Chas, you’re not alone. This will definitely be a case where most of us (on both sides, I suspect) will be voting more against the other candidate than *for* their own party’s candidate — or picking ‘none of the above.’
We can at least be relieved that the present administration will, at long-suffering-last, come to an end.
Language caution in the 1968 clip below, but this election season (and all it represents about our sliding culture) think of Charlton Heston’s discovery of a familiar landmark at the end of his visit to the mysterious and horrific “Planet of the Apes’ where apes ruled the world.
You’ll need a border collie in that administration. Just sayin’
Meanwhile, trouble on the horizon for our friends in the Democrat party:
_____________________________
WASHINGTON — Two of the Democratic Party’s most loyal constituencies, labor and environmentalists, are clashing over an effort to raise tens of millions of dollars for an ambitious voter turnout operation aimed at defeating Donald J. Trump in the November election.
The rift developed after some in the labor movement, whose cash flow has dwindled and whose political clout has been increasingly imperiled, announced a partnership last week with a wealthy environmentalist, Tom Steyer, to help bankroll a new fund dedicated to electing Democrats.
That joint initiative enraged members of the nation’s biggest construction unions, already on edge about the rising influence of climate-change activists. The building-trades unions view Mr. Steyer’s environmental agenda as a threat to the jobs that can be created through infrastructure projects like new gas pipelines.
The dispute, laid bare in a pair of blistering letters sent on Monday to Richard L. Trumka, president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., underscored the tensions between the two pillars of the Democratic coalition.
For decades, organized labor was among the most powerful forces on the left, financing Democratic candidates and reliably delivering working-class votes, and political foot soldiers, for the party in crucial states and districts.
But with blue-collar white voters shifting to the Republican Party and Democrats growing more reliant on higher-income voters and liberal donors like Mr. Steyer, environmental activists are increasingly muscling out unions. …
_______________________________
“The classified details behind Iran’s treatment of several U.S. sailors who were captured by the Islamic Republic during a tense standoff earlier this year are likely to shock the nation, according to one member of the House Armed Services Committee, who disclosed to the Washington Free Beacon that these details are currently being withheld by the Obama administration.
Rep. Randy Forbes (R., Va.) told the Free Beacon in an interview that the Obama administration is still keeping details of the maritime incident under wraps. It could be a year or longer before the American public receives a full accounting of the incident, in which several U.S. sailors were abducted at gunpoint by the Iranian military.
“I’ve had a full classified briefing” from military officials, Forbes told the Free Beacon. “It could be as long as a year before we actually get that released.”
Details of the abduction are likely to start an uproar in the nation and call into question the Obama administration’s handling of the incident, which many experts say violated international and maritime law.
“I think that when the details actually come out, most Americans are going to be kind of taken aback by the entire incident, both how Iran handled it and how we handled it,” Forbes disclosed. “I think that’s going to be huge cause for concern for most Americans. That’s why I’ve encouraged members of Congress to get that briefing so they do know exactly what did take place.”
Forbes suggested that Iran’s treatment of the U.S. sailors—which included filming them crying and forcing them to apologize at gunpoint—may have been much worse than what has been publicly reported.
“I think clearly there were violations of international and maritime law that took place here,” Forbes said. “We [the United States] did almost nothing in response, in fact, to have Secretary [of State John] Kerry actually thank them for releasing our sailors after they way they captured them, I think was a slap in the sailors’ face.”
Freedom of conscience and religious objectors are about to be forced to perform abortions or face loss of federal funds. If only Obama was as intent on stopping enemies like Iran as he is with making sure unborn children never see the light of day. He’s a disgusting excuse for a president, and man.
“The Obama Administration looks like it’s on a mission to trample religious and conscience protections and force as many people as it can to promote and pay for abortions.
Breitbart reports the pro-abortion administration issued a new nondiscrimination policy in the name of “equity” on Friday that pressures doctors and hospitals to promote and perform abortions. Those that don’t would not be eligible for federal funds including Medicare and Medicaid, according to the report.
The “Final Rule” on Obamacare Section 1557 came from the Department of Health and Human Services on Friday, and it largely had to do with discrimination and “gender identity.” While the rule summary does not mention abortion specifically, it explains that the rule “requires that women be treated equally with men in the health care they receive and also prohibits the denial of health care or health coverage based on an individual’s sex, including discrimination based on pregnancy, gender identity and sex stereotyping.”
David Christensen, vice president of government affairs for the Family Research Council, told Breitbart that the new rule mandates that federally funded health care providers offer abortion, among other services.”
“The Obama administration also has been ignoring a federal law and allowing California to force churches to pay for abortions, LifeNews reported. Despite continued pleas from churches and pro-lifers for more than a year, the administration has done nothing other than promise to look into the matter.
Interesting links over at the nate silver site. In a transcript discussion they were having about the possible appeal of a Gary Johnson to Bernie types, Silver says: “Johnson is sort of a capital-L libertarian, instead of a Rand Paul conservative libertarian. I think some Sanders supporters could groove to him on social policy even though they might find his economics pretty detestable.”
Big Bernie rally in our area tonight that we’re (not me specifically) covering.
I didn’t follow the Iran/Navy story closely. Am I correct that one of the boats in our politically correct Navy got lost and wandered into Iranian waters?
It makes me feel bad for my ancestors who had to fight against competent Yankees. The modern Yankees accidentally drift into enemy waters. Their Secretary of State accidentally sends state secrets to Nordstroms along with her pantsuit order. We just seceded too early.
… She (Noonan) has written the book on the unfitness of the current candidates, in one case quite literally. But here we are. We’re in a country with two dominant parties that have all but nominated “Crazy Man versus Criminal,” as she put it. Now what do we do? The question of which candidate to vote for is easier than the question of what the paths forward are for the Republican Party and the conservative movement it houses.
She argues for patience, soberness of thought, reflection, and humility.
We can certainly overanalyze the Trump phenomenon. While he has his supporters, it’s also true that most Republicans opposed him. But he won. What does that mean? And if, when blaming people, you don’t look inward even a little bit, you’re almost certainly part of the problem. …
… When Trump won winner-take-all South Carolina, I knew it was over.
Because of my opposition to his candidacy, it threw me into a week’s long funk. My opposition, by the way, is based on his policy positions more than anything. I don’t like his narcissism or deception, but the same could be said of many other politicians, so he’s not tremendously special in that regard. I don’t like the way he treats other humans, but the same could be said of most other politicians. I’m a constitutionalist who cares about virtue. Trump is simply not my guy. …
… For my part, I wondered if my hatred of the Republican Party’s impotence and incompetence and stated desire to see it destroyed may have been a tad overwrought. (It was completely overwrought.) …
It’s not that Trump can’t or shouldn’t be opposed. But if it’s done, how it’s done matters a great deal. …
Come to terms with the seriousness of the problem first, then commit to showing your fellow Americans the beauty of what you believe in.
________________________________________
Hemingway’s article was good. Noonan is one of my favorites. I think the real reason that some of us (especially Chas and me) are so down is what Trump’s nomination says about the Republican Party and America in general. As Matt Walsh said a few weeks ago: “If America was a Christian Nation, Trump Would Not be Winning”.
Deep down we knew America wasn’t a Christian nation. However, the success of Trump taught us that character means nothing to a plurality of the voters in the “good” party. That is a sobering realization. It was particularly sobering to me to see Trump win Southern state after Southern state. This Dixie doesn’t deserve to rise again.
Donna – I know a man who has said he is libertarian & is supporting Sanders.
Interestingly, although it is a common misconception that the Libertarian Party draws off of the Republican Party, it actually has attracted about an equal number from each party. Currently Gary Johnson is getting more Democrats than Republicans coming over to him.
Karen, yes, libertarianism has always been a curious mix of (what I’d view as) far left and far right. I’ve always viewed it as where the left and right go so far around the circle that they wind up meeting. It’s definitely a hybrid, it’s kind of both but not either.
But positions such as legalizing drugs and pulling back on military involvement (and a “hands off” approach to social issues like abortion, gay marriage, etc.) make it uniquely appealing to the left.
The massive (and across the board) tax increases alone that Sanders’ agenda would require seems antithetical to libertarianism. The tax man cometh, hand what you’ve earned over to the government, please. But maybe there are different kinds of libertarianism these days. 🙂
Donna – Yeah, I’ve wondered how he could make that choice. His explanation, from what I can glean from his writings on Facebook, is that our government is so screwed up & corrupt that we need someone totally new & different. Seeing as how a Libertarian would most likely not be elected, Bernie is his choice.
This man is actually very intelligent, so I’m sure there is much more to it than what I wrote above, but it does still baffle me a bit.
Wandering Views 
I can’t get excited about either Trump or Hillary.
this whole mess leaves me depressed..
LikeLiked by 2 people
Chas, you’re not alone. This will definitely be a case where most of us (on both sides, I suspect) will be voting more against the other candidate than *for* their own party’s candidate — or picking ‘none of the above.’
We can at least be relieved that the present administration will, at long-suffering-last, come to an end.
LikeLike
Language caution in the 1968 clip below, but this election season (and all it represents about our sliding culture) think of Charlton Heston’s discovery of a familiar landmark at the end of his visit to the mysterious and horrific “Planet of the Apes’ where apes ruled the world.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Chas, You may want to consider voting for my Grand-Dog, Arnold Weaver. Not a liberal, Not a lunatic!
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’ll need a border collie in that administration. Just sayin’
Meanwhile, trouble on the horizon for our friends in the Democrat party:
_____________________________
WASHINGTON — Two of the Democratic Party’s most loyal constituencies, labor and environmentalists, are clashing over an effort to raise tens of millions of dollars for an ambitious voter turnout operation aimed at defeating Donald J. Trump in the November election.
The rift developed after some in the labor movement, whose cash flow has dwindled and whose political clout has been increasingly imperiled, announced a partnership last week with a wealthy environmentalist, Tom Steyer, to help bankroll a new fund dedicated to electing Democrats.
That joint initiative enraged members of the nation’s biggest construction unions, already on edge about the rising influence of climate-change activists. The building-trades unions view Mr. Steyer’s environmental agenda as a threat to the jobs that can be created through infrastructure projects like new gas pipelines.
The dispute, laid bare in a pair of blistering letters sent on Monday to Richard L. Trumka, president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., underscored the tensions between the two pillars of the Democratic coalition.
For decades, organized labor was among the most powerful forces on the left, financing Democratic candidates and reliably delivering working-class votes, and political foot soldiers, for the party in crucial states and districts.
But with blue-collar white voters shifting to the Republican Party and Democrats growing more reliant on higher-income voters and liberal donors like Mr. Steyer, environmental activists are increasingly muscling out unions. …
_______________________________
LikeLike
My border collie also brings in the ever-important female component.
She can be, however, a lunatic — given the right (or wrong) circumstances.
And she is a control freak.
LikeLiked by 2 people
rw: I’ve got a feeling…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tychicus, Does your feeling concern my Thunder or my Grand-Dog’s presidential chances?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your Thunder – your Grand-Dog isn’t corrupt enough to win…
LikeLiked by 1 person
My cat, Bruce, is willing to serve. I think he qualifies, as he is sneaky, unfaithful, and transgendered. He also throws up a lot.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yet another failure from our pathetic excuse for a Commander in Chief.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/congressman-classified-details-irans-treatment-u-s-sailors-will-shock-nation/
“The classified details behind Iran’s treatment of several U.S. sailors who were captured by the Islamic Republic during a tense standoff earlier this year are likely to shock the nation, according to one member of the House Armed Services Committee, who disclosed to the Washington Free Beacon that these details are currently being withheld by the Obama administration.
Rep. Randy Forbes (R., Va.) told the Free Beacon in an interview that the Obama administration is still keeping details of the maritime incident under wraps. It could be a year or longer before the American public receives a full accounting of the incident, in which several U.S. sailors were abducted at gunpoint by the Iranian military.
“I’ve had a full classified briefing” from military officials, Forbes told the Free Beacon. “It could be as long as a year before we actually get that released.”
Details of the abduction are likely to start an uproar in the nation and call into question the Obama administration’s handling of the incident, which many experts say violated international and maritime law.
“I think that when the details actually come out, most Americans are going to be kind of taken aback by the entire incident, both how Iran handled it and how we handled it,” Forbes disclosed. “I think that’s going to be huge cause for concern for most Americans. That’s why I’ve encouraged members of Congress to get that briefing so they do know exactly what did take place.”
Forbes suggested that Iran’s treatment of the U.S. sailors—which included filming them crying and forcing them to apologize at gunpoint—may have been much worse than what has been publicly reported.
“I think clearly there were violations of international and maritime law that took place here,” Forbes said. “We [the United States] did almost nothing in response, in fact, to have Secretary [of State John] Kerry actually thank them for releasing our sailors after they way they captured them, I think was a slap in the sailors’ face.”
LikeLike
Freedom of conscience and religious objectors are about to be forced to perform abortions or face loss of federal funds. If only Obama was as intent on stopping enemies like Iran as he is with making sure unborn children never see the light of day. He’s a disgusting excuse for a president, and man.
http://www.lifenews.com/2016/05/16/obama-administration-forces-doctors-and-hospitals-getting-federal-funds-to-do-abortions/
“The Obama Administration looks like it’s on a mission to trample religious and conscience protections and force as many people as it can to promote and pay for abortions.
Breitbart reports the pro-abortion administration issued a new nondiscrimination policy in the name of “equity” on Friday that pressures doctors and hospitals to promote and perform abortions. Those that don’t would not be eligible for federal funds including Medicare and Medicaid, according to the report.
The “Final Rule” on Obamacare Section 1557 came from the Department of Health and Human Services on Friday, and it largely had to do with discrimination and “gender identity.” While the rule summary does not mention abortion specifically, it explains that the rule “requires that women be treated equally with men in the health care they receive and also prohibits the denial of health care or health coverage based on an individual’s sex, including discrimination based on pregnancy, gender identity and sex stereotyping.”
David Christensen, vice president of government affairs for the Family Research Council, told Breitbart that the new rule mandates that federally funded health care providers offer abortion, among other services.”
“The Obama administration also has been ignoring a federal law and allowing California to force churches to pay for abortions, LifeNews reported. Despite continued pleas from churches and pro-lifers for more than a year, the administration has done nothing other than promise to look into the matter.
LikeLike
Interesting links over at the nate silver site. In a transcript discussion they were having about the possible appeal of a Gary Johnson to Bernie types, Silver says: “Johnson is sort of a capital-L libertarian, instead of a Rand Paul conservative libertarian. I think some Sanders supporters could groove to him on social policy even though they might find his economics pretty detestable.”
Big Bernie rally in our area tonight that we’re (not me specifically) covering.
LikeLike
Tess would have to keep Bruce in a corner when they got into the same room. Especially if snacks are to be served.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I didn’t follow the Iran/Navy story closely. Am I correct that one of the boats in our politically correct Navy got lost and wandered into Iranian waters?
LikeLike
It makes me feel bad for my ancestors who had to fight against competent Yankees. The modern Yankees accidentally drift into enemy waters. Their Secretary of State accidentally sends state secrets to Nordstroms along with her pantsuit order. We just seceded too early.
LikeLike
From Mollie Hemingway (writing about Peggy Noonan’s latest columns):
http://thefederalist.com/2016/05/17/beltway-conservatives-need-to-get-out-of-their-bubble-on-trump/#.VzsL-ZB-izo.twitter
_______________________________
… She (Noonan) has written the book on the unfitness of the current candidates, in one case quite literally. But here we are. We’re in a country with two dominant parties that have all but nominated “Crazy Man versus Criminal,” as she put it. Now what do we do? The question of which candidate to vote for is easier than the question of what the paths forward are for the Republican Party and the conservative movement it houses.
She argues for patience, soberness of thought, reflection, and humility.
We can certainly overanalyze the Trump phenomenon. While he has his supporters, it’s also true that most Republicans opposed him. But he won. What does that mean? And if, when blaming people, you don’t look inward even a little bit, you’re almost certainly part of the problem. …
… When Trump won winner-take-all South Carolina, I knew it was over.
Because of my opposition to his candidacy, it threw me into a week’s long funk. My opposition, by the way, is based on his policy positions more than anything. I don’t like his narcissism or deception, but the same could be said of many other politicians, so he’s not tremendously special in that regard. I don’t like the way he treats other humans, but the same could be said of most other politicians. I’m a constitutionalist who cares about virtue. Trump is simply not my guy. …
… For my part, I wondered if my hatred of the Republican Party’s impotence and incompetence and stated desire to see it destroyed may have been a tad overwrought. (It was completely overwrought.) …
It’s not that Trump can’t or shouldn’t be opposed. But if it’s done, how it’s done matters a great deal. …
Come to terms with the seriousness of the problem first, then commit to showing your fellow Americans the beauty of what you believe in.
________________________________________
LikeLike
Hemingway’s article was good. Noonan is one of my favorites. I think the real reason that some of us (especially Chas and me) are so down is what Trump’s nomination says about the Republican Party and America in general. As Matt Walsh said a few weeks ago: “If America was a Christian Nation, Trump Would Not be Winning”.
Deep down we knew America wasn’t a Christian nation. However, the success of Trump taught us that character means nothing to a plurality of the voters in the “good” party. That is a sobering realization. It was particularly sobering to me to see Trump win Southern state after Southern state. This Dixie doesn’t deserve to rise again.
LikeLike
Donna – I know a man who has said he is libertarian & is supporting Sanders.
Interestingly, although it is a common misconception that the Libertarian Party draws off of the Republican Party, it actually has attracted about an equal number from each party. Currently Gary Johnson is getting more Democrats than Republicans coming over to him.
LikeLike
A man who says he is libertarian and supports Sanders is like someone who says he is conservative and supports Trump.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Karen, yes, libertarianism has always been a curious mix of (what I’d view as) far left and far right. I’ve always viewed it as where the left and right go so far around the circle that they wind up meeting. It’s definitely a hybrid, it’s kind of both but not either.
But positions such as legalizing drugs and pulling back on military involvement (and a “hands off” approach to social issues like abortion, gay marriage, etc.) make it uniquely appealing to the left.
LikeLike
I’ve never thought there’s any such thing, really, as a “Christian nation” (although our founders were influenced by Judeo-Christian thought).
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d have to say, though, that a Libertarian supporting a pro government-controlling socialist does sort of make your head spin.
Huh?
🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s a weird and confusing political year, what can you say?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The massive (and across the board) tax increases alone that Sanders’ agenda would require seems antithetical to libertarianism. The tax man cometh, hand what you’ve earned over to the government, please. But maybe there are different kinds of libertarianism these days. 🙂
LikeLike
Donna – Yeah, I’ve wondered how he could make that choice. His explanation, from what I can glean from his writings on Facebook, is that our government is so screwed up & corrupt that we need someone totally new & different. Seeing as how a Libertarian would most likely not be elected, Bernie is his choice.
This man is actually very intelligent, so I’m sure there is much more to it than what I wrote above, but it does still baffle me a bit.
LikeLike