rgmwa

I just see that as her stating the obvious and stroking Trump's ego at the same time. Nothing to do with her politics being better or worse than his. It was a shrewd answer.

That's very good advice, Marty although like OME, I've also been thinking about this. I lost my wife a few months ago and I now have a house that's far too big for one person and a dog. We seem to have accumulated so much stuff over the years, that I really need to cull a lot of it while I'm still around, rather that leave it all to the kids to sort out one day. Not that I'm thinking of departing any time soon, but I don't want to dump it all on them. As far as tools go, my son already has more than I do, although he said he'd like to have my my shed.

He's just pardoned Ross Ulbricht who ran the Silk Road on-line illegal drug marketplace: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/21/ross-ulbricht-silk-road-trump-pardon Note his reason for the pardon: Trump said he had called Ulbricht’s mother to tell her he would pardon her son “in honor of her and the Libertarian Movement, which supported me so strongly”. As long as you vote for him, you're in the clear no matter what kind of a scumbag you may be. He's also let all the J6 criminals convicted of serious crimes out, no doubt because they supported him and he wants to re-write the history of what happened.

I pulled this extract from a New York Times opinion piece by jack Goldsmith. I think it sums Trump up pretty well. It takes extraordinary skill to wield executive power successfully throughout an administration. If past is prologue, Mr. Trump lacks the acumen to carry out his ambitious agenda. The first problem is management style. In his first term, Mr. Trump was a poor administrator because of his mercurial, polarizing style and a general indifference to facts and the hard work of governance. There is no reason to think this will change in his second term. Mr. Trump also lacks the emotional intelligence that the great presidents had in various degrees — the self-awareness, self-control, empathy and ability to manage relationships that are so vital to steering the ship of state on the desired course. Second is the question of whether Mr. Trump knows where he wants to go. “Great presidents possess, or are possessed by, a vision of an ideal America,” Mr. Schlesinger noted. Mr. Trump has a powerful slogan, “America first,” a robust agenda, and many discrete and often insightful political instincts. But he lacks a coherent sense of the public ends for which he exercises power. This will make it hard over time for his administration to prioritize challenges, a vital prerequisite for presidential success. It will also make his administration susceptible to drift and reactiveness, especially once unexpected events start to crowd the presidential agenda. Third, personal gain was neither a priority of the great presidents nor a guide to their exercise of power. There is every reason to believe that Mr. Trump’s personally motivated first-term actions — his insistence on loyalty over other values, his preoccupation with proclaiming and securing his personal power, and his indifference to conflict-of-interest norms — will persist. These inclinations will invariably infect the credibility, and thus the success, of everything his administration does. Fourth, Mr. Trump is unlike any previous president, even Jackson, in broadly delegitimating American institutions — the courts, the military and intelligence communities, the Justice Department, the press, the electoral system and both political parties. This will do him no favors when he needs their support, as he will. Mr. Trump is especially focused on eroding the capacity of federal agencies. At the same time, he has plans to regulate in areas including health, crime, energy and education, and to deport millions of people, all of which require a robust and supportive federal work force. Mr. Trump’s twin aims of incapacitating the bureaucracy and wielding it to serve his ends will very often conflict. Fifth, Mr. Trump’s obsession with hard executive power and an extreme version of the unitary executive theory will be self-defeating. If his stalwart subordinates carry out his every whim, as he hopes, bad policies will result. If the loyalists Mr. Trump is putting at the top of the Justice Department do not give him candid independent advice that he follows, he will violate the law and often lose in court, as happened in his first term. The great presidents used coercive unilateral power when they needed to, but only when they needed to — none more so than Lincoln and Roosevelt, who faced the most serious crises in American history. But these presidents also understood that hard power could go only so far and that persuasion and consent were surer tools to achieving lasting presidential goals in our democracy. This idea is lost on Mr. Trump.

He didn’t work any wonders the first time when he said he’d fix everything and achieved practically nothing except tax cuts for the wealthy. Won’t be any better this time although it might be worse because he’s surrounded by some half-competent enablers who will do what he tells them.

Ah, my old home town. First permanent settlement in Victoria (1832). Nice place and has a few good pubs. Alcoa and woodchip exports pretty much keep it going. They were going to close the smelter a few years ago.

I think AI will be fantastic for things like medical research but its development is likely to be driven far more by military imperatives and commercial profit than any altruistic peaceful purposes. It’s still early days and there is plenty of time for it to have disastrous consequences as well as great benefits.

Hmmm. Sounds like something OME would write. It has his style, but is it really OME, or is it Chatgpt sounding like OME?

I've been busy trying to decide what to do for the rest of the day. Going well so far.

She is there simply because a new US president is being sworn in. The fact that it’s Trump is unfortunate but that’s who it is.

Trump's policies are totally flexible and reversible and determined by whatever he thinks will make him popular, rich or famous on any given day, and preferably all three .

I agree. The tree looks great! Much better than those other two clowns.

They should have hired a better photographer - subject off-centre, poor lighting, cluttered background and Trump's eye is half closed unless it's supposed to be a leering wink. If I was Trump I'd sue for incompetence.

He'll be happy about that mainly because his `release the hostages, OR ELSE' bluster won't be tested. He wouldn't have had a clue what to do about the `or else' part.

No worries Marty. You being wrong and me being right are equally rare events.

I'm not so sure Marty. I agree that two negatives multiplied together are a positive, but in (-2²) the exponent is worked out first so (-2²) becomes (-(2²)) = -4 as opposed to (-2)² = (-2)x(-2) = 4 In the above example: -(-2+2-2) - (-2²) becomes -(-2) - (-4) 2 +4 = 6

-2² means -(2²) = -4 its being confused with (-2)² = 4

First one 39, second one 6

So, revenue raised by tariffs imposed on exporters but actually paid internally by US importers is now redefined as `external revenue`? Sounds like a good plan by Trump to convince his supporters of his financial genius while they wonder why they're paying more for what they buy.

Turned 93 in August last year. Looks more like 103 in that first photo. so I think OT is probably right that it's been modified. Still, hard to believe she's 93. Doesn't seem that long ago that I was watching that show. ☹️

I remember using 10 figure logs for surveying calculations. That was about 1970. Put me off becoming a surveyor.

All egotistical bluff and bluster at this stage. Lets see what actually happens when he gets in and whether his competency matches his ambitions. "When I take over, all hell will break loose" may be right, but it won't have anything to do with the hostages, just his chaotic mismanagement.

He’s a nutcase. He might even scare Trump because he’s so much richer and in some ways more influential. Trump doesn’t like competition from someone he can’t easily intimidate. Will be interesting to see what happens when they don’t want to be on the same team anymore.

I got caught like that once. Had a credit balance on my credit card, withdrew some of it on-line to pay into another account and immediately got hit with a $20 or $25 fee. That was NAB or Westpac. Can't remember which. Never did that again. I'll bet they all do it.

You’re right. There goes another elegant theory destroyed by an inconvenient fact.