57 thoughts on “News/Politics 6-2-18

  1. From last night #1: Hopefully, Kevin D. Williamson’s funny column about Portland and perversion won’t cost him his new job.

    From last night #2: Last night I posted Reagan’s clear and prescient speech about free trade on Facebook. A liberal friend asked me: So what happened?

    This was my response:

    Whatever their flaws, governments that are democratic tend to produce leaders who share important characteristics with the people themselves. A people who are ignorant or intellectually lazy elect candidates who are ignorant or intellectually lazy. A people who blame others for their problems tend to elect demagogues. People who are economically illiterate elect candidates who are economically illiterate. A people who do not read may elect a candidate who does not read. A people who are increasingly dishonest and amoral will nominate and elect candidates who are dishonest and amoral. Our leaders are mirrors who tell us much about ourselves. This decline did not start with Trump though he, more than any other because of the obviousness of his flaws, should cause people to look in the mirror and ask, “What have we become?”

    To you I can elaborate:

    1. Little Bush was ignorant and intellectually lazy like Trump and it led to the Iraq Invasion, Medicare D and No Child Left Behind.
    2. Obama was a demagogue just like Trump though his target audience and his scapegoats were somewhat different. It is interesting to note that those Obama/Trump voters (that some of us find incomprehensible) tend to be lower class whites from the upper Midwest. Obama and Trump both appealed to this group and both used American businesses (corporations) as scapegoats.
    3. Obama was as economically illiterate as Trump. They just believe in different myths. Obama thinks socialism works. Trump thinks protectionism works.
    4. Most neutral observers (there are a few) can see that the Clintons and Trump are equally (completely) amoral and dishonest.

    Like

  2. My son sent me this article about Buchanan’s 1992 speech.

    I remember the speech well since I voted for Buchanan in the 1992 primary against Big Bush. Buchanan’s protectionism (which increased during the campaign) disturbed me. I blamed it on overexposure to Yankees in New Hampshire. However, Buchanan’s strong opposition to perversion and criminality won me over. I have to believe that deep down Buchanan is embarrassed by the way Trump has attacked the FBI and been defended by Alan Dershowitz, that famous defender of criminals, whom conservatives always detested.

    Like

  3. For those who may think I exaggerate when I say our education system is ruining our youth……

    Your weekly report on campus news. We aren’t losing the kids because we voted for Trump. We’re losing them because we send them to high price schools that indoctrinate instead of educate, and where the values you taught them are mocked and ridiculed.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/06/identity-politics-week-in-higher-education-2/

    “Academia has become a hotbed for tribalism.

    Prof Who Vandalized Home of NRA Official Fined $500
    NYU Scholar Compares American National Anthem to Nazi Salute
    Wesleyan U. President Laments Trump’s ‘Degradation Of Our Culture’

    Almost exclusively for the left.

    Professor’s New Book Advocates for ‘Marxist and Socialist Ideas’ in Education
    Prof Calls NRA ‘Terrorists’ and Brags About Having Tenure
    Large Percentage of Republicans at Harvard are Self-Censoring in the Classroom”
    ———————

    “It’s all about activism.

    Student: Women’s Studies at Georgetown Emphasizes Activism Over Academics
    Marygrove College to Offer Masters Degree in Social Justice
    University Holds ‘Social Justice Summit’ for Educators”
    ———————-

    Like

  4. The curious case of Mr. Downer.

    Alternate tile: The FBI is Lying.

    Or: All Roads Lead Back to Barry

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-curious-case-of-mr-downer-1527809075?shareToken=stf66c22d0606b4f818caf1dc6535ba89d&ref=article_email_share

    “To hear the Federal Bureau of Investigation tell it, its decision to launch a counterintelligence probe into a major-party presidential campaign comes down to a foreign tip about a 28-year-old fourth-tier Trump adviser, George Papadopoulos.

    The FBI’s media scribes have dutifully reported the bare facts of that “intel.” We are told the infamous tip came from Alexander Downer, at the time the Australian ambassador to the U.K. Mr. Downer invited Mr. Papadopoulos for a drink in early May 2016, where the aide told the ambassador the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton. Word of this encounter at some point reached the FBI, inspiring it to launch its counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign on July 31.

    Notably (nay, suspiciously) absent or muddled are the details of how and when that information made its way to the FBI, and what exactly was transmitted. A December 2017 New York Times story vaguely explains that the Australians passed the info to “American counterparts” about “two months later,” and that once it “reached the FBI,” the bureau acted. Even the Times admits it’s “not clear” why it took the Aussies so long to flip such a supposedly smoking tip. The story meanwhile slyly leads readers to believe that Mr. Papadopoulos told Mr. Downer that Moscow had “thousands of emails,” but read it closely and the Times in fact never specifies what the Trump aide said, beyond “dirt.”

    When Mr. Downer ended his service in the U.K. this April, he sat for an interview with the Australian, a national newspaper, and “spoke for the first time” about the Papadopoulos event. Mr. Downer said he officially reported the Papadopoulos meeting back to Australia “the following day or a day or two after,” as it “seemed quite interesting.” The story nonchalantly notes that “after a period of time, Australia’s ambassador to the US, Joe Hockey, passed the information on to Washington.”

    My reporting indicates otherwise. A diplomatic source tells me Mr. Hockey neither transmitted any information to the FBI nor was approached by the U.S. about the tip. Rather, it was Mr. Downer who at some point decided to convey his information—to the U.S. Embassy in London.

    That matters because it is not how things are normally done. The U.S. is part of Five Eyes, an intelligence network that includes the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The Five Eyes agreement provides that any intelligence goes through the intelligence system of the country that gathered it. This helps guarantee information is securely handled, subjected to quality control, and not made prey to political manipulation. Mr. Downer’s job was to report his meeting back to Canberra, and leave it to Australian intelligence. We also know that it wasn’t Australian intelligence that alerted the FBI. The document that launched the FBI probe contains no foreign intelligence whatsoever. So if Australian intelligence did receive the Downer info, it didn’t feel compelled to act on it.

    But the Obama State Department did—and its involvement is news. The Downer details landed with the embassy’s then-chargé d’affaires, Elizabeth Dibble, who previously served as a principal deputy assistant secretary in Mrs. Clinton’s State Department.

    When did all this happen, and what came next? Did the info go straight to U.S. intelligence? Or did it instead filter to the wider State Department team, who we already know were helping foment Russia-Trump conspiracy theories? Jonathan Winer, a former deputy assistant secretary of state, has publicly admitted to communicating in the summer of 2016 with his friend Christopher Steele, author of the infamous dossier.”

    Like

  5. For those of you planning on flying in the near future…….

    I’m sure it’s fine. 🙂

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/02/obama-era-faa-hiring-rules-place-diversity-ahead-airline-safety-attorney-tells-tucker-carlson.html

    “The safety of America’s airline passengers is being compromised for the sake of diversity in hiring air traffic controllers, an attorney suing the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) told “Tucker Carlson Tonight” host Tucker Carlson on Friday.

    During the Obama administration, the FAA replaced the previous hiring standards with rules designed to increase diversity among air traffic controllers, attorney Michael Pearson said.

    “A group within the FAA, including the human resources function within the FAA — the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation Employees — determined that the workforce was too white,” Pearson told Carlson. “They had a concerted effort through the Department of Transportation in the Obama administration to change that.”

    Pearson said there’s no data to support that increasing diversity in the ranks of air traffic controllers would make the flying public safer. Thus, Pearson said, he is suing the FAA for its revised hiring practices.

    “It’s the safety of the national airspace that’s at risk here,” Pearson said.”

    Like

  6. If the NYT called me that, I’d wear it as a badge of honor.

    They should stick to what they’re good at. Leftist propaganda.

    Like

  7. A few basics on newspaper editorial pages:

    1. Most major newspapers have an editorial page.

    2. On that page appear editorials written by the editorial board of the newspaper and other articles.

    3. The editorials of the editorial board of The New York Times and The Washington Post are predictably liberal. The editorials of the editorial board of the Dallas Morning News tend to be conservative. If you read several newspapers, you quickly learn the editorial slant of each paper.

    4. Most major papers also run the columns of op-ed columnists from both the right, left and center. In the old days these would be printed on the page opposite the paper’s own editorials. Thus the NYT and the WaPo regularly print columns by conservative columnists and the Dallas Morning News will print columns by liberals.

    5. The column @ 11:21 was not written by the editorial board of the New York Times. It was written by conservative columnist Bret Stephens.

    Like

  8. Missouri’s Gov’s problems are of his own making.

    But nice try trying to pin it on Trump somehow.

    They even admit that

    “The name of Donald Trump lurks beneath this topic. It isn’t necessary to draw specious comparisons between Trump’s personal behavior and that of Greitens. The latter’s guilt is unique and uniquely disgusting. ”

    but then try to tie it to Trump anyway.

    Fail. Try again.

    Like

  9. “The column @ 11:21 was not written by the editorial board of the New York Times. It was written by conservative columnist traitorous Never-Trumper Bret Stephens.”

    And gleefully printed by the NYT…….

    In order to be accurate, I’ve fixed your statement.

    Like

  10. If any Trumpkins want to publish tips on how to watch a Black Sparrow video or read The Raw Street Journal, I am all ears.

    Like

  11. Meanwhile, Google gets busted again by their easily seen bias. And they only stopped because they got caught.

    http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/02/google-withdraws-hosting-dem-fundraiser/

    “Google was set to rent out its D.C. headquarters to a progressive group running a fundraiser for top Senate Democrats, but canceled it Friday just days before.

    The group “Run For Something” cultivates up-and-coming Democrats for all levels of government. Its event, “Party For Something,” was supposed to occur June 6 at a location only disclosed if tickets ($100 to $1,000) were purchased.

    “Important note! Confirmation of the date, time, and venue will be in your donation receipt,” reads the website, which also says “Location available upon RSVP” elsewhere. “No need to print anything; just check in with ID when you arrive.”

    The venue likely shows up as something different now since Google confirmed to The Daily Caller News Foundation that the event was occurring at its offices in the nation’s capital, and subsequently that it was canceled since leadership had allegedly just become aware.

    “June 6th: Games, drinks and building the bench with Senators Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand & Cory Booker!!” the invite states at the top. “Why? Because Run For Something set a goal of recruiting 50,000 new voices this year to run for office — and you want to help make it happen.”

    Like

  12. Thanks for the other Stephens column. It is excellent:

    ‘‘And want to preserve your own republican institutions? Then pay attention to the character of your leaders, the culture of governance and the political health of the public. It matters a lot more than lowering the top marginal income tax rate by a couple of percentage points.

    This is the fatal mistake of conservatives who’ve decided the best way to deal with Trump’s personality — the lying, narcissism, bullying, bigotry, crassness, name calling, ignorance, paranoia, incompetence and pettiness — is to pretend it doesn’t matter. “Character Doesn’t Count” has become a de facto G.O.P. motto. “Virtue Doesn’t Matter” might be another.

    But character does count, and virtue does matter, and Trump’s shortcomings prove it daily.

    Maybe you think the Russia investigation is much ado about nothing. Yet Trump brought it on himself every step of the way, from firing James Comey after the former F.B.I. director wouldn’t swear fealty, to (potentially) admitting to obstruction of justice with that tweet about Mike Flynn’s firing. Or maybe you regret the failure to repeal Obamacare. But that had something to do with the grotesque insults Trump lobbed at John McCain, the man whose “nay” vote sank repeal.”

    We’re still waiting for those tips on getting the most from the old Black Sparrow.

    Like

  13. Yes, this was truly one of Stephens’ best:

    Look at every other administration embarrassment (Scaramucci) or failure (the wall, and Mexico paying for it) or disgrace (the Charlottesville equivocation). Responsibility invariably lies with the president’s intemperance and dishonesty. That puts Republican control of Congress in play. It also risks permanently alienating a millennial generation for which the G.O.P. will forever be the party of the child-molesting sore loser and the president who endorsed him.

    Now look at the culture of governance. Trump demands testimonials from his cabinet, servility from Republican politicians and worship from conservative media. To serve in this White House isn’t to be elevated to public service. It’s to be debased into toadyism, which probably explains the record-setting staff turnover of 34 percent, according to an analysis from the Brookings Institution.

    In place of presidential addresses, stump speeches or town halls, we have Trump’s demagogic mass rallies. In place of the usual jousting between the administration and the press, we have a president who fantasizes on Twitter about physically assaulting CNN. In place of a president who defends the honor and integrity of his own officers and agencies, we have one who humiliates his attorney general, denigrates the F.B.I. and compares our intelligence agencies to the Gestapo.

    Trump is normalizing all this; he is, to borrow another Moynihan phrase, “defining deviancy down.” A president who supposedly wants to put a wall between the U.S. and Latin America has imported a style of politics reminiscent of the cults of Juan Perón and Hugo Chávez.

    Conservatives may suppose that they can pocket policy gains from a Trump administration while the stain of his person will eventually wash away. But as a (pro-Trump) friend wrote me the other day, “presidents empower cultures.” Trump is empowering a conservative political culture that celebrates everything that patriotic Americans should fear: the cult of strength, open disdain for truthfulness, violent contempt for the Fourth Estate, hostility toward high culture and other types of “elitism,” a penchant for conspiracy theories and, most dangerously, white-identity politics.

    This won’t end with Trump. It may have only begun with him. And Trump’s supporters may wind up proving both sides of Moynihan’s contention: not just that culture is what matters most, but that politics can still change it — in this case, much for the worse.

    Like

  14. This was predicted here on several occasions.

    Every day finds our former Western European allies becoming more estranged from the US and more likely to make separate deals with Russia and China.

    Like

  15. There’s so much boilerplate and melodrama, even from guys who get some stuff right.

    And want to preserve your own republican institutions?

    What republican institutions is Stephens talking about that need preserving now? Stephens refers to Trump’s (and, I guess, *only* Trumps?) failure to repeal Obamacare, and claims, “that had something to do with the grotesque insults Trump lobbed at John McCain, the man whose ‘nay’ vote sank repeal.” That’s John McCain, Republican nominee for President a mere 10 years ago; the guy who Obama called to thank for saving Obamacare. The *Republican nominee* for President. And Stephens wants us to blame Trump for the failure to repeal Obamacare…why? Because John McCain’s feelings were hurt.

    OK.

    Like

  16. SolarP, Paul Ryan got the House to pass the Obamacare repeal despite:
    A. Trump never learning anything about the bill, appearing comically ignorant about the bill in meetings with Congressman, and giving zero help in lobbying for votes; and
    B. Trump actually sabotaging the bill by calling it “mean”.

    In the Senate, Trump remained completely ignorant, again was completely unhelpful in lobbying for votes, and had already gratuitously antagonized several Senators, including McCain who cast the deciding vote.

    Younger Americans have never seen an effective president effectively push an agenda through Congress. Fortunately, Obama and Carter were about as inept as Trump, though for completely different reasons. For those who want to learn about such leadership (for good or for ill), read a biography of Reagan or LBJ.

    Like

  17. Here are some Republican institutions that need preserving:
    1. An independent judiciary whose legitimacy is not questioned by a dishonest President in moronic Tweets to his cult.
    2. Independent Congressional oversight, not a profoundly uneducated and corrupt Committee Chairman (Nunes) serving as an accessory after-the-fact and stooge to the dishonest President.
    3. A fair and independent press not various media outlets that function like Pravda defending every Presidential lie with uneducated boobs like Hannity actually collaborating nightly with the President to choreograph their lies to the MAGA sheep.
    4. An FBI and Justice Dept. free from Presidential pressure to investigate and prosecute enemies of the president.
    5. A Postal Service free from Presidential pressure to raise rates on companies owned by enemies of the President.
    6. A State Dept. acting in the best interest of the US, and not vacillating spastically as the President is influenced by flattery, bribes or perceived insults.

    Like

  18. The NYTimes article about the weakening EU linked @1:49 os not necessarily bad news. It may and probably will get painful at some point but how else can Globalism unwind? As EU fractures there will be opportunities for bilateral agreements.
    Debra

    Like

  19. RickyW,

    had already gratuitously antagonized several Senators, including McCain who cast the deciding vote.

    So it’s Trump’s fault those Senators, including McCain, cast wrong votes.

    OK.

    (Hey everyone: If Ricky replies, watch how he’ll call me a Trump cultist and all that…).

    Like

  20. Isn’t it odd that Republicans, who you’d think that, in addition to wanting to preserve Republican institutions, would wan’t to, you know, govern on Republican principle, don’t do that because Trump is mean and does Tweets? An institution worth preserving indeed!

    Like

  21. Debra, Globalism isn’t going to unwind. It is giving people all over the world enough food to eat for the first time in history. Unlike Trump, the leaders of over 95% of the countries in the world are not economically illiterate. Global trade is going to continue to expand whether the US decides to disengage and pull back into our own shell or not. If the US enacts tariffs, other countries will enact retaliatiory tariffs against the US. They are not so stupid that they would impose tariffs against one another. It will take Trump and a Trumpkin successor many years to make the US a basket case like Venezuela, but that is where protectionism would take us.

    Cars, phones, TVs and most manufactured products are made from products from many countries, not just one or two countries. So how are these bilateral agreements that Trump has proposed going to work? The man doesn’t understand actual business. Fake universities aren’t real businesses. Casinos aren’t real businesses. They are con games. Money laundering operations through real estate sales aren’t real businesses. Stiffing your lenders and your contractors is not what successful operators of real businesses do.

    Like

  22. 3;34 is not the post of a cultist. It is simply the post of someone who has never seen an effective president in action and doesn’t understand how an effective president operates.

    Like

  23. 3:41 is the post of someone who can’t understand how two parties can both be wrong about a thing. An ineffective president need not be, and in the case of the Trump admin, is not the reason Republicans riding the 3rd significant red wave in the last 10 years failed *yet again* to do anything close to what they’ve been promising all that time.

    Like

  24. “It is simply the post of someone who has never seen an effective president in action and doesn’t understand how an effective president operates.”

    Now. Don’t be so hard on yourself. A president who keeps his word and campaign promises and is “effective” as Trump has been is new to all of us. You’ll acclimate eventually. 🙂

    Like

  25. A few thoughts on 3:45:
    1. A Congressional majority (but less than a veto-proof majority) with a hostile president seldom, if ever, passes significant legislation.
    2. Regardless of the make-up of Congress, good Presidential leadership is almost always required if major legislation is to be passed. See Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Eisenhower, LBJ and Reagan.
    3. The Republicans Congress from 2011-2016 did what they were elected to do: they neutered Obama. They did basically the same thing the Republican Congress did to Clinton from 1995-2000. Lest you think that is unimportant:
    A. Name one major piece of liberal legislation that was passed from 1995-2000 or from 2011-2016; and
    B. Observe what happened to the annual budget deficits from 1995-2000 and from 2011-2016 compared to prior and following periods.
    4. Those ‘red waves’ were anti-Obama and (in 2016) anti-Hillary. A majority of Americans wanted Obama neutered and if Hillary had won (as most expected) they wanted her neutered. The Republicans had no mandate to make major changes. Trumpers (who are a major part of the Republican coalition) are white welfare staters. Quite a few of those Trumpers voted for Obama – twice.

    Like

  26. Here is the latest on the Trump/Russia front. To be honest, I don’t know why Mueller even wants to question Trump. Trump is going to lie and contradict himself frequently as he did yesterday concerning the North Korean envelope. However, more than anything Trump will just babble incoherently and will likely not even attempt to answer the questions asked. That is what he does in interviews. You can’t question a 6 month old. You can’t effectively question a person in the last stages of Alzheimer’s. Trump appears no more competent than an infant or a mentally disabled person. Maybe it is an act like David acting crazy before the Philistines, but if I were Mueller I would not waste my time talking to Trump.

    Like

  27. Ricky @4:33 You call it babbling. I think of it as the art of saying nothing in many words. It’s obfuscation, and it can be annoying, but I have seen it used very effectively in court. Immigrants or people for whom English is a second language can be adept , mostly because people assume they don’t really understand what’s being said, even when they do. But native English speakers can give that impression too. I agree that Trump would talk a lot, say little, and frequently seem to contradict himself, and in end, it would go nowhere. A waste of time. ;–)

    Liked by 1 person

  28. I call Jonah Goldberg a conservative. I suppose The Trump Cult would call him a “traitor” or a “heretic”. He just lost his father-in-law. This is some obituary.

    Like

  29. I’m sorry he lost his FiL, and it’s a nice obit for him.

    But yeah, still a traitor. Just because he’s mourning, it doesn’t change that.
    ———————-

    And what’s with this?

    “Quite a few of those Trumpers voted for Obama – twice.”

    You keep pointing that out, that some moderate, working class Dems voted for Trump, like that’s a bad thing. Your point is what exactly?

    You and the rest of the Never-Trump Traitors (Patent Pending) have jumped in bed with the hardcore left of the Dem party, the Obama progressive faction. You should be the last one throwing stones on this particular point.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. The point is that those Trumpkins aren’t just white welfare staters, they are liberals who voted for what you call the “anti-God, baby-killing” Democrat Obama. They don’t see any inconsistency either. They simply switched from a black con-man who promised to keep the welfare state goodies flowing to an orange con-man who promised to keep the welfare state goodies flowing.

    Like most Never Trumpers I remain as opposed to socialist Democrats as I am opposed to welfare-stater, economically illiterate, pro-criminal, amoral and cultish Trumpkins.

    Like

  31. When I used to put my son to bed, I always told him slightly revised versions of bedtime stories. Goldilocks was a Democrat who leeched off the Republican bears. The first two of the three little pigs were Democrats who had to live in straw and stick houses because they spent their money on drugs.They had to flee to the brick house of the Republican bear. My son would correct my Dad when Dad would unknowingly leave out these important additions when he spent the night at my parents’ house.

    Of course, now the stories will have to change. The first pig can remain a Democrat who spent his money on drugs, but the second pig will be a Trumpkin who spent his money at Trump University. I am not comfortable with the third pig in the brick house being a Republican. I may make him an Indian immigrant or a Singaporean.

    Like

  32. @8:29 That explains a lot. The rest of us have been told those fables too, usually at election time, where the Republican is always the wise one and Democrats are evil or idiots. (And Democrats have probably been told their versions as well.) Both parties are telling lies to keep the masses consuming the way you need them to consume for Globalism to work, and to seduce people into going into debt for higher education to make living, when doing so will only make them too strapped to do anything but go along with the party line and hope for the best. Sad.

    Like

  33. This is why alcohol and guns don’t mix, moron. This jerk should know better. And yes, there’s video.

    https://www.denverpost.com/2018/06/02/fbi-mile-high-spirits-shooting/

    “An off-duty FBI agent allegedly accidentally shot a man in the leg early Saturday after the agent’s gun fell from his holster on the dance floor of Mile High Spirits, according to a Denver police news release.

    “The victim was transported to the hospital with a good prognosis,” the news release read.

    The name of the agent wasn’t released because he hasn’t been charged, said Marika Putnam, a Denver police spokeswoman.”

    Like

  34. Thoughts?

    https://apnews.com/9f30770a3a3d42538cd3f14672cd6529/Many-breast-cancer-patients-can-skip-chemo,-big-study-finds

    “Most women with the most common form of early-stage breast cancer can safely skip chemotherapy without hurting their chances of beating the disease, doctors are reporting from a landmark study that used genetic testing to gauge each patient’s risk.

    The study is the largest ever done of breast cancer treatment, and the results are expected to spare up to 70,000 patients a year in the United States and many more elsewhere the ordeal and expense of these drugs.

    “The impact is tremendous,” said the study leader, Dr. Joseph Sparano of Montefiore Medical Center in New York. Most women in this situation don’t need treatment beyond surgery and hormone therapy, and “the rest of them are receiving chemotherapy unnecessarily.”

    The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute, some foundations and proceeds from the U.S. breast cancer postage stamp. Results were discussed Sunday at an American Society of Clinical Oncology conference in Chicago and published by the New England Journal of Medicine. Some study leaders consult for breast cancer drugmakers or for the company that makes the gene test.”

    Like

  35. There’s nothing particularly impressive about the list at 4:09. It’s standard fare for the opposition party to oppose; Dems are doing it now. There is very little of real conservative legislation even discussed, let alone passed, in the past 30-40 yrs. Sure, it would have been nice for Rs to have had Congress when Obamacare was passed, because since none of them voted for it, it’s safe to assume it wouldn’t have passed with enough Rs holding seats. But wait! Is it safe to assume that? Well maybe not. I guess it depends on if President Obama had insulted all those principled Republicans, because according to one poster here, and another prominent columnist for the NY Times quoted above, some of those Rs broke a years-old campaign promise to defund the debacle of Obamacare, and it was because mean-tweeter Trump wasn’t nice to them.

    Like

  36. The recent omnibus spending bill is a conservative nightmare. No amount of whining about how uncouth Donald Trump is justifies it. It’s pure, unprincipled waste.

    Like

  37. Tuesday is coming and the WaPo is already in damage control mode.

    https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06/02/doj-inspector-generals-report-coming-washington-post-already-worried-republicans-will-seize/

    “Whenever some news that is harmful to Democrats becomes a story, someone in the media will publish it under a version of this headline: “Republicans Seize on…”

    For instance, outspoken members of the Democratic party have been pushing Trump’s impeachment for a year. Last month the NY Times published a story headlined, “Republicans Seize on Impeachment for Edge in 2018 Midterms.” There is some news here but the headline could easily have been “Democratic push for impeachment could backfire this fall” but the bad news for Dems gets refocused into a “Republicans Seize…” story instead.

    After the Parkland shooting, Politico Magazine wrote a whole story about Republicans seizing on the fact that Democratic Sheriff Scott Israel seemed to be making a fool of himself in public. The article doesn’t deny Israel is a disaster, (“Israel really does seem to deserve some blame, and really has displayed ineptitude and arrogance in public”) it just refocuses on those darn Republicans who were seizing on the fact that the Sheriff sounds like an idiot. How dare they!

    Friday the Washington Post set a new milestone in the “Republicans seize” genre: A “Republicans about to seize” story about an IG report that hasn’t even been published yet.

    The headline doesn’t literally say “Republicans seize” but that’s the gist: “As Justice Dept. inspector general moves from Clinton email to Russia and Trump, he risks becoming a political weapon.” How does IG Horowitz risk becoming a weapon? Apparently by releasing a fair and accurate report critical of the FBI:”
    ——–

    WaPo, the NYT, and NTers just can’t have the truth interfering with their narrative of lies and half-truths.

    Like

  38. Looks like Mueller’s leaking to the NYT and his favorite propagandist Maggie again……

    https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06/03/answering-questions-raised-yet-another-leaked-letter-mueller-probe/

    “Taking them in order, let’s start with how the Times got the letter. I already heard a member of one panel on CNN this morning opining that it “probably” came from Trump’s team because he’s trying to make his case before the public and the letter “doesn’t look like” a legal court document. That seems unlikely on two counts. First of all, as the Times staff readily admits, there’s almost nothing in the arguments being made by Trump’s lawyers that we haven’t been hearing from them openly in interviews since the beginning. In fact, most of it can be found in Trump’s Twitter feed. The other reason I don’t think it came from Team Trump is how the origins of the letter are described in the Times article. When they get something from a leaker in the White House or Trump’s organization it’s almost always characterized as being from a White House official speaking on background or a “source familiar with the President’s thinking” or something like that. It lends more credibility to the story and works to spread the idea of chaos and dissent inside the White House.

    This article merely describes the letter as having been, “obtained by the New York Times.” No indication of the source is offered. Since they don’t want to reveal their source, I’ll go ahead and say that my money is on the probability that it came from Mueller’s team yet again.”

    Like

  39. SolarP As noted @ 4:09, the Republican Congresses from 1994 until today were elected to play defense against liberal Democrats and they did that. When paired with Democrats Clinton and Obama, they did reasonably well. See the two tests at 3a and 3b @ 4:09. However, when paired with a big spender Republican like Little Bush or a lazy, imbecilic Republican who was completely uninvolved in the budget process (Trump), they spent like drunken sailors.

    Like

  40. Looks like maybe Ricky is right, but for the wrong reasons. Reasons that have nothing at all to do with Trump.

    https://amgreatness.com/2018/05/31/why-trump-may-be-americas-last-republican-president/

    “Competence doesn’t win elections: bribery does.

    This is the central lesson in The Dictator’s Handbook, a book which studies politics in terms of interpersonal relationships and incentive structures, as opposed to vague social trends and ideological dogma—and it’s a lesson the Democrats learned well.”
    ———————-

    “The Philosopher’s Stone
    The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, alternatively known as the Hart-Celler Act, opened America’s borders to the world, and forever changed the rules of political engagement in this nation. No longer was politics fought along primarily ideological (Right versus Left) or historical (North versus South) lines; instead, mass immigration made it exceedingly profitable to play the game of identity politics. By catering to the disparate group identities of new immigrants, the Democrats realized they could lock-up a potentially infinite source of voters.

    And while it’s true that America’s political culture has always, to some degree, been mired in issues of identity due mainly to slavery’s legacy, it is also true that by 1965 the exploitation of black-white tensions was not a “growth market”—especially considering that the Democrats were on the losing side of the Civil Rights Movement. They needed a fresh source of reliable voters, and they created one.

    Since 1965, more than 45 million people have immigrated to the United States, and America’s immigrant population is now at an all-time high. Obviously, immigration has added significant numbers of new voters, but perhaps less obvious is the fact that America’s immigrant population votes Democrat by an extraordinary margin.

    According to a report from the Center for Immigration Studies, immigrants vote Democrat by a ratio of at least 2-to-1, and this gap is widening. This data is supported by a study from Pew Research, which finds that non-white Americans vote Democrat by a roughly 3-to-1 ratio. This is important only insofar as the vast majority of immigrants since the 1965 reforms are not white, and therefore there is significant overlap between the datasets—they prove the same point.

    Not only do immigrants vote left, so do their children—and their children’s children. As it turns out, political affiliation is highly heritable, as Jonathan Haidt notes in The Righteous Mind. Of course, this is not to say that politics is genetic, but only that the beliefs and values that underpin a person’s political opinions are shaped by their upbringing.

    Politics, like many bad habits, runs in the family.

    Immigration as a Political Iron Lung
    Before going any further, I need to be crystal clear: I am not arguing that we should deny citizenship to liberals. Nor do I think the GOP should necessarily impose a conservative values test (which I can only assume would be branded patriotically as an “American values” test). It remains, however, that we need to discuss the fact that immigration is changing, and has already changed, America’s political landscape—for better or worse.

    For example: with the exception of the anomaly of Ross Perot in 1992 splitting the Republican vote, American-born voters have not elected a Democrat as president since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. That is, every Democratic president since then—Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton (second term), and Barack Obama—won because the immigrant voting block tipped the scales in his favor.

    Another example: since 1960 California’s population exploded from 15.9 to 39 million people. This growth was almost entirely due to immigration, much of it foreign. In fact, some 10 million immigrants currently reside in California. This has changed the voter demographics so significantly that California is now a one-party state. “

    Like

  41. AJ @12:46 Neither you nor Jazz Shaw (whoever that is) will ever learn. Mueller and his people don’t generally leak. That is why it is always a surprise to everyone when a new Trumpkin or Russian is indicted. As we have seen for 17 months, leaks come daily, if not hourly, from:
    A. Trump aides;
    B. Former Trump aides;
    C. Trump lawyers;
    D. Former Trump lawyers;
    E. People who want to become Trump aides;
    F. Trump family members;
    G. Lawyers for Trump family members;
    H. Trump stooges (think Nunes);
    I. Former Trump mistresses;
    J. Lawyers for former Trump mistresses;
    K. Former Trump wives;
    L. Moronic friends of Trump with whom he gossips at night;
    M. People writing books about Ttump’s aides, lawyers, stooges, wives, former wives, mistresses, children, etc.
    N. (My own personal favorite) Trump himself leaking info on the condition that he be identified only as a “senior White House source”.

    Like

  42. Debra, At lunch we figured out the third little pig who lives in the house of bricks. Since the others are fleeing toward his home, he must be a Texan pig.

    Like

  43. Debra, I read your post @ 8:53 and noticed a point of agreement. Most of the children of Democrats and Trumpkins should not go to college. In fact our educational system should be radically changed so that these students can receive vocational training (including apprenticeship work) from ages 12-18. This is the European system.

    At the same time all federal programs related to student loans/grants should be eliminated. This would:
    A. Force a reduction in the cost of college;
    B. Eliminate many worthless degree programs;
    C. Promote college students working at part time jobs;
    D. Force parents of college-bound students to save.

    Parents (hopefully with input from the kids) would need to determine if college is appropriate for a child at about age 12. We already do that. Most of the kids who take pre-AP or AP classes are prepared for college. The kids in the regular courses are prepared for nothing at age 18 and have just wasted 6 years of their lives.

    Like

  44. Ricky, There was nothing about Trump’s lazy imbecility that compelled Republicans to come up with a monstrosity of a spending bill. That’s on them. If they’re so namby pampy sensitive that some tweets of his make them legislate out of spite or hurt feelings, that’s on them. I’m not sure what’s compelling anyone to speak heroically of them.

    Like

  45. SolarP, Most Congressmen are sheep. Most of them are really dumb. Look at Maxine Waters, Devin Nunes, Sheila Jackson Lee and Blake Farenthold. The few that are intelligent (such as Paul Ryan or Adam Schiff) really stand out. It is hard to lead stupid sheep and keep them on task. That is why Ryan never wanted to be Speaker.

    Voting “No” to the plans of liberal Democrat Presidents requires little in the way of brains or discipline. However, we are fortunate that the Rs were able to do that during 1995-2000 and 2011-2016. Coming up with workable spending cuts or reforms of a really messed-up healthcare system is hard. It is beyond the mental capabilities of half-wits such as Nunes and Farenthold. Strong Presidential leadership is required. Reagan did it by mobilizing public opinion and putting the fear of electoral defeat in the heads of Congressmen. Little Bush actually led Republicans in the wrong direction. Trump just puts on a clown show. He is like Tyron Lue. Reagan was like Steve Kerr or Popovich or the coach of the Celtics.

    You are right. Trump’s lazy imbecility does not compel Congress to overspend. However, Congressman are like children or NBA players. They will misbehave on their own if not properly led. They need constant direction and guidance lest they do something stupid like dribble out the clock in a tie game as we saw on Thursday night.

    Like

  46. Well I’m sorry that’s the way those guys are, Ricky, but exhibit A for that very thing is John McCain; it’s right there in Stephens’s quote. The reason McCain didn’t so one thing–cast a single vote the right way–is because his feelings were hurt and he embodied the person you describe in 2:45. And remember, he was the Republican nominee in 2008. Did you vote for him? I sure didn’t.

    Like

  47. So the Trumpers think I am a globalist, but another interesting group thinks I am a ”Glober” or a “Globetard”.

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.