Saturday, July 23, 2016

Stewart to Trump voting Republicans, "This country isn't yours, you don't own it, there is no 'real America!'"

The Daily Show's Jon Stewart said what should have been said a decade ago, so we wouldn't have had to listen to every self-righteous entitled whiner demand their big government leader Trump solve all of their problems for them:
Stewart: "You feel you're this countries rightful owners. There's only one problem with that, this country isn't yours, you don't own it, it never was, there is no 'real America.' You don't own it.

You don't own patriotism. You don't own Christianity.  You sure as hell don't own respect for the bravery and sacrifice of military, police and firefighters. Trust me, I saw a lot of people on the convention floor in Cleveland, with their Blue Lives Matter rhetoric who either remained silent or actively fought against the 9/11 First Responders Bill re-authorization. I see you and I see your bullshit."

Friday, July 22, 2016

Walker appoints inexperienced Bigot and Racist to Supreme Court: Against Gay Marriage and Affirmative Action is Slavery.

Republicans have put “originalism” on their platforms list of judicial qualifications, a belief straight out of America’s biggest conservative think tanks, including the radical Federalist Society.

So who’s going to be the first sucker who’ll buy into Scott Walker’s amazing appointment to the Supreme Court. JS:
No Experience Walker Pick!!!
Gov. Scott Walker on Friday named a little-known Waukesha lawyer with no judicial experience to the state Supreme Court, putting Daniel Kelly on the bench and keeping in place the high court's 5-2 conservative majority.
And how else would you apply for a job you didn’t have any experience doing?
Kelly, 52, initially applied for the appointment in secret.
And of course, being a right wing bigot, racist, and secret applicant seeking a spot on the state’s supreme court, it's obvious he would never let his feelings impact his decisions.  
"The primary and only job of a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice is to apply the law as it is written and the oath that I will take will guarantee to you that my personal political beliefs and political philosophy will have no impact on that whatsoever. Those things simply have no place inside the courtroom."
Especially if you think anything like Kelly. He would have you believe a guy with the following issues could be impartial. Check out this verbose and pompous master of word salad elitism. Stunning:
A 2014 book chapter in which he wrote same-sex marriage would rob marriage of any meaning … 

"Affirmative action and slavery differ, obviously, in significant ways," Kelly wrote. "But it's more a question of degree than principle, for they both spring from the same taproot. Neither can exist without the foundational principle that it is acceptable to force someone into an unwanted economic relationship. Morally, and as a matter of law, they are the same."
You'd have to be an idiot or a Republican voter to not think something was terribly wrong.

Kelly isn’t even close to impartial, because he’s fulfilling an agenda. And get this, he's not just a member, but president of...:
....the Milwaukee chapter of the Federalist Society … a group of conservative and libertarian attorneys who promote a specific judicial and legal approach. According to its website, this entails: “Reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values and the rule of law.
Oh, there's more...he's part of the right wing lawsuit mill Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty.

On affirmative action? No surprise here...:
'I believe that there is a moral and constitutional equivalence between laws designed to subjugate a race and those that distribute benefits on the basis of race in order to foster some current notion of equality.' Although the intent of affirmative action programs may be to benefit select minorities, they can and often do have the opposite effect. When the use of coercion comes unmoored from the Equality Imperative, there is nothing to prevent it from unwittingly damaging those it was meant to assist." 
And on marriage and that imagined "equal protection" under the law. thing..
"So what happens in a throw-down between the traditional institution of marriage and one reimagined primarily in terms of fairness? A recent case before the United States Supreme Court shows it’s a monumental mismatch: the multimillennial institution went down without landing a punch. The case was United States v. Windsor, and the question before the Court was whether our federal governors may define marriage as something subsisting between one man and one woman. In saying 'no,' the Court illuminated the power and destructiveness of 'justice as fairness' in the legal realm."

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

Trump tosses First Amendment, threatens "Art of the Deal" writer with Cease and Desist for speaking out against him.

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow broke the news that Trump's not too happy about the 1st Amendment free speech rights of Art of the Deal ghost writer Tony Schwartz, and is legally issuing a cease and desist letter trying to stop him from telling the truth about the real Trump.

New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer is posting the story soon, but if you can't wait, here's an incredible preview:

Trump campaign won't admit truth, Plagiarized GOP enemy Michelle Obama's speech. Who's lying Now?

So, it was plagiarized.

Melania Trump may not be running for office, but her role in the presidential campaign is important, especially to Donald Trump. What his campaign does is therefore important and a reflection of what a Trump presidency might be like in office. Lying and stealing just got a pass by Republican voters.

Plagiarism is a big deal to the right wing, who have made it their business to remind every Democrat of the time they lifted comments without attribution. Scott Walker trashed his Democratic opponent Mary Burke for supposed plagiarism when the person writing her jobs plan copied his own previous work.

Walker: “She’s not the candidate, so I’ll give her deference and let them explain staff or otherwise. Donald Trump is the candidate."

Eric Trump claims Time Travel: My head hurts now....

Stolen Passages: Imagine Melania giving attribution to Michelle Obama at the convention. Not happening. Melania's speech turned up 23 matches according to "TurnitIn." Only 16 are needed to create the likelihood that a match is coincidental is less than 1 in a trillion. Yikes.

But now we know Michelle Obama was a major influence to Melania, word for word. Politico:
The Trump campaign emails: "Meredith McIver, an in-house staff writer from the Trump Organization, has released a statement ... McIver's statement, which says the Trump family "rejected" her offer (to resign) ...

The statement reads: "My name is Meredith McIver and I’m an in-house staff writer ... "In working with Melania Trump on her recent First Lady speech, we discussed many people who inspired her ... A person she has always liked is Michelle Obama. "Over the phone, she read me some passages from Mrs. Obama's speech as examples. I wrote them down and later included some of the phrasing in the draft that ultimately became the final speech. I did not check Mrs. Obama's speeches. That was my mistake, and I feel terrible for the chaos I have caused Melania and the Trumps, as well as to Mrs. Obama. No harm was meant. Mr. Trump told me that people make innocent mistakes and that we learn and grow from these experiences.
But the Trump campaign's cover up just made it worse, showing voters how a little rephrasing can avoid ever taking any responsibility.
CNN’s Chris Cuomo grilled Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort aboutthe undeniable plagiarism in Melania Trump’s RNC speech. But instead of simply acknowledging that part of Melania’s speech was lifted from Michelle Obama and moving on, Manafort repeatedly refused to admit any impropriety had occurred.

“As far as we’re concerned, there are similar words that were used. But the feelings of those words and the commonality of those words do not create a situation where we feel we have to agree [that plagiarism occurred]. You want to have that opinion, fine.”

GOP Conventions Tuesday Night focus on "Jobs & Economy"...a no-show!

The "Jobs and the Economy" Tuesday night convention topic was missing, replaced with "Hillary for Prison." Twitter helped explain that phenomenon:

While Gov. Mike Pence brags about his states 4.7% unemployment rate, he wants you to think Indiana's economy is separate from anything President Obama's has done. The same goes for Scott Walker:

Save America from another 4 years of Obama's Socialism? The doom & gloom GOP convention is etching in stone the horrors of Obama's job killing agenda, forgetting a few important items: 

Oh, and that $16 trillion Obama debt...

GOP Rep. Sean Duffy exaggerates role of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton on federal debt: The total federal debt is at $19 trillion. But most of it was amassed before Obama took office. And many factors -- Congress, the economy and Obama himself, but to almost no extent Clinton -- played a role in the debt increases during Obama’s tenure.

Hillary wants to revise the First Amendment? Outrageous!

Throwing political opponents like Hillary Clinton in jail sounds so...banana Republican, doesn't it?

Sadly, they mean to do just that, and see nothing disturbing about it. Donald Trump Jr. received media praise for a powerful speech that perpetuated a list of absolute nonsense and lies that were disproved by his own party's congressional investigations, and no one cared.

The next logical step for Republicans?

Republicans have been "framing" the issues in same way the tabloids have doing for years, with sensationalized eye candy like...

The Wall Street Journal has mastered the art of propagandist headlines that are meant to alarm its readers, like the one below:

Clinton to Madison: Get Me Rewrite

She tells Sanders voters that she’ll revise the First Amendment.

How dare she. The article is actually about Hillary Clinton's promise to take money out of politics, by proposing an Amendment to the Constitution that would overturn Citizens United. 

Voters won't like that...right? It's obvious who the WSJ is trying to reach with this one, but it sure isn't the American public, as you can see by the results from the conservative pollster Rasmussen Reports: 
Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey (July ’15) found that 59% of voters think most members of Congress are willing to sell their vote for either cash or a campaign contribution, and 56% think it’s likely their own representative has already done so. That includes 26% who think it’s Very Likely their representative has sold his or her vote. 

76% of Likely U.S. Voters (Feb. '16) believe the wealthiest individuals and companies have too much influence over elections,

80% agree that wealthy special interest groups have too much power and influence over elections. 
So as horrible as "revising the First Amendment" sounds, Americans are with Hillary and Bernie. 

Sure both party's take lots of money to fund their campaigns, but only one wants to take that same money out, and it sure ain't the Republicans. Even more surreal, their down and out small town middle American voters want to oddly, elect a millionaire. You can't make this stuff up.

What we're not seeing is the WSJ opposing a proposed revision in the new Republican platform:
“We do not accept the Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage and we urge its reversal, whether through judicial reconsideration or a constitutional amendment returning control over marriage to the states,” the platform reads.
That's a good revision.

I'm surprised Trump missed this one. After all, it could be true:

Tuesday, July 19, 2016

Sheriff Clarke on law abiding Black Lives Matter members openly carrying guns: "...those are the people I fear most. I do not fear law abiding gun owners."

The Republican talk of the "Blue Lives Matter" movement, begs the question; what about our lives mattering? That's the argument conservatives were making about "Black Lives Matter." No consistency, no "pricibles."

The Scalia misinterpret the 2nd Amendment started all of this, and we're now seeing the inevitable results and quick unraveling of what used to be a civil society. The overreach of gun drooling anti-government conservatives has given us a kind of freedom and liberty loving chaos.

Desperate to blame someone else for the now out of control gun carnage, and not the elimination of gun laws, Republicans focused in on one video of marchers chanting "What do we want? Dead Cops! When do we want it? Now." Republicans blamed Black Lives Matter and Millions March NYC. Wrong again:
The New York chapter of the Trayvon Martin Organizing Committee (TMOC), who were unauthorized by the Martin family to use Trayvon's name or likeness, were the sole faction of marchers using the chant.
But does that matter to Fox News' Sean Hannity and "purveyor of hate" Sheriff David Clarke? Nope.
Clarke: "Look, Black Lives Matter is a...they're purveyors of hate. It is a hateful, violent ideology. It's not an organization. It is not a movement, it is an ideology I said has to wiped off the face of the earth." 
So says the 1st and 2nd Amendment freedom fighter. Even worse, Clarke is afraid of Black Lives Matter group members carrying guns. I'm having Black Panther Party flashbacks now.
Hannity: "Ohio has an open carry law. Black Lives Matter, the new Black Panther Party, they have said they're going to be carrying guns sheriff. What do we do?"

Sheriff Clarke: "Well I'll tell you what, those are the people I fear most. I do not fear the law abiding gun owner."
Like the Cliven Bundy's of the new West? Geraldo Rivera pointed out the obvious:
"The problem with the 2nd Amendment for everybody is that are plenty of dysfunctional people...I don't want Black Panther Party members carrying weapons, I don't want patriot party members carrying weapons..."

Cleveland Police Detective Steve Loomis blamed President Obama, I guess because he's black, for saying we do have a race problem, even in law enforcement. Oh wait, we're not supposed to say that:

If guns make us so much safer, then why did the Cleveland Police Union ask open carry be suspended during the Republican convention?
“We are sending a letter to Gov. Kasich requesting assistance from him. He could very easily do some kind of executive order or something — I don’t care if it’s constitutional or not at this point,” Cleveland Police Union president Stephen Loomis told CNN.

(Loomis also blamed Obama for those shootings, saying he had “blood on his hands.”)In general Republicans argue that open-carry laws are an important party of the right to bear arms and improve public safety. The research does not support this argument.

Trump "and his two eunuchs...Paul Ryan and Reince Priebus."

Wisconsin's political embarrassment is comedy gold:

Republican not being racist again....

Sadly, Chris Hayes didn't let either of his guests react to Rep. Steve King's jaw dropping white supremacist lecture on history. After columnist Charlie Pierce mentioned the "wired...unhappy dissatisfied crowd of white people" at the convention, King chimed in.

Esquire: Here's what King said tonight about white people and, you know, non-whites:
"This whole white people business, though, does get a little tired…I'd ask you to go back through history and figure out: Where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you're talking about? Where did any other sub-group of people contribute more to civilization?"

King just came out with a clarification...something he felt he had to do?
"It’s pretty close [to what I said]. What I really said was 'Western civilization' and when you describe Western civilization that can mean much of Western civilization happens to be Caucasians. But we should not apologize for our culture or our civilization."  
Sure, that's what he said originally.

Scott Baio makes a fool of himself...again!!!

MSNBC host Tamara Hall proved tough journalism is the Republican Party's real enemy.

Armed with the facts, Hall held celebrity right wing big mouth Scott Baio's feet to the fire for misogynistic tweets and flaming hypocrisy. If only the media would do this to our actual politicians.

I normally don't post stuff like this, but this was too much fun to miss. It starts with reality show star Antonio Sabato saying "if you understand Obama...I mean that's not a Christian name is it?" It quickly goes downhill from there:

Baio bashed Obama for rephrasing an old saying used in self defense classes, described this way in the Wall Street Journal:
Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans" ... John McCain’s campaign immediately accused the Democratic candidate of playing the politics of fear.
Yes, Baio and other right wingers interpreted that as a threat. In context, not so much:
Obama made the comment in the context of warning donors that the general election campaign against McCain could get ugly. “They’re going to try to scare people. They’re going to try to say that ‘that Obama is a scary guy,’” he said. A supporter yelled out a deep accented “Don’t give in!”

“I won’t but that sounded pretty scary. You’re a tough guy,” Obama said.

Trump's Careless Plagiarism Denied!!!

More dangerous than the outright plagiarism running rampant in the Republican Party, is the media's promise to make this whole story go away. It's like they can't wait to move on to something else. Reporter after reporter and radio news reports are repeatedly saying in their coverage that this will go away and won't matter at all. Oh, okay. Amazing.

Here's the offending speech by Melania Trump, a speech she said before the convention she wrote herself:

The irony is that Trump would just happen to plagiarize elements of Michelle Obama's speech, one of the Republican Party's most despised first ladies, next to Hillary of course.

I wonder what Scott Walker would say about this top-of-the-ticket recklessness, since he made such a big thing about plagiarism against his Democratic opponent Mary Burke.
It's clear from my conservative friend in Milwaukee that this won't change his mind about who he'll vote for, and even he thinks this is a disaster.

We should have seen this coming after Trump ripped off Walker's campaign symbol:

The excuses and denial from the Trump team are hilarious. Check out the endless stream of bullshit; Melania says she wrote the speech; Trump manager Paul Manafort's non-denial; Christie saying 93% is original; Queen gave no authorization for song; Speech writer who originally tweeted the plagiarism; Conservative David Frum trashing campaign saying they tell lies, blame others, don't take responsibility:

I liked this...

OH NO!!! These tweets have now surfaced...assuming they're real, Trump's got a problem:

Monday, July 18, 2016

Trump's 60 Minutes interview exempts Pence, not Hillary, from backing Iraq war!

I am so tired of lazy reporting. Never once has the media mentioned the unrelenting negative smear campaign Hillary Clinton has had to endure since the early 1990's, when she tried to put together health care reform. Gee, I wonder why her negative numbers are so high today, anyone venture a guess?  

And Democrats have bought into it hook, line, and sinker, as usual.

Now thanks to the 60 Minutes interview with Trump and VP pick Mike Pence, I now have a few other complaints to get to, like the built in Republican double standards no one seems to care about. 

First, Republicans have never admitted out loud that going into Iraq was a historical disaster. No criticism of Bush, no anger directed at Cheney or Rumsfeld for lying this nation into that war. In fact, ISIS grew out of one of those lies (check out Frontline). But now that Trump is saying it was "badly handled" and a mistake, every Republican voter is quietly admitting it too. 

Of course vocal Democratic opponents, politicians and voters alike, were cowards and weak on national security at the time. They were mocked by eye rolling conservatives who simply wrote it off as just more "Bush bashing" rhetoric. 

But that's all forgotten now. Like Trump, they were always against the Iraq war:  
Donald Trump: Yeah, you went to Iraq, but that was handled so badly. And that was a war-- by the way, that was a war that we shouldn't have entered because Iraq did not knock down--excuse me

Lesley Stahl: Your running mate--voted for it.

Donald Trump: I don't care.
"I don't care?"

What follows is another frustration; a persons past only counts against them if they're a Democrat. Obama's college papers, his pastor, his community organizing...etc., horrific stuff? State Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley's comments bashing "totally stupid or entirely evil" Democratic voters, the gay community, abortion is murder, feminism...etc., that's all too far in the past to count against her ability to be impartial today. 

But Hillary's support of the Iraq war? 
Lesley Stahl: What do you mean you don't care that he voted for?

Donald Trump: It's a long time ago. And he voted that way and they were also misled. A lot of information was given to people.

Lesley Stahl: But you've harped on this.

Donald Trump: But I was against the war in Iraq from the beginning.

Lesley Stahl: Yeah, but you've used that vote of Hillary's that was the same as Governor Pence as the example of her bad judgment.

Donald Trump: Many people have, and frankly, I'm one of the few that was right on Iraq.

Lesley Stahl: Yeah, but what about he--

Donald Trump: He's entitled to make a mistake every once in a while.

Lesley Stahl: But she's not? OK, come on--

Donald Trump: But she's not--

Lesley Stahl: She's not?

Donald Trump: No. She's not.

Lesley Stahl: Got it.
Just this morning, the author of Trump's "Art of the Deal" Tony Schwartz was so troubled by the thought of a Trump presidency that he made these amazing comments:

And this racist presidential wannabe had this to say about Obama's body language of all things, because Trump couldn't find anything in to criticize in his speech about the Baton Rouge shooting:
“I watched the president. Sometimes the words are OK. But you just look at the body language — there’s something going on. There’s something going on. There’s just bad feeling. It’s probably something that we really don’t know and maybe we can’t feel it unless we’re black.”

Sunday, July 17, 2016

Justice Blocking Republicans hoping to appoint Right Winger to Court, whine Ginsburg too Partisan in recent comments - Part 2

I thought this detailed look at the right wing hypocrisy and intended politicization of our nations courts touched on all the right points when it came to the phony outrage over Justice Ginsburg's Trump comments. This piggybacks off my first piece Huffington Post:
While Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg apologized for her remarks on Donald Trump last week, politicians and the media who did backflips to criticize her are rewriting history. Strong, opinionated women, like “The Notorious RBG,” are always criticized. Her comments deserve a deeper analysis beyond subjective punditry or sanctimonious Tweets. 

It is worth watching Lawrence O’Donnell’s piece taking the issue out of the headlines and putting it in context. There has been clear precedent for Supreme Court involvement in elections prior to Justice Ginsburg’s opining.

The first justice of the Supreme Court, John Jay, ran for Governor of New York twice during his service. Three other Supreme Court justices ran for presidential nominations while serving and continued to serve after they lost their campaigns. 

As O’Donnell points out, a surprisingly erroneous Washington Post piece said, “Supreme Court experts I’ve spoken to were unaware of any justices getting so directly and vocally involved — or involved at all, really — in a presidential campaign.”

In 2000, Justice Antonin Scalia was the justice who stopped the recount in Florida with an unprecedented injunction favoring George Bush. He then was one of the five Republicans on the Court who overruled the Florida Supreme Court and installed George Bush in the White House. 

The vast majority of the 5-4 decisions since the Justice Rehnquist era, when Republicans had the Court majority, have not deviated from GOP orthodoxy and favoritism. For instance, the Citizens United decision overwhelmingly results in more financial support on behalf of Republican candidates.

In 2004, it was public knowledge that Justice Scalia had a friendly and personal relationship with Dick Cheney, and yet would not recuse himself on a case involving the then-vice president. “In a 21-page memorandum filled with scorn and with lessons in the ways of Washington, Justice Scalia wrote that if people assumed a duck hunting trip would be enough to swing his vote, ‘the nation is in deeper trouble than I had imagined,’”(New York Times).

The media states again and again that the Supreme Court stays out of politics, but actions speak louder than words. Justice Samuel Alito has not attended a State of the Union since President Obama critiqued the Citizens United decision in 2010.

Gary Legum writing for Salon says, "For us to continue pretending that the third co-equal branch of our government can somehow remain immune to the highly polarized atmosphere of the other two is to infantilize the American public.

If we are comfortable enough labeling our Supreme Court justices as either “liberal” or “conservative”... If we are so comfortable with assuming that an established and accomplished judge such as Merrick Garland, for instance, with a long resume of impartiality on the bench is nothing more than a political football to be tossed around by Republicans... If we are truly happy to accept these labels and partisan plays with the Supreme Court, is it actually surprising or so wrong that a distinguished, 23-year-serving justice should hold a personal opinion? 

The actions of Justice Scalia are lauded and Justice Ginsburg is immediately criticized. There is one big difference — Ginsburg is a woman.

Republicans "smaller government" lie exposed!

Trump’s VP pick Mike Pence once wrote in defense of cigarettes, “A government big enough to go after smokers, is big enough to go after you.”

Scary stuff that plays to the paranoia of an overreaching government we all know can’t be trusted.

Of course it’s an odd way to make your case, bashing government for saving people’s lives, and then defending cancer causing cigarettes and second hand smoke. But Pence did just that.

Republicans have a convoluted way of defining “big government.”

The GOP is really talking about big liberal government. Government doesn’t get smaller under Republicans. If anything it gets a lot bigger, adding piles of rules and regulations meant to reverse laws designed to protect Americans.

Laws protecting drinking water are reversed with stacks of new regulations that only protect polluters and high capacity wells. The same is true of health care and tort reform, where insurer profits take precedent over public health and medical errors aren’t reduced but instead are shielded from punishment.

This perfect example shines a light on Paul Ryan's recent take on "small government." Salon:
The Supreme Court released its 5-3 decision blocking unfair and unconstitutional abortion regulations in Texas: “The plurality added that ‘[u]nnecessary health regulations that have the purpose or effect of presenting a substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion impose an undue burden on that right.’”

One might ask, “Unnecessary regulations? Where have I heard that before?” If one scrolls up just few tweets on Ryan’s Twitter page, the answer appears: “We need to take a smart approach that cuts down on needless regulations while making the rules we do need more efficient and effective … That’s from Ryan’s economic portion of “A Better Way,” the recently released policy platform.

The speaker never intended women to have safer abortions … He did not want there to be abortions at all … the GOP-led Texas legislature imposed regulations so severe on clinics that many were forced to close.

Imagine even briefly that these regulations were on businesses that, say, sold crutches and wheelchairs. Imagine that they forced many of those businesses to close. It isn’t difficult to imagine how different the post-decision tweet would have been then.

They claim in one breath to be opposed to government intervention and regulation and then, in the next, decry the removal of regulations. This isn’t principled governing, and it is a glaring inconsistency that must be addressed.
But not so small government Republicans aren’t shy about where government needs to be much, much bigger; national security.

While Americans will have limited access to their small government at home, Republicans will expand an American global government throughout the world with preemptive invasions and a military presence everywhere. Republicans haven’t kept this part of their plan a secret either, they want to expand the military budget and take out potential global threats on a whim.

Reince dreams up word salad twist on Trumps Muslim Ban.

Wisconsin's own embarrassing RNC Chair Reince Priebus must have spent hours constructing just the right wording that obscures Trump's outright ban of Muslims coming into the U.S..
Reince: "A temporary ban on countries that harbor and train terrorists, until we get a better vetting system...that's really where 75% of the people are is not a religious test...that's what I believe in, and that's what 80% of the American people believe in..."
...from Muslim countries? What this odd freak of nature came up with is classic Reince. Notice how Reince up the percentage of Americans who supposedly "agree" with the ban. Heck, I think I was just included. From the theater of the absurd...take it away Jake Tapper:
Trump recently indicated a change––only Muslims from terror states––but his team indicated there was never any pivot. Jake Tapper challenged him as that being just his “interpretation.”
Reince's anecdotal response....
"It's what I've seen him say in person, at events..."  

Here are a few tweets:

Saturday, July 16, 2016

Wisconsin leading Authoritarian Anti-American Movement, with "Center for Competitive Federalism"

Republicans hate America!!! You know the routine: Blah, blah, blah, nothing is working, and everything is getting worse. Yet they always get away with ripping the nation a new one. Remember this phony Republican moment of outrage:

But Trump:

Because America isn't great, right? With something so intentional, and a campaign slogan too boot, you'd think he would be roundly criticized...but that's the magic of Trump.

Next Step - Statist "Center for Competitive Federalism:" Secession is out, so what comes close? Something called "Competitive Federalism," another whiny tantrum from arrogant and entitled freeloading conservatives too cheap to pay forward, like previous generations did building roads, schools and infrastructure.

As "small government" regulations pile up from overzealous Republican legislators hoping to legally block Wisconsinites from getting in the way of business, supply side blunders are pushing more people into many of our social safety nets, the same programs targeted for elimination. Scott Walker calls it a "hand up" and not a hand out.

With nasally arrogance, founder of CCF Rick Esenberg serves up word salad nonanswers he thinks people will never understand or care to dissect. Wrong.

On WPR's Central Time, Esenberg's ego spilled out for everyone to hear, suggesting life long Wisconsinites should just "vote with their feet" and leave the dairy state if we didn't like the policies. Seriously?
Esenberg: "There would be certain things the states could not do. But, in that the states themselves would be disciplined not only by their own Constitutions, but by the ability of the persons who live within them, to vote with their feet, and go someplace else if they didn't like the policies their particular state was adopting." 

Esenberg is another "why can't Wisconsin be like Texas" Republicans. Since I grew up in the state, I never felt it needed saving or a face lift. Not Esenberg:
Wisconsin should look to Texas … However, as a purple state, Wisconsin's path towards a more independent and robust statehood might require different strategies … like creating a commission on competitiveness to identify regulatory reform, reviewing all federal funding requests and prohibiting state regulatory agencies from working with federal regulators if certain programs are deemed coercive.

Additionally, expanding Walker’s Blueprint for Prosperity initiative, eliminating the "over-criminalization of commercial activity."
Esenberg piles on the bullshit saying even Democrats will jump on board:  
The report concluded that the Midwest is becoming the birthplace of a new conservatism that can appeal to people of all political persuasions, including Democrats, by eliminating the one-size-fits-all solutions imposed by the federal government.  "(A system) in which the states would function as laboratories of democracy, which they would be able to engage in trial and error with respect to policy."

Friday, July 15, 2016

What Mike Pence brings to America...

Let's take a look at what Gov. Mike Pence brings to the Trump ticket:

Was Pence Trump's pick after-all? 

Or this from, where radical conservatives like Trump and Pence won't rein in constitutional chaos:
Judge Andrew P. Napolitano: "This is another example of let's not preserve and protect and defend the Constitution, let's find ways around it to achieve our ends." 

The Trump/Pence oh-no Logo.

The Trump/Pence campaign logo hit the fan with some amazing commentary from Twitter today.

If it looks familiar...seriously, has the monolithic Republican Party done anything original...ever?

After Scott Walker pummeled his Democratic gubernatorial challenger for supposed plagiarism, he ironically and blatantly committed plagiarism himself lifting America's Best's logo:

Marching in lockstep from one plagiarized idea to another, the Borg-like Republican "idea" machine put this Walker ripoff out, desecrating the flag all over again:

Getting back to the Twitter reaction, it was pretty obvious what the usually bumbling knuckleheads at Trump headquarters did to inadvertently stay in the spotlight:

Someone got artistically creative:

Is the Trump campaign still spending too much time scouring the white supremacist sites?

Thursday, July 14, 2016

Ryan's Desperate Support of Trump is just the beginning.

So where do I start? Paul Ryan has finally been exposed at the "wonky" poser many of us have been writing about for years. His annual repackaged "roads to prosperity" list is just the same old failed supply side mumbo-jumbo deep red states like Louisianna, Kansas, Oklahoma, Kentucky and Indiana have been convulsing from for the last few years.

Add Wisconsin to that list. Following that same formula, Scott Walker's Wisconsin avoided the other states huge deficits by doing what they couldn't do; stop funding state parks; slash funding for their state university system; stop construction and road maintenance while letting 5 foot high overgrowth consume our get the idea.

Let's start with Paul Ryan's rationalization for supporting his party's racist, bigoted authoritarian candidate for president. The following concerned student has all the values and moral judgement Ryan threw out door long ago. He simply can't understand how Ryan could support a guy like this...uh, tax cuts and special interest money kid. Liberal leaning naive students like this maybe shouldn't be allowed to vote yet:

“I cannot and will not support Trump,” one audience member at Tuesday’s CNN Town Hall event said. “It concerns me when the Republican leadership is supporting somebody who’s blatantly racist and has said Islamophobic statements, want to shut down our borders. How can you morally justify your support for this kind of candidate, somebody who could be very destructive?”

Ryan first scolded the young man, a Republican student named Zachary Marcone.

“You’re going to help elect Hillary Clinton,” he said.

Ryan's answer clear; he'll do anything to get a few tax cuts and kill Obamacare.
Ryan also states unequivocally justices who aren't like Scalia won't be faithful to the Constitution, backing his party's partisan block of Obama's not so conservative justice nominee. I think Dumb Ron Johnson said it best:

“America needs Supreme Court justices who share Justice Scalia’s commitment to applying the Constitution as written and to the freedom it secures.”

Hypocritically, Ryan sees no irony in blocking Obama's pick so a possible Republican president would nominate an activist conservative "impartial" justice. That would shore up for decades a Republican dominated the court.

But even conservatives are tired of this condescending jerk. Lou Dobbs doesn't hold back in the following commentary, hitting all of Ryan's the low points. He even gives a little airtime to Ryan's opponent, Paul Nehlen, backed by Tea Party Forward:

Remember, these are his fellow conservatives taking politically damaging shots at wonder boy. Like the fact Ryan keeps playing the race card...yea:

Cognitive Dissidence had a nice feature article on Ryan as well. The Journal Sentinel's Dan Bice wrote about ousting Ryan too.

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

Kansas Republicans protect vote by rejecting nearly 50,000 voters for state electoral offices.

Republicans can try desperately to make their case they're only trying to protect the integrity of elections and that "one fraudulent vote is one too many," but that all flies out the window with this startling action and admission that they are the party of suppression, no matter how you deny it.

Not real American like is it, in a representative democracy?

County election officials will count their votes for president, U.S. Senate and Congress but not their votes in state and local races or local ballot questions.
What could be wrong with that? That's not all, Kansas Republicans can pretty much game the political system in any way they want with this rather broad law:
Kansas law allows the regulations board to approve a temporary rule without a formal public hearing if an agency sees quick action as necessary to preserve “the public peace, health, safety or welfare.”
This is what happens when the Constitution leaves our right to vote up to the states.
About 17,000 people were in that category as of last week, but as many as 50,000 prospective voters could be affected in the November election.