Jennifer Lin shares her misty water-colored memories of dealing with the Donald when she was young reporter for the Inky.
Nearly 30 years ago, the Republican presidential candidate, incensed over an Inquirer story about his casinos, called her in her New York office, said she had “s- for brains” and said she worked for “a s- newspaper,” Lin said.
Then he called her editor and referred to Lin as “that c-,” Lin said.
Details at the link.
The less-volatile four-week average of claims dropped to 256,000, the lowest since April, from 258,250 in the prior week.
The number of people continuing to receive jobless benefits declined by 46,000 to 2.06 million in the week ended Sept. 17, the fewest since July 2000.
If you follow the link, you will see that Bloomberg’s headline falls upon its fainting couch clutching its pearls that Bloomberg’s “experts” were wrong.
Honestly, I don’t know why they bother.
Glorious promises . . . delivered with supreme confidence will always be attractive to huge numbers of people . . . .
Reg Henry remembers Monday’s debate and reaches a disquieting conclusion. A snippet:
So went the debate. Hillary Clinton was calm, mostly civil, patient, well-prepared and professional. Donald Trump was an unprepared, ill-mannered jerk. He had neither command of the facts nor mastery of his own personality. Sadly, that is why I think he may have won the night.
That may seem contrary, but debates occur in the culture of their times. In a sane world, Ms. Clinton would be judged the winner, but that is the very world willfully abandoned by many Americans. They may suppose a debate is just a shouting match; it’s all just words and the important thing is to steamroll your opponent with them. This he did.
He was helped by a culture that has become fact-free and in thrall of the Big Lie as practiced by the Nazis, the idea that if you tell a lie big enough and often enough, people eventually will come to believe it, no matter how absurd.