Thursday, October 1, 2015

Science and Climate Change Deniers: Guess Which Party It Applies

Most GOPers' View of Climate Change: "Routine forever..."

What Happens is in Our Hands

From this article - the following:
In American politics, Pope Francis’ encyclical has not made legislative action on climate change inevitable, but it has made the issue unavoidable. The politician’s shrug and quip: “I’m no scientist” — is no longer acceptable. If climate change is a global threat, then addressing it, as the Pope argued, is both a moral and public requirement.
But the dysfunctional American debate on climate change illustrates a broader challenge.
Ten or 15 years ago, this issue was less divisive. But it got pulled into the polarization vortex. Now the two sides do not merely hold different policy views; they have different versions of reality. The camps not only advocate different solutions; they also inhabit different factual universes.
Many conservative Republicans now deny the existence or danger of human-caused warming and routinely question the motives of scientists who speak up on the issue. For a conservative to stray from skepticism is regarded as ideological betrayal.
In a recent National Affairs essay, Jim Manzi and Peter Wehner provide an explanation: “The Republican position — either avowed ignorance or conspiracy theorizing — is ultimately unsustainable, but some still cling to it because they believe that accepting the premise that some climate change is occurring as a result of human action means accepting the conclusions of the most rabid left-wing climate activists. They fear, at least implicitly, that the politics of climate change is just a twisted road with a known destination: ceding yet another key economic sector to government control.”
Story continues at the link above – a very good and well-reasoned article – sadly most GOPers will pass on reading it, when in fact they might benefit from reading it and passing it on to others.
My view: Most GOPers who deny or don't have a concern about the dramatic change on Mother Earth do so for one reason, I believe: They figure it will not happen in their lifetime or maybe even their kids’ lifetimes, so why worry now. Just leave the problems or solutions for someone else.
Imagine that view over time. Where would we be? Probably in caves too afraid to come out and explore anything. Thanks for stopping by.

Saturday, September 26, 2015

Modern GOP Case Study: Science Deniers Who Pass Down Corrupt DNA

GOP Candidate's Conundrum 
[click image for larger view]

Oh, Hell, Just Stick With the Tried-and-True Platform

What truly amazes me and perhaps you, too about GOPers in office or those seeking office is how “patriotic and ‘real’ American” they try to come across yet all the while pandering to ugliest anger around. They peddle the worst unfounded fear possible.  They tell tons of blatant lies and crazy anti-this or anti-that government conspiracies. They thrive on an excellent PR machine that dispenses mass disinformation. They drive truckloads of utter hype about need for positive change and ways to “fix” our problems at home while waving a Bible and proposing changes to the Constitution, which they say they cherish, yet in the end they do a total 180° about face, and then have the gall to blame anyone in sight (except themselves) for nothing getting done in a positive manner. 

Folks: that takes real skill and talent and the GOP is full of that, too.

I assess that they all have the same crazy corrupt DNA passed down through the ages and yet they deny or simply do not profess to believe in the proven science of evolution, or most other science as far as that goes. Try and figure that one out and you'll end up in a padded cell with jacket that arms that fold in the back. Got that image? 

The worst part is that they have a big major controller who dispenses “News and Disinformation,” which is totally “Unfair and Unbalanced.” Yeah, that nit work – their benefactor: FAUX gnus.

All the while they say everyone around them infringes on their freedom of speech, religion, or their brand press. They should adopt this logo:

That's all I have today ... thanks for stopping by.

Thursday, September 17, 2015

News: SGT. Bergdahl & His Article 32 Hearing [Like Grand Jury] On-going

Old Army Photo of now-SGT. Bowe Bergdahl

This Update of the Following Story Comes from NPR on that which follows regarding this saga:

The Donald J. (J as in Jerk) T-rump calls Sgt. Bergdahl a “traitor.”   FYI for T-rump: That has not been proven, Mr. T-trump. So do me the distinct the honor of just STFU.
Plus, how many times have we heard this crappy statement making the GOP-rightwing talk show rounds?
[...] some members of Bergdahl’s former unit have called for serious punishment, “...alleging that some service members died while looking for him.”
FACT: The Pentagon has never said there was any evidence that anyone ever died while searching for Bergdahl at any time.
However, as his lawyer says in the article, and I totally agree: Sgt. Bergdahl did suffer while in captivity at the hands of the Taliban. President Obama getting him back home even under the circumstances of the Gitmo detainee swap for him, was the right call.  

I say, show him compassion and let him go on to enjoy life either in the Army if he choose and they agree to keep him, or he goes back home to join his family in the life he chooses.

Original Story and this Update — my editing makes it fit the blog and it covers this most-interesting very complex military justice case.

RALEIGH, NC (AP) (original source) — Military prosecutors have reached into a section of military law seldom used since World War II in the politically fraught case against Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the soldier held prisoner for years by the Taliban after leaving his post in Afghanistan. Observers wondered for months if Bergdahl would be charged with desertion after the deal brokered by the U.S. to bring him home. He was — but he was also charged with misbehavior before the enemy, a much rarer offense that carries a stiffer potential penalty in this case.

Bergdahl could face a life sentence if convicted of the charge, which accuses him of endangering fellow soldiers when “he left without authority; and wrongfully caused search and recovery operations.”

Many say the misbehavior charge allows authorities to allege that Bergdahl not only left his unit with one less soldier, but that his deliberate action put soldiers who searched for him in harm's way. The Pentagon has said there is no evidence anyone died searching for Bergdahl.

The Obama administration has been criticized both for agreeing to release five Taliban operatives from the Guantanamo Bay prison and for heralding Bergdahl's return to the U.S. with an announcement in the White House Rose Garden. The administration stood by the way it secured his release even after the charges were announced.

The military has scheduled an initial court appearance known as an Article 32 hearing for Bergdahl on Sept. 17 at Fort Sam Houston, Texas. The proceeding is similar to a civilian grand jury, and afterward the case could be referred to a court-martial and go to trial.

Misbehavior before the enemy was used hundreds of times during World War II, but scholars say its use appears to have dwindled in conflicts since then. Misbehavior before the enemy cases were tried at least 494 times for soldiers in Europe between 1942 and 1945, according to a Military Law Review article. Legal databases and media accounts turn up only a few misbehavior cases since 2001 when fighting began in Afghanistan, followed by Iraq less than two years later. By contrast, statistics show the U.S. Army prosecuted about 1,900 desertion cases between 2001 and the end of 2014.

The misbehavior charge is included in Article 99 of the military justice code, which is best known for its use to prosecute cases of cowardice.

However, Article 99 encompasses nine different offenses including several not necessarily motivated by cowardice, such as causing a false alarm or endangering one's unit — the charge Bergdahl faces. 

The complexity of Article 99 may be one reason it's not frequently used. 
  1. Recent prosecutions under the misbehavior charge include a Marine Lance Corporal who pleaded guilty after refusing to provide security for a convoy leaving base in Iraq in 2004.
  2.  A soldier in Iraq was charged with cowardice in 2003 under Article 99 after he saw a mangled body and sought counseling, but the charges were later dropped.
  3.  The specification Bergdahl faces appears in the 1971 case of an Army captain accused of endangering a base in Vietnam by disobeying an order to establish an ambush position. The captain was found guilty of other charges including dereliction of duty.
  4. Another case cited in a 1955 military law journal says an Army corporal was convicted under Article 99 of endangering his unit in Korea by getting drunk on duty. In the article it says he “became so drunk that it took the tank company commander thirty minutes to arouse him.”
For Bergdahl, the Article 99 offense allows the prosecutors to seek a stiffer penalty than the desertion charge, which in this case carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.

Bergdahl's attorney, Eugene Fidell, has argued his client is being charged twice for the same action, saying in a previous television interview that ‘it's unfortunate that someone got creative in drafting the charge sheet and figured out two ways to charge the same thing.”  

“The question is: Is it a piling on?” (Said Jeffrey K. Walker, a St. John's University law professor, and retired Air Force officer, who was a former military lawyer). Then Walker added: “It does almost look like you're trying to get two bites at the same apple.”

I have said all along, we were correct to trade the 5 Taliban detainees for his release and then allow the military justice system to play out to the fullest. Imagine he were still in Taliban hands or if they had handed him over to ISIS? I shudder at that thought.

Now we wait and see. Stay tuned.

Monday, September 14, 2015

Focus on Refugees: Real Human Tragedy and Real Security Concern

"It’s our dream that there should be a caliphate 
not only in Syria but in all the world and 
we will have it soon, God willing..."   — ISIS operative

Refugees all Across Europe

I am not one to cry wolf, ever, but I do post this with great concern about a serious problem.
What better tactic or method to get nasty operatives into a country than mixed in as refugees ... not all of them for sure, but plenty and enough to later resort to doing great harm.

Just look at what only two men did in OK City, or what 19 did in 4 planes on 9-11 or at hotels or resorts in Mumbai or Tunisia, or well elsewhere – take your pick.  

It does not take many if they are well armed and well-trained and highly motivated and bent on mass destruction as suicide bomber or truck or car bombing.

Food for thought ... this is a very huge security problem ... believe me it is, and it is real and a fact of everyday life now it seems.

That ISIS quote above appeared in the UK (the Express) It ties directly into my focus of this post:  The vast majority of over 4 million Syrians who have fled the country are nowhere near Europe – they are scattered all over Iraq, Turkey, and elsewhere, and most of them see no way out of their desperate circumstances. 

One summed it up for most saying: “The influx of our Syrian refugees has left few work opportunities in Turkey. We don’t know what to do or where or how to live.”

I add as I’ve said before that this presents not only a humanitarian crisis but a national security set of circumstances for the receiving countries, namely those with strong ties to the West, and more aligned with or close to the U.S.  

Some can’t be paranoid enough in this day and age of massive terrorism around the globe and not just from large groups like ISIS, but smaller one or two or three man groups bents on mass destruction and wide scale, so this issue is a serious concern - may not paramount to everyone who does not want or need that - but critical nevertheless. 

Among all the refugees as I have noted before based on the images we see are a heck of a lot of young men with all hopes lost and maybe, and I emphasize maybe ISIS plants – let’s face it as I’ve also said, what better way to get your guys into a country easily disguised as a refugee.

This is serious food for thought and hearty discussion isn’t it? I emphasize not unfounded hype from FOX and others - fear only sells if we buy ... debate and rational thinking is called for. We can ignore ISIS quotes and PR crap, but we should not.

The following headline from Vox.com is a bit disturbing for a number of reasons outlined below along with my emphasis in RED about the disturbing points and my justification of my view about those disturbing reasons in the article – feel free to chime in.

The Vox.com article and headline: “Letting Syrians come to the US would benefit them enormously, and quite possibly pay for itself.”

The Syrian toddler (a 3-year old boy) who washed up on a Turkish beach wearing a bright red t-shirt and shorts will not be the last.” Thus writes Noah Rothman at Commentary, who added: “America and the West own a portion of the torment that characterized his short time on Earth. In our comfort, we allowed this great human catastrophe to metastasize. 

I note: That photo generated worldwide headlines and outrage as millions strive to escape and leave their native countries for a better life in Europe and elsewhere, mostly to avoid ongoing war there or for economic reasons.  

Continuing: The sentiment [in the article] while admirable is dead wrong. What Rothman means is that the United States should have gone to war years ago to intervene more forcefully in the Syrian civil war — a costly undertaking that likely would have failed. Any US shortcoming isn't an undue hesitancy to help Syrians by dropping bombs. It is our refusal to let Syrians help themselves by allowing more refugees to move to the United States — a solution that would certainly work, would carry little in the way of short-term financial costs, and that would likely provide a powerful boost to the US economy and drastically increase the living standards of Syrians who were able to relocate.  

I note: I totally disagree with that for so many reasons it would take 50 sheets alone to list them, but I will harp on a few key ones that I hope are as obvious to anyone following this mess.  

As I watch refugees fleeing, stuck on trains, boats, and anything to use to escape for whatever reason, I cannot but ask why so many young men, who don’t have a care in the world, look healthy, energetic, and able to work – so why flee? (1) To avoid serving in the Army or anti-government groups (like in Syria), (2) unable to find work, (3) can’t get ahead education-wise, or simply lazy bums looking for a way to America and “land of golden opportunities they imagine?  

I don’t know, but those scenes concern me that a young, healthy man in his 20’s with nothing to look forward to back his native land that his native government is unable or unwilling to do anything positive to make his life better. That tells me that he is a prime recruit for ISIS or a like-minded terrorist group based on him being desperate. It would be easy to come to the US as a refugee with no papers, no passport, no ID of any kind, just lust to do damage to the US for not helping in their native land? How ironic is that view? So what better way to come here “legally” as it were?  
I do not by any stretch want to sound wacky or goofy and certainly not paranoid but I do think the questions I raise are paramount ones especially in this day and age. And, let’s be honest, harsh terrorist activities do not take an Army. Any small number can cause great turmoil and death and destruction while planting fear and disruption on a wide scale.  

Any group that is well-trained, well-funded, and well-armed can inflict great harm in a short period of time, even under the label of gratitude. That is my concern, and my only concern.  

Compassion must never dilute or taint our security interests and focus first and foremost. That aspect is what ISIS may be counting on ... look the other way: help refugees, don't consider any security issues... hopefully those sworn to serve, protect and defend are thinking along the same line as I am. Nothing should ever take the place of public safety - nothing. 

That is my #1 concern all along, and not to avoid helping people in dire need. But, to me, there is a huge difference between those two avenues to thought. 

One is for rational caution and not complacency vs compassion while ignoring the obvious indicator for nastiness by a few, even as they claim refugee status from a generous nation. 

Vigilance is the operative word in all cases. This human loss situation will be us for a long time.  

Thanks for stopping by.

Friday, September 11, 2015

ISIS World Threat: More on Display Every Day — They Must be Eradicated

Not a Scene the World Needs to See Again  

Limited or Light Exposure: How it looks in a few spots

Massive Exposure to Chemical Weapons

I have advocated for some time the immediate and total confrontation of and complete eradication of ISIS. They have shown on far too many occasions their graphic and ugly and sickening photos and videos of the death and destruction they have spread on a wide scale all cross Syria, Northern Iraq, and elsewhere. They must be stopped at any cost. 

Below is a link to a recent and chilling report from the BBC.


The reality of the situation is that the world must unite and work now to confront ISIS/ISIL en masse and totally wipe them out. There is no gray area here — it is black white.

They must be stopped once and for all. Any delay is impossible to measure or understand or comprehend what they will do next. Delay is not an option for a civilized world to react.

The BBC report is here - it is about 4 and half minutes - click here to view.  

Thanks for stopping by as usual. Come again.

Tuesday, September 8, 2015

DARK DICK: Warmonger, Par Excellence He's Baaaaaack Awe Shït Moment

His Eye on Iran

The leading GOP-Rightwing war hawk is back and in his own lingo when he stood next to Dubya who once called a reporter an asshole, Cheney said: “Yeah, big time.” He is against the Iran nuclear agreement deal, but his has no qualms about a bombing run... WTF moment for sure.

That story here — it is a good piece and hard to argue with otherwise.

The White House is firing back at former Vice President Dick Cheney for his public displeasure over the Iran nuclear agreement deal now pending a vote in Congress.

Cheney, “Dark Dick” as I refer to him has long been a fierce critic of President Obama just about on everything, but now he is publicly savaging the administration's Iran nuclear deal with new intensity while promoting his new book.

(I Note: Ah ha, so promote his book, make lots money he hopes, while keeping the GOP-RW base in tow and pissed more than ever, if that’s even possible, in the run up to 2016 election).

In a seemingly unusual reaction, the White House is using its official social-media accounts to promote a video blasting Cheney for his comments. The video stressed that Cheney was a leading proponent of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. The video also notes that the former vice president continued to argue that he was “right to back the invasion even though intelligence agencies never found the weapons of mass destruction that were used to justify the war.”

Mr. Obama has said in the past: “Let's not mince words: The choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy and some form of war — maybe not tomorrow, maybe not three months from now, but soon. How can we in good conscience justify war before we've tested a diplomatic agreement that achieves our objectives?” (Source: The New York Times).

Leading up to forthcoming vote, critics have balked at Mr. Obama's suggestion that they are indirectly advocating military conflict and that the choice is that simple. The opposition, spearheaded by congressional Republicans, frequently argues that the agreement will actually lead to a more unstable Middle East with even more conflict.  

Recall that this nuclear deal was struck in July between the U.S. and Iran along with approval of five major world powers (the UK, China, Russia, France, and Germany). Sticking points, among other things, is that the deal grants billions of dollars of sanctions relief in exchange for Tehran curbing its nuclear ambitions while allowing increased inspections.  

Congress is expected to soon vote against the agreement but without the votes to override Obama's promised veto.  

Mr. Obama has the votes to sustain his veto, if necessary and even possibly to stop a Senate filibuster (that is a developing aspect of this deal/vote drama).  

Stay tuned as usual – it might be get a lot nastier and bumpier.

Friday, September 4, 2015

Trumpeting Tax Break Horn (which is okay) But, Not on Taxpayer Backs

Golf Course Guru, too: Fore.....!!!!

This story caught my eye and I am sure yours, too... and it darn sure is worthy of open and honest discussion from USA Today here, in part with this headline:

Trump seeks 90% tax cut at New York golf club

I had to the read the story twice to fully comprehend what I was reading or what Mr. Trump's intention truly was ... in simple terms (my view): “T-rump wants a huge tax break for himself and pass the bill to local taxpayers around this golf resort,” or as Ossining (NY) Receiver of Taxes Gloria Fried said: “He’s going to pass the tax burden on to everybody else. And we still won’t get to play on his golf course (sic).”

And, this man wants to be president - okay, fine and dandy run for president all you want but don't ride into office on the backs of the people you have pledged to preserve, protect, and defend under our supreme law of the land for your own self interest and financial benefit.

I'm done now ... continue the story, and thanks for stopping by.

Monday, August 31, 2015

Donald J. Trump-Scott "Koch Lackey" Walker 2016: Wall Off the Borders

The Trumpster: Arrogant, Insulting and Potty-mouth

Son Like "Father" or Benefactor

From Mr. T-rump reported by various sources like here from The Guardian:

In the race for the White House among the GOP field at least is a strong call for immigration reform with Trump out front pushing the issue of border security to the fore – and pushing his fellow GOP contenders further to the right.

He thinks the best way forward is, quite simply, to build a southern wall. He thus far is the clear poll leader among Republican voters as he repeatedly calls for a wall along the length of the US-Mexico border and in his words: “Make Mexico pay for it.”

Further he says, “I would do something very severe unless they contributed or gave us the money to build the wall,” he said in June, adding: “I would build it. I’m very good at building things.” 

Undaunted by his earlier harsh and ugly words against immigrants coming here undocumented, Trump argues that it would be feasible to build such a barrier, citing as evidence the Great Wall of China, next to which his wall would cost “peanuts.” 

And, from Trump's perhaps likely choice for VP we have Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI): He hold a holds a similar view about walling off Mexico, plus one better as it were as he proposes: Building a wall between the U.S. and Canada.

Related: Walker-Koch relationship here and here.  And, his wall proposal here.   

Their team motto, should they become the final GOP team: “Wall Off America: What the Hell — Make Us Great Again…!!!”

Whew boy ... !!!

Thursday, August 27, 2015

T-rump Appeal: Ugly and Dangerous, Okay for Many, or Way Off the Mark

The Crowd He Panders to Most: Whites Only
(Divide, Separate and Alienate

Best Location for Trump Supporters
(Climb in, plenty of room)

Extracted from Yahoo News – my editing enables it to fit this blog format – contents are basically the same as original (reported by Michael Walsh).
Donald Trump picked up an endorsement last week — one that, uncharacteristically, he chose not to boast about. It was from David Duke, the former Ku Klux Klan leader and Louisiana state representative, who asserted on his radio show that the GOP frontrunner “… understands the real sentiment of America, and I think he realizes that his path to popularity toward power in the Republican Party is talking about the immigration issue. He has really said some incredibly great things recently. So whatever his motivation, I don’t give a damn. I really like the fact that he’s speaking.” (Duke’s comments flagged by Buzz Feed).
As Trump has galvanized the anti-immigration movement, seizing control of a primary process that was supposed to be about traditional Republican economic and foreign-policy issues, he has begun attracting support from some of the more unsavory elements on the right-wing fringe: neo-Nazis, Klansmen and white-power advocates. (Note: The Daily Stormer, described by the New Yorker as “…America’s most popular neo-Nazi news site” quickly endorsed Trump (Note: their leader Craig Cobb, who gained national attention in 2013 over a failed plan to set up a whites-only town in ND, has resurrected the idea, and said he would name the place after Trump).
White racism and anti-immigrant nativism obviously share some attributes, but they have different policy implications and constituencies that don’t entirely overlap. So could Trump’s enormous magnetism be bringing them together?
Trump himself hasn’t made race an overt issue in his campaign or in his previous flirtations with public office. The consistent theme in his views over the decades has been xenophobia, directed at foreigners he blames for every shortcoming of the American economy — Japan and Germany when he was writing his books in the 1980s, China and Mexico now.
In any case, his campaign this year hasn’t made much of an effort to reach out to minorities. Over the weekend, he said he knows nothing about the Black Lives Matter movement against police brutality.
Trump further has said: “I know nothing about it. I’m seeing lots of bad stuff about it right now (Trump said in a FOX News interview that Think Progress flagged). He then called Democratic presidential nominee O’Malley a “…disgusting little weak pathetic baby” for apologizing to activists who took offense at his comment that “black lives matter. White lives matter. All lives matter.” Then Trump added: “When I watched that whole thing going on and how they’re pandering … I think it’s a disgrace.”
In April 2015, when civil unrest broke out in Baltimore following the death of Freddie Gray, then Trump tweeted, “Our great African American President hasn’t exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore!”
Black Americans have taken notice. Earlier this month, Gallup released a sample of data collected between July 8 and August 8 on each presidential candidate’s favorability among African-American adults. Gallup data says Trump is by far the least popular candidate with the black community.

Trump is the candidate who will struggle most among blacks. Trump’s familiarity among blacks is about on par with Clinton’s, but he is deeply disliked. Nearly seven in 10 blacks have an unfavorable view of him — by far the highest negative opinion of any candidate. 
Blacks presumably haven’t forgotten the issue Trump brought to national prominence with his birth certificate disbelief rants (his unfounded speculation that Mr. Obama was born in Africa, which was often seen in the 2012 campaign as a proxy for racism) (Note: I would add: clearly it was racism and hatred). Trump then publicly doubted whether Mr. Obama’s grades were good enough to get into Columbia University or Harvard Law School, saying in part: “I heard he was a bad student. How does a bad student go to Columbia and then to Harvard?” (Note: Trump told the Associated Press in April 2011 then he added. “I’m thinking about it. I’m certainly looking into it. Let him show his records.”
That was widely viewed as both a slur on Obama’s intellect and an attack on affirmative action, implying that the future president benefited from racial preferences. Trump has often boasted about his own college grades, but his campaign has refused requests, including by the conservative website Daily Caller to release his own transcripts
Various other statements about Trump:
1.  From Reason magazine: Report about former NM Libertarian Party candidate, Gary Johnson: “Trump is appealing to a segment that many label simply as racist since it exists, and it’s out there. And, you know what? I don’t want to have anything to do with it. It embarrasses me. The electorate will paint the entire Republican Party with a broad brush as a result of Trump, and it won’t be positive,” Johnson concluded in his interview.

2.  Chris Christie: Even his brashness, which once felt refreshing to disaffected conservatives tired of “typical politicians,” now seems downright pedestrian to the legions of Trump converts.

3.  Trump’s GOP rivals: Like Scott Walker and Jeb Bush have both waded into divisive discussions with increasingly radical comments.  

4.  Republican strategists: Many fear Trump’s immigration streak will irrevocably alienate the nation’s growing demographic of Hispanic voters from the party.

5.  From The Atlantic magazine: Republican Party elites can already envision the attack Ads of sad-eyed children being torn from their parents. The harsh immigration rhetoric doesn’t only offend Latino voters, they say — it hurts the party with other minority groups, with moderates and independents, with young voters and with women.

6.  The Web magazine, the Federalist: Trump has tapped into widespread anger that could transform the party by seeing that Trump presents a choice for the Republican Party about which path to follow: (1) a path toward a coalition that is broad, classically liberal, and consistent with the party’s history, or (2) a path toward a coalition that is reduced to the narrow interests of identity politics for white people (only). The voters will get to decide, and a lot is riding on the outcome.
Conclusion: A Trump spokesperson declined to address the various issues affecting the African-American community, or the David Duke comments and endorsement.

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Dopes Imitate the Ninny: Worth Watching - No Admission - Laughs Galore

Walker and Bush: Reflection of The Donald - What a Hoot...

The headlines from Salon.com here tell the story, here in part;

“Walker and Bush Try Trumpism: Unsurprisingly, They Just Look Like Dopes”

Maybe Bill Kristol was right: “This GOP field is just one dope after another, trying to out-dope each other, failing, and letting America’s ultimate dope comfortably expand his lead.” (sic)
Let’s just consider how well two of the alleged front runners, Scott “Koch Clone” Walker and JEB (John Ellis Bush) Bush, have been handling the Trump menace this week.
We have been mocking these two poor, hapless souls a lot recently. That’s because they keep doing highly mockable things. They kept it up recently with further comical assaults on their dignity that is anyone’s guess will not substantially cut into Trump’s lead.

Sunday, August 23, 2015

Pied Piper with Trumpet: Fall in Line and Get With My 4-Point Program

Toot, Toot: I know how you all love a new toon, so this is mine.

My 4-point program, or plan, if you will ...

My plan: (1) Me, (2) Myself, (3) and I, and of course: (4) Moi. 

I am on top of the plan. I am the sole proprietary owner. The plan is all mine. It is clearly mapped out above as you can plainly see. 

My plan route is clear. The path is well-chartered. I have the money to go the whole distance. I am prepared to do, say, pay, try, lie, imply, or deny anything to that end. No matter how long it takes.

Notice how I easily and freely I use the pronoun “I” why is that do you think? 

Because this race is just about me – it always has been and it always will be. I am the only PR guru in this race. I am who I am; deal with it.  

BTW: My on-line campaign store is open for business – stop by and buy something. We will have contests later on for you to stay at a Trump Tower of your choice, and at my campaign’s expense, assuming that it legal (wink/wink). Check out the store and enjoy. My personal fav T(rump)-shirt:

Like I said, I am who I am.

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Re-emphasis: Voter Fraud Issue Benefits GOP Also Big Bogus Issue

A National Movement is Sorely Needed for 2016 and Beyond

How to Stop the Wild Elephants

This topic needs a refocus to wake up the voting community before we  have a repeat of either 2010 or 2014... now is the time to act. Therefore, I offer this review and two excellent sources.

1.  Here from excellent source that tracks this issue — The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU.

2.  Here from one of the best in the business — Bill Moyers.com.

A couple of highlights vis-á-vis the concept of voter fraud and more strict rules are needed:
  • Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare.
  • Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud.
  • Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct.
  • Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda.

When there has been election fraud in American elections, it has usually been committed by politicians, party operatives and election officials who have something at stake in electoral outcome. 

Voters rarely commit fraud because for them, it is a motiveless crime, the individual benefits to the fraudulent voter are immaterial, while the costs are prohibitive.

The most important illustration of outright corruption of elections is the century-long success of white supremacists in the American South stripping African-Americans of their right to vote. Elites and party bosses in the urban North followed the Southern example, using some of the same tricks to manipulate electoral outcomes and to disfranchise immigrants and the poor.