascar cannot afford virtually anything we have to sell! The trade deficit with them is not due to Madagascar imposing trade barriers on us. As it is almost always the case, the reasons why there are trade imbalances are multiple and they are not due to тАЬcheating.тАЭ
In fact, the trade deficit with Madagascar is very good for us because we get vanilla, cloves, cobalt, titanium, nickel, and textiles from them.
Nope, I saw it on National Review, AND a friend of mine posted a rather long analysis of it. I got about halfway through yours when my eyes glazed over at the hyperbole. Maybe I said something similar once before. I really don't remember.
Oh, okay, fair enough. The fact that Madagascar's alleged tariff rate was so high immediately drew my eye. I guess it was the same for others. That still doesn't address the silliness of attacking an article you haven't read. Or your motivations for attacking it that have nothing to do with Trump criticism.
And please, feel free to point out the hyperbole that made you're eyes "glaze over," I'm pretty sure everything in the article is well referenced fact.