Sunday, December 18, 2016

Tiniest-Handed Authoritarian of the Year

Trump has been going around doing rallies (which is weird in itself), and there is a point he brings up every time. He is Time magazine's Person of the Year this year, whatever. But here's the thing he complains about. He says they should call him "Man of the Year." His crowds go wild over this. He has brought it up at three different events so far.

We know why they don't call it "Man of the Year." It isn't Man of the Year because there is an upheaval going on, gender roles in our society are changing. Women are people now, they are working and participating in the economy, they are engaging in intellectual dialogue, they fight in wars. A hundred years ago they couldn't vote, and now the goal, among people who have thought about it, is equality. And the way ahead is hard but the goal seems reachable, besides being practical and good. To reach this goal some things have to change, some doors have to be unlocked.

Trump and his basket of deplorables call this "political correctness," they hate it that Time considers women to be equal to men, but Time can call it whatever they want. Nobody is forcing anybody to stop saying "Man," it just isn't part of the phrase "Person of the Year," which Time magazine owns. If Trump wants to be Man of the Year then he can buy Time and change the title. Nobody's stopping him. In the meantime, the people who currently own the magazine call it something different.

It's not political correctness, not somebody saying you can't say something because you might offend somebody. The NFL has a Man of the Year and nobody cares. Time has a Person of the Year because there are great women who sometimes deserve the award. And anyway, since 1986, that is, in the past thirty years, Angela Merkel last year was the only woman who has won the award. So political correctness is not really doing spectacularly well in this particular domain.

The rallying-point is that Trump and his followers do not want this kind of social change. He has made a point of dehumanizing women, especially when he was running against one; it is not even an undercurrent, it is what he stands for, with his shady modeling agencies and beauty pageants and his three wives and what's up with him and his daughter, for crying out loud?

There are two other alternatives for Time, right? They could have Man of the Year and Woman of the Year, and if they wanted to be progressive about it the Woman would be some scientist or powerful politician, but just as likely it would be a woman who is attractive, acts or sings, dresses fashionably, and makes moderately provocative social statements.

The other thing Time could do is just forget the Woman of the Year. Award a Man of the Year and that's all. How do you like the sound of that? I don't remember people complaining, but that's what they did up until 1999.

And that's what Trump wants to go back to, what his followers want. They believe America was great back then, when the concept of a Woman of the Year was not even a thought you had. You didn't miss it back then, you didn't go hey wait a minute, what about the women? It just didn't exist, there was no such thing, and that's how it was. If there was a great woman they called them Man of the Year, no problem. A couple of women got the Man of the Year award, and I suppose that was a little awkward but it was not a big deal and it didn't happen very often.

This "great again" concept is terrible, going backwards to ugliness. Hopefully we get through this phase of history without losing too much ground.

84 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

In Poland, a window on what happens when populists come to power

"WARSAW — The Law and Justice Party rode to power on a pledge to drain the swamp of Polish politics and roll back the legacy of the previous administration. One year later, its patriotic revolution, the party proclaims, has cleaned house and brought God and country back to Poland.

Opponents, however, see the birth of a neo-Dark Age — one that, as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to move into the White House, is a harbinger of the power of populism to upend a Western society. In merely a year, critics say, the nationalists have transformed Poland into a surreal and insular place — one where state-sponsored conspiracy theories and de facto propaganda distract the public as democracy erodes.

In the land of Law and Justice, anti-intellectualism is king. Polish scientists are aghast at proposed curriculum changes in a new education bill that would downplay evolution theory and climate change and add hours for “patriotic” history lessons. In a Facebook chat, a top equal rights official mused that Polish hotels should not be forced to provide service to black or gay customers. After the official stepped down for unrelated reasons, his successor rejected an international convention to combat violence against women because it appeared to argue against traditional gender roles.

Over the weekend, Warsaw convulsed in street protests amid allegations that the Law and Justice party had illegally forced through a budget bill even as it sought to restrict media access to Parliament...."


Poland, home of pogroms in another age some of us still remember.

THE KIELCE POGROM: A BLOOD LIBEL MASSACRE OF HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS

The term “Kielce Pogrom” refers to a violent massacre of Jews in the southeastern Polish town of Kielce on July 4, 1946.

December 19, 2016 7:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

threat to democracy:

WASHINGTON — GOP members of the Electoral College are under siege by Democratic activists and Hollywood elites as they prepare to cast their decisive votes for President-elect Donald Trump on Monday.

“As I left home, the count was 67,875 e-mails,” said Wyckham Seelig, a Republican elector from Michigan.

“They’ve made my life a little more difficult. [But] have they motivated me to change my vote? Of course not,”

Another Michigan elector, Michael Banerian, the youth vice-chair of the Michigan Republican Party, said he has received death threats from anti-Trump forces.
“I’ve had people talk about putting a bullet in the back of my mouth. I’ve had death wishes or people just saying, ‘I hope you die.’ Or, ‘do society a favor, throw yourself in front of a bus,’ ” Banerian said.

Seelig made the 65-mile drive from his Ann Arbor area home to Lansing a day early, expecting demonstrators to try to block him and Michigan’s 16 electors from casting their votes.

Liberal actors like Martin Sheen teamed up for a anti-Trump video campaign the past week that pleaded with Trump supporters to defect.

Dem electors — including US Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s daughter Christine in California — had sought unsuccessfully to arrange an intelligence briefing for all members of the college before Monday’s vote. The briefing was to center on ALLEGED Russian interference in the US election.

Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) even called for a delay in the college’s vote to make time for the briefing.

“We have no choice but to try to stop Donald Trump from becoming president,” added Bret Chiafalo, a Washington elector and founder of a movement to stop Trump.

If 37 of Trump’s electors defect, the presidency would be decided by the GOP-led House of Representatives.

Each state delegation has one vote for president. The Senate would elect the vice president.

But Suprun, a defiant anti-Trump elector, continued to rebuke the president-elect.

“Hey @realdonaldtrump We should tell Russia we don’t want the President from the election they stole. Let them keep you. #Unpresidented,” he tweeted.

December 19, 2016 9:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"threat to democracy"

Far from a threat to democracy, dissent is the backbone of democracy.

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions."
-- Samuel Adams

"There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest."
--Elie Wiesel

"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it."
-- Martin Luther King, Jr.

"Where globalization means, as it so often does, that the rich and powerful now have new means to further enrich and empower themselves at the cost of the poorer and weaker, we have a responsibility to protest in the name of universal freedom. "
--Nelson Mandela

“Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be slaves.”
― Henry David Thoreau

“I love America more than any other country in the world and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.”
― James Baldwin

“If I were to remain silent, I'd be guilty of complicity.”
― Albert Einstein

"Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels -- men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, we may never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion."
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

December 19, 2016 10:50 AM  
Anonymous topsy-turvy at TTF said...

report:

"Another Michigan elector, Michael Banerian, the youth vice-chair of the Michigan Republican Party, said he has received death threats from anti-Trump forces.
“I’ve had people talk about putting a bullet in the back of my mouth. I’ve had death wishes or people just saying, ‘I hope you die.’ Or, ‘do society a favor, throw yourself in front of a bus,’ ” Banerian said."

brilliant anon:

"threat to democracy"

TTF:

"Far from a threat to democracy, dissent is the backbone of democracy"

wacky thinkin' blog

just like Russia TEACHING THE FACTS about Hillary is the same as Islamic fundamentalists killing thousands at the World Trade Center


December 19, 2016 11:59 AM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

It was bad enough when conservatives lapped up all the propaganda from Fox news. Now they're getting it from Russia, and from some news reports, they seem to be reading it more than real news - you know, the stuff they call the "lame stream media."

No one is really surprised that Russia would like to influence our political system and policies in an effort to make things more favorable to Russia. The thing that IS surprising though was how subtle the effort was. Growing up during the Cold War we expected Russian propaganda efforts (and many others, for that matter) to be rather ham-fisted, big, and clumsy. And perhaps it was to a lot of people, namely those who can manage to discern fake news when they see it.

But that's not the audience Russia needed to reach to push things in its direction.

The other thing to worry about is that this will not be the last time Russia tries this. It has also given a blueprint to Iran, Pakistan, and anyone else who doesn't like our policies to follow.

Education and critical thinking skills could help combat this undue foreign influence on our internal affairs, but those are not items high on the Republican priority list, to put it nicely.

December 19, 2016 3:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

more propaganda from fox news. Faux news ?

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/12/19/report-truck-drives-into-crowded-christmas-market-in-berlin.html

nope, CNN has it too :

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/19/europe/berlin-christmas-market-truck/index.html

Chances that this is a terror attack by a friendly Muslim ? about 100%. But that, of course, makes me a racist for jumping to that conclusion.

Thank God Trump is President and will stop this.

Praise be to Angela Merkel, for exposing her people to this.



December 19, 2016 4:38 PM  
Anonymous viva la difference said...

"No one is really surprised that Russia would like to influence our political system and policies in an effort to make things more favorable to Russia. The thing that IS surprising though was how subtle the effort was. Growing up during the Cold War we expected Russian propaganda efforts (and many others, for that matter) to be rather ham-fisted, big, and clumsy. And perhaps it was to a lot of people, namely those who can manage to discern fake news when they see it."

cinco, cinco

they e-mails revealing Hillary's character and tactics and true feelings about U.S. voters were no more fake news than Mitt Romney's 47% comment

it was well-known well before the election that Russians had hacked Hillary's server and that they preferred Trump

still, revealing the e-mails, if Russia did that, is no worse than the media does every day of the week

unless the information is fake or Russia somehow tampered with ballots (which, btw, is close to impossible to do in a significant degree), than all this hub-bub is simply Dem sour grapes

if they want to keep it from happening again, they can stop being so careless with cyber-security

as you recall, that was another key election: Hillary's carelessness with confidential information

if you think they could get into the DNC server and not the home one she used for State Dept business, you're crazy

historically, the Russians have tried to attack the GOP with propaganda

this time, they attacked the Dems with truth

see the difference?

December 19, 2016 5:17 PM  
Anonymous Think again said...

Anon, Hillary's email server was secure. Nobody has said it was hacked by the Russians.

And there was nothing incriminating or scandalous in the DNC emails. Some shop-talk where the insiders favored one candidate over another, but that's their business, you can be sure the RNC was having similar discussions on their side. No news came out of the DNC emails, besides Comet Ping Pong.

December 19, 2016 5:30 PM  
Anonymous dems are hy po crrrrrrites!! said...

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/12/electoral-college-protests-donald-trump

it's official:

Dems lose their grand effort to persuade Trump electors to defect

in the end, more Clinton electors deserted her sorry candidacy than the other way around

"Hillary's email server was secure."

no, it wasn't

"Nobody has said it was hacked by the Russians."

actually, the FBI said it appears several foreign governments did

"And there was nothing incriminating or scandalous in the DNC emails."

then what's the problem?

as I said, it was on the level of Romney's 47% statement

didn't hear anyone say that revealing those private comments threatened democracy

"Some shop-talk where the insiders favored one candidate over another,"

that, and Hillary's contempt for Dem constituencies and proof the media was feeding Hillary debate questions to try and get her elected

that's actually more dastardly than anything the Russians are being accused of

"but that's their business,"

after all these years, Dems are suddenly pro-privacy

ROFL and LOLOLOLOLOLOL

"you can be sure the RNC was having similar discussions on their side."

actually, they owned up to all their private views

that's why the experts that they couldn't be elected

December 19, 2016 6:22 PM  
Anonymous that's right, Obama said Hillary lost badly said...

now that the attempt to overthrow the electoral college, Obama has admitted that it wasn't Russia or the FBI that cost Hillary the election

it was the Dems' failure:

"President Barack Obama on Monday offered one of the most blunt assessments of the Democratic party's failure to win the White House in 2016, arguing that the party needs to reframe its debates for suburban and rural voters.

In an interview on NPR posted Monday morning, the outgoing president chalked up Hillary Clinton's failure to woo voters in more rural states like Wisconsin, Iowa, and Michigan, to structural hurdles based on where Democrats live, as well as the party's failure to frame the debate for voters.

"We have a scrambled political landscape right now. There are some things that we know are a challenge for Democrats — structural problems. For example, population distribution, oftentimes younger voters, minority voters, Democratic voters, are clustered in urban areas," Obama said.

The president continued: "As a consequence, you've got a situation where there are not only entire states but also big chunks of states where, if we're not showing up, if we're not in there making an argument, then we're going to lose. And we can lose badly, and that's what happened in this election."

December 19, 2016 6:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As someone who works in that industry, you are nuts.

Hillary had a SCIF in her NY house.

Do you know what a SCIF is ? How about a NIPR net ?

How about an upgrader or downgrader ?

Military networks aren't even connected to the internet... it is an ENTIRELY separate network.

Hillary stripped information off the classified computers in her SCIF (look it up), and brought a personal computer into the SCIF to transfer information onto. She left the door to the SCIF unlocked and open.

For anyone who works in the defense industry, what she did is absolutely and completely shocking.

And part of the reason she lost.

And anyone who would treat out national security with such disdain deserves to lose.

December 19, 2016 6:40 PM  
Anonymous Think again said...


FBI Director Comey: "With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal email domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked." Some disgruntled FBI agents told some reporters off the record that they were "99% sure" that hackers had gotten into her system, but they were, how you say it, blowing smoke out their ass. Thesse would be Giuliani's friends who influenced Comey to interfere with the election by making a statement smearing Hillary with no evidence and no new information.

When she was working at CNN Donna Brazile apparently gave the Democratic campaign some information about the questions during a debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, and they used it to give Hillary an advantage. The bad part is how the information was used by the DNC inner circle; most Democrats would prefer to see a fairer primary season.

The RNC's private discussions about their own candidates were never revealed and never brought out into the open. They ended up having to run their worst person, and you can be sure there was some colorful language going on in their emails conversations, but the public never saw it.

BTW, keep in mind, nobody wanted Trump to win the election, Democrats or Republicans. His campaign identified a voting subpopulation and won crucial votes, but the GOP didn't want hi to win any more than the Dems did. Now that he's in power they are taking turns sucking him off to try to get him to sign the rightwing bills they wanted all along. Might work, might now. It is humiliating for each of them, and proves how spineless they really are.

The allegations about leaving the SCIF unlocked have no basis in any legitimate news source; as far as I can tell it is more fake news. If you have a respectable source, go ahead and cite it.

December 19, 2016 7:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well it's the daily caller, but they are quoting portions of the FBI report. I am going to assume that they didn't misquote the FBI report, if you can determine they did have at it.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/02/fbi-top-secret-rooms-at-clintons-homes-were-not-always-secure/

“Investigation determined the Chappaqua SCIF was not always secured,” the report notes.

Screen Shot 2016-09-02 at 3.48.16 PM
The FBI’s report also notes that Clinton gave statements that contradicted with those made by Abedin and two others about the existence of personal computers in the SCIFs.

Clinton said that personal computers were never present in the SCIFs. But Abedin and Justin Cooper, a Bill Clinton aide who helped set up Hillary Clinton’s private email system, said that there were.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/02/fbi-top-secret-rooms-at-clintons-homes-were-not-always-secure/#ixzz4TL1AlsF5

December 19, 2016 8:37 PM  
Anonymous Think again said...

That article does not give a source but I found the link to the FBI report here. You can control-F and look for SCIF, the word appears 55 times. The report echoes everything that anyone said about the SCIFs at the Clinton homes and office. There are contradictory reports and nobody seems to know exactly what the rules are or what anyone did. Clinton did not use a computer in the SCIF but may or may not have brought her cell phone into one or more of them. One part of the report says she always locked the SCIF in her home when she was not in it, another part says it was left open sometimes. It was under secure video surveillance so I don't think people were walking in and out planting bugs. It appears her aides did not know how to access it... really, there is no there there. She had a job to do and she did it, despite paralyzing government bureaucracy.

Did she break a rule? Maybe, hard to tell. If she did, it did not seem to matter any.

The game is over, anon, you don't have to complain about her any more. She is a good woman and would have made our country proud but the pettiness of people like you wore her into the ground. Now you can devote your effort to defending Trump's choices of the worst possible people for cabinet positions, and his barbaric approach to diplomacy.

December 19, 2016 8:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok this is theresa not your usual anon.
I have been in a SCIF as an uncleared person.
They turn big "uncleared person" lights on ... if they let you in
they validate that you are a US person before they do so.

what Hillary did with her SCIF, not okay.
not close to OK, and the uncertainty does not help.
people die when you reveal drone flight plans
we have folks in the field that can die when you reveal where our forces might be stationed or not stationed.

Peoples kids (not yours, liberals never send their kids into the field, if they did they would IMMEDIATELY BECOME REPUBLICANS) could die over Hillary's indiscretion with military secrets.

what about that do you not understand ?

CLASSIFIED MEANS CLASSIFIED FOR A REASON.

Theresa

December 19, 2016 10:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have no morals and no conscience.

I could die tomorrow, YOU could die tomorrow.

What kind of a person were you ?
I am comfortable in my choices ...

ARE YOU ?
Did you put your parents first ? I DID.
Did you put your kids immediately after ? I DID.
were you honest ?
did you lie ?

My step fathers kids were liberals.
They never got on a plane when he was dying ....they refused.

so liberals on this blog.... do you believe that you have an obligation to move hell or high water to be with a parent while they are dying....

OR NOT ?

Curious if you are redeemable.

December 19, 2016 11:00 PM  
Anonymous Think again said...

It appears that you are saying that you knew a liberal who would not get on a plane to fly to where their parents were dying, is that the story? They were afraid of flying, it sounds like? And so now, because of that, you are saying that all liberals have no morals and no conscience?

Your statements would be offensive except that they are so irrational and immature that my reaction is pity. I can't take it seriously. You seem to think everything you do is heroic and everything any liberal person does is immoral and unredeemable. I am happy to say that I cannot imagine living in a state of constant judgment of other people like that.

December 19, 2016 11:29 PM  
Anonymous WelKome to Trump's AmeriKa said...

Neo-Nazis and white supremacists are targeting Jewish residents in Montana for harassment

Sieg Heil!

December 20, 2016 7:22 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Theresa asked "were you honest ?
did you lie ?".

How profoundly hypocritical of you, chronic and prolific liar that you are, to ask such questions.

The liberals on this blog are honest people and you're well aware of that but like Wyatt/bad anonymous you can't stop lying because the positions you take are indefensible in reality.

December 20, 2016 1:26 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Further to what Good Anonymous said about Theresa above:

Theresa like Wyatt/bad anonymous is a chronic liar. She regularly accuses people of saying things they didn't say and believing things they don't believe and points to that as victimizing her. She regularly makes absolute assertions of reality based on hearsay, speculation, flawed logic, and lies.

She's driven by extreme emotional turmoil that's inexplicable given her privileged upbringing and claimed "happy childhood". She is far better off than the average American and yet whines constantly that her $200,000 a year income isn't enough - her greed knows no bounds. She complains bitterly about the cost of paying for her children's post secondary education even though she freely chooses to do so and is under no obligation to do so. In a typical display of voting against her own interests she says "thank god for Trump" even though it was Hillary who would have given her financial help to completely pay for her children's post secondary education (which seems to be her greatest anxiety) or at least allow her to deduct the cost from her income tax.

Blinded by anger and emotion, proud of being closed minded and unwilling to acknowledge truth or reality she, like Wyatt/bad anonymous, fabricates her own reality to sooth her inner turmoil and ends up hurting her own interests.

If Theresa wasn't in such a place of extreme privilege I'd feel sorry for her too but its hard to feel pity for someone for whom too much is never enough.

I have all the clean water I want to drink, bathe, and do laundery, there are no mice or vermin in my house, I don't have to swat dozens of flies every summer day, I have all the food I want to eat, I can flush the toilet whenever I want and never have to go outside at -30 in a stiff breeze in snow up to my knees to lean against a tree to poop, I have a car to drive anywhere I need to go, I'm married to an incredibly warm, compassionate, humble, and nurturing man - my life is sooooo luxurious!

On second thought maybe I do feel sorry for Theresa that she can't appreciate the luxuries in life that I'm so grateful for.

December 20, 2016 1:57 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

"You have no morals and no conscience."

Ooohh. Who pissed in your Froot Loops?

Actually I do. I weigh various things with different weights than you do, but the fact that my priorities are different from yours simply do not mean I have no morals or conscience. You clearly operate from that assumption, but it is simply wrong.

"I could die tomorrow, YOU could die tomorrow."

The Anon has stated on several occasions that he (or she) would like to see me die in a number of creatively horrific ways. Even though I might THINK that of someone, I'm not going to say that or write it out in public. That's just one of my moral values.

"What kind of a person were you ?
I am comfortable in my choices ...

ARE YOU ?"

Despite how little some of us reveal about ourselves here on this blog, I think everyone has a pretty good idea of "what kind of person" the other ones are. Even with as many difficult life choices as I have had to make, I'm am terribly thankful that I didn't turn out like any of the conservatives here.

At least there is a cure for my condition.

(I know that last line leaves me open for an easy attack, and I doubt the conservatives will be able to resist saying something to demean me. But that will just show what kind of person they are.)

"Did you put your parents first ? I DID."

Yes, I was at my conservative step father's funeral, with my brother and two half-sisters. Only one of his seven biological children from his first wife were.

My step father was a Tea Party guy before the Tea Party was invented. He always had at least one gun in his pick-up truck, and when he died, no small portion of his net worth was in guns. I could give you all sorts of details about his funeral, his life, and peoples' thoughts about why his other Catholic children didn't show up, but that is none of your business, and would only make him look bad.

There are many reasons why children might not show up to a parent's funeral. It could have to do with abuse, abandonment, lack of child support payments, drug or alcohol abuse, or many other reasons. I'm not going to judge other people on their decisions to show up or not. That is their business with their family, not anyone else's. That's one of my conscious choices.

"Curious if you are redeemable."

Don't worry about me being redeemable. I really don't care whether you think I am or not. Your opinion of me means SQUAT in the big scheme of things. I don't lose any sleep over it. I'm sure no one else does either.

Cynthia



December 20, 2016 3:56 PM  
Anonymous c'est la vie, you never can tell said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

December 20, 2016 7:35 PM  
Anonymous snow- it's both cold and warm at the same time said...

"The Anon has stated on several occasions that he (or she) would like to see me die in a number of creatively horrific ways."

now, cinco, you know that was all in fun

I know I've explained this multiple times but what's one more?

when you make one of those insincere "have a nice day"s, I counter with a shocking malicious request for you to go hurt yourself

it's called parody

(I really am creative, aren't I?)

anyway, no one actually wishes you any harm

we need you around for comedic purposes

btw, a while ago I posted one of those creative comments you like so much and Jim deleted it

someone's looking at a stocking full of coal this weekend

it's a global warmer

December 20, 2016 8:09 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Those weren't insincere. When I stopped being able to be sincere about it, I stopped saying it.

It would have been a parody if you had typed something like "Have a magnificently, wonderful, glorious day!"

As it was, it was most kindly described as simple contrarianism, and when I stopped posting "Have a nice day," you started. More contrarianism. You are many things Anon, but funny is not one of them.

Cynthia

December 20, 2016 8:38 PM  
Anonymous what kinda year again? said...

that's very cold

after all the nice things I've said about you

Have a very merry Christmas

and a Trumpy New Year!

December 20, 2016 8:53 PM  
Anonymous Guess Who Wants to Curtail Climate Change With a Wall said...

Pre-Christmas melt? North Pole forecast to warm 50 degrees above normal Thursday

"It’s not normal, and it’s happening again.

For the second year in a row in late December and for the second time in as many months, temperatures in the high Arctic will be freakishly high compared to normal.

Computer models project that on Thursday, three days before Christmas, the temperature near the North Pole will be an astronomical 40-50 degrees warmer-than-normal and approaching 32 degrees, the melting point...."

No worries, though.

Climate change is just a hoax.

The sea level is not rising.

Well, except maybe in Scotland.

Donald Trump calls global warming a hoax, until it threatens his golf course

"Donald Trump has mixed feelings about climate change.

In January 2014, he publicly wondered how the United States could be spending money to combat what, in his words, was a “GLOBAL WARMING HOAX.” In October, when Trump was bitten by the autumnal chill, the Republican presidential candidate snarked on Twitter that he could use “a big fat dose of global warming.” He told The Washington Post editorial board in March that he is “not a great believer in man-made climate change.”

But when it came to protecting his own investments from global warming’s effects, Trump canned the screaming capital letters and jokes. Instead, Trump wants to curtail climate change with a wall..."

December 21, 2016 6:31 AM  
Anonymous I'm dreamin' of a white desert said...

for the first time in forty years

snow in the Sahara Desert

we call it global warmin', here in topsy-turvy TTFland

December 21, 2016 8:56 AM  
Anonymous the weather outside is frightful said...

https://www.facebook.com/topic/Sahara-Desert/109593875725949?source=whfrt&position=3&trqid=6366544583136119551

December 21, 2016 8:58 AM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

NASA has a lot of useful information about climate change here:


http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

It covers all sorts of topics which can be accessed by licking on the "More" links in each section.

Here is the one on Solar Irradiance:

"It's reasonable to assume that changes in the sun's energy output would cause the climate to change, since the sun is the fundamental source of energy that drives our climate system.

Indeed, studies show that solar variability has played a role in past climate changes. For example, a decrease in solar activity is thought to have triggered the Little Ice Age between approximately 1650 and 1850, when Greenland was largely cut off by ice from 1410 to the 1720s and glaciers advanced in the Alps.

But several lines of evidence show that current global warming cannot be explained by changes in energy from the sun:

Since 1750, the average amount of energy coming from the sun either remained constant or increased slightly.

If the warming were caused by a more active sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.

Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases."

Cynthia

December 21, 2016 11:25 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Happy holidays everyone!

And remember, a big party in the middle of winter is the reason for the season :)

December 22, 2016 11:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Merry Christmas, Hanukka Tovah, and Happy Kwanzaa everyone!

Weather buoy near North Pole hits melting point

"Santa may need water skis instead of a sleigh this year.

A weather buoy about 90 miles south of the North Pole registered a temperature at the melting point of 32 degrees (0 Celsius) early Thursday, as a giant storm east of Greenland drew abnormally warm air northward.

Weather models had predicted temperatures could get this warm and this buoy, part of the North Pole Environmental Observatory, provides validation.

“It seems likely areas very close to or at the North Pole were at the freezing point” Thursday, said Zachary Labe, a doctoral student researching Arctic climate and weather at the University of California at Irvine.

Data from the buoy (No. 300234064010010, which can be downloaded here) show that air temperatures have risen more than 40 degrees in the past two days, when they hovered near minus-11 degrees (minus-24 Celsius) which, even then, was above average.

The entire Arctic north of 80 degrees, roughly the size of the Lower 48 states, has witnessed a sharp temperature spike reaching levels 30-35 degrees (nearly 20 Celsius) above normal. In reviewing historical records back to 1958, one cannot find a more intense anomaly – except following a similar spike just five weeks ago...."


Enjoy the heat wave Priya Lynn!

December 22, 2016 4:18 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Good anonymous ts been much milder than usual here in November and most of December so far. Temperatures of a little above and a little below freezing rather than the normal far below freezing temperatures. Its been nice but it sure does fill me with an ominous feeling for the future of this planet.

Its amazing that the North Pole is having similar temperatures to Saskatoon. MSNBC said record high temperatures at the north pole this year and last year and currently 50 degrees F above normal.

December 23, 2016 10:54 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Its official:

Hillary won the popular vote in the election by 2.9 million votes. And Trump and his minions are calling that a "landslide" win for him.


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

December 23, 2016 3:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“We have an incoming president who has kind of the maturity of a five-year-old, wrapped by a massive ego. And to have that just a second away from a nuclear trigger is very, very scary.”

December 23, 2016 9:09 PM  
Anonymous the candy cae that stirs the hot chocolate said...

Dems are realizing how stupid they were to jump on the Obama Love Train:

http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/12/22/the-democrats-turn-on-obama/

that only took 8 years

hahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

December 24, 2016 12:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As usual, you and the 5 year old you voted for are just full of opinions.

Gallup shows Obama's Approval rating is at 56% and his disapproval rating is at 41% (as of 12/23/16) while Trump's Favorable Rating is almost the exact opposite of Obama's with 42% holding favorable views of him and 55% holding unfavorable views. (as of 12/16/16)

Back on January 23, 2009, [all the way to the left on this graph:] Obama's approval rating had been 68% while his disapproval rating was only 12%,, numbers which are astronomical compared to Trump's Dec. 2016, 42% favorable/55% unfavorable ratings.

December 24, 2016 2:46 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "Dems are realizing how stupid they were to jump on the Obama Love Train:".

LOL, Look at the approval ratings of Obama.

That must be some more of that Republican math like where Trump losing the popular vote by 3 million is "winning in a landslide".

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

December 24, 2016 11:36 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

For the first time in American history the FBI director worked with the Russians to tip the election to the candidate they favoured. And even then Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million.

Trump will go down in U.S. history as the most illegitimate president ever.

And the most ignorant Republican presidential candidate ever, and imagine the competition for that title!

December 25, 2016 12:09 AM  
Anonymous One reason for Obama's high approval rating said...

Federal health officials Wednesday touted a record 6.4 million customer sign-ups on the federal Obamacare marketplace HealthCare.gov so far this open enrollment season — topping last year's pace during the same time period by 400,000 customers.

And they sharply warned that insurance coverage gains under Obamacare could be lost if President-elect Donald Trump and congressional Republicans follow through on their threats to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Those threats have led some would-be HealthCare.gov customers to ask whether they should sign up for coverage for 2017, officials revealed.

"The American people don't want to go backwards," said U.S. Health and Human Services Department Secretary Sylvia Burwell, who cited analysis that has projected up to 30 million people would lose coverage if Obamacare were to be repealed without a replacement plan in place.

"These are people's cancer therapies, diabetes medications and mental health treatments on the line," Burwell told reporters during a conference call.

"Every one of the 6.4 million people enrolled represents a story about how the Affordable Care Act has changed health care in America, and why coverage matters," she said.
"We're going to keep moving forward, we're going to finish open enrollment by enrolling more people than ever," said Burwell, who in late January is set to be succeeded as HHS secretary by Trump's nominee for the department, Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga.

She noted that the new record tally for HealthCare.gov — which serves residents of 39 states — comes despite the fact that the monthly premiums for many individual health plans are rising more sharply for this fourth Obamacare enrollment season than they did in prior years.

"Today's enrollment numbers confirm that some of the doomsday predictions about the marketplace are not bearing out," Burwell said. "Some people asked whether customers would sign up ... and today, we know that answer is 'yes.' "

Last Thursday was the largest day for an open enrollment ever on HealthCare.gov, with 670,000 plan selections.
Thursday had been the original deadline for selecting a plan that begins coverage effective Jan. 1. But federal officials extended the deadline through this past Monday because of the volume of customers.

Open enrollment for 2017 plans, which began Nov. 1, runs through Jan. 31 — 11 days after Trump is scheduled to be sworn in as president.

Burwell on Wednesday said that more than 30,000 people who have called the customer help line at HealthCare.gov have asked whether they should sign up in a plan given the election of Trump, who has vowed to repeal Obamacare.

"Again, our answer is 'yes,'" Burwell said. "The coverage people sign up for today is a contract for 2017."

December 25, 2016 7:42 AM  
Anonymous Grab Our Pu--ies party delusions of grandeur as they plan to cut the safety net said...

“Merry Christmas to all! Over two millennia ago, a new hope was born into the world, a Savior who would offer the promise of salvation to all mankind. Just as the three wise men did on that night, this Christmas heralds a time to celebrate the good news of a new King. We hope Americans celebrating Christmas today will enjoy a day of festivities and a renewed closeness with family and friends.

“Even as we celebrate, we must also remember those among us who are less fortunate. Many on this day are without hope, and need the kindness and compassion of those around them. It is our prayer we will rise to meet the material, emotional, and spiritual needs of individuals all around us, and what better day is there to love our fellow man than today?

“As we open presents, enjoy Christmas dinner, and celebrate our own family traditions, we are mindful of our men and women in uniform. Many are stationed around the world today protecting our freedoms, and cannot be with their own spouses, children, parents, and siblings. We express the deepest gratitude for service that takes them away from celebrating with loved ones, and we ought to remember them in our thoughts and prayers not just on Christmas Day, but the whole year round.”

https://gop.com/rnc-message-celebrating-christmas-2016/

December 26, 2016 8:31 AM  
Anonymous Mr. Opposite said...

Yes, indeed, we are so excited to welcome our new King. He will be just like Jesus, I bet.

December 26, 2016 8:38 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

December 27, 2016 11:27 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Conservatism for a long long time has defined itself by what it's not and that's liberalism. They've already had practice surrendering concepts like empathy, compassion, and morality to the liberals, so now they are just about openly hating and hurting liberals and they see Trump as the best method of doing so.

Literal nazis are goose-stepping around like they own the country because their bigot-in-chief narrowly slipped into power.

Speaker Paul Ryan Pushes New Rules To Censor NRA Critics

December 27, 2016 11:28 AM  
Anonymous five more thinking days til auld lang syne said...

"LOL, Look at the approval ratings of Obama."

this was Priya Lynn at midnight on Christmas Eve as part of a hate-filled rant

this individual is so desperately sad

reminds of that old Lennon lyric:

"if you go carryin' pictures of Chairman Mao
ya ain't gonna make it with anyone, anyhow"

I ask you:

if you chaired a major political party, would you rather have a lame duck President with mildly respectable favorability poll results

or control of the White House, both Houses of Congress, the Supreme Court, both Houses of state legislatures and the governor mansions in the majority of states?

think about it

when you're not suffering from a bout of major depression

if TTFers are looking for a good New Year's resolution, how about "don't be so stupid"?

if you think you're not stupid, here's a collection of reading to disabuse you:

the NY Times explains that Trump didn't win because of racism:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/26/opinion/sorry-liberals-bigotry-didnt-elect-donald-trump.html?ref=opinion

the Daily Beast explains that liberals are responsible for letting inner cities go to hell:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/12/27/progressives-have-let-inner-cities-fail-for-decades-president-trump-could-change-that.html

the National Review explains how Obama's foreign policy has endangered the free world:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443347/

the NY Post explains that when liberal entertainers boycott Trump, they actually help him reach out to the average citizen:

http://nypost.com/2016/12/26/the-entertainment-elites-inaugural-boycott-will-backfire-again/

Happy New Year!!

December 27, 2016 11:33 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

In this thread at October 12, 2016 10:21 PM Good anonymous said ""Thanks, Priya Lynn, and welcome back!"

Wyatt/bad anonymous responded "yes, you are welcome to mumble to yourself you continue to be subject to shunning"

Wyatt's previous comment where he said he was going to ignore my posts was deleted because he got "dispassionate" again.

Just like I said ever since then, Wyatt/bad anonymous hasn't got the self control to ignore me.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

December 27, 2016 12:50 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

I get a nice little rush - like that first sip of coffee in the morning - knowing how unhappy Wyatt/bad anonymous is and that I contribute to that every day simply by existing, living well, and thriving. He will someday die as he lived, full of spite and misery.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

December 27, 2016 12:51 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "this was Priya Lynn at midnight on Christmas Eve as part of a hate-filled rant".

Actually it was 11:36 your time, 9:36 my time and I was feeling very jovial. It was you up at 12:28 AM that day making a hate filled rant:

"the candy cae [sic] that stirs the hot chocolate said...

December 24, 2016 12:28 AM"

Now go ahead, "ignore" me some more!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

December 27, 2016 1:01 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Happy holidays everyone!

And remember, a big party in the middle of winter is the reason for the season :)

December 27, 2016 1:12 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous is too stupid to know about time zones.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

December 27, 2016 1:22 PM  
Anonymous RIP Carrie Fisher said...

Billy Dee Williams ✔@realbdw

I'm deeply saddened at the news of Carrie's passing. She was a dear friend, whom I greatly respected and admired. The force is dark today!

1:16 PM - 27 Dec 2016

December 27, 2016 3:19 PM  
Anonymous Oh poor baby! You apparently don't love Kid Rock and Ted Nugent enough said...

Nice bubble-dweller headlines.

Meanwhile, here in the Real World, headlines read:

Donald Trump Building Team of Racists

Trump Picks Jeff Sessions, Senator Accused Of Racism, For Attorney General

Trump picks prominent climate skeptic as EPA chief

Trump Goes Corporate on Secretary of State Pick

Why Paul Ryan Is So Desperate To Vote On Obamacare Repeal Quickly
A debate could expose enough about the consequences to scare off the public — and maybe Donald Trump too.


Don’t be fooled: Closing the Trump Foundation doesn’t solve Trump’s conflict of interest problems

Montana politicians condemn armed neo-Nazi march in Richard Spencer’s hometown

December 27, 2016 4:33 PM  
Anonymous next up: Cleopatra said...

"I'm deeply saddened at the news of Carrie's passing. She was a dear friend, whom I greatly respected and admired. The force is dark today!"

why are we bringing up this here, of all places?

I have no big problem with Fisher, but she was a high school drop-out who became a b-list actress who lucked into a part on a phenomenal film series

of course, her parents were a famous couple, beloved by Americans until gay icon Elizabeth Taylor seduced her father and left her as a small child as part of a broken home

so she was one of the first victim of a lunatic fringe gay advocate in a significant chapter of the decline of Western moral standards

so great to get Billy Dee Williams' thoughts on it

sheez!


December 27, 2016 4:40 PM  
Anonymous hate to pop the bubble you live in said...

"Nice bubble-dweller headlines.

Meanwhile, here in the Real World, headlines read:

Donald Trump Building Team of Racists

Trump Picks Jeff Sessions, Senator Accused Of Racism, For Attorney General

Trump picks prominent climate skeptic as EPA chief

Trump Goes Corporate on Secretary of State Pick

Why Paul Ryan Is So Desperate To Vote On Obamacare Repeal Quickly
A debate could expose enough about the consequences to scare off the public — and maybe Donald Trump too.

Don’t be fooled: Closing the Trump Foundation doesn’t solve Trump’s conflict of interest problems

Montana politicians condemn armed neo-Nazi march in Richard Spencer’s hometown"

talk about bubble dwellers

most of what you posted above is a bunch of the obsessive kind of crap that people are sick of having dominate our national discussion

that's why Trump is going to be President soon

people want to focus on creating economic opportunity for everyone and a strong economy

and they could care less about the concerns of the talking heads who rarely venture outside the beltway

the perfect example is the tax returns that the media requires all presidential candidates to give them

they never stop to realize that they don't make the rules and Americans don't like them

so despite the media fit about the tax returns, the majority of Americans in Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania and Ohio and Florida and Texas and the rest of America combined less California voted for Trump

again, let's hope your New Year's resolution is to stop being stupid

American democracy needs a viable second party


December 27, 2016 4:57 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Melania, unmuted: Melania Trump gave a speech using her own words — which only reminded us why women can’t relate to her

The tone-deaf address she delivered in Berwyn, Pennsylvania, on showed why she is not a sympathetic or empathetic figure among American women and has the worst favourability ratings of any prospective first lady assessed by Gallup since 1992.

One major goal of hers has been to eliminate bullying. That Melania Trump would take on this cause while enabling perhaps the world’s most famous bully is highly ironic.

“Our culture has gotten too mean and too violent,” Melania Trump told the crowd in the suburbs of Philadelphia. “It is never OK when a 12-year-old girl or boy is mocked, bullied or attacked. It is terrible when that happens on the playground and it is unacceptable when it’s done by someone with no name hiding on the internet.”

Perhaps no hollower words have ever been spoken, even in the political sphere where empty promises and sentiments are rampant. Melania Trump would have been better off repeating the plagiarized passages from her convention speech. Before her convention speech, Melania Trump’s net favourable rating of -4 points was already significantly lower than the next-lowest one: the 12 percent garnered by Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. (Real Clear Politics defines net favourability as “the percentage of voters who view a candidate unfavourably subtracted from the percentage who view him or her favorably.”)

Almost all other prospective first ladies have been viewed favorably by more than one-third of Americans and unfavourably by a quarter or less. Not surprisingly, after her convention speech, Melania Trump’s scores did not improve.

December 27, 2016 6:17 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

No doubt this negativity directed toward Melania is a reflection of the strongly negative feelings toward her husband. Many American women (including Facebook executive Sheryl Sandberg) would agree that marriage is the most important choice one can make. What does this say about Melania Trump, a woman who knowingly married a man who jokes about his own daughter as “a piece of ass,” whom he wants to date? What does this say about the judgement of a person who voluntarily entered into marriage with a twice-divorced misogynist who brags about sexual assault?

Contrast this with the powerful rhetorical skills of the woman she plagiarized: Michelle Obama, with whom I disagree about most policies, is an undeniably popular and articulate advocate for her husband. Contrast this also with other former first ladies like Laura Bush and Nancy Reagan, who tackled substantive policy issues while in the White House.

Melania Trump, an immigrant from Slovenia, never seems to grasp the concept of American exceptionalism that underpins the traditional Republican ethos. She never speaks of where she came from, of the deep historical struggles in her homeland and the sacrifices people made to overcome the economic effects of war and socialism in her former country. She offers no substance; there are no references to improving global understanding when she speaks, only to glitzy European modeling. She is built for high-end fashion, not for high stakes world of politics.

Perhaps the greatest irony of Melania Trump’s speech on Thursday is that by choosing to speak, she reminded us that she can, highlighting the fact she’s been muted, mostly serving as a silent, statuesque, unsmiling presence on the campaign trail. Ultimately, though, it seems likely Donald Trump doesn’t care whether Melania Trump speaks or not. He doesn’t care much for what women have to say.

December 27, 2016 6:17 PM  
Anonymous just trying to help said...

more readings for TTFers as they consider their New Year's resolution to be less stupid:

Hillary lost because people who used to vote Dem didn't vote:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/27/the-horrors-of-2016-could-have-been-stopped-donald-trump

there are divergent views on anthropic global warming theory:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/climateers-cant-handle-the-truth-1482882375

Obama is pro muslim:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/12/27/trump-israel-security-council-vote-james-robbins-column/95854656/

December 27, 2016 10:39 PM  
Anonymous Cold Hard TTF said...

Anon, like you, Trump is a troll. He's an old lady who likes to whine about "the liberals" and political correctness and he never thought he had a chance of winning. He's a fat Ann Coulter. He is not a winner, he is a loser, and he expressed the loser's point of view through the whole campaign, calling people names, lying like it didn't matter, encouraging rudeness and violence. It never crossed his mind that he would win this thing. He didn't even deny his rule-breaking, dishonesty, and cheating, because he never thought it would be an issue. And now he is impeachable for a list of reasons, never mind walking right to the edge of treason.

He won and that's fine, that's what losers and trolls like you were looking for, and there are a lot of you. He played the electoral game and he won. Somebody had to win, and it was Donald Trump.

In a few weeks there won't be anybody for him to mock -- Hillary is a done deal, and you sound like a loser btw trying to throw shit on her after the election, like you have nothing in the present. Trump's going to be the one in the White House and he is going to have to make the kinds of decisions that you and he find so easy to complain about. He is going to screw it up and he is going to be one pissed-off pussy-grabber when people start complaining about him. And the fact is, he won't keep any of his campaign promises. No wall, no repeal of ACA, manufacturing jobs and coal jobs won't come back. He is a laughing-stock, a troll, like you.

He will be staring into the void and no crowd chanting "lock her up" is going to make it easier for him. The smirk and the mockery are going to become distant memories as he tries to keep his head above water while the paybacks and comes-around come rolling in.

Unfortunatey, the whole country is going to have to swirl down the toilet-bowl with him. The most we can hope is that a lesson is learned.

December 27, 2016 11:02 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Well said Good anonymous. Great insight.

If it weren't for all the people who are going to get hurt it would be funny to watch Trump trying to excuse all the promises he can't keep and royally F-up everything he touches.

He's already tweeting about his eagerness to start a new nuclear arms race, tearing up four decades of U.S. non proliferation policy. He's basically telling countries without nuclear weapons to get them - "come on in, the water's fine". This is going to end badly. Trump is the scariest thing to ever happen to the U.S. and perhaps the world.

December 28, 2016 11:53 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Even Wyatt/bad anonymous said a few weeks before the election "Trump will be president, let's hope our Republic survives".

Wyatt sometimes claims he's not a Trump supporter but the vast majority of the time he's defending, supporting, and promoting Trump as a great thing. He alternates wildly between absurdly claiming Trump will be good for gays and saying Trump's election means the end of gay rights.

Wyatt/bad anonymous must be getting whiplash from all the 180 degree turns he's doing on Trump. The fact is that Wyatt/bad anonymous IS just a troll who'll say whatever he thinks will provoke a response even if it completely contradicts what he just said a minute ago.

Wyatt/bad anonymous does this because he is a sadist. And research shows internet trolls like him are.

December 28, 2016 12:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gallup reports: Obama Bests Trump as Most Admired Man in 2016

"STORY HIGHLIGHTS

22% name Barack Obama as most admired man; 15% name Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton is the most admired woman
9th time Obama has won; 21st time for Clinton

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Americans are most likely to name President Barack Obama as the man they admire most in 2016. Twenty-two percent mentioned Obama in response to the open-ended question. President-elect Donald Trump was second at 15%. It is Obama's ninth consecutive win, but the seven-percentage-point margin this year is his narrowest victory yet.

The results are based on a Dec. 7-11 poll. Since 1946, Gallup has asked Americans to name the man, living anywhere in the world, whom they admire most.

Incumbent presidents typically win the distinction -- in the 70 times Gallup has asked the question, the president has won 58 times. The 12 exceptions were mostly times when the sitting president was unpopular, including 2008, when Americans named President-elect Obama over President George W. Bush. Obama and Dwight Eisenhower in 1952 are the only presidents-elect to win the distinction. Eisenhower finished first 12 times, more than any other man in history. Obama is now second all-time with nine first-place finishes.

Obama's win over Trump this year is largely a result of the president earning more mentions among Democrats than Trump receives from Republicans. Fifty percent of Democrats named Obama as most admired, compared with 34% of Republicans choosing Trump...."


This news, coming at this moment, will probably be somewhat galling to Trump. Over the weekend, Obama told his former adviser David Axelrod that he believed he could have won in 2016, a claim at which Trump chafed. To lose an admiration contest in the wake of that seems as though it would be particularly frustrating to the president-elect.

December 28, 2016 2:50 PM  
Anonymous gitchy goomy said...

oh, just because people admire someone, it doesn't mean they want him to be President

I personally think Obama has more admirable personal qualities than Trump

he wasn't a good President though, and Trump might have beat him

it's really too hypothetical, with too many factors

recent history is littered with those who were high riding in polls until they actually joined a campaign

think Ross Perot, Rick Perry, et al

December 28, 2016 3:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama's goodbye kiss to the dumb Dem Party:

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/646195?unlock=9UYHSLUSD4GATAB1

December 28, 2016 4:01 PM  
Anonymous good King Wencelas said...

how can non-scientists determine who's telling the truth is the global warming debate?

how about examining who will give you a straight answer?:

http://manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2016/12/22/how-to-tell-whos-lying-to-you-climate-science-edition

December 28, 2016 8:09 PM  
Anonymous Cold Hard TTF said...

The idiot who wrote that has no idea what he's talking about. Climate scientists don't talk about "hockey sticks," that is the simplest kind of analogy they can come up with to describe a complex dynamical system in phase transition on the edge of chaos so that even anon can have some idea what they're talking about.

There is no reason to think the ordinary doofus can understand the physics of climate science, any more than the ordinary doofus can understand the human genome or even how satellites stay in stationary orbit. There are people who devote their entire lives to studying the climate, and I know it's a shock to a troll like you anon, but they actually know more than you about it. More than you and this famous cartoonist, as well, who you seem to consider an authority just because he agrees with you.

And why do the right-wingers favor pollution and deny that we are causing bad things to happen to the climate? There is one explanation, and that is that it will cost big companies money if we committed to keeping the earth and its atmosphere clean.

Easy to see why cigar-smoking CEO's don't want science to be correct, but why do losers like anon take up the cause? Simple: because the capitalists have figured out how to make the poorly-educated working class believe anything. Fox News, talk radio, fake news, "think tanks" that pose as academic institutions, corporate funding for scientific research -- and the result is, anon can't see any reason to believe a bunch of PhD scientists over a famous cartoonist. It saves the corporations a ton.

December 28, 2016 8:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Your contrarian states: "Recently he has dipped his toe into the subject of "climate science," with a focus on the apparent inability of partisans on either side of the debate ever to convince a single person to come over from the other side. "

To the contrarian I say: "Climate science" is not political except to the 3% who work like dogs to make it such. To the other 97%, who work like scholars to bring us facts and understanding about how the world works, it is science.

To you I say : How many TTFers have you brought around to your side in your many years posting here?

There used to be two of you through the last MoCo LGBT battle, but Theresa barely checks in anymore. Even she and her daughters have to be concerned about the thrice married pussy grabber who thinks it's Presidential to tweet to try to incite the resumption of 1950s nuclear arms race.

Let's Make America Great Again:

DUCK AND COVER, KIDS!!

What a dangerous fucking cheat you both voted for.

December 28, 2016 8:38 PM  
Anonymous galileo said...

"The idiot who wrote that has no idea what he's talking about."

oh, he was quite clear that he wasn't a climate scientist. he was writing about how you can glean hints bout which side is telling the truth.

"Climate scientists don't talk about "hockey sticks,""

not anymore. they were embarrassed to be discovered cooking the books to create a false impression.

"that is the simplest kind of analogy they can come up with to describe a complex dynamical system in phase transition on the edge of chaos so that even anon can have some idea what they're talking about."

they weren't talking about the system. they were trying to create the false impression that the climate was stable for a millennium and then temperatures shot up dramatically when the automobile became widely used. they conspired to create this false impression. it's been documented.

"There is no reason to think the ordinary doofus can understand the physics of climate science, any more than the ordinary doofus can understand the human genome or even how satellites stay in stationary orbit. There are people who devote their entire lives to studying the climate,"

what anyone can understand is the results. from forseeing the effects from thirty years ago to now, all the way to predicting the weather tomorrow, they have been consistently unreliable. you don't need a weatherman to see which way the wind blows

"And why do the right-wingers favor pollution and deny that we are causing bad things to happen to the climate? There is one explanation, and that is that it will cost big companies money if we committed to keeping the earth and its atmosphere clean."

or perhaps they see an effort to find a rationale for setting up a worldwide system of taxes and regulations.

"anon can't see any reason to believe a bunch of PhD scientists over a famous cartoonist."

when you have scientists who refuse to answer questions and have been documented as trying to adjust numbers to create a false impression, why would anyone believe them?

history is full of examples of scientists unanimously believing something that is wrong. you can never go wrong by maintaining a skeptical attitude. when scientists resist that, you know something is up

December 29, 2016 4:33 AM  
Anonymous don't tell Barack said...

hey, look at this

Americans have confidence the economy will get better under Trump:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/donald-trump-economy-consumer-confidence-233011

December 29, 2016 7:22 AM  
Anonymous that Barry!! said...

hey, look at this

Barack has no proof:

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/312049-obama-under-pressure-to-prove-russian-interference-in-election

December 29, 2016 7:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"hey weren't talking about the system. they were trying to create the false impression that the climate was stable for a millennium and then temperatures shot up dramatically when the automobile became widely used. they conspired to create this false impression. it's been documented."

You mean Exxon tried to create the false impression climate change was not happening when it actually had data proving it was.

Exxon knew of climate change in 1981, email says – but it funded deniers for 27 more years

But that was then, and this is now.

The Hill: Exxon shifted on climate change under Trump pick

Why?

Trump acknowledges climate change — at his golf course:
The billionaire, who called global warming a hoax, warns of its dire effects in his company's application to build a sea wall.


Duh.

Try harder to keep up.

December 29, 2016 8:06 AM  
Anonymous when will TTF ever learn? said...

hey, stooooopid

no one denies that the planet is warmer now than the late 1800s

the issue is by how much and whether it was stable for a millennium prior to that

you keeping up now?

hey look at this

Barry wouldn't have beat Trump either:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/no-obama-probably-wouldnt-have-beaten-trump-214557

December 29, 2016 8:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Barry wouldn't have beat Trump either:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/no-obama-probably-wouldnt-have-beaten-trump-214557"


You skipped the word probably.

Oops.

Trump lost the 2016 popular vote, which Obama easily won both in 2008 and 2012.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_popular_vote_margin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_elections_in_which_the_winner_lost_the_popular_vote

Belief in conspiracies largely depends on political identity

Sometimes it seems that Americans will believe anything. And what we know as true or not true these days can depend on our political point of view. But there are many of us who are willing to give at least some credence to the possibility that a claim might be true.

At least that seems to be the case in the latest Economist/YouGov Poll. One of the most notorious internet rumors of the 2016 presidential campaign, that there was a pedophile ring in the Clinton campaign, with code words embedded in the hacked emails of Clinton campaign manager John Podesta, is seen as “probably” or “definitely” true by more than a third of American adults. The poll was conducted after an armed North Carolina man tried to “self-investigate” the claim by going to the District of Columbia pizza restaurant that was alleged to be the center of the ring earlier this month and found nothing. But even afterwards only 29% are sure the allegation is “definitely” not true....

December 29, 2016 9:02 AM  
Anonymous Cold Hard TTF said...

I am not wasting any more time on this anon. You are so sure you are qualified to discuss something you don't understand, and there is no point in it. The "hockey stick" is a simplification to allow scientists to communicate with a lay audience. It describes a sudden acceleration in the change of a variable, a second-order increase. Climate journal articles do not talk about hockey sticks, they use algebra to describe such features in the data space. You have never opened one and read it, and would not understand it if you did.

"history is full of examples of scientists unanimously believing something that is wrong. you can never go wrong by maintaining a skeptical attitude. when scientists resist that, you know something is up" This statement begins with a good point. The task of science is always to question and challenge current understanding, and scientists amend their models constantly. Sometimes they even throw one out and replace it with a better one.

That has not happened with models of climate change.

Scientists have not resisted "maintaining a skeptical attitude." Their models and theories are, and should be, entirely unaffected by popular belief which is based on corporate propaganda. Their conclusions follow from the data.

The pro-pollution position has nothing going for it. There is no scientific support for it, whether you believe so or not. Further, it is disrespectful to the earth and the other organisms that live on it to treat it like a trash can. Whatever you think of carbon gases, look at the number of species going extinct. The idea that we have the right to make an ugly mess of the planet is not spiritual, it is not moral, it is violent and destructive and irresponsible. I understand that those things are cool in the new fascist world but I do not accept them.

December 29, 2016 9:48 AM  
Anonymous just breathe said...

"Trump lost the 2016 popular vote, which Obama easily won both in 2008 and 2012"

we didn't hold a popular vote in any of those three years

if we had, people may have made a different decision about whether or not to vote

no telling which way that group would break

as is, Clinton electors got more votes overall in the electoral college vote but that's only because the California electors racked up a huge win in California, where there was no reason for GOP voters to go to polls since there was no Republican nominee for the Senate seat and the Presidential race was a done deal

"I am not wasting any more time on this anon"

that's probably your best strategy

you have nothing to say and it just gets more obvious the more you tap your keyboard

"The "hockey stick" is a simplification to allow scientists to communicate with a lay audience. It describes a sudden acceleration"

ah, but there was no such acceleration

"Climate journal articles do not talk about hockey sticks, they use algebra to describe such features in the data space. You have never opened one and read it, and would not understand it if you did."

oh, climate systems may be complicated but temperature increase is not

"Scientists have not resisted "maintaining a skeptical attitude." Their models and theories are, and should be, entirely unaffected by popular belief which is based on corporate propaganda. Their conclusions follow from the data."

but they haven't made the data available

other scientists generally do

"The pro-pollution position has nothing going for it. There is no scientific support for it, whether you believe so or not. Further, it is disrespectful to the earth and the other organisms that live on it to treat it like a trash can. Whatever you think of carbon gases, look at the number of species going extinct. The idea that we have the right to make an ugly mess of the planet is not spiritual, it is not moral, it is violent and destructive and irresponsible. I understand that those things are cool in the new fascist world but I do not accept them."

carbon isn't a pollutant

we all breathe it out every day and it makes plants grow

if you're really concerned, here's three things that could be done to reduce carbon in the atmosphere:

1. massive forestation projects
2. massive switch to nuclear power
3. tax incentives for individuals to live closer to work and for employers to institute telecommuting

don't think the GOP would resist any of these


December 29, 2016 10:55 AM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

"carbon isn't a pollutant"

You should prove this and put the argument to rest for good.

Stick a bunch of house plants in your car, then a hose from the tailpipe through a window. Sit in the driver seat, close the doors and windows, and turn the engine on. Make sure you brought in a notebook and camera so you can record the increases in plant growth. It should only take a few hours to get the results you need.

December 29, 2016 12:19 PM  
Anonymous it's easy being green said...

"You should prove this and put the argument to rest for good"
oh, there's no argument

everywhere you go

everywhere you've gone

the air is filled with carbon

it's never hurt anyone

and no scientist thinks it's a pollutant

liberal-in-chief Barry O redefined the word for political purposes

that's just like a liberal

go on outside and exhale a bunch of carbon

it makes the world green



December 29, 2016 2:00 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Man, you're getting lazy in your old age. Not even trying to make a compelling argument. Just being contrarian and stupid.

Do you just do this so you can have someone to converse with in your lonely little world?

December 29, 2016 3:49 PM  
Anonymous use your thinkin' mind said...

actually, I'm the only one making an argument at all

the moron that takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin' just says all the scientists say it and so I don't question

zero attempt to discern, zero skepticism

you'd almost think they just believe what they want to believe

try the words of Nobel laureate Dylan: "don't put my faith in nobody, not even a scientist"

don't give up thinking

December 29, 2016 4:05 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

You have mistaken being a contrarian and conspiracy theorist with thinking.

It doesn't take much thinking to say "no it's not" to anything a liberal says.

And just because the right has imagined a vast global conspiracy theory, doesn't mean they've actually done any critical thinking.

Skepticism is a healthy part of science, but just because someone disagrees with a scientist, doesn't mean they have actually thought about anything, much less have proposed an alternative theory that fits all the same facts.

When you have a theory a data that fits all, or even just most, of the observed facts, then you have a scientific theory which can be further examined and tested. Until then you are just blowing smoke.

Cynthia

December 29, 2016 4:28 PM  
Anonymous slinko said...

when e-mails emerge show scientists discussing how they're going to adjust data to create a certain impression, when climate scientists try to get attorney generals across the land to move against people who disagree with any aspect of AGW theory, when they change the name of their theory from warming to "change" so any weather event will prove it, when researchers move against any student who questions any aspect of AGW, when researchers refuse to release data showing how they've adjusted the historical record, it doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to see something is wrong

tell us, since you claim to be a thinker, why are no solutions ever proposed other than regulation and taxation?

"When you have a theory a data that fits all, or even just most, of the observed facts, then you have a scientific theory which can be further examined and tested"

and tell us why you don't require this of the climate research complex

December 29, 2016 4:57 PM  
Anonymous Muy Caliente said...

Climatic Research Unit email controversy: "Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct. However, the reports called on the scientists to avoid any such allegations in the future by taking steps to regain public confidence in their work, for example by opening up access to their supporting data, processing methods and software, and by promptly honouring freedom of information requests. The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged throughout the investigations."

December 29, 2016 5:12 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

"when e-mails emerge show scientists discussing how they're going to adjust data to create a certain impression,"

As was noted above, East Anglia was investigated by 8 different bodies that found no wrong doing. The presentation of complex information is something that gets discussed a lot in the engineering consulting business, and my boss and I would sometimes argue for hours over the best way to do it. That doesn't mean we were trying to hide anything from the customer. He was very much a visually oriented person and I am very much focused on the words. He often didn't bother reading the words, and so everything had to be in the pictures. It caused both of us exceeding amounts of frustration. We some how managed to get a lot of high-performing products out the door though. It wasn't a matter of lying to the customer, it was a matter of trying to explain all the data in the most coherent, efficient, understandable, and effective fashion.

The data that was stolen from East Anglia was put up on servers all over the world years ago. Why has no one taken this data to show that there is no real warming??? The conspiracy theorists have all the data they wanted to blow this case wide open - why haven't they done so? Have they all fallen victim to an even bigger conspiracy?

"when they change the name of their theory from warming to "change" so any weather event will prove it, "

I wasn't in the room when folks decided to change from "warming" to "change," so I can only speculate that it was done as a response to the right-wing conspiracy theorists, who, after the extremely hot year of 1998, air temps didn't appear to be going up that much. That doesn't mean the planet wasn't warming though. (Continued below.)

December 29, 2016 5:43 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Put a lot of ice on the stove, and mix it well with a bunch of water until the whole mixture has stabilized at 32 degrees.

Now turn on the stove and keep mixing the water well, and measuring the temperature of the water-ice mixture, and the air 4 feet above the stove.

You will find that even though you are adding heat from the stove - warming it - the temperature of the water-ice mixture doesn't budge much at all, until most of the ice is gone, then it will rise rapidly, at least until it gets to 212 degrees, at which point, the temperature will stop rising again until it all turns to steam. You will also find that the air temperature 4 feet above the stove didn't change much either.

There is a physics reason why the ice water temperature didn't change, and it has to do with what is called the "latent heat of fusion" for ice which is about 334 joules per gram. This "fusion" has nothing to do with the nuclear fusion most people think about when they hear that word.

So what is the best way to describe the time period where heat is being added to the ice water, but the temperature is not going up? Is it "warming" because we are adding heat from the stove, even though the temperature doesn't rise? Or is the best term "change" because the ice is turning to water? What is the best term that will lead to the least confusion to a populace who, on average, has very little understanding of basic physics?

December 29, 2016 6:14 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...


"tell us, since you claim to be a thinker, why are no solutions ever proposed other than regulation and taxation?"

You haven't been paying attention. There are things all of us can do. I have added a bunch of insulation to my house - well above the regulated minimums in some places, changed my home from electric baseboard heat to a high-efficiency heat pump, replaced drafty old single pane windows with triple-pane Krypton gas filled units, and I recently replaced a leaky electric water heater with a heat-pump based unit. Some of these things have paid for themselves already in electricity savings, some will take a few years.

I also drive a hybrid, carefully, so that I can maximize milage. In the summer I get close to 50 mpg - well above the government CAFE standards. My household also voluntarily recycles as much as possible, including things like old electronics which we have to pay for. There are plenty of things we all can do to minimize our footprint on the planet, you just have to think about it a while.

Cynthia

December 29, 2016 6:32 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...


"and tell us why you don't require this of the climate research complex"

Parts of the "climate research complex" involves private universities, or public universities dependent upon private sources for revenue. Data, methods, equations, programs and algorithms all are potential sources for future revenue. If that info gets out, anyone can monetize it, not just the folks who did all the hard work to develop it.

Giving all that hard work away to people who didn't earn it is just socialism.

Cynthia

December 29, 2016 6:38 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home