ChrisWeigant.com

Friday Talking Points [419] -- Obama's Final Presser

[ Posted Friday, December 16th, 2016 – 18:17 PST ]

We've got a lot to cover today (including Obama's final press conference), so let's just dive right in and try to get through the rest of the week's news in lightning fashion.

On Monday, the Electoral College will meet to chose the nation's next president. Some have held out hope that there will be enough "faithless electors" (or, as they like to say, "Hamilton electors") to deny Donald Trump the presidency. Color us skeptical, because we don't think they're going to actually do so, personally.

Trump's transition team rolls merrily along in the meantime, as Trump announced that Rick Perry will be the new "Secretary of Oops." Until he can reliably remember the Department of Energy's name, that's what we'll be calling him.

Trump reportedly just wanted to "torture" Mitt Romney by dangling the Secretary of State job in front of him, in an effort to goad Mitt into a public apology for saying mean things about Trump in the past. Mitt reportedly refused, which is no real surprise since that book he wrote was actually titled No Apology. Then Trump twisted the knife not just by appointing Rex Tillerson but also handing the chairmanship of the R.N.C. to Mitt's niece, who had supported Trump's campaign. Oh, that's gotta hurt!

Speaking of relatives, Trump's offspring sat in on a meeting with all the tech giants (except for the Twitter head who had refused Trump's request for a "Crooked Hillary" emoji, of course). These are the same kids Trump is going to turn his business over to, mind you. At least, that's what we assume -- since Trump cancelled his press conference this week, which was supposed to address his conflict-of-interest problems.

Overall conclusion: the swamp's not getting drained, it's getting deeper and murkier all the time.

Republican senators are feeling a little feisty, and a few of them are standing up to Trump's picks. Rand Paul led this off last Sunday when he stated unequivocally that he would never vote to confirm John Bolton to any post, seeing as how Bolton still thinks the Iraq War was a dandy idea. Bob Corker also weighed in with his own "misgivings" on Bolton. Bolton's not the only one, either -- there may be a big battle over Tillerson's confirmation, as at least a few Republican senators remember that their party used to hate Russia with a passion, not so long ago. Marco Rubio said he was skeptical, and is reportedly getting the full-court press to change his mind, led by none other than Dick Cheney. Lindsey Graham also has his doubts about Tillerson. No word yet from John McCain, but Graham did win the "most amusing comment of the week" award for his reaction to Trump refusing to admit Russia hacked the election: "If it was a 400 pound guy, it was a 400 pound Russian guy."

In other Republican news, the guy who redesigned his House office to resemble Downton Abbey just got arraigned on corruption charges. [Please, insert your own joke here, in the most upper-crusty British accent you can manage.]

Down in North Carolina, Republican lawmakers are so upset that a Democrat won the governor's race that they convened an emergency session to essentially strip the governor's office of as much power as they could. This is being called a "coup" by Democrats, and they certainly have a point. Here's what the Republicans are up to, point by point:

The bills Republicans are pushing through the legislature would, among other things, cut the number of appointments the governor can make by 80 percent; make his cabinet appointments subject to state senate confirmation; transfer authority for the state board of education from the governor to the superintendent (a Republican ousted a Democrat this year in the election for that seat); move the authority to appoint trustees of the University of North Carolina from the governor to the legislature; and dilute the governor’s control over the state board of elections and mandate that the board will be chaired by a Democrat in odd-numbered years (when there are no elections) and a Republican in even-numbered years (when there are elections).

Over on the Democratic side of things, President Obama gave his final press conference today, but we've more than covered that down in the talking points, so we merely mention it in passing. Obamacare signups are proceeding apace, it was also announced.

Some Democratic state attorneys general are already chomping at the bit to sue Trump's administration, it seems:

If the Trump administration withdraws from environmental, antitrust or financial regulations, the attorneys general say they will plug regulatory holes that may gape wide open, deploying state laws like New York's Martin Act, which allows the state attorney general to pursue wide-ranging investigations on Wall Street. They have pledged to defend undocumented immigrants, and to combat hate crimes.... And if Mr. Trump's policies veer toward the unconstitutional, several of the 10 current and incoming Democratic attorneys general interviewed recently said they would apply a remedy favored by Mr. Trump himself: a lawsuit.

Climate change scientists, meanwhile, are privately backing up their research data in fears the incoming administration will just purge any data it doesn't ideologically approve of. Although there was one positive bit of news on this front: the Trump transition team actually backed off on its witch-hunt questionnaire seeking to identify federal employees who support climate change research. The team disavowed the questionnaire and said it had disciplined whoever sent it out.

The Democratic National Committee chair race is heating up, with the entry of Tom Perez into the race (facing challenger Keith Ellison and two candidates from the state level). This has already been pitched as a "Bernie Sanders versus Hillary Clinton supporters" battle, but it might actually be more of a "Obama supporters versus Sanders supporters" type of thing. We'll see. Perez is pretty progressive, so ideologically the contest isn't as divided as some in the media are trying to make it sound.

Meanwhile, jockeying has already begun (if you believe these particular tea leaves) for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. Traditionally, presidential candidates are expected to have some foreign policy experience (at least, among sane political parties), which is why the following Senate committee shifts may be notable: Cory Booker is moving from the Homeland Security Committee to the Foreign Relations Committee, while Elizabeth Warren has joined the Armed Services Committee. Make of it what you will.

In the 2016 election, two bits of rehash are currently in the news, both of which we would file under "too little, too late" or perhaps "securing the Hell out of the barn doors, after the livestock is already in the next freakin' county." First, Facebook announced it will now be filtering for fake news items. Gosh, think that might have influenced the election? Second was the Obama administration itself, who NBC reported failed to respond to the Russia election hack because of the following three reasons:

They didn't want to appear to be interfering in the election, they thought Clinton was going to win, and they thought a potential cyber war with Moscow was "not worth it." "They thought she was going to win, so they were willing to kick the can down the road," said one U.S. official.

Hindsight is 20/20. Or, perhaps, 2020 (one hopes).

Since it's the end of the year, we're getting all the best-of lists in review. The Washington Post "Fact-Checker" column posted their list of the 12 biggest lies of the year, while Pamela Meyer at Huffington Post offered up her own list of 10.

In marijuana news, Colorado announced that weed sales had topped one billion dollars for the year, while weed became legal (to grow and possess, but not to sell openly for another year) in Massachusetts for the first time in over a century. The Boston Globe heralded the event's historical significance:

It was 1911. The New England Watch and Ward Society (née the New England Society for the Suppression of Vice) was battling against drugs and other "special evils." And in April of that year, the group's leaders successfully petitioned the Massachusetts Legislature to outlaw possession of several "hypnotic drugs," including cannabis.

One hundred five years, seven months, and 16 days later -- Thursday -- marijuana became legal again in Massachusetts.

Hey, at least they didn't dump a bunch of it in a harbor or anything. Meanwhile, the Drug Enforcement Agency reaffirmed the fact that they still essentially hold the same antediluvian viewpoint as was held in 1911, by posting a confirmation that oils and extracts are still treated the same as all other cannabis products -- which used the archaic spelling "marihuana" throughout. What century are these folks living in, really?

To end on an amusing note, no matter what you think of Donald Trump, at least he hasn't posed recently with a blow-up sex doll. As the article (yes, with photos) points out:

Chileans are in an uproar over a Cabinet minister being given an inflatable sex doll with a note saying "to stimulate the economy" taped over its mouth.

The furor erupted after photos of Economy Minister Luis Cespedes posing with the blow-up doll circulated on social media.

As Beavis and Butthead might have put it: "Heh heh... heh... he said stimulate... heh heh." Hey, at least one other country has their own misogynistic and juvenile leaders, for whatever comfort that is worth.

 

Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

Barack Obama was pretty impressive during his final press conference, but we're covering that down in the talking points. Instead, we're going to give the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award to John Podesta, who is fast becoming the leading voice denouncing not just the Russian hacking, but also the F.B.I.'s laxity in investigating it.

Podesta made his case in a scathing and extraordinary op-ed written for the Washington Post, and will reportedly appear on at least one Sunday morning show to make his case (NBC's Meet The Press).

Podesta was, of course, the person most personally affected by the hack, and had to see all his emails exposed by WikiLeaks during the campaign. But, as he points out, the difference between the F.B.I.'s handling of Hillary Clinton's email server and the Russian case was rather notable:

What takes this from baffling to downright infuriating is that at nearly the exact same time that no one at the F.B.I. could be bothered to drive 10 minutes to raise the alarm at D.N.C. headquarters, two agents accompanied by attorneys from the Justice Department were in Denver visiting a tech firm that had helped maintain [Hillary] Clinton's email server.

This trip was part of what F.B.I. Director James B. Comey described as a "painstaking" investigation of Clinton's emails, "requiring thousands of hours of effort" from dozens of agents who conducted at least 80 interviews and reviewed thousands of pages of documents. Of course, as Comey himself concluded, in the end, there was no case; it was not even a close call.

Comparing the F.B.I.'s massive response to the overblown email scandal with the seemingly lackadaisical response to the very real Russian plot to subvert a national election shows that something is deeply broken at the F.B.I.

Comey justified his handling of the email case by citing "intense public interest." He felt so strongly that he broke long-established precedent and disregarded strong guidance from the Justice Department with his infamous letter just 11 days before the election. Yet he refused to join the rest of the intelligence community in a statement about the Russian cyberattack because he reportedly didn't want to appear "political." And both before and after the election, the F.B.I. has refused to say whether it is investigating Trump's ties to Russia.

The entire article is in this vein, and is well worth reading. Podesta really has nothing to lose at this point by making the case that Comey is way too political and put a rather hefty thumb on the scale of the election, so you can bet we'll be watching him this Sunday morning.

For standing up for himself and making his case in such a clear and convincing fashion, John Podesta is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week.

[John Podesta is a private citizen, and our blanket policy is not to provide contact information for such people. You can always tune in to Meet The Press this Sunday to see him, though.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

Former House member Chaka Fattah this week was sentenced to 10 years of federal prison on corruption and bribery charges this week. If the Washington Post is right, this represents the second-longest sentence ever handed down to a member of Congress (the longest was the 13-year sentence given to Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson).

That, sadly, is really all that needs to be said to qualify Fattah for this week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week.

[Chaka Fattah is no longer a member of Congress, and it is our policy not to provide contact info for private citizens (even if they are in jail).]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 419 (12/16/16)

Before we get started with the talking points, we have a program announcement to take care of first. This will be the final FTP column of the year. This is due to the next two Fridays being pre-empted by our year-end awards columns, where we hand out awards left and right, as always. Yesterday's column opened the field to nominations, so if you've got someone in mind for one of the awards, head over and suggest it in the comments. Regular FTP columns (starting off with Volume 420, which should be interesting...) will resume on the first Friday in January.

Our talking points for this final 2016 column all come from President Barack Obama's press conference today -- the last one he will give as president. Because it is the last time he'll face the press is such a situation, he took the opportunity to make the case for his own legacy. Our first five talking points come from this preamble, to remind people where we were eight years ago versus where we are today (all of these were taken from the presser's transcript, if you'd like to read the whole thing).

Obama joked about this, later on in the press conference, when a reporter began with "Two questions on where all this leaves us." Obama quipped: "Where my presidency leaves us? It leaves us in a really good spot!"

The last two talking points are longer and more focused on two specific political issues, and are presented out of order (Obama actually answered the Russia one last). Obama, when asked about Russian hacking, took the opportunity to marvel at the shift in Republican thinking towards Russia in the past few months. We included this because we've been using that line about Reagan spinning in his grave for about a week now ourselves, and Obama certainly put it better than we could hope to.

And the final talking point came when Obama was asked where the Democratic Party goes from here. While Obama had warm words for the bid launched by Tom Perez to chair the D.N.C., he didn't openly back any candidate, but he did have some thoughts on where the party should focus its efforts, where he actually sounded a lot like Howard Dean, even though Dean has taken himself out of the running for the job. It's a valuable quote to close on, and we sincerely hope Democrats take it to heart next year and beyond.

And finally, we'll close as Obama did, by wishing everyone Mele Kalikimaka! (and see you next year!)

 

1
   Then and now

Obama began extolling his legacy by pointing out some rather impressive economic numbers.

As I was preparing to take office, the unemployment rate was on its way to 10 percent. Today it is at 4.6 percent, the lowest in nearly a decade. We've seen the longest streak of job growth on record, and wages have grown faster over the past few years than at any time in the past 40.

 

2
   Obamacare is a success

Obama (of course) defended the record of his namesake legislation.

When I came into office, 44 million people were uninsured. Today we have covered more than 20 million of them. For the first time in our history, more than 90 percent of Americans are insured.

In fact, yesterday was the biggest day ever for healthcare.gov, more than 670,000 Americans signed up to get covered, and more are signing up by the day.

. . .

Since I signed Obamacare into law, our businesses have added more than 15 million new jobs, and the economy undoubtedly more durable than it was in the days when we relied on oil from unstable nations and banks took risky bets with your money.

 

3
   Things are better all over

Obama really does have a historically impressive track record, on all sorts of issues.

We've cut our dependence on foreign oil by more than half, doubled production of renewable energy, enacted the most sweeping reforms since F.D.R. to protect consumers and prevent a crisis on Wall Street from punishing main street ever again.

 

4
   Nuts to the naysayers!

We have no idea why Obama (and Democrats in general) has never made the impressive scale of the recovery a major issue. Every single thing he tried was derided by Republicans with apocalyptic doom-and-gloom scenarios. None of them came true.

None of these actions stifled growth as critics are predicted. Instead, the stock market has nearly tripled.

 

5
   Oh, and we cut the deficit by two-thirds

Again, an issue that neither Obama nor the Democrats have touted loudly enough.

Add it all up, and last year the poverty rate fell at the fastest rate in almost 50 years, while the median household income grew at the fastest rate on record. In fact, income gains were actually larger for households at the bottom and the middle than for those at the top.

And we have done all this while cutting our deficits by nearly two-thirds, and protecting vital investments that grow the middle class.

 

6
   Reagan would roll over in his grave

We're glad it's not just us who are a little baffled at Republicans' new-found love of Russia. Remember the Cold War? And the party that made mountains of political hay over red-baiting? We do.

So, this is one of those situations where, unless the American people genuinely think that the professionals in the C.I.A., the F.B.I., our entire intelligence infrastructure, many of whom -- by the way, served in previous administrations and who are Republicans -- are less trustworthy than the Russians. Then people should pay attention to what our intelligence agencies say.

. . .

And what I worry about -- more than anything -- is the degree to which because of the fierceness because of the partisan battle, you start to see certain folks in the Republican Party and Republican voters suddenly finding a government and individuals who stand contrary to everything that we stand for as being OK, because that's how much we dislike Democrats.

I mean, think about it. Some of the people who historically have been very critical of me for engaging with the Russians and having conversations with them, also endorsed the president-elect, even as he was saying that we should stop sanctioning Russia and being tough on them and work together with them against our common enemies.

It was very complimentary of Mr. Putin personally. Now that -- that wasn't news. The president-elect during the campaign said so. And some folks who had made a career out of being anti-Russian didn't say anything about it. And then after the election, suddenly they're asking: "Oh, why didn't you tell us that maybe the Russians were trying to help our candidate?" Well, come on.

There was a survey some of you saw where -- not just this one poll, but pretty credible source, 37 percent of Republican voters approve of Putin. Over a third of Republican voters approve of Vladimir Putin, the former head of the K.G.B. Ronald Reagan would roll over in his grave. And how did that happen? It happened in part because for too long, everything that happens in this town, everything that's said is seen through the lens of does this help or hurt us relative to Democrats or relative to President Obama. And unless that changes, we're going to continue to be vulnerable to foreign influence because we've lost track of what it is that we're about and what we stand for.

 

7
   Where Democrats should go from here

And finally, Obama had some sage advice for the party as a whole, echoing Howard Dean's "50-state strategy."

And where Democrats are characterized as coastal, liberal, latte-sipping, you know, politically correct, out-of-touch folks, we have to be in those communities. And I've seen that, when we are in those communities, it makes a difference. That's how I became president. I became a U.S. Senator not just because I had a strong base in Chicago, but because I was driving downstate Illinois and going to fish fries and sitting in V.F.W. Halls and talking to farmers.

And I didn't win every one of their votes, but they got a sense of what I was talking about, what I cared about, that I was for working people, that I was for the middle class, that the reason I was interested in strengthening unions and raising the minimum wage and rebuilding our infrastructure and making sure that parents had decent childcare and family leave, was because my own family's history wasn't that different from theirs even if I looked a little bit different. Same thing in Iowa.

And so the question is, how do we rebuild that party as a whole, so that there's not a county in any state -- I don't care how red -- where we don't have a presence and we're not making the argument, because I think we have a better argument. But that requires a lot of work. You know, it's been something that I've been able to do successfully in my own campaigns.

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

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

 

105 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [419] -- Obama's Final Presser”

  1. [1] 
    neilm wrote:

    And where Democrats are characterized as coastal, liberal, latte-sipping, you know, politically correct, out-of-touch folks, we have to be in those communities.

    ... there is something wrong with this?

    Of course the coastal, liberal, latte-sipping Americans are out of touch with rural America.

    But you know what, rural America is out of touch with coastal, liberal, latte-sipping America, and the last time I looked we were paying the taxes that keep their communities solvent.

    A bit of gratitude might be in order ;)

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Comparing the F.B.I.'s massive response to the overblown email scandal with the seemingly lackadaisical response to the very real Russian plot to subvert a national election shows that something is deeply broken at the F.B.I. ... Comey justified his handling of the email case by citing "intense public interest."

    I watched FBI Director Comey's entire congressional testimony after his public announcement recommending no charges against Secretary Clinton for her decidedly careless and indeed reckless handling of sensitive and classified emails while she was Secretary of State.

    I was duly impressed with his dispassionate eloquence and clear-headed judgement. I remember thinking at the time that it was a fair explanation for his actions and, more than that, something that Hillary should have used more in her own defense.

    The work of the FBI and of Director Comey throughout Hillary's self-induced email scandal was, in my view, exemplary.

    What John Podesta and others critical of Comey fail to take into account is the difficult position the FBI director found himself in from the moment that Bill Clinton incomprehensibly boarded the Attorney General's plane in Phoenix for a private meeting, days before a decision was to be rendered in the email server case and regardless of how casual it was or was not.

    From this moment forward, Comey was put in a very difficult position, made more difficult by a hyper-partisan environment in Congress (recall that Comey was implored to inform Congress if any new information was gleaned that impacted the case of Hillary's private email server) and within an unprecedented presidential campaign.

    So, if Podesta wishes to deflect from the reality of why Hillary lost another bid for the presidency, he should at least name the real culprit and what really forced Comey's hand, Hillary Clinton's ham-handed husband.

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Speaking of Hillary ...

    She's my MDDOTW award recipient for her continued refusal to accept any personal responsibility for her tragic and resounding loss to Donald Trump.

    She insists on blaming FBI Director Comey and the DNC/Podesta email hacks for what essentially amounts to a monumental failure of imagination on the part of the Clinton campaign and of the candidate herself.

    Her remarks this week in that regard to a group of her biggest and presumably still "shell-shocked" donors and fundraisers was nothing short of pathetic and not at all conducive to ensuring a favourable Clinton legacy.

    The best thing the Clintons can do now is just go away.

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    From Obama's presser:

    And so the question is, how do we rebuild that party as a whole, so that there's not a county in any state -- I don't care how red -- where we don't have a presence and we're not making the argument, because I think we have a better argument. But that requires a lot of work. You know, it's been something that I've been able to do successfully in my own campaigns.

    True. So very, very true.

    I only wish that President Obama was as effective and successful in making those better arguments during the course of his presidency as he was during his presidential campaigns.

  5. [5] 
    altohone wrote:

    CW

    Edit
    2nd paragraph

    "On Monday, the Electoral College will meet to chose the nation's next president"

    Choose.

    A

  6. [6] 
    altohone wrote:

    Hey CW

    "Perez is pretty progressive, so ideologically the contest isn't as divided as some in the media are trying to make it sound""

    The two big claims to progressive fame Perez has are worker protection and overtime regulations neither of which have taken effect and both of which will almost certainly be undone by Trump before they do.

    That's called a zero for those keeping score.

    His "progressive" support for the TPP is out of step with the party and country and the new direction Dems claim to be heading in too.

    Obama (who was leader of the Democratic party when they lost control of both houses of Congress and state houses, and who chose Debbie WS too) trying to boost Perez after failing the party so badly is a sad joke.

    As for Hillary and Podesta and Obama, and you and too many others, going on about Russia hacking, let's review-

    - zero direct evidence of Russian culpability has been presented.
    None.
    - Obama's excuse for claiming Putin's direct involvement was "Nothing happens in Russia without Putin knowing about it".
    That is the worst kind of guilt by national association... even though there hasn't been any proof released to confirm the hackers were even Russian
    - the first stories in the media were based on intentional official leaks from anonymous sources making unverifiable assertions
    - the latest assertion via intentional official leak from anonymous sources claimed verification via "diplomatic and allied intelligence" sources... got that?
    We are supposed to believe unnamed diplomats and unnamed foreign intelligence sources... because our own CIA and NSA sources don't have any actual proof.
    CW, if you took the time to read Sam Biddle's article on the subject at TI, you would be doubtful too.

    The fact that the same tactics used to sell fraudulent info about WMD's in Iraq are being used, and the fact that leaks normally prosecuted fiercely by the Obama admin are also being used should only raise those doubts further.

    -
    -

    Of course, the irony of Hillary falsely blaming the response to her transparency evading email practices, which hinges on her actions alone (how dare Comey react to me shooting myself in the foot?), and blaming hacks which she and her campaign insisted for months revealed nothing of consequence is too much to bear (there's nothing to see here, but I lost because of it?)

    I can't believe you gave an award to a supposed pro who can't handle email security basics.

    -
    -

    Obama

    - The shift in thinking on Russia cuts both ways.
    - Too Big To Fail banks are BIGGER, and still taking risky bets
    - Insurance isn't health care, and the cost of the corporate subsidies (aka misallocation) is enormous
    - the Wall Street reforms are weak, and will not prevent future fraud, and main street is still getting hammered
    - we had the weakest recovery from a recession on record, and touting the growth on Wall Street is missing the point of why Hillary lost
    - He didn't strengthen unions, raise the minimum wage, or rebuild our infrastructure.

    There's so much spin in there I can't believe you're praising it.

    A

  7. [7] 
    michale wrote:

    Down in North Carolina, Republican lawmakers are so upset that a Democrat won the governor's race that they convened an emergency session to essentially strip the governor's office of as much power as they could. This is being called a "coup" by Democrats, and they certainly have a point.

    You mean like Obama is doing to President Elect Trump?? :D

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-18/obama-hits-the-gas-in-race-to-regulate-before-trump-takes-reins

    Goose... Meet Gander.... :D

    Some Democratic state attorneys general are already chomping at the bit to sue Trump's administration, it seems:

    If the Trump administration withdraws from environmental, antitrust or financial regulations, the attorneys general say they will plug regulatory holes that may gape wide open, deploying state laws like New York's Martin Act, which allows the state attorney general to pursue wide-ranging investigations on Wall Street. They have pledged to defend undocumented immigrants, and to combat hate crimes.... And if Mr. Trump's policies veer toward the unconstitutional, several of the 10 current and incoming Democratic attorneys general interviewed recently said they would apply a remedy favored by Mr. Trump himself: a lawsuit.

    Why, that sounds positively REPUBLICAN!! :D

    Climate change scientists, meanwhile, are privately backing up their research data in fears the incoming administration will just purge any data it doesn't ideologically approve of.

    You mean, like Democrats have done for the last 8 years???

    The Democratic National Committee chair race is heating up, with the entry of Tom Perez into the race (facing challenger Keith Ellison and two candidates from the state level). This has already been pitched as a "Bernie Sanders versus Hillary Clinton supporters" battle, but it might actually be more of a "Obama supporters versus Sanders supporters" type of thing. We'll see. Perez is pretty progressive, so ideologically the contest isn't as divided as some in the media are trying to make it sound.

    The best thing for the GOP is to have Ellison take over as head of the DNC...

    First, Facebook announced it will now be filtering for fake news items. Gosh, think that might have influenced the election?

    Call it what it is.. Facebook will censor news based solely and completely on ideology. If it's news that doesn't support the Left Wingery ideology, it's "fake" news...

    Welcome to 1984, courtesy of the Democratic Party...

    Washington Post "Fact-Checker"

    You DO realize that those two terms are mutually exclusive and should NEVER be in the same sentence, right?? :D

    Podesta made his case in a scathing and extraordinary op-ed written for the Washington Post,

    Washington Post... 'nuff said...

    Obama began extolling his legacy by pointing out some rather impressive economic numbers.

    Cherry picked numbers cannot help but be impressive..

    But the only numbers that really matter are the numbers from the election....

    If Obama done so good, why was his Party given a huge kick in the arse???

    Obamacare is a success

    Apparently, the pot is in heavy use in the White House..

    That's like the Captain of the Titanic saying that the boat is completely seaworthy as it is sinking...

    We've cut our dependence on foreign oil by more than half,

    That was done *IN SPITE* of Obama and the Democrats.. Not because of...

    None of these actions stifled growth as critics are predicted. Instead, the stock market has nearly tripled.

    Most of the growth in the stock market has been since Trump was elected.. :D

    That says it all...

    I don't blame Obama for putting the best spin on things he can...

    But look at it this way.. If an alien JUST came to planet earth and was sitting in on POTUS's presser, he/she could NEVER believe that the Democratic Party has been completely and utterly decimated over the last 8 years....

    But, like I said... I admire the man that he could put such a positive spin on events that has totally destroyed his Party...

    326

  8. [8] 
    michale wrote:

    Since in my advancing years, it's difficult to monitor more than one commentary at a time, please allow me to bring yesterday's commentary comments forward...

    Thanx to all for the good wishes.. :D My lovely wife and I are very excited to welcome a grand-daughter to our expanding family.. :D Grandsons are great, but a grandpa needs a granddaughter to dote on... :D

    Congrats on your being correct in the election and especially because of that beautiful new granddaughter of yours!

    RUSS!!!!! Great ta see you back!!!! I was worried aboutcha... :D Thank you for both.. I predict we're going to have some wild times in the coming 4 years...

    So, why not get started.. :D

    I took a few weeks off after the election and am just now getting back online. Can't wait to discuss Triple - P with ya soon! (president Putin-puppet!)

    Ya know.. It's downright eerie... When the Left goes on and on about how Trump is tied at the hip with the Russians, all I hear is the Right going on and on about how Obama was born in Kenya...

    It's really ironic...

    The Right had their Obama/Kenya meme and the Left has their Putin Puppet meme...

    From where I sit, there is no difference. BOTH were/are designed to de-legitimize the President Of The United States...

    I now understand why ya'all were so pissed about it... :D

    But it's clear from the facts that Putin really wanted Hillary to win....

    327

  9. [9] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    What John Podesta and others critical of Comey fail to take into account is the difficult position the FBI director found himself in from the moment that Bill Clinton incomprehensibly boarded the Attorney General's plane in Phoenix for a private meeting, days before a decision was to be rendered in the email server case and regardless of how casual it was or was not.

    Well said...

    As I mentioned previously, Comey was in an impossible situation... If he followed the law and recommended indictment for Hillary, the Left would have been apoplectic the damage to the election would have been immeasurable... If he simply recommended NO INDICTMENT or just issued NO recommendation, the Right would have been apoplectic and the damage to the election would have been immeasurable..

    So, Comey made the best choice he could in this unprecedented situation.. He made up some bogus excuse about how intent was the determining factor so there wouldn't be any indictment, but he then laid out for the American people exactly what Hillary's crimes were...

    He basically put all the facts out there and let the American people make up their own minds...

    I didn't agree with his decision.. I think he should have followed the law and just let the chips fall where they may...

    But I respect the hell out of the guy for charting the best course, really the ONLY course, available to him...

    And again, I am constrained to point out that many in Weigantia said that they would abide by Comey's decision and not question his integrity, regardless of what decision he made...

    Comey is the unsung hero of the election..

    I have said it before and I'll say it again... If you make a decision that pisses off EVERYONE, it's like the best possible decision to make... :D

    328

  10. [10] 
    michale wrote:

    Obama (who was leader of the Democratic party when they lost control of both houses of Congress and state houses, and who chose Debbie WS too) trying to boost Perez after failing the party so badly is a sad joke.

    Obama boosting Perez???

    Perez is toast.. He might as well pack it up and go home... :D

    329

  11. [11] 
    michale wrote:

    Call it what it is.. Facebook will censor news based solely and completely on ideology. If it's news that doesn't support the Left Wingery ideology, it's "fake" news...

    Welcome to 1984, courtesy of the Democratic Party...

    IE

    HANDS UP, DON'T SHOOT will be "real" news..

    HILLARY CLINTON BEARS SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR HER ELECTION LOSS will be "fake" news....

    Only the news that is ideologically pure will be "real" news...

    Like I said....

    Welcome to 1984, courtesy of the Democratic Party...

    330

  12. [12] 
    michale wrote:

    "I have never been proud of my country until they elected my husband as President."
    -Michelle Obama, 2008

    "America is entering a time of hopelessness"
    -Michelle Obama, 2016 after the Democratic Party was decimated..

    Yea... No ideological agenda there.. :^/

    331

  13. [13] 
    michale wrote:

    Climate change scientists, meanwhile, are privately backing up their research data in fears the incoming administration will just purge any data it doesn't ideologically approve of. Although there was one positive bit of news on this front: the Trump transition team actually backed off on its witch-hunt questionnaire seeking to identify federal employees who support climate change research. The team disavowed the questionnaire and said it had disciplined whoever sent it out.

    The Democrats’ panic over climate questions speaks volumes

    Former president Bill Clinton used to say, “If you know what you’re talking about, you don’t mind talking.” And it stands to reason that if you don’t know what you’re talking about, you will panic and hide when you are asked to talk. Well, the very idea that the Trump transition team is asking for the names of the government officials who worked on specific climate matters during their time in government service has sent the Democrats running for the hills. But merely being asked for the names of those who attended climate change conferences and participated in creating or studying climate change policy has been greeted as a threat and sent liberals in the government and in the media into a frenzy. Why are they so hypersensitive? Obama Energy Department officials have said they will not name any of the staffers who worked on climate change programs or even attended any such meetings, with Energy Department spokeswoman Eben Burnhan-Snyder saying the inquiries from the Trump transition had “left many in our workforce unsettled.” Seriously? Asking who did the work around there is out of bounds? Again, the Energy Department is refusing to answer questions about who did what to formulate the policies that we now live with. They would rather go into hiding than matter-of-factly and proudly explain their work. Why could that be? It confirms so much of what Republicans suspect about the Obama administration. (Disclosure: My firm represents interests in the fossil-fuel and nuclear-power industries.)

    Perhaps it is because during the Obama years, work on climate change issues all started from a mandated conclusion: That manmade global warming was settled science and that it was bad and getting worse. Researchers quickly determined where the money was, and they knew the more alarming the study or findings from a working group, the better.

    All the hiding and panic speaks to a government that is out of control. How can it be that people won’t admit they even attended a specific meeting? It’s certainly the first time in my memory that one administration has affirmatively tried to hide their work from the next administration. So exactly what is it the Obama forces are hiding? Why have they gone silent in the face of a simple initial inquiry? There are plenty of safeguards in government to prevent retribution, so that isn’t really what this sudden fear is all about. And, the fact that scientists have “begun a feverish attempt to copy reams of government data onto independent servers” because they are worried about being denied “irreplaceable public data” also seems just a little paranoid and adds to the intrigue.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/12/14/the-democrats-panic-over-climate-questions-speaks-volumes/?utm_term=.3f701cecae3a

    What are the Democrats so afraid of??

    If there work is on the up and up, why wouldn't they be PROUD to brag about it???

    One of the bedrocks of the scientific method is to put out EVERY shred of information so that others can replicate the work and confirm the science..

    If the Democrats are afraid that their "science" cannot be confirmed, then that says loads about their so-called adherence to "science"....

    332

  14. [14] 
    michale wrote:

    I don't know what ya'all are thinking that Putin has Trump's balls...

    Putin doesn't have Trump's balls..

    http://theworleys.net/temp/TrumpsBalls.jpg

    *I* do!!! :D heh

    333

  15. [15] 
    michale wrote:

    Snopes, which will now have the power to declare what news is or is not legitimate on the world’s largest online platform, almost exclusively employs leftists.

    Facebook announced Thursday that mythbusting website Snopes will be one of a few fact-checking organizations allowed to label stories as “fake news.”
    http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/16/snopes-facebooks-new-fact-checker-employs-leftists-almost-exclusively/

    Left Wingers will exclusively judge what is and is not "real" news..

    What could POSSIBLY go wrong?? :^/

    If you have to censor ideologies that are contrary to "accepted" dogma, you have already lost the debate...

    334

  16. [16] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz

    DANGEROUS POLICE CHASE IN CANADA
    https://www.facebook.com/streetfx/videos/10158252368575112/

    335

  17. [17] 
    michale wrote:

    Electors under siege
    Members of the Electoral College votes have been inundated by harassing phone calls and hate mail. Many report receiving death threats.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/electors-under-siege-232774

    Wasn't it the Left who castigate and denigrated Donald Trump for not accepting the results of the election??

    Now it's those same people who are doing EXACTLY what they claimed Trump would do...

    Hypocrisy, thy name is Left Wing...

    I am glad the Left Wing denizens of Weigantia are above that sort of thing :D I mean that sincerely...

    336

  18. [18] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale said:

    I have said it before and I'll say it again... If you make a decision that pisses off EVERYONE, it's like the best possible decision to make... :D

    Ohhhhh.... Like Adam Lanza's decision to go on a shooting spree at the local elementary school, is that it? Seriously, that is perhaps one of the dumbest things I have ever read in my life!

    Also, scientists are backing up all of the data out of fear that Trump's picks to run these agencies (read: Big Oil's political prostitutes) will destroy the data. I love the spin that you used: scientists not wanting to defend their claims! That's great! Glad to see you are staying true to your GOP brainwashing!

  19. [19] 
    altohone wrote:

    Troll
    15

    There is a real danger of censorship, and of it becoming ideologically supported with this fake news idiocy.

    The left (the real left... not the corporatist warmongers pretending to be the left that you keep conflating with them) has been consistently pointing out how much of our "news" is actually factually lacking propaganda for decades.

    The labels mainstream, lamestream, and corporate media (among others) came about due to the awareness by so many that much of it can't be trusted. Independent verification using alternate sources by readers concerned with the truth became a necessary skill.

    Whether it's reporting that downplays government spying, the necessity for the latest war, anything about Israel (ironically excluding much of Israeli media, but there are books and documentaries on how skewed US reporting on that country is), corporate PR posing as news, etc... our news has been littered with "fake news" forever.

    I believe that not too long ago CW mentioned how yellow journalism has a long and proud tradition in this country, and there is a rather fine distinction between that, tabloid stories, fake news and even the satire produced by The Onion (which has made quite a few people who believed it look stupid).

    Facebook is a horrible company that I would never support so I'm not affected by their latest horrible policy, but the idea that they or any fact checking group can be relied on and trusted with such an ill-defined job is nonsense.
    The labeling and banning of activism for BDS as hate speech, criticism of Facebook and anything remotely resembling a nipple is already problematic.

    If a corporation that creates and litters a platform used by so many is allowed to restrict information, there will be negative consequences, and they may be severe.

    While fake news about WMD's convinced people to support an illegal war of aggression (and many other bad policies) limiting access to information could be just as bad.

    People who consider themselves well informed need to think twice before supporting bad policies as a reaction to Trump or anything else.

    A

  20. [20] 
    michale wrote:

    Russ,

    Ohhhhh.... Like Adam Lanza's decision to go on a shooting spree at the local elementary school, is that it? Seriously, that is perhaps one of the dumbest things I have ever read in my life!

    WOW.. How you got here from there, I will NEVER know....

    Also, scientists are backing up all of the data out of fear that Trump's picks to run these agencies (read: Big Oil's political prostitutes) will destroy the data.

    Which isn't much different than the Left Wingery censoring, attacking and denigrating those who dispute the human caused global warming *theory*

    I love the spin that you used: scientists not wanting to defend their claims!

    It's not spin, it's fact..

    Why is this agency so afraid of taking a stand on the merits of their so-called "science"??

    Because this agency KNOWS it's a global con and they don't want to get caught...

    Troll
    15

    There is a real danger of censorship, and of it becoming ideologically supported with this fake news idiocy.

    Asshole,

    Yea... That's what I said.. Duh.... :D

    338

  21. [21] 
    michale wrote:

    Christmas saved: Carrier families thank Trump, count blessings
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/12/16/christmas-saved-carrier-families-thank-trump-count-blessings.html

    The beginning of the Trump era..... It's going to be a wonderful 8 years... :D

    339

  22. [22] 
    michale wrote:

    Ohhhhh.... Like Adam Lanza's decision to go on a shooting spree at the local elementary school, is that it? Seriously, that is perhaps one of the dumbest things I have ever read in my life!

    I mean, honestly..

    If YOU want to go on record as comparing FBI Director Comey to Adam Lanza, far be it from me to stand in your way...

    But, under the "dumbest things" one has ever read in their lives, that would be right at the top....

    But weren't you one of the ones who said they would accept Director Comey's decision, regardless of what it would be??

    340

  23. [23] 
    michale wrote:

    The Democratic shoot-out in the lifeboats has begun.

    Now usually when one political party loses a presidential election, both branches of Congress and a majority of governorships, a little soul-searching and a perhaps an “autopsy” are in order.

    But not so for the Democratic Party these days, whose officials are still searching about for scapegoats.
    http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/editorials/2016/12/editorial_dems_still_in_denial

    My gods...

    "It's Director Comey's fault!!!"

    "It's FAKE NEWS' fault!!!"

    "It's the Russians fault!!!"

    "It's the Elector's fault!!!!"

    Jesus H. Frakin' Christ!!!

    Hillary Clinton was the WORST possible candidate for this particular election..

    It's THAT simple....

    Democrats can scape-goat in denial til the cows come home..

    But there is one FACT here and ONE FACT only that explains Hillary's loss...

    She was the ESTABLISHMENT/STATUS QUO candidate in an election that despised with a passion the Establishment and the Status Quo..

    THAT is why she lost the election...

    341

  24. [24] 
    neilm wrote:

    It amuses me that all the trumpbots who kept telling us on TV that Trump "tells it like it is" and "isn't a politician" are still chanting "Lock her up" at Trump rallies even after Trump tells them he was just lying to get their votes.

    That's fanboyism at its purest.

    "You people were vicious, violent, screaming, 'Where's the wall? We want the wall!' Screaming, 'Prison! Lock her up!' I mean, you are going crazy. I mean, you were nasty and mean and vicious and you wanted to win, right?"

    Where is the wall? Where is Hillary's special prosecutor?

    How long before a flicker of realization kindles? How long before the denial that Trump is just another politician, and one of the worst liars at that, is allowed past the barrier of false hope? How long before the tidbits like the 1,100 Carrier jobs that even Fox News admits was only 800 is so chewed over it is like yesterday's chewing gum?

    Never for the truest fanboys, that we expect.

    Never for the racists who chant "Hail Trump, Hail Victory (Seig Heil)".

    But as the jobs don't come back, the rural depressed counties keep declining, the sane people in an insane time will remind you that Trump has lied all his life and lied to get your votes. In a rare moment of honesty at his recent victory rally he tried to pretend you were all in on the joke, but you aren't there yet.

    Don't break our country on the road to your epiphany please. Or at least not so much that we can't fix it again for you in four years time.

  25. [25] 
    neilm wrote:

    The left (the real left... not the corporatist warmongers pretending to be the left that you keep conflating with them) has been consistently pointing out how much of our "news" is actually factually lacking propaganda for decades.

    The left, the real left that realizes that extremism isn't just a problem on the right, and that politics is the art of the possible. The real left that knows that in a democracy you need the people behind you but you need to work to convince them, not berate them. The real left that get things done not undermine the insufficiently pure. The real left have known about the venality of the press for centuries, not decades. It isn't news that there is crap journalism.

    There are good journalists working for responsible publications and news channels, but you have to pay for them. The Economist isn't free. The Guardian isn't going to be free for much longer. Even CW needs support. The BBC is paid for by license fees the Brits pay for us, so some if us get a free lunch there.

    But if you see demons everywhere, and all the press is corrupted, maybe the demons have a more local source.

  26. [26] 
    michale wrote:

    It amuses me that all the trumpbots who kept telling us on TV that Trump "tells it like it is" and "isn't a politician" are still chanting "Lock her up" at Trump rallies even after Trump tells them he was just lying to get their votes.

    "There you go again..."
    -Ronald Reagan

    Ya'all's variable definition of "lie" is increasingly annoying...

    When a person states an intent to do something and then changes their mind due to changing circumstances, that is not a "lie" as it is commonly defined...

    In the alternative, you can state for the record that Obama was "lying" when he said he would close Gitmo...

    Where is the wall?

    Jesus, why don't ya let Trump get sworn in???

    Where's the GITMO closing??

    Once again, we see the definitions changing, depending on whether the person has a '-D' or a '-R' after their name..

    But as the jobs don't come back, the rural depressed counties keep declining,

    The jobs ALREADY are coming back... :D And depressed counties???

    You mean, the ones that are EUPHORIC that Trump was elected??

    :D

    Let's face reality, my friend.. The ONLY "depressed" counties are the ones, the very VERY few (relatively speaking), that Hillary won...

    That's the reality whether you want to admit it or not... :D

    Don't break our country on the road to your epiphany please.

    Democrats and Obama have already broke the country...

    Trump will get it fixed.. So much so that I bet YOU will vote Trump in 2020..

  27. [27] 
    michale wrote:

    The left, the real left that realizes that extremism isn't just a problem on the right, and that politics is the art of the possible.

    And yet, the Left... the "Real" Left *never* calls out the extremism from the Left. The "real" Left pretends it doesn't exist and ONLY castigates the Right for THEIR extremism, much of which actually isn't...

    So, while I am sure that what you say is true, that the "Real" Left intellectually understands that extremism is present on BOTH sides of the political spectrum... If the "Real" Left remind silent on the LEFT extremism and ONLY attack the RIGHT extremism, then their claim is spurious and cannot be supported by facts..

    There are good journalists working for responsible publications and news channels, but you have to pay for them. The Economist isn't free. The Guardian isn't going to be free for much longer. Even CW needs support. The BBC is paid for by license fees the Brits pay for us, so some if us get a free lunch there.

    Fine... Then let Facebook PAY for fact-checkers that have no partisan bias....

    No one would say BOO to that...

    343

  28. [28] 
    michale wrote:

    Let's face reality, my friend.. The ONLY "depressed" counties are the ones, the very VERY few (relatively speaking), that Hillary won...

    I mean, honestly...

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/16/us/politics/the-two-americas-of-2016.html?_r=0

    How can you look at that map and come to ANY other conclusion than this country thoroughly and utterly rejected Hillary Clinton...

  29. [29] 
    michale wrote:

    But I understand that many of ya'all are hurting over this...

    I will endeavor to be more compassionate and understanding...

  30. [30] 
    michale wrote:

    The left, the real left that realizes that extremism isn't just a problem on the right, and that politics is the art of the possible.

    For example...

    Where is the condemnation from the "Real" Left over the violent and abhorrent treatment of Electors by Hillary supporters???

    Like I said...

    It's one thing to CLAIM that one condemns in theory deplorable attacks such as this...

    But unless one ACTUALLY condemns the ACTUAL act???

    It's nothing but hollow words that are devoid of any real meaning...

    346

  31. [31] 
    neilm wrote:

    Let's face reality, my friend.. The ONLY "depressed" counties are the ones, the very VERY few (relatively speaking), that Hillary won...

    Um, not according to facts:

    https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2016/11/ClintonCounties.jpg&w=1484

    Hillary won 64% of the economy of the U.S.

    Here is a possibility that won't happen because the Republicans will change the rules.

    1. Massive across the board tax cuts
    2. Repeal Obamacare
    3. Increased military spending
    4. Dramatic decrease in government spending to mitigate the costs of 1 and 3. 2 is a wash at best of the Republicans from a spending perspective as the costs will get pushed down to ER coverage.
    5. States get less money from the Federal government
    6. Blue states increase state tax to cover the loss and replace services
    7. Republicans announce that taxes will be too high in California, etc. and that businesses will move to paradises like Texas resulting in California's economy crashing
    8. The rich people who pay the taxes in California grumble and announce they are moving to Texas, just like everybody on both sides said they were moving to Canada.
    9. A few businesses up and leave, and get huge airtime on Fox News
    10. Most businesses stay because smart but not wealthy people like good healthcare, government services, etc. that California and the blue states provide.
    11. More and more red states look more and more like Kansas
    12. Your average red state voter who has been told to blame "Libtards" and Obama for a decade realize that every single politician who represents them all the way through state government, Congress and the White House is a Republican, and things are getting worse. Meanwhile the 64% of the country that voted for Hillary and is diverting the taxes from the Federal Government to State governments and providing good services are doing well.
    13. The pendulum swings.

  32. [32] 
    michale wrote:

    Washington Post is fake news...

    And the possibility is greater that those things will happen.

    If they don't the pendulum will swing. If they do, President Trump is reelected in a landslide that hasn't been seen since Reagan. You will vote for Trump then

  33. [33] 
    neilm wrote:

    Jesus, why don't ya let Trump get sworn in???

    Because I just like whining about Trump.

    Also, every time Trump does something his supporters like they crow about it (800 jobs at Carrier), but every time I point out the things he is walking away from (special prosecutor for Hillary, Mexico paying for the Wall) I'm told to be patient.

    It can't be both ways, if he is getting congratulated today, he should also be held to account for breaking promises today.

  34. [34] 
    altohone wrote:

    neil
    25

    "The left, the real left that realizes that extremism isn't just a problem on the right, and that politics is the art of the possible. The real left that knows that in a democracy you need the people behind you but you need to work to convince them, not berate them. The real left that get things done not undermine the insufficiently pure. The real left have known about the venality of the press for centuries, not decades. It isn't news that there is crap journalism."

    You are not part of the real left, by self admission, so you are either delusional or lying when you misrepresent people such as yourself as the real left. You lack standing. And calling the fake left the real left doesn't alter the reality.

    A self described socially liberal economic conservative who supported a candidate just like himself and couldn't get the people behind them thus costing the Democrats an easily winnable election lecturing the left about the real left is laughable.

    Fake left Democrats embracing Big Money and their trickle down economics is not practical when it costs them elections and prevents getting things done.
    Fake left Democrats supporting a president that embraces Big Money and trickle down economics and refuses to even attempt enacting leftist policies is not the art of the possible.
    Fake left Democrats attacking the safety net and enacting right wing corporatism at the behest of their Big Money donors and alienating their base is not the art of the possible.
    Fake left Democrats supporting right wing militarism is not practical when it violates core beliefs while misallocating trillions of dollars and makes spending on productive policies impossible.
    Fake left Democrats abandoning their base is not practical or the art of the possible when it costs them elections.

    The fake left doesn't get things done BECAUSE they are insufficiently pure.

    Inaction on leftist policies that are supported by overwhelming majorities of the people is the true extremism... by definition. And the flipside to that is that supporting policies supported by the overwhelming majority is by definition NOT extremism.

    And the left berating the fake left that has duped so many is a moral obligation and necessity if their insidious influence is to be ended.

    As far as journalism goes, the fake left Democratic presidential candidate stood on the floor of the Senate and went on TV and repeated fake news propaganda to help sell an unnecessary and illegal war of aggression. Fake left i.e. right wing economics determined her votes in the Senate. She based her campaign on and embraced right wing economics sold by fake news outlets.

    Your fake "real left" is part of the problem.

    It's not "crap journalism". It's carefully crafted for effectiveness in selling crap policies by design and intention.

    The fake left embracing and defending it and then whining about fake news is hypocrisy.

    Most of the "responsible publications and news channels" have participated in disseminating this fake news propaganda, and you are once again delusional or lying when you deny this doesn't amount to corruption, and that we shouldn't point out this undeniable truth.

    And, for the record, trying to paint those who are acting against this corruption as paranoids who "see demons everywhere" is a classic propaganda technique to delegitimize the opposition, and it is truly sad that you would engage in it. After earning my respect, stooping so low is disappointing.

    A

  35. [35] 
    neilm wrote:

    Washington Post is fake news...

    No, it isn't. I defy you to find one statistic wrong in the infographic. Most of the wealth creating counties, even in Texas for Pete's sake, voted for Hillary. These are the counties and states that invest in their communities and create places where people want to live and work.

    People don't want to live and work in dead coal counties with no restaurants, no theatre, no symphonies, no beautiful shopping areas. It just is. This was a FU election and the Democrats didn't get fired up enough. But the Democrats are angry now because Trump is trashing our way of life and his victory tour is an insult that plays well with the angry Republicans, but will only serve to galvanize support against him.

    Look at what happened to Vanity Fair - Trump tweets that they are losing subscribers, and they have the single best day for subscriptions any magazine has had for decades. Look at Obamacare - record breaking sign ups as soon as Trump announces he is going to kill it - the beast has awoken, and chances are Trump won't be able to help himself and will keep poking the growing fire in the left's belly.

    We have figured Trump out - he is pathetically sensitive to criticism, particularly of his perceived intelligence and his precious properties. He will lash out and the left will use that to get their supporters angry. It is already happening where I live - my wife is incandescent. My friends intend to donate money and time at the next election to "get this orange clown out and fast".

    I'm hoping Trump succeeds beyond all expectations, just as I hope every plane I get on to doesn't crash even if I'm concerned about the pilot. But this pilot is staggering into the cockpit smelling of beer and slurring. If we have to replace him half way through the flight I'm ready for that too.

  36. [36] 
    neilm wrote:

    A self described socially liberal economic conservative

    i.e. the real left.

    Your left is the left of the SWP, the WRP that I grew up with. I lived for several years in a run down apartment with leaking roof in Scotland with two left wing radicals. I've read the left wing "Socialist Party Principles" document.

    I don't need an explanation about the fake left, I've heard it time and time again, and you know what, it makes no difference.

    Being pure and winning no votes is pointless. Compromising and realizing that we live in a world of shared for gray, not black and white or white and black depending on which extreme edge of purity you happen to ascribe to does nothing. Even when you get a populist clown that instigates a revolution, be it Chavez, Pinochet, Ortega or Ergodan the same story plays out. We get revenge against the "oppressors" then a kleptocracy (have you checked out what Ortega is doing in Nicaragua recently?).

    And that election that I lost for you managed to get more people voting for a left wing candidate than any other in the history of the U.S. bar one - and that was the last left wing candidate I supported for the same reasons.

    My old friend Paul, who used to buy "Socialist Workers" paper every week and railed incessantly against Margaret Thatcher and the Conservatives is now as center left as I am. My left wing medical student friend, Brendan, is now a Consultant in the NHS and still rails on about the Conservatives but is as much a part of the establishment and has also moved to the centre now he has a lovely family of six to support and likes the big pay check all his hard work has earned him. It pays for his kids can go to good schools and have nice European vacations. And good luck to both of them, they are still great guys and deserve everything they have, even though they wanted to take it away from everybody else when they were 22.

    I've got about as much time for the "pure left" as I do for the RWNJs. Once you can build something, I'll be impressed, but so far, like Trump, all I hear is patronizing drivel and a pattern of wealth destruction (Ortega, Chavez, Pinochet, Ergodan, Putin) that the responsible people in the centre need to fix later on.

  37. [37] 
    altohone wrote:

    Hey CW

    A follow up to some of Obama's presser claims would be interesting.

    Specifically I'd like to see an analysis of whether the ballot referendums increasing the minimum wage (which Obama had nothing to do with) are responsible for the increase in the median wage and the decrease in poverty.

    I haven't come across any analysis on the subject yet, but if you or anyone else stumbles across one, please share.

    Along a similar line of thought, an analysis that determined whether those claims were based on the depressed income and increased poverty from the Great Recession would provide some context too.

    Thanks
    A

  38. [38] 
    neilm wrote:

    Fake left Democrats embracing Big Money and their trickle down economics is not practical when it costs them elections and prevents getting things done.

    Trickle down economics is a farce. Don't try to lump me in with that self serving POS. While you have enough voters to stuff Congress with Grover Norquist idiots we can't make the tax laws more progressive, but to blame that on the left wing is just the game these clowns want you to play.

  39. [39] 
    michale wrote:

    We have figured Trump out - he is pathetically sensitive to criticism, particularly of his perceived intelligence and his precious properties. He will lash out and the left will use that to get their supporters angry. It is already happening where I live - my wife is incandescent. My friends intend to donate money and time at the next election to "get this orange clown out and fast".

    TRUMP IS TOAST-esque prediction #212.. :D

    Because I just like whining about Trump.

    Fair enough.. Kudos for the honesty... :D

    It can't be both ways, if he is getting congratulated today, he should also be held to account for breaking promises today.

    He is being congratulated today because he has gone above and beyond what a President Elect normally does to honor his promises to the people who voted for him..

    But there are limits to what he can do as President Elect..

    If Obama wants to step aside and hand over the reigns now??? I mean, it's not as if Obama is being effective at ANYTHING... He puts the LAME in Lame Duck...

    THEN you'll have an argument to make.. :D

    348

  40. [40] 
    michale wrote:

    If Obama wants to step aside and hand over the reigns now??? I mean, it's not as if Obama is being effective at ANYTHING... He puts the LAME in Lame Duck...

    I like whining about Obama.. :D And Democrats :D

  41. [41] 
    michale wrote:

    Remember when Camp Clinton was "horrified" when Trump implied he wouldn't accept the results of the election??

    Podesta refuses to say election was 'fair and free'
    http://thehill.com/homenews/news/310941-podesta-refuses-to-say-election-was-fair-and-free

    Hypocrite, thy name is Camp Clinton

    350

  42. [42] 
    altohone wrote:

    neil
    36

    You can claim supporters of right wing economics are part of the "real left" until the cows come home.

    It's a lie.
    Not true.
    Factually challenged.

    Your past and anecdotes about your friends are irrelevant. Things are different here.
    A straw man about socialism is another disappointing tactic that should be beneath you.
    And, it's not addressing the content of my comment.

    And you can't claim that the Obama administration wouldn't have been more successful economically and politically if he had embraced left wing populist economics.

    We will never know, because he didn't try.
    We know he did continue right wing economics (which had just caused massive wealth destruction in case you want a locally relevant anecdote), and it was economically mediocre and politically harmful across the board for Democrats.

    And don't think I didn't notice you ended by admitting you are in the center, Mr "Real Left".
    Or is it Jekyll and Hyde?
    I'm guessing it's self delusion since liars cover their tracks better.

    Of course, right wing economics isn't centrist either. But delusion has consequences... for example the disconnect between your comments today and those of the past few weeks where you actually supported truly centrist economic policies supported by the majority.
    But, whatever.
    Maybe those were the true delusions.

    A

  43. [43] 
    altohone wrote:

    neil
    38

    I'm not blaming trickle down economics on the left wing, I'm blaming it on the fake left who have wholly embraced it as evidenced by recent history and Hillary's campaign.

    What gives with another straw man?

    A

  44. [44] 
    neilm wrote:

    for example the disconnect between your comments today and those of the past few weeks where you actually supported truly centrist economic policies supported by the majority.

    My opinions about economics have not changed. We are now talking about achieving the economics goal we both agreed upon a few weeks ago. In a democracy with a lot of points of view, extreme solutions never prevail. For everybody on the left that rails about inequality, etc. there is somebody on the right (cue Michale) who thinks we are living in a socialist hellhole that only people like Trump can make better.

    I'm not going to change your opinions any more than I am Michale's, but there are sound policies out there that we can convince the population is good for them, if only we can articulate them in a fashion that appeals to them.

    You can conflate center left economics with trickle down and tell us we are tools of the right until the cows come home, but the sensible left is the one that can win. Look at the thumping Bernie got in the primaries by a candidate you have all been trashing for the last few weeks. And don't tell me that the DNC told me and millions of others how to vote.

    The membership of the nut case left is going to swell if Trump nosedives and especially if his paper thin ego causes him to lash out in every direction. Let's hope we don't get a left wing nut case caucus in Congress like the Republicans have with the Freedom Caucus. But I'm not ruling it out after 2018 if Trump creates a massive backlash.

    Then we will have two extremes that maybe will create the crucible that can bring the sensible left and the sensible right together. Maybe a new "Sensible Party" can be the whipping boy for the extremists on both sides but wins elections and gets the country moving again. I can only hope.

  45. [45] 
    michale wrote:

    For everybody on the left that rails about inequality, etc. there is somebody on the right (cue Michale) who thinks we are living in a socialist hellhole that only people like Trump can make better.

    OR somebody in the middle...

    That's really the point ya'all miss about Trump...

    While support for Clinton and Obama is totally, completely and unequivocally 1000% ideological, the support for Trump is completely, totally and unequivocally 1000% patriotic...

    In other words, Democrats voted for Hillary Clinton...

    AMERICANS voted for Donald Trump....

    351

  46. [46] 
    neilm wrote:

    I'm not blaming trickle down economics on the left wing, I'm blaming it on the fake left who have wholly embraced it as evidenced by recent history and Hillary's campaign.

    What gives with another straw man?

    You mean like the "fake left" straw man that you created and then pinned trickle down to?

    I can see clearly with my own eyes the growing inequalities that trickle down and tax cuts for the rich have given us. I'm the one harping on incessantly about the bloody Gini co-efficient.

    However I'm also the person who has seen the overall economy grow significantly. I've pointed you to the last three years' Credit Suisse World Wealth Reports that show that our average wealth per person is over $300K while the median is under $45K.

    We have voted ourselves a basic retirement and socialized healthcare for over 65 year olds. We have accepted Medicare Part D without screaming about the non-negotiation clause regarding prices, and even when we tried to fight back in California with Prop 61 it was defeated. We like giving ourselves money, and we like a strong Military.

    Until we can have sensible discussions about the Military and SS/Medicare we can entertain lovely thoughts about free tertiary education. Until we accept that technology, not China or Mexico or Vietnam decimated our heavy industry, and that free trade agreements (even with, horror of horrors, clauses that you don't like) have grown our economy and lifted 100's of millions out of abject poverty. Until we realize that imposing one person's certainty that they are right on a democracy isn't going to work without blood, then we can have a sensible discussion about the future.

    In the interim please continue your left wing purity. I have to listen to too much right wing purity as well. It is a free country and the 1st amendment give you the right.

    But don't expect me to believe nonsense solutions to adopt sensible economic policies until you can show me how to get most of the country to vote for them.

  47. [47] 
    neilm wrote:

    That's really the point ya'all miss about Trump...

    You desperate naivety about Trump being a man of the people is sweet. But have you looked at his cabinet picks?

    For Education we have a home schooler.
    For Energy we have a dimwit that thinks glasses make him look smarter.
    For Housing we have a self described amateur.
    For Labor we have a Fast Food CEO who wants to abolish the minimum wage.

    The most consensus we have from the Republican Party isn't repealing Obamacare (they've realized that it is a good idea after all). It isn't working on policies to create high quality jobs (they want to lower or abolish the minimum wage), it isn't even to build a bloody wall or punish Hillary even though they know she did nothing wrong. No the #1 priority, with the bills ready to sign and everybody chomping at the bit for January 20th is a tax cut for the wealthy. From 40% to 33%. They are going to make out like bandits. You kids deficit (it ain't ours, we will be long gone before that credit card bill arrives in the mail) will balloon as we also give their buddies in Lockheed Martin etc. lots more of their money.

    But you keep telling me Trump is the centrist, fight for the little guy politician we've all been waiting for.

  48. [48] 
    neilm wrote:

    In other words, Democrats voted for Hillary Clinton...

    AMERICANS voted for Donald Trump....

    So I'm not an American?

    And neither are the other 66 million people who voted for Hillary.

    But the 63 million who voted for Trump are.

    Thank goodness you don't subscribe to identity politics.

    #NoSarcasmHereOfficer

  49. [49] 
    michale wrote:

    You desperate naivety about Trump being a man of the people is sweet. But have you looked at his cabinet picks?

    I never claimed Trump was a man of the people..

    I know exactly who and what Trump is..

    He is a man who takes shortcuts to get things done..

    Since you dislike him, you will concentrate on the shortcuts..

    With me, I am more concerned about the getting things done part..

    But have you looked at his cabinet picks?

    Yes, disrupters all.. People who will go into their respective agencies and render a much needed kick in the ass attitude adjustment...

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/17/us/politics/donald-trump-cabinet-picks.html?ref=todayspaper

    What part of CHANGE/ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT did ya'all not understand?? :D

    But you keep telling me Trump is the centrist, fight for the little guy politician we've all been waiting for.

    And the evidence to date supports that assertion..

    It may change.... It may not...

    But in the here and now, it's clear that Trump is a true Independent...

    Trump has been a Democrat longer than he has been a Republican...

    Why are you so sure that his Republican persona will be dominant??

    352

  50. [50] 
    michale wrote:

    In other words, Democrats voted for Hillary Clinton...

    AMERICANS voted for Donald Trump....

    So I'm not an American?

    By voting for Hillary, you chose the Globalist identity BEFORE the American identity..

    You chose the President that "dreamed of open borders" and a dilution of American exceptionalism...

    That's fine... I don't think any less of you over that... I too want a global one world government.. It's the only way we can join the United Federation of Planets.... :D

    But I want a one world government based on AMERICAN values.. Not Chinese values or Russian values or, gods forbid, ISLAMIC values... :^/

    And neither are the other 66 million people who voted for Hillary.

    But the 63 million who voted for Trump are.

    Thank goodness you don't subscribe to identity politics.

    I *DO* subscribe to "identity" politics insofar as the *ONLY* "identity" that's relevant in this debate...

    AMERICAN identity......

    The funny thing is, is that *MY* "identity" politics is all inclusive whereas the Left's identity politics is all divisive....

    Funny how that is...

    :D

  51. [51] 
    neilm wrote:

    With me, I am more concerned about the getting things done part..

    We agree. That is what I'm worried about. He takes big risks with other people on the line, then runs behind lawyers if it doesn't work out. Unfortunately what works in the NY real-estate market doesn't translate well to running a country of 320M people.

  52. [52] 
    neilm wrote:

    Why are you so sure that his Republican persona will be dominant??

    He only has one persona: me.

  53. [53] 
    michale wrote:

    He only has one persona: me.

    You are confused..

    THAT is Hillary Clinton...

    Which is why she lost..

    Someone with a ME persona wouldn't have negotiated the Carrier deal.. She would have said, "Frak it, I won! I don't have to do jack shit!!"

    Unfortunately what works in the NY real-estate market doesn't translate well to running a country of 320M people.

    I guess we'll find out, eh?? :D

  54. [54] 
    neilm wrote:

    Someone with a ME persona wouldn't have negotiated the Carrier deal.. She would have said, "Frak it, I won! I don't have to do jack shit!!"

    Nope, you miss the "I'm the hero" angle.

    Plus you've spanked the Carrier "deal" to death. What about the other 1,300 jobs. The Renaud ball bearing plant? Having one CEO that does billions in business with the government take a $7M bribe to make Trump look good isn't really that consequential (he then had to spoil it by lying - he just can't help himself, claiming 1,100 jobs instead of 800 and then attacking the local union leader).

    By 2020 you'll be wishing you'd voted Hillary as Trump's true colors become apparent.

    In fact 60% of Trump supporters will wish they'd voted for Hillary in four years time ;)

  55. [55] 
    michale wrote:

    Plus you've spanked the Carrier "deal" to death.

    That's because you refuse to acknowledge it..

    What about the other 1,300 jobs.

    It's a shame that Trump couldn't save ALL the jobs.. But failure to do so in NO WAY diminishes the act of the jobs he DID save...

    Why hasn't Obama tried to save ANY of those jobs???

    Because he doesn't give a shit..

    Would Hillary had tried to save ANY of those jobs if she had won??

    Of course not..

    Why??

    Because she doesn't give a shit..

    By 2020 you'll be wishing you'd voted Hillary as Trump's true colors become apparent.

    TRUMP IS TOAST-esque prediction #244... :D

    In fact 60% of Trump supporters will wish they'd voted for Hillary in four years time ;)

    TRUMP IS TOAST-esque prediction #245...

    My prediction is already on record.. Trump will win re-election by a landslide the likes we haven't seen since Reagan..

    And at least 60% of Weigantia will be voting for Trump... :D

    355

  56. [56] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    But I want a one world government based on AMERICAN values.. Not Chinese values or Russian values or, gods forbid, ISLAMIC values...

    Would you care to narrow that down a bit, because you've said here that folks who didn't vote for Trump didn't have 'American' values..

    How about New York values, not Texas values? How about Utah values, not Maine values, or gods forbid, Tennessee values?

    Do you understand how UN-American that whole line of reasoning is? Eventually we have to get to a place where a fellow with, say, Kentucky values can express himself without fear of retribution. That's what America stands for: be what you want to be, not 'salute my flag or else!'.

  57. [57] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    It's a shame that Trump couldn't save ALL the jobs.. But failure to do so in NO WAY diminishes the act of the jobs he DID save...

    Why hasn't Obama tried to save ANY of those jobs?

    So you agree that the Millions of jobs saved by the Auto Industry Loan Program (aka the Auto Bailout) just dwarf all of that.

    But as you say, 'can't save every job', eh?

  58. [58] 
    michale wrote:

    Nope, you miss the "I'm the hero" angle.

    And what's wrong with that?? Especially if some does good....

  59. [59] 
    michale wrote:

    So you agree that the Millions of jobs saved by the Auto Industry Loan Program (aka the Auto Bailout) just dwarf all of that.

    Yes, I have already conceded that Obama deserves credit for that...

    Just as Trump deserves credit for HIS actions...

    Would you care to narrow that down a bit, because you've said here that folks who didn't vote for Trump didn't have 'American' values..

    Actually, I said EXACTLY that.. Trump isn't a Republican or a Democrat.. He's an American....

    And THAT's why Americans voted for him...

    Hillary voters voted for a Democrats...

    Trump voters voted for an American....

    How about New York values, not Texas values? How about Utah values, not Maine values, or gods forbid, Tennessee values?

    For patriotic Americans, American values supercede regional values..

    That's what people in New York and California who voted for Hillary forget...

    They are Democrats first and Americans second.. Sometimes not even second..

    Just like Hillary...

    357

  60. [60] 
    altohone wrote:

    neil
    44

    "My opinions about economics have not changed. We are now talking about achieving the economics goal we both agreed upon a few weeks ago. In a democracy with a lot of points of view, extreme solutions never prevail."

    According to your own words over the last few weeks, you support the leftist economic policies that have the support of the majority... by definition NOT "extreme solutions"... and that means you are NOT an economic conservative (this shouldn't be news to you). In politics, conservative means right wing... maybe the problem here is that you are using the dictionary definition?... as in not extreme.

    If the majority already supports those policies, we don't need to "convince them" or "articulate them in a manner that appeals to them".
    We just need real left candidates who will fight to enact them.

    We didn't "vote ourselves" Medicare and SS, we voted for candidates that would fight for and enact them.

    Hillary and Obama DO NOT support the leftist economic policies we've been discussing that have majority support, or they would have been pursued and campaigned on.
    Obama and Hillary are undeniably defenders of trickle down economics... the status quo.
    And the status quo economics is far from "center left".

    The real left supporting fake left candidates is the problem.

    Forgive me for jerking your chain to make that point.

    But the real left attacking other people in the real left as extremists for pushing for policies that they themselves support is also part of the problem. Do you have a mirror?

    -
    -

    Moving on...
    Bernie getting 43% of the vote is not a "thumping". Hillary adopting, or rather pretending to adopt his policies was also due to their support... so it wasn't the policies that weren't popular.
    The media excluding Bernie from coverage except negative and false portrayals just like those from all the fake left Hillary supporters in Congress and our establishment, portraying the race as over before it began and all during the primaries because of the superdelegate numbers, scheduling debates at times designed to limit exposure, and unfair practices against Bernie by the DNC for which people got fired certainly did occur.

    State party shenanigans excluding millions of voters from participation in the primaries through voter registration purges (22 states) and closed primaries and early registration deadlines also occurred.
    The lack of name recognition and machine politics loyalty in southern red states that were never going to be competitive in the general can't be ignored as a major factor in that measly 7% difference by which Bernie lost either.

    -
    -

    Who are these "extreme nutcase left" people you are referring to?
    Are they the people who support the policies you support, or are you talking about real socialists whose members represent .0006% of the population and have zero representation in Congress and in this forum?

    -
    -

    comment 46

    No, claiming anybody here wants the government to control the means of production, aka socialism, is a straw man.

    The truth about fake left Democratic candidates who do not support the leftist economic policies you support is not a straw man.

    I know you've been railing against inequality, which is why you are not part of the fake left... despite your mistaken affinity for their candidates.

    A strong military does not require unnecessary and illegal wars using it. In fact, such wars weaken our military and create more enemies than we kill.

    You're going to have to expand on what you mean by "sensible discussions about our military and Medicare/SS"
    You supported a strong safety net and universal healthcare recently... if that's what you mean by sensible, I'm on board and have been.

    A tiny transaction tax on Wall Street trades to pay for higher education seems sensible to me too, and does not require cutting the safety net or military spending.

    You supported legislation to mitigate the harmful effects of free trade recently too. Fake left candidates do not. I agree with you, not them.

    I believe I already covered the part about how sensible left wing economic policies you support already have majority support.
    We just need real left candidates who support them.

    Whew!

    A

  61. [61] 
    michale wrote:

    The most UN-AMERICAN of actions is happening right now...

    Electors being harassed and attacked to change their votes..

    How can ANYONE who calls themselves "American" fail to condemn those actions???

    No one will condemn it because it's being carried out by Hillary supporters with Hillary's tacit approval..

    And THAT's why the actions are not condemned...

    Actions that are wholly and utterly UN-American...

    358

  62. [62] 
    michale wrote:

    Am I wrong??

    "You're not wrong.."
    -Chuck AKA God, SUPERNATURAL

    :D

    359

  63. [63] 
    michale wrote:

    Like it or not, The Democrats will have to come off their crying jag after the inauguration. Some of them will need safe spaces for a little while longer, with calming videos of puppies and kittens. But some senior members of the party understand that soon even Democrats still deep in an endless drunk will have to sober up to deal with cold and unforgiving reality.
    It won’t be easy, because Scotch and vodka (no 15-year-old bourbon for these worthies), pouting and hysteria, can be addictive. Every new scheme to trash the Electoral College invites another, and there’s always someone eager to “keep the dream alive,” to make sure “the dream will never die,” and nourish other great dreaming moments in the party’s past.
    One of the dreamers, who may have been imbibing something stronger than vodka, is Larry Lessig, a law professor at Harvard, who says, as if he knows what he’s talking about, that 20 Republicans are lined up in the Electoral College to vote against Donald Trump when the college meets on Monday.
    The professor leaves himself lots of room to wiggle. “Obviously,” he says, “whether an elector ultimately votes for his or her conscience will depend on whether there are enough others doing the same. We now believe there are more than half the number needed to change the result seriously considering that vote.” There “may” be 20, or they may not, and they “may” be seriously considering flipping their vote, or they may not. Wiggle, wiggle.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/15/the-democratic-hangover-is-on-the-way/

    Regardless of Russian super-duper spy programs..... regardless of Elector harassment.... regardless of useless recounts...

    Donald Trump will be the 45th President Of The United States...

    The Left needs to come to grips with this reality...

    360

  64. [64] 
    neilm wrote:

    OK, we are going back to an America we haven't seen for a while - an American with both fiscal and monetary levers.

    This means Congress are actually going to do something. Which I thought was the most scary threat the right wing could hear "I'm from the government and we're here to help".

  65. [65] 
    neilm wrote:

    But Mr. Trump said in May he would “most likely” replace Ms. Yellen. “She is not a Republican,” he said in an interview with CNBC.

    Sounds like a Democrat/Independent to me Michale ;)

    #TrumpisaRepublicanGetOverIt

  66. [66] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Donald Trump will be the 45th President Of The United States... The Left needs to come to grips with this reality...

    And after that, Trump supporters need to understand that it doesn't end there - it begins there.

    There is still a congress which, despite a Republican majority, has quite a range of opinion, and some of those dissenters will be Republicans. There are business and special interest groups ready to spend vast amounts of cash to promote their issues, and there are States with Democratic majorities who will balk and sue just as Republican states did for Obama. So Trump and his supporters will need to take the lyrics of Trump's odd choice for campaign theme song: "You can't always get what you want" to heart.

    For patriotic Americans, American values supercede regional values..

    ..until we reach the issue of the use of the logo of the confederacy, a flag of treason, which is still memorialized in several state flags, and embraced by the 'patriotic' right.

    So your use of the qualifier 'patriotic' in this context carries a few pieces of luggage of its own.

    Is it patriotic to burn a US flag? Supreme Court says it is. You know why? Because everyone here has the right to say, 'fuck off' to folks who think they know what American values are.

    So if we were to impose actual American values on the rest of the world, it would necessarily include the right of the rest of the world to tell us to fuck off. That's fair.

  67. [67] 
    neilm wrote:

    Altohone 60

    A self described socially liberal economic conservative

    My concern is that:

    1. The Democrats will put up a Jeremy Corbyn style candidate - marvelous chap and loved by the party, but unlikely to win an election. Bernie reminds me a bit of Jeremy, but Bernie has a lot more charisma.

    2. The economic policies that we both support will be at the extreme end of the spectrum and will scare off the center

    3. Without a plan to cut Military spending and put SS & Medicare on solid financial ground, then we will get nothing or blow a big hole in the deficit. This plan can include raising taxes on everybody, especially the wealthy, imposing a transaction or volume tax on certain forms of trading, etc. but if we let a left wing administration blow a hole in the deficit, it is just as bad as letting a right wing government do it.

    In the U.K. the population is fairly centrist. In Germany and France it leans slightly left. But in the U.S. the political center is way further to the right of center. Nowhere else would put up with Sandy Hooks, etc. Gun control would be the top priority until sensible gun laws were in place. Nowhere else would allow military funding at the levels we have. The list goes on.

    To win an election we need to be appealing to the center with feasible policies and learn how to counter right wing fear mongering (because that is all they have, and when we play that game, we lose - Hillary could have got 5% more votes and won in a real landslide if she had stuck to her true convictions and sold their vision for a better America. Instead she did a poor impersonation of Bernie and alternated that with drummed up fear of Trump).

  68. [68] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    To win an election we need to be appealing to the center with feasible policies and learn how to counter right wing fear mongering (because that is all they have, and when we play that game, we lose).

    Yeah but what do you do when all the media wants to talk about is your opponent? Backhanded compliments will only get you so far. Besides, his faults were..are..so glaring, that, like the kid who could see the emperor's nudity when others wouldn't, we felt compelled to say, "But, but..don't you see it too? He's an old, rich, exhibitionist, wagging his sack in our faces and telling us it's a purse, and daring us to disagree."

  69. [69] 
    altohone wrote:

    neil
    67

    Nobody in the Democratic party is as far left as Jeremy Corbyn... nobody.
    Your concern doesn't match reality.
    (and Corbyn's viability has yet to be tested in the UK)

    The economic policies we both support are supported by the majority... how many times do I have to point that out? We are the center.

    A Medicare for all system is by far the most cost effective approach. In the meantime, negotiating drug prices has majority support and would reduce costs significantly.
    I assume that you are talking about the government paying back the trillions in the SS trust? Collecting the taxes and then reneging on the benefits won't fly. But the "get nothing" claim is right wing fear mongering.
    In any case, raising the minimum wage would increase the taxes collected for both programs and deal with a big chunk of the problem.

    We were discussing economics...

    And I think you're wrong about Hillary.

    A

  70. [70] 
    michale wrote:

    Sounds like a Democrat/Independent to me Michale ;)

    Sounds like someone who knows how badly the Democrats have scroo'ed the pooch.. :D

    Especially in fiscal matters...

    And after that, Trump supporters need to understand that it doesn't end there - it begins there.

    And that's what's so funny.. Trump supporters have NO problem with that. :D It's only the Left who is whining and crying...

    Present company excepted, of course.. :D

    There is still a congress which, despite a Republican majority, has quite a range of opinion, and some of those dissenters will be Republicans. There are business and special interest groups ready to spend vast amounts of cash to promote their issues, and there are States with Democratic majorities who will balk and sue just as Republican states did for Obama. So Trump and his supporters will need to take the lyrics of Trump's odd choice for campaign theme song: "You can't always get what you want" to heart.

    Oh of course.. That's a given..

    But as fragmented and as leaderless and rudder-less as the Democratic Party is, in the here and now, Trump will be able to get a LOT of what he wants..

    "The reward could be.. well... more wealth than YOU can imagine!!"
    "I dunno.. I can imagine quite a bit..."

    -Star Wars

    :D

    ..until we reach the issue of the use of the logo of the confederacy, a flag of treason, which is still memorialized in several state flags, and embraced by the 'patriotic' right.

    A flag of treason?? :D hehehehehe

    Is it patriotic to burn a US flag?

    Of course it isn't... But it's permissible..

    So if we were to impose actual American values on the rest of the world, it would necessarily include the right of the rest of the world to tell us to fuck off. That's fair.

    Abso-frakin'-loutly

    And, inadvertently I am sure, you have supported my point and hit the nail on the head as to why Trump supporters to the Democratic Party to...ummm.. what were your words?? "FUCK OFF"....

    Because your Globalists/Corporatists/Establishment Party wanted to IMPOSE their globalization by force...

    A true and viable one world government can only come about when it is achieved by mutual consent...

    "Elections have consequences"
    -Barack Obama

    Trump won the election fair and by the rules...

    Someone needs to clue the Democratic Party in on this undeniable FACT...

    Because, in the here and now from where I sit, the Democratic Party is looking like a hysterical bunch of birthers...

    And THAT is how history will record them...

    . Gun control would be the top priority until sensible gun laws were in place.

    Sensible gun laws ARE in place... That's the fact that you just won't concede... You can have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the history of the world and bad things will STILL happen..

    One only has to look at Chicago and California to know that this is true.....

    All the gun laws in the world would not have stopped Sandy Hook...

    . Instead she did a poor impersonation of Bernie and alternated that with drummed up fear of Trump).

    Exactly.. Hillary ONLY went with "TRUMP IS EVIL, TRUMP IS BAD" because that is ALL Hillary had.... She couldn't talk positive about herself because there was nothing positive to say...

    So, her ONLY plan was to talk Trump down... Her ONLY plan was to get the media to talk Trump down..

    But Trump supporters knew better.. Hillary is a bona fide liar and could not be trusted.. She proved that over and over again..

    As for the media?? There is a reason why the media has approval numbers that are in the toilet. They proved that they were in the bag for Hillary over and over again...

    The more Hillary and the MSM knocked Trump, the higher his approval numbers went...

    Besides, his faults were..are..so glaring, that, like the kid who could see the emperor's nudity when others wouldn't, we felt compelled to say, "But, but..don't you see it too? He's an old, rich, exhibitionist, wagging his sack in our faces and telling us it's a purse, and daring us to disagree."

    OR....

    Or... Your wrong and that's why Trump won...

    "We can't discard the possibility just because we don't happen to like it.."
    -Martin Sheen, THE FINAL COUNTDOWN

    361

  71. [71] 
    michale wrote:

    You desperate naivety about Trump being a man of the people is sweet. But have you looked at his cabinet picks?

    “I was never of the belief that the way you bring about change is to not hire anybody who knows how things work, and to start from scratch and completely reinvent the wheel. I’m the one who brings change. It is my vision. It is my agenda.”
    -Barack Obama

    :D

    362

  72. [72] 
    michale wrote:

    It's ironic.

    6 years ago, we were arguing the exact same point.. How Obama picked the people who had a had in the financial meltdown to fix things.. :D

    But back then, ya'all were arguing the point made in #71 and I was arguing ya'all's here and now point.. :D

    It's going to be a wild 8 years, eh?? :D

    363

  73. [73] 
    michale wrote:

    President-elect Donald Trump “doesn’t know much,” former President Bill Clinton told a local newspaper earlier this month, but “one thing he does know is how to get angry, white men to vote for him.”

    Bill Clinton is such a jackass sore loser..

    Clinton can't get it thru his booze addled brain that millions, if not TENS of millions of those "angry white men" voted for Obama.. TWICE....

    It wasn't racism that lost Hillary the election...

    It wasn't sexism that lost Hillary the election...

    It wasn't the Russians that lost Hillary the election...

    It wasn't Fake News that lost Hillary the election...

    It wasn't FBI Director James Comey that lost Hillary the election...

    HILLARY lost the election because she was a crappy candidate and a greedy liar and cheat...

    It's that simple and any attempt to blame ANYONE and ANYTHING other than Hillary is nothing but sore loser/sour grapes...

    364

  74. [74] 
    michale wrote:

    "From the tenor of these emails, you would think these people are curled up in a corner in a fetal position with a thumb in their mouth."
    -Elector Charlie Buckels

    That about sums up the vast majority of Democrats these days... :D

    Present company excepted, of course... :D

    365

  75. [75] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    HILLARY lost the election because she was a crappy candidate and a greedy liar and cheat...

    It's that simple and any attempt to blame ANYONE and ANYTHING other than Hillary is nothing but sore loser/sour grapes...

    That sounds like a dead-accurate summation of the response of the Republican electorate today. That it also sounds like it belongs in a schoolyard is beside the point, or perhaps it IS the point: Trump is the personification of a temper tantrum of the right; a red-faced, feet-kicking, utterly destructive meltdown, because they haven't gotten their way for the last eight years.

    And having finally gained access to their sister's bedroom, they intend to rip down the Justin Bieber and Katy Perry posters and paint the pink walls black. They have plans for their hated fraternal foe: maybe a heavy metal party with lots of puking, I dunno - I don't think they've thought that far ahead...

  76. [76] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    And like a lot of abusive siblings (or husbands), this is how the right gets away with all of the venomous, hateful things they said during the campaign:

    "Hey, I was just angry; you have only yourselves to blame for making me angry."

  77. [77] 
    michale wrote:

    That sounds like a dead-accurate summation of the response of the Republican electorate today.

    It's an dead accurate summation of ANYONE with common sense, more than 2 brain-cells to rub together and not enslaved by Party ideology...

    Trump is the personification of a temper tantrum of the right; a red-faced, feet-kicking, utterly destructive meltdown.....

    And yet, it's the entirety of the Left Wingery who is, either by commission or omission, exhibiting those EXACT tendencies that you ascribe to the Right...

    Funny how that is, eh?? :D

    And like a lot of abusive siblings (or husbands), this is how the right gets away with all of the venomous, hateful things they said during the campaign

    And, as I point it, yet, it's the LEFT who is trying to get away with all those hateful and venomous things...

    Ironic, iddn't it.. :D

    365

  78. [78] 
    michale wrote:

    {The Democratic Party has} nothing new to offer, with their vision of the future limited to larger doses of the same failing medicine and their intolerance for disagreement showing they would never learn from their mistakes. Their bad ideas had run their disastrous course.

    Yet instead of analyzing what went wrong and trying to find new organizing principles, party leaders and activists are pointing fingers at the FBI and Russia, and engaging in a mad bid to overturn Trump’s Electoral College victory.

    Because they are doomed to fail, we could be witnessing the death throes of the Democratic Party as we know it. With Obama and the Clintons encouraging the attempted theft of an election they lost and failing to denounce intimidation and death threats against Trump electoral voters, most Americans have reason to consider the Dems a dead letter.
    http://nypost.com/2016/12/18/time-to-face-reality-obama-trump-is-going-to-be-president/

    I honestly never thought I would live to see the day that the Democrats would try and overthrow a fair election solely and completely because they lost...

    It's mind-boggling...

    366

  79. [79] 
    michale wrote:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-rust-belt-is-right-to-blame-obama-1482098189

    As Tom Cruise would say...

    "Now, I don't know what all that means.... But it sounds pretty bad..."

    :D

  80. [80] 
    michale wrote:

    Terrorist attack in Germany...

    Russian Ambassador shot dead in Turkey...

    "I think I'll go play golf.."
    -Barack Obama

    :^/

    Change the name to Donald Trump and the Left Wingery would collectively lose their minds...

    20 Jan 2017 can't come soon enough...

    369

  81. [81] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Yawn. The old "your president can't take a vacation" thing is an annual reminder that true partisans can't miss an opportunity to be predictable and annoying.

    2018 can't come soon enough.

    As for the death of the Ambassador:
    I'd look first for Putin's fingerprints on it. I know the guy stood up and yelled jihadist slogans, but he could have been recruited by Putin's old friends, or by Erdogan. Why? Because closer ties to Turkey are exactly what Putin wants. Putin even released a statement afterward that emphasized that 'nothing' would prevent Russia from getting closer to Turkey (and by the way, sorry about the ambassador, love, Vlad).

    Now if, on the other hand, Russia's abominable behavior in Syria is drawing the attention and scorn of the Jihadists, wouldn't this be exactly the wrong time to cozy up to Russia ourselves?

  82. [82] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Why do you presume the gunman in Turkey was a jihadist?

  83. [83] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Richard Engel of NBC reported tonight that the gunman identified himself as a jihadist after shooting the Russian Ambassador. He ranted something about Russia's role in Aleppo. NBC had videotape of it.

    Do I believe the gunman? Not necessarily. The fact that he'd just killed someone doesn't enhance his credibility.

  84. [84] 
    michale wrote:

    Yawn. The old "your president can't take a vacation" thing is an annual reminder that true partisans can't miss an opportunity to be predictable and annoying.

    Ya mean, like the Left was when Bush was "on vacation"?? :D

    Regardless, even YOU must admit that the optics were horrible....

    Well, you would if you weren't enslaved by Party.. :D

    I'd look first for Putin's fingerprints on it. I know the guy stood up and yelled jihadist slogans, but he could have been recruited by Putin's old friends, or by Erdogan.

    So, in other words, you agree with Romney when he said back in 2012 that Russia is our number one foe....

    Funny how the Left ridiculed Romney back then, eh?? :D

    Romney was downright prescience...

    Want to give him some credit??

    No??

    Didna think so... :D

    370

  85. [85] 
    michale wrote:

    Do I believe the gunman? Not necessarily. The fact that he'd just killed someone doesn't enhance his credibility.

    Awww, come on... The ONLY reason you don't believe the gunman is because it doesn't fit with your Anti-Russian agenda-of-the-day... :D

  86. [86] 
    michale wrote:

    Why do you presume the gunman in Turkey was a jihadist?

    Him yelling ALLAH AKHBAR!!!! kinda gave it away.. :D

  87. [87] 
    michale wrote:

    I'd look first for Putin's fingerprints on it. I know the guy stood up and yelled jihadist slogans, but he could have been recruited by Putin's old friends, or by Erdogan.

    So, in other words.....

    When you hear hoof beats, you think "Zebras! Gotta be zebras..."

    :D

    375

  88. [88] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Hey, in this world you have to keep an open mind. It could be zebras.

  89. [89] 
    michale wrote:

    Hey, in this world you have to keep an open mind. It could be zebras.

    Yes, it *COULD* be Zebras...

    But the fact that one goes there FIRST is telling...

    Especially when it's driven by ideology...

    If it's ideologically advantageous to think ZEBRA, one thinks Zebras... If it's ideologically advantageous to think HORSE, one thinks horses...

    No where is this on display better than with the RUSSIANS ARE THE ENEMY meme...

    When it was ideologically advantageous to say Russians were NOT the enemy, as in 2012 to ridicule Romney, then Russians were NOT the enemy..

    When it is ideologically advantageous to say Russians ARE the enemy, as in the 2016 election, then all of the sudden, Russians ARE the enemy..

    We are at war with East Asia. We have always been at war with East Asia..

    It's 1984, courtesy of the Democratic Party..

    378

  90. [90] 
    michale wrote:
  91. [91] 
    michale wrote:

    And ya know what really crystallizes things???

    Donald Trump makes a whirlwind US tour to thank the American people, the ones that put him in the White House..

    Hillary Clinton has a party to thank big-dollar donors for their money that she, in turn, flushed down the toilet..

    That right there EPITOMIZES the divide between the Democratic Party and the American people...

    The DP stands for big-dollar donors...

    Donald Trump stands with the American people...

    The facts are clear...

    380

  92. [92] 
    michale wrote:

    And if I read one more whiney Leftist whining and crying about the popular vote, I am going to lose my lunch!!

    In 1960, in the World Series, the Yankees scored more runs than the Pirates.... 55 to 27...

    The Yankees also had a higher hit average than the Pirates... .329 to .256

    But the Pirates won the series because they won the games in the right way according to the rules..

    Did New York fans whine and cry, "But!!! But!!! But!!! The Yankees had more runs than the Pirates overall!!!! Screw the rules!!! Declare the Yankees the winners!!!"

    The vanity vote is meaningless... If you take away California, Trump won the vanity vote by nearly the same amount as Hillary did...

    And THAT is as meaningless as the vanity vote itself...

    Trump won.... Get over it already...

    381

  93. [93] 
    michale wrote:

    And in the Insult To Injury department....

    Donald Trump wins Electoral College - as attempts to cause rebellion turn to farce with DEMOCRATS deserting Hillary
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4048394/The-Latest-Electoral-College-meets-formally-elect-Trump.html

    MORE electors were faithless to Hillary than to Trump... :D

    Ya really can't make this stuff up!!

    383

  94. [94] 
    michale wrote:

    OK, OK, OK.....

    I said I would endeavor to be more compassionate and understanding.......

    I will endeavor harder....

    384

  95. [95] 
    michale wrote:

    'THEY ARE MERKEL'S DEAD!' German far-right blames

    GERMAN Chancellor Angela Merkel is facing a backlash after 12 people were killed when a “refugee” ploughed through innocent revellers at a Christmas market in a truck.
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2440378/german-far-right-and-security-experts-blame-angela-merkels-open-door-migrant-policy-for-berlin-truck-attack-by-refugee/

    This is why an open refugee program is so dangerous...

    386

  96. [96] 
    altohone wrote:

    Troll
    95

    It now seems the German police may not have captured the right person...

    A

  97. [97] 
    michale wrote:

    Troll
    95

    It now seems the German police may not have captured the right person...

    Asshole,

    Link???

  98. [98] 
    michale wrote:

    At his end-of-year news conference Friday, President Obama admitted to his own weakness with his statement that his response to the DNC hacking was to tell Russian President Vladimir Putin to “cut it out,” when he saw Putin in China in September, fully a year after FBI agents tried to contact the DNC about the hacking attempts. What?! I hope Obama added a determined foot stomp and a “by golly” to his pitiful admonition to Putin. I wonder if Putin laughed in Obama’s face, or waited until he left the room.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/12/19/the-russians-werent-that-good-the-obama-administration-was-that-bad/?utm_term=.f6981fe9562c

    :D

  99. [99] 
    michale wrote:

    It now seems the German police may not have captured the right person...

    ISIS praises 'soldier' who carried out Berlin massacre as police STILL hunt gunman who killed 12 in lorry attack - but are forced to release asylum seeker suspect after admitting he's the wrong man
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4049442/Terror-attack-fears-lorry-ploughs-Christmas-market-Berlin-leaving-two-people-dead.html

    Why is that so difficult???

    Yea, typical of a Left Wingery administration.. So myopically opposed to fighting Islamic terrorism, that they make bonehead mistakes like this....

    388

  100. [100] 
    michale wrote:

    Merkel sure isn't looking Leader-Of-The-Free-World-eee right now...

    "They don't really seem Ancient-eee"
    Lt Col John Shepard, STARGATE ATLANTIS

    :D

    389

  101. [101] 
    michale wrote:

    Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyoming) once said that, “Those who travel the high road of humility will not be troubled by heavy traffic.”

    That descriptive and funny line came to mind after I heard what first lady Michelle Obama told Oprah Winfrey last week in a TV interview. Because of Donald Trump’s election, she told the former talk show host, “We are feeling what not having hope feels like.”

    She couldn’t prove that by the polls. A recent Quinnipiac University poll found that 59 percent of voters are “optimistic about the next four years with Donald Trump as president.” Sixty-six percent of respondents said they believed he would create jobs, 52 percent said they believe Trump’s policies will help the economy, 53 percent expressed confidence he will take the country in the right direction, and 49 percent think Trump will be either a “great” president or a “good” president.

    Michelle Obama’s hubris that only her husband could provide hope, despite the unpopularity of his policies (his personal popularity remains high), may be why St. Paul cautioned: “Do not think more highly of yourself than you ought.” (Romans 12:3). Pride is the first sin, which leads to all others.
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/12/20/cal-thomas-what-michelle-obama-doesnt-understand-about-hope-and-humility.html?refresh=true

    The arrogance of the Obamas still astounds me...

    392

  102. [102] 
    altohone wrote:

    Troll
    99

    Right wing militarism created the refugee crisis in Europe.

    But the initial person who was arrested was a refugee... the actual perpetrator may not be.

    And Merkel is not part of the left wing in Germany.
    So, what are you talking about?

    A

  103. [103] 
    michale wrote:

    Right wing militarism created the refugee crisis in Europe.

    But the initial person who was arrested was a refugee... the actual perpetrator may not be.

    And Merkel is not part of the left wing in Germany.
    So, what are you talking about?

    Asshole,

    I honestly don't know how to respond to such blatant ideological-based fabrications...

    Ya got me..

    395

  104. [104] 
    altohone wrote:

    Troll
    103

    Fabrications?

    Facts.

    Every.
    Single.
    Point.

    The refugees from Libya and Syria are the result of right wing militarism.

    The Germans haven't caught the driver of the truck... so we don't know if he was a refugee.

    Merkel's party is not part of the left in Germany.

    Is it ignorance, denial, or do you just enjoy looking stupid?

    You earn your moniker regularly.

    A

  105. [105] 
    michale wrote:

    Troll
    103

    Fabrications?

    Facts.

    Every.
    Single.
    Point.

    Asshole,

    Yea, "facts" that you cannot support by ANY documentation or proof..

    Ergo.. Not facts...

    Nothing but fevered fabrications of an ideologically enslaved mind...

    For example..

    The Germans haven't caught the driver of the truck... so we don't know if he was a refugee.

    The Germans haven't CAUGHT the driver of the truck, but they HAVE identified him. And he is a refugee...

    Like I said. You have no facts...

Comments for this article are closed.