tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-58700385768186642682024-03-18T15:27:20.897-07:00The American HumanAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.comBlogger1771125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-72126301867339660422018-05-26T13:44:00.000-07:002018-05-26T13:44:20.899-07:00When Trump Speaks or Writes, Figure Out the Lies First. Then Call It Like It Is.<b>We've spent days letting Trump control the agenda with his daily splash of lies. It has to stop.</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/K4EYFzvD0kARiI3BztedhSIJJ1o=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/HLM7QWQ53I75XOWKW7TN3LV6GI.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="596" data-original-width="800" height="297" src="https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/K4EYFzvD0kARiI3BztedhSIJJ1o=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/HLM7QWQ53I75XOWKW7TN3LV6GI.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Paul Waldman <a href="https://t.co/sLM7Sqf8OV" target="_blank">gets it</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
You may have noticed that today’s news is not dominated by the blockbuster revelations of what members of Congress learned yesterday when they met with Justice Department officials to review information about the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, specifically the bureau’s use of a confidential informant who contacted Trump campaign officials after learning of suspicious links involving Russia.<br />
<br />
Why is it that the results of that highly unusual meeting (two meetings, actually) are not splashed across every front page and dominating every minute of cable news today? Because the whole thing was a farce, and it didn’t give Republicans what they were hoping for.<br />
<br />
This reveals the absurd pattern we’ve fallen into. It goes like this: President Trump makes a ridiculous accusation that almost everyone immediately understands to be false. Then we in the media, because it’s the president, treat that accusation as though it’s something that has to be taken seriously. Then governmental resources are mustered to deal with the accusation. Then Republicans try to twist the mobilization of those resources to give them the answer they’re seeking. But because it’s all based on a lie, they fail once Democrats force some measure of truth to be revealed. </blockquote>
This pattern has to stop. When Trump lies, just report the lie. Then follow up with "We have no reason to take Trump seriously." The press must not say things like "Trump claims [fill in lie]..." followed by reaction around the political sphere. Just say, "There he goes again. We cannot follow up on lies. We await a factual statement on the matter."<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-67254314755554191842018-05-17T10:21:00.001-07:002018-05-17T10:23:22.498-07:00The Irrationality of Trump's Racism in One Graph<b>Though Trump apologists are falling over each other to defend or explain his "They're animals!" comment about immigrants, what defeats them before they even venture a word is Trump's history of racist remarks, from his Obama birtherism to his speech announcing his run for the presidency.</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DdaeGBjU8AEvPeI.jpg:large" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="488" data-original-width="651" height="298" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DdaeGBjU8AEvPeI.jpg:large" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
The truth of this covers more than New York, it covers all immigrant populations across America. Immigrants simply <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_crime#United_States" target="_blank">commit less crime</a> that the native-born.<br />
<br />
Face it, between Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric and his shithole-countries remark -- not to mention his wistful call for more Norwegians -- we can only find proof of Trump's blatant racism. If that weren't enough, just recall to mind his Charlottesville "good people on both sides" <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/12/politics/trump-charlottesville-statement/index.html" target="_blank">statement</a>.<br />
<br />
Thanks to Paul Krugman for the graph.<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-54688567101063123252018-05-14T09:38:00.001-07:002018-05-14T09:38:23.080-07:00John Kelly Doesn't Get What It Means to Be an Immigrant<b>A quick look at Kelly's bio reveals he's Irish-Italian from Boston. If anyone should get what it means to be from an immigrant family, he should. Yet he is displaying a total ignorance of his ancestry and that of so many different American immigrants throughout history.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2018/05/10/gettyimages-947922790_wide-a4d48b57a482feab52117b58bc096244bd19ddce-s1500-c85.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="451" data-original-width="800" height="225" src="https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2018/05/10/gettyimages-947922790_wide-a4d48b57a482feab52117b58bc096244bd19ddce-s1500-c85.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The definition of a racist might be one who cultivates his ignorance of race<br />
in order to appear rational while explaining why certain population
groups<br />
are sub-standard. If so, John Kelly meets that definition.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
The Trump administration has practically defined its core belief as "dark skin means rapists, drug dealers, and 'not their best people.'" After all, why don't more Norwegians come here? Why do they have to come from "shithole countries?"<br />
<br />
John Kelly, who tries to look rational even as he describes an African-American congresswoman as "an empty barrel" while lying through his teeth about some of her clearly impressive acts. He can't help himself is my guess. Growing up in Boston might make you "Boston Strong," but it clearly also can make you "Boston Racist." Kelly is living proof. Reference <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_busing_desegregation" target="_blank">the busing riots</a> of yesteryear if you need explanation. <br />
<br />
Comes his ridiculous, recent statement on immigration:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The vast majority of the people that move illegally into United States
are not bad people. They’re not criminals. They’re not MS-13. Some of
them are not. But they’re also not people that would easily assimilate
into the United States into our modern society. They’re overwhelmingly
rural people in the countries they come from – fourth, fifth, sixth
grade educations are kind of the norm. They don’t speak English,
obviously that’s a big thing. They don’t speak English. They don’t
integrate well.</blockquote>
I don't need to know the particulars of his own ancestry other than the countries his people flowed from to know that his Irish and Italian roots had a fucking boatload of rural people among them, most of which had little need of or access to education to plant and harvest their fields. Even if they came from cities, few had any education. The educated and successful had little reason to leave.<br />
<br />
I've been to both Ireland and Scotland and seen up close the land from which my people sprang. I actually have spoken to many of my paternal grandmother's Scottish kin and learned that the Wallaces were drainers. "Oh, aye, Chairlie's a drainer like most Wallaces about." Turns out there's too much water, not too little, around Luthermuir, Aberdeenshire, and draining the land for agriculture was necessary. Who knew?<br />
<br />
Kelly, you prick, I did. I've also been all around Galway, Ireland where that side of the family came from, and there were more sheep there than you could shake a stick at, and it was one of the hardest hit areas during the Great Potato Famine. I doubt my kin spent many years in a schoolroom or reading books. Play a fiddle, now that might be a different story. Within two generations, though, my family was producing doctors, lawyers, teachers, writers, and, yes, musicians.<br />
<br />
John Kelly's world view, like that of most around Trump, is dependent on some people being inferior. Kelly needs that to feel good about himself. In that, he channels Trump. What pure dicks.<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-60215758566655430432018-05-12T14:54:00.000-07:002018-05-12T14:54:31.225-07:00Fourth Circuit Rules Electronic Devices Searches at Border Are Unconstitutional.<b>This is great news. So many illegal searches, now over.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvxzb2_HGArZ0d-52KpSc_JrBFAGFVpPVJx9tS6htFUKqPqffVjVKDp9-wb0PN4ye4s8B33pjQ-dmZqeYKNTGOjtzTaZ3vsiJGNSkP771MhNDn4j19F80FDGX9B3HKTfFV2tVvd3q-9pFa/s1600/laptop_search.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvxzb2_HGArZ0d-52KpSc_JrBFAGFVpPVJx9tS6htFUKqPqffVjVKDp9-wb0PN4ye4s8B33pjQ-dmZqeYKNTGOjtzTaZ3vsiJGNSkP771MhNDn4j19F80FDGX9B3HKTfFV2tVvd3q-9pFa/s1600/laptop_search.jpg" data-original-height="329" data-original-width="600" height="218" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">No more unwarranted snooping.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
This is good news for a change. Confiscation and forensic searches of electronic devices at U.S. <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/05/fourth-circuit-rules-suspicionless-forensic-searches-electronic-devices-border-are" target="_blank">borders are out</a>.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span><span>The ruling in <a href="https://www.eff.org/document/us-v-kolsuz-4th-cir-2018"><i>U.S. v. Kolsuz</i></a> is the first federal appellate case after the Supreme Court’s seminal decision in <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/13-132.html"><i><span>Riley v. California</span></i></a> (2014)<i> </i>to
hold that certain border device searches require individualized
suspicion that the traveler is involved in criminal wrongdoing. Two
other federal appellate opinions this year—from the <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/appellate-court-issues-encouraging-border-search-opinion">Fifth Circuit</a> and <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/eleventh-circuit-judge-endorses-warrant-border-device-searches">Eleventh Circuit</a>—included strong analyses by judges who similarly questioned suspicionless border device searches.</span></span></blockquote>
Good. A step in the right direction. <br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-48840123738164078162018-05-12T11:20:00.000-07:002018-05-12T11:20:08.025-07:00Anne Applebaum Weighs In: America IS Losing Hegemony with Trump's Moves<b>As sometimes happens, I have "original thoughts," only to find out I'm channeling the experts. <a href="http://www.theamericanhuman.com/2018/05/what-trump-has-done-to-our-carefully.html" target="_blank">Nice feeling while it lasted</a>. </b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/06/North_Atlantic_Treaty_Organization_(orthographic_projection).svg/550px-North_Atlantic_Treaty_Organization_(orthographic_projection).svg.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="550" data-original-width="550" height="400" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/06/North_Atlantic_Treaty_Organization_(orthographic_projection).svg/550px-North_Atlantic_Treaty_Organization_(orthographic_projection).svg.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Leading NATO has let us lead "the free world," as Applebaum says, "on the cheap."</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Here's <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-has-put-america-in-the-worst-of-all-possible-worlds/2018/05/11/ff68940c-5553-11e8-9c91-7dab596e8252_story.html?utm_term=.b13a31085331" target="_blank">her piece this morning</a> on vanishing hegemony:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Above all, it depended on an American willingness to invest: in
diplomacy, in military power — but above all in alliances. By forging
mutually advantageous agreements with Germans or <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/us/politics/trump-south-korea-trade-deal.html" shape="rect" title="www.nytimes.com">South Koreans</a>, the United States had far greater influence than it would have had otherwise. By creating and then expanding <a href="http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/29/trumps-shadow-hangs-over-nato-transatlantic-alliance-europe-defense-deterrence-europe-mattis-jens-stoltenberg/" shape="rect" title="foreignpolicy.com">NATO</a>, by maintaining <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/world/asia/south-korea-troop-withdrawal-united-states.html" shape="rect" title="www.nytimes.com">troops in South Korea and Japan</a>,
the United States kept parts of Europe and Asia free to choose
democracy, and open for commerce and trade. Everywhere else, agreements
and partnerships as well as money and armies gave the United States an
outsize voice in trade and commerce, as well as matters of war and
peace. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
President Trump knows no history and does not have any
idea how the United States became an “essential” country, let alone a
superpower. But he seems to believe that he can maintain that status,
and even increase it, without making investments — diplomatic, military
or monetary — at all. <span>This </span>week, the outline of what this means — call it “hegemony on the cheap” — suddenly came into sharp focus.</blockquote>
The sharp focus is on Trump blowing stuff up, mostly out of ignorance.<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-73453903696279131912018-05-12T10:32:00.000-07:002018-05-12T11:21:50.758-07:00What Trump Has Done to Our Carefully Crafted Hegemony<b>Blown it up is what.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6pApnlq-UW_rHuo7TKx4BpD6orqFa_lW-ildcBRTCDtB_Ek-V8MTKGYgYW57t-exa_ShFKQaGTGfZTgscQKFTjOsYTQ0RuyMzj4MYDLOwOkpjMcBuC9LtqxtXtRNOC9oJTo-t_4uBMBc/s1600/trumpfrump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="552" data-original-width="980" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6pApnlq-UW_rHuo7TKx4BpD6orqFa_lW-ildcBRTCDtB_Ek-V8MTKGYgYW57t-exa_ShFKQaGTGfZTgscQKFTjOsYTQ0RuyMzj4MYDLOwOkpjMcBuC9LtqxtXtRNOC9oJTo-t_4uBMBc/s400/trumpfrump.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Donald Trump, thinking through shit. This might take a while (if we're lucky).</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="_5pbx userContent _3576" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}">
I've spent my life with baby boomers. We have one thing in common. We've only known a world that
America clearly has led, shaped by our victory in WWII, dominated by
fidelity to our European allies in the West through NATO (driven by the
Cold War) and our allies in the East, Japan and S. Korea (driven by
concerns of eventual Chinese hegemony).<br />
<br />
So Trump comes in with
his America First nationalism and blows up all the relationships. After
the smoke clears, we'll see a diminished America, no matter how tough
Trump thought he was being. Make no mistake, we will pay a price.<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-64209608433128472362018-05-12T09:48:00.000-07:002018-05-12T09:48:26.997-07:00Trump's Drug Plan Blames "Big Government" and Protects Big Pharma. Surprise, Surprise.<b>On the Destroy-the-Obama-Legacy front, Donald Trump is keeping promises left and right, no matter how destructive his policies are. On the promises that would help real people -- whoever they are -- no so much.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dc79GQ3X0AEXQgk.jpg:large" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="589" data-original-width="771" height="305" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dc79GQ3X0AEXQgk.jpg:large" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Traders were cautious on health stocks, then Trump spoke, people
panicked,<br />
then they figured out what he said, leading to the super spike
of relief.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
You've got to hand it to Donald Trump, he knows how to obscure his broken promises. Saying “Today, my administration is launching the most sweeping action in
history to lower the price of prescription drugs for the American
people,” without batting an eye and then <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-pharma-drug-prices_us_5af5920de4b032b10bf9eaa7" target="_blank">adopting a plan</a> that does next to nothing to fix drug prices is quite a trick. if you wonder what Wall Street thought of it, look at the chart above. If you wonder what Big Pharma thought of it look below.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10824203/Screen_Shot_2018_05_11_at_3.01.02_PM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="642" data-original-width="800" height="320" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10824203/Screen_Shot_2018_05_11_at_3.01.02_PM.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
The dip before he spoke? The same. The bit of dread as he spoke? The same. The spike of relief after analysts figured out "big whoop?" Yep. Man of the people, all right.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-87386356798340046362018-05-11T08:38:00.000-07:002018-05-11T08:38:47.281-07:00America's Loss of Standing in the World, Let Me Count the Ways<b>Sure, we peaked in WWII, though the Korean War was an effort to unsplit a country, and Vietnam was a disastrous opposite effort. Still, we've spent decades creating moral, ethical, democratic, scientific, and, yes, financial leadership. We were at the helm of the financial world, and our dollar became the de facto world currency. All of that is threatened.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKnDovSPdRvWhNZ0uTSyDTImA776oKu7TStyxRNP6YZa1LkDbE1VYuIlMnfYGmeXt9H-urxHJJd-dHtflRjOYTlH-vI04L1hYWF-d5V32qSMix4cS6w9F4ODPorjZZsHnEFJlcG7jUqc8/s1600/trumphmm.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="619" data-original-width="1100" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKnDovSPdRvWhNZ0uTSyDTImA776oKu7TStyxRNP6YZa1LkDbE1VYuIlMnfYGmeXt9H-urxHJJd-dHtflRjOYTlH-vI04L1hYWF-d5V32qSMix4cS6w9F4ODPorjZZsHnEFJlcG7jUqc8/s400/trumphmm.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Imagine how dangerous he'd be if he knew what he was doing. (Hard to imagine.)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Read this piece on <a href="https://www.interfluidity.com/v2/6929.html" target="_blank">what else Trump is squandering</a> with his violation of the Iran agreement.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Prior to, well, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/08/politics/donald-trump-iran-deal-announcement-decision/index.html">yesterday</a>,
the US could claim a moral high ground. Its extraterritorial financial
control might be objectionable, yes, but absent some coordinating
mechanism like that, there would always be a competitive race among
politicians and bankers to allow themselves to be persuaded that Mexican
drug lords are just legitimate businessmen from a hardscrabble country
and why should the Iranians be prevented from getting nukes when the
world winks at the Israelis? The US may not be the ideal global
financial policeman, but like every other kind of global policeman that
it is, it may be better than no policeman at all.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
However, now, specifically with respect to its enforcement of
financial sanctions on an apparently compliant Iran, it is the United
States that seems, even among its Western partners, to be <a href="http://theweek.com/articles/772032/trumps-clear-message-iran-deal-america-not-trusted">the rogue state in need of policing</a>.
However begrudging European acquiescence to extraterritorial US
sanctions may have been two days ago, it is more begrudging today.</blockquote>
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-6376433391304261012018-05-11T07:29:00.000-07:002018-05-11T07:31:50.238-07:00NASA to End Space Tracking of Greenhouse Gases<b>If we don't know the how-much and the where of carbon emissions, we can't track various countries' output of these gas. I guess that's the point. How much more of this can we take?</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/5af50bf81e000044008e5239.jpeg?cache=anljrxpm6v&ops=scalefit_720_noupscale" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="720" height="266" src="https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/5af50bf81e000044008e5239.jpeg?cache=anljrxpm6v&ops=scalefit_720_noupscale" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
This is horrendous in a lot of ways. It fits right in with the way the Trump GOP is squandering our standing in the world. Now we are more <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nasa-greenhouse-gas-monitoring-killed_us_5af50a35e4b0e57cd9f7db6b" target="_blank">anti-science and pro-pollution</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="content-list-component bn-content-list-text yr-content-list-text text" data-beacon-parsed="true" data-beacon="{"p":{"mnid":"citation"}}" data-rapid-cpos="1" data-rapid-parsed="subsec" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph">
The Trump administration has quietly eliminated funding for NASA’s research program that tracks greenhouse gases around the world.</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="content-list-component bn-content-list-text yr-content-list-text text" data-beacon-parsed="true" data-beacon="{"p":{"mnid":"citation"}}" data-rapid-cpos="2" data-rapid-parsed="subsec" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph">
According to <a class="bn-clickable" data-beacon-parsed="true" data-beacon="{"p":{"lnid":"Science","mpid":1,"plid":"http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/05/trump-white-house-quietly-cancels-nasa-research-verifying-greenhouse-gas-cuts"}}" data-rapid-parsed="slk" data-rapid_p="1" data-v9y="1" data-ylk="subsec:paragraph;cpos:2;elm:context_link;itc:0" href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/05/trump-white-house-quietly-cancels-nasa-research-verifying-greenhouse-gas-cuts" target="_blank">Science</a>, the <a class="bn-clickable" data-beacon-parsed="true" data-beacon="{"p":{"lnid":"Carbon Monitoring System","mpid":2,"plid":"https://carbon.nasa.gov/index.html"}}" data-rapid-parsed="slk" data-rapid_p="2" data-v9y="1" data-ylk="subsec:paragraph;cpos:2;elm:context_link;itc:0" href="https://carbon.nasa.gov/index.html" target="_blank">Carbon Monitoring System</a> (CMS) tracks the world’s flow of carbon dioxide from space. Such a system is critical to monitoring any improvements — or failures — in attempts to cut the pollution linked to climate change.</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="content-list-component bn-content-list-text yr-content-list-text text" data-beacon-parsed="true" data-beacon="{"p":{"mnid":"citation"}}" data-rapid-cpos="3" data-rapid-parsed="subsec" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph">
NASA spokesman Steve Cole told the magazine that the program was canceled due to ”budget constraints and higher priorities within the science budget.” Usually, Congress battles such cuts, but this time, there was simply no mention of the program’s $10 million annual budget in the White House budget.</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="content-list-component bn-content-list-text yr-content-list-text text" data-beacon-parsed="true" data-beacon="{"p":{"mnid":"citation"}}" data-rapid-cpos="4" data-rapid-parsed="subsec" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph">
Although existing grants will finish, Cole said, no new projects will be undertaken. NASA’s budget report for fiscal year 2019 assumes the <a class="bn-clickable" data-beacon-parsed="true" data-beacon="{"p":{"lnid":"“termination” of CMS","mpid":3,"plid":"https://smd-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/science-pink/s3fs-public/atoms/files/SMD_FY19_Budget_Roll_Out_All_Hands-Final-180220-2%3DTAGGED.pdf"}}" data-rapid-parsed="slk" data-rapid_p="4" data-v9y="1" data-ylk="subsec:paragraph;cpos:4;elm:context_link;itc:0" href="https://smd-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/science-pink/s3fs-public/atoms/files/SMD_FY19_Budget_Roll_Out_All_Hands-Final-180220-2%3DTAGGED.pdf" target="_blank">“termination” of CMS</a>.</div>
</blockquote>
Watching our step-by-step degradation is beyond disheartening.<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-949141225743111942018-05-11T02:32:00.000-07:002018-05-11T02:44:53.243-07:00All-White Military Wives -- from our 40% Black Military -- Invited to Spouses Day at White House<b>Okay, maybe I see one Asian in there? Also, no male spouses? What, did Mike Pence get the nod as planner? This deserves a <i>holy fuck.</i></b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dc5Ed04X0AAOmZr.jpg:large" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="532" data-original-width="800" height="318" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dc5Ed04X0AAOmZr.jpg:large" width="480" /></a></div>
<br />
Absolutely contemptible. But, should I say, absolutely par for the course?<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Note. </b>Apparently the odds of this happening by chance are lower than a trillion to one. (Thanks Ronald Klain)<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Super Double Note. </b>Someone spotted Ivanka Trump in there. What? Is it product placement?<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-80919299190805388552018-05-10T03:52:00.001-07:002018-05-10T03:52:22.039-07:00The Republican Party Is So (Russian) Mobbed Up. Can We Survive as a Country?<b>Read and weep. We're getting a window into how Michael Cohen worked, but this stuff has been going on -- and known -- for quite a while.</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://external.fsnc1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQBFRFSjq4uhof2h&w=476&h=249&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdallasnews.imgix.net%2F1513350540-Trump_russia_hero-%281%29.jpg%3Fw%3D1200%26h%3D630%26format%3Djpg%26crop%3Dfaces%26fit%3Dcrop&cfs=1&upscale=1&fallback=news_d_placeholder_publisher&sx=0&sy=1&sw=1200&sh=628&_nc_hash=AQABds3dBpjrqnIm" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="249" data-original-width="476" height="208" src="https://external.fsnc1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQBFRFSjq4uhof2h&w=476&h=249&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdallasnews.imgix.net%2F1513350540-Trump_russia_hero-%281%29.jpg%3Fw%3D1200%26h%3D630%26format%3Djpg%26crop%3Dfaces%26fit%3Dcrop&cfs=1&upscale=1&fallback=news_d_placeholder_publisher&sx=0&sy=1&sw=1200&sh=628&_nc_hash=AQABds3dBpjrqnIm" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
From Ruth May's <i>Dallas Morning News </i><a href="https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/04/05/putins-proxies-helped-funnel-millions-gop-campaigns" target="_blank">article from six months ago</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team probes deeper into potential
collusion between Trump officials and representatives of the Russian
government, investigators are taking a closer look at political
contributions made by U.S. citizens with close ties to Russia.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Buried
in the campaign finance reports available to the public are some
troubling connections between a group of wealthy donors with ties to
Russia and their political contributions to President Donald Trump and a
number of top Republican leaders. And thanks to changes in campaign
finance laws, the political contributions are legal. We have allowed our
campaign finance laws to become a strategic threat to our country.</blockquote>
The only good news is that Mueller has been on this for quite a while. No wonder the Republican Party is trying to shut him down. Big-ass gravy train, among other things.<br />
<br />
A few weeks ago Mueller diverted a side thread of his investigation to the Southern District of New York in order to more directly go after Michael Cohen. Now, with what's coming out, it's obvious why, and also obvious why Trump is more nervous about this side investigation that the main one. Or is this the main one now? Hmm.<br />
<br />
The question now may not be how mobbed up Donald Trump is. The question might be how mobbed up the Republican Party is, and is their patent disregard of the continuing Russian meddling a sign that they want the meddling to continue on their behalf? Double hmm. <br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-90485988194562628232018-05-09T14:32:00.001-07:002018-05-09T14:37:53.547-07:00The Unified Theory of Trump Stormy Scandals and Foreign Policy. Yes, They're Connected!<b>No, this is not ridiculous. It's exactly the way this shit works with Trump. His messes are his whole mess. We just get to live with it.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://otb.cachefly.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Cohen-Trump-Daniels.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="533" data-original-width="800" height="266" src="https://otb.cachefly.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Cohen-Trump-Daniels.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Yes, Russian sanctions and the Iran deal-breaking are connected to<br />
Stormy via Cohen. Who would have thought such a thing? Er, Avenatti.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Okay, for the grand Unified Field Theory of Trump's Stormy Daniels Foreign Policy:<br />
<ul>
<li>Trump and his lackies going back as far as 2015 with Michael Flynn, Vladimir Putin and Russian oligarchs have been playing footsies, always about playing ball vis a vis sanctions and other quid pro quo arrangements.</li>
<li>There were multiple tracks, but one of them turns out to be payments by Viktor Vekselberg -- partly on behalf of <span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">Oleg Deripaska -- to the same LLC set up to funnel money to Stormy Daniels. The "quo" is the slow walking of sanctions that would affect the money interests of both oligarchs, who have close ties to Putin. In fact, both a set of sanctions by Barack Obama to punish Russia for dirty campaign tricks and sanctions later passed by Congress have not taken full effect, with both Steve Mnuchin and Wilbur Ross playing their parts.</span></li>
<li><span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">So, Daniels was paid off, in effect, with money paid for having the sanctions delayed.</span></li>
<li><span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">There is very much more to this, as payments from drug company Novartis and AT&T have flowed into the same LLC account set up by Michael Cohen. So stay tuned on that one, but it sure sounds like pay-to-play to me.</span></li>
<li><span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">From a <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/how-michael-cohens-apparent-russia-payment-might-help-prove-collusion.html" target="_blank">Slate piece</a> on this: "</span><span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">The Steele Dossier alleged that Russians had made a deal with Trump
associates for the Russians to sell Rosneft, the massive state energy
company, and use the commissions to give Trump associates payments under
the radar, in return for lifting or softening sanctions. The Rosneft
sale went through in December 2016, a month after the election,
coinciding with Jared Kushner, Michael Flynn, and Carter Page’s various
alleged communicatio, ns with Russians. Just eight days before this oil
megadeal, Flynn and Kushner met Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak at
Trump Tower, and Kushner reportedly proposed a secret communication link
with the Kremlin through the Russian embassy. Then, a few days after
the Rosneft deal, <a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/with-kushner-revelations-the-worst-case-scenario-comes-into-view">Kushner met Sergey Gorkov</a>, chair of Russia’s government-owned VE Bank (VEB) and Putin’s close confidant."</span></li>
<li><span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">So, yet another crazy piece of the "dodgy" dossier is proven true. (Pee tape, anyone?)</span></li>
<li><span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">Connection to Iran? With the Iran deal, Trump has produced a mirror image: When the clearly dirty-dealing Russians are rewarded by cancelling or delaying sanctions, even though they do harm to the U.S., the Iranians are punished by having their sanctions re-instituted, even though they are in compliance.</span></li>
</ul>
<span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">By the way, there's one more late-breaking element. We know that the only other client Michael Cohen could claim to have to the court -- other than Trump and Sean Hannity (and that's just "advice on real estate deals") -- is </span><span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">Elliott Broidy, a Republican fundraiser. Apparently Cohen helped arrange a payoff of $1.6 million for Broidy to yet another Playboy Playmate, </span><span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">Shera Bechard, who got pregnant and had an abortion. But here's the funny part: According to records, the Broidy payoff was, just as with both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, arranged between Michael Cohen and attorney Keith Davidson ostensibly representing the women, and the Broidy payoff also used the Stormy NDA as a template right up to and including the fake names David Dennison and Peggy Peterson and paid through the same entity, Essential Consulting LLC that was used to pay off Stormy.</span><br />
<span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska"><br /></span>
<span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska">Now, please tell me why it's not obvious that both payoffs were on behalf of Donald Trump, and that for some reason Elliot Broidy didn't mind stepping up and taking the fall -- and the heat -- for Donald Trump. Was it to bury the abortion? Was it also a pay-to-play move by Broidy who had a number of foreign deals he needed help with? John Campos of New York Magazine <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/theory-playboy-model-had-affair-with-trump-not-broidy.html" target="_blank">thinks so</a>. What a mess, and it's only going to get messier.</span><br />
<br />
<span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska"><b>Note. </b>Don't forget that Michael Cohen is mobbed up with both Russian and Ukrainian interests in a number of ways: he's married into it, he was raised around them via his uncle, and he owned, co-owned, managed, and traded taxi medallions with them. </span><br />
<span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska"><br /></span>
<span data-original-name="Oleg Deripaska"><br /></span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-67939984138548410942018-05-06T10:22:00.000-07:002018-05-06T10:22:25.952-07:00Withering Fact: Poor Are Born Poor, Rich Are Born Rich<b>For your entertainment, enjoy this graph showing the percent of inherited wealth in Europe's big three:</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCBRuR61G_7jKXtoP5Ck7E5q2xrHv7naQmNfrWW9njlpS8806bhJwtmE2LsabvK78oxHUPGiQV5dyMxJ0cxJzS5fPDfZnKdTKDj_KQDb0MV3Ahe0OaOHfVisHUk6JKNlg5czkRUeZsZv8/s1600/inheritedwealth.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="482" data-original-width="691" height="278" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCBRuR61G_7jKXtoP5Ck7E5q2xrHv7naQmNfrWW9njlpS8806bhJwtmE2LsabvK78oxHUPGiQV5dyMxJ0cxJzS5fPDfZnKdTKDj_KQDb0MV3Ahe0OaOHfVisHUk6JKNlg5czkRUeZsZv8/s400/inheritedwealth.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Translation: In France, UK, and Germany, among the wealthy, over half are born that way. Share of inherited wealth in the U.S. is as much as 45%.<br />
<br />
Upward mobility? Meritocracy? Not so much. This also explains a more recent phenomenon: The rich go to college, and the not-so-rich go into debt.<br />
<br />
When I went to college, I emerged with less than 4 grand in debt. Same school, same percentages today? I'd have finished college owing 80 grand. I shudder...<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-39372920485417770512018-05-03T11:15:00.001-07:002018-05-03T11:15:09.616-07:00Holy Corruption Charges, Batman! Did Giuliani Just Admit Cohen Is Trump's Bagman?<b>Does anyone remember how Nixon's campaign committee -- run by his Attorney General -- had bagmen that took payoffs, in cash, to phone booths? <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_LaRue#'Bagman'_for_Watergate_burglary_pay-off" target="_blank">I do</a>.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2018_18/2419766/180503-michael-cohen-1025a-rs_a74dc3d59e9de3e961aec206aeac96d5.focal-1000x500.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="800" height="200" src="https://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2018_18/2419766/180503-michael-cohen-1025a-rs_a74dc3d59e9de3e961aec206aeac96d5.focal-1000x500.JPG" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Michael, didn't count on Rudy yapping, did you? Get measured for a jumpsuit.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Josh Marshall lets us know <a href="https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/an-mo-for-other-more-serious-crimes" target="_blank">how it works</a> in the Cohen/Trump case:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
So now we have Giuliani confirming that this is exactly how Trump and
Cohen operated. Hush money to Stormy Daniels is one thing and certainly
raises potential serious campaign finance violations, but she is not a
public official. What I find most significant about Rudy’s admission is
what it says about the nature of the relationship between Trump and
Cohen and how it suggests an M.O. for other more serious crimes.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Trump
is a major real estate developer in NY who has openly bragged about his
ability to cut through red tape and get politicians in his pocket. We
now have serious SDNY public corruption prosecutors and FBI agents in
possession of a massive amount of electronic data from his bagman. They
likely already have all of his financial records as well. And Rudy has
now given them the roadmap for how Trump may have laundered bribes
through Cohen as purported legal fees or retainer payments. Every
invoice Cohen has ever issued to Trump is suspect. Every corrupt payment
Cohen has ever made or facilitated to building inspectors, councilmen,
pornstars, or whomever can potentially be tied back to Trump. In
addition, I suspect Trump and his kids had a false sense of comfort that
their communications with Cohen would be privileged. I am convinced
this is why Trump and his family are freaking out about the Cohen raid
and the possibility he could flip. The SDNY is sitting on the mother
lode of evidence and Rudy has given them the connection between
purported legal fees and payments by Cohen to third parties.</blockquote>
Yep, sounds like a bagman to me. Also, if Cohen received payments from Trump, plus an extra taste, plus money for taxes (as Rudy makes out), and then he didn't declare the transactions in his 2017 taxes, someone is screwed. Did Trump declare it? Oh, right, he's delayed his tax filings. Hmm.<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-54040376723313425982018-05-03T10:19:00.000-07:002018-05-03T10:19:32.522-07:00Senior Editor at Townhall.com Gets All Classy about Stormy.Oh man.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Getting to the point where I'm actively glad that Trump used Stormy Daniels like a teenager on the internet uses handfuls of Kleenex, threw her away and tossed a few singles at her haggard ass just because it provokes liberal tears and Fredocon frenzies.😎💥🤷🏼♂️</div>
— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) <a href="https://twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/992044202857979904?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 3, 2018</a></blockquote>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
People told me people on the right pimp people on the left to get a rise out of them. Now I see what they mean. But, seriously, dude, get some help.</div>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-85896903654607211422018-05-03T08:36:00.000-07:002018-05-03T08:36:05.487-07:00Sometimes They're Just Past Their Prime. Can the Country Afford it?<b>There's little question now that Trump's recent addition to his "legal team" (deserves to be in quotes), Rudy Giuliani, made a few gaffes in an outing on Hannity and a morning follow-up on Fox&Friends. Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall sums it up.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/03/3-giuliani-3.nocrop.w710.h2147483647.2x.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="449" data-original-width="800" height="223" src="https://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/03/3-giuliani-3.nocrop.w710.h2147483647.2x.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Oh, Rudy, how much did you screw up? Let me count the ways...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<a href="https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/rudes-in-twilight" target="_blank">Here's Josh</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I think it’s quite possible that it was the President’s legal team’s
plan to eventually claim Cohen had in some way been reimbursed for
paying $130,000 to Stormy Daniels. But it’s clear to me that Giuliani
did not plan to do it this way or do this at all. For starters, it does
not put his client in a better legal position. If anything it takes a
possible FEC violation by Michael Cohen and creates a false report
violation by Donald Trump. It also throws into question whether Cohen
was actually performing legal duties at all (nominal attorney fees are
now described as loan repayments and not for legal work). Most directly,
it makes a number of previous claims by Trump and Cohen into lies.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
My
best guess is that Guiliani and Trump and other members of the legal
team had discussed this story (true or not) as a way to escape a claimed
FEC violation. They did so with what appears to have been a fairly
limited understanding of campaign finance law. But they thought it was a
good idea. Giuliani then meandered his way into floating it during his
interview with Sean Hannity. Note how he immediately fixes on the point
that this solves the campaign finance problem (even though it appears
not to). He’s adamant and cocky about it. He is then caught off guard
when Hannity – himself caught off guard and scrambling in response to
the initial claim – reminds him that the story is that Trump never knew
anything about the Daniels deal at all and did not know where the money
was from.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
[...]</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In any case,
people often imagine there are plans when there are no plans. Or they
think that when there’s an intricate argument it must show a plan and
perhaps a good one. The reality is that sometimes you have no good plan
because you, in fact, have no good options. You’re stuck. Put more
coarsely, sometimes you’re just fucked. What you have are a half dozen
brainstorms cooked up by a group of old men in a room used to bending
reality to their purposes when something goes wrong. That’s much more
difficult on a national stage in front of intense scrutiny. That’s what
happened last night. Rudy Giuliani is far, far past his prime, used to
the accommodating hothouse world of Fox News cronies and cash and carry
deal-making in his law firm gigs. This was as sloppy as it looked and
did his client no favors.</blockquote>
It's sad, and that would be it, if it weren't so dangerous to the country. And it's not over.<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-10098439829823385212018-05-02T13:06:00.002-07:002018-05-02T13:06:48.669-07:00We Already Know How to Solve Most Problems. Why Don't We Do It?<b>We've already a head start with Social Security (expand it!), Medicare and VA healthcare system (expand it to everyone, who doesn't deserve it?), and the general aspects of unemployment insurance, food stamps, TANF, and child tax credits (expand them all or fold into a guaranteed minimum income equal to a combination of the components). Why don't we? If everyone paid what they could afford, then everyone would be okay, right? Oh, I get it: Conservatives will have none of it.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://cphpost.dk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/baby-and-dad-sleeping-825x510.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://cphpost.dk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/baby-and-dad-sleeping-825x510.jpg" data-original-height="495" data-original-width="800" height="246" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Danish fathers still don't take enough advantage of paid paternity leave, <a href="http://cphpost.dk/news/danish-dads-still-dont-take-recommended-amount-of-paternity-leave.html" target="_blank">study says</a>.<br />
But the Danish system beats the hell out of the U.S., where we have none.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
It's always confounded me that Americans don't seem to want what's in front of their faces, and that's more of the social programs already proven to work.<br />
<br />
But Paul Krugman knows. He's generally on point on most socio-political economic questions. We <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/02/opinion/politicians-dont-need-new-ideas.html" target="_blank">don't need new ideas</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I’m not saying that politicians shouldn’t be open to new thinking and evidence about policy. But a political party isn’t like Apple, which needs to keep coming up with glitzier products to stay ahead of Android. There are huge problems with U.S. policy on many fronts, but very few of these problems come from lack of good new ideas. They come, instead, from failure to act on what we already know – and, for the most part, have known for a long time.<br />
<br />
Let me give two big examples: access to health care and environmental protection.<br />
<br />
On health care, we know perfectly well how to provide more or less universal access, because every other advanced country does it.<br />
<br />
How can a nation provide universal access to health care? There are actually three ways. You can have direct provision by a government health system, like Britain’s NHS; you can have a single-payer system of government health insurance, like Canada (or Medicare here); or you can use a combination of regulation, mandates, and subsidies to prod the private sector into covering everyone, like Switzerland.<br />
<br />
And all three systems work! True, you can have trouble if the funding is inadequate or the rules aren’t effectively enforced, but that’s true of any policy. Universal health care is a solved problem. We don’t need new ideas to achieve that goal here – in fact, we got about halfway there under Obama, and all we need to finish the job is a progressive president and a progressive majority in Congress.<br />
<br />
What about protecting the environment? I guess you can make the case that there were important new ideas in the 1980s. Until then, environmental policy consisted almost entirely of top-down regulation. Economists had known for generations that there was a case for exploiting market forces via things like emission taxes or tradable emission permits, but these first made it into the world of political reality with the Bush-era emissions-trading scheme used to control acid rain.</blockquote>
That's exactly right. We know how to do these basic things, and we only need the correct political environment in which to accomplish them and expand upon them.<br />
<br />
A commenter on his article puts it all together so very well:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Moving past the two Republican crimes against American humanity of the greatest 'free-market' healthcare rip-off in the world at an obscene 17% of GDP and the Trump-Pruitt Environmental Pollution Agency, let's give full credit to the primary Republican crime against American humanity: the branding, marketing and force-feeding of 'supply-side' economics strychnine to 320 million.<br />
<br />
This incredible economic fraud and Big Lie is simply a form of economic torture and sadism, an enshrined misanthropic assault on virtually every building block of this democratic republic that has decimated the election process, destroyed national infrastructure, trashed public education, made a Reverse Robin souffle of the tax code, and pervertedly turned public goods like national defense, prisons, healthcare, and the the environment into private profit centers for vulture capitalists.<br />
<br />
Supply-side economics is a Republican fraud.<br />
<br />
Demand-side economics is what powers healthy economies; Keynesian economics is what works well, not right-wing cuckoo Robber Baron economics.<br />
<br />
Higher worker wages, strong worker unions, high consumer spending and increased government spending leads to business expansion resulting in greater employment opportunities.<br />
<br />
Higher wages and higher levels of employment create a multiplier effect that further stimulates aggregate demand leading to greater economic growth.<br />
<br />
Bring back Keynesian economics. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
And dump Republican Reverse Robin Hood national-train-robbery economics.</blockquote>
About right. Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-15053112882718943132018-04-28T13:17:00.000-07:002018-04-28T13:17:43.230-07:00Paul Ryan's Makers- and-Takers Stance Is in Open Conflict with Christian Values<b>Ryan fires House chaplain for "being too political." I think what he meant was "Don't call out my hypocrisy."</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/igfgVi957eI4/v0/-1x-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="585" height="272" src="https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/igfgVi957eI4/v0/-1x-1.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Thing is, it doesn't trickle down if you grab it and send it back up.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Speaker Paul Ryan stepped in it this week, by all accounts, when he fired the House chaplain for including Christian values in a recent invocation.<br />
<br />
Holy Jesus, Batman! What about market forces?!?<br />
<br />
Yeah, what about them? A <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-29/yes-paul-ryan-can-be-pro-capitalist-and-a-catholic" target="_blank">Bloomberg View writer</a> recycles the zombie economics of trickle-down to declare Ryan all-in on behalf of the poor. Sample graph:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
At a nationally televised town hall last week, Paul Ryan was asked
how he upholds the Catholic Church’s teaching that we should help the
poor. Ryan, a Catholic, answered that his emphasis on economic growth,
upward mobility and opportunity for all is how, as House speaker, he
puts that teaching into practice.</blockquote>
Ugh. How many times do we have to send the money up to the top and watch income inequality increase to understand that market forces don't work (at least the way you say they do)?<br />
<br />
Even if it works a little, does that mean Ryan is satisfied that he's a little Christian and the priest should shut up a lot?<br />
<br />
I for one want to move past Ryan. He's a well-documented fraud. His numbers never added up, and even as speaker he never tried to push through a budget that met his exact prescriptions and instead pushed budget busters. So here are my general thoughts on the inherent conflicts in conservative economic thought:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Sides in an argument can agree to disagree. That, often, is civil discourse. Fine.<br /><br />But when one side disagrees with itself -- when its core beliefs conflict with its core values -- the only way the situation is resolved is through confession or hypocrisy.<br /><br />The central problem is conservative libertarianism runs counter to Christian communitarianism. You either have to say "I don't want to give food to the poor, flat out," (honesty) or you say "Jesus would cut food stamps, too." (umm, no). This is difficult for evangelicals who primarily line up with Republicans. (inarguable)<br /><br />Liberals don't generally win the religious vote (inarguable), but they don't have any such conflict of beliefs versus values. "We want to feed the poor," lines up nicely with "Jesus went right past food stamps to loaves and fishes, so good chance Jesus is into feeding the poor, too."</blockquote>
My conclusion: Conservatives are dogged by conflicts where liberals
aren't, even though conservatives can claim (statistically) that they are the
proper home of Christian evangelicals.<br />
<br />
Liberals for the win, in this case. If not, explain how a true Christian conservative would solve this dilemma?<br />
<br />
<b>Note. </b>Here's how income inequality charts:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://www.census.gov/content/census/en/library/visualizations/2015/demo/real-household-income-at-selected-percentiles--1967-to-2014/jcr:content/map.detailitem.800.high.png/1459361117641.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="690" data-original-width="800" height="345" src="https://www.census.gov/content/census/en/library/visualizations/2015/demo/real-household-income-at-selected-percentiles--1967-to-2014/jcr:content/map.detailitem.800.high.png/1459361117641.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
A picture's worth? How about another?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://i.pinimg.com/736x/5f/94/a4/5f94a48938e1193d01aad556e9470342.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="582" data-original-width="736" height="316" src="https://i.pinimg.com/736x/5f/94/a4/5f94a48938e1193d01aad556e9470342.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
At some point, can Americans stop demonstrating such toxic greed? What ratio would Jesus want? (Full disclosure: I'm an atheist. Doesn't mean I don't have values.)<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-65512876057008192462018-04-15T13:52:00.000-07:002018-04-15T13:52:29.148-07:00Americans Want Things Only Liberals Will Provide, and Polls Show It.<b>Below is a list I found in Salon of policies Americans would rush to enact.</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgp8t5DfeRMjAaKzC3bDCXBLLZADD-hB6zGHi7sSHGH5E8pdKOiUnUbeA_Au2Xcc5GPckCbkbA8M-sB35AuAfJG2gjLx_Xg8uhqHinhvwfqz5Xcbna6Tnnb2ujcxisItx-PbiLjX8HJaZs/s1600/local.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="427" data-original-width="531" height="321" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgp8t5DfeRMjAaKzC3bDCXBLLZADD-hB6zGHi7sSHGH5E8pdKOiUnUbeA_Au2Xcc5GPckCbkbA8M-sB35AuAfJG2gjLx_Xg8uhqHinhvwfqz5Xcbna6Tnnb2ujcxisItx-PbiLjX8HJaZs/s400/local.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
And the trouble is Democrats are afraid to totally embrace this, for fear of what, alienating non-college-educated white men? Er, maybe.<br />
<br />
Here's the list:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="" data-node="node-56">
<ul>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Allowing the government to negotiate drug prices (supported by 79 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Offering students the same interest rates as big banks (78 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Universal pre-kindergarten (77 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Fair trade that protects workers, the environment and jobs (75 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Ending tax loopholes for corporations that ship jobs overseas (74 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Ending gerrymandering (73 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Letting homeowners pay down mortgages with 401k funds (72 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Debt-free college at public universities (71 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">A $400 billion infrastructure jobs program (71 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Requiring the NSA to get warrants before collecting our data (71 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Disclosing corporate spending on politics and lobbying (71 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Medicare buy-in, available to all (71 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Closing offshore corporate tax loopholes (70 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">A "Green New Deal," creating millions of clean energy jobs (70 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">A Full Employment Act (70 percent)</span></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Expanding Social Security benefits (70 percent)</span></li>
</ul>
</div>
</blockquote>
How many of these things are you against? Thought so.<br />
<br />
Get out and tell your representatives what you want. Then vote 2018.<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-51718709798615361052018-03-31T05:19:00.001-07:002018-03-31T05:19:35.034-07:00Scott Pruitt's Corruption of the EPA Might Be the Worst of the Trump Effect<b>Scott Pruitt's living arrangement can only be considered classic corruption, deserving (in any rational, moral administration) of termination, even legal actions. In Trumpworld? Who knows, and that's an ominous result of the overall corruption Trump seems to relish.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/0r3EQstVSccgQ8nEr-1.jpg?resize=1280%2C720px&ssl=1" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="450" data-original-width="800" height="225" src="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/0r3EQstVSccgQ8nEr-1.jpg?resize=1280%2C720px&ssl=1" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">We are and should be moving away from coal. Trumpworld wants it back. Why?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Paul Krugman presents all we need to know in a Twitter thread:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Thinking some more about this Pruitt story. Kudos to Bloomberg for getting the facts; but I wish reporters wouldn't lump de facto bribes from lobbyists with padded expense accounts, like unnecessary first-class travel. Corruption is a much bigger deal 1/ <a href="https://t.co/cVaDP3Oap4">https://t.co/cVaDP3Oap4</a></div>
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/979757351145299968?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<br />
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Think about it: if a govt official abuses his office by taking a fancy trip, taxpayers lose the expense of that trip. But if he accepts what amount to kickbacks from corporations who can benefit from his actions, the cost can be far larger 2/</div>
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/979757905325981696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<br />
<div data-conversation="none" data-lang="en" style="text-align: center<blockquote class=;" twitter-tweet="">
</div>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Environmental enforcement is, in a way, almost custom-built for corruption. If you waive or fail to enforce a rule that, say, prevents certain companies from dumping toxins in the water supply, the benefit of your action accrues to a small, well-connected group 3/</div>
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/979758295039791105?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Meanwhile, the costs of your malfeasance fall on a large, diffuse group -- ordinary citizens -- who may not even be aware that you're compromising their health and sending some of them to an early grave, and certainly don't employ DC lobbyists 4/</div>
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/979758708333965315?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
So if we let environmental officials get away with personally profiting from lobbyist connections, you're going to have a pronounced pro-pollution bias -- and this will be true even if the social costs of their laxness are vastly larger than the benefits 5/</div>
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/979759286275530752?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
If you try to put an economic value on the sickness and death caused by pollution, the numbers are huge; but if officials get a green light to be corrupt, they'll cheerfully impose those costs to raise a few companies' profits 6/ <a href="https://t.co/AyXcqKeyWV">https://t.co/AyXcqKeyWV</a></div>
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/979760043389259776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
So officials at the EPA need to be squeaky clean -- even more than officials in general. But Trump has set the standard for his administration, and we're well on our way to third-world-level corruption everywhere 7/</div>
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/979760404338442240?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
<br />
<br /></div>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-68242731509771228702018-03-29T03:12:00.000-07:002018-03-29T03:12:44.472-07:00Trump Can't Find a Lawyer? It's Because He Can't Tell the Truth.<b>Donald Trump is coming up on the moment when he has to talk to Robert Mueller. If he can't pack some truth for the trip, he's fried, seriously fried. Lying to Mueller has been more than one man's Waterloo.</b><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Great briefing this afternoon on the start of our Southern Border WALL! <a href="https://t.co/pmCNoxxlkH">pic.twitter.com/pmCNoxxlkH</a></div>
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/979082457340407808?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 28, 2018</a></blockquote>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Trump is always needing to reinforce, for his base, the notion that he's delivering on his promises. (That's why he's started trade wars by putting tariffs in place, only to roll them back when the shit hits the international fan. Real tough guy!) So he's "tough" on trade like he promised.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Congress, though, even a Republican-controlled Congress, won't give him the border wall he promised Mexico would pay for. But, goddamit, he's getting his wall after all! <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/salvadorhernandez/trump-tweeted-pictures-claiming-the-start-of-his-border?utm_term=.ok9a6NdEv#.xpoJLqmvr" target="_blank">Or maybe not</a>. </div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: left;">
The project, which started in 2009, will replace a 2.25-mile section in the California-Mexico border wall, according to a statement last month from US Customs and Border Protection.<br /><br />The original wall in that section, built in the 1990s, had been built from recycled metal scraps and old landing mat materials, the agency said.<br /><br />"Although the existing wall has proven effective at deterring unlawful cross border activity, smuggling organizations damaged and breached this outdated version of a border wall several hundred times during the last two years," CBP said.<br /><br />The project will replace the old wall with a 30-foot-high, bollard-style structure.</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Great. Not only is it an old wall built during the Obama years, it's been breached so many times it's laughable. But it'll be a GREAT WALL! For his base, at least.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
He can't even brag about his wall without constructing a large fraud -- mostly because nobody's building a goddam wall for him. Congress won't give him the money. So he resorts to, well, his usual tactics. He'd better not try that with Mueller. Any lawyer worth is salt is pretty sure Trump can't help himself. Why should they believe otherwise? Hence, no legal team worth a damn. Pity. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-82349205575516136122018-03-26T10:42:00.000-07:002018-03-26T10:42:02.355-07:00Why Bolton and Trump Will Fail at Their Alt-Diplomacy<b>The Bobsey Twins of America First Militarism are bound to fail because their tough-guy diplomacy is beyond ham-fisted.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5ab50a7b834caa185c8bf3c1/master/w_1298,c_limit/Wright-John-Bomb-Iran-Bolton-New-Warmonger.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="533" data-original-width="800" height="266" src="https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5ab50a7b834caa185c8bf3c1/master/w_1298,c_limit/Wright-John-Bomb-Iran-Bolton-New-Warmonger.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">When all options are on the table, you need to use all options.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
This is not original thinking in that I gleaned it from two articles I just read, but alarm bells did go off when I grasped the implications. On the Twitter, Ross Douthat pointed to a Reuters bit that had John Bolton schooling Trump on required parameters to a North Korea meeting, at this point tentatively scheduled for May. Bolton went on <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-bolton-northkorea/trump-should-insist-on-libya-style-denuclearization-for-north-korea-bolton-idUSKBN1GZ37A?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social" target="_blank">Radio Free Asia to pontificate</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - John Bolton, U.S. President Donald Trump’s new
national security adviser, said Trump should insist that any meeting he
holds with North Korea’s leader must be focused squarely on how to
eliminate that country’s nuclear weapons program as quickly as possible.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Bolton, a hawk who Trump named on Thursday to replace H.R. McMaster in
the key security role, told Radio Free Asia on Monday that discussions
at the proposed summit with Kim Jong Un should be similar to those that
led to components of Libya’s nuclear program being shipped to the United
States in 2004.</blockquote>
Great. Bolton chooses an Asian venue to tell Kim he'll insist on a Libya-style solution -- in which, years later, Qaddafi is pulled from a culvert and ends up beaten to death by the side of the road. Yeah, Kim's totally going for that offer.<br />
<br />
Then, in the next article I read, we've got <i>Vox </i>pointing out the implications of Trump <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/3/26/17147604/trump-iran-north-korea-kim-summit" target="_blank">pulling out of the Iran deal</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
What does Donald Trump’s stance on the Iran deal have to do with his relationship with North Korea? It turns out, quite a lot.<br /><br />That’s because the president’s desire to pull out of a historic nuclear deal with Iran could likely hurt his chances of reaching a significant weapons agreement with Pyongyang.<br /><br />There’s a simple reason why, experts tell me: If Trump backtracks on America’s promises to Tehran, then North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has no reason to trust Trump during negotiations about Pyongyang’s nuclear and missile programs.</blockquote>
Game, set, match. What's worse is that the next review of the Iran deal is set for May (the U.S. revisits the deal every 90 days to check if Iran is complying), ostensibly the month the North Korean talks are set, although Kim hasn't actually signals it's on. I guess this is supposed to be set up by the South Koreans, or something.<br />
<br />
So, here's the deal. Bolton wants a pre-condition that North Korea will end its nuclear program in order to meet, and Trump is set, at Bolton's encouragement, to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal just as the two sides are scheduled to meet. Why, then, would Kim agree to anything? So he can agree to something you can't trust the Americans to uphold, or agree to something that ends with him dead in a ditch?<br />
<br />
I don't think so. Way to go, Monsters of War<span class="st" data-hveid="189" data-ved="0ahUKEwjN9svfw4raAhVE8GMKHcFADg8Q4EUIvQEwDQ" style="font-size: 13px !important; line-height: 18.2px !important;">™.</span><br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-27152539151567875192018-03-20T09:49:00.001-07:002018-03-20T09:57:13.206-07:00Arm Teachers. That Will Fix Everything.<b>We are insane.</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhomehIVmoIuGsn4tVt_1PyE_p80easWNJKriiyttV87yKPpAgbMVPdeQLYi6pdYo30iA-iGC-CdXcehrcKIzluvLi6MghFjJxcBy3G5leCDeaLDLp1a7dsR7NwyCjR3hmhWX6iXQo0HYs/s1600/gundeathrate.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="875" data-original-width="1170" height="342.7" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhomehIVmoIuGsn4tVt_1PyE_p80easWNJKriiyttV87yKPpAgbMVPdeQLYi6pdYo30iA-iGC-CdXcehrcKIzluvLi6MghFjJxcBy3G5leCDeaLDLp1a7dsR7NwyCjR3hmhWX6iXQo0HYs/s400/gundeathrate.jpg" width="460" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="color: #0000ee;">Uh, could it possibly be the guns? And, hey, why not <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/11/16743108/house-republicans-concealed-carry-reciprocity-bill" target="_blank">universal concealed carry</a>?! (They want it in the omnibus budget bill on Friday.)</span><br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-7899656384009891242018-03-15T10:02:00.000-07:002018-03-15T10:02:43.446-07:00Trump Says So Many Ridiculous Things, It's Hard to Keep Track<b>In a speech to donors, Donald Trump admits to lying to Trudeau. And that's not the worst thing in the speech.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://multifiles.pressherald.com/uploads/sites/4/2015/08/APTOPIX-GOP-2016-Deba_Wake-1024x551.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="430" data-original-width="800" height="215" src="https://multifiles.pressherald.com/uploads/sites/4/2015/08/APTOPIX-GOP-2016-Deba_Wake-1024x551.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The master deal maker can't be trusted. Who, now, will make a deal? No one.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Much has been made of Donald Trump making stuff up in a conversation on trade with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Aside from admitting to lying, there's something deeply pathetic about the whole business. Not only does Trudeau know that Trump's full of shit, he also knows that Trump can't win in a negotiation about NAFTA, primarily because he's revealed that he has a losing hand. The U.S. has a trade surplus with Canada!<br />
<br />
And that's not even the worst thing in the now-infamous donor speech. Here, buried in an article about it, Trump threatens to <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/378532-trump-boasted-to-donors-about-making-up-facts-during-talks-with" target="_blank">blow up our mutual defense deal</a> with South Korea, over what? Naturally, trade:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Trump also implied during the speech that he could pull U.S. troops
stationed in South Korea if he didn’t strike a trade deal favorable to
the U.S. with the country, the newspaper reported.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“We have a very
big trade deficit with them, and we protect them. We lose money on
trade, and we lose money on the military,” Trump said. "We have right
now 32,000 soldiers between North and South Korea. Let’s see what
happens.”</blockquote>
Let's get this straight: Trump has just agreed to meet with Kim Jong-un to, possibly, negotiate a deal on denuclearization, and as they ramp up for the meeting, Trump announces that he'd consider pulling our forces out of South Korea if it doesn't reduce our trade deficit. I can hear Kim yucking it up across the DMZ.<br />
<br />
Trump and The Art of the Deal? More like The Art of the WTF.<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5870038576818664268.post-61827954316766163552018-03-14T13:39:00.000-07:002018-03-14T13:39:50.477-07:00John McCain, Victim of Torture, Hints He Will Lead the Charge Against Confirming "Ms. Torture."<b>More than a decade ago, the public editor for NPR explained why she was dropping "torture" as a term and substituting "enhanced interrogation." (Her rationale was that we didn't know what defined torture.) A long-time contributor, I haven't given NPR a dime since. We know what torture is, and Gina Haspel enabled it, directed it, then covered it up.</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://s.abcnews.com/images/Politics/AP_john_mccain_jt_150720_4x3t_384.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="288" data-original-width="384" height="300" src="https://s.abcnews.com/images/Politics/AP_john_mccain_jt_150720_4x3t_384.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">John McCain's less than stellar medical care in captivity was a form of torture.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
It's gratifying that Rand Paul has already announced his vehement opposition to Gina Haspel for CIA Director. John McCain hasn't stated opposition but has declared what he needs to see from her even to consider a "yes" vote:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The torture of detainees in U.S. custody during the last decade was one
of the darkest chapters in American history. Ms. Haspel needs to explain
the nature and extent of her involvement in the CIA’s interrogation
program during the confirmation process. I know the Senate will do its
job in examining Ms. Haspel’s record as well as her beliefs about
torture and her approach to current law.</blockquote>
Such a statement invites those on the Senate Intelligence Committee to offer no quarter to Ms. Haspel in her confirmation hearing. Will she get by? Should she even be considered in light of her horrendous career as <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/cia-cables-detail-its-new-deputy-directors-role-in-torture" target="_blank">a mocking, almost celebratory practitioner of torture</a>?<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
One declassified cable, among scores obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union in a lawsuit against the architects of the “enhanced interrogation” techniques, says that chief of base [Haspel, in Thailand,] and another senior counterterrorism official on scene had the sole authority power to halt the questioning.<br /><br />She never did so, records show, watching as Zubaydah vomited, passed out and urinated on himself while shackled. During one waterboarding session, Zubaydah lost consciousness and bubbles began gurgling from his mouth. Medical personnel on the scene had to revive him. Haspel allowed the most brutal interrogations by the CIA to continue for nearly three weeks even though, as the cables sent from Thailand to the agency’s headquarters repeatedly stated, “subject has not provided any new threat information or elaborated on any old threat information.”<br /><br />At one point, Haspel spoke directly with Zubaydah, accusing him of faking symptoms of physical distress and psychological breakdown. In a scene described in a book written by one of the interrogators, the chief of base came to his cell and “congratulated him on the fine quality of his acting.” According to the book, the chief of base, who was identified only by title, said: “Good job! I like the way you’re drooling; it adds realism. I’m almost buying it. You wouldn’t think a grown man would do that.”</blockquote>
Gruesome. Do you want someone like this in charge of the CIA, an institution that has operated black sites and black ops around the globe for decades? The answer can only be a loud no. Write your senator. <br />
<br />
<b>Note. </b>When NPR disavows that position and apologizes, I'll gladly start contributing again.<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11899483218291241507noreply@blogger.com0