Facebook > Email > More Pinterest Print Twitter Play

Greg Abbott Picked a Twitter Fight With “Faithless Elector” Chris Suprun

Is unsolicited Twitter beef with constituents something we should expect from our politicians going forward?

By Comments

Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman/AP

Before there was “Make America Great Again,” there was “You’re fired!”

Donald Trump’s tagline on The Apprentice, the NBC reality show that helped maintain the real estate magnate’s profile as he entered the political arena, was a natural fit. It was the sort of thing that sounded authentic coming from Trump. It’s easy to believe that he relished every opportunity he had to shout it at someone who disappointed him in one way or another, whether there were cameras on or not—indeed, his whole reality TV persona was built around that idea.

“YOU’RE FIRED!!” is a little less natural coming from Greg Abbott, but that didn’t stop him from declaring it this morning, in a tweet sent without provocation to GOP elector Chris Suprun—one of the two “faithless electors” the party had in Texas this year, and the only one to pen an op-ed in the New York Times comparing Donald Trump to the Emperor in Star Wars. Electors cast their ballots yesterday, and this morning, the Governor called Suprun out.

There are a few surprising things contained in that missive. First, of course, it’s no coincidence that Abbott referenced Trump’s tagline in singling out Suprun. Abbott’s relationship with Trump has been complicated, and was well reported over the summer in Texas Monthly by Erica Grieder. He was quick to support Trump after he vanquished Ted Cruz in the Republican primary, even as he warned of “dire consequences” following the release of Trump’s infamous “grab them by the pussy” tape. Abbott’s been an avowed Trump supporter, in other words, but one who’s maintained a level of introspection about it that the #MAGA enthusiasts and people with “deplorable” in their display names have been been interested in.

This morning, though, Abbott didn’t just invoke Trump’s tagline—he followed Trump’s pattern of singling out someone with significantly less political power and standing via Twitter to call attention to a dispute. Suprun, of course, has been dealing with attention from people who are furious with him for some time—there’s no shortage of threats either veiled or explicit aimed at the guy online—but the fact that Abbott decided to personally get involved in the fray is unusual for a leader who has tended to position himself as a sober voice for Texans at a time when colleagues like Sid Miller, Dan Patrick, and Ken Paxton make headlines for their more freewheeling approach to things like social media, accusing others of hypocrisy, and/or alleged securities fraud.

All of which raises the question: If Greg Abbott, who’s resisted the temptation to throw down with his constituents on social media is now dropping Trumpisms at folks like Chris Suprun via Twitter, is this what we can expect going forward? Miller and Patrick, like the President-elect, pride themselves on their outspoken public personae—and none of those folks have suffered consequences, “dire” or otherwise, for the things they’ve said. With that in mind, is what we’re seeing from Abbott today something we can expect to see a lot more of? Picking fights with everyone from Rosie O’Donnell to Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter to a guy who works in a factory in Indiana hasn’t cost Trump, after all—if anything, it’s just delighted his supporters. In a state like Texas, where there’ll be voters in 2018 who have never drawn breath at the same time as a viable statewide Democratic candidate, is picking Twitter fights with Chris Suprun or the subject of the next two-minute-hate just good politics?

Suprun, for his part, seems to have been thrown off-balance by the unexpected call-out. He responded a few times, noting that he was only “fired” after he already cast his ballot, retweeting a follower who pointed out that the governor doesn’t do the job of “firing” their constituents, and sharing the response from DPS officials who suggested he suspend his Twitter account when he sent them copies of death threats that he received.

Suprun’s time in the public eye is probably close to an end. Indeed, it would have been safe to guess that his time in the public eye would have ended yesterday, after he cast his ballot for John Kasich instead of Donald Trump as one of Texas’ electors to no avail. But Abbott’s tweet keeps the attention on Suprun for a while longer still. That’s the power of the bully pulpit that tweet-happy politicians like Abbott and Trump are apparently keen to exercise these days.

Related Content

  • WUSRPH

    Abbott has been working on his “tough guy” image for the last few months…He sent out a e-mails about how the Democrats were ganging up on Texas (and him) when Clinton spent a few bucks here…and others warning that he was about the only one standing between Obama doing a bunch of bad things to Texas before he leaves office. All were, of course, fund raisers for him. I suspect he will continue this “fighting governor” message thru the session…even if the fund raising deadline will keep him from combining it with fund raising requests.

  • Fred Talmadge

    I’m afraid the next election cycle is going to be a lot mean tweets. Sad.

  • José

    Really, Governor? Is that truly how you want to present yourself to the public? That tweet was neither clever nor funny, neither bold nor profound. It was simply childish and embarrassing.

    • You’re only saying that because you are a liberal. Don’t deny it. A conservative would think it’s funny.

      • SpiritofPearl

        Just like liberals laugh at Trump impressions on SNL.

      • donuthin2

        The things people find funny is a sign of their intelligence. Conservatives are still watching HeeHaw reruns.

        • Unwound

          i like hee haw reruns.

      • Finchy74

        Nah, this conservative doesn’t. It’s a foolish move by Abbot. Suprun’s little 15 seconds of fame (and probably money) is now over. He should be relegated to a very small footnote of history.

        I do understand Abbot’s animosity toward Suprun, I share it. But the guy deserves to be forgotten.

        • Shelly H.

          If you were truly Libertarian you’d applaud Suprun’s vote of conscience. You should actually read carefully the the wording in the constitution about the electors.

          • Finchy74

            But I’m not “Libertarian”, I’m “libertarian”. The Libertarian party has been co-opted. Just like the Republican party and especially the Democrat party. I’m sure the “Libertarian” party would like me to vote for Hillary Clinton or some other wonderful globalist…such as John Kasich.

            I’m quite familiar with the Constitution and nobody is arguing against his right as an Elector to vote for someone other than Trump. However, given his financial difficulties, his resume inaccuracies, his speaking appearances about the matter sounding like they were written by the DNC, his vote for John “Globalist Sellout” Kasich and his his use of Van Jones’ PR company, you’ll have to forgive me if I’m skeptical that this man made a “vote of conscience”.

            You’ll feel better if you’re just honest with yourself. You don’t like Trump. Suprun didn’t vote for Trump and that makes you feel good because it reinforces your opinion, however ill-informed it might be.

  • Jose Campos

    Well said Mr Gobernor! That person does not deserve any respect!

    • Shelly H.

      Respect is earned and Abbott’s abuse of his office has shown that he has not earned and will probably never be able to re-earn the respect he once was given due to the office he holds. Chriss Suprun understood exactly how the Electoral College was meant to work and voted accordingly. He was more patriotic than all those electors who believed that their pledge to vote a certain way over-ruled the Constitution.

      Trump will have us in a shooting war with China before he takes office.

      • SpiritofPearl

        Amen

      • Finchy74

        lol You find Suprun to only be patriotic because of your obvious dislike for Trump.

        And in terms of a “shooting war with China”, anyone who has been following the world press knows that we just dodged an enormous bullet in terms of conflict with world powers.

        The current administration along with NATO have been antagonizing Russia for the past 24 months. Bomb shelters are being built in every major Russian city because they were convinced America was going to go to war with them. Puntin has made pleas to the American people at the UN to wake up and realize what is happening on the world stage. We’ve been extremely close to world war 3 for two years and 99% of Americans have no idea. Based on her rhetoric, Hillary would have almost certainly made that war happen.

        I won’t pretend to think that I can change your mind on this issue, but at least look at transcripts of speeches and rallies. At every turn, Trump was arguing for dialogue, for detente with Russia and China while Hillary was threatening military consequences.

        • WUSRPH

          You act like mean old Uncle Sam has been picking on innocent, sweet little Vladimir….Some folks can remember something called the invasion of Crimea, and prior to that Georgia, plus stirring up a rebellion in the Eastern Ukraine. NATO and the US have reacted to Russian moves……Try listening to some other news source than Radio Moscow.

          • BCinBCS

            Yet another example of the era of 1984. I remember when conservatives hated communists. Now, they’re best buds.

          • WUSRPH

            They still do…but other than those in the Troll’s imagination, there aren’t enough of them around any more to make them a good target. Trump certainly does not see Putin as being a communist….which he isn’t……he’s just a good old fashion Russian Imperialist Nationalist….

          • BCinBCS

            They still do…

            And the conservative outrage over the Russian interference in our election is….deafening?

        • Shelly H.

          I’ve never hidden my dislike for our idiot-in-chief-elect. He’s unfit to serve, and I vehemently stated that when he announced his candidacy. You are blinded by far-right & the white supremacist ideology that have taken over the Republican party.

          China thinks Trump is weak and Putin thinks he’s a useful idiot.

          • Finchy74

            lol I give you actual information, you give me accusations and rhetoric. This is why your party is losing.

            I’m african american and quite liberal on many issues. But I appreciate your racist remark as a reminder as to why i left the Democrat plantation.

  • BCinBCS

    Two worthless and worn-out phrases:
    “Dy-no-mite” – Jimmie Walker on Good Times
    “You’re fired” – Comrade Donald Trump on The Apprentice

    It’s the circus part of bread and circuses designed to avert the attention of the masses.

  • donuthin2

    The mark of a guy with little intellectual depth.

  • SpiritofPearl

    At least we now know Greg has a pulse.

  • Rules of Blazon

    Donald Trumpski is a white supremacist and a Russian puppet. And so is Jade Helm Greg, because he supports Trumpski.

    • Unwound

      bernie would have won

      • BCinBCS

        Unwound, I like Bernie, I identify more with him than with Hillary so it is not sour grapes when I state that there is no way that he would have won the election.

        • Unwound

          unlike clinton, he would have actually campaigned in the rust belt states that clinton lost, and promoted policies that would have improved their lives. i dont think he would have had the voter apathy issue clinton faced.

          • BCinBCS

            I respect your opinion but still disagree.

          • Unwound

            he surely couldnt have done worse than clinton, or campaigned as stupidly.

          • BCinBCS

            Now there we do agree.

          • WUSRPH

            He could have done substantially worse than Clinton….who, you might remember, won the popular vote by more than 2.8 million votes. While he might have had some additional drawing power to some workers in the Midwest he would have been overwhelmed by the “socialist….communist” onslaught complete with pictures of communist era life in the Soviet Union and Cuba, etc. The GOP would love to have run against him.

          • Unwound

            she also lost the election. the GOP may have loved to run against him, but remember, the dems dream candidate to run against was trump.

            hes currently the most popular politician in the US, commie scum status not withstanding.

          • WUSRPH

            Sanders was never subjected to a 50th of the scrutiny that Hillary was….His attraction was always to a limited far-left and/or politically ignorant group of younger voters…..Just putting price tags on his programs would have been enough to cost him the general election…Some of us remember Gene McCarthy and a few can even recollect Henry Wallace……Bernie is the current candidate for those who live in a political dream world.

          • Unwound

            sanders never had the liabilities clinton had either, or for that matter, the baggage mccarthy had left over from LBJ. and putting price tags on trumps policies really kept him out of office didnt it?

          • WUSRPH

            Sanders had different liabilities than Hillary…but he had his own…..

          • Unwound

            not even close.

          • WUSRPH

            Because it did not happen…we will never know….You can believe Bernie could have won all you want. I will, however, believe that he would have been crushed as badly as McGovern.

          • Unwound

            hmmm

            the most popular politician in the country vs the least popular nominee of all time

            http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html

          • WUSRPH

            Popular because he was basically unknown……The GOP would have made him very well know, very quickly……..Bernie was making the same arguments Trump was…about America gone wrong, etc….That vote was already committed…and it was not a vote that wanted to change the system….they just wanted their piece of it….Bernie represented too much of a change for a basically centralist country.

          • Unwound

            keep telling yourself that.

          • John Johnson

            And he will. Bernie would have kept all the blue collar Dem’s that voted for Trump that won it for him, and kept all the other conventional Dem votes. No one wants to go there.

          • Unwound

            and he would have visited wisconsin and michigan instead of doing fundraisers with gazillionaires in SF and NYC

          • John Johnson

            Exactly.

          • St. Anger
          • Unwound

            the last data we have on sanders states 53.9% approval rating (from late october). obama is currently at 53% via gallup. if you have more current information on sanders, id like to see it.

          • José

            Backup Quarterback Syndrome.

            Sanders was never the nominee. If by some chance he had become the Democratic nominee for President he would have been ripped to pieces and dragged through the mud.

          • Unwound

            funny, 6 months ago dems were saying that there was no way they could lose to trump. now theyre saying theres no way they could have won.

          • WUSRPH

            Maybe some Democrats you knew were saying that there was no way we could lose to Trump, but most of them I know—including me—thought it was going to be close even when the polls were suggesting otherwise…..We hoped she would win….but a whole lot of us had concerns from way before Trump got the nomination about most of the GOP contenders except, in my case, Cruz. I said early on that she was not a good campaigner—too nerdy, etc.—but I have to admit I never thought they would spend time and money in places like Texas and Arizona and ignore the base states of Michigan and Wisconsin….That was more than a bad campaign decision….it was total negligence.

          • John Johnson

            How many times late in the campaign did I post “wait and see” comments to your cocky posts predicting a Hillary victory? I even went so far as mentioning that we could talk about it on the Wednesday after the vote. You are a one-way, selective memory pedant. What a combo. I am chuckling right now. You picked a loser once again.

          • Unwound

            happy new year. bernie would have won

          • José

            I hope you don’t mean me. For the record I have never been a member of the Democratic Party or voted in their primaries. And while I considered Trump a longshot, just like others, I don’t recall ever saying that his chances were impossible. Could Clinton have won? A decisive number of voters in swing states made their choice in the final week. You tell me how that might have changed without the Comey travesty and the hacking DNC of emails.

            Regardless, I don’t think that Sanders really had a chance in either contest. It appeared to me that Clinton pulled a few punches and saved campaign funds, thereby beating Sanders for the nomination only as badly as she had to. The GOP had a wealth of oppo ready to unload on him in the general election. There was no reason to tip their hand early or use it after the convention.

          • Unwound

            i havent found any evidence that the DNC email hack had any effect on the election other than revealing what we already knew. the comey issue however, certainly seems to have done some damage. none of it absolves clinton for running the worst campaign since wendy davis.

            merry christmas, happy boxing day. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2fb108ed3b4987bd56502d75c265064d34e48e900711d213f6cb6f6bccdf31ee.jpg

          • BCinBCS

            And of course, the real irony is that instead of using America’s hatred of Russian communism to defeat Bernie, Comrade Trump embraced Russia to get elected.

          • WUSRPH

            But, rest assured, the GOP would have used that issue against Bernie…..and used it successfully had it been necessary. Politics, after all, does make strange bedfellows.

          • BCinBCS

            I wasn’t arguing that fact, I was pointing out the Republican hypocrisy.

          • WUSRPH

            After al, Hypocrisy is the Official Religion of Politics…

          • BCinBCS

            And especially GOP politics.

    • Unwound

      happy new year. bernie would have won.

  • WUSRPH

    Speaking of Tweets…How about some dangerous ones:

    “Trump will soon be president, and every tweet and other utterance will matter greatly. “The president’s words, as uttered in speeches and other official statements, literally shape American foreign policy,” Shamila N. Chaudhary, a senior fellow at New America, wrote at Politico. “In turn, State Department bureaucrats rely on the commander in chief to articulate clear, thoughtful and consistent views, based on facts and a knowledge of history. Only then can the entire weight of the large State Department bureaucracy follow seamlessly behind him—and carry out his goals.” In other words, the problem with Trump’s tweets isn’t just that they contain lies and speculation; it’s that a steady, sober foreign policy is made impossible by those tweets. If other nations take Trump’s tweets literally, as China did, there is a real possibility of military conflict.”

    (Thanks to the New Republic)

    • SpiritofPearl

      How long before he gets us all killed? Taking bets.

      • WUSRPH

        I have to believe that the “system” will keep him from that….but the last time the world saw such a leader with a tendency to spew out words that caused international tensions his name was Kaiser Wilhelm II of Imperial Germany….He of the “yellow peril” and other such incendiary remarks. The German Foreign Office had to spend much of his time calming down his neighboring nations…but he so poisoned the atmosphere and the attitude toward Germany that we wound up with World War I. I hope the US State Department does not have to do the same for Trump.

        • SpiritofPearl

          Kaiser Wilhelm didn’t have access to Twitter.

          • WUSRPH

            Which makes Trump’s loose mouth on twitter even more of a potential danger.

          • SpiritofPearl

            Precisely my point . . .

    • donuthin2

      Hopefully responsible people will become totally dismissive of anything he says. That is not as problematic as taking him literally. At a minimum it will cause a lot of confusion and inaction. The opposite is too bad to contemplate.

    • BCinBCS

      Speaking of Tweets…How about some dangerous crazy ones:

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/127f535a817bb24baf9a2dede305b3b01b1f631527d07068fc0d7b579952a2e0.jpg

      (Shakes head slowly)

      • WUSRPH

        Let’s see if I understand this one: We start a new arms race with the Russians spending billions (more likely trillions) to add to our nuclear arsenal and delivery systems and encourage other nations (Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and who else) to get their own so that the world will begin to think seriously about the danger of nuclear weapons.

        Huh?

        Even Reagan saw the danger and worked to reduce the number of weapons….We already have more delivery vehicles (nice phrase) than the Russians….and are working on new missile subs and a new manned bomber…plus updating our warheads. What else does he want us to do? How many times do we have to be able to destroy the world?

        • WUSRPH

          Thanks to the Washington Post:

          If he means what he says, this could be the end of the
          arms-control process that reduced 80 percent of our Cold War arsenal,”
          said Joe Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, a
          Washington-based security foundation.

          Former congressman John Tierney (D-Mass.), executive
          director of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, said:
          “It is
          dangerous for the President-elect to use just 140 characters and announce
          a major change in U.S. nuclear weapons policy, which is nuanced, complex,
          and affects every single person on this planet.”

          • WUSRPH

            “Of course the U.S. has more missiles, submarines and aircraft carriers, but what
            we say is that we are stronger than any aggressor.”

            VLADIMIR V. PUTIN,
            Russia’s president, who vowed to continue modernizing his nation’s nuclear
            weapons.

  • WUSRPH
    • BCinBCS

      In their scenario, any idea why the 70% chance that there might be riots in South Korea? (Last graphic)

      Btw, I could easily see the Cuba prediction coming true.

      • WUSRPH

        I suspect the riots in South Korea would be a result of the current crisis over the impeachment of the president AND their prediction of how North Korea will upset everyone by developing a missile with the capacity to hit the US West Coast and call Trump’s bluff.

  • WUSRPH

    I expected some reaction to Trump winning, but this probably a little too much:

    “A supervolcano caused the largest eruption in European history. Now it’s stirring again.”
    (thanks to Washington Post)

  • Dastardly Deeds

    Suprun was sending the most taunting and ridiculous tweets directly to Trump. This guy is off the rails. One tweet made fun of Tump’s hands and another claimed he was sending a message to Trump via an SNL skit.

    Getting a fired tweet was mild in comparison, and well deserved.

  • Michael Areno

    If Suprun is indeed “posing” as a 9/11 Hero he should be a National Social Outcast. He had no business voting against the will of the people and even less morals if he is, in fact, a fraud

    • SpiritofPearl

      But he’d like to try . . . Talk of constitutional conventions come from him regularly.

  • Jay Trainor

    Even as hard as he’s trying, thank goodness Gov. Abbott can’t change the U.S. Constitution.

  • BCinBCS

    I thought that this was important enough to port it to this blog post:

    In the previous blog about Rick Perry and Rex Tillerson, WUSRPH posted a comment pointing out to the many “Trumpartians” that Comrade Trump has already started going back on his campaign promises, He referenced this National Review article that lists many of these about-faces.

    
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443251/donald-trump-abandons-movement-campaign-promises?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20Trending%20Email%20Reoccurring-%20Monday%20to%20Thursday%202016-12-21&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives

    The National Review is a conservative publication founded by Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan’s mentor William F. Buckley, Jr. so its conservative viewpoint about Comrade Trump should be trusted by any true conservative.

    But what about the liberal take on The Comrade? Well, there’s always the liberal economist Paul Krugman who writes:

    [Trump] said lots of things on the campaign trail, but his personnel choices indicate that in practice he’s going to be a standard hard-line economic-right Republican. His Congressional allies are revving up to dismantle Obamacare, privatize Medicare, and raise the retirement age. His pick for Labor Secretary is a fast-food tycoon who loathes minimum wage hikes. And his pick for top economic advisor is the king of trickle-down.

    So in what sense is Trump a populist? Basically, he plays one on TV — he claims to stand for the common man, disparages elites, trashes political correctness; but it’s all for show. When it comes to substance, he’s pro-elite all the way.

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/12/19/reality-tv-populism/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body

    Ya know, it might mean something when a hard core conservative and a hard core liberal come to the same conclusion. It’s looking more and more like the man that many thought would be their populist savior is actually a grifter running a long con.

    • BCinBCS

      “When there’s no need to pander to the sheep (because they’re loyal for reasons that have nothing to do with their own interests) there’s really no reason to be gentle about shearing them.”
      -D. C. Sessions

    • BCinBCS
    • Finchy74

      It’s disingenuous to start your post with this conceit:
      “The National Review is a conservative publication founded by Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan’s mentor William F. Buckley, Jr. so its conservative viewpoint about Comrade Trump should be trusted by any true conservative.”

      Clever, mind you. But disingenuous. The modern day National Review in no way, shape or form resembles the publication that those men founded. The modern day National Review is now populated with NeoCons like Bill Kristol who unsurprisingly, want more NeoCons in government. NeoConservatives such as Jeb Bush, John Kasich and Hillary Clinton. So no, any informed individual would not expect the National Review to approve of a candidate who is not a NeoCon.

      And using Paul Krugman to support your argument? For shame. Krugman’s maid has to put corks on all the dinner forks so that Paul doesn’t poke his own eyes out. The man is an abject fool and has made a career out of feeding incorrect predictions to foolish Liberals.

      • WUSRPH

        I have little use for Kristol and his ilk, but I think you mistake what the NR was and is still. It is a voice for thinking people educated in “classical conservatism” ala Edmund Burke. As such, it clearly would have little interest is supporting a candidate like Trump who is about as far from a true conservative as you can get. Trump, like many Tea-Partiers, can call themselves “conservatives” if they wish, but that does not make it so. You can call a Zebra an Elk, but that won’t make it one.

        • John Johnson

          Please provide your definition of “liberal” and “conservative”.

      • José

        So, for just a minute ignore the names and the labels. Read what they said. Point out specifically what was written and what you dispute and why.

  • WUSRPH

    “His thoughts are so correct,” Trump said

    2,900 explosions in a day. Heavy artillery and tank fire returns to the front
    lines in Ukraine. It was the bloodiest day for the Ukrainian military in five months.

    Yeah, Vladimir certainly knows how to communicate.

  • WUSRPH

    “Let there be an arms race”, say Donald Trump, cuz if there is we will “outmatch them at every pass.”

    I get the impression that somewhere Trump heard or read that Ronald Reagan helped bring down the Soviet Union by engaging them in an arms race that bankrupted their economy. He may think he can do the same…..but what he overlooks is that Reagan DOUBLED the U.S. National Debt in the process and sent us farther down the road to insolvency. But then most of Donald’s plans will probably do that by themselves without the cost of a new arms race so the impact on the deficit is likely to be of little concern to him.

  • John Bernard Books

    checking to make sure the sky hasn’t fallen……

    shaking my head, laughing.

  • SpiritofPearl

    The Orange One wants a ballroom for his castle. Let him pay for it himself:

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/12/trump-wants-to-add-a-ballroom-to-the-white-house.html

    • WUSRPH

      There is a ballroom in the White House….maybe it isn’t big enough for Trump’s grand entrances.

  • WUSRPH

    A Merry Christmas (Xmas) or Happy Holidays or both as appropriate to ALL of you.

    • José

      Peace on Earth, goodwill to all.

    • donuthin2

      and be safe.

  • John Bernard Books

    Our good friend Crooked Hillary wanted the Donald to be her opponent….
    How’s that working out for you dems?
    Merry Christmas dems i hope you got what you wanted….

  • BCinBCS

    I’d like to pass along a word of caution:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3b6755180cbd2df86e02f426bc98b36a0fd7d677b5243e661ddac7776adf4b1e.jpg

    Happy Holidays to all! 😉

  • SpiritofPearl

    Roast beef and Yorkshire pudding at Chez Pearl!

    Celebrate!

    • John Bernard Books

      don’t forget the crow….

    • John Johnson

      You didn’t eat a curry dish. Wow!

  • BCinBCS

    And it begins…

    Seems that the Trump organization has pressured the government of Kuwait to change its National Day celebration from the Four Seasons Hotel to Trump International Hotel.

    Newt Gingrich said in an interview about this that Comrade Trump is a “special” case so the rules may need to be changed for him and, besides, as President, he can simply pardon anyone in his organization that violates the rules.

    (I guess Newt and The Comrade don’t realize that the “rule” that they want to change is a Constitutional law.)

    https://thinkprogress.org/under-political-pressure-kuwait-cancels-major-event-at-four-seasons-switches-to-trumps-d-c-1f204315d513#.eqxu6swq8
    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/trump-mafia-approach-governing

    • WUSRPH

      Why should a old piece of paper stand in the way of The Donald saving the world?

  • BCinBCS
    • SpiritofPearl

      “Dr.

      • BCinBCS

        “Being There” (w/ Peter Sellers)

        • SpiritofPearl

          Imagine

          • BCinBCS

            That’s actually pretty easy.
            Good catch, Pearl.

  • WUSRPH

    A thought for the new year:

    • John Johnson

      In case the rest of you have not noticed, there is no link to Burkablog from the online TM website. BB is done. There are plenty of threads being posted under the Daily News banner, so have at them.

      • WUSRPH

        It still works for me………

        • WUSRPH

          But I do expect more changes as TM continues to try to adapt to the new age of the media. It now has its own Tweet and Facebook sites as well as the BB and the daily post, etc. but I’ve always had the feeling that it has been less successful in adapting to the new world than others That may be part and parcel of being a monthly publication with a smaller staff and longer deadlines for articles, etc. I’ve noticed that many magazines have had more trouble adapting than newspapers which are used to a daily publication and frequent updating…..some of that is the basic difference between the two formats…..but they are adapting or dying. I expect a major push in this direction by the new management. Paul Hobby isn’t spending $25 million to buy a dying publication….He clearly has major plans for making it even more influential than it has been.

      • WUSRPH

        I have tried it from every TM site I can find and it works with no problem. You must have caught it at some really unusual moment.

  • WUSRPH

    Since he says it never happened, it would only be appropriate for Trump to reverse the sanctions and steps taken today to punish the Russian’s hacking……Wonder if he has the you know what’s to back up his statements…..More likely, he will gradually and quietly repeal them out of pubic sight.

    • José

      We will not see hacked emails from the RNC or Trump campaign.
      Releasing the emails is sabotage. That’s what the Russians and Wikileaks did to Clinton.
      Holding emails as extortion is how they would use them against Trump.

      • WUSRPH

        But I doubt extortion would work with Trump. He is such a megalomania that he would be convinced that they could release anything they have and it would make no difference. Remember, his line about how he could shot someone on Fifth Avenue and it would have no affect. He really believes that.

  • WUSRPH

    Paxton is at it again….Now he is challenging a Texas state law, approved by the Legislature years ago, that sets aside 4 of the 46 leadership posts of the State Bar for minority group members….He is claiming that it is unconstitutional discrimination against White males, like him, by setting a quota of offices not open to Whites.

  • WUSRPH

    Something to keep in mind when they start talking about vouchers in January…It gives taxpayers money to more kids who never attended public schools.

    “Indiana’s voucher system offers hint of school policy in the era of Trump

    As Donald Trump signals his intent to pour billions of federal dollars into efforts to expand vouchers and charter schools, many public school advocates say Indiana offers a cautionary tale. While the state’s voucher program was touted as a way to offer poor and lower-middle-class families an escape from public schools that have failed them, more than half of its recipients have never attended Indiana’s public schools.”
    (Thanks to the Washington Post)

  • WUSRPH

    But Trump says we should just forget about it:

    “A code associated with the Russian hacking operation dubbed Grizzly Steppe by the Obama administration has been detected within the system of a Vermont utility, according to U.S. officials.

    While the Russians did not actively use the code to disrupt operations of the utility, according to officials who asked for anonymity in order to discuss a security matter, the penetration of the nation’s electrical grid is significant because it represents a potentially serious vulnerability. Government and utility industry officials regularly monitor the nation’s electrical grid because it is highly computerized and any disruptions can have disastrous implications for the function of medical and emergency services.”
    (thanks to the Washington Post)

    • John Johnson

      Read new post above…I want to see your response.

      As far as this post goes …do you think that the U.S. is not the most prolific hacking entity in the world? Did you see the documentary on the hacking of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges, and the mistake made that allowed others to trace it back to us?

      This cyberwarfare is no different than nuclear proliferation. Everyone capable is deep down in underground bunkers working their asses off trying to develop new “in’s” and new firewalls.

      We can do great damage to any computer generated control systems in the world. Many can do the same to us. It is a standoff.

      The Russians tested the waters during our last campaign period. Obama did nothing. Every line in the sand he drew got obliterated by feet stepping all over it; every bow he made let people know he was a puss.

      Our allies are lining up to criticize Obama/Kerry’s Israel policy. They can’t wait for Trump to take office. No one respects Obama. He has been a joke of a President. They were all thinking what Netanyahu was saying, but bit their lips.

      • WUSRPH

        You said you wanted to see my response to your long post. I made it. What is your response?

        As tp Russian hacking…does that mean we should, as Trump suggests, just forget it….Obama at least is making pay some penalty……Of course, Trump may have a different view since he benefited from what they were doing.

    • John Johnson

      Please repost your prior post about my looking something up. It disappeared off my screen.

      • WUSRPH

        Is this what you mean?

        WUSRPH John Johnson • 2 hours ago

        I see that while the rest of us where enjoying Xmas you spent your time digging thru the internet looking for data that you though made some sort of a point. You’ve asked me to comment on your entry…but I find that somewhat difficult since you give us no source and no data to back up many of your claims. In addition, much of what you claim is based on a misleading, distorted hypothesis. To make sense of it—and illustrate your errors—I would have to spend a number of hours digging out your sources and then trying to determine the validity of their claims. I do not think that would be worth my time, however, I have done a little checking on a couple of items.

        Let’s start with your unintended but nevertheless humorous attack on the Obama Administration based on a claim that it had no business experience and thus, you infer, did worse than its predecessors. You give no sources so I will accept your numbers…I find this entry somewhat humorous in that your thesis of better government with more business experience is totally undermined by comparing your figures with history. This is most obvious in comparing the George W. Bush Administration with Obama. According to your numbers Bush was NO. 2 among all the listed presidents with 55% of his staff having business experience compared to Obama’s 8%. If having business experience makes so much difference, how can you then explain how the vaunted 55% Bush Administration led us into the worst Recession since the Great Depression while the 8% Obama not only led us away from that economic collapse and into one of the longest periods of economic expansion in US history? (PS the numbers of business background people in both the FDR and Wilson administrations is also high….and these are the administrations that most conservatives say were the most hostile to business.)

        Now let’s move to your claim that there are more welfare recipients in 11 states than workers. You give us no data or source for this claim, but I suspect that it probably came from a column by Brandon Gaille

        http://brandongaille.com/welfa

        which, similarly presents no data or source for the claim. This makes it impossible to validate. However, I did take a few minutes to look into it and found several basic problems with the data on which it appears to be based.

        First, it can only make its figures work if it uses a greatly expanded definition of “welfare” that covers many people who are not generally considered to be welfare by including anyone “getting benefits from means-tested federal programs. For example, to make your claim work there would have to be nearly 15 million people on “welfare” in California since there are 14.6 million employed workers in that state. Two examples of the kinds of programs that have to be classified as “welfare” to make this analysis work are the SSI program of aid to aged, disabled and handicapped outside Social Security and various veterans pensions that are wealth tested. It also includes taxpayers who qualified for the Earned Income Tax Credit. I cannot tell from your post, but some advocates of your hypothesis even include unemployment compensation under their definition of welfare.

        Second, the numbers it uses are based are cumulative in many cases double-count people. For example, they obtain the TOTAL number of persons receiving “welfare” by counting the number of persons receiving benefits in each category of service and add that to the totals for other services to get the overall total. This overlooks the likelihood that a person who receives TANF may also receive food stamps and, in effect, counts them as being two different people. This dramatically increases the numbers of recipients. The number is also inflated by the fact that, if a single person in a household receives a benefit, ALL residents in the household are counted as being welfare recipients. (This method of counting, in fact, probably doubles the number of people involved….For example, it produces a total number of welfare recipients of more than 100 million when the number of actual people is closer to 52 million.)

        Third, when it compares the number of employed people with the number of welfare recipients it fails to take into account that many times they are often the same people. For example, there is at least one working person in more than 23% of the households on TANY and that more than 60% of those who wee capable who received food stamps were employed. Thus, rather than being leeches on the system, as you infer, many of those on “welfare” are contributing workers.

        Fourth, the number of welfare recipients also include children and the aged who are not considered part of the work force.

        I could go on but, rather than continue to explain the world to you, I would refer you to an column at

        http://www.politifact.com/pund

        which thoroughly examined a similar claim that there were more welfare recipients in the US than employed people by Terry Jeffrey of CNSNews.com that appeared on TownHall.com, which appears to be another one of your sources.

        I would also refer you to an article from the Washington Post for a more balanced view of who and how many people receive benefits from the government.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com

        PS. Like you I have not included most of my sources……You can look them up as I had to do for yours.

        • WUSRPH

          To be blunt, your claim is a perfect example of the old saying attributed to everyone from Mark Twain to British Prime Minister Disraeli that there are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics.

  • John Johnson

    Looking for comment:

    “Intellectuals can persuade the public that government programs are good for us all, which sound ok and feel good, but are not practical in
    terms of implementation. They hide in academia, and are seldom touched by the real world. Here are the facts:

    1.
    California
    New Mexico
    Mississippi
    Alabama
    Illinois
    Kentucky
    Ohio
    New York
    Maine
    South Carolina
    These 11 States now have More People on Welfare than they do Employed!!!

    2.
    Last month, the Senate Budget Committee reports that in fiscal year
    2012, between food stamps, housing support, child care, Medicaid and
    other benefits, the average U.S. Household below the poverty line
    received $168.00 a day in government support.

    What’s the problem with that much support?
    Well, the median household income in America is just over $50,000, which
    averages out to $137.13 a day.
    To put it another way, being on welfare now pays the equivalent of
    $30.00 an hour for 40 hour week, while the average job pays $24.00 an
    hour.

    3.
    A recent “Investor’s Business Daily” article provided statistics from a
    survey by the United Nations International Health Organization:
    Percentage (%) of men and women who survived a cancer five years after
    diagnosis:
    U.S. 65%
    England 46%
    Canada 42%

    % of patients diagnosed with diabetes -received treatment within 6
    months:
    U.S. 93%
    England 15%
    Canada 43%

    % of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
    U.S. 90%
    England 15%
    Canada 43%

    % referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
    U.S. 77%
    England 40%
    Canada 43%

    Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
    U.S. 71
    England 14
    Canada 18

    % of seniors (65+), with low income, who are in “excellent health”:
    U.S. 12%
    England 2%
    Canada 6%

    And now…for the last statistic:
    National Health Insurance?
    U.S. NO
    England YES
    Canada YES

    4.
    Check the last set of statistics!!
    The percentage of each past president’s cabinet… who had worked in the
    private business sector…prior to their appointment to the cabinet.
    You know what the private business sector is: a real-life business…not
    a government job.

    Here are the percentages.
    38% T. Roosevelt
    40% Taft
    52% Wilson
    49% Harding
    48% Coolidge
    42% Hoover
    50% F. D. Roosevelt
    50% Truman
    57% Eisenhower
    30% Kennedy
    47% Johnson
    53% Nixon
    42% Ford
    32% Carter
    56% Reagan
    51% GH Bush
    39% Clinton
    55% GW Bush
    8% Obama

    This helps explain the bias, if not the incompetence, of this current
    administration: ONLY 8% of them…have ever worked in private
    business!

    That’s right! Only eight percent—the least, by far, of the last 19
    presidents!

    And these people are trying to tell our corporations how to run their
    business?

    How can the president of a major nation and society, the one with the
    most successful economic system in world history, stand and talk about
    business when he’s never worked for one?

    Or about jobs when he has never really had one?
    And, when it’s the same for 92% of his senior staff and closest
    advisers?

    They’ve spent most of their time in academia, government, and/or
    non-profit jobs or as “community organizers.”

    • BCinBCS

      JJ, it’s the same old crap with you over and over. Well, thanks to the Russians and the FBI, your boy is in power and he has loaded his cabinet with millionaire businessmen so everything should be utopia and unicorn rainbow farts from January 19th onward. Rather than counter a lot of your nonsense, I’m going to sit back, grab some popcorn and watch.

      • John Johnson

        Well, well, well…you are finally coming around. If your memory isn’t shot, you will remember that I have been suggesting you do just this since Nov. 9th.

        • BCinBCS

          Countering your nonsense and sitting back waiting for Comrade Trump to implode are two separate matters. I’m tired of dealing with one (thanks WUSRPH for picking up the slack) and expect the other to be extremely sad but fascinating to watch.

    • WUSRPH

      I see that while the rest of us where enjoying Xmas you spent your time digging thru the internet looking for data that you though made some sort of a point. You’ve asked me to comment on your entry…but I find that somewhat difficult since you give us no source and no data to back up many of your claims. In addition, much of what you claim is based on a misleading, distorted hypothesis. To make sense of it—and illustrate your errors—I would have to spend a number of hours digging out your sources and then trying to determine the validity of their claims. I do not think that would be worth my time, however, I have done a little checking on a couple of items.

      Let’s start with your unintended but nevertheless humorous attack on the Obama Administration based on a claim that it had no business experience4 and thus, you infer, did worse than its predecessors. You give no sources so I will accept your numbers…I find this entry somewhat humorous in that your thesis of better government with more business experience is totally undermined by comparing your figures with history, This is most obvious in comparing the George W. Bush Administration with Obama. According to your numbers Bush was NO. 2 among all the listed presidents with 55% of his staff having business experience compared to Obama’s 8%. If having business experience makes so much difference, how can you then explain how the vaunted 55% Bush Administration led us into the worst Recession since the Great Depression while the 8% Obama not only led us away from that economic collapse and into one of the longest periods of economic expansion in US history?

      Now let’s move to your claim that there are more welfare recipients in 11 states than workers. You giver us no data or source for this claim, but I suspect that it probably came from a column by Brandon Gaille

      http://brandongaille.com/welfare-statistics-by-race-state-and-payment

      which, similarly presents no data or source for the clam. This makes it impossible to validate. However, I did take a few minutes to look into it and found several basic problems with the it.

      First, it can only make its figures work if it uses a greatly expanded definition of “welfare” that covers many people who are not generally considered to be welfare by including anyone “getting benefits from means-tested federal programs.”

      Second, the numbers it uses are based are cumulative in many cases double-count people. For example, they obtain the TOTAL number of persons receiving “welfare” by counting the number of persons receiving benefits in each category of service and add that to the totals for other services to get the overall total. This totally overlooks the possibility that a person who receives TANY may also receive food stamps and, in effect, counts them as being two different people. This dramatically increases the numbers of recipients. The number is also inflated by the fact that, if a single person in a household receives a benefit, ALL residents in the household are counted as being welfare recipients.

      Third, when it compares the number of employed people with the number of welfare recipients it fails to take into account that many times they are often the same people. For example, there is at least one working person in more than 23% of the households on TANY and in more than 60% of those on food stamps;

      Rather than continue to explain the world to you, I would refer you to an column at

      http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jan/28/terry-jeffrey/are-there-more-welfare-recipients-us-full-time-wor/

      which thoroughly examined a similar claim that there were more welfare recipients in the US than employed people by Tom Jeffrey of CNSNewscom that appeared on TownHalll.com, which appears to be another one of your sources.

      • WUSRPH

        To be blunt, your claims are a perfect example of the old saying attributed to everyone from Mark Twain to British Prime Minister Disraeli that there are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics.

  • John Johnson

    Just one more example of the WPE’ers failure to lead:

    Central Americans again surging across border in sign U.S. policies have failed http://www.star-telegram.com/news/nation-world/national/article123743934.html

  • WUSRPH

    As we look forward to the new year with all its challenges, including the uncertainties of a Trump presidency, I offer my best wishes to all of a fruitful and safe New Year.

  • John Bernard Books

    Some of us could see the train wreck coming after 8 years of Obama…
    “There are five stages of liberal denial, painfully exposed in 2016 by political developments such as the Brexit referendum and the Trump election.
    1. Mockery The first stage of liberal denial has been ongoing for decades and reflects liberal confidence in itself and the political system. Populists and other illiberal democrats are mainly mocked for being inarticulate and uninformed; amateurs that barely put a scratch on liberal self-confidence. In fact, these populists only strengthen it, their stupidity evidence that they are incapable of replacing us.”
    Liberals really believe they are the smartest people in the room…
    “2. Outrage
    The second stage is that of liberal outrage, which has dominated 2016 around the world—but particularly within liberal circles in the U.K. and U.S, the countries most shaken by the so-called populist surge. During this stage liberals are still confident about their dominance but are starting to worry about the illiberal challenge. Hence, the outrage is not just addressed toward fellow liberals but is also meant to shock potential populist supporters into submission. How can anyone support [insert illiberal challenger] given that they do/say [insert illiberal action/statement]?”
    Liberals believe only they have the right to free speech…
    “3. Disbelief
    In the third stage, liberals know that they have won but we don’t yet believe it.
    4. Conspiracies
    When it finally has sunk in that the election/referendum has been lost, liberals enter the fourth stage of denial, slowly but steadily accepting that some voters have actually rejected the liberal consensus. However, still in denial, they argue that is not a real rejection of liberalism; or, if you wish, not a rejection of real liberalism.
    5. Democratic Denial
    The final, and ultimate, stage of liberal denial is the rejection of the democratic legitimacy of the new political reality.”

    The dem party is in total disarray but liberals firmly believe they are in charge….

  • SpiritofPearl

    Mr. W,

    • donuthin2

      The Press like many things are a reflection of their constituency and that too me, is most discouraging. We seem to be reduced to the lowest common denominator. It is true in public schools, universities and local, state and national government. For the most part, the public does not want the truth, so those delivering the message are limited in how far they can push the truth and survive. Generally things, whatever they are, have to get really bad, before they are reversed as we as a whole stay in denial for too long.

      • SpiritofPearl

        Things are now officially “bad.”

    • BCinBCS

      Thanks for the links, Pearl, they were interesting – especially part 1.
      I looked and even followed his/her prior articles but I could not discover the author’s name. Does anyone know it?

      • WUSRPH

        This is what it says on the masthead:

        PressThink, a project of the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute at New York University, is written by Jay Rosen.

        • BCinBCS

          It’s always easy to make mistakes when one assumes and I assumed that Jay Rosen was the editor of PressThink and some other reporter had written the article – I had no idea that it was a one man show.

          I was curious about the author because the article was so insightful. I am always impressed (and a bit envious) by someone who can aggregate disparate ideas into a cohesive, logical theme. If all of the article was his original analysis, I am very impressed.

      • SpiritofPearl

        He is Jay Rosen, NYU journalism prof.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Rosen

        He has a blog called PressThink. I found the links on Erica’s twitter feed, a good source of info on journalism and Texas politics.

    • John Bernard Books

      Maybe JJ and his cohart ain’t the problem….

  • donuthin2

    Does anyone have a suggestion for a blog that is similar to what BB was in the past? I enjoyed the diverse opinions of many and thought Burka had a unique ability to create discussion from both sides of the issue. I have about given up here as it seems that TM has no commitment to trying to rehabilitate BB.

    • WUSRPH

      I think three things have affected BB lately. First, the loss of Erica which meant no one was assigned the job; second, the holiday season where, unless you are doing “year wrap up” pieces, there is not much happening with a Texas angle—which is supposed to be its main area; and, third, the change in management and ownership. The combination of all three have made it sort of an afterthought for TM for a couple of months….leading to fewer threads and less interest by its followers. But I expect this to change with this new year. Whether BB survives in its current format is unsure, but, I remain convinced that TM will have some form of a blog covering the Legislature whether it be BB or something under another name. I also think that, with that slant, it can draw enough interest from a broader field of posters. At least, as JJ would say, that is how I see it.

      • John Bernard Books

        There isn’t a market for a few malcontents to gather and bash the producers. That is why Rush, Fox News or Drudge is #1 and has no competition.
        There is a reason dems haven’t won a statewide office in over 20 years.
        Liberals just “don’t get it.”

    • SpiritofPearl

      Lean left: lawyersgunsandmoney.com, balloonjuice.com, juanitajeans.com

    • dave in texas

      I’m replying several days later to try and prevent a troll infestation of one of my favorite sites. It’s the Atlantic Discussions Channel.

      https://disqus.com/home/channel/theatlanticdiscussions/

      It was created by some folks who were sick of the cesspool that The Atlantic’s comment section had become. There’s not a whole lot that’s Texas-specific, but it’s a good place to discuss politics. It’s heavily moderated, so trolls get banned pretty quickly if all they have to offer is trolling. It certainly leans liberal, but there are several conservative regulars who make it a good place hear opposing viewpoints without the usual hate-mongering, probably because liberal trolling and conservative-bashing will get you shut down the same as liberal-bashing will. There are discussions on lots of other stuff besides politics, usually based on an article from a newspaper or magazine. There are also threads that are just fun (be prepared to choose Team Pie or Team Cake), a couple of daily open threads, etc. Check it out; it’s absolutely become one of my favorite places on the interwebz.

  • John Bernard Books

    Are liberals simply clueless…..
    ““The president prides himself on the fact that his administration hasn’t had a scandal and he hasn’t done something to embarrass himself,” Jarrett said in an interview broadcast on CNN Sunday.”
    http://nypost.com/2017/01/01/obamas-closest-adviser-says-president-has-been-scandal-free/

    Dems fail to see the connection between using the IRS to “get citizens” and losing the 2016 election.

  • WUSRPH

    Vanity, Oh Vanity thy name is TRUMP.

    Did you see that The Donald is made a CNN for not using a prettier picture of him on a book. He’s taken on job of National Picture Editor as well as National Leader…..but then, to perryphrase an old song, “He’s so pretty….”

    • BCinBCS

      W, I’m glad that you went all Leonard Bernstein on us because I didn’t know if I should post the following:

      I do not like rap music but I do like decent poetry and, as a product of the 60’s, I can get into dissent. In my ramblings around the intetoobs I ran across this British poet and rapper and was fixated. Give her a listen and let me know what you think.

    • José

      Any experienced politician would know that it only gets worse from here. Once Trump assumes office he will get blamed for all sorts of things, not all of which are his fault. Criticism and ridicule will increase. It’s going to be tough for a thin-skinned man with a childish temperament. The dude might well blow a gasket.

      • WUSRPH

        Back in the olden days when I was a reporter there was a know rule—never piss off the photographer or the picture editor….You would pay for it. Most learn to live with it….but, as you note, Trump is very, very thin-skinned. If he had the power, he would probably mandate the use of an “official photograph”.

  • WUSRPH

    I assume you saw that State Rep. Mondo Martinez what shot in the head by a bullet some idiot fired into the sky to celebrate the New Year The perpetrators of this old traditional way of celebrating were absent the day they talked about gravity in school. He says he’s now going to introduce a bill to ban such “celebratory” shooting. (Of course, it is already illegal inside most city limits). You want to bet that the NRA and the Texas Rifle Association and Rep. Stickland all oppose it as a restriction of our Second Amendment right to be a fool.

  • John Bernard Books

    2016 was the year of the dem meltdown….
    “The most notable damage was located deep in the VIP room of the Clinton camp. A custom 150 inch ultra HD TV, a gift from the Saudi Arabian government, was found with a broken screen. The damage was caused by a $950,000 bottle of champagne that was believed to have been thrown at the screen by the former presidential candidate some time during the election.

    Early in the morning, the custodial staff were greeted by flipped-over tables as the floors were covered with expensive food, drinks, and appetizers. Broken champagne flutes and gilded silverware were also seen scattered around the would-be party room.

    The most telling sign of a massive meltdown was the cake. The pastry that had once proudly displayed the presidential seal, was violently flung against the walls in chunks. A broken topper from the cake in the shape of the white house was discovered lodged firmly into the drywall near the dessert table.”
    http://republicbroadcasting.org/news/alleged-cnn-report-on-hillary-on-election-night-a-shocking-portrait-of-a-woman-gone-berserk/

    or woman gone berserk….we all see it here.

  • SpiritofPearl

    Tell me

  • WUSRPH

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/category/the-daily-202/?utm_term=.79743ffb3181&wpisrc=nl_daily202&wpmm=1

    Important dates for 2017…Note the debt ceiling deadline in March….It will be interesting how the “King of Debt”, as Trump dubbed himself, handles that one……He said all we had to do was print more money….

  • PatBryanTX2

    Republicans have already lost all veracity saying “We didn’t need Truth any way.”
    But now, in order to self-justify and rationalize their installing the most vulgar lowlife Russian agent they could find as leader of the Free World, it is necessary for the entire party to abandon every facade of class, style or propriety.
    Go ahead, GOPers, wallow in the caca with Wee Donnie.