Sunday, October 14, 2018

Ignore High and Low

There seems to be some confusion lately about civility, and Michelle Obama’s 2016-ish idea that “When they go low, we go high.” Some prominent liberals — Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Michael Avenatti, among them — are having second thoughts about this lofty-sounding idea, which is, intrinsically, a losing strategy. When they hit us below the belt we are going to be nice back to them, uh huh. The problem arises when you think there are only two options, that is, we “go high” by turning the other cheek or we “go low,” like conservatives do.

Going low would mean lying, using dirty tricks such as voter suppression, manipulating the press, falsely associating your opponent with negative groups. Well, liberals could do that, we could go low. There is nothing inherently wrong with working the system to further a higher cause, except for one thing. When your cause is reason, fairness, and kindness, and the other side’s cause is to gain power for power’s sake, guess what — the power-seekers are gonna win. Winning power is conservatives' whole goal and they will be dedicated to it: winning at any cost. There is no belief system behind that, they don’t have a plan for what to do once they’ve won power, they just mean to win. Lying and manipulating people is inconsistent with liberals’ goals, and it wouldn’t work for us, anyway. So, as far as I can tell, “going low” is not a liberal option. A liberal who goes low is, technically, a "conservative." BTW, the concern with looking like hypocrites affects only one side of the national debate.

Another option is to fight back. But you can hardly do that. Here’s a term for you: Gish Gallop. Wikipedia explains:
The Gish gallop is a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments. The term was coined by Eugenie C. Scott and named after the creationist Duane T. Gish, who used the technique frequently against proponents of evolution.
You cannot “fight back” against the Gish Gallop. Trump is a troll supported by an army of trolls, and this is what they do: the Gish Gallop. They throw out accusations and ridiculous falsehoods too fast to keep up with. Trump’s lies have accelerated lately, almost every statement he utters contains a falsehood, and you simply cannot find the facts and refute every lie as fast as he can generate new ones. Never mind his supporters. The lies come so fast that you cannot in a lifetime disprove all of them. Fighting back is futile. There is also a tactical advantage for the person who makes a statement, relative to the person who counters it. So don't bother.

Oh, you could “go high.” WTF does that mean? You could talk in calm tones, stick with facts, make reasonable statements and follow through with them. Uh huh. You could bore people to death. The media will treat you like you don’t exist, people will ignore you. Picture Hillary in the debates, “going high” against Trump, talking about policies and decisions she would implement if elected, with him snorting and pawing behind her, stalking and distracting. In today’s attention economy, nobody cares about the high road. It should work, we should be able to discuss issues rationally, but in the current environment this is simply a losing tactic. You can take the high road all day if you want, to a room full of empty chairs.

Here’s a crazy idea — how about playing good, positive, assertive offense? What if liberals went out and talked about what they actually stand for. Don’t bother saying, “Tax fairness isn’t socialism,” or “My brother-in-law did not work for such-and-such borderline controversial group” or “I do not support crime,” or “I do not want an unregulated border…” or whatever. What do you stand for? A decent minimum wage? International relations? Climate issues? Gender equity? Making clear, un-watered-down progressive assertions will be controversial enough, the cameras will follow you. Wolf Blitzer's eyeballs may pop out, but they will pop out on national television and it will draw a great audience.

Say what you say, and ignore what the authoritarians say you say.

Liberal politicians, and liberal voters for that matter, should deliver their message, clearly and loudly. Act like the ridiculous accusations don’t exist. If somebody is so stupid that they think, say, that Eric Holder is literally going to kick a Republican, then they are a lost case anyway. Make a joke if you must address the issue, and move on to your own talking points. This isn’t “going high,” and it isn’t “going low.” The media will pay attention to you if you make bold and clear statements of your beliefs and your intentions as a candidate.

The truth is, most Americans hold progressive values; you might find thirty percent are haters, the rest are good, reasonable, caring people. A liberal candidate may advocate a single-payer healthcare system, and another may recommend another way to enact coverage for everyone — let that be our debate. Almost all Americans would want to have their health needs taken care of without cost, there is nothing controversial about that idea. The question should be, what approach will we take? What is the best way to do it? Who cares if pharmacy and insurance lobbyists are freaking out? Not our problem. Let them figure out what their role is in America’s better future — I am confident they will figure out how to rake a buck off the top.

Similarly, most Americans are not racists, or sexists, they may hold traditional values and stereotypes that bias their attitudes but they do not mean to block women from being successful and do not approve of rape and harassment, they do not believe that Hispanics and black people are inferior and less deserving that white people; they might not understand gay people but they don’t really have anything against them. Fairness and equality are not radical ideas, you don’t have to “go high” to say out loud that discrimination needs to be eliminated, and that there need to be programs that lend a hand up. Most people believe that. It is a winning argument. Just say it. Abortion, too. Most people know that sometimes a woman needs an abortion. If one American woman in three has had one, then that means everybody knows a woman who has had an abortion. It is your wife, your sister, your neighbor. It is legal, it is medical care, and it needs to be protected; everybody knows that. Don’t pussyfoot around, don’t let the nuts define the topic, just say what is obvious. It’s not “going low” and it’s not “going high” to say that decisions about a necessary medical procedure need to be made by a patient and her doctor, not some religious terrorists. It is saying what needs to be said.

It may seem to be a little rude sometimes to refuse to go along with the topic that the authoritarian right and their media pundits believe we should be discussing, well we can be nice about it, but firm. We don’t need to talk about giving guns to teachers — it’s a dumb idea, we don’t even have to argue why it’s dumb, the idea is not realistic and it was only suggested to throw reasonable debate out the window. People do not want to take little kids away from the parents and lock them up or put them up for adoption, there is nothing "bold" about opposing that. Nobody in America actually wants lower taxes for rich people — we all hate having to give our money to the government, but we do it because we all know we are going in together on the costs of services that only government can provide. So why are America’s oligarchs getting away with paying nothing? Liberals should not have to argue about whether they are socialists or not when they oppose tax cuts for the rich, it’s a stupid criticism and we should ignore it. Anybody who thinks it is “socialist” to expect the rich to pay taxes is a goner already anyway.


Anonymous Self-described ‘communists’ tried to donate to a Democrat. They were actually GOP activists. said...

Not to mention these fake communist GOPers were liars.

The potential donation that arrived at an Arizona campaign office Thursday had all the markings of a grass-roots, feel-good politics story — at first.

Two young men, who said their names were Jose Rosales and Ahmahd Sadia, had shown up at the Flagstaff campaign office of Rep. Tom O’Halleran, a Democrat who is running for reelection to represent northern Arizona.

They claimed they were from nearby Northern Arizona University and were eager to volunteer. They had also brought along a jar of small bills and coins — totaling $39.68 — money that they said wanted to donate to O’Halleran’s campaign.

That’s when things grew odd.

A junior staffer who “didn’t realize what was happening” directed the pair to fill out a campaign contribution form. The men mentioned they were with the “Northern Arizona University Communist Party,” according to O’Halleran campaign manager Ryan Mulcahy.

“Once they filled out the forms, they became oddly insistent on getting a receipt for the contributions,” Mulcahy told The Washington Post. “They were told the only way you can get a receipt is [by] email. So they ended up crossing out the email they had written down and writing in another one.”

Meanwhile, as the men were leaving, another staffer came over — and recognized them from social media as being affiliated with the Arizona Republican Party, Mulcahy said. Shortly after the pair left, O’Halleran’s finance director, Lindsay Coleman, drove over to the local Arizona GOP office to return the donation.

Her suspicions were almost immediately confirmed upon entering the GOP office, in an awkward exchange that was captured on video.

“Do you have, um, are there two young Republicans named Ahmad or Jose?” Coleman asked a receptionist.

“I don’t believe so,” someone in the GOP office told her.

“Oh, okay. Well I’m here, because two young gentlemen right here” — at this point Coleman pointed to a man who stepped out from a room in the office — “made this contribution to our campaign--...”

A bearded man at the GOP office pointed at the man and seemed to correct Coleman: “This is Oscar.”

Without missing a beat, Coleman continued: “And Oscar, who gave a donation under the name of Jose...”

October 14, 2018 2:05 PM  
Anonymous GOP liars continued said...

...The camera panned back to Oscar/Jose, who had abruptly turned back around and reentered the room from which he had emerged moments earlier. The door closed.

Still speaking loudly, Coleman pointed out that it was illegal to falsify contribution information to the Federal Election Commission and said that she would probably be filing a report with the police. Then she called out toward the closed door: “Um, Oscar, I have your cash! And I’d like to return it to you, please!”

Oscar/Jose emerged yet again.

"Yep,” he said.

Coleman handed him an envelope with the attempted campaign donation.

“Here you go, Oscar. Us returning your funds that you just made to our contribution to our campaign under the name of Jose Rosales, claiming to be with ‘NAU Young Communists’ when you are in fact with the NAU Young Republicans and your name is Oscar,” Coleman told him. “I don’t know if you heard me, but it is illegal to falsify donation information to the FEC, so thank you for your support but we cannot accept your funds.”

“Okay, yeah,” Oscar/Jose said, as Coleman walked away, smiling.

O’Halleran’s campaign posted video of the encounter to YouTube on Friday. Mulcahy said he suspects O’Halleran’s opponent, Wendy Rogers, was behind the attempted campaign donation, saying it “fits in particularly well” with her attempts to paint O’Halleran as a far-left extremist.

Polls show the race is leaning slightly in favor of O’Halleran, who was first elected to the office in 2016.

Rogers’s campaign has denied involvement in the attempted donation, calling it “juvenile.”

“We are focused on defeating Tom O’Halleran and the Democrats this November and don’t have time for juvenile pranks,” Wendy Rogers’s campaign spokesman, Spence Rogers, told the Guardian. “We are more concerned about exposing Tom O’Halleran’s open borders liberal record.”

Mulcahy pointed out that the same person who appeared in the video trying to avoid Coleman has also appeared in recent photos from Rogers’s campaign. Though other outlets have identified “Oscar/Jose” as an NAU student, The Post was unable to reach that student early Saturday morning.

“Obviously contributing to Tom pretending to be communists — it’s almost like they’re trying to set something up,” Mulcahy said. “I just think this was really, really misguided attempt ... to try to embarrass Tom and to try to embarrass the campaign.”

The Arizona GOP did not immediately respond to a request for comment early Saturday morning.

The Arizona Republic reported Friday that the two young men had been a staff member and a volunteer for the Arizona Republican Party, and that neither was working there anymore.

Mulcahy said O’Halleran’s campaign has not filed a police report but has not ruled out taking legal action.

“We’re taking everything into consideration on the best way to move forward,” Mulcahy said. “At the end of the day, the two gentlemen who conducted this were low-level campaign volunteers. I’m sure encouraged to do this by someone more senior. ... We would like to see those people be held accountable.”

October 14, 2018 2:06 PM  
Anonymous a goner already anyway, haha!! said...

Hillary Clinton is back, this time denouncing civility.

Talking with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour this week, she defended the unprecedented protests, threats and harassment that roiled the Brett Kavanaugh nomination.

“You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about,” Clinton said. “That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and/or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again.”

In other words, sure, we’re acting like toddlers now, but we’ll be grown-ups once we’re in charge.

It’s true that Democrats took a heavy blow when the Senate approved Kavanaugh’s promotion to the high court. For the first time in two generations, the Supreme Court has an originalist majority. These conservatives actually believe that the judiciary is only there to determine if laws are constitutional or not and that it isn’t their place to legislate from the bench.

Contra Hillary, this wasn’t the result of mass incivility by Republicans or illegal appointments of black-robed reactionaries. Conservatives won this battle through shrewd, long-term planning that goes back decades.

One of the reasons Democrats lost the Kavanaugh battle, however, was their frenzied reaction to the bland jurist with bipartisan appeal and the highest rating from the left-leaning American Bar Association.

Moderate Republicans and independents closely watched the three-ring Senate hearings, mobs of screaming protesters chasing politicians out of restaurants, and ludicrous allegations of drug rings and gang rape. For the most part, they decided, these people are ridiculous.

The current conservative majority on the Supreme Court started back in the 1980s with the creation of The Federalist Society. They built a network of lawyers and judges who actually believed the Constitution meant what it said and, over the years, provided a stable of originalist jurists.

After years of quiet, sober and very hard work, today the group is recommending accomplished, vetted judges to President Donald Trump. So far, a staggering 69 judges have been confirmed by the Senate for the Supreme Court, Courts of Appeals and District Courts.

The Democratic reaction to all this has been hysteria, and not just from the mob banging on the Supreme Court’s bronze doors.

Democratic Socialist candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez insists we must pour some white-out on Article II.

“It is well past time we eliminate the Electoral College,” she said, “a shadow of slavery’s power on America today that undermines our nation as a democratic republic.”

Leading progressive outlets like The New Yorker and Vox are also wringing their hands over the electoral college, but both agree it’s only part of the problem.

“The Republican Party has relied not just on the quirks of the Electoral College,” John Cassidy wrote in The New Yorker, “but also on another electoral body that was designed to limit majority rule: the U.S. Senate, where the 1.7 million residents of Idaho receive the same number of representatives as the 39.5 million residents of California.”

The Electoral College and the Senate are not “quirks” — they’ve been the rules of the game for 230 years. Democrats know this. They’ve just decided it’s too tough to play by them.

Republicans have and, as a result, hold the White House, both houses of Congress, 33 state governorships, 31 state legislatures and now a conservative majority on the Supreme Court.

Instead of dressing up in costumes, interrupting hearings or screaming in Senate elevators, progressives should focus on the boring, difficult work of civilly appealing to American voters in all 50 states.

Perhaps, in a few decades, they’ll finally beat the GOP at this game

October 14, 2018 10:57 PM  
Anonymous Hoo Boy said...

You got it, anon, perfect response. And now Hillary should issue a statement saying "I am not opposed to civility," and Republicans can say, "Yes you are, you shrill lesbian pedophile bitch," and we can spend the news cycle discussing which ways to misinterpret her attitudes, instead of the more pressing problems of American democracy requiring someone with some spine to hold it up.

October 15, 2018 8:14 AM  
Anonymous Another GOPer lie exposed said...

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who is gearing up for a likely 2020 presidential bid, has released a DNA test that suggests she has a distant Native American ancestor, part of an extraordinary effort to discredit President Trump and others who have questioned her claims about her heritage.

A report distributed by Warren concludes that there is “strong evidence” that the senator had a Native American in her family tree dating back six to 10 generations. The test results, after first being reported by the Boston Globe, were widely distributed to reporters Monday morning by Warren’s Senate campaign committee, along with a video on her upbringing and a link to a new “fact squad” website that seeks to debunk critics of her heritage.

The DNA analysis, by Carlos D. Bustamante, a Stanford University professor, concludes that “the vast majority” of Warren’s ancestry is European but that “the results strongly support the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor in the individual’s pedigree, likely in the range of 6-10 generations ago.”

That timing fits Warren’s family lore, passed down during her Oklahoma upbringing, that her great-great-great-grandmother, O.C. Sarah Smith, was at least partially Native American, the Globe reported.

If Warren’s great-great-great-grandmother was Native American, that puts her at 1/32nd American Indian. If the ancestor was 10 generations back, she would be 1/512th Native American.

Trump has frequently mocked Warren’s claims about her heritage, calling her “Pocahontas.” During a freewheeling phone interview with Fox News last week, he asserted that the senator “faked her heritage,” adding: “I have more Indian blood in me than her, and I have none.”...

That's tRump, Chief GOP Liar.

October 15, 2018 8:26 AM  
Anonymous looking forward to the first week in November said...

T first, it was safe to ignore Kanye West's growing bromance with President Trump. After all, West is a performer, which makes it easy to discount his politics, and he is married to a Kardashian, enough said.

But recent events demand attention. First came West’s appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” where he rapped in his Make America Great Again hat and praised Trump, which NBC cut from its telecast.

Then there was Thursday in the Oval Office. Once again, his stream-of-consciousness commentary veered from nonsense to common sense and included references to being “programmed” as a black man to support only liberal politicians.

There was no denying those events were intriguing and entertaining, but it still didn’t seem politically significant — until the left-wing media went absolutely bonkers.

Their extraordinarily venomous and personal attacks on West reminded me of the left’s unhinged smears of Brett Kavanaugh and Trump.

Many invoked his race in pejorative terms, especially outrageous.

An anchor on CNN accused West of putting on a “minstrel show,” a pundit on the same panel called him “the token Negro of the Trump administration.”

Another chipped in with, “Kanye West is what happens when Negroes don’t read.”

A New York Times columnist said the White House scene was “white supremacy by ventriloquism” and an MSNBC anchor called it “an assault on our White House.”

Whoa, Nellie. What nerve did he touch?

The first thing to notice are the double standards. If conservatives criticized a black liberal in those words, the liberal media would let loose a chorus of “racism” and ­demand that every Republican ­denounce the commentators.

But this time, it was the liberal ­media itself making the offensive comments, so Democratic politicians were not required to take a stand. Naturally, none did.

Yet it was the sheer volume of the hatred, and the uniformity of it, that really got attention. What’s this really about?

The outpouring of wrath suggests the answer. To wit, if Kanye West is important enough to be targeted by so many in the media for character assassination, he must be dangerous.

And if he’s dangerous, it’s in the same way that conservative speakers are dangerous to college snowflakes. Any dissent from the ruling coercive liberalism might be contagious, and therefore must be silenced. Diversity of thought cannot be permitted.

So we can assume the left fears West could be a leading indicator that Trump’s appeal to the working and middle classes is cutting across racial barriers.

And precisely because Democrats are making a fetish of race, gender and identity politics, a prominent racial and cultural force like Kanye West leaving the fold could be the start of a movement toward conservative values. Which is why he must be silenced by any means necessary.

October 15, 2018 8:26 AM  
Anonymous looking forward to the first week in November said...

It may be too late, for there are clear reasons why he and others would dissent from the coercive orthodoxy. Consider that black unemployment has reached historic lows because of the Trump economic boom, and one report says about 800,000 more African-Americans have jobs now than had them at the end of Barack Obama’s presidency.

These changes are giving rise to new, confident voices such as Candace Owens, a black commentator and activist, who supported West and blasted his critics.

“The paradigm has shifted,” Owens said. “Black conservatives will no longer be fearful. Black conservatives are willing to speak out. We are excited. It ­finally feels like it’s our time.”

Democrats, regardless of their race, generally count on getting ­upwards of 90 percent of the black vote. And the election of Obama seemed to seal party allegiance for years to come.

Not surprisingly, exit polls from the 2016 presidential contest showed Clinton getting about 89 percent of the black vote, and Trump just 8 percent.

That dramatic tilt confirmed that black voters remain the most reliable group in the Dems’ coalition, outpacing Latinos and Jews, with those groups generally giving the party about 75 percent of their votes.

Still, recent polls show Trump gaining support among black voters, with his approval rating as high as 36 percent in an August Rasmussen survey. Others, including Gallup, show he has gained, as well.

We will know more after the midterms, but, generally, the willingness of individual voters to buck historic group trends is a hopeful sign. Fundamentally, America is a nation of free individuals, not of tribes or groups, and our republic is healthier when both parties are forced to compete for every vote.

Any vote taken for granted is a vote not earned and leaves politicians free to break their promises without suffering any consequences.

And we’ve all had enough of that

October 15, 2018 8:30 AM  
Anonymous either 1/32 or 1/512, something like that... said...

"You got it, anon, perfect response. And now Hillary should issue a statement saying "I am not opposed to civility," and Republicans can say, "Yes you are, you shrill lesbian pedophile bitch," and we can spend the news cycle discussing which ways to misinterpret her attitudes, instead of the more pressing problems of American democracy requiring someone with some spine to hold it up."

you mean how Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing became a debate over whether the FBI should investigate how he masterminded "gang rape trains" in high school?

instead of the more pressing problems of American democracy requiring someone with some spine to hold it up?

“the results strongly support the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor in the individual’s pedigree, likely in the range of 6-10 generations ago.

If Warren’s great-great-great-grandmother was Native American, that puts her at 1/32nd American Indian. If the ancestor was 10 generations back, she would be 1/512th Native American."


October 15, 2018 8:42 AM  
Anonymous just glad Chief Wahoo isn't around to see this said...

"the results strongly support the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor in the individual’s pedigree, likely in the range of 6-10 generations ago.

If Warren’s great-great-great-grandmother was Native American, that puts her at 1/32nd American Indian. If the ancestor was 10 generations back, she would be 1/512th Native American."

she actually made a press release about this

isn't she afraid people would laugh?

October 15, 2018 8:46 AM  
Anonymous whatcha gonna do? said...

hate to give you kids any bad news, but....

RealCLearPolitics had the projected Senate at 50-50 before the Dems' incivility explosion at the Kavanaugh hearings

now, GOP is favored 53-47

and that still factors in some pre-Kav polls to depress the GOP average

I predicted 54-46

I stand by it

further, the big blue wave in the House is down to a four-seat advantage with 29 seats as toss-ups

toss-ups tend to go to the side with the momentum

turns out, Americans don't want to spend the next two years with endless investigations and impeachment hearings of Kavanaugh and Trump

maybe you devise some constructive vision over the next three weeks

it's probably too late but it's worth a try

October 15, 2018 8:59 AM  
Anonymous she's all in !!! said...

I just put down the New York Times. My heart is racing.

They’re predicting “Republicans could run the table and win a majority.” Democrats’ chances are slipping with 23 days left.

I refuse to give Republicans another 2 years in power if it’s the last thing I do.

To fix this, I’m personally triple-matching gifts until midnight to WIN and kick every Republican out of office.


Suggested Support: $1

I need 4 more Democrats from 20191 to step up before midnight and give a dollar. President Obama’s historic legacy is at stake. With our Final FEC Deadline on Wednesday, I can’t overstate the importance.

Can I count on your $1?

I’ll personally triple-match your gift.

Thank you,

Nancy Pelosi

October 15, 2018 9:11 AM  
Anonymous GOPer Chief Liar lies again said...

Trump taunted Warren over the issue at a July rally in Montana.

"I will give you a million dollars to your favorite charity, paid for by Trump, if you take the test and it shows you're an Indian," he said. "I have a feeling she will say 'no.'"

Warren on Monday reminded the president of his promise. "Please send the check to the National Indigenous Women's Resource Center," she said on Twitter.

When asked about the DNA test, Trump said, "Who cares?" Then he denied making the comment, as he left Washington to visit hurricane-stricken areas in Florida and Georgia.

RealClearPolitics has the videotape posted in this article:

Trump Offers $1 Million For "Pocahontas" Elizabeth Warren To Take DNA Test To Prove Indian Ancestry

October 15, 2018 1:26 PM  
Anonymous i write the songs said...

you have to feel bad for the gay agenda

they don't know whether to go high or low

but they'll do whatever it takes to get that magic obama feelin' again

reminds of what one America's most beloved gay artist once sang:

"I've look high, low, everywhere I possibly can
But there's just no tryin' to get the feeling again
It seemed to disappear as fast at it came"

it won't be back or a long....

long time

October 15, 2018 1:36 PM  
Anonymous Facts about 20191 said...

20191 -- Reston Virginia

Gerry Connolly (D) incumbent in the 11th District of Virginia

11th District voters elected Congressman Connolly with 88 percent and Hillary Clinton with 66 percent of the vote in 2016,

Connolly contributions
86.6% in state vs 13.4% out of state
42.0% in district vs 56.7% out of district and 1.3% no district data

Dove contributions
28.2% in state vs. 71.8% out of state
5.6% in district vs 83.3% out of district and 11.1% no district data

October 15, 2018 1:47 PM  
Anonymous Self-loathing is a shame said...

The homophobe is a Barry Manilow fan!

October 15, 2018 2:05 PM  
Anonymous it's the month of terror said...

I don't know that knowing a lyric from the radio constitutes fandom but I always liked his songs. Back from the heyday of top 40 singles

you know, I'm not a homophobe

I know a lot of very congenial homos and they don't scare me in the least

they are perfectly fine fellas

I just don't think we need to structure society in order to preference them

some of the very political gays are very obnoxious but, then, so are their straight minions

October 15, 2018 2:37 PM  
Anonymous Digby said...

Republicans are terrified of the “left-wing mob”: What really scares them is losing

Why are conservatives whining about the imaginary leftist mob? It’s a last-ditch effort to hold onto power

hear that the angry mob is on the march getting ready to take to the streets and destroy everything that God-fearing Real Americans care about. Again. This latest iteration of the perennial right-wing fear-mongering began when survivors and women's rights activists came to Washington to protest the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. These frightening revolutionaries scared the bejesus out of Republicans and they haven't been able to get a good night's sleep ever since.

President Trump has taken the lead in bravely defending the good people of our nation against these vicious street fighters, telling rally-goers in each of his many such events in the past week:

"You don’t hand matches to an arsonist, and you don’t give power to an angry, left-wing mob. And that’s what the Democrats have become."

That was a scripted line, obviously. Trump could never come up with such a literary phrase. His own words are a bit more pungent: “The Dims have gone wacko!”

He pulls out the "law and order" card frequently, claiming the loyalty of all police, casting them in opposition to Democrats. To a cheering group of law enforcement officers at the White House back in August, the president of the United States said, "[W]e have a little opposition called, the Democrats. I guess they just don't mind crime. They don't mind crime. It's pretty sad. ... The Democrat Party is held hostage by the so-called resistance, left-wing haters and angry mobs." Then he called himself their proud commander in chief, showing that he believes he commands the police as well as the military, which isn't true.

From the moment Trump was inaugurated and the Women's March was held in numerous cities the following day, the propaganda arm of the GOP has been pushing the idea that people protesting Trump's presidency are violent. The NRA was first out of the gate with a series it called "the clenched fist of truth," warning their members that the left-wing mob was coming for them:

Today, Trump's loyal soldiers have lined up behind him to wring their hands and clutch their pearls over the nasty women who stormed the halls of the Senate to yell at men in elevators. They've never been more frightened in their lives. David French of National Review has written that "it's time to stop excusing, rationalizing, and minimizing behavior that is dangerous, menacing, and threatening," by which he apparently means people being rude to Republicans in restaurants.

None of them seemed to have been concerned about the storming of town halls back in 2010, which came with written instructions from Tea Party organizers to "Artificially Inflate Your Numbers," "Be Disruptive Early and Often" and "Try to 'Rattle Him,' Not Have an Intelligent Debate."

The conservative protest model was very dignified and respectful:

Video: Tea Partiers Mock And Scorn Apparent Parkinson's Victim

As for descending on the capitol to take the protest to the elected officials, here's how it's handled by respectable people...

October 15, 2018 2:40 PM  
Anonymous Digby continues said...

Video: Tea Partiers Spit on Congressman Cleaver

The Tea Party protests against the Affordable Care Act were certainly aggressive, sometimes dangerous and always inexplicable. (Why people were so overwrought that the government was trying to make health care available to more people is something for future psychiatrists to figure out.)

Anyone who has observed the Donald Trump phenomenon knows that he has a history of inciting his followers to potential violence. Recall that during the campaign at various times he responded to protesters with remarks like, “I’d like to punch him in the face," "maybe he should have been roughed up," "part of the problem is no one wants to hurt each other anymore" and "if you do (hurt him), I’ll defend you in court, don’t worry about it.” His reference to the Charlottesville white supremacists as "very fine people" will go down as one of the more disturbing comments made by any president in American history.

Trump's rally-goers still commonly launch into chants of "lock her up" at the mere mention of Hillary Clinton and, more recently, Dianne Feinstein. Perhaps some people think that crowds calling for the jailing of political opponents is all in good fun. But it's chilling for the president of the United States to stand smiling and nodding above them as they do it.

This current chest-beating about "the angry left-wing mob" may morph into something more threatening as we move into the presidential campaign next year and Trump and his followers start to feel the heat of possible defeat. The NRA certainly seems prepared to take it to the next level. Sure, the Republicans hope to keep their base riled up by pretending that the "angry mob" of women in pink hats and protesters embarrassing Republican officials in public presents a threat to the nation. But Trump voting right-wingers are not actually afraid. They're playing the victim to own the libs.

Republican officials are using this "angry mob" rhetoric for a specific purpose: They're trying to get Democratic lawmakers to feel uncomfortable and distance themselves from their most passionate supporters, in hopes that that will suppress the midterm vote. Handwringing conservative pundits are trying to make liberals in the media condemn the protesters and put them on the defensive. They want to make the Democrats condemn their own voters. So far, it's not working.

Protests, even violent ones, are nothing new in America. Trump copped his "I am the candidate of law and order" from Richard Nixon, who basically stole it from George Wallace during an era of political assassinations, urban riots and massive civil rights and anti-war protests. There are plenty of examples of similar political and social upheavals in our past, including a bloody civil war. The "polarization" we are experiencing in our politics is hardly unprecedented.

Considering how outrageous the president of the United States has become and how supine and accommodating the Republicans in Congress have been, these first two years of the Trump administration have been remarkably serene. That's because the supposedly dangerous "Resistance" has actually been feverishly organizing on the ground all over the country to recruit candidates and run campaigns to send Republicans packing. The "angry left-wing mob" isn't running wild in the streets -- it's running for office. That's what's got Republicans shaking in their boots.

October 15, 2018 2:40 PM  
Anonymous we're all minorities !! said...

"Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who is gearing up for a likely 2020 presidential bid, has released a DNA test that suggests she has a distant Native American ancestor, part of an extraordinary effort to discredit President Trump and others who have questioned her claims about her heritage."

actually, the math in Elizabeth's report is faulty

she is either 1/64 or 1/1024 American Indian


according to The New York Times, the average white person in America has nearly double the amount of American Indian DNA (0.18%) as Elizabeth Warren (0.098%), who claims to be Cherokee

October 15, 2018 4:07 PM  
Anonymous Will wonders never cease said...

Well lookie there.

The TTF troll puts its faith in data offered by the New York Times.

I'm a white person in America and I do not have any native American DNA per's assessment.

tRump owes Senator Warren one million dollars.

Of course he'll try to weasel out of it as he does every debt he's ever incurred.

Or maybe he'll declare bankruptcy again like Sears just did.

"It's a shame" he's declared bankruptcy more times than Sears has.

Trump's multiple bankruptcies are a "very, very sad" result of his improperly running his businesses.

#1) Trump Taj Mahal (1991): The Trump Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City opened in 1990, with Trump financing the completion of its construction with $675 million in junk bonds at 14% interest. By the following year the casino itself was in debt to the tune of $3 billion, while Trump himself owed some $900 million in personal liabilities.

In order to keep the Taj Mahal afloat, Trump struck a deal with his lenders in which he gave up half his ownership share and equity in the casino, sold his Trump Shuttle airline and his Trump Princess 220-foot yacht, and agreed to a bank-set limit on his personal spending in exchange for a lower interest rate and additional time to make his loan payments.

#2 and #3) Trump’s Castle and Trump Plaza Casinos (1992): Less than a year after the Taj Mahal bankruptcy Trump filed for Chapter 11 protection again for two more Atlantic City hotel-casinos, the Trump Plaza and Trump’s Castle, over their inability to make principal and interest payments on bonds. The Plaza ($550 million in debt) and the Castle ($338 million in debt) were competing against each other, as well as against the Taj Mahal, and Trump gave up a 50% share in exchange for more favorable terms on the debts.

#4) Trump Plaza Hotel (1992): Donald Trump filed for bankruptcy protection a third time in 1992 over the Trump Plaza Hotel on New York’s famous Fifth Avenue, overlooking Central Park in midtown Manhattan. Once again, Trump gave up a 49% stake in the property to secure more favorable terms from lenders on the luxury hotel’s debt of more than $550 million.

#5) Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts (2004): In 1995, Donald Trump established Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts as a publicly traded company, an entity that eventually consolidated his three Atlantic City casinos (Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Castle, and Trump Plaza), along with other properties, under one company. In 2004, Trump sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection for the company, with filings listing about $1.8 billion in debt. Yet again, Trump’s ownership in the business was reduced, from 47% to 27%, in order to obtain more favorable terms from lenders.

#6) Trump Entertainment Resorts (2009): After its 2004 bankruptcy, Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts was renamed Trump Entertainment Resorts (TER), and that latter entity went Chapter 11 in 2009 with a debt of $1.2 billion. Trump fought with his board of directors over how to restructure the company and ended up reducing his ownership share of the business once again (to 10%) and resigning as chairman of the board.

Other Trump Business Failures

Trump Steaks
GoTrump (online travel site)
Trump Airlines
Trump Vodka
Trump Mortgage
Trump: The Game
Trump Magazine
Trump University
Trump Ice (bottled water)
The New Jersey Generals (pro football team)
Tour de Trump (bicycle race)
Trump Network (nutritional supplements)
Trumped! (syndicated radio spot)

October 15, 2018 4:29 PM  
Anonymous goofy grape said...

"There seems to be some confusion lately about civility, and Michelle Obama’s 2016-ish idea that “When they go low, we go high.”"

maybe Michelle said this first. I don't remember

but I do remember Hillary repeating it ad nauseum, with a crazed look on her face

"Some prominent liberals — Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Michael Avenatti, among them —"


if Michael Avenatti is a "prominent liberal", you guys a ein a lot more trouble than I thought

"are having second thoughts about this lofty-sounding idea, which is, intrinsically, a losing strategy"

if you think civility is, like, intrinsically, a losing strategy, just wait til November and see what incivility gets you!!

"Well lookie there.

The TTF troll puts its faith in data offered by the New York Times"

actually, I used them because you crazed radicals have too much invested in their propaganda to argue with it

"I'm a white person in America and I do not have any native American DNA per's assessment"

so what?

you're apparently stupider than average so you may just be one of those oddball outliers in a whole mess of ways

"tRump owes Senator Warren one million dollars."

If I read it correctly, he said if he gave her a test and she took it and she was American Indian, he'd give her one million dollars

he never gave her one

and she's less Native american than average so her seeking preferential treatment based on minority status was fraud

unless we're all entitled to it (except you, of course)

October 15, 2018 4:59 PM  
Anonymous tRump thugs said...

Proud Boys Street Gang Had A Weekend Of Coast-To-Coast Violence

Members of the violent and homophobic gang were involved in violence in Oregon and New York, but there were no immediate arrests.

For one weekend, a violent misogynistic and homophobic street gang of proto-fascists ran amok on the East Coast and West Coast, seeking out and then assaulting protesters in Portland, Oregon, and New York City.

The Proud Boys ― a pro-Trump fraternity known for acts of violence ― started their outburst of violence on Friday night, immediately after members left an event headlined by their leader, Vice co-founder Gavin McInnes, at the Metropolitan Republican Club, the GOP’s headquarters in New York City.

Footage shot by video journalist Sandi Bachom shows a group of Proud Boys setting upon three anti-fascist protesters on a street on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, then beating them on the ground while screaming homophobic slurs.

“Do you feel brave now, faggot?” one of the attackers yelled, according to two journalists on the scene. Another video shows multiple attackers yelling “faggot.”

McInnes was present after the assault, waving a sword. He had billed his New York appearance as a celebration of the anniversary of a Japanese ultranationalist who assassinated the head of the Japanese Socialist Party with a sword on Oct. 12, 1960.

The murderer of Inejirom Asanuma, the head of the Japanese Socialist Party, was 17 years old, just a boy. But he'd joined a far-right group, the kind that demanded a return to tradition and a purging of foreign influence. Sound familiar? He hung himself in a juvenile detention cell after writing a pro-Imperial message on the wall.

October 15, 2018 5:08 PM  
Anonymous To the misreader said...

"If I read it correctly, he said if he gave her a test and she took it and she was American Indian, he'd give her one million dollars"

You misread what your Chief GOPer Liar said.

Here are his quotes from RCP:

..."I promise you I'll do this: I will take, you know those little kits they sell on television... learn your heritage!"

"A guy says he was born in Scotland, turns out h was born in Puerto Rico, that's okay, that's good, you know. A guy ways he was born in Germany, he was born someplace else."

"And in the middle of the debate, when she proclaims that she is of Indian heritage because her mother said she has high cheek bones, that is her only evidence, her mother said we have high cheek bones," Trump continued.

"We will take that little kit -- but we have to do it gently. Because we're in the #MeToo generation, we have to do it gently," the president trolled. "And we will very genlty take that kit, and slowly toss it, hoping it doesn't injure her arm, and we will say: I will give you a million dollars to your favorite charity, paid for by Trump, if you take the test and it shows you're an Indian."

Senator Warren did not wait for some cheap little rigged RONCO test kit provided by your Chief GOPer Liar.

She did much better than that and had an actual DNA analysis conducted by Carlos D. Bustamante, a Stanford University professor, who reported “the vast majority” of Warren’s ancestry is European but that “the results strongly support the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor in the individual’s pedigree, likely in the range of 6-10 generations ago.”

Your bankrupt Chief GOP Liar owes one million dollars to Senator Warren's "favorite charity, paid for by tRump" as "promised."

October 15, 2018 5:50 PM  
Anonymous tiger lily's friend said...

"You misread"

no, I read it quite correctly

as you demonstrate with the following quote:

"Senator Warren did not wait for some cheap little rigged RONCO test kit provided by your Chief GOPer Liar"

so, she didn't meet the terms o the challenge

but, wait, there's more:

"She did much better than that and had an actual DNA analysis conducted by Carlos D. Bustamante, a Stanford University professor, who reported “the vast majority” of Warren’s ancestry is European but that “the results strongly support the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor in the individual’s pedigree, likely in the range of 6-10 generations ago.”"

so, the test by the grand pooh-bah himself found she has less Native American DNA than the average American

there's no sense in which she is an Indian

and she has used this minority status many times to receive preferential treatment

one sick puppy

October 15, 2018 6:05 PM  
Anonymous hocus pocus Senate said...

Politicians talk about "witch hunts" so often that the occult has almost become cliche in American politics. But in Arizona, there's at least one candidate on the ballot who takes sorcery very seriously.

Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Arizona, has been known to hang out with witches. It was during the height of the Iraq War when Sinema, then a far-left protest organizer, summoned supernatural help to stop the Iraq War.

Emails show Sinema inviting a prominent coven of feminist witches in Arizona called Pagan Cluster to celebrate International Women’s Day and to protest the war in March of 2003. Code Pink protesters wore pink, obviously enough, and the Women in Black wore black. But Sinema encouraged the witches to wear “colorful clothing and come ready to dance, twirl, and stay in touch with your inner creativity and with the Earth.”

The Sinema campaign would not say why she invited the witches or clarify why she thought members of the occult deserved a seat at the table during discussions concerning war and peace. The witches in question, it should be noted, claim to practice only nonviolent magic and say theirs is a peaceful and democratic kind of sorcery.

Out of the broom closet and into the public square, the Pagan Cluster focuses “sharing spiritual insights and participating in direct democracy.” Their visions are decidedly liberal and many of their coven “have roots in the Reclaiming Tradition of feminist Witchcraft.”

This sort of hocus pocus wasn't isolated either. Later that year, in November, Sinema attended a similar anti-war rally, this one in Miami and with other pagans. In emails archived online via the WaybackMachine, she writes about "singing and spiraling in the pagan's circle only 5 rows back from the police line." The magic was not enough to stop a police crackdown apparently. Sinema described the subsequent crowd control and arrests as "brutal."

October 15, 2018 6:31 PM  
Anonymous tRump thugs IDed said...

Dannis Davila
David Kuriakose
Erik Dupuy
Irvin Antillon
Joe Bola
Johnny Kinsman
Matthew Mark Meyer
Maxwell Hare
Simon L. Greenwood

Dave Jay
Geoff Young
Johnny Kinsman
Maxwell Hare

October 15, 2018 6:38 PM  
Anonymous Junior tRump Liar gets it wrong again said...

"and she has used this minority status many times to receive preferential treatment"


Show us one time she used her heritage to get anything she didn't earn herself.

You won't find anything.

Instead, watch 90 seconds of the video at WaPo, starting 2 minutes in and find out what her bosses say about her and her heritage.

October 15, 2018 6:55 PM  
Anonymous following all the prominent liberals, haha said...

WASHINGTON – A federal judge in California on Monday dismissed a lawsuit filed by former porn star Stormy Daniels alleging President Donald Trump defamed her in a tweet.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, had filed the suit after Trump posted a tweet dismissing comments she had made in broadcast interviews.

U.S. District Court Judge S. James Otero indicated during arguments last month that he believed the tweet by Trump that named her appeared to be protected by the First Amendment.

Michael Avenatti, Daniels' attorney, a VERY PROMINENT LIBERAL,....

lost again!!!

October 15, 2018 7:34 PM  
Anonymous lizzie is history said...

Why did Sen. Elizabeth Warren spend all these years claiming to be a Native American?

One plausible answer might be that her family had lied to her, or were also misled about their heritage, and that Warren truly believed she was Cherokee. This happens relatively often, I suppose. Then again, few people exhibit as much certitude, and gain as many benefits, over a claim that’s so obscure and unverifiable.

The second is that Warren herself lied or exaggerated her heritage, knowing full well that her contention to Cherokee ancestry was likely nothing more than lore. She then latched on to this negligible history to gain traction in an academic field that was searching for more diversity in their candidates.

We now know that the second option is more probable after the prospective presidential candidate decided to make a huge deal out of taking a DNA test, that, in reality, only proves she is as white as I am. A ludicrously unskeptical Boston Globe story about Warren’s dramatic decision to take the test begins by contending that there’s “strong evidence’’ of Warren’s Native American’s ancestry dating back 6 to 10 generations—which creates the impression that she has Native American family littered over the past 100 years.

In truth, we learn, it’s possible that Warren’s great-great-great grandmother was partially Native American. This would make her around 1/32nd American Indian, a far cry from any reasonable threshold to embrace minority status for a job. That’s exactly what she did starting in the 1990s, before walking back her claims when it became politically expedient.

Then again, being 1/32 (and really, the math says 1/64th) Native American is the high-end possibility. It is just as possible that Warren 1/1,024th Native American. (The story intially claimed it was 1/512th.) So maybe her great-great-great-great grandmother was part Cherokee.


October 15, 2018 8:48 PM  
Anonymous lizzie is history said...

Whatever the number is, there’s little genetic data available from Native Americans because of fears of exploitation (Warren’s case might be good example of why). There is no way to break down the DNA into region or tribe. The DNA tests merely rely on some guesswork by referencing the DNA to people from South America.

According to The New York Times, the average white person in America has nearly double the amount of American Indian DNA (0.18%) as Elizabeth Warren (0.098%), who claims to be Cherokee. Then there is this:

The credulous reporter who wrote the Warren DNA piece didn't do the math correctly (and this is before getting into why the particular test, which didn't even use American Indian DNA to compare, was garbage). Six generations removed is 1/64. Ten removed is 1/1024 (0.098%).

I don’t much care about Warren’s ethnicity, but she is not, in any genuine sense, a racial or ethnic minority. Not in blood. Not in experience. Under her standards, how many Americans would qualify as Native American? Or put it this way: is being 1/1,024th African enough to claim “minority” status in a professional setting? I’m asking for the liberals who believe race-based hiring is an important means of facilitating diversity and ensuring fairness.

It was Warren who made it all an issue. We don’t fully know how important Warren’s claims were in her career. There is, however, much evidence that her self-driven minority claims in the 1990s were helpful. Warren, who once maintained her family had “high cheekbones like all of the Indians do,” was listed as a “minority faculty member” by The University of Pennsylvania. She had the school switch her designation from white to Native American. Warren self-identified as a “minority” in the legal directory, and Harvard Law School preposterously listed her as one of the “women of color” the school had hired. On job applications, Warren was very specific in claiming that she had Cherokee and Delaware Indian ancestry.

When her supposed Native American heritage came under scrutiny during her first Senate bid, Warren presented a recipe she had published in her cousin’s cookbook as evidence of her background. It was signed “Elizabeth Warren — Cherokee.” Later we learned that even the recipe was taken verbatim from an article in The New York Times five years earlier.

It’s easy to see what’s going on. Warren wants to dull Donald Trump’s “Fauxcahontas” jibes because she is about to run for president. Rather than admitting she has no genuine cause for being “proud of my Native American heritage” in her career, she’s doubled down on the assertion.

In the end, Carlos D. Bustamante, a Stanford University professor who does his best to help Warren, concludes that “the vast majority” of Warren’s ancestry is European. And Warren could easily have continued to claim that she was merely acting on the history she was told by her family rather than a cynical attempt to bolster her career. Now we have evidence that the latter is far more likely.

One of the talking points proliferating online—and also featured in the Globe article, so Warren will surely use it—is that Trump’s criticism of Warren is comparable to birtherism, and thus racist. Yet there are numerous important differences. For starters, Barack Obama was an American citizen. Obama is black. Obama didn’t invent, or grab onto, some opaque ancestral history to take advantage of minority hiring and deny someone worthy of the position.

One of these attacks is a conspiracy theory fueled by paranoia. The other is turning out to be fact.

Acting as if the results of the test are a vindication of her initial claims, as so many journalists are now framing it, is an assault on reason.

October 15, 2018 8:49 PM  
Anonymous just win, baby said...

"Some prominent liberals — Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Michael Avenatti, among them —are having second thoughts about this lofty-sounding idea, which is, intrinsically, a losing strategy"

BANGOR, Maine (AP) — A hazardous materials team was called Monday to investigate a suspicious letter sent to the home of Republican Sen. Susan Collins, officials said.

Police and fire vehicles were parked outside her home, and several people in hazmat suits were seen entering the home. Yellow police tape was wrapped around the perimeter of the property.

It was unclear who sent the letter. But critics have hurled threats at Collins recently over her vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Outside the house, a Bangor Daily News photographer captured an image of a person in a hazmat suit holding an envelope in a plastic bag. Later, the FBI arrived, along with vans carrying people in military uniforms, the newspaper reported.

October 15, 2018 11:46 PM  
Anonymous let's talk said...

What’s behind the recent spread of outraged mobs on US streets, wild-eyed and throwing violent fits because their favored political outcome didn’t happen? How did so many Americans give up on resolving disagreements through discussion and turn the fact that a disagreement exists into an excuse for a tantrum?

Campuses started setting up “safe spaces” well before 2015, when the news hit our media in earnest: College students were literally taking shelter from the possibility of hearing opinions they might disagree with.

For all the mockery the idea received, we’re seeing that principle extended to the real world. The recent outbursts on our streets have their root in the idea that only one opinion is the correct one and all others must be shut down.

And politicians are encouraging the idea that disagreement is a personal attack: “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about,” Hillary Clinton said last week.

“If you don’t agree, unfriend me” is a common enough post on Facebook — and that’s directed toward people who are supposed to be your friends.

It’s not a big leap from there to: If you don’t agree, you can’t have dinner, as Ted Cruz found out recently when he was chased from a restaurant. Or to yelling at Sen. Jeff Flake in an elevator. Or to: If you don’t agree, I can physically assault you, applied to strangers on the other side of your protest, as happened recently to the Republican son of President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice.

We’re also years into those pre-Thanksgiving articles about how to talk to members of your own family who have a different political perspective. Most pieces now advise you to avoid talking politics altogether. That’s normal, actually — but if you avoid the subject because it makes you bristle with anger toward the people you love, that’s a problem.

It’s not just far-off relatives with a different political perspective that raise the ire of those unable to handle disagreement. In a Washington Post op-ed, “Thanks for not raping us, all you ‘good men.’ But it’s not enough,” Victoria Bissell Brown writes that she raged at her husband because of some small comment “I yelled at my husband last night. Not pick-up-your-socks yell. Not how-could-you-ignore-that-red-light yell. This was real yelling. This was 30 minutes of from-the-gut yelling.”

This is not normal. This is not behavior that should be rewarded with publication of an op-ed column on a non-fringe website. Bissell Brown is a retired history professor; the lessons of safe-space campus culture weren’t limited to students.

October 16, 2018 4:49 AM  
Anonymous let's talk said...

And when she reports that “I announced that I hate all men, and wish all men were dead,” that isn’t a joke we can all be in on. The inability to resolve conflict normally even in our own homes is exactly what spills out onto our streets.

After the 2016 election, we heard lots of admissions that many of us reside in political bubbles where we never hear outside opinions. For a while, it seemed like the consensus was that this was a negative thing. But now people increasingly retreat to these bubbles, proudly, and never learn how to handle political disagreement.

The result is the rage we’re seeing now. The more we shut off hearing the other side’s point of view, the more likely we are to see these mobs spring up.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder said last week, “Michelle [Obama] always says, you know, ‘When they go low, we go high.’ No. When they go low, we kick them. That’s what this new Democratic Party is about.”

Criticized for encouraging violence, he called it “fake outrage” and tweeted that he only meant “Republicans are undermining our democracy and Democrats need to be tough, proud and stand up for the values we believe in — the end.” He didn’t explain how his kicking comment made sense in that context.

When the other side is seeking to “destroy what you stand for,” or “undermine our democracy,” violence doesn’t seem so far-fetched.

In covering the early days of “safe spaces,” Conor Friedersdorf wrote for The Atlantic about student protesters who didn’t want a reporter filming them: “At various points, they intimidate him. Ultimately, they physically push him. But all the while, they are operating on the premise, or carrying on the pretense, that he is making them unsafe. It is as if they’ve weaponized the concept of ‘safe spaces.’ ”

Never learning to argue out their political beliefs, these people have graduated and now expect their opinions to always be shared and their favored political outcomes to always occur. Instead of being told to grow up, they’re encouraged to express their fury by people who should know better. Better for everyone if they had their rude awakening sooner rather than later.

October 16, 2018 4:51 AM  
Anonymous Hail to the Redskins said...

So sad that the gay agenda fell for Elizabeth Warren's inadequate defense for pretending to be a minority so she could get preferential treatment. At this point, she has as much chance as Hillary or that most prominent liberal, Michael Avenatti, to be President. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Liberals routinely denounce conservatives as racists, but after the vicious insults hurled at Kanye West in the anti-Trump media in the past few days in response to his meeting with President Trump, prominent African-American conservatives are saying West is being unfairly targeted for racist attacks from the left.

Deroy Murdock, a journalist who is black, denounced attacks on West by other African-Americans on CNN, saying that “these reprehensible, racist comments on CNN are typical of the Trump-hating left.” He added that “black Americans who think for ourselves are mocked and degraded with words we last saw under Jim Crow.”

Murdock was responding to an attack on West by CNN political commentator Bakari Sellers, a former Democratic state legislator in South Carolina, who said “Kanye West is what happens when Negroes don’t read.”

Another African-American CNN commentator, Tara Setmayer, called West “the token Negro of the Trump administration.”

Larry Elder, a black conservative author and talk radio host, said that “apart from white Republicans, the remaining group in America that is still OK to insult, ridicule and stigmatize is black Republicans.”

Imagine the furor that would have occurred if a liberal African-American entertainer had been attacked with the same insults thrown at West. But since West is a Trump supporter, the left feels it can demonize him with the vilest of insults.

Dismissing, discounting, devaluing and demonizing someone’s opinions because of the color of his or her skin is pretty much the “textbook definition” of racism.

And that’s exactly what we’ve seen from the angry, hate-filled mob that the Democrats and their allies have become as they smeared and demeaned West over his unthinkable heresy: backing Trump while black.

October 16, 2018 5:14 AM  
Anonymous Hail to the Redskins said...

Never mind the fact that West, in his extraordinary appearance Thursday in the Oval Office with President Trump, made deep and important points about the breakdown of families, about welfare dependency, and about economic policy, jobs and manufacturing.

Dismissing, discounting, devaluing and demonizing someone’s opinions because of the color of his or her skin is pretty much the “textbook definition” of racism. And that’s exactly what we’ve seen from the angry, hate-filled mob that the Democrats and their allies have become as they smeared and demeaned West.

Never mind that his comments about business revealed an ambitious, entrepreneurial spirit that is a model for any young person – black, white or from any other background – to aspire to.

Never mind that West’s passionate defense of thinking for yourself, standing up for what you believe, and resisting oppression and intimidation represent ideals that underpin a free, tolerant and pluralistic society.

And never mind that West actually made an argument in favor of those famous “democratic norms” that we keep being told are under threat these days.

Never mind all that: West is black; black people are supposed to support Democrats; black people are supposed to hate President Trump. It follows that West must be belittled and delegitimized.

So we had the obscene spectacle of some in the elitist Democratic establishment behaving like a crazed left-wing mob, turning on an African-American man and ripping him to shreds with unthinking brutality: West is mentally ill. West is stupid. West must be destroyed.

But here’s an interesting question: what explains the sheer intensity of the left’s racist rants over West? After all, West has expressed support for President Trump before, and the reaction, while hostile, was nothing like this.

I think there’s a simple explanation: the left is in a state of panic over President’s Trump’s undeniable success.

After years of depicting Trump as a narcissistic buffoon with zero interest in or knowledge of policy, imagine how galling it must be for the left to watch as he completes what any objective observer would conclude is one of the most successful first two years of a presidency ever.

On the economy, Trump has ended the war on enterprise, the war on energy and the war on success. It’s not just the deregulation and the tax cuts. It’s the fact that business leaders and entrepreneurs can see that this is an unashamedly pro-enterprise administration.

The president’s pro-business approach has led to a revival in business confidence, and that in turn has spurred a massive boost in business investment, including in infrastructure. This is the key not just to economic growth but to wage growth. Investment boosts productivity; if workers are more productive they can earn more.

That’s why we’re seeing not just record lows in unemployment but a big shift from part-time to full-time work and a rise in earnings after decades of wage stagnation.

Donald Trump promised to be a pro-worker president and he is delivering.

October 16, 2018 5:17 AM  
Anonymous Hail to the Redskins said...

But Trump’s triumphs go well beyond the economy. As his administration matures I detect an increasingly solid grip on strategy and policy, and it comes right from the top.

The president is now achieving the recognition he deserves for a trade strategy that seeks to combine economic benefits for working Americans with impressive geo-strategic ambition.

Gone are the years of failed elitism that assumed nothing could be done about a rising China. President Trump refuses to cede American global leadership to the authoritarian regime in Beijing, and that is a historic accomplishment.

Then look at the grasp President Trump has shown on foreign policy more broadly: dramatically lowering the threat of nuclear war with North Korea; deterring chemical weapons use by Syria; showing that strength works – as evidenced with the release Friday of Pastor Andrew Brunson by Turkey.

There’s also the less visible but equally significant policy work that the Trump administration is quietly advancing. A great example is the Workforce Development initiative led by Ivanka Trump, coordinating a government and private sector crusade to equip American workers with the skills they need to flourish in the fast-changing 21st century economy.

All of this may seem a world away from Kanye West’s wild meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office. But they are intimately connected.

What West sees is a president who is delivering on his promises, bringing about big changes after years of politicians who were all the same, and producing tangible positive results for American workers and families.

Interestingly, the left see that success as well. That’s what they’re terrified of. And that’s why any credible endorser of President Trump – like Kanye West – must be destroyed.

October 16, 2018 5:20 AM  
Anonymous life should be preferenced, not practices that are lifeless said...

"Going low would mean lying,"

Dems do it as a default

"using dirty tricks such as voter suppression,"

or paying voters to come to the polls

or buying dossiers of lies and pretending they have another source,

or weaponizing the intelligence agencies to spy on your opponent

"manipulating the press,"

whatever this means, most of the mainstream press acts as a department of the DNC

they don't just report facts, the argue, on the front page, the liberal position

"falsely associating your opponent with negative groups."

you mean like when TTF constantly tries to associate Trump with white supremacist groups or when they try to associate pro-family groups with Westboro Baptist?

"Well, liberals could do that,"

well, liberals do that

"we could go low."

when they say this, all it means is that they will be less hypocritical and acknowledge what they have always done

October 16, 2018 6:00 AM  
Anonymous grrrrrrrrrrrreat!!! said...

Liberal journalists bending over backwards to defend the violent, left-wing mobs now plaguing this nation fundamentally misunderstand how political protest works in this country.

In an op-ed masquerading as “news,” Washington Post political reporters inform us that Republican criticism of left-wing “mobs” is merely “fearmongering” designed to rile up “white voters, particularly men.”

The “angry mobs” that Republicans have been denouncing, they claim, are nothing more than high-minded activists engaging in the “freedom to assemble” because they’re “appalled” by GOP policies.

When Daily Beast columnist Matt Lewis condemned the mob of activists that drove Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and his wife out of a restaurant, angry CNN anchor Brooke Baldwin shot back, “Oh, you’re not going to use the mob word here.”

CNN’s Don Lemon also defended the incident: “It’s not mob behavior. It’s people who are upset and angry with the way the country is going.” He then made the astonishing claim that the Constitution permits Americans to protest “wherever you want.”

He’s wrong.

Considering that these “journalists” depend on the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press for their very existence, it would probably behoove them to actually read the entire thing … all 45 words of it:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

It should come as a relief to The Post, Baldwin and Lemon that Republican lawmakers have never so much as hinted that Congress should pass such a law. Their only demand has been the viewpoint-neutral enforcement of laws against violence, harassment and destruction of property — none of which even remotely conflicts with the right to assemble.

The Supreme Court has made abundantly clear that freedom of assembly is not absolute, explicitly allowing the government to impose content-neutral “time, place and manner” restrictions as long as they “are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and ... leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information.”

That’s why you need a permit to hold a demonstration in a public space, and why such demonstrations can be restricted to the location specified in the permit.

Nor is private property safe from the depredations of the rabble, despite the fact that the First Amendment only applies to the government, and nowhere requires private citizens to open up their homes or businesses to protesters.

With active encouragement from Democrats such as Rep. Maxine Waters of California, radical leftists have taken to forming flash mobs when they spot a Republican official dining out. This sort of behavior is inconvenient for the people on the receiving end of such abuse, but the real victims are the restaurant owners whose livelihoods are threatened by it.

October 16, 2018 8:15 AM  
Anonymous grrrrrrrrrrrreat!!! said...

The incitement shows no signs of abating. Last week, former Attorney General Eric Holder declared that when Republicans “go low,” Democrats should “kick ‘em,” and Hillary Clinton delivered the mafia-esque warning that “civility can start again” only once Democrats regain control of Congress.

More fundamentally, the First Amendment guarantees Americans’ right to assemble “peaceably” — a qualifier that increasingly doesn’t apply to the type of behavior exhibited by leftists and Democrat activists.

"Antifa" protesters recently shut down public roadways in Portland, Oregon, blocking traffic and intimidating the hapless motorists stranded by their lawless antics.

Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., police made hundreds of arrests as protesters opposed to the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court flagrantly violated rules designed to ensure the orderly functioning of public institutions. At least 300 protesters were arrested for unlawfully demonstrating at a Senate office building, and nearly 200 more were arrested for similar infractions at the Capitol and Supreme Court buildings.

The numerous Democratic partisans masquerading as objective journalists seem to think that this is just what “activism” looks like in a constitutional republic. But on those rare occasions when conservatives are “appalled” enough by Democratic policies to actually protest, they show that it is indeed possible to “petition the government for a redress of grievances” without creating new grievances for their fellow citizens in the process.

The foremost example of conservative protest in recent memory is the Tea Party movement, which not only secured permits for its events, but also ensured that its supporters fastidiously abided by the terms of those permits.

Freedom of assembly is one of the most important rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, which is why the Founders included it in the very first amendment they adopted, alongside the freedoms of religion, speech and the press.

The Democrat-Media Complex’s characterization of unruly — and frequently violent — mob action as mere “activism” demonstrates not only a shocking ignorance of basic constitutional principles, but also a callous disregard for the well-being of those individuals who have the misfortune to become collateral damage in the left’s unhinged, self-righteous crusade.

October 16, 2018 8:17 AM  
Anonymous never before said...

Given what the Trump administration is saying are record achievements for a president at this stage in office, why would anyone consider voting for Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections?

Paul Bedard has listed 289 accomplishments of the Trump administration, beginning with the obvious one, the economy: “They include 173 major wins, such as adding more than 4 million jobs, and another 116 smaller victories, some with outsize importance, such as the 83 percent one-year increase in arrests of MS-13 gang members.”

They also include two justices now on the U.S. Supreme Court and 82 other federal judges confirmed to lower courts.

As the White House has touted, unemployment in all demographics is the lowest it has been since 1969. Despite a recent blip in the stock market, portfolios have grown fatter since Donald Trump became president. An analysis in The Wall Street Journal predicts economic growth is likely to continue “for years.”

Other positives include updated trade deals with Mexico and Canada that will produce benefits for American manufacturers and workers far more than the old NAFTA deal ever did.

Consumer confidence reached an 18-year high in September, according to Lynn Franco, director of Economic Indicators at the Conference Board, which conducts the Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index.

Top this off with the successfully negotiated release of Pastor Andrew Brunson from a Turkish prison and a more realistic foreign policy in confronting America’s enemies.

According to Gallup’s weekly tracking poll, for the week of Oct. 7, the president’s approval rating jumped a percentage point, from 42 percent to 43 percent. His disapproval rating holds at 53 percent, though that number is down three percentage points from the week of Sept. 16. Rasmussen, which tends to be more favorable toward Republicans, puts the president’s approval at 51 percent. That is higher than President Obama achieved at a similar point in his presidency. Presidential polling does not necessarily forecast voter behavior in state and local races, though one Quinnipiac University Poll shows that Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican, has a nine-point likely voter lead over his opponent, Rep. Beto O’Rourke, Texas Democrat.

In view of Republican successes, including tax cuts and the booming economy, what Democratic policies would produce results better than these? Other than spite for the president, why would voters elect candidates who want to return to a past where things were far different?

Do people who didn’t have jobs during the previous administration want to embrace policies that kept them unemployed? Do businesses once prevented from hiring people because of regulations now wish to have regulations re-imposed and to lay off workers they recently hired?

By what logic do some people wish to return to the recent past, including a recent past that includes Republican presidents who cannot lay claim to the type of successes President Trump is enjoying?

Perhaps most amazing is the president’s growing approval among African-American voters, whose votes he is openly campaigning for as evidenced by rapper Kanye West’s endorsement and the president’s reciprocal embrace. USA Today reported on a new Rasmussen poll that shows “approval rating among African Americans is at 36 percent, nearly double his support at this time last year.” Despite the NAACP’s hostility toward the president, African-American voters seem focused more on results than symbolism.

Polls have been wrong in the past — take the 2016 election as the latest example — but the president has begun touting his record while campaigning for candidates. That record appears to be resonating with voters, at least in some states. Never has the Ronald Reagan question “Are you better off than you were four years ago” seemed more relevant. Never has the answer appeared more obvious.

October 16, 2018 9:04 AM  
Anonymous united we stand, divided we fall, and if our backs should ever be against the wall, the Dems will stab us said...

Despite the overwhelmingly negative coverage of his administration, President Donald Trump's approval rating is as high or higher than half of the previous six presidents at this point in their first terms. You won't believe who scored better.

Trump has been enjoying a rare string of good news. The economy is humming and the jobless rate just hit a 49-year low. Trump won an intense battle over Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court. He secured a replacement for Nafta. His poll numbers are edging up. And Republican prospects in the midterm elections appear to have improved.

But according to the Gallup Poll, Trump's approval rating as of his 632nd day in office was 44%.

Is that good or bad? That depends on the context. Trump has never polled well. Gallup had his approval rating at 45% the day he took office.

The mainstream press focused intensely on Trump's initial rating, which was well below those of any president since Gallup first started tracking this in 1945.

But the press lost interest in such comparisons as time went by.

he reason is that, by this point in their first terms, approval ratings for most presidents had declined. Sometimes sharply.

As a matter of fact, Trump's approval rating is now higher than, or tied with, three of the past six presidents at this point in their first terms.

He's currently tied with Obama (at 44%), and above both Clinton (41%) and Reagan (42%).

Obama's approval rating on day one was 67%, but steadily declined as his economic policies failed to re-energize the economy, despite the massive stimulus, while he forced through the highly unpopular ObamaCare.

Clinton's eroded after he broke his promise on tax hikes.

At this point in Reagan's first term, the economy was in a painful recession, and unemployment was above 10%.

Needless to say, each went on to win re-election handily.

October 16, 2018 10:50 AM  
Anonymous united we stand, divided we fall, and if our backs should ever be against the wall, the Dems will stab us said...

But look at who scored higher than Trump: George W. Bush (67%), George H.W. Bush (56%), and Jimmy Carter (49%). W. was coming off his sky-high approval rating in the wake of 9/11, which peaked at 90%. He ended his second term at 34% approval. George H.W. had just started building up troops in preparation for liberating Kuwait in Operation Desert Storm. Carter had recently signed the Camp David Accords.

What does all this mean?

First, it means that anyone who thinks Trump's low approval ratings today are a problem for his re-election prospects is mistaken. There's no correlation. Three presidents with ratings as low or lower than Trump's served two terms. Two with much higher approval ratings at this point ended up as one-term losers.

But there's a broader point here.

Democrats and the press keep describing Trump as a hugely divisive figure. But the polls show that his approval is starting to line up with previous presidents.

What's more, Trump's low numbers are almost entirely because Democrats are universally opposed to him.

To see this effect, look at the IBD/TIPP polls from the same month in the Trump and Obama administrations.

In October 2010, Obama had an approval rating of 42%. Trump's approval in the October 2018 IBD/TIPP poll is 40%.

Naturally, Democrats gave Obama a sky-high approval ratings, as do Republicans for Trump.

Among independents, there's almost no difference — Trump's approval is 33%, Obama's was 34%.

But there's a huge gap in how Democrats and Republicans viewed their political opponents.

At this point in Obama's presidency, 10% of Republicans approved of the job Obama was doing. And that was after his massive failed stimulus, his signing of ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank, and other policies highly antagonistic to Republicans.

Trump, on the other hand, gets approval from a mere 5% of Democrats. That's where it's been throughout Trump's presidency.

Republicans, in other words, were more forgiving of Obama than Democrats have been of Trump.

So, who's being divisive here? Trump and the GOP? Or the Democrats who will hate Trump no matter what he does?

October 16, 2018 10:51 AM  
Anonymous what did these two ever see in one another? said...

In a post gloating about a recent court ruling in his favor, President Trump referred to Stormy Daniels as “Horseface.” Daniels's attorney, Michael Avenatti, fired back, calling the president a “disgusting misogynist and an embarrassment to the United States.”

huh, Michael..

you're a bit of a national embarrassment yourself

October 16, 2018 12:30 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Tяump feigns concern over killing of Journalist

CNN is reporting that Saudi Arabia is preparing to admit that journalist Jamal Khashoggi died mistakenly during interrogation at their embassy in Turkey, but that this was done without the approval of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman. Which means some guy is about to be put to death to absolve the prince of responsibility.

Let me tell you how this is going to play out. Someone who took part in the interrogation will be arrested and charged with…well, something. They’ll be quickly convicted and hung or beheaded. The crown prince will then say, “See, I told you I had nothing to do with this.” And Tяump will say, “See, he told us he had nothing to do with this.” And nothing will ever be done about it. The only one held accountable will be a token sacrificial lamb, whose blood will wash clean the sins of the Saudi royal family. It’s all very Christian for a Muslim theocracy, really.

And I’ll guarantee you that this excuse, this way out of the problem, was cooked up by Jared Kushner, Tяump and his advisors and bin Salman. Our government isn’t just a passive bystander to all of this, they are almost certainly a co-conspirator, at least in the cover up.

It should also be noted that this completely contradicts their initial denials of having anything at all to do with it. They said he left the Saudi embassy and they have no idea what happened to him after that, but it wasn’t them. That was a lie. The fact that they lied so brazenly about it just another reason why Tяump admires them and isn’t much bothered by it all.

October 16, 2018 1:33 PM  
Anonymous heterosexuality deserves a priviliged place in society said...

why is this Trump's problem?

it's horrible thing to have happen but he's not an American citizen and this didn't happen in America

things like this happen every day in places like China, Cuba and Canada

we don't have the capacity to do anything about it

October 16, 2018 2:35 PM  
Anonymous Right wing mobs get police protection in Portland said...

On Aug. 4, the Portland Police Bureau in Oregon protected two proto-fascist gangs as they marched around town, some in full body armor, in a planned disturbance disguised as a free speech rally.

Members of Patriot Prayer and its violent, punch-happy bodyguards, the Proud Boys, laughed and cheered behind barricades as cops fired dangerous rubber bullets and other nonlethal weapons at their opposition: a mix of local anti-racist and anti-fascist demonstrators. Cops nearly killed one of those these counterprotesters when an impact grenade penetrated a man’s helmet and embedded itself into his skull.

Police claimed anti-fascists had hurled projectiles at riot cops — something two HuffPost reporters on the scene never witnessed. Days later — after outrage over the department’s response to the rally — Portland Police Chief Danielle Outlaw said on a conservative radio show that protesters were acting like children and were only “mad because I kicked your butt.”

What Outlaw didn’t say at the time was that the people she and her department defended had been armed to the teeth. In an appalling revelation Monday, Mayor Ted Wheeler told reporters that police found a group of Patriot Prayer members on Aug. 4 with a cache of guns on a rooftop before the demonstrations that day — and didn’t say a word.

Instead, police acted as their personal guard and kept silent about the cache — which included what officials described as “long guns” — for two months, when Wheeler found out about them.

During a press conference, he recalled the rally on Aug. 4, revealing that “the Portland Police Bureau discovered individuals who positioned themselves on a rooftop parking structure in downtown Portland with a cache of firearms,” according to The Oregonian. Police released a statement Tuesday “clarifying” that the cache consisted of three rifles in their cases. “After further review it has been determined that no firearms were seized or taken as safe keeping from the individuals,” the statement said.

Assistant Chief Ryan Lee said that the unidentified Patriot Prayer members were legally carrying the weapons and that officers didn’t make any arrests.

Asked why the public wasn’t made aware of the gun cache, Outlaw reportedly said, “Hindsight is always perfect.” At the time, Portland police released photos and information about weapons seized during the rally but didn’t mention the guns:

Joey Gibson, the leader of Patriot Prayer, who has had Proud Boys among his bodyguards at various rallies he has held in the Pacific Northwest, told The Oregonian that Monday was the first he had heard of the weapons stash.

Portland is a city with a white terrorism crisis. It has long been a battleground for “alt-right” factions and counterprotesters, a haven for violent neo-Nazis and white supremacists, and a difficult city for people of color and non-Christians. There have been numerous violent rallies over the past few years in which out-of-town fascists descend on the city to fight local protesters ― and though the city is scrambling to fix the problem, community leaders say it has had multiple opportunities.

“It’s just disappointing that Portland leadership doesn’t recognize that it itself is under attack,” said Eric Ward, a longtime civil rights strategist and the executive director of Western States Center in Portland.

“This is a political group that associates with the ‘alt-right’ that comes into Portland with the specific intent to both intimidate and to spark violence,” he said. “This isn’t a fight between two factions. This is an assault on our values as a community, on what we want to be as a city. And we’re losing.”

Violent protests involving Patriot Prayer and the Proud Boys erupted on the East and West coasts this weekend, sparking a nationwide conversation about what to do with a pro-Trump gang that has gone relatively unchecked by local governments for years....

Portland police didn’t respond to calls for comment for this article.

October 16, 2018 6:05 PM  
Anonymous a sleepy blue ocean in November said...

"On Aug. 4, the Portland Police Bureau in Oregon protected two proto-fascist gangs as they marched around town,"

this is America

anyone who marches is protected

especially, now, when Dems have convinced themselves that they win brownie points if they incite riots with right-wing fringe groups

try being responsible and civil participants in our civil discussion instead of battling nutcases in the street

then, maybe someday, voters will give you another chance

With economic optimism soaring in the country, will Democrats be able to sweep to power in either house of Congress or will buoyant sentiment help Republicans keep hold of their Congressional majorities?

The latest CNBC All-America Economic Survey offers mixed signals, but leans against a wave Democratic election like that those that swept Republicans to power in 2010 and 2014.

The poll of 800 Americans across the country, with a margin of error of 3.5 percent, found a five-point Democratic lead on the question of who voters will choose in the November congressional elections. The 41 percent to 36 percent margin is not far from what pollsters would expect given the greater percentage of Democratic registered voters.

"A five point differential is not something that's going to cause a big electoral wave," said Micah Roberts, the Republican pollster on the CNBC poll, a partner Public Opinion Strategies. "Economic confidence that people have among a lot of groups is providing a buffer" for Republicans.

Indeed, the poll found that 49 percent of the public is optimistic about the current economy and optimistic it will get better, the highest level in the poll's 11-year history and more than double the 20 percent registered in the December 2016 survey.

Jay Campbell, the Democratic pollster for the survey and a partner with Hart Research Associates, is skeptical of a wave for the Democrats, saying the five-point advantage is "not enough to suggest this is going to be a massive wave election a la 2010."

Working in the Republicans' favor is not only record-high optimism about the economy but also about the stock market and near-record high optimism about wage growth. Americans expect their wages to grow an average of 5.2 percent in the next year, up from 4.6 percent in the June survey and the highest since 2008. A record-high 52 percent of the public say now is a good time to invest in stocks, with a record-low 24 percent saying it's a bad time.

President Donald Trump's approval rating also pulls both ways. Just 42 percent approve of the job he's doing as president overall, unchanged from the June survey. But 52 percent approve of his handling of the economy, also unchanged from June, including 89 percent of Republicans, 53 percent of Independent voters and even 19 percent of Democrats.

October 16, 2018 6:37 PM  
Anonymous Dem Senate clown show is travelling the nation for your entertainment said...

Bob Menendez, incumbent Senator from New Jersey, was indicted on corruption charges last year and got off because of a hung jury. Now, it turns out he travels to the Carribbean to use underage prostitutes. President Obama's Justice Department had evidence that for several years, Menendez had been traveling to the Dominican Republic to engage in sexual activity with prostitutes, some of whom were minors. After the FBI caught him lying about his trips to the Dominican Republic, his lawyers argued that having sex with underage girls overseas, would hardly be a federal crime. Outrageous!

If New Jersey re-elects him in November, it will be the laughingstock of the nation.

Elizabeth Warren, incumbent Senator from New Jersey, lied about being a Native American to
help her get preference for jobs. Oklahoma Republican U.S. Rep. Markwayne Mullin, an enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation, is calling on Sen. Elizabeth Warren to apologize for claiming Native American heritage. Mullin said he is extremely disappointed more so than offended.

"There was a 2014 scientific study and it said that the average European American walking around is 0.18% Native American. She's half of that. So, the idea that she continues to double down on this lie is the most disgusting thing to me," Mullin said on Tuesday.

"It's the fact that she's in the public eye and she continues to use this," he said. "And what she was trying to do is put this to bed so she could run against President Trump in 2020 and it is backfiring on her. I'm glad to see it because what she needs to do is come out and apologize to all of us."

Mullin said he lives where his tribe "stopped walking."

"We're not trying to play politics," Mullin said. "My family literally still live where my family literally stopped walking on the 'volunteer walk,' and I use that as a loose term. I still live on the Indian allotment land that my family has."

"The heritage runs deep in my family, for her they're just stories," he said. "They're just stories she's trying to get publicity over or she is trying to get sympathy off of or maybe it's because she was trying to get a job at Harvard. I don't know. But the lies have gone on far enough and it's time for her to apologize."

If Massachusetts' citizens don't demand her resignation, it will be the laughingstock of the nation.

Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Arizona, during the height of the Iraq War, was a far-left protest organizer and summoned supernatural help to stop the War.

Sinema invited a prominent coven of feminist witches in Arizona called Pagan Cluster to celebrate International Women’s Day and to protest the war in March of 2003. Sinema encouraged the witches to wear “colorful clothing and come ready to dance, twirl, and stay in touch with your inner creativity and with the Earth.”

The Sinema campaign would not say why she thought members of the occult deserved a seat at the table during discussions concerning war and peace. The witches in question, it should be noted, claim to practice only nonviolent magic and say theirs is a peaceful and democratic kind of sorcery.

Out of the broom closet and into the public square, the Pagan Cluster focuses “sharing spiritual insights and participating in direct democracy.” Their coven “has roots in the Reclaiming Tradition of feminist Witchcraft.”

Later that year, in November, Sinema attended a similar anti-war rally, and wrote about "singing and spiraling in the pagan's circle only 5 rows back from the police line."

If Arizona elects her in November, it will be the laughingstock of the nation.

October 17, 2018 6:40 AM  
Anonymous did I mention California's clown Senator, Diane Feinstein? said...

Donald Trump, the most gay-friendly President, like, ever, just nominated his second open homosexual to the federal appeals court. That's twice as many as Barack Obama, the gay villain who opposed gay marriage when he ran for president in 2008.

Patrick Bumatay, the homosexual, is another in a stream of originalist judges Trump is putting in the judicial system, far more than any recent President. Trump knows how to get things done!

Surprise, surprise...Diane Feinstein and Kamala Harris are opposed to Bumatay because trump didn't ask them first.

President Donald Trump recently announced another wave of judicial nominees, and among them is an openly gay lawyer, Patrick Bumatay.

Trump nominated Bumatay to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, based in San Francisco, the nation’s largest federal appeals court. It hears cases from nine Western states and has 29 judges; there are currently six vacancies.

Bumatay is an assistant U.S. attorney in California handling various criminal issues, including opioid abuse and transnational organized crime, according to the White House. He went to Yale and Harvard Law School, and the White House said Bumatay is a member of the National Filipino American Lawyers Association, the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association and the Tom Homann LGBT Law Association.

Bumatay is the second openly gay person Trump has nominated for the federal bench, according to the Washington Blade. The first was Mary Rowland, a magistrate judge who Trump nominated to be on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in June.

There is currently only one openly gay federal appeals court judge in the U.S., according to the Washington Blade: Todd Hughes, who was nominated by President Barack Obama in 2013 to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Gregory T. Angelo, president of gay conservative group Log Cabin Republicans, applauded Trump’s nomination of Bumatay.

“As someone who has personally known Pat for the better part of a decade, I can tell you I will have great personal satisfaction to see him seated on the bench on the 9th circuit,” Angelo told NBC News. “Patrick is highly qualified, and the fact that he is openly gay only adds to the historic nature of his nomination.”

California's two senators, both Democrats, Dianne Feinstein, the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Kamala Harris, have come out against Bumatay’s nomination. The Associated Press reported that Feinstein and Harris are opposing the nominations of Bumatay and two other judicial nominees because the California lawmakers were not consulted prior to their nominations.

October 17, 2018 7:07 AM  
Anonymous tRump says "Don't blame me" said...

President Trump said Tuesday that it’s not his fault if Republicans lose control of the House in this year’s midterms, weeks after he told supporters to “pretend I’m on the ballot” in November.

Trump made the comments in a wide-ranging interview with the Associated Press.

“I don’t believe anybody has ever had this kind of impact,” Trump told the AP, defending his efforts to rally support for candidates across the country. He has headlined four “Make America Great Again” rallies in each of the past two weeks, and he’s holding three more this week.

Earlier this month, at a rally in Southaven, Miss., Trump urged supporters to go to the polls, telling the crowd, “Pretend I’m on the ballot.”

Trump’s remarks come as Republicans’ prospects of maintaining control of the House appear increasingly dim.

October 17, 2018 9:12 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

"Republicans’ prospects of maintaining control of the House appear increasingly dim"

a month ago, the blue wave seemed a sure thing

now, no one says that

where do you get "increasingly" from that?

the only increasing is the loss of TTF brain cells

October 17, 2018 9:26 AM  
Anonymous Merrick Garland....LOL said...

"Dem Senate clown show is travelling the nation for your entertainment"

you can always count on Dems providing clowns to the Senate

remember Al Franken?

a big jackass grin on his horse face as he mugged for the camera while grabbing a sleeping woman's breast

ladies, stay away from him

his boutonniere squirts

October 17, 2018 9:34 AM  
Anonymous tiger lily's friend said...

A descendant of legendary Native American Pocahontas has called on Senator Elizabeth Warren to apologize for her claims of being of Cherokee ancestry.

Earlier this week, Warren released the results of a DNA Test to “prove” she’s Native American, though the results have been widely mocked.

The report shows that Warren is between 1/64th and 1/1024th% Native American, and her closest Native family member existed between 6 and 10 generations ago!

Pocahontas descendant Debbie White Dove Porreco said how she and other Native Americans feel about the results, “I think they feel betrayed, they feel disappointed, and at this point she needs to come back and apologize to everybody for what she’s done.”

And, President Donald Trump had plenty to say on Twitter, tweeting:

"Elizabeth Warren is being hammered, even by the Left. Her false claim of Indian heritage is only selling to VERY LOW I.Q. individuals!"

In a statement, Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin, Jr. said Warren’s DNA test, “dishonors legitimate tribal governments and citizens whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.”

In a Tweet, Warren herself called on Donald Trump to make good on his pledge of a $1M donation to Warren if her claims of Native American heritage were ever proven.

Warren is currently running for re-election to the Senate in Massachusetts and was looked at as a possible 2020 presidential candidate before this embarrassing fiasco.

October 17, 2018 9:42 AM  
Anonymous Mueller probe dies with a whimper said...

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to issue findings on core aspects of his Russia probe soon after the November midterm elections as he faces intensifying pressure to produce more indictments or shut down his investigation, according to two U.S. officials.

Specifically, Mueller is close to rendering judgment on two of the most explosive aspects of his inquiry: whether there were clear incidents of collusion between Russia and Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, and whether the president took any actions that constitute obstruction of justice.

Mueller’s findings probably won't be made public. The regulations governing Mueller’s probe stipulate that he can present his findings only to his boss, who is currently Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The regulations give a special counsel’s supervisor discretion in deciding what is relayed to Congress and what is publicly released.

The question of timing is critical. Mueller’s work won’t be concluded ahead of the Nov. 6 midterm elections, when Democrats hope to take control of the House and end Trump’s one-party hold on Washington. Even if that happens, the Democrats won't take control until January.

This timeline means that Trump could replace Attorney General Jeff Sessions after the election, a move that could bring in a new boss for Mueller. Rosenstein also may resign or be fired by Trump after the election. Either way, Trump has control over whether the findings go to Congress or are released publicly.

Rosenstein has made it clear that he desperately wants Mueller to wrap up the investigation as expeditiously as possible, before he loses control of the findings.

October 17, 2018 10:11 AM  
Anonymous Welcome to Trumplandia where we help cover up the murder of journalists said...

...Since when is it acceptable to kidnap an individual using one’s diplomatic compound as shelter? Beyond that, no one other than Trump could believe that a 15-person delegation with a bone-saw-carrying forensic specialist could jet in and out of Turkey and utilize the Saudi diplomatic offices without permission of high-level officials. Moreover, how does an interrogation get botched to such a degree — if this is the so-called defense — that someone dies? Surely, the Saudi team wouldn’t risk hacking up a journalist and bringing his remains back to a kingdom ruled with an iron hand unless they were awfully certain that the regime had their backs. Nevertheless, Trump wants to look for suspects!

While Pompeo and Trump want to provide plausible deniability for the Saudis, American business leaders as well as House and Senate leaders in both parties do not. The conduct of the Saudis was so outrageous that Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) momentarily forgot his role as favorite Trump sycophant. He chatted with Fox News hosts on Tuesday, calling the Saudi crown prince “toxic” and insisting, “This guy has got to go.”

Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (Md.), the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, told CNN: “There’s going to be consequences, and we’re going to take action. We’re an independent branch of government. We’ve shown that before with our relationship with Russia, we’ve shown it with North Korea, and we’ll show it here with Saudi Arabia.” Likewise, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) condemned Trump’s participation in a “Saudi-led coverup and whitewash,” which is “undermining the credibility of the United States.”

Trump has a long history of embracing and spreading this sort of nonsense (birtherism, President Barack Obama bugging Trump Tower, Russian denials of meddling in U.S. elections) while refusing to accept established facts that he doesn’t understand or want to acknowledge (e.g. a trade deficit isn’t an invoice, climate change is real, and immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans).

In fact, the entire right-wing universe — from talk radio to Fox New parrots to intellectually corrupted groups to passive (or equally dishonest) lawmakers to pundits who should know better but can’t bring themselves to criticize Trump — is designed to perpetuate an information bubble wherein only Trump-approved facts enter. It’s how most totalitarians operate, which goes a long way toward explaining Trump’s affinity for the world’s strongmen.

October 17, 2018 11:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"while grabbing a sleeping woman's breasts"

The sleeping woman's breasts were inside her flak jacket and Franken's hands were outside the flak jacket.

There are no flak jackets for all those pussies Trump helps himself to whenever he feels the desire to grab them.

October 17, 2018 11:07 AM  
Anonymous Merrick Garland....LOL said...

"The sleeping woman's breasts were inside her flak jacket and Franken's hands were outside the flak jacket"

nice little piece of hypocrisy, this statement is

yeah, Monica Lewinsky's clothes were on, too

the Franken jackass was humiliating the woman because when he french-kissed her against her will, she told the creepy clown to get lost

didn't she know he was an important celebrity?

how dare she reject someone of his stature?

ever read his autobiography: Al Franken, Giant of the Senate?

"There are no flak jackets for all those pussies Trump helps himself to whenever he feels the desire to grab them."

first of all, he was bragging, so who knows if anything like this actually happened

but, more to the point, he said it was consensual and no woman has come forth and denied that

and, not unimportantly, this was a crass term Trump used in private that the leftist mobs have made and every day phrase


because any damage to our culture is justified to take down Trump

Addressing the bitter, partisan battle over Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination, Chief Justice John Roberts reaffirmed on Tuesday the court’s commitment to independence.

Acknowledging what he described as “the contentious events in Washington in recent weeks,” Roberts ― speaking to a packed auditorium at the University of Minnesota ― stressed the importance of keeping the judiciary separate from “political branches” and warned of the dangers that can arise when the court bows to political pressure.

“I have great respect for our public officials. After all, they speak for the people, and that commands a certain degree of humility from those of us in the judicial branch who do not,” the chief justice said. “We do not speak for the people, but we speak for the Constitution. Our role is very clear: We are to interpret the laws and Constitution of the United States and ensure that the political branches act within them.”

Roberts, who was nominated to the court by then-President George W. Bush in 2005, noted that the history of the Supreme Court “would be very different without that sort of independence.”

Roberts’ comments, made about a week after Kavanaugh’s induction onto the nation’s highest court, mark the first time the chief justice has spoken publicly on the topic of his colleague’s confirmation process. Kavanaugh, who was falsely accused of sexual misconduct by multiple women, fills a vacancy left by Anthony Kennedy, who’d been a key swing vote on the bench.

In his remarks, Roberts quoted Kavanaugh, citing comments the new justice had made at his swearing-in ceremony.

“As our newest colleague put it, we do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle, we do not caucus in separate rooms, we do not serve one party or one interest, we serve one nation,” Roberts said. “I want to assure all of you that we will continue to do that, to the best of our abilities, whether times are calm or contentious.”

October 17, 2018 11:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Roberts ― speaking to a packed auditorium at the University of Minnesota ― stressed the importance of keeping the judiciary separate from “political branches” and warned of the dangers that can arise when the court bows to political pressure."

Sure, Roberts has to say that because Kavanaugh's partisan screed he cried and belly-ached to the Senate Judiciary Committee included this bit of partisan bulloney:

"This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election. Fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record. Revenge on behalf of the Clintons. and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups."

Roberts has to protect SCOTUS from partisan idiots like Kavanaugh.

October 17, 2018 12:34 PM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

Kavanaugh called a spade a spade

the opposition to is nomination was shrill and political from the start

it had nothing to with C Ford

her story was so unfeasible that Feinstein didn't release until all other hope of stopping Kavanaugh was gone

his statement wasn't partisan, it was a reaction to the hyper-partisan mobs chasing Senators out of restaurants, screaming in Senate chambers, making it necessary for Senators to get a police escort to get into their offices, and planting unsubstantiated charges in the media and outlandish charges of gang rape trains

hopefully, the Dems will pay for this in a few weeks

opposition to such tactics is non-partisan

people who support them are indecent

October 17, 2018 1:35 PM  
Anonymous a little reminder said...

Just a few weeks ago, analysts thought that control of the U.S. Senate was in play this November and that momentum was shifting to the Democrats. Thanks to their brutal campaign of character assassination against now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh, those chances appear to be slipping away.

Case in point is Tennessee, where Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn was struggling in her Senate race against popular former Democratic governor Phil Bredesen. In mid-September -- after the first Kavanaugh confirmation hearings -- a CNN poll showed Blackburn trailing by five points (in a state Donald Trump won by 26 points). But as the ferocity of the attacks on Kavanaugh grew, so did Blackburn's poll numbers. By early October -- after Christine Blasey Ford testified and Kavanaugh was accused of exposing himself to a college classmate and participating in high school gang rapes -- a CBS News poll showed that Blackburn had pulled ahead by eight points. And last week, after Kavanaugh was finally confirmed amid scenes of angry protesters banging on the doors of the Supreme Court, a New York Times poll showed Blackburn leading by 14 points. That is a shift of 19 points in one month.

In other words, the Democrats' smear campaign of uncorroborated sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh has united Tennessee Republicans behind Blackburn and poured cold water on Democrats' chances in the Volunteer State. And rightly so. It probably didn't help with Tennessee voters that Democrats excoriated Kavanaugh for his high school drinking and for inside jokes in his high school yearbook -- as if being a beer-drinking jock was some sort of crime. Worse, Kavanaugh was publicly branded a sex offender for accusations decades old and uncorroborated by any witnesses or evidence. A man's good name was being destroyed. The treatment of Kavanaugh wasn't fair, just or right. And it backfired. Politico reports that retiring Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., told Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., that Democrats' attacks on Kavanaugh hurt Bredesen badly. Bredesen clearly saw the impact the Kavanaugh fiasco was having on his support among Republican voters he needed to win, because he tried to cauterize the bleeding by coming out at the last moment in support of Kavanaugh's confirmation.

October 17, 2018 1:44 PM  
Anonymous a little reminder said...

But while his endorsement did not mollify angry Republicans, it enraged many of his Democratic supporters. The super PAC Priorities USA said it would not support Bredesen, while MoveOn announced, "We're cancelling a planned six-figure digital video ad expenditure for Phil Bredesen in Tennessee due to his Kavanaugh position." Campaign volunteers have reportedly been bolting from his campaign.

The Kavanaugh fiasco crystallized the stakes for Tennessee Republicans, reminding them while they may like Bredesen, a vote for the Democrat is a vote to make Schumer majority leader. A Democratic takeover would be a game-changer, giving Schumer the power to block any more Trump Supreme Court nominees and put a halt to the president's transformation of the federal appeals courts. In the wake of the Kavanaugh fiasco, 58 percent of Tennessee voters say they want Republicans running the Senate. So, Democrats may have blown a chance to pick up a seat in a deep-red state thanks to the blowback over their efforts to destroy Kavanaugh. As Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-S.C., so poignantly told Senate Democrats at the Kavanaugh hearing, "Boy, y'all want power. God, I hope you never get it. I hope the American people can see through this sham." It appears that the American people have.

With Tennessee slipping out of their grasp, the Democrats' chances of a Senate takeover are slipping as well. Among vulnerable Democrats, it looks as if Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., is a goner. After the Kavanaugh hearings, her Republican opponent's lead expanded from four to 12 points. If she goes down, Democrats will need to pick up three GOP-held seats to win the majority. That does not appear to be happening, as races have shifted toward Republicans in Texas, Nevada and Arizona -- the states other than Tennessee where Democrats have pinned their hopes for flipping GOP-held seats.

There are three weeks before Election Day, so a lot could still happen. But if Democrats fail to take the Senate, they can thank their horrific treatment of Kavanaugh for what would amount to a double defeat -- securing a conservative majority not only on the Supreme Court but in the Senate as well. If so, they richly deserve it. And hopefully they learn the right lesson: When you drag your party and your country down into the depths of political depravity, Americans will not reward you at the polls.

October 17, 2018 1:45 PM  
Anonymous Republicans making Nazis look more mainstream every day said...

This is what we get to look forward to with more Republicans in Congress:

A man who spouts white supremacist views from his perch in Congress has endorsed another white supremacist vying to become Toronto’s next mayor.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) on Monday tweeted out his support of Faith Goldy, a far-right white nationalist who is looking to lead Canada’s largest city.

“Faith Goldy, an excellent candidate for Toronto mayor, pro Rule of Law, pro Make Canada Safe Again, pro balanced budget, & ...BEST of all, Pro Western Civilization and a fighter for our values,” King tweeted. He added that the mayoral candidate “will not be silenced.”

Goldy is an openly racist white nationalist who has at times recited the infamous “14 words” used by neo-Nazis in reference to preserving the white race. After the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last year in which anti-racist protester Heather Heyer was killed by a white supremacist, Goldy was fired after going on a podcast for the white supremacist website The Daily Stormer. Goldy has also previously recommended a book calling for the “elimination of Jews” and said on a podcast that she believed homosexuality was a reason for the Holocaust.

King’s endorsement of Goldy is hardly a surprise. The Republican lawmaker is himself a white supremacist who constantly retweets other white supremacists on Twitter. He has promoted a neo-Nazi on Twitter and advocated against “mixing cultures.”

“We need to get our birth rates up or Europe will be entirely transformed,” King said on CNN last year.

King has also said the government should spy on mosques and promoted a false conspiracy from InfoWars that a Jerusalem imam told Muslims to “go into Western Europe, build your enclaves there, breed their women, and do not associate or assimilate into the broader society.”

Goldy suggested Tuesday that if she loses the mayoral election, it will be because the election was “RIGGED.”

Republicans are making America love Nazis again.

October 17, 2018 2:11 PM  
Anonymous Your white hood is showing said...


because any damage to our culture is justified to take down Trump"

You say that as if promoting white supremacists isn't damaging our culture. If you don't put a stop to the Nazis, they will take over.

Wake up and smell the covfefe.

October 17, 2018 2:15 PM  
Anonymous Lying GOPers politicize entire WVA Supreme Court said...

Earlier this year, Republicans in the West Virginia legislature took the extraordinary action of impeaching every single member of the state Supreme Court.

But the entire process has blown up in Republicans' face. The state courts are now in a full-blown constitutional crisis, because the impeachment of Democratic Chief Justice Margaret Workman has been ruled unconstitutional and there is no judge willing to preside over her trial.

The impeachments stemmed from reports last year detailing the justices' alleged lavish use of state money to decorate their offices. While some of the justices clearly did engage in misconduct — GOP Justice Allen Loughry is separately indicted on federal charges of fraud, witness tampering, and false statements — the office renovations themselves were probably entirely legal, and the impeachment reeked of a political power grab. Republicans sat on the allegations for months until it was legally impossible to hold an election to replace them, thus ensuring GOP Gov. Jim Justice could appoint a full bench of new Republicans in place of the original 3-2 split Democratic court.

The problem for the GOP started when Workman sued, alleging her impeachment was illegal because the legislature did not actually specify any misconduct and violated her due process.

There was no valid state supreme court that could hear the case — all the justices were either suspended or had been replaced with acting justices who then recused themselves. So on Workman's request, retired justice Thomas McHugh picked Harrison County Circuit Judge James Matish to serve as acting chief justice, who then appointed four acting associate justices, who in turn unanimously ruled in Workman's favor, invalidating the impeachment.

It was at this point that everything exploded. The GOP state senate, enraged that a makeshift court appointed at the request of Workman had overruled them, planned to simply ignore the ruling and hold an impeachment trial anyway. But Justice Paul T. Ferrell, who was in charge of presiding over the trial, honored the court ruling and refused to move forward, forcing the senate to back down. Then Republicans in the state house said they would still present the articles of impeachment to the senate even though the senate was no longer planning to hear them.

What is happening in West Virginia, whole extreme, is far from unique. Republican state legislators have frequently sought to undermine state courts that rule against them.

In Pennsylvania earlier this year, the GOP pushed to impeach most of the Democratic state supreme court after the justices threw out their congressional gerrymander. In 2015, Republicans in Kansas tried to outright shut down all funding for state courts after the state justices ruled against their scheme to cut funding to public schools, eventually caving amid the potential disaster of being unable to adjudicate any laws. And in North Carolina, Republicans have passed a series of laws designed to prevent Democrats from challenging an incumbent justice on their supreme court, which has backfired horribly as she is now polling in third place.

West Virginia's crisis threatens to blow up the independent judiciary and undermine the basic legitimacy of their court system. And Republicans have only themselves to blame.

October 17, 2018 2:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"her story was so unfeasible that Feinstein didn't release until all other hope of stopping Kavanaugh was gone"

Feinstein protected Dr. Ford's privacy at her request.

The question is, who leaked Dr. Ford's name to Ed Whelan so he looked at her LinkedIn page hours before her identity was publicly revealed.

Most likely it was White House lawyer Don McGahn.

October 17, 2018 2:53 PM  
Anonymous The new Republican midterm strategy is to copy Democratic ideas. said...

Writing in The Washington Post, journalists Erica Werner and David Weigel point to a surprising new trend: Republicans trying to stave off midterm defeat by mimicking traditionally Democratic stances. “A growing number of Republican candidates are sounding a lot like Democrats as they face midterm elections, co-opting Democratic talking points on issues from health care to education funding to the #MeToo movement,” Werner and Weigel write.

Many Republican politicians now say they support making insurance companies take people with pre-existing conditions, despite the party’s push to repeal Obamacare. In practice, this is an unsustainable position, since protecting those with pre-existing conditions combined with repealing Obamacare would lead to skyrocketing costs for both consumers and the federal government.

“Health care is not the only issue where Republicans are offering proposals that are more typically heard from Democrats,” Werner and Weigel write. “After a national wave of teacher walkouts, a number of Republican governors and gubernatorial candidates are running on promises of maintaining or increasing education spending. These include Walker in Wisconsin, Gov. Doug Ducey in Arizona and Republican Attorney General Adam Laxalt in Nevada.”

Texas Senator Ted Cruz has jumped on both bandwagons, saying he favors protecting individuals with pre-existing conditions and also arguing that, “It’s time to give teachers and other public servants fair retirement pay.”

Some Republicans are also hoping to minimize the gender gap by borrowing from the language of #MeToo. As Werner and Weigel note, “And amid fallout from the Kavanaugh hearing, with surveys showing a growing gender gap that favors Democrats among women voters, Republicans in a number of races have portrayed Democrats as hypocrites on women’s rights by pointing to allegations that they have committed abuse or sexual assault—in each case, borrowing the language of the #MeToo movement.”

October 17, 2018 3:54 PM  
Anonymous cutting back on Dems, we don't need so many Dems...... said...

oh, OK, you don't the GOP to copy the Dem clowns

here you go:

WASHINGTON — On the heels of a new Treasury Department report showing a 17 percent rise in the annual federal budget deficit, President Donald Trump asked his Cabinet to propose major belt-tightening.

"We're going to be asking for a 5 percent cut from every secretary," Trump told reporters just before a Cabinet meeting, adding "if not more," when he actually sat down with his lieutenants a few minutes later.

An across-the-board reduction in federal spending of that magnitude, which hasn't happened since the Eisenhower administration, according to an NBC review of annual federal outlays, but America boomed aferward.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told Bloomberg in an interview Tuesday that the real budgeting problem is entitlement programs.

"It's disappointing, but it's not a Republican problem," McConnell said of the deficits in his Bloomberg interview. "It's a bipartisan problem: unwillingness to address the real drivers of the debt by doing anything to adjust those programs to the demographics of America in the future."

On Wednesday, Trump said Democrats had forced his hand to spend more on domestic programs than he wanted in exchange for a massive increase in Pentagon funding.

"I had to do that in order to get the $700 and the $716 billion, those numbers have never been heard of before," he said of defense spending. "I had to give the Democrats, I call it 'waste money,' and things that I would have approved, but we had to do that in order to get the votes because we don't have enough Republican votes to do this without them."

Trump's budget proposal for the next fiscal year, setting requests to Congress for each department, will be unveiled early next year.

October 17, 2018 4:25 PM  
Anonymous Power hungry Republicans at it again said...

Rick Scott's power grab plan to stack Florida's court in the last few hours of his term fails:

Florida's next governor and not incumbent Gov. Rick Scott will get to pick three new justices to the state Supreme Court, the court ruled Monday in a decision with major implications in this year's gubernatorial campaign.

In a major rebuke to Scott, the Supreme Court concluded that the Republican governor exceeded his authority when he started the process to find replacements for the three justices.

Age limits of 70 are forcing three of the seven justices — Barbara Pariente, R. Fred Lewis and Peggy Quince — to retire at midnight Jan. 8, the *SAME DAY* Scott is scheduled to leave the governor's office. Scott, claiming he had authority to name the replacements, last month asked a nominating commission to start accepting applications with a Nov. 10 deadline.

The court's one-page ruling Monday says "the governor who is elected in the November 2018 general election has the sole authority to fill the vacancies" triggered by those mandatory retirements.

Scott, barred from seeking re-election as governor because of term limits, is running against Democratic U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson.

The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by the Florida branch of the League of Women Voters and Common Cause.

October 17, 2018 4:26 PM  
Anonymous Welcome to tRumplandia said...

"We're going to be asking for a 5 percent cut from every secretary" to pay for tRUmp's and his rich pals' tax cuts.

No surprise there!

October 17, 2018 4:49 PM  
Anonymous tRump's a Horse'sAss said...

Republicans Will Repeal Obamacare If They Get The Chance, Mitch McConnell Says

You had your chance, TurtleFace.

We all remember

Repeal proved to be spectacularly unpopular and the votes that House Republicans took in favor of their bill are now hurting them politically ― so much so that, all across the country, Republicans who supported repeal are now insisting, falsely, they never tried to take away the law’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions.



October 17, 2018 5:49 PM  
Anonymous grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreat again!!! said...

"No surprise there!"

no, it isn't

but Dems are feigning outage about the deficit

the GOP will cut out the necessary waste too bring expenditures more in line with our way too high taxes

"Repeal proved to be spectacularly unpopular and the votes that House Republicans took in favor of their bill are now hurting them politically ― so much so that, all across the country, Republicans who supported repeal are now insisting, falsely, they never tried to take away the law’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions."

repeal was never "spectacularly unpopular"

never as unpopular as Obamacare was when it passed before anyone had read the bill

the GOP has always said they will preserve the pre-existing condition requirement

and they have already repealed the mandate and obnoxious penalties on the poor

but there are other aspects of Obamacare that need to go

"You say that as if promoting white supremacists isn't damaging our culture. If you don't put a stop to the Nazis, they will take over."

this was the response to my saying that Dems have introduced crude terms into the vernacular because they think Trump must be stopped at all costs

actually, no one is promoting white supremacists

and if you think there is any chance that Nazis in America have any chance to grow beyond the current handful of sad kooks, you should see a psychiatrist without delay

there are more people in America that think they are Anastasia Romanoff than belong to a Nazi group

October 18, 2018 5:52 AM  
Anonymous grrrrrrrrrrrreat again !!! said...

Critics of the Trump tax cuts said they would blow a hole in the deficit. Yet individual income taxes climbed 6% in the just-ended fiscal year 2018, as the economy grew faster and created more jobs than expected.

The Treasury Department reported this week that individual income tax collections for FY 2018 totaled $1.7 trillion. That's up $14 billion from fiscal 2017, and an all-time high. And that's despite the fact that individual income tax rates got a significant cut this year as part of President Donald Trump's tax reform plan.

True, the first three months of the fiscal year were before the tax cuts kicked in. But if you limit the accounting to this calendar year, individual income tax revenues are up by 5% through September.

Other major sources of revenue climbed as well, as the overall economy revived. FICA tax collections rose by more than 3%. Excise taxes jumped 13%.

The only category that was down? Corporate income taxes, which dropped by 31%.

Overall, federal revenues came in slightly higher in FY 2018 — up 0.5%.

Spending, on the other hand, was $127 billion higher in fiscal 2018. As a result, deficits for 2018 climbed $113 billion.

Let's compare these results with Obama's last full fiscal year in office, 2016.

Individual income tax revenues went up by a mere 0.3%, Treasury data show. Fiscal 2016 also saw a 13% drop in corporate income taxes. FICA tax collections climbed by less than 1%. Excise tax collections dropped almost 3%.

Overall revenues increased by 0.5% — about the same as this year. The deficit? It climbed by $148 billion.

So, in other words, the government did better on revenues and deficits in the year after Trump's tax cuts went into effect than it did in Obama's last year in office.

October 18, 2018 7:55 AM  
Anonymous grrrrrrrrrrrreat again !!! said...

I hate to gloat but....

I predicted a while ago that the Senate would wind up 54-46 GOP after the election

this morning, with 2 and a half weeks to go, the RCP prediction is 54-46

a few weeks ago, before the Dems' Kavanaugh fiasco, they had it at 50-50

looks like Mike Pence will be making fewer trips to Capitol Hill over the next two years

the party in the White House usually loses in the first mid-term but the GOP is actually going to pick up seats

how could Dems be so stupid?

the Kavanaugh fiasco was almost as bad as when they nominated Hillary

she won the popular vote in only 13 states

that was a landslide rejection!!

Dem stupidity is the new normal!!!!!

October 18, 2018 9:29 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

In the last few days I have been in Seattle, Dallas and Des Moines.

In airports, on airplanes, in hotels and in restaurants, I have been approached again and again by people who are glad Republicans stood up for now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh and took on the left. Not a single person has been hostile or negative in five days of travel (and Seattle is hardly lacking in liberals).

I do not remember any political event that has so galvanized Americans. More than 20 million people watched Kavanaugh’s tough, aggressive defense of his family and his life at his Senate confirmation hearing, and it clearly had a powerful impact.

The national conversation has clearly continued to build toward a condemnation of the left and a sense of defending decent people from smears and character assassination.

One startling moment came in Des Moines, when Irene Seuntjens of Ankeny, Iowa walked up to me at the Iowa History Center and announced: “I am a 75-year-old lifetime Democrat who switched to Republican, and I am now volunteering for the GOP candidates.”

Furthermore, members of Seuntjens’ whole family in Iowa, Georgia, Oregon and Wisconsin are also now Republicans. She told me: “The viciousness against Kavanaugh was the last straw. The Democrats are no longer the party of John Kennedy that I belonged to when I was young.”

Seuntjens’ testimonial was reinforced by Merle Miller of Iowa City (home of the University of Iowa and maybe the most liberal town in Iowa) who said: “It comes down to jobs versus mobs.”

The initial polls in state after state have shown a real shift toward the Republicans.

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz is pulling away in Texas.

Republican Kevin Cramer has a remarkable lead over incumbent Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota.

Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds has begun to pull away from Democratic candidate Fred Hubbell in the Iowa governor race.

In Tennessee, former Gov. Phil Bredesen is beginning to fall behind Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn for a Senate seat.

In a Senate race in Arizona, a real gap is opening for Republican Rep. Martha McSally, as Democratic Rep. Kyrsten Sinema’s own crazy comments have surfaced as a hardline left-winger more suited to Berkeley than Phoenix.

As I am writing this, the Senate race in Nevada has gone from very close (with Democratic Rep. Jacky Rosen occasionally ahead by 1 or 2 points) to Republican Sen. Dean Heller gaining a 7-point lead.

In West Virginia, Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin – the only Democrat to vote to confirm Kavanaugh – has seen his re-election race tighten up.

And the Senate Democrats’ election fund has just dumped $3 million into New Jersey, suggesting that party leaders are worried about Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez’s race against Republican Bob Hugin.

October 18, 2018 9:35 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

I think three things relating to Justice Kavanaugh have happened to change the dynamic against the Democrats and for the Republicans.

First, the sheer viciousness of the smears, lies and character assassination against Kavanaugh galvanized Republicans who had been relatively passive about the election.

Now Republicans are deeply angry about the Democrats’ dishonesty and nastiness.

Republicans were especially offended by the left’s behavior because Kavanaugh has two young daughters who had to endure such personal lies about their father. The Republican base’s energy is dramatically higher than it was two weeks ago.

If “Remember the Alamo” was a rallying cry for Texans, “Remember Kavanaugh” has become a rallying cry for Republicans.

Second, 2018 has become the year when the mask came off the Democratic Party.

On issue after issue, Democrats have become radical advocates of radical policies – policies that they are willing to use radical, coercive actions to force on the American people.

Democrats’ support for open borders, sanctuary cities, government-run health care, higher taxes, bigger government, and endless resistance, investigations and threats of impeachment have all seemed radical.

The Democrats’ intensely hostile description of their opponents – deplorables; people who consort with evil; and people who should be kicked, confronted, and driven out of restaurants and stores – all seem to be a radical break with the American system.

Watching Democratic activists scratch at the Supreme Court doors, they seemed out of control. The behavior of these radical activists is becoming a definer of the Democratic Party – reinforced by incumbent Senate Democrats who are using similar language and tactics in Senate hearing rooms.

For many Americans the mask is off and the Democrats have become a frighteningly dangerous party.

Third, the Kavanaugh fight drove home how much politics and government have become a team sport.

For weeks it was clear that the effort to confirm Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination was a fight between the Republican team led by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and the Democratic team led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York.

I first realized how big this shift was when I saw the changing poll numbers in North Dakota and Tennessee. Suddenly voters were saying to the Democratic candidates: “I know who you are –you are on the Schumer team.”

There was no middle ground. Democrats like Bredesen and Heitkamp who claim to be “moderate” were shrugged off because their first vote was going to be for the radical party to be in charge.

I am reminded of a special election in Alabama during the Reagan years. The race was very, very close until two things happened. Vice President George H.W. Bush came to campaign for the Republican candidate and Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts came to campaign for the Democrat.

Within a week there was a 20-point gap, as all of the undecideds concluded that they did not want to send a “moderate” supported by Ted Kennedy to Washington.

The same team identity test is building and virtually guarantees Republicans will gain seats in the Senate and may keep their majority in the House.

The three Kavanaugh impacts have been dramatically reinforced by President Trump crisscrossing the country to huge, enthusiastic rallies, where he drives home the messages day after day.

The Kavanaugh fight is going to prove to be a major turning point in American politics.

October 18, 2018 9:38 AM  
Anonymous Just wait for the crash said...

"The Treasury Department reported this week that individual income tax collections for FY 2018 totaled $1.7 trillion. That's up $14 billion from fiscal 2017, and an all-time high.

Overall revenues increased by 0.5% — about the same as this year. The deficit? It climbed by $148 billion."

For the idiots who can't read or do math - from the numbers you posted yourself:

The deficit climbed more than *10 TIMES* faster than the the revenue increase. That is simply not sustainable. Much of that money went to fat cats who already had more money than they could spend or invest carefully and responsibly with. So much of that is sloshing around in the stock market over heating markets and will eventually come crashing back down again once people realize it's WAY over-valued. The question is how much of the rest of the economy will suffer as well. Will it be as bad as 2008? Worse?

The money should have gone to the workers - increasing minimum wages and those of other low-paid workers as well. Those folks buy things they've needed for years - like new cars to replace their old ones that are falling apart. Bigger and better homes, more and better food, college for their kids. Basically goods and services that actually build up the economy, rather than enlarging the pot for rich people to gamble in.

Republican tax cuts have NEVER paid for themselves - like they always claim - and this time around is no different. The proof is in the numbers.

October 18, 2018 11:21 AM  
Anonymous grrrrrrrrrrrreat again !!! said...

"For the idiots who can't read or do math - from the numbers you posted yourself:

The deficit climbed more than *10 TIMES* faster than the the revenue increase."

yes, it did

but the revenue did increase

and more than it did in Obama's last year

so, tax cuts did make revenues increase

"That is simply not sustainable"

no, it isn't

the government wastes too much on lazy incompetent government workers

"Much of that money went to fat cats who already had more money than they could spend or invest carefully and responsibly with."

fat cats didn't get any money

the government did confiscate less from people's inheritances and reduced our corporate to closer to the average globally

but only an extortionist Orwellian would say not confiscating as much as you once did is "giving"

you need have lunch with my buddies, Merriam and Webster

"So much of that is sloshing around in the stock market over heating markets and will eventually come crashing back down again once people realize it's WAY over-valued. The question is how much of the rest of the economy will suffer as well. Will it be as bad as 2008? Worse?"

other than certain tech stocks, there are no stocks selling at particularly high multiples

nice theory if you can get away with it, though

unfortunately for you, you can't get away with it

"The money should have gone to the workers - increasing minimum wages and those of other low-paid workers as well. Those folks buy things they've needed for years - like new cars to replace their old ones that are falling apart. Bigger and better homes, more and better food, college for their kids. Basically goods and services that actually build up the economy, rather than enlarging the pot for rich people to gamble in."

believe or not, paychecks are money

and lower income workers are getting lot more of them these days

that's why lower income Americans support a President who is bringing growth

it's also the reason we see minorities moving to Trump

they have neve seem so much opportunity before

"Republican tax cuts have NEVER paid for themselves - like they always claim - and this time around is no different. The proof is in the numbers."

revenues are up

and more than they were under Obama

if we can get Dems to stop obstructing spending limits, the deficit will go down

October 18, 2018 11:46 AM  
Anonymous Trump delivers again for minorities.What was Obama's problem? said...

Kanye West’s literal embrace of President Trump was all over the news last week. The president’s rhetorical embrace of criminal justice reform got considerably less attention, but may prove more consequential.

In an interview on the morning of his meeting with the rap impresario, Trump signaled that he was ready to go beyond “back-end” reform, which focuses on rehabilitation of inmates, and support “front-end” reform, which focuses on reducing sentences and sending fewer people to prison.

The key to understanding Trump’s remarks is Alice Marie Johnson, whose sentence the president commuted in June at the behest of West’s wife, Kim Kardashian.

Johnson, a first-time offender who received a life sentence in 1996 for participating in a Memphis cocaine-trafficking organization, has described herself as “a telephone mule, passing messages between the distributors and sellers.” While serving nearly 22 years in federal prison, she became a grandmother and great-grandmother, an ordained minister and a mentor to other inmates.

Although it took the intercession of a fellow reality TV star for Trump to free Johnson, he clearly was impressed by her story. More important, he recognizes that Johnson, whom he calls “the most incredible woman,” is not unique in receiving an absurdly disproportionate sentence for a nonviolent crime.

“You have many people like Mrs. Johnson,” Trump said on Fox News. “There are people in jail for really long terms.”

Notably, Trump did not say the solution is more commutations, although those would certainly be welcome. “There has to be a reform, because it’s very unfair right now,” he said. “It’s very unfair to African-Americans. It’s very unfair to everybody.”

Last May, the House overwhelmingly approved the FIRST STEP Act, a collection of modest prison reforms aimed at reducing recidivism and promoting reintegration. The bill is on hold in the Senate, where Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is demanding that it include sentencing reforms as well.

The latest proposal would incorporate into the FIRST STEP Act four elements of Grassley’s Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act.

The amendments would widen the “safety valve” that lets some drug offenders escape mandatory minimum sentences, narrow the criteria for mandatory minimums that apply to repeat drug offenders, clarify that escalating sentences for drug offenders who have guns require prior convictions and retroactively apply the shorter crack-cocaine sentences that Congress approved in 2010.

If Trump backs the changes Grassley wants, an amended bill could be approved by the lame-duck Congress after the election. “I believe the president was sincere,” said Jason Pye, the vice president of legislative affairs at FreedomWorks, which supports sentencing reform.

“I was skeptical when the White House began dabbling in this more than a year ago. But the White House has been fully engaged on this.”

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is no fan of sentencing reform, which may count in its favor, as far as Trump is concerned.

If Sessions does not get on board with “prison reform,” Trump said, “then he gets overruled by me, because I make the decision.”

October 18, 2018 12:44 PM  
Anonymous i see a red door and I want to paint it black said...

In regard to Kanye West being called a "coon," a "sell-out," "self-loathing" and an "Uncle Tom," Obama also knows a thing or two about that. In 2000, when he ran for Congress against Rep. Bobby Rush, Rush branded Obama as an out-of-touch, not-from-the-'hood, Harvard-educated elite who taught at University of Chicago and who was not "truly black." Then-state Sen. Obama, beaten badly in the race, said, "When Congressman Rush and his allies attack me for going to Harvard and teaching at the University of Chicago, they're sending a signal to black kids that if you're well-educated, somehow you're not 'keeping it real.'" As President, Obama later said: "There's no one way to be black. Take it from somebody who's seen both sides of debate about whether I'm black enough."

Second, let's examine the reaction to West's White House visit from a prominent Trump-hating white critic, MSNBC's Chris Matthews. Analyzing why Trump invited Kanye West to the White House, Matthews inadvertently exposed the liberals' game of using the race card for votes. Matthews said the main reason Trump invited West was to assuage white voters' concerns about Trump. Matthews said, "White people won't vote for a guy -- most of them -- if they think they're racist."

Hold on!

Most nights, Matthews and his left-wing cable colleagues scramble to come up with new and different ways to call Trump "racist." They argue that Trump knowingly and intentionally crafts his message to appeal to white racists. On election night, CNN's Van Jones attributed Trump's victory to "whitelash" -- claiming that "racist" white voters found a kindred spirit in "racist" Donald Trump. But Matthews, in an unguarded moment, conceded that most whites would not vote for somebody if they thought he or she was racist.

The con has been exposed.

Matthews said, in effect, that most white people are not racist, would not vote for a racist and therefore only a brain-dead white politician would run an election catering to racists. Yet virtually every night, he and his guests preach racism, racism, racism in America.

In fact, Matthews echoes the words of John O'Sullivan, then-editor of the National Review. Sullivan, in 1997, said, "White racism does exist, but its social power is weak and the social power arrayed against it overwhelming."

To the left, the only acceptable blacks are victicrats who believe racism is the top problem. Never mind the liberals -- like Obama -- who know damn well the top problem is fatherlessness. But Democratic politicians -- like Obama -- also need to keep blacks angry for votes.

Quite the Faustian bargain.

October 18, 2018 1:03 PM  
Anonymous You're living in the wrong country said...

"but only an extortionist Orwellian would say not confiscating as much as you once did is "giving"

Libertarians and Republicans are all of the mindset the taxes are all extortion. They completely forget that the only reason the US can support a global military force that costs 10 TIMES more than what the average global citizen pays for his military is TAXES. If you're want to call something extortion, it would be confiscating large chunks of paychecks so your government can buy half of the entire planet's total military output. Remember, we only have 5% of the world's population, but we buy spend about 50% of its military output.

Republicans have never seen a military budget that they don't want to increase. Meanwhile, Republicans are hell bent on cutting Medicare and Social security benefits that were paid for out of US citizen PAYCHECKS.

Without taxes, there is no US. There is no border control. There is no US military. Schools would disappear - except for the rich of course. There would be no FEMA to help folks out after hurricanes. No NASA to put men on the moon, no NOAA to let people know when hurricanes are bearing down on them.

I know you love to live in your world of fantastical hyperbole where taxes are all "Orwellian confiscation," but our modern society simply wouldn't exist without it.

If you want to live in a country without income taxes (they tax other things to generate their necessary revenue) try one of these countries:

United Arab Emirates
Saudi Arabia
Cayman Islands
The Bahamas

I'm sure you'd fit in well with all the hard-line conservatives in Saudi Arabia. And since the government owns the oil company there, you don't have to worry about them taking too much of their profits in taxes.

Seems like the perfect place for you.

October 18, 2018 1:32 PM  
Anonymous homosexuality never ever produces any life. two homosexuals just ain't a marriage said...

I don't know why you think I'm against taxes

I'm only opposed to them when they are extortionist and conficatory

just like Jim, I think we should go in "together on the costs of services that only government can provide"

right now, half of Americans make no contribution at all

so WE are not going in together at all

half of us are paying for the other half

and, truthfully, even after Trump tax cut, the upper 10% pay most of the "costs of services that only government can provide", although the rest of the upper 50% at least makes a small contribution

further, a great deal of government is not services that only government can provide

hence the extortion and confiscation

OK, you've been schooled now

no more crap from you

October 18, 2018 2:22 PM  
Anonymous heterosexuality should be societally preferenced because it alone brings life said...

Everyone wants to be thought of as a disruptor, from cupcake makers in Brooklyn who reimagine the lowly pastry to app creators in Palo Alto who upend entire industries.

Well, here’s to the disruptor living at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

President Trump — the Great Disruptor who is challenging the premises and practices that all the Serious People tell us are immutable — is disrupting business-as-usual in Washington, New York, Geneva, Brussels and Beijing.

Donald J. Trump has been upsetting the status quo ever since he descended the escalator in Trump Tower to disrupt the make-believe world of mendacious politicians mouthing meaningless talking points and the media that pretend to believe them.

Washington conventional wisdom told us economic stagnation, higher taxes, greater regulation and fewer manufacturing jobs were metaphysical certainties. President Trump disrupted that.

Beijing had figured out how to displace America as the world’s No. 1 economic and military superpower by gaming the international trading system and gulling somnambulant elites into believing “as China grows more prosperous it will become more democratic and an ally of the U.S.” President Trump has disrupted that, and rewritten the conventional thinking about China.

In the process, the president disrupted the World Trade Organization, which the world now acknowledges is incapable of defending the international trading system against the depredations of a recidivist China.

President Trump disrupted the Wall Street-Washington cartel that deliberately mislabeled globally managed trade as “free trade” and its strategy to move American factories to China and import goods to the United States tax-free. As the president’s trade representative, Robert Lighthizer, said, “Some businesses and some Wall Street guys will have to figure out another way to make a fortune.”

In the Middle East, President Trump disrupted the diplomatic fantasy that Israel would ever surrender control of Jerusalem to an international authority that has proven itself incapable of managing a piece of real estate on the east side of Manhattan, let alone an entire city in the most volatile region on earth.

Whether the G-7 summit, a meaningless communiqué or global compact on this or that, the United Nations or some other sacred cow of the “liberal international order” that’s never been questioned or updated since its invention more than 70 years ago, President Trump has disrupted them all.

While he was at it, he disrupted the notion that American taxpayers would foot the bill for NATO in perpetuity and finance Europe’s slow drift to socialism.

Most fundamentally, President Trump has disrupted the consensus belief that says the decline of the United States is inevitable and can be managed only, not averted.

When Silicon Valley tech titans disrupt industries and destroy the jobs of thousands of Americans in the process, media pundits cheer them as heroes. When President Trump disrupts an ossified status quo that has ill-served our nation and its people, these same pundits harrumph and recoil in horror.

The truth is, America always has welcomed disruption and disruptors — the rebels, the troublemakers, the ones who see things differently. They invent. They explore. They create. They inspire. They change things. They push the human race forward.

Disruption is the price you pay for change you can really believe in.

October 18, 2018 2:29 PM  
Anonymous Gay people getting married every day said...

"Most fundamentally, President Trump has disrupted the consensus belief that says the decline of the United States is inevitable and can be managed only, not averted."

I don't know what crowd you've been hanging with, but that was not a consensus belief among my friends before Rump skulked into office.

I will admit though, none of us had any idea how many white supremacists were hiding in dark holes just waiting for their blond savior - Hair Trumpenfuhrer - to get into office.

Gotta admit, that was a TOTAL surprise. And no, we don't really believe in that kind of change.

Nazis should have learned they were losers years ago. Somehow their deplorable thinking keeps growing under the white Christian right.

October 18, 2018 2:55 PM  
Anonymous Gay people getting married every day said...

"I don't know why you think I'm against taxes"

Do you even bother to read your own posts? Or are you just spinning the Wheel of Right Wing Talking Points and typing whatever goes in? Or you could just be a troll bot computer negating nearly every post that isn't your own.

"right now, half of Americans make no contribution at all

so WE are not going in together at all

half of us are paying for the other half"

And there's a good reason for that, and it's only going to get worse. Corporations and rich people have been writing the laws for this country for decades to preserve their wealth, and pay workers as little as possible - going out of their way to destroy unions along the way.

US productivity has soared over the past few decades, but in real terms, worker income has been stuck in the 70's. That isn't the workers' fault.

It's now gotten to the point that only those near the top have money left to tax, and Republicans continue to make it worse.

They are turning our economy that looks a lot more like China of the 80's - rich plutocrats owning the vast majority of production resources, and a large swath of under-educated poor people willing to work at desperation wages. You can't even afford your own health care if you work at WalMart - it gets picked up by tax payers that can at least make a living wage - but WalMart's owners are rolling in dough. It apparently never occurred to them that they could pay their workers enough to afford their own health insurance. As long as they can eat some food and come to work, apparently that's enough.

It's good to be a rich capitalist in this country. Not so much for folks at the bottom.

The graphs here show how the wealth is skewed in this country:

October 18, 2018 3:13 PM  
Anonymous lie must be preferenced - that's pro-science said...

"Most people know that sometimes a woman needs an abortion"

science denier

This year, March for Life leadership wants to draw attention to the fact that science and technology continue to reveal the humanity and life of an unborn person even in its very earliest stages.

In 2008, President Obama was famously asked, “When does life begin?” He dodged the question by joking that was “above my pay grade.” While this response conveniently gives cover when advocating policies that are destructive of life in its earliest stages, the answer isn’t difficult. An organism is alive when it meets four criteria: metabolism, reaction to stimuli, growth and reproduction.

The zygote, the first cell formed at the moment of conception, is the earliest developmental stage of the human embryo. It is undeniably human in that it is composed of human DNA and totally different from any other human that has ever existed. DNA is present, whether it’s 23 pairs of chromosomes or 22. The fingerprint that each of us has – distinguishing us from any other human on the planet -- is determined by that DNA on day one.

Fetal development in its simplicity and depth is astonishing. Only three weeks after fertilization, a little one’s heart starts beating. At eight weeks of pregnancy the baby has started moving around (even though Mom can’t feel this quite yet). By the 10th week of pregnancy, a baby’s fingers and toes are forming. By 13 weeks, right at the end of the first trimester, the baby has fingerprints. If the baby is female, she already has more than 2 million eggs!

During the second trimester, organs including kidneys begin to work, and expectant parents might even see their little one sucking his thumb on an ultrasound. At 19 weeks of development a baby’s senses are developing and she or he can likely recognize Mom’s voice at this stage.

One hundred years ago our understanding of embryonic development was very different from what it is now. Medical advancements continue to reaffirm the science behind the pro-life cause – that life begins when egg meets sperm and a new, unique, human embryo is created. Moreover, breakthroughs in science and ultrasound technology have provided a window into the womb allowing us to witness firsthand the development of life.

Pro-life is pro-science, and science should always be at the service of life. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Recently you might have read that the Department of Health and Human Services cancelled a contract related to acquisition of aborted fetal tissue between the Food and Drug Administration and an organization called Advanced Biosciences Research. ABR is a major supplier of aborted fetal tissue; the Trump administration’s ending of the contract was a very good thing. Unfortunately, millions of taxpayer dollars still flow to similar experimentations using human fetal tissue or human embryonic stem cells -- both of which rely on the destruction of human life.

To help counter this, Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) and his co-sponsor Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) introduced the Patients First Act – HR 2918 – which would prohibit tax dollars from going toward such needless destruction in the name of research. Instead, it would redirect federal support to alternative stem cell research, including the use of adult stem cells, which has proven to be much more successful in saving lives.

Science makes clear that human life -- and our uniqueness as individuals -- begins on day one, at fertilization. Life, in its most vulnerable form, should be protected, and we are grateful for HR 2918 and call on members of Congress to pass this and similar legislation preserving the dignity of the human person from its earliest moments.

It is for such reason that each January we march. We march to protect life in its earliest and most vulnerable stages, and we march to restore a vision of a world where the beauty, dignity, and uniqueness of every human life are valued and protected – from day one.

October 18, 2018 3:55 PM  
Anonymous no special preferences for homosexuals said...

"I don't know what crowd you've been hanging with, but that was not a consensus belief among my friends before Rump skulked into office"

glad to hear

you still voted for Barry Obama?

"I will admit though, none of us had any idea how many white supremacists were hiding in dark holes just waiting for their blond savior - Hair Trumpenfuhrer - to get into office."

well, there aren't many

glad reality is starting to dawn on you

first step to knowledge is knowing what you don't know

and you sure don't know a hell of a lot

"Gotta admit, that was a TOTAL surprise. And no, we don't really believe in that kind of change."

oops, you're regressing

just keep thinking about Anastasia and you'll come around

"Nazis should have learned they were losers years ago. Somehow their deplorable thinking keeps growing under the white Christian right."

yep, the hallucinations are returning

"Do you even bother to read your own posts? Or are you just spinning the Wheel of Right Wing Talking Points and typing whatever goes in? Or you could just be a troll bot computer negating nearly every post that isn't your own."

I do, in fact, read them

like Jim, I believe taxes are for "the costs of services that only government can provide"

they are not for income redistribution

"And there's a good reason for that, and it's only going to get worse. Corporations and rich people have been writing the laws for this country for decades to preserve their wealth, and pay workers as little as possible - going out of their way to destroy unions along the way."

there are no such laws

it is not a proper function of government to redistribute all assets equally, or to redistribute them at all

"US productivity has soared over the past few decades, but in real terms, worker income has been stuck in the 70's. That isn't the workers' fault."

if they think they can, the workers can start their own companies

it's a free country, happens all the time

"It's now gotten to the point that only those near the top have money left to tax, and Republicans continue to make it worse."

repeat after me

the government is too big and it's not necessary or beneficial

"It's good to be a rich capitalist in this country. Not so much for folks at the bottom."

polls show most people think things are going great and are optimistic

October 18, 2018 5:40 PM  
Anonymous too bad about TTF said...

Quietly, President Trump is putting together the greatest performance on the economy and trade in modern presidential history. This is happening quietly because both the actions and results of his policies are grossly under-reported in the press.

Exhibit A is the president’s impressive, but virtually ignored, “hat trick” at the United Nations (U.N.) last week. At the U.N., President Trump fulfilled an important campaign promise when he sat with President Moon Jae-in and signed a landmark modernization of the trade deficit-inflating 2012 South Korea deal known as “KORUS.” This new Korea deal means more auto, agricultural, and pharmaceutical exports for American producers even as it extends critical protections for our light truck industry out to 2041.

At the U.N., President Trump and his United States Trade Representative Robert E. Lighthizer also announced the president’s intention to ask Congress for “fast track” authority to negotiate a new trade deal with Japan. Such a deal would help pry open Japan’s notoriously closed agricultural and auto markets. It was a development hailed from Capitol Hill and Detroit to the wheat fields of Montana — but the news got largely buried.

The third part of last week’s hat trick was an extraordinary joint statement from Japan, the European Union and the United States. It roundly condemned non market-oriented economies’ use of forced technology transfer policies and unfair trade practices while promising strong actions and disciplines to combat these problems.

Of course, last week started off with a bit more of a bang as President Trump announced the death of the pernicious NAFTA trade deal and the birth of “USMCA” — the United StatesMexicoCanada Agreement. Sure, the USMCA got a little more press but nothing to match its $1.2 trillion status as the largest trade deal in United States history — one destined to turn North America into a manufacturing powerhouse and restore the United States as a leading automaker.

While much of the mainstream media continues to underreport the president’s achievements, stock market investors continue to vote with their dollars. With earnings high, growth robust, wages up, and unemployment at historic lows, the bulls of Wall Street don’t need a weatherman or news anchor to know which way the Trump growth winds are blowing.

The growth we are witnessing — over 4 percent in the latest quarter — is no accident. Under the banner of “economic security is national security,” President Trump is fulfilling every single growth-inducing promise that Candidate Trump made during the campaign.

Corporate tax cuts are stimulating investment, productivity and wage growth, and innovation. A wave of deregulation is lowering the costs of United States producers and increasing their global competitiveness. With an end to the war on coal and with the unleashing of the United States petroleum industry, the United States is now the world’s largest oil producer and one of its largest petroleum exporters.

Meanwhile, President Trump’s two simple rules, “Buy American, Hire American,” are significantly strengthening our manufacturing and defense industrial base. Defensive tariffs levied on a flood of underpriced steel and aluminum have led to an investment boom in these two key pillar industries — to the benefit of many communities hit hardest by the forces of globalization.

The bottom line: President Trump is demonstrating both to predecessors and future presidents all the good that can come when the person in the Oval Office thinks 24/7 about how to grow this economy and raise the wages of the men and women of America, particularly those who work with their hands. From Main Street to Wall Street, the results are unprecedented. Too bad, the media is missing a great presidency.

October 18, 2018 6:54 PM  
Anonymous too bad about TTF said...

The despicable treatment now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh received at his Senate confirmation hearing proves conclusively that the Democratic Party is not the party of women – it is the party of exploiting women for political gain.

In their eagerness to pander to women by saying absolutely anything that might win their votes, Democrats were even willing to throw out the centuries-old concept that is the foundation of our legal system: the presumption that we are all innocent until proven guilty.

Democrats insisted that women accusing Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct should automatically be believed with absolutely zero evidence to back up their claims.

Kavanaugh “bears the burden of disproving these allegations,” said Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., who as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee really ought to know better.

OK, so will Coons pledge right now to immediately resign from the Senate if a woman he may never have even met comes forward and says – without any corroborating evidence or witnesses – that he sexually assaulted her decades ago?

“There is no presumption of innocence…” insisted Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

That’s a truly scary statement that sounds like it could have been made at the Salem witch trials in the 1690s, when absurd accusations of witchcraft – primarily made by teenage girls – resulted in the conviction and hanging of 14 women and five men, plus the deaths of five people in jail.

The statement of “no presumption of innocence” could also apply to the anti-communist crusade waged by Sen. Joe McCarthy, R-Wis., in the 1950s, when he accused hundreds of federal employees of being communists without evidence.

And, of course, dictatorial regimes have a long history of imprisoning and killing their enemies in nations where there is no presumption of innocence.

Who in their right mind would want this for America?

If we toss out the presumption of innocence in our country – the way Democrats tossed it out for Kavanaugh – any one of us, regardless of our gender, could be arrested tomorrow and locked up indefinitely or even executed without evidence.

One liberal celebrity, actor and comedian Patton Oswalt, took the statements about taking away Kavanaugh’s presumption of innocence to their logical conclusion, tweeting: “My verdict is GUILTY. Across the board. Don't even need to hear the cases!”

October 18, 2018 7:02 PM  
Anonymous too bad about TTF said...

But while Democrats said Kavanaugh was flat-out guilty until proven innocent, they have reacted very differently to more credible accusations of sexual misconduct when a Democrat was the one being accused.

A current example of this is Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., who is also deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee. His former girlfriend has accused him of repeated verbal and physical abuse, including a time when he allegedly once pulled her from a bed by her ankle during an altercation in 2016.

As evidence, the former girlfriend published a photo of a medical document that shows she had been in an abusive relationship with Ellison, and her son has also said he has seen the abuse on video.

Ellison has denied any wrongdoing.

What did the Democratic Party of Minnesota do in response to calls for accountability for Ellison? It hired an internal lawyer to investigate the allegations, and then predictably concluded that there was “no substantial evidence” of abuse.

There’s only one catch – the lawyer doing the investigating is a partner of a law firm that has donated more than $500,000 to Democrats since 1998, including nearly $50,000 to Ellison himself.

And now Ellison is running as the Democratic candidate for state attorney general in Minnesota. If he were a Republican, Democrats would be demanding he abandon his candidacy and resign from Congress – but because he’s a fellow Democrat he gets a free pass.

Of course, dismissing credible allegations of reprehensible behavior is nothing new for the Democratic Party, which for nearly 30 years has done its level best to portray former President Bill Clinton as the sympathetic victim of some puritanical crusade.

But Monica Lewinsky was just the tip of the iceberg when it came to accusations of sexual misconduct perpetrated by Clinton.

Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, and other women made claims against Clinton that go beyond the Lewinsky affair. Juanita Broaddrick claims that in 1978 Clinton met her at a hotel in Little Rock and violently raped her and bloodied her lip.

Clinton finally had to admit: “Indeed I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not appropriate. In fact it was wrong.” But he denied allegations by other women.

Despite all of this, Democrats still gush over the Clinton dynasty.

The hypocrisy doesn’t end there. Democrats routinely attack their female enemies, secure in the knowledge that they will face few, if any, repercussions from their mainstream media allies.

Liberals have attacked conservative women online with explicit and inexcusable abuse. Even Kavanaugh’s 10-year old daughter was targeted by a left-wing editorial cartoon.

As Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., pointed out, all Democrats want is power – by any means necessary.

At this point, it’s clear that the Democrats don’t really care about women. They only care about what women can do for them.

October 18, 2018 7:03 PM  
Anonymous Gay people getting married every day said...

"repeat after me

the government is too big and it's not necessary or beneficial"

Well, now we know why republicans always sound like they are repeating the same few worn out phrases... all they do is repeat the same propaganda that there fearless leader spits out. Thinking isn't really part of the process. It's just "repeat after me." Kind of like church - don't stop and consider how convoluted and irrational all the stuff in the bible is, just "repeat after me" and "believe what I tell you." It's rich guys that control Fox news and they use there platform well to manipulate the masses into believing what's good for the rich folks is good for everyone else too. It's not. Eventually it leads to revolutions by mobs of angry poor people.

I'm not buying your Kool-aid. We have facts and history to go by. The supply-side economics that Ronnie Raygun set forth has (and Bush 1 rightly called "Voodoo Economics") has led us to predictable consequences - greater wealth for the richest class, decreasing wealth for the middle class, and greater instability in our economy - because it's being driven by the whims of the investor class and not buy the hard, day-in, day-out labors of millions of working Americans - you know, the kind of stuff that built this country in the first place.

The totally unregulated free markets espoused by Republicans led to the Great Depression, and the Great Recession. It took a Democrats to lead us out of both of these, and World War II to help get us out of the first one. It was reasonable banking regulations that kept hedge funds out of the home mortgage markets and kept American homes safe from the vagaries of over-leveraged securities bubbles. Until Republicans - and the investment bankers behind them got those laws repealed.

The facts are out there for anyone willing to learn from history. But if you're lazy, just keep repeating what the plutocrats want you to believe.

October 18, 2018 11:46 PM  
Anonymous 'nuf said said...

"At this point, it’s clear that the Democrats don’t really care about women. They only care about what women can do for them."

Said with a straight face from the party that supported Roy Moore.

Try not to hurt your arm patting yourself on the back for how well you treat women.

October 18, 2018 11:52 PM  
Anonymous I've said more than 'nuf said...

wow, nuf said

this from a guy who votes just like Harvey Weinstein, Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner, Bill Cosby, Al Franken, Elliott Spitzer, Matt Lauer, Garrison Keillor, Charles Manson, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards, Gary Hart, and on to infinity

Donald Trump certainly seems to be disliked by a majority of African-American professional athletes, cable news hosts, academics and the Black Congressional caucus. Yet there are increasing indications that his approval among other African-Americans may be reaching historic highs for a modern Republican president.

Polls have indicated that Trump's approval rating among black voters is close to 20 percent. That is far higher than the 8 percent of the African-American vote that Trump received on Election Day 2016.

A recent Rasmussen Reports poll showed African-American approval of Trump at 36 percent.

Even 20 percent African-American support for Trump would all but dismantle Democratic Party presidential hopes for 2020. Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election with 88 percent of the black vote. That was about a six-point falloff from Barack Obama's share of the black vote in 2012.

But far more importantly, an estimated 2 million of the African-American voters who cast ballots for Obama in 2012 simply did not show up at the polls in 2016 to vote for the off-putting Clinton.

Even a small drop in African-American turnout or anything less than the usual 85 percent to 90 percent supermajority for a Democratic presidential candidate on Election Day can prove fatal. Why?

Republican presidential candidates now routinely win 55 percent to 60 percent of the so-called white vote, and about 70 percent of voters are white. That lopsided margin may widen further, given that progressive Democrats are not making any effort to recapture turned-off white working-class voters.

With continually diminishing white support, Democrats must increasingly count on massive minority turnout and bloc voting -- especially among African-American voters, who make up about 12 percent of electorate.

Roughly a third of Asians and Latinos vote Republican, and voter turnout among these groups generally isn't as strong as it is among whites and African-Americans.

October 19, 2018 12:11 AM  
Anonymous I've said more than 'nuf said...

But why is the supposedly odious Trump having suc success in undermining the traditional marriage between African-Americans and Democrats?

The most recent jobs report revealed that the unemployment rate for African-American teenagers fell to 19.3 percent, the lowest figure on record. That number stands in marked contrast to the 2010 rate of 48.9 percent under the Obama administration. Overall black unemployment is currently at 5.9 percent, which is close to a record low.

Under Trump, the economy is growing at nearly 4 percent per year. The robust growth coincides with Trump's effort to curb illegal immigration and imported labor. The net result has been to empower minority job applicants in ways not seen in nearly half a century.

Trump's implicit message is that every American worker is now crucial in maintaining the red-hot economy. In a job-short economy, laborers suddenly have a lot of leverage over their employers. And wages are rising.

Trump's nationalist message adds to this sense of empowerment, especially when he campaigns on putting Americans first in his economic decision-making.

A former entertainer, Trump is courting African-American celebrities such as rapper Kayne West and football legend Jim Brown. Activist Candace Owens and her Turning Point USA organization are trying to convince black voters that being politically independent forces both parties to compete for the African-American vote.

Ironically, Trump is reaching out to the African-American community to a much greater degree than progressives are reaching out to the estranged white working class.

October 19, 2018 12:13 AM  
Anonymous boy, Dems are super-screwed now!! said...

Trump has other issues that might fuel the effort to redirect black support. Abortion, for example, is supposedly a Democratic sacrament. But few progressives talk much about the high rate of black abortions. African-Americans make up between 12 percent and 13 percent of the American population but account for as many as 35 percent of all abortions.

Yet liberal family-planning advocates were not always shy about their occasionally eugenics-inspired agendas of the past. The spiritual founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was an unapologetic eugenicist who professed that the object of birth control was to discourage the reproduction of those she derided as "the unfit."

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal icon, once couched her support for abortion in neo-eugenic terms. In a disturbing 2009 interview, she was quite blunt: "Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."

Trump should stress other issues that might appeal to African-Americans, such as the right of access to charter schools, and how boutique environmentalism and over-regulation drive up the cost of affordable housing, fuel and electricity.

Trump might also make it clear that his message is geared to all Americans, including African-Americans. As a group, they are already doing better economically today than during the Obama administration -- and everyone gains political clout when politicians must work for, rather than feel entitled to, their votes.

October 19, 2018 12:15 AM  
Anonymous it's getting chilly said...

The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a special report last week predicting apocalyptic environmental consequences if the nations of the world are unable to reduce the amount of warming to 1.5° C above pre-industrial levels in the next 12 years. The IPCC report insists that meeting this target requires “rapid and far-reaching” changes—all unspecified—in a wide range of areas including land, energy, industry, buildings, transportation, and cities. These changes, the report insists, must reduce carbon dioxide emissions to about 45 percent of 2010 levels by 2030 and to a neutral level of no new carbon dioxide emissions by 2050.

Much press coverage has embraced the report’s conclusions. The New Yorker stresses the dire warnings of the IPCC report. The Guardian speaks of the “urgent changes” needed to contain climate change underneath its headline picture of a raging California wildfire. Yet it is here that the story starts to unravel from both a scientific and economic perspective. The unstated narrative behind the picture is that temperature increases due to global warming will cause environmental catastrophes. But in the case of forest fires, this claim is simply untrue: in the United States, the number of forest fires has been down by about 86 percent since 1930, and the current year ranks as the 40th highest on record. To be sure, the risks of fire today remain great but for reasons that are unrelated to climate change. Higher levels of CO2 make plants more drought resistant, which increases the amount of burnable material. What matters most, however, is not temperature change, but finding the proper techniques for forest management. Yet one weakness of the IPCC report is that in its discussion of forest fires, it does not mention alternate causes.

The same gap exists with respect to the frequency and severity of hurricanes. From all the recent publicity, one might think that they are rapidly on the rise. But the evidence cuts very much in the opposite direction. It is easy to find reports of major hurricanes that occurred before 1950, as with the record flooding in North Carolina in 1945. But anecdotes never tell the full story. Cato Institute scholars Patrick Michaels and Ryan Maue have demonstrated that hurricane frequency rises and falls in a cyclical manner:

There are a number of clear inferences that can be drawn from just this data set. First, there has been a steady increase in overall levels of CO2 since at least 1950. But whatever its cause, that single variable cannot explain the cyclical pattern of hurricanes. Similar cyclical patterns have been observed in measuring the extent of Arctic ice since at least 1900, including changes during the last 12 years. The same is true of sea levels, which have risen consistently over thousands of years, but not at constant rates; the rates have fluctuated several times in the past 120 years, making it difficult to find a trend. No one is quite sure why there is variability, but the overall levels of sea rise are far lower than feared ranging somewhere between 5 and 8 inches per century. The great vice of the IPCC report is that it attributes all negative environmental phenomena to climate change. It does not acknowledge the data that presents a serious challenge to the dominant orthodoxy that increases in CO2 since the onset of industrialization are the cause of temperature change and the supposed global dislocations.

October 19, 2018 12:40 AM  
Anonymous it's a chiller tonight ! said...

The larger scientific issue is to develop an expanded theory of climate change that incorporates variables other than carbon dioxide in the equation. Globally, these include the effects of water vapor, also a greenhouse gas, and of aerosols, which tend to lower temperatures. Locally, these include recently discovered volcanic activity under the West Antarctic ice sheet, and the falling of land from the draining of aquifers. MIT climatologist Richard Lindzen recently discussed these issues in his lecture at the Global Warming Policy Foundation—“Global Warming for the Two Cultures”—which calls attention to the deep gap between scientific knowledge and popular culture. Lindzen put the role of CO2 emissions into proper perspective in order to negate the claim that changes in the level of CO2 can drive major climate changes. He pointed out that the total energy flows over the surface of the earth amount to about 200 watts per square meter. The key conclusion is: “Doubling CO2 involves a perturbation of 2% percent to this budget.” The obvious question is how that small change in an energy budget can drive the major changes to the earth’s climate that so many claim. Clearly, other factors have to be at work, including water vapor, whose effects are exceedingly difficult to model. Its distribution is uneven and uncertain over the surface of the earth, and it can take the form of different kinds of clouds with different absorption rates for heat. Water vapor both keeps radiation from the sun from coming in just as it prevents the leakage of radiation out from the system. The wide variation in temperature patterns, sea levels, and plant growth long before modern post-industrial history indicate that these forces are powerful.

At this point, CO2 seems to have a reduced role. But again, matters get more complicated. If the effect of CO2 on temperature is relatively weak, its effect on plant growth is powerful, given that CO2 and water are basic resources that plants require to live. Here the unambiguous effect is that the increase in CO2 has made plant life stronger, and has led to a major amount of global greening over the last 30 years. That increase in CO2 levels tends, moreover, to reduce temperature extremes by making land cooler in the day and warmer at night.

So why is there so much fear about the consequences of climate change? As reported by Marlo Lewis of the Competitive Enterprise Institute total fossil fuel consumption is up 55% since 1950. Total energy-related CO2 emissions is up 500 percent. Total CO2 concentration is up by about one-third. The total temperature increase during that time has been 0.65°C. But in the meantime, global life expectancy has increased from 48 years to 71.4 years. Global malaria infections are down about 37 percent, and global malaria deaths are down by 62 percent. Corn yields per acre are up 25 percent since 2000, 44 percent since 1990, and 88 percent since 1980. Global GDP is sharply up and global poverty is sharply down. And other numbers only reinforce the same trend: as Johan Norberg shows in his book Progress, all major indicators—life expectancy, income, health—are up. As basic levels of technology continue to improve, we will have cheaper production of energy and its more efficient utilization.

October 19, 2018 12:41 AM  
Anonymous chillaxin', dudes said...

Things seem pretty good, so why does the IPCC think that the future is bleak? And why does it think that major transformations are needed to deal with the risks of CO2 emissions? There is no reason to think that all nations can be coaxed into a single coherent central plan to manage emissions, assuming that one even exists. At the very least, China, now the largest emitter of CO2 and India, the third largest, will both sit this one out. Yet at the same time, the United States, which has rightly ditched the Paris Accord, posted in 2017 the largest reduction in CO2 emissions of any nation by relying increasingly on natural gas as a source of energy, even as overall global CO2 levels have moved upward. As Bjorn Lomborg, the head of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, has written, it is not easy to introduce wholesale changes into any economy, and the IPCC presents no evidence that the enormous cuts in fossil fuel consumption it requires to reach its targets can realistically be made.

The first and most simple point is that fossil fuels are here to stay because over the long-haul they are more efficient than either wind or solar energy, especially now that improvements through fracking have reduced the costs of fossil fuel extraction while other improvements in technology have increased the amount of energy extracted per unit of fossil fuels. Even with massive subsidies, the efforts to produce major shifts to wind and solar have proved prohibitively expensive, given their intrinsic unreliability when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine, and the persistent difficulty of storing such energy in a cost-effective manner. Pull out the subsidies, and these markets may survive in certain niche locations, but they will not displace fossil fuels. The far better path, therefore, is to concentrate on improving yields and reducing externalities from our best energy sources, instead of overlooking the serious externalities that wind and solar themselves can create. The simple path of steady and predictable technological improvement promises far greater returns than the measures suggested by the IPCC report.

October 19, 2018 12:42 AM  
Anonymous Who needs the 1st Amendment if you've got the 2nd? said...

President Donald Trump celebrated Republican Rep. Greg Gianforte during a rally in Missoula, Montana, on Thursday, cheering the lawmaker as a “tough cookie” over his assault of a reporter last year.

“Any guy that can do a body slam, he’s my kind of guy,” Trump said at the event as supporters cheered him on. “I had heard that he body-slammed a reporter ... and he was way up, and I said, ‘Oh, this is terrible, he’s going to lose the election.’ Then I said, ‘I know Montana pretty well,’ and I said I think it might help him. And it did.”

Jacobs had been attempting to ask Gianforte a question about Republican health care legislation at an election eve event.

Gianforte won the election but later pleaded guilty to misdemeanor assault. He was fined $300, given a six-month deferred sentence and ordered to perform community service, among other penalties. He also donated $50,000 to the Committee to Protect Journalists and apologized to Jacobs.

John Mulholland, the editor of Guardian US, condemned Trump’s statements later Thursday, saying they amounted to “an attack on the First Amendment by someone who has taken an oath to defend it.”

“An alarming number of journalists have faced serious physical assault,” Alexandra Ellerbeck, the North America program coordinator at CPJ. “We also know that around the world and even in the United States this year, journalists have been killed for their work. It’s one of the most dangerous times to be a journalist. President Trump should use his platform to condemn press freedom abuses at home and abroad, not cheer on physical assaults of reporters.”

October 19, 2018 1:16 AM  
Anonymous Even Putin sees America's downfall said...

Russian President Vladimir Putin gloated Thursday about what he sees as the end of the United States’ world dominance due to growing “mistakes.”

Putin also claimed America holds “some responsibility” for the disappearance of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi because the Saudi journalist was living in the U.S., he said his in annual foreign policy speech, according to the Financial Times. He did not elaborate. Khashoggi has not been seen since he entered the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul on Oct. 2. Turkish officials say he was murdered and dismembered by orders of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

“In this regard, the U.S. has a certain responsibility. If someone knows what happens and there was a murder, I hope some evidence is provided. And dependent on that, we will make some decisions,” Putin added in his remarks in the Black Sea resort of Sochi. He said there was currently no reason to “harm our relations with Saudi Arabia.”

As for the U.S., he said that “empires often think they can make some little mistakes ... because they’re so powerful. But when the number of these mistakes keeps growing, it reaches a level they cannot sustain.”

He added: “A country can get the sense from impunity that you can do anything. This is the result of the monopoly from a unipolar world ... . Luckily this monopoly is disappearing. It’s almost done.”

October 19, 2018 1:20 AM  
Anonymous oh noooooooooooo....... said...

"Even Putin sees America's downfall
Russian President Vladimir Putin gloated Thursday about what he sees as the end of the United States’ world dominance due to growing “mistakes.”"

gee, Vlad said that?

now, I'm really worried

he thinks we made a mistake by, somehow, letting Kashoggi get killed

we know Vlad the Righteous would never be involved with such a thing

October 19, 2018 5:57 AM  
Anonymous tRump and his team trashes freedom of the press said...

Saudi Arabia transfers $100 million to U.S. amid crisis over Khashoggi

Conservatives mount a whisper campaign smearing Khashoggi in defense of Trump

Twitter explodes after 'psychopath' Donald Trump cheers body-slamming of reporter

Unlike tRump and his band of thugs, the framers felt freedom of the press was so important they put it in the first Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

Notice there is no cost associated with the right of the people to peaceably assemble and petition the Government for a redress of grievances

tRump and company are UNAmerican to their core

October 19, 2018 8:29 AM  
Anonymous Black people can't vote for you if you kick them off the registration said...

Republicans think black people are going to vote for them because Rump is doing so well with the economy.

They have forgotten that they've been going out of their way for decades to suppress black and brown voter turn-out.

So how is that going to work, actually?

Don't worry - Trevor Noah has a plan!

October 19, 2018 10:51 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality deserves a priviliged place in society said...

"Republicans think black people are going to vote for them because Rump is doing so well with the economy"


they're just setting up voter fraud prevention to make sure illegal aliens don't vote

"They have forgotten that they've been going out of their way for decades to suppress black and brown voter turn-out."

they didn't know that until Dem nutcases told them

"So how is that going to work, actually?"

Dems whine that blacks can't vote but it's a proven stat that Dems can't win without 90% black support

now that some blacks have figured out that Dems will ever help them, that will drop to at least 80%

if that occurs, we'll never have another dumb Dem President

they know that, which is why they went lividly crazy when Kanye dared to support the welfare of the country and recognize that Trump has their back

October 19, 2018 11:04 AM  
Anonymous Facts not opinion said...

"they didn't know that until Dem nutcases told them"

They've known it for decades.

"Freedom Rides established great credibility with black and white people throughout the United States and inspired many to engage in direct action for civil rights. Perhaps most significantly, the actions of the Freedom Riders from the North, who faced danger on behalf of southern black citizens, impressed and inspired the many black people living in rural areas throughout the South. They formed the backbone of the wider civil rights movement, who engaged in voter registration and other activities. Southern black activists generally organized around their churches, the center of their communities and a base of moral strength."

That's one reason 87% of blacks Dems, not lying GOPers.

"Trends in party affiliation among black voters have been largely stable over recent years. Overall, 87% of black voters identify with the Democratic Party or lean Democratic, compared with just 7% who identify as Republican or lean Republican.

Among Hispanic voters, the Democratic Party holds a 63% to 27% advantage over the GOP in leaned party identification. As with black voters, trends in party affiliation among Hispanic voters have changed little in recent years.

Based on 2016 surveys, 66% of Asian registered voters identify with the Democratic Party or lean Democratic, compared with 27% who identify as Republican or lean Republican. The data for party identification among Asians are based on interviews conducted in English."

October 19, 2018 11:17 AM  
Anonymous Well-oiled with sludge and filth said...

Multiple news outlets are reporting that there was a shouting match outside the Oval Office on Thursday afternoon between White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and National Security Advisor John Bolton. Bloomberg described the melee as “a profanity-laced argument.” The report added that, “The shouting match was so intense that other White House aides worried one of the two men might immediately resign.”

The incident reinforces the sense of a chaotic White House, an impression that was furthered by a bizarre visit from musician Kanye West last week.

On October 10, Olivia Nuzzi of New York magazine published a revealing account of an interview she had with Trump, where they discussed rumors that Kelly was about to leave the White House. In order to reassure her, Trump brought in lemmings like Kelly himself, Vice President Mike Pence, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Their entrance into the Oval Office seemed to be done on cue, as if Trump wanted to present a show of solidarity. Trump described the White House as running like a “well-oiled machine.”

October 19, 2018 11:24 AM  
Anonymous New low for Donald tЯump? Now he’s helping Saudi regime cover up Jamal Khashoggi’s murder -- HE HATES FREE PRESS said...

Read the first paragraph of this report from Shane Harris in the Washington Post and think about it for a moment:

"The Trump administration and the Saudi royal family are searching for a mutually agreeable explanation for the death of journalist Jamal Khashoggi — one that will avoid implicating Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is among the president’s closest foreign allies, according to analysts and officials in multiple countries."

I assume that is based on information from reliable sources. And what it says is truly shocking: The White House is conspiring with the Saudi government to cover up a murder.

Here's another passage from the New York Times in an article about how Saudi Arabia is considering pinning the blame on a top general, presumably with the relieved permission of President Trump and Jared Kushner, who, according to the Intercept, regularly texts his good buddy Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) on WhatsApp:

"Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law and Middle East adviser, has been urging the president to stand by Prince Mohammed, according to a person close to the White House and a former official with knowledge of the discussions.

Mr. Kushner has argued that the outrage over Mr. Khashoggi’s disappearance and possible killing will pass, just as it did after other Saudi errors like the kidnapping of the prime minister of Lebanon and the killing of a busload of children in Yemen by a Saudi airstrike."

The Times edited that paragraph later to eliminate the damning detail. But the point still stands.

At first Trump acted as though he didn't know anything about it all, which was obviously daft. Word of Khashoggi's disappearance into the Saudi consulate in Istanbul was almost immediately reported and U.S. intelligence certainly knew about it. Then, after speaking with King Salman on the phone, Trump mused publicly about "rogue killers" possibly having done the deed but still refused to admit that the Saudis had been involved, running a potential alternative theory up the flagpole. He has said repeatedly he doesn't want to disturb his massive "arms deals," most of which were negotiated during the Obama administration and none of which add up to the massive dollar amounts he claims.

Meanwhile, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo flew over to Riyadh and let himself be photographed yukking it up with MBS, who the administration insists is conducting a thorough "investigation" into a crime he is suspected of perpetrating. Upon Pompeo's return to Washington, he assured the public that we would be provided with the results shortly -- as if they would have any credibility at all.

All this is happening as the global media is reporting hourly on the details of this gruesome homicide, apparently ordered by a young thug who believes he can literally get away with the murder of a journalist in a foreign country without paying a price. In a way, you can't blame him. MBS is said to be an admirer of Vladimir Putin, who has allegedly ordered the assassination of Russians on foreign soil and is commonly known to kill journalists and political rivals in his own country. Nobody says much about that. President Trump has defended that, saying, "There's a lot of killing." It hasn't seemed to have hurt Putin's prestige or power on the world stage. And it has sent a powerful message to his critics: Watch your backs; I can get you anywhere...

October 19, 2018 11:53 AM  
Anonymous New low for Donald tЯump? Now he’s helping Saudi regime cover up Jamal Khashoggi’s murder -- HE HATES FREE PRESS said...

...MBS has emulated Putin in a number of ways in the two years since he assumed power. He abducted the Lebanese prime minister, impulsively ordered a blockade of Qatar, and escalated the war in Yemen to even more brutal levels, targeting civilians, especially children. He rounded up a group of cabinet ministers and wealthy rivals and held them hostage in the Riyadh Ritz-Carlton, reportedly using torture and plenty of muscle to relieve them of their wealth and influence. (Kushner was rumored to have provided him with U.S. intelligence about some of them.) Not only did nothing happen to the prince after that, he has been feted in foreign capitals as if he were Bruce Springsteen.

As with what Trump describes as his love affair with Kim Jong-un, Kushner -- Trump's top strategist in charge of Middle East peace (and emolument management) -- had already established a tight bro-on-bro relationship with MBS, flying over to Riyadh for all-nighters with the young prince "swapping stories and planning strategy." MBS has reportedly said to his close associates that he has Kushner "in his pocket," which seems to be accurate.

Trump believes that all foreign policy is based upon how nice leaders are to him personally. And the Saudis were very nice indeed when he went on his first big foreign trip. They gave him bling, they promised arms sales and they saw right away that he was in way over his head. He was happy to throw all the U.S. eggs in that basket, assured by Kushner that this would lead to many excellent results, with Iran marginalized, Israel secure and everyone living happily ever after. It's an impossibly naive strategy.

Normally, one would assume that the far more worldly Saudis would play it smarter. But as it turns out, their own man of the future, MBS, is equally inept with a similar, if obviously less inhibited, authoritarian worldview. Torturing and killing a U.S. resident who wrote for the Washington Post was a very risky move with little upside.

Again, you can't blame him for thinking he would easily get away with it. After all, the most powerful man in the world calls the press evil and commonly points them out to his supporters as "the enemy of the people." And after all, Khashoggi was explicitly banned from writing in newspapers, appearing on TV or going to conferences in his home country back in November of 2017 by MBS because he had criticized Donald Trump. No doubt the prince assumed Trump would be grateful to see one of his critics "taken care of."

He's probably right. On Thursday evening, in the middle of this horrific international incident, Trump praised an American politician for beating up a reporter:

"...Here's the video of Trump on Greg Gianforte body slamming Ben Jacobs: "Any guy that can do a body slam, he's my kind of guy."
9:30 PM - Oct 18, 2018"

Of course Trump will not apologize. His followers love it. Some of them have now embarked on a campaign to smear Jamal Khashoggi so that Trump's cover-up has cover of its own. How long will it be before Trump repeats these smears at a campaign rally?

MBS may not survive this. The loss of prestige and economic blowback on his country is intense, and he's shown himself to be an unfit leader. But he likely has nothing to fear from the U.S., at least under the current administration. Donald Trump is with him all the way.

October 19, 2018 11:53 AM  
Anonymous AP-NORC Poll: Just 1 in 4 thinks Kavanaugh told entire truth said...

WASHINGTON (AP) — Just 1 in 4 people thinks Brett Kavanaugh was completely honest when as a Supreme Court nominee he gave sworn testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee last month, with Republicans and Democrats holding starkly distinct opinions of his credibility, according to a poll released Friday.

The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research survey also found that the public holds tepid views of how major players handled the extraordinary battle, which culminated Oct. 6 in an exhausted Senate's near party line confirmation of Kavanaugh. President Donald Trump, Senate Republicans and Democrats and the FBI each earned approval from 32 percent or less of the poll's respondents.

Overall, 39 percent said they believe Kavanaugh was mostly honest but was hiding something when he testified last month before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the drama's most unforgettable day. Another 31 percent said he was largely lying, and 25 percent said he was totally truthful. A combative Kavanaugh denied California college professor Christine Blasey Ford's testimony to the committee that he sexually assaulted her at a 1980s high school gathering when they were teenagers, and he rebutted classmates' descriptions of him as a heavy drinker.

The question was among several that underscored how stances over the searing confirmation battle are deeply colored by people's political allegiances and less so by gender. Republicans hope partisan tensions heightened by the fight will drive conservative voters to the polls in the Nov. 6 elections, when GOP control of the House and the Senate is at stake.

Six in 10 Republicans, including 57 percent of men and 64 percent of women, said they think Kavanaugh was entirely truthful when he appeared before the Judiciary panel. They included Ricky Richards, who took the survey and agreed to explain his views in a subsequent interview.

Richards said he believed Kavanaugh, citing repeated FBI background checks that unearthed no wrongdoing, testimony from supportive witnesses and the body language of Kavanaugh and his wife at the crucial Judiciary session.

"He was angry, but he handled himself better than I would have," said Richards, a 59-year-old engineering consultant from Clifton, Texas.

He said Ford's testimony seemed "purely scripted," and he faulted her for not recalling some details of what she says happened to her, which experts have said is common for trauma victims.

Fewer than 1 in 10 Democrats, men and women, said they think Kavanaugh was fully candid during his appearance. Just over half said he was mostly lying while the rest said he was largely truthful but was hiding something.

"It's just the way he presented himself, the way he answered questions. He was so defensive," said Barbara Heath, a 60-year-old Democrat and former factory worker from Springfield, Ohio. "To me, he was covering up a lot of things."

Overall, 43 percent disapprove of Kavanaugh's confirmation while 35 percent approve. More independents disapprove than support his confirmation, 35 percent to 17 percent, while the remaining respondents do not have a strong opinion either way.

Forty percent of all men approve of Kavanaugh's elevation to the high court, while only 30 percent of women do. Yet party identification washes much of that difference away: Around three-quarters of Republican men and women favor Kavanaugh's confirmation, a view shared by only about 1 in 10 Democrats of both genders.

Americans are about evenly divided over whether the Judiciary panel treated Kavanaugh fairly. In contrast, 42 percent thought the committee was unfair to Ford while 30 percent said it was fair to her. Nearly two-thirds of college-educated women said Ford was treated unfairly, a potentially damaging finding for House Republicans defending competitive suburban districts in next month's elections...

October 19, 2018 12:35 PM  
Anonymous You Betcha! said...

"they know that, which is why they went lividly crazy when Kanye dared to support the welfare of the country and recognize that Trump has their back"

You apparently didn't actually see the video. It was Kanye that was lividly crazy.

Here is quote:

"There’s a lot of things affecting our mental health that makes us do crazy things that puts us back into that trap door called the 13th Amendment.

I did say “abolish” with the hat on. Because why would you keep something around that’s a trap door? If you’re building a floor — the Constitution is the base of our industry, right? Of our country, of our company. Would you build a trap door that if you mess up and you — accidentally something happens, you fall and you end up next to the Unabomber? You end up — you got to remove all that trap door out of the relationship.

The four gentlemen that wrote the 13th Amendment — and I think the way the universe works, it’s perfect. We don’t have 13 floors, do we? You know, so the four — the four gentlemen that wrote the 13th Amendment didn’t look like the people they were amending. Also at that point, it was illegal for blacks to read — or African Americans to read. And so that meant if you actually read the Amendment, you would get locked up and turned into a slave.

Again — so what I think is, we don’t need sentences; we need pardons. We need to talk to people. I was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. I was connected with a neuropsychologist that works with the athletes in the NBA and the NFL. And he looked at my brain — it’s equal on three parts. I’m going to go ahead drop some bombs for you — 98 percentile IQ test. I had a 75 percentile of all human beings, but it was counting eight numbers backwards, (inaudible), so I’m going to work on that one. The other ones, 98 percent — Tesla, Freud.

So he said that I actually wasn’t bipolar; I had sleep deprivation, which could cause dementia 10 to 20 years from now, where I wouldn’t even remember my son’s name. So all this power that I got, and I’m taking my son to the Sox game and all that, I wouldn’t be able to remember his name from a misdiagnosage."

Now for Republicans, who like to see their politicians speak in short, nonsensical, word-salad sentences, and only really hear the conservative dogma sound bites, this may seem "normal." But it is not. This stream-of-consciousness rant doesn't even make sense half the time.

And given Kanye's history, one has to wonder if he isn't currently suffering from mental health issues, or was under the influence of drugs at the time. The concern from the left was not for who his supporting, but for his apparent lack of grasp on reality. Everyone knows there are black conservatives - one is sitting on the Supreme Court. No one blinks an eye when he supports conservative positions. But he can explain explain his stances in clear sentences at least, even when they are wrong.

But if Clarence ever started talking like Kanye, people would freak out and wonder what the hell is wrong with him - and may assume that dementia had started kicking in.

Not that dementia is a problem for Republicans. Ronnie Raygun's second term was riddled with dementia, but most Republicans didn't even notice because that's how they act normally.

October 19, 2018 12:37 PM  
Anonymous The nothing to look at hoax said...

By the final third of October, fiery colors of fall are usually all over the place in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast. Not this year. While we are still at least a week or two from typical peak fall foliage in the immediate D.C. area, this year’s delay in autumn color is unlike anything in recent memory.

A combination of extended warmth and humidity until very recently is probably a chief cause, as is the extremely rainy summer and early fall. Before the past few cold fronts, it was certainly difficult to tell what time of year it was.

The Foliage Network’s latest update cuts right to the chase. “The bizarre foliage season continues!” its latest report says. "In the ten years we have covered this region, we’ve never seen anything like this. The fall color is still on hold.”

A mash-up of its reports from the past 10 years at this time shows it is not fibbing.

Green continues to dominate much of the Mid-Atlantic and surrounding region. Way too much green.

Although decrease in light duration per day is a primary trigger for fall foliage and that change is now proceeding quickly, color is also dictated by environmental conditions, i.e. the weather. And this year, the weather is apparently playing a major role in the timing and intensity of fall color...

Fall in recent years has tended to be warmer than normal, overall. Last year we were also wondering where it was, well into November. Shifts in fall foliage patterns are expected as the climate-change signal strengthens.

“Projections for the end of the century suggest the warmer temperatures would delay the onset of peak colors, but also make them disappear sooner, leading to a shorter season,” Climate Central writes.

Despite some bad news about this year’s color so far, keep in mind that even in crummy years there are plenty of pretty scenes to be seen. Much of the fun is the exploration involved in finding them.

October 19, 2018 4:56 PM  
Anonymous Trump: "Who? Never heard of him ..." said...

I guess Trump's fans all think the sign of a great leader is someone who demands loyalty but runs like a scared rabbit the minute one of his employees or allies gets into trouble and acts like he never knew them. Recall this example:

"Manafort has nothing to do with our campaign. I’ll tell you, I feel a little badly about it. They went back 12 years to get things that he did 12 years ago?

“You know, Paul Manafort worked for me for a very short period of time…. He worked for me, what, for 49 days or something? A very short period of time.”"

Actually Manafort ran his presidential campaign for six months. And he was involved for months longer, through the election, the transition and his top lieutenant Rick Gates worked with the White House.

So, no.

This guy too:

"Michael Cohen was a PR person who did small legal work, very small legal work. And what he did was very sad, when you look. By the way, he was in trouble not for what he did for me; he was in trouble for what he did for himself. You do know that? Having to do with loans, mortgages, taxicabs and various other things, if you read the paper. He wasn’t in trouble for what he did for me; he was in trouble for what he did for other people. He represented me very little. It’s a very low level. And what he was is also a public relations person. And now if he wants to try and get a little bit lighter sentence for what he did . . . Totally uninvolved. I wasn’t involved and he had other clients, No. 1. And No. 2, he was a contractor to a large extent. But Michael Cohen, if you take a look at what he did, this had to do with loans, and I guess the taxi industry is something that I have nothing to do with, he did this on his own time."

Michael Cohen's title was Executive Vice President of the Trump Organization for ten years, the same title as Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric Trump. So no.

Now the same dynamic is happening with foreign policy:

"In conversations with allies, the president has begun to distance himself from Prince Mohammed, 33, saying he barely knows him. And he has played down the relationship that Mr. Kushner has cultivated with the Saudi heir."

That is, of course, total bullshit. He has been financially involved with the Saudis for years, of course. But Trump and Kushner's cultivation of MBS (or should I say MBS's cultivation of Tump and Kushner) is very well documented. They put all their eggs in that psychos basket because they sensed a kindred spirit.

Trump's entire foreign policy "philosophy" (if you want to call it that) is based upon how "nice" foreign leaders are to him personally. MBS was very "nice." They liked each other. Kushner and MBS "fell in love."

They are in this together all the way.

"Josh MarshallVerified account

Given all we've seen over the last week, the scrambling for a cover story, the refusal to accept the obvious, hiding intelligence, why are we assuming that President Trump or members of his inner circle didn't have some advance knowledge of Khashoggi's fate?

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) October 19, 2018"

October 20, 2018 8:03 AM  
Anonymous President Thug said...

‘The Saudis still aren’t coming clean’: Doubts expressed on explanation of Khashoggi killing

The world has a question for the White House: When do murders matter?

Trump’s sure bet turned out to be his biggest foreign policy crisis

Trump: "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters OK? It's like incredible."

No, it's criminal.

October 20, 2018 3:49 PM  
Anonymous down in the deep blue sea said...

The Trump administration is planning a major move to reform legal definitions by defining a person’s gender as immutable and the one identified at birth based on genitalia. This would correct confusion created by radical fringe gay activists trying to obtain rights by redefinition of existing laws beyond the intent of legislators.

According to the New York Times which released the story Sunday, it would be "a government wide effort to roll back recognition and protections of transgender people under federal civil rights law.”

The piece goes on to point out that “the new definition would essentially eradicate federal recognition of the estimated 1.4 million Americans who have opted to recognize themselves — surgically or otherwise — as a gender other than the one they were born into.”

In response, Danica Roem, an openly transgender member of the Virginia House of Delegates, tweeted a link to the Times report and exaggerated: “Singling out and stigmatizing your transgender constituents isn’t just the antithesis of constituent service; it’s dangerous and gets us killed.”

Radical fringe gay advocate, attorney David Leopold, hyperbolized, saying: “Trump admin considers all-out attack on transgender community in move that would exclude the population from civil rights protections.”

Prominent liberal thinker, Chelsea Clinton, disapproved, writing: “The Trump Administration ‘Eyes Defining Transgender Out of Existence,’ at a moment when transgender Americans face high levels of discrimination and violence. Outrageous and wrong to lessen protections and attempt to deny equal humanity.”

Deep, Chelsea, deep.....

October 21, 2018 3:15 PM  
Anonymous Your ignorance is showing again said...

"identified at birth based on genitalia"

Many times the gender of a person cannot be "identified" by their genitalia. For intersex people, the OB/BYN may not be able to tell if what they see is a large clitoris or a tiny penis. Variations can include fused labia or unfused scrotum.

Try to learn a little something.

October 21, 2018 4:37 PM  
Anonymous The government should stay out of people's business said...

So now the Trump administration thinks they can tell people what gender they are better than the people themselves.

What could possibly go wrong?


October 21, 2018 5:40 PM  
Anonymous Chief Liar strikes again said...

Here's what Trump said, verbatim, yesterday:

Aaron Rupar✔
Replying to @atrupar
TRUMP: "We are looking at putting in a very major tax cut for middle-income people. And if we do that it'll be sometime just prior to November. We are studying very deeply right now round the clock a major tax cut for middle income people."

(There are 11 days until November!)
4:20 PM - Oct 20, 2018

He clearly said they were going to do it before the election, in fact he said they are working around the clock to get it done.

Congress is not in session until after the election.

October 21, 2018 6:04 PM  
Anonymous down in the deep blue sea said...

"So now the Trump administration thinks they can tell people what gender they are better than the people themselves"

no, the Trump administration is deferring to science to answer this question

Democrats generally oppose science

if an unborn child is inconvenient, they say it is not a human life, regardless of what science says

if some guy feels like acting effeminate, they say he is whatever gender he wants to be rather than what science says his chromosomes are

Every election people talk about an “October surprise” that upends the conventional wisdom about the outcome. Well, it appears we can see the contours of at least one October surprise. The Democrats have managed to shoot themselves in the foot with their handling of the Brett Kavanaugh nomination and the antics of their most extreme supporters. The “Blue Wave” that liberals have been waiting for may still come, but it’s more likely to splash the knees of most GOP incumbents than to submerge them.

Veteran political handicapper Charlie Cook puts it bluntly in his latest column at the Cook Political Report, in which he asks whether “those who led the out-of-control demonstrations on Capitol Hill against the Kavanaugh nomination have any understanding of how much damage they did to Democrats and the party’s chances of winning a majority in the Senate. His answer: “My guess is they don’t. But Senate Democrats probably do.”

Cook now says the odds of Democrats winning a Senate a majority are “long, no better than 1 in 5.”

As for the House, political analysts still make the Democrats slight favorites to retake control there for the first time since 2010. But a new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll out today says Democrats have reason to worry about the battleground seats that will determine control:

The Democratic advantage has vanished in House districts that matter most. In districts rated as most competitive, the parties are dead even on which one should control Congress. In last month’s poll, Dems led by 13 points.

In other words, Republicans have a real chance to beat the odds and hold their losses below the 23 seats that would transfer House control.

October 22, 2018 10:41 AM  
Anonymous down in the deep blue sea said...

The reasons for this turnaround are various and go beyond the shrinking of the enthusiasm gap between the parties (before the Kavanaugh nomination, Democratic voters were more enthusiastic). The WSJ/NB poll shows President Trump with a 47 percent job approval, his highest rating yet as president. At the same time, 44 percent of registered voters say Republicans handle the economy better versus only 27 percent who pick Democrats. That’s the largest lead on that question the GOP has ever had in the WSJ/NBC poll.

In the aftermath of a new trade deal with Canada and Mexico, Republicans also are favored by voters on trade, by 18 percentage points.

The Kavanaugh hearings apparently took a negative toll on the image of Democrats. In September, Democrats had a 45 percent favorability rating, while Republicans were at 38 percent. Post-Kavanaugh, Democratic favorability has fallen eleven points to 34 percent while the GOP has held even at 38 percent. It’s been years since the GOP had any advantage in polls on that question.

The campaign still has more than two weeks to go, but early voting in most states locks up more ballots with each passing day. Another October surprise is still possible, but for now, the new conventional wisdom of the 2018 election is set: Democrats had a real chance to ride anti-Trump sentiment and inflict a crushing defeat on Republicans. But their own excesses tripped them up and woke up fatigued Republican voters, reminding them that 2018 was indeed an us-versus-them election. Republicans will probably still lose ground, but for the first time, they are on the offensive in many marginal districts.

Perhaps one lesson from the 2018 election will be that when both President Trump and Democrats run brutal, divide-and-conquer campaigns, Trump just does it better and more effectively. And when voters finally focus less on personalities and more on issues in the final stages of the campaign, the left-wing lurch by Democrats hasn’t done them any favors in what is still a center-Right country.

And when the “Blue Wave” recedes next month, will Democrats just blame Trump, or will they look in the mirror? The answer to that question may be a good predictor for how the 2020 presidential election turns out.

October 22, 2018 10:46 AM  
Anonymous down in the bottom o' the deep blue sea said...

what a gift tp the GOP, right before the election!!

President Trump said the US will “turn away” the thousands of Central American migrants heading to the US border in search of jobs in the US and blamed Democrats for being weak on immigration.

“Full efforts are being made to stop the onslaught of illegal aliens from crossing our Southerns Border. People have to apply for asylum in Mexico first, and if they fail to do that, the U.S. will turn them away,” Trump wrote on his Twitter account on Sunday.

He continued to heap blame on the Democrats for the migrants marching north.

“The Caravans are a disgrace to the Democrat Party. Change the immigration laws NOW!,” he said.

Trump comments on the social messaging site come as the crowd of migrants fleeing poverty in Honduras and El Salvador resumed their march to the US after being delayed by Mexico riot police on Saturday at the Guatemalan border.

The number of migrants swelled to about 5,000 as more people continue to join the group that stretches for about a mile.

Earlier Sunday, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said her department would monitor the caravan as it made its way to the border.

“While we closely monitor the caravan crisis, we must remain mindful of the transnational criminal organizations and other criminals that prey on the vulnerabilities of those undertaking the irregular migration journey,” Nielsen said in a statement. “We fully support the efforts of Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico, as they seek to address this critical situation and ensure a safer and more secure region.” ­

Trump said he would mobilize the US military and shut down the border if the migrant group didn’t turn around.

October 22, 2018 12:33 PM  
Anonymous You probably don't even know what DNA stands for said...

"Democrats generally oppose science"

No. It is Republicans that cherry-pick science.

Democrats believe what 97% of researchers in climatology have to say about climate change - and have been saying since the 1950's. In the 1970's, they were pretty convinced it was going to happen, but they didn't have a good handle on how fast it was going to occur - decades? centuries? millennia? The last couple of decades has shown that the answer is decades - within our lifetime.

Republicans on the other hand, believe the whole "climate change thing" is a hoax, even though they have no evidence for that, or that it is not caused by man, but none of their explanations fit the measured data. They have no climate models that show how temps are going to remain the same or drop. They just keep insisting it's a fabrication by scientists trying to get funding. There are plenty of ways scientists can get funding for things more interesting than climate change, but that doesn't stop the right wing propaganda.

Brain dissections and fMRI scans have shown differences between male and female brains, and also that images and dissected brains of trans people closely match that of their reported gender. That scientific evidence is always ignored by right-wing anti-science propagandists.

There are also numerous genetic conditions that don't fall neatly into the "male / female" dichotomy that are ignored by republicans. Many of these folks have been part of the trans community for years before they have an operation or test that reveals a genetic or biologic underpinning to their cross-gendered behavior. These folks are also ignored by the right wing.

Perhaps what is most ironic though, is that a group of people, who for a large part don't even believe in evolution, and would like "creationism" taught in schools, claim that DNA, the very molecule that enables evolution, absolutely defines gender - even though testing of athletes has proven quite problematic:

"Chromosome testing was introduced by the International Olympic Committee during the 1968 Summer Olympics.[10] This tested for the Y-chromosome, and was designed to identify males potentially disguised as females. This method of testing was later abolished, as it was shown to be inconclusive in identifying maleness.[11]

October 22, 2018 1:58 PM  
Anonymous You probably don't even know what DNA stands for said...

The International Association of Athletics Federations ceased sex screening for all athletes in 1992,[12] but retained the option of assessing the sex of a participant should suspicions arise. A resolution was passed at the 1996 International Olympic Committee (IOC) World Conference on Women and Health "to discontinue the current process of gender verification during the Olympic Games". The International Olympic Committee's board voted to discontinue the practice in June 1999.[13] Chromosome testing was last performed at the Atlanta Olympic Games in 1996.

The practice of chromosome testing came under scrutiny from those who feel that the testing was humiliating, socially insensitive, and not entirely accurate or effective. The testing is especially difficult in the case of people who could be considered intersex. Genetic differences can allow a person to have a male genetic make-up and female anatomy or body chemistry. In the Journal of the American Medical Association, Simpson, Ljungqvist and others stated,

Gender verification tests are difficult, expensive, and potentially inaccurate. Furthermore, these tests fail to exclude all potential impostors (eg, some 46,XX males), are discriminatory against women with disorders of sexual development, and may have shattering consequences for athletes who 'fail' a test ...

Gender verification has long been criticized by geneticists, endocrinologists, and others in the medical community. One major problem was unfairly excluding women who had a birth defect involving gonads and external genitalia (i.e., male pseudohermaphroditism). ...

A second problem is that only women, not men, were subjected to gender verification testing. Systematic follow-up was rarely available for athletes "failing" the test, which often was performed under very public circumstances. Follow-up was crucial because the subjects were not male impostors, but intersexed individuals.[14]"

Of course, ALL of this science is ignored by republicans. It seems their brains are too small to comprehend the fact that even when you have the DNA, not everyone falls neatly into the "male" or "female" category.

It's not surprising that the DNA molecules do not always match up to produce 1 of 2 possible outcomes. There are BILLIONS of molecules required to code for a life, and during the transcription phase, not all of them are copied correctly. Sometimes those errors lead to problems like birth defects, sometimes they lead to differences like red hair, and other times they lead to a better adaptation, like better immune system molecules. These are known scientific facts. As such we should expect to see differences in sex and gender just like we see in height, weight, body shape, hair color, life expectancy, intelligence, strength, and any other human attribute you can name.

There is simply NO human characteristic that always falls into 1 of 2 distinct categories. Variations are found in everything. But those scientific facts are completely ignored by republicans so they can force their religious and discriminatory agenda down the throats of all US citizens.

October 22, 2018 1:59 PM  
Anonymous She blinded me with Science! said...

Brain structure and function in gender dysphoria
by Julie Bakker


The concept of gender identity is uniquely human. Hence we are left with the phenomenon of men and women suffering from Gender Dysphoria (GD) also known as transsexualism to study the origins of gender identity in humans. It has been hypothesized that atypical levels of sex steroids during a perinatal critical period of neuronal sexual differentiation may be involved in the development of GD. In order to test this hypothesis, we investigated brain structure and function in individuals diagnosed with GD using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Since GD is often diagnosed in childhood and puberty has been proposed to be an additional organizational period in brain differentiation, we included both prepubertal children and adolescents with GD in our studies. First, we measured brain activation upon exposure to androstadienone, a putative male chemo-signal which evokes sex differences in hypothalamic activation (women > men). We found that hypothalamic responses of both adolescent girls and boys diagnosed with GD were more similar to their experienced gender than their birth sex, which supports the hypothesis of a sex-atypical brain differentiation in these individuals. At the structural level, we analyzed both regional gray matter (GM) volumes and white matter (WM) microstructure using diffusion tensor imaging. In cis-gender girls, larger GM volumes were observed in the bilateral superior medial frontal and left pre/postcentral cortex, while cis-gender boys had more volume in the bilateral superior-posterior cerebellum and hypothalamus. Within these regions of interest representing sexually dimorphic brain structures, GM volumes of both GD groups deviated from the volumetric characteristics of their birth sex towards those of individuals sharing their gender identity. Furthermore, we found intermediate patterns in WM microstructure in adolescent boys with GD, but only sex-typical ones in adolescent girls with GD. These results on brain structure are thus partially in line with a sex-atypical differentiation of the brain during early development in individuals with GD, but might also suggest that other mechanisms are involved. Indeed, using resting state MRI, we observed GD-specific functional connectivity in the visual network in adolescent girls with GD. The latter is in support of a more recent hypothesis on alterations in brain networks important for own body perception and self-referential processing in individuals with GD.

October 22, 2018 4:39 PM  
Anonymous asdaskfjjkadflaflaeuiwaeiweifwaefwefwsef;saefd;jksd said...

It must take a lot of energy to generate the kind of pseudo-scientific BS in the last three posts.

Republicans are warning of dire consequences if the minority party wins control of Congress in the midterm elections.

GOP candidates for months have touted the booming economy in their pitch to voters, highlighting historically low unemployment and gross domestic product expanding at a healthy clip.

President Trump this week credited his administration for spurring that growth.

“One of the reasons the economy is so strong is that we're not hampered by the ridiculous regulations that we were getting rid of and are getting rid of,” he said at a Cabinet meeting.

GOP rhetoric is now including doomsday predictions about what would happen if Democrats win the House or Senate on Election Day.

When asked about the stock market last week, Trump said, "The Democrats, you look at what they would do to it. They would knock it down, you'd — instead of being up 50 percent, you'd be down 50 percent."

He’s not the only one painting a picture of a potential downturn if Democrats get a chance to pursue their economic policies on Capitol Hill.

Conservative commentator Hugh Hewitt this week tweeted a story on strong manufacturing numbers and added, "If we are tired of this we can just give the Speaker’s Gavel back to @NancyPelosi folks."

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) warned that a Democratic majority in the House would impeach Trump, creating political chaos that would spook markets and drown the economy.

“If we had impeachment next year, we'd see utter chaos,” Cruz said in his debate with Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D) this week. “We would see an end to the repeal of the job-killing regulations that's fueling our economic growth.”

“I want to keep the economic boom we're experiencing right now going, moving forward,” he added. “Congressman O'Rourke wants the next two years to be drawn into the partisan circus of impeachment proceedings against President Trump.”

Cruz leads O'Rourke by a mile.

Democrats have said they will make oversight of the Trump administration a key priority if they take over the House.

House Democrats have also expressed interest in bolstering financial regulatory bodies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and scaling back some of the benefits from the GOP tax cuts. They would need bipartisan agreement in the Senate and a signature from Trump to turn any legislative initiatives into law.

An analysis by the Goldman Sachs Investment Strategy Group found that share prices grow more slowly under divided government, according to MarketWatch.

Others note that as long as Trump is in the White House, Democrats have very little chance at seeing any of their economic policies becoming law.

“Democrats have not had any say for the past two years, and even if they control the House, they still don’t have much of a say,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics.

When Trump was elected, Zandi noted, stock markets reacted favorably to the prospect that a unified Republican government would cut taxes and regulation. None of that is likely to change after the midterm election.

“I don’t think there’s any prospect if the Democrats win the House or even the whole Congress that there will be a tax increase, so I think that’s a stretched argument,” he said.

If anything, there might a chance for a bipartisan deal on infrastructure spending. That, Zandi said, would further stimulate the economy.

October 22, 2018 4:58 PM  
Anonymous Chief Liar keeps lying and Congress is still NOT IN SESSION said...

WASHINGTON, Oct 22 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump, speaking to reporters at the White House as he left on a campaign trip to Texas, said on Monday his administration planned to produce a resolution within two weeks calling for a 10 percent tax cut for middle-income people.

"We're putting in a resolution sometime in the next week or week-and-a-half, two weeks," Trump said. "We're giving a middle-income tax reduction of about 10 percent. We're doing it now for middle-income people."

Trump said on Saturday his administration was studying a tax cut to be rolled out some time around the beginning of November just before the Nov. 6 congressional elections, even though lawmakers are out of town campaigning and Congress is not in session.

October 22, 2018 5:36 PM  
Anonymous The sky is going to fall! (Again!) said...

Republicans always claim the end of the world is coming if Democrats get into office.

Remember Gingrich saying gas would reach $10 a gallon if Obama was reelected? Yeah, that didn't happen. Here is some more of there ridiculous gloom and doom that Republican voters fall for every time:

October 23, 2018 12:23 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality deserves a lot of priviliges as society's life producer said...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump, speaking to reporters at the White House as he left on a campaign trip to Texas, said on Monday his administration planned to produce a resolution within two weeks calling for a 10 percent tax cut for middle-income people.

“We’re putting in a resolution sometime in the next week or week-and-a-half, two weeks,” Trump said. “We’re giving a middle-income tax reduction of about 10 percent. We’re doing it now for middle-income people.”

Trump said on Saturday his administration was studying a tax cut to be rolled out some time around the beginning of November just before the Nov. 6 congressional elections.

Trump’s fellow Republicans are seeking in the elections to hold on to their majorities in the House of Representatives. Even if they don't, they will be be able to pass tax cuts before January.

The president said on Monday that the proposed tax cuts would be unveiled before the election but would have to go through Congress afterward.

"Republicans always claim the end of the world is coming if Democrats get into office."

I seem to recall that Dems said Trump would have us in a depression and war by now.

What happened?

October 23, 2018 9:11 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality deserves a lot of priviliges as society's life producer said...

The Trump administration is moving forward with efforts to define gender on the basis of biological sex, reversing decisions under the Obama administration that essentially allowed individuals to choose their own sex for federal government purposes. A new memo from HHS argues federal agencies need a definition of sex and gender that is defined “on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.”

The changes are to take place under Title IX section of a 1972 law that bars sex-based discrimination in federally funded education institutions, but could have far broader implications, in areas such as single sex settings and set aside programs.

Progressives are apoplectically outraged by the fact that the Trump administration will no longer allow pseudoscience to define the words “man” and “woman,” but this is a common-sense move that will help the government better protect women’s rights and avoid the confusion of trying to regulate the myriad genders that have been invented in the past several years.

It is important to understand that this change will in no way affect how trans people or anybody else choose to label themselves. Rather, it will allow the government to have an objective standard when implementing federal programs. Without such a standard, a haphazard set of rules exists as to who qualifies for legal protections under Title IX.

Frankly, this move has been a long time coming and is very obviously needed. Our government and governments around the world have been struggling to keep up with new definitions of gender that seem to pop up every day. In recent years many advocates of the idea that people can choose, or self identify, their gender have argued that its nobody’s business but the person making the choice. But this is patently false.

October 23, 2018 9:24 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality deserves a lot of priviliges as society's life producer said...

Questions were always bound to arise that would require the state to make a determination about a person’s sex. College athletics, where men who identify as women have unfair advantages, is one example; another is set-aside or quota programs. If government contracts require that a certain number of subcontractors on a project have to be women-run businesses, for example, then there needs to be a definition of “woman.”

Both of the above examples show how this move really does protect women. The set-aside programs are a particularly good example, as their entire point is to ensure that women, who supposedly face disadvantages in male-dominated fields, receive a leg up. It makes no sense at all that a 40- or 50-year-old man, who has enjoyed the benefits of his sex for his entire career, can decide he is a woman and receive the benefit of the set-aside at the expense of a firm helmed by a woman who is more likely to have experienced the circumstances the law aims to compensate for.

The fact of the matter is that while academics and activists have been running around willy nilly changing the definition of sex and inventing 72 (at least) new pronouns, none of this has been rooted in any kind of confirmable science. It is farcical to think that the state can somehow keep up with such changes or pursue policies regarding sex without a workable and consistent definition.

The move also means that those with the most radical views about the sexes will not be able to impose them on our society and laws. In effect, it will mean that this objective standard will replace a hodgepodge of rules, regulations, and definitions of gender as it pertains to the federal government.

What will not and should not change is individuals and non-government related institutions’ abilities to pursue whatever policies in regard to gender they choose to appear as. Nobody is being told that he can’t identify or accept the gender identity of a person however he wishes. Newspaper style guides will still be free to define gender however they wish, and obviously private individuals can make their own choices as well.

The simple fact is that there is no compelling scientific basis upon which to believe a person can change sexes. While many believe that one can do so, it’s just that: a belief. And many do not share that belief. Foisting this metaphysical assertion on all of the federal government’s actions in absence of any actual legal text to support it, as the Obama administration tried to do, was the wrong decision.

For government purposes, using the scientific, historical, and standard definition of sex and gender is the only sensible path, and the administration is right to follow it.

October 23, 2018 9:25 AM  
Anonymous homosexuality never ever produces any life. two homosexuals ain't a marriage said...

PRESIDENT Trump is winning.

There is simply no other way to fairly interpret the fact that he’s just hit a new high in his approval rating.

Even better for Trump, he’s officially more popular than his predecessor Barack Obama was at the exact same stage of his first tenure as President.

According to the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, Trump is now at 47% approval, compared to Obama’s 45% two weeks before the midterm elections in 2010.

Given all the fire, brimstone and perpetual outrage about Trump since he won the White House, this is a truly remarkable state of affairs.

Of course, America’s liberals will respond to the shock poll in the way they respond to all things Trump - with fury, incredulity and by sticking their collective heads in the sand.

‘HOW CAN THIS BE HAPPENING?’ they will wail, uncontrollably.

‘WHAT THE F**K IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE WHO LIKE HIM?’ they will howl into each other’s kale salads.

‘THIS IS THE END OF PLANET EARTH!’ they will sob, in their normal understated manner.

All of which will be music to the ears of Trump, a man who absolutely revels in liberal hysteria because he knows it works for him, as this new poll proves.

The more Trump-bashers scream abuse at and about him, the more it fires up his base – and indeed, the more it fires up Trump himself.

After all, at his heart, the President’s a street-fighting New Yorker who loves a good scrap.

And in two weeks time, he may deliver the biggest knockout punch of his presidency.

Until recently, it was widely assumed the Republicans would lose control of the House of Representatives in the midterm elections.

It was being depicted as a ‘damning referendum on Trump’ and historically, most presidents – like Obama - take a whack in the midterms.

But now, I’m not so sure.

In fact, I’d say there’s a very good chance the Republicans will hang onto the House, as well as the Senate, and Trump will move on empowered and emboldened to what could very well be an even bigger win in 2020.

October 23, 2018 9:31 AM  
Anonymous homosexuality never ever produces any life. two homosexuals ain't a marriage said...

Why is this happening?

Well first, the US mainstream media has become the boy that cried wolf.

Their constant collective outrage over every tiny thing Trump says, tweets or does – much of it driven by commercial self-interest - has had the inevitable effect of diluting the impact of that outrage.

Barely a week goes by without some supposed new ‘Trump crisis’ fuelling wall-to-wall cable news coverage and dire predictions of impeachment or even jail time for the President.

Yet within a few days, each ‘administration-threatening scandal’ dissolves into a giant nothing-burger.

Liberal celebrities are just as bad, relentlessly shrieking away on social media about their hatred for Trump – seemingly oblivious to the fact that nobody cares any more. We just assume all celebrities hate him because they think it’s ‘cool’ to do so.

The effect of this endless hysterical cacophony, as I have repeatedly warned, has been to make Trump ever more popular with his base and with the GOP.

More significantly, as this poll suggests, it’s also begun to move moderates with no particularly animated view of Trump more to a place of tolerating him.

And that’s terrible news for the Democrats, because their only game plan with Trump is to abuse him and rely on mockery and sneering as an election strategy.

It’s the same flawed, arrogant and elitist mentality that led to Hillary Clinton branding Trump supporters ‘a basket of deplorables’ in a speech that I still believe did more than anything else to lose her the election.

I look at the Democrats today and see a Party that’s learned absolutely nothing about how to beat Trump.

And I see a President who’s growing stronger by the day.

Trump’s become a political Godzilla, crushing everyone who dares challenge him and bulldozing his way through an agenda that is beginning to pay real dividends.

In less than two years, Trump’s got two nominees onto the Supreme Court, entrenching a Conservative majority.

He’s slashed taxes, and regulations – sparking a boom in the US economy that shows no sign of stopping, a surge in jobs and record low unemployment.

Trump’s forged a peaceful dialogue with North Korea, launched a trade war with China that many think is long overdue, withdrawn from the obviously flawed Iran nuclear deal and Trans-Pacific Partnership, forced Mexico and Canada to update NAFTA, bullied NATO countries into paying their bills, and bombed ISIS out of Iraq and Syria.

He’s also clamped down hard on illegal immigration.

As I write this, a ‘caravan’ of more than 7,000 Central American migrants – most of them from Honduras - is moving towards the Southern border.

They intend trying to enter the United States illegally.

It’s hard to think of a more powerful image to vindicate Trump’s much criticized demand for a new ‘Wall’, isn’t it?

October 23, 2018 9:36 AM  
Anonymous homosexuality never ever produces life. two homosexuals never produce a marriage said...

As he tweeted: ‘Full efforts are being made to stop the onslaught of illegal aliens from crossing our Southern Border… The Caravans are a disgrace to the Democrat Party. Change the immigration laws NOW!’

Trump clearly believes this caravan will help Republicans in the midterms, and so do I. Expect to see the President down on that border very soon, playing Mr Tough Guy.

The combined effect of all these ‘wins’ – obviously this is a subjective word if you’re a Democrat - is that Trump enters this election in an increasingly dominant position as a President who is doing exactly what he said he’d do.

I also think he’s a President who’s beginning to really enjoy himself.

When I saw him several months ago for an interview aboard Air Force One, I was struck by how relaxed and confident he seemed.

He exuded an air of someone who’d worked out how Washington works – or rather, doesn’t! – and how to play the broken, highly partisan system to his advantage.

As for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian collusion, all the signs suggest this may soon deliver a massive damp squib.

Of course, Trump remains a hugely divisive and polarising figure with a penchant for flying loose with the truth and heavy on the inflammatory rhetoric.

But love him or loathe him, there is no denying that he’s winning.

So once again, I can only advise the Democrats to stop their ridiculously self-defeating state of perpetual Trump outrage and work out how they’re actually going to beat him.

Because right now, Trump’s kicking your a**.

October 23, 2018 9:37 AM  
Anonymous an early Thanksgiving said...

To the Dems who had to be dragged screaming from Senate chambers, who chased conservatives out of restaurants, who introduced crass terms into our national vernacular, who march to abolish ICE, who block Senate halls, who insist people are guilty of gang rape until proven innocent, who think there are 73 genders, and so much more, I have one thing to say:


Is the "blue wave" turning red?

Republican-affiliated voters have outpaced Democratic-affiliated voters in early voting in seven closely watched states, according to data provided by TargetSmart and independently analyzed by the NBC News Data Analytics Lab.

GOP-affiliated voters have surpassed Democratic-affiliated ones in early voting in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Montana, Tennessee and Texas, the data showed.

Key Senate races are underway in seven of those eight states and will determine which party controls the chamber.

The latest data suggests robust enthusiasm among early Republican voters have put an end to Democratic hopes for a "blue wave" in next month's midterm elections.

October 23, 2018 10:43 AM  
Anonymous boo! Dems are bewitched, bothered and bewildered said...

PRESIDENT Trump has made a common sense decision:

for the purposes of governmental entitlements, privileges, and protections, the position of the United States is to follow science and consider one to be the same gender they were when born

this just in from the Kavanagh Supreme Court:

if you are thinking of challenging the decision in court,

don't bother

October 23, 2018 12:57 PM  
Anonymous Just because you're confused by someone else's gender doesn't mean they are said...

"If government contracts require that a certain number of subcontractors on a project have to be women-run businesses, for example, then there needs to be a definition of “woman.”

This from the same folks that always argue that we need to get rid of "all these job-killing regulations" that stifle the economy. Why force a company to hire women when there are men available that can do the job better? That's just enforced discrimination - and the government giving "special protections" to people who don't need it!

It's funny how much you like those laws when you can turn them against trans people.

I guess you like having it "both ways!" ;)

Oh, and there are plenty of people who have surgically and hormonally made their bodies match their brain sex. Many of them you could stand up naked with other people of the same sex and you wouldn't be able to tell them apart. There is simply no good reason to have their government required documentation not match their current bodies. It only leads to harassment, marginalization, and targeting by people who call themselves "Christians."

October 23, 2018 1:21 PM  
Anonymous Don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain said...

"So once again, I can only advise the Democrats to stop their ridiculously self-defeating state of perpetual Trump outrage and work out how they’re actually going to beat him."

Funny, not too long ago it was the Republicans who were in a perpetual state of outrage against a president they believed was actually born in Kenya, secretly a Muslim - or possibly the anti-Christ, and out to bring Russia-style socialism to the US - probably sometime after gas went to $10 a gallon.

And I almost forgot to mention - his Secretary of State was running a child-porn ring out of a pizza parlor.

Meanwhile, Trump has set us back on the path for Mutually Assured Destruction by tearing up a nuclear missile treaty that previously, many Republicans thought was one of Raygun's great achievements. What could possibly be bad with that?

We are also at the beginning of an entirely unnecessary trade war with China which has caused losses so great in the farming sector that Rump now wants to give farmers more taxpayer money. China used to be sending money to our farmers for that.

Then of course there's the Westmoreland coal company (one of the oldest in the US) that filed for bankruptcy earlier this month. Wasn't the Big Orange One saying he was going to bring back coal?

October 23, 2018 1:47 PM  
Anonymous It's the end of the world as we know it, and Evangelicals feel fine said...

Evangelical Christians overwhelmingly support President Donald Trump because they believe he'll cause the world to end.

Many have questioned why devout evangelicals support Trump, a man who has bragged about sexual assault, lies perpetually and once admitted he never asks God for forgiveness. Trump’s lack of knowledge of the Bible is also well-known.

Nevertheless, many evangelical Christians believe that Trump was chosen by God to usher in a new era, a part of history called the “end times.” Beliefs about this time period differ, but it is broadly considered the end of the world, the time when Jesus returns to Earth and judges all people.

“What kick-starts the end times into motion is Israel’s political boundaries being reestablished to what God promised the Israelites according to the Bible,” Nate Pyle, a pastor and author of a book about Jesus.

On December 6, Trump officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, a controversial move that was lambasted by U.S. allies around the world. The eastern part of Jerusalem has long been envisioned as the future capital of a Palestinian state if and when a two-state solution is reached between Israel and the Palestinians. By recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, many critics say Trump killed any chance of a negotiated peace deal in the Middle East.

But evangelical Christians threw their full weight behind the decision. Currently, over half of all American evangelicals support Trump’s presidency, and the announcement about Jerusalem plays a big role in that.

“Most evangelicals subscribe to a belief in pre-millennialism, the belief that the second coming of Christ will begin a 1,000-year period where Christ will rule over a peaceful and prosperous earth,” Neil J. Young, a religion historian, told Newsweek. Young, who holds a Ph.D. in history from Columbia University, writes frequently on evangelical culture and politics.

“For his evangelical supporters, there's a sense that Trump's unlikely election to the presidency proves that he has been chosen by God,” Young told Newsweek. “He shouldn't have won the election, so the thinking goes, so the fact that he did—and that victory came only via the Electoral College, no less—just demonstrates that only God could make it happen.”

October 23, 2018 2:07 PM  
Anonymous to avoid complications, she never kept the same address said...

the last couple of posts are just sad

I think we can now say TTF has truly lost its mind

just goes to prove the old adage:

Democrats produce mobs

Republicans produce jobs

what would you rather have?

a welfare check

or a paycheck?

that's the choice for the heartland in a couple of weeks

a couple of short weeks....


October 23, 2018 2:39 PM  
Anonymous Obama still created more jobs than Rump said...

TRUMP: “One new and great FACT — African American unemployment is the lowest ever recorded in the history of our Country. So honored by this.” — tweet Friday.

TRUMP: “I am proud to have fought for and secured the LOWEST African American and Hispanic unemployment rates in history.” — tweet Saturday.

THE FACTS: Not exactly. He omits important caveats.

Black unemployment did reach a record low, 5.9 percent, in May. That rate has since risen to 6.6 percent in July.

Despite some recent progress, the black unemployment rate is now nearly double that of whites, which is 3.4 percent. The most dramatic drop in black unemployment came under President Barack Obama, when it fell from a recession high of 16.8 percent in March 2010 to 7.8 percent in January 2017.

TRUMP: “Economic growth, last quarter, hit the 4.1. We anticipate this next quarter to be — this is just an estimate, but already they’re saying it could be in the fives … I think we’re going to be very shortly in the fives.” — remarks Tuesday before a group of business executives.

TRUMP: “As you know, we’re doing record and close-to-record GDP.” — remarks Tuesday.

THE FACTS: No. These are the latest in a string of exaggerated claims that Trump has made about the U.S. economy.

While economists are generally optimistic about growth, very few anticipate the economy will expand at a 5 percent annual rate in the July-September quarter the president referred to. Macroeconomic Advisers, a consulting firm in St. Louis, forecasts 3.2 percent growth in the third quarter. JPMorgan Chase economists have penciled in 3.5 percent. The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta pegs it at 4.3 percent.

Whatever the final number turns out to be, none of these figures represents record or close-to-record growth for gross domestic product, the broadest measure of the nation’s output. The 4.1 percent growth in the second quarter was simply the most since 2014.

TRUMP: “We’ve created 3.9 million more jobs since Election Day — so almost 4 million jobs — which is unthinkable.” — remarks Thursday at prison reform event in Bedminster, N.J.

THE FACTS: It’s not that unthinkable, since more jobs were created in the same period before the November 2016 election than afterward.

It’s true that in the 20 months since Trump’s election, the economy has generated 3.9 million jobs. In the 20 months before his election, however, employers added *4.3* million jobs.

TRUMP: “Great financial numbers being announced on an almost daily basis. Economy has never been better, jobs at best point in history.” — tweet Aug. 6.

THE FACTS: He’s exaggerating. The economy is healthy now, but it has been in better shape at many times in the past.

Growth reached 4.1 percent at an annual rate in the second quarter, which Trump highlighted late last month with remarks at the White House. But it’s only the best in the past four years. So far, the economy is expanding at a modest rate compared with previous economic expansions. In the late 1990s, growth topped 4 percent for four straight years, from 1997 through 2000. And in the 1980s expansion, growth even reached 7.2 percent in 1984.

It’s not clear what Trump specifically means when he declares that jobs are at the “best point in history,” but based on several indicators, he’s off the mark.

The unemployment rate of 3.9 percent is not at the best point ever — it is actually near the lowest in 18 years. The all-time low came in 1953, when unemployment fell to 2.5 percent during the Korean War. And while economists have been surprised to see employers add 215,000 jobs a month this year, a healthy increase, employers in fact added jobs at a faster pace in 2014 and 2015. A greater percentage of Americans held jobs in 2000 than now.

Trump didn’t mention probably the most important measure of economic health for Americans — wages. While paychecks are slowly grinding higher, inflation is now canceling out the gains. Lifted by higher gasoline prices, consumer prices increased 2.9 percent in June from a year earlier, the most in six years.

October 23, 2018 3:12 PM  
Anonymous yeah, Obama is a real prize alright said...

wow, as an example of who has performed better on the economy, the TTFer must go back to 1953 for lower unemployment

for higher growth, he needs to go back to 1984

news flash: Eisenhower and Reagan were Republicans too!

remember about Obama:

-he never had growth as high as 3% for any year
-his first couple of years saw unemployment skyrocket and when some jobs came back, they were low quality
-manufacturing jobs were disappearing
-large swaths of the population gave up on ever finding a job
-the fed had to prop up the economy the whole time he was President with zero interest rates, which caused great suffering for elderly people living off savings
-he borrowed more than all other Presidents combined
-while the Chinese stole our technological secrets with impunity, Obama twiddled his thumbs

October 23, 2018 3:38 PM  
Anonymous an early Thanksgiving said...

you know, earlier I expressed my thanks to all the Trump resisters out there for all they've done to make Trump look civil by comparison

now, a special word to all the gay activists

with your bizarre and lewd gay "pride" parades, your attacking the appearance of a female Trump press secretary having dinner in Lexington, suing bakers for not endorsing gay marriage, installing homosexuality as a plot line in virtually every prime time show, and on and on...

you chimed in, you acted up, and you changed this process

those who are about to clean your clock in early November, salute you

thanks a million, guys!

October 23, 2018 3:52 PM  
Anonymous I notice you conveniently left out the economic sabotage of the Republican Congress said...


During the Obama era, Democrats frequently believed, but only rarely uttered aloud in official forums, that the Republican Party was engaged in economic sabotage. Not a coldly conscious plot, exactly. But it seemed just a little too convenient that the party had reversed its fiscal ideology at precisely the time when doing so would damage Democrats and thereby smooth the GOP’s return to power.

Now that Republicans have reversed their position once again, also in a way that happens to redound to their political benefit, the answer seems a little more clear. Republicans have used their control of government to virtually double the budget deficit, which had been hovering around half a trillion dollars per year, and will now likely run well over $1 trillion — during the peak of an economic expansion. There is no economic rationale for this behavior. Their policy is simply to support fiscal contraction under Democratic presidents and fiscal expansion under Republican ones. Cynicism is the only basis to explain their behavior.

During the Bush administration, the party followed Dick Cheney’s famous dictum, “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter,” as a basic guide. Republicans financed two large tax cuts, a Medicare prescription-drug benefit, two wars, and a large domestic-security hike entirely through higher borrowing.

Importantly, in addition to supporting permanent deficit increases, they also supported temporary deficit increases in order to ward off recessions. When the economy slowed in 2001, Republicans supported a Democratic plan to mail out short-term tax credits. Here, they were following the perfectly sound logic of Keynesian economics, which held that during a recession, the government should boost demand by temporarily increasing the deficit. Even committed right-wing ideologues like Grover Norquist and Paul Ryan supported fiscal stimulus explicitly on these grounds. (“I like my porridge hot,” said Ryan at one hearing, explaining why he agreed with the Keynesian arguments made by Republican economist Kevin Hassett that it was vital to inject demand into the economy as quickly as possible.)

When the economy entered another recession at the end of Bush’s second term, Republicans again overwhelmingly supported another temporary stimulus bill. In February of 2008, Congress voted, by margins of 380 to 24 and 81 to 16, to mail out flat checks to every American household in order to stimulate more spending. “This is the Senate at its finest, recognizing this was an opportunity to demonstrate to the public that we could come together, do something important for the country and do it quickly,” said a satisfied Mitch McConnell.

October 23, 2018 4:04 PM  
Anonymous I notice you conveniently left out the economic sabotage of the Republican Congress said...

As it turned out, what looked like a mild recession at the beginning of 2008 developed into a global economic crisis of staggering size. By 2009, the economy was plunging into the deepest crisis since the Great Depression. But at that point, which also coincided with partisan control of the presidency changing hands, Republicans decided they no longer agreed with Keynesian economics. Or they believed the scale of the crisis somehow failed to justify the cost to the Treasury. So thoroughly and so rapidly did this conversion permeate the Republican Party that, by the time Obama took office, it was almost impossible to find a conservative of any sort who had a kind word for the stimulus. Even the most openminded conservatives seemed more concerned about deficits than the calamity of unemployment that could top double digits. “The issue is the risk the Democrats are taking, period, by spending enormous sums that aren’t obviously justified by the current crisis,” wrote Ross Douthat in February 2009.

Republicans whipped themselves into a frenzy over the debt, which threatened a “debt crisis,” even a Greece-style social upheaval. In 2011, Republicans cited this urgent fiscal threat to justify their extraordinary tactic of threatening to refuse to lift the debt ceiling, possibly triggering global economic calamity, in order to coerce Obama to adopt their policies. Obama mistakenly took the threat as an opportunity to enter into long-term fiscal policy negotiations. The end result of the fiasco was “sequestration”: caps on the discretionary portion of the federal budget. Obama assumed that, since the caps were designed to be painful rather than to identify tolerable savings, and since they squeezed defense spending in particular, Republicans would be willing to negotiate to lift them.

They weren’t, though. Republicans instead decided sequestration was wonderful, the crown jewel of their achievements since taking control of Congress. Sequestration made for bad government, and dragged down the economy, but since Obama didn’t like it, Republicans decided they wanted to keep it. Eventually, when defense cuts bothered them too much, they negotiated deals to slightly alleviate the caps year by year. But their insistence that lifting the caps be paid for by finding offsetting savings made it hard to negotiate much relief.

The solution to this problem turned out to be simple. Once a Republican held the White House, Republicans simply abandoned the whole idea that sequestration, or anything at all, needed to be paid for. They have happily reverted to the Bush-era practice of putting everything on the national credit card. Not only has this allowed them to cut taxes and lift sequestration, they are also ready to finance an infrastructure bill through deficit spending — a position they adamantly opposed under Obama.

Republicans are implementing fiscal stimulus on the largest scale since 2009. One could make the case (as Eric Levitz does) that, despite low unemployment, additional stimulus is still justified in order to heat up the labor market enough to produce really strong wage growth. I’m more persuaded by the need for stimulus when unemployment was above 6 percent, and that it’s no longer worth the additional debt. Alternatively, one could oppose stimulus now and also in 2009, if you seriously oppose it always. But supporting fiscal stimulus now with unemployment close to 4 percent while opposing it when unemployment was far higher is a position no economist in the world would justify.

And yet that literally-no-economist-supported stance is in fact the stance of the overwhelming majority of the Republican Party.

Whether this represents a conscious strategy of economic sabotage is not exactly an answerable question. The human brain is very good at concocting rationales for our self-interest. Republicans found reason to be receptive to arguments for Keynesianism under Bush, to reject them under Obama, and then to forget their old position under Trump.

October 23, 2018 4:07 PM  
Anonymous I notice you conveniently left out the economic sabotage of the Republican Congress said...

What is beyond dispute is the partisan benefit to the Republican Party of these reversals of fiscal conviction that occur every time the White House changes hands. When Democrats passed major social legislation, they had to scratch and claw to offset every dollar of spending — alienating powerful constituencies by making them pony up to cover the cost of Obamacare. Republicans, on the other hand, have had the luxury of letting other people worry about how to pay for their priorities. Obama had to govern with the headwind of a congressional party obstinate about maintaining economically harmful spending caps that it’s now admitting — by voting to remove them — it didn’t even like.

This remarkably bad-faith fiscal policy does not present Democrats with any attractive options. On the one hand, they probably don’t want to withhold support for important spending programs just to make life difficult for Trump. On the other, they also don’t want to go along with a system in which the government systematically under-stimulates the economy under Democratic presidents and overstimulates it under Republican ones. The second option is probably the less-bad of the two. At the very least, Democrats should be prepared for the inevitable hypocritical GOP flip back to hysterical deficit-hawkery that’s bound to come whenever Democrats win the next presidential election.

October 23, 2018 4:09 PM  
Anonymous Watching the chicken counters said...

Just remember, the polls had Clinton winning the election last November.

October 23, 2018 4:17 PM  
Anonymous I'm walkin' down the street, I'm talkin' to every who I meet said...

"During the Obama era, Democrats frequently believed, but only rarely uttered aloud in official forums, that the Republican Party was engaged in economic sabotage"

there was some restraint but, somehow, Obama was still able to borrow more than any other president, doubling our debt in eight years

how much more do you think we should have let him get away with?

Dems aren't exactly rolling over to allow trump to do anything he wants

to get their cooperation, he was forced to compromise and allow them to indulge in a lot of wasteful domestic spending

but republicans haven't changed philosophy about deficits

they've already starting working on steep budget cuts

stay tuned

November will be here before you know it!

relax, and try to laugh

October 23, 2018 4:24 PM  
Anonymous Obama the Worst strikes again said...

for eight long years, Obama sat in the Oval Office, writing children's books, decorating, planning travel, and playing video games with his satellite-cruise-missile toy where could kill anyone in the world with the push of a button

meanwhile, he did nothing to stop global warming during a crucial period

here's what we can thank him for:

Hurricane Walaka, one of the most powerful Pacific storms ever recorded, has erased an ecologically important northwestern island from the Hawaiian archipelago.

Using satellite imagery, federal scientists confirmed Monday that East Island, a critical habitat for endangered Hawaiian monk seals and green sea turtles, was entirely washed away earlier this month.

“I had a holy shit moment, thinking ‘Oh my God, it’s gone,’” said Chip Fletcher, a University of Hawaii climate scientist. “It’s one more chink in the wall of the network of ecosystem diversity on this planet that is being dismantled.”

October 23, 2018 5:08 PM  
Anonymous The economy looked great in early 2008 too said...

You ignore the fact that thanks to rampant banking deregulation and lack of enforcement of what laws were left under Bush, tax revenues dropped by 500 Billion dollars a year before Obama even stepped into office.

If you really want to complain about the debt Obama left, you have to admit that he never should never have made the Bush tax cuts permanent. Those should have gradually been put back into force once the economy started growing. That would have limited the debt growth.

Obama could have also reduced spending by pulling out of Bush's totally unnecessary cluster F$(# in Iraq. That would have saved hundreds of billions of dollars, the lives of many US soldiers, and cost us less for their medical care going forward.

But Republicans would have nailed Obama to a cross for that. Who cares about deficits when you can bomb Muslims with impunity?

And Republicans are never going to admit that tax cuts are wrong. In fact, even when the economy was humming along when Obama left office, and the deficit was dropping, Republicans knowingly increased the deficit in a huge way once Rump got in. "Conservatives" are now spending like drunken sailors and the deficits are growing 10 times faster than the revenues are increasing. It won't be too long before Obama's deficits just look like chump change compared to Rump's reign.

The size of the annual deficit was decreasing during the last couple of years of Obama's term, but thanks to Republicans, it's back up to increasing at over a TRILLION dollars a year, every year, for the foreseeable future. Until of course, investors balk at lending us more money - at which point the value of the dollar will collapse, and we will have another recession - at least. This outcome is practically a forgone conclusion. Historically, there is simply no economy that has ever kept spending like this without creating a debt crisis. This is simply NOT a way to build and maintain a strong and stable economy - much less a "Super Power." Show me one counter example, if you can.

Republicans don't care about this though, and can't think past the next tax cut. Whoever is in office at the time the economic music stops - and we're left without a chair to sit on - they will be blaming the Democrats for creating their spending problem; and they have voters stupid enough to believe them.

October 23, 2018 5:39 PM  
Anonymous Can you spin any faster? said...

"meanwhile, he (Obama) did nothing to stop global warming during a crucial period

here's what we can thank him for:

Hurricane Walaka, one of the most powerful Pacific storms ever recorded, has erased an ecologically important northwestern island from the Hawaiian archipelago."


It looks like one of the Russian trolls forgot the conservative party line. It's time to cut back on the Vodka, comrade.

Let me remind you, for Republicans, climate change is a hoax pulled off by 97% of the world's climatologists so they can keep their cushy government jobs; and Democrats are environmental radicals out to destroy our economy by passing all sorts of job-killing regulations.

But I can see how desperate you are to blame Obama for anything. It must be bad when you have to blame him for something that happened nearly 2 years AFTER he left office, and AFTER Rump assigned Scott Pruitt - a guy who doesn't even believe man made CO2 is a problem, to dismantle the EPA.

And of course it was Rump who slapped a 30% tariff on Chinese solar panels, much to the chagrin of American installers and homeowners.

But go ahead, after years of screaming about how green energy is going to cost too much and environmental regulations are destroying our economy - well earning yourselves the nickname "climate change deniers" - change your story to blame Obama for doing nothing about climate change and hope NOBODY will notice.

October 23, 2018 6:16 PM  
Anonymous wake up everybody said...

oy vey

we're going to have to start using TTF as a synonym for stupid

Democrats are hoping to administer a tough midterm-election blow to the Republicans — akin to the “shellacking” President Barack Obama got from the Tea Party in 2010 — as a means of shutting down President Donald Trump. But it’s looking iffy now, post-Kavanaugh, and if they fail, they’ll have the politically correct culture that has moved from college campuses into the Democratic Party to blame.

Opposition to PC culture is a major source of Trump’s appeal to voters. While most politicians, even Republican politicians, were afraid to challenge it head-on, Trump was unafraid, mocking the PC social justice warriors even on their own ground.

Since Trump’s election, the response among Democrats has been to double down. After all, if Trump’s against politically correct culture, then they have to be for it. But that puts them right where Trump wants them to be, because PC culture is highly unpopular.

Don’t just take my word for it. Here’s what a recent article in The Atlantic, with the title "Americans strongly dislike PC culture" says:

“Among the general population, a full 80 percent believe that ‘political correctness is a problem in our country.’ Even young people are uncomfortable with it, including 74 percent ages 24 to 29, and 79 percent under age 24. On this particular issue, the woke are in a clear minority across all ages. Youth isn’t a good proxy for support of political correctness — and it turns out race isn’t, either. Whites are ever so slightly less likely than average to believe that political correctness is a problem in the country: 79 percent of them share this sentiment. Instead, it is Asians (82 percent), Hispanics (87 percent) and American Indians (88 percent) who are most likely to oppose political correctness.”

So political correctness is overwhelmingly unpopular with the vast majority outside of “woke” social-justice culture of progressive activists, which The Atlantic article tells us make up about 8 percent of the population.

But it’s still a problem, because although the woke are a minority, they have a lot of influence in academia and journalism (which they dominate), and in the corporate world, where the demands of activists are usually acceded to, and where HR departments are staffed with sympathizers.

October 23, 2018 7:03 PM  
Anonymous wake up everybody said...

Thus we have a large group of Americans — at 80 percent, we could call it a silent supermajority — that feels pushed around by what turns out to be about 8 percent of the population. You’d expect that to be the end of things, as every sensible politician would want to take the side of the 80 percent over the 8 percent. But it’s not that simple.

What PC culture is really about, as Wesley Yang notes, is power struggles within the elites. Yang writes: “Political correctness can thus be defined as the ideology of a distinct class of petty officeholders and office seekers within the therapeutic state." As Henry Louis Gates Jr. put it back in 1993, "They invite a regime so heavily policed as to be incompatible with democracy."

Petty officials indeed: The main source of PC culture on campus isn’t professors, who lean left, but the more numerous true believers in campus “diversity” and “student life” administrators, who lean much further left. And unsurprisingly, PC demands on campus always seem to wind up promoting more money and power for administrators.

People who work in the corporate world see the same kind of thing going on there. And people who work outside of both look on and wonder whether everyone is going crazy.

The trouble for Democrats is that the activists who now run the party come from the PC activist camp. It’s virtually impossible to oppose them, as President Bill Clinton once did, in an effort to reach out to mainstream America. But with 80 percent of America opposed to PC culture, it’s easy for Republicans to make Democrats sound crazy just by quoting PC rules regarding everything from Halloween costumes to the number of genders then watching the Democrats rabidly defend them.

It’s not just a problem for Democrats. Everyone else faces a problem, too: No party stays out of power forever, and as long as the Democrats are dominated by PC activists, sooner or later they’ll get back in power, and the effort to make America look like a PC college campus will go into overdrive. We can only hope that they sober up before that happens.

October 23, 2018 7:05 PM  
Anonymous Yes, that's another dog whistle you heard said...

"Political Correctness" as a problem in the US is another canard propagated by right-wing media to feed their victim-hood myth and bash liberals like they do with the fake "War on Christmas."
Nobody stopped conservatives from saying "Merry Christmas," yet crowds of Rump sycophants cheer every time he mentions it as if there were PC police forcing them to say "Happy Holidays." It just didn't happen; but facts don’t stop the right-wing propaganda machine from pretending it's a major cultural issue of our time.
At its heart, the fundamental tenant of "being PC" is simply treating other people with the same dignity and respect you’d like for yourself. If you believe that's a real problem in the US, you have totally distorted priorities.
Unfortunately, the real backlash to the fake PC problem is gallons of electronic ink spilled in posts decrying the terrible "PC" problem. Its entire focus is convincing people they are WAY too nice, and it’s causing the downfall of America. It's not. But it's a wonderful distraction from REAL problems the US faces, like Russia meddling in elections, spiraling debt with no plans to repay it, under-funded schools and teacher / police / fireman pension funds, crumbling infrastructure, expensive and under-performing health care just to name a few.
The backlash against the "PC culture" is the latest generation of hate speech against everyone who doesn't believe and promulgate right-wing Christian dogma. It's just hidden better than before. And while the masses are busy fighting about "PC culture," plutocrats are passing more laws to make themselves even richer - they want plenty of cash on hand when the economy collapses.
It took years, but Republicans finally learned they shouldn’t use the "n" word when talking about black people. And putting up a picture of Willie Horton anymore is just too obvious. The nefarious "left" is on to that, and you must be "PC" to avoid being called out for the obvious racist / misogynist / homophobic / transphobes you are.

October 24, 2018 12:39 AM  
Anonymous Yes, that's another dog whistle you heard said...

It must be terrible to hide that vitriol all the time - how do you do it?! I mean, first you had to be nice and PC to the blacks, and then browns, and then the gays, and my god! it's hard to even talk *#$! about trans people anymore! THE COUNTRY IS TOO PC! It's destroying America!

Have no fear, Rump is here! You don't have to be PC anymore! You can say all the nasty crap you've been holding in for so long! You can roll back all those laws that made you try and be honest about hiring decisions - you no longer must make up an excuse like "he didn't fit our company culture" for not hiring someone, you can just say "we don't hire gays / blacks / Jews / Muslims / trans people here!"

Grab a beer, a pussy, and say all the deplorable stuff you like, because PC culture is dead!

And the predictable outcome of that – the white supremacist wing of the Republican party has heard the clarion call of the oppressed white Christian being "too PC" and has come crawling out from under their rocks to save America, and this is their modus operandi:

A republican website in Idaho has sent out a racist robocall against Florida Democratic gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum.

Florida voters received the robocall on Tuesday; speaking in an exaggerated minstrel dialect, an actor pretends to be Gillum, saying: “Well hello there. I is the Negro Andrew Gillum, and I be asking you to make me governor of this here state of Florida.”

Minstrel music plays in the background, and a monkey screeches occasionally to refer to Gillum, the mayor of Tallahassee.

The ad says Gillum’s health care plan is cheap, because he’ll just give chicken feet to people as medicine. It explains how Jewish people are going to vote for him, because Jews are “the ones that been putting Negroes in charge over the white folk, just like they done after the Civil War.”

Welcome to 1964. Rump has "Made America Great Again."

October 24, 2018 12:41 AM  
Anonymous Fox News’ migrant caravan coverage backfires: Panel of independent voters rejects fearmongering said...

"When "Fox & Friends" co-host Steve Doocy asked a panel of independent voters for their thoughts on a caravan of 5,000 Central American migrants traveling through Mexico to reach the United States, he seemed surprised by their answers, which expressed sympathy for the individuals fleeing poverty, oppression and violence.

"I think uneven immigration laws are a problem for any country," one independent voter told Doocy when asked about America's immigration laws. "And I think our immigration laws need to be modernized and updated. But this country is founded on immigration. And all of us come from immigrants."

When asked how he would feel if the caravan reached 20,000 people, the voter responded, "This is the mightiest country on the planet, I think we can handle a caravan of people, unarmed, coming to this country," although he added that the government should "process them properly."

Another independent voter on the panel also expressed sympathy for the migrants and condemned both political parties for their handling of the situation.

"There’s a humanitarian crisis taking place in Central America. And yet, this issue gets turned into a complete political football. There’s very little honest discussion about what’s actually happening, it gets turned into talking points," he told Doocy.

Video at

A third panelist, seemingly referring to Fox News' coverage of the issue, commented that, "Treating this as an ‘invasion’ is a bad idea and it’s going to end horribly... People have to realize these are human beings coming here, and there needs to be a real solution offered in dealing with it."

Earlier, "Fox & Friends" host Doocy implied sinister forces were at work behind the caravan.

At a different point in the Fox News program on Monday, co-host Brian Kilmeade seemed to undermine his network's own fearmongering coverage."I imagine these are good people. Most of them are good people. I'm sure some are up to no good. I'm sure they just want a better life. I get that."

At the same time, Kilmeade pointed the finger of blame at Sen. Dianne Feinstein, claiming that she had supported policies which had encouraged lax immigration policies.

"Where are they getting water? Where are they getting food? Who's handling the logistics? I mean, I was reading in the LA Times that apparently a number of Mexicans who live in the area lined the highway, handed out clothes and sandwiches and bottles of water, but still: 7,000 people. You know, that's an army of people. Who is feeding them?" Doocy asked. His comments played into a larger right-wing theory that the immigrant caravan is being secretly funded by wealthy left-wingers, with Jewish business magnate and philanthropist George Soros frequently cited as one such villain.

The individuals in the caravan have a number of backgrounds, according to The Washington Post. They include men and women fleeing political turmoil in Nicaragua, poverty in Guatemala and violent crime in Honduras. Many of them are migrants who had lived in the United States for years but been deported and are now attempting to reunite with their families and get back their old jobs. Trump, by contrast, has depicted the migrants in disparaging terms, claiming last week that "there are some bad people in that group. This country doesn’t want them."

October 24, 2018 8:33 AM  
Anonymous sadie hawkins is a bigot said...

On Sunday, the New York Times reported a shocking story: The Trump administration had defined transgender people out of existence. How, exactly, could a government entity simply make an entire population cohort disappear? Did they alleviate gender-identity disorder? Did Vice President Mike Pence enact The Handmaid’s Tale?

No, it turns out that the Trump administration simply defined “sex” as biological sex. You know, the actual definition of the word “sex.”

The New York Times headlined thusly: “‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration.” How would this massive human-rights violation take place? According to the Times:

The Trump administration is considering narrowly defining gender as a biological, immutable condition determined by genitalia at birth, the most drastic move yet in a governmentwide effort to roll back recognition and protections of transgender people under federal civil rights law.

Now, we should pause here for some definitions. The political Left and its allies in the media routinely and dishonestly shift the definition of the word “gender.” Sometimes, they mean “feminine or masculine characteristics,” regardless of biological sex; sometimes, they mean biological sex. This confusion is key to transgender-rights arguments. If “gender” simply means the behavioral manifestations of femininity or masculinity, without regard to sex, then there are an infinite number of possible genders — each individual human being manifests these traits differently. If “gender” refers to biological sex, there are only two genders, and, very rarely, intersex people. But the Left simply says that gender is not connected with sex (a man can be a gendered woman, meaning effeminate). But then it switches the terminology, claiming that gender is connected with sex after all (a male who is a “gendered” woman is a woman). This is rhetorical and logical slight-of-hand.

The Obama administration tried to make it legal slight of hand, too. The Obama administration took the clear language of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which bans discrimination in education based on sex, and then redefined sex as gender unconnected with sex — a complete eradication of the original meaning of the text. Under that standard, a woman who was discriminated against on the basis of sex by a school — say, a woman who was denied admission at Harvard based on her sex — was in the same legal situation as a man who claimed he was a woman and was thus denied admission to a women’s school such as Wellesley. That’s insane, and it’s obviously unintended by anyone who proposed or voted for Title IX. In fact, it carves the heart out of Title IX by eliminating the reality of sex entirely.

But according to the Times, pointing this out “defines transgenders out of existence.” Here’s how the Times reports this:

A series of decisions by the Obama administration loosened the legal concept of gender in federal programs, including in education and health care, recognizing gender largely as an individual’s choice and not determined by the sex assigned at birth.

October 24, 2018 9:32 AM  
Anonymous sadie hawkins is a bigot said...

First off, there is no “sex assigned at birth.” Doctors don’t get together and simply “assign” a sex at birth. I know. I’ve been present at the births of both my children, and there was no medical conference to “assign” sex. Sex is biological. End of story. But according to the Obama administration, your subjective perception of your sex (what they term “gender,” at least sometimes) should be protected by Title IX in a way that your objective sex should not be, since women’s colleges should now be forced to accept men who say they are women, for example.

The Trump administration, however, restored some sense of sanity to this enterprise by using an objective measure of sex rather than the thoughts and feelings of subjective human beings. The Department of Education argues that sex ought to be defined “on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.” In other words, sex ought to have an objectively observable definition.

This is the extent of the great evil that the Trump administration supposedly perpetrated against those suffering from gender-identity disorder. But that’s not a great evil at all. That’s called reality. If Democrats wish to change Title IX by explicitly amending it to include protection for effeminate behavior by biological men, or masculine behavior by biological women, or to protect self-attributed “gender identity,” by all means, they can go for it. But to simply rewrite the law along the lines of illogical leftist groupthink is a violation of any constitutional system. It happens to be bad policy as well.

But the propagandizing won’t stop. Look at this comment from Catherine E. Lhamon, the political hack who led the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights under Obama:

This takes a position that what the medical community understands about their patients — what people understand about themselves — is irrelevant because the government disagrees.

The conflation of “what the medical community understands about their patients” with “what people understand about themselves” is utterly anti-scientific trash. In no other arena of medicine would we take the self-perception of a patient over an actual objective diagnosis. But here we’re supposed to, and we’re supposed to declare that such a standard-free subjective definition is based in science.

If Democrats want to run on their anti-science agenda, they should go ahead and do it. If the media want to back their play, they should go ahead and do it. But nobody should make the utterly dishonest suggestion that willful, illegal rewriting of law to back overtly political priorities amounts to either answerable government or supportable science.

October 24, 2018 9:36 AM  
Anonymous More right wing crap said...

The above piece of crap was published by a Russian Jew with no scientific background whatsoever, Ben Shapiro, in the National Review.

October 24, 2018 9:40 AM  
Anonymous how could Dems be so stupid? said...

sheesh, is anti-semitism now acceptable to the gay agenda?

you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

With the midterms mere weeks away, Democrats are already preparing to invoke the era of Richard M. Nixon and Watergate. Anticipating a "blue wave" that will retake the House in November, they have started laying out plans for impeachment proceedings — or at least serious investigations with that goal in mind.

But the Democrats’ political positions, combined with their actions during and in the wake of the confirmation hearings for now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s U.S. Supreme Court nomination, suggest a different Nixon-era touchstone: his 1972 landslide re-election.

The actions of Democrats in 1972 helped propel a Republican president originally brought into office by the closest of margins in 1968, supported by Americans who feared their way of life was under assault by potentially violent leftists.

Democrats now appear to be priming for a new George McGovern moment. Trump voters see the opposition undermining established political and social norms; seeming to condone potential political violence; doubling down on radical change; and offering up possible candidates even left of the liberals they’ve run in recent elections.

As Alan Greenblatt, who a year ago also broached the possibility of a "McGovern redux," argued: "In the Democrats’ 2020 maneuvering, there will likely be a lane wide open for a pragmatist among the many progressives preparing to make a run.” The Kavanaugh hearings suggest the path is now, in all likelihood, closed, and Democrats are on a single-lane highway to political perdition.

The legitimate fears among conservatives and many others that heated up during the election of Donald Trump remain on a simmer. And the Democrats’ angry demonstrations and embrace of a leftist agenda could confirm 2020 Trump voters’ 2016 concerns that the country they know is slipping away — and only Trump has the courage to stop it.

October 24, 2018 9:49 AM  
Anonymous It looks like people don't want to buy what Republicans are selling said...

The free market harshly judges Steve Bannon’s value as a dining companion.

Bannon, the former CEO for the Trump campaign and erstwhile presidential advisor, is scheduled to speak on Friday at the the Hillsborough County Republican Party’s dinner in Tampa Bay, Florida. The event is a fundraiser, although, as the Tampa Bay Times reports, it won’t be raising much money from attendees.

The dinner originally hoped to raise money by charging $20,000 per seat for ten guests to sit at Bannon’s table. There were further VIP tickets going for $1000 a piece. General admission for the event was set at $125.

Ticket prices were dramatically cut last week, when you could pay $5,000 for proximity to Bannon, $300 for a VIP seat, and $50 for general admission. The bargain prices were offered, according to a Facebook post, because “We want to pack the house!!!”

On Monday, an email went out saying the entire event would be free. “The Trump Anniversary Dinner with Steve Bannon this Friday will be COMPLEMENTARY TO ALL,” one of the organizer of the event wrote in a mass email. “We have a donor who will cover our expenses.”

If this trajectory continues, it’s entirely possible that by Friday, Tampa Bay Republicans will be dragging people from the street and offering them money to attend the event.

On Tuesday, Bannon gave a speech at Staten Island and screened his movie Trump at War. According to The New York Daily News, 38 people attended the event.

October 24, 2018 9:53 AM  
Anonymous heterosexuality deserves a lot of priviliges as society's life producer said...

"It looks like people don't want to buy what Republicans are selling said...
The free market harshly judges Steve Bannon’s value as a dining companion."

so sad

the TTFer thinks that because people don't want to pay thousands to sit next to a guy Trump fired, that is a sign they support the gay agenda

life sometimes gets desperate for the fringe....

October 24, 2018 9:59 AM  
Anonymous how could Dems be so stupid? said...

Assuming the economy continues to hum along and jobs, particularly in manufacturing, keep getting added by the hundreds of thousands, voters who worried that Trump wasn’t up to the job and reluctantly supported Hillary Clinton could feel comfortable backing the president. Indeed, Trump's approval ratingRecommended

has reached a new high this week, according to an NBC News/WSJ poll.

Trump is going to use America's strong economic numbers to ensure a GOP midterm victory
Trump’s voters seem seized by some of the same fears as the “silent majority” that backed Nixon in 1968 — particularly a sense that the country was coming apart. Concerns include political correctness, tolerance for massive illegal immigration, the dominance of international institutions and fears that free trade and the ability of corporations to easily relocate overseas are killing jobs, stifling wages and exacerbating economic inequality. These concerns are coupled with more mainstream conservative worries about escalating government control over their lives — whether by executive orders, prioritization of identity politics over religious values, or government interference in health care and other sectors of the economy.

And unlike in 1992, when Bill Clinton ran as a moderate Democrat and co-opted portions of the previously victorious GOP agenda into his own platform, Democrats have doubled down on the agenda that herded voters into Trump’s arms.

Efforts by Trump to limit illegal immigration and migration from countries where terrorism is endemic are vilified as a cold-hearted and racist. Support for nationalized single-payer health plans for all, modeled on Medicare, is pretty much required for entry into the Democratic presidential primary. Socialism, successfully kept at bay in this country for more than a century, is no longer an extreme position.

Meanwhile, the very nature of gender is being expanded, and any objection to gay marriage is scorned as bigoted. Every mass shooting is turned into a demand for gun control, which Trump backers fear will become an assault on the Second Amendment. Conservatives who acknowledge climate change but question the extent — not the fact — of man’s contribution to it are denounced as full-out “deniers.” The idea of a “guaranteed wage” for all, which sounds like something out of Karl Marx’s “Das Kapital,” is gaining currency.

Unusual rectangular iceberg seen floating off Antarctic ice shelf

For Trump supporters, the Kavanuagh hearings yielded more cause for grave concern: The possibility that the left might turn to violence to achieve its ends, and the suggestion that principles that have held the republic together since its beginning could be abandoned. The left sounded ready to ditch the notion that one is innocent until guilt is proven and accept that Kavanaugh was guilty of sexual abuse based on decades-old charges not substantiated by evidence. To endorse Kavanaugh, they were told, was to condone attacks against women.

Democrats are also increasingly talking about abolishing the Electoral College. With Kavanaugh’s confirmation, and an apparent conservative majority in place, the very legitimacy of the Supreme Court is questioned.

Trump supporters see the potential for violence suggested by the sight of protestors ramming the doors of the Supreme Court, chasing after and screaming at senators in the halls of the Capitol, dislodging a senator and his wife from a restaurant, and preventing another from riding on an elevator.

Such threats were casually dismissed. "I think that it just means,” said Judiciary Committee member Sen. Mazie Hirono, “that there are a lot of people who are very, very much motivated about what is going on.”

Yet Democrats now even question former first lady Michelle Obama’s cautionary “we go high” axiom. Former Attorney General Eric Holder quoted Obama but instead issued a call to go so low as to “kick” the opposition. Hillary Clinton says the time for civility is over.

October 24, 2018 10:05 AM  
Anonymous Eagleton is shocked said...

Top Democratic prospects like Sens. Kamala Harris of California, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Cory Booker of New Jersey and former Vice President Joe Biden are all running to the left — or are already ensconced there.

They’re in a place America has never really gone when electing presidents. Senator Barack Obama looked pretty far to the left, at least from the perspective of a conservative. But he did his best to sound moderate, even opposing gay marriage during his first presidential run.

That’s over. The left is now comfortable in its ideological home. But it’s a house haunted by the spirit of McGovern.

October 24, 2018 10:06 AM  
Anonymous Stop blaming Democrats for how Republicans vote said...

"The actions of Democrats in 1972 helped propel a Republican president originally brought into office by the closest of margins in 1968, supported by Americans who feared their way of life was under assault by potentially violent leftists."

The reason Americans "feared their way of life was under assault by potentially violent leftists" was the same then as it is now - Republicans always frame any and all protests against their crooked presidents as violent attacks from the far left. There is simply no admission that ordinary, middle of the road, average Americans can be totally disgusted by the behavior and increasing lies of their Republican president - whether we're talking about 1972 or 2018.

The folks who now call themselves the anit-fa used to call themselves anarchists - the ones who didn't want any government at all - not left NOR right. But the right-wing media keeps conflating them with the left because pretending their violence is part and parcel of all democratic or liberal minded voters stokes fear in, and motivates their Republican base.

Rather than confronting the issues of a president who lies as easily as he breathes, and deal with it head-on to get America back to a point where truth, decency, and sane heads prevail, the right wing media, both then and now tries to blame Democrats for the a$$holes the Republicans voted into office. And then claim it is the Democrats for the right-wing fear mongering that make Americans fearful enough to propel their candidate into office.

And with Nazis becoming more and more a part of Republican politics these days, you can't blame people of all stripes for rooting for the anti-fa when they're out there standing up against the fascists.

If Republicans would hold their own candidates to moral standard that was higher than pregnant sow's belly, they'd find that large swaths of America wouldn't be out protesting and angry at their president. And they wouldn't have to try and blame Democrats for letting such horrible disaster into office. Again.

You are responsible for your own vote.

October 24, 2018 10:21 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home