61 thoughts on “Delusional Incompetence”

1. The POTUS has been suffering from magical thinking.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply ↓

2. Actually, Prof, your question about how so many Americans could vote for such a person is the right question. In fact, it is the most important question, I think, because 72 million voters are not all that stupid.

   If you can put aside your rage for a moment, consider the comparison to a religious belief… say, creationism. If you frame it as a matter of intelligence, you can get all worked up about how a couple of hundred million Americans can all be this stupid. But framing it this way – a matter of intelligence – doesn’t leave us anything to work with. I think it’s equally unhelpful to say because Icelandic youth do not believe in creationism makes them all intelligent. Such a framing assumes the conclusion no matter how justified one may think the framing is. I think you’ve made the same mistake here. (And you’re certainly NOT alone!)

   I am wondering if these voters for Trump specifically, and Republican generally are immersed in a reality quite different from voters like you who voted for Biden specifically and Democratic generally. Do you share the same reality?

   I don’t think so. I think people have become immersed in their own bias-bubble without knowing it. In fact, there may be no way to know you are in such a bubble when you read biased newspapers and magazines, watch biased TV, listen to biased radio, go to biased movies, stay notified with biased social media feeds, and surround yourself with like-minded people. This is the world that seems normal… until someone from the ‘other’ reality shows up and claims your reality is all wrong. I think it’s easier than ever to dismiss this ‘crank’ entirely and go back to your own reality.

   So I left wondering if this might be the case and how might we know? All I have to go on, really, is this growing disconnect between partisan camps, the rise of all kinds of denialism, the loss of trusted sources independent of bias, and the growing evidence of behavioural manipulation by digital algorithms streamlining our feeds.

   What do you think?

   LikeLiked by 5 people

   Reply ↓

   • Here’s my little poem or ditty:

     I can’t bear the POTUS
     Much more than the VIRUS
     For he has been lying
     Even to the dying
     About his true FOCUS

     Here’s a witty video entitled “Opening a Country With a Closed Mind”. It sums up the viral mess quite well.

     In a nutshell:
     The POTUS’ FOCUS is a hocus-pocus.

     As for the wonderful MAGA tagline . . . “Make America Great Again”, it should be changed to “Make America Sick Again”.

     LikeLike

     Reply ↓

   • Dear tildeb,

     I agree with you that people are often highly embedded or entrenched in filter bubbles and echo chambers. Moreover, the USA is very much plagued in varying degrees by misinformation, disinformation, post-truth politics, demagoguery, plutocracy, oligarchy, ochlocracy, kleptocracy and narcissistic leadership.

     LikeLike

     Reply ↓

   • Tildeb, I expected your profound insight into this/my bafflement to this current state of affairs my country is in. I always gladly welcome your wisdom Sir.

     Please give me a few minutes (or a few hours?) to calm my anger before fully responding to your accurate comment/question for careful consideration. At that time I will indeed respond with a clearer head and composed heart. 🙂

     LikeLiked by 1 person

     Reply ↓

   • My two cents….there are bias bubbles and then there are bias bubbles.

     So a few things came to my mind concerning facts from biased sources and unbiased ones and what would be considered unbiased. I would think court records, the actual witnessing of words said in their entire context, executive orders and the full documents available, bills and laws that are passed and not passed and their documentations and things of this nature, scientific reports from various universities or think-tanks and the full results and comparisons…etc. These would be about as unbiased as you could get.

     So if you pass a law or sign an executive order or say something in an address to the nation or a press conference, if you decide to go with or against 10 reputable diverse scientific establishments, if you are on tape saying one thing and the following week on tape saying the complete opposite with no explanation as to why, and if all or part of these efforts or proposals negatively affect or do harm to certain groups of people or all people, or do provable damage to the environment, or change the current rules of our constitution and form of government to suit yourself onl,y or discriminate to the point of willful danger to certain groups of people, or have taxation and loopholes designed to favor the more wealthy and weaken the middle and lower classes, then this all becomes an ethical or moral issue.
     It is no longer a bubble of opinions or self centered desires, but something that can be linked to the very fate of our civilization, our country, and if it succeeds or not in the long run; if we progress ahead in a quest for a better, safer world for all, or fall behind into a heap of failed countries, ultimately due to corruption and greed.

     LikeLiked by 3 people

     Reply ↓

     • Well, I’m certainly onboard with your criticisms of Trump and I agree that using other information from (relatively) independent and (usually) trustworthy sources is very helpful. But I also think many of us do this – seek out many sources first, come to a conclusion second – and so we feel our opinions and beliefs have a grounding outside of our preferences.

       If religious people did this regarding their religious beliefs – sources first, conclusions second – no one would believe the cockamamie just-so stories necessary to join the cult! So we know something else is going on for religious belief to spread; I think something similar must be going on for this growing partisanship… on both sides of the political divide.

       I also think it’s subtle enough to avoid straightforward identification as, say, religious indoctrination of children up front but quite effective tilting people this way or that way over time, tilting to accept more of what aligns with an ever-growing partisan bent… a bent that our original preferences may indicate combined with slightly more resistance to what does not align, something presented to us that is somewhat against our preferences. I think whatever this is is subtle.

       I know it’s hard – well, harder anyway – for me to read and follow sites that offer ideas and opinions and beliefs I fundamentally disagree with. There is often cause and even explanations for these differing views and I like to understand them and better articulate why I disagree. But I do this because I find it helps me over time spot bias not just with beliefs I have but stand out more clearly on sites I usually find comfortable aligning with my preferences. My preference – just to be clear – is for opinions, beliefs, and explanations that I think strengthens the liberal principles I hold in action.

       To be clear, my preferences really are based on very strong principles – a base that doesn’t allow me to convince myself of something expedient or easy or feels good over what I deem to be right, hard, or difficult. I know immediately the mistake I’m making if I find something attractive and seductive and excuses me to vilify and feel virtuous rather than address with reason and evidence partisan notions I disagree with.

       But here’s what I’ve noticed – like we all have with fundamental religious believers – that when reality doesn’t matter or hold some final say in a partisan position, all bets of coming to a mutual understanding are off and we’re left with… well, as Prof has clearly said, rage. And that’s not very helpful but almost a kind of self punishment in the face of such obstinacy.

       LikeLiked by 3 people

       Reply ↓

       • Your points here Tildeb are certainly valid and worth taking to heart, trying better to be a constructive solution rather than a demotivating inflamer. I am trying to use my “rage” to point out that due to MANY variables and causes over the last 2-3 decades culminating in these last 11-months—as I was explaining in my recent post Country vs City: The U.S. Political Landscape—America and Americans are losing their social-civil engagement with multi-diverse people, more specifically those not only within our comfort zones, but with those who are different or very different in their world-views, nationalism/patriotism, down to our individual cliques or bubbles. IOW, though luxurious freedom, liberty, independence, pursuit of INDIVIDUAL happiness are all perceived and promoted virtues of our democracy, if not tested, monitored, self-reflective, etc… it does indeed nurture self-absorption and gradual disengaged isolation into more and more remote islands, if you will. Our insane progress in technologies (booming social-media platforms) and WiFi-maxed electronic devices are just TWO of many factors contributing to our sociopolitical polarization. 😟

         I do believe one fatal movement to this current demise has been the eroding of Intellectualism in our varied and diverse public institutions of academia, research, fine arts, scholarship, etc, everything that matures younger generations to LEARN from past mistakes and disasters. There’s more to it than what I’ve mentioned, sure. But this is what I’ve witnessed in my country and state of Texas for several decades. Inclusion of multiple learning apparatus and experiences are FAR BETTER teachers than exclusion!

         LikeLiked by 3 people

         Reply ↓

         • Indeed, the ongoing anti-Intellectualism has been a huge sore in this land of supposed freedom.

           LikeLiked by 2 people

           Reply ↓

         • Here are a few pertinent quotes about anti-Intellectualism:

           “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
           Isaac Asimov

           “In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy.”
           George Orwell

           “I’m tired of ignorance held up as inspiration, where vicious anti-intellectualism is considered a positive trait, and where uninformed opinion is displayed as fact.”
           Phil Plait

           LikeLiked by 1 person

           Reply ↓

           • Three great quotes SoundEagle. Thank you! 🙂

             LikeLiked by 1 person

     • Mary, that’s an accurate assessment of America’s current sociopolitical condition. However, we cannot completely blame our government IF it was originally designed and is supposed to always be a “government of the people, by the people, for the people…“! So all Americans are also responsible for this train-wreck we put ourselves on by the shucking of civil virtues and responsibilities. 😒

       LikeLiked by 3 people

       Reply ↓

     • Dear Mary,

       I certainly agree with the central tenet of your comment. It is going to be a very tall order for Biden to turn things around. It would have been much easier if some Republican senators had been far most honest and incorruptible, for they have been very greedy, uninspired, cowardly and lack criminal, moral and political accountabilities. It is all quite a big mess in danger of getting bigger still. Even a global pandemic still cannot unite folks in the USA and wake them up. Perhaps it will take an even bigger crisis to do so, such as a series of climate change disasters.

       I have been featuring an exemplar of a politician, statesman and chancellor so upright and unflinching in their integrity and honesty that if any of those senators had even just a fraction of his goodness and decency to perform their duties and to go against the POTUS, the USA would not have sunk to such an intractable, dangerous and protracted quagmire. The upright character of this particular politician, statesman and chancellor has been immortalized in a poem, which is featured and explained in my newest post at https://soundeagle.wordpress.com/2020/11/11/strong-wind-knows-tough-grass/

       This politician, statesman and chancellor had been fired six times and rehired six times, and still he persisted in his upright approach and upstanding ideal. He even surrendered his own lands, real estates and military power! If only they can learn from the upright character that I feature in my said post. In my own words, this historical figure is the personification of enduring loyalty, integrity, bravery and forthrightness achieved with benevolence and righteousness, but without favouritism and transgression. He was certainly not afraid of being fired half a dozen times.

       LikeLike

       Reply ↓

   • I may have answered or replied to this comment Tildeb already along with Mary’s down below.

     But you are certainly correct in my need to “frame” this sharp chasm between ideologies that has developed in the U.S. political arena NOT in an intellectual scale or dichotomy, but some other constructive, positive framework that can be applied, useful, and measurable by everyone of many backgrounds. Here’s a video from a February 2016 blog-series I did of exactly what you are talking about. THIS, right here, what Ann Atwater and C.P. Ellis of 1960’s and 1970’s North Carolina had to do together or else they would ALL decline into hate, chaos, and civil revolt. But against incredible odds, two bitter “enemies” (ideologies) did it!

     They recently made a fine movie out of this story in 2019 called The Best of Enemies. I definitely recommend it to anyone!

     LikeLiked by 2 people

     Reply ↓

     • Some background of the making of that movie…

       LikeLiked by 1 person

       Reply ↓

     • This story represents why liberalism is superior to any and all philosophies about social groups. When we can break through our beliefs about groups of people and the characteristics we elevate to differentiate membership, we find the individual. Then, and ONLY then, do we have the opportunity to see ourselves in the Other and understand there is only We. The Us versus Them construct collapses. This is the battle we fight today.

       Changing one’s mental framework has a huge impact because belief in bias and discrimination is necessary to cast real people in real life into group memberships (and the never-ending intersectionality we can find) and THIS membership narrative is necessary to believe in order for group-based conflict, for genocides, for holocausts, for racism, bigotry, and systemic discrimination. As this story reveals, once we see ourselves in the Other, only then can we begin to grasp that justice means equal treatment for every individual – that each of has to be willing to sit in the empty chair behind the veil and be willing to be subject to whatever policies we promote, that we believe serves the public good, whatever laws we believe serve the common person, whatever procedures we believe serves a justified cause. When we personalize this public treatment for all – encapsulated into the idea of government of the people, by the people, for the people through all of its institutions – we see liberalism in personal action on a daily basis.

       But if we want to divide people, then we introduce and go along with the artificial construct of groups – a narrative – and suffer the consequences of this intentional and divisive framework that individuals are just little cogs operating mindlessly in the machinery of group interactions. This framing is the GroupThink narrative in action, done often for the best of reasons (we believe), but it leads to promoting, sustaining, and increasing partisanship and subtracts directly from being able to see ourselves in the Other. My group is not your group. By definition!

       Simone de Beauvoir wrote about this extensively in her seminal work Second Sex in her attempt to break through to men what it meant to be a woman, to be categorized and then treated as The Other. John Rauls, the American philosopher, offers a solution to this very problem of GroupThink narrative, a practical and personal guide to be principled about how we treat everyone, how to live as agents of equality and fairness and justice by implementing what is now known as the veil of ignorance – a veil behind which you yourself might be placed to be on the receiving end some policy or procedure or law. This allows one to immediately compare and contrast what is said about a policy or procedure or law and what it actually IS in practice. When there is a discrepancy – and that’s what drives partisanship: belief that one’s narrative is the right one compared to some other narrative – our principles of being just, of being fair, of being compassionate and caring people, are at stake and put to the test right here, right now. Personal responsibility for being this way with our actions today is at stake. And we must make a decision whether or not to follow these liberal principles or act against them by believing in some other GroupThink bullshit narrative we’ve been sold as if representing these higher principles we believe we are implementing when, in fact, we can know that any GroupThink policy, procedure, or law represents a manipulative anti-liberal narrative.

       I think we rage when we think we have no options, no control, no effect. But we do: and that control begins and ends only about and with ourselves subject to reality’s effects on us. We can try to extend our principles outwards by action but without solid principles upon which to justify our actions on behalf of ourselves AS the Other our efforts are doomed. We become part of the narrative problem when we believe in them. That’s why raging only against one GroupThink narrative – in this case, Trump and his minions – rather than ANY GroupThink bullshit is destructive and counter-productive and increases partisanship.

       The problem is with assuming the BELIEF used to justify any GroupThink narrative regardless of which partisan camp it comes from is principled. It’s not. It’s unprincipled bullshit. We heal ourselves first by being responsible for our principles and then responsible for when we extend the same offer outwards. That’s a real option, real control, done to real effect. How we frame our thinking about the world is how we will change – and has changed – the world. Let’s do it for the better. But we also need to understand that this is a process and not an end point. We don’t have that power but we do control our contribution. Standing against any GroupThink narrative is the necessary starting point if we want to bring this widening partisan gap and all the conflict and harm it inevitably produces. That’s the real battle and it begins with each of us.

       LikeLiked by 2 people

       Reply ↓

     • Excellent video…

       LikeLiked by 1 person

       Reply ↓

       • I must agree Mary. 🙂 It shows that we, ALL OF US, no matter how different, opposed, or hated, we CAN overcome the cancer of exclusion and collaborate together. Easier said than done, right? 😏 I know this to be true for myself sometimes because I can lose my cool and get emotionally angry as Tildeb correctly pointed out.

         But I do get emotionally passionate if I may rephrase Tildeb’s description of me 😉 because I CARE, I do “believe” in the core principles of our Constitutional Democracy and how our core Founding Fathers intended those principles & virtues and designed them not for just one person or a plutocracy/oligarchy, but for the entire Greater Good without neglecting the minority or disadvantaged! A refresher course in these principles & virtues for people naïve of them:

         https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/founding-principles/

         https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/exploring-constitutional-principles/

         I think I’m going to soon draft a blog-post (again) on these core founding principles, virtues, and responsibilities. I wish these public high school curriculums were not so DE-emphasized in our state’s ISD’s today and much better taught and tested for superb attainment. 😔

         LikeLiked by 2 people

         Reply ↓

3. Here’s a very succinct and graphical way to encapsulate the POTUS, especially when words cannot even begin to capture the sordid state of his presidency:

   http://soundeagle.wordpress.com/2017/10/18/the-quotation-fallacy/best-quotation-to-win-an-exclusive-loyal-contract-to-make-pig-boss-company-great-again/

   LikeLike

   Reply ↓

4. HA! Good point about the “barely won.” What’s good for the goose …

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply ↓

   • Thank you Nan. It seems that our current political climate and partisanship no longer knows the meaning of the word: fair. Or objectivity, equitable, or for those lower rural IQ’s here and sports fanatics-freaks (like myself 😉 ) … there are very good reasons for having umpires, referees, officials, judges, arbiters, or timekeepers, etc. 😆 Otherwise, imagine the total chaos, anarchy, and dog-eat-dog tactics, cheating that would run rampant during a game! Everybody cannot get “their way” all game or all the time, right?

     Pardon my rhetorical questions, but it seems a ridiculously elementary question and concept doesn’t it? But all humans SURELY realize they are not the only person on Earth, right? The world and life does NOT revolve only around you and your wants, right? 🥴🤔

     LikeLiked by 1 person

     Reply ↓

     • Well, I’m the only one that truly experiences the world so perhaps yes, it does revolve around me. But then again … 😏

       LikeLiked by 1 person

       Reply ↓

       • 😄 Well, if only you experience the world, then what on EARTH am I experiencing? 🤔🤪🤭

         LikeLike

         Reply ↓

         • No…no … I meant I experience the world in MY way. You experience it in YOUR way. But MY way is more real … because it’s MY version.

           HA!! Have I got you thoroughly confused? 😝😂

           LikeLiked by 2 people

           Reply ↓

           • Umm… huh? 😕

             🤪😊

             LikeLike

5. Since it first surfaced the MAGA slogan has always baffled me. At what point did the US:
   a) Become great
   b) If it was great then at what point did it become un-great?

   Here’s hoping Your Greatness will be able to answer otherwise I shall be greatly disappointed.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply ↓

   • HA! You’re really on a kick today with all the “wordy” comments!

     LikeLiked by 2 people

     Reply ↓

     • Just a touch of the ”verbals” … I’ll be all right once the football is over. Liverpool are playing in half an hour.

       LikeLiked by 2 people

       Reply ↓

   • Finally getting around to your comment/questions here Ark. Apologies for the delay.

     Question #1 — At what point did the U.S. become great?

     By global comparisons this is quite the relative, subjective question isn’t it? What defines “great”? 😉 I think recently you were the one who shared The Good Country Index and Simon Anholt’s seven categorical equation of what each country on Earth contributes to the common good of humanity, and what it takes away. Here’s that link:

     https://index.goodcountry.org/

     According to those SEVEN categories the USA ranks a shitty #38… with our worst contribution/attribute being “International Peace & Security,” (a dismal ranking of 108th). I’d say that many/most Americans believe the USA became “great” (for the globe) during and right after World War 2. But that is merely a matter of biased opinion. The USSR sacrificed the MOST to defeat Nazi Germany than any of the Allied nations hands down; no contest whatsoever!

     Question #2 — If it was great then at what point did it become un-great?

     Well, again this is a relative, subjective question and answer, however, my simple answer with no elaborate explanation—unless you want it—would be during and after President Eisenhower’s Administration (1953–1961) and then worse still during and after President Reagan’s Administration (1981–1989). Why these two administrations? Because of the precedents they (permanently?) set for the Executive Branch’s power and authority OVER Congress.

     LikeLiked by 1 person

     Reply ↓

     • 1916. That’s when the US became the dominant global power relative to the definition of being a ‘Great Power’. Add 2 world wars, consider the lead in science, technology, food, and the ability to manufacture, look at how global issues were shaped by the US in the 20th century, and you have a country that exceeds all others to influence the world. Throw in the dominance of American culture, the rise of influence exporting liberalism especially by way of the UN which it funds to the tune of about 80% last time I checked, the need for US participation in military and economic treaties and trade pacts, and you have a great nation. But you also see a decline in just about every area of dominance since the 90s, especially in home grown discontent with the ‘failure’ of the country to be morally pure, and today – like any good Catholic would recognize – that general shame and guilt for its incompetence and cruelty is assumed to be far more morally weighty than all other nations combined. And so a vast number of Americans as well as most Western liberals think well of themselves if the hold the country in contempt and especially condemnable… deserving of severe judgement for its high crimes. There is almost no fair comparing and contrasting between the US and any other Great Power over the past 150 years. It’s always condemnable to the extent that the country’s reshaping of the world to be a much better place is waved away and considered unimportant and unworthy of any recognition of its achievements without immediately assuming those came at an even greater price victimizing others.

       The lack of fair historical comparisons is ubiquitous and so it seems ridiculous for someone like I am to say it is STILL a great country – the greatest the world has ever had – but can and must do better to remain this way.

       LikeLiked by 2 people

       Reply ↓

       • 1916. That’s when the US became the dominant global power relative to the definition of being a ‘Great Power’.

         I definitely agree Tildeb. I would even push our global dominance further back to the United States’ rise to global power in 1900 after the Spanish-American War and acquiring and annexing territories in the western Pacific and Latin America. Major General Smedley Butler of the USMC explains the aftermath of our Monroe Doctrine:

         And by 1916 the U.S. was the single most Imperial nation of all the Pan-Americas. I did a 5-part blog-series on this very subject called Black Underworld Inc.

         https://professortaboo.com/2019/02/14/black-underworld-inc-part-i/

         And yes, the USA “…can and must do better to [have a chance of] remaining this way.” Let’s hope that at LEAST 80-million Americans or more do that and stay vigilant to protecting our core Constitutional principles and virtues by remaining actively engaged in our civil virtues and responsibilities! If 80–100 million Americans shuck that honor and legal right over the next decade…

         …then the globe will look VERY, VERY different. Not in a good sense either.

         LikeLike

         Reply ↓

         • Yes, but why? Why such a doctrine? Because that’s what Great Powers do: create suzerain buffers and run proxy wars there. Russia and Crimea. China and Vietnam. Germany and the Baltic states. France and Alsace. Britain and Belgium. India and Ceylon.

           Because the US had already fought France and England and Spain in North America, it was only good sense in the real politiks of Great Powers to announce their sphere of influence and then act on it. That’s why the Soviets had to make a tough decision in Cuba. Tit for tat… and the loss of a nuclear sub.by the Americans to show determination. These powers test each other all the time. It’s not just an American failing, which is my point. And yes, that western border over ocean extends right to the edge of the pacific. That’s the buffer which is always contested by an advancing China as they create islands out of garbage and announce territorial expansion. If not the States there, then China will rule. That’s the real world, real politiks, and not some weird notion of American bullying. The choice is always one of the Great Powers because no country is immune from having to choose… or, if no choice is made and then acted upon, then that choice will be imposed. Look no further than Hong Kong where democracy and individual rights in law is a threat to Chinese national security and will not be tolerated. Period. End of story. The same is true for South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and Taiwan. The ONLY thing stopping the Chinese from taking control is the US’ suzerain claim on these buffer states. It was the failure of the US secretary of state Marshal paying too much attention to rebuilding Europe (best plan ever) to clearly lay out these suzerain borders that ended up dividing Korea – and later caused a war – and Vietnam – that also later caused a war. This kind of stuff is VITAL to the peace and security of the planet when Great Powers face uncertainty of ownership. So it is a tragedy that both the US and western European civilian population seem to think their governments are failing when they uphold suzerain borders rather than appreciate what is actually true: peace comes ONLY when these borders – these areas of influence – are firm. yes, you can call it imperialism and yes you can presume that’s bad/unfair/bullying/egotistical/whatever… but this is what insures peace. Too many people fail to grasp that this binary choice – war or peace – is the only choice, and choosing to be nice and fair and forgiving and empathetic to suzerain nations produces war with another Great Power that does not suffer from such political drawbacks at home. No one plays this game worse than the US because they alone have a civilian population to answer to and be vilified by that same civilian population for trying hard to keep the peace. That’s where we are today.

           LikeLiked by 1 person

           Reply ↓

6. Mister D, you have gone a bit quiet. All okay over there in the Lone Star State?

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply ↓

   • Yeah, a few very important life-decisions are on the close horizon for me; making some preparations for them and their outcomes with certain individuals. 🙂 Of course, COVID-19 effects every aspect of plans in so many ways—it is remarkable how invasive that damn virus has become… for an ENTIRE EFFIN YEAR no less, Ark. 🥴😔

     LikeLiked by 1 person

     Reply ↓

     • If any of those life decisions involve dumping Arsenal and coming over to the Dark Side … you will be welcomed.
       Otherwise, I sincerely hope any other life decisions are settled gently and with a smile. Too much aggro all round for my liking.
       Wishing everything of the best , Mister D.

       LikeLiked by 2 people

       Reply ↓

       • 😄 Geezzz, your “Dark Side” with the Klopp Boys is a VERY attractive offer! Hell, I am even considering dumping my beloved Barcelona too. 😒 Neither club is performing worth a hill of lima beans, even with one of the GOAT’s of the game in Lionel Messi!!! 💔 Ugh, I have just had a miserable footballing 2020 year all around.

         (with his arms raised to the heavens screaming…) What else must I endure after this year your Highness Jules Rimet!!!!??? 🙌

         LikeLike

         Reply ↓

         • Well Arsenal have just equalized against City in the Carabou Cup. Brilliant headed goal by Lacazette after a pinpoint cross from Martinelli!
           It’s on the TV in the background.

           LikeLike

           Reply ↓

           • OMG, I completely forgot about that game! 🤪

             Lemme see if I can find it on some streaming service I am NOT subscribed to!!! 😠

             LikeLike

           • Yep, as suspected… ONLY available via ESPN+ …another of about 30 different streaming “clubs” I do not belong to. I tell ya Ark, my lifetime habit of the Beautiful Game of Footballing is becoming a very, VERY expensive habit. 😔

             LikeLike

           • Try typing Carabao Cup in Google. It might give you access to commentary if not visuals.
             If not, I’ll keep you posted from this end.

             LikeLiked by 1 person

           • The Google webpage on the “EFL Cup” still has the score as Arsenal 0 — Man City 1. 😄

             I’m asking myself, Do I really wanna be tortured by this for the next hour or two? LOL Ark, why do we let this game affect us so deeply, so profoundly? 😉

             LikeLike

           • It’s been updated. 1-1.
             Re Steffen. Not watching the game, but by the sound of it, the commentator seems impressed by his work so far.

             LikeLike

           • Btw, how does our American boy/goalkeeper Zack Steffen look?

             LikeLike

           • Dammit … sorry Prof. City just scored from a free kick. 2 – 1

             LikeLike

           • 😒 Grrrrr. Well, at this point in my Dunners season, I think I’d rather Steffen have a great showing—allowing just one goal—than Arsenal winning against him.

             If Zack puts on a stellar show, then it just reinforces my argument to my American hyper-proud sports fans that our domestic MLS does NOT make our U.S. boys near as good (world class?) as our players who play at clubs such as Man City, Barcelona, Borussia Dortmund, Chelsea, Juventus (McKennie, a Dallas native), Bayern Munich (Chris Richards), RB Leipzig, and a host of others at top-flight clubs. That is absolutely UNPRECEDENTED in U.S. footballing history!!! And I am so very proud of today’s newest generation, all started by our national team/boys of the 2002 FIFA World Cup where well over half of the roster played regularly in Europe—unlike Landon Donovan who naïve American soccer fans still believe he is America’s GOAT. Just shows the ignorance Ark of the average typical American “sports fan.” 🤦‍♂️

             LikeLike

       • Ugh. 🙄 Ark… I’ve gotten an utterly irrelevant comment-reply on my above first reply to you: “Yeah, a few very important life-decisions” … from Nigel is a Teapot. 🤦‍♂️ It is in Moderation. Glad of that for sure! I’m debating whether to release it or not.

         Why oh WHY did you ever introduce that nut-case to me!!!??? 🤨

         LikeLiked by 1 person

         Reply ↓

         • Word to the wise — DO NOT allow him to invade your blog. He’s like a parasite and will return again and again and again and again … well, you get the picture. I immediately moved him to my Blocklist at his first appearance.

           P.S. He says nothing and uses 1000+ words to do it.

           LikeLiked by 1 person

           Reply ↓

           • 😄 Nan, the person you are describing sounds eerily like me, at your blog! I return and return and return, get off topic (sometimes), and say a whole lotta nothing in 100,000+ words. 😉 😛

             LikeLike

           • Hmmmm. Now that you mention it …

             LikeLiked by 1 person

           • 😆 😉

             LikeLike

         • Is he still around?
           Comedic value alone makes people like this real gems.

           LikeLiked by 1 person

           Reply ↓

     • Oh-oh! Do I sense an event that begins with a “w” in the foreseeable future??!?!?

       LikeLiked by 1 person

       Reply ↓

       • 😆 Hahaha! Yes, Qin and I have talked many MANY hours about such plans as…

         LikeLike

         Reply ↓

       • …walking at least 1-2 hours for health benefits! This in conjunction with other activities and plans. 😉

         LikeLike

         Reply ↓

         • Oh you ARE sneaky!!

           I’m still going with my original inference.

           LikeLiked by 1 person

           Reply ↓

7. Pingback: A Baseline? | The Professor's Convatorium

8. Related, somewhat, to your original post … I wondered if you had seen this:

   Instead, Texas’s hands-off approach has rallied the virus, killing more than 33,700 Texans, leaving children orphaned and forcing doctors to make painful decisions about rationing care. Now, after months of suffering, the pandemic has reached another hellish chapter, with hundreds dying daily.

   “Elections have consequences, and this is the direct result of Republican leadership,” Rahman said.

   From an article in The Guardian.

   I guess the old saying about Texas has to be maintained — “”Everything’s Bigger in Texas.”

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply ↓

   • Yep. That article is spot-on Nan, sadly enough. 😢 A full year (2020) of blatant indifference to this highly lethal virus by a very specific demographic and political persuasion in this Red state of Texas is essentially solely responsible for the useless, premature deaths of 35,000+ Texans. Absolutely.

     LikeLiked by 1 person

     Reply ↓

9. Pingback: Here We Go Again | The Professor's Convatorium

10. Pingback: Enemies: The Art of Wordfare & Cannon Fodder | The Professor's Convatorium

11. Pingback: Omicron Ba.4 and Ba.5 | The Professor's Convatorium

Go Ahead, Start the Discussion! Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Δ