Third Party & Independents Archives

It's not Susan Rice's Fault - It's Trump's Fault

It seems that the progressive view of some recent events in the news goes something like this:

  • Putin helped elect Trump. We all know that and if you demand evidence rather than the clouds of suggestion swirling in the media, you must be a Russian stooge.

  • Because Putin helped elect Trump, President Assad has seen fit to launch gas attacks on the opposition in the still-burning Syrian Civil War. Why? Because we progressives say so. Never mind Obama’s shifting red line in the sand. It’s all Trump’s fault. Never mind any evidence other than the stuff we progressives present to you. Usually as rumor and innuendo. It’s all Trump’s fault. Syria is turning into a mix of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Bosnia and may be unsolvable with someone like Assad in power. But it’s Trump’s fault.

  • Susan Rice is a powerful, fantastic woman who did a fantastic job as National Security Adviser for President Obama. Especially on Benghazi, with her deft deflections of the Obama administration’s - as in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s - screw up’s, by instead referring to that video. Whose fault Benghazi was.

So now that Susan Rice - former National Security Adviser to Obama - has suddenly found herself in an awkward position after it has been revealed that it was she who demanded the unmasking of Trump officials caught up in "incidental" surveillance. And this was the fact that led Devin Nunes to do his nighttime swoop through the White House Grounds to be able to view that evidence. Helped by the man who found the evidence: Ezra Cohen-Watnick. The National Security Council director of intelligence.

So the smoke has lifted just a little, and we have a little more clarity.

Now the remaining key question is: who leaked the unmasked Trump officials/associates? In other words, has Susan Rice done enough Clintonesque lawyerly tap dancing to avoid prosecution? Did she get someone else to do the dirty - and illegal - work of leaking? By suggesting in subtle-but-you-better-damn-well-do-this ways that these unmasked names need to get around Washington? And into the media?

Hopefully Susan Rice will have time to some splaining to Congress and perhaps to the courts.

Oh yes, there is another question. In today's world, where the NSA and likely other agencies record just about every phone call, email and other digital data, that occurs in America and around much of the world, how can we avoid having information be used and abused for partisan political purposes? Without sacrificing a very real need to know who might be planning to harm Americans and America's interests around the world, including at home.

Unmasking doesn't necessarily have to lead to leaking, but the two actions - one generally legal, the other illegal - have seemed to follow one another lately. It would be hard and perhaps foolish to enact laws or regulations that forbid unmasking. Leaking, however, is another matter. Especially when it occurs during a transition between administrations from opposing parties who harbor more than the usual dosage of hostility towards each other.

Bring Susan Rice to the Senate. And have her speak. For as long as necessary. And maybe give Ben Rhodes a call. He was Rice's deputy after all. And might have more than a few things to share as well.

Unless both Rice and Rhodes plead the fifth. Which might also happen.

Posted by AllardK at April 5, 2017 2:23 PM
Comments
Comment #415015

AllardK, we have known forever that here actually is no honor among thieves, and little among politicians and political appointees as well.

One does not suddenly become honorable, or adopt ethical morality simply because they cross the Potomac River into the DC swamp.

My question; are we getting the politicians we deserve?

My answer is yes, unless elections are rigged; and I don’t believe they are.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 5, 2017 3:35 PM
Comment #415023

Unexpected, but welcome editorial from the Chicago Times.

“The Senate has never experienced a partisan filibuster to block a Supreme Court justice, so there’s never been a case of a majority party blowing up Senate rules to circumvent minority party opposition to a high court appointment. Supreme Court nominations have been withdrawn, and the 1987 nomination of Judge Robert Bork was defeated, but when the vote’s up for grabs, the Senate has found a way to do the responsible thing. The late Justice Antonin Scalia, an arch-conservative whose seat Gorsuch would fill, was confirmed with 98 votes. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal, got 96 votes. Those were the days: politics, the art of the possible.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-gorsuch-confirm-nuclear-filibuster-trump-reid-0404-md-20170403-story.html

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 5, 2017 5:11 PM
Comment #415031

Something very interesting happened today, and we may look back at this as a fundamental turning point in the Trump presidency, the day he jettisoned the far right and moved towards the middle.

A few days ago, Trump stated the US would no longer back the ouster of Assad in Syria. It resulted in the Syrians running hog wild, gassing a village and generating absolutely horrendous images. Who gave Trump the advice to announce we were going to leave Assad alone?

The health care bill was a complete debacle. Who gave Trump the advice to go for it in the first place?

Who wrote the Immigration EO’s that blew up? It was so bad, the administration will be hamstrung for a long time on one of its fundamental initiatives.

The approach to the Russian’s role in the election has crippled the White House. Instead of attacking the problem head on, demanding transparency and a quick, open investigation, someone in the administration thought it would be a good idea to counterattack, delay, obstruct, and so on.

The Gorsuch nomination has turned into a catastrophe. It turns out he has been a plagiarist more than once. The GOP and Trump have gone all in for this guy. They are too far in to back out. Now this ‘brilliant legal scholar’ will become an ugly, indelible stain for years to come. Who promoted this guy?

It was Bannon who protected Ezra Cohen-Watnick from being fired by General McMaster at the NSC. Cohen-Watnick was one of the sources for Stupid Watergate, where Nunes snuck over, took the documents provided by Cohen-Watnick (and two others), and then pretended he had found them and brought them to the White House the next day. That was Bannon’s idea.

Today Bannon was fired from the NSC.

In another recent thread I said:

” We are in a slow motion train wreck right now. The State Department has been disabled and Tillerson is on an island, even as North Korea and Syria present challenges. Inexperienced people are at the tops of various government hierarchies.

We are adrift, and counting on a handful of generals and Goldman Sachs guys to keep this country afloat.”

Today, Trump decided to ditch the far right/alt right, and go with the generals, led by McMasters. Bannon was fired. A lightweight Flynn flunkey and FOX news ‘analyst,’ K.T. McFarland, was told she was no longer the deputy at the NSC and was heading for a post in Singapore. Heh. The head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is back on the NSC, along with Director Pompeo from the CIA, and Coats, Director of National Intelligence.

In addition, Trump invited the NYT into the White House for an interview. At a presser, the MSM was generously represented.

So maybe Trump has come to his senses. A 35% approval rating has a wonderful way of sharpening one’s focus. It does not mean there will be a happy ending for problems with Syria, North Korea, Russian meddling in the election, attacks on the MSM and judiciary, health care reform and immigration issues.

But it is a start.


Posted by: phx8 at April 5, 2017 11:51 PM
Comment #415035

phx8

“The Gorsuch nomination has turned into a catastrophe”

He’ll be confirmed. The democrats lost any chance of affecting that outcome when Reid changed the rule to ram through Obamas appointees. If they force the nuclear option they’ll have exactly zero chance of having any input at all if there are other SCOTUS vacancies.

Posted by: dbs at April 6, 2017 6:45 AM
Comment #415039

But it is a start?
The left will still label Constitutional values as ‘far right.’ They will still hold the same hypocritical views on dealing with foreign leaders. They will still claim anything less than government healthcare as a complete debacle. They will still use activist judges to force liberal views. They will still claim that Trump and Putin rigged the election. They will still hate and persecute Supreme Court nominees and judges who are not leftists. They will still claim those who do not fall in lock-step with their political correctness to be white supremacists. Especially if they dare speak out.
They will still hate, target, persecute, and attack anybody even the slightest to the right of their anti American unconstitutional beliefs. Especially if they are President.

This isn’t this start of anything. It’s the half-way point of a fundamental transformation, it’s only going to get uglier, and we have the far-left extremists to thank for it all.

Posted by: kctim at April 6, 2017 9:16 AM
Comment #415042

dbs,
I am fine with seeing the Senate doing away with the nuclear option. What goes around, comes around.

kctim,
The shambolic state of the Trump administration has nothing to do with liberals. It is self-inflicted. Part of it is due to bad advice. Part of it is Trump’s fault. His ridiculous tweets have caused him to destroy what little credibility might have come along with the office of the President, but Trump can not fire himself.

There are literally hundreds of positions that still need to be filled. Tillerson and Trump (probably at the urging of Bannon) fired two levels of administration at the State Department, leaving the inexperienced Tillerson standing on an island. It is an absolute disaster, and the administration is adrift when it comes to North Korea and Syria.

It is not the fault of liberals if Trump’s Immigration EO is unconstitutional. It is not the fault of liberals if the health care AHCA received only 17% approval. And it is not the fault of liberals that Trump has a 35% approval rating, unless you believe 65% of the country is liberal. Trump brought this on himself. He has offended just about everyone capable of being offended.

We are almost three months in, and nothing has been accomplished, other than a couple EO’s allowing coal companies to pollute streams, a rollback of environmental protections, and doing away with financial transparency so oil companies can go back to bribing foreign countries. The Congress did away with your internet privacy. Every thing you do on the web will be available to the highest bidder. Trump signed it in a closed door ceremony. No announcements. No cameras.

It is not liberal’s fault that AG Sessions lied under oath about meeting with the Russian ambassador and had to recuse himself. It is not liberal’s fault the head of the EPA may lose his license to practice law after lying under oath. It is not liberal’s fault that the head of HHS is under investigation for insider trading. And it is not liberal’s fault that the Trump campaign has been under criminal investigation by the FBI for cooperating with the Russians.

Trump did bad all by himself, and if nothing else, that approval rating is driving it home. You can bet he understands that, because he is a narcissist and he craves approval, and a 35% approval rating at this point in an administration is horrendous.

There are a handful of competent people in the government- the generals and Goldman Sachs guys- but that’s not enough to run the country.

I hope he can change. I hope he gets better advice.

Posted by: phx8 at April 6, 2017 10:11 AM
Comment #415044

Phx8,
The supposed state of Trump’s administration is nothing but partisan hyperbole. One side wants to promote it as total incompetency and the other side wants to promote nothing is wrong. The truth lies in the middle.
Trump is not a political insider, he is a rookie working outside of the box and some mistakes will be made. Unlike his predecessor those mistakes will not be ignored with false claims of racism.
Yes, criticism over his tweeting and trips to Mar-a-Lago are self inflicted. He can, and needs to do better.
Your claims of “absolute disaster” and “nothing has been accomplished” are premature and silly. It hasn’t even been three months yet.

Activist judges bypassed Congress and decreed that the immigration provision was unconstitutional. Liberals will not accept anything less than single-payer healthcare.
I believe ‘approval’ polls now as much as I believed them when they said everybody loved Obama and Hillary. And after the last ten years, I couldn’t care less about who might be offended.

Your wrong opinions about his EOs are typical and would be more interesting than all this theorizing about him being in some kind of advertising cahoots with the Russians.

“I hope he can change. I hope he gets better advice.”

LOL!
The left hopes nothing more than that the exact same tactics they are accusing Trump working with Russia of using, pays off for them in the coming election.
Their blind devotion and defense of Obama and Clinton prove that.

Posted by: kctim at April 6, 2017 11:17 AM
Comment #415045
It is not liberal’s fault that AG Sessions lied under oath about meeting with the Russian ambassador and had to recuse himself. It is not liberal’s fault the head of the EPA may lose his license to practice law after lying under oath. It is not liberal’s fault that the head of HHS is under investigation for insider trading. And it is not liberal’s fault that the Trump campaign has been under criminal investigation by the FBI for cooperating with the Russians.

You can add the alleged ethics violations by Devin Nunes and subsequent investigation by the House ethics committee to that list. Nunes has recused himself from the HIC investigation.

I hope he can change. I hope he gets better advice.
Don’t worry. The coming Democratic will give him plenty of good advice in 2019. Posted by: Warren Porter at April 6, 2017 11:37 AM
Comment #415048

So I wonder if this state department shake up will spur the crisis Trump needs to solidify his power as dictator. With Bannon freed up to begin a propaganda blitz it seems Trump may be setting the stage for his takeover. Unless of course this group Trump has put together is really as stupid as they appear to be. But that isn’t possible is it?

Posted by: j2t2 at April 6, 2017 11:50 AM
Comment #415049

kctim,
Trump’s lack of experience is a drawback. It is an excuse for incompetence. I am not interested in excuses. Being an outsider and a businessman was supposedly an asset. Obviously, it is not.

While I want single-payer, I think most liberals would accept and even support improvements to the ACA by Congress.

“Activist judges bypassed Congress and decreed that the immigration provision was unconstitutional.”

No. This has nothing to do with Congress. First the Acting AG, Sally Yates, refused to enforce the Immigration EO because it was unconstitutional. Trump fired her. Multiple judges have turned down both Immigration EO’s, and so far, the Trump administration is not even bothering to take it to the SCOTUS for a simple reason- the EO is unconstitutional. Last year, when Trump declared he was banning all Muslim immigration, his goose was cooked. A ban based on religious views or race will always be unconstitutional if that is the law’s underlying intent, even if the law itself bans people by country.

Posted by: phx8 at April 6, 2017 11:56 AM
Comment #415050

WP,
Saw that about House Intel Chairman Nunes recusing himself from all things Russian. Congress is investigating him for leaking classified information. Stupid Watergate nears an endgame.

Nunes… What a dumbass.

Posted by: phx8 at April 6, 2017 12:04 PM
Comment #415051

How long will Trump tolerate that 35% approval rating? How long before he tries to improve his approval rating with a rally round the flag effect, and starts a war? Not long. And without an effective State Department, it should be easy to blunder into.

Posted by: phx8 at April 6, 2017 12:08 PM
Comment #415056

Phx8,
The only thing Trump has not been successful at is learning and playing the Washington game.

Forgive me for laughing out loud here, but after the example you set over the past 9 years, do you really expect people to take your new found concern of inexperience, incompetence and excuses? That’s some funny sh*t there man.

“While I want single-payer, I think most liberals would accept and even support improvements to the ACA by Congress.”

That doesn’t change the fact that leftists will falsely claim all who disagree are ‘far-right extremists.’

“No. This has nothing to do with Congress”

The who gave the President the power to, “by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

How and when did Yates and activist judges get the power to read minds to determine underlying intent, or to use their own political beliefs, to take that power away from a President?

Be careful with that blind partisanship, before you know it you will be ignoring ALL facts and claiming false flag operations and starting wars.

Posted by: kctim at April 6, 2017 2:21 PM
Comment #415059

“We are almost three months in, and nothing has been accomplished…(Except)”

I find phx8’s analysis amusing. The very accomplishments he dissed, are some of the very ones that got Trump elected.

Most new administrations experience some initial mistakes and this one is no exception. President Trump is doing everything he can to fulfill his campaign promises. What a novel idea for a liberal to comprehend.

Meeting with the Chinese is huge, and one can hope that the Chinese can be of more help to the world in dealing with North Korea. The other security issues on the menu to be discussed are critically important.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 6, 2017 2:55 PM
Comment #415060

kctim writes; “Unlike his predecessor those mistakes will not be ignored with false claims of racism.”

Give yourself an A+ for that observation.

“…rally round the flag effect, and starts a war?”

phx8’s comment, while sounding like a silly twit’s prayer, does give one pause to think about how we got into Vietnam.


Posted by: Royal Flush at April 6, 2017 3:07 PM
Comment #415067

dbs,
Doing away with the filibuster weakens the Senate. Have you noticed Democrats are fine with that? I don’t think you have thought this one through.

RF,
Trump has NO significant accomplishments. He made a lot of promises. He has failed to keep his promises. This is not kindergarten. There are no presidential participation trophies. Trump has failed.

All,
Trump said and tweeted a lot of stuff about Syria. He was adamant about staying out of Syria in 2013, yet he considered Obama weak for not doing anything. The GOP refused to give Obama an AUMF. Back in the day, Trump insisted there should be no action against Syria without congressional authorization. A few days ago, Tillerson & Haley stated that we would no longer pursue the previous administration policy that Assad must go; instead, it would be up to the Syrian people. Syria responded to the new policy by promptly gassing a village. Now Trump is turning tough again.

Trump took a bad situation and made it much, much worse through diplomatic incompetence. His weakness towards Assad resulted in the Syrian government gassing people. Now what?

Posted by: phx8 at April 6, 2017 5:48 PM
Comment #415069

phx8, are you kidding us about knowing for certain the reasons for, and details of, the gassing in Syria? Do you pretend to know the mind of Assad?

I have been following this story and investigation will begin soon. If you have concrete facts…please share.

He also wrote; “Trump has NO significant accomplishments.”

Another silly Liberal Twit comment. No doubt we disagree on the meaning of the word “significant”.

The proof of “significance” my Lefty Pal, is the outrage shown by you and the Left.

When Gorsuch dons the robes of a Supreme Court Justice, a major promise made by candidate Trump will have been met.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 6, 2017 6:22 PM
Comment #415074

Apparently we disagree on the meaning of the word ‘accomplishment’ too.

Is failing to do something an accomplishment?

Posted by: phx8 at April 6, 2017 7:46 PM
Comment #415075

Good question phx8. My understanding is that accomplishments usually are measured when achieved.

Example.

A significant accomplishment was achieved today.

An insignificant accomplishment was achieved today.

No accomplishment was achieved today, but perhaps it will be accomplished tomorrow, or next month, or next year, or…?


Posted by: Royal Flush at April 6, 2017 7:54 PM
Comment #415076

A significant accomplishment today, Trump keeps Obama’s Red line promise by sending 50 Tomahawks to Syria.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at April 6, 2017 9:43 PM
Comment #415079

Actually I heard it was 59 Tomahawks. We had a gutless girly-man in office for the past 8 years. He drew lines in the sand and at the same time systematically dismantled the American military. Thank God that clown is gone. Trump will now get everyone’s attention.

Posted by: Blaine at April 6, 2017 10:33 PM
Comment #415085

^^^^ what he said

Posted by: dbs at April 7, 2017 6:22 AM
Comment #415086

phx8


“Doing away with the filibuster weakens the Senate. Have you noticed Democrats are fine with that? I don’t think you have thought this one through.”

What is there to think about? The dems would have done it in a second to confirm Garland had they regained the senate. TK even said as much. The dems drew first blood when reid did it on appellate court appointees. Don’t see an upside to not doing it. Your guys fu%ked up by not letting Gorsuch through. It would have given them some appearance of moral high ground the next time around. Not well played by schumer is all I can say.

Posted by: dbs at April 7, 2017 6:43 AM
Comment #415088

My guess is that Schumer was under pressure from democrat diners. And the second thing was he calculated that McConnell would never do away with the filibuster. The republicans have always caved to democrat and media pressure, but for some strange reason, McConnell actually grew a pair and stood his ground.

Lastly, all this action did was restore the senate to the same rules it operated by a couple of decades ago. Up until a few years ago, a filibuster was never used against a presidents SC nomination, it was always a straight up or down vote; but it was the democrats who first invoked a 60 vote threshold for a nomination. Reid did away with lower court appointees when republicans used the democrat rule to block 2 of well over 200 Obama successful nomination. All the republicans did was to take us back to 20 years ago, requiring a simple 51 up or down vote. It’s not the constitutional crisis that the left wants us to believe. But it was a great mistake by the left. Any more nominations by Trump, and no doubt there will be, will sail right though the Senate. So we can only thank Reid and Schumer.

Posted by: Blaine at April 7, 2017 8:38 AM
Comment #415089
The dems drew first blood when reid did it on appellate court appointees.

First blood was drawn when Mitch McConnell failed to adhere to the deal struck by the Gang of Fourteen during the Bush era. Instead of judiciously using the filibuster to stonewall particularly unqualified or radical nominees, the decision was made to filibuster anyone Obama nominated. That was extreme and it required an extreme response.

Don’t see an upside to not doing it.
Weakening the Judicial filibuster only weakens taboos regarding the legislative filibuster. Many far left dreams (Socialized Medicine, Publicly Financed Campaigns, Federally Subsidized Abortions, etc) become politically feasible after Democrats regain control of all the branches in 2021. Posted by: Warren Porter at April 7, 2017 8:41 AM
Comment #415091

Correction in previous sentence; Reid did away with the ability to filibuster lower court nominees when republicans used the democrat rule to block 2 of well over 200 nominees.

One other thought; while the liberal media is playing over and over again whether Trump violated congressional rules by bombing Syria, Gorsuch will sail right through the senate today. Trump manages to stay two steps ahead of his enemies.

Posted by: Blaine at April 7, 2017 8:47 AM
Comment #415092
Up until a few years ago, a filibuster was never used against a presidents SC nomination, it was always a straight up or down vote

Chief Justice Abe Fortas can testify to that!

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 7, 2017 8:58 AM
Comment #415093

Your comments about regarding the legislative filibuster is the latest “the sky is falling” talking point of the left. Thank you Warren for bringing it to the attention of WB.

But tell us Warren, since you brought it up, exactly how many of Obama’s nominees were filibustered by the republicans. Considering Republicans have controlled the Senate ever since 2010. The democrats spent the 2 years they controlled the Senate to ram through the failed stimulus package and Obamacare. I do know the Obama nominated 2 extremely liberal justices to the SC under a republican controlled senate and they sailed right through with a simple majority vote.

Posted by: Blaine at April 7, 2017 9:10 AM
Comment #415095

Warren, is that the best argument you have? Abe Fortas was confirmed to the SC. He was blocked from becoming Chief Justice do to ethics problems, and eventually resigned after I believe 4 years on the court…his ethics problems caught up with him.

My previous comments stand.

Posted by: Blaine at April 7, 2017 9:27 AM
Comment #415096

Incidentally, he was not really filibustered from becoming Chief Justice…he withdrew before debate had concluded. The conservatives continued debate due to his ethical problems. And although a close personal friend and choice of LBJ to succeed Chief Justice Warren, he withdrew.

Posted by: Blaine at April 7, 2017 9:33 AM
Comment #415100
quote text I do know the Obama nominated 2 extremely liberal justices to the SC under a republican controlled senate and they sailed right through with a simple majority vote.

Blaine’s dementia strikes again. Elena Kagan & Sonia Sotomayor were nominated and confirmed during the 111th Congress when Democrats controlled the Senate. When Sotomayor was confirmed, Republicans could not have mounted a filibuster even if they had tried as they only controlled 40 Senate seats at the time.


He was blocked from becoming Chief Justice do to ethics problems

Face it, you were wrong. Own your mistake.

he withdrew before debate had concluded.
A filibuster means that the debate never concludes. Fortas was filibustered. End of story. Posted by: Warren Porter at April 7, 2017 10:24 AM
Comment #415104

Warren, I don’t really care who was nominated and when they were nominated. Sotomayor and Kagan were liberals and were approved by a bipartisan vote. It was never even considered to use a filibuster. The point is, there has never been a filibuster of a nomination to the SC. What happened to Fortas was not considered a filibuster, he was in fact approved to the SC. The extended debate was for the position of Chief Justice and he withdrew before the vote. Today’s interpretation of a filibuster is the requiring a 60 vote threshold. A 60 vote threshold was not required for Fortas.

Posted by: Blaine at April 7, 2017 11:47 AM
Comment #415109

“Many far left dreams (Socialized Medicine, Publicly Financed Campaigns, Federally Subsidized Abortions, etc) become politically feasible after Democrats regain control of all the branches in 2021.”

I’d say it’s a little early for that bold a prognostication. Lol Remember, last time you guys had that much control, you screwed the pooch, and were booted over the next 3 election cycles because of it.

Posted by: dbs at April 7, 2017 1:09 PM
Comment #415110

Aaaaaaand…… Gorsuch is confirmed 54 to 45.

Posted by: dbs at April 7, 2017 1:22 PM
Comment #415113
I don’t really care who was nominated and when they were nominated.

Of course, you change your tune in order to save face. That doesn’t change the fact that you were wrong. Why not man up for a change? Admit that you made a mistake and move on.

Sotomayor and Kagan were liberals and were approved by a bipartisan vote. It was never even considered to use a filibuster.

Sotomayor & Kagan were popular and well liked on both sides of the aisle. Because they were mainstream and not radical, they enjoyed support from several Republican Senators and easily garnered the 60 votes necessary make a filibuster attempt unthinkable.

Unlike Sotomayor & Kagan, Gorsuch is a radical who was unable to gain the confidence of 60 Senators like Sotomayor & Kagan did. He should’ve suffered the fate of Abe Fortas, another nominee who had the support of a majority of Senators but not enough to invoke cloture and end debate.

A 60 vote threshold was not required for Fortas.
True. Back then, the rules were that a 2/3 supermajority was necessary to end a filibuster. Yesterday, it was just 3/5.
he withdrew before the vote

The vote happened on October 1. Fortas’ nomination was withdrawn on October 4. Since when does October 4 occur before October 1?

dbs,

I’d say it’s a little early for that bold a prognostication. Lol Remember, last time you guys had that much control, you screwed the pooch, and were booted over the next 3 election cycles because of it.

McConnell’s use of the filibuster was a key reason why Democrats “screwed the pooch”. With it gone, you’ll have no defenses against leftist legislation save the Supreme Court. Just to remind you, the filibuster (and only the fillibuster) prevented the 111th Congress from doing the following:

1. Passing a single payer health care plan rather than the PPACA.
2. Passing the Waxman-Markey Cap & Trade Bill.
3. Passing the DREAM Act
4. Etc

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 7, 2017 2:18 PM
Comment #415114

warren

The democrats did away with cloture on lower court nominees. They also threatened to do away with it for supreme court nominees. It just bit them in the ass. I’ve haven’t heard the republicans suggest that it be done away with for legislation. DEmocrats had effectively 60 seats and weren’t able to get the votes for those things. That isn’t likely to change considering the constituency of many of their states.

Posted by: dbs at April 7, 2017 2:37 PM
Comment #415117
It just bit them in the ass.
Not really. The Supreme Court is no more conservative than it was 18 months ago. On the plus side, we got a bunch of liberals on the bench all across the country.
I’ve haven’t heard the republicans suggest that it be done away with for legislation.
No, they haven’t. But just like the elimination of the filibuster on lower court nominees paved the way for the elimination of the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees, the elimination of the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees will pave the way for the filibuster’s elimination on legislation.
DEmocrats had effectively 60 seats and weren’t able to get the votes for those things. That isn’t likely to change considering the constituency of many of their states.
For most of the 111th Congress, Democrats only had 59 votes. But still, as you said, Democrats still struggled with 60 Senators because they relied on moderates elected in red states to reach that threshold. People like Robert Byrd sunk cap & trade. People like Ben Nelson sunk single payer health care. People like Blanche Lincoln sunk the DREAM act. In a world without a legislative filibuster, Democrats can get their legislative priorities enacted without relying on the votes of moderate to conservative Democrats elected in red states. Posted by: Warren Porter at April 7, 2017 3:14 PM
Comment #415118

Well said, Stephen. Like I said, conservatives haven’t really thought this thing through. Seeing Gorsuch on the bench is painful, but it paves the way for better times for a liberal agenda, one that the majority of Americans want.

Posted by: phx8 at April 7, 2017 3:29 PM
Comment #415119

Phx8,

Gorsuch’s ascension to the high court will be a Pyrrhic victory for conservatives. Democrats are going to be running the show in 2019. As long as Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg and others don’t die in the next 20 months, the right’s goose is going to be cooked.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 7, 2017 3:43 PM
Comment #415125

Someone made a funny observation. Whenever Trump says he has “full confidence” in someone, that person is about to get fired.

And whenever Trump uses the word “fake,” he has just told a lie, or is about to tell a lie.

I am still chuckling over what happened to K.T. McFarland. She was a FOX news foreign policy ‘expert’ who had not served in a foreign policy position since a low level gig under Reagan. Flynn made her Deputy National Security Advisor. After all, she had been on FOX! McMaster fired her. I’ll bet he told someone ‘I want that idiot as far away from me as possible,’ because she got sent to Singapore- literally the other side of the world!

Sometimes bureaucrats can be funny.

Posted by: phx8 at April 7, 2017 4:49 PM
Comment #415127

“Many far left dreams (Socialized Medicine, Publicly Financed Campaigns, Federally Subsidized Abortions, etc) become politically feasible after Democrats regain control of all the branches in 2021.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 7, 2017 8:41 AM

You may be correct. Yet, I have no reason to believe that a Left leaning SC would bypass the Constitution which your examples may require.

The Left is unable to understand the difference between Laws and Justice. Gorsuch will follow the Law; since, as we all know, Justice is blind.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 7, 2017 5:46 PM
Comment #415135
You may be correct. Yet, I have no reason to believe that a Left leaning SC would bypass the Constitution which your examples may require.

Only time will tell. All I know is that the Republicans are playing with fire. These are the only plausible scenarios I can see where the gamble pays off:

A) RBG or AMK die during the next 20 months allowing Trump to make a second nomination without any haranguing from congressional Democrats. I guess SGB can kick the bucket too, but he’s a bit younger.

B) Republicans miraculously maintain their control of Congress beyond the 2018 elections.

C) Donald Trump or another Republican wins the 2020 Presidential Election.

Otherwise, all bets are off. Trump’s Democratic successor gets to choose a replacement for Anthony Kennedy (and perhaps RBG too) and the Right loses all the marbles.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 7, 2017 8:22 PM
Comment #415145

Thanks for the laugh Warren. Your belief, requiring a miracle for retention of congress by the Republicans, is baseless and humorous.

I never realized what a “chicken counter” you were Warren.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 8, 2017 1:57 PM
Comment #415147

In the past 8 years the democrats have lost 1200 seats in state and local governments. They only control 4 states. They are loosing blue States to become red. If Trump continues to create jobs and caters to union workers, who in their right mind believes the democrats are going to do anything but continue their death spiral? The American people from everywhere but NYC, some New England liberals, and the west coast voted for Trump for one reason…and that was a conservative in the SC. That’s right, all those people who cling to their guns and religion voted for Trump simply because he promised a conservative justice. These same people watched as Trump nominated and confirmed Gorsuch, a pro-gun and pro-religious freedom justice. Trump won again. The media didn’t make Trump and the media can’t break Trump. And the only thing the extreme liberal left has going for them is a extreme liberal media. McConnell would NEVER have changed the rules to confirm Gorsuch if the heat hadn’t been on him. I believe they got the message. Let’s add to that the constant (CONSTANT) attacks from people who will never identify with Trump supporters; the media who blatantly show where they stand, the elitist Hollywood crowd who have lost their minds, the bombardment of social media identifying Soro’s money every time a protest against Trump takes place, and let’s not forget the elitist college and high school educators who making enemies of themselves to the American people. What I have just stated is reality in America, not the spin world that WB liberals write about.

Posted by: Blaine at April 8, 2017 2:39 PM
Comment #415148

Blaine, you certainly echoed my beliefs. Thanks

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 8, 2017 2:55 PM
Comment #415159
Your belief, requiring a miracle for retention of congress by the Republicans, is baseless and humorous.


How many times since WWII has a party entered a midterm election controlling both the Presidency and both houses of Congress, lost fewer than 25 seats and retained control of Congress?

1946: Democrats lost 45 House seats (and control of Congress)
1950: Democrats lost 29 House seats
1954: Republicans lost control of Congress
1958: Divided Government (GOP still lost 48 House seats)
1962: —> “Miracle” (Influence of Cuban Missile Crisis)
1966: Democrats lost 47 House seats
1970: Divided Government
1974: Divided Government (GOP still lost 48 House seats)
1978: —> “Miracle” (albeit with 15 House seats lost)
1982: Divided Government (GOP still loses 26 House seats)
1986: Divided Government (GOP still loses 8 Senators and control of the Senate)
1990: Divided Government
1994: Democrats lose 52 House seats (and control of Congress)
1998: Divided Government
2002: —> “Miracle” (Influence of 9/11)
2006: Republicans lose 40 House seats (and control of Congress)
2010: Democrats lost 63 House seats (and control of Congress)
2014: Divided Government
2017: Unified Government —> 7 out of 10 situations like this since WWII have been catastrophic for the incumbent party. The three other instances all happened when the incumbent President was popular (approval ratings above 50%). Donald Trump’s approval ratings are nowhere near 50% and it will take a miracle for him to get there.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 8, 2017 7:58 PM
Comment #415182

Aren’t we all pleased that Warren finds such comfort and succor in historical happenstance?

Not even one hundred days into the Trump administration and a congress and senate held by the Republicans and our Lefty Pal can already make predictions on events nearly two years in advance.

What brand of tea leaves does Warren use…we all are wondering.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 9, 2017 5:13 PM
Comment #415184

It’s the same brand of tea that caused many Watchblog conservatives to predict Trump’s victory last year.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 9, 2017 6:58 PM
Comment #415192

The problem with reading the tea leaves is that the Democratic Party of the past is not the Democratic Party of today. The bluedog southern democrats are now republicans. Just a couple of decades back, West Virginia was a solid democrat state, but not any longer. And West Virginia will never change back, unless we can load it up with imported aliens. The democrats have made their bed with anti gun, anti Christian stands.

Posted by: Blaine at April 9, 2017 9:38 PM
Comment #415194

Blaine,
In West Virginia the following positions are held by Democrats:
Governor
1 Senator
4/5 elected offices- Secretary of State, Auditor, Treasurer, and Secretary of Agriculture

Democrats still dominate state and local offices, in part because unions are so strong.

The three Representatives are Republican. WV went for Clinton in the presidential elections of 92 & 96, and for Bush, McCain, Romney, and Trump since then.

Finger chili! Funny skit from SNL includes Trump and West Virginians:

http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/television/7752592/alec-baldwin-donald-trump

“As president, I promise, I’ll do everything I can do to make sure you people work in coal for the rest of your lives. And your kids are going to work in coal, and your grandkids, and it’s going to be incredible.”

A townsperson replies, “All we want are good jobs, they don’t have to be in coal.”

Trump disagrees. “Sorry, hombre, it’s all coal. In Trump’s America, men work in two places: coal mines and Goldman Sachs.”

Posted by: phx8 at April 9, 2017 11:11 PM
Comment #415196

Phx8, you need to stick to reality instead of SNL skits. Like I said, 2 decades back and WV was solid democrat, but not anymore. Manchin is the democrat senator that votes with republicans. The state democrats are more closely identified with republicans than they are the democrat platform.

Posted by: Blaine at April 9, 2017 11:31 PM
Comment #415212

WV Democrats have always been conservative. That is nothing new. What is important is the change occurring in suburbs across the sunbelt. Educated folks who used to vote Republican are discovering that the GOP is increasingly out of step with their personal ideology. These people look forward to a bright globalist future rather than back upon a protectionist past. Only Democrats will be able to fulfill that.

Watch what happens in Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Georgia and North Carolina over the next two years.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 10, 2017 9:19 AM
Comment #415213

Blaine,
The Democrats are a much broader coalition party. Unlike the GOP, they do not rigidly stick to an ideology, and they rarely primary Democrats that do not adhere to liberal positions. As a result, the party does include moderates, or relatively conservative candidates that once used to be considered Republican moderates. It can be a little frustrating, but as a liberal, I would rather see an inclusive party than one whose tribalism keeps propelling it further and further into the fringe and belief in conspiracy theories, with an increasingly ageing population, almost no appeal to younger people, and almost entirely white, and predominantly male.

Yes, it will occasionally win some elections, but in the long run it is a bad trend for the GOP.

Posted by: phx8 at April 10, 2017 10:17 AM
Comment #415214

Oh good grief, what planet do yo two come from?

So here we go again with Warren Porter making insinuations and when I respond, he will begin a tirade of how I’m reading things in his response that are not there. But, let’s go: Warren says the democrats of WV are conservative and that’s why they’re now republicans. He goes on ro say that educated republicans across the sunbelt have now realized, because of their education, that the Democratic Party is the way to go. Why means the conservative democrats of WV who have become republicans, did so because of ignorance. So Warren says educated people are Democratic and uneducated people are republicans. So let’s look at who the democrats cater to: inner city uneducated blacks and Hispanic immigrants who can’t even speak English. Once again we see the elitist arrogance and hypocrisy of the left through WP’s comments. Which also have a coloring of racism.

Next we see ph, who is a flat out racist. “The democrats are a much broader coalition party…and they do not rigidly stick to an ideology”. But then you go on to say the democrat party rarely primary candidates that are not liberal. These two sentences are in direct conflict with each other.

It appears ph is trying to convince himself and WP that the democrat party is inclusive of all ideas…liberal, moderate, and conservative. This is a crock, the democrats have never been inclusive. Once again the racism of ph comes out by his accusations that the Republican Party is made up of mainly white old men. Great…

But this fails to answer the question, if what you say is true; why is the extremist liberal media constantly harping on the divisions of the Republican Party? In the recent votes on Obamacare, Pelosi threatened democrats to stand together against a repeal, but republicans approached the repeal from several positions. What did the media say? That there was great division between the establishment, moderate, and conservative wings of the republicans. Another ignorant statement by ph, the democrats are in complete lockstep with party leadership.

Posted by: Blaine at April 10, 2017 10:53 AM
Comment #415217

I’m watching the great event of the swearing in of Gorsuch as Justice of the SC. This is a great moment in American history. There were a lot of people in America who were not really on board with Donald Trump, but were swayed to vote for him simply because of his list of candidates for the SC. Many of us truly believe that had Hillary been elected and been able to nominate an anti constitutional liberal justice, it would have bee the end of America as we know it. It scared the heck out of many Americans. This will be the crowning event of Trump’s presidency. Done in 100 days.

Posted by: Blaine at April 10, 2017 11:17 AM
Comment #415220

Blaine,

Maybe you should stop imagining insinuations that aren’t there?

He goes on ro say that educated republicans across the sunbelt have now realized, because of their education, that the Democratic Party is the way to go

Or maybe, the motivation for the shift in the sunbelt isn’t attributable to intelligence or education, but merely a factor of the different economic pressures on different groups of people? Americans with college degrees benefit from globalization a lot more than Americans without. People vote according to those interests.

Look, if you want to keep on assuming Republicans are a coalition of stupid, poor and ignorant racists, go head, I won’t stop you. But please, don’t project those hallucinations onto me. I’m smart enough to understand that both political parties are a tapestry of different groups rather than the simple caricatures that you like to proffer.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 10, 2017 11:48 AM
Comment #415222

Oh Warren, I certainly don’t think conservatives are ignorant or racist; but I do believe most democrats are ignorant. I’m certain you have never watched shows like “Watter’s World” or any of the “Man on the street ” show’s, where democrats (the educated college students) are asked simple questions about politics and government…needless to say, their answers show a certain lack of knowledge.

The states you listed are run by republicans; so what could possibly lead you to believe democrats are going to gain control in these states? Once again, I love how you side refuses to discuss this point, but republicans have gained over twelve hundred state and local government seats, and republicans control 46 out of 50 states. Democrats control only four states, and democrats are miraculously going to do what??? Your dreaming. Tell me Warren, what exciting reason do you have for democrats to even show up during the next election? Your not running a national candidate. The Democratic Party, contrary to ph’s belief of inclusion, is divided. Hillary didn’t have a platform to run on last November, unless you considered Trump is evil as a platform? What’s your platform this time? We don’t need a wall, more open borders, gun control, cut the military, we support BLM and violent protests, higher taxes, or if we’re elected we’ll do nothing with ISIS? I’m sorry, but I don’t think America supports this platform.

Posted by: Blaine at April 10, 2017 2:55 PM
Comment #415223
I’m certain you have never watched shows like “Watter’s World” or any of the “Man on the street ” show’s

Wrong again, Jay Leno took me and my roommate “Jaywalking” numerous times when we were in college and I’ve seen Watters’ segments on occasion. While there is great entertainment value gained from such things, these anecdotes never convey any real data. Reasonable responses end up on the cutting room floor and the nature of the interaction inhibits nuanced answers.

The states you listed are run by republicans; so what could possibly lead you to believe democrats are going to gain control in these states? Once again, I love how you side refuses to discuss this point, but republicans have gained over twelve hundred state and local government seats, and republicans control 46 out of 50 states.
Change the subject if you wish, but it doesn’t erase the facts. Republicans are deeply unpopular today outside of their base due to their overreach. The narrow results of last year’s election gave conservatives a mandate to compromise with liberals to implement moderate policies. Instead, we’ve witnessed an overreaching executive and an impotent Congress.
What’s your platform this time?

I am glad you asked. The platform is going to be one of renewal and restoration. Renew and restore our Constitution and the system of checks & balances. Renew and restore our civil rights such as the right to vote or the right to equal protection from unlawful discrimination. Renew and restore Obamacare, which now has plurality support.

Right now, America is rudderless as its Commander-in-Chief prefers to wine, dine and play golf instead of taking charge. Trump is fundamentally a “can’t do” President. He believes American workers can’t compete in a global economy which means they need a protectionist government to coddle them. He believes police can’t enforce the law without infringing on people’s rights. He believes the military can’t defend America without higher taxes or deficit spending. He believes the border with Mexico cannot be enforced without confiscating citizens’ private property on an unprecedented scale. He believes Syrian refugees cannot be vetted for resettlement in the United States. Such defeatism is pathetic and will not earn votes in November 2018.

Hillary Clinton was an anchor, weighing down the Democratic party. She repeatedly demonstrated poor judgement when handed the reins of power as a Senator and Secretary of State. She should not have been nominated and I voted against her at every opportunity. Her foibles made her an easy target for Russian propaganda and many Americans voted accordingly. But, in 2018, her name won’t be on the ballot, nor will Obama’s name be there. Instead, it will be a referendum on the 115th Congress.

Eighteen months from now, will Americans want to return Republicans to power? Not unless Congress does its job. Will Congress pass a budget that funds all the government services Americans expect from their government? Will Congress’ investigation of possible contacts between Trump’s campaign and Putin’s agents be thorough? Will Congressional oversight of Trump his family’s businesses enforce prohibitions against receiving foreign emoluments? Will Congress and Trump keep promises to reform the tax code and replace Obamacare with something better? Unless Congress’ does its job, November 2018 looks very grim for the GOP.

I’m not discounting the chance that Republicans manage to figure things out and right this ship. But I am confident that will be impossible if things stay on the current trajectory. Fulfilling Trump’s outsized campaign promises with the current trajectory of bickering and confusion isn’t going to happen.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 10, 2017 4:36 PM
Comment #415224

1) I know I commented on this thread before…Where are all my comments?

2) I think the Republicans at this point are confusing their past success with their future victories. The Republicans might not realize how badly they’ve blown it, how much that fiasco in Washington, and Trump’s various failures and betrayals (real or imagined) have taken an already marginal President and crippled him further. The fact he can’t seem to take a failure in stride, can’t seem to take the cue to be humble enough to learn his lessons, shows how much an uphill climb he has.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 10, 2017 4:52 PM
Comment #415225

If you guys keep playing identity politics, attacking the 2nd Amendment, disparaging religion, demanding higher taxes for health care, promoting division, and forcing people to embrace certain behaviors, that kind of platform will guarantee another close election.

Renew and restore our Constitution? LOL!!!

Posted by: kctim at April 10, 2017 4:56 PM
Comment #415226
I know I commented on this thread before…Where are all my comments?

Very Bizarre. Maybe AllardK or Elizabeth made a mistake when removing spam.

I think the Republicans at this point are confusing their past success with their future victories. The Republicans might not realize how badly they’ve blown it, how much that fiasco in Washington, and Trump’s various failures and betrayals (real or imagined) have taken an already marginal President and crippled him further. The fact he can’t seem to take a failure in stride, can’t seem to take the cue to be humble enough to learn his lessons, shows how much an uphill climb he has.

Exactly. Democrats succumbed to the exact same thing in 2009/2010. Now, the shoe is on the other foot.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 10, 2017 4:58 PM
Comment #415227

Oh good grief Warren; reading your latest montage is like reading the talking points of Rachel Maddox. There’s no evidence to prove any of your claims; it’s simply a wish list of the left. I hate to tell you this big boy, but everything Trump has done has been popular with the people who voted for him. Secondly, there is nothing your side can do to motivate the left to go vote. The democrats believe they don’t need the blue collar white working class to win an election. They believe blacks and Hispanics along with the east and west coast is all they need to win elections. If I’m not mistaken, there are many more democrat senators facing reelection than republicans and house seats are a virtual guaranteed reelection. And how many republican governors do we have to aid in the victories of senate and house seats?

Posted by: Blaine at April 10, 2017 5:02 PM
Comment #415228

kctim, Oh yes, Warren’s comment on the constitution is hilarious 😂, the left don’t even believe in the constitution and they want to renew and restore it??? This is trick language for rewrite it in their own image.

Posted by: Blaine at April 10, 2017 5:09 PM
Comment #415231

Courtesy of David Wasserman:

Even a single-digit finish in a seat like KS-04, with a Cook PVI score of R+15, would portend big trouble for Republicans in next week’s special primary election in GA-06, which has a PVI score of R+8. There is a real chance Democrat Jon Ossoff, who is dramatically outspending the rest of the field while the main GOP contenders turn on each other, could hit 50 percent on April 18 and avoid a runoff. As such, we are moving GA-06 to Toss Up.

We’ll have to wait and see what happens tomorrow.

A comment suggests I have no proof to back up my predictions. It’s true, I am only sharing my opinion and intuition, which could be wrong. However, the hubris emanating from the Right is simply astonishing. America’s political history is strewn with the corpses of political parties that assumed success in one election ensured success in the next.

The 2018 election will be decided by the relevant policies and issues. It will not be decided by how many state governments Republicans already control or how many Senators of one party or the other are up for reelection. Instead, it will be a referendum of our unified Republican government. Dissatisfaction with that will make voters yearn for divided government as they have many times before.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 10, 2017 6:02 PM
Comment #415238

The media and the polls had it completely wrong last fall, and they have it wrong now. When WP shares predictions, it’s called opinion. When the right shares opinions, it’s called astonishing hubris. Once again, double standards and hypocrisy.

Posted by: Blaine at April 11, 2017 8:23 AM
Comment #415240

The only job of the media and the polls is to sway public opinion to the left. They were so wrong last fall because they believed that their promoting and coddling of Obama would easily translate to the same kind of victory for Hillary. What they didn’t count on was the amount of people who reject those policies and their enthusiasm to turnout and vote against them.
Apparently, shouting sexism isn’t as effective as shouting racism, nor is attacking individual rights or forcing all people to embrace and promote the behavior of a very small minority.

Warren is right that the coming elections will be decided by the relevant policies and issues, but neither he nor the left know or even care what those policies and issues actually are.
The coming elections will be decided by President Trump’s actions on the actual policies and issues that he ran on.

Posted by: kctim at April 11, 2017 10:01 AM
Comment #415241

I don’t get it. Why are you saying the polls were wrong last fall? They were right about the general election. On election eve they projected Hillary Clinton winning by 3%. She actually won by 2%.

Posted by: phx8 at April 11, 2017 10:37 AM
Comment #415242

She didn’t win, Phx8.
The polls, media and talking-heads projected that she would win the Presidency in a landslide, she did not.

All she did was get a few million more votes in a few leftist states. That is not how you win the Presidency. That is why the polls were wrong.

Posted by: kctim at April 11, 2017 11:00 AM
Comment #415245

ph is a blooming idiot. Hillary won in the polls and won the election? This is the problem of the left, that live in an alternate universe. If Hillary had won by a single electoral vote; the left would have declared her a landslide winner with a solid mandate. Trump won the 2016 election for president of the United States. It’s history, a constitutional victory, over finis, finished. Everyone of these clowns that say they believe in the constitution and deny Trump’s win, do not believe in the constitution.

Trump enjoys a 57% approval of his decision to bomb Syria. Everything Trump promised to do, will raise him in the polls when he does it. Let’s wait and see how popular he is for putting Gorsuch in the SC. He was elected because of his promises, and because the American people believed he would fulfill his promises, unlike lying politicians.

The media had it wrong all the way to election night. Go back and watch the videos of the MSM when did dawned on them that Hillary was going to lose. It starts about 9PM and for a couple of hours the media, including FOX, were in complete panic mode. They began talking about looking for votes.

Posted by: Blaine at April 11, 2017 1:29 PM
Comment #415246

“These people look forward to a bright globalist future rather than back upon a protectionist past.”

Is Warren desiring a “one-world government”? If not, what exactly is a “globalist future”.

Frankly, the past in America has been mostly excellent, with reducing poverty, people living longer, freedom from tyranny, traditional moral values, good citizenship and a helping hand all over the world to those in need and suffering from tyrants.

Our “protectionist past” included spending our wealth and blood to free the world from the slavery of various “isms”


Posted by: Royal Flush at April 11, 2017 1:59 PM
Comment #415247

kctim & Blaine,
You both seem very confused. Hillary Clinton was ahead in the national polls by 5-6% two weeks prior to the election. That would consitute a landslide. When FBI Director Comey sent a letter announcing he was re-opening the investigation into HRC’s e-mails, her polling numbers declined. She won the popular vote. That is what polls measure. The national polls were correct. She lost the electoral college by the narrowest of margins, less than 80,000 votes spread over just three states. That means Trump won the White House.

I watched election returns and I did not sense anything remotely resembling “panic” among the media. There were spontaneous widespread protests because the majority of Americans did NOT vote for Trump, and feared what he would do.

Posted by: phx8 at April 11, 2017 3:25 PM
Comment #415248

Phx8,
The polls, media and talking-heads were projecting a Hillary Presidency, not a meaningless popular vote victory.

If you didn’t observe any fear, anxiety or unthinking behavior from the media on election night, then I don’t know which channel you were watching.

There were spontaneous widespread protests because spoiled leftists unjustifiably feared they would lose their special treatment and entitlements.

“the majority of Americans did NOT vote for Trump”

US population: 318.9 million
235,248,000 people of voting age
Around 135,719,576 voted in 2016

68,408,844 voted for ‘right wing’ candidates
67,310,732 voted for ‘left wing’ candidates

Your statement insinuates that the majority of Americans wanted Hillary as President and with that the left wing government she ran on. That is false and is nothing but desperation.

Posted by: kctim at April 11, 2017 4:16 PM
Comment #415249

kctim,
Do you really think Libertarians are right wingers? That’s funny. I have voted Libertarian in the past. And I remember Rheinhold blowing some silly right winger out of the water because they said the same thing on WB. Liberals and libertarians definitely have their differences, but they have far more in common than libertarians and conservatives. Add Johnson (Libertarian), Stein (Green), and McMullin (Independent) to HRC’s totals for a truer picture of the popular vote. The Libertarian VP candidate actually said that if people could not vote for Johnson, they should vote for Hillary Clinton rather than Trump. McMullin was vicious in his condemnations of Trump. Still is.

Posted by: phx8 at April 11, 2017 5:09 PM
Comment #415250

Following is one of the best, and most succinct, descriptions of “identity politics” I have read.

The Dark Side of Hillary Clinton’s Electoral Rationalizations

“Identity politics works like this: Progressives do everything in their power to explicitly and unequivocally stoke race- and gender-related resentments and grievances. Any pushback against identity politics is labeled denialism at best and racism or sexism at worst. Progressive ideas are so self-evidently superior that opposition is best explained as grounded in misogyny or the always-reliable “fear of change.” Opposition, even from women and even from people of color, is proof of the awful and enduring power of sexism and white supremacy.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446604/hillary-clinton-democrats-identity-politics-not-ideas-are-democrats-explanation-2016

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 11, 2017 5:32 PM
Comment #415251

AG Sessions went to the southern borders and announced what the Trump administration was going to do about illegal border crossings and drug trafficking. Once more the American people will support Trump in his crackdown. Illegal border crossings are already down.

Regarding phx8’s poll numbers…he has no idea what he’s talking about. Simply liberal media talking points.

Posted by: Blaine at April 11, 2017 5:44 PM
Comment #415252

It is not just illegal border crossings that are down. Legal ones are down too. It is called ‘The Trump Slump.’ Tourism is way down. People from other countries do not want to come here anymore, and it will cost the tourism industry over $100 million this year.

“Data released this week by travel search engine Kayak reported a 58% decline in searches for flights to Tampa and Orlando from the UK, and a 52% decline in searches for Miami. Searches for San Diego were also down 43%, Las Vegas by 36% and Los Angeles 32%.”

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/feb/28/us-tourism-experiences-a-trump-slump

(And if anyone does not like The Guardian, the same info is available on Kayak and virtually any publication associated with travel).

Posted by: phx8 at April 11, 2017 6:10 PM
Comment #415253

It seems, from reading many WB posts over many years, that we have a goodly number of political and martial thinkers and analysts among our numbers.

North Korea is making ever more threats of unleashing its military forces; including whatever nuclear capability they may have. The dynastic ruler has even threatened to hit our homeland with nukes.

Russia has sent a ship into the Middle East, and China is siding with Syria. The United States has a carrier group heading toward Korea.

Now is a great time for our pundits to make known their predictions on war, peace and/or standoff.

Unprovoked surprise attacks are distasteful to me; the memory of Pear Harbor still a raw historical memory.

Living in a false hope of peace through diplomatic negotiation with North Korea or Syria is both blind and cowardly.

What will the United States do? What should the United States do?



Posted by: Royal Flush at April 11, 2017 7:45 PM
Comment #415255

RF,
It is a good question. Sometimes there really are no good answers.

The Obama administration had it right. Stay out of Syria as much as possible. Insist no chemical weapons be used. Defeat Isis in Iraq & Syria, using American air power and Iraqi troops. Hope the Syrian Al Qaida competitor does not win. Eventually the Sunni Iraqis and Syrians will have to form their own government. This could take a generation. But as awful as they are, Isis is not an existential threat. They might manage some terrorist attacks and lone wolf attacks, but that is a problem we can handle.

As for what Trump will do with Syria… No one knows. He campaigned as an “American First” isolationist.” He also campaigned making claims he would defeat Isis in 30 days. Right now the generals are in charge.

North Korea is worse. Much worse. An erratic, unstable, unpredictable dictator has nuclear weapons and is trying to build missiles capable of reaching the US. Taking them out will take 3 months and costs perhaps 100,000 South Korean lives. Is it worth it? Will pressure on China result in enough pressure on North Korea to convince them to stop? Probably not.

Generally speaking, war is a last resort, and I don’t think we are at that point with North Korea. Yet. If they test a long range missile, then it might be time to attempt a decapitation of the regime.

Posted by: phx8 at April 11, 2017 8:28 PM
Comment #415256
Once again, double standards and hypocrisy.

My opinions are well-informed educated guesses, yours are primitive generalizations. Only time will tell which is right.

I’d like to congratulate James Thompson and his staff for a well-fought campaign. A 20 point swing in a ruby red Republican district is a difficult accomplishment indeed. However, we can’t give Thompson all the credit, he benefited enormously from widespread dissatisfaction with Donald Trump and the Republican Congress. Anyway, the result leaves the Left energized and ready to take on the next challenges in Georgia & Montana. Meanwhile, the roughly hundred Republicans hailing from districts Trump won by fewer than 20 percentage points must be quivering. Money Quote:

“At the end of the day, the national environment has to get better for us not to lose the House,” said one House GOP strategist, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “The way things are headed, we would lose the House.”

I don’t think this strategist is engaging in hubris.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 11, 2017 10:54 PM
Comment #415257

Your real trouble here is that Trump had no real agenda other than winning. He still has no clear agenda. When everything is a reaction, when it’s always a repudiation of the Republican’s Bete Noire, Barack Obama, there is no clear thought, because that might produced agreement, and agreement would destroy the fantasy of political purity.

Me? If his attack had been more effect, part of a sound shift on policy, the product of organized thinking… I could have agreed with it. Problem is, Trump did this on impulse, but that doesn’t keep it from having long term consequences.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 11, 2017 11:09 PM
Comment #415258

Warren,
Before tonight, I thought you were being overly optimistic about the chances of taking the House. After that special election in KS, suddenly the prospects look much more realistic to me. That wasn’t just any old district. That was the Koch Brothers home district. That was one of the reddest of the red districts, and the GOP won it by just 6 points. They should have won it by 20 or 30! Someone did the math, and if measured against Trump’s margins in the recent election, the Democrats would win 359 seats in the House.

Of course, there are extenuating factors- a good Democratic candidate, perhaps a weak Republican one. Also, Kansas is in a one-state, self-induced economic train wreck thanks to its Republican Governor and legislature. They drastically cut taxes, watched the deficits and debt soar, saw their debt downgraded, tried to make up the difference by trashing the budget of public education, and meanwhile, the Governor tried to refuse Obamacare Medicaid money. So Republican Kansas has suffered more at the hands of its own Republicans than most red states.

Posted by: phx8 at April 11, 2017 11:13 PM
Comment #415260
Unprovoked surprise attacks are distasteful to me; the memory of Pear Harbor still a raw historical memory.

First to clarify. Even though the Pearl Harbor attack was a gross violation of international law and norms and absolutely necessitated a retaliatory war to be fought, it was not unprovoked. In 1941, American “neutrality” consisted mainly of economic warfare waged against the Axis powers. While Britain and the USSR benefited from Lend Lease, Japan suffered under an oil embargo in July 1941. Without oil, Japan would be completely defenseless, which made the attack on Pearl Harbor imperative for their own national defense. Japan’s goal was to neutralize the American Pacific fleet, enabling Japan to seize the Philippines and open the seaway to the Dutch East Indies, where much oil could be had.

The situations in Syria and North Korea are very different from Imperial Japan. With outside support from Russia and China respectively, neither Syria nor North Korea are in any existential danger at the moment. There will no surprise attacks borne of sheer desperation because everyone (except arguably the US) is perfectly fine with the status quo. Russia & China enjoy having proxies and allies to ward off American influence near their respective territories. If Trump follows the Obama doctrine and tosses out the traditional neoconservative playbook, all should be fine.

The problem is that Trump has a high temptation to call for a presumptive strike so that he appears “tough”. Assad & Kim don’t care if the US President is “tough” or not. All they need to know is that the US will smite them if they attempt any fishy business against their respective neighbors (Israel & South Korea). Making clear our resolve to defend our allies is vital to keeping the peace.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 11, 2017 11:28 PM
Comment #415261

Phx8,

One last thing to mention regarding KS-04. National Democrats didn’t spend a dime on that race while the GOP spent loads. The massive influx of cash and attention came at the behest of an internal Republican poll that showed Estes up by just a single point. It seems like that money did it’s job and kept the seat red, but you aren’t supposed to be spending that kind of money in safe districts if the wind’s at your back as Blaine would like us to believe. The NRCC’s going to wish they still had that money when they’re competing in those sunbelt swing districts next year.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 11, 2017 11:44 PM
Comment #415264

http://kiranfertilityservices.com/

Posted by: madhu at April 12, 2017 1:04 AM
Comment #415268

“My opinions are well-informed educated guesses, yours are primitive generalizations. Only time will tell which is right.”

Oh yes, I now understand, Warren Porter’s opinions are based on his 20 some years of life and a well informed EDUCATED guess based on college time that provided safe spaces from the evil conservatives; whereas my opinions are based on the ignorant opinions of a red neck middle American who only has a lifetime (70 years) of life experiences to form primitive generalizations. Once again elitist and arrogant, you just can’t help yourself can you Warren? Do you have the slightest idea what your comments sound like?

So in Kansas, we have an immediate fulfillment of Rush Limbaugh’s prediction of yesterday. That if the republican didn’t win by at least 30 points, it would be a victory for the democrats. I wonder if that was a well educated guess or a primitive prediction?

Only in the mind of a democrat could a loss by almost 10 points be considered a victory. The Democratic Party threw everything they had at this district, millions of dollars and advertisements. Not to mention the democrat was running on a conservative republican ticket. Advertisements with the candidate target shooting with an AR-15 and more, but in the end he was nothing but another liberal who would have thrown his complete support behind the agenda of pelosi.

The American people, in their primitive way, are watching the democrats meltdown as they attack every aspect of President Trump; from attacking every person who works for him, attacking his family, to filibustering every single thing he tries to pass through congress. But I guess elitist like Warren think the middle Americans are just too stupid to recognize this obstructionism.

Posted by: Blaine at April 12, 2017 7:43 AM
Comment #415271

Phx8,

Today’s liberals are nothing like the classic liberals of the past and I get a good chuckle every time they try to make that claim.

Left wing government demands that the desires of society be placed before the rights of the individual, and requires a strong centralized government to do so. Libertarians “strongly oppose any government interference into their personal, family, and business decisions.”
That makes you polar opposites, and the rare agreement on a wedge issue does not change that.

Perhaps you need to read up some: https://www.lp.org/platform/

Now, I would be the last person to try and claim that Conservatives aren’t also guilty of straying from the Constitution, but they don’t do it to the extent that leftists do.

There is no doubt that Libertarians are to the right of everybody else that count. I have heard Libertarians state that they are not liberals or Conservatives, but not ‘right wing?’

“Add Johnson (Libertarian), Stein (Green), and McMullin (Independent) to HRC’s totals for a truer picture of the popular vote.”

You’re in la la land, my friend.
Clinton has nothing in common with Libertarians and McMullin specifically ran against Hillary Clinton’s ‘liberalism.’ They ran against Trump, not ‘right wing’ policy. To use their votes as some kind of validation for HRC and her far-left policy is ridiculous.

Posted by: kctim at April 12, 2017 9:28 AM
Comment #415272

KS-04

https://ballotpedia.org/Kansas%27_4th_Congressional_District

Posted by: kctim at April 12, 2017 10:01 AM
Comment #415273

One of these days, Trump will break Twitter by piling too many lies in one tweet:

“Great win in Kansas last night for Ron Estes, easily winning the Congressional race against the Dems, who spent heavily & predicted victory!”

1. That win was anything but easy for the GOP. They were forced to devote money and time to a race that should have been a walk over. Trump & Pence campaigned with robo-calls and Cruz held a rally.

2. The Democrats did NOT spend heavily. National organizations for the Democrats barely even participated.

3. Predicted victory? Democrats predicted it was a long shot, at best.

This election raised a lot of eyebrows. Part of the reason it turned out to be close is that Estes was a weak candidate. Another reason is that the GOP is not very popular in KS anymore is because they harmed the economy with bad conservative policies. But Trump won this district by 27 points. Now a Republican in KANSAS wins by 7! All those low approval numbers and disastrous failures to pass legislation are taking their toll.

Blaine,
“The Democratic Party threw everything they had at this district, millions of dollars and advertisements.”

That is false. The largest contributor was a liberal community organizing site, and they delivered $160,000.

You accuse Democrats of “filibustering” everything. That is false. The Democrats filibustered Gorsuch. That’s about it.

Posted by: phx8 at April 12, 2017 10:20 AM
Comment #415274

kctim,

Now, I would be the last person to try and claim that Conservatives aren’t also guilty of straying from the Constitution, but they don’t do it to the extent that leftists do.

That is where you are wrong. I read the libertarian platform and find 90% to my liking. You don’t understand the Left. Saying that the Left, “demands that the desires of society be placed before the rights of the individual, and requires a strong centralized government to do so” simply isn’t true, at least for this country. In fact, in the United States, demanding societal desires be placed before the rights of individuals is a tenet of conservatism, not liberalism. This is how we get laws empowering discrimination against all sorts of minorities (Homosexuals, Transgender, People of Color, Religious minorities, etc).

The only key difference between libertarians and liberals is the recognition by the Left that private interests are just as capable of violating individual rights as the government. Power needs to be balanced between private and government interests to ensure that neither wields too much control. Likewise, the only key similarity between libertarians and conservatives is antipathy to taxes and gun control.

There is no doubt that Libertarians are to the right of everybody else that count.
No. Libertarians are to the LEFT of everybody else. Liberalism is about the freedom to choose how to live one’s own life, which is also what libertarians want too. Liberals and libertarians might squabble over the best way to empower people to live their own lives as they wish, but both ideologies pale in comparison to the concentration of power preferred by conservatism.
They ran against Trump, not ‘right wing’ policy
Trump is the very embodiment of the Right. If it weren’t for the emergence of Trump’s rightism, McMullin would never have ran & Johnson would have been as ineffectual as he was in 2012.

Blaine,

Oh yes, I now understand, Warren Porter’s opinions are based on his 20 some years of life and a well informed EDUCATED guess based on college time that provided safe spaces from the evil conservatives; whereas my opinions are based on the ignorant opinions of a red neck middle American who only has a lifetime (70 years) of life experiences to form primitive generalizations. Once again elitist and arrogant, you just can’t help yourself can you Warren? Do you have the slightest idea what your comments sound like?

Way to be an elitist Blaine, now you are saying that you think it’s impossible to make an educated guess without a college education. That’s going to go over real well with swing voters in the Midwest.

Meanwhile, I am going to stick with my original position. Every American is capable of making educated guesses if they are willing to remove their heads from partisan echo chambers, inform themselves and put some thought into what they are saying. Formal schooling does not factor if one is a motivated autodidact.

So in Kansas, we have an immediate fulfillment of Rush Limbaugh’s prediction of yesterday. That if the republican didn’t win by at least 30 points, it would be a victory for the democrats. I wonder if that was a well educated guess or a primitive prediction?
Apples and Oranges, my friend. Predicting that the sun will rise tomorrow is hardly in the same league of the sort of forecasting we are talking about. It does not take any sort of insight to know that Democrats would celebrate a close finish in KS-04. The question is, did Limbaugh see any of this coming back in March when this was off many people’s radar?
Only in the mind of a democrat could a loss by almost 10 points be considered a victory.
Actually, it was 6.8 percentage points. And as Royal Flush reminded me a while back, I shouldn’t call a 76 year old an octogenarian, lest I cause offense. (How he voted for JFK in 1960 despite being less than 21 years old is a story for another day). I don’t think the situation will change in 6 months when he is 76.8 years old either.
The Democratic Party threw everything they had at this district, millions of dollars and advertisements.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. The DCCC contributed not a single cent to Thompson’s advertising budget. The ONLY expenditure was a last minute phone bank effort. Republicans wasted millions of dollars on a safe seat, putting them at a disadvantage when more competitive races take place next year.
Advertisements with the candidate target shooting with an AR-15
…in the context of his military service.
in the end he was nothing but another liberal who would have thrown his complete support behind the agenda of pelosi.
So which is it? Was this guy running as a conservative Republican or a liberal Democrat? Sounds like the latter to me, and it is amazing that 45% of people in greater Wichita were willing to vote for someone who supports Pelosi’s agenda. That kind of support for liberalism hasn’t been expressed in that part of the country in ages. There certainly isn’t any precedent for this in my lifetime.
The American people, in their primitive way, are watching the democrats meltdown as they attack every aspect of President Trump; from attacking every person who works for him, attacking his family, to filibustering every single thing he tries to pass through congress. But I guess elitist like Warren think the middle Americans are just too stupid to recognize this obstructionism.

I think Americans are more sophisticated than the primitivism you attribute to them. They see right through the bullshit proffered by the Right. Paul Ryan and company have spent years lying about how Washington would function much better, if only they had single party control. Now, we see our Republican emperors have no clothes as both Trump and Ryan deal with various ‘growing pains’. Republicans still have time to right the ship and win reelection next year, but Americans are running out of patience. All I can say is that I’d be awfully scared right now if I was a Republican. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 12, 2017 10:50 AM
Comment #415275

Like I said, the democrats threw everything the had against Estes; and their goal is to block everything Trump tries to accomplish. Obama was a weakling, a coward; he sat back as the evil leadership in the world walked all over him. We now have a patriotic president who will not draw imaginary lines in the sand. We now have a strong AG who is going to put a stop to criminal illegals flooding across the border. I know the left absolutely hates Trump and will do anything to deny his presidency, but Trump got more than the votes of Americans. The last week before the election, there were thousands of prayer vigils taking place across America. I know the left hates to hear the name of God invoked, but Christian Americans believed Hillary, while carrying on the Obama agenda, would have brought about the demise of our beloved country. I have no doubt that what we saw on that fateful Tuesday in November was the hand of God intervening in our nation.

Posted by: Blaine at April 12, 2017 10:56 AM
Comment #415276

Warren, I’m sure we could archive your comments, but you and Stephen are always the first to bring up “educated”. In the past few weeks you have invoked “education ” many times. Is there a reason for this? And best of all, you relate educated with the left and primitive with the right.

Posted by: Blaine at April 12, 2017 11:06 AM
Comment #415278

Warren,

Our nation was founded on the principles of limited government and individual rights. The policies of today’s left demand that individual rights be infringed upon in order to achieve their ideas of a better society. Those policies require a large powerful centralized government to enact and enforce those policies on the state level.
By today’s definitions, the more government and fewer individual rights you advocate, the further left you go on the scale.

“Saying that the Left, “demands that the desires of society be placed before the rights of the individual, and requires a strong centralized government to do so” simply isn’t true”

Government mandates are put in place to satisfy the desires of society. Mandates infringe upon freedom of choice and require government enforcement in order to be effective.

“demanding societal desires be placed before the rights of individuals is a tenet of conservatism, not liberalism.”

Complete and utter nonsense.
Today’s liberalism specifically targets individual rights in order to compensate for the lack of personal responsibility.

“This is how we get laws empowering discrimination”

No, we get laws like that by giving government the power to make such laws in the first place. When you give government that power, you give it the power to define and regulate.

“The only key difference between libertarians and liberals is the recognition by the Left that private interests are just as capable of violating individual rights as the government.”

Only? LOL.
While there is indeed a difference between the Libertarians wanting smart limited regulation of private interests, and liberals wanting heavy regulation, it’s individual ‘interests’ where you fail miserably.
Personal responsibility, limited government, prioritizing the rights of some but not others, the right of all to live in whatever manner they choose, a free market in education, health care, gun ownership etc…

“the only key similarity between libertarians and conservatives is antipathy to taxes and gun control.”

In other words, personal responsibility and individual rights.

“Trump is the very embodiment of the Right.”

Not even close to it, and those on the right are going to find that out the hard way soon enough.
McMullin ran and Johnson did better, because Trump is not a true Conservative and their voters knew Trump was saying what it took to get votes.

Posted by: kctim at April 12, 2017 12:15 PM
Comment #415279
Is there a reason for this?

I don’t know if Stephen and I refer to education at the rate you suggest or if you are just suffering from apophenia. If you are right, I’d blame the constant barrage of uneducated and uninformed comments authored by Watchblog Conservatives.

Formal education counts for very little when it comes to politics, unfortunately. Becoming an intelligent voter requires a large degree of self-motivated learning. Formal education can provide the tools to make such autodidacticism easier, but it is by no means the only such route.

Of course, a key exception occurs when dealing with areas of expertise. Because I have advanced training in both Statistics and Meteorology, my ideas about issues like global warming are going to be far more informed than those of an ordinary American. Knowing these things isn’t just a hobby for me, it’s MY JOB. But the same can be said for other occupations as well. A few courses in chemistry and physics might give me a clue about how welding works, but an actual welder is going to be far more informed than I in this regard.

I do consider myself to be an intelligent, well-informed voter, but I am quite certain that this is incidental to my status as a doctoral student in the physical sciences. It has much more to do with my participation on Watchblog and the resulting exposure to diverse opinions. Indeed, I have many colleagues who do not care about politics. They make primitive predictions and faulty generalizations just as you do despite wielding advanced degress. I say this, even though they are ‘liberal’ and might agree with me on many policies. It’s just how they decide to live their lives, thinking about politics isn’t a priority for them so they’ve outsourced their thinking to someone else. The same happens on the right too (you are a poster boy in this regard).

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 12, 2017 12:23 PM
Comment #415281

Blaine-
You can speak for God if you like but here’s the truth: he hears you, but he makes up his own mind, and sometimes when he says yes to a prayer, it’s in the knowledge that you will suffer for getting what you want, and should suffer.

Maybe he saw no better way to break the haughtiness and prideful sin of the GOP than to let it follow the King Saul they’d raised up.

People forget that things were not always good for Israel, despite the people’s chosen status. Sometimes being chosen means you’re held to a higher standard, rather than allowed to slouch down and behave with mediocrity-tinged complacency. They had maybe two good kings, David and Solomon, but most of the rest were crap, so much so that Palestine didn’t even remain in one piece.

You forget the Prophets, forget the words of the man himself. Maybe he’s trying to get you to realize that your people aren’t to hold themselves greater than others, but deal with them as more humbled equals.

The Lord has many ways of breaking those who think themselves above reproach, above accountability. Try taking the beam out of your eye before you take the mote from ours.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 12, 2017 2:08 PM
Comment #415282

Stephen, I did see a picture of you on a website a few years ago. I never saw a “note” in your eye, but you did look like a girly guy. You and Warren are so easy; your arrogance because of superior intelligence demands that you throw in your two cents worth. I’ve read your comments of your superior knowledge of religion before. Your talk means nothing, and why…because just as you don’t accept the constitution as written, you also don’t believe the Bible. How can you tell me what the Bible says, when you don’t believe it’s God’s word?

Regarding Warren’s comments; Warren, you honestly feel yourself far above the masses of common people, don’t you? There are a majority of Americans who believe GW is a fraud. It’s not true, the data has been proven to be false. Any scientist who disagrees with the liberal view of GW is blackballed. Yet, no matter what evidence comes out, you are so arrogant as to believe your right and everyone else is just plain stupid. Let me ask, who stands to get rich off of GW? Follow the money. How many fraudulent green energy companies got millions from Obama and then went belly up? Dozens of fraudulent companies supported by Obama and given tax dollars.

Posted by: Blaine at April 12, 2017 2:37 PM
Comment #415283

68% of Americans believe Global Warming is caused by humans, and 62% believe it is already occurring

http://www.gallup.com/poll/206030/global-warming-concern-three-decade-high.aspx

Posted by: phx8 at April 12, 2017 3:18 PM
Comment #415284

Ph, your poll results are based upon faulty data. If the only information the public receives from the fake news media regarding GW is from pro GW scientists, then the publics beliefs are going to be slanted toward GW. The same polls that had Hillary with a sweeping victory in November, are the same polls trying to convince us of man made GW. And you think we should believe them.

I missed your answer as to who stands to get rich through the lie of GW? I also missed you comments about Obama sinking hundreds of millions of US tax dollars into green energy that completely failed.

Posted by: Blaine at April 12, 2017 4:35 PM
Comment #415285

“If Trump follows the Obama doctrine and tosses out the traditional neoconservative playbook, all should be fine.”

Some, such as Warren, would apparently follow Obama into Hell. I have no idea what the Obama doctrine was for North Korea. His Syrian doctrine involved trusting the untrustworthy and looking away from facts on the ground.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 12, 2017 4:54 PM
Comment #415286

The Obama doctrine is simple to understand; America is at fault, America has stolen the world’s resources, America is evil, Obama will lead from behind, Obama will cut the military.

Posted by: Blaine at April 12, 2017 5:18 PM
Comment #415287

Regarding the ecstatic comments by my Lefty Pals on the slim win in Kansas by Republican Estes; I would remind them of the Republican candidate winning the special election Senate seat in Massachusetts. Was that truly representative of huge political change?

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 12, 2017 5:21 PM
Comment #415288

Here’s an eye-opening story coming out of “official China”. I will not attempt to spin or parse the article. I will say that President Trump appears determined to end the game North Korea has been playing. Perhaps he has convinced China to help.

“With everyone putting down new and/or revised “red lines”, be it on Syria or North Korea, it was now China’s turn to reveal its “red” or rather “bottom line”, and in a harshly worded editorial titled “The United States Must Not Choose a Wrong Direction to Break the DPRK Nuclear Deadlock on Wednesday” Beijing warned it would attack North Korea’s facilities producing nuclear bombs, effectively engaging in an act of war, if North Korea crosses China’s “bottom line.”

The editorial in the military-focused Global Times tabloid, owned and operated by the Communist Party’s People’s Daily newspaper, said that North Korea’s nuclear activities must not jeopardize northeastern China, and that if the North impacts China with its illicit nuclear tests through either “nuclear leakage or pollution”, then China will respond with force.

China may be just waiting for Trump to “decapitate” the North Korean regime, to pounce and immediately fill the power vacuum.”

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-11/china-threatens-bomb-north-koreas-nuclear-facilities-if-it-crosses-beijings-bottom-l

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 12, 2017 5:32 PM
Comment #415290
I would remind them of the Republican candidate winning the special election Senate seat in Massachusetts. Was that truly representative of huge political change?

If Martha Coakley had run a better campaign, she might’ve eeked out a narrow win, but it is true that dissatisfaction with the Democratic party served as an anchor around the neck of any Democrat running in that race. Scott Brown’s win definitely foreshadowed the GOP’s sweep of Congress later that year.

I have no idea what the Obama doctrine was for North Korea. His Syrian doctrine involved trusting the untrustworthy and looking away from facts on the ground.

Read Jeffrey Goldberg’s interview with Obama for The Atlantic from last year.

Regarding China and North Korea, the breakdown in the relationship between the two nations is nothing new. China is very frustrated with the antics in North Korea. Only the fear of American troops stationed along the Yalu river keeps the PLA at bay. If an opportunity to replace the current North Korean government with different leadership more closely aligned to Chinese interests ever presented itself, China would undoubtedly seize the opportunity. Donald Trump is a non-factor in any of these calculations.

Blaine,
Instead of engaging me on facts or policy, you’ve chosen to take the low road, attacking Stephen on the basis of his appearance and attacking me for taking the time to develop expertise in a scientific field. Responding to such remarks in detail isn’t worth my time. Show me an indication that you are curious and willing to learn something new, and maybe I’ll teach you something. Until then, I have better things to do. 😉

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 12, 2017 7:25 PM
Comment #415291

“Only the fear of American troops stationed along the Yalu river keeps the PLA at bay.”

True Warren, and fear of the collapse of North Korea might find millions of the 25 million North Koreans flooding over the Chinese border causing great unrest.

“Donald Trump is a non-factor in any of these calculations.”

Warren, you have such a narrow view of world events which is most likely due to political myopia and bias against any accomplishment not attributable to Democrats.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 12, 2017 7:51 PM
Comment #415292
fear of the collapse of North Korea might find millions of the 25 million North Koreans flooding over the Chinese border causing great unrest.

Absolutely.

Warren, you have such a narrow view of world events which is most likely due to political myopia and bias against any accomplishment not attributable to Democrats.

The Chinese don’t think much of Donald Trump. This much is clear, evident with how easily they manipulated him into adopting the one-china policy despite his capricious announcement after the phone call with Tsai Ing-wen last December. All it took was granting a few patents and trademarks to the Trump Organization, if I recall. To be honest, I was wrong to say Trump was a non-factor earlier. He has decidedly made things worse for the United States. China won big time when the TPP agreement was scuttled, weakening US relations with Vietnam and a whole host of nations that would’ve been our allies in these Chess matches.

Read This.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 12, 2017 9:06 PM
Comment #415304

My Pal Warren appears to believe that the Chinese liking a president would solve the problem with North Korea. Really? Sure didn’t happen with Clinton, Bush II or Obama. Which of these Warren, did the Chinese think much of, and what was the benefit?

TPP was scuttled appropriately as it was not neutral in its trade policies. We can not, and must not; be bribed into unfair trade which harms American companies and workers.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 13, 2017 3:40 PM
Comment #415305

P.S. Warren, I read the link you posted. It was interesting but nothing new was revealed. It was simply someones “what-ifs” presented with a political spin.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 13, 2017 3:50 PM
Comment #415316
My Pal Warren appears to believe that the Chinese liking a president would solve the problem with North Korea. Really? Sure didn’t happen with Clinton, Bush II or Obama. Which of these Warren, did the Chinese think much of, and what was the benefit?

‘Liking’ has nothing to do with it. China pursues its own interests without thinking much of any US President.

TPP was scuttled appropriately as it was not neutral in its trade policies. We can not, and must not; be bribed into unfair trade which harms American companies and workers.

So much for the free market… bit of a shame that conservatives like you are now basically advocating for wealth redistribution. Raising prices for American consumers and channelling that money to prized special interests will only work as long as you don’t run out of other people’s money.

Anyway, the aforementioned geostrategic benefits of trade are significant. Growing American soft power around the Pacific rim is vital to maintaining America’s global hegemony despite China’s current trajectory.

Posted by: Warren Porter at April 14, 2017 6:29 AM
Comment #415328

The dollar is strong. It is strong because the US economy is strong, especially compared to other countries. The US is virtually the only major industrialized country raising its interest rates because the economy is strong. And because the US economy is strong and the dollar keeps rising against other currencies, US imports become more expensive in other countries, and exports in the US are cheaper. This means tariffs are not going to happen. This means the opposition to trade agreements was based on a series of false premises. Trump is just now figuring this out.

The US is shouldering the world economy, and it is a burden and it slows us a little, but we have been doing it successfully for years. Trade agreements will happen, and they will be nearly identical to TPP, but Trump will simply rename it and proclaim himself a great negotiator.

Trump used to say he would label China a currency manipulator on day one. Now he says China is not a currency manipulator. Trump is finally getting the concept that the dollar is strong, and that trade imbalances have nothing to do with currency manipulation.

I suppose the good news is that Trump is listening to people who know what they are talking about, because Trump has no real ideological foundation for his beliefs. Reality has a liberal bias, and Trump is running face first into reality on an almost daily basis.

The bad news is that people who did not know what they were talking about voted for Trump in the first place, and now Trump is punting them. Trump has reversed himself on most of his major positions, and the few he still seems to hold have no chance of being approved.


Posted by: phx8 at April 14, 2017 12:36 PM
Post a comment