https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Category: Civil Liberties

Not quite sure why I didn’t have this in earlier. Other items that may include this are Censorship, ZT and PC, and Politics & Law

SCOTUS rules in favor of the “Masterpiece” baker. Sort of.

This ruling is being crowed (from the right) or denounced (from the left) as something quite a bit larger than I think it will turn out to be in the long run. In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the baker in the Masterpiece bake shop case. The baker had refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, despite Colorado law saying that businesses could not discriminate based on sexual orientation.

But this isn’t a massive “religious freedom / bigotry trumps all else” ruling, as was being sought by the plaintiff’s deep-pocket supporters. The actual ruling is being described as “narrow” because it’s very dependent on the facts in this case, rather than being a new principle of law being established.

The court found that

  1. Yes, states can and should protect the civil rights of gay people, and can do so under the Constitution.
  2. The plaintiff’s religious beliefs do need to be taken into account, but were dismissed with hostility by the state commission that originally ruled against him.
  3. The plaintiff had a basis in 2012 — prior to Obergefell and the state okaying gay marriage — to believe that he was on defensible legal grounds in how he acted.
  4. The commission had ruled very differently in the case of bakers refusing to produce anti-gay cake decorations, declining to use some of the same rationales they made in those decisions in this one.

The court sort of leaves it open as to how to balanced sincere religious beliefs with Constitutionally permissible protection of individuals who might be discriminated against through those beliefs. That means we will likely see a lot more litigation around this matter. One thing the ruling points out is that showing hostility toward religious and philosophical beliefs (as commission members were shown to have done) makes it easier to stake a claim that religious freedom under the First Amendment is being violated. The court was able to find that the law was not being applied in a religiously neutral fashion, neither favoring nor disfavoring religious beliefs; the problem was not that the law itself was discriminatory, but the way the state commission went about applying it.

But the ruling also makes it clear that the current facts on the ground (esp. Obergefell) have changed things since this matter first came up (i.e., the questionable legality of same-sex marriage is not something a future business person can use as a defense). It also strongly affirmed that “the laws and the Constitution can, and in some instances must, protect gay persons and gay couples in the exercise of their civil rights.”

That’s not necessarily all a bad thing, even if the headlines around the case are disheartening.




Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case – CNNPolitics
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a cake to celebrate the marriage of a same sex couple because of a religious objection.

Original Post

Un-American

RT @WalshFreedom: I hope EVERYONE realizes how un-American it is to say that people who don’t stand for the Anthem should leave the country.

On the NFL putting a stop to anthem protests

RT @Popehat: Political correctness is ruining free speech in America. To fight it, we insist that professional athletes participate in nati…

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” on Anthem Protests in the NFL

Amid angry tweets from the President, loud shouting from some football fans, and declining ratings (which were declining even before the episode), the NFL has partially caved on the whole “taking a knee during the national anthem” thing. Under the new rules, which basically go back to the status quo ante of some years ago, players will no longer be required to be out on the field during the anthem, but, if they are, they will be required to “show respect” during the anthem, including standing, etc.

So players will not be, arguably, compelled to perform political speech, or be obliged to act patriotically. But only in the context of not being visible. Any actual protest they have about things (e.g., the original concerns expressed about police actions against African-Americans) will need to find another venue or opportunity.

I’ll be curious to see what comes next. The nationalists will crow that they’ve put “those people” in their place (the President is already blathering about it). The underlying issues remain unresolved. How many players will choose to sit out the anthem behind the scenes, and how will that work?

And will the fans who claim they stopped watching because of this actually turn around and start watching (assuming they actually stopped)?

It’s an easy compromise for the NFL owners. I’m not sure it will truly make anyone happy (except for a few dolts), but it will mean the owners aren’t getting angry calls from the White House, so I guess that means that their biggest concern is addressed.




washingtonpost

View on Google+

Making prison a bit less humane, a bit less hopeful

Prison serves three purposes: to incarcerate (segregate criminals from the general population), to punish (discouraging criminals from committing crimes in the future), and to rehabilitate (to give criminals the ability to rejoin society someday in a productive fashion).

The American penal system — supported, sadly, by a large chunk of the American public — have largely given up on that third purpose. And as a result, prison becomes more harsh, and more likely to create repeat offenders.

This latest set of policy changes in the federal prison system is emblematic. Books are no small thing in prison. They can be materials that help train or inspire a prisoner in changing their life. They can be a way to occupy oneself that isn’t a communal TV or causing trouble.

And now, by federal fiat, they will be much, much more expensive, and much less convenient to acquire.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting that prisoners should have it easy. But I’m not sure making it harder on them in this way is helpful.

In parallel, federal prison regs now make it more difficult to stay in touch with people on the outside, by forcing all prisoner email contact lists to be unique — two prisoners with the same friend on the outside, or family member, or pen pal (or, perhaps, journalist associate) will have to go through a special process for both of them to be able to correspond.

Because further isolation of prisoners is surely going to help them have lives to return to outside.

And making it harder for journalists to stay in touch with prisoners will certainly improve prison conditions, too, right?




New Federal Prison Policies May Put Books and Email on Ice
The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is quietly rolling out a pair of new policies that could restrict access to books and communications…

View on Google+

On redesigning an icon

I’m fascinated by modern iconography, and reducing information into a compact symbol that is easily understood and universally applied.

This article about the efforts (some of them inadvertent) to redesign the famous wheelchair / accessibility icon, and the emotions and controversy that’s raised, is pretty fascinating, too.




The Controversial Process of Redesigning the Wheelchair Symbol – Atlas Obscura
It has its own emoji, but where did the new Accessible Icon come from?

View on Google+

In the words of Martin Luther King

On the 50th anniversary of his assassination. Via WIST:

I must confess, my friends, the road ahead will not always be smooth. There will be still rocky places of frustration and meandering points of bewilderment. There will be inevitable setbacks here and there. There will be those moments when the buoyancy of hope will be transformed into the fatigue of despair. Our dreams will sometimes be shattered and our ethereal hopes blasted. We may again with tear-drenched eyes have to stand before the bier of some courageous civil rights worker whose life will be snuffed out by the dastardly acts of bloodthirsty mobs. Difficult and painful as it is, we must walk on in the days ahead with an audacious faith in the future.
— “Where Do We Go From Here?” Southern Christian Leadership Conference (1967)

A nation that continues year after year to spend more on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.
— “Beyond Vietnam,” speech, Clergy and Laity Concerned, Riverside Church, New York City (4 Apr 1967)

“Which of them shall be accounted greatest?” Let the churches stop trying to outstrip each other in the number of their adherents, the size of its sanctuary, the abundance of wealth. If we must compete let us compete to see which can move toward the greatest attainment of truth, the greatest service of the poor, and the greatest salvation of the soul and bodies of men. If the Church entered this kind of competition we can imagine what a better world this would be.
— “Cooperative Competition / Noble Competition,” sermon outline

We must meet hate with love. We must meet physical force with soul force. There is still a voice crying out through the vista of time, saying: “Love your enemies , bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you.” Then, and only then, can you matriculate into the university of eternal life. That same voice cries out in terms lifted to cosmic proportions: “He who lives by the sword will perish by the sword.” And history is replete with the bleached bones of nations that failed to follow this command. We must follow nonviolence and love.
— “Give Us the Ballot,” Speech, Prayer Pilgrimage for Freedom, Washington, DC (1957)

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit together at the table of brotherhood; that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
— “I Have a Dream,” speech, Washington, DC (28 Aug 1963)

Segregation is a cancer in the body politic which must be removed before our democratic health can be realized. The underlying philosophy of segregation is diametrically opposed to the underlying philosophy of democracy and Christianity and all the sophisms of the logicians cannot make them lie down together.
— “Keep Moving from This Mountain,” Spelman College (10 Apr 1960)

We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws, because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail, and we shall still love you. Bomb our homes and threaten our children, and we shall still love you. Send your hooded perpetrators of violence into our community at the midnight hour and beat us and leave us half dead, and we shall still love you. But be ye assured that we will wear you down by our capacity to suffer. One day we shall win freedom, but not only for ourselves. We shall so appeal to your heart and conscience that we shall win you in the process, and our victory will be a double victory.
— “Loving Your Enemies,” sermon, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery (17 Nov 1957)

This simply means that there is some good in the worst of us and some evil in the best of us. When we discover this, we are less prone to hate our enemies. When we look beneath the surface, beneath the impulsive evil deed, we see within our enemy-neighbor a measure of goodness and know that the viciousness and evilness of his acts are not quite representative of all that he is. We see him in a new light. We recognize that his hate grows out of fear, pride, ignorance, prejudice, and misunderstanding, but in spite of this, we know God’s image is ineffably etched in being. Then we love our enemies by realizing that they are not totally bad and that they are not beyond the reach of God’s redemptive love.
— “Loving Your Enemies,” Sermon, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery (25 Dec 1957)

As long as there is poverty in the world I can never be rich, even if I possess a billion dollars. As long as millions of people are inflicted with debilitating diseases and cannot expect to live more than thirty-five years, I can never be totally healthy even if I receive a perfect bill of health from Mayo Clinic. Strangely enough, I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be.
— “Remaining Awake through a Great Revolution,” Commencement Speech, Morehouse College, Atlanta (2 Jun 1959)

It may well be that we will have to repent in this generation. Not merely for the vitriolic words and the violent actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence and indifference of the good people who sit around and say, “Wait on time.”
— “Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution,” sermon, National Cathedral, Washington, DC (31 Mar 1968)

It may well be that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition is not the glaring noisiness of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. It may be that our generation will have repent not only for the diabolical actions and vitriolic words of the children of darkness, but also for the crippling fears and tragic apathy of the children of light.
— “The Christian Way of Life in Human Relations,” speech, General Assembly of the National Council of Churches, St Louis (4 Dec 1957)

Any church that violates the “whosoever will, let him come” doctrine is a dead, cold church, and nothing but a little social club with a thin veneer of religiosity.
— “The Drum Major Instinct,” sermon, Ebenezer Baptist Church, Atlanta (4 Feb 1968)

And so Jesus gave us a new norm of greatness. If you want to be important — wonderful. If you want to be recognized — wonderful. If you want to be great — wonderful. But recognize that he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. That’s a new definition of greatness. And this morning, the thing that I like about it: by giving that definition of greatness, it means that everybody can be great, because everybody can serve. You don’t have to have a college degree to serve. You don’t have to make your subject and your verb agree to serve. You don’t have to know about Plato and Aristotle to serve. You don’t have to know Einstein’s theory of relativity to serve. You don’t have to know the second theory of thermodynamics in physics to serve. You only need a heart full of grace, a soul generated by love. And you can be that servant.
— “The Drum Major Instinct,” sermon, Ebenezer Baptist Church, Atlanta (4 Feb 1968)

The time is always right to do what’s right.
— “The Future of Integration” Finney Chapel, Oberlin College (22 Oct 1964)

It may be true that morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law cannot change the heart but it can restrain the heartless. It may be true that the law can’t make a man love me, but it can restrain him from lynching me, and I think that’s pretty important also.
— “The Other America,” speech, Stanford U. (1967)

A riot is the language of the unheard.
— “The Other America,” speech, Stanford U. (1967)

In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
— “The Trumpet of Conscience,” Steeler Lecture (Nov 1967)

We must honestly admit that capitalism has often left a gulf between superfluous wealth and abject poverty, has created conditions permitting necessities to be taken from the many to give luxuries to the few, and has encouraged smallhearted men to become cold and conscienceless so that, like Dives before Lazarus, they are unmoved by suffering, poverty-stricken humanity. The profit motive, when it is the sole basis of an economic system, encourages cutthroat competiotion and selfish ambition that inspire men to be more I-centered than thou-centered.
— “Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?” ch. 3 (1967)

The gospel at its best deals with the whole man, not only his soul but his body, not only his spiritual well-being, but his material well being. Any religion that professes to be concerned about the souls of men and is not concerned about the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them and the social conditions that cripple them is a spiritually moribund religion awaiting burial.
— Pilgrimage to Non-Violence (1960)

The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.
— Strength to Love (1963)

The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a nonconforming minority.
— Strength to Love, 2.3 (1963)

Men often hate each other because they fear each other; they fear each other because they don’t know each other; they don’t know each other because they can not communicate; they can not communicate because they are separated.
— Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story (1958)

True peace is not merely the absence of tension; It is the presence of justice.
— Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story, ch. 2 (1958)

To accept passively an unjust system is to cooperate with that system; thereby the oppressed become as evil as the oppressor. Non-cooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. The oppressed must never allow the conscience of the oppressor to slumber. Religion reminds every man that he is his brother’s keeper. To accept injustice or segregation passively is to say to the oppressor that his actions are morally right. It is a way of allowing his conscience to fall asleep. At this moment the oppressed fails to be his brother’s keeper. So acquiescence — while often the easier way — is not the moral way. It is the way of the coward.
— Stride Toward Freedom, ch. 11 “Three Ways of Meeting Oppression” (1958)

Now the judgment of God is upon us, and we must either learn to live together as brothers, or perish together as fools.
— The Trumpet of Conscience (1967)

The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.
— Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (1967)

We are called to play the good Samaritan on life’s roadside; but that will be only an initial act. One day the whole Jericho road must be transformed so that men and women will not be beaten and robbed as they make their journey through life. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it understands that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.
— Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? ch. 3 (1967)

To ignore evil is to become an accomplice to it.
— Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? 3.2 (1967)

If our nation had done nothing more in its whole history than to create just two documents, its contribution to civilization would be imperishable. The first of these documents is the Declaration of Independence and the other is that which we are here to honor tonight, the Emancipation Proclamation. All tyrants, past, present and future, are powerless to bury the truths in these declarations, no matter how extensive their legions, how vast their power and how malignant their evil.
— Emancipation Proclamation Centennial Address, New York City (12 Sep 1962)

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.
— Letter from Birmingham Jail (16 Apr 1963)

In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.
— Letter from Birmingham Jail (16 Apr 1963)

We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people. We must come to see that human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and persistent work of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, and forever realize that the time is always ripe to do right.
— Letter from Birmingham Jail (16 Apr 1963)

I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will.
— Letter from Birmingham Jail (16 Apr 1963)

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”
— Letter from Birmingham Jail (16 Apr 1963)

We are challenged on every hand to work untiringly to achieve excellence in our lifework. Not all men are called to specialized or professional jobs; even fewer rise to the heights of genius in the arts and sciences; many are called to be laborers in factories, fields and streets. But no work is insignificant. All labor that uplifts should be undertaken with painstaking excellence. If a man is called to be a street sweeper he should sweep streets even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say “Here lived a great street sweeper who did his job well.”
— Sermon, New Covenant Baptist Church, Chicago (9 Apr 1967)

It is all right to tell a man to lift himself up by his own bootstraps, but it is a cruel jest to say to a bootless man that he ought to lift himself up by his own bootstraps.
— Sermon, Passion Sunday, National Cathedral (31 Mar 1968)

With Selma and the voting rights bill one era of our struggle came to a close and a new era came into being. Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we know that it isn’t enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t earn enough money to buy a hamburger and a coup of coffee?
— Speech to Striking Sanitation Workers, Memphis, Tennessee (18 Mar 1968)

Less than a century ago, the laborer had no rights, little or no respect, and led a life which was socially submerged and barren. He was hired and fired by economic despots whose power over him decreed his life or death. […] American industry organized misery into sweatshops and proclaimed the right of capital to act without restraints and without conscience. […] The inspiring answer to this intolerable and dehumanizing existence was economic organization through trade unions. The worker became determined not to wait for charitable impulses to grow in his employer. He constructed the means by which fairer sharing of the fruits of his toil had to be given to him or the wheels of industry, which he alone turned, would halt and wealth for no one would be available.

This revolution within industry was fought bitterly by those who blindly believed their right to uncontrolled profits was a law of the universe, and that without the maintenance of the old order, catastrophe faced the nation. But history is a great teacher. Now everyone knows that the labor movement did not diminish the strength of the nation but enlarged it by raising the living standards of millions. Labor miraculously created a market for industry, and lifted the whole nation to undreamed-of levels of production. Those who today attack labor forget these simple truths, but history remembers them.
— Speech, AFL-CIO Convention, Miami (11 Dec 1961)

If a man hasn’t discovered something that he would die for, he isn’t fit to live.
Speech, Detroit (23 Jun 1963)

On some positions cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?” Expediency asks the question, “Is it is politic?” Vanity asks the question, “Is it is popular?” But conscience asks the question, “Is it right?” There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right.
— Speech, Santa Rita, Calif., (14 Jan 1968)

Yes, if you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. Say that I was a drum major for peace. I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter. I won’t have any money to leave behind. I won’t have the fine and luxurious things of life to leave behind. But I just want to leave a committed life behind.
— Sermon, Ebenezer Baptist Church (4 Feb 1968)

 

View on Google+

Trump makes it clear who his bestest buddy is

I have no doubt that Donald is wildly impressed by and envious of Vlad’s 75% victory (not to mention the ease with which Vlad suppressed the opposition and the media). I have no doubt that Donald wishes he could do those same things. “Congratulations on the victory!”

Oh, and that nerve agent attack that everyone — including portions of the US government, at least in theory — are blaming Russia for? Never came up in the conversation. Because, y’know, even if it’s not fake news, Donald probably thinks it’s kinda cool super-spy stuff that he wishes we were doing to his our enemies.




Trump congratulates Putin on his reelection, discusses ‘arms race’ – The Washington Post
The U.S. president confirmed the call and said he hopes to meet with Putin “in the not too distant future.”

View on Google+

Agitation

A thought for an MLK, Jr., Day, from Frederick Douglass:

The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august claims, have been born of earnest struggle. The conflict has been exciting, agitating, all-absorbing, and for the time being, putting all other tumults to silence. It must do this or it does nothing. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.

— Frederick Douglass (1817-1895) American abolitionist, orator, writer
Speech on West India Emancipation (4 Aug 1857)

More on variations of this quotation here.

View on Google+

Hoist by his own Twittard

Donald Trump keeps getting into trouble based on things he’s said, and that’s now swung around to the prisoners at Guantanamo. The US Supreme Court has allowed a variety of shenanigans around Gitmo based on the idea that there is some vague sense of due process to deal with the people who are being stashed there.

But a group of the prisoners there are now suing in federal court over their detention, saying that Trump’s repeated statements that as far as he’s concerned, they’re locked in and he’s throwing away the key, regardless of any formal testing and disposition of their individual capture and imprisonment, violates that SCOTUS premise, and the constitutional requirement that all people in the purview of the US government are entitled to due process.

Will this go anywhere? Hard to say. But if it does, it will be part and parcel of Donald Trump’s inability to keep his mouth shut (or his sense that he needs to keep throwing red meat to his nativist base, whatever the cost).




Guantánamo inmates claim Trump’s ‘anti-Muslim bias’ fuels their detention | US news | The Guardian

View on Google+

Tweetizen Trump – 2018-01-08: “A Very Stable Genius At That!”

Been a long time, Donald, but I’d like to hit some, um, “highlights” from your Twitter stream over the past week. Because some of it was highly entertaining.

I’m going to ignore most (but not all) of the various Iran and Pakistan and North Korea and Palestine tweets, because your throwing gasoline onto campfires in diplomatic matters is pretty well known already. I’ll just pick a few others to look at.

It may seem a foreign concept, Donald, but have you ever heard that old saying about flies, honey, and vinegar? Are you really accusing the Justice Dept. of being some sort of “Deep State” conspirator (apparently so) and then expecting them to do stuff for you?

It kinda sounds that way.

As to the Abadin matter, the reality of what was released doesn’t seem to align with your description, nor with anything to do with “sailors pictures on submarines”.

Yeah, Donald, pretty much everyone had a laugh over this fraudulent erroneous tweet. Commercial jet deaths have been in decline for twenty years. There were no commercial passenger deaths world-wide in 2017, not just in the one country where you have some indirect control, for one thing. And the last US commercial passenger jet death in the US was back in 2009.

And the White House explained what you meant by “very strict”: an announcement that the Air Traffic Control system would be modernized and semi-privatized (no work on which has happened yet), and the various travel bans announced through DHS (which don’t seem at all related to “Zero deaths in 2017”).

So no idea what you’re going on about, Donald.

On the other hand, your FAA head has just left, and you have no replacement nominated. Tell me how that helps your safety record going forward, Donald. [6]

Whining that you’re not being treated fairly is what 9-year-olds do, Donald. I mean, really.

Oh, by the way, Donald, the NYT is still not failing. Just saying.

So what “RESULTS” are you and the GOP showing for DACA, aside from saying, “No deal unless I get my wall“? Nothing much I can see.

Oh, Donald.

First off “We have taken Jerusalem, the toughest part of the negotiation, off the table” isn’t negotiation, it’s bullying. I mean, really, Donald.

Also, so what have the Israeli (to whom we contribute BILLIONS OF DOLLARS a year in just military aid) actually done about talking peace?

What are you, Donald, ten years old?

Or just compensating for something else by touting your “bigger & more powerful” “button”?

Yeesh.

 

So Donald “I never quit” Trump is admitting that opposition from states to turn over personally identifiable private information on their voters, sometimes in violation of their own laws, to be dumped into an unsecured database through an insecure process, is enough to make you quit?

Of course. Because it was all just for show, Donald. You just want to be able to continue to claim that you lose the popular vote in 2016 because of “voter fraud.”

Oh, the whole “mostly Democratic States” thing? Really not all that true, Donald.  Nor is your assertion that “many people are voting illegally.” [13]

So let’s try this, Donald. Push for an initiative for a national identification card, with the primary purpose to make sure that everyone can get one, that it won’t be subject to additional fees and weird document needs and limited hours and oh, yeah, we just closed the place that does that in your neighborhood shenanigans that the GOP has pulled on state voter ID.

Do that, and I might be inclined to think you’re actually serious about this, Donald.

Are you still going on about that, Donald?

At any rate, the ideas that (a) the national anthem is played as a tribute to soldiers, or (b) that soldiers consider NFL players taking a knee in protest of police violence against minorities as an insult to them, and that therefore (c) glurgy Facebook memes of a veteran’s widow at a military cemetery is somehow a germane argument is …

… well, it’s another case of not knowing whether you are goofy enough to believe it, Donald, or simply want to stir up your hyper-nationalist base.

That’s accompanied by a (of course) Fox News chart about the Dow Jones Industrial Average breaking 25K.

Actually, a look at the DJIA for the last ten years shows a pretty steady climb from the depths of the Great Recession brought on by the last GOP Administraion. I mean, I know that you prefer to look at the last year alone, rather than the preceding decade (as that means that your Democratic predecessor gets some credit, the horror!), but it’s sort of sloppy statistics to take credit for everything when you’re standing on the record of those who come before.

Really? Because I’m pretty sure I saw it headlined everywhere, Donald.

That’s kind of a misleading statement, Donald.

We all love it when you come up with names for your ostensible enemies. It’s even funnier (or more pathetic) when you do it to people who you used to call allies and advisors and friends and supporters.

Vindictive, much?

Aside from the unfounded assertion that it was a “fraudulent” comment, vs. an erroneous one (something he clearly stated later in the day in issuing a correction), you’ve not only (once more) gone over his punishment for it, but called for greater punishment.

You are kind of a mean person, you know that, Donald?

So, first off, Donald, if “there’s no such thing as bad publicity,” then you scored big time with this triptych of tweets. I mean, amazing, zany stuff.

Not to be contradictory or anything, but just to clarify a few points.

  1. Russian collusion has not been proven a total hoax. I’m not sure where you get that from, Donald, but it’s clearly untrue.
  2. Ronald Reagan was, in fact, suffering from dementia during his time in the White House. It was covered up by White House staff and family at the time, but it was known to be the case and is a matter of record today. So … really, not the best defense.
  3. I don’t know that anyone has ever talked about your having a reputation for mental stability, but you have been known in the past as a very sharp, clever operator (which I guess we can take as a proxy for “smart”). However, as I’m sure you are aware (or once would have been), Donald, being “smart” and “stable” at age 20, or 30, or 40, or 50, or 60, is not at all an indicator of where you are at age 71.
  4. Hillary Clinton did not go down in flames. She garnered more popular votes than you, and your electoral victory was a modest one. That doesn’t mean you aren’t President, but, really, Donald, it’s unbecoming and a bit worrisome that you keep repeating the same (inaccurate) attacks over, and over, and over.
  5. Hyperbole is not your friend, Donald. You are not a sharpie real estate mogul any more. Claiming to be a “genius,” “and a very stable genius at that!” is not only really kind of goofy, but … well, it’s not really the sort of thing that is proven by asserting it, but by others observing it in your actions and words.

Actually, Donald, you’ve decried any criticism — even stuff using live quotes from you — as “fake news” from the first day you announced. This followed a long pattern of threatening to sue media outlets that posted material that you didn’t like.

The real problem, Donald, is that it’s unclear whether this is merely a rhetorical tactic (the quasi-grown-up equivalent of a grade-schooler answering ever accusation or criticism with a loud “Nuh-UH!”), or whether you’ve actually slipped a cog and simply believe that by denying it you can you make it all untrue.

 

I think, perhaps, it’s best to let the public make that judgment by watching the video of the interview (where Tapper basically had to cut off Miller who simply wanted to tout Trump as a triumphant genius without answering any questions) [2]

 

I have to ask our studio audience, is anyone else disturbed by the President of the United States not merely letting truth prevail (as Jefferson put it) when he feels falsely accused, but personally supporting creating a Media Event to mock journalists and news organizations he claims are “corrupt and biased”?

Because I’m disturbed by it.

Harry Truman suggested that those who can’t stand the heat should get out of the kitchen. Perhaps you consider that advice, Donald.

That is to say that people who have the money to invest in the stock market are making (if they cash out before it dips back down again) oodles of money. How much of that money is actually benefiting the folk who aren’t gambling on the market?

And let’s also be real — that creation of “value” is illusory. It’s creation of electronic records of wealth — nothing tangible is actually produced when the market goes up (or is lost when it goes down). And because of the nature of the market, the value only “exists” while a minimum number of people actually try to draw on it. If everyone went and sold off all their stock value increases over the past year, the market itself would crash and “lose” tremendous value.

Also the whole job thing? Kind of weird that you’d take credit there, given that job growth in 2017 was actually lower than job growth in 2016. Obama also managed to take the unemployment rate from 10% in the depths of the Great Recession down to 4.8% when he left office; the current 4.1% is nice, but not that huge of a change — certainly nothing in improvement approaching the continued stock market records.

—

Welp, that’s about it. Man, these things take a long time to write up, which is why I’ve largely given up doing so regularly, but it’s good to see the zaniness, narcissism, fragile ego, and lies haven’t diminished any since I stopped doing so. Hang in there Donald — I’m sure the rest of 2018 will be a hoot ad a half as well.

View on Google+

All those post-1791 constitutional amendments are just ruining this country

And in another fun bit of Roy Moore trivia, in a 2011 appearance on a whackadoodle conservative radio show, he opined that getting rid of all those amendments to the Constitution beyond the first Ten would “eliminate many problems.”

His spokesfolk have come out and declared that, no, he really only meant the 14th and 17th Amendments. Or maybe more, but those are the ones he’s really peeved at.

It is kind of weird, though, that he’d just be interested in getting rid of two when agreeing with the show host about voiding all the amendments after the first 10 he said, “That would eliminate many problems.” I mean, that would include 17 other amendments, not just two. Why wouldn’t he say, “Well, I disagree with a couple,” so that people didn’t think he wanted to allow slavery again, or undo women’s suffrage, or get rid of extending the vote down to 18, restricting a president to two terms, barring poll taxes, or barring denial of the right to vote based on race?

Anyway, let’s assume for argument that he only has a mad-on about 14 and 17.

17 is a bugbear for conservatives, calling for US Senators to be voted for by a state-wide election, not by state legislators. Moore really dislikes that one, apparently because he doesn’t trust the state citizenry, or else because he liked the problem that progressives sought to fix with this amendment, that state legislators are easily bought off, and therefore by extension so are the US Senators they are selecting.

14 is the real kicker here. That post-Civil War amendment [1] was designed to make it clear that: (a) freed slaves — in fact, all African-Americans — born in the US were US citizens, (b) all US citizens have a right to due process under the law, including state and local laws, and that (as interpreted by the Supreme Court), the provisions of the US Constitution trump those of state constitutions and local laws, and (c) all people in the US must be treated equally by the law: federal, state, and local.

Moore just doesn’t like it because it means states don’t have ultimate rights.

The danger in the 14th Amendment, which was to restrict, it has been a restriction on the states using the first Ten Amendments by and through the 14th Amendment. To restrict the states from doing something that the federal government was restricted from doing and allowing the federal government to do something which the first Ten Amendments prevented them from doing. If you understand the incorporation doctrine used by the courts and what it meant. You’d understand what I’m talking about.

Looking at the quote … I have no idea what he is talking about, except that the 14th Amendment lets the feds restrict what state governments can do. That seems to be a cardinal sin in Moore’s book.

For example, the right to keep and bear arms, the First Amendment, freedom of press liberty. Those various freedoms and restrictions have been imposed on the states through the 14th Amendment. And yet the federal government is violating just about every one of them saying that — they don’t they don’t — are not restrained by them.

Yes, how horrible that those Bill of Rights rights have been “imposed on the states through the 14th Amendment.” Yet, somehow, Moore thinks that the federal level is (or is claiming it is) not subject to the Bill of Rights, which is kind of weird given that they are part of the federal constitution and are litigated in federal courts all the time.

But let’s stick a pin in this:

  • Roy Moore doesn’t think the citizens of Alabama should be voting for him; he’d prefer if the Alabama state legislature had that right.
  • Roy Moore thinks that “equal protection under the law” and “due process” should be the choice of each state.
  • Roy Moore thinks that other federal protections in the Bill of Rights should be up to the states, too.

Roy Moore might believe some other things, based on his broad dismissal of Amendments 11-27 … and he said a lot of really interesting things in those radio shows … but I think focusing on the above is sufficient.

——
[1] Because he last felt that America was great at a time when “despite slavery” we were somehow a bunch of united families. That implies that after the Civil War ended slavery (as confirmed by the 13th Amendment), America was no longer great.




Roy Moore in 2011: Getting rid of amendments after 10th would ‘eliminate many problems’ – CNNPolitics
Alabama Republican Senate nominee Roy Moore appeared on a conspiracy-driven radio show twice in 2011, where he told the hosts in an interview that getting rid of constitutional amendments after the Tenth Amendment would ‘eliminate many problems’ in the way the US government is structured.

View on Google+

Coming soon to a pulpit near you: “Vote for This Guy”

While it didn’t make a big splash in the initial analysis of the House tax reform bill, one provision in there is interesting and disappointing in both small and large ways.

The GOP bill will repeal the Johnson Amendment which, back in the 1950s, basically said that a church (or other charitable organization) that was enjoying tax-exempt status could not, in turn, engage in political activity in favor of a specific candidate, because the tax exemption was going to support their charitable work, not their partisan politicking.

While the Johnson Amendment is rarely actually invoked by the IRS, it’s been a bugbear for conservative Christians as a suppression of their Religious Freedom. “How can we possibly preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ freely,” they cry, “if we can’t urge all our parishioners every Sunday to vote for Donald Trump?”

(Note: campaigning on behalf of a political candidate is an activity of the Kingdom of Earth, not the Kingdom of Heaven. This is nowhere more apparent than Christian churches supporting Donald Trump. Thus endeth the lesson.)

Of course, this provision in the tax bill will be much more consequential than just allowing even-more-partisan sermons on Sundays. It’s been suggested that repealing the Johnson Amendment will make activist conservative churches the target for massive voter donation money laundering schemes — all of it tax deductible, to boot! — oversight of which will be zealously resisted by conservative Christians who think that they should be able to directly influence the State, but the State shouldn’t have an control over them — even as they sell their heritage for a mess of pottage.




Trump Tax Bill Repeals Limits on Politicking From the Pulpit

View on Google+

Because who needs diverse voices?

The US has had powerful restrictions on media outlets — newspapers and television stations — for several decades. Though they have been tweaked and made a bit less restrictive over the years, they have continued ensure that single media companies, or a small number of mega-companies, cannot take over the nation’s broadcasting and print journalism.

Ajit Pai thinks that’s silly, and is single-handedly, as head of the FCC, dismantling those protections. Because what could go wrong with a single company owning multiple news stations in a particular market, or companies distributing broadcast local news from a centralized out-of-state source, or companies owning newspapers everywhere? How could that possibly impact the quality and diversity of the information that American need now more than ever?

Fiddlesticks. says Commissioner Pai. Business efficiency and hamstringing the government against restricting oligarchies are clearly far more important causes than that.




Ajit Pai submits plan to allow more media consolidation
Rules that preserve media diversity in local markets will be eliminated.

View on Google+

Best government banking money can buy

The Trump Treasury Dept. has come out publicly against a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rule that says a limited set of banks cannot use forced arbitration clauses to block class action suits against them. Because of course they did.

The GOP members of the House have already passed a CRA resolution to undo the CFPB’s rule. The GOP leadership of the Senate is moving forward with its side of the CRA to finalize the rule’s appeal. Because why should anyone ever need to sue a bank, or band together in a class action against something untoward or fraudulent a bank has done. I mean, that sort of thing never happens, right?




Treasury Dept. Says You Shouldn’t Have The Right To Sue Your Bank Or Credit Card Company
Forget the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the “right to a speedy and public trial” in criminal matters. And who needs that ancient Seventh Amendment and its fancy “right of tri…

View on Google+

‘You aren’t here for the hunting, are you?”

A series of unfortunate events:

  1. Mike Pence attends a football game where he knows there will be anthem protests.
  2. Mike Pence says in advance he will leave the game if there’s an anthem protest.
  3. Mike Pence leaves the game because there was an anthem protest.
  4. Mike Pence raises a stink about it on Twitter, asserting without basis that the protesters are disrespecting soldiers and hard-working Americans, and including a picture of himself standing during the anthem in 2014 (never considering that someone had to be distracted by taking that picture rather than paying attention to the national anthem).
  5. Mike Pence notes that his boss, Donald Trump, told him to leave the game if this happened, but that he did it willingly.

Sort of sounds like he went there intending to make a counter-protest of his own.

Heck, sounds like he’s one of the folk (along with his boss) adding “politics” to a sporting event.

If you go someplace knowing you will be offended by something you know will happen, in order to point out how offended you are, don’t you have to take at least some responsibility for being offended yourself?

[h/t +Stan Pedzick]




Mike Pence leaves San Francisco 49ers-Indianapolis Colts game over protesting during national anthem

View on Google+

Political speech cannot be compelled by the state

And that includes some publc school districts levying punishment to student athletes who take a knee during the national anthem.

You cannot force someone by law or other threat of state punishment to express (or not express) political sentiment. That includes patriotic displays. It would be as wrong (and illegal) to tell someone they must say or do something patriotic as to tell them they must not.

The Supreme Court has been very clear on this, dating back to the pretty-hyper-patriotic days of the Second World War. They ruled in Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette that students could not be compelled to pledge allegiance to the flag (emphasis mine), as it would be a violation of the First Amendment’s freedom of speech:

If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.

It that’s so for an explicit expression like the Pledge of Allegiance, how much more so for standing or hand-over-hearting for a patriotic tune? And calling something a “tradition” or saying that such protest must be done “respectfully” (i.e., out of sight) is no way to dodge around it, either.

Regardless of how one feels about the merits of such national anthem protests, they are in their own way more attuned to what the flag and the nation behind it stand for than “officials, high or petty” demanding behavioral orthodoxy and expressions of patriotism under threat of penalty.




What the Supreme Court Says About Sitting Out the National Anthem
Some public schools are telling student athletes they can’t kneel during the anthem – but that’s unconstitutional.

View on Google+

Jeff Sessions says it’s okay to fire transgender workers again

Because of course he did. Probably with a prayer on his lips and a song in his heart.

The U.S. Department of Justice has reversed course on whether federal law banning sex discrimination in the workplace provides protections for transgender employees, saying in a memo that it does not. The memo sent to U.S. Attorneys’ offices on Wednesday by Attorney General Jeff Sessions says Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 only prohibits discrimination on the basis of a worker’s biological sex, and not their gender identity.

Sessions rescinded a Justice Department memo from 2014 that said Title VII does protect transgender people, a position also taken by several federal appeals courts in recent years.




U.S. anti-bias law does not protect transgender workers -Justice Dept

View on Google+

Tweetizen Trump – 2017-10-01: “Again with the Tweeting!”

Donald! It’s been weeks and weeks since I’ve delved into your Twitter stream. Honestly, it stopped being fun repeating the same mantra (“That’s untrue, Donald. That’s a distortion, Donald. You already said that, Donald. That’s silly, Donald. That’s unbecoming, Donald.”) every day.

But, hey, this weekend seems to have been a perfect storm of Twittiness that bears at least some acknowledgment. So let’s remember how we were doing this zaniness and have at, starting with Saturday morning!

PUERTO RICO (and the US VIRGIN ISLANDS)

What remains a deep, dark, terrible mystery in your Presidency, Donald, is how seriously to take you. When you make comments like this, should we assume that you actually believe (maybe because Fox News told you) that the media are actually saying harsh things government relief workers in Puerto Rico? Should we assume that you believe criticism of the magnitude (or lack thereof) of the relief effort is a criticism of the hard, painful, backbreaking work being done on the ground? Or should we read this as a casual ploy to deflect criticism of you, Donald, into being criticism of those relief workers?

In other words, Donald, are you nuts, or simply lying? I look forward to the answers in the history books of the future.

In the meantime, Donald, cite your facts. Tell us where CNN or NBC are “disparaging” FEMA and other relief workers on the ground. What specifically have they said?

In fact, the White House was asked about specific coverage, and didn’t have any answers. And a review of those networks’ coverage shows that they talked about the clear hardships being experienced there, the problems in getting relief to people around the island because of its devastated infrastructure, and criticism of the job that you and your administration (not the boots on the ground) were doing in addressing the problems.

Nobody’s criticizing those “First Responders.” They’re criticizing you.

(By the way, I’m not sure “First Responders” is the correct term here. That is usually reserved for Police and Fire Fighting folk. Disaster relief is a bit different. Again, this could be simple terminology confusion on your part, or could be an intentional effort to make it seem like the media is criticizing Fire Fighters and Police about Puerto Rico.)

Well, I guess that’s better than hanging out in New Jersey over the weekend and playing golf (even if you did nobly dedicate the golf trophy to hurricane victims).

So what are you planning on doing there, Donald? Will this in any way reflect an increase or escalation in government effort to assist the disaster relief efforts? Or just be another photo op?

No, the media are working overtime to show how your authorized efforts are inadequate to the task. They aren’t blaming soldiers, etc., they are blaming you. And you’re trying to dodge it.

Great people, yes. Amazing job, certainly by the individuals there. Adequate job to the task? Really, it seems not.

So when people don’t complain, and instead praise you, then you lavish them with complements. When someone, like Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz of San Juan, says that efforts aren’t happening fast enough and that people are suffering and dying, you criticize their leadership and their people.

That is, perhaps, very human of you, Donald (nobody likes being called out for criticism) — but not very leaderly.

Also, it helps explain in party why some people choose to complement you.

They would respond, Donald, but they have no power or cell phone infrastructure to see your tweet.

Sigh. I would reply to each of your tweets, Donald, but they all fall into the same pattern: complement people who are complementing you, assert that you are doing incredible stuff, pretend that criticism of you is criticism of relief workers on the ground, accuse Fake News of being fake. Lather, rinse, repeat.

So let’s just quote the tweets for effect.

 

That one came with a nine minute video with the caption “KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK & IGNORE THE FAKE NEWS! I want everybody on the ground in PR & USVI assisting in Hurricane Maria relief efforts to know that we are grateful & thankful to all of you! Ignore the FAKE NEWS & keep up the GREAT WORK! THANK YOU!”

I will leave it at that, except to suggest that “all buildings now inspected for safety” in Puerto Rico, an island of 3.4 million, where trucks can’t even bring food and water supplies, is so ludicrous as to not even warrant a snort.

I mean, come on, Donald — at least pretend to be giving us an accurate report.

AND IN OTHER CRITICAL LEADERSHIP NEWS …

You then retweeted:

https://twitter.com/SLandinSoCal/status/912099544975806464

So let me say this about that:

1. Compelled political speech — and, yes, this is political speech — is not only unconstitutional as a government order, but unseemly as a suggestion.

2. Why do you get to dictate what people are actually protesting about?

3. This, this is what you are spending time tweeting about, both these and other messages last week? In what universe is this a national priority that deserves the Bully Pulpit?

Heck, someone might think you were merely trying to rile up some support after, I don’t know, you failed (once again) to repeal Obamacare, had to fire your HHS Secretary, faced mounting criticism over Puerto Rico, and ran out of schoolyard insults toward North Korea.

4. This is pretty much the same hand-waving you did above regarding “If anyone is criticizing me, they are criticizing the hard-working folk on the ground in Puerto Rico.” Asserting that criticism of the how our nation is handling one piece of public policy (albeit a profoundly important piece) is somehow spitting in the faces of military alive and dead and denigrating everything our nation stands for is silly at best, and dangerously offensive at worst.

5. I will throw out to your supporters this particular piece I found online.

If you voted for someone who said he prefers soldiers who don’t get captured, who insulted the parents of a gold star captain, who said he knew more than the generals, who said he always wanted a Purple Heart, who dodged the draft, and who called the US military a disaster, please don’t pretend that you’re angry at those who kneel during the anthem because it’s disrespectful to our military.

And if you voted for that person because he’s not politically correct and he says what’s on his mind, please don’t tell me that kneeling during the anthem is wrong.

And if you voted for a reality show star because he’s an outsider and not a career politician, please don’t tell me that athletes shouldn’t voice their political views.

And if you voted for him because he cares about the Constitution, please don’t tell me that people shouldn’t exercise their right to free speech.

And if you voted for him because, despite his wealth and comfortable life, he was willing to go out there, be made a target, and say what’s really wrong with this country, please don’t tell me that black athletes should just shut up and be grateful to be rich.

In other words, Donald, there’s no reason to listen to you as a moral authority on this subject (or, in my opinion, any subject.)

THAT’S STRANGE …

I’m sure Luther Strange comforts himself with that thought now every night he goes to sleep.

I mean, how freaking insecure do you have to be, Donald, to be saying, “Well, hey, even though I said he’d be elected, even though I campaigned hard for him, even though he lost, at least he rose in the polls because of me”?

Hell, even Breitbart snickered over that one.

It also doesn’t help your case, when you start deleting tweets you made in support of Strange. Yeesh.

AND IN CASE ANYONE HAD STOPPED WORRYING ABOUT NUCLEAR WAR …

That’s just great, Donald. People are really nervous about North Korea, and the prospect of nuclear-tipped DPRK missles landing on Guam … or Hawaii … or Alaska … or the West Coast of the US. Or even Japan, or South Korea, or pretty much anywhere.

And then, after the world watching you and Kim trade insults like gang chieftains in a back alley, we learned, much to some relief, that there were actual diplomatic channels open between Us and Them — nothing guaranteed, but, for the love of God, people actually talking and negotiating, rather than double-dog daring each other. Tillerson, your Secretary of State, even reassured us that “Americans should sleep well at night.”

Which … you then pissed all over, undercutting your own chief of foreign policy. Again.

I’m sure that Americans will sleep even better, knowing you are at the helm.

View on Google+

The Rambling-to-the-Point-of-Incoherence President

I’d say this zany stream of consciousness was remarkably entertaining, if it weren’t coming from the freaking President of the United States.

This reads like being trapped with your drunken Uncle Fred in the parlor at Thanksgiving and having to listen to him babble through all his pet peeves while taking long swigs of Wild Turkey at key moments. Except that everyone else in the parlor is yelling and screaming and cheering and egging him on.

Really, this is a deeply disturbing story.

(If anyone can dig up some glaring contradictions between what was reported and this video of the event, I’d actually be grateful. I can’t bring myself to watch it for an hour and a half.)




‘I love Alabama — it’s special’: At rally for Sen. Luther Strange, Trump vents frustrations in rambling speech
Trump said that his endorsement of Sen. Luther Strange might have been a mistake. He also said a lot of other things over nearly 90 minutes.

View on Google+