Audio Of The Week: Alt VC
There is more than one way to do VC investing. In this podcast, Jerry Colonna talks to two VCs who are taking different approaches to venture investing.
There is more than one way to do VC investing. In this podcast, Jerry Colonna talks to two VCs who are taking different approaches to venture investing.
Comments (Archived):
Nah, sorry, that’s not the audio of the week. What we heard yesterday is the audio of the week, the fortnight, the month, the year, the decade, the century and the millennium…all combined. Nixon’s tapes, in retrospect and by comparison, are like listening to Nickelodeon.
my partners and I have said our piece on the election. i don’t plan to get into any more than that here at AVC. that doesn’t mean i am not horrified by his actions. but i am also not the least bit surprised.
Respect your choice….Couldn’t resist the layup 🙂
The big audio? The audio not released by Hillary that we now have some basis for confirming what we already thought about her.http://www.nytimes.com/2016…Citing the back-room deal-making and arm-twisting used by Abraham Lincoln, she mused on the necessity of having “both a public and a private position” on politically contentious issues.I am feeling more comfortable with her as the day goes by since I know more now than ever that she isn’t what she comes across as in public not even close to being the near socialist that she presents. Nice to have some confirmation of that instead of just hunches.
You can’t believe it. You can’t believe anything Hillary says about anything. That to the bankers she admitted lying to the public does not mean that she was telling the truth to the bankers! Hillary has zero credibility. Hillary’s word is trash, worthless. Hillary has never done anything at all significant for anyone but Hillary. Helping poor people in Haiti? She ripped them off — she and Bill directed some of the $1+ billion for Haiti earthquake relief to some of their buddies and got a big kickback.
Naw. It was just locker room banter, posturing, etc.There was no evidence he cheated on his current wife Melania or on any of his wives.He was really talking just in the abstract.How many men have NOT had such locker room banter?His response that he heard much worse from Bill Clinton on a golf course is fully credible.Further, whatever locker room banter Trump had, Bill was seducing and apparently raping women going way back to Arkansas and even Oxford and forward from there to the present, in their house in Chappaqua, etc. And we can’t forget Monica — in the White House and Oval Office with evidence on a blue dress, etc.That tape is no evidence of Trump doing anything wrong or unusual. It was with no women around, etc. No woman was confronted with that banter.Indeed, beyond a few words of locker room banter, men posturing, etc., Trump’s record with women on serious issues is huge, rock solid, and terrifically good.Hillary’s record on women? For one, she was apparently an accessory to some of what Bill did with women that was seriously illegal and threatened some of the women where what Bill did was consensual.For another, athttps://www.youtube.com/wat…is the tape of Hillary laughing at how she used some legal tricks to acquit a man, IIRC about 40, who raped a girl of 12, so hard she needed internal stitches and was rendered infertile for life. She is still alive and still suffering from the rape. Hillary? She is still laughing.The Bill-Hillary marriage is a fake marriage; instead of a marriage, it is a money-power partnership.Then there are the suspicions and accusations of Hillary’s sex life, right with women.Indeed, for a record on women, Trump is way ahead of Hillary, far, far better for women than Hillary.The huge noise about the few words on that little tape is just more media Hillary bias and media looking for headlines from the favorite of the media — sex scandal. The outrage is much like in the movie Casablanca with “shocked, shocked to discover there is gambling going on in here”; “Your winnings, Sir.”.Besides, what is important to you about our POTUS? Some few words, all in the abstract, of locker room banter before 2005 or now national security, economic growth, replacing ObamaCare, getting good medical care for our Vets, sending direction of K-12 education back to the local communities, getting the US energy independent via an all of the above approach, fixing the Iran deal, stopping ISIS, having the US respected again, putting a lot of our 95 million people currently out of the labor force back to work, getting work and good education and training and reducing crime for the people in our run down inner cities, rebuilding US infrastructure, enforcing our trade deals, especially on protection of our intellectual property, stopping their predatory marketing practices, currency manipulation, and illegal trade barriers (e.g., how Airbus gets subsidies to beat Boeing), stopping illegal immigration, reducing taxes and paying for it by increasing economic growth (like Walter Heller did for JFK and like Reagan did) and raising revenue enough to pay off the national debts, stopping the flow of illegal drugs from Mexico, etc.?Or are you mostly concerned about sex scandals? Okay, if you don’t like sex scandals, the Clintons are by light years worse than Trump.Trump and women? He likes beautiful women. So what? So do I: A lot of them were really pretty in teh sixth grade; by the seventh grade a lot of them were drop dead gorgeous; I dated one, the prettiest human female I ever saw, in person or otherwise. I still think of her. Just GORGEOUS.But, Bill? Apparently Bill rapes women, did going back, apparently at least to Oxford. And see the current evidence of Bill’s love child with a Black Arkansas prostitute.Trump ran beauty contests. Trump promoted women to high positions. Trump has two daughters that went to Wharton and look like examples of terrific fathering. Melania? She leads the life of a queen.Then for grabbing by the short hair, review your history: JFK did that to a young woman intern in the White House, just walked up to her, reached under her skirt, and grabbed. E.g., seehttp://rockcenter.nbcnews.c…Later he and her were in the tub playing with rubber ducks — literally — while Jackie was traveling. The young woman was already engaged. JFK used his position as POTUS to be a sexual predator on at least one young woman White House intern. Then there is the JFK thing with the Mafia babe. Then there is the thing with JFK and Marilyn Monroe.Compared with JFK, Trump is a choir boy. Compared with Bill, JFK is a choir boy. And you are worried about Trump?Think of it this way: Suppose a man didn’t engage in even a few words of locker room banter. Then he could be suspect and become unwelcome in a lot of locker rooms. Men are supposed to be talking about females, female anatomy, high performance cars, fast boats, that is, “moving vehicles” as in the James Bond movies, sports, etc. For those few words, apparently that is what Trump did once back in 2005.Don’t get led around by media wanting to create several days of headlines with a sex scandal — “For God’s sake, give your brain a chance.”Look, it’s your country, too. Get real. Don’t be gullible and manipulated and let the media grab you below your belt and lead you around while your brain is asleep.
Seriously, I mean, seriously? Locker room banter. Media manipulation. This is game over. Nail in the coffin. Donald’s not leaving but I wouldn’t be surprised if Pence takes a flyer. If he has balls and a moral compass he will, otherwise he’s just another fake, willing to do anything to get ahead regardless of his beliefs, religious or otherwise, and his public posture.
Not supporting Trump politically but I am surprised that you are surprised that someone like Trump would have used language like that in private at some point in his life. He was riffing with another man and getting him to laugh as a private citizen not a politician and further as an entertainer. I’ve done similar to get laughs. Have you? So has, I would suspect, upwards of 70% of men. If not gay. Do you want to rule all of those people out from public office going forward? Maybe give everyone a lie detector test?What if I heard that a guy that wants to marry one of my daughters talked like this at one point. Sure it would bother me because I know about it that’s why. Should I not bless the marriage? Well if it’s so important to me maybe I should give him a lie detector test as well. [1]Points taken off for not knowing there was an open mike. But otoh he probably didn’t even care. Wonder if any federal wiretap laws were broken if implied that the mike is off. Would be an interesting case.On Hardball Chris Matthews who was totally up in arms about this (as well as every other commentator on his show and on CNBC that I saw as well) but he slipped in that the last time he did the same was 40 years ago (iirc). That would make he 30 years old assuming he is being truthful. So that is ok but not 11 years. [2]Now as far as the points he made about how he could get what he wants out of women clearly wrong but once again we don’t have any Cosby like evidence of anything other than things that he said in which he appeared partly joking and riffing to back that up. No stained dress ala Monica Lewinsky.[1] My point is if it’s that important to you then don’t be passive aggressive and only care about it when you know about it. Dig deep on everyone you meet or do business proactively. What you do with the expectation of privacy is your business.[2] That said would not surprise me if Trump was doing the same today simply because he clearly lacks impulse control. The guys who have impulse control keep it to themselves.
But LE, I’m not running for public office. Is it hypocritical for me to hold someone running for office to a higher standard than I hold myself? I don’t think so. I’m flawed. Terribly flawed. I acknowledge my shortcomings, well, at least most of them. Nobody is entirely “clean,” particularly with the amount of scrutiny that exists in today’s world. Would JFK, LBJ, Mickey Mantle or any other notorious philanderer achieve the same free pass today that they did in their hey day? Not a chance. The stakes have changed immeasurably for anyone seeking public office w/ respect to privacy and media coverage, which has shifted from classic journalism to sensationalism w/ no boundaries. The standards for acceptability have shifted, too. Most “gotcha” reporting uncovered today is hardly black and white and full of nuance. It’s like the “fog of war,” where things aren’t always like they seem. This isn’t one of them.
You probably remember when there was a big issue regarding cocaine, pot and the Presidency. No more. Obama cocaine and pot. And who can forget Bill Clinton’s “I didn’t inhale”.http://poorrichardsnews.com…Is it hypocritical for me to hold someone running for office to a higher standard than I hold myself? I don’t think so.That is why I asked if we want to rule out anyone who in the past has spoken like (or similar or racist) prior to running for office. Do you want to rule all of those people out? I am sure many of them with semi public flaws actually have done so. Decided not to run.And yes I do hold people running for office to a higher standard in some ways then ordinary people. But in the end they are just ordinary people that are exceptional in some particular way. Really no different than the guy that ends up operating on your brain. Perhaps ones that don’t get caught just have a greater degree of self control.https://www.youtube.com/wat…Finally I am reminded of the secret service sex scandal and hookers. What I thought? Well sure they are highly testosterone driven so I give them a pass. A pussy like me is not going to take a bullet for anyone. Ditto for firefighters running into burning buildings. Not going to be me risking my life. At least I am honest enough to admit that the downside comes with an upside and that’s an evil that we have to live with. Ditto for politicians. Special narcissistic breed. Comes with the territory.https://www.youtube.com/wat…
There’s too much baggage here w/ Trump. I can see how some may view these “red flags” individually as the “flaws of human nature” (not my opinion, btw), but collectively not a chance.
Agree with the overwhelming amount of flaws btw. I am just trying the case based on the facts of this one individual episode as isolated and not allowing into evidence a gross amount of other things that are objectionable. It’s a mental exercise and game that I do to not become lazy in my thinking. Call it defend the indefensible.
Everyone has a mother. Half the world is women.I don’t condone but know that there is locker room talk. I can tolerate and maybe overlook that.I think people have gotten way too sensitiveBUTSure the UPenn bookstore manager was a pig. But what if he method was to grab your wife by the P***y??Some married woman is going to come forward and is going to say he did it.And the way he says it is especially deplorable. You know because I’m rich and powerful I can do it.That is not locker room talk. That is the talk of somebody that has lost their moral compass.I have heard that before. I heard it from Pete Musser and Dennis Koslowsky. They both self destructed.What’s most damning is he says it to somebody he doesn’t know.I have a fraternity brother CEO very close friend. We “share” a hotel room at every homecoming and graduation.He got properly divorced and now “just has fun”. When he comes back in the morning is there locker room talk? Yes. But it is never like that and we have been close friends for over 30 years.He talks to me and I say just like Roger Staubach famously once said: “I like sex as much as Joe Namath, but I like it with only one woman”
And the way he says it is especially deplorable. You know because I’m rich and powerful I can do it.There is a reason that trials often take a long time separate from how cumbersome the legal process is. The reason is that facts and context matter. Everyone jumps on and condems Trump, either because they already hate him or because (in the case of some supporters) they are just protecting their ass.The fact is saying as a riff what he said and actually doing it are two different things. And at this point we have no credible proof that he used his power to abuse women, just some talk in a bus on a hot mike. That is not enough to convict him, in all fairness, no matter how much someone hates him. But of course it happens. Because it causes an immediate visceral reaction in many people.Sure the UPenn bookstore manager was a pig. But what if he method was to grab your wife by the P***y??My current wife (not the bookstore wife) told me that there is an older doctor at her hospital (might be 70’s?) that is old school and when he comes up behind her he often rubs her neck. Have no clue why. The way she tells the story it’s like his shtick with women. Told another way it could be harassment. Apparently it doesn’t bother her enough to say anything and get this guy in trouble. She thinks it’s innocent and just let’s it go by.I just hate hate hate rush to judgement w/o knowing all of the facts and context of why something happened. To me what he did on the bus (and hearing the reaction of Billy Bush) was simply trying to get a laugh out of someone. Bush was egging him on. In a PC world of course people can’t accept this type of thing or give him any benefit of the doubt. That said of course he could be exactly that pig and take advantage of women. But accusations like that are easy to make really easy.
No.You just don’t say that.Rub a neck, give a big hug? Well that’s not me. Can I tolerate it? Yes.Is Hillary the most despicable money grubbing liar I have ever seen? Yes.I suppose corrupt can be controlled but crazy is forever. You can’t fix stupid.
You just don’t say that.You mean the “grab her p**y” line by Trump? Or that he said “they let me get away with it” and all of that?He was an entertainer, non politician, and further it was in 2005. And it was said with the expectation of privacy. Look at what happened to Colin Powel with his emails that went public (non sexual but privacy expected).This is really similar to a concept that I learned in business law which was that an offer made in jest or excitement is not a valid offer. It’s really like trying to convict a guy for murder because at one point he might have said in a bar “I’d like to kill my wife”. Or even a wife saying “sometimes I could kill my husband”.He is not as much crazy as he lacks impulse control and likes to live on the edge and take risks and stick to his guns.And I think crazy can be good (but don’t think in this case it is I will agree). Why? Because crazy comes up with creative solutions to problems. Even Fred might agree with this. The things he backs are often derided as foolish and crazy and stupid and that he is nuts. Just look at how JLM piles on him for bitcoin. It’s that “defective” brain that sometimes comes up with really good alternatives.That said I acknowledge it’s a big risk and probably not a chance that we should take.
Trump’s Achilles is he thinks he’s smart and Republican voters are stupid.He campaigns about “Made in America” and making America’s economy great again … BUT … https://uploads.disquscdn.c…https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
LE:by your omission only your ex-wife and current wife you have selected and the incidents you recount on the blog to justify other misogynistic mens behavior and sexual misconduct only reveals the lack of morals and poor decision making in women that allow the sexual misconduct.It is definitely not the majority of women who are empowered that allow the Neanderthal thinking men to commit the reported sexual misconduct and support of Trumps sexual misconduct. Not one moment surprised. Tripling down on it.
Here is the video, it is a classic response to a tough question, it shows the character of the man. He has gone on to be a Billionaire. Joe Namath, not so much.https://www.youtube.com/wat…
Sure but it’s just a response. Let’s ask him “do you ever look at or fantasize about being with other women?” and see what his response is to that question.
> There’s too much baggage here w/ Trump.Lots of such claims. Essentially no significant evidence of anything at all significant. Do you have some such evidence? If so, then please trot it out so that the objective readers here can consider it. If not, objective people will move on.
Considering the new standards, no way should the US elect as POTUS someone the US Director of the FBI said was in massive violation of section (f) of the US Espionage Act. That is super SERIOUS stuff. So, are the bribery and RICO violations from the UBS and Ericsson case. When Sweden discovered the Ericsson case, the Ericsson CEO resigned right away.
Don’t be fooled for even a nanosecond: He has iron clad impulse control.He also during the primaries used his exquisitely measured impulse control to get about $2 billion in earned media, knock out 16 competitors, including one who spent, what, $200 million to get four delegates. His impulse control is how early on he got 30,000 or so to come to a rally in AL.For excellent evidence of his impulse control, look carefully, in detail, word for word, athttp://www.c-span.org/video…with the Luntz interview where Trump pushed back at McCain’s attack. He was balanced exactly on a knife edge, really the point of a needle, to achieve just what the heck he wanted: Strictly, literally speaking, he was 100% correct. But, in addition, he pushed back HARD against McCain and, in fact, stopped the McCain attacks. And he gave raw meat to the media that instantly and broadly distorted what Trump said that gave Trump many millions in free media.E.g., in his early rallies, when there were protesters, sometimes Trump shouted some angry “Get’m OUT’a here!” or some such. So, the despicable media rushed to claim that Trump had no impulse control and was inciting violence — total BS. Instead, Trump was bonding with his audience, showing them that he was as serious about the content of the rally as they were. Can hear much the same about the umpires at baseball games.You’ve been misled: First, Trump did nothing wrong. Second, even if he had, on those issues, you’ve been led on a detour around the main issues of this campaign and the future of the US.
Your comments are disgraceful. And your judgement appears seriously impaired.
You gave no evidence.
Evidence Trump did do something WRONG. This is his own Republican party condemning his words and action.https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Makes no sense. So, whatever one might think of Trump’s 11 years old few words of harmless men’s locker room banter, in private (compare with the women’s open banter at the wedding scene early in The Godfather), Hillary is MUCH worse, especially on sex scandals, especially on treatment of women about sex.What does make sense is that the people on that list wanted their clique to win and now want Trump to lose so that they can win in 2020. Also, their clique is closer to Hillary than Trump because Hillary is for sale and Trump is not. That clique wants someone for sale.There are old neo-cons on that list, and Hillary is much closer to the W neo-cons than Trump is.E.g., Condi is on that list. That’s Condi of the aluminum tubes she claimed, and IIRC had Powell claim before the UN, were for separating uranium isotopes. BS. And the US Department of Energy, who knows some things about uranium separation, told her was BS. She ignored the DoE. Eventually why Iraq wanted those tubes — as bodies for DIY rockets.Look, that clique is still with the W, Cheney, neo-con view of the world. And they like open borders, H1Bs, new slave labor, etc.All that piece you showed had for a reason was those few words of harmless locker room banter not nearly as bad as what Bill said to Trump on a golf course. I’ve given some of the dirt on sex on the Clintons. Again, yet again, on sex scandals, Trump is a choir boy compared with JFK who is a choir boy, or even a castrato, compared with Bill. Where did you miss it? Apparently Bill is a RAPIST with Hillary complicit and an accessory. What Bill DOES is MUCH worse than any interpretation of what Trump harmlessly said.If you had a daughter of about 19, would you want her to work in a Clinton White House? How about in Trump Tower as, say, a computer assistant to some of Trump’s children in the Trump Organization?Trump is a determined, serious, successful family man. No way is he some James Bond, Don Juan, or seventh grade loser on women.Look, if Trump wasn’t such a family man, then he would live like a sultan. Or, and if you want a more shocking statement, there is the Mayor Bloomberg statement “I’m a single, straight billionaire living in NYC — it’s a wet dream!”. Who is getting all wound up about that one?Net, “Always look for the hidden agenda”, and here the hidden agenda is that the old W clique wants to win in 2020 so now wants Trump/Pence to lose, and the banter is JUST an excuse for highly gullible suckers. Don’t be fooled.I’m surprised at your offering up that silly image as evidence.
Did something wrong and people trying to cover their own ass are two different things. Of course it can be both but of course they are going to distance themselves especially after seeing the tide go that way. This is no different than how the stock market reacts to news.
People who stand for public office are scrutinized and subject to the “Moral Majority” more than people who don’t.
Not worth squabbling with you. You are blinded by hate and ignorance, and refusing to see straight. I am not Republican or Democrat, and just want to vote for pragmatic, centrist candidates who are in it for the right reasons. There’s a preponderance of evidence that Trump is an asshole and is out there just for himself. If you cannot see it, that’s fine and it’s your choice.
You are just name calling, the last step of a loser.
On Nov 8, you will know who the loser is.
We know who the hot mic loser is: Trump.As for whether he walks the talk of “Make America Great Again” …https://uploads.disquscdn.c…https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
The impulse control to get baited to tweet about a girl at 3am. Or to disparage a gold star family. Hook, line, sinker.
For the girl, you mean the Miss Universe girl 20 years ago? IIRC during her reign she had a personal problem that left her in violation of her contract. Trump was compassionate, helped her, and she finished her reign. IIRC, the “Miss Piggy” reference is questionable although connected since her problem was that early in her reign she suddenly gained 60 pounds, in violation of her contract.That there was any baiting is just pejorative fabrication by the media. Instead, Trump is a very hard worker.For the Gold Star family, that is total made up, cooked up, contrived, fabricated BS: The Khan guy is an old Clinton buddy, was a lawyer at a law firm that did the Clinton taxes. Also Khan was representing the Saudis and, thus, part of the Khan, Saudi, Huma, Clinton thing-y. The Khan speech at the DNC was intended to be a trap for Trump. Apparently Khan was claiming that the clause on freedom of religion in the US Constitution forced the US to ignore religion when considering immigrants — a total BS claim, especially for a lawyer. The Constitution says no such thing, and the US is free to admit or not admit anyone for any reason or no reason.IIRC, all Trump did was say that he would have liked to have heard also from Khan’s wife.But, the trap failed: Trump did NOTHING wrong, said NOTHING wrong. Get a transcript from a solid source, and give the reference, and show where Trump did/said anything wrong.That Trump said anything wrong was a total cooked up, planned, fabricated case of dirty propaganda by the media and likely with the help of the Clinton campaign.Same for the accusation that Trump made fun of a handicapped reporter. Total fabrication.There is also the CNN claim that Trump called for nationwide racial profiling by the police. Total BS. Instead, Trump mentioned the success Giuliani had had with profiling in NYC and the success the Israelis have and suggested profiling for Chicago. The “racial” was totally inserted by CNN — a contemptible LIE.For such things, due to media dirty propaganda, we need, must, MUST have solid evidence, with context, with complete quotes and/or video, with references to rock solid sources — that is, common high school term paper writing standards. E.g., one of the references I’ve given here, on the McCain flap, was to a C-SPAN video. The transcript by, IIRC, the Federal News Service, is also there.Sorry, your two examples you threw up were just air balls.I’m for Trump and still trying to find anything seriously wrong with him on anything at all serious and why so many people are so against him and, further, and MUCH more challenging, why anyone awake and not on the take is for Hillary.To me, the evidence is rock solid that Hillary is by a wide margin the worst, and the most dangerous, and very dangerous, person ever to run on a major party ticket for POTUS. And, to me, Trump is so good he stands to be the best POTUS back to Ike, FDR, … Lincoln.I’m looking hard for solid evidence I’m wrong. If you have some such evidence, then please trot it out.
You don’t seem to know what the word baited means.
Trump was attacked by Hillary: She threw the mud at the last minute in the last debate. She had to because her campaign had already put the story on deck with lots of media outlets and ready for publication ASAP after the debate.So, Trump defended himself. He should, and he did. Clinton is trying a chess fork — she attacks and (A) if Trump defends then she says he is impulsive, thin skinned, and can be “baited” and (B) if he doesn’t then she or the media will say that he is weak. BS. No voter should fall for that sewage.What Trump actually did with and for that Miss Universe woman was compassionate and helpful.What did Trump actually say that was actually, significantly wrong on anything significant?Besides, this campaign is not about Miss Universe or totally silly things like being “baited”.If you are a US citizen, then you should be scared sh*tless over the prospect of Hillary getting back into the White House.Again, do you have something Trump did that was significantly wrong on something significant? If so, then trot it out, with a good reference. Else we should move on to what the media wants to ignore — the issues.
You have been seriously, totally, profoundly misled.You’ve been talked into paying Rolls Royce prices for a rusty bucket of bolts where the seats are falling through the rusted floor pan and turning down a great, new Rolls for the same price because of some hints about dust in the tread of one of the tires.
I was discussing this with my wife last night and used the expression “shocked that there is gambling going on in here”. She didn’t understand what I was saying at all.https://www.youtube.com/wat…
Ref your reply to SaltShaker would you have felt the same had it been young men his banter was about ?
For that sort of thing, you need to look to Hillary, certainly not Trump! Or me.
He was being himself …https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Sorry, there are some fundamental problems with your understanding men’s locker room banter!Trump did NOTHING wrong.The Hillary crowd and the media, especially the Hillary media, are desperate to use the few words on that old tape to divert attention from the real issues in this campaign. They want the election of a POTUS to be about sex scandals instead of important issues. And, Hillary and Bill are without doubt the worst case of sex scandals in the Oval Office since 1776.We’ve heard the words and seen that there was NOTHING wrong. Now it is just stupid, brain-dead, shooting the US in the gut, dysfunctional, etc. to keep talking about that nonsense instead of the real issues.For bragging, that’s 99 44/100% different. His bragging and exaggeration are part of his selling technique, brand building, success technique, etc. It’s fine. Nothing wrong with it. He toots his own horn; no one else would do it nearly as well. And locker room banter is not closely connected — e.g., lots of men, losers, that no women would pay 10 seconds of attention to, in locker rooms hint or brag about their successes with women.E.g., in the seventh grade, the losers said that what you do with a girl is “find her, fool her, feel her, f-her, and forget her” — maybe they got an A in English for awful alliteration? They clearly knew less than nothing about girls, women, love, etc. And there is much more of the same. E.g., the early James Bond movies got much of their success from letting adolescent boys think that meaningless love making without love was something to emulate, that along with fast “what is it with you and moving wehicles” or some such as one Bond Girl explained, likely in Golden Eye. She was a total dream of a girl.Look, sex scandals are one of the long time main attention getters and key money makers for the news media, and their pretended shocks are a long way from reality.Gee, for this election, and before the debate tomorrow we are, where, right, back in grades 5-8 learning about sex for the first time. Gads.Lesson: That’s what the Hillary camp wants to talk about instead of economic growth, etc.
You said it yourself “E.g., in the seventh grade, the losers said that what you do with a girl is “find her, fool her, feel her, f-her, and forget her”, so aged 59 Trump behaved like a 7th grade (12-13 years old) LOSER.https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Commonly people learn to walk by age three but keep walking for all or nearly all their lives. Seventh grade male locker room banter starts at about the seventh grade but can continue for the rest of life. Typically men never forget when they first noticed girls. I can’t.E.g., a few months ago, I found a guy who had been in my grade in K-12. We talked about some of the girls. His remarks about some of them were typical locker room banter or even more serious. He described one girl as “would jump on your genitals” but genitals is not the word he used. When I was in about the seventh grade, one of the few father-son remarks about girls from him was “some girls will pull our your d… and sit on it.” I wish he had said much more about the emotions of girls and young women, but first cut he was correct. He was being contemptuous of such girls. That contempt was influential on me — I was ready, willing, able, and eager to love a girl, and I wanted nothing that could be justification for contempt. I wished he’d given me a much more complete description of the emotions and behavior of those girls. Still, first-cut, he was correct although I still don’t like the contempt. I’m just not into exploiting or taking advantage of another human, and certainly not some girl in grade, middle, or high school. Of course, much of the contempt came from religion — apparently they wanted the congregation to feel guilt so that the religion could sell its services, so religion picked something they were sure nearly everyone would do and called that a source of guilt. Guilt? NO WAY. One girl I took on a date to a movie dressed for church and on the ride home sat next to me. I walked her to her door, the right time, didn’t try to kiss her, etc. I called her for another movie and she was busy that Friday. I suggested Saturday, the next Friday, Saturday, Friday, Saturday and gave up. Much later I just went to her house after school to show her the go-cart I’d built. She was eager to let me in, glad to see me, not at all interested in the go-cart, was nervous about something, told me she was not supposed to have anyone in the house. I said she was safe with me — I’d given up on a movie dat but just wanted to be friends enough to show her the go-cart. So, right away she put her arms around my neck, jumped up, wrapped her legs around my waist, let her skirt fly whatever direction, and I was shocked. We couldn’t go to a movie but right away she wanted to do WHAT? I had no contempt for her. I did want to understand her. So, I saw quite a lot of girls with behavior that gets contempt, from religion or wherever. That’s the source of a lot of the locker room banter. For me, I just didn’t want to have contempt for the girls.But, again, in male locker room banter, like they walk for the rest of their lives, they engage in seventh grade banter. Blame religion. And not all the girls are 100% determined to be Miss Little Vera Pure, to draw again from religion. Okay with me except I don’t want them to get hurt physically or emotionally, abused, infected, become a single mom, receive a bad reputation. Instead, I hope they find a really good boyfriend who is really good to her.Your PNG file is deceptive propaganda. No, as I have just explained that is much of “how men talk behind closed doors”, and one of the main reasons is where the GIRLS take the first step and the description of that step as deserving contempt by much of religion. Also the PNG calls “sexual aggression”: Nonsense. There was just locker room banter, in the abstract, with no female involved at all. That’s two pieces of deception and fabrication. That’s enough to junk the PNG.Here’s the real question: What do people REALLY have against Trump, especially that lets them forget Hillary’s bribery and massive violation of section (f) of the US Espionage Act?
Why keep defending Trump’s indefensible words and actions? Do you think people want someone with the puerile mind and character of a 7th grader to lead them?https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
> Why keep defending Trump’s indefensible words and actions?Trump did nothing at all seriously wrong. Look at the video: He was just doing male locker room banter, getting the Bush guy to laugh, and giving a really good caricature of an alpha male. Then, as soon as the door to the bus opened and Bush and Trump stepped out and met the woman to be on the show, Trump was beautifully courteous and respectful to her — he smiled, didn’t come too close, gave her a fully professional, business hand shake, etc.According to the politically correct (PC) norms where any price is to be paid, even serious harm to a whole country, to avoid any hint of any harm, even to a tiny fish, what Trump did was in violation. PC is suicidal stuff, so far has let ISIS kill a lot of people, make a huge mess in France, German, Sweden, England, cost the US a lot in blood and treasure, etc. PC is bad stuff.The media like PC because it gives them more raw material for scandal, headlines, eyeballs, and ad revenue. So, the media play up the whole thing. Then nearly everyone else has to go along, “shocked, shocked” as in Casablanca.Again, yet again, over again, once again, one more time, Trump did nothing at all significantly wrong, NOTHING.Also Trump enemies, the Democrats, the NeverTrump crowd, the Bush family, friends, and team members, everyone who wants to run for POTUS in 2020 all come out saying that Trump should withdraw, etc. So, they are just trying to pursue their selfish interests instead of the interests of the US. Bummer.I explained: That people learn to walk at age 3 does not mean that everyone who walks is acting in all respects like they are age 3. That US maled discover girls and engage in locker room banter in the seventh grade does not mean that all men who engage in locker room banter — and a huge fraction of men, nearly all, do for another 70 years or so until they are too weak even to stand up — does not mean that they are acting in all respects like they are in the seventh grade. In particular, your claim that Trump is acting like he is in the seventh grade is wildly false. E.g., how many seventh graders could have made some billions, been a great father to five children, and beaten the other 16 Repubs?Look, fact of life: Men, nearly all men, certainly nearly all REAL MEN, engage in locker room banter. Indeed, as I explained from my personal experience, a lot of that banter that PC regards as insulting to women is about just what some women do on their own, take the first step, try to get the man to jump into bed with them, without any prior considerations about anything — enough girls and women tried it with me often enough. They were going a lot faster than I dared to go — to me, no instant roll in the hay is worth the chances of serious medical, legal, or financial problems. Again, not all the girls and women are Miss Virginia Vera Pure. Not nearly. A lot of male locker room banter that PC would scream about is just men comparing notes on what the girls/women try to do or, in Trump’s case, are ready, willing, able, and eager to do.Again, for male locker room banter, Trump did NOTHING wrong. NOTHING. The Bush guy got a lot of laughs. No particular woman was involved.Trump claimed that he tried with a married woman? Well, gotta tell you, a lot of married women are plenty ready, willing, able, and eager to have affairs AND expect and want a man to try. Maybe some woman looked like she wanted Trump to try — such things really DO HAPPEN in real life. So, Trump tried. He confessed, he failed. But, he did NOT force her. Maybe she had a good time seeing that she could get Trump to try — it’s been known to happen. Indeed, some married women want only affairs, really don’t like the commitment, responsibility, etc. of marriage, even if they are married. Am I guessing? Nope. Have I seen such things? Yup.Understand now, Trump did NOTHING wrong?Then, in attacking Trump, you are supporting the Clintons, and they are much, Much, MUCH, MUCH worse on a huge range of issues, especially sex scandals, than even the worst accusations about Trump.This attack on Trump is a case of mob psychology: It’s like in a small town where there is a rumor that Joe did something wrong. Then without anything like objective consideration, a mob gathers. No one person is eager to kill poor Joe, but 50 such people in a mob are sufficient to kill him. So, it is with this attack on Trump: Here the Democrats, the Never Trump people, and the media are all highly motivated to join a mob and attack.That’s one reason we have laws, so that we can know in relatively precise terms just what is and is not permitted. According to any laws at all, Trump did NOTHING wrong. Of course, apparently the Clintons did a LOT that was very wrong including rape, accessory to rape, physical molestation of women, bribery, and violation of section (f) of the US Espionage Act. You do see some differences here, right?I’m still trying to understand why some people are so against Trump. Here are some guesses, IMHO, none justified:(1) Some people are very much tied in to some of the Clinton policies, e.g., open borders for a new version of slave labor.(2) Some groups in the US have long been totally devoted to the Democrats and don’t want to change now, at least not in public, maybe in a voting booth.(3) Some people are willing to be influenced by the media, and for whatever reasons there isn’t much left of local newspapers that were heavily Republican, and the national media is nearly all totally in the tank for the Democrats, no matter what. In particular that media wants little more than just affirmative action for POTUS on both race and gender.It appears to me that Obama is wide open to impeachment for violation of his oath of office to enforce the laws and for letting in Syrians and, thus, guilty of giving aid and comfort to the enemy, that is, high treason. But now there’s no time to impeach him. I do suspect that Obama is no longer in fact our Commander in Chief, that is, that power was taken from him (there are legal procedures for that).(4) Trump looks like he could be a strong leader. That Trump can’t be bought scares some people — they don’t trust influencing government just by votes and also want influence via lobbying with big money attached. Also, the worst dictators were strong leaders, and weak leaders have a tough time being dictators. So, some people would feel safer with a weak leader.(5) To make an omelet, have to break some eggs. Well, Trump’s plans, proposals, and policies constitute a really big omelet with a lot of changes.For immigration, really, the big change, especially under Obama, was declining to enforce our long standing laws, procedures, and policies, and Trump really will be just returning us to what we long did — still, what he is doing is a big change in the present sick-o situation.So, Trump intends some big changes. For an analogy, Trump intends a large omelet, and for that maybe some people are afraid he will break too many eggs or some of the wrong eggs.So, some people are afraid of eggs Trump might break.(6) Trump is a capable guy, has a great track record of getting things done. Here he is exceptional. Well, not many people are familiar with people who are so exceptional. So, it’s easy for people to misunderstand Trump.IMHO, quite generally, exceptional people, including people exceptionally good, often have to lay low, keep their exceptionality quiet, else some people will be scared.Of course, instead of laying low, Trump promotes his brand and emphasizes his exceptional accomplishments. That he is exceptionally capable is great with me; that he promotes his brand I don’t mind at all. But I suspect that some people get scared.(7) It happens that last night I watched the movie Patton. Well, again I concluded that Patton scared Bradley and that Bradley very much resented Patton. Bradley’s view, in his book, was that the US had unlimited blood and treasure — the problem is, he was willing to expend more than necessary.So, Bradley wanted things just good enough to win the war but not a lot better. Well, by D-Day, Bradley no doubt believed that the US was going to win. So, Bradley wanted nothing to do with exceptionally good Patton.Well, we got Patton because General Frydendahl lost 1500 US soldiers at Kasserine — that was not good enough even for Bradley. But, on D-Day, Bradley cost a lot of US lives — he didn’t have nearly enough naval bombardment of the US beaches, especially Omaha. Cost a lot of US blood and treasure. Bummer. Similarly for the charge off the beaches — Bradley was too slow and unambitious, and that cost a lot of US blood and treasure.For more, in Sicily Bradley got angry when Patton beat Monty to Messina. That was darned important: Otherwise Monty would keep getting Ike to have the US do the dirty work while Monty got all the glory, which Monty wanted.What did Monty do that was so good? He beat Rommel at El Alaiman. How’d he do that? Sure, (1) massive supplies of US equipment via the Red Sea and Suez Canal. (2) Rommel’s supply lines were too long. (3) Too much of Rommel’s supplies were sunk in the Med due to British breaking the German code and knowing when the supplies were on the way.What did Monty do that was good? D-Day? Nope, a disaster taking Caen. Market Garden? Nope, a poorly planned disaster. Sicily? Nope: He got stuck. Monty was a pain in the ass. Patton was correct in showing up Monty in Sicily, if only to keep Monty from getting Ike to let Monte waste US blood and treasure.So, after Sicily, Patton had Bradley and Monty angry with him. But Patton’s success in Sicily put him in line to lead the invasion of Italy and then Normandy and, really, threaten Ike’s job, and, IMHO, Ike didn’t want that. So, Ike wanted to protect himself from Patton. So, with the slapping incident, Ike had his chance and did so.Then, Ike put losers instead of Patton in charge of the Italy invasion — wasted a lot of US blood and treasure. Similarly for Normandy. Similarly for the Falaise Pocket where Patton could have closed the pocket and captured a lot of Germans — Ike, etc. stopped Patton. But, with Patton subordinated to Bradley, Ike had what he wanted: Much of Patton’s potential to win without any threat of Patton getting too much power.Lesson: Really capable, exceptional people get a lot of enemies from all sides and above.Application: That’s what Trump is getting. Indeed, the media gang up and pile on is entirely similar to what Patton got.At times I did very well at some things. Yup, I got a lot of enemies from doing too well.Summary:We very much need what Trump can do for the US. No way should we gang up, pile on, and have him lose because he is too good. That would be brain-dead dumb.So, my guess is that your beef with Trump is that he is too good and that you are afraid.But, you are failing to notice the huge damage the US would suffer under the Clintons. In failing to notice this difference, you have been misled by the media-Hillary campaign.For me, I’m not afraid of Trump at all. I am afraid of Clinton, e.g., what she would do taking bribes, to US national security, to the SCOTUS, on immigration, on corruption, etc.When evaluating Trump, I f’get about any of his style issues. I will f’get about his personal life unless there is something significantly wrong, and I don’t see anything close, e.g., nothing like the Clintons — a couple of degenerates.What I look at with Trump is his positions, proposals, plans, policies, etc. To this end, I have lots of YouTube URLs and transcripts of his speeches and text and PDF files of his plans. And I like that he looks sincere and ready, willing, able, and eager to do well getting his positions, etc. implemented.On the current sex scandal, well, I can guarantee you that teenage boys talk about sex. My experience with teenage girls convinces me that teenage girls talk about sex, maybe more than the boys do. So, everyone old enough to vote has already done a lot of talking about sex, and I can’t believe that more than 1% of those take at all seriously the Trump-Bush locker room banter.Media, NeverTrumpers, Democrats, sorry ’bout that: All you’ve done is throw up air balls that never came even close. You have shown again what total losers you are.If you want to talk about sex, then talk about your affirmative action hero Obama who wants your second grade girls sharing restrooms and locker shower rooms with teenage boys.Back to the real issues.
You wrote: “Back to the real issues. We very much need what Trump can do for the US.”Ok, let’s focus on economics and the choices he and his family made wrt “Made in the USA” and keeping American manufacturing alive.* https://uploads.disquscdn.c…* https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Trump and economics?Okay.I will give some references.Likely all the data I mention here can be found from good sources via a Google search.What Trump BoughtNo doubt in business, Trump bought a lot of imported goods, e.g., TVs from South Korea. Well, in business, he had little choice.But he says he wants to turn that situation around, and it appears to me that that is one of the main reasons he is running for POTUS.So, he agrees with the problem you mentioned and is busting his back side trying to do something about it.Our Economy Is SickThe stupid Viet Nam war greatly inflated the US economy. Bad.As Chair of the Fed, Volker slapped on a 22% prime rate, and that stopped the inflation. Pain.Reagan and Gingrich reduced taxes and got the economy going again. Good.Based on what Reagan and Gingrich did, by the time of Clinton, the US had paid off the national debt or nearly so, and Wall Street was worried that there would be no more T-bills. Good except we should continue to have T-bills.Then there was the year 2000 computer scare, and in response Fed Chair Greenspan increased the money supply too much. Bad.That and the growth of information technology in Silicon Valley created inflation and the NASDAQ bubble.After 2000, the bubble suddenly burst. Pain.W wanted to show good things to his father so got us into Gulf War II. His man in Baghdad, L. Paul Bremer, made a mess, and the US lost lots of blood and treasure and made Iraq worse than it was under Saddam. Dumb de dumb dumb W.Then W got all softhearted and wanted everyone in single family, detached, suburban houses based on the observation that people in such houses tend to do well in the US and the left wing theory that putting a poor person in such a house will suddenly let them also do well in the US economy.To this end, Fanny and Freddie were backing mortgages written on used toilet paper. The mortgage brokers made a bundle. So did the housing general contractors. The housing market went into a huge bubble.The Chair of Wells Fargo said we’re blowing a bubble and wouldn’t like the results — from a big interview on Frontline — I have the full transcript.Some on Wall Street, e.g., CDO guys and their bond raters, did some dirty stuff and helped blow the bubble.W messed up, big time. W is a total doofus.The bubble burst. Lehmann and a lot more on Wall Street and in finance around the world went belly up. Pain.We got the Great Recession, the worst since the Great Depression.Then we got our affirmative action POTUS who concentrated on bowing to leaders in China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and France, his jump shot, bro dinners in the White House, the White House exercise facilities, his golf game, with Pelosi and Frank pushing through ObamaCare guaranteed to fail and, at least from Frank, only a step to single payer, weakening the US that Obama believed was a menace to the world, e.g., total wack-o, moonbeam, self-destructive nonsense (calm down, Virginia: there was plenty of ice in the Arctic this September; the predictions were BS), about getting rid of carbon (shakedowns, extortion?) and subsidizing wind and solar (kickbacks?), helping the economies of Mexico and China, helping his Muslim buddies around the world, e.g., Iran, and flooding the US with people he hoped would vote Democrat and break the power of Whitey.But he didn’t try to get the economy going again.So, for 8 years we’ve been in the Great Recession or very slow growth out of it, 2/3rds as long as we were in the Great Depression. The production and money we have lost is staggering. That is, we should have had the production of 60+ million people for 8 years — at’s a lot’s uh goods, services, and dollars. We can’t prosper, have a good standard of living, a strong, safe country by massively sitting on our back sides. Obama has enormously weakened the US.Now the US has a huge national debt, a huge annual budget deficit, 95 million citizens who could work but out of the labor force, a lot of the labor force non-citizen essentially slave labor lowering wages and taking jobs of US citizens, manufacturing employment down by about 1/3rd, lots of businesses and jobs moving or gone out of the country, lots of importing, an annual trade deficit of about $800 billion, horrible situations in many of the minority inner cities, a weakened military, etc.Did I mention our economy is sick?Trump’s PlansTrump’s plans boiled way down are in three words — jobs, jobs, jobs.One approach is, for earnings earned by US companies but currently deposited out of the US and brought back to the US, lower the taxes from 35% to 10%. That should bring several trillion dollars back to the US that will likely heavily be invested in growth. Fred might be able to do a big raise?Then Trump wants to enforce our existing trade deals — which Obama refused to do.Some of the enforcement is to stop China, etc. from blocking imports to China from the US. More is to stop currency devaluations. And there are more such steps.Trump wants to protect our intellectual property, as in the existing trade deals, which Obama refuses to do.Trump wants to negotiate trade deals one to one, which Obama refuses to do.Trump will dump the TPP which would weaken the US as Obama wants to do. Hillary called the TPP the “gold standard”: Due to propaganda lies, have to see the actual statement; it is athttps://www.youtube.com/wat…Gotta say, Hillary is a first class actress. In that video clip, she looks and sounds serious, genuine, sincere, thoughtful, competent, responsible, etc., but her actual content is just total BS. I can believe she looked and did much the same as a college sophomore: Superficial looks? Really good. Actual content: Total BS. In this case, highly destructive BS.Indeed, during the next term of POTUS, Obama wants continued influence on the White House. How? If Hillary wins, then she will have to take orders from Obama. Why? IMHO, Obama and Hillary are two scorpions in a bottle, each with serious dirt on the other.The trade deal steps will increase the demand for Made in the USA for buyers both in the US and elsewhere.Trump wants to enforce our long standing immigration laws, procedures, and policies. That will get rid of the slave labor taking jobs of US citizens. Ike did. Trump can do a lot of this with just one word — eVerify.Trump wants education and training for the workers for the jobs.As we saw this week, Clinton says in private that she wants “free trade and open borders”. That would further hurt the US and lots of US citizens but would help some people in business who, then, might be generous to Bill for speeches and the Clinton Foundation Clinton family slush fund.Trump wants a lot of the new jobs and training to be aimed at the poor US central cities.Trump wants much lower taxes on businesses. So, businesses will be eager to come to or come back to the US. Due to the increased demand for Made in America, there will be more businesses in the US. Net, there will be a lot of jobs for those 95 million US citizens.Trump wants to lower taxes on the middle class. That will create more business activity with its taxes.Then with so many new jobs, there will be less welfare spending and more taxpayers. The new business activity will generate tax revenue. Trump claimed in his speech to the NY economic club, athttps://www.youtube.com/wat…that the “math works”. Below are some associated PDFs. So, (in that speech or others) he says he can balance the Federal budget and pay down the national debt.For more, Trump wants more for the VA, the military, and US infrastructure — that will mean more jobs, business activity, etc.So, that is a lot on Trump and the economy. No doubt I omitted a lot.I just took a quick pass over my collection of files on Trump: There is more on Trump and the economy in pdf files and speeches inhttps://assets.donaldjtrump…https://assets.donaldjtrump…https://assets.donaldjtrump…https://assets.donaldjtrump…https://www.c-span.org/vide…https://www.donaldjtrump.co…https://www.youtube.com/wat…And there is much the same as I explained and more in nearly any of his rally speeches, e.g., some recent ones athttps://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…https://www.youtube.com/wat…Hillary lies so much, there is no telling what the heck she would actually want to do for the economy.Since so far in her career in public service Hillary has yet to do anything significant and good for anyone but Hillary, Bill, and Chelsea, I have to doubt that Hillary would or even could do anything good for the US.Hillary is essentially guaranteed to seriously hurt the US, e.g., via her SCOTUS nominations. And she might otherwise seriously hurt the US: Broadly if for some reason the US actually needed an actually competent POTUS, we would be in serious trouble.A big threat: Too many of the hundreds of thousands of Muslims Hillary wants (or Obama wants Hillary) to import would be ISIS soldiers who ASAP would explode nukes in as many US cities as they could. No joke. A year after 9/11/2001, the Hart-Rudman Commission predicted just that.IIRC, if Hillary won, she would still be vulnerable to court and jail and/or impeachment from what she has already done.Hillary is a disaster, by a wide margin — nasty, lying, crooked, national security disaster — the worst person ever to run for POTUS from a major party.Proof: As from FBI Director Comey’s statement, section (f) of the US Espionage Act. Done.That proof alone is sufficient, but there are many more available.But, for me, just narrowly in the short term, for some strange, personal reasons, Hillary would be a safer bet for me and my startup.Still, I’m strongly for Trump.To me, Trump is fully sincere. I believe we can take his intentions in his statements quite seriously. And he is capable, able to get good stuff done. And he will have a Republican Congress. And he is a good leader, e.g., for his rallies gets 30,000 people to stand in line with line starting at dawn or so.IMHO, Trump looks like a good bet to be the best US POTUS since Ike, FDR, …, Lincoln.
Come on Sigma, you know that some men may talk like that in private but I am sure you also know that there are also decent people that don’t. There are many ways to play the alpha male, and the cheapest and easiest is to brag around being an asshole. And that is all what Donald Trump is to me, an asshole.It is also disgraceful that the people handling both campaigns have gone so far and so low. The US, not the country the nation, deserves much better than that.
We are in desperate times.And seeing what we’re made of.
You gave no evidence.It appears that the Hillary and media propaganda machines have misled you.There are fabricated problems with Trump, all false but still small even if they were true, but HUGE, very serious problems with Hillary — e.g., she belongs in jail for massive violation of section (f) of the US Espionage Act, e.g., as in FBI Directory Comey’s statement.
I have no evidence. I just have perceptions of what I see and hear, and an understanding that those are limited. I hope the best for you and those living in the US, among the limited options you may have right now.
perceptions of what I see and hear I can guess at what you are seeing:Trump’s background was to be successful in business. In the end, he was.Part of his success was to build a brand as the best and to be loud and attract a lot of attention.He took a version of that brand building and used it to beat 16 Republicans and get the Republican nomination.But, then, the US liberal media, especially the parts, e.g., CNN and the NYT, totally in the tank for Hillary, and the Hillary campaign took what people could see about Trump and distorted, fabricated, and lied to make claims that there was something seriously wrong with Trump.Then, in a huge shock, there’s no doubt about Hillary: As Giuliani has claimed, the UBS and Ericsson cases were bribery and RICO violations. And as US FBI Director Comey’s statement made clear, Hillary is in massive violation of section (f) of the US Espionage Act.So, on the one hand we have Trump with nothing at all serious wrong with him and sincere, capable, highly accomplished, and determined to help the US.And on the other hand we have Hillary who has yet to have any significant accomplishments on anything significant and with serious legal problems from huge crimes.But Hillary has the media, e.g., essentially all the newspapers, her smile and nice woman act, and lots of money involved on her side.When the US voters catch on, Hillary may win Manhattan and Hollywood and nothing else.I have URLs to good sources for everything I claimed here and have often posted them here at AVC.
I echo @ccrystle:disqus but i’ll complete bullshit as well.
Have an actual argument? Some evidence? With references?
Proof that not all men are mysoginistic assholes? Sure–myself and most of us.
Fine. And what the heck does this have to do with Trump?Let me guess: You swallowed whole the claims, with no even decent evidence, that Trump is misogynistic.The burden of proof, of course, is on the proposer, and in this case we have no proof, just accusations, distortions, fabrications, and lies.E.g., the NYT ran a big story, front page, above the fold, centered claming that Trump was misogynistic, and the women involved came forward and said that the story was false.E.g., the media went wild over Trump’s statement about Megan Kelly’s anger in her question at the first primary debate. No, Trump did not say he could see blood coming from her period. Neither did he mean it.So much for the media distortions, fabrications, and lies.On the other hand, we have how well Trump did with Ivanka and Tiffany and, now, Melania. And we have how many women he promoted to high positions, e.g., Kellyann Conway as his campaign manager.In wildly strong contrast, we have how Hillary was an accomplice to what Bill did to women against their will, how Hillary threatened those women. And we have, as I posted here, the video of Hillary laughing at how she freed the bum who violently raped that 12 year old girl.We’ve covered this stuff. We know this stuff.But the propaganda beat goes on — repeat it often enough from enough sources and enough people will believe it, e.g., that Trump is misogynistic. Then as we are batting down that lie, there are others, and the total is that Hillary gets to have the campaign talk about irrelevant dirt either false or trivial instead of the real issues, e.g. her massive violation of section (f), …. E.g., the tape of the locker room words has existed since 2005. So, why did it come out just now, as an October surprise just before a debate? Sure — don’t talk about the real issues.Open minded, objective, rational people not part of the money won’t much like Hillary and will see Trump as a good candidate for the best POTUS since Ike, …, and see Hillary as the worst candidate for POTUS ever.But, wait, this just in: I just saw at Drudge, since we were considering who was nasty to women, there is:KATHLEEN WILLEY CALLS FOR HILLARY TO RESIGN FROM CAMPAIGN…JUANITA BROADDRICK: She lives with and protects a rapist….PAULA JONES: Bill ‘was getting wee wee sucked under Oval Office desk and won second term’…Gennifer Flowers: Bill Clinton Told Me ‘Hillary Had Eaten More Pussy Than He Had’…In bringing up sex scandals, maybe the media will get eyeballs, but the Hillary campaign stands to lose. But we already know that Hillary has poor judgment, e.g., calling 1/4 of the voters irredeemable deplorables.The Democrats have their little deck of cards to play. They play them over and over. So here with this misogynistic stuff it’s the sexist card.Their favorite is the race card, and go long on that being the next card played. The media-Hillary campaign likes just playing these few cards over and over. Actually, nearly all the mud was thrown at Trump in the first Repub debate and since then just over and over.But for the real issues, don’t expect to see those in the media.
Such nonsense.
Uh, specifically what part or parts? Even one example? Actually, I do have a lot of relatively good references to support much of what I say. Where I’m just expressing an opinion based on the references should be clear enough.I’m very much for Trump, but, if I’m wrong, then I want to know it.
Make your own choice.
I am sure you also know that there are also decent people that don’t.There are for sure people who have never spoken that way ever. However it is also likely that people who speak like that only do it in front of select people or those that they perceive as being willing to accept that type of conversation or commentary and for that matter potentially even enjoy it. In private, or when someone perceives a level of trust (for whatever reason) things are typically different.I’ve spoken in the past about two guys that made a lewd comment to my ex wife (wife at the time of the comment) when she was a salesperson in business for herself selling advertising. It didn’t appear to bother her and quite frankly it didn’t bother me either. I asked her if she got the order. (She did). So perhaps she was flirting on purpose and acting cute. Who knows? I’ve told the story countless times and don’t remember anyone reacting in particular disgust about what they did. In another case it was clear that the manager at the time of the University of Pennsylvania bookstore had the hots for her and that was the reason he let her distribute her books at the register and didn’t let her competitor (a much larger company) do the same. Competitor was banished to outside on Locust Walk. He also told her he didn’t want me stopping by. It didn’t bother either of us and quite frankly and practically it was great that she was able to get that type of special treatment from such a dog of a man. Whatever fantasy he had I presume stayed a fantasy. Now of course if he was working for me I would have fired him if I found out. But as part of a business transaction that we benefited from, not a chance. Kind of exactly what Hillary did by staying with Bill knowing he was a rising star in politics after he cheated on him. (Same as Melania with Trump no doubt she knows he is a dog).
LE:Disgusting is the only word that describes the episode of your ex-wife and sales experience and your cavalier response to it. That description is the type of people you are. Money before morals. (Thanks for the glimpse) Certain beliefs in life manifest in one’s actions. Not one moment surprised. The party and beliefs of revile.
The tape is surely a violation of the intimacy of a private conversation. Too bad that people keep those type of things around as “assets” to use them when needed. Is that legal in the US?My reaction has to do more with the tone of the comments and it would be the same reaction that I would have if I hear that in a private conversation.
Trump doesn’t even respect his own daughter. In private and in public, he shows how little regard he has for women.What kind of man lets another man demean his daughter (with her UPenn economics degree, responsibilities in executive management and own fashion line) into “a piece of ass”?https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Love it. Reboot podcasts added to today’s to-do list.
I’ve become a huge fan of his podcasts. Need to post on my impressions of them because on one side they are just what I need, on the other an approach to self realization that is not my bent.
Check out David Axelrod’s podcast w/ Tom Brokaw, who IMO is the last of the truly iconic broadcast journalists. Axelrod isn’t the greatest interviewer, but Brokaw, who is currently battling cancer, expands on some of his truly amazing life experiences and shows sincere appreciation for the charmed life he has led.
Serious subject Podcast! #seriousSaturday pretending to be someone else vs employing mentors is delicate ba lance
33 minutes in Jerry discusses the downside of pretending to be someone else. However there are many people out there that are driven by the accomplishments of someone that came before them whether it be Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Zuckerberg, Warren Buffet or Ray Kroc. You can’t overlook the positive aspects of aspirations to be someone else, even if it has a negative impact on some people who can’t handle the game or the heat. [1] And when you are younger you don’t know who you are anyway and won’t find out until you have had some success and/or failure. As an anecdote you hear many stories that start by saying “when I was growing up I looked up to and wanted to be…”On another topic, to me, and I say this to Jerry if he is reading this, much of the pain that people have is in blindly exceeding their baseline capabilities as a person and trying to do something that they would like to do but can’t do and aren’t capable of. Or are being pushed to do by a parent, family or friends. [2] That is the real danger. You have to listen to your body and what it tells you. And you have to realize that you might not be able to handle the stress of what you think you want to do in your life as exciting as it might be or as much as you want approval from others. You may have to settle back to a lesser state and be happy with that. It’s a balance for sure to get to the right set point.[1] Ditto for sports or entertainment, people growing up wanting to be or inspired by someone who came before them.[2] An example of this might be Jeb Bush running for President for the wrong reasons.
Agree on 1 but disagree on 2, I’d bet that most people underestimate their abilities not overestimate.What holds most people back is education, formal and informal.
Well if you don’t have self confidence then perhaps you are wise to stay out of the game. If you are lucky enough to have a mentor that pushes you and gives you confidence to take a chance you’d better hope that you grow as a person and don’t need that crutch as you get older.One of my nieces lacks confidence and has decided when she graduates to stay either close to school or close to home. While I think it’s a mistake in some ways I am not going to give her any pushing or words of wisdom because I think she simply isn’t capable of breaking out of the box caused by her lack of confidence. I know this partly because a summer or two when I personally got her a job at a PR firm that anyone else would have died for she turned it down because she was afraid to drive into that part of the city (and it’s no big deal actually).
It’s not confience that’s slows people down, it’s ignorance
Well if it is self-ignorance, perhaps. Lack of confidence can be debilitating.
CONTRIBUTORS:Not even surprised by Trump’s audio or the defense of the indefensible.The results of this election will only be a surprise to the losers with the excuses and the repeat of lack of governing and obstruction.Will be entertaining. The White House will be occupied only if they are invited.The Democrats are rejoicing and better be voting with Republicans acknowledging Trump isn’t a real Republican. This will not be easy to lay down those racist and misogynistic views.
We get pulled in all sorts of directions throughout our lives. Sometimes, to please other people. Sometimes, to emulate others. Sometimes, because we simply don’t know who we really are until something drastic happens.As time passes, Steve Jobs’ words resonate more and more with me. There’s a LOT of dogma in AI that means the Natural Language frameworks and datasets are all flawed. Plus there’s the whole “lack of women in technology” thing.But I listen to my heart and my intuition and they’ve been great compasses so far.https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Better than a lot of thinking but, still, not very good, mostly not good enough to be very effective in practice, without a lot of luck, and not nearly as good as the best or what you can do.Really there is a lot of readily available, well practiced, quite solid discipline with techniques for creative, original thinking, new, correct, significant, powerful and valuable in practice.E.g., the US DoD did GPS, and right from the beginning it was creative, original thinking, new, correct, significant, powerful and valuable in practice and following discipline with techniques that removed all doubt. There was no chance that the GPS project would fail.
@fredwilson:disqus i noticed you are a fan of podcasts. would be curious to know your thoughts on the future of podcasts. the ones you post seem to have great content, but is the podcast medium one that will be sustained into the future?the issue i’ve come across is that there is no opportune time to listen to podcasts. how do people who live in a city that doesn’t require a car or have short commutes find time to listen to podcasts? it is different from the video medium because there you have visuals to watch; reading can be skimmed (very difficult to try to “skim” audio); music can be played in the background (very difficult to multitask with podcasts because you end up missing much of the content). that leaves me with simply playing a podcast and staring off into space- a very unnatural act in the restless age of multitasking. i’m honestly quite surprised that podcasts are still around at this point.
save them offline and listen on the subway?
i suppose part of my point was that there is a population who have short commutes. i imagine that population is not negligible in size.
gym, bike rides, walks. 45 minutes a day for me works.
How many of us actually have the time to sit and watch something that isn’t especially compelling.Or as entertainment when the brain needs a rest.Videos often become audio for me, just listening, not watching. And even then hard to find the time.I’ll make time for this one.
I listened while fitting new chainrings to my bicycle. A tedious job made easy by Jerry and his guests.Wearing grease covered rubber gloves means a voice controlled home is getting ever closer. Google Home, Nest, Philips Hue, all are on my list.Edit: is it possible to use Google’s voice command process to search, find, and play this podcast without any touch prompts? I can say “OK Google” and that will search and find, but not play.
I listen to podcasts each morning (almost every day in the gym) starting my day with stories not music.Best thing I’ve done in a while.http://arnoldwaldstein.com/…
That seems like a great idea and definitely something that keeps the mind agile. I have a hard time listening to anything in the morning. May need to push through.
keeping the mind agile is just about everything.whatever you do that works is worth doing.
Glad I did.
Snapio, coming soon.
I have less podcast time than I used to when I drove in suburbia but a good pair of earbuds isolates sound and gets me some quality time during my morning walking commute (15 minutes or so each way). I usually fall asleep listening to a podcast, I know that’s not for everyone but it helps me focus on something. They’re also good to listen to while cooking or doing laundry. Overall I think moving to a city has increased my commuting time rather than decreasing it. Walking + waiting + transit take many more minutes than the suburban mode of going into my car, driving somewhere, and then getting out of the car in a parking lot next to where I need to be. Uber/Lyft help and in Cambridge the wait time for a car is usually less than 5 minutes but surface traffic is slow. Over the summer Lyft ran a promotion (as did Uber) where they paid 75% of my fares which meant for a bunch of trips I usually took on the MBTA, Uber/Lyft was cheaper. For those trips it was definitely not better than the T time wise.It’d be nice if Uber had a feature where they let me pipe my own audio into the Uber if it’s a regular Uber without having to ask a driver.Most people have “settled” for bicycle as the best end to end transit option but as much as I like cyclists the drivers in this place terrify me.
The podcast content is sad.Yes, apparently VCs are motivated to follow some patterns.Yes, for something better, in ROI or whatever, it is necessary to do something different. Necessary? Yes. Sufficient? HELL NO! It was good to see that some VCs clearly understand that they are looking for some really exceptional, very rare, situations. Good.But, then, it was sad to see VCs using patterns to look for such rare situations!Looking at Intel, Microsoft, Cisco, Google, Facebook, and Amazon, what are the patterns to be followed? Right, even if they exist, they are not simple to see.IIRC the pattern is: Look for a young company with traction significant and growing very quickly in a huge market where the crucial core technology is essentially just routine software and where the founder-owners are desperate to sign a standard term sheet.Three problems:(1) For something like Plenty of Fish, IIRC, the founder never took equity funding and got his exit at $500+ million as sole owner. So, some good companies won’t take equity funding.(2) Without more features for the company, the traction is vulnerable to not lasting.(3) The traction might mean just a fad that will fade quickly.More generally, the pattern is next to silly, cardboard instead of well engineered steel.No one would design a bridge, tall building, or airplane this way. So, why design a startup this way?For Facebook, etc., tough to know if that was mostly luck or something to be replicated in a pattern. E.g., one should have been very clear on why Facebook would do better than, say, MySpace or various fora, etc.There are patterns for doing ambitious, wildly successful projects: The all-time, unique, unchallenged, world grand champion is the US DoD for their more advanced projects, e.g., GPS.Risk for GPS? There wasn’t any. Fantastic project, essentially no risk. When have VCs ever done such a thing? Right — drum roll, please — NEVER! And with the thinking in the podcast, they never will. Right, maybe five VCs will mention A. Viterbi as an exception, but no way did the VCs understand anything about Viterbi!And that is a special case of the reasons that on average the VC ROI and success rate are so low.Startups in the commercial world should build their desired patterns by borrowing heavily from that DoD work.But, for the three people in the podcast, to pursue this pattern, they all need to go back to school.
I like alternative thinking on anything. It’s the clever way to get into something, instead of following the frey. “Don’t play a game that’s not yours.” – keeper quote.
“Alternative thinking”, necessary for being better but not sufficient!
It’s a good start nonetheless.
Sorry, too often “alternative thinking” is a bad start, not a good one, a step backwards, something worse, much less good than the proven ways of the past, IMHO usually something horrible, back to superstition, witchcraft, etc.Instead, right away should pass sanity checks, sleep on it checks, sniff tests, simple arithmetic checks, why no one has done this before checks, doesn’t violate some laws of physics tests. Next, should see how it would work in some simple cases. Next, look for some extreme cases where it might fail, then for some reasonably common cases where it might fail.Then identify with brutal severity ALL the assumptions are making. Then identify with more brutal severity what need for success. Leave out nothing except when KNOW are making a GOOD approximation, Then write out some rock solid, iron clad, granite hard mathematical proofs that the assumptions do in fact yield needed results. Set the proofs aside. Return to the proofs as if hated them and try with all have to find an error, even a single comma wrong.Then do the proofs all over again.See why the proofs work, make sure that makes sense, and, knowing fundamentally why the proofs work, do them over again until they are elegant.Check all that.Using the proofs, do some calculations, by hand or with some simple software, on some simple cases and make sure they work.If it is an important project, then write up the work as a polished article and get some severe, objective peer review.Look for anything overlooked.Be willing to bet your life it’s rock solid and correct.Now can take it seriously.E.g., that’s why there was no risk in GPS, the SR-71, Keyhole (the first Hubble telescope but aimed at earth instead of space), the M1-A1, COBE (Cosmic Origins Background Explorer for the 3 K background radiation), the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the JPL space craft to Pluto, and very low risk for the Navy’s earlier version of GPS, the Manhattan Project, the F-117 stealth, the search for the Higgs Boson, 14 nm microelectronics, a lot in high end radar, towed array passive sonar, and much more.The F-117? On the first serious test, flew threw right through Saddam’s astoundingly dense Baghdad anti-aircraft artillery fire, so dense it looked like could get out and walk on it, over and over, with no F-117 lost, none damaged, and none even scratched, literally. The F-117 pilots bet their lives all the above was correct. Thank you Lockheed Skunk Works. The F-117 pilots and their families thank you, also along with everyone on the US side in Gulf War I.Uh, a huge fraction of the best people in the STEM fields understand the above. Nearly no one in information technology entrepreneurship and its equity funding in Silicon Valley understands any of the above.
Admittedly relieved that another video wasn’t the video of the week. Not that you would go there.Never so happy to see Jerry Colonna’s name. Although I’m always happy to see Jerry’s name. Anywhere.
Two days ago Fortune had this article quoting Jerry about the down times in entrepreneurship and investment:* http://fortune.com/2016/10/…It’s really important to see and understand all the sides of the slog.
Thanks for this Twain. You are a goldmine.Slog it is. But never going back.
Right, we keep moving forward with baby steps and giant leaps.We laugh. We cry. We tear our hair out in frustration (metaphorically). We share. We make sacrifices. We go through cycles of fear, futility, confusion, clarity, hope and absolute focus …Through it all, we progress towards the target of what we set out to do and we learn lots along the way.
This did not disappoint. Actually helped me make some decisions.Unrelated, one comment in particular grabbed me. “The worst thing a CEO or investor can do is to use the company to resolve your own issues.” There were other rich thoughts not as “sound bitable.”
Alt Potus – Trump.As an aside, it seems to me that regardless of which candidate wins the election… America loses.
Alt mentor – Jerry.
Be yourself, everyone else is already taken-great quote. I have found when I am true to myself, I am okay. When I am not, I feel totally out of place. I have had the choice of being myself or fake a couple of times and it has hurt me career wise. Hurt badly. But, I am still myself and comfortable in my own skin. If I would have had the other path, I would have been totally unhappy and then who knows what would have happened.
CONTRIBUTORS:A great time in the election cycle. Very revealing the mindset of contributors. Can’t change or improve the morals and principles were there are none.They triple down on the Neanderthal view.Cavemen and Vikings. And they are proud of it.
@fredwilson:disqus Fred’s posts have a decent batting average. Enough to check quickly rather than delete. I look forward to checking out this podcast. I don’t understand the skepticism about podcasts in the comments. They’re perfectly suited for listening in the car. They are longform for the busy person. For me, living in Brooklyn, I listen while running every morning. The perfect podcast supplies real information and lasts at least 40 minutes and not more than an hour. Podcasts that last only 5 or 10 minutes are annoying while multi-tasking. This is distinctly different from videos, which should be as short as possible.
We have blocked that morons rambling and idiotic dissertations.The wannabe Hannity but more Breitbart of this blog. He tries just a tee too much.Protect your women and children from this one. Just saying. The passive progressives are afraid to say what they would have no problem saying to them.Eight years and the Progressives still have not learned. Get vocal, develop some coconuts, fight back and vote.
I’m in a hurry to get to work on a hardware problem in my development computer. Maybe we could take up your interest at another time?This just in! The hardware problem was programs, especially Web browsers, encountering memory errors, sudden halts of the OS, lots of BIOS and OS complaints, some extreme temperature sensitivity, etc. MEMTEST86 gave me some hints. Finally I ordered to DIMMS, just old 400 MHz, 1 GB, DDR 1, 184 pins each. I just installed them, and first cut the system is MUCH more stable.So, give me some more specifics about Trump and BS, and I will try to reply to your misunderstandings with some references.BTW, all things considered, that hardware problem has been one heck of obstacle for my startup. Oops, some such things happen! But, all the work unique to me is still rock solid and was all fast, fun, and easy. For DIMMs going bad or BIOS checksum errors, that’s not direclty my fault!