ChrisWeigant.com

Everybody Agrees We Have The Freedom To Disagree

[ Posted Wednesday, July 4th, 2018 – 15:44 PDT ]

First, I'd like to wish everyone a happy Independence Day!

In these tribalistic political times, it can be very hard to see it but there are still things we all largely agree upon. For instance: blowing up a bunch of fireworks is really cool, and we should all get together to enjoy the spectacle at least once a year. Who could be against such a deeply-rooted American tradition, after all?

There are plenty of other things we can all agree upon which are also centered around this particular date in history. Let the record plainly state: Fourth of July cookouts and barbeques are fun. So are pool parties and going to the beach. Little kids love sparklers. John Philip Sousa really knew how to write a damn fine patriotic march. Our flag is both colorful and beautiful, and on this particular day should be seen everywhere. Politicians should be seen slowly riding in the backs of beautifully-preserved classic convertibles, because Detroit was indeed once the envy of the world (and for good reason... just look at that chrome sparkle!).

Our Founding Fathers were all flawed men in many ways, but their hearts were (mostly) in the right place as they tried to hammer out an untried and unique form of government. They kind of blew it the first time around (there are no grand monuments to the Articles of Confederation for a reason), but then they got it largely right on their second try. The first and best grand political compromise gave us the duality of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Both are now celebrated, while the bitter political rivalry between the Federalists and the Antifederalists has long been forgotten by most.

Even in our political rivalries today, we still (astonishingly) agree on a few things. The worst thing you can call a sitting president is "king" (or "wannabe king," or even "emperor"). This political tactic goes back to at least Andrew Jackson (calumnied as "King Andrew The First," in his day) and continues apace today, as both Barack Obama and Donald Trump have recently been accused of monarchical dreams. But no matter which direction across the aisle the accusation is flung, it is considered the worst possible thing to accuse an opposing president of being (or wanting to be). Some things haven't changed since our Revolution against George III, in other words. Kings are bad for America, we can all still agree on that.

Both sides of the political aisle tend to whitewash the parts of history they don't want to face up to. We all still truly want to believe the historical myth that: "America didn't start out perfect, but since that point we've been steadily getting better all the time, and have never backslid at all." This should come as no surprise, because it is largely what we're all taught in school as kids.

Both sides of the aisle still have a healthy respect for the "log cabin origin story." These days, it's pretty hard to claim you were born in a log cabin, but humble beginnings are still seen as a huge asset for just about any politician. The humbler the beginning the better, usually. The language we all expect to hear from our politicians comes from both sides as well -- words such as: freedom, rights, liberty, justice, fairness, and "I will fight for you!" are near-universal during campaign season. The two sides may disagree on the interpretation of various patriotic terms, but we all largely agree on the concept that they are good things to support.

Most people believe deep down that the American experiment truly has no end. We can weather this storm, no matter what it happens to be. Our history is chock-full of examples of how our system of government prevailed in the end, after all. While there are always dark mutterings and conspiracy theories ("Obama/Trump is going to declare himself president-for-life and refuse to hold an election!") the system will prevail, in the end. Or, at least, we hope it will, when our guy's not in office.

Sure, there is much that divides us. Pretty much everything, these days. It's hard to see much of anything that doesn't take on a political tinge these days. Conversations with relatives across the political divide usually have a flavor of astonishment on both sides -- "How can you, a thinking person I respect, actually believe or support that?!?" But usually, after a quick bout of snide comments, everyone has another beer and agrees that it did turn out to be a fine day for the Fourth, if a bit hot and humid.

We can all agree to disagree on things political, and yet still (usually) manage to have a good time. There's a reason for this, and that is there is still much that connects us no matter how bitterly divided we are on who should run the country and how they should go about doing so. So to return to today's theme, most of us can still manage to have fun on a holiday even with people whose political beliefs we may despise. Because no matter how much divides us, we can usually agree that having a good time is a good thing. I'm going to close today with the end to one of the earliest Independence Day columns I ever wrote, from back in 2007, because it's still the best thing I've said about how we can all agree on at least a few things on today of all days:

But the glorious Fourth is all about what a cool idea America was in the first place, and how we of all nations came up with the idea first. It is a day even a tree-hugging liberal in San Francisco can fly an American flag proudly -- with no militaristic overtones taken by her tree-hugging liberal neighbors, it should be noted -- since it is a day to celebrate what the ideal of America is. And that's something every American holds deeply in their own heart, and can celebrate in a very personal way -- even while enjoying the public celebrations.

So go ahead this Independence Day. Have a hot dog. Jump in some water somewhere. Watch a parade. Drink a beer. Drink two! Watch some fireworks.

The Founding Fathers not only would have approved of the concept of you having a great July 4th, they founded the whole damn country just so you could exercise your natural right to do so. You would be letting them down, in essence, by not doing so.

And that's something we all truly can celebrate together. Because it's not just celebrating your right as an American to have a happy Fourth, it's actually celebrating your birthright as a human being to be happy.

So go out there and pursue some Happiness today!

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

97 Comments on “Everybody Agrees We Have The Freedom To Disagree”

  1. [1] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    “I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts, and beer.”
    A.Lincoln

  2. [2] 
    neilm wrote:

    Like

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    Great Commentary, CW... :D

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    On this (belated) 4th Of July, let us celebrate this moment.. :D

    http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    On this (belated) 4th Of July, let us celebrate this moment.. :D

    http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/

    The most attended Inaugural in history... :D

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:
  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    “I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts, and beer.”
    A.Lincoln

    I heard "beer" then what???

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    The most attended Inaugural in history... :D

    Ooopss. That should read

    "The inaugural with the largest audience in history.."</B.

    My bust..

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Because love's such an old fashioned word
    And love dares you to care for
    The people on the (people on streets) edge of the night
    And love (people on streets) dares you to change our way of
    Caring about ourselves
    This is our last dance
    This is our last chance
    This is ourselves..... under pressure
    Under pressure
    Pressure

    Just rockin out to QUEEN and DAVID BOWIE and the last part seemed so apropos... :D

  10. [10] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Hey, when everyone's done shooting rainbows out of their asses, there's a real world with serious problems waiting for our attention out there. People are being poisoned in Britain, gassed in Syria, enslaved in North Africa, and gang-raped in India. In our own country, we're locking up babies and charging them with crimes, shooting unarmed black men at an alarming rate, and acting as human target practice for nutjobs with AR-15's. The whole world is heating beyond livability, being choked and suffocated in a layer of plastic, and is sliding into another neo-fascist delirium. The gap between the richest and poorest on our planet has never been wider, nor has the industrialized world seemed so hapless. America, for its part, has responded by empowering the crass, the coarse, the imbecilic, the unhinged and the violent among us. Preening celebrities, dilettante billionaires, power-hungry church leaders and untrustworthy politicians are all we seem to have to lead us out of this dark and increasingly dystopian nightmare. Anyone have time to cry for the polar bear who's been treading water for days, looking in vain for an iceberg to rest himself on? Nope, that bastard's gonna drown.

    Okay, I admit that I haven't had my morning coffee yet.

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hey, when everyone's done shooting rainbows out of their asses, there's a real world with serious problems waiting for our attention out there. People are being poisoned in Britain, gassed in Syria, enslaved in North Africa, and gang-raped in India. In our own country, we're locking up babies and charging them with crimes, shooting unarmed black men at an alarming rate, and acting as human target practice for nutjobs with AR-15's. The whole world is heating beyond livability, being choked and suffocated in a layer of plastic, and is sliding into another neo-fascist delirium. The gap between the richest and poorest on our planet has never been wider, nor has the industrialized world seemed so hapless. America, for its part, has responded by empowering the crass, the coarse, the imbecilic, the unhinged and the violent among us. Preening celebrities, dilettante billionaires, power-hungry church leaders and untrustworthy politicians are all we seem to have to lead us out of this dark and increasingly dystopian nightmare. Anyone have time to cry for the polar bear who's been treading water for days, looking in vain for an iceberg to rest himself on? Nope, that bastard's gonna drown.

    I think someone needs a hug....

  12. [12] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Nope. Just coffee. I'll be fine.

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Heh

  14. [14] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Balthy

    Re "The gap between the richest and the poorest on our planet has never been wider . ."

    For most of the entire history of the world, the "gap" (presume you're talking the wealth gap) has been the result of the fact that a very small class (call 'em the 'nobility' for purpose of discussion) essentially held the rest of the population in some degree of servitude, thus enriching themselves at the expense of those over whom they exercised control.

    In the modern world, or any way in the modern developed world, that is no longer the case. When everybody has at least some sort of opportunity to succeed, and a meritocracy exists, it is to the advantage of everybody for the highly productive people to produce wealth in far greater amounts than the less productive, because that creates the opportunity for redistribution.

    We can argue about the most desirabile level of redistribution from the more productive to the less productive, but you gotta remember, if nobody was highly productive, there wouldn't be any point in arguing over the desired level of redistribution, 'cause there wouldn't be anything to redistribute!

  15. [15] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    See? Once I get a little bean, things improve a bit.

    Still, these days we seem too...distracted..to really discuss our problems reasonably.

    The administration seems too distracted by its political fortunes, focusing more on scoring points with its base of support by dismantling the achievements of the previous administration, rather than formulating new solutions to intractable problems that loom before us.

    The loyal opposition seems too distracted by intra-party rivalries and crises-of-the-day reactions to formulate a coherent response.

    And regular citizens seem too distracted to pay attention to any of it. Too many new music acts to keep track of, too many television shows to watch, too many platforms to watch or listen to it all on, and too many electronic protocols and passwords to keep in our heads. They're buried in a mountain of information, both real and fake, without a sherpa in sight.

    And no one really knows who to vote for or against, in many cases. The 'non-partisan movement' successfully removed party identification from many ballots, leaving voters confused and frustrated. Even when parties are identified, terms like 'Independent' could mean left-leaning, right-leaning or intransigent. You'd have to be a poli-sci major in many cases to identify the particular political philosophy of candidates who only run attack ads against their opponents and mouth meaningless platitudes in their own.

    We're simultaneously drowning in information, and dying for lack of a single sip of useful knowledge.

    I think I need a second cup.

  16. [16] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I agree.

  17. [17] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    We're simultaneously drowning in information, and dying for lack of a single sip of useful knowledge.

    Actually, I disagree with that but, I can't say why right now ... it's too hot.

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    The solution is simple..

    Calm things down instead of hyping things up..

    Calling for angry mobs to "absolutely harass" government workers and supporters is NOT the way to calm things down..

    Does anyone disagree with that assessment??

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Facebook flags Declaration of Independence as hate speech
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/4/facebook-flags-declaration-independence-hate-speec/

    The Democrat Party's problem in a nutshell...

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    For example..

    Mad Maxine's calls to get an angry mob together and "absolutely harass" Trump supports...

    And the result??

    VIDEO: Teen attacked at Whataburger for wearing 'Make America Great Again' hat
    https://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/viral-video-shows-teen-attacked-for-wearing-make-american-great-again-hat

    When is that going to be universally condemned by ALL on the Left??

  21. [21] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Michale [20] You seem unnaturally attentive to this woman's statements. You do realize that there are 534 other members of the House of Representatives, don't you? I could do the same and quote Anne Coulter back to you all day.

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale [20] You seem unnaturally attentive to this woman's statements. You do realize that there are 534 other members of the House of Representatives, don't you? I could do the same and quote Anne Coulter back to you all day.

    And if Ann Coulter was a Republican CongressCritter, if Ann Coulter was the face of the current Republican Party, THEN you would have a logical and rational argument..

    But she's not, so you don't..

    The simple fact is YOUR Democrat Party leader has called for getting an angry mob together and "absolutely harass" government officials..

    And you say NOTHING...

    Silence Gives Assent..

  23. [23] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    CR [14]: ..a very small class (call 'em the 'nobility' for purpose of discussion) essentially held the rest of the population in some degree of servitude, thus enriching themselves at the expense of those over whom they exercised control.

    In the modern world, or any way in the modern developed world, that is no longer the case.

    Really? When was the last time that you won an argument with a bank or utility of any sort? The car that you bumped into might belong to a corporate executive or representative of a Sovereign Wealth Fund, and good luck getting either of those assholes to pay for your passenger-side mirror.

    The unjustifiably entitled and non-productive elite are still with us, they've just become legal entities and shell corporations. Don't look at the celebrities, the truly rich own them.

    You need to re-read your De Tocqueville to remember the attitude the founders had toward the subject. Back then, Americans equated their commonality with individualism and liberty. The elites weren't 'producers', they were Masters and Overseers.

  24. [24] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    M [22] if Ann Coulter was the face of the current Republican Party, THEN you would have a logical and rational argument..

    I'm glad that you agree that there are sometimes irrational voices on both sides. If Maxine Waters were the face of the Democratic Party, you'd have a point as well, I guess, but all she ever advocated for was confrontation, this isn't even new for her. She's as reliably reactionary as as 'Goober' Gomert, or 'Lispy' Farenthold are on your side.

  25. [25] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:

    It seems that some people mistook the Declaration of Independence for left-wing propaganda when they encountered it as tweets. (Sorry, I only get the Washington Post on one device and can't seem to copy the full text here.)

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../some-trump-supporters-thought-npr-tweeted-propa...

    It's not terribly surprising that FB's algorithms reacted to a phrase like 'Indian savages', and not surprising that the authors, men of their times after all, would use such a phrase.

    'Casey Stinnett, managing editor of the Liberty County Vindicator, said that the social network had complained about an update featuring paragraphs 27-31 of the historic U.S. document. His outlet was posting bite-size sections in the lead up to the July 4 celebrations on Wednesday but received a notice from Facebook the day prior saying the words had violated its “standards on hate speech.”

    In an article posted to the newspaper’s website describing the takedown, Stinnett said he suspected it was most likely the phrase “Indian Savages” that had triggered the deletion. “It is a very great irony that the words of Thomas Jefferson should now be censored in America,” he wrote, hypothesizing that it could have been a different case if the founder had instead used the term “Native Americans.”

    The disputed passage, first posted on July 3, stated: “He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”'

    So not the whole Declaration of Independence--and perhaps those who reacted to the NPR tweets would not have reacted in the same way given more context. But I seem to remember people presenting the whole thing years ago, just without saying it was the Declaration, and getting a similar reaction.

  26. [26] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:
  27. [27] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Mezz 25: Right wing sentiments on a leftish account. At least to the face book. *sigh*

    Context seems to be an exotic thing now, like a pixie on a summer night..

  28. [28] 
    neilm wrote:

    Re "The gap between the richest and the poorest on our planet has never been wider . ."

    I'm not sure I'm buying that. Perhaps it is true if you take two people in the World - one a small child taking their last breath as they starve to death (the lowest amongst us) vs. say Jeff Bezos who has more wealth and more ability to use that wealth then anybody else in the history of our planet (I'm assuming Jeff is the wealthiest, replace with Carlos Slim or whoever if you care about these things).

    I content that Bezos is also more wealthy than e.g. Rockerfeller because, even if you adjust for inflation, blah, blah, blah, Rockerfeller could never go into space, buy an antibiotic to cure an otherwise deadly disease, etc.

    So, basically every day we invent something new for Jeff Bezos to buy, and we have some poor soul expiring their last breath because they have nothing to eat, the gap between rich and poor is growing.

    But I think that in larger terms, things are getting more equal on a Worldwide scale. In fact, I think this equalization at the world scale, coupled with rising inequality in the U.S. and the other previously "rich" countries is leading to the populism, verging on fascism, we are seeing across the great democracies.

    There are some great books about this. "Enlightenment Now", by Pinker, and the Ted Talks of Hans Rosling show the global picture. "Coming Apart" by Charles Murray shows us the state of affairs in the U.S.

    As usual, no party or ideology has all the answer, but the more responsible groups (socialists, libertarians, conservatives, liberals) all have good ideas to add to the mix.

    The tragedy of our country at the moment is that we are sitting in our echo chambers, when the best solution is a compromise between all the different philosophies.

    Beware the person who thinks they have all the right answers. As the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy reminds us, most of us don't even know what the questions are, let alone all the answers.

  29. [29] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Re Facebook getting bent out of shape over the term "Indian Savages", as quoted from the founder's documents.

    It could be worth mentioning that the word "savages" was adopted into English directly from the original French noun "sauvages", translatable as "the wild ones".

    As an adjective, "savage" originally meant "feral", or "wild", in the sense of "untamed".

    Only over time did it evolve into English as "bloodthirsty", "cruel", etc.

  30. [30] 
    neilm wrote:

    Re Facebook getting bent out of shape over the term "Indian Savages", as quoted from the founder's documents.

    Their automated system flagged it, it was reviewed and unblocked. The Vindicator thanked Facebook for quickly resolving the matter:

    “We never doubted Facebook would fix it, but neither did we doubt the usefulness of our fussing about it a little.”

    No drama.

  31. [31] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    neil [28] Beware the person who thinks they have all the right answers. As the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy reminds us, most of us don't even know what the questions are, let alone all the answers.

    Natch. But given that, I'm all for unvarnished presentation of the challenges we face. We may not have the right questions, nor nearly enough answers, but we have to at some point look reality square in the eye anyway, or we're asking for it.

    And yeah, missing "No Drama Obama" every day.
    Just saw Biden speak on TV: he's looking like better and better 2020 prospect every day. Hasn't aged as fast as I expected him to, but then: Jerry Brown, right? He looks healthier than I do.

  32. [32] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Well, it looks like Pruitt resigned from the EPA, finally. Not sure why he chose to do so now. Trump still supported him. He’s been caught time after time violating ethics rules and working to undermine the purpose of the organization he chaired without ever batting an eye at the charges.... so what has changed?

    It was thought that Trump wanted Pruitt to take over as AG if they could get Sessions to resign, as Pruitt wouldn’t need to be approved by the Senate since he had already been approved in his role as EPA chief. But that only would work if Pruitt was still on the Cabinet when Sessions resigned (and only if Sessions resigned and was not fired by Trump).

    Maybe Pruitt’s crimes have become so flagrant that even Trump couldn’t turn a blind eye. If Trump isn’t personally benefitting, he tends to be less gracious.

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Balthy,

    I'm glad that you agree that there are sometimes irrational voices on both sides.

    Of course their are....

    But the fact is, on YOUR side, you have a Party leader, a "rock star" who is advocating violence against the OTHER side and that's acceptable to most everyone here??

    Well, that is comment worthy..

    And please, don't fall back on that tired excuse that Mad Maxine wasn't advocating violence..

    When you advocate getting together an angry mob and "absolutely harass" people at their meals and at their homes??

    THAT is advocating violence..

    If Maxine Waters were the face of the Democratic Party, you'd have a point as well,

    Mad Maxine IS the face of the Democrat Party these days... A Party "rock star"...

    I guess, but all she ever advocated for was confrontation, this isn't even new for her. She's as reliably reactionary as as 'Goober' Gomert, or 'Lispy' Farenthold are on your side.

    Who???

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Their automated system flagged it, it was reviewed and unblocked. The Vindicator thanked Facebook for quickly resolving the matter:

    “We never doubted Facebook would fix it, but neither did we doubt the usefulness of our fussing about it a little.”

    No drama.

    The mere fact that Facebook would flag the Declaration of Independence, even by algorithm is very indicative of it's Left Wing bias..

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Beware the person who thinks they have all the right answers. As the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy reminds us, most of us don't even know what the questions are, let alone all the answers.

    So, we can safely ignore all the Humans Cause Global Warming fanatics??

    Kewl.. :D

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    When was the last time that you won an argument with a bank or utility of any sort?

    Yesterday...

    For over a year, AT&T has been overcharging me.. My phone bill was supposed to be around $80 a month.. I had paid the bill full in Jun ($166) and my new bill came out a week later and it was $240.. I was on CHAT with AT&T for 2 hours threatening to go to the Public Utilities Commission and file a complaint.

    My current bill of $240 was knocked down to $77 and a promise that my bill will never be over $80...

    Sometimes you CAN fight City Hall and win!! :D

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just saw Biden speak on TV: he's looking like better and better 2020 prospect every day.

    You want to elect an old white guy for POTUS??

    What are you!!!??? A Republican!!???

    :D

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, it looks like Pruitt resigned from the EPA, finally. Not sure why he chose to do so now.

    Death threats to the family, no doubt..

    You have HAVE to love the "peaceful" and "tolerant" and "respectful" Democrat Party...

    :^/

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Immigration top issue for U.S. voters, economy a close second: Reuters/Ipsos poll
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-immigration/immigration-top-issue-for-u-s-voters-economy-a-close-second-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1JV31K

    Democrats are toast this Nov....

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    Texas mom shoots man trying to take car with her kids inside at gas station: 'I hope that woke him up'
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/05/texas-mom-shoots-man-trying-to-take-car-with-her-kids-inside-at-gas-station-hope-that-woke-him-up.html

    Thank the gods for the 2nd Amendment...

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, anyone wanna lay bets on who President Trump will pick??

    I am hoping for Judge Barrett.. That's the pick for most exploding heads by liberals.. :D

    Seriously, though.. That would be the shrewdest pick for President Trump...

    She'll be on the bench for at least 40 years... Her views on the 2nd (which is my deal breaker) aren't really well known.. But I am willing to go on faith. Her being a strict Constitutionalist is sufficient..

    Hopefully she will be questioned on the 2nd during her confirmation hearings..

    That's my pick.. What's ya'all's??

  42. [42] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    CW-
    "You disappointed the shit outta me."
    -Tony Russo
    Married to the Mob

  43. [43] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I hope President Trump picks the most conservative judge who is more than willing to break with precedent and settled law.

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    I hope President Trump picks the most conservative judge who is more than willing to break with precedent and settled law.

    That would likely be Roe v Wade...

  45. [45] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    maryanne trump barry ;p

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Indeed.

    Do you think Trump will go with my choice?

  47. [47] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @liz,

    not sure which one best fits your description

  48. [48] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Neither am I.

  49. [49] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    But, I'm sure the president does.

  50. [50] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    ... or, knows ...

  51. [51] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    can you imagine what would happen if donald did nominate his sister? i mean, it's not as if she isn't a legit conservative judge in her own right...

  52. [52] 
    neilm wrote:

    Forget Trump picking - for him the choice is like the OJ fridge at the supermarket, there are 4 brands of pre-frozen juice that all taste the same, and they let the clown pick the label with the colors he likes most.

    The "choice" is a farce, like everything else with this administration. They have all been cleared by the Federalist Society.

    Trump's choices are: male/female and white/not white

    Who knows how he will feel the day he decides - Florida Natural or Minute Maid (I'm going with "Simply Orange" myself).

  53. [53] 
    neilm wrote:

    Welcome to our Trade War - we kicked it off today by raising your prices on a range of items, then the Chinese kicked soybean farmers in the teeth.

    So glad we have a complete moron in the White House.

  54. [54] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Precisely, Neil!

    Let's hope he picks badly - if you know what I mean and I'm not sure you do. :)

  55. [55] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    In other words, Neil, let's hope he picks the cream of the crop from the Federalist Society's list.

  56. [56] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That will at least make it a little easier for certain senators to vote nay.

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    How many comments does it take to ... :)

  58. [58] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If his sister would be the worst choice, Joshua, then yes, let's hope he picks his sister.

  59. [59] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    ... make my point clearly and concisely?

  60. [60] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Usually, more than one. :(

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    Welcome to our Trade War - we kicked it off today by raising your prices on a range of items, then the Chinese kicked soybean farmers in the teeth.

    And HOLY SHIT!!! We're STILL here!!!!

    The world hasn't ended.. Planet Nirubu is still out in the never reaches of our galaxy.. The earth hasn't exploded..

    We are all enjoying the same rights and privileges we enjoyed yesterday..

    In short.. Big woop...

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's going to be Judge Bartlett.. I would put quatloos on it...

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's going to be Judge Bartlett.. I would put quatloos on it...

  64. [64] 
    John M wrote:

    [39] Michale

    "Democrats are toast this Nov...."

    I'd file this prediction with all the "Trump is Toast" predictions during the presidential election, in the "it ain't going to happen" circular file.

  65. [65] 
    John M wrote:

    [63] Michale

    "It's going to be Judge Bartlett.. I would put quatloos on it..."

    I'll take that bet and raise you 1,000 quatloos that it will be Judge Kavanaugh instead.

  66. [66] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Trump will nominate Pruitt — the “Trumpiest” candidate possible.

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Democrats are toast this Nov...."

    I'd file this prediction with all the "Trump is Toast" predictions during the presidential election, in the "it ain't going to happen" circular file.

    :D YOu realize yer just increasing my GLOAT quotient, right?? :D

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'll take that bet and raise you 1,000 quatloos that it will be Judge Kavanaugh instead.

    Yer on.. :D

  69. [69] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    John,

    Which one would be the worst choice?

    Michale,

    Which one would be the best choice?

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale,

    Which one would be the best choice?

    Overall?? Barrett... She is a woman which will blunt the sexist criticism that is thrown at Trump and will also set up sexist criticism of Democrats who oppose her...

    And, since religious freedom is part and parcel to today's issue de jour, her being catholic will set up Democrats as religious intolerant boobs..

    The one draw back to Barrett is she doesn't have much of a judicial history...

    We're hoping for a Scalia, but we might get a Souter..

    That's a danger...

    Plus on my hot-button topic, the 2nd, she has absolutely no history or info on..

    But I am willing to trust President Trump's instincts on whomever he picks...

  71. [71] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I don't know, Michale, it sounds like Barrett is not conservative enough for me.

  72. [72] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    CW-
    Are you one of the most people that think the American experiment truly has no end?

    If so, then shouldn't we explore all possibilities that could advance the experiment instead of just discussing how to continue the both sides of the aisle approach that is clearly not working?

    Ignoring the existence of those that are not from either side of the aisle and their ideas is an example of both sides of the aisle whitewashing the public discourse on what options citizens have because they don't want to face up to citizens having other options in the same way they whitewash the parts of history they don't want to face up to.

    One commenter here recently said that the one of the both sides that turns out their base and suppresses the other side's turnout will win in 2018. Paula even said that people that would not vote for Democrats in 2018 should just stay home.

    40% of eligible voters have rejected the choices offered by the both sides of the aisle by not voting. 20-30% of those that vote in presidential elections but don't vote in off year elections have also recognized the futility of the both sides approach and do not participate in off year elections.

    Together these citizens make up over 50% of eligible voters. How can you claim to be covering the reality of the 2018 elections while ignoring an option that could get some these citizens to participate for a productive purpose rather than not vote?

    If the Democrats message is so wonderful, why are you afraid to address One Demand, the current opportunity to mobilize these citizens and to inform citizens aboot this opportunity?

    Wouldn't it be better if these citizens participated in One Demand in 2018 instead of not voting? If not, why not?

    What harm would it cause if they did?

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    I don't know, Michale, it sounds like Barrett is not conservative enough for me.

    Heh...

    I think we have a Scalia clone flying around somewhere. :D

  74. [74] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I hope so.

  75. [75] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    CW-
    Not informing citizens aboot One Demand and the opportunity to mobilize the 2018 off year non-voters (and possibly even some of the 40% that don't vote at all) is the equivalent of Dr. Morbius trying to keep Altaira from being exposed to other humans in Forbidden Planet.

    As these citizens make up over 50% of eligible voters it would take less than one out of twenty of these citizens participating in One Demand in 2018 to total 5% of the 2018 general election vote.

    This could inspire more of these citizens to participate in 2020 and inspire many small contribution candidates to run in 2020.

    This will provide an opportunity in 2020 for the Democrats to run candidates that will inspire these citizens to vote for them rather than inspire these citizens to not vote.

    And it will provide these citizens with an opportunity to support candidates that can beat some of the Democrats in 2020 if those Democrats choose to not take advantage of this opportunity to attract the votes of these citizens.

    This is how democracy is supposed to work.

    Isn't time for you to "let the record plainly state" why you are ignoring this very real option for these very real people?

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hispanic-Latino Unemployment Rate Hits Lowest Level on Record in June
    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/craig-bannister/hispanic-latino-unemployment-rate-hits-lowest-level-record-june

    WWOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH

    Hear that?? That's the Democrat's Blue Wave being flushed down the drain.. :D

  77. [77] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    if we took guns and schadenfreude out of the equation, what kind of justice would you actually want making decisions up there? a scalia or thomas who tries to get inside the head of a white slave owner from 1770's? an alito or roberts who tries to go exclusively by what the words of the constitution say, irrespective of their current meaning or impact? something in-between? something completely different?

  78. [78] 
    Michale wrote:

    JL,

    Probably a Scalia or a Thomas who has one eye on the text of the Constitution, one eye inside the mind of the founding fathers and a final eye on common sense...

  79. [79] 
    Michale wrote:

    "You ain’t supporting shit, nigga! Bitch ass motherfucker"
    -Kino Jimenez, after assaulting a teen age Trump supporter..

    Just have to LOVE the Left Wingery, eh?? :^/

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya really got to feel some sympathy for the Left Wingery..

    They are screaming to the high heavens how bad Trump is, how he is going to destroy the economy and this country...

    And FACTS and REALITY just **WILL NOT** cooperate... :D

    There has been WAY too much winning for President Trump and his supporters... :D

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    Population 16 years and older
    May: 257,454,000
    June: 257,642,000 (+188,000)

    Civilian Labor Force (Population 16+ and want a job)
    May: 161,765,000
    June: 163,277,000 (+1,512,000)

    Labor Force Participation Rate (% of 16+ population who want a job)
    May: 62.8%
    June: 63.4% (+0.6%)

    Employment
    May: 156,009,000
    June: 156,465,000 (+456,000)

    Employment-Population Ratio
    May: 60.6%
    June: 60.7% (+0.1%)
    https://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab1.htm

    The reality is that there are 456,000 more jobs in June than May, but 1,512,000 more people (0.6% of the population) who want a job. A huge gain in employment, and more people wanting to work. All good news.

    So... Much... Winning...

  82. [82] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Michale [78]: I thought so. Aliens.

    Y'know I was about to make a long post about the pros and cons of various SCOTUS picks, but we're talking about Trump here, who is likely to pick the best looking.

    So I've got nuthin'.

  83. [83] 
    Michale wrote:

    Y'know I was about to make a long post about the pros and cons of various SCOTUS picks, but we're talking about Trump here, who is likely to pick the best looking.

    Yea.. Cuz Neil Gorsuch is such a hottie.. :^/

    Do you just spew out Trump insults without ANY thought to facts or reality??? :^/

  84. [84] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    M [83] Yea.. Cuz Neil Gorsuch is such a hottie.. :^/

    Who's insulting who? You don't think Gorsuch isn't a somewhat handsome fellow that looks good on TV?

    Tell you what I think: I think Trump is gonna pick the most radically conservative woman or black man that he can find, and figure that regardless of whether that nominee can get nominated, he can use the Democrats' reaction to him or her as a brickbat through the midterms. He's gonna troll us, sure as I'm sitting here, and dare us to object.

  85. [85] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    [81] And yet in poll after poll, most Americans continue to say that they disapprove of Trump.

    Quinnepiac had his disapproval numbers up to 55% the other day.

    No wonder he's running off to his friend/handler Putin. He's someone who understands the urge to be a petty dictator..

  86. [86] 
    Michale wrote:

    Tell you what I think: I think Trump is gonna pick the most radically conservative woman or black man that he can find, and figure that regardless of whether that nominee can get nominated, he can use the Democrats' reaction to him or her as a brickbat through the midterms. He's gonna troll us, sure as I'm sitting here, and dare us to object.

    Change conservative to lberal and it sounds like EXACTLY something Democrats would do.. :D

  87. [87] 
    Michale wrote:

    Quinnepiac had his disapproval numbers up to 55% the other day.

    Very similar to Obama's numbers at this point in his POTUS-ency...

    No wonder he's running off to his friend/handler Putin. He's someone who understands the urge to be a petty dictator..

    You must be REALLY in the dumps, if that's the best you got.. :D

  88. [88] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Change conservative to lberal and it sounds like EXACTLY something Democrats would do.. :D

    In reality, Michale, President Obama - who is a Democrat, last I checked - nominated a very moderate judge who had the support of Republicans and Democrats alike in the name of Merrick Garland.

    I might even say that the reason for Obama's moderation was a direct result of the actual Biden rule as Obama was in his last year of office.

  89. [89] 
    neilm wrote:
  90. [90] 
    neilm wrote:

    Trump doesn't know what he is doing in real world negotiations, but the Chinese aren't playing around. They are targeting their tariffs to hit Trump's geographical base:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-tariffs-hit-trump-counties-harder-1530869400

  91. [91] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That's election meddling, Neil.

    Not a winning issue for the Resistance.

  92. [92] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz (91)-
    That is why the Resistance is concentrating on the one issue that will make it possible to win- Big Money in politics.

    Until that issue is resolved or is being resolved then any other issue will not be resolved.

    And any person or candidate that is not resisting Big Money in our political process is not part of the Resistance.

  93. [93] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Re: Tariffs, like sanctions, are often targeted to influence the influential, Liz. The Magnitsky Act targeted all of the oligarchs around Putin'. Your own lovely country is about to impose its own retaliatory tariffs, if I recall, targeted at Harley Davidson and Kentucky Bourbon. Two guesses who's attention they're trying to get (HD is in Paul Ryan's district).

    Election Meddling (terrible term for it) is planned and executed in secret. It can involve cybercrime, undercover operations, theft, lies and fraud, among other things. The whole idea is to make it seem organic, local, or homegrown, rather than originating from outside the country.

  94. [94] 
    Michale wrote:

    In reality, Michale, President Obama - who is a Democrat, last I checked - nominated a very moderate judge who had the support of Republicans and Democrats alike in the name of Merrick Garland.

    Only because he knew that McConnell wouldn't process the nomination. :D

  95. [95] 
    Michale wrote:

    Election Meddling (terrible term for it) is planned and executed in secret. It can involve cybercrime, undercover operations, theft, lies and fraud, among other things. The whole idea is to make it seem organic, local, or homegrown, rather than originating from outside the country.

    And the Russian totally and 10000% blew it, didn't they..

    An agency who has perfected "election meddling" to an art form so that there has NEVER been any evidence of anything....

    EXCEPT....

    Except in 2016 when the coronated candidate, the candidate whose turn it was... Lost..

    Why, it's almost as if the Russians WANTED to get caught so as to sow internal strife and violence..

    And who starts salivating at Putin's command???

    Your Democrat Party.....

  96. [96] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Balthasar,

    I was trying to be a bit sarcastic. Oh, well ...

    However, as you say, there are many ways to meddle in elections. Imposing targets tariffs are now being used in an effort to influence the next presidential election.

    I hope those efforts are hugely successful. :)

  97. [97] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Balthasar,

    I was trying to be a bit sarcastic. Oh, well ...

    However, as you say, there are many ways to meddle in elections. Imposing targeted tariffs are now being used in an effort to influence the next presidential election.

    I hope those efforts are hugely successful. :)

Comments for this article are closed.