Democrats & Liberals Archives

The Monday Night Massacre

Throwing concepts such as law & order by the wayside, President Donald Trump has expressed a preference for ruling by imperial decree. Tonight, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates has been relieved of her duties. Her crime? Defending the US Constitution.

Of course, we will hear from conservatives about how Yates refused to defend last Friday's executive order. They will assert that any cabinet official serves at the pleasure of the President and that disobedience in light of an EO is more than enough justification for dismissal. Ever more so when said cabinet official is merely an acting Attorney General. Of course, this ignores the legal quandaries underlying Friday's executive order, a measure already generating dissent among the ranks of Republicans in Congress and sparking Judicial rulings unfavorable to the White House from courts all across the United States.

At the end of the day, this sort of chaos and mayhem is NOT the law & order promised by Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign. Americans' patience is bound to wear even thinner in light of these naked power grabs. Already, Trump's inaugural honeymoon, as told by approval polling, has deteriorated faster than any President since FDR. Meanwhile, Democrats privately gnash their teeth, gleeful at the prospect of a Democratic Wave in the next Congressional election in 2018.

Emboldened, these Democrats will kick, scream and use every parliamentary procedure available to them in order to stymie Donald Trump's authoritarian power grabs. Unconfirmed cabinet officials including attorney general appointee Jeff Sessions will be the first target. The stolen Supreme Court nomination will be an easy second. Remember, under today's Senate rules, a robust minority of 40 or more Senators can filibuster whoever Trump nominates to succeed Antonin Scalia. Thus far loathe to implement the nuclear option, Mitch McConnell will likely toss prior precedent out the window in order to ensure his wife's job security.

Everywhere, it quickly becomes apparent that Trump's talk of "American Carnage" 1.5 weeks ago was a prophesy, not a passive observation. Rome burns and its Emperor acquiesces to the evil which enthroned him. Meanwhile, American Patriots continue their resistance in defense of the liberal ideals and principles underlying our cherished Constitution. Today may be an unhappy day in American history, but I am sure the stage is set for an American Renaissance of unimaginable proportions once this nightmare ends.

Posted by Warren Porter at January 30, 2017 9:56 PM
Comments
Comment #412711

Some wise words from Senator Chuck Grassley:

Today, the Senate confirmed Sally Yates to be the United States Deputy Attorney General. I congratulate her on her confirmation, and I’m looking forward to working with her on the many important issues the Department of Justice is facing. I supported her nomination, both in Committee and today in the full Senate, and I hope that she will show independence as she provides leadership at the Department. As she told us during her hearing, she is aware that her client is, ‘The people of the United States… not the President… not the Congress, it’s the people of the United States

It appears very prescient to remind us that we are Yates’ client, not Donald Trump.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 30, 2017 10:49 PM
Comment #412712

She played politics with the wrong person Warped. The same thing would of happened if an Bush appointee would refuse to uphold one of Obama’s EO’s. If you say otherwise you are full of it.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 30, 2017 11:04 PM
Comment #412713

KAP,

Let me guess, Elliot Richardson and William Ruckelshaus likewise “played politics” with the wrong person, right?

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 30, 2017 11:17 PM
Comment #412714

This is gross political malpractice. It is incompetence. Period.

The Immigration EO has already been shot down in court five times. Everything about this was just plain stupid. First, Trump could have at least waited to have his team in place, especially his own AG, before implementing such a controversial policy. Second, there was a failure to coordinate among his own people. Trump, Bannon, and Miller failed to bring DHS and the DoD into the implementation. They rushed it without thinking things through. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

The Trump administration has a Republican Senate and House. This could have been accomplished through legislation. It could have been fast tracked. If the Democrats filibustered it, then Trump might have resorted to an EO, just as Obama resorted to an EO after immigration reform failed. Going through the legislature is always- ALWAYS- preferable to using an EO. It could have created some sort of consensus. Instead, it is just a huge cluster****.

Someone needs to grab Trump, slap him silly, and shout in his face- “You are the President! Get your f****** act together. NOW!”

But the way this administration is going, that would turn out like that scene in the movie “Airplane,” where a long line of passengers lines up to slap a hysterical passenger, only this time the hysteria will last four years…

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=youtube+airplane+slapping+scene

Posted by: phx8 at January 30, 2017 11:43 PM
Comment #412719

U. S. Code 1182 READ IT. 6 of Trump’s predecessors have suspended immigration but only Trump’s is unconstitutional.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 8:24 AM
Comment #412720

The only problem which Trump should have done is have State and HHS input before signing the EO

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 8:28 AM
Comment #412721
U. S. Code 1182

I refer you to this excerpt from MLK’s letter from a Birmingham jail:

Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application.
Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 9:10 AM
Comment #412722

Warped, That may be true in some cases but IMO not this one. The Obama administration named those 7 countries, NOT, Trump. In 2015 even the teary eyed Schumer suggested we put a suspension on refugees. Those 7 countries are known to have terrorist ties and training camps. Syrian refugees cannot be properly vetted in most cases because of no paper trails according to the FBI and other intel. groups. So please tell me how Trump’s few months ban is unconstitutional when his last 6 predecessors have done the exact same thing?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 9:54 AM
Comment #412724

Neither Obama nor any of his predecessors ever implemented a ban as broad or as generic as Donald Trump. Neither Obama nor any of his predecessors ever refused to accept people already approved to enter the country. If you cannot see the differences, you are full of it.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 10:26 AM
Comment #412725

If you can’t see that those issues were and are being corrected you are full of it, Warped.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 10:44 AM
Comment #412726

What’s interesting is to see the legal community siding with Trump. Here’s a legal analysis of Yates’ statement by Professor Goldsmith:

https://lawfareblog.com/quick-thoughts-sally-yates-unpersuasive-statement

And concurrence from Ben Wittes:

Instead, she took a step that amounted to frank insubordination and amply justified, indeed necessitated, her removal, a step which actually muddied the moral waters of our current situation.
Posted by: George in SC at January 31, 2017 11:00 AM
Comment #412727

George,

Technically, the firing of Yates may be completely legal, but the optics are absolutely terrible.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 11:08 AM
Comment #412728

The big mistake Yates made was NOT counseling the President on his EO but instead played politics and told the J. D. not to defend it because she thought it was unconstitutional. That is for a Fed Judge to decide not her.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 11:23 AM
Comment #412729

Warren, the optics of Yates’ statement are absolutely terrible and there’s nothing technical about it. It’s legally indefensible and as a lawyer she knew that. She did it anyway.

As to your analogy to the Massacre here’s an article by Josh Blackmon:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/why-trump-had-to-fire-sally-yates-214715

Posted by: George in SC at January 31, 2017 11:26 AM
Comment #412730

KAP,

When we have a President who isn’t playing by the normal rules, it is laughable to expect others to wear the handcuffs of tradition.

Presidents need to consult with their cabinets BEFORE issuing EOs like this. Ignoring such precedent leads to clusterfucks like what we are witnessing now.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 11:27 AM
Comment #412731

Not playing by the normal rules BOO HOO BOO HOO Warped. What do you call normal in D.C.? 535 Children whining and crying because they don’t get their way. What Cabinet does Trump have, 3 out of how many? Obama had 7 his first day, Trump had 0. Maybe that’s what is needed in D.C. someone who doesn’t play by the “Normal D.C. rules”.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 11:36 AM
Comment #412732

Perhaps if Trump had played by the normal rules, he’d have a fully confirmed cabinet like Obama did.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 11:42 AM
Comment #412733

Perhaps if both sides played by the same rules and ENFORCED the laws already on the books we wouldn’t be having this discussion, now would we Warped?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 11:56 AM
Comment #412735

There has been a clear majority in support of changing said laws for over a decade. The far right didn’t play by the normal rules and obstructed those the changes, leading to the current situation.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 12:24 PM
Comment #412737

Quit with the BULLS**T Warped, both sides are at fault for the situation we are in.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 12:53 PM
Comment #412738

Excuse me? I don’t remember Democrats breaking any norms or rules when they controlled Congress. Things didn’t go to hell until after the 2010 election.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 12:57 PM
Comment #412739

Warped, Your showing your partisan blinders

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 1:24 PM
Comment #412740

A pathetic ad hominen doesn’t change the facts. You cannot show me an example of norm-breaking committed by Democrats before the 2010 election.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 1:26 PM
Comment #412747

WP, how about this:
“Everyone agrees that tax-raising measures must originate in the House. Obamacare originated in the Senate. It was introduced in Congress in 2009 by Senate majority leader Harry Reid, who called it the “Senate health care bill” (a description still touted long afterwards on Reid’s website). Employing the chicanery that marked the legislation through and through, the Democrat-controlled Senate turned its 3,000-page mega-proposal into a Senate amendment. The Senate attached its amendment to a nondescript, uncontroversial House bill (the “Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009”) that had unanimously passed (416–0) in the lower chamber.”

Source: National Review

Posted by: Watcher at January 31, 2017 1:46 PM
Comment #412748

There’s no norm against amending a nondescript, uncontroversial House bill with a 3,000-page mega-proposal.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 1:50 PM
Comment #412749

Except it didn’t “amend.” It replaced.

“Origination Clause: Article I, Section 7, Clause 1. It reads as follows:

“All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”

As a tax, Sissel argues, the financial penalty is “for raising Revenue.” He then notes how Obamacare was adopted: First, the House passed H.R. 3590, which created a first-time homebuyer tax credit for armed services personnel and “accelerated” certain estimated corporate income tax payments. Next, when H.R. 3590 came to the Senate, that body gutted it and inserted the PPACA instead, which the Senate then passed. Finally, the House passed the new H.R. 3590. So as a practical matter, Sissel says, the Obamacare tax originated in the Senate—not, as constitutionally required, in the House.”

and also:

“The second issue is whether the Senate’s action in gutting the original bill and replacing it with something else constituted an “Amendment.” If it was not, then Obamacare’s levies really arose in the Senate, and are unconstitutional.”

Is this the “norm?”

Source: Tenth Amendment Center

Posted by: Watcher at January 31, 2017 2:00 PM
Comment #412751

As I said Warped quit with the BULLS**T, both sides are at fault for the situation we are in. As far as the ACA that bill would never had passed except for the BULLS**T that went behind closed doors and Harry “The Snake” Reid crap. Democrat and Republicans all 535 of them are like Kindergarden Kids crying when they can’t get their way. So get off the BULLS**T train Warped or else the EPA will be on you.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 2:22 PM
Comment #412753


Comment #412721

U. S. Code 1182

I refer you to this excerpt from MLK’s letter from a Birmingham jail:

Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 9:10 AM

Warren began his post with such fire and elegance and caved with just one fact.

Just great. You can’t make this stuff up.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 2:41 PM
Comment #412754

George,

Technically, the firing of Yates may be completely legal, but the optics are absolutely terrible.
Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 11:08 AM

Waffle, Waffle, collapse. LOL

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 2:43 PM
Comment #412755

“When we have a President who isn’t playing by the normal rules, it is laughable to expect others to wear the handcuffs of tradition.”

Does Warren know that “normal rules” would be the Constitution. Nope…and, he doesn’t care.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 2:46 PM
Comment #412756

Thanks to “Watcher” for the posts and links.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 2:51 PM
Comment #412757

KAP & Watcher,

H.R. 3590 originated in the House. The fact that it did not include any healthcare reform language until after it was amended does not belie that fact. Taking a house bill, gutting it, and replacing it with revenue raising language is nothing new for the US Senate. This is exactly the procedure used to implement LBJ’s surtax in 1968 as well as Reagan’s 1982 tax increase. This method of making sausage is entirely normal.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 3:20 PM
Comment #412758

Tonight, President Trump will announce his nominee for Supreme Court Justice. Regardless of who gets the nod, my Leftie Pals will be outraged. Let the knife sharpening begin. Plug in the spin machine.

It makes no difference to the Left that Republicans did not try to filibuster either of former President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominees. The only filibuster attempt in the past few decades was by Democrats against Justice Samuel Alito.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 3:27 PM
Comment #412759

Does anyone agree that a “massacre” involves only one person as Warren suggests in his opening headline?

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 3:30 PM
Comment #412763

Warped, I really don’t care where that CLUSTERF**K of an ACA started because Democrats own it anyway. As far as what is going on now with the Senate playing childish games with Trump’s cabinet picks is the real “massacre” in terms of them getting themselves re elected in the mid terms. A lot of those Senators and congress persons come from states that Trump won. If you want to see a “massacre” wait until the mid terms.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 4:01 PM
Comment #412764

Right Rich. I believe the Dems have ten senate seats up for grabs in states won by President Trump.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 4:07 PM
Comment #412765

Exactly Royal, Democrats are only hurting themselves with their game playing. People are getting tired of the petty Bulls**t. They want action out of D.C. not childish games.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 4:15 PM
Comment #412766
I really don’t care where that CLUSTERF**K of an ACA started because Democrats own it anyway.
Your admission that the Democrats did not violate any of Congress’ norms in 2009-2010 has been noted.

RF,
Remind me, how did Republicans representing states won by Obama in 2008 do in the midterm election two years later?

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 4:47 PM
Comment #412767

Warren, I stated a fact about the ten states. If you want to tell us something, go ahead.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 4:52 PM
Comment #412768

Rich KAPitan seems to be the only one making predictions about 2018. However, I am a bit incredulous that Republicans can gain seats when their President’s’ approval rating is tanking and all of their cherished legislative initiatives are resoundingly unpopular.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 5:02 PM
Comment #412769

Warren, you, nearly the entire media, almost all of Hollywood, every elected Democrat and much of the voting electorate were “incredulous” that Trump could even be elected. Please don’t make the same mistake again.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 5:30 PM
Comment #412770

Warped, I depends on what you call Norms blocking the opposite party from having a say, holding closed door sessions. You call that normal? Not in my 70 years on this planet. Maybe in your short time here but not mine. As far as predictions go I base them on 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016. Your party lost over 1000 seats nation wide because of the BULLS**T that your party is pulling. Keep up the good work Warped, maybe someday you will figure out that your policies aren’t working. This country isn’t ready for liberal policies.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 5:38 PM
Comment #412771

This country isn’t ready for liberal policies.
Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 5:38 PM

No Kap, it is not and hopefully never will be. The Democrats have seen erosion of their traditionally strong base of blue collar workers, women and minorities.

Apparently the Left believes that because their clownish voting blocs take to the streets at the slightest urging by their puppet-masters, while the Right shows constraint and decorum, that they are winning hearts and minds.

Election results prove that belief to be wrong.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 5:46 PM
Comment #412772
This country isn’t ready for liberal policies.

Given the ongoing crescendo of fervor opposing Donald Trump, I am quite apt to disagree, but we shall see what happens in 21 months. Remember, 60% approved of Obama’s job performance as he left office.

I depends on what you call Norms blocking the opposite party from having a say, holding closed door sessions.

Actually, the opposing party was given the option of having a say during the 111th Congress. Max Baucus led meetings with the gang of six for months trying to hammer out a bipartisan deal. The Tea Party put an end to that.

As for closed door sessions, there isn’t a major piece of legislation since WWII that hasn’t been partly negotiated behind closed doors. The PPACA was unusually transparent, with hour after hour of committee meetings and markup sessions broadcast on C-SPAN.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 5:51 PM
Comment #412773

Yep Royal, Trying to convince a liberal of that FACT is like talking to a wall, but at least with the wall you get better results.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 5:53 PM
Comment #412774

Warped, The Republicans were doing what their people wanted them to do, but Democrats thought they knew better and shut Republicans out of the process. Hence why your side is on a loosing streak.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 5:59 PM
Comment #412775

I would take those polls with a grain of salt, Warren. If this election proved anything, it is that large crowds of extreme leftists, and the media’s love of Obama, did not translate into the mass support the leftists believed they had.

As they say, the only poll that matters is the one on election day.

Posted by: kctim at January 31, 2017 6:00 PM
Comment #412776
Election results prove that belief to be wrong.

How does losing the electoral votes of three large midwestern states by the narrowest of margins prove that belief to be wrong?

How does winning a 3 million plurality of the popular vote prove that belief to be wrong?

How does Obama’s 60% approval rating throughout his final month prove that belief to be wrong?

How does Trump’s abysmal job approval rating prove that belief to be wrong?

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 6:01 PM
Comment #412777

Kap, this quote by Warren is what we have as opposition.

“Given the ongoing crescendo of fervor opposing Donald Trump, I am quite apt to disagree (about the country being ready for Liberalism)”

Who has observed a “crescendo of fervor opposing Donald Trump?”

Is a crescendo defined as the audience of late night TV talk shows, a few people marching on our streets yelling canned lyrics, the Hollywood types aggrandizing themselves as they receive awards for…for…”acting”?

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 31, 2017 6:04 PM
Comment #412778

I don’t know how he can figure that Royal, the polls I see are that at least 57% favor Trump’s EO on the ban.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 6:10 PM
Comment #412779

RF,

Perhaps you wouldn’t be so deaf if you took your head out of the sand and paid “Real America” a visit. You know, the place that generates nearly two thirds of US GDP. Donald Trump has done what Hillary Clinton never could do, inspire and mobilize the Left. Dismissing the protests as a “few” people is only going to lead to egg on your face in 21 months.

Posted by: Warren Porter at January 31, 2017 6:29 PM
Comment #412783

From all the post I see on Facebook more people are sick and tired of the useless protest, Hollywood elite, and Congress that that egg you say will be on Royals face may turn out to be something else in your face Warped. I agree Trump mobilized the left alright and people are seeing the lefts true colors and they ain’t liking it.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at January 31, 2017 7:52 PM
Comment #412784

KAP,

Since when does your Facebook feed decide elections?

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 1, 2017 7:44 AM
Comment #412785

Warped, Same way polls don’t decide elections, as we found out this last election, but it does give a way to see how people feel about what is going on with the way things are going same way polls do. People are sick and tired of the liberal protest, Hollywood elite, and D.C. in general.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at February 1, 2017 8:53 AM
Comment #412788

KAP,
FB “scans and collects everything posted in the past week by each of your friends, everyone you follow, each group you belong to, and every Facebook page you’ve liked. For the average Facebook user, that’s more than 1,500 posts. If you have several hundred friends, it could be as many as 10,000. Then, according to a closely guarded and constantly shifting formula, Facebook’s news feed algorithm ranks them all, in what it believes to be the precise order of how likely you are to find each post worthwhile.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/cover_story/2016/01/how_facebook_s_news_feed_algorithm_works.html

In other words, the FB feed (and other social media sites you may be using) uses an algorithm to show you what you will want to see. That means you will be seeing a totally different ‘news’ feed from me. It creates a feedback loop that reinforces the user’s bias.

This is relatively new. Conservatives used to complain that the FB feed was not conservative enough. When FB instituted a new algorithm, conservative news feeds exploded with ‘fake news’ during the campaign. Russian propagandists, Macedonian teenagers looking to make money by generating clicks, and others understood conservatives were more likely to share ‘fake news’ and, once again, we saw a self-reinforcing feedback loop.

FB has since changed its algorithm in an attempt to limit the proliferation of ‘fake news.’

Did fake news stories and algorithms change the way anyone voted in 2016? Not exactly. What it actually did was feed the tendency for confirmation bias. It has been documented that liberals are more likely to look at news from both liberal and conservative sources, while conservatives are more likely to only view conservative sources. This reinforced the echo chamber effect. It also absorbed bandwidth. Fake news may not have directly affected the way a person voted, but it crowded out other sources that might have changed that vote.

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2017 10:10 AM
Comment #412789

phx8, Most people I associate with on FB know what fake news is. I have over 400 friends on FB plus their friends and what they are saying or complaining about are such real stories as the EO’s and Trump’s new SCOTUS pick. I know about the stupid crap that is on FB and don’t even bother with it. FYI I do look at both side of the issue and make my own determination on the issues. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, and a few others are where I get most info from. Case point one of my Liberal Democrat friends put up a bunch of junk that I searched in MSNBC, CNN, and FOX and could not find anything pertaining to what that person posted, so my comment to that person was FAKE NEWS.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at February 1, 2017 10:40 AM
Comment #412790

Glad to hear that is how you approach it.

The relentless attacks on the MSM by Trump, talk show hosts like Limbaugh, and conservatives like Ted Cruz are intended to discourage critical thinking, and encourage indoctrination. For all its faults, bias, slants, and so on, the MSM seeks to practice widely accepted journalistic ethics. The Trumps, Limbaughs, and others do not; in fact, their message depends on people NOT approaching topics from a neutral perspective, or practice critical thinking. The constant assaults on public education, especially higher education, reflect this.

It will be interesting to see what happens with economic statistics that have been widely disputed by conservatives. Trump claimed the unemployment rate was 20, 30, or even 40 percent. Other conservatives have claimed all the statistics are part of a conspiracy theory.

Now, conservatives are in charge of government and the statistics. Will they merely forget what was said previously? Will they change the numbers to match what they want? When it comes to Global Warming information, government web sites are being scrubbed of data. The gathering of additional scientific information will be stopped.

I think they will willfully forget about the economic statistics and what they said. Like “1984,” all that talk about conspiracy theories with economic numbers will go down the memory hole.

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2017 10:49 AM
Comment #412793

phx8, I believe in School choice, the unemployment numbers are higher then what the government says it is and that global warming information is questionable. That being said I think it is time for Democrats to get over their pitty party and start doing the job they were elected to do. The liberal protests and the Democrats delaying votes on Trump’s cabinet positions are only serving one purpose and that is PISSING PEOPLE OFF. Democrats lost get over it. It’s time for Democrats to look at their position and fix what is giving them the losses they are getting.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at February 1, 2017 11:39 AM
Comment #412794

“It’s time for Democrats to look at their position and fix what is giving them the losses they are getting.”

That Democratic Party is done and long gone, KAP. The liberal democrat party of today thrives on identity politics and dependency. And, as their recent actions have shown, they would rather resort to promoting more division, and even violence, than even think about becoming the moderate party of yesterday.

Posted by: kctim at February 1, 2017 12:16 PM
Comment #412795

Totally agree with that kctim, one can only hope they see the error of their ways.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at February 1, 2017 1:54 PM
Comment #412796

kctim,
The only identity politics going on here is among the Republicans. They are the party of older white males, primarily rural and less educated. The majority of virtually every other group you’d care to name votes Democratic. Those majorities are shut out of the GOP.

And just to remind you, it is the GOP that primaries its candidates if they are not extreme and divisive enough. Democrats do not.

As for violence, do we even need to talk about the GOP defense of guns? Over 30,000 Americans die each year from gun violence. The Democrats want to limit that and reduce it. The GOP does not. You can give reasons why, but nothing changes that fundamental fact.

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2017 2:43 PM
Comment #412798

phx8 writes; “For all its faults, bias, slants, and so on, the MSM seeks to practice widely accepted journalistic ethics. The Trumps, Limbaughs, and others do not…”

My goodness phx8, how quickly you forget or perhaps “wash” your brain. Just a few days ago I posted, and you read, just a few of the mainstream media types, Dan Rather, Catie Curic, Brian Williams and others caught and disciplined for promoting fake news in their position as reporters.

Can you provide the names of Conservative political prognosticators who have been caught falsifying news?

phx8 writes; “The gathering of additional scientific information will be stopped.”

What an outrageous suggestion. Do you actually believe that? Or, are you referring to some reduction of government funding?

The death of any American by violence is tragic phx8. I mourn for the 60 million unborn babies as well.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 1, 2017 4:04 PM
Comment #412801

What the hell is an unborn baby?! There is no such thing.

“Can you provide the names of Conservative political prognosticators who have been caught falsifying news?”

You mean, just today? Canada demanded an apology from FOX and today, FOX apologized to the Canadians for initially saying the killer of Muslims at a mosque in Quebec was another Muslim. The terrorist was, in fact, a white supremacist. Despite the correction, the story took off as another one of those fake news stories shared by Alt Right white supremacists.

Today, VP Pence said it was the “will of the people” that the new SCOTUS nominee should be approved. That is false. The will of the people was for Hillary Clinton to be president. The Constitution provides for an electoral college, which means an allocation favoring small states resulted in this situation. That is NOT the same as the will of the people.

And I did not bother refuting your examples of fake news because I have never heard of any of them other than Rather & Williams. Both apologized and resigned.

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2017 4:39 PM
Comment #412802

Typical immoral response to murdering the unborn phx8. My blood-lusting Pal has no problem killing future Americans in the womb and instead favors importing those from alien wombs.

These hypocrites insist the law regarding abortion absolutely must be followed in every corner of this country. But, feel free to violate immigration laws or any others you may disagree with.

My poorly informed Pal phx8 is purposefully “confused” about what constitutes a deliberate lie with his examples.

So phx8, you agree that both Rather and Williams do not represent “widely accepted journalistic ethics”.

What’s the problem? Is your spinning machine broken?

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 1, 2017 5:00 PM
Comment #412804

One thing I’ve observed over and over again while reading Royal Flush’s comments on WatchBlog: He always switches the topic to abortion when he is losing an argument.

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 1, 2017 5:27 PM
Comment #412805

Phx8,
The fact that Republicans refuse to pander to this group or that group with identity politics, does not mean they are only for one group.
The ONLY group Republicans are even close to pandering to are Christians, and that is just to protect their freedom to exercise their religion as they see fit. NOT to promise them more entitlements or to create new rights for them.

And I hate to break it to you, but “rural and less educated” is no different than ‘urban and less educated’ or having an 8 year degree in some worthless BS subject and working at Starbucks.

“The majority of virtually every other group you’d care to name votes Democratic.”

Of course they do, you guys are the ones who divided them into groups and formed exclusive political alliances with them with pandering and promises. That’s the very definition of identity politics.

“Those majorities are shut out of the GOP.”

Only if they expect special treatment for being a member of some group, rather than equal treatment as an American.

“And just to remind you, it is the GOP that primaries its candidates if they are not extreme and divisive enough. Democrats do not.”

WTH are you talking about? Right this minute you have far-left democrats bragging about disowning family and targeting everybody from neighbors to small business owners to singers to sports figures to politicians, for daring to have supported Trump, agree with him on something, or being seen with him.

“As for violence, do we even need to talk about the GOP defense of guns?”

Seeing how you are claiming your opinion to be a “fundamental fact”, yes I do think we need to discuss those on the right and their defense of the 2nd Amendment.
It is absolutely ridiculous for you to claim that those on the right don’t care about gun violence, simply because they support their Constitutional rights and don’t agree with the draconian measures you desire.
IF democrats were serious about limiting and reducing gun violence, they would target those actually responsible for it, NOT those who live in peace with the right.

Now, perhaps we can discuss the actual divisiveness and violence we are seeing from the leftists today? The so-called protests, riots and threats immediately after the election? The attacks for not voting the ‘right way’? The inauguration day violence and destruction? The chick marches to disparage the US President and his supporters, and to protest something that hasn’t happened? Or perhaps you would like to discuss the blm ‘protest’ in Seattle this past weekend?

Your guys on the far left have no idea of the door you are opening with all of this nonsense.

Posted by: kctim at February 1, 2017 5:32 PM
Comment #412806

Sure Warren. “I mourn for the 60 million unborn babies as well.”

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 1, 2017 5:34 PM
Comment #412807

“… murdering the unborn…”
“… killing future Americans…”
“… importing those from alien wombs.”

Yowzah!

Maybe we should refer to ourselves as unmurdered Americans, or post-born pre-zombies. Hey, I heard foreigners hatch their babies in pods, just like that movie…

Meanwhile, fighting is escalating in eastern Ukraine. Apparently that is not a problem for the Trump administration. Tillerson, winner of Russia’s highest medal, The Order of Friendship, was confirmed today.

But to make this whole thing work, and help Exxon and the Russians close the $500 billion artic drilling deal, the Trump administration desperately needs higher oil prices. Everything about this administration is devoted to it, including oil lobbyists and Global Warming Deniers in cabinet posts.

How to do it? Hmmm. (Tapping foot). Hmmm. Aha!

Threatening the Iranians went right to the top of the charts today.

Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2017 5:47 PM
Comment #412808

LOL…Fairy-tale fancy from our faulty frenzied friend.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 1, 2017 5:58 PM
Comment #412809

“Threatening the Iranians…”

C’mon…that’s anti-obama. Just give them a few hundred million.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 1, 2017 6:02 PM
Comment #412810

Fighting is escalating in the eastern Ukraine:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/31/europe/ukraine-fighting/

The new Secretary of Defense, Tillerson, won the Russian Order of Friendship:

https://www.rt.com/usa/370009-rex-tillerson-putin-connection/

The $500 billion deal:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/world/europe/rex-tillersons-company-exxon-has-billions-at-stake-over-russia-sanctions.html?_r=0

As for the threat to Iran by Flynn, and an immediate jump in crude oil prices:

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/01/this-oil-market-black-swan-may-emerge-as-flynn-puts-iran-on-notice.html


Posted by: phx8 at February 1, 2017 6:42 PM
Comment #412811

Obey abortion laws. Disobey immigration laws.

Hypocrites please explain.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 1, 2017 7:11 PM
Comment #412828
The fact that Republicans refuse to pander to this group or that group with identity politics, does not mean they are only for one group. The ONLY group Republicans are even close to pandering to are Christians, and that is just to protect their freedom to exercise their religion as they see fit. NOT to promise them more entitlements or to create new rights for them.

This is total horseshit. Republicans know who constitutes their base and pander to them appropriately.

Obey abortion laws. Disobey immigration laws.

Hypocrites please explain.

Nobody believes that. There are no hypocrites here to explain your fantasy.

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 2, 2017 11:23 AM
Comment #412942
Can you provide the names of Conservative political prognosticators who have been caught falsifying news?

Certainly you jest Royal. Faux news didn’t earn that name by reporting real news.


How about KellyAnne and the tragedy at Bowling Green?


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/vigils-bowling-green-massacre-kellyanne-conway_us_5895b80ce4b0c1284f2636de?lx9e8lhux9s3mobt9&

Posted by: j2t2 at February 4, 2017 12:45 PM
Comment #413032

“Republicans know who constitutes their base and pander to them appropriately.”

Ah, that’s right, their base is the unintelligent evil whitey living outside of urban areas, isn’t it. FFS Warren, you’re starting to sound as unhinged as Phx8 and, as crazy silly as J2.

So, how exactly are Republicans pandering to us dumb evil white men, Warren? There are no laws, regs, programs, grants etc… exclusively for white men, so what exactly are they using to brainwash us into supporting something as outdated as individual rights?

Posted by: kctim at February 8, 2017 9:02 AM
Comment #413035

I did not characterize anyone as unintelligent, evil or dumb. Please desist from this straw man and perhaps I will answer your question.

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 8, 2017 11:29 AM
Post a comment