Do you know where that gets you? Sihanouk was mesmerized by the Khmer Rouge calling him majesty.
And true to form, he seems to think the only problem here is how much we think he should be paying for that plane. The man understands nothing but money.
Given his failed casinos, his failed university, his failed steaks, his failed vodka, and his belief that foreign countries pay American import tariffs, I’m not entirely sure that he understands money.
I am sure that he only understands one very limited aspect of money. Money performs different functions including a measure of value, a means of purchase/exchange, a means of payment, and a means of hoarding, which are independent of money’s concrete forms. But he only understands money as a fetish, which in Marx’ economical theory of money could be interpreted as the lowliest manifestation of money, and the most socially useless. And that fetish he confounds with gold, and mostly his gold is not solid, but just superficially plated.
Some day in the distant future his name will be used to depict stupid vulgarity, like Phyrrus name is associated to a victory that is not worth the cost. I wonder which of his numerous idiocies will be used for a phrase and what that phrase will be. But that his name will be immortal in that sense, of that I am sure.
Yes, this. He doesn’t understand how to use money, as in running a business. What he does understand is “My number bigglyer than your number,” and that’s all that matters.
Yeah; he’s a con artist, he’s demonstrably good at conning/bullying people and organizations into enriching him. But his actual business ventures consistently turn into disasters. It’s the scam he’s good at, not understanding money (or anything else).
And yet another excuse to post this:
You have to realize that he never cared for a second whether any of these business were “successful” in the traditional sense, because:
And he surely walked away from all of those ventures richer than before, even if his investors didn’t.
And with his shit meme coins Donny has perfected that style of grifting.
I’d rather con $500 each from 10,000 people than $5M from one person.
It’s safer.
Wait. Am I to understand that there is not a single Democratic Senator who acknowledges the fact that EVERY action of the America-hating fuckstick must be opposed?
I fear that democrat senators and reps are all in on the same game as the republicans. Why aren’t they doing something about our fascist government? Because they want it, too? I don’t know.
I fear we are all pawns in some game that we don’t even know is being played.
of course, the other theory is they are all spineless cowards who think they will be spared the death camps.
No, I don’t believe in bothsiderism or conspiracy theories.
That’s probably closer to the truth. But I’m pretty sure that what’s going on is that Democrats believe that taking the high road is better for the country and will pay off in the long run. They don’t want to be complete obstructionists, with the (vain?) hope that once MAGA runs its course, they may eventually get to a place where bipartisan deals can be struck again.
The way government is supposed to work is that everyone wants to do what’s best for the country, it’s just that they disagree on how to do that. So they debate and argue and eventually compromise. The problem is that many on the right don’t give a crap about what’s best for the country. Real patriots on that side of the aisle were weeded out as RINOs or forced to change their ways to please King Trump and his toadies. Or they simply got old and died.
The norms and propriety that the Democrats want to cling to have given the Republicans so much room to do whatever they want. It’s like having a fight between a street punk and a Victorian aristocrat. The aristocrat refuses to engage in dirty fighting and tries to keep it as a “sporting contest”, while the punk throws dirt, goes for the groin, and pretends to be hurt in order to sneak attack when shown mercy.
I do believe that the Democrats can’t become the Republicans in order to ensure that they defeat them, otherwise we truly have bothsiderism as a fact, but I also don’t think they are adapting as well as they need to in order to succeed in the new reality.
Or…and maybe this is crazy talk, but maybe, just maybe the Democrats, unlike the Republicans, are not some monolithic bloc that all essentially believe and vote the same way all the time. That they’re not really a single party but effectively a coalition of minority parties, and this works against them in times like this when people want to tar them all with the same brush or when they need to all work in the same direction.
This seems like a weird answer to the question about why every single Democrat in the Senate voted the same way that Republicans did.
On one vote, sure, for what honestly was the most reasonable of the terrible Cabinet picks.
Any others?
That one vote is what we’re talking about. Did you get confused?
No, the point under discussion was the belief that every action must be opposed unanimously, and the one vote was an example where that did not only not occur but did not occur in spectacular fashion.
We’ve basically turned into a bunch of micro-managing pointy-haired bosses. We’re saying “why aren’t you doing anything?” when we really mean “why aren’t you achieving the numbers I want in the manner of my choosing?” That works as well kibitzing Senate votes as it does some C-suite asshole coming down from on high to figure out how to bump his bonus a couple points.
Though in my experience the punks are the diverse, inclusive, ethical ones and the aristocrats are the classist, spiteful scumbags.
The fight description works to illustrate your point, but not the characterization!