Can you imagine the line that would form to take up a gun in the shooting party? There's Chuck Schumer to start with, then Elizabeth Warren followed by Barack Obama, most recently John McCain, and most notably himself, if he could be two places at once. There are more, many that hide their real feeling for this political mutant, because he is so powerful and has absolutely no qualms about what he does. As long as it furthers Mitch McConnell's sick agenda. I realize my proposal is cold-heartened, of course undoable, but I wonder how many Americans would join me in this?
Most of you know that I am an advocate of gun control and solidly against gun violence, but this scenario seems fitting for McConnell who in 2016, "...cut the legs out from a bipartisan effort to keep suspected terrorists from buying guns." Meaning simply that U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell, is in favor of terrorists being able to acquire guns in this country. Say what you want, but that's the only way to define it. I know it all sounds bizarre but this is the way the mind of this deranged individual works. To take it even further, you wonder how long before he just becomes fruit loops.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, “No majority leader wants written on his tombstone that he presided over the end of the Senate.” He added...
“Breaking the rules to change the rules is un-American. I just hope the majority leader thinks about his legacy, the future of his party, and, most importantly, the future of our country before he acts.”
But these aren't the words of Chuck Schumer. They were delivered "...in 2013, by then-Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), when Democrats pushed through a similar filibuster change for lesser nominations." It just illustrates once again how muttonhead McConnell will do anything, no matter its damage to the country, to get what he wants. Washington Post writer Dana Milbank wants Mitch McConnell's tombstone to read, "...that he presided over the end of the Senate." Milbank wants to also say this...
“'He broke America.' No man has done more in recent years to undermine the functioning of U.S. government. His has been the epitome of unprincipled leadership, the triumph of tactics in service of short-term power."
Progressive, former developing countries like Chile decided to look to solar rather than stick with coal power. As a matter of fact, coal-fired power plants dropped 62 percent over the past year worldwide, according to a survey by the Sierra Club. The Washington Post reports...
An investor in Chile wanting to build a hydroelectric dam or coal-fired plant potentially faces years of costly political battles and fierce resistance from nearby communities.
Coal-fired power plants are responsible for one-third of America’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
Coal combustion waste is the nation's second largest waste stream after municipal solid waste.
Forests are destroyed by mountaintop removal mining.
Coal causes a loss or degradation of groundwater.
Transportation of coal releases air pollution such as soot and can lead to disasters that ruin the environment.
But the new U. S. President of Profit has decided we need to create more jobs at the expense of destroying the environment so he picks the coal industry as the next goal for all this increased employment. The problem with this is that the entire coal industry employs fewer people than Arby's. That's right, a U.S. fast-food chain has more people working for it than all the coal companies nationwide. But Donald John apparently doesn't see the ignorance in his efforts, because this is a passionate group and it got him top TV exposure. They like him, they like him.
Industry experts have pointed out repeatedly, that the coal jobs are extremely unlikely to come back. The plight of the coal industry is more a function of changing energy markets and increased demand for natural gas than anything else. Coal is basically dead, and from here on should be relegated to once a year Christmas stockings. Besides, from experience over the years, coal mining companies have placed minimum emphasis on safety with the former CEO of Massey Energy convicted of conspiracy to willfully violate mine health and safety standards in 2015.
It gets worse: "Coal contains minor amounts of the radioactive elements, uranium and thorium. When coal is burnt, the fly ash contains uranium and thorium at up to 10 times their original levels. And, its 500 tons of small airborne particles, can cause bronchitis, reductions in lung function, increased hospital and emergency room admissions, and premature death. It also contains arsenic, lead and mercury. Solid waste from a typical 500MW coal plant contains 120,000 tons of ash and 193,000 tons of coal sludge from the smokestack scrubber." (Excellent stats thanks to Sourcewatch.org)
Here's one. Trump is cutting back on Obama's environmental protections but then instructs "...federal regulators to rewrite federal rules to reduce carbon emissions." Are they different? Are they better? Or is this just a way to delay and eventually do nothing? I vote for the latter. Apparently a $39 million cost figure under Obama's plan can't be confirmed, but isn't saving the environment worth spending a significant amount of money on? The problems of the appalling conditions in China have been used to signify a need to take action in the U.S. before it is too late.
In total, the statistics may not be real but the problem of pollution in America is very real.
Donald Trump is in deep doo doo the Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether or not his election campaign staff was involved, while at the same time he must defend the lowlife Jeff Sessions he nominated for Attorney and a gutless Republican approved. So, does he do what any self-respecting individual would do--especially the President of the United States--build a palatable defense for each with facts? And since the world knows there is no defense for what has been done, what's left. Simple, we go on the offense with more lies and misinformation. Trump's tweet 3/4...
“How low has President Obama gone to tapp [sic] my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”
First of all, the man is illiterate when it comes to spelling, and second, as has been the case with past accusations, he gives absolutely no proof. Here's what the master of handed-over misinformation, Sean Spicer, had to say 3/5...
“Reports concerning potentially politically motivated investigations ahead of the 2016 election are very troubling.”
What the hell are these people talking about? Fact checker asked for evidence of this "dramatic claim" but received nothing. The Washington Post reports that possibly Spicer's "reports" refer to news stories and not concrete information. But, "The Washington Post for months has sought to confirm this report of a FISA warrant related to the Trump campaign but has been unable to do so." More so, WP assumes other major news media have done the same and also come up empty. The gist of the matter is that month of FISA for information on Russian hacking have been denied.
"The FBI and five other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from the Kremlin covertly aided President-elect Donald Trump, two people familiar with the matter said."
"The agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and representatives of the director of national intelligence."
FISA court (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act), has been approached from about every direction including the former White House, for the purpose of uncovering Donald John's connection to the Russians in the 2016 campaign, not for the purpose of wiretapping Trump Tower. There is more investigation into how money transferred from the Kremlin "may have been used to pay some email hackers in the United States or to supply money to intermediaries who would then pay the hackers. More from McClatchy...
"On Jan. 6, the director of national intelligence released a declassified report that concluded Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered an influence campaign to “undermine faith in the U.S. democratic process,” damage Hillary Clinton’s election prospects and bolster Trump’s. The campaign included the hacking of top Democrats’ emails and fake news distributed by Russian sources."
“A Trump presidency scares me more than anything else. I’m terrified that he’ll become president.”
This, of course, was pre-election, and sounds like he may be comparing the then coming election of Donald Trump with books of his like Carrie, It, and Misery. If you lump all of King's chillers together, they wouldn't equal the repugnance of the Trump administration. Stephen King likens the Trump presidency with his 37-year-old book, Dead Zone, about a salesman who fights the establishment to run for president. He doesn't make it but King has some interesting tweets mocking Donald John's charges over Obama's wiretapping of Trump Tower...
"Not only did Obama tap Trump's phones, he stole the strawberry ice cream out of the mess locker."
"Populist demagogues like He Who Must Not Be Named aren't a new thing; see THE DEAD ZONE, published 37 years ago."
"Obama tapped Trump's phones IN PERSON! Went in wearing a Con Ed coverall. Michelle stood guard while O spliced the lines. SAD!"
It is pretty pathetic when one of the greatest writers of all time spends part of his valuable time to poke fun at the new president of the United states, not in a playful way, but to point out the absurdities and lunacies of this new administration. Avi Selk, in the Washington Post story once again reiterates...
An Obama spokesman and a former intelligence director said there was no wiretap. Some speculated that Trump was referring to claims on talk radio and the conservative website Breitbart that Obama used “police state” tactics against him. Others accused Trump of trying to distract from reports that his staff covered up conversations with Russian officials during the campaign.
On the legal side, FBI Director James Comey feels there is no credibility in Trump's claims that Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower phones and told the Justice Department to refute the charges. Donald John fired back refusing to "acknowledge" Comey's judgment, probably leading to some kind of confrontation with the head of the nation's leading law enforcement agency. The New York Times is leery of the fact that Trump would fire Comey because that could very well backfire into a cover-up over his campaign connections with the Russians.
Although Sean Spicer has made several comments stating Donald Trump's conclusion that former President Barack Obama did in fact wiretap trump Tower during the 2016 presidential campaign. He offered no evidence at the time, nor has Donald John since his accusations. Yet the two of them are adamant it happened. But not so sure are others in the White House, including Sarah Huckabee Sanders who pretty much hedges on most of Spicer's and Trump's allegations. This is why Spicer didn't really want to talk about this...
"During an at-times-painful interview with ABC's Martha Raddatz, Huckabee Sanders repeatedly suggested that Trump's allegation was worth looking into but declined to vouch for it. Raddatz pointed this out repeatedly, and Huckabee Sanders responded by saying 'if this happened,' 'if this took place,' 'if it did' and 'let's find out.'”
Martha Raddatz is one of those reporters that gives no quarter when it comes to getting the truth and
Martha Raddatz-Sarah Huckabee Sanders
didn't relent with Huckabee Sanders continued use of the preposition "if" when Raddatz finally exclaimed, “If,” “if,” “if,” “if.” Huckabee Sanders reply, ""I agree." Raddatz added...
"Let me just say one more time. The president said, “I bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October.” So the president believes it is true?"
HUCKABEE SANDERS: I would say that his tweet speaks for itself there.
In a nutshell, Donald Trump "trumped" up this conspiracy theory of Barack Obama wiretapping Trump Tower during the 2016 campaign, solely for the purpose of diverting attention away from the issues that he and his staff were in cahoots with Putin and the Russians in 2016 to aide his election chances and damage Hillary Clinton's, And the other issue, the skaggy lowlife he nominated for AG, Jeff Sessions lying about his contact with the Russians during the election. With a lack of support from his FBI Director, now some of his staff, where does the American public draw the line?
Iowa has always been the come-to state for Presidents and 2016 was no different for Donald Trump. He took the state 51.1% to win against Hillary Clinton's 41.7, garnering the 6 electoral votes. Des Moines, where I spent several years, went for Clinton as did another major metro area, Cedar Rapids. Iowans are considered good, down to earth, stable people with common sense. That's pretty much true as I can attest to after spending several years in the capital city, but also having experienced a hard-line cliquishness there that forbids outsiders in until proven. I never made it.
I left in the late sixties, never sorry for my decision, and have never looked back. I tell you this to qualify the fact that I am a maverick, always have been, and always will be. Mavericks don't do well in the state, although there is a basketball team there by that name who are apparently winners. But it is people like Tom Godat, a union electrician from Clinton, Iowa, that represents a state that has been a combination of Democrat and Republican in the past, but recently has been attacked by the Tea Party. It elected Joni Ernst to the Senate, something many in the state still can't believe.
But back to Mr. Godat, who has always voted for Democrats, decided to cast his vote for Donald Trump in 2016, not that he particularly thought Trump was best, but because he thought Hillary Clinton was worse. An excellent case in point to shore up the fact that Bernie Sanders should have been the Democrats nominee, not Clinton. Tom now says he is "embarrassed" over his vote. I would suspect that a lot of good people out there are also coming to the same conclusion. What I don't understand is, after viewing Trump's campaign, why wasn't Tom Godat horrified with what he saw?
There were Donald John's comments about Mexican immigrants, about women, about veterans, the disarming of Clinton's bodyguards, saying Obama was the founder of ISIS, sicking the gun nuts on Hillary, encouraging Russia to hack Clinton's campaign, more racism calling for a ban on Muslims in the U.S., saying people in New Jersey were cheering on 9/11, suggesting one of his protesters should be roughed up, referring to his daughter in a sexual way, his bizarre comments about Megyn Kelly's menstrual period, I could go on forever but you get the idea. Why didn't Tom Godat?
Washington Post reporter, Jenna Johnson, and her photographer, Michael S. Williamson, ran into "...more than 100 Iowans [who]explained why so many of them are already disappointed in the new president." It only took four days which means they encountered 25 a day. That's an impressive number of people when you consider that Iowans aren't that open and easy to get to talk to by people they don't know. And then there's Lost Nation, Iowa, where the president received 66 percent of the vote. After Trump's election, the Iowa legislature voted to dramatically scale back the collective bargaining rights of the state’s public workers, distressing my Lost Nation residents.
The Huff Post reports that "thousands" of people across the country are unhappy with their vote for Donald John, and they are tweeting it in response to the "head tweeter's" barrage of lies and misinformation. Here's an example...
“I’m starting to feel like the biggest mistake of my young 23 years of life has been voting for [Trump],” Joseph Richardson tweeted on Nov. 21.
And that's less than two weeks after the November 8, election day. Richardson said it was a bitTrump’s Cabinet picks or the 'very childish' behavior he exhibited at a press conference last week. And he does regret his vote. Sort of." Even if he did it over, Richardson says he still couldn't vote for Clinton continuing with, “I still think Trump would be the better candidate. I’d still regret it. I’d vote for him again but I’d still regret it.” Go figure. But it is this exact kind of reasoning that political pundits were clamoring over during the 2016 election.
unsettling and added, "He doesn’t like
Now here's a guy you just have to shake your head over. Not sure if he is misinformed, full of indecision or just not too bright...
"Bill said he would like Trump to act more like President Barack Obama, who he voted against twice but considers 'an extremely honorable man who served the country fantastically.'”
I could understand a statement that said, served the country "well," or "fine," or even "right." But how can you call Obama "extremely honorable" and a man "who served the country fantastically" but still have voted against him twice? Makes no sense unless there is an ulterior motive. And that's what is wrong with our political system, people voting who haven't the slightest idea what they are doing. There were some that lashed out at Donald John for not following up on his promise to investigate Clinton’s handling of sensitive emails, a decision that also puzzles some of the pundits.
Others voiced their reason to vote for Trump was his promise for change, to drain the swamp. Many of this group think the swamp is fuller than ever, but others believe Trump is following through on his promises. Even the alt-right and its white nationalists are down on Donald Trump. Remember Richard Spencer? The guy "who stood at a podium shortly after Donald Trump's election and, in a video that went viral, shouted 'Hail Trump!' while several in the crowd celebrated the victory with a Nazi salute." He's not sure now his President will be racial enough.
From what I have read, a large number of Trump voters have combined to strongly object over the fact that Donald John did not investigate, subsequently prosecute Hillary Clinton over the email issue. This is a major campaign promise that he broke, and the fact that this is one of the primary annoyances of those who voted for the man, it is yet just one more instance that reflects the amount of animosity toward Hillary Clinton. This was clear from the early 2016 campaigning right through the November election. A leading reason Democrats are in the hole they are now in.
Donald Trump's top adviser and chief White House strategist, Steve Bannon, described Richard Spencer asone of the leading intellectuals of the alt-right movement. CNN reported that...
"Spencer is a white nationalist who believes that there should be a 'peaceful ethnic cleansing,' where people who are not of European descent voluntarily leave the United States."
Not that it is important since this deranged kind of thinking probably has no chance of ever being initiated in this country, but what if they don't leave voluntarily? But just maybe the thought of ethnic cleansing isn't so far out when you consider Trump has already provided the model in his latest Muslim ban of now six countries just announced in Monday's address to Congress. More from Slate on Bannon/Spencer connection...
"In August, [2016] Bannon proudly described his site as 'the platform for the alt-right,' a movement with Spencer as one of its intellectual leaders, again, according to Bannon’s own site."
It is said the Vice President is only a heartbeat away from the presidency. In the case of Steve Bannon, this is a heart beat that could change the direction of the greatest free nation of all time.
The left is in, perhaps, the worst shape it has been in for decades. Not that it has had that much past luck in Congress, the only positive recently being Barack Obama who was stonewalled by the GOP during his entire eight years. But the election of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton proves the inability of Democrats to nominate an electable candidate to run against a weakened Republican Party. They had one in Bernie Sanders but blew it allowing Debbie Wasserman Schultz to run the show and bar his nomination through unethical tactics, for which she was fired.
There are all kinds of perceptions of whether or not the Bern would have beat Trump, but what is sure is the fact that he would have given him a better run for his money than Hillary Clinton did. Sanders awakened the younger crowd, which could have been his ace in the hole against Donald John. But this is all history and the focus now is how to bring Democrats/Progressives back to the forefront. If my experience with the Demographic grassroots volunteer organization is any indication of the competency of this group, this is where the most work is necessary.
With both Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders I volunteered my services repeatedly; in both cases, with no takers. That's right, my background in database management, including computer modeling , along with research and market predicting was made available several times to apparently deaf ears. Due to my physical condition I couldn't go out and knock on doors, but time and again I offered to make my full office and experience available. Most recently, I contacted Bernie Sanders' campaign right up to the bitter end of his running for the nomination. Both in my state and national. Nothing.
And today Democrats are divided over how to handle Donald Trump, with one group wanting an all-out war, the other wants to try and guide him to the center. It should be obvious by now to anyone, you don't push Donald John in any direction but his own. And then there's the realization that with all the support to oppose Trump, the congressional Democrats just may not have the power to accomplish what they want. Impeachment now would take some strong support from Republicans and that isn't likely to happen. Of course, 2018 could turn the tide.
Bernie Sanders
But there has always been a leader from the left that stood out when minds were being made up aboutBernie Sanders stood out as the candidate of choice but denied his right. The American public was screaming for change, and the Bern offered that in a way that would most benefit the working class. What they got was Donald Trump, the voice of...Donald Trump.
campaigns and elections to come. Names like F.D.R., John Kennedy, Bill Clinton, unfortunately, Hillary Clinton most recently. There was a clear point at which the obvious was there to see in 2016, and that was when
One Democrat from a left-leaning state, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who is Vice Chairman off the Democratic Governors Assn., spoke of massive support for resistance against Donald John's Executive Order banning refugee admissions and travel from seven majority Muslim countries. Gov. Inslee has backed a lawsuit that challenges Trump's Executive Order and commented that by "...undermining Mr. Trump across the board..." The Dems will eventually hope to split Republicans away from the President. Not sure the likes of Mitch McConnell are bright enough.
The Democratic Party is so weakened that several Congress members from red states are afraid to oppose Trump for fear of losing their seats. But what good are those seats to the left if they have no voice. The answer is none. I am having a problem here wondering why we aren't getting fire and brimstone from a team of Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer. They are, combined, the strength of the Senate and the Democratic Party. The Republicans doesn't hesitate to gang up against the left when the opportunity presents itself.
However, this is what the Dems are up against. A House and Senate controlled by the GOP. A Republican in the White House, although with such a lack of direction in his first month in office, the unknown will be the biggest problem. And if, probably when, Neil Gorsuch is installed in the Supreme Court, it will be five conservatives against four liberals. Insurmountable odds? Maybe not. Leo Jennings, a Democratic consultant from Youngstown, Ohio, days the Party must adopt a more Progressive economic agenda. Progressives must reclaim the Party.
Jennings, a Sanders supporter, said...
"If we don't start talking about the things that we can do to make it better for all working-class voters, we're bankrupt as a party."
Jennings feels you should lump whites and blacks (people of color) together in the Party's approach, but not rule out identity politics altogether. A state Party organizer who is black said, "If the Democratic Party wants to be around in the future, they need to go left." Precisely what Bernie Sanders was doing when his campaign was ruthlessly side-tracked. The public saw Hillary Clinton as too middle of the road and much too connected to the financial community to be on the side of the consumer. Some Sanders' supporters did vote for Hillary butt it was all too late.
I mentioned the potential magic trio earlier of Sanders, Warren and Schumer, the latter also Senate minority leader, thinking how much power is held by three of the most forceful Democrats in the Senate. What if we now add former President Barack Obama to the formula as a civilian, and Bill and Hillary Clinton, if they are of a mind, plus any other Progressives that want to join the new club. Now, looking forward to 2018, and a takeover of the Senate, and the House too, this consortium could be unbeatable. Is there any reason why these people couldn't and shouldn't work together?
There is at least one skeptic, Chinemerem Onyeukwu, 23, the Party organizer from Ohio, who is worried that, "...Democrats are going to keep running what he called '90s-style campaigns despite Clinton's loss." He has reason to believe that when, in light of the changing analytics of the 2016 Primaries, the Dems were still under the spell of the wicked witch from Florida. There is hope with the election of a new Democratic National Committee head yesterday, Tom Perez. It wasn't the pick of Bernie Sanders and the rest of the Party left, so the future remains to be seen.
There is just no end to the idiocy of this organization. You have to wonder how a group with double-digit IQs can hang around so long; probably because there are so many people out there with double-digit IQs. I am talking about the Tea Party, of course, more specifically their continued derision of Barack Obama. Apparently, these blockheads don't know he is out of office, no longer in the White House. Not in a policy-making capacity anymore, and probably doesn't give a damn what the Tea Party thinks or says about him. But they still keep grinding it out. Why?
Because of headlines like this, "BIZARRE: Obama’s CULT Manual FOUND, Claims ‘Clouds Will Part’ When He and Michelle Return," that encourage those double-digits to read their crap and give up their money. The Tea Party has been bankrolled from the beginning by the Koch Bros., David and Charles, guilty repeatedly of favoring their business interests over human life and the general well-being of consumers. The Tea Party follows suit by favoring their ultra-conservative credo and driving issues that benefit their group at the expense of the country. No matter, it will always be stupid.
There are several terms used for Mitch McConnell, the most disliked member of the U.S. Senate, but "condescending prick" in The Daily Banter is perhaps one of the best. My favorite is asshole, which is described in the dictionary as, a stupid, mean, or contemptable person. That certainly works for me. But get this, in Kentucky, Rand Paul, the state's other Senator, has an approval rank of 51%, McConnell only 40%. Even Breitbart, an alt-right publication, says he is the most unpopular U.S. Senator with a 52% disapproval rating, only 38% approve. The man is a disgrace to this country.
The Daily Banter is referring to his bitching and moaning over protests against Donald Trump that are holding up Senate business, when this jerk brought Senate business to a complete halt during the Obama administration, just because it was Barack Obama. I have always said this also included racial overtones, a characteristic McConnell has been accused of before. The downside of all this with Donald John in the White House, it is a two-barrel crisis since the former will no doubt rubber-stamp most everything McConnell does. One can only hope the American public wake up before 2018.
Many Republican Senators, featuring Mitch McConnell at the head of the list, have made it their goal, actually a crusade, to put the good of America on the back burner with the sole purpose to stand in the way and defeat anything the Democrats propose. The movement became a monster under McConnell as the minority leader in the Senate in 2009. His quote was: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” A single-minded promise to screw the country in order to stop a great President from doing great things. They did.
But Barack Obama was elected to a second term, so now how do we get rid of Mitch McConnell? Legally, of course. With this in mind, I would like to suggest that McConnell immediately retire from the Senate and enter a monastery to atone for his sins against the former President. If he won't go willingly, maybe Harry Reid could be talked into shanghaiing him from the Congress subway system, then delivering him to the abbey. After all, Reid is a former boxer. I know this would never happen but can't you see it now?
First of all, you would have to explain to McConnell what atone means. Second, none of the Monks would have anything to do with him. Naturally.
Third, McConnell would refuse to enter the monastery if there were any black monks; force needed Fourth, he would fight to block any...well, just about anything that comes up within the walls.
Fifth, all the lies he tells in the monastery must stay in the monastery. Denied.
Pipe dreams? Yes, but this is what Progressives do with this kind of President and Congress. The real story...
Elaine Chou had just been approved as Donald Trump's Transportation Secretary and her husband, Mitch McConnell was elated; along with a GOP Congress and a new figurehead in the White House he was sure he could control. Yes, Donald John was elected to the office but McConnell knew he was the real savior of the Republican Party now. He had never had this kind of power, and was just glad that he had found his source of long term stamina in the last few years to keep him going. It was the only way he had had the drive to fight against Barack Obama's second term. Damn those blacks.
McConnell grabbed his bottle of Mexican vitamins and took two; the dosage was six a day. God forbid anything happen to the doctor in Mexico City who supplied him. Heading back to the Senate chamber, his cell phone rang and it was doctor Gonzales who was excited, exclaiming that he wouldn't be able to supply the Senator any longer with his precious supplement.
"What do you mean? I pay you a fortune for the capsules. Do you need more money? I can always call the Koch brothers for a loan."
"No, no, something called Obamacare. Federales just raided my shop and took everything. I am ruined and all because of you."
"What did I do," he was desperate now.
"The Mexican President is a good friend of Barack Obama and when he found out what I was doing, he had me raided."
McConnell knew he would waste away and be unable to fulfill his duties of Majority Leader without his beloved Mexican vitamins. Even his wife didn't know. "Just sit tight. I'll take of this."
As he strode onto the Senate floor, he approached the podium and called for order. "Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate." Only a handful were there, all Democrats. "After a long discussion with my staff, I have decided that this body will vote to continue Obamacare, and I would heartily recommend to Speaker Ryan that the House do the same." Obamacare was kept by both houses.
That night he heard the sound of a text on his phone and when he checked, former President Obama said, "Now we're even. Any more of your crap and I'll tell Elaine."
President Barack Obama is in a tie with former President Ronald Reagan now but will eventually surpass him in the role of greatest American Presidents. Obama has surged in the past few years, as Reagan has lost five points. This compared to Obama's nemesis, Mitch McConnell, who has been voted most unpopular U.S. Senator, plainly illustrating the lack of class in the latter.
What is even more bizarre than the fact that he won the presidency is that Donald Trump just claimed it is he who should take credit for the improved economy. Here's his tweet...
"The U.S. Consumer Confidence Index for December surged nearly four points to 113.7, THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN MORE THAN 15 YEARS! Thanks Donald!"
In fact it is President Barack Obama who has slowly but carefully returned the economy to prosperity after the devastation of the George W. Bush administration. Trump, hopefully won't be responsible for another GWB debacle, the possibility of which could be many times that of Bush's. Anyone who has to feed their ego with this kind of bullshit must have an enormous inferiority complex. Can you imagine this man sitting in the Oval Office when Russia's Putin says something to piss him off, and off go the missiles starting world war III.
CNN Money says "...consumer confidence was making a comeback for years before Trump even began his campaign." Right after George W. Bush put the economy in the toilet, and just as Barack Obama was entering the White House...
"...in the depths of the Great Recession, the index hit a low of 25.3. Before Trump was elected, it had climbed all the way back to 100.8 in October."
All thanks to President Obama, of course. Now what will Donald Trump do with what he is being given?
Here is a recent quote from Newt Gingrich, a politician that should have been relegated to just cutting the yard a long time ago, re. Barack Obama's legacy...
"His legacy is like one of those dolls that, as the air comes out of it, shrinks and shrinks and shrinks. He's in this desperate frenzy."
Politico describes Gingrich's personal life as, "...a hot mess." As an example, "In April 1980, Newt filed for divorce while his wife, Jackie, was in the hospital fighting uterine cancer. "As far as politics goes, Politico says he is, "...The man who poisoned Washington." Further...
"More than anyone else in the modern history of Congress, it’s Gingrich who observers credit for bringing the hyperpartisan, obstructionist approach to Washington that we associate with the capital to this day."
And all this time we blamed Karl Rove. But enough about Newt Gingrich who should put out to pasture like Arizona Senator, John McCain, both of which outlived their usefulness--if it was ever there to begin with--years ago. But Gingrich has the nerve to question President Obama's legacy when his own will read like an empty book. Apparently, the outdated Gingrich forgot....
President Obama rescued an economy trashed by former President Geo. W. Bush
He gave health insurance to millions who did not have it
Obama has led the global push for climate change to save the environment
Struck the landmark nuclear deal with Iran, slowing down the nuclear race
President Obama passed the legalization of same-sex marriage
There's more but you get the idea...this is a man with a legacy. And what I don't really understand is why the media continues to give voice to completely outmoded politicians like Gingrich and McCain. But I guess we'd rather see another blast about the two of them than anything else from T-rump.
President Obama entered the White House with American optimism at 32%, 34% of the country satisfied with his election. Donald Trump will take office with 22% optimism, 23% satisfied with his election. But the kicker is 29% are pessimistic about the president-elect, with this figure only 9% under Obama. NBC reports, "That's a significantly worse outlook than Americans expressed after the elections of both Barack Obama and George W. Bush." I have no doubt that Donald Trump has several excuses to justify these numbers but an election after-market has spoken.
Democratic pollster Fred Yang of Hart Research Associates says...
"Usually elections settle arguments and the nation comes together, at least in the short term. Today, hard feelings persist on both sides of the partisan divide. It's as if the 2016 campaign has never ended."
It appears to me that all this skepticism is well justified by the people Trump has chosen to support him...
Steve Mnuchin, Sec. of Treasury who worked at Goldman Sachs for 17 years, a firm that had to be bailed out by the government due to risky investments. Jeff Sessions, Atty. Gen. who was denied a federal judgeship. Andrew Puzder, Sec. of Labor, a hardliner against any increase in minimum wage. Betsy Devos, Sec. Education, wants to get rid of public school system. Tom Price, Sec. Health and Human Services, wants to scuttle Obamacare. These are only a few and many are billionaires.
A statistic that cannot be ignored is the fact that 46% of the American public still gives him a poor rating, compared to 40% who are positive. And the confidence in Donald Trump's election all comes from his base voters, not those who didn't vote for him. There are 92% of Trump voters who believe the man can bring change to Washington--with Clinton only 20%--but have these people considered just what kind of change they want, and is this also what the president-elect wants. So far, Donald Trump has not convinced many of us he isn't in all of this just to promote his business.
They all did well during Barack Obama's administration but put the skids on when Donald Trump was elected. These are Standard and Poor's stocks that excelled under Obama, some even soared like online retailer Amazon.com (AMZN),alcoholic beverage seller Constellation (STZ) and real-estate investment trust General Growth (GGP) all with 1,000% growth since 2008 when President Obama took office. They now trail the 3% regular rise in the S&P 500 since the Trump win. There is also a rapid decline in bond prices according to USA Today.
Investment experts expect a significant change in government policy under Donald Trump, particularly on globalization, which many of the down companies depend on. And as well they might, considering the new President-elect changes his mind daily, his word is worth very little, and shows fits of being unstable at times. Here's an example of why the concern...
Constellation bought U.S. distribution rights to Corona and other Mexican brews in June 2013. Mexican beers now account for 90% of Constellation's beer business, which is more than half the company's revenue, Ramey says.
Constellation is a top maker of wine and beer including brands like Robert Mondavi and Black Velvet. Here's another quote from USA Today...
"His tough talk on larger, unregulated companies (and) industries has many spooked that he’ll do something negative, or that he’ll be friendlier to competition," says Daniel Kurnos, analyst at Benchmark Capital.
Bernie Sanders had said if Donald Trump planned to fight the outsourcing of many U.S. companies, he was with him all the way. Then the Carrier Indiana plant situation arose with Trump demanding the company change its position on sending jobs to Mexico. As it turns out more than half of the Carrier jobs still went south. Just another Trump deception.
The results of the 2016 election have spawned a huge game of 'Who do you like?' In the cases of the high-profile politicians, nobody's winning, except Barack Obama. In a recent CNN/ORC poll the results were dismal for at least three:
For all Americans
Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House, 47% favorable, 35% Unfavorable
Real Clear Politics rates Donald Trump currently, 39.5% Favorable, 56% Unfavorable. All of this is out in left field compared to Barack Obama's rating following his 2008 election, 70% Favorable, 25% Unfavorable. His current, Favorable 56%, Unfavorable 40%. In another Republican comparison, when George W. Bush left office, his Favorable was 27%, Unfavorable 66%. The key is the Dems needed someone like Obama in 2016...think Bernie Sanders.
We just experienced the most obnoxious election in recent history, perhaps ever.
"...more than 8-in-10 Americans say the country is more deeply divided on major issues this year than in the past several years."
"And more than half say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy is working in the US."
But here's hope for Progressives, "...nearly 8-in-10 overall hope to see the GOP-controlled government incorporate some Democratic policies into its agenda." CNN interprets the poll saying
"...'most' say they would like to see President-elect Donald Trump, who won with an Electoral College majority despite trailing in the popular vote nationwide, pursue policies that could draw in new supporters rather than appeal solely to those who backed him during the campaign."
Not sure who CNN's "most" is, but I do not see Progressives wanting new supporters in any Republican form, certainly not the Donald Trump ilk. But the feelings are unanimous that we are a split nation, "...with 85% saying so overall, including 86% of independents, 85% of Republicans and 84% of Democrats." And even though Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, the general public still feels ill about her following the election.
As Progressives, we can only hope that Trump will do the right thing. If not, there is 2008. Unfortunately, thanks to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrats/Progressives have been saying that too much in the last few years.
Global warming is-global warming isn't. 97% of climate and earth scientists agree temperatures have increased in the past 100 years; 84% say they personally believe human-induced warming is occurring, and 74% agree that "currently available scientific evidence" substantiates its occurrence. NASA says:
"The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years."
"Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century."
"All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880. Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years."
There is a supposed hiatus of global warming for the last 19 years and Climate Depot calls it an embarrassing reality. The IPCC (The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), established in 1988, and recognized by the Earth Summit, admits global warming has paused. Wikipedia attributes the pause to an unusual El Nino in 1998 but adds these references to weather patterns are measured in 15 year periods, possibly too small for accuracy, not accurate.
Watch this video with President Barack Obama with leading climate activist, Leonardo Dicaprio:
In other words, there may be a pause but climate change will get back to its old tricks in no time. Following are but a few in Congress that totally deny the existence of global warming, pointed out by President Obama. Visit this site and you can check your state.
Sen. Mitch McConnell from KY, Rep. Paul Ryan, WI, both a disgrace to Congress, and someone I seriously doubt if she even knows what climate means, much less climate change, Joni Ernst, from Iowa. And there are several more laughables.
Well, there is one action that deserves attention, simply because it had so much discussion during the Primary. It's the TPP trade deal to bring jobs back to this country, which Trump actually built part of his platform on. Bernie Sanders was also against the TPP but Barack Obama thought it was good for this country, hoping it would be part of his trade legacy. It's hard to fight any proposal, though, that will bring jobs back to American workers so a plus so far.
But from here on it turns into promises, vague meanderings, and complete absences of issues that were, again, a part of the Trump platform. According to CNN, "...he focused exclusively on campaign promises that would not require congressional approval." Shades of screams Obama heard from the Republican do-nothing Congress. But, then, the shoe is on the other foot now and time will tell how this plays out with the good-ole-boys who did not support Trump.
On the major issues requiring congressional approval, he backs off significantly from his vitriolic campaign rhetoric that was obviously meant to get the votes of his group of uneducated rednecks. Among other things, he called Mexican immigrants "criminals" and "rapists," then added they were killers too. "He Insisted The Mexican Government Intentionally Sends Their Criminals To The U.S." See all nine here. Didn't even mention building the Mexican wall.
Another major issue of the campaign not included in Trump's first one-hundred days is the repeal of Obamacare. You will remember his meeting with the sitting President and Obama asking him to at least keep the no preexisting conditions of the ACA, and the President hopeful he would agree. Trump released his own plan on healthcare back in March of 2016, making several vague references to what he would do. There was one high point:
"Trump would also allow prescription drugs to be imported and for full transparency of health care pricing, although he offered few details about how that — or any of the proposals — might work."
The first 100 days starts January 21, 2017. Mark your calendars for April 24, 2017, for the first evaluation of the new president that lost the popular vote by 1.7 million votes...and still counting.
It is certain that Democrats will attempt to block any radically conservative nominee that Donald Trump comes up with to fill Antonin Scalia's seat. It will no doubt include a filibuster. The GOP, however, could initiate the "nuclear option" and overcome this but will they? The NO simply lets the Senate head call a vote to change the number of votes needed to stop the filibuster from 60 to a majority, which the Republicans have. Bingo, the Supremes have gone ultra conservative.
But hold on, Dahlia Lithwick of Slate says, it isn't Donald Trump's nomination to make and actually we already knew that. The Senate's token asshole, Mitch McConnell, stopped Barack Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland. And has-been John McCain had also said that should Hillary Clinton become President, he would block all of her nominees. And he doesn't even know who they would be. This all confirms the stupidity of the current Republican Party.
The only answer now is for the Democrats to stand firm and do everything in their power to prevent Trump's Supreme Court nominations. Unless he comes to his senses and works with the Dems on a nominee, and we know that won't happen. But here's the kicker, the Advise and Consent clause of the Constitution gives the President the right to do many things, including nominate judges for the Supreme Court. The court then approves or disproves the nomination.
But what if the Senate doesn't act. The Supreme Court has said:
"No procedural principle is more familiar to this Court than that a constitutional right, or a right of any other sort, may be forfeited in criminal as well as civil cases by the failure to make timely assertion of the right before a tribunal having jurisdiction to determine it.”
"It is altogether proper to view a decision by the Senate not to act as a waiver of its right to provide advice and consent. A waiver is an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege."
Although he is running out of time, Obama could "...advise the Senate that he will deem its failure to act by a specified reasonable date in the future (perhaps 30 days) to constitute a deliberate waiver of its right to give advice and consent. I know we're in the change of command but the GOP started the fight and it's the Democrats time to finish it. And that would be, if there is no action by the Senate, Obama appoints Garland to the Supreme Court. Case closed.
It happened in 1975 under Gerald R. Ford's presidency you can read here.
The Hispanic community of Arizona can rest easier after the decisive defeat of Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Tuesday's election, at least until January 20, 1917. I talked to one Latino as he finished grooming our yard, ready to ask him if he voted but he asked me first. I said, "Yes, did you?" His answer was a quick "Yes." I didn't ask him who he voted for but I'm betting as far as the Sheriff's race is concerned, it was probably Paul Penzone, Arpaio's opposition.
Don't know how my guy voted in the Presidential election either but Hispanics accounted for 11% of the total vote and favored Clinton by better than two to one. In 2008 Obama received 67% of the vote but the Latino turnout was only 9%. Once again this ethnic group did not step up to the plate. They also offered no help in the Arizona legislature where the stupid laws like the 2010 immigration bill that was eventually gutted.
I am more inclined to believe the white population of Arizona was finally fed up with Joe Arpaio, sick of the grandstanding to feed his ego, and at least $55 million in lawsuits against him and his department. And recently he was personally indicted on contempt of court charges he will have answer without his shield to back him up. Not sure what state's position will be on paying future legal bills. Knowing this state, anything is possible.
Hillary Clinton was supposed to ace the Hispanic vote but she barely held on to Obama's 2008 numbers. Either the Dems just aren't approaching the Latino community right, the latter just don't give a shit about their future, or it's all Hillary's fault. The future of the Democratic Party is significantly in question right now. Where are you Bernie?
Thank God it's over and it's time for us Progressives to face the facts and regroup to make sure the Donald Trump administration doesn't wreak havoc. It will be hard with the WH and Congress in the control of the GOP.
Hillary Clinton carried the baggage that obviously defeated her on Nov. 8, spawning a situation we will have to live with for the next four years. Has everyone forgotten all the things Trump said over the period of the campaign? Things like:
"undocumented immigrants will be deported en masse, Arab Americans will be racially profiled and the United States will "bomb the s--- out of ISIS."
There's more:
"In Trump's America, foreign Muslims will be banned from the US, Syrian refugees sent back to their war-torn country and free trade agreements torn to shreds. And, of course, the US will build a 'great wall' on the US-Mexico border, which Mexico will have to pay for."
And even more in the article underlined above. These are not Presidential comments and it is hopeful that the tone of the President-elect reported by Pres. Obama, in their personal conversation today, will prevail in Trump's governing of this country. I am not yet ready to predict a George W. Bush comeback but the next few months will determine that.
