Republicans in the tank for Cruz and Bradley, Democrats should take on Conservative Talk Radio.

The Democratic Party has for some time looked like a football teams defense that's been out on the field too long. That never ends well. But it's their own damn fault, because unlike a football team, they came out to play without an offense. Big problem.

That leaves our Borg-like Republicans lots and lots of time to do whatever they want.

Cruz? Yes, that's what their Leaders Want: At first, I thought it was odd how every Republican I talked to backed the flaccid candidacy of Marco Rubio, the absent Senator. But odder still, ever since he's dropped out, Wisconsin Republicans are now suddenly behind Ted Cruz. Just like that. Isn't it funny how conservatives who rattle on and on about freedom and liberty, can't wait to take their orders from their leaders - vote Cruz.

Mean Girl Rebecca Bradley's bigoted, divisive, politics...they like it!!!  The new Marquette University Poll showing Bradley pulling ahead in the race for supreme court justice was due mainly for her hatred of gays and Democrats. As it turns out, Bradley hit all the right notes saying what conservative voters have been thinking and talking about for years. Her short tempered nasty demeanor and victimhood made her the undisputed choice for the states highest court. Right wing "originalism" is now the generally accepted interpretation of the Constitution, having received no criticism by our intimidated "fair and balanced" media and Democratic Party.

These are just two examples that speak volumes about the R.I.P. Democrats. But like Supernatural's Sam and Dean, there's always a way to come back from the dead. Here's just one idea...

Democrats should Demand Radio Time, put the pressure on Conservative Talkers: Talk show hosts Sly and The Devil's Advocates are the only liberal alternatives in Wisconsin, and both programs feature Republican guests. That doesn't happen in conservative talk.

When I did my own talk show, WIBA management insisted I have a conservative co-host to counter what they thought were my anti-American liberal ideas. I ended up loving the idea because it gave me an insight into how conservatives think and how they argue. Just ask State Sen. Frank Lasee, who sat in the studio a number of times, and endured a few heated but respectful debates. Former Rep. Steve Nass, now a senator, once got so angry after an interview he blasted me a few minutes later on the floor of the Assembly.

Most surprising to me was their desire to come back for another debate. Funny still, they thought they had won their often disjointed silly debate with me. Heck, maybe they did with their voters. My objective was to expose what I thought were flawed ideas and logic, by using their own words against them.

My point; Democrats should go on the offensive, demanding radio time on conservative talk stations. They should publically challenge them to a debate, publically ask them why they're not being invited on their shows. And never let up. Why wouldn't they want to try and win the argument? What's the problem with letting callers ask their own questions, gain some insight into how Democrats think, where they're coming from, encourage critical thinking?

OFFENSE: A Democratic offense would force Republicans to spend time fighting back, cutting into the time they have to hatch their next dystopian one size fits all edict. Democrats may stand for something, it's just that voters don't know exactly what that is.

Trump vs Right Wing Radio

Conservative talk radio is suffering from stage four political cancer. And only a few hard core right wing patients are willing to die from it. Many listeners just can't stand the pain anymore...

President of iHeartMedia Pittman is begging a San Antonio judge to give him a restraining order. But the radio stations’ owner doesn’t have a stalker or a crazed ex-wife. No, he wants a restraining order to keep his creditors from putting the hate-radio company in default and bankruptcy.

It seems his 850 radio stations, spread out across the country, are in danger of going under, because Pittman owes $20 billion to his creditors. It is impossible to feel sorry for the “hate radio” generator of mass racism, xenophobia, homophobia, and misogyny. Pittman is responsible for spreading incredibly ignorant ideas across the country, ideas that have caused untold damage between family members and other groups of people ... corporate owner of hate salesmen like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and Glenn Beck

So it wasn't a big surprise when the unlikable Donald Trump made the rounds and took a few lumps from right wing hosts who are used to getting away with murder on Milwaukee radio stations. You’d think station owners would care just a little about the quality of their product, and demand their hosts back up their endless steam of on air fictional bloviating…guess not. 

The biggest purveyor of mindless rambling bullshit is WISN/WIBA-AM's Vicki McKenna, my cohost for the one year I was inside the right wing bubble. Rude and detached from reality as ever, McKenna didn't impress Trump:  

“Obviously you’re not going to vote for me, ” Trump told WISN talker Vicki McKenna. After 25 minutes of sparring, he signed off with a sarcastic, “Best of luck to you, Vicki,” and hung up on her, according to McKenna.

The reason for Trump's abrupt exit? McKenna, like Charlie Sykes, are drunk on the Scott Walker supply side Kool-Aid. To them, failure is success, divide and conquer is healthy:

“You’re in Wisconsin, where it’s a different state, sir, than you might be used to.m This is a state that pulled together Republican coalitions. Scott Walker didn’t win or get the incredible reforms that we were actually able to pass through in a blue-state-turned-purple-state like Wisconsin by dividing Republicans.”

WTMJ's Charlie Sykes continues to crank out great fiction, imagining "civility,""decency," and sticky to flip floppy "principles." Check out this god awful projection:

“Here in Wisconsin, we value things like civility, decency and actual conservative principles,” the talk show host declared before ripping Trump for his campaign behavior, comparing him to “a 12-year-old bully on the playground,” and suggesting his claim to be a conservative was a “giant fraud.”

Trump at least has a handle on the states declining business and job creation, which are fighting words for in-the-tank "stand with Walker" radio brownshirts:

McKenna fiercely defended the health of the state’s manufacturing sector and derided Trump’s view that trade is killing jobs. “Wisconsin is actually fourth in the Midwest in terms of manufacturing growth. We’re not losing manufacturing in Wisconsin!”

Trump told McKenna, “I don’t think fourth in the Midwest is very good, because the Midwest is not doing particularly well.”

After all the interviews Trump has given, he seemed surprised by Wisconsin's biased talk losers:

Trump sounded perplexed by the talk radio buzz saw he ran into Monday. “I’m a little surprised that talk show hosts would be supporting somebody. You’d think there’d be a certain impartiality,”

Yea, you'd think.

To hear McKenna and Sykes talk up unity in Walker's Wisconsin, treating the 2011 protests & recall like something the Democrats started, you'd have to declared them mentally incompetent:

“Look, if you’re going to be the presidential candidate, you have to find a way to unify a whole bunch of people right now who are at each others’ throats,” McKenna told Trump. “And we feel it viscerally here because we went through the (protest) occupation in 2011 and a recall election in 2012. That’s the landscape you’re facing here when you’ve got Republicans acting like ‘recallers’ to other Republicans.”

That whole picking your presidential candidate thing...yea, just like a recall?

Trump trashes Walker's Wisconsin.

Credit Donald Trump for telling fellow conservatives the truth about Scott Walker's Wisconsin. Things aren't going well here, despite the fact that stand with Walker voters approve of the job he's doing now. The new Marquette University Poll shows an improvement, up from 39% to 43%.

I'm hoping conservative voters are more informed than the right wing trolls who seem preoccupied nationwide with correcting grammar and spelling in news articles. Content not so much, if at all.

Trump's stay in Wisconsin will help expose Walker's lies as only Trump can explain them:

WSJ: At the rally, Mr. Trump accused Mr. Walker of overstating the strength of the state’s economy, a criticism that fell on receptive ears of an audience that booed at the mention of their governor’s name.

"He’s not doing such a good job, Scott Walker, but he’s convinced you there’s no problem. Both Walker and Cruz want TPP — that would hit Wisconsin so hard.”

Trump was point blank about Walker's Wisconsin:

Trump then read a long list of economic data points to make the case that Walker has failed: total state debt $45 billion, 20,000 fewer people in labor force than 7 years ago, 800,000 food stamp recipients; middle class hit hard due to loss of manufacturing; 15,000 jobs lost to NAFTA and more.

“He’s not doing such a good job, Scott Walker, but he’s convinced you there’s no problem.”

Trump's $45 billion number includes a whole bunch of debt, including the states healthy pension fund. The real number is around $14.1 billion, up about $860 million from his first day in office. Walker 's Wisconsin was also coming up $2.2 billion short in revenue, prompting the huge cuts to the UW and state parks, among other things. Trump continued:

"You had a $2.2 billion budget deficit and the schools were going begging and everything and everything was going begging because he didn't want to raise taxes because he was going to run for president.

"So instead of raising taxes he cut back on schools, he cut back on highways, cut back on a lot of things. And that's why Wisconsin has a problem and you're losing jobs all over the place."

Here's Trump on right wing radio WROK:



No Love for Paul Ryan: 

The audience also surprised Mr. Trump by booing the mention of a local luminary, House Speaker Paul Ryan, whose hometown is Janesville. “How do you like Paul Ryan?” Mr. Trump said, and when the crowd booed, he said, “Wow. I was told to be nice to Paul Ryan. He is the Speaker, he is very nice. Wow, are you sure you are all Republicans? Are you mostly conservatives?”

I especially liked Trump's honesty about the Republican hypocrisy about eminent domain:

Trump called the Club for Grow (he donated $15,000 to them for Scott Walker recall election) a“crooked outfit.” Trump said that a representative of Club for Growth had met with him and written to him asking for $1 million and now the group is running ads against him in Wisconsin.

“He writes me a note asking for $1 million dollars. Now they are doing ads all over Wisconsin on eminent domain. By the way without eminent domain you would not have schools roads or hospitals... but they are complaining about eminent domain which is kind of funny because these people love the Keystone pipeline... which is all about eminent domain,” he said.

But the latest flap might be his downfall as a candidate; abortion, where women are prosecuted and men go free:

When continually pressed for what the answer is regarding punishing women who would break any theoretical ban, Trump said the “answer is that there has to be some form of punishment, yeah.” 

When pressed on if the United States should change the law of the land on abortion as set by the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling Roe v. Wade Trump responded: “You’ll go back to a position like they had where people will, perhaps, go to illegal places.” Still, he maintains “you have to ban it. This issue is unclear and should be put back into the states for determination.”

The MSNBC host followed up wondering if a man should bear responsibility for abortions as well, to which Trump said “no” he didn’t think so. 

Here's a bit of analysis featuring Trumps reversal a few hours later:

Bradley's "Originalist" Constitution does not protect or promote "a more equal society!!!"

I never thought Rebecca Bradley would be partisan enough to highlight, and go after, JoAnne Kloppenburg for her promise to promote a more equal society. I was wrong.

The Constitution doesn't promote a more Equal Society? Apparently "originalists" have decided all rights have already been doled out, end of story. Forget any new challenges and efforts to discriminate.

Bradley's "originalist" Constitution believes "a more equal society" is a return to the days when the middle class fought back and threatened the status quo. She made that clear in the editorials she wrote at Marquette University. In a recent partisan rant, Bradley proved once again she hasn't moved an inch from her bigoted, partisan, condescending comments of the past:

In a March 21, 2016 interview on Wisconsin Public Radio’s "Joy Cardin Show," Bradley said:

"Given her judicial philosophy, JoAnne Kloppenburg has told us she thinks it's her job to promote a more equal society. She will most definitely introduce her social and political beliefs into her decision making."

But as PolitiFact pointed out, it wasn't Kloppenburg's idea so much as something the courts have emphasized over centuries:

"...my decisions are based on the law and the facts, not on ideology or partisan politics. I am faithful to the court’s role as an independent check and balance on the other political branches of government. My duty is to uphold the Constitution, a sacred document that represents the will of the people and which contains the fundamental principles that define our democracy, protect individual rights and promote a more equal society."
Kloppenburg’s statement is more broad than Bradley suggests.

If Bradley doesn't like the idea of "a more equal society," or thinks it's partisan to expect that from our courts, then by all means let's make sure voters know what she won't do...

"...JoAnne Kloppenburg has told us she thinks it's her job to promote a more equal society." 

Amazing. But there's a reason Bradley doesn't agree with a more equal society; because it's part of a "living breathing" reading of the Constitution, the opposite of her originalist philosophy.

At the beginning of the 19th century, Chief Justice John Marshall had lectured the American people to always remember that the Constitution is intended "to be adopted to the various crises of human affairs." This notion of a "living constitution" is not accepted by all scholars or judges, but the history of the Equal Protection Clause in the last half-century would indicate that its applications, and possibly its meaning as well, have changed over time.

Tax Time Nightmare another gift from corporate America.

Check out the following expose from Ezra Klein about the tax software scheme by Intuit and H&R Block to make lots of money from an unsuspecting publilc. This is something I didn't know anything about.

For most Americans every dollar made, including our current family status, is already known by the IRS. It would be simple for the IRS to send you your tax form already filled out, waiting for your signature. You could also check the box and opt to do it yourself.

But the big financial software companies have successfully lobbied to kill that option. Here's a great video where Klein spills the beans on another corporate ripoff:

If I'm not itemizing deductions (like 70 percent of taxpayers), the IRS has all the information it needs to calculate my taxes, send me a filled-out return, and let me either send it in or do my taxes by hand if I prefer. This isn't a purely hypothetical proposal. Countries like Denmark, Sweden, Estonia, Chile, and Spain already offer "pre-populated returns" to their citizens. 

The United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan have exact enough tax withholding procedures that most people don't have to file income tax returns at all, whether pre-populated or not. California has a voluntary return-free filing program called ReadyReturn for its income taxes.

Obama and Reagan both backed this idea:

The Obama administration supports return-free filing, and Ronald Reagan touted the idea in a 1985 speech:

"We envision a system where more than half of us would not even have to fill out a return. We call it the return-free system, and it would be totally voluntary. If you decided to participate, you would automatically receive your refund or a letter explaining any additional tax you owe. Should you disagree with this figure, you would be free to fill out your taxes using the regular form. We believe most Americans would go from the long form or the short form to no form."

The Republican talking point for decades plays on the myth liberal Democratic Americans like taxes in general, and don't mind paying more. Without this silly caricature, they can't make the argument that freeloading off the work and legacy of generations before them is okay:

Rebecca Bradley Changed? "...big money liberal elites...vicious, they lie...dirtier than ever." Not so much.

The ad below is..."Paid for by Citizens for Justice Rebecca Bradley, Patrick Knight, Treasurer."

Hey, She hasn't changed!!! The partisan, decidedly negative ad Rebecca Bradley approved and paid for proves she hasn't changed since 1992. What she said 24 years ago about queer loving, flag burning, radical, socialist, pot smoking liberals who voted for Bill Clinton when she was at Marquette University... 

"...We've just had an election which proves the majority of voters are either totally stupid or entirely evil..."    

...applies today. The "vicious" lies against Bradley mentioned in the ad below by crazy Sheriff Clarke were direct quotes from her own writings.

Bradley: "The PC movement is entirely the agenda of feminists, gays, liberal extremists and 1960's radicals who never left school and consequently are largely ignorant of the real world."

Proof - She's still the same Rebecca Bradley!!! "Paid for by Citizens for Justice Rebecca Bradley," repeats the theme she made against Clinton voters: 

"I’m Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. I know a little something about what it’s like when the Big money liberal elites come gunning for you. They’ve got the media in their back pocket. They’re vicious, they lie, and this time, they’re out to get Justice Rebecca Bradley. I’d call it mudslinging but it’s dirtier than that."

I’m Justice Rebecca Bradley. It’s no surprise my opponent and her partisan allies are running a false, viciously personal smear campaign against me.

Her peers aren't impressed either:

Milwaukeee Bar Association Releases 2016 Judicial Poll Results regarding the qualifications of judicial candidates that appear on the ballot in Milwaukee County. 

Yikes, 138 say she's not qualified, compared to JoAnne Kloppenburg's 48. Not even close.

Or we could do what the press in Wisconsin has been doing for years, acting like it's so hard to know...

Walker admits defeat on Job Creation, now attacks the number of help wanted ads.

I'm off to Easter with the family, but there's something I'm looking into that lies at the very heart of Scott Walker's desire to fill the jobs already open, and not create new ones.

Word salad Walker offered up this down-the-rabbit-hole logic:

Walker: "One of my top priorities has shifted from job creation to filling jobs, which really in turn becomes a form of economic development going forward because for a lot of employers in this state if they don’t have confidence they can fill vacant positions now, that becomes a barrier to adding more jobs in the future."

Will we be able to survive 3 more years of this Bizarro World approach to managing the state?

What is the historical average of the open jobs market? It seems likely that number would be pretty consistent. So is it ridiculous to change what might be unchangeable, all those help wanted ads that persist no matter what happens, because of the ebb and flow of the marketplace (hint: Jake?)?

One thing I do know, Walker is now marketing a new product for a third term, smaller in size, gluten free, but at a more expensive price; last in the Midwest in almost all jobs and business creation categories.

Republicans oppose Pipeline...that is, Wind Energy Pipeline through Arkansas.

After years of vilifying judges and justices who's decisions they disagree with as "liberal activists legislating from the bench," Republicans are admitting what they really wanted was "conservative activists legislating from the bench." Got it, loud and clear.

Republicans are about to blow up another myth, this time on jobs, energy pipelines and energy independence; Arkansas Republicans just came out against jobs and a 705 mile energy pipeline because it crosses right through their state and...wait for it, supplies electricity from WIND and not big oil. ArkTimes:

Wind Energy in 1923?

The Arkansas congressional delegation, all Republicans, quickly issued a statement decrying the decision. They said it usurped state control over transmission lines. They've been trying to pass legislation to prevent this.

The same Arkansas Republicans have been supportive of a pipeline carrying dangerous Canadian tar sands through the Great Plains in the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, despite local opposition in those states. That line doesn't pass through Arkansas.

What happened to job creation and making the U.S. energy independent? 

The electrical pipeline will move wind energy produced in Oklahoma and Texas through Arkansas to Tennessee. First, let's shine a light on a few Republican hypocrites:

Arkansas Republican Sens. John Boozman and Tom Cotton, who are to the right of the right wing of the Republican Party and supporters of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, have filed a bill in Congress that would give the states veto power over electric lines, ostensibly to stop the federal government from exercising eminent domain. Given their position on Keystone, it's possible their financial support from the oil industry motivates them and others who oppose the project.

I'm not arguing for or against the wind pipeline, I just wanted to point a finger at the hypocrites who are in the back pocket of big oil, and the vacuous nature of their "principled" arguments. 

What happened to job creation and making the U.S. energy independent?

Opposition is coming from the Cherokee Nation and one specific and unlucky wind energy supporter. On the latter, I thought her story was oddly funny;  

Clara Dotson's 80 acres north of Dover is crisscrossed by utility easements: a natural gas pipeline, HVAC power line and an Arkansas Valley Cooperative electric distribution line. Last year, she learned that Valero/Plains All American planned run its pipeline shipping crude oil from Oklahoma to Tennessee through her property. Utilities have the power of eminent domain in Arkansas, which means that landowners can't stop them from building on their land. They can dicker over compensation, but that's it.

Still, you would think getting forever utility payments to use her property would more than make up any loss in property value to Dotson, or any future land owners, right? 

Millsaps and others — including the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma — believe the line will lower their property values a full 30 percent. (Clean Line says studies indicate that 10 percent is a more accurate figure) … The company will offer "the full market value" for acreage in its easement and would also pay the landowner $500 for a "mono" pole and $1,500 for a lattice pole, which requires a larger base. He said easements would be between 150 and 200 feet wide.

Jobs, jobs, jobs, Republican want to kill all the jobs....

Three Arkansas companies will get working making components of the line ... Also, a converter station will be built in Arkansas so that power can be supplied in the state, not just carried through to others. 

Walker's backward Fossil Fuel Energy Policy Killing the Return of Manufacturing in Wisconsin!!!

There's a reason why Scott Walker's Wisconsin isn't seeing a manufacturing Renaissance; his big oil pals are getting rich overcharging big business. I know, crazy right? Esquire Magazine's Charles Pierce explains Walker this way:

Scott Walker, the goggle-eyed homunculus hired by Koch Industries to run their Midwest subsidiary formerly known as the state of Wisconsin.

Walker's embarrassing AG lapdog Brad Schimel wrote an opinion piece recently in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. He claimed...

As one of the top manufacturing states in the country, Wisconsin has much to lose if the Obama administration succeeds in its plan to destroy the viability of clean-coal electric generation. Manufacturing jobs in our state depends on affordable and reliable electric power. Because of the degree to which our state economies rely on manufacturing jobs, we will be disproportionately affected by the president's so-called "Clean Power Plan."

An outrageous lie the press failed to followup on.

Electricity rates paid by businesses and residents of Wisconsin now rank highest among eight Midwest states ... The analysis was released at a time when one of We Energies' largest customers, Charter Steel of Saukville, is raising concerns about the utility's rates and a power plant construction program that has left We Energies with more power than its own customers need.

The fact is, the states biggest manufacturers are getting pummeled with high utility rates, ending any chance they'll expand in Wisconsin. There's not peep coming out of the Walker administration, because they're in the pocket of big oil and energy. Look what he's done to the PSC. The rhetorical stall tactics have run their course:

Charter says We Energies has been telling customers for years to be patient because rates in surrounding states will catch up...

But that hasn't happened. In fact, the price difference is getting worse due to We Energies over expansion, which comes in at twice the planned required reserve:

Wisconsin exceeds the 7.1 percent planning reserve requirement set by MISO for 2016. Wisconsin’s planning reserve margin for the 2016-2022 period is between 14.2 and 17.5 percent.

Just as bad, the big cuts to "Focus on Energy" will kill whatever advantage we had:

An analysis of the state's energy situation found that residential electric bills in Wisconsin actually rank below the Midwest average, because customers here are using far less power on average than those in other nearby states ... nearly $8 a month below the average of all eight Midwest states ... Energy efficiency and the conservation program  Focus on Energy have helped keep average Wisconsin residential usage flat over the last two decades," said the report, 

But Walker couldn't help but mess that up too....

Wisconsin's electric utilities back the bill, which would cut funding for the Focus on Energy program by $7 million at a time when electricity costs in Wisconsin have risen above the national average. But the program's supporters cite its savings, pointing out that the program has delivered $3 of savings to customers for every $1 spent. 

Theresa Lehman, director of sustainable services at Miron Construction said at a time when capital spending budgets are tight, the program offers incentives that help customers cut their costs by allowing them to afford the upfront expenses of switching to more efficient LED lighting. St. Elizabeth Hospital in Appleton is saving $30,000 a year. Another client, Lake Mills Elementary School, received $100,000 in incentives from the program and is now saving $85,000 every year on its energy costs.

Walker's disconnect is unsettling. Hie rhetoric gives the appearance prices are steady right now, even while they increase, even without Obama's Clean Power Plan:

The federal Clean Power Plan was put on hold last month in a 5-4 vote by the U.S. Supreme Court. Wisconsin has joined with coal mining and coal-reliant states to challenge the rule, citing the impact it would have on the state's manufacturing sector.

Cruz liked the way Walker dismissed Act 10 protesters; Cruz calls Trump coward, in bar fight over wives!!

As WPR reported:

Cruz Says He Was 'Inspired' By Walker During Act 10 Protests: "Wisconsin is known for producing fighters," Cruz said. "When Gov. Scott Walker stood up and led the fight against the union bosses of the public employee unions, and when millions and millions of men and women across Wisconsin stood with Gov. Walker, that fight inspired millions of Americans across this country. It inspired me, it inspired Heidi."

In a down-the-rabbit-hole interpretation of the 1st Amendment, Cruz portrayed every protesting Wisconsinite standing up for workers, as corrupt "special interests."

"It showed that when we stand together as 'we the people,' we can beat the special interests and we can end the corruption."

Cruz wants to be President? To hear one candidate for president call another candidate a "coward," in an argument over their wives...seriously, what is happening in this country, and why is the Republican Party still relevant:



And then this happened...

A Final word on the “Biden Rule,” by Vice President Joe Biden, and GOP wants another Judge Bork!!

Context, that’s what it’s all about.

"So now I hear all this talk about the ‘Biden Rule,’” the vice president said at the Georgetown University Law Center. “It’s frankly ridiculous. There is no 'Biden Rule.' It doesn’t exist.”

He a while to come out and correct Republicans, but Biden finally found the time.

He said there is “only one rule I ever followed on the Judiciary Committee, that was the Constitution’s clear rule of advice and consent.”

Biden defended his record during his years as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, painting Republicans’ Supreme Court blockade as a desperate gambit that “could lead to a genuine constitutional crisis.”

During his time as chairman or ranking member of the Judiciary panel, Biden said, all eight high court nominees received a hearing and a floor vote. 

“Every nominee, including Justice [Anthony] Kennedy — in an election year— got an up-or-down vote,” he said. “Not much of the time. Not most of the time. Every single time.”

Leaving a seat vacant creates the possibility of a 4-4 tie in consequential cases, which leaves a lower court’s decision in place. That could result in a “patchwork Constitution” where laws are unevenly applied throughout the country, Biden said, and in turn “deepen the gulf between the haves and have-nots. The meaning and extent of your federal constitutional rights — freedom of speech, freedom to follow the teachings of your faith or to determine what constitutes teaching of your faith, the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure — all could depend on where you happen to live,” he said. I think most people in this country would call that unfair and unacceptable.”

For comparison, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at what's behind the Republican resentment toward Democratic nominees for the Supreme Court. For Republicans, Judge Robert Bork was the best justice they never had, thanks to the Democrats.

As Franken and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) swiftly pointed out, Bork, whose nomination to the Supreme Court was rejected by a bipartisan 58-42 vote in 1987, received both a vote and a hearing. Nevertheless, Hatch maintained that this vote was a turning point in the politics of Supreme Court nominations. Bork, Hatch claimed, was “one of the greatest legal minds we’ve had,” and Bork’s rejection was the beginning of the cycle of escalating efforts by both parties to keep the other party’s nominees off the Supreme Court, according to Hatch.

What was churning around in that conservative activist legal mind? 

Hatch does have a point. Republicans have long viewed Bork as a fallen martyr,
Judge Bork’s opponents made a weighty case against his nomination in 1987 ... Bork had a long history of criticizing progressive Supreme Court decisions. Bork opposed the doctrine of one person/one vote, which eliminated malapportionment of state legislatures that gave rural votes far more representation than urban voters. He criticized decisions striking down racial covenants in housing and those banning voter literacy tests. He attacked a decision invalidating poll taxes. And he opposed Supreme Court decisions saying that the Constitution forbids the government from discriminating against women — arguing instead that “the Equal Protection Clause probably should be kept to things like race and ethnicity.”

Yes, what a great legal mind?

Bork’s most well-known statement, however, most likely came from a 1963 article he published in the New Republic, which opposed federal bans on race discrimination by businesses. The principle behind such laws, Bork argued, “is that if I find your behavior ugly by my standards, moral or aesthetic, and if you prove stubborn about adopting my view of the situation, I am justified in having the state coerce you into more righteous paths. That is itself a principle of unsurpassed ugliness.” (Bork later repudiated this statement — although he did not repudiate many of his other previously expressed views.)

The NRA's Guns for Kids Programs: Red Riding Hood has a Gun, and Iowa's Toddler Militia?.

Here's a couple of really bad idea's, backed by the radical gun lobby group, the NRA, to put guns in the hands of our kids:

Adding guns to the world of the Brothers Grimm drastically reduces death rates, according to a couple of stories published by the NRA. In the NRA's reimagined fairy tales, putting rifles in the hands of children creates a safer world.

The NRA Family site published its first reimagined fairy tale — "Little Red Riding Hood (Has A Gun)" in January, and followed up with "Hansel and Gretel (Have Guns)" last week.

On Twitter, inspired by the series:

@SarahFMcD wrote: "Prince traveling kingdom 2 find owner of glass slipper shot dead by gun wielding evil stepmother,"


@Scott_Craven2 offered: "The porridge was too cold, the bed was too hard, but this AK47 is just right. Who's up for some bearskin rugs?"

Just a sample of the NRA's fractured fairly tales:

In the NRA's rewrite, Little Red Riding Hood walks through the woods with a rifle in her hands, warding off the wolf along the path. "The wolf leaned in, jaws open wide, then stopped suddenly. Those big ears heard the unmistakable sound of a shotgun's safety being clicked off. Those big eyes looked down and saw that grandma had a scattergun aimed right at him. He realized that Grandmother hadn't been backing away from him; she had been moving towards her shotgun to protect herself and her home.

Or the classic Hansel and Gretel: The two kids set out into the woods to feed the family. Gretel takes down a 10-point buck ... When they see the gingerbread house, they save two boys who were trapped by the witch.

Like all bills named by Republicans and the NRA, they usually mean just the opposite of the legislation. Yahoo News:

The Youth Safety & Parental Rights Act (House File 2281), (would let) people under the age of 14 be permitted to handle “a pistol, revolver or the ammunition” in the presence of an adult. Current law prohibits anyone under 14 to use handguns, and plenty of Iowans want to keep it that way.

Democratic Rep. Kirstin Running-Marquardt, who supports the right to bear arms and worked in a gun store for about five years, spoke out against the bill, saying, “We do not need a militia of toddlers.” Running-Marquardt said ... handguns are simply inappropriate for very young children and don’t even fit their hands.

Regarding “parental rights,” Running-Marquardt noted that there many things children in Iowa are not allowed to do: They cannot drive under 14 (even with parental supervision) or be employed under 10. “You have to balance the rights of the children with their life and safety."

Ya think? Just how did this happen? You can blame one dad's selfish intentions and complete disregard for every other kid in the state:

Nathan Gibson, a hunter, has been lobbying for the bill on behalf of his daughters, Natalie and Meredith, 12 and 10, who share his passion for shooting as a sport. The bill, he said, would allow Natalie and Meredith to participate in youth events with the Scholastic Shooting Sports Foundation. “This is literally about youth scholastic shooting, which leads to eventually, potentially as a father could hope, an Olympic gold medal, scholarships, things like that,” Gibson said to Yahoo News. “It’s about my daughters’ sport.”

Why didn't the bill address a logical age limit for kids participating in competitive sports only? Because Republicans can't govern:

But Running-Marquardt said the bill is so poorly worded that it does not specify an age at which children could use handguns or make exceptions for children training for competitions. The National Rifle Association strongly supports the bill ... Republican Rep. Jake Highfill, who proposed the bill, did not respond to a request for comment from Yahoo News.

Critic uses the "C-Word?" What a weird, inappropriate lie coming from a candidate for the Supreme Court who also broke the judicial code!!!

I don't know why the media isn't picking up on the one glaring problem Rebecca Bradley has...her temperament. Her mean girl antics have reached the surreal stage.

One critic has been using Bradley's own words and deep political resentments against her, destroying her credibility as a judge or justice.

So what does she do? She accused him of using the "c-word" on Twitter. The Journal Sentinel investigated and didn't find any evidence to back up Bradley's juvenile claim.

It's becoming very clear Bradley is undeniably an in your face conservative. It's not something that changes over time, especially now. Why are we even entertaining that possibility?

The "c-word," really? To falsely accused One Wisconsin Now's Scot Ross of using it in his tweets, with no evidence to back it up, makes you wonder what she'll do on the bench to justify some wacky decision:

JS: The c-word. At a Tuesday forum before the Dane County Bar Association, Bradley criticized the director of the liberal group One Wisconsin Now for his postings on Twitter, accusing him of "regularly using the c-word."

The group's executive director, Scot Ross, said he has never done that, and a review of his Twitter feed does not show instances of that happening. Ross has taken criticism from conservatives for his Twitter commentary, such as when he called former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer a "racist anus."

But character assassination is only he beginning. She's even broken the judicial code already, yes, while she's applying for a job on the states highest court:

Kloppenburg criticized Bradley for discussing a recent Supreme Court decision because the losing party has asked the justices to reconsider their ruling. "She's talked about that case when there's a pending motion for reconsideration in that case," Kloppenburg said. "Our judicial code of conduct prohibits any justice from talking about such a case and because of the way ethical complaints are handled against justices right now, it's likely that nothing would come of such an ethical lapse."

Bradley's response was to deny reality:

"An allegation of an ethical lapse, it simply isn't true whatsoever."

Huh? Here's what happened, but shouldn't have:

Kloppenburg's allegation against Bradley was over her willingness to discuss a 4-3 decision last month that found that evidence that was seized when police entered a room without the owner's permission could be used because the police officers were checking on someone's safety. Bradley wasn't on the court when the case was argued, but she said she helped decide it to avoid a 3-3 split that wouldn't have resolved the case.

Bradley was just doing us all a big favor...well, not all of us:

"The people would be deprived of a decision from the Wisconsin Supreme Court. So I elected to participate in those cases, doing my job for the people of Wisconsin so they can get a decision."

The man who lost the case has asked the Supreme Court to reconsider the decision, arguing Bradley's participation in the case violated his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection.

Republican Party Anoints Ryan to be stealth presidential candidate!!!! Even Flipped on "Makers and Takers," the life blood of GOP Policy.

When I read  Charlie Pierce's article in Esquire magazine about Paul Ryan's AIPAC foreign policy speech, he declared...

Paul Ryan's Latest Speech Said One Thing: He's Running

Damn if he wasn't right. Ryan's been everywhere, talking about everything, from Israel to the GOP infused distrust of politics and institutions. Yea, I thought that that was a little odd too. But he's trying desperately to rebuild all the bridges he burned along the way.

Ryan Flips on "Makers and Takers" Agenda...or, Now I Know He's Lying, and Running for President: Hell, he can't take that back. The Republican Party platform is based on idea of "makers and takes," right; makers give jobs, need tax cuts and fewer regulations, and want a free ride. The takers are still getting punished for collecting unemployment, taking food stamps, having plasma TV's, draining our health care system, demanding more and more free stuff from the government. Not anymore?

It's the most breathtaking, blatantly dishonest Republican take back I have ever seen. But Ryan can't pull it off. Like in his first example below, where he automatically assumes other people have bad ideas, and his are better:

Ryan: "If someone has a bad idea, well why don't we tell them why our idea is better." 

What an **shole. Or the whole idea Republican test their assumptions, like...supply side economics. How's that working in Wisconsin, Michigan, New Jersey, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma?

Ryan: "We test their assumptions. And while we're at it, we test our own assumptions too. (check out the goofy shrug that he hasn't quite perfected yet)

Basically, Ryan is now saying what Hillary and Bernie have been saying. Ouch!

Ryan: "Takers' wasn't how to refer to a single mom stuck in a poverty trap, just trying to take care of her family. Most people don't want to be dependent. And to label a whole group of Americans that way was wrong. I shouldn't castigate a large group of Americans to make a point."

I can't wait to see him trash his previous agenda. Oh, he hasn't done that yet? All this from a guy who wouldn't take this kind of talk from the Pope. Just search this blog for the many House bills he's a party to, and then tell me how much he's changed. Search "Ribble" and you'll see a list of House bills he and Reid Ribble voted yes on.

Ryan: "I didn't just say this to be politically correct. I was wrong!"

And the Democrats have been right about this stuff all along, without trying to be president.   

Dumb Ron Johnson wants to Corporate and Special Interest Dark money to reduce the Power of the Press.

As we're finding out, that "money is free speech" shredding of the 1st Amendment was only the beginning.

Dumb Ron Johnson has taken that next jaw dropping step to redefine who's speech is constitutionally protected, a political ratings system to determine who's more deserving.

Forget about the "originalist" view of the 1st Amendment, and that odd confusing "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." Johnson won't have it.

Johnson: "Trust me, we will not allow the Supreme Court to flip, it's not going to happen." 

Johnson: “I have never had the press press me so hard to make a change of position. The press wants the Supreme Court to flip because the press is not particularly interested in freedom of speech."

So Johnson blamed the press, the cornerstone of a free and informed nation, for having no interested in preserving free speech. As Johnson suggested, "originalist" founding father Thomas Jefferson had it all wrong when he made these observations centuries ago:

"Our citizens may be deceived for a while, and have been deceived; but as long as the presses can be protected, we may trust to them for light." 

"No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues to truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions." 

"The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure."

Silly Jefferson believed newspapers actually sparked a healthy public debate over the issues.

It appears Dumb Ron Johnson wants corporate and special interest dark money to "reduce" the power of the press, abridge it with Citizens United:

Johnson: "When other Americans, other than the members of the press, can get their message out, the press’s power is reduced. You engage in campaign finance reform, which restricts free speech, that makes a few members of the press have all the more power. So the press is really not for freedom of speech. They like restrictions in speech because it gives them more power. So again, they want to see the Supreme Court flipped. I got that."

This is a final nail in the coffin of the free press, which has already been delegitimized by right wingers as "liberal." I found it humorous when one of their favorite conservative news sources, Breitbart, fell apart over in-fighting. Even Marco Rubio trashed it as conspiratorial.

Well what do you know, Paul Ryan worries Americans "distrust politics...distrust institutions."

Take a look the list of GOP fabrications below, created over the last 7 years under Obama. Republicans have tried to delegitimize our first black president at every turn. I've underlined the most ridiculous claims:

Paul Ryan to the Rescue: With the resulting take down of Obama, and polling that overwhelmingly believes the U.S. is heading in the wrong direction (reality says otherwise), Paul Ryan has now stepped out to put the finishing touches on their 7 years of anti-government, anti-Obama rhetoric:

Politico is reporting that Ryan is now oddly (and completely out of character) concerned about a divided country, and that Americans "distrust politics ... they come to distrust institutions." What led them to believe that???

Aren't we supposed to distrust government because it just keeps getting in the way, and can't do anything right? And no one wants government to tell us what to do.

Gee, Americans are losing faith in government??? How'd that happen (see list of fabrications above again):

House Speaker Paul Ryan on Wednesday will warn against getting “disheartened” about the current state of politics, saying that Americans can’t lose faith in their government.

In a sweeping speech, the Wisconsin Republican is expected to implicitly rebuke the heated rhetoric and chaos that has defined the Republican presidential primary so far ...

“Looking around at what’s taking place in politics today, it is easy to get disheartened. How many of you find yourself just shaking your head at what you see from both sides? Now, a little skepticism is healthy. 

When people distrust politics, they come to distrust institutions. And we can’t enable it either. 

So I have made it a mission of my Speakership to raise our gaze and aim for a brighter horizon. Instead of talking about what politics is today, I want to talk about what politics can be. I want to talk about what our country can be.”

Ah, "Aim for a brighter horizon." Hey, that sounds like a good slogan for a presidential candidate.

Voter Suppression: Arizona Voters Waited 4 Hours to Vote after Elections called.

Really, no red flags going up? No one is asking WHY Democratic turnout is lower nationwide...not even curious?

That might be changing. The long lines and 4 hour waits to vote in Arizona were hard to ignore. Here are a few important tweets and pictures. Hopefully the media will have a story or two...but I'm not holding my breath:

Ryan uses poll numbers to make Obama's Growing Economy look like we're on the Wrong Path.

Republicans have been relentless trashing the U.S. economy, trying in every way to delegitimize Obama. If you believed the GOP presidential front runners, the country was on the verge of collapse.

This was all by design:

Secret meetings led by House GOP whip Eric Cantor (in December 2008) and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (in early January 2009) in which they laid out their daring (though cynical and political) no-honeymoon strategy of all-out resistance to a popular President-elect during an economic emergency. “If he was for it,” former Ohio Senator George Voinovich explained, “we had to be against it.”

Republicans have made it their business to obstruct everything he does. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said it best in 2012: “Our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term.”

This PolitiFact finding makes it seem like the country is headed in the wrong direction too, based on the GOP's campaign of deception to the American public for the last 7 years:

How could the public feel otherwise, hearing lie after lie on conservative talk media and countless fact free Republican presidential debates. Heck, they even said in public how they planned to delegitimize Obama. Except for "cut to lobbyist," the cliche ridden list of fear based fiction below has been successfully sold to the public, according to the poll Ryan is referencing:

Reality looks completely different. PolitiFact had a responsibility of making note of was how wrong public perception is, and that Ryan's use of the poll number obscures the truth. Many of the numbers have gotten better since I screen captured these. 

Even with all the obstruction, does this look like American is on the wrong path?

  

Trickle Down Voodoo Economic disaster in Kentucky too. Thank you Gov. Brownback.

While the press feeds on the distractions thrown out there by Trump, the consequences of actual Republican policy on everyday Americans continues to be ignored. 

Republicans would lose miserably in November if Americans knew how badly Republicans ran their states into the ground, using supply side economics. At the least, conservatives would have to reevaluate or even replace the party's adopted platform completely, which for them would be way too much work.

You've read about the nightmarish Louisiana experiment under Jindal, get ready for the Kansas disaster. The Kansas "real-live experiment," the term used by Gov. Sam Brownback to describe his supply side plan, was supposed to be the template for the nation. Wow. Seth Meyer's delivered the bad news:



Just in case this video is ever removed, here are parts of the transcript:

We look at what Gov. Sam Brownback did to Kansas and his followers are doing in other states like Oklahoma and Louisiana. “In the last few years, Kansas has become somewhat of a laboratory for Conservative Gov. Sam Brownback who cut taxes for the wealthy and completely eliminated income taxes for small businesses. A plan he boldly described this way … ‘Real-live experiment’ is a terrible sales pitch for something. Brownback claimed this plan was ‘designed to show the rest of the country that these policies could work on a national level. He even told the Wall Street Journal in 2013, ‘My focus is to create a red-state model that allows the Republican ticket to say, ‘See we’ve got a different way, and it works.' He also claimed it would work fast calling it a ‘small business accelerator’ where you literally remove all taxes to spur growth.

The problem, we now know, is that it didn’t work. It failed so spectacularly that Kansas’s economy was downgraded by the S&P. Supporters claimed the plan would generate $323 million in new revenue but it actually produced a $688 million loss. They’re so desperate for cash they even auctioned off pornography and sex toys from a company that owed back taxes and whose property they seized.

Brownback claimed his ‘experiment’ needed more time to work and, surprisingly, voters gave him that time. It still didn’t work. It got worse. So, surely, Brownback raised taxes to cover the shortfall. No. There will be no tax increases. Instead, Brownback decided to balance the budget on the backs of the state’s children, slicing off $106 million in funding and moving $50 million from another fund that pays for Head Start and preschool.

The sad thing is that most Kansas taxpayers don’t even want the cuts Brownback made for their businesses. Last week, the Topeka Capitol Journal reported business owners urged Kansas state House members to raise their own taxes. Asking to have the state raise your taxes is unheard of. If even the small business owners of Kansas want their taxes raised, the results of the experiment are in. Republicans want to replicate these policies on a national level, but even when you buy couch cleaner they tell you to try it on a small patch of fabric first and that’s what happened here. Kansas was the small patch of fabric and not only did the cleaner not work the couch exploded.”

Republican admission Supreme Court just political tool, would anger Chief Justice Roberts.

There is no precedent for what Republicans are doing to delay the nomination of Obama's justice pick. The fact that they've come clean, like it wasn't obvious with all the GOP lawsuits in front of the court, they expected a certain, activist outcome, and got it most of the time.

Chief Justice John Roberts noticed, and said what most of us have been saying for centuries. The trolls will be bumping into walls after this one...:

Ten days before Justice Antonin Scalia died, launching the political battle over who would fill his vacancy, Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a speech slamming the Supreme Court nomination process. In remarks at Boston's New England Law, The New York Times reportsthat Roberts denounced the politicization of the process that he says is really just meant to ensure that nominees are qualified for the job.

"We don't work as Democrats or Republicans," the chief justice said, "and I think it's a very unfortunate impression the public might get from the confirmation process."

Roberts pointed out that while nominees back in his day were easily confirmed, the last three justices — Samuel Alito Jr., Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan — have all faced split votes from the Senate. "Look at my more recent colleagues, all extremely well qualified for the court and the votes were, I think, strictly on party lines for the last three of them, or close to it, and that doesn't make any sense," Roberts said. "That suggests to me that the process is being used for something other than ensuring the qualifications of the nominees."

President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court last week, despite Republicans' promises that they will deny any Obama nominee in favor of letting the next president fill the vacancy. 

Trickle Down Voodoo Economic disaster in Louisiana under "Idiot" Jindal, so says Republican.

While stories like this keep rolling in, the national press doesn't get the connection between every Republican state and those that are tanking economically. Supply side is failing big time. 

Even though it's only one Republican sheriff asking for a reassessment of GOP policies, I'll take it:

Republican Sheriff Newell Normand might be a good ol’ boy from Jefferson Parish in Louisiana, but that didn’t stop him from lobbing a dose of reality at the Metropolitan Crime Commission’s annual awards luncheon on Tuesday. According to a video of the speech posted by WUVE, Normand bad-mouthed the GOP’s Beltway establishment and elected officials, notorious tax cutter Grover Norquist and called former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal an “idiot,” equating him to cult leader Jim Jones.

Normand fully admits that he endorsed and supported Jindal when he ran for governor, but that Jindal’s leadership destroyed the state that Normand holds dear. 

“What a mess. Bobby Jindal was a better cult leader than Jim Jones. We drank the elixir for eight years. We remained in a conscious state. We walked to the edge of the cliff and we jumped off and he watched us and guess what? Unlike Jim Jones he did not swallow the poison. What a shame.

We have to just say no! I’m a Republican but I’m not a hypocrite. We have to look at ourselves critically as a party and figure out where we are and what we’re going to be about. We do not need to face the stupidity of our leadership as it relates to how we’re going to face balancing this budget and talking about these silly issues because we’re worried about what Grover Norquist thinks. To hell with Grover Norquist! I don’t care about Grover Norquist!

We’re worried about the ATR report card. And I have to listen to my Republican counterparts talk about gobbledigook. Blah, blah blah… And I’m so sick and tired of hearing: Obama, Obama, Obama. You know how much intellect it takes to blame something on somebody else? This much! Propose a solution. Work together.” He closed by comparing politics to being married and asked how many people in the audience refuse to compromise in their marriages.

 Here's part of the address by the new Louisiana Democratic Governor, John Bel Edwards with the really bad news:

Trump support biggest in many of the hardest hit Rural conservative areas of the State.

The Journal Sentinel's map charting Trump's favorable numbers matched up oddly to the rural areas of the state that depend so much on the Earned Income Tax Credit. Trump the blusterer, the racist, bigot and a forceful government authoritarian. Yes, a millionaire like Trump, who doesn't really need anybody or their approval, will lift a finger to help?

These are the poor disenfranchised voters getting government help, who vote Republican, and want to downsize government because it doesn't benefit them at all...except when you point out what they are getting. I have no problem with any of the programs, but they do:

And while Paul Ryan and others in congress talk about increasing the EITC, state Republicans went in the other direction, and cut back the EITC in Wisconsin. Confused policy principles should be a bright red flag. 

Defending Bradley's hate speech a twisted contradictory nightmare...

The bottom line for Rebecca Bradley; she has the temperament of a teenage "bad girl." It's obvious and embarrassing. Wisconsin's high court is already the laughing stock of the nation. But there's something else...

Even though the latest Kloppenburg-Bradley debate didn’t offer up anything new, something did occur to me that I think got lost in all the rhetoric. 

Rebecca Bradley has been attacking JoAnne Kloppenburg for being “liberal,” and warned that her presence on the court would result in left wing decisions. Aside from the fact the court, with or without Bradley, would still be an activist conservative one, Bradley then went on to inadvertently destroying her own argument.

In one instance, Bradley concedes her personal opinions are important in this race:

"I'm not the type of person who ever wants to hurt someone," Bradley said. "I've gone through a process of change, I've grown up, I've grown as a person."

But when Kloppenburg questioned any evidence of that change, Bradley flipped it around and claimed it didn't matter:

"We're people. We have opinions on the issues of the day. Once we put the black robe on ... we put those opinions aside."

If that were true, that would have to include everyone, even Kloppenburg. But it didn't.

And if you want to make the argument that only conservatives can push their feelings aside, what would explain the claim by Republicans that the GAB had to be dismantled because even judges can't leave their political leanings behind? They basically said an all partisan elections board was no different than a group of former judges, pretending to be non-partisan. 

Keep in mind that Kloppenburg isn’t the one with a history of exclusion, or bashing individuals for their sexual preference and their choice for president. Only Bradley has done that.

In one of the more bizarre media writings to date, Wisconsin State Journal columnist Chris Rickert somehow compared Bradley's homophobia, women invite rape, liberals voting for Bill Clinton are dumb, partisan Federalist Society membership, and birth control is murder documented statements to Kloppenburg's kind words for retiring union leader John Matthews: 

Now that state Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley has been outed as a reformed (she says) homophobe who leaves oral arguments early to speak before the state’s conservative business lobby ... Kloppenburg said she “couldn’t miss gathering with some of the best people in Wisconsin to honor the most amazing John Matthews.”

Ouch? Smooth Chris, that's the same? God it's fun watching these guys twist into pretzels trying to explain their vacuous unprincipled flip floppy positions.