ChrisWeigant.com

My 2015 "McLaughlin Awards" [Part 1]

[ Posted Friday, December 18th, 2015 – 19:24 PST ]

Welcome to our year-end awards columns!

As we do every year, we are pre-empting our regular "Friday Talking Points" column, in order to bring you our "best and worst of 2015" list. In homage to our regular Friday columns, we will continue to gleefully abuse the privilege of using the editorial "we" throughout, so get used to that.

Speaking of homage-ing, our very title is, as always, a nod to The McLaughlin Group, who came up with these awards categories for their own year-end shows. We say "homage" with every degree of courtesy and respect, in the hopes that this column won't ever get sued for copyright infringement (to which we would reply: "Fair use!" and "Satire!"... heh).

Just to warn everyone, this is going to be a long column, but it's broken up into smaller chunks for each of the awards. Even regular readers of "Friday Talking Points" may not make it to the end, where we bestow the Person of the Year award, so if you hang in there for the whole thing, our hats are off to you for your stamina!

As always, some of you may seriously disagree with some of our picks (this year, more than most, in fact). If this turns out to be the case, feel free to offer up your own choices in the comments.

Oh, one other technical note -- due to the calendar (which, we hasten to add, is outside our control), the "Part 2" companion to this column will run next Wednesday, not Friday. This is because Christmas and New Year's fall at the end of the week this year, so we had to work around this situation. So check back next Wednesday to see the rest of this year-end best and worst list.

OK, that's enough intro-ing, let's just get right to the awards, shall we?

 

Trophy
   Biggest Winner Of 2015

This is often an easy category to call, which was indeed the case in 2015. Gay marriage was the Biggest Winner of the year, easily. This is actually the second time gay marriage has won this award, as it also won the 2013 Biggest Winner award, it's worth noting. But while 2013 was indeed a transformational year, 2015 will go down in history as when the big Supreme Court case happened which guaranteed marriage equality all across America.

The high court had set up the situation for this case two years prior, when it refused to rule on the basic question of whether gay marriage was a constitutional right or not. Everyone (us included) predicted at the time that there would be a much bigger second case -- although we certainly didn't expect it to happen so soon (given the glacial pace of the federal court system).

But this June, the Supreme Court did indeed rule on the basic legal question, and it was a clear victory for gay rights. The Republicans have now been reduced to fighting what the military would correctly call a "rear-guard action" (sorry about that) ever since, squabbling over wedding cakes and court clerks. Republican presidential candidates barely even mention the issue anymore, since they know it's a losing political proposition for them, at this point.

Capping off the American victory for gay marriage, the people of the Republic of Ireland -- notorious in the past for being almost theocratic in its deference to the Catholic Church -- actually voted for gay marriage. By doing so, they became the first country on Earth where the voters loudly proclaimed their support for marriage equality.

All around, it's pretty easy to see that gay marriage was clearly the Biggest Winner of 2015.

 

Trophy
   Biggest Loser Of 2015

Two Republicans were in the running for Biggest Loser of the year, but neither John Boehner (who lost his speakership through a revolt in his own party) nor Scott Walker (who was going to be the great Midwestern hope for the party's presidential aspirations) really rose to being an award-level loser.

Instead, the Biggest Loser of 2015 was the Confederate battle flag. This treasonous rag was previously almost ubiquitous across the South, as the descendents of traitors flew it proudly to celebrate their "heritage" of once being able to own other people. Now it is coming down. The transition isn't complete, but you know the end is nigh when even NASCAR starts begging people not to publicly display. There has been a big shift in what is considered socially acceptable, even in the South.

The change, sadly, came as a result of domestic terrorism. When a murderous killing spree happened in a black church in Charleston, South Carolina, the nation was shocked to its core. The victims were targeted solely because of their race. This led South Carolina's governor, the Indian-American Nikki Haley, to call for the Confederate flag's removal from her statehouse grounds. When this flag came down, it was the start of a new era of how the flag (and other commemorations of the Confederacy) would now be seen by the country at large.

As noted, the transition is not complete -- the Mississippi state flag still uses the Confederate image, for instance. But states have been given the OK by the Supreme Court to ban the image from their vehicle license plates, and even this week the city of New Orleans announced it'll be taking down four statues of Confederate heroes. So progress is being made, faster in some locations than others. But the country's attitudes underwent a sea change during 2015, which is why we're giving the Biggest Loser award to the Confederate flag.

 

Trophy
   Best Politician

We're going to make an easy prediction before announcing the Best Politician award: You're going to get tired of reading this man's name in these awards. Yes, there's simply no way around it. Donald Trump was the Best Politician of the year.

Trump doesn't even like being called a politician, it's worth noting, but he certainly does seem to be good at it. Previously considered nothing more than a political joke, Trump has been threatening to run for president for over a decade, now. This year he turned out not to be kidding about his ambitions.

Nobody's laughing much now. Trump started his campaign off by saying incredibly offensive things, and he now enjoys the position of being able to say increasingly offensive things without paying a political price for doing so. In fact, the opposite is true -- his approval actually goes up when he says offensive things.

From the start of his campaign, Trump has absolutely dominated the Republican field in the polling. Only one other candidate (Ben Carson) has even gotten anywhere near besting Trump in the polls, in fact. His most recent poll numbers among Republican voters were 38 and 41 percent -- when the rest of the field struggles (and mostly fails) to even hit 15 percent.

Donald Trump is astonishing pretty much everyone within the Beltway who does politics for a living. Nobody foresaw his rise, nobody would believe he could sustain it, and even now most are still engaging in some form of magical thinking to reassure themselves that Trump can't possibly be the Republican nominee (our favorite from the past week alone: "Trump will get beat by Ted Cruz in Iowa, and then get so annoyed at not winning that he'll drop out of the race before New Hampshire even votes").

Donald Trump has completely upset the apple cart of American politics. Love him or hate him, you've got to admit that no other political figure even came close to the attention Trump has gotten in the past six months. Trump is unquestionably the Best Politician of the year.

 

Trophy
   Worst Politician

Of course, we do realize that it depends on how you define these awards where you would place Donald Trump. An argument could very easily be made that Trump is the "worst" politician to appear on the American stage since the Civil Rights era. But we choose to define the terms in a different way, which leads us to name Jeb Bush the Worst Politician of 2015.

Jeb (or, as he wants us to call him, "Jeb!") Bush was supposed to have completely wrapped up the Republican nomination by now. He had a master plan, after all. It was to raise so much money that all other competitors would quietly bow out of the race for the nomination. This money would then be spent attacking Hillary Clinton and reminding everyone that Jeb was "the smart one" in his generation of Bushes.

Obviously, this plan was seriously flawed. Or, perhaps, the plan was a good one (his super PAC raised a whopping $100 million before anyone else's campaign had even gotten their shoes tied, really), but the candidate was flawed. For whatever the reason, Jeb Bush's lackluster campaign is somewhat of an embarrassment these days for all the Establishment Republicans who shoveled mountains of cash into the project. Jeb didn't even scare anyone off from running (unless you count Mitt Romney), and the Republican field at one point had a whopping 17 people running.

Jeb Bush, by almost any measure, was the Worst Politician of 2015. We almost feel sorry for Jebbie, and can easily picture him skulking back home to Florida, where he will spend his days rocking back and forth in a crouch, mumbling: "It wasn't supposed to be this way!" Poor Jeb. Or, to be charitable to his exclamatory campaign theme one last time: Poor Jeb!

 

Trophy
   Most Defining Political Moment

There were quite a few nominees for the Most Defining Political Moment. An easy case could be made for Donald Trump's campaign announcement, where he began by labeling Mexicans as "rapists." That pretty much defined not only his campaign, but the entire Republican campaign -- xenophobia would be the big theme for the rest of the year.

John Boehner's ouster as Speaker of the House, in any normal year, would likely have been the Most Defining Political Moment. Speakers don't get forced out every day, to put this another way.

But, sadly, we have to give this award to two different series of events. The first was the terrorist attacks in France. At the start of the year, we were all Charlie Hebdo. At the end of the year, an absolute massacre was carried out in Paris. In between, some Americans thwarted an attempted shooting on a train. The terrorism in France focused the world's attention dramatically on terrorism in general and the Islamic State in particular. It was a tragedy, but it was also a definitional political moment.

The second series of events that wins Most Defining Political Moment was the relations between African-Americans and the police in American cities. Last year, we had Ferguson. This year, we had riots in Baltimore, and a video release in Chicago. Videos -- from body cameras and dashboard cameras -- were really the most "defining" aspect of these events, in fact, as America watched on their nightly news how some cops have awfully itchy trigger-fingers. This year also saw the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, which arose as a reaction to all of these events. Which is why "videos of cops shooting black men" was equally the Most Defining Political Moment of the year.

 

Trophy
   Turncoat Of The Year

We briefly considered the Tea Party, again for their ouster of Boehner, but then we remembered what the Senate was up to this year.

The entire Republican caucus in the Senate wins the Turncoat award this year, for their disgraceful actions in the run-up to the Iran nuclear pact. Not only did the Senate Republicans invite Bibi Netanyahu to essentially use the floors of Congress as his own campaign ad (to win an election back in Israel), but they actually tried to conduct their own foreign policy to undermine the president's negotiations.

I used the words previously when discussing the Confederate flag, but they are just as appropriate here. When the Senate Republicans wrote a letter to the government of Iran trying to scuttle the talks between them and the Obama administration, it was illegal (see: the Logan Act), it was traitorous, and it bordered quite closely on outright treason.

Think that's too strongly worded? Imagine, if you will, what Republicans would have said if (for instance) Senate Democrats had written a similar letter to the Soviet leaders in Russia while Ronald Reagan was in the process of negotiating a pact with them. Think Republicans would have shied away from using such language? I don't, which is why I do use such language.

What the Senate Republicans did was to turn their coats against America in ways that had previously been considered unthinkable. They all win Turncoat of the Year, without question.

 

Trophy
   Most Boring

This was a tough choice between two candidates, but while Jeb Bush was pretty darn boring, just on stylistic points alone we have to give Most Boring to Ben Carson.

His speaking style even seems to put him to sleep, after all. In fact, just the thought of listening to a Ben Carson speech in full is making us... very... sleepy. [Yawn!] Excuse us, we've got to go lie down for a nap, now.

 

Trophy
   Most Charismatic

We define "charismatic" neutrally -- you can have good charisma or bad charisma, but we measure the award by total charisma without regard to direction.

This is a polite way for apologizing for giving another award to Donald Trump. Of course, we do realize that different people define "charisma" in their own ways, but the way we measure it, nobody else really even came close. OK, maybe Joe Biden, as he struggled with the decision to run for president after tragically losing his son -- that might be the only example from the past year to even merit consideration.

But the winner of Most Charismatic is clear. Donald Trump has launched what political historians would likely label a "cult of personality," and it has been confounding the Republican Party ever since he started. Frank Luntz, who makes his living holding focus groups to figure out what Republican voters are thinking, has pronounced that he's never personally seen anything like the Trump phenomenon.

The core of Trump's support: people simply do not care what he says -- this is why whenever he says something incredibly outrageous, Trump's support goes up, not down. Trump supporters like the way Trump talks, not what actually comes out of his mouth. And (as Luntz and others are starting to realize), they are much more loyal to Trump than even to the Republican Party.

If that isn't a working definition of political charisma, we don't know what is. With gritted teeth, we have to reluctantly admit that Donald Trump is indeed the only possible choice for the Most Charismatic award.

 

Trophy
   Bummest Rap

This was a tough one to decide, because there were two bum raps in 2015 that were both hyped almost beyond belief, with a compliant media going along for the ride. The first was all the hoopla over the Iran nuclear deal, which (just for starters) did not "give" Iran hundreds of billions of dollars. It unfroze money that was always Iran's to begin with, which is not the same thing as the U.S. handing over taxpayer dollars to Iran, as many critics inferred. There was plenty of apocalyptic rhetoric deployed about this deal, and almost none of it bore any relation to the actual facts of the deal. What with the Bibi speech to Congress and Republicans going full-on "the end is nigh," the Iran nuclear deal got a very bum rap indeed this year.

But the winner in this category was "Benghazi!" -- and, in particular, the bum rap that Hillary Clinton was personally directing terrorists to attack U.S. personnel (or something -- it was indeed hard to keep up with the conspiracy theories surrounding Benghazi). Clinton spent a very long day testifying before a House committee specifically designed to blunt her chances of becoming president -- an abuse of power we haven't seen from Congress in a long time. Clinton emerged unscathed from this hearing, with nary a scratch on her. This bum rap has been around a very long time now, but Republicans have yet to realize that their continued hyperventilating over Benghazi is not now (if it ever even was) doing them any good politically at all. Benghazi was the Bummest Rap of 2015, and Hillary did a great job of rising above it.

 

Trophy
   Fairest Rap

Well, let's see... there were quite a few to choose from in the Fairest Rap category. The "blade runner" guy who got his conviction upheld (and increased, in fact) in South Africa. The world's soccer gurus (FIFA) are possibly the most corrupt sports leaders outside of the Olympic committee. Dennis Hastert was a pedophile predator and paid a whopping amount in blackmail to cover it up. Deflategate, with Tom Brady wiping his phone data. The Ohio marijuana legalization ballot initiative would have legalized a weed oligopoly in the state. There are probably lots of others that escaped our notice, as well. A good case could be made that "Bernie Sanders's entire platform" is indeed the Fairest Rap of the campaign season (towards Wall Street in particular).

But we've got to say that the Fairest Rap this year came from the media world, not the political one. Brian Williams took a very hard fall this year, and it was entirely deserved. BriWi (as we like to call him) had a sort of side career to his anchoring the NBC news show, that of being a charming guest on late-night television, where he would regale the host with his personalized stories of the intensity of his experiences in all sorts of crises (Hurricane Katrina, war stories, etc.). This BriWi cottage industry rose up to bite him in the nether regions this year, when he was exposed as a serial liar (or, to be more charitable, a serial exaggerator) in just how personalized these stories became, over time, after BriWi told them over and over again -- with the stories morphing from "this happened while I was there" to "this happened to me, and I witnessed it." BriWi was kicked off NBC (to be replaced by Lester Holt), and demoted to some sort of anchor emeritus on MSNBC. BriWi lied, he was fired, and he even got a much cushier gig than anyone else who lied about the news should have. It was all the Fairest Rap of 2015.

 

Trophy
   Best Comeback

Gay marriage made a spectacular comeback at the Supreme Court, but we've already given a big award for that. Hillary Clinton likewise made a big comeback in her Benghazi hearing, too, but she's already gotten an award for that as well. In sort of a generic big-picture sense, the American economy continued its comeback from the Great Recession, as unemployment hit five percent -- exactly half of the ten percent of its highest Great Recession spike, in Obama's first year in office. The economy's doing so well that the Fed just saw fit to raise interest rates for the first time since the collapse.

But we've got to hand the Best Comeback award to Secretary of State John Kerry. Kerry's low point, of course, was losing the 2004 election to George W. Bush. Not much more needs be said about that, really. But he is now in the job that will likely be his last one in his political career, and he's been achieving things at a frenetic pace.

After Hillary Clinton stepped down (when Obama won his second term), John Kerry was tapped to lead the State Department. Since then, an amazing amount of foreign policy has been conducted. Cuba has been reopened, which ended the Cold War for good. That's a spectacular achievement, although reportedly the Pope and the White House had more to do with working the deal out than the State Department. Still, it's been up to Kerry to implement (the deal was actually announced in 2014, but the implementation has happened this year). The Iran nuclear deal likewise ended decades of non-contact between America and Iran -- another historic milestone, and one that can be directly chalked up to Kerry's work. Kerry can also take credit for the recently-announced climate change pact worked out among all the planet's nations. That's a lot of achievements, and even when Kerry failed to reach his goals (most notably, on getting the Israelis and Palestinians together), you could at least admire his lofty ambitions and dedication to solving seemingly-intractable problems on the world's stage.

So, from the depths of losing a presidential campaign to what will likely be seen as his political crowning achievements, Secretary of State John Kerry deserves the Best Comeback award.

 

Trophy
   Most Original Thinker

First, an honorable mention in this award category, to Bruce Roter, the man behind the effort to create a Museum of Political Corruption in Albany, New York. As we've seen over the year, there are plenty of Albany politicians (from both sides of the aisle) who were indicted for the rankest corruption this year alone, which makes the choice of Albany an easy one for the first such museum in the country. The museum effort achieved non-profit status this year, and now counts Zephyr Teachout as one of its supporters, so if you're looking for a good cause to donate to this holiday season....

Also worth mentioning was Thomas Piketty and his book on economics, but we checked and the book actually came out in 2014, which we considered disqualifying for this year. He certainly was a very original thinker on the subject and made a gigantic splash with his book, though.

But we've got to give the Most Original Thinker award to none other than Bernie Sanders this year. Now, it could certainly be argued that Bernie's populism and his demonization of Wall Street isn't exactly new. It could also be argued that other Democrats on the presidential campaign trail have trod this path before (John Edwards and Howard Dean, to name just two). But Bernie's campaign has caught fire in such a way that it could not be ignored -- even with the almost-complete media blackout on Bernie news.

Bernie's been pulling in crowds of thousands and thousands of people ever since he started running. I personally attended a Bernie rally in Phoenix last summer, where 11,000 other people showed up to hear what Bernie had to say. And that was in the summer -- long before most people even started paying attention. Bernie just announced he has now topped 2,000,000 individual donations, which has set a record for any presidential campaign (and it's not even 2016 yet). Bernie Sanders has shown that economic populism is exactly what a large portion of the electorate wants to hear right now, and he's been a remarkably strong and consistent voice throughout the campaign. For that feat, he deserves Most Original Thinker.

 

Trophy
   Most Stagnant Thinker

This one, sadly, is pretty easy. The Islamic State (a.k.a. ISIL, or ISIS, or Daesh) is stagnant in the extreme, since they truly want to take society back to the Dark Ages -- say, about 1,000 years ago.

In fact, we consider this award so obvious that little more needs be said about it. The Islamic State's thinking is downright paleolithic, and needs to be consigned to the dustbin of history, like the rest of the Dark Ages.

 

Trophy
   Best Photo Op

An absolute plethora of choices filled the Best Photo Op category this year. On literal grounds, the Pluto flyby by NASA certainly qualifies, as it was a photo op many years in the making and the pictures were absolutely spectacular (especially to those of us who still refer to "the planet Pluto").

Another geeky nominee was this year's "Pi Day" which was the most spectacular ever, at precisely 3/14/15 -- 9:26:53, which is the exact value of pi, to ten places. There won't be another such moment for 100 years, making it notable indeed.

The opening of Cuba certainly produced historic photos, as did gay people getting married in every state in the country this summer.

From the campaign trail, the Bernie Sanders mega-rallies were certainly photogenic (I personally snapped a few decent shots of one, if I do say so myself). The most amusing photo op from the campaign trail, however, was the video loop of all the journalists frantically chasing Hillary Clinton's "Scooby Van" at one of her first campaign appearances. It's rare indeed when the mainstream media turns the lens on its own idiocy, and this was one of the best examples in years.

Using a different definition of "best," all the cop shooting videos certainly qualified -- because without those videos and photos, a whole lot of these incidents would never have risen to the media's attention. Poor people complaining about police brutality? The media yawns. Video of a cop shooting an unarmed poor person, and then later lying like a rug about what happened? Now that's a story!

But, sadly, our Best Photo Op came as a result of one of the many, many shooting tragedies which happened this year. President Obama is, even as we write this, meeting with the family members of those killed in the most recent shooting tragedy, which is a grim milestone to note. But his best moment came in the wake (or, more accurately, "at the wake") of the Charleston church shooting victims. Whether it was spontaneous or planned (it certainly caught the organist by surprise, from the video), President Obama broke into a solo rendition of "Amazing Grace" as part of his eulogy in the church, and eventually the rest of the congregation (and the organist) joined in with him. It was a poignant moment, and it was also (sadly) the Best Photo Op of the year.

 

Trophy
   Worst Photo Op

Once again, in sadness, there were many bad photo ops to choose from this year. The Baltimore riots. All those cop videos (if you define the award categories differently). Paris (twice -- let's not forget "Nous sommes Charlie Hebdo"). Mike Huckabee milking the release from jail of a county clerk who refused to do her job because she wanted the religious right to be a bigot. The misleadingly-edited abortion videos which attacked Planned Parenthood.

Two incidents stood out from all of this, however. The first was the photos of Walter Palmer gleefully celebrating killing Cecil the Lion, in Zimbabwe. That was a pretty bad photo op, and led to righteous (and well-deserved) outrage from animal lovers everywhere.

But we cannot put an animal's life above a human's, so the Worst Photo Op from 2015 was the photo of a dead Syrian child washed up on a Turkish beach. The refugee crisis between Turkey and Greece (and the rest of the European Union as well) was the most heartbreaking news of 2015, in fact. And the photos of a tiny corpse who didn't make it absolutely defined the issue in the world's press. We were all forced to confront the reality of the plight of these refugees from a brutal war by seeing someone's son tragically lost during the harrowing voyage many of these refugees have attempted. Clearly the Worst Photo Op of the year.

 

Trophy
   Enough Already!

This category is a complete free-for-all, as always.

Immigrant-bashing -- Enough already!

Refugee fearmongering -- Enough already!

Trump's Mexican wall -- Enough already!

Brian Williams -- Enough already!

Michele Leonhart, ex-head of the D.E.A. -- Enough already!

Secret Service sex (and other) scandals -- Enough already!

John Boehner -- Enough already!

Denny Hastert -- Enough already!

Selfies -- Enough already!

Mass shootings -- Enough already!

10-candidate debates -- Enough already!

Benghazi -- Enough already!

Hillary's emails -- Enough already!

And finally, a bit of wishful thinking:

Donald Trump -- Enough already!

 

Trophy
   Worst Lie

Donald Trump's entire campaign? Well, at the very least, Trump asserting that most folks crossing the southern border were "rapists" and "criminals." That's the big lie that got his campaign rolling, so it deserves singling out. As does Ben Carson's biography, which is now seen as following in the fine Brian Williams tradition of "just makin' stuff up."

Volkswagen's "cheat mode" to beat smog tests was a pretty egregious example of corporate lying. Then there was Deflategate, of course.

But the Worst Lie of the year had to be both the Planned Parenthood videos, and pretty much everything Carly Fiorina had to say about them while debating. Planned Parenthood does not "profit" from selling fetal tissue, no matter how the videos were edited to make this lie appear true. They have been investigated by multiple state governments since the videos came out, and they have been exonerated by each and every one. The charge simply isn't true. But that hasn't stopped Republicans from taking the lie and running hard with it. Planned Parenthood doesn't even cover its administrative costs any more (which was fully legal, mind you), in an effort to discredit the lie further. The Worst Lie of the year was the Planned Parenthood videos, and everything said about them by Republicans since (led by Carly in a nationally-televised debate).

 

Trophy
   Capitalist Of The Year

You can charge us with personal bias in this one, and there's a certain degree of truth to that, we have to admit. The 2015 Capitalist of the Year award goes to the remaining members of the Grateful Dead.

The Jerry Garcia-less Dead staged five concerts this year, as a "Fare Thee Well" final tour. They appeared in Chicago and the San Francisco Bay Area, and charged a whole bunch of money for the tickets, in order to further fund the bandmembers' retirement. Then, immediately after these "last concerts ever," almost all of them announced an extended tour to rake in even bigger piles of cash from their fans.

Now, don't get us wrong -- we attended the California shows and enjoyed the experience immensely. The music was great, the crowd was even better, we saw friends we haven't laid eyes on in decades, and in general a great time was had by all. Oh, this reminds us that one of these shows really should have qualified for a Best Photo Op award, when a spectacular double-rainbow appeared over the stadium after a sprinkling of rain (which was not, as initially reported, a $50,000 fake, we might add).

Still, no matter how much we personally enjoyed the event, it has to be noted on purely capitalist grounds (is that Jerry spinning in his grave I hear?). It's a tough cookie for some idealistic hippies to swallow, but the remaining members of the Grateful Dead were indeed the Capitalists of the Year.

 

Trophy
   Honorable Mention

This is another one of those anything-goes categories.

The 150th anniversary of the surrender at Appomattox Court House, which ended the Civil War, is certainly worth an Honorable Mention.

American Pharoah deserves a mention for winning horseracing's Triple Crown -- the first time any horse has won since 1978.

The documentary film (which aired on PBS this year) titled 1971, which chronicled the same events as Betty Medsger's book The Burglary, certainly deserves an Honorable Mention. Any fan of Edward Snowden should really check this extraordinary story out.

Let's see, who else? Angela Merkel for being the strongest leader in Europe over the past year, but then she's already been given a prestigious award by a magazine for her efforts.

Joe Biden, who ultimately declined to run for president this year, which disappointed many Biden fans within the Democratic Party. Biden's personal anguish was on public display after the death of his son Beau, and he handled his grief in laudable fashion.

Jim Obergefell, whose name will forever be synonymous with gay marriage in American history. Obergefell joins Marbury, Dred Scott, Miranda, Brown (from Brown v. Board of Education), and Roe (a pseudonym, but still), as a member of an elite group of people whose names have entered the common vernacular because of significant Supreme Court cases.

The Kurdish peshmurga, who are the most successful group fighting the Islamic State, certainly deserve accolades.

Women in the military who are now free to attempt qualifying for every combat job that males are able to compete for.

And, finally, the driverless car, which is going to be a reality on American roads a lot faster than you might now think.

 

Trophy
   Person Of The Year

Once again, this is going to cause many of you to cringe. Fair warning, and all of that.

Donald Trump was the 2015 Person of the Year. There's just no getting around it.

Whether he wins the Republican presidential nomination or not, and whether he's our next president or not (hopefully not, but you never know...), 2015 will always be remembered by political historians as the Year Of The Donald. Trump-mania exploded shortly after he announced his run, and it shows absolutely no signs of abating any time soon. This has astonished, frightened, terrified, and absolutely blown the minds of approximately everyone inside the Beltway -- especially the Republican Party bigwigs.

There's no other way to put it -- Donald Trump has successfully hijacked the Republican Party. They are all scared to even take him on, in the fears of his supporters bolting from the party en masse. Beyond this explosion of anxiety and angst within the party, Trump's continued success has given rise to a level of "magical thinking" which is unprecedented in Washington (at least in our memory) -- most of it coming from the media. Here's a quick timeline of this magical thinking, as a review:

Trump's not really running -- he threatens this every cycle.

Trump is a joke. Nobody will support him -- they'll just laugh at him.

Trump said what about Mexicans? He's toast.

Trump is just the "flavor of the month" -- he'll implode soon.

Trump is just a "summer romance" -- his numbers will fall in the fall.

Trump said what about John McCain? Wow -- stick a fork in him, he's done.

Trump said what during the debates? That's it -- the beginning of the end.

Trump will not be the Republican nominee, because the voters will wake up at the last minute.

Trump said what about Muslims? He's finally gone too far this time.

Trump won't win the nomination, but he might run as a third-party candidate.

Trump might -- at best, mind you -- cause a brokered convention, where the party bigwigs will deny him the nomination.

Trump is going to quit the race in a huff, right after he loses Iowa to Ted Cruz.

Now, we may have missed a few bits of magical thinking in there ("Trump said what about women?" springs to mind), but it's a pretty fair recap of Washington insiders all convincing themselves -- and echoing such pronouncements between themselves -- that there was just no possible way that Trump's support was in any way solid or real. Of course he won't win the nomination (they all tell each other at cocktail parties), such a thing is simply inconceivable.

We call this magical thinking because there is absolutely nothing factual to back it up. It's all a big "gut feeling" call by pretty much everyone in the media and the political class. And, so far, it simply has not happened, no matter how many times it has been predicted. Trump is the clear frontrunner to win the Republican nomination. He has absolutely defined the Republican race. Every other candidate reacts to Trump's pronouncements, if they want to get covered by the news at all. Trump has spent very little money on his campaign because he hasn't needed to -- he's gotten all the free television time he wants, and he doesn't even bother (in most cases) to give in-studio interviews. He's literally phoning his campaign in, all the while beating the pants off every other Republican in the field. Only one man -- Ben Carson -- has ever bested him in the polling averages, and Carson only managed this feat for less than a week, before he started his own spectacular slide back towards political oblivion. Other second-place candidates are still struggling mightily to pull in even half of Trump's support.

For dominating not only the Republican Party but the entire presidential campaign for six months now, and for being the biggest political story for pretty much that entire period, Donald Trump is the clear choice for Person Of The Year. We apologize for the pick -- we don't like it any better than you, in other words -- but our motto has always been "reality-based political commentary," and it is simply impossible to ignore the reality of Trump's dominance of American politics in 2015.

 

[See you next Wednesday, for the conclusion of our 2015 awards!]

 

If you're interested in traveling down Memory Lane, here are all the previous years of this awards column:

2014 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]
2013 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]
2012 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]
2011 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]
2010 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]
2009 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]
2008 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]
2007 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]
2006 -- [Part 1] [Part 2]

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

100 Comments on “My 2015 "McLaughlin Awards" [Part 1]”

  1. [1] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Update:

    Reload the page to see the updated Pledge Drive graph. We're almost at 3/4ths of our goal. Woo hoo! Let's keep those donations coming in, folks, or I'm going to have to unleash the kittens once again!

    :-)

    -CW

  2. [2] 
    Michale wrote:

    The change, sadly, came as a result of domestic terrorism.

    Except... it wasn't....

    There were quite a few nominees for the Most Defining Political Moment. An easy case could be made for Donald Trump's campaign announcement, where he began by labeling Mexicans as "rapists."

    Except... he didn't... :D

    It was a tragedy, but it was also a definitional political moment.

    It wasn't a tragedy!! According to our esteemed POTUS, it was a "setback"... :^/

    Think that's too strongly worded? Imagine, if you will, what Republicans would have said if (for instance) Senate Democrats had written a similar letter to the Soviet leaders in Russia while Ronald Reagan was in the process of negotiating a pact with them. Think Republicans would have shied away from using such language? I don't, which is why I do use such language.

    Or, imagine Nancy Pelosi going to Syria to undermine President Bush...

    Oh wait.. We don't HAVE to imagine it..

    Because it really happened...

    The misleadingly-edited abortion videos which attacked Planned Parenthood.

    Except... they weren't...

    But we cannot put an animal's life above a human's, so the Worst Photo Op from 2015 was the photo of a dead Syrian child washed up on a Turkish beach.

    Nailed that one...

    Immigrant-bashing -- Enough already!

    Except... no one is bashing immigrants...

    Trump asserting that most folks crossing the southern border were "rapists" and "criminals."

    Except.... he didn't...

    Planned Parenthood does not "profit" from selling fetal tissue, no matter how the videos were edited to make this lie appear true.

    Except... they do...

    With the exception of the Trump awards (Trump is more Democrat than anything else) you really gave the Democrats a break on this batch...

    Considering what a great year the Democrats had, I guess it's understandable..

    But the problem is that a great year for Democrats means it's a crappy crappy year for the country...

    I'm just sayin'....

    Michale
    510

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    Planned Parenthood does not "profit" from selling fetal tissue, no matter how the videos were edited to make this lie appear true.

    Except... they do...

    To be more accurate, they DID...

    Until they got their hands caught in the baby parts cookie jar and had to stop taking in thousands of dollars..

    No matter how you want to look at it, those videos were disgusting...

    The fact that there are Left Wingers who actually SUPPORT such barbarity???

    And what's even MORE disgusting is those same Left Wingers will whine and cry over animal testing...

    In both cases, the advancements that these provide is justification enough..

    As usual, it's the hypocrisy that really chaps my arse...

    Michale
    514

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Here's an idea for a new award..

    BIGGEST WHINERS AND WIMPS

    Students at an ultra-liberal Ohio college are in an uproar over the fried chicken, sushi and Vietnamese sandwiches served in the school cafeterias, complaining the dishes are “insensitive” and “culturally inappropriate.”
    http://nypost.com/2015/12/18/pc-students-at-lena-dunhams-college-offended-by-lack-of-fried-chicken/

    Poor little snowflakes don't get proper menu items..

    Waaaa Waaaaa Waaaaaaa

    Jeezus! It's pathetic that these fragile little snowflakes are tomorrows leaders...

    Michale
    515

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    Biggest Loser Of 2015

    It depends on how you define "loser"... If you define it in it's literal sense, that's one thing..

    But if you define it in it's colloquial sense, as in "moron" or "idiot" or "life-challenged" then the Biggest Loser Of 2015 would be the afore mentioned sensitive snowflake children of this country's universities and places of "higher" education..

    I mean, honestly.. "Safe places"??? "Time off for traumatic events"???

    If this morons need "safe places" they should have stayed at home with mommy and daddy....

    Michale
    516

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    Reload the page to see the updated Pledge Drive graph. We're almost at 3/4ths of our goal. Woo hoo! Let's keep those donations coming in, folks, or I'm going to have to unleash the kittens once again!

    Wouldn't it be awesome if we could get CW.COM over the hump BEFORE Christmas!!!

    I think that would be the FIRST time that has happened since CW.COM was born...

    Com'on people!!! Let's make some history together here!! :D

    Michale
    517

  7. [7] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale [2] -

    Are you serious? Our motto here, I hasten to remind you, is "reality-based politics" --

    When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.
    -Donald Trump, in his campaign announcement

    -CW

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

    But he was talking about ILLEGAL immigrants...

    That's the context of the entire issue...

    But ya'all constantly and consistently overlook the "ILLEGAL" part of "immigrant bashing"..

    No one.. I repeat, NO ONE has ANY problem with legal immigrants... Terrorist plants notwithstanding..

    The issue has ALWAYS been **ILLEGAL** immigrants...

    Criminals...

    It's the distinction that makes ALL the difference..

    Michale
    520

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    If Trump is so evil incarnate, so racist, so bigoted...

    If Trump is all these things...

    Why didn't we hear about it when Trump was a Democrat and showering Democrats like Senator Clinton with $$$$??

    Either Trump is NOT all that bad as ya'all claim...

    Or Trump's $$$ and political designation is all that matters...

    Which is it?? :D

    Michale
    521

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    The misleadingly-edited abortion videos which attacked Planned Parenthood.

    Edited Videos...ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!

    *EVERY* video out there on the 'Net is "edited"..

    **EVERY** video that the Left Wingery EVER used to attack the Right has been "edited"...

    So, give it a rest..

    A video that is "edited" is JUST as valid as a video that is not "edited"...

    Michale
    523

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Whooaaaa...

    Obama's RCP Poll number has taken a HUGE hit...

    Bout time!!! :D

    Michale
    525

  12. [12] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Everyone attending an awards show is supposed to get a swag bag.
    Here is my contribution.
    Trumpface sings "This land is my land".
    https://youtu.be/ZZFSGMBr4SE

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    DON!!!

    Good ta see ya again!! :D

    Trumpface sings "This land is my land".
    https://youtu.be/ZZFSGMBr4SE

    hehehehehehehe

    Too funny!!! :D

    Michale
    526

  14. [14] 
    dsws wrote:

    Imagine, if you will, what Republicans would have said if (for instance) Senate Democrats had written a similar letter to the Soviet leaders in Russia while Ronald Reagan was in the process of negotiating a pact with them. Think Republicans would have shied away from using such language? I don't, which is why I do use such language.

    Just because Republicans do it, that doesn't make it right.

    Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. We're not at war with Iran.

    The whole idea that freedom of speech vanishes when foreign countries are involved? Ludicrous. Even before the first amendment, congresscritters' freedom of speech was guaranteed in article I section 6.

    Trump supporters like the way Trump talks, not what actually comes out of his mouth.

    This wild optimism is, as far as I can see, absolutely unfounded.

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Clinton goes for the jugular after data breach

    The front-runner prepped for a policy discussion, but after the data breach, she’s ready for a different kind of debate.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/clintons-offense-will-be-personal-216962

    WOW..

    DEM ON DEM VIOLENCE

    Wonder what Hillary is worried about..

    Maybe she wants to put Bernie away before she is indicted...

    Michale
    527

  16. [16] 
    dsws wrote:

    Of course he won't win the nomination (they all tell each other at cocktail parties), such a thing is simply inconceivable.

    Points for the Princess Bride reference, although it's about Trump whereas the Princess Bride news was about Cruz.

  17. [17] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Re: Trump's comments about Mexicans

    Trump's 'understanding' is that Mexico actively picks people to send to America, and chooses the worst to do so (like when Cuba opened their jails and asylums during the Mariel boatlift). This was offered with absolutely no proof of course (when does that bother The Donald and his acolytes hem-hem).

    At this point they are Mexicans, but not illegal immigrants, they are only illegal immigrants when they either cross the border illegally, or overstay their tourist period in the U.S.

    This Chris is right - The Donald is talking about Mexicans, not illegal immigrants.

    Not that it really matters of course - it is all a big lie designed to rile up the perpetually angry.

    Donald Trump - simple solutions to complex problems for simple people.

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Clinton goes for the jugular after data breach

    The front-runner prepped for a policy discussion, but after the data breach, she’s ready for a different kind of debate.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/clintons-offense-will-be-personal-216962

    Hillary whining about political dirty tricks is like Kahless complaining that people are mean or Colonel Green complaining that people are two-faced... :D

    Michale
    528

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    This Chris is right - The Donald is talking about Mexicans, not illegal immigrants.

    That's an opinion unsupported by facts...

    Ya'all HAVE to make the argument about immigrants...

    Because, when we're talking ILLEGAL immigrants... Ya'all HAVE no argument.. :D

    Michale
    529

  20. [20] 
    Paula wrote:

    For "most charismatic" I'd have gone with Pope Francis. Trump isn't "charismatic" to me. He's simply loudly channelling the worst of the worst of the Republicans -- no one else finds him attractive. He gets attention because the media is built that way but it's as much a statement about tiresome media tendencies as anything else.

    The Planned Parenthood scam stands out to me as one of the most despicable mass-acts by repubs in a long time, and the fact that repubs around the country are still actively trying to destroy women's access to reproductive care...Yep, Biggest Lie.

    I like John Kerry as the Best Comeback.

    Biggest Loser could also be the Grilling of Hillary by the hapless Benghazi Committee -- what a sad spectacle by the inquisitors and what a great performance by Hillary!

    I'm not sure where these would fit, but a "worst" was the discovery of Homen Square in Chicago and another "worst" would be Rahm Emmanuel's response to the horrors of the Chicago PD. In this last year we have learned that many PDs across the country are corrupt and sadistic on multiple levels, and are enabled by other institutions and individuals. Sadly we have also learned just how nasty and racist many Americans are as we see the responses to the Black Lives Matter movement by America's Biggest Asswipes. ABA's are also the loudest Muslim-bashers, encouraging hate crimes against Muslims (which have, I believe, tripled this year). So another loser is the notion that racism is all over now.

    How about "Greatest Contrast?" which would be the Repub Clown Car versus the Dem field.

  21. [21] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Prediction: The Donald, China and the Yuan

    Let's hope there are no more terrorist attacks for the next year. This may be wishful thinking, but if it comes to pass, The Donald's hysteria over Islam will get a bit long in the tooth.

    Thus I predict that China is going to become Donald's new boogie man to scare the fearful.

    The reason is due to the Fed's recent rise in interest rates. The Yuan is pegged to the dollar, and the dollar has been on a tear recently, pulling the Yuan to an unsustainable high against most other currencies. Beijing has spend 1/2 trillion dollars of its reserves on currency support already, but that can't be expected to continue indefinitely (they are down from $4T to $3.5T so far).

    The Chinese government are not stupid, and they know that if/when they respond to the market pressures The Donald and the Republicans are going to go into a 'currency manipulation' fear frenzy.

    Personally I think this is going to be a 'when', so the timing will be interesting.

    If they keep propping up the Yuan for 8-9 more months, at a cost of another 1/2 trillion US$, they may be able to create a large gap between the official and market value of the Yuan, and then let it suddenly drop an eyepopping amount in September/October. This would undoubtedly be a huge 'fear-factor' boon for the Republicans just before the election.

    If the Chinese adopt a policy of slowly letting the air out of the Yuan, the first adjustment will be met with howls, but after that it will be old news and when the fearful discover it makes no difference to them, they will thirst for the next monster under their bed to be scared of.

    Wasn't "May you live in interesting times" a Chinese curse ;)

  22. [22] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Michale:

    1. Still no list of mainstream scientific theories (like evolution, the age of the planet of global warming) that any of the Democratic nominees deny (since you claimed that there were hundreds and I'm only asking for one)?

    2. How can a rapist in Mexico be an illegal immigrant? Is a Mexican visiting this country on a legal visa waiver an illegal immigrant? Thus if you accept The Donald's fearmongering about the 'rapists being sent' to the U.S., they are not illegal immigrants until a later time.

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'm not sure where these would fit, but a "worst" was the discovery of Homen Square in Chicago and another "worst" would be Rahm Emmanuel's response to the horrors of the Chicago PD.

    But Rahm is a Democrat!!!

    And he has the COMPLETE and UNEQUIVOCAL SUPPORT of Hillary Clinton...

    So, there seems to be some incongruity here.. :D

    Michale
    530

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    1. Still no list of mainstream scientific theories (like evolution, the age of the planet of global warming) that any of the Democratic nominees deny (since you claimed that there were hundreds and I'm only asking for one)?

    As I said, that's not the question..

    You claim that Democrats are ALL about "science"..

    I have PROVEN that Democrats are ONLY about the "science" that supports their agenda..

    YOU still haven't addressed the FACT that "scientists" who promote the Global Warming religion want to PROSECUTE and INCARCERATE those real scientists who dissent..

    I don't blame you.. I wouldn't want to address an issue that so totally decimates my agenda.. :D

    Michale
    531

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    2. How can a rapist in Mexico be an illegal immigrant? Is a Mexican visiting this country on a legal visa waiver an illegal immigrant? Thus if you accept The Donald's fearmongering about the 'rapists being sent' to the U.S., they are not illegal immigrants until a later time.

    So, it's your claim that a person is a "rapist" BEFORE they have committed a rape??

    Well, I guess if people are born gay, they can be born rapists..

    That makes sense.. At least from a Democrat's perspective, I spose.. :D

    Michale
    532

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    Paula,

    ABA's are also the loudest Muslim-bashers, encouraging hate crimes against Muslims (which have, I believe, tripled this year). So another loser is the notion that racism is all over now.

    You DO realize that "muslim" is a religion and not a race, right???

    But you, inadvertently I am sure :D, prove my point about the Left Wingery and false claims of racism..

    Democrats want to make EVERYTHING racism.. Even though every issue they champion has NOTHING to do with race..

    This is simply one more example of that...

    Michale
    533

  27. [27] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    Here's the transcript:

    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/06/16/donald-trump-transcript-our-country-needs-a-truly-great-leader/

    You'll note Trump doesn't qualify his statement with the word "illegal" anywhere.

    Paula -

    Good point about Rahm. Maybe I can work him in somewhere next week...

    -CW

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    You'll note Trump doesn't qualify his statement with the word "illegal" anywhere.

    Actually he does..

    When do we beat Mexico at the border? They’re laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically.

    Legal immigrants don't "beat us economically"...

    Only ILLEGAL immigrants do that..

    I realize that it's imperative for the Left to make the argument about LEGAL immigrants..

    But the argument is, always has been and always WILL be about ILLEGAL immigrants..

    Criminals...

    Michale
    534

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sadly we have also learned just how nasty and racist many Americans are as we see the responses to the Black Lives Matter

    Black Lives Matter is a PROVEN racist hate group...

    You don't do yourself any favors by holding those scumbags up as an example..

    Michale
    535

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    Good point about Rahm. Maybe I can work him in somewhere next week...

    Don't forget to include that Hillary supports Rahm completely, unequivocally and 1000%... :D

    Yea, I am a presumptuous little shit.. :D

    Michale
    536....

  31. [31] 
    Paula wrote:

    I'm not thrilled with Hillary's response to-date re: Rahm. She did call for a justice department investigation but has expressed support for Rahm. Since they have been friends for years it puts her in a nasty bind and so far she is, I think, trying to avoid it.

    My view re: Rahm is that he found out (or found out more). once elected, about the kind of shit that's been going down in Chicago, apparently for years. He was then faced with a choice about what to do and he chose the politically expedient course. He should step down but he should also come clean. He's not the only politician in America facing these kinds of choices -- Police corruption and systemic abuse seems to be pretty widespread and hasn't been dealt with very well in most places. Such situations thrive because so many people stay quiet, look the other way, or are terrorized/threatened into silence. I think genuine courage is required and Rahm could go a long way towards redemption if he lead/participated in rooting this crap out. But there has to be sunlight, starting with him.

    Friendship goes both ways -- if this is going to get hung around Hillary's neck Rahm needs to step up. I think it is a really tough call when personal loyalties are at stake. We will see what happens as things progress.

  32. [32] 
    Paula wrote:

    Michale (29): stop being such a completely idiotic prick.

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale (29): stop being such a completely idiotic prick.

    Just the facts, ma'am... Just the facts..

    If there was a group of white people espousing violence and such and were holding signs that said WHITE POWER...

    You would sure as hell label that group a racist hate group..

    Why is it any different if it's a group of black people??

    Hmmmmm???

    Michale
    537

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'm not thrilled with Hillary's response to-date re: Rahm. She did call for a justice department investigation but has expressed support for Rahm. Since they have been friends for years it puts her in a nasty bind and so far she is, I think, trying to avoid it.

    How brave of her.. {/sarcasm}

    "Party Uber Alles"

    Michale
    538

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Police corruption and systemic abuse seems to be pretty widespread

    Except.... it's not...

    But why let little things like FACTS get in the way of hysterical fear-mongering...

    Police in this country make MILLIONS of arrests every week..

    And a tiny tiny TINY fraction result in death or injury of scumbags..

    Out of that tiny tiny TINY fraction a tiny tiny tiny TINY fraction of those are controversial....

    And out of THAT tiny tiny TINY fraction of a tiny tiny tiny TINY fraction, a tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny TINY fraction are unjustified...

    "Widespread"???

    Yea... Right...

    Michale
    539

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Paula,

    Ride along on an inner city patrol.... Leave your comfort zone and see what the life of a police officer is like..

    Barring that, read the book SIGNAL ZERO...

    If you approach either honestly, you will get an idea of what cops face EVERY minute of EVERY day...

    Michale
    540

  37. [37] 
    rdnewman wrote:

    Here is an excerpt from an older Red State article about Mr. Trump financial and commercial holdings:

    Because there is absolutely no way that he would be able to meet the financial disclosure requirements, and, were he to somehow be elected, he would not, could not, put his empire into a blind trust. It wouldn’t work, and he is not going to liquidate everything and put it into Treasuries, or an index fund.

    Now the article gets rather hyperbolic (RS is no friend of Mr. Trump), but the fundamental question remains: if Trump is not willing to put his financial and commercial assets into blind trust, the diplomatic and legislative conflicts of interest seem insurmountable.

    This seems almost as big of a question of whether a candidate is a natural-born citizen.

    I'd like to see that question come up in a debate.

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    RD,

    : if Trump is not willing to put his financial and commercial assets into blind trust, the diplomatic and legislative conflicts of interest seem insurmountable.

    IF

    What has Trump said about this??

    Did Hillary put anything in a "blind trust" when she was a Senator or SecState??

    Michale
    541

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya gotta ask yourself one question, Paula..

    If Black Lives Matter is such a legitimate activist group, why do we ONLY hear from them when a cop kills a black person??

    A cop killing a black person accounts for .08% of black deaths...

    .08%

    Meanwhile, black abortions and black on black violence accounts for OVER 99% of black deaths...

    99%

    We don't hear a PEEP from BLM over THOSE issues..

    The ONLY logical conclusion we can garner from these FACTS is that, for BLM, black lives don't really "matter"...

    Pushing a racist agenda and fomenting racial strife is the ONLY raison d'être for the Black Lives Matter hate group..

    If there is a flaw in my logic, by all means...

    Point it out...

    Michale
    542

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    Paula,

    Michale (29): stop being such a completely idiotic prick.

    Hay... I gotta be me!! :D

    Michale
    543

  41. [41] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    If there is a flaw in my logic, by all means...

    how about the fact that you include abortions under the heading of "black deaths," when aborted fetuses are legally not even people. that's not so much a logical flaw as basing one's logic on untrue axioms, but it still falls under the G.I.G.O. heading.

    JL

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    Police corruption and systemic abuse seems to be pretty widespread

    Let me put it in a context that ya'all can completely relate to...

    Claiming that "police corruption and systemic abuse seems to be pretty widespread" is absolutely NO DIFFERENT than claiming "black people's violence and systemic criminal behavior seems to be pretty widespread"

    NO.... DIFFERENCE... WHATSOEVER.....

    So.....

    If ya'all want to concede the latter, I'll be happy to discuss the former...

    Anyone??? Anyone??? Beuhler???

    Michale
    544

  43. [43] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Michale:

    You may not have noticed black protests against crime and violence, but that doesn’t mean they aren't happening. Black Americans, like everyone else, are concerned with what happens in their communities, and the pundits who insist otherwise are either lying to you or willfully ignorant.

    An 'Atlantic' article from 2012 (source below) listed a small sample.

    Fox News is VERY concerned with Black Lives Matter protests however, and goes out of the way to paint them in the poorest light possible. That part you seem to be aware of.

    Have you ever felt you are being played by the media like a 2-bit kazoo? That the media is showing you what they want you to see and giving you only the facts that lead you 1. 2. 3. down their chosen decision process so you come to the conclusion that want you too?

    You are not alone, however the Internet is an amazing tool, and usually with less than an hour of research you can find different sides of an issue, then find and read the raw source materials and facts to make your own mind up.

    Source:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/04/why-dont-black-people-protest-black-on-black-violence/255329/

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    You may not have noticed black protests against crime and violence, but that doesn’t mean they aren't happening.

    Fine... prove it..

    http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/04/why-dont-black-people-protest-black-on-black-violence/255329/

    Do you have anything that is contemporary with the BLM movement???

    Nope...

    Michale
    545

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    But you miss the point...

    We're not talking about black groups..

    We're talking SPECIFICALLY about the Black Lives Matter group..

    Do you have ANY facts or evidence of THAT group protesting the black and black violence or black abortions???

    No, you do not...

    Ergo, the Movement's name is a lie..

    Because, to them, black lives DON'T "matter" unless the group can use black deaths to push a racist political agenda...

    Michale
    546

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    Do you have ANY facts or evidence of THAT group protesting the black and black violence or black abortions???

    Sorry..

    Do you have ANY facts or evidence of THAT group protesting the black ON black violence or black abortions???

    Michale
    547

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Black Lives Matter is a lie..

    Just like "Hands Up Don't Shoot" and "I Can't Breathe"...

    The BLM group has chosen to address cops shooting/killing black people..

    OK, fine.. It's not an issue by ANY stretch of ANY possible statistic, but if a group wants to protest that, more power to them..

    Just don't call it "Black Lives Matter"...

    Because, on a cosmic scale of black lives, getting killed by cops is way way way way WAY down there on the list of importance...

    The *ONLY* reason this aspect is exploited is solely and completely due to the political aspect...

    Michale
    548

  48. [48] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Michale:

    So your basic problem is you don't like the name BLM have chosen?

    Well boo-hoo ;)

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    So your basic problem is you don't like the name BLM have chosen?

    No, my basic problem is that the group is a racist hate group..

    The fact that their group name is a lie and that the lie is sucked in (and sucked up to) by the Left Wingery is merely annoying..

    The fact that you can't address the former leads me to conclude that you agree on that part...

    Michale
    549

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    I mean, honestly...

    Look at the group you are defending...

    "WHAT DO WE WANT!?? DEAD COPS!!!"
    "WHEN DO WE WANT THEM!!?? NOW!!!"

    THAT is the group you are defending??

    Seriously!???

    What would you say about a WHITE LIVES MATTER group who chants:

    "WHAT DO WE WANT!?? DEAD BLACK PEOPLE!!!"
    "WHEN DO WE WANT THEM!!?? NOW!!!"

    We both know what you would say about that.

    Michale
    550

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, of course, there is Ismaaiyl Brinsley, BLM member who brutally executed 2 NYPD officers...

    You just have to know that BLM was saying amongst themselves "Well, that's a start"..

    Anyone wanna tell me again how honorable and good the BLM racist hate group is???

    I seem to have forgotten what with all the evidence and facts to the contrary... :^/

    Michale
    551

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well boo-hoo ;)

    Heh :D

    Michale
    552

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/car-plows-pedestrians-near-planet-hollywood-killing-one-injuring-37-video

    We MUST ban cars!!!!! Tens of thousands are killed by cars every year!!!

    BAN CARS!!! BAN CARS!!!

    Especially ASSAULT CARS!!!!

    Michale
    553

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    Car plows into pedestrians near Planet Hollywood, killing one, injuring 37

    We MUST ban cars!!!!!

    Tens of thousands are killed by cars every year!!!

    BAN CARS!!! BAN CARS!!!

    Especially ASSAULT CARS!!!!

    No body has ANY reason to own a car that can go above 10mph... You just have to allocate more time to get where you are going..

    BAN CARS!!! BAN CARS!!!

    Michale
    553

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ridiculous, iddn't it..

    Blaming an inanimate object for the actions it's owner...

    Completely and utter ridiculous...

    "It's redonkulus!!!"
    -Donkey, SHRECK IV

    :D

    Like I have always said... When a gun walks into a crowd of it's own volition and makes the conscious and sentient decision to shoot people...

    Then... and ONLY then... will gun control fanatics have a legitimate argument..

    Speaking of cars...

    Interesting factoid.. There is only ONE vehicle that you CANNOT be arrested for driving drunk..

    Can anyone name it??

    Michale
    554

  56. [56] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    I'm fine treating guns and cars equally - both should require registration, insurance, a license to prove you can operate them and there should be a tax on ammo (like gasoline) to address issues with their use.

    Not sure if you like that part of your analogy?

    Or how about this, if guns and cars are simply benign objects, what about atomic bombs - why can't everybody who wants have their own nuke? What could possible go wrong - it isn't like a disgruntled nut job is going to set one off?

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'm fine treating guns and cars equally -

    Owning a gun is a constitutional right..

    Owning a car is not..

    I was merely talking about saving lives..

    If you want to go on about treating constitutional rights equally, then it makes sense to treat gun ownership and voting equally..

    I am fine with requiring registration, insurance, a license and training for voting..

    Or how about this, if guns and cars are simply benign objects,

    IF guns and cars are benign objects??

    It's a fact that they are...

    what about atomic bombs - why can't everybody who wants have their own nuke?

    Because bombs and grenades and cruise missiles are not firearms. They are ordinance and not covered by the 2nd Amendment..

    Michale
    555

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    both should require registration, insurance, a license to prove you can operate them and there should be a tax on ammo (like gasoline) to address issues with their use.

    NONE of which would prevent CBMSs or terrorist attacks...

    The only thing that all that would accomplish is to make gun ownership extremely onerous so as to reduce the number of gun owners.

    Which is EXACTLY the goal of the Left Wingery..

    But hay... If you make voting as onerous as gun ownership, I'll play ball.. :D

    Michale
    556

  59. [59] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Just because you don't see the point of registering and insuring all firearms, doesn't mean it will not work Michale. Responsible ownership would go a long way to addressing many of the problems of our current firearm free-for-all.

    "In Colonial times "arms" usually meant weapons that could be carried. This included knives, swords, rifles and pistols. Dictionaries of the time had a separate definition for "ordinance" (as it was spelled then) meaning cannon." (source: http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html)

    So replace Nukes with Bazookas, and explain why it would be a good idea for everybody to be allowed to keep a bazooka in their trunk?

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just because you don't see the point of registering and insuring all firearms, doesn't mean it will not work Michale.

    It will not work for the stated goal of preventing crowd based mass shootings and terrorist attacks..

    Which is the stated goal of the effort..

    So replace Nukes with Bazookas, and explain why it would be a good idea for everybody to be allowed to keep a bazooka in their trunk?

    It wouldn't...

    But comparing a anti-tank weapon to a long rifle or a handgun is argument Reductio ad absurdum..

    Gun owners are acceptable of REASONABLE restrictions..

    This has been proven beyond ANY doubt...

    But REASONABLE restrictions have run out.. Gun Control fanatics have shot their wad on REASONABLE restrictions...

    But, of course, the Gun Control nuts want more...

    Which simply shows that Gun Control nuts are for a gun ban... That is the ONLY thing that will satisfy them..

    Michale
    557

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    I assume we're done on the Black Lives Matter discussion?? :D

    Michale
    558

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    HA!!

    NJ police captain says some Muslims did celebrate on 9/11
    http://nypost.com/2015/12/21/nj-police-captain-says-some-muslims-did-celebrate-on-911/

    Another "lie" of Trump's that turned out to be dead on ballz accurate...

    Just like his London/Muslim comment....

    Michale
    559

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    Responsible ownership would go a long way to addressing many of the problems of our current firearm free-for-all.

    There already IS "responsible ownership"... On a NATIONWIDE scale...

    The problem is, for the vast majority of the Left Wingery, the definition of "responsible ownership" is not owning any guns at all..

    And THAT is the ultimate goal of the Left Wingery's gun control efforts..

    Which is why, whenever there is a crowd-based mass shooting, the Left comes up with WOULDN'T IT BE NICE law ideas that do NOTHING to prevent or help prevent the incidents that caused the push...

    A horrible shooting at a Charleston Church.. The Left Wingery's response??

    LET'S BAN A HISTORICAL BATTLE FLAG!!!

    Using a shooting tragedy to push an unpopular and completely useless agenda..

    THAT's the Left Wingery...

    Michale
    560

  64. [64] 
    Paula wrote:

    Michale: (50):

    More nonsense and a perfect distillation of your inability to see beyond your own nose.

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    More nonsense and a perfect distillation of your inability to see beyond your own nose.

    How exactly is it nonsense??

    Each statement singles out a group of people for mass execution....

    How are those two statements any different??

    Answer: They're not..

    Michale

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    But I would still like an answer to my question...

    How can ya'all support a group that chants:

    "What do we want!!?? DEAD COPS!!!
    When do we want them!!??? NOW!!!"

    and

    "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em up like bacon!!"

    Support such a group doesn't really lend itself to credible perspectives, don't you agree??

    Michale
    563

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    Guns top Christmas lists...
    http://www.today.com/news/guns-topping-christmas-lists-thanks-terrorism-concerns-fear-over-restrictions-t63321

    Like it or not, people..

    The United States is a pro-gun country...

    Michale
    568

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama admin. agrees to fetal-tissue research probe amid Planned Parenthood backlash
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/22/obama-admin-agrees-probe-fetal-tissue-research/

    So...

    Nothing to those videos, eh??

    They were all just a big lie, right???

    Apparently... NOT....

    Michale
    569

  69. [69] 
    Paula wrote:

    Michale (68): If you read your own linked article you might have noticed: "The Health and Human Services Department’s inspector general has agreed to probe how the Obama administration funds and oversees research involving fetal tissue...It will also probe whether the government is conducting adequate oversight of the research to make sure that it complies with the law."

    This is a look at Fetal Tissue research -- certainly inspired by the Planned Parenthood smear and the energy with which anti-choicers will embrace any lie that supports their position -- but it is not a proof of wrongdoing by PP. Indeed, further down you might have read: "For its part, Planned Parenthood welcomed the “timely” audit, saying it has been asking NIH since July to create an independent panel to conduct the first examination of fetal tissue-research standards since the Reagan administration."

    But why go to the trouble of reading and comprehending when a misleading headline published in a rightwing rage appears to bolster a cherished lie?

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Indeed, further down you might have read: "For its part, Planned Parenthood welcomed the “timely” audit, saying it has been asking NIH since July to create an independent panel to conduct the first examination of fetal tissue-research standards since the Reagan administration."

    Yea... And Obama "welcomed the public debate on domestic surveillance".. :^/

    Remember, I was born AT night..

    Not LAST night..

    Would this audit have come about if the baby ripping hadn't been exposed??

    No..

    Would this audit have come about if there was nothing untoward??

    No..

    Maybe legally PP is in the clear.. MAYBE..

    Ethically?? MORALLY???

    How can ANYONE look at the cavalier way that these blood suckers are discussing bartering baby parts for Lamborghinis and NOT come away sick and disgusted??

    Michale
    570

  71. [71] 
    Paula wrote:

    Uh uh. No. This is your normal form of "argumentation" and you don't get a pass. You took a source and used it to make a point it failed to make, and when confronted fell back on "no smoke without a fire" and a hyperbolic emotional appeal that relies on a fantasy of wrongdoing created by people like you who can't win on the facts.

    Anti-choicers believe they have a moral argument. Their problem is that more people don't agree with their position than do. That makes it hard for them to "win" on the merits of their position BUT they only compromise their integrity by stooping to lies to try to get their way.

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    Don't get me wrong..

    I don't have a dog in the abortion fight... I think BOTH sides of the issue are whacked out...

    But maybe it's because I am alone amongst Weigantians in that I deal with babies on a daily basis, having two wonderful grandkids still in diapers. One 3 months, one 24 months..

    And I see those videos and I simply cannot help but be utterly and completely REPULSED by what I see...

    I can't imagine how ANY human being cannot feel the same listening to these baby butchers revel in their actions and talking about making enough off of baby parts to get a new Lamborghini....

    It's unfathomable to me that anyone can say, "Ahh, that's no big deal..."

    Michale
    571

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    . You took a source and used it to make a point it failed to make,

    Actually, the fact that it got you to respond would surely indicate that the point WAS made...

    and a hyperbolic emotional appeal that relies on a fantasy of wrongdoing created by people like you who can't win on the facts.

    The facts were clear in the videos and by the spoken word of those who were video taped..

    Anti-choicers believe they have a moral argument.

    They DO have a moral argument... That is a fact..

    Their problem is that more people don't agree with their position than do.

    That's an opinion, unsupported by facts..

    The fact that the Obama Administration has bowed to public pressure and ordered this audit proves that you are wrong..

    Michale
    572

  74. [74] 
    Paula wrote:

    The fact that the administration is looking at policies does NOT prove that PP did anything wrong; I predict it will end up clearing PP once again, although that isn't the point of the probe.

    The video tape is a fraud and every time you use it to make your false point you are perpetrating a fraud.

    Your grandchildren, however cherished, are irrelevant. You would be of greater value to them, however, if you could learn how to evaluate competing arguments, especially emotional arguments, and make an effort to separate facts from feelings.

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    The video tape is a fraud and every time you use it to make your false point you are perpetrating a fraud.

    The series of videos included interviews with people who actually worked at PP...

    How is that "fraud"??

    Your grandchildren, however cherished, are irrelevant.

    I would disagree...

    . You would be of greater value to them, however, if you could learn how to evaluate competing arguments, especially emotional arguments, and make an effort to separate facts from feelings.

    The facts are that PP sold fetal organs and fetal tissue..

    Do you deny these facts??

    Michale
    573

  76. [76] 
    Paula wrote:

    No one is denying that PP legally sold fetal tissue; no one ever has.

    The slur is that the video pretends people at PP deliver viable fetuses from women, kills them (by callously leaving them on cold tables until they die) and sells them (no doubt rubbing their hands together in remorseless glee -- all they needed was Snidely Whiplash). That is the picture being drawn by the fraudulent video and that is what you are being lead to react to.

    If you don't like fetus tissue being used for research, that is an issue you can have views on. If you don't like payment for the fetal tissue you can you can try to have it stopped. You don't have to make things up; you don't have to target women's clinics; you don't have to harass or do violence to women who use PP or people who work at them.

    The video inspires violence -- it is wicked. Morality is not served by deception or incitement to harm.

  77. [77] 
    Michale wrote:

    No one is denying that PP legally sold fetal tissue;

    Read that statement back to yourself..

    What kind of society do we live in where people can say "legally sold fetal tissue" and be perfectly OK with it..

    THAT's the point..

    Michale
    577

  78. [78] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.aim.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/wapo-ted-cruz-cartoon.png

    Classy, Left Wingers..

    REAL classy....

    I guess kids are off limits only with Democrats... :^/

    Imagine the uproar if a Right Winger had drawn this cartoon with Obama's daughters..

    Double standards much??

    Michale
    579

  79. [79] 
    Michale wrote:

    Paula,

    What confuses me is that we are talking about a group (The Left Wingery) that goes batshit hysterical crazy over animal testing..

    Yet this exact same group is so blase and accepting of harvesting aborted babies for organs and tissue..

    You can see why such diametrically opposed attitudes would be confusing...

    At least, it is to those not dominated by political ideology..

    Michale
    580

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    Apologies...

    My idiotic prick-ness is showing again.. :D

    heh

    Michale
    581

  81. [81] 
    Paula wrote:

    Michale: The discussion was about the deliberate distortions in the PP video, not about the legality/morality of Fetal Tissue research. What you have attempted is first, what's called "moving the goal-post" -- OK, busted on the PP video so let's pretend we were arguing about a different subject -- followed by an attempt to divert the argument to the Cruz cartoon (change the subject) followed by another attempted deflection from the PP Video's distortions by throwing up a comparison between Animal Testing and Fetal Tissue research.

    You don't want to admit the PP video is nothing more than a fabricated hit-piece but that's what it is. You don't want to admit it because if you do you would have to give some thought to the implications. What does it mean: that a group would do such a thing? That a group would confidently expect to get away with such a thing? That so many conservative institutions and powerful individuals would either embrace it or, at minimum, refuse to acknowledge the fundamental dishonesty in it? That so many people would immediately accept it's validity?

    Of course you don't have to give it any thought -- you can just change the subject and attempt to get me on the defensive. It's up to you.

  82. [82] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale: The discussion was about the deliberate distortions in the PP video, not about the legality/morality of Fetal Tissue research.

    That's an opinion...

    That it was a distortion I mean..

    What I saw was pretty gross...

    followed by an attempt to divert the argument to the Cruz cartoon (change the subject) followed by another attempted deflection from the PP Video's distortions by throwing up a comparison between Animal Testing and Fetal Tissue research.

    So, you are slamming me for being all over the board??

    Hi, I am Michale.. Nice ta meetcha...

    You don't want to admit the PP video is nothing more than a fabricated hit-piece but that's what it is.

    Because it isn't... It's no more a "fabricated hit piece" than the cop shooting video's that the Left Wingery likes to scream hysterically about...

    But THOSE are valid, right?? :D

    Michale
    583

  83. [83] 
    Michale wrote:
  84. [84] 
    Michale wrote:

    Basically what you are miffed about, Paula, is that a group with an agenda used some underhanded and questionable tactics to push their agenda..

    "OH MY GOD, WHAT A FUCKING NIGHTMARE!!!"
    -Marisa Tomeii, MY COUSIN VINNY

    Of course, the Left Wingery would NEVER stoop to such underhanded tactics, right??

    {{cough}} {{cough}} white hispanic {{cough}} Hands Up, Don't Shoot {{cough}}

    Basically, you are bitching and moaning about tactics the Right Wingery uses...

    But you support to the hilt the EXACT same tactics when the Left Wingery uses them...

    Ergo, I really can't get too bent out of shape over the tactics....

    Michale
    585

  85. [85] 
    Michale wrote:

    The mere fact that A> Planned Parenthood changed their policies and 2> the Obama Administration ordered an audit PROVES that the video's showed wrongdoing..

    This is an undeniable fact...

    Michale
    586

  86. [86] 
    Paula wrote:

    Michale:

    "Basically, you are bitching and moaning about tactics the Right Wingery uses…"

    You admit to the tactics but don't want to admit to their wrongness. The "both sides do it" dodge is an attempt to avoid dealing with the unacceptability of the dishonesty, and the wholesale embrace of that dishonesty by so many conservatives (and the associated implications).

    You -- as always -- assert "the left" is just as guilty without ever providing support for such statements. But what you're really doing is evading responsibility for your own thinking.

  87. [87] 
    Michale wrote:

    You admit to the tactics but don't want to admit to their wrongness.

    Au contraire...

    I admit to the wrongness of BOTH sides' tactics..

    You only admit to the wrongness of the Right Wingery's tactics..

    You -- as always -- assert "the left" is just as guilty without ever providing support for such statements.

    Uh... I just did..

    "White Hispanic"...

    "Hands Up, Don't Shoot"...

    "I can't breathe:...

    But what you're really doing is evading responsibility for your own thinking.

    Actually, that is you who do that..

    You refuse to accept that the Left pushes their agenda as nastily, as wrongly and as dishonestly as the Right pushes THEIR agenda...

    Michale
    588

  88. [88] 
    Michale wrote:

    NBC altered audio recordings to make Zimmerman appear to be racist to further a Left Wingery agenda..

    Did you complain about THOSE underhanded tactics?

    No you did not...

    So, as I said, I can't get all excited about your indignation over the Right Wingery's tactics when you constantly give the Left Wingery a pass for the exact same tactics...

    Michale
    589

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, of course, there is the BIGGEST Left Wingery lie of the year...

    Black Lives MATTER

    Michale
    590

  90. [90] 
    Paula wrote:

    Michale: (88): Nope, you're just avoiding the PP scam and its ramifications, which is what you always do. Whatever you're yapping about re: Zimmerman, I never heard of, know nothing about and therefore have no opinion of. But it is typical of you, especially when you are losing an argument, to bring in something unrelated to the specific topic and try to use it to support your "both sides do it" evasion. The truth re: PP is that the video is a fraud and every time you reference it to make a point you are a perpetuator of a fraud. That doesn't change regardless of anything anyone else does or says about any other topic. YOU would be the person lying, not NBC or some nameless lefty on some topic we're not talking about. And should you continue to perpetuate the fraud that is the PP video in the future that will be a deliberate choice you have made.

    With respect to Black Lives Matter you are just an unmitigated ass.

    I am off to do holiday things. When you play Santa for your grandchildren think hard about what it means to be an example, and what you wish to be an example of.

    Happy Holidays.

  91. [91] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Love him or hate him, you've got to admit that no other political figure even came close to the attention Trump has gotten in the past six months. Trump is unquestionably the Best Politician of the year.

    When did the deciding factor as to who is the best politician become the person who gets the most attention?

    I guess the answer is about the time that politician ceased to be known as an honourable profession.

  92. [92] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale: (88): Nope, you're just avoiding the PP scam and its ramifications, which is what you always do.

    Not at all.. I am simply pointing out your hypocrisy..

    And you avoid that, as you always do...

    The truth re: PP is that the video is a fraud

    And yet, PP changed their policies due to the video..

    Obama ordered an audit of PP due to the video..

    You have your "truth" and that's fine..

    But the FACTS clearly show that the video is not a fraud..

    With respect to Black Lives Matter you are just an unmitigated ass.

    Perhaps.. But that doesn't change the fact that Black Lives Matter is a lie..

    I am off to do holiday things. When you play Santa for your grandchildren think hard about what it means to be an example, and what you wish to be an example of.

    Honesty and integrity..

    Happy Holidays.

    And to you and yours as well.. :D

    Michale
    591

  93. [93] 
    Michale wrote:

    I guess the answer is about the time that politician ceased to be known as an honourable profession.

    Since when has "politician" ever BEEN an honorable profession??

    But I agree that Trump doesn't fit the definition of politician...

    Michale
    592

  94. [94] 
    Michale wrote:

    Happy Holidays.

    And to you and yours as well.. :D

    And Merry Christmas :D

    Michale
    599

  95. [95] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Since when has "politician" ever BEEN an honorable profession??

    that was my thought as well, though the way the question was phrased sent my mind back to ancient greece.

    JL

  96. [96] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    i'd say it went back to the age of pericles, perhaps 450 BC? so that would make it approximately 2,465 years?

    JL

  97. [97] 
    Michale wrote:

    that was my thought as well, though the way the question was phrased sent my mind back to ancient greece.

    heh

    Well said.. :D

    Michale
    601

  98. [98] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua and Michale,

    It never ceases to amaze me how little the two of you think of your country and of your fellow Americans.

    I can rhyme off quite a few American politicians who have demonstrated over the course of my lifetime how politics can be a very honourable profession.

    You know, that reminds of a fundamental problem with Americans - they are cynical to the extreme, all the time, no matter what. That is a very dangerous slippery slope, the consequences of which we are witnessing today.

  99. [99] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    It never ceases to amaze me how little the two of you think of your country and of your fellow Americans.

    don't worry, we place the blame for our society's ills squarely where it belongs: Canada.

    :)

    JL

  100. [100] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Very funny.

    BTW, you can't do that, anymore ... for at least the next four years, anyway. :)

Comments for this article are closed.