Steve King Strikes Again!

Back when I was still doing my Idiot of the Week posts, in March 2017 to be exact, I awarded Filosofa’s Idiot of the Week award to a member of Congress named Steve King of Iowa.  Mr. King apparently appreciated the award so much that he keeps flitting across my radar, begging to be given some additional recognition, it would seem.  All I can say is that he’s lucky I don’t live in his home state of Iowa!

Let’s face it … any representative that earns a score of zero from the Humane Society, but an ‘A’ rating from the NRA is not somebody you’re really going to look up to!  Now, King has a reputation, well-earned, of being a racist and a bigot.  He is firmly against LGBT rights, has spoken cruelly against Mexicans in general, against Muslims, was against President Obama because of his ethnicity, loves Donald Trump, supports racial profiling, is a climate-change denier and … need I go on?  There is a word for people of his ilk … it starts with a ‘J’, ends with another word for a donkey, and if I have to tell you what it is, then you are in the wrong blog!

So, what has King done now, you ask, to ruffle the Filosofa’s feathers? Back in 2005, when Hurricane Katrina hit both the Florida and Louisiana coasts and nearly devastated much of New Orleans, as parts of the levee system were breached, King was one of 11 members of Congress who voted against a federal aid package for New Orleans.  On Thursday, 14 years after the devastating hurricane that took the lives of at least 1,500 in Louisiana alone, King spoke at a Town Hall meeting in his district.

“Here’s what FEMA tells me. We go to a place like New Orleans, and everybody’s looking around saying, ‘Who’s going to help me? Who’s going to help me?’ We go to a place like Iowa, and we go, we go see, knock on the door at, say, I’ll make up a name, John’s place, and say, ‘John, you got water in your basement, we can write you a check, we can help you.’ And John will say, ‘Well, wait a minute, let me get my boots. It’s Joe that needs help. Let’s go down to his place and help him.'”

What. A. Jerk.  FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), by the way, denies his claim. It should be noted that King’s state, Iowa, is predominantly white, whereas New Orleans is 60% African-American.  If New Orleans were predominantly white, King would almost certainly not have made such a ridiculous statement.

Once again, as has happened multiple times in the past year, his fellow republicans took him to task.  Representative Steve Scalise, whose district includes parts of New Orleans, said …

“His comments about Katrina victims are absurd and offensive, and are a complete contradiction to the strength and resilience the people of New Orleans demonstrated to the entire nation in the wake of the total devastation they experienced.”

Last weekend, King came under fire for this Facebook post …Steve-King-fb-post

Nice, huh?  And in January he was stripped of his committee assignments in the House for white supremacist remarks he mad.  When asked about an apology for his remarks, he refused to apologize.  Even Mitch McConnell condemned King’s remarks …

“There is no place in the Republican Party, the Congress or the country for an ideology of racial supremacy of any kind. I have no tolerance for such positions and those who espouse these views are not supporters of American ideals and freedoms. Representative King’s statements are unwelcome and unworthy of his elected position. If he doesn’t understand why ‘white supremacy’ is offensive, he should find another line of work.”

The late night hosts didn’t miss the opportunity …

The people of Iowa have elected this doofus nine times now!  This nation is undergoing a very tense, divisive time and the very last thing we need is an obnoxious white supremacist with a loud mouth in Congress, for we already have one in the White House.  Iowans … PLEASE remove your heads from your patooties, wake up, and vote Mr. King out of Congress next year!!!

Pete Buttigieg: The 7 Issues Guide

Today I bring you the 6th installment of TokyoSand’s excellent series, The 7 Issues Guide, helping us get to know a bit about the platforms of the democratic candidates running for president next year. Pete Buttigieg is on deck today, and he is one that I know very little about. Thank you, TokyoSand, and your diligent volunteers, for helping us get to know Mr. Buttigieg!

Political⚡Charge

buttigieg Pete Buttigieg; Photo by Yuri Gripas, Reuters

The Democrats have a big field of candidates running for President in 2020. To briefly use a sports analogy, I see our candidates as the starting players on the Blue team, each bringing their own unique strengths to the table in a bid to take our country in a very different direction than the one we’re on today.

But as we well know from 2016, the media (and especially social media) gets fixated on non-substantial issues that take up all the oxygen. Plus, they don’t give the candidates the same treatment or the same amount of airtime.

In order to help voters get to know the Democratic candidates, I’ve enlisted the help of a team of terrific volunteers who have helped gather quotes and information about what the candidates have said or done in regards to the 7 issues that midterm voters identified…

View original post 2,041 more words

The Electoral College … Keep, Abolish, or Circumvent?

One of the big debates in Washington and around the nation is whether it is time to get rid of the electoral college.  It’s funny in retrospect, but after President Barack Obama won his second term of office, Donald Trump tweeted this …

trump-tweet

But, when the electoral college put him, against the majority vote, into the Oval Office, suddenly he didn’t mind it so much anymore.  Funny how that works, isn’t it?

trump-tweet-2.png

One of Elizabeth Warren’s talking points as she campaigns for next year’s presidential election is the abolishment of the electoral college, and it seems a majority in this country are in agreement.  A Pew Research Center poll last year found that a 55% majority support picking presidents by popular vote, compared to 41% who prefer keeping the electoral college.  The usual 4% were asleep … again.

Most of the candidates from both political parties, a number of members of Congress, and others have opined on this issue in recent weeks, but I don’t really care about any of that right now.  I prefer to talk facts … you know, those pesky statements that are supported by hard data?  Let’s first take a look at the rationale behind the electoral college as it was first written into the U.S. Constitution.

There were two primary reasons for the electoral college.  The first was to ensure that only a qualified person becomes president (are you laughing yet?).  The framers of the Constitution believed that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate the citizenry. It would act as check on an electorate that might be duped.  The founders did not trust the population to make the right choice. The founders also believed that the Electoral College had the advantage of being a group that met only once and thus could not be manipulated over time by foreign governments or others.

The second reason for the electoral college system was to mitigate the disadvantage of states with smaller populations.  That, however, is rather a myth, as I will show in a bit.

Now, the majority in this country believe the electoral college has outlived its usefulness.  I have to agree … it is obvious that in the 2016 election it did the exact opposite of what it was intended to do and put the candidate who actually lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, or 2.1%, in office.  This was the least qualified candidate imaginable, yet he now sits in the Oval Office.  It is time for a change.

However, the only means to repeal or abolish the electoral college would require a constitutional amendment, which is not even remotely likely to happen at this point.  But … there is another option.

Contrary to popular belief, the Constitution does not mandate that the winner take all in each state … that was the decision of the individual states over the course of the 19th century.  A state can decide, as 12 states plus the District of Columbia have recently done, to essentially bypass the electoral college.  The states that have signed onto this plan, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, are …

  • District of Columbia – 3 electoral votes
  • Colorado – 9 electoral votes
  • Connecticut – 7 electoral votes
  • Hawaii – 4 electoral votes
  • Illinois – 20 electoral votes
  • Maryland – 10 electoral votes
  • Massachusetts – 11 electoral votes
  • New Jersey – 14 electoral votes
  • Washington – 12 electoral votes
  • Vermont – 3 electoral votes
  • California – 55 electoral votes
  • Rhode Island – 4 electoral votes
  • New York – 29 electoral votes

If enough states pass the bill to account for 270 electoral votes, the bill will become law of the land and as a result, would ensure that every vote will be equal throughout the U.S. and that every vote, in every state, will matter in every presidential election.  Not only would this bypass the electoral college, but would also make gerrymandering* pointless.  There are 8 additional states, totaling 72 more electoral votes, where the bill has passed one chamber of the state legislature.  If all 8 pass the bill and the governors sign it into law, added to the 181 electoral votes above, that accounts for a total of 253, a mere 17 short of the magic number.

Under the compact, states pledge to allocate all their electoral votes to the winner of the nationwide popular vote in presidential elections.  While this would not abolish the electoral college, it would guarantee that the candidate with the most popular votes would win the election.  Seems to me there can be no logical argument about that … it is as it should be.  We the People are supposed to elect a president, not the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party … We The People!

The argument against this compact mainly comes from the Republican Party, and their argument is that a popular vote system would encourage candidates to only campaign in the larger (population) states, and the smaller states would suffer.  The reality is that in 2016, two-thirds of the visits by both Clinton and Trump took place in just six states (Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia and Michigan), and 94 percent of the visits went to just 12 states. Twenty-four states plus the District of Columbia got zero campaign visits.  Kind of puts that argument to rest, don’t you think?

I’ve put together a chart showing each state’s population and electoral votes (electoral votes, by the way, are equal to a state’s representation in Congress).

State Electoral Population # of people represented by each elector
Number of Electoral Votes % of Total Population % of Total
Alabama 9 1.67% 4,874,747 1.50%          541,639
Alaska 3 0.56% 739,795 0.23%          246,598
Arizona 11 2.04% 7,016,270 2.15%          637,843
Arkansas 6 1.12% 3,004,279 0.92%          500,713
California 55 10.22% 39,536,653 12.14%          718,848
Colorado 9 1.67% 5,607,154 1.72%          623,017
Connecticut 7 1.30% 3,588,184 1.10%          512,598
Delaware 3 0.56% 961,939 0.30%          320,646
District of Columbia 3 0.56% 702455 0.22%          234,152
Florida 29 5.39% 20,984,400 6.44%          723,600
Georgia 16 2.97% 10,429,379 3.20%          651,836
Hawaii 4 0.74% 1,427,538 0.44%          356,885
Idaho 4 0.74% 1,716,943 0.53%          429,236
Illinois 20 3.72% 12,802,023 3.93%          640,101
Indiana 11 2.04% 6,666,818 2.05%          606,074
Iowa 6 1.12% 3,145,711 0.97%          524,285
Kansas 6 1.12% 2,913,123 0.89%          485,521
Kentucky 8 1.49% 4,454,189 1.37%          556,774
Louisiana 8 1.49% 4,684,333 1.44%          585,542
Maine 4 0.74% 1,335,907 0.41%          333,977
Maryland 10 1.86% 6,052,177 1.86%          605,218
Massachusetts 11 2.04% 6,859,819 2.11%          623,620
Michigan 16 2.97% 9,962,311 3.06%          622,644
Minnesota 10 1.86% 5,576,606 1.71%          557,661
Mississippi 6 1.12% 2,984,100 0.92%          497,350
Missouri 10 1.86% 6,113,532 1.88%          611,353
Montana 3 0.56% 1,050,493 0.32%          350,164
Nebraska 5 0.93% 1,920,076 0.59%          384,015
Nevada 6 1.12% 2,998,039 0.92%          499,673
New Hampshire 4 0.74% 1,342,795 0.41%          335,699
New Jersey 14 2.60% 9,005,644 2.76%          643,260
New Mexico 5 0.93% 2,088,070 0.64%          417,614
New York 29 5.39% 19,849,399 6.09%          684,462
North Carolina 15 2.79% 10,273,419 3.15%          684,895
North Dakota 3 0.56% 755,393 0.23%          251,798
Ohio 18 3.35% 11,658,609 3.58%          647,701
Oklahoma 7 1.30% 3,930,864 1.21%          561,552
Oregon 7 1.30% 4,142,776 1.27%          591,825
Pennsylvania 20 3.72% 12,805,537 3.93%          640,277
Rhode Island 4 0.74% 1,059,639 0.33%          264,910
South Carolina 9 1.67% 5,024,369 1.54%          558,263
South Dakota 3 0.56% 869,666 0.27%          289,889
Tennessee 11 2.04% 6,715,984 2.06%          610,544
Texas 38 7.06% 28,304,596 8.69%          744,858
Utah 6 1.12% 3,101,833 0.95%          516,972
Vermont 3 0.56% 623,657 0.19%          207,886
Virginia 13 2.42% 8,470,020 2.60%          651,540
Washington 12 2.23% 7,405,743 2.27%          617,145
West Virginia 5 0.93% 1,815,857 0.56%          363,171
Wisconsin 10 1.86% 5,795,483 1.78%          579,548
Wyoming 3 0.56% 579,315 0.18%          193,105
Totals 538 100.00% 325,727,661 100.00% ————–

As you can see, the smaller states are better represented in the electoral college than the more populous ones.  Take a look, for example, at California, the most populous state, that gets only 1 electoral vote for every 718,848 people, versus the least populous state, Wyoming, with 1 electoral vote for every 193,105 people.  Something doesn’t seem quite fair here, don’t you think?

It is my belief that the electoral college has been proven not only unnecessary, but a direct impediment to a fair and honest democratic election.  Since at this juncture it is virtually impossible to pass an amendment to repeal it, the next best thing is to pass legislation to make certain that every vote counts equally.  I also think this might go a long way in overcoming voter apathy, one of the biggest stumbling blocks we have.  Let us hope that enough state legislatures and governors will see this as the best way and choose to do the right thing.

* This small graphic explains the effects of gerrymandered districts as well as any I have seen.gerrymandering

Cory Booker: The 7 Issues Guide

Today I am happy to bring you the next in TokyoSand’s series, The 7 Issues Guide, which is introducing us to the democratic candidates running in the 2020 presidential election. Today’s piece is about Cory Booker, the U.S. Senator from New Jersey. Now, I like Cory Booker, he has many times stood up for what he believes in, and he generally shares my beliefs. He does, however, have a bit of controversy in his background, but I suspect we won’t find a single candidate who doesn’t. Thank you, TokyoSand and your diligent volunteer helpers, for all your hard work in preparing this series.

Political⚡Charge

booker2Let’s get to know Cory Booker!

The Democrats have a big field of candidates running for President in 2020. To briefly use a sports analogy, I see our candidates as the starting players on the Blue team, each bringing their own unique strengths to the table in a bid to take our country in a very different direction than the one we’re on today.

But as we well know from 2016, the media (and especially social media) gets fixated on non-substantial issues that take up all the oxygen. Plus, they don’t give the candidates the same treatment or the same amount of airtime.

In order to help voters get to know the Democratic candidates, I’ve enlisted the help of a team of terrific volunteers who have helped gather quotes and information about what the candidates have said or done in regards to the 7 issues that midterm voters identified as…

View original post 1,905 more words

Sociologists Unravel The Mystery Of President Trump’s Supporters Who Continue To Back Him

It could be that this report that Gronda has written about is the answer to the question that has been keeping us awake at night: What does it take to shake Trump supporters awake? The report is disturbing if it is correct, but well worth the read and worth pondering, for it does answer a number of questions. Thank you, Gronda, for bringing us this information and allowing me to share.

Gronda Morin

Anyone who’s a ‘Never Trumper’ from the left to the right have been pondering the question, who are those peoples who continue to back the republican President Donald Trump despite his bullying, abusive character flaws, just for starters. The Washington Post has numbered his lies as exceeding 9,000 whoppers since he became president in November 2016.

At the start, I had excused away President Trump’s supporters allegiance to him based on my personal theory that many of them were suffering from economic anxiety especially in rural areas where good paying manufacturing/ plant jobs were more scarce. But over time, I did note that there had to be other reasons to explain those who continued to back President Trump, as many of his policies were counter to their economic well being.

Two sociologists have developed the profile of the type of individual who continues to back President Trump which could end…

View original post 2,385 more words

Warren Davidson’s Newsletter

Yesterday, I received a routine newsletter from my representative in the U.S. House of Representatives, Warren Davidson.  I have little or no respect for this man or his policies, did not vote for him and would not vote for him if he were the only candidate on the ballot.  However, I receive his newsletter because a) one needs to keep tabs on what one’s elected officials are doing, not that you can believe a word they say, and b) I like to annoy the heck out of him by responding to each one.  Below is his latest newsletter …

Warren DavidsonDear Friends,

Congressman Davidson voted against H.R. 1, the For the People Act, as this deceptively labeled legislation would put our free and fair elections system under federal control, infringing on several Constitutional rights. H.R. 1 is the top item on Speaker Pelosi and House Democrat’s policy agenda for the 116th Congress. Congressman Davidson introduced several amendments to H.R. 1 that would protect free speech, uphold states’ rights, and defend nonprofits from political targeting by the IRS. He led a debate on these amendments this past Thursday on the floor of the House.

Addressing anti-Semitic Comments

On Fox News Radio Congressman Davidson also reacted to anti-Semitic remarks recently made by Congresswoman Ilhan Omar this week. He told host Todd Starnes that America is not an anti-Semitic country, yet Congresswoman Omar has continued to make anti-Semitic remarks. Congressman Davidson said that if there is any place where these comments would be out-of-line, it would most certainly be the Foreign Affairs Committee, of which Congresswoman Omar is a member.

New Executive Order Aimed at Lowering Veterans’ Suicide

President Trump recently signed an executive order aimed at decreasing the number of veteran suicides and creating a task force of state and local groups to raise awareness of the crisis. The new task force created by the executive order will create a grant system like the Housing and Urban Development VA Supportive Housing program, which provides funding for state and local programs that help homeless veterans and their families find permanent housing.

Davidson Receives Defender of Economic Freedom Award

The Club for Growth recognized Congressman Davidson this week for his consistent defense of economic freedom and pro-growth policies in Washington. This year, only 25 Members of Congress (20 House members and 5 Senators) will receive the Award.

Second Amendment Visit

Congressman Davidson met with a group of gun owners in West Chester this past week where he discussed two gun control bills, which he opposed in the House. He spoke with the group about how these bills would have made it harder for law-abiding citizens to purchase, own, carry and use a firearm.

Thank you for taking the time to keep up with the work I am doing on your behalf in Washington and at home in Ohio. I encourage you to stay connected with our office through my website , Facebook , Instagram , and Twitter pages. It is an honor to represent you.

Sincerely,

Warren Davidson

Member of Congress

Don’t you hate it when someone refers to themself in the third person? So much more I could have said, would have liked to say, but short, sweet and to the point is always best … these guys have short attention spans.

Davidson won in a special election in June 2016 to replace John Boehner after Boehner resigned. He then won again in 2018 by a 68.76% margin … obviously my neighbors have no sense.  He is a member of the ignoble House Freedom Caucus, that most radical of all conservative elements in Congress.  They aren’t even well-liked or respected by their own fellow republicans.

Predictably, Davidson is anti-women’s rights, anti-LGBT rights, opposes the use of renewable energy, has an “A” rating from the NRA, wishes to repeal ACA (Obamacare), supports maintaining a “numerically superior” nuclear arsenal, supports Trump’s border wall and a ban on Syrian refugees, supports a “Judeo-Christian” national code of morality, and more.  In other words, he is against We the People and for a Christian/military complex.  To put it kindly, he is a fool of the most dangerous sort.

I responded briefly, touching only on two of the issues raised in his newsletter …

Mr. Davidson,

I just read your latest newsletter and I have a few questions.  Are we, the people you are elected and paid to represent, supposed to applaud you for voting against legislation that would serve a number of purposes, including taking some of the corruption out of the election process?  And are we to applaud you for opposing sensible gun legislation that might … just might save some lives?  Thus far, you are the antithesis of what this nation needs and what the majority of We the People want.  You’ve licked the boots of Trump and of the NRA for long enough, Mr. Davidson.  Unless you show some accountability and responsibility, I will work as hard as I can to see that you are voted OUT of Congress next year.

Jill Dennison, tax payer, citizen, VOTER

Do you get periodic newsletters via email from your senators and representatives?  If not, you should sign up for them, if for no other reason than to let them know you are watching, you are aware, and you will not tolerate any b.s.

I Never Run Out Of Snarky Snippets …

snarky-toonI don’t know why it is, but I always seem to have an overload of snark in my head these days.  It’s gotten so bad that when I cut a corner too close the other day and bumped my shoulder, I yelled that whatever idiot built this house must have been a republican!  And when one of the kitties turned over the dish of kibble and it went all over the floor, I gave her a 10-minute lecture about the importance of neatness and told her that if she didn’t mend her ways I would give her to a republican family.  So, it must be time for me to open that release valve and share my angst with you, my friends!


Plagiarism???

It was one week ago today that four tornados ripped through central Alabama, leaving devastation and lost lives in their wake.  Donald Trump, with Melania at his side, and the requisite 2 steps behind, went to Alabama to survey the damage, to bring well-wishes, and to be seen as doing that thing that presidents do.  But one thing he did has the wires buzzing …

He signed bibles.  Now, my issue with this is not religious-based, for you all know that I am not religious.  But the way I see it, authors sign books they have written … their own work.  Painters sign their own paintings.  You do not sign work that isn’t your own, and the bible damn sure isn’t written by a man who cannot even write his own name legibly or speak in complete sentences.  To me, this is a form of plagiarism, pure and simple.

Other presidents including Ronald Reagan and Franklin Roosevelt have also signed bibles, and I don’t condone that either, lest anybody think I’m just picking on Trump.  Oh, and it is said that Melania also signed a few.


Chris Wallace feels rejected …Chris-WallaceI’ve generally considered Chris a solid journalist, a cut above the usual Fox ‘News’ fare, and I’ve wondered why he was at Fox when I thought he would likely be welcomed with open arms by any of the legitimate news networks.  Perhaps Chris is also beginning to wonder what he’s doing at Fox.  As I noted in an earlier post the Democratic National Committee (DNC) decided that Fox News would not host the democratic primary debates.  There are very valid reasons for this decision, notably the almost familial relationship between Fox and Donald Trump.  Wallace, who certainly would have been one of the moderators if Fox hosted the debates, seemed disappointed …

“To be banned, or boycotted, for the 12 debates over the next year, is kind of stunning.”

Well, Chris, it’s like that old saying my grandmother used to use:  If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.  Perhaps Mr. Wallace will soon decide to go to work for a legitimate news outlet.

I’m a bit disappointed in Chris for toeing the party line, because in the past, he has shown himself to be far less a trumpeter than the rest of the clan over at Fox.  He criticed Trump for referring to the press as the “enemy of the people”, and in turn he says Trump “let me know that he doesn’t think I treat him fair”.


Shine on …bill-shineAnd speaking of Fox, one of their former executives, Bill Shines, who joined the Trump administration eight months ago as a “assistant to the president and deputy chief of staff for communications”, whatever the heck that means, has already resigned.  Why?  Not because he’s fed up with Trump and his ways, but because he wants even more … he is planning to work on Trump’s campaign for 2020.  (Why is there even a Trump campaign for 2020?  He needs to be gone long before then!)

Shine’s new title is “senior adviser to the president’s 2020 reelection campaign”.  Actually, his prior and new title both translate into “boot-licker”, so let’s call a spade a bloody shovel, shall we?  In Shine’s own words …

“Serving President Trump and this country has been the most rewarding experience of my entire life. To be a small part of all this President has done for the American people has truly been an honor. I’m looking forward to working on President Trump’s reelection campaign and spending more time with my family.”

Oh please.  Mr. Shine must have had a pathetically deprived life if this was the “most rewarding experience” in it.  If I were his wife, I’d be packing my bags right about now, for obviously he loves Trump more than her or his children.

However, there may be more to it than meets the eye, for rumour has it that there have been several disagreements between Trump and Shine in recent weeks.  Nonetheless, Trump had high praise for Shine …

“Bill Shine has done an outstanding job working for me and the Administration. We will miss him in the White House, but look forward to working together on the 2020 Presidential Campaign, where he will be totally involved. Thank you to Bill and his wonderful family!”

Stay tuned … Shine may either fade into oblivion and write another ‘tell-all’ book about his stint in the administration, or he may end up being Trump’s next campaign manager.trump-staff.png


Don’t hold your breath, Mike …

I see that Michael Cohen is suing the Trump Organization for unpaid legal fees.    What are the odds of him collecting on that?  Nada. Zero. Zilch.  Even if a judge orders restitution, it won’t happen.  Trump is notorious for cheating legitimate creditors out of their money, so why would he be likely to pay the man who has, under oath, called him a liar, a racist, and a cheat?


Another one drops out …

U.S. Senator from Ohio, Sherrod Brown, has dropped out of the running for the 2020 presidential election.  In one sense, I am sorry to hear this, for he is a good man with sound ideas for what a government should and shouldn’t be or do.  I think he would have made a fine president.  However, his odds weren’t good, for he is not well known to most living outside Ohio, and at this point, there are already too many in the running, making the long runup to the primary somewhat of a joke.  While typically I think the more the merrier … give We the People the chance to get to know a wide variety, narrow the field bit by bit, and then settle on one or two of the best.  But these are not ‘typical’ times and if Trump is still eligible to run by next year, we need to have the strongest, most ‘electable’ candidate to unseat the incumbent.  Unfortunately, that is not Sherrod Brown.

While Senator Brown is not in the running, he is still fighting the good fight, as he will hold his senate seat at least until 2025 …

“I will keep calling out Donald Trump and his phony populism.  I will keep fighting for all workers across the country… And I will do everything I can to elect a Democratic president.”


And that is just about enough snarkiness for today, don’t you think?  I’m sure there will be more soon, for I never seem to run out of something to natter about.  My family, both the humans and the furry ones, thank you for giving me a platform to vent, thus relieving them of the burden.

Elizabeth Warren: The 7 Issues Guide

Today I present to you the fourth in the series by TokyoSand titled The 7 Issues Guide. This time she introduces us to Senator Elizabeth Warren. I’ve always thought that Warren has sound ideas, that she is more about the people of this nation than some. However, I would note that the Senator has a few issues that I believe will make her candidacy very difficult. One of those is the same issue that Hillary Clinton had, that she is not considered to be particularly “personable”. However, she has a solid platform, and that should matter more than personality. Thank you, TokyoSand and your diligent volunteers, for this excellent series, and for your generous permission to share!

Political⚡Charge

Screen Shot 2019-03-03 at 8.29.43 PM

The Democrats have a big field of candidates running for President in 2020. To briefly use a sports analogy, I see our candidates as the starting players on the Blue team, each bringing their own unique strengths to the table in a bid to take our country in a very different direction than the one we’re on today.

But as we well know from 2016, the media (and especially social media) gets fixated on non-substantial issues that take up all the oxygen. Plus, they don’t give the candidates the same treatment or the same amount of airtime.

In order to help voters get to know the Democratic candidates, I’ve enlisted the help of a team of terrific volunteers who have helped gather quotes and information about what the candidates have said or done in regards to the 7 issues that midterm voters identified as the most important. I hope…

View original post 1,798 more words

It’s Snarky Snippet Time!!!

It seems about time for some snarky snippets, don’t you think?


Rules were made to be … rescinded?

If you don’t like a rule, you can just ignore it.  If that doesn’t work, you can just re-write the rule.  At least, if you are Donald Trump, that seems to be the way it works.  I’m reasonably certain that it would not work that way for most of us.

Case in point …

Back in 2016, President Obama signed an executive order, part of which mandated an annual accounting of how many civilians have died in military and CIA strikes.  The goal was to increase transparency in an effort to limit the number of civilian deaths as a result of drone strikes in countries like Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan.  The deadline for that annual accounting by U.S. intelligence officials passed last week with no report issued.  And so, Trump merely rescinded that part of the executive order with an executive order of his own.  As I said at the beginning, if you don’t like the rule, or miss the deadline, just get rid of the rule!

The number of drone strikes abroad has dramatically increased since Trump took office.  For example, during President Obama’s entire eight years in office, 154 strikes were carried out in the war-torn country of Yemen.  Comparatively, during Trump’s two years, 176 have been conducted.  Extrapolating the data, more than 4.5 times as many per year under Trump.  And yet, he has decided it is not important for that data to be made public.  I beg to differ.


Freedom???

I have frequently compared the Trump administration to George Orwell’s book, 1984, and with good reason.  One of those reasons is what Orwell dubbed ‘newspeak’, and what the Trump administration has termed, ‘alternative facts’.  Either term works.  It is the means Trump & Co. use to justify the unjustifiable.  I have also said that somebody needs to write an “Alternative Facts Dictionary”, for it becomes confusing to those of us who grew up with Merriam-Webster as our guide.  Here’s a new one for you:  Freedom = deprivation of rights.  That’s funny, for I thought it was the opposite.

Specifically, ‘religious freedom’ has become a buzzword for “anything the Christians don’t like is bad and will not be tolerated”.  But would somebody please explain to me what problem Christians have with LGBT people?  Mind you, before somebody takes umbrage, I am not referring to all Christians, but the group of them that agree with Mr. Jack Phillips, the Colorado baker who refused to bake a cake for a gay couple and ended up costing much money and causing much angst as a result of his homophobia.  Though not Christian myself, I have many friends who are Christians, but who are not homophobes. In fact, I have a number of friends who are both gay and Christian.  But then there are those others …

Nebraska State Senator Patty Pansing Brooks introduced LB 627 in January this year, a bill that would have updated all relevant state statutes to prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.  No-brainer, right?  But did you know there are more than two dozen states that have no LGBT nondiscrimination protections at the state level?  Long story short, the bill failed to garner the votes needed to pass. Opponents of the bill claimed that it would be used to target religious business owners in the state and punish them for their beliefs.  Bullsh*t!  People in this nation are not punished for their beliefs, but for their discriminatory actions!

Senator Robert Clements suggested that LGBT people didn’t deserve protections because he wasn’t aware of any science suggesting they were “born at birth that way.”  By a grammar book, Mr. Clements!  And perhaps re-read that bible you claim to be spouting from.

This, as well as anything, epitomizes why I eschew religion … far too often it is used as justification to promote bigotry and hate.  Michael Pence, Donald Trump, the televangelists, and all those who would enforce the “Christian point of view” on the rest of us are bigots, plain and simple.  Believe as you wish, but don’t punish those of us who do not think as you do.


Take THAT, Fox ‘News’!

Three cheers for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) who today announced that they will bar Fox ‘News’ from sponsoring the 2020 Democratic Primary Debate.  The reason they cite is an article in The New Yorker titled “The Making of the Fox News White House”.  According to DNC Chairman Tom Perez …

“Recent reporting in the New Yorker on the inappropriate relationship between President Trump, his administration and Fox News has led me to conclude that the network is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates. Therefore, Fox News will not serve as a media partner for the 2020 Democratic primary debates.”

Among other things, the article reported allegations that late Fox News founder Roger Ailes passed along questions to Trump prior to a 2016 Republican primary debate and noted that former Fox executive Bill Shine is now the White House communications director. Several other former Fox News employees and contributors work in the Trump administration.

I have referred to Fox as state t.v. more than once, and while that may be somewhat of a stretch, it most certainly is not an arms-length relationship as it ought to be.

Trump is none too happy about the DNC decision, it would appear.

baby-trump“Democrats just blocked @FoxNews from holding a debate. Good, then I think I’ll do the same thing with the Fake News Networks and the Radical Left Democrats in the General Election debates!”

Such is not, contrary to what he may believe, within his power.  But wait!  There are executive orders!  Oh, but it’s going to be a fun twenty months.  Define ‘fun’ as ulcer-inducing in this case.  Shoot me now.


I end this morning’s snarkiness with a cartoon …Mitch-hunt

Nothing To Hide???

We’ve all done some dumb things in our time, for me probably as recently as yesterday or even an hour ago!  But if asked, I will tell you about it and either laugh along with you or hang my head in shame.  Either way, I won’t go to great lengths to keep it a secret.  I’ll even tell you that I failed Biology in high school.  It was not my first, nor would it be my last act of rebellion, but I almost never went to class, for I absolutely refused to cut open earthworms or frogs.  Instead, I hung out in the boys’ bathroom and smoked.  I will also confess to having smoked marijuana a few times in my earlier days … if I had liked it, I would likely still be smoking it, but I hated it!

I may have some things that I’m not exactly proud of in my past, and likely you do too, but I have to ask why the leader of a nation would go to great lengths to keep his high school transcript out of the public eye.  We already know he isn’t the brightest bulb in the pack, contrary to him calling himself a ‘genius’.

According to a report in yesterday’s Washington Post,  in 2011 a group of “prominent, wealthy alumni” had requested Trump’s academic records from New York Military Academy, and the school’s Board of Trustees intended to hand said records over to this group, who said they wanted to ensure the records remained secret.  In other words, his high school transcript would have been buried.  Superintendent Jeffrey Coverdale refused the request but did relocate the records to another area where they could not be released upon request.  Now … why???  This was 2011, the year he considered running against President Barack Obama in the 2012 election.

To this day, Mr. Coverdale refuses to release Trump’s transcripts or to identify the people who ordered him to pull them from his files, saying …

“I don’t want to get into anything with these guys. You have to understand, these were millionaires and multimillionaires on the board, and the school was going through some troubles. But to hear, ‘You will deliver them to us?’ That doesn’t happen. This was highly unusual.”

Seems to me that just about everything having to do with Trump is “highly unusual”.genius-2.jpgWe already know that there were disciplinary problems associated with Trump, such as the time he attempted to shove another cadet out a second-story window.  To add fuel to the fire, or more likely smoldering remains, there was Michael Cohen’s testimony last week that Trump ordered him “to threaten his high school, his colleges and the College Board to never release his grades or SAT scores”.

After the military academy, where we can only speculate that he did manage to graduate, he spent two years at Fordham University.  Michael Cohen, under Trump’s orders, wrote to the administration at Fordham, demanding that that the records be “permanently sealed” and said any release was “criminality,” which “will lead to jail time.”  In addition, Fordham officials confirmed Cohen’s letter, and said they had also received a phone call from Trump’s campaign.  Why???

After Fordham, he attended University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton business program.  While Trump claims he was “first in my class”, his name does not appear on the school’s dean’s list or on the list of students who received academic honors in his class of 1968, giving rise to the lie in his claim.  Why???

See, when somebody lies about something like this, it leaves the door wide open for speculation.  One could think, perhaps, that he had the lowest grades in the military academy and that his daddy bought his diploma.  Or, one could think, as I have previously speculated, that he rarely even attended classes at Wharton, and that daddy bought his degree, just as he bought his military deferments.  Or, one could even wonder if Trump ever actually attended the first class at Wharton and daddy made a special ‘deal’ for a degree to be signed, sealed, and delivered for an unspecified amount of money.  One’s imagination can just run wild when secrets are kept and lies are told.

There is definitely something fishy here.  But the real joke is Trump himself.  For a man who claims to be a ‘genius’, he is pretty damn stupid.  He has taken extraordinary and suspicious measures to keep his school records secret, but here’s what he said about President Obama …

“I heard he was a terrible student, terrible. How does a bad student go to Columbia and then to Harvard? I’m thinking about it, I’m certainly looking into it. Let him show his records. I have friends who have smart sons with great marks, great boards, great everything and they can’t get into Harvard. We don’t know a thing about this guy. There are a lot of questions that are unanswered about our president.”

For the record, Barack Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School and was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. That’s magna cum laude, the second highest academic honour.  You and I know Trump did not fare nearly as well, or we would be hearing about it daily, if not hourly.  After all … look at this tweet from 2013 trump-tweet-geniusThe epitome of arrogance.  Now, there are two questions I leave you with today:

First, why is he going to such lengths to ensure that the people of this nation do not see his academic records?  We already know he is no genius, we already know his daddy used his money to buy privileges for his boy, so to find that he had lousy grades, disciplinary problems and poor attendance would be no surprise.  He plays only to his base, and the majority of them likely have some poor grades in their own record.  So … why?  Which leads to the next, and most important question …

What else is he hiding?  He has steadfastly refused to release his tax returns – what would we find there?  If he would hide something as minor as his academic records, then it is a certainty that he has deeper, darker secrets.  Has daddy bought him out of trouble other than the financial sort?  We already know he has a problem keeping wee willie winkie in his pants and has sexually abused women in the past.  Could it be he was accused or rape even before he became a public persona, perhaps while still in school, and daddy paid to have it covered up?  genius-1Speculation?  Sure, but when you hide things that are relatively innocuous, people are going to speculate as to what else you’re hiding.  Are there secrets being hidden with the help of his wealthy donors that would ensure his removal from office, or perhaps even ensure him a cell next to Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen?  Think about it.