Facebook > Email > More Pinterest Print Twitter Play

Meet The Texas Presidential Elector Who Might Not Vote for Trump

Art Sisneros, an industrial welding supplies salesman, could be Texas’s first ”faithless elector.”

By Comments

Photo by Charlie Leight/Getty Images

On December 19, Texas’s 38 presidential electors will assemble in Austin to cast their votes for president. Typically, all 38 would vote for the candidate who won the popular vote in Texas—in this case, Donald Trump. But 2016, clearly, is not a normal year. During the general election, at least three Texas GOP electors publicly expressed ambivalence about voting for Trump—Chris Suprun, Marty Rhymes, and Art Sisneros. Last week, Suprun said he would be supporting Trump after all. Rhymes followed suit on Monday.

That leaves Sisneros, a forty-year-old industrial welding supplies salesman from Dayton, a town of about 7,000 in Liberty County, northeast of Houston. Contacted by phone on Wednesday, Sisneros said that he’s still considering his vote. “I honestly still have not made my decision yet,” Sisneros said. “I’ve got three options—to vote for Trump, to be faithless and vote for somebody else, or to resign.”

Unlike twenty-nine states (and the District of Columbia) with laws requiring its Electoral College representatives to vote according to the popular vote, Texas’s electors are free to cast their ballot however they want. Over the course of history, there have only been 157 of these so-called “faithless electors” who went against the popular vote in their state. But it’s never happened in Texas. The two state parties only require electors to sign an affidavit that they will vote according to the will of the people. The Texas Republican Party did not respond for requests for comment.

Texas elector Art Sisneros
Texas elector Art Sisneros

Courtesy of Art Sisneros

Sisneros, a libertarian and a Christian, supported Rand Paul in the Republican primary; for president, he wrote in Thomas Hoefling, a little-known anti-abortion activist from Iowa whom Sisneros called “the only qualified” candidate in the race. The day before the general election, Sisneros published an essay entitled “Biblical Voting in the Age of Trump” detailing his qualms with the president-elect on his personal website. The essay closely examines a number of passages of scripture in an attempt to divine whether “it is acceptable for a Christian to vote for a man like Trump for President.” Sisneros concludes that it is not:

It seems clear to me that God both calls me to vote and directs me to only vote for men who fear Him and are just according to God’s law. He doesn’t expect or allow me to add to his qualifications and seek for perfection. He also doesn’t hold me accountable for all the sins that these qualified men commit once in office. He does, however, give me clear commands for who is qualified and expects me to be obedient with my calling as a voter. Therefore, I can not in good conscience vote for Donald Trump for President.

Although he couldn’t bring himself to cast a ballot for Trump in the general election, he’s having a harder time deciding what to do with his Electoral College vote. “The principle still applies, but the difference is that as an elector I’m voting as a representative of my congressional district,” he explained. “And so the question becomes, did they vote for me because they trust my judgment and my ability to make that decision? Or was their vote in the confidence of the pledge I signed at the [state GOP] convention that I would vote for the nominee? That’s where the tension is.”

Since the election, Sisneros has been besieged by supporters of both Trump and Clinton urging him to vote for their candidate. He receives about a hundred emails a day, as well as countless phone calls and Facebook messages. That feeds into the national effort currently underway to persuade Republican members of the Electoral College to block Trump by switching their vote to either Clinton or a different Republican. A petition on Change.org calling on the Electoral College to vote for Clinton has received over four million signatures, making it the most popular petition in the site’s history. And two Democratic members of the Electoral College have launched a campaign to persuade their Republican colleagues to block Trump.

Sisneros seems unlikely to vote for Clinton even though she won the national popular vote. He argues in his essay that she is at least as unqualified for the office as Trump: “There is no doubt that Trump has said and done things that are too depraved to be repeated here, but so has Hillary Clinton, his opponent in this race for the White House.”

Although he originally decided to run for elector at the GOP state convention “on a whim,” Sisneros has since given the position serious study, including reading several books about the history of the Electoral College. “In the beginning, it wasn’t even based on party,” he said. “States would just select the wisest people they knew in a particular area. We’ve gotten so far away from what the original intent was. So how do we get back there—how do we reform the system? And what does that look like?”

Related Content

  • WUSRPH

    A man of conscience…rare in these days.

  • Louann Platter

    When he ran for elector at the convention, he knew who was on the ballot. He gave his oath–his word. A Christian should feel bound by his sworn oath.

    • jadedhaven

      A Christian should put no other before God, including politicians or political parties. To do so is idolatry.

      • Louann Platter

        By your reasoning, I guess he already did when he swore an oath. And of course there’s the scripture about not swearing but to let your yea be yea etc. Purity is hard. Keeping your word, especially your sworn oaths, a little easier.

        • Shelly H.

          Lovely twisting of scripture.

          The “oath” that the GOP required electors sign isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. Those states that passed laws binding electors to the popular vote of their state are also worthless since if they were challenged SCOTUS would strike them down. The wording of the electoral college in the Constitution is one of the few areas where it is perfectly clear. In this instance the Constitution is what should be followed, not what a political party, or state legislature decrees.

          The states can choose electors in any fashion they deem acceptable, what they can not do is require electors to vote a certain way. A lot of people hate the electoral college because they do not understand its purpose. The people do not and never have been the ones to elect the President. The people vote to tell their state who their choice is for President and each state’s electors may listen to the preference of its citizens, or if it deems that the citizens have made an unwise choice to vote in the best interests of the state even if it is not what the majority voted for.

          What or who is popular is not always the best choice.

  • jadedhaven

    Mr. Sisneros sounds like a conscientious and thoughtful man who values the teachings of his faith. A bright light of Christianity stranded in a sea of amoral republicans, good luck to you sir.

  • José

    If Mr. Sisneros follows his conscience and votes for someone other than Trump, as is his Constitutional right, there could be an added benefit– it might finally spur some action on reforming the Electoral College. Especially if enough electors abandon Trump and throw the selection of the President to the House of Representatives. Whether or not we keep something like the EC or replace it with a straight national popular vote or some other method, something ought to be done to fix the current scheme where electors are bound to a particular candidate, sort of but not really. The original intent of the Constitution is clear and still in effect, giving electors the freedom to vote as they choose. If people don’t like the idea of so-called faithless electors then they need to change the Constitution, not just count on social pressure and hope.

    • Jed

      the problem is, the republicans, who are closest to controlling enough states to actually call a constitutional convention, are the ones who systemically benefit from the way the electoral votes are allocated (it disproportionately increases the voting power of small/rural states, almost all of which are red, which is why we have gwb & trump).

      so, barring an EC revolt this time, this would be the *last* thing that would come up at a constitutional convention.

      • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

        Its working as intended. Elections have consequences. You lost, we won, get over it.

        Those last two quotes are from Barack Obama.

        • Jed

          what is it with you people?

          i am simply saying what the constitution says.

          why are all these self-proclaimed moderates and constitutional conservatives suddenly so quick to dismiss the constitution?

          i don’t expect anything to happen next month. but denying that it would be allowed is to court treason.

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            BS, you are whining, your statement with regard to this is how we got GWB and Trump belies your intent.

            Deflection and projection — the two primary weapons of the progtroll.

          • Jed

            “BS, you are whining, your statement with regard to this is how we got GWB and Trump belies your intent.”

            no, it just belied an understanding of math.

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            And a passive-aggressive personality coupled to your blind belief in progressive ideology.

            If you are going to insult me, at least be man enough to not hide behind veiled insults.

            I’ll put my education and accomplishments up against yours any day of the week junior.

          • Jed

            what are you talking about?

            i haven’t insulted you at all (not yet anyway). if anyone is projecting, it ain’t me.

            what part of what i said do you find objectionable? what part of the arithmetic of electoral votes do you disagree with?

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            What I am talking about is your passive-aggressive statement about you having an understanding of math that I don’t have.

            Done with you, you aren’t worth my time.

          • SpiritofPearl

            You lose.

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            No, we won.

          • SpiritofPearl

            “We”?

          • Jed

            i didn’t imply that you don’t get the math. you may have inferred it, but my statement was only about me (defending myself from you, i might add).

            but since you bring it up, if you understand the math, what is your specific objection to my comments?

          • lovelydestruction

            Oh, put your dick back for Christ same.

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            This is what you’ve got? Pathetic snowflake.

          • lovelydestruction

            You’re the one waving your dick like a flag. Ooooh.

          • allright

            Why is it now, only after a (‘renegade’) Republican wins, that the Constitution has ‘suddenly’ important and viable? Really, do tell.

            In 2008 Barack Obama described the U.S. Constitution as having “deep flaws”. He continued radio interview in Chicago by saying that the Constitution “reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.”

            So you lieberal/progressive/socialist/democrats want it both ways, huh? Either it’s a “flawed” document, or it’s the culmination of guiding principles penned by pioneers and patriots to form a lasting Representative Republic.

            Now, which do yo claim it is?

          • BCinBCS

            Actually, allright, it’s both.

          • allright

            I disagree. And until 1) there’s something better to replace it, or 2) the supreme court renders it unrecognizable or worse, attempts total dismantling, it remains the law of the land.

            Thank God the American people (silent majority) got it right and prevented a Clinton presidency, or option 2 above would be a foregone conclusion. Now, at least we’ll have a chance get some conservative supremes on the bench.

          • lovelydestruction

            “Silent majority”, neither silent or a majority, won. Maybe the EC can wrest it from these special snowflake’s dimpled greasy hands. They made quite a error this time.

          • SpiritofPearl

            It will happen sooner than you hope.

          • allright

            What does your comment even mean? What is this “it” you are referring to? Try to communicate above a 3rd grade level, please.

          • SpiritofPearl

            I block halfwits. They waste my time.

          • allright

            Then you should block yourself immediately, if not sooner; you must be the self-proclaimed leader of the (dumb) masses, based on your nonesensical ranting and raving.

          • Jed

            sorry, am i defending all comments ever made about the constitution, or only those made by left-handed black men?

            my statements in this thread have been completely factual. if you can’t handle those, i got nothing for ya.

            ps – the answer is both, as any constitutional scholar (leftist or otherwise) will tell you.

        • SpiritofPearl

          He won twice. Suck it up.

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            are you really that stupid … wait, nevermind.

          • SpiritofPearl

            Ad hominem . . . you lose again. Come back when you can debate like an adult .

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            bwahahahaha …

          • allright

            Come back when you can run a viable candidate who is not doing her/his dead-level best to dodge indictment…from a lieberal/progressive/socialist/democrat ‘stable’ of possibilities, this should take quite a while.

          • John Johnson

            Allright…Pearl is the Queen of ad hominem remarks. She is one of only four people in the history of this site to get kicked off.

          • SpiritofPearl

            I block halfwits. Adios.

          • allright

            Typical lieberal/progressive/socialist/dimwitcrat – drown out, or silence those voices that disagree with you/your agenda. Typicla left-wing ‘tolerance’. Free speech for me, silence for thee! Nothing but a useful idiot, you are!

        • lovelydestruction

          Ahole

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            Snowflake.

          • lovelydestruction

            Lol you won’t walk away from this fragile snowflake the same way you walk up, I guarantee you that.

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            Lol, look, its a chairborne ranger. You are a pathetic tool.

          • lovelydestruction

            Right back at you, tool.

          • FIDO, a Deplorable Redneck

            What’s next? A round of “neener-neener” or “I’m rubber you’re glue”?

            Thanks for the laugh.

          • lovelydestruction

            Thanks for the confirmation

          • allright

            This election has proven what we’ve known about you lieberal/progressive/socialist/democrat losers all along – confirmation indeed!

          • allright

            Now THAT’S a good one – chairborne ranger – I’m going to steal that one.

          • allright

            HA! says the keyboard warrior, on an anonymous blog/website…oooooo, so scary, NOT! Your aligator mouth would get your hummingbird azz buried before you knew what hit you, snowflake.

          • lovelydestruction

            Ditto, dipstick.

          • allright

            Pot, meet kettle.

        • Michael Massey

          “He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!”

          “The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one!”

          “More votes equals a loss…revolution!”

          “Lets fight like hell and stop this great and disgusting injustice! The world is laughing at us.”

          All these quotes are from Donald Trump on the day of the 2012 election. Being a hypocrite has been elevated to an actual art-form by this guy. He’s not too shabby at whining & sniveling either.

      • José

        Yes, a constitutional convention would be a bad idea and I would never suggest waking that monster. It turns out there is another way to amend the Constitution. It’s been used a few times already.

        • Jed

          same trigger(s).

          unless you mean civil war.

      • Gregg Macklin
  • tlajj5

    If he is a man of his word, he will honor what he signed up for. He is a representative of his states popular vote. Trump.

    • Jed

      same response here.

    • Shelly H.

      You are incorrect. He is a representative of the state’s interests not the popular vote. Please see my other responses to other comments for more detail.

  • Kozmo

    The Electoral College, another useless relic of American Exceptionalism. The proof of what hypocrites we are when we criticize other countries’ democratic processes. Name me any other free nation that suffers such a profoundly disruptive and anti-democracy process in their own elections?

    • Jed

      direct majoritarian elections are only way to design a democracy.

    • Shelly H.

      I always love when people call parts of the Constitution useless relics. No other country has a democratic republic set up like ours. Most other democratic republics do not use a “first past the post” voting system, which doesn’t allow for more than two parties to dominate the political process. They also use variations of parliamentary government set-up vs the 3 branch system the US has. Below I am expanding on my response to another comment.

      The wording of the electoral college in the Constitution is one of the few areas where the intent is perfectly clear. The Constitution is what should be followed with regards to how the electors vote, not what a political party, or state legislature decrees, doing so negates the intent of the purpose of the electoral college.

      The states can choose electors in any fashion they deem acceptable, what they can not do is require electors to vote a certain way. Many people hate the electoral college because they do not understand its purpose thinking that it is redundant or usurping the will of the people.

      The people do not and never have been the ones to elect the President. The people vote to tell their state who their preference is for President and each state’s electors may listen to the preference of its citizens, or if it deems that the citizens have made an unwise choice to vote in the best interests of the state even if it is not what the majority voted for. Automatically awarding electors to the popular vote negates the very check that the founders foresaw as being necessary to avoid an angry mob electing an unqualified and unsuitable candidate due to the importance of the duties that were granted to the President.

      The first and possibly most important duty of the President is being the Commander in Chief of the military, followed by being the architect of US foreign policy. Next would be appointing cabinet positions, followed by judiciary appointments. When it comes to domestic policy the President has INPUT, not control, to what Congress chooses to legislate. The President can influence legislation with his input, and by choosing to sign or veto legislation but Congress can override a veto. The economy and other domestic issues are the dominion of the Congress not the President.

      All I have done here is paraphrase & simplify the language of Article II of the US Constitution and one of the federalist papers authored by Alexander Hamilton.

  • BCinBCS

    In Twilight Zone timing, the article that I was reading immediately before I opened this BB post was about Micheal Baca a Democrat from Colorado who has banded with a few other “Hamilton Electors” in an effort to convince 269 of their fellow Electors to vote for a to-be-agreed-upon moderate Republican in order to deny Donald Trump the Presidency of the United States.

    Baca states in the HuffPost article:
    “We are following the process as designed. The people vote, but that’s obviously not the end of it. If it were, Hillary Clinton, the popular vote winner, would be president, end of story. Instead, the vote triggers this second phase, the Electoral College, where electors representing their states and parties, deliberate — and that’s the important word. They deliberate, and then they choose a president.”

    “What I want people to understand, is that this is the process, the democratic process, that we as electors are committed to upholding. There was the vote, now there’s the deliberation in the Electoral College about what’s in the best interest of the country.”

    The full article is here:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-way-out-of-trumpland-hail-mary-pass-to-save-the_us_582b2f65e4b0852d9ec21d4e

    • Unwound

      i doubt clinton would actually accept it if it happened, but maybe im underestimating her narcissism. this sounds more like someone trying to bring attention to themselves.

      • Jed

        why would it be narcissistic to honor the outcome of an election conducted as prescribed by the constitution?

        i’d call that “constitutional.”

        • Unwound

          she lost the election, fair and square, and it was self inflicted.

          • Jed

            dude, i am not jockeying for any of these things, merely referencing the process. the election hasn’t happened yet.

          • Shelly H.

            Um, point of order, the people do not elect the president, the states do. We vote our choice for president to give our input to the state on how we prefer the state’s official representatives – electors, to vote. The electors are not obligated in any way to vote for any candidate either by the people, political parties or the state.

            It would be constitutionally sound for a state to appoint electors and not hold a public election for president.

          • Unwound

            but thats not how it works, or how its going to work. you guys are playing in academics here.

          • Shelly H.

            I would disagree, because that is exactly how presidential elections work here in the US and have worked for the 240 years of our country’s existence. The press, especially in the past 100 years reinforce the illusion that people elect the president. If more people would take the time to read and understand what is and isn’t in the constitution we would not have this same discussion every four years.

          • Unwound

            So you actually think that reps are going to cast a majority vote for anyone other than trump.

          • lovelydestruction

            She didn’t lose the popular vote, and the massive retaliatory wounds she received were not self inflicted. She stubbed her toe, her foes amputated her leg.

          • Unwound

            its a really crappy campaign when you dont even visit a state that kerry won by .34 points in 04.

      • BCinBCS

        These Hamilton Electors, realizing that Trump would be the president otherwise, are advocating that he be replaced by a moderate Republican, not Hillary Clinton. Their effort would be dead in the water if they proposed replacing Trump with a Democrat.

        • Unwound

          i think its already dead in the water

          • BCinBCS

            Certainly Unwound but it’s like turning on the lights and seeing the roaches scurry – all of these hypocritical originalist “True Americans” who can’t support the Constitution when it doesn’t suit them.

          • Unwound

            again, youre playing in academics here. not sure why this is even an actual discussion other than a curiosity.

          • BCinBCS

            Academics?
            It’s the Constitution, not a teaching moment.

          • Shelly H.

            I’d argue it’s both. It is the Constitution and it is a teaching moment helping someone understand the meaning and intent of it.

          • BCinBCS

            Yes, I should have said, “It’s the Constitution, not exclusively a teaching moment”.

          • Shelly H.

            I wish I knew how to get smilies and images to work in disqus. because rereading what I wrote came out snarkier than I intended it to.

          • BCinBCS

            No, Shel, I understand. You caught my mistake and I corrected it. I appreciate the scrutiny.
            Believe it or not, I’m a fairly laid back person and my personality doesn’t allow me to take most things personally (even when they sometimes are). For example, look how long it took for me to block JBB.

          • Unwound

            So you think there’s a likelyhood of anyone other than trump getting the electoral college vote

          • BCinBCS

            I don’t think that anyone will go against their state. There might be a possible protest vote by the Texas or Colorado Elector but I see it as unlikely and futile.
            (But what do I know? I voted for Hillary.)

          • Unwound

            That’s the only point I was trying to make.

        • Kozmo

          Yes. It’s a silent attempted coup from within.

  • JEM

    It’s pretty simple–you vote the way your district votes. There’s no requirement for deep thought here. By voting for neither major candidate, he’s basically disenfranchising the people he represents. In the part of Texas I’m from, not doing what you say you’ll do doesn’t make you “faithless”, it makes you a liar.

    • Jed

      this is not what “represent” means.

      consider this: if the job was literally to vote exactly as the people do, then why do we need electors at all?

      • JEM

        This gentleman (Sisneros) is not a representative in any political sense of the word. He did not campaign, he did not personally receive a single popular vote, he did not have any of his ideas or positions approved by the voters. He merely was selected by his party to cast their vote in the electoral college–it’s an honorary function. He signed an affidavit saying he would vote for his party’s choice, an affidavit that didn’t leave him an out based on his conscience. He says “And so the question becomes, did they vote for me because they trust my judgment and my ability to make that decision? Or was their vote in the confidence of the pledge I signed at the [state GOP] convention that I would vote for the nominee? That’s where the tension is.” The hubris of this gentleman is incredible. No one has a clue about his judgement or his conscience. He was selected because he promised to vote for the party’s candidate, period. If his conscience won’t let him vote for the selection of his party, then he can either resign or make himself a liar based on the sworn affidavit he signed.

        • Louann Platter

          Exactly! And, I would add, that he DID campaign for the position at his party’s convention. I doubt seriously they voted him this honor based on anything less than his proven allegiance & integrity. Apparently, they were wrong about both.

        • BCinBCS

          It’s revealing to me that conservatives who constantly preach law and order and not expanding government beyond the literal original intent of the Constitution are so quick to abandon their principles when it goes against their interests.

          The use of Electors was specifically set up in the Constitution so that they could be a moderating force on the people of the United States. If you do not like the fact that Electors can vote against the wishes of the people of their state, then amend the Constitution.

          • JEM

            No, I’m pretty happy with the Constitution as it stands. I’m delighted that a liberal can support the electoral college, even though it will name Trump president with a minority of the popular vote. That seems to be a sticking point with most of your brethren. I agree that the electoral college is a good thing, as it prevents a few population centers from controlling the fate of the whole country. As for Mr. Sisneros, hopefully his personal integrity and Christian principles will lead him to honor his word. If not, his vote will make no difference, and he will be marked as a liar who gained his position under false pretenses.

          • BCinBCS

            I support the Electoral College because it is part of our Constitution but I am in favor of an amendment to do away with it because of the disproportional representation it gives to sparsely occupied and rural areas.

          • Shelly H.

            I am not a liberal, I am pragmatic. I support policies that are practical and efficient. Some of those are Republican and some are Democratic, or Liberal & Conservative however you wish to label them. I do not support the mixing of religion in politics it is dangerous and has led us to this precipice. I do not support removing programs for party politics or adding programs for the same reason.

            Donald Trump is unfit to be President. He showed just how broken and corruptible the primary system is. I would welcome the return of “back room deals” for selecting party candidates. Our only hope is for men of conscience like Mr Sisneros to do their duty as outlined in the US Constitution and vote for someone who fits the qualifications to be President. At this point I do not care if it is Clinton, McMullen, Paul Ryan, etc.

        • Shelly H.

          That sworn affidavit isn’t worth the paper it was printed on. States may determine how electors are chosen, here in Texas we let each political party elect 38 potential electors from their membership, but neither the state nor political party has the right or the legal standing to dictate how the electors vote. The entire reason for having electors is the STATES elect the president, not the people. We the people get to give our input by casting our ballot, but our input is not and should in no way ever be considered binding upon the electors. The electors should always vote in the best interest of the state, >90% of the time that coincides with the popular vote.

          • BCinBCS

            Ding, ding, ding.
            Absolutely correct answer.

          • Shelly H.

            Thank you, I have been teaching this lesson on how the presidential election is different from other elections since 2000. Eventually, enough people will actually understand that we’ll stop seeing the repeal the electoral college nonsense.

          • BCinBCS

            …we’ll stop seeing the repeal the electoral college nonsense.

            So does that imply that you oppose amending the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College?

          • Shelly H.

            Yes. The electoral college is one of the many checks and balances built in to the system. It is the only check we have on the people. Although, it is possible, probable even, that this check in the system is not fool proof. I think we will find out on Dec 19th whether or not it will work as intended to prevent an unsound choice of president made by the electorate.

          • BCinBCS

            I differ with you. I would like to see it repealed.

            It is fraught with all sorts of problems, the greatest being that it promotes unequal representation.

          • Shelly H.

            I may come over to the dark side if the intended purpose fails us. 😉

          • Jed

            the intended purpose would be to take a trump popular win and turn it into a clinton presidency. the electoral college did exactly the opposite of that. it isn’t just failing, it is making things worse!

          • Jed

            think about what you just said. the electorate chose CLINTON. THEY didn’t make the unsound choice. the only reason we are getting trump IS BECAUSE OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE.

            you can’t claim that the purpose of the electoral college is to prevent a trump win that IT CAUSED! especially since it won’t anyway.

          • Kozmo

            The Electoral College that in its wisdom has now given us TWO presidential losers of the popular vote. A shining moment for democracy. Imitated by the entire world!

            If it were Republicans who had come out on the wrong end of this farce, the EC would have been gone long ago and the echoes of those right wing tantrums would still be heard.

          • Shelly H.

            I believe there have been 3 elections where the President-elect lost the popular vote. The difference being that in all prior elections the leading candidates were qualified to take office. You can hate George W. all you like, the fact is, he was fully qualified to assume the office of President and in the end was a capable President.

            Again, the people do not elect the President the States elect the President.

          • BCinBCS

            Shel, I do a lot of reading and I have seen two other figures – five and six. I don’t know how many presidents have served after receiving fewer votes than their opponent – three, five or six – but I am certain of the two that have occurred recently.

          • Shelly H.

            I believe you are correct. It’s still early and I haven’t had my full load of caffeine yet.

          • Unwound

            yeesh, thats a bit of an overstatement. i consider war crimes to be disqualifying, not a symbol of capability.

          • Jed

            wait. understanding the constitutionality of the electoral college is far from making a convincing argument that it is a good thing.

            why would you defend it on those terms? it is right now in the process of doing exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do (taking a reasonable popular verdict and turning it into a victory for the demagogue).

            the only reason one would support the electoral college today is if you think a place like wyoming needs more political influence than it has people. bleck.

          • JEM

            Some facts and some opinions. Yes, the affidavit can’t be enforced-fact. Your opinion is that it isn’t worth the paper it was printed on. My opinion is that one should do what they have promised–in writing–to do. In your opinion, electors should vote in what they feel are the best interests of the state. In my opinion, if you sign a document that says “I hereby pledge to vote for the Republican Party’s nominees for President and Vice-President at the meeting of Presidential Electors” you have given up your right to judge what are the best interests of the state and delegated that decision to your party. You’ve pledged your vote for the Republican nominee if you are elected. This gentlemen says he has moral issues with voting for Trump, but doesn’t seem to have moral issues with violating his word. I’m not sure I want a welding supply salesman who ran for elector “on a whim” to decide what’s best for Texas–those aren’t the strongest of qualifications. He can certainly vote in the general election as he wishes, and that’s where he gets to voice his opinion as to what is best for Texas. I can say with some certainty that he wouldn’t have been chosen as an elector if he hadn’t sworn to vote for the party’s nominee (Trump, in this case). Since he seems disinclined to vote for Clinton either, in effect he is wasting one of Texas’ electoral votes. It won’t make any difference in this race, but I would hate to see a closer race decided by someone who has gone rogue against the wishes of his party and the people of Texas. Maybe I’m just a throwback to the old Texas ways where a man’s word was his bond and people concluded business deals with a handshake. I do predict that by 2020 Texas will join the 29 other states that have laws to punish faithless electors. Just my opinion.

          • Shelly H.

            Have you read the constitution where it concerns presidential electors? My “opinion” as you put it is based on what is Article II, the Twelfth, and Twentieth amendments as well as Hamilton’s Federalist paper addressing electors. The intent of the Constitution supersedes any “pledge, affidavit, promise, state law, etc” that would change the intent of how the electors are to cast their ballots. I am not basing my opinion on some nebulous idea of misplaced honor or party loyalty.

            The affidavit is unconstitutional and there is no dishonor in not following it. Forcing electors to sign an affidavit promising to vote in a predetermined way to be certified as electors is unconstitutional.

            Those affidavits are immoral. So trying to hold an elector to a promise he did not fully understand, who has done his due diligence to understand what his job is as an elector and finding that the affidavit he was forced to sign was immoral and unconstitutional is ridiculous.

            If the tables were reversed, and Trump was the Democratic nominee and Clinton was the Republican would not change my stance on this one bit. Political parties should not have that much influence on presidential electors.

          • BCinBCS

            Absolutely correct again.

          • José

            True that. The US Constitution takes precedence and that’s that. This is hardly the first case where state law is inconsistent with the Constitution. Any fool who swears to uphold the Texas Constitution and Texas laws ought to be well aware that the vow includes a mighty big asterisk, saying “except where the Supreme Court rules otherwise”.

          • JEM

            The constitutionality of state pledge laws was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 1952 in Ray v. Blair. The court ruled in favor of the state’s right to require electors to pledge to vote for the candidate to whom they are pledged, as well as to remove electors who refuse to pledge.

          • BCinBCS

            Yes JEM, the Supreme Court did state in Ray v. Blair that political parties can require a person to pledge that they will cast their vote for the party’s nominee in order to be chosen as an Elector. It did not address, however, the requirement in that oath that once chosen the Elector must vote for the party’s nominee.

            It boils down to the states having jurisdiction over the administration of elections and therefore the selection of Electors but the Federal government (i.e. the Constitution) having jurisdiction over how those Electors may vote.

          • JEM

            There are some nightmare scenarios that might come out of this. Let’s say that a closely won race would be decided by the electoral votes from Michigan, and that several faithless electors in Michigan switch parties and give the election to a candidate different from the one they are pledged to support. According to Michigan law, their votes are nullified and they are replaced. So a new president is seated and, of course, the issue goes to the Supreme Court, which could make a decision that removes a sitting president. Luckily no such scenario has occurred, and there is almost no chance something like this will occur this year. It is correct that Ray v. Blair did not address what would happen if an elector did not vote his pledge, as that was not the issue before the court. The court did find that electors are agents of the state government, not federal, with the implication being that states have some broad latitude in how they deal with electors. However, that was a different court in a different time. There is no doubt that the founders envisioned the electors as free agents who would make wiser choices than the “unschooled” population in general. There is also no doubt that the founders intended these electors to be white males, and that they didn’t foresee the party politics that would soon come to define the American political process. I personally would like to see the process modernized to reflect modern conditions, but I’m not really sure how a new model would look and I doubt we could ever get away from party politics enough to choose a system that wouldn’t favor one party or the other, or if it is even possible to choose such a neutral system.

          • Shelly H.

            Just because Michigan Law says they are nullified does not make them null. Yes it would go to SCOTUS. I doubt they would allow the inauguration to go forth until the matter was settled because as you point out removing a sitting President would be a legal and potentially a Constitutional nightmare.

            Delaying the Oath of Office would not cause permanent harm to the country. I would have to do some research on this but I don’t think Jan 20th has to be inauguration day and there is some flexibility to the date. As I said I would have to do some research since this is uncharted waters we are discussing.

            Here’s another potential scenario – If the President-Elect dies before taking Office, the VP-Elect would not necessarily be sworn in. It is assumed that is what would happen but more likely the House would have to elect the President in such a scenario.

          • Shelly H.

            Correct.

          • Ben Voigt

            If he believed the affidavit was unconstitutional, he should have said so AT THE TIME and refused to sign it.

            If he originally believed that he could in good conscience vote for Trump, and has as a result of things revealed during the election news cycles, discovered that he cannot, the correct thing to do is honor both his pledge and his conscience by stepping aside.

            If he has changed his mind about the wisdom of the pledge, he has no one to blame but himself, as he is the one who chose to bind himself by it without first understanding it.

            The reason for the electoral college is to protect the interests of the states against federal overreach. Things like unfunded mandates weren’t possible under the original system where Senators were chosen by state government. That protection is weakened, but the non-proportionality of the Senate and the EC are still in place and still act to protect smaller states from more populous states that would otherwise run roughshod over them.

            States that choose to extract a pledge from their electors do so because they have determined it is in their interest to cast their electoral votes according to a (winner-take-all, typically) popular election.

            If an elector has taken a pledge but feels the popular election doesn’t serve the interests of his state, he needs to raise that with the state government, not go back on his word.

          • Kozmo

            “Run roughshod over them” pretty much sums up what Democrats in Texas have undergone for a couple decades now. I don’t see what was equitable about the DeLay-sponsored gerrymandering and redistricting in this state to ensure Republican dominance. National congressional vote totals for Democratic party candidates are higher than Republican totals yet the Republicans continue to also dominate the House of Representatives out of proportion to their votes. Austin is split into FIVE congressional districts deliberately to weaken Democratic representation (and specifically to attack Lloyd Doggett). The game is rigged.

          • Ben Voigt

            When our government was set up, the founding fathers intentionally rigged the system to put the federal government under the control of the states. Things like “unfunded mandates” were never supposed to be possible.

            State governments having a lot of influence over how congresspersons from that state are elected is part of that. Please remember that under the original system, the state legislatures, not the general voting populace of each state, elected the senators. And the electors who voted for the president in the Electoral College process.

            The tenth amendment was also supposed to ensure the supremacy of the states in all except the few enumerated powers.

            So, if you want to argue for “unrigging” the system, go ahead and put your arguments in favor out there for debate. But please don’t suggest that the rules have become rigged in the last couple decades. It’s how our Constitutional Republic (never has been a democracy) was designed.

          • BCinBCS

            Ben wrote: “If he originally believed that he could in good conscience vote for Trump, and has as a result of things revealed during the election news cycles, discovered that he cannot, the correct thing to do is honor both his pledge and his conscience by stepping aside.

            This amounts to a de facto amendment to the Constitution which, by this method, is not allowed.

            This would be the same as a state saying that even though the SCOTUS has ruled that there is a Second Amendment right to bear arms they will not allow a gun owner to be in possession of ammunition or, alternatively, that all guns must have their barrels plugged.

            A back door loss of a Constitutional right is still a loss of a Constitutional right.

          • Ben Voigt

            You’re confusing a right expressly granted to the people (Second Amendment), with one not enumerated at all, and therefore “reserved to the States or the people”. The states can place any sort of restrictions on electors that they want, such as: residence requirements, age requirements, support for the candidate under whose name they appear on the ballot.

            If the name Sisneros had appeared on the ballot, you’d have a legitimate argument that the voters chose to have him his exercise his judgment. But the ballot only contained the names of the presidential ticket. Texas voters overwhemingly requested to have a panel of electors pledged to vote for Trump.

          • BCinBCS

            Yes Ben, you’re correct about states running elections and having rules and restrictions about the apparatus of voting but the actual election and elector votes fall under the purview of the Federal government. As I discussed with JEM in a previous post :
            [T]he Supreme Court did state in Ray v. Blair that political parties can require a person to pledge that they will cast their vote for the party’s nominee in order to be chosen as an Elector. It did not address, however, the requirement in that oath that once chosen the Elector must vote for the party’s nominee.

            It boils down to the states having jurisdiction over the administration of elections and therefore the selection of Electors but the Federal government (i.e. the Constitution) having jurisdiction over how those Electors may vote.

          • Shelly H.

            Ben wrote: If he believed the affidavit was unconstitutional, he should have said so AT THE TIME and refused to sign it.

            The state convention where they chose electors was in May prior to Trump clinching the nomination. That is why the pledge says the Nominee and not our Nominee, Donald J Trump. At that point the Republicans could have still changed the convention rules and nominated someone else.

            The Republican party failed to nominate someone qualified to be president, who could lead their party. Now we have a man who has no clue what he is doing and chaos in this transition.

          • getitrightalready

            AMEN!!! Who is this Mr. Cisneros and what, exactly, would qualify him to decide what is best for Texas over and above the voice of the people?!? I never heard him campaign on a platform of any sort so that WE would know that we were choosing a wise person to make such a monumental decision on OUR behalves! What “qualified” him was his commitment to cast his vote based on the will of the people of Texas! This is a ludicrous conversation and I am appalled at this man’s narcissism! Puh-leeze!

        • Jed

          i didn’t use the word “represent,” you did.

          and the rest is as it may be, but it doesn’t change the constitution.

  • SilaSez

    Only one choice really, resign. You’d have a clear conscious. to vote against the will of the people by imposing your own will is exactly why Trump was elected. If your conscious will not allow you to vote in manner you agree to vote, resign.

    • dave in texas

      Yeah, this. I think a good parallel to this is Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to LGBT folks who wanted to get married. A lot of people, myself among them, said that if she couldn’t carry out her duties as the law prescribed, then she should resign. Even though I would like nothing more than to see Donald Trump repudiated, Sisneros should do the job he was elected to do. In the immortal words of Mo Udall – “The people have spoken, damn them.”

      • Jed

        not the same. she promised to do a job and refused to do it.

        he is contemplating how to do the job he signed up to do, when the very nature of that job is open to interpretation.

        • BCinBCS

          Exactly.

        • Gregg Macklin

          He did sign a pledge to vote for the GOP winner. Now he is backing away from that pledge. So is his word, just words to be abandoned when he feels the need? Seems so

          • Jed

            “So is his word, just words to be abandoned when he feels the need? Seems so”

            why should he differ from the candidate?

          • Gregg Macklin

            Voters like you are to blame.

          • Richard Steven Patterson

            Constitutionally, a pledge or a law that attempts to “bind” an Elector is illegal …

      • Flybob

        WHY would you want Trump repudiated…he hasn’t lifted a finger in the office yet…..you’re no better than the rest of the morons that voted for the fraud in chief……Trump may be an excellent president. The economy has already taken off and he hasn’t set foot in the oval office yet…..

        • BCinBCS

          By the economy taking off, I assume that you mean the stock market has taken off. The stock market has taken off because it realizes that it will soon have carte blanche. Donald Trump wants to do away with most of the restrictions that were placed on the market (and banks) after the 2008 Great Recession. In addition to that, Paul Ryan wants to change social security from a government run system to a private investment system pouring billions of dollars into the market. This is why the market has taken off – all for bad reasons.

          • Flybob

            REALLY???? Well I’ll be dipped! And you don’t think for one second that Mr Trump’s idea of getting rid of obamascare, regulations and cleaning up a bit of the “swamp” had a thing to do with it…..I’m so glad I found you because I was really stupid prior to that. The “great depression” that the fraud in thief managed and straightened out MUST be why we’re ALL the sudden heading UPWARD for the first time in more than 8 years! God bless mr homobama! Or should I say allah bless the pos muslim homosexual narcissist wannabe dictator. I can’t defend bush but there has been MORE THEN ENOUGH time to stop blaming bush….especially when the 44th president dirtbag DOUBLED the national debt…that’s right johnny……mr obama the halfbreed pig finally delivered…he spent more than all the 43 presidents…COMBINED!!! Oh yeah….in less than 7 years every single dime we take in income tax will go to pay ONLY THE INTEREST ON OUR DEBT!!! The same mr homobama said just 10 years ago that would be IMMORAL to leave our children with. Mr bc….you’re in the tank for the moron that ALMOST KILLED America and aint over yet….we still have 50 days he can shred our country with more illegal aliens and muslim invaders. You have to have your head so far buried to believe a word of what you said that you’ll never see sunshine ever again. the man (if you call that POS a man) KILLED race relations and totally divided our country in a way that has never been experienced in America…..he killed foreign relations, expanded the muslim purpose and let them successfully invade us. In fact he PROMOTED it. America may never recover from what he did. And you can even suggest that the fact that Trump being elected had nothing to do with the economy FINALLY getting an edge? You got ants in your head sir.

          • BCinBCS

            Thanks for the reply, Bob, it’s always nice to meet another liberal.

          • Flybob

            You really are dense beyond compare…….America is NOT a democracy braindead…..we are a Constitutional republic in case you weren’t in school that day. Democracies have historically ended in mass genocide…but you knew that with your level of intelligence…..by the way….communism/socialism and Marxism….same…..get a life…..go back to your basement and watch pornos and eat Cheetos and try to figure out why your little weiner turned orange…..if you had a new brain it would be lonely…..liberals are WHY we are losing our country and I’ll thank you for not insulting me to that level….like I said…you have no idea

          • BCinBCS

            You’re pretty sharp there catching the liberal comment, Bob.
            Keep up the good work.

          • Xer0

            ignore the bitter troll. They are still so butthurt their corrupt old hag lost. There is no reasoning with these leftists.

        • Richard Steven Patterson

          One, Trump has nothing to do with the economy, and Two, You don’t have to light a match to know that a stick of TNT will blow you to Hell …

          • Flybob

            Living proof drugs will rot your brain….Trump has nothing to do with the economy? behold the men without a brain….aka liberal racist hater……what makes people like you hate your own race so badly? You make me sick to my stomach….don’t bother wasting your time replying…..you got all the response out of me you deserve

          • BCinBCS

            Flybob, exactly how did you come to the conclusion from his comment about the economy that Richard Steven Patterson was a “liberal racist hater”? And how did you make the leap from him being a “liberal racist hater” to him being someone who hates his own race?

            With statements of logic like that, do you not see why most people here at BB think that you are a nut job?

          • Flybob

            hehehe…nutjob….Not seeing that one. I did what ALL you liberals do….I labeled those who do not think like me….so if I’m a nutjob then exactly what are those who are looting and pillaging because their guy didn’t win? I watch your comments and you have potential but you’re still so one sided that you will never (maybe) be convinced that America is more important than parties. I will NOT defend bush OR the bush family. Do you know why? I highly doubt it….but I am a pretty seriously studied person…you are not…yet….I hope to change that. Did you know that prescott bush and henry ford supported the germans AND the allies in WWI AND WWII? Did you know who started the federal reserve…ILLEGALLY??? Do you know WHY it was illegal? Did you know who the president was that wrote the most illegal executive orders? Do you know WHY executive orders that make law are illegal? Did you realize that the act of 1869 that incorporated the entire UNITED STATES (notice the words are all in capitals) AND the people was totally illegal and lawyers made it happen because the bankers (rothschilds mostly) promised them power because we could not make good on our debts (as we are now again experiencing)? Did you ever look at your birth certificate and noticed that your name is in all capital letters and do you know why? I don’t really care what people think of me….I have had a very successful life and have raised 5 wonderful children…I prefer people to like me and respect me but it’s not my only goal. MY goal is to get people to wake the hell up and see life as it really is. I actually believe in my life I have discerned the truth form the crap for the most part. Reading your stuff shows me you have not. Did you ever hear of the original 13th amendment and have you ever studied it and why it was not included in the Constitution? Do you know what BAR means? (hint….BRITISH accreditation registry) Do you realize the crown of Britain has more control over America than the voters do? Do you realize that Trump won by such a huge margin that even george soros could not cover it up? Study the truth and stop being a party lover that is majorly foolish. BOTH parties are uber corrupt and start thinking for yourself. The lawyers have lied to us for so long that even THEY believe their crap. Wake up man! You’ve been lied to…that bad part is that you’re swallowing it.

    • Jed

      conscience.

      is he imposing his own will be voting other than trump, or representing the best interests of the people? not so clear. the question of what it means to talk of the “peoples’ will” is much more complicated than that.

      • lovelydestruction

        Hillary won by a couple million votes, and counting.

        • Mrs. Lansdowne

          Not when you subtract the estimated 3million votes by illegal aliens and the estimated 2million votes by dead people. You also need to realize that the Trump campaign worked to win the Electoral College votes as they realized that was what was needed to win the election. You can’t change the rules after the fact.

          • Jed

            not to mention the estimated 18 jillion i am making all these numbers up.

          • Unwound

            this will be the funniest thing i read all day.

          • BCinBCS

            Mrs. Lansdowne, 3 million votes by illegal aliens and 2 million votes by dead people? That’s patently absurd. You do not help your case using such outlandish falsehoods.

          • Mrs. Lansdowne

            What’s absurd is the level of cheating that the democrat party is willing to use to try and influence the outcome of presidential elections.

          • BCinBCS

            O.K., I’ll play your game. Sure the Democrats cheat but the Republicans do even more so. As a matter of fact it was their cheating that enabled them to win the majority of electoral votes despite getting fewer votes overall. And this cheating of ballots by Republicans does not begin to take into account the additional cheating through voter intimidation and voter suppression by Republicans against Democrats nor does it take into account the cheating through gerrymandering by Republicans. You see Mrs. Lansdowne, when it comes to cheating, the Democrats are in the minor leagues compare to Republican professionals. If only the Democrats were as good as the Republicans at cheating, Hillary Clinton would be president.
            (See how easy that was for me to do?)

          • Rob Harris

            (Sorry, extremly poor wifi here in Maiduguri, Nigeria this afternoon but Mrs. Lansdowne, my Nigerian colleagues who are muslim btw, are in agreement with you — that nobody on earth could surpass the corruption of politics in Nigerian unless it is that of the U.S. democratic party)!

          • lovelydestruction

            Imagination is fun.

          • EQ4ALL

            You don’t keep up with the news much, do you?

          • lovelydestruction

            Prove that lie.

          • Flybob

            YOU prove YOUR lie……afraid you’ll lose your ebt? Trump won…get over it

          • lovelydestruction

            Everyone who doesn’t agree with you has ebt? What a bigoted little mother. We’ll see who won when electoral college meets. Dump is not qualified.

          • Flybob

            First off Mr Trump is FAR more qualified than bho ever thought about because he is a LEAST an American Citizen. Second…..WHO is the bigot? It appears that your pot has not YET called you the black kettle because it is YOU that has judged a person when YOU are not qualified to decide whether or not Mr Trump is qualified….the man has successfully operated many businesses….something the last fraud in chief never had a part in and he is also not a lawyer which is a HUGE plus for me. Other than that…..I wear the bigot tshirt PROUDLY!!! It is NOT immoral to love my race OR accomplishments more than others and if you call that bigoted then it is my pleasure to appease you. Furthermore it causes me a great deal of delight to know that you don’t think highly of me…..if you did I would believe there is something wrong with me because you’re a judgmental uninformed idiot in my opinion….which happens to be far more important to me than you approving of my life and opinion. BHO was a travesty to America because he is an America hater and a liar. If you can’t face the truth then you might want to examine your own methods. I know that once the bonds of tyranny have been broken that bho caused in America we actually DO have a chance at being great again…and PROUD OF OUR COUNTRY! Got a problem with that then LEAVE IT! I am NOT proud of the last president and I am NOT proud of the destruction he caused in many fields…..we lost our way….mostly because of the people that would vote for free things rather than go out and work. That’s not opinion…it’s fact

          • lovelydestruction

            Quite a rant from a right-wing nut-job, still spouting conspiracies his Führer disavowed. Bless your heart.

          • BCinBCS

            The stupid – it burns!

            Vice President-elect Mike Pence went to see the Broadway musical Hamilton and was asked to listen to a prepared speech after the program by the cast expressing their concerns about Trump.

            Pence was not angered but Trump and his followers were. As a matter of fact, large numbers of Flybob’s cousins launched a Twitter attack against the Hamilton Musical Theatre in Ontario, Canada not realizing the difference between it and the musical Hamilton in New York City.

            I’m sure that they were as well informed when they voted.

            http://www.rawstory.com/2016/11/rabid-trump-supporters-mistakenly-threaten-to-boycott-hamilton-theater-in-canada/

          • Flybob

            love your sense of humor there boopah…..glad it doesn’t reflect on your brain power….your guy all but destroyed America and you can bash a guy that hasn’t done a thing yet??? Oh yeah…..plenty of gray matter missing up there….by the way…the stock market broke records yesterday….let’s blame it on bho…..hahahahahahahahaha…he’s LEAVING the office of fraud in chief and the economy improves…..must be magic….or can we still blame that on bush…..like I asked the man above….when did you finally realize you hate your own race? moron

          • BCinBCS

            Yea Flybob, the stock market is doing so amazing after the election of Trump and it did so “poorly” under Obama.

            In March 3, 2009 after President Obama had been in office for two months in biggest recession that the United States has ever seen, the Dow-Jones was at 6,547. On November 8, 2016, the day of the election it stood at 18,332.

            So yea, the continued increase in the Dow MUST be due to Trump.
            .
            Dow Jones – 10 Year Daily Chart

          • Flybob

            The stock market is NOT the end all be all for the American economy. But it IS an indicator. When the vote appeared to be in favor of the wicked witch of the east it went down 850 points…..but by opening bell the next morning and when Trump was identified as the winner it was in fact UP 306 points. People (especially business people) were afraid of the biotch winning and they were selling off quickly. When they realized she had lost it TOTALLY reversed. MY employer (for the last 19 years) told me prior to the election that if hitlery won we would probably have to close the flight department. On the morning of her lose he put a ton of funds back into the market. It’s NOT the only indicator and bho has made so many bad decisions that I’m still not sure we can recover without a total collapse first but we at LEAST have some hope….for now. It’s still ugly. Did you know that within 7 years every single penny of what we take in income tax will go to paying ONLY the interest on our debt??? Not one dime will go for the benefit of the American people? Were you aware that the federal reserve AND the IRS is not even owned by the American people??? Did you know that our government MANDATED BY LAW that you must buy something???? (healthcare) That’s securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity???? REALLY??? Do you believe we still live by constitutional law??? Is the right to keep and bear arms uninfringed? Can you get on an airplane with your gun if you choose to? WHO said that if one were to give up their rights in the name of security they would have neither? WHY is our country under siege from “black lives matters” and NEVER white lives matter too? You’re just not paying attention sir. You see through rose colored glasses and because your charge is so partisan you’ve lost your values as an America. I hate BOTH parties. Your feelings seems to be “my daddy was a democrat….my grandpa was a democrat and by God I’LL be a democrat”. But the truth is that the democrats AND the republicans are NEITHER interested in freedom as Americans are guaranteed by our own founding documents. Have you read the Declaration of Independence? The Constitution? DO you know why they’re important? I challenge you to look at your life and how our freedoms have been desecrated and ask yourself WHY that has happened….hint…WE let it happen because we are uninformed…..you more than me….so insult as you may….you have no idea what you’re talking about without studying what I am asking you to do. I’ll bet my last dime you’ve never read Article VI or the preamble to the US Constitution……so either get informed or go away……you will either see what I’m saying or I’m not interested in further conversation with you…….

          • BCinBCS

            Flybob claimed: “When the vote appeared to be in favor of the wicked witch of the east it went down 850 points…

            On November 1, 2016, the market was at 18,037.10 and closed at 18,259.60 on November 7, 2016. That’s a loss of 225.5 points, nowhere near the 850 points that you claim.

            Flybob asked: “Did you know that within 7 years every single penny of what we take in income tax will go to paying ONLY the interest on our debt??? Not one dime will go for the benefit of the American people?”

            Did you know that the increase in debt was largely due to the expenses of getting out of the Great Recession and the GOP tax cuts? Would you rather that the U.S. collapse rather than borrow money?

            Flybob asked: “Did you know that our government MANDATED BY LAW that you must buy something????

            Did you know that this is not unusual? Do you own an automobile? Will you one day retire on Social Security or get your health care from Medicare?

            Flybob asked: “Is the right to keep and bear arms uninfringed?

            Did you know that no Constitutional right is absolute?

            Flybob asked: “WHY is our country under siege from “black lives matters” and NEVER white lives matter too?

            I dunno, maybe because police aren’t killing white people willy-nilly like they are black people?

            Flybob suggested: “Your feelings seems to be “my daddy was a democrat….my grandpa was a democrat and by God I’LL be a democrat

            Uh, nope. All of my relatives, except for my youngest brother, are conservative Republicans.

            Flybob asked: “Have you read the Declaration of Independence? The Constitution? DO you know why they’re important?

            Yes, yes and yes.

            Flybob wagered: “I’ll bet my last dime you’ve never read Article VI or the preamble to the US Constitution.

            You would lose that bet. As it happens, I was reading Articles IV, V and VI two days ago and I have read the Preamble many times.

          • Flybob

            Every single one of your claims is totally untrue and you do NOT deserve to live under the protection of the Constitution. The stock market futures DID go down 850 points and if you can’t find that then you’re too dense to converse with. It is easily verified. It also went UP after we found out Mr Trump won….fact, not opinion. You ARE entitled to your own opinion but NOT your own facts. ANd I CERTAINLY WOULD rather have the country collapse (it is now inevitable) than leave our innocent children to deal with the outcome. And for the record, the ONLY reason the stock market and other did not collapse is because the fraud in chief spent/borrowed more than every single president prior….COMBINED…something he said just a couple years earlier was totally immoral to leave our posterity…..look it up dummass….Continuing….youbet your arse the rights PROTECTED by the US Constitution are DEFINITELY ABSOLUTE!!! WHY have rights that can be invaded??? You said you read article VI…try remedial training…..or maybe you don’t understand the meaning of “SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND”….and in the Declaration of independence “INALIENABLE RIGHTS” which means you cannot sign them away by contract NOR can ANY person or entity take them from you. You read the preamble? WHAT does preamble mean there sunshine? MISSION STATEMENT!!! The US Constitution as written for exactly 6 purposes….all listed in the preamble……not 1…not 22….SIX!!!! Like I said…try remedial reading training and the use of the English language because you clearly are either not well informed or have serious mental capacity issues. Liberalism is DIRECTLY slavery and that is fact. You MAKE me pay someone out of my wallet those who will not help themselves or foreign countries????slavery bucko….no other word for it. And for the record NO drivers license is necessary to travel….or do you think the founders licensed people to ride horses OR to go anywhere. Also social security is COMPLETELY ILLEGAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL…or can you show me in the Constitution in the 17 enumerated powers of the government it IS allowed??? You’re idea of America is not only wrong but it is also dangerous. Let me put it to you this way…try to take my right to free speech OR my guns and you’ll find deadly opposition…..believe it mr traitor to the country and the founding documents. I PRAY that when the SHTF you and others like you face people like me….I’m done with you….you’re not what I thought you were….you’re an idiot I also do not believe you have read the Constitution which makes you a liar….like the rest of your kind…..go away….you can’t be reckoned with….it is your way or the highway…and if you claim that is MY way I would only say that my way is the Constitution and is not negotiable. You do NOT deserve to live in America….you have NO idea why MILLIONS of Americans gave their lives to protect our freedoms……I have ZERO respect for you and your kind…..too stupid to debate when the facts are abundant.

          • BCinBCS

            Flybob every citizen deserves to live under the protection of the Constitution including me and even a RWNJ like you.

            You were not talking about the futures market in your original post and it has no real bearing on the market. The futures market is like a poll, it doesn’t give the result of the election any more than the futures market gives the closing Dow price. And, besides, if you meant the futures market, you should have said the futures market.

            Your logic makes no sense. You stated that you “CERTAINLY WOULD rather have the country collapse (it is now inevitable) than leave our innocent children to deal with the outcome.” If our country collapsed, our kids would also suffer and if you meant children that may be born in the future, you have no way of knowing how long the horror of a failed economy would last. And it makes absolutely no sense to allow the country to collapse rather than saving it, to do otherwise is sheer stupidity.

            Flybob you show your ignorance when you continue to insist that Constitutional rights are absolute. Maybe you should tell that to the SCOTUS because they are the ones who say otherwise. (A quick example: Can you claim absolute First Amendment rights to yell “fire” in a theatre ?)

            It’s not worth my time to continue debating a “sovereign citizen” who thinks that the only taxes that should be paid are those that directly benefit him, who cannot or will not learn the dangers of a pure capitalistic system, who only wants to obey laws with which he agrees, and who hasn’t the education to see the nuances of the Constitution. It’s like explaining calculus to a second grader.

          • Flybob

            Futures DO count moron…..that are a trend indicator and are VERY important….they can and DO cause sell offs and the drop may continue…you’re just too stupid to realize that. Support the collapse when it would have cost my children less than everything they can ever earn??? You bet I would. Now we have a debt that CAN NEVER BE REPAID!!! Within 7 years every dime we take in income tax goes to pay ONLY THE DEBT!!! The money/taxes the people will pay will not benefit them one iota!!! AND NOT ONE PENNY OF THE PROCEDES WILL PAY ANY OF THE DEBT DOWN!!!! BRULLIANT!!! Aren’t you proud of what you and your kind have caused for our future generations??? And it is NOT against the US Constitution to yell fire in a crowded theater…..but you ARE and SHOULD be responsible for those who are injured if there’s a stampeded and injuries. I know….you said you read article VI but you did not. It states CLEARLY that ALL judges are bound by and ANY law or constitution in any state to the contrary NOTWITHSTANDING!!! Read is and weep moron…..the scotus is corrupt and post Constitution and every one of them should be impeached. There is provision in the Constitution to DO just that…but you know that because you’ve read it….and monkeys might fly out of my butt. There ARE NO nuances in the US Constitution brainiac…..it is clear and concise. It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND and regardless of how many times I’ve read the Constitution I have seen ZERO evidence that says “except when the scotus nullifies” or “refuses to agree” or “there are nuances in the US CONSTITUTION”….in fact is says the exact opposite….but you know that mr second grade drop out. And exactly what do you know about calculus? I hope a hell of a lot more than you do about the Constitution because that is ZERO….like your brain cells. AND for the record….the US Constitution does NOT protect every citizen…..it speaks AGAINST those who would deny it, commit treason against it or cause others to deny it. YOU DO NOT deserve the protection it was written to provide because you do not support it….unless it suits YOUR needs. I’d just LOVE to be more harsh in my language here but they do NOT support the free speech the US Constitution DOES provide for those who support it. I took an oath to defend and support the Constitution and the republic for which it stands and you better believe I have and will continue to adhere to my oath……against all enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC (enemies to the document like YOU) and trust me….I will RELISH the day when patriots rid the country of treasonous vermin like you and those that teach our children the lies that you spew. You’re way too gone to argue with….I’m done…..you’re just plain too dense….and I AM a sovereign citizen and you should be too….we are individuals…until we allow ourselves to join the borg as YOU insist I do. You can do as you wish BUT YOU CANNOT FORCE ME TO!!! Just try it and see what you get….one way or another I WILL BE FREE….like I said traitor….go away

          • BCinBCS

            Wow, wow, wow, wow.

            You are so effing ignorant that I am not going to waste my time correcting the idiocy that you are puking. Have a hateful life.

            (BTW, look up the Dunning-Kruger Effect and do something about how it applies to you.)

        • Jimmy Rodriguez

          Hypothetically she could win all of California’s 17 million registered votes, which would top Trump by the MILLIONS AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS (one of President-Elect Trump’s word), a clear majority, but still not do anything to change the 55 electoral college votes in that or other states. I’m happy the EC worked in his favor. Happy Thaksgiving.

          • lovelydestruction

            I hope the electors realize they’re not merely ceremonial, but meant to correct the error made.

      • Gregg Macklin

        Jed, find copy of the Constitution and READ IT. The popular vote has nothing to do with who becomes POTUS

    • lovelydestruction

      Will of the people is Hillary.

      • Unwound

        good luck enforcing that.

      • Flybob

        TOTAL LIE!!! Trump won more than 300 electoral college votes and the biotch won just over 200. It was a landslide. May be the will of the NEEDY on food stamps and getting free stuff but the geographical win lose map is clear. He won all but the big cities where the most people are more likely to get more free stuff. get a grip…..Your’e just plain stupid

        • lovelydestruction

          You’re a bubble-headed moron. The majority of America hates Dump.

          • Flybob

            hahahahahabwahahaha…yep…you’re in touch with reality…..guess you didn’t notice he filled rooms and venues with tens of thousands of people every time he went anywhere. The only ones that hate Trump are the ones that are afraid they may have to LEARN TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES!!! CLEARLY you are from Colorado and have been smoking a little too much of the wacky tobacky……I’m really glad the people that hate Trump so badly ELECTED HIM FOR PRESIDENT!!!! Your moniker clearly describes you……totally disconnected from reality. Trump won by such a high margin the cheaters couldn’t cover it up…..you’re an idiot

          • lovelydestruction

            I hate him and I support my family in Texas. A couple swing states elected him. Don’t fool yourself.

          • EQ4ALL

            A couple of swing states and a few HUNDRED ELECTORAL VOTES!

          • lovelydestruction

            So, 74 votes is “a few HUNDRED ELECTORAL VOTES!” in your tiny tiny mind. Not that it matters, especially to Trumpanzees. Unless TRUTH matters, but in the AGE of TWUNT, Truth is Dead.
            See what I did there? TRUMP = C*nt + Tw*t = TWUNT.
            President-elect Twunt.

          • Dan Garcia

            thats a lie

          • lovelydestruction

            Hahahahahahaha! ok

    • Flybob

      how in the HELL do you say there is only one choice??? He can either resign OR vote as his district voted which is the law! And Trump was NOT elected against the will of the people! He was elected by and for good reason. Do you NOT understand the principle of the electoral college? What if 90% of the population lived in new york and the other 10% lived in all the other states. The 90% have NO idea what happens in the other 49 states. So they have the effect on ALL of the country even thought they are only one state. The electoral college dampens the effects the big city animals have on the REST of the country, You really need to think about WY the electoral college exists and still works today as it was designed. IF the biotch won the popular vote (I do not believe she did) it is because the morons in the big cities get the most free stuff and they vote to KEEP their free stuff.

      • Gregg Macklin
      • BCinBCS

        Flybob, I was going to respond to your last two comments but it would be a waste of my time because their contents indicate that you don’t have the intellect or psychology to accept anything except what you believe.

        • Flybob

          Sounds good to me…..so then in the words of the immortal bard Phil Robertson….sick my duck traitor……you have no idea about me or my intelligence……at least I can see the truth through my foggy glasses as opposed to your rose colored glasses. YOUR BIOTCH LOST BECAUSE OF YOUR OTHER GUYS’S POLICIES STUPID! GET OVER IT!!!

          • BCinBCS

            Flybob wrote: “…you have no idea about me or my intelligence…

            Oh, I have a very good idea about your intelligence.

          • Xer0

            You were wrong. You lost. The majority of Americans are sick of the arrogant leftwing and their silliness. Now scram kid, you bother me.

          • donuthin2

            Agree, it is pretty apparent that he has little.

      • Nancy Davenport Ganiko

        I do not believe she won the popular vote either….her propaganda lying machine news media cannot be trusted with what they report. I watched Trump’s rally’s and hers….hers was minute…and all I saw were the angry icons floating across the screen in droves….it was very odd. She was booed completely away from more than one of her stops and intents to speak, there were no crowds.

        • Doug Clinton

          She won by 4 million votes in California, 2 million nationwide, so remove the PDR of Kalifornia and Trump won the electoral and popular vote

          • Alti

            Or, remove the illegals (which True the Vote is doing) and Trump more than likely won handedly.

  • Doug Packer

    He should be removed if he can’t do what he was charged to do.

    • José

      You could say the same thing about Dan Patrick. Paxton. Miller. Abbott.

      • Doug Packer

        Except they’re doing EXACTLY what they were elected to do. The minority of voters doesn’t win the right to affect the political process the way they feel it should be done.

        • Gunslinger

          No. That’s exactly the way America works. Any idiot can set up a system of government where the majority rules and the minority gets completely shut out of the process. But here in this country, minority rights are respected in the law-making process via various laws, rules and traditions.

          • Doug Packer

            HaHa! Yeah, like Obama and the Democrats have done for the last 8 years? You’re funny

          • Gunslinger

            Not nearly as funny as you, buzzcut. Do you think that the Republicans didn’t get to assert themselves during the Obama presidency? They blocked nearly everything that Obama and/or the Democrats tried to do…no doubt, to your satisfaction. That’s a far cry from being shut out. See Merrick Garland for example.

  • Unwound

    interesting that someone would actually be considering a breach of protocol like this, but ultimately it makes zero difference in whats going to happen. trump will be sworn in in january.

    • Jed

      not if 20 people did this.

      • Unwound

        dont be naive

        • Jed

          what par tis naive? that there might be 20. fair enough, but i am not claiming that it will happen. only that it could.

          or is it naive to expect that the process might be honored if it went that way? if it did and it weren’t, we would have civil war. is that what you are suggesting?

          • Unwound

            yes.

  • oblate spheroid

    I worry about the safety of any elector who refuses to cast their vote for Trump in a state whose popular vote went to Trump. A small but vocal and well-armed segment of the citizenry, who now feels vindicated and validated, wouldn’t take too kindly to that. I suspect that such an elector, whether casting a vote for Hillary, McMullin, or not at all, would be endlessly harassed and potentially attacked.

    • WUSRPH

      He’s not the only one that may have something to fear. A woman friend of mine was nearly run off the road late at night on the way to Dallas Thursday a week ago and cursed with the word Sid Miller used because she had a Hillary sticker on her car. I have also had friends tell me they have removed their signs, etc. because of their fears and advise me to do the same. I ,however, still have my yard sign and the sticker on my car. I will not be intimidated by thugs.

      Of course, most Trump supporters are not like that but with his comments at his rallies he may have given some the idea that such behavior is okay. I only hope things calm down, but his actions will have a major effect on whether and when that happens.

  • SpiritofPearl

    Time for a civics lesson. Jesus had nothing to say about it:

    https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html#restrictions

  • Jed

    i’m not really sure why there is so much controversy here (and elsewhere?) over a relatively straightforward part of the constitution.

    for a bunch of people who claim to favor the plain textual meaning of the constitution, people sure are having trouble with it.

    here is the definitive text. it ain’t that complicated:

    http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment12.html

    • SpiritofPearl

      It varie

      • Jed

        i don’t disagree.

        one diff, though. in 2004, the “establishment” got what it wanted. this time, not sure.

    • John Johnson

      Hear, hear!

  • BCinBCS

    Just as this BB article was being posted by Michael Hardy, I asked a question in the comments section of the previous article by Dave Mann. Since everyone had already moved on to this article, my question was never answered so I would like to repeat it here because I’d really like to get an answer. My post was:

    I have been doing a lot of reading about why Donald Trump won the election. I have discovered that there are about a half of a dozen prominent reasons that are the most popular. One of these has me confused and I hope that JJ or some of the other conservatives who post or lurk here at BB can help me understand it.

    Quite a number of people are stating that they voted for Trump rather than Hillary because they are tired of the political correctness of the left. They resent having their ideas and actions labeled as racist, bigoted, denier, misogynist, or other stigmatizations. This labeling of them by Hillary and the left is one of the reasons that they did not vote for her.

    What I cannot understand is that if they find these characterizations of their attitudes and actions as offensive, why don’t they change their attitudes and actions. Instead of making a change, they vote for someone who thinks and acts like them in a direct rebuttal of the other candidate and her supporters who believes these thing are wrong. Do they think that electing a president who is anti-pc, who is a racist, a bigot, a denier or a misogynist makes them correct? Would they be as proud or at least as comfortable with the label of murderer or rapist which, except for degree, is no different? Can anyone explain this to me?

    Does anyone have an opinion on this?

    • Shelly H.

      IMO as a former moderate republican, it has to do with the idea that you can cast a vote against a candidate by voting for their opponent. Since you were voting against x by voting for y, you weren’t really voting for y, so what y said or stood for was irrelevant because you were voting against x.

      Clear as mud huh? BTW this idea has been around since the 90’s.

      • BCinBCS

        I understand what you are saying, Shel but I don’t agree that most racist, misogynist and sexist voters cast their ballot for Trump because they didn’t like Hillary.

        I repeatedly hear conservatives telling liberals to quit whining about the results of the election when it was their whining against political correctness that manifested itself in their support of Trump.

        It seems logical to me that if a racist or a sexist doesn’t like being called a racist or a sexist that the way to solve that problem is quit being a racist or a sexist, not to elect a racist or sexist as the president. To me, that action merely perpetuates the problem.

        • Shelly H.

          I don’t disagree. I’m just stating what I’ve been repeatedly told – “I cast my vote against Hillary” when I have asked how voting for a racist, sexist, misogynist was not a deal breaker.

          IMO, voting against a candidate is as stupid as being a single issue voter. If you can not vote for a candidate why bother voting? When you vote for a candidate you vote for everything about them – the good, the bad, and the ugly. You can not pick and choose parts of a candidate. You aren’t Mary Shelley building Frankenstein’s monster.

      • John Johnson

        I was a moderate Repub. In early 2007, I had a lengthy piece published in the Fort Worth Star Telegram and Houston Chronicle entitled “Tell Me Again Why I Voted for You”. The ST even had a cartoon drawn up to accompany my offering.

        I reflected on a rejection of the Repub party after my wife’s personal relationship with the Reagan’s, my son’s personal interactions with GWB when he was owner of the Texas Rangers, my wife’s personal invite to the Gov’s mansion when the Bush’s occupied it, and my lifelong Repub straight ticket voting.
        I decided I could no longer support a party so intent on expanding the Middle Eastern conflict, especially if the one calling the shots was a Christian. The OT says that conflicts in the Mesopotamian region will continue until end of life on earth. Why then would a Christian President want to interject our country and resources into an already centuries ongoing regional conflict thinking that it was, and is, going to make a difference? I also addressed Cheney pulling GWB’s strings. I am no New Wave Republican.

        I did not vote for Obama, but started to. I did not cuss him or speculate on what he might do wrong until he started doing them. The ACA got crammed down our throats. Race relations started going backwards and his interjecting personal opinions from the highest office in the land, before the facts were in, grated on me.
        The way the immigration issue was handled and his Exec Orders overreach added on.

        I voted for Trump, not because l like him…more because I can’t stand her. I also put faith in his promises to curb special interests influence and initiate change in DC. I want things off high center.

        Words are one thing…actions another. I studied the words of one candidate, and several decades of history to compare against those words. I had the words of the other, and just words to consider. He has all sorts of charges of racism and misogyny leveled against him for his words, but actions in real life, as stated by many women and people of color who have known him over decades, tell a different story.

        I have grown weary, and angry, reading what all of you who hate and despise him keep speculating on what he is going to do.

        Why not just knock off all the speculating? Can’t you just wait until he actually gets in office and starts making decisions and attempting to initiate change before you unload on him?

        I gave Obama that courtesy.

        • BCinBCS

          JJ, you are becoming the new JBB. It would take me the better part of an hour to debunk all of the wrong statements that you made in your post. You really should do some research into what actually took place during the Obama administration, not what Fox or Breitbart says happened.

        • Unwound

          “I have grown weary, and angry, reading what all of you who hate and despise him keep speculating on what he is going to do.”

          we’re already beginning to get an idea. hes so far installed a white nationalist as his chief advisor and nominated someone who was too racist to be a federal judge by STROM THURMOND as AG

      • Jed

        i assume you mean the 1790’s.

    • John Johnson
      • BCinBCS

        The young lady that wrote that blog states that the poor people that she witnessed are Trump people because they are “ignored” by the Democrats?!!? Are you kidding me?

        She says that the reason that they remain poor is because services are not available to them because they are white. In what universe does this lady live where only minorities qualify for SNAP, Medicaid, CHIP, TANF, SSI, EYTC, WIC, REAP, Section 8, TANF and about fifty other programs for the poor?

        She cites statistics where the rural poor do not have the educational opportunities as urban poor. In what universe does this lady live where only the urban qualify for Reading First, Head Start, Rural Education Achievement Program, Adult Basic Education, Supplemental Educational Opportunities, Work-Study, Learning Centers, GEAR-UP, Pell Grants and about a dozen other education programs for the poor?

        Exactly what in Trump’s platform is there for them? Show me specifically where Trump has policies for the white, rural poor. I can certainly show you where Hillary has those policies.

        They think that Trump is going to bring back coal and bring back manufacturing. It’s a lie. It isn’t going to happen and gullible to think that it will.

        I feel like Cornwallis at Yorktown when he had his band play The World Turn’d Upside Down as he was surrendering to George washington. The world is upside down.

        • Gunslinger

          “It’s gullible to think that it will.” Exactly. God help those people, but that’s exactly what they are: gullible. Again, they’d rather have someone tell them, against all logic and likelihood, that everything will go back to the way it was, than face up to the reality that plants and mines will never open again. Couple that with the the ease of scapegoating non-white people who use those government programs as the reason why all the poor rural whites aren’t getting what’s “theirs”.

          • BCinBCS

            And, Gunslinger, for a lot of these poor, rural whites, going back to the way things were would be no better than the way thing are.

          • John Johnson

            How in the hell can you make a statement like that? You ever lived in the country? You must have missed all the farm repossessions a few years
            back. You must not have been reading and watching when all the Big’s started buying up those farms and ranches. You think all these people should move to the cities?
            How about those in Appalachia? Where are they supposed to go for work? How about those blue collar Trumpies in Michigan and Wisconsin? They all suppose to go back to school? and become what? Give them some answers Einstein. Impart some feigned wisdom on all of us.

          • BCinBCS

            Well, JJ, I’d recommend that they stay where they are, eschew additional education, drink, smoke take, drugs and die of some preventable disease. After all, that’s the Republican way.

          • John Johnson

            How about a methodical, well planned program where coal is phased out over a period of time instead of wiping out jobs of young and old alike all in one punch to the gut?

            How about keeping manufacturing in America and replacing coal with other manufacturing businesses?

            How about keeping all jobs in the U.S.? How about hiring U.S. employees instead of importing engineers and the like on visas to decrease payroll?

            How about our becoming truly energy independent and doing away with imported oil? How about saving all the trillions we spend on playing Big Brother in the Middle East because of oil that we don’t need?

            Our policies supporting multinational oil and manufacturing are not propagated solely by Republicans…bi-political Big’s run the show and both parties cater to them in return for money.

            You are simply a rube with a proclivity for blaming those slimy Repub’s for everything.

          • BCinBCS

            Coal production and the jobs associated with it are a direct result of demand and because the U.S. is now energy independent due to horizontal drilling and fracking there is an abundance of natural gas. An abundance of natural gas results in lower prices which means that places that used to rely on dirty coal with its contaminants that wear out furnaces and that produces ash and other by-products that must be handled and disposed are converting to clean and cheap gas. It’s market forces that are the primary reason that coal miners no longer have jobs. You would be screaming bloody murder if the Federal government was subsidizing the production and burning of coal when a cheaper energy source was available without government subsidies.

            The return of manufacturing will not change the employment picture significantly. Even if manufacturing returned, it would hire vastly fewer people due to automation. We are leaving the industrial revolution and entering the intellectual revolution where computers and robots will be doing the work of humans. It is folly to try to structure the U.S. economy on an outdated technology represented by industrial manufacturing.

            How often do you search out alternatives to the products sold at Wal-Mart for those manufactured in the United States? As long as there is consumer pressure for cheaper goods, those goods will be manufactured where labor costs are low – overseas.

            Do I mostly blame Republicans for the mess that the U.S. is in? Yes I do.

            It was during Ronald Reagan’s presidency that his economists proposed the changes that shifted how companies viewed their responsibilities. They went from having unions that protected worker’s rights and raised middle class salaries even among those who were not unionized to a work force where practically no manufacturing was unionized. Even more significant was the change in corporate philosophy that resulted from Reagan’s economist. They were the policy makers who changed business policy from growing a business, protecting its employees and keeping it in the United States to a model where the primary emphasis was stockholder returns. This disregard for the welfare of the worker, the company and the nation in favor of the profit of the shareholder is a Republican guiding principal which continues to this day.

          • WUSRPH

            There you go again putting things into “;perspective” (he hates that word and the very concept) and explaining the history behind actions. He is much more comfortable with his myths and anecdotes.

        • John Johnson

          Do you think all poor people she references want to be wards of the Federal government? They want jobs. What kind of representative government just eradicates jobs in one fell swoop without offering alternatives? What kind of government enters into trade agreements that shuts down thousands of manufacturing plants in the U.S. and leaves millions without work? If you have answers for that, please don’t waste them on me. Get your ass up to DC and impart that wisdom there. Stop in rural PA and WV on your way back. Tell all those folks that you are the new messiah.

          • BCinBCS

            The United States is undergoing another work revolution. First there was mechanization where machines replaced brute human and animal labor then came the industrial revolution where industries produced the jobs that took people from the farms to the cities and now we are in the automation revolution where computers and robots are replacing humans. Each of these revolutions resulted in disruption and required adaptation. Those that successfully adapt prosper and those that don’t adapt don’t prosper.

            Taking advantage of government programs to better oneself is not becoming a ward of the Federal government. Accepting help to prevent your family from going hungry is not becoming a ward of the Federal government. Accepting government help but maintaining the status quo waiting on mining or industrial jobs that won’t be coming back is becoming a ward of the Federal government.

            Since you are so enlightened, how would you solve their problem?

          • John Johnson

            That’s the Fed way of doing things, and you just repeat it like a good parrot. Tell some hands on mechanic, miner or farmer who is in their 40’s and above to “go to school to learn a new trade. Go to school, learn a new trade and then look around for a job in your town. “There are jobs in a city two states over” the Feds say. Go sell your home that is not worth squat in a depressed market. You don’t have money to move your family, and certainly none to get into a place to live once you get there. It’s easier to just sit, take Fed assistance and wait to die.

            How about staging shut downs over a decade or more which would allow older workers to close out their working years doing the only job they know, and offering those local young people free trade training in electronics, plumbing, welding, computerized machine tools and the like. Then offer Fed subsidies for manufacturing companies moving into the area with a trained work force? That’s a new way of addressing the problem. Yours is older than dirt.

          • BCinBCS

            I do not know how you would propose to slowly phase out jobs as described in your first paragraph. Do you advocate the government subsidizing businesses that would close or relocate due to economic conditions or should the government buy and run theses companies?

            As for free retraining, that was a major policy point of the Clinton campaign. Since she did not get a chance to implement her policies maybe you should be directing those questions to your buddy Trump.

          • John Johnson

            Read again. Coal is still in demand around the world. Let them continue to export to China while winding down. If you have a trained workforce and offer incentives to move into the Appalachian region, business will come…if it is not more profitable to move to another country. It’s like putting a puzzle together.

            As for Clinton, she gave her spiel to those unemployed miners and they didn’t buy it. They watched what her mentor was doing to them and figured more of the same.

            Auto workers the same; ditto the steel workers.

            Surely this is going to sink into your noggin at some point in time.

          • WUSRPH

            The United States has spent billions of dollars over the past 40 years or so trying to help the people of Appalachia become qualified for such jobs and trying to attract more businesses and industries. You would know that if you relied on anything for information but what you hear at the country club. It has not worked.
            What you, in effect, are proposing is to put the workers and the companies at which they work on the government payroll till they die out. Selling coal to China would only be possible if we paid a massive subsidy. China gets all the coal it wants at a much cheaper price from Australia which is now suffering a downturn in its coal industry because China is cutting back on the use of coal. (I know expect you to say that was not a literal suggestion by you but only an example.)
            You are, in effect, proposing the same thing for other industries in which people are being automated out of jobs in sort of a modern autarky. This is the sure road to obsolescent industries and massive inflation.

          • John Johnson

            You can’t get businesses to set up anywhere in the U.S. if they keep moving to Timbuktu because they can find cheaper labor and less taxation. What comes first? The chicken or the egg?

            Same with immigration. Do we start deporting first, or plug the holes on the border first? You plug the holes.

            There is a market for coal or the US mines would be shutting down without government mandates.

            I will add that I previously pointed out that offering training in an area to people with no jobs once trained accomplishes what? A trained person on welfare. Want them all to move to Texas? Florida? California? If you don’t have any money to live, much less move… if the few real estate assets you own are basically unsalable because no one has local money to buy from you or you owe more than its now worth, what options do you have?

            This is what the multinational movement, unfair trade practices, and unthought out government mandates produce.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, one of the traits of conservatives that drives me crazy is precisely what you are doing. Conservative fail to take into account the complexity of things.

            Between my two stints in college, I worked as a union trained equipment operator in the chemical plants around the Texas City area. We would occasionally get a person who would want us to make an impossible lift. We would have to explain to him that the only way to lift what he wanted was to use a “sky hook”, the hypothetical crane attached to the sky that could reach anywhere. Your solution to the coal problem requires “sky jobs”.

          • WUSRPH

            Funny but liberals have been talking about those kinds of problems for some time. Even me with my stench infused mind was talking about the need for relocation assistance a couple of weeks ago….guess you missed it…..but there has always been no basic problem in doing any of those things—conservatives who consider all of that as a form of socialism. I see nothing that suggests they have changed their minds or any willingness to directly or indirectly (thru special tax cuts) subsidize jobs for a decade or more.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, China has vast reserves of coal. Why would they buy it from us and ship it around the world from our east coast. Even if they were fiscally crazy enough to buy our coal, they would buy west coast (Wyoming, etc.) coal and ship it the shorter distance across the Pacific Ocean.
            Has the futility of coal sunk into your head yet?

          • BCinBCS

            This is from the May 14, 2016 Fortune Magazine:
            China’s coal sector has been struggling with a massive capacity glut and miners have been encouraged to cut production to shore up domestic prices, which plummeted around 30% last year. The country has promised to shed 500 million tons of surplus capacity in the next five years.

          • John Johnson
          • BCinBCS

            So I decided to go deeper in this cake slice that is the issue of coal and found some surprising facts. As you can see from the graphs below, use of coal has risen steadily since the 1950’s but as you can also see, underground coal mining like they do in Appalachia has remained relatively flat during that time while surface mining has exploded with practically all of that surface mining being done west of the Mississippi.

            Hillary Clinton said in a CNN Town Hall:
            So for example, I’m the only candidate which has a policy about how to bring economic opportunity using clean renewable energy as the key into coal country. Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right?

            And we’re going to make it clear that we don’t want to forget those people. Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories.

            Now we’ve got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don’t want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy that we relied on“.

            She was stating that the Democrats see the future of coal and they see the need to train those miners to do other jobs in the future.

            My question is: What is Trump going to do for these poor Appalachian miners whose jobs are being taken away by western open-pit mines?

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e1242a7297e701efe277824e7e19463be4b09b68488b2457df9b62b6031bd94f.jpg

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_coal_mining_in_the_United_States

          • John Johnson

            Great job of stating the obvious. Did you really learn something profound for this piece? Her party shuts down the coal industry and she says that she is going to revitalize the region and deliver jobs to them. They voted for Trump. Why?

          • BCinBCS

            Man you are dense!

            The Democrats did not shut down their jobs.

            Economic conditions are and will be shutting down their jobs! Natural gas is shutting down their jobs! Open pit mining in the west is shutting down their jobs!

            Voting for Trump will not reverse the economics and voting against Hillary eliminated their chance for retraining (and, possibly, relocation).

          • WUSRPH

            What kind of government—a capitalist, free-enterprise conservative government that’s what kind. Socialism would have found jobs for all of then. Modern liberals offer education and retraining….but balk at subsidizing jobs as you advocate.

          • BCinBCS

            I wrote previously how the Reagan administration completely altered the philosophy of modern day business. There were many consequences of that change including the phasing out of company funded pensions in favor of employee funded 401(k) programs, the elimination of company funded health plans in favor of employee fund-sharing plans and the elimination of most company funded job training programs that are now the financial responsibility of the potential employee through private job training and community college programs.

            Now JJ wants to eliminate even the need for companies to be profitable so that they can remain in business to hire people to do old economy work.

            Amazingly inefficient.

          • John Johnson

            You are so full of it. “Found jobs for them”???The Feds want to train them for jobs that don’t exist. The jobs are far away. If not in China, then in places like North Carolina, South Carolina or Florida.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, our country has a long history of people moving for economic reasons – it’s how Texas got its start and how people coped with the Depression. Is it too much to ask the poor little darlings of Appalachia to do as much?

    • Gunslinger

      ” Do they think that electing a president who is anti-pc, who is a racist, a bigot, a denier or a misogynist makes them correct?” Yes, they do. They’re tired of being wrong and being told they’re wrong. So they elect a guy who tells them they’re right.

      As for changing their own attitudes and actions…what’s easier? Changing your thoughts, beliefs and actions; or, pushing a button for someone who says you’re right and don’t have to change at all?

      • John Johnson

        Another goofy post. People tell you why they voted for Trump, and you call them liars and make up an answer for them. Ridiculous.

        • Gunslinger

          I called no one a liar. But it stands to reason that many do identify with Trump’s ethno-centric leanings. People vote for the candidate they most identify with. Just as some people voted for Hillary if for no other reason than she’s a woman.

          JJ, my own family is this way. Don’t tell me no Trump voters are racists when I speak them myself. Now, not all Trump voters are this way. Only a number of them. How many there are, I don’t know.

          • John Johnson

            Then quit addressing his followers as racists, woman abusers and the like. Some are; the vast majority are not. You would have us thinking that no women nor minorities voted for Trump. Look again.

          • Gunslinger

            Maybe they all aren’t. But for some reason, they all have the uncanny ability to look the other way when their candidate seems to be all of those very things.

          • John Johnson

            Maybe you missed this quote from a link that Unwound shared earlier today:

            “One of the few coastal elites to have cracked the Trump discursive code is the otherwise odious Peter Theil, who told the National Press Club, “the media is always taking Trump literally. It never takes him seriously, but it always takes him literally.” Voters on the other hand, said Theil, “take Trump seriously but not literally.” Bingo!”

          • WUSRPH

            To perryphrase our beloved former governor Rick,
            Not all the people who voted for Trump are racists, etc. ….but most of those who are racists, etc. voted for Trump

          • John Johnson

            Except for the black racists. Is racism found only in whites?

          • BCinBCS

            There is JJ, and it is the discrimination of whites by blacks that is holding back the white race from reaching its full potential.

          • John Johnson

            It is racial hatred by people of both colors that prevent us from blending.
            This deal is not one sided. Until we have respected leaders from both sides advocating and pushing in the same direction, we will have impasse. Obama’s sending Sharpton to Ferguson was the absolute most stupid move I can remember with regards to quelling racial differences.

          • BCinBCS

            Yes, from a white perspective sending Sharpton was a bad move but it was a smart move from the perspective of the blacks that Obama was trying to calm.

            Considering that Trump has hired the racist Steve Bannon to be his chief advisor and racist Jeff Sessions to be his attorney general after running an election campaign in which he refused to disavow the racism of his supporters, I think that you have a lot more racism to oppose coming from conservative whites than there ever has been from blacks.

          • WUSRPH

            Certainly not….The Japanese were for many centuries probably the most racist people in the world. But anyone who cannot see the continued impact of White Racism in this country is lying.

          • John Johnson

            You make me laugh. You are like a tragic figure in a medieval play.

    • John Johnson

      You think that a “good many” voted for Trump with their #1 reason being a dislike of political correctness. Where do you come up with this stuff? We tell you directly for months the reasons; I have listed them numerous times; I posted a link to Peggy Noonan’s spot on essay on the Trumpies’ motivation. You just ignore them all, and continue to post ignorant, inane stuff. You seem to be falling as much in love with words and self as your mentor. Please give it a break.

      • BCinBCS

        Gee JJ, I’m sorry that I do extensive reading of many sources rathe than the few on which you rely. If you think that there were not a lot of racist and misogynist who voted for Trump then you haven’t been paying attention.

        • John Johnson

          Regardless of the self promotion, you are not registering points. You are nowhere near as smart and perceptive as you think you are. I didn’t say that their were no racists or misogynists who voted for Trump. No one has. I wonder if Farrakhan followers voted for Hillary? Get my point, or is it too much for you to comprehend? You are a liberal, narrow minded, twit with an air of fabricated supremacy. You are becoming a tragic figure.

          • BCinBCS

            (1) I’m not a poster on BB to score points or promote myself. That’s simply yet another ad hominem attack on your part. (if I were self-promoting, I’d use my real name.)
            (2) Louis Farrakhan would not have been on Hillary’s staff but Steve Bannon is on Trump’s.
            (3) Calling me narrow-minded and a twit are not only more ad hominem attacks but are also incorrect descriptions of me.
            (4) I have never poo-pooed all as not knowing what they are talking about. If I find inaccuracies, I point them out, almost always with facts.

            I point out your inaccuracies above as a way of demonstrating that you apparently are incapable of mounting a rational defense of your president. You descend to ad hominem attacks instead of facts because facts are not on your side.

          • John Johnson

            Your facts are not facts; it is simply something someone else has written or said that you agree with that you deem fact. It grows old. I don’t buy it. You are just a mouthpiece for liberal ideology.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, your petulance is getting old.

            You argue: “The fact is that people had all sorts of reasons other than race or women hating for voting for him, which they state, but you ignore. This is fact.” in response to this question of mine: “I have discovered that there are about a half of a dozen prominent reasons that are the most popular. One of these has me confused and I hope that JJ or some of the other conservatives who post or lurk here at BB can help me understand it.

            As you can see, I was not ignoring the other reasons, I was simply curious about that specific one.

          • John Johnson

            Petulance is the product of dealing with a person with tunnel vision and selective reading. For months, I have given you, and others here, specific reasons many were supporting Trump other than the three derogatory ones you keep repeating. I posted links to Noonan’s and the Economist’s takes which were spot on. You obviously didn’t read them or catch on. Now the WaPo and other’s are somewhat getting the message and catching on to them. You…well, you are still wandering around in the dark.

          • WUSRPH

            And for months we have given you our reasons why we could not vote for Trump, which you could never accept. We viewed him as totally unqualified and as a ;potential threat to the American system. . I for one, hope that his actions are sufficient to change those views but, as yet, nothing he has said or done has come close.

          • John Johnson

            Oh, I never said that I did not understand your “Hitler is coming” rhetoric. Your “He’s a do nothing bullshitter” or “He’s not qualified”. I never said that I was enamored with him. I told you why I was not voting for Clinton. More of the same was not acceptable. Forget about her flaws.

            “Nothing he has done yet…”? You mean his nominations that reflect that he means business and is planning on carrying out his promised agenda?

            You have to hate that. Why wouldn’t you be squealing? Who did you expect him to pick? A Cisneros? An Elizabeth Warren? Wesley Clark?
            I promise you that you are not going to like what he is planning on doing, but he is moving like a businessman and not a politician. I’m loving it.

            If we reach a quagmire or he shows any signs of crazy and dangerous action, I will be criticizing him just like I did Bush/Cheney. I am not an ideologue. Are you?

          • WUSRPH

            I doubt you expect me to be just hunky-dory with the nomination of persons with know white supremacist attitudes as his top advisor in the White House and as the Attorney General. I, unlike you and The Donald, think that the strength of this nation comes from its diversity. Those appointments run directly counter to that. There are many more than qualified Republicans, including some who supported him, that would not give rise to fears of intolerance towards their fellow Americans. Of course, it is more than possible that he appointed them BECAUSE they would do just that.
            As to your promise to protest “if he shows any signs”….by then it may be too late. I voted to make sure that possibility never arose in the first place.

          • John Johnson

            I’ll have to study up on that White Supremacist comment.

            You voted to hold things in a pitted and decaying road. I voted for the guy who says he is going to fix the road. I’m optimistic; you’re scared. I get it.

          • BCinBCS

            If…he shows any signs of crazy and dangerous action…

            JJ, you’re precious!

    • Unwound

      This article does a fair job of explaining the mindset of a lot of trump voters. it doesnt go much into PC, but discusses how he was successful in communicating with them vs clinton

      http://nonsite.org/editorial/listening-to-trump

      • John Johnson

        Good read. Thanks for posting. He “gets it”.

        Just one of his astute observations, which are built from analysis and not emotional distress.

        “One of the few coastal elites to have cracked the Trump discursive code is the otherwise odious Peter Theil, who told the National Press Club, “the media is always taking Trump literally. It never takes him seriously, but it always takes him literally.” Voters on the other hand, said Theil, “take Trump seriously but not literally.” Bingo!”

        • WUSRPH

          I sure hope that the enemies and friends of the United States do not have to find out that you should not take what Trump says “literally”. That could be a hard lesson if they or some other country acts toward them based on what Trump says. But I guess that when he talks “diplomatic talk” he will give them a card that says “take this literally” so they can know he is serious.

          • John Johnson

            You made a living churning out bullshit for Bullock. He was a great negotiator. I bet he often said things he didn’t mean, in very pointed terms to get someone’s attention. You know…threats. With him, and with Trump, and people like them, you never know. You enter into negotiations with some fear and trepidation with them, and the back and forth begins. Anyone walking in to visit with them with an “I hold all the cards” attitude are in for a rude awakening. Hide and watch.

          • WUSRPH

            I’m not the one who has to “hide and watch” but I sure would be if I were a Lithuanian, Estonian or Latvian who heard him say that “it might not be in our interest” to honor our commitment to them and who had a Russia looking toward them like a wolf at its prey.

            May I suggest you go read some of the new book on August 1914. It might give you a better understanding of how important in international relations it can be that when one nation speaks that others not misunderstand.

          • John Johnson

            May I suggest you once again try and understand what Trumps comments about NATO really meant, and what they were meant to accomplish. “Pay your share or there will be problems.”

          • WUSRPH

            Pay your share means what? The NATO agreement, developed to meet Cold War conditions, calls for 2%

          • John Johnson

            Maybe you missed my prior post days ago. We have been paying 3.4% with all others averaging about 1.5%. I read somewhere that since Trump made his pointed comments about others paying their share that some are already getting “caught up”.

          • WUSRPH

            Some of those who you say are getting caught up includes the three tiny fairly poor Baltic States that, no matter what they spend, cannot defend themselves against the Russians. They are trying to build up enough to maybe able to blunt one of the Bear’s claws should he attack. They have no chance unless we stand by our sacred pledge to defend them and deter any Russian adventurism….. But I suspect that you say “big deal…what advantage to us is it that they stay free?” since you and Trump seem to value nothing unless it has some financial benefit.

            Chamberlain said something along those lines when Hitler broke the Munich agreement and seized the rest of Czechoslovakia. Within a year he found out the real value of protecting freedom.
            Let us hope we do not have to learn it again.

          • BCinBCS

            As an interesting aside, the Balkan states are now in an elevated state of military alert and are actively training their civilians in guerilla warfare techniques.

          • WUSRPH

            You would too if the in-coming head of your only protection had just about offered you to Russia. I doubt even Trump could get away with allowing the Russians to physically occupy them. But he well may standby while Putin quietly threatens them to bend to his will and extends his “sphere of influence” over them. This would make them puppet states who will need Russian permission to do anything. Hardly what anyone would call free states… Of course this moves the Russian sphere of influence right to the Polish border…but, what they heck, what good does Poland do for us? To perryphrase Adlai Stevenson we could quietly let then “nibble” Europe while we hide behind our ocean and our missiles.

          • John Johnson

            “The sky is falling…the sky is falling!” We are never, under Trump, going to let the Russians have their way with the Baltic States. Putin knows it…you whiners don’t. We are not pulling out of NATO. The Balkans will be protected.

          • WUSRPH

            You have been advocating bringing all our troops home to fortress America for years…but now you seem to be changing your mind.
            Do we have your solemn commitment that The Donald will do as you say? If so, we can all stop being concerned by the possibility that he meant what he said.
            Chamberlain, of course, had one of those solemn commitments on a piece of paper when he returned from Munich.

          • John Johnson

            You skip all over the place. Please stop it. Are our expensive military bases in Germany and Korea part of NATO? Supporting Japan since with military protection since we defeated them?

          • WUSRPH

            Again, there is not time or space to provide the education you so badly need but, in brief:

            Our bases in Korea are, like in Europe, a tripwire to give assurance to South Koreans that we will support them in case of another invasion from the North. They serve to help maintain the peace.

            Our bases in Japan, for which it pays support, are to back up the assurance to Korea PLUS give us access to and a presence in most of the Pacific, backed up by Guam and Hawaii.

            As a world-wide power with world-wide interests and responsibilities we have to be on the scene…..

            You, of course, would have us hide behind the oceans in Fortress America and rely on the threat of great Thor striking from the sky with nuclear missiles….even in cases where they cannot be effectively used or when there use might result in world-wide destruction. It is fortunate that, up to now at least, our leaders have been wiser than that.

          • John Johnson

            Thanks for pointing out that we are far removed from the major conflict areas. Thanks for mentioning the long held believe that we are the world’s police force and our allies’ Big Brother, and somehow responsible for spending more money on their protection that they do themselves.

            We have 900 overseas posts in the world; the Russians have two.

            Meanwhile, vets are getting screwed around, exported jobs are turning entire regions into massive welfare pits, families are having to drop healthcare and the debt meter keeps turning at a rapid pace.

            Do you think that father and mother without insurance for their kids thinks that 900 bases are necessary? How about the returning vet who served at one of them, lost a limb, and now can’t get the care he needs from the VA? How about the unemployed auto workers/subcontractors, and steel plant workers? Think they feel we should be shipping jobs overseas, building roads and schools and power plants, handing foreign powers millions of dollars after they spit in our face, and sending our troops and equipment to 900 locations around the globe? I don’t think so. I know I don’t.

          • WUSRPH

            Most of what you say is, of course, your usual dose of myths, misinformation, anecdotes and undigested bits of data so I will not attempt a point-by-point response. Just a few brief points:

            * The kinds of heavy industries you cite as are, in fact, those that benefit the MOST from defense spending. That is one of the reasons Trump is proposing spending billions more on defense—creating jobs. You and he seem not to be on the same page when it comes to that.

            * We are involved in the world not out of some sense of superiority or power madness or some bleeding heart reason (altho the defense of freedom is a worthwhile goal) but because it is in our own best interests to have a stable, peaceful world.

            *We have to play the leading role simply because we are the only nation with the wealth and resources to do so. Others should and must play a part as individual states and coalitions such as NATO and maybe they should do more and us less. The level of our involvement is constantly being analyzed and adjusted as events require or allow….but there is now way we can avoid playing the major role.

            I recognize your desire to withdraw behind our oceans but the day of that being possible ending many, many years ago.

          • John Johnson

            Hahaha. More pompous pap from the smartest guy in the world.

            I never called for a cutback in defense spending…just overseas spending. 900 posts or bases is goofy. You always want to expand the conversation when you get cornered. It is one of the traits of a politician and political spinmeister.

            I will also add that I have never said that we should shirk our commitments to our allies; what I did say is that we have no business starting, or causing wars in the Middle East and that everyone in NATO needs to pay their agreed share. I called for bringing the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan months ago.

            Please keep it short, keep it simple, don’t expand the conversation or come up with a bunch of “yeah, but’s”.

          • WUSRPH

            So what are we going to do with all the planes, ships, tanks, guns and additional troops Trump wants to add…Park them in surplus yards like we did with much of what was left over from WW II? March them around their bases? The inconsistency of your position is overwhelming…plus your lack of any understanding of why we are active the world and why we need to have an advanced position and bases in the world (that geography again). But there is one thing you are consistent in—your need to insult other people.

          • John Johnson

            See…there you go again expanding the conversation by responding to something that was never addressed or said. You are a pro at it.

            I said I did not advocate for decreased defense spending on anything except overseas bases. We have equipment that needs repair, upgrading and replacement. Maybe you remember my post about our jet pilots sitting because they don’t have operational aircraft to fly. We need new, innovative weapons and equipment. That takes money and it produces jobs.

          • WUSRPH

            We are already building and deploying the newest, most advanced innovative weapon systems in the world, leagues ahead of everyone else from troop carriers to advanced fighters with a bomber on the drawing boards and submarines to carriers. We already have the best equipped military in the history of the world, far in advance of any potential enemy. Billions are being spent, Trump proposes to spend billons more. What is the limit? Just spending and spending to produce jobs is about as big of “waste” as their can be.
            Have you ever considered that, in this day of drones and unmanned air vehicles, that if we have–as you claim—more pilots than planes that it might not be that we need more planes but that we have trained too many pilots? Or that they have been trained for the new planes (f-35s) coming into service now?
            You read a couple of articles in the popular press or see one TV show and hear two myths at the country club and think you know something about the military and strategy. In reality you know virtually nothing.
            I am NO expert, but I have studied this subject for more than 50 years and find it a useless task to try to educate you. I pity the poor military briefers who have to try to explain anything to your new endeared one, The Donald, if his level of knowledge is not more than yours. But, thanks to the news media, he now at least knows what the Triad is, even if he does not understand why he have it. But then he, like you, “know(s) more than all the generals”.

          • John Johnson

            I think you are bigtime stuck on yourself as the smartest guy in the room who really isn’t. You want to teach and preach about everything but you don’t know “everything”. You know history, so stick to history. Everything you have predicted since I first crossed paths with you has been wrong. Your batting average stinks. Don’t waste anymore of your opinions presented as fact to me; tell your well trained little lapdog the same. He’s as bad as you are about it. I am very comfortable with myself, my life, and my President at this point. I like what I see. I would not expect you whiners to shut up until you can at least start seeing what’s coming off the line. You are devastated, humiliated, and embarrassed. I get it. Go sit in a corner, wipe your eyes dry, get yourself together and come back when you aren’t totally speculating. Can you do that? Yeah, I didn’t think so. Being able to hold court here is an integral part of your life. Sad.

          • WUSRPH

            As usual, you ignore everything for a personal attack. You are more like the Troll everyday…I pity both of you for the shallow and I am certain unhappy lives you actually lead.

          • John Johnson

            I simply ignore you because I’m not buying what you are selling…or how you try and sell it…all wrapped up in snobbish, volumous packages of hot air. You are every bit as good at getting personal; you aren’t as good picking winners or future outcomes. Stay away from those.

          • John Johnson

            You are all over the place. On one hand you deem spending billions on 900 overseas bases/posts warranted…on the other, you rail against spending to upgrade, replace and develop. As far as facts…think I’m going to believe your take or the interviews on 60 Minutes with Colonels, pilots and ground crew members? Think I’m going to listen to you or my two frat brothers who retired as fullbird colonels after almost 30 yrs apiece. You just have this elevated sense of “right” that is not warranted. You are too about self to even be aware of it.

          • John Johnson

            You slay me…you can’t seem to deal with reality with regards to how the world has evolved from a military standpoint. Having bases around the world does what? At least the ones we pay for in allied countries. We have subs all over the oceans and carriers all over the seas, and support ships carrying first responding Marines. Why do we need to be paying for massive land based military instillations and stocking them with US military personnel in places like Germany? We can support any insurgency full bore, and up to, and exceeding our NATO commitments without these obsolete dinosaur bases and expenditures.

            I have surmised that you will prostitute all the convictions that you, as a Dem posses, just to disagree with me.

            I am objective; you are dyed in the wool pedant.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, I get tired of disagreeing with you but here I go again. If you think that the United States could oppose political or military aggression by Russia or China only from our ships at sea is incredibly naive.

          • WUSRPH

            There isn’t space or time available that would apparently be sufficient to educate you on military history, strategy and tactics and why we need bases in various parts of the world (logistics is one reason, of course). So I will limit my response to the most basic explanation. We have bases in troops in Europe for four basic reasons:

            First, so that they will be close to outbreaks and can intervene immediately. It would take many days, perhaps weeks or months, to bring them from the U.S.

            Seconds, as links and transit points to other parts of the world including the Middle East, etc.

            Third, as a visible sign of our commitment to NATO to relieve fears that if we are not directly involved in any conflict from the beginning that we might decide to “sit this one out” and leave Europe to its fate since, as the Donald might say, “we have no interest in the conflict”.

            Fourth, as part of that proof of our commitment as a “trip wire” that, because any aggressor must attack our forces as well as European troops, it will give us cause to honor our pledge. “You spilled our blood.”

            Many thought that the breakup of the Soviet Union might make these reasons obsolete….but its resurgence as Russia in places like Georgia, The Crimea and Eastern Ukraine as well as Syria and its threats to the Baltic States gives many reasons to question that judgment. We did, however, bring some units home and decreased our commitment after that breakup. We would like to do more, but events will control that decision.

            This is about as basic and simple as I can make it, but it is clear that that is the appropriate level for one with your limited understanding of the question.

          • John Johnson

            It will not take me near as many words to dispute your position.

            We have about 900 foreign military bases; the Russians have two. One in Syria, and a small naval presence in South Vietnam.

          • WUSRPH

            The Russians also have direct or close geographic contact with virtually all the problem areas and areas of interest in the world other than Africa and the southern Pacific. We are located far away across two oceans. Look at a globe sometime.

      • BCinBCS

        Thank-you Unwound.
        The hypothesis of that article made more sense than almost everything that I have read and, if true – and so far I see no reason why it’s not – explains the answer to the question that I previously asked about Trump supporters and their racism, bigotry, denialism and misogyny.

        • Unwound

          well, the bigotry part still applies as well. and the real test will be if the rubes who bought his line continue to back him when they figure out it was all garbage.

    • Unwound

      one more, i think larry summers is a genuinely terrible person, but his views on how “PC” just gives people cover to do terrible things is true

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/17/larry-summers-political-correctness-has-become-a-codeword-for-hate/?postshare=9631479488097192&tid=ss_tw

    • pwt7925

      A couple of thoughts. You partially answered your own question. You’re correct that people resent having their thoughts actions, etc. so labeled. Part of this, I believe, is that they don’t perceive themselves in that way, but do perceive their being labeled as a way to simply shut them up and to provide an excuse to ignore them. Labels do that. Your suggestion of simply telling them that they are wrong and ought to change isn’t going to change their mind, any more than their telling you that you’re out of touch and out of line and ought to change your views accordingly. And you shouldn’t be so surprised when they don’t see the error of their ways and flock to yours.

      • BCinBCS

        Interesting. I hadn’t thought of the fact that they don’t recognize those labels as being true even though they are obvious to me.
        (pwt, this answer is why I posted the question. Thanks.)

        • BCinBCS

          I wrote the previous reply before I read the article at nonsite.com that Unwound recommended. Essentially, that article postulated the same thing that you are maintaining, pwt. It’s an astute observation.

          As someone who was trained to be a scientist, it is very hard for me to ignore data. It appears that it is a common phenomena with some people allowing them to not see the contradictions and bad things about Trump. I accept that fact now. It will cause me to view people in a whole new light.

          I read about a half of a dozen blogs and all (or most) of the comments at three of them. I learn so much directly and indirectly from the bloggers and from the commenters. Thanks to everyone here at BB who have contributed to that knowledge.

        • pwt7925

          In today’s environment, labels are a principle means to shut down debate. People are anxious to label their opponents are being somehow inhuman. “You are a racist. I don’t have to listen to you.” “You are a baby killer. Your opinions are invalid and I don’t’ have to listen to you.” IMO Labels are the first resort of people who either aren’t interested in debating, have closed their minds, or are lazy.

    • Jed

      buncha lifelong bullies who got their widdle feewings hurt.

  • Gregg Macklin

    He singed a pledge to vote for the GOP candidate. If he doesn’t he is a liar.

    • BCinBCS

      And we all know that there’s no lying in politics.

      • Gregg Macklin

        He claims Biblical reasons for maybe changing his vote. Yet he signed a pledge to vote for the GOP winner. Going back on the promise is Unchristian

        • BCinBCS

          I see your point.

        • SpiritofPearl

          “Congress shall establish no religion. , . ,”

          • WUSRPH

            But that does not mean that an individual cannot base his vote on religious reasons…..In fact, in order to be true to his faith he probably should when there is a conflict between one’s beliefs and a candidate’s positions on a major issue.

          • Gregg Macklin

            WOW, just wow. The1st Amendment has nothing at all to do with the the subject of the article or my post here. NOTHING. BTW, your quote is wrong. Not surprised actually. I mean you read something I nor the article said, so why would anyone think you could quote the Constitution accurately?

          • SpiritofPearl

            You’re off the reservation here. You can’t claim “unchristian” as a valid argument in this case. That pesky First Amendment trips up folks like you every time.

          • Gregg Macklin

            The Elector is claiming Biblical reasons for HIS not voting Trump. However the Elector signed s pledge that he would abide the will of this district and vote for the winner of the district. Now he is backing away from his pledge, and act that is NOT Biblical to HIS claim.

            BTW Being the Elector is NOT Congress, he is NOT making law respecting the establishment of a religion. The 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause specifically addresses Congress and ONLY Congress. Basic grade school sentence structure. Funny thing about the Establishment Clause, ANY law, or ruling, against or for a public prayer or display anywhere, is a violation of the “Shall make no law…” Clause. Student or even teacher led prayer IS Constitutional.

  • SpiritofPearl

    Resistence

  • SpiritofPearl

    “Kakistocracy”

  • WUSRPH

    Well we now know how Trump feels about Civil Rights. Jeff Sessions as Attorney General makes it clear that advancing or even protecting the civil rights of minorities and ethnic groups is definitely NOT going to be a concern of the Trump Administration. A man with a consistent record of opposition to civil rights groups and legislation who was rejected for a federal judgeship because of his racist comments, etc. is certainly a change from any attorney general we have had for 40 years or more. I suspect that JJ and company will call the appointment only balancing the “political correctness” of recent years by appointing a man who will protect the interests of the rest of us.
    Other names being floated for various jobs are equally worrisome.

    • SpiritofPearl

      The Grand Dragon running Justice . . .

      • WUSRPH

        Plus a former general with direct ties to a Kremlin propaganda outlet for national security adviser and a TeaPartier for CIA chief. Looking worse at every pick.

        • BCinBCS

          But you know that he is going to appoint only the best advisors administrators.
          /s

      • WUSRPH

        Now, now…after two of those other people in a row it is time to have an attorney general who is as white as a sheet.

        • John Johnson

          I’ve used this term before with you…”We’ll see.”

          You were surprised and devastated on the 8th. Who knows…you might be surprised again in six months or so, but this would still be devastating to you. You will have been wrong yet again.

        • BCinBCS

          😉 (x2)

        • SpiritofPearl

          “Sheet” is the operative word.

    • José

      I get real impatient with folks who chastise us Trump critics and say give the man a chance. Well, he has that chance and he’s not doing a danged thing to convince us now that he is any different from the conman that he was during the primaries. I’ve already contacted my Representative asking him to get busy with that Congressional oversight that they are so good at doing.

  • WUSRPH

    I see that Trump bought his way out of some probably embarrassing testimony by “settling” the Trump University law suit with the State of New York. $24 million is a small price to pay to avoid having all the claims he has made during the campaign about his first-class school publicly revealed to be untrue. He will probably be able to write it off on his taxes and thus avoid another year of paying to support the country he now is supposed to lead (sic).

  • WUSRPH

    It sure looks like The Donald has a “lese-majeste” attitude when it comes to anyone criticizing him or his administration-to-be. Now he is demanding an apology from the cast of the play “Hamilton” for not being nice to VP-to-be Pence. Says that “should not happen” He said the same thing about those protesting his election. Wonder if we are in for at least a symbolic return to the provisions of the Alien and Sedition Acts of the John Adams and Woodrow Wilson administrations that made it a crime to criticize the government. He has already threatened to go after the media, including by changing the interpretations of the First Amendment. How far will his sense of omnipotence go?

    • José

      The dude really, really needs to read Amendment I. It’s short enough to finish before he gets too fidgity, it’s simple and clear, and it’s an essential component of our American values.

      • WUSRPH

        He wants to refine it to reverse the standard of proof in libel cases among other things. I wonder if sympathy for that kind of a ruling will be on the check list for prospective federal judges along with abortion and absolute gun rights?

        • WUSRPH

          Now he is after Saturday Night Live..The man cannot take any criticism, even a joke.

  • José

    This matter of independent minded electors recalls a little known fact about a previous election. Back in 2000, it was thought by many that Bush might win the popular vote but lose the Electoral College vote. A number of Bush surrogates were prepared to articulate the case that the electors should honor the wishes of the American voters and select Bush as the next President. When the vote tallies came in with the exact opposite results—Gore won the popular vote, narrowly—those talking points were scrapped. Typical right wing hypocrisy.

    Now in 2016 we had Trump mouthing off before the election about how he wasn’t going to accept the results if he lost, and many of his supporters were prepared to cause a ruckus too. Meanwhile, the Dems have generally agreed that there is little reason to contest the numbers. Their response has been somewhat different: to question WHY the vote went as it did (including discussing the unfair meddling of Comey, Assange, and Putin), to begin lobbying against many of the dangerous policies proposed by Trump, and perhaps even to mention that the election technically isn’t over until the Electoral College votes are cast and validated by Congress, according to the strict wording and original intent of the US Constitution. I think that’s fair enough. You should too.

    One more things about faithless electors. Does anyone know about Robert Satiacum? This guy is an elector in Washington State for the Democratic Party. A Sanders supporter, he announced a month before Election Day that he would not cast his electoral vote for Clinton. That was a big deal because Clinton was sure to win Washington, and at the time it was quite possible that his one vote could decide the election. Surprisingly it was not a huge story, nationally. I think it’s because Clinton and team were not a bunch of thin skinned crybabies.

    • John Johnson

      Trump said he reserved the right to contest as the Bush/Gore election was.

      The situation about fighting the Electoral College set-up reminds me of the “nuclear option” brouhaha and how it is about to bite the Dem’S in the butt.

      I would imagine Clinton’s people were not up in arms about Mr. Satiacum because they thought they had it in the bag by well over 80 or so more EC votes.

      To suggest that no one is causing a ruckus…have you missed the protests? The crying by the “participation trophy” millennials who don’t understand anything about losing because they have never been exposed to it…or the out of state, non-voting paid thugs who have been destroying private property?

      • BCinBCS

        Nice rewrite of history there, JJ (“Trump said he reserved the right to contest as the Bush/Gore election was.“)

        Trump was screaming constantly that if he did not win the election it was because it was rigged. (But then, as you stated before we shouldn’t take what he says literally – I guess unless it is something that the conservatives want him to do.)

        As far as the EC…JJ you’re licking only the icing.

        So you’re advocating doing away with all public protests or just those by liberals? When was the last time that you spoke out against the hundreds and hundreds of hate-type acts perpetrated by conservatives against those with whom they disagree? Apparently a Constitutional act should not be allowed and a criminal act should not be discouraged.

        • John Johnson

          Please list those recent mob hate acts initiated by conservatives.

          • BCinBCS

            I don’t know of any mob hate acts but there have been hundreds of individual and small group hate acts perpetrated since the election of Trump – hell, there were even instances of violence at his rallies.

            From the November 13, 2016 issue of Time:
            In the days since the presidential election, states across the country have seen increased incidents of racist or anti-Semitic vandalism and violence, many of which have drawn directly on the rhetoric and proposals of President-elect Donald Trump.

            The Southern Poverty Law Center has counted more than 200 complaints of hate crimes since Election Day, according to USA Today.

            “Since the election, we’ve seen a big uptick in incidents of vandalism, threats, intimidation spurred by the rhetoric surrounding Mr. Trump’s election,” Richard Cohen, president of the Southern Poverty Law Center told USA Today. “The white supremacists out there are celebrating his victory and many are feeling their oats.”

            Many advocacy groups have called on Trump to condemn such attacks and threats, but the President-elect has yet to do so.

            The article went on to document five especially bad incidents.

            The full article can be found here:
            http://time.com/4569129/racist-anti-semitic-incidents-donald-trump/

      • Rob Harris

        I do so enjoy irony and well parsed sarcasm….

        • John Johnson

          Chad makes me laugh. He hits nail right on the head.

        • Jed

          you kids get off my lawn.

          • BCinBCS

            😉
            Perfect!

  • Richard Blumenthal

    He made a signed commitment. If he chooses not to keep his word, he should resign and allow a more honorable person to take his place.

  • ╚DJ╦STEPHEN►V╗

    So sick of these freaks shoving religion down everyone’s throat. Separation of church and state means nothing in the USA ,,such a hypocritical and fake country.

  • Ty

    Overthink things much????? Geez….

  • Redeemed

    If this gent follows through with what he says his Christian beliefs may dictate, it will be the first time I can recall where Dems cheered for someone following their religious convictions instead of labeling them with a “phobe,” “ists,” or “ism,”

  • John Bernard Books
  • SpiritofPearl

    Fun times at the Capitol:

    https://www.texastribune.org/2016/11/19/watch-dps-troopers-riot-gear-separate-dueling-prot/

    FWIW there were many more anti-fascists than white nationalists.

  • Marie Murphy Bishop

    Art said several months ago on a Facebook post that he would be voting Republican. I read it and so did most of Dayton. Now he is him hawing? I think he is grandstanding, looking for his 15 minutes of fame. Step down Art.

  • José

    Sisneros was elected legally and fairly, but now some folks want him to step down for not fulfilling his campaign promise. All right, then. Will you also call for Trump to refuse the presidency because he is already going back on his pledges? If not then go take a hike.

  • BCinBCS

    And how do you think that your inability to accept facts makes you look?

    • John Johnson

      On occasion here, over the years, I have admitted I was wrong. Not too long ago to the Professor. Never seen anyone else do it, I don’t believe.

      You post stuff that you read or make up and call it fact. I read both conservative and liberal newspaper pieces everyday, along with various magazine articles.
      I don’t know where you get some of your stuff from, but if often doesn’t jive with what I feel is true based on what I’ve read or heard. Why you feel you need to impart some sort of superior knowledge or intelligence on me is hard to figure. It isn’t sinking in.

      • BCinBCS

        JJ wrote”…often doesn’t jive with what I feel is true based on what I’ve read or heard.

        There’s your problem.

  • harleyboy

    If he is a Christian as he says, then he should keep his pledge by doing what he said – “support the GOP’s standard-bearer.”

    • SpiritofPearl

      The US is a secular country.

      • harleyboy

        What is your point? All I am saying is that if he keeps his word as someone claiming to be a Christian should, then he will support the GOP’s standard bearer. I said nothing about this being a Christian nation – even though we were founded on Christian principles and our legal system is based on the Ten Commandments. If America ever was a Christian natino, the reailty of continuing to be a Christian nation ended long ago.

  • BCinBCS

    I, too, wish that we did not have so many bases and personnel overseas but I see their necessity.

    Let me give you and analogy.

    If we were to remove our troops from, say, South Korea then the North Koreans could do to the South what Russia did to Ukraine with the Crimean Peninsula. It would be a fait accompli since we would be an ocean away and we could do nothing about it except start an amazingly costly war. It’s a pay me now or pay me later situation.

    • WUSRPH

      Sorry, BC, but you seem not to understand. He does not care about what might happen to South Korea or anyone else in the world. If it does not have a direct monetary impact on him and/or the US, he says we should not bother ourselves with it. Defending Democracy elsewhere is of no concern to him…as the word or concept, except as it directly affects him, has no meaning. He (and I fear Trump as well) would just let it happen.

    • John Johnson

      900 us; 2 them???? Crazy, and expensive and not needed.

  • WUSRPH

    The Washington Post has an interesting article identifying Trump as being America’s first Independent President….how he is not a Democrat or even a Republican but just used that party as a vehicle to reach the presidency. Worth reading.

    • BCinBCS

      Uh, link?

      • WUSRPH

        Sorry, but I cannot provide them with this old lap top I am using while setting up my new computer to replace the one that blew up a week last Thursday.

      • John Johnson
        • BCinBCS

          Thanks for the link JJ.

          For those that don’t want to read the entire Dan Balz article, the gist of it is:

          Trump took the elements of an independent candidacy — the lack of clear ideology, the name recognition of a national celebrity and the personal fortune needed to fund a presidential campaign — and then did what no one seemed to have thought of before. He staged a hostile takeover of an existing major party. He had the best of both worlds, an outsider candidacy with crosscutting ideological appeal and the platform of a major party to wage the general election.

      • José

        If not the same article, this one has a similar message. Interview with former RNC chair Michael Steele.
        https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/11/15/michael-steele-donald-trump-is-the-freest-president-weve-had-in-a-generation/

        • BCinBCS

          I sure don’t see in Donald Trump what Michael Steele sees in Donald Trump. We shall see.

          • José

            Me neither. But then again I don’t think that anyone has a really good idea about what national policies will be legislated under a Trump presidency. If it turns out that he actually wants to get something done then it’s somewhat plausible for him to strike a partnership with Democrats and moderates.
            As for other aspects of a Trump presidency we know danged well what’s going to happen. Outright thievery, embarrassingly inept diplomacy, and a general debasement of the office.

          • BCinBCS

            Yep.

  • John Bernard Books

    Nailed it…
    “Rob Schneider ✔ @RobSchneider
    I haven’t seen the Democrats this mad since we freed the slaves!”

  • BCinBCS

    Again with the ad hominem attack and no factual rebuttal.

    • John Johnson

      You want the “poor little darlings” to suck it up, and you want me to not call you an asshole? That’s not how it works in my world. Toughen up, Buttercup.

      • BCinBCS

        Again with the ad hominem attack and no factual rebuttal.

  • BCinBCS

    I eagerly await a refutation of my facts as it appears that your only defense is ad hominem attacks.

    • John Johnson

      You just don’t get it. What facts? What you call facts?

      • BCinBCS

        If you don’t consider them facts then they should be easy to refute.

        • John Johnson

          What? Your comment about Western US mines having more to do with Appalachian mine closings than the federal government? This has something to do with it, along with NG depressed costs, but the Appalachian mines produce a grade of coal good for smelting and steel making. No steel plants in US, no demand for product. Who’s fault? What else did you want me to dispute?

          • BCinBCS

            It’s your show, JJ. You tell me why there are relatively few steel mills in the U.S.

          • John Johnson

            What? You don’t know? Read up on it. I’m not going to play your goofy little game. Ask one of the steel workers who voted for Trump.

          • BCinBCS

            Yep, just as I thought. You don’t know.

  • John Johnson
    • BCinBCS

      The first place that Congress should reduce personnel is their own staffing. Cut the assistants to all Congresscritters to three. One to staff their Washington office, one to staff their home district/state office and a floater. That would demonstrate to the American people the sincerity of their willingness to cut government spending and set a good example for the rest of government.

      • John Johnson

        You know how you always tell me that I come to a conversation “half cocked”? A 30 year rep or senator could possibly reduce staff. If we want limited terms, a newbie would need experienced people, like your mentor, to educate and support them. This is not about Congressional staffing…this is about the millions of employees who work for “departments” and “agencies”.

        • BCinBCS

          Are Congresscritters part of government?
          -Yes-
          Does this define their staff as government workers?
          -Yes-
          Does Trump advocate cutting government workers?
          -Yes-
          Therefore Trump should require Congresscritters to cut their staff.
          What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

          • WUSRPH

            Not that some of the offices are not overstaffed, but do you really want to cripple constituent service, the only thing most congresspeople actually do these days?

          • BCinBCS

            You mean cripple service like Trump will do to EPA, Education and a lot of other agencies that he doesn’t believe in?
            Goose/Gander.

          • John Johnson

            Agree…and they just send out canned responses to constituent complaints from we commenbreds. Want something more you have to show up with a big check in your hand. You might also explain to BC that every congressman needs someone like you on their staff to help them propagandize and write legislation…with the help of the lobbyists. You weren’t protected from being fired, were you? Please explain this to him.

          • John Johnson

            You are continuing to be obtuse. Your observations on this subject are not ignorant…they are flat out stupid. Want examples of why we need to do away with civil service unions, I can go into explicit detail.

        • WUSRPH

          I know you don’t care for facts, but the number of federal employees (non-defense) went DOWN under Obama. It is now lower than it was under Ronald Reagan. Plus the percentage of the work force employed by the feds is also down. I know that does not agree with your anecdotes, but facts rarely do.
          http://historyinpieces.com/research/federal-personnel-nu

  • John Johnson

    Oh, no! Trump calls for studying visa programs that allow companies to hire foreign engineers and the like at reduced salaries which undercut US professionals. Why hasn’t someone else done that? Multinational corporations bought votes?

    • jadedhaven

      I’d like to see that link, John. The last time I saw him speak/tweet on that matter he was all for more HB1 visas for STEM jobs. He sounded just like Lamar Smith (TX-R), the biggest HB1 booster in congress and a recipient of huge money by Dell and other computer/software companies who would prefer to outsource well-paying, professional jobs to foreigners who will accept substantially less money.

      • John Johnson

        Heard it on the tube. No link.

  • BCinBCS

    From NBC News:
    Maryland officially became the first state on Tuesday to approve a plan to give its electoral votes for president to the winner of the national popular vote instead of the candidate chosen by state voters.

    Gov. Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, signed the measure into law, one day after the state’s General Assembly adjourned.

    The measure would award Maryland’s 10 electoral votes to the national popular vote winner. The plan would only take effect if states representing a majority of the nation’s 538 electoral votes decided to make the same change.

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18053715/ns/politics/t/maryland-sidesteps-electoral-college/

    • John Johnson

      Woopee! This means what? Do you want a civil war war where all the red states take on the condensed blue pockets on the map? It would seem so.

      Lick your wounds…heal up and accept defeat

    • SpiritofPearl

      This article is from 2007.

  • WUSRPH

    I wonder how many of the net work and media types will “temper” their coverage of The Donald after getting balled out by him today. If yelling at them doesn’t work, there is always what Nixon did to them—sic the IRS and the FBI on them and tap their telephones. He’s already threatened the revise the First Amendment and get the DOJ to investigate them for anti-trust and monopoly violations (althou the SCOTUS has exempted the media in the past).

    • Shelly H.

      Here’s hoping this backfires and they tell trump that he can take his tirade and stick it where the sun don’t shine.

      • John Johnson

        Oh, Shelly…I feel for you. This is how I expressed my anger the last seven years. I seven instead of eight because I gave him one year of grace period.

    • BCinBCS

      O.K., I give.
      What’s wONDER?

    • John Johnson

      You mean like sending the IRS to strong arm opposition? You are right…this should always be a concern.

  • Richard Steven Patterson

    This Nation hangs by a thread … if 38 Texas Electors voted for ROMNEY OR BUSH, they would send the election to CONGRESS, and CONGRESS could chose the third place ROMNEY OR BUSH, instead of Trump or Clinton, as the next President … a GOP ROMNEY would be acceptable to 95% of America, or at least they could live with him for 4 years, whereas at least 55% of America will be against Trump (or Clinton) from day one. Not my favorite choice but would Constitutionaly save The Republic.

    • John Johnson

      Civil war.

  • SpiritofPearl
  • John Bernard Books

    and the “Flakes” begat the “Snowflakes”….
    ““The party’s message, structure and apparatus are broken,” said Kofinis, who was chief of staff to moderate Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. “We haven’t acknowledged it for years because we had the White House.”
    Obama’s two terms masked a crumbling party infrastructure.
    During Obama’s tenure, Democrats lost over 800 state legislative seats, at least 13 governorships and both houses of Congress.
    Party insiders are reluctant to blame the popular Obama but cite plenty of reasons for the decline.”
    https://ca.news.yahoo.com/democrats-search-answers-stem-spreading-republican-tide-111317153.html

    No it wasn’t racism it was dem policies. Dems in total disarray….

  • SpiritofPearl

    “Although no elector is bound by federal law . . .”

  • WUSRPH

    A major development that could affect Texas: A three-judge federal court (made up entirely of GOP appointees) has found that Wisconsin unconstitutionally gerrymandered its legislative districts to keep Democrats from being able to express their wishes. The SCOTUS recognized the potential for “political gerrymandering” some years ago but in later cases proved unable to find a case that meet its criteria. This case gives it another chance. If the Wisconsin ruling is upheld it could affect situations in Texas such as the way Travis County is carved up into multiple congressional and state senate districts with the specific goal of keeping Democrats from exercising their voting strength.

  • SpiritofPearl

    Ms. Konni

  • Jay Trainor

    I fully sympathies with Mr. Sisneros but should he vote for someone than Trump, he’ll be hounded by Republicans even if he moves out of Texas. Perhaps a Democrat or Libertarian in-law owns a business he can go to work for.

    • José

      It would hardly be the first time that someone paid a price for standing up for principle. See: Civil Rights advocates in the 1950s and 1960s.

  • WUSRPH

    Trump Foundation admits that it violates the law…He invests with Saudi Arabians during the election campaign…Now we find out. Wonder which foundation should be investigated?

    • SpiritofPearl

      Impeachment is unlikely.

      • WUSRPH

        Too early and the potential offenses are not enough….He’s probably going to have to “pull an Andrew Jackson” on the Congress itself and directly challenge its role or standby doing nothing while Putin devours the Baltic States or something major like that before anyone will seriously consider it

    • SpiritofPearl
      • WUSRPH

        I had heard about it since the election but I did no see it at the time it was printed., I had a professor in college in 1965 who predicted about the same…but in his prediction the big issue was to be property rights

  • WUSRPH

    Now Trump is saying that he could conduct his business out of the White House if he wanted to and that a president cannot have a conflict of interest. It appears he is TECHNICALLY correct. A president CAN have a de fact conflict of interest but probably not a de jure as the conflict of interest laws were not written to apply to the president. Of course, we’ve never had a president with as many potential conflicts as Trump or one who seemed so blasé about them. But then ethics laws were written to keep the bad guys from sinning….good guys don’t need them.

    • Shelly H.

      Except for that pesky clause in Article II that prohibits the President from accepting titles, gifts etc. from monarchs and foreign states.

      So anyone want to wager on how long Trump lasts before he is impeached?

  • John Bernard Books

    Dems race over the cliff……
    “Those results don’t show Democrats successfully walking and chewing gum at the same time. It shows them choking on their gum and stumbling down their own slippery slopes at every level of governance. Bump called this the “Thelma and Louiseing” of the Democratic Party, and he’s correct. That period roughly corresponds to the peak of their identity-politics commitment, too. They managed to win one more presidential election in that period, but they’ve clearly lost the country. This is just another stage on the actual Kübler-Ross progression — denial.”
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/de6889f3c3c6212f00757c35eab341d9562c57e767a840585c3c23c93648a8b5.jpg

  • BCinBCS

    This is incredibly OT but maybe BB could use a little diversion since the commenting seems to have died down.

    I am of the habit of writing down any interesting information or fact that I hear or read on the backs of the junk mail envelopes that sit on my desk. They accumulate until I get a critical mass that makes me open them and sort the recyclable paper from the cellophane windows and plastic doo-dads that are sometimes part of the mailings. I keep the envelopes on which I have written things that I want to remember in a separate pile.

    I also of the habit of picking up and keeping interesting rocks that I come upon, a habit that I must have inherited from my grandmother who did the same. My house is littered with small piles of odd or beautiful stones. Recently, I picked up a beautiful white quartz rock that had been left in the yard of one of my investment properties and it sits on my desk on top of a stack of my information containing junk mail envelopes.

    That appearance of that stone sitting on those envelopes triggered a memory from when I was young. In my early years, every desk had at least one but usually three or four similar rocks or, instead, sometimes glass weights or if the desk belonged to someone of means or someone who worked for the right company sachets made of embossed leather filled with lead shot.

    I’m sure that the old-times at BB such as WUSRPH, Beerman, Pearl, JBB, (maybe) JJ and (maybe) roadgeek know why those things were kept in those days but I wonder if the “youngsters” know the reason. If any of you young posters have an opinion, post a reply. If none of the youth of this blog know the answer, I’ll post it tomorrow evening. Good luck.

    (I know that you old-farts know the answer, so don’t reply. Give the whipper-snappers a chance.)

    • SpiritofPearl

      I don’t get it. Must be a Texas thing . . .

      Happy Thanksgiving!

      • BCinBCS

        Not a Texas thing, Pearl – more of a Southern thing.

        • Jed

          they still use windows up north.

    • Jed

      i think i know, but i am 48. so i’ll wait.

      • BCinBCS

        Was your answer correct, Jed?

    • BCinBCS

      What were those rocks, glass weights and leather bags used for back in the day?

      First a little background:
      When we older folks were very young no one had air conditioning. When I was young the only places that had “conditioned air” were grocery stores and movie theaters. You can imagine on a hot, humid, sweltering Texas afternoon how a housewife in her even hotter house would “realize” that she needed an ingredient for that evening’s supper that would require a trip to the air conditioned store. The same was true later in the evening when husband and wife were home and couldn’t cool off. The normal Friday or Saturday evening movie routine might include a weekday movie in the air conditioning to escape the oppressive heat.

      But what would people do when they weren’t at the grocery store or the movies? There were windows and screened doors and there were fans. All of those people who worked at a desk for a long time would orient their desk to take advantage of any breeze that might be blowing and, if they were lucky, they might have an oscillating fan to stir the hot air.

      The only problem with a breeze coming through the windows or from a fan is that t would blow your papers around with most of them invariably finding their way to the floor. And this brings us to the answer to my question. Those rocks, glass weights and leather bags were paper weights and they kept your papers neatly on your desk free from the vagrancies of the wind.

      Did you get the answer?

      Here’s another question about which this answer reminded me. Older homes have double hung windows that allowed the upper sash to be opened by lowering it and a lower sash that could be opened by raising it. Today’s homes generally have fixed upper sashes that cannot be opened and lower sashes that can. Why is this? I’ll give you a hint: It isn’t so that more of the window could be opened because the upper sash, when open, would cover the lower part of the window and the lower sash, when open, would cover the upper part of the window. No matter what open combination was used only one-half of the window could be open.

      I’ll answer this tomorrow.

      Happy Thanksgiving to all!

      • Shelly H.

        I don’t see your answer to the window question so I’ll answer – circulation. Heat rises so having the upper sash lowered allowed the hotter air out and the lower sash raised allowed cooler air in creating a convection air current aka circulation.

        • BCinBCS

          Ah Shel, you are either showing your age or your intelligence. That’s the exact reason.
          (I didn’t post the answer because I got busy replacing a TV that finally died after 35 years – got me one of them new-fangled flat ones.)

          • Shelly H.

            I’m over 45 so I’ll claim both. 😀

            When I was in school the only air conditioned rooms were the office and the library. In elementary I remember we had those louvered glass windows that opened in either on top or bottom but not the middle. I remember in 4th grade after afternoon recess we would get an ice cube and a minute in front of the teacher’s box fan. My Jr High and High schools had the transom at the top that opened as well as at the bottom.

            My HS building was 50 years old when I attended and we had radiators that we would try and sit by in the classes that didn’t have assigned seating in the winter, it gets very cold in the Panhandle/South Plains.

  • John Bernard Books

    Which are you? The gullible low information voter…..or the paid dem shill that spouts the DNC party talking points….

  • John Bernard Books

    Prez Trump is already creating jobs….
    “t the start of 2017 hundreds of jobs in Duval County will be available through the building of a refinery in the southwest corner just outside of Laredo, Texas off of Highway 359.
    Raven Petroleum will be the first refinery built in the United States since the early 1970s, according to Duval County Judge Ricardo “Rocky” Carrillo.”
    http://www.alicetx.com/news/20161117/refinery-in-duval-county-expected-to-create-jobs-and-more

    With the stock market setting new records daily, Prez Trump slashing gov regs and creating jobs…..the dem party is fini….

  • Jean

    Please Mr. Sisneors cast your vote for President Elect Donald Trump. He will get our country back on tack. He is against abortion, he wants to put Christ back in Christmas and other religious things that have been taken away from the American people. The people of America deserve better than what we have had in the last 8 years and Mr. Trump will make that happen. He is for We The People, not himself.

    • donuthin2

      You are incredibly naive.

    • SpiritofPearl
      • WUSRPH

        I like the way the writer sums up what the White working class is actually going to get from Trump:

        “Had Hillary Clinton won the election, the white working class might have gotten some tangible benefits — a higher minimum wage, overtime pay, paid family and medical leave, more secure health insurance, and so on. Trump and the Republicans oppose all that. So what did the white working class actually get? They got the election itself. They got to give a big middle finger to the establishment, to the coastal elites, to immigrants, to feminists, to college students, to popular culture, to political correctness, to every person and impersonal force they see arrayed against them. And that was it.”

        I hope they enjoyed the good times while that lasted (past tense).

        • John Johnson

          I like the way you and your tribe just keep on keeping on. You got the election all wrong and now you want to compound your ignorance by telling the rest of us what we can and can’t expect…as if you know. You don’t know squat.

          You so much want to rub our noses in some sort of I-told-you-so-wrapped Trump failure. Does this seem healthy to you?

      • BCinBCS

        Thanks for the link Pearl. I printed the article so that I could give it to a friend who won $50.00 from me on the presidential election results. I’m sure that I’ll eventually get the last laugh.

      • Jean

        You must be one of those liberals I’ve been hearing about…. Maybe you’d better go get some play dough or hot cocoa…Better yet, go to the tear room!

    • José

      I go to church every Sunday as well as several other times during the year, like Christmas Eve. Jesus Christ has been the focus of Advent and Christmastide each and every year, without exception. I have no idea why you would think otherwise, or why you would need the President to tell you so. My fellow Christian Mr. Obama would agree, and I doubt that Mr. Trump has given the matter any thought whatsoever. Girl, you nuts.

      • WUSRPH

        Actually, not observing Christmas is a very old American practice. All those good Puritans and Pilgrims who settled New England refused to observe it or allow its observance. They considered it a carry-over from a Pagan winter holy day..

        • José

          Puritans and Quakers, true. But colonial America included Anglicans and even Catholics, and those folks appreciated a good festival. Bring on the figgy pudding.

          Regardless, Christmas has certainly become an American tradition. And while the holiday has become secularized over time, that’s not because of any intentional act of devious atheists as Jean might suggest. Rather it is an effect of Christians imposing the holiday on a non observant public and the insidious merchandizing. I’m all for keeping Christ in Christmas, with the understanding that it requires faith communities to take it back.

      • BCinBCS

        “Jesus Christ has been the focus of Advent and Christmastide each and every year…

        Yea José and with Trump and his climate change deniers Jesus’ future “Christmastide” will wreak havoc and destruction on Galveston and the rest of the Texas coast. 😉

      • Jean

        obama is not a Christian! I have no clue what you are talking about other than, a true Christian “serves” God. Just going to church won’t get you anyplace. You Must SERVE HIM

        • SpiritofPearl

          There is no religious test for public office in America. President Obama lives as a decent man. Trump is a sexual predator and crook. You have been shafted.

          • Jean

            Done with you Spirito…you are FOS

          • SpiritofPearl

            Good Christian lady needs to wash her pious mouth out with soap.

        • Shelly H.

          So tell us exactly how a “true Christian” SERVES God? And BTW please define “TRUE CHRISTIAN”

          • Jean

            If you are not a Christian what good would it do explaining it to you. Obey the 10 Commandments

          • José

            Cool. Can we talk about how well Mr. Trump scores in that test? He’s not strong or brave enough to have murdered anyone but I think he is on awful shaky grounds with the other nine commandments.

          • Shelly H.

            I am probably more of a Christian than you are based on your comments here. It always amazes me that some Christians believe that they have the right to pass judgment on others – from how they should behave to whether or not another’s belief passes muster. Even Jesus said that only the Father can pass judgment.

            Being a Christian is more than obeying the 10 Commandments. Being a Christian requires faith in something that is inexplicable. Christians love others without judgment, are humble, patient, kind, generous of time and spirit. Being a Christian requires an internal change not an external action.

            “…and the second greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as yourself”

            Lots of those who claim to be Christians are unable to follow that commandment. Lots of self hatred amongst those who claim the title Christian.

    • John Johnson

      Jean, bold of you to post here…especially anything relating to your Christian beliefs. You have ventured behind enemy lines where a severe reaction to their candidate’s defeat has them muttering, sputtering and wailing like they are being physically tortured. This could go on for awhile. They were already dicussing who Hillary would pick for the Supreme Court, and what Bill’s role might be, other than interviewing West Wing interns. Her loss was devastating to them and they are looking for a fight anywhere they can find it. Your waving the Christian banner here was the ultimate “red flag in bull’s face”. The good Christian, after reading these crass comments, would just offer up an “I’m sorry; I caught you at a bad time”, but let me assure you that if Hillary had won, and they were celebrating here, anything relating to Christians was still going to be slammed…especially by the one who was abused in a Catholic school somewhere. They can separate good Muslims from bad here and defend the good ones to the hilt, but they can’t do that with Christians. We are all bad.

      • BCinBCS

        Oh, you poor poor persecuted Christians. How horrible you have it here in America.

    • Shelly H.

      Awww you’re one of those Christians who think they’ve lost their safe place. I bet you wear your faith on your sleeve and boast publicly what a good Christian you are for any who will listen and validate your precious self.

      Quick pro-tip, being pro-birth/anti-abortion does not make you a true or even a good Christian. You want Christ back in Christmas you need to start with yourself. I’ll bet you’re one of those avaricious greedy Black Friday shoppers spending hundreds of dollars on material things.

      • Jean

        I don’t need a safe like these whiners who lost the election…they are pitiful. I don’t believe in abortion and I don’t boast to anyone about my religion. And no, I don’t shop on Black Friday. Material things are not important to me. Shelly H….It’s time for you to get off your “high-horse” and stop judging people you don’t know.

        • Jean

          Correction “safe place”

        • Shelly H.

          My high horse? I’m not the one who is bemoaning a war on Christmas, and believes that religious freedoms have been taken away. And as for judging others – don’t point out the speck in my eye when you have a plank in yours.

  • donuthin2

    Of all the hookers that have agreed to serve in the Trump cabinet, I am only surprised and disappointed with Haley Babour

    • WUSRPH

      Huh? Or joke?

  • WUSRPH

    Hillary Clinton’s vote total is 64,223,986 (48.1% of the vote), while Trump’s is 62,206,395 (46.6%) – a difference of 2,017,591 votes (1.5%). And they are still counting.

    • José

      And all them folks that have been yakking about voter fraud for months, they ain’t interested in talking about it no more.

      • WUSRPH

        Actually I think they are going to do a lot more talking about voter fraud, etc. over the coming months an next few years. What they have done to suppress turnout by those they consider to e undesirable as voters has not worked well enough to protect them from the coming demographic changes that threaten their hold on power. As such, I think we will see a number of “voter fraud” protections considered and probably passed by the Legislature here and in other Red States over the next couple of sessions.

        I expect one of the efforts will be to try to tighten up on voter registration—both by making it harder to be registered (building on the restrictions they put on voter registration drives, etc. in prior sessions) and perhaps by a TOTAL voter re-registration, Now, as you know, you automatically get a new registration certificate every two years with those returned by the post office purged—but only after a follow-up attempt to locate the applicant. (I am proud to have played a small role in setting up that system). But I expect that they will claim that this allows too many dead and otherwise unqualified persons to stay on the rolls. Thus, we need to cleanse the rolls and make everybody start over…..and automatically do that every four yeas or so.

        I also expect more cuts in the time allowed for “early voting”—The National Review on the election day it self was crying about we made voting too easy and early voting was its prime target. Reducing the time back to say a week at the most (and none on Sunday) will also be claimed as a cost-saving mechanism. This will be only one of several efforts to make it harder, not easier, to vote.

        None of this would be possible if Clinton had won, but with a Trump/Sessions Justice Dept. and no pre-clearance under the Voting Rights Act they will have a open field to do almost anything.

        • José

          Time to start putting quotation marks around “Justice” Department.
          Paging Mr. Orwell.

  • John Bernard Books

    Are you happy its Trump or just happy its over…
    “And ‘optimistic’ might be an understatement. According to the latest report, in some cases, Americans are the most hopeful they have been in more than a decade. For the first time since 2006, 37 percent of households said they expect their personal finances to improve in 2017. Also hitting decade highs: real income expectations, as wage growth continues to gain strength in a broadening swath of the economy.”
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-23/soaring-consumer-confidence-are-americans-happy-it-s-trump-or-just-happy-it-s-over

    Being Donald Trump Means Never Having To Say You’re Sorry

  • WUSRPH

    Trump’s choice for Education Secretary; Never went to public schools, sent her kids of private Christian schools, pushes for vouchers to fund those schools and is closely involved with a group that promotes child labor. Just what we need to reform public education for the masses.

    • donuthin2

      Looks like a logical choice for the poor factory workers who are frustrated because their jobs disappeared. I am sure she will have a plan for their kids to get back on track for the American dream.

      • WUSRPH

        Yeah, we can send the worthwhile and Christian kids to private schools and leave all the undesirables to lower funded work camps.

        • SpiritofPearl

          Christian madrasas paid for with your tax dollars . .
          .

          • John Johnson

            Oh, the Muslims don’t have private schools for their boys to attend?

    • José

      “Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?”

  • SpiritofPearl
    • John Johnson

      “One of the few coastal elites to have cracked the Trump discursive code is the otherwise odious Peter Theil, who told the National Press Club, “the media is always taking Trump literally. It never takes him seriously, but it always takes him literally.” Voters on the other hand, said Theil, “take Trump seriously but not literally.” Bingo!”

      • BCinBCS

        Too bad the electorate didn’t get the memo about Theil’s cracking of the Trump code. If they had, Hillary would be president. As it is, there’s going to be a lot of pissed-off Republicans joining the Democrats who are already in that state of mind.

        • John Johnson

          Hahaha. Clueless as ever when it comes to looking forward. I’ll use the term one more time that I know you’ve come to hate…wait and see.

          • BCinBCS

            And I don’t suppose that your rosy Trump outlook of rainbows and unicorn farts could be you “looking forward”?

          • John Johnson

            I don’t believe you can find many prognostication from me since he was elected. I am optimistic, but we won’t really know squat for several more months. You, or the other hand, are predicting doom and gloom and groaning and moaning like the little pantywaists who need counseling to overcome their angst.

            Now, if I was a federal employee, I might be concerned…but only if I were a slacker who was doing a half-assed job knowing I was untouchable. That is about to come to an end.

    • SpiritofPearl

      Blocked . . .

      What happened to your pal, Crazy Charlie? Did MQS fire him after the baggers lost Harris and FB counties?

      • John Johnson

        What does “blocked” mean?
        You have blocked your ability to read what I post? How did you just happen to read and respond to this one? I could care less about you, or anyone, blocking me or anyone else. I can still respond to all your posts, for all to see, without having to put up with a retort. That seems stupid to me…but that is just my analytical, objective thinking taking over.

  • rtb

    An industrial supplies salesman has sway over the election? His qualification to represent the vote of 1000’s of people is what?

    • José

      To be completely honest, Sisneros is at least as qualified to be an elector as Donald Trump is qualified to be nominated for President. Both meet the minimal legal requirements and both were selected by the party according to its established process.

      • BCinBCS

        Yes!
        (Along with all that implies.)

      • donuthin2

        yup

  • SpiritofPearl

    Check

    • BCinBCS

      In that New Republic article Brian Beutler gave an example of Trump behavior that has me very worried: “…we see exactly how Trump bringing an untouchable sense of self-regard into the Oval Office could lead to tragedy. A chief of staff with no experience in government, manipulating a president who has no idea what he’s doing, resulting in an impulsive, damaging outburst for which nobody’s held accountable.

      • WUSRPH

        But that may have consequences that affect us all.

      • John Johnson

        Who is O’s Chief of Staff?

        • BCinBCS

          Denis McDonough is Obama’s CoS. Before him it was Jack Lew.
          Why do you ask?

    • John Johnson

      One should never expect a tiger to shuck its stripes. You certainly never will.

      This link is a bunch of tripe. Not because there are not some aspects of it that are compelling, but more because you fail to see similarities, and provide links, to how the current administration has handled passing out similar misinformation. The reason for the Benghazi raid is a prime example.

      I have tried to determine in my mind why Hillary was telling the Saudis, and even her daughter, one thing and the O spokespersons telling us another. I have tried to determine why they sent Rice, the Ambassador to the UN, on the talk shows to “explain” while Hillary, the Sec of State, and person logically responsible for taking the lead, hooked ‘um to South America. Seem logical to you?

      I could go on.

      How about a little objectivity? Is there none in your cranial make up?

      • BCinBCS

        It’s been two and one-half weeks since the election and aside from Trump saying that he has changed his mind and is not going to arrest, convict and jail Hillary Clinton, there hasn’t been a single Republican mention of Benghazi or the e-mails. It’s funny how that’s worked out.

        • John Johnson

          Funny??? Nothing funny about it.

          During a transition period, your would expect plans for the transition to be taking place. They are.

          Hide and watch what happens when the reins are turned over, and quit posting all the bad dreams you are having about what might come to pass. You are a whining, and it’s growing old.

  • WUSRPH

    On Nov. 25, 1986, the Iran-Contra affair erupted
    as President Reagan and Attorney General Edwin Meese revealed that profits from
    secret arms sales to Iran had been diverted to Nicaraguan rebels

    Of course, RR had pledged that we would never deal with terrorists like Iran…We only sold them missiles.

  • SpiritofPearl

    A crew of sycophants and donors . . . What hapoened to “I’m going to have the BEST people”?

  • donuthin2

    Well if you happen to have interests that coincide with Trump’s personal interest, you will probably be happy with his success, but if you happen to be one of those who voted for him because you were frustrated about your upward mobility, you are in for a big disappointment.

    • WUSRPH

      That’s because at his core he believes that, if you are suffering from the economy and not moving upward, it is because you are a LOSER. Winners don’t need the government to help them.

      • John Johnson

        You made you living by being a political spinmeister. You want to tell us that you never prostituted yourself to do what your boss wanted done to curry favor and garner a big check into his account? Tell the truth. If you don’t, I’m going to start telling stories his personal attorney has shared with a friend of mine which might be embarrassing.

    • John Johnson

      And you base this on what? Something he has done? I know this defeat, being totally unexpected, grates terribly on Hillary supporters. Why not wait and see what happens? Why just keep on speculating? Many like me, who actually considered voting for Obama back in ’07, waited months into his first term to start the yapping.

      • BCinBCS

        One doesn’t have to experience drinking sewer water in order to know that it’s not good for you.

      • donuthin2

        It is not speculation, it is a proven fact. He is selfish, self gratifying and has already shown that he will use the office for personal benefit.

        • WUSRPH

          He’s like JJ in that he believes that all politics is corrupt and that all involved are only in it for their personal gain….so why should anyone expect him to be any different when he gets to be president.

          • John Johnson

            I never said “all”. Just more of your over the top posting. The system is breaking down; it is overgrown and mismanaged; it needs readjusting. No one else was advocating for it. I am anxious to see what Trump does; I am not “scared”, nor am I going to be applauding or cussing him until I have something concrete to respond to. Why don’t you take the same approach?

        • John Johnson

          Already shown? How so? Words or actions?

  • BCinBCS

    From the “Maybe There’s Hope For Democracy After All” department:

    The Supreme Court ruled 5 to 3 that:

    …states can try to remove partisan politics from the process of drawing political maps.

    The decision was a victory for the proponents of independent commissions and a blow for state lawmakers who did not want to be drawn out of the process.

    Voters in seven states — Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, New Jersey and Washington — have turned to such commissions in an effort to reduce political “gerrymandering,” the map-drawing method that leads to districts easily won by Democrats or Republicans.

    Arizona’s Republican legislators challenged the law by citing the specific wording of the Constitution. It instructs that “the times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof.”

    I find it hard to believe that three Supreme Court Justices felt that it’s O.K. to rig the political system. But, as you know, IOKIYAR.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/29/supreme-court-arizona-congress-maps/27400015/

    • José

      It’s notable that the states named in the first suit are a mixture of red and blue. Redistricting reform should be nonpartisan. It’s not in the interest of the a Republican Party or the Democratic Party. It’s in the interest of the people.

      • WUSRPH

        It has happened usually in states with initiative and referendum in which the voters can make changes in law or the constitution. It is not likely in a state like Texas without that power simply because it is in the best political interest of the party in power to retrain control of how to draw the districts.

    • WUSRPH

      The SCOTUS found that it was possible for there to be “political gerrymandering” about 30 years ago…but since then it has had several cases in which it found that it had not taken place…The last time.several justices wanted to overturn the original ruling, but Justice Kennedy kept it alive by saying that at some time someone might come up with a method of showing it had taken place. The folks in Wisconsin developed a formula that may meet his test. It will be interesting to see. They really must have gotten far out of line to do worst than what the Legislature has done to Travis County when it comes to state senate and congressional districts. (See prior post)

      • BCinBCS

        The main purpose of me posting the gerrymandering news from Wisconsin and SCOTUS was because it would be of special interest to the Travis County folks. It is horrible what Republicans did to that county.

  • BCinBCS

    For those of you up early (or still up late):

    Fidel Castro died Friday night around 10:30 pm. He was 90 years old.

    • José

      Been waiting my whole life to hear that news. Going to be real interesting to see how the people of Cuba react, now that El Jefe is gone to meet his Maker. Will they insist on more changes and reforms? Will Presidente Raúl surprise us, now that Big Brother is no longer looming over his shoulder?

      • Shelly H.

        Miami has decided it’s party time. IMO that’s wrong. I found the celebrating of Bin Laden’s death to be distasteful as well.

        • José

          Yeah, sad and distasteful but hardly surprising. The revolution caused a lot of hurt and loss, and Fidel was the appropriate target for all that festering anger. Those folks would never let go. Let’s hope that Castro’s death facilitates the transition to a more normal and healthy future, for the good of both nations. THAT we can celebrate.

          • Shelly H.

            I can agree with that.

          • BCinBCS

            Do you, Shel, W or JJ care to speculate what Trump’s attitude toward Cuba will be?

            On the one hand he must placate the anti-communist conservative wing of the Republican party but on the other, I’m sure that he is drooling over the prospect of owning or managing hotels there.

          • WUSRPH

            Maybe he can get his Turkish or Saudi or Russian “partners” to build them.

          • BCinBCS
          • José

            I confess to having little confidence about anything that Trump will do. But yeah, it already occurred to me that a Trump hotel in Havana is a very real possibility. SMDH.

          • Shelly H.

            Oh if there is money to be made he will give the finger to the anti-communist conservatives. He pretty much already has with his bromance with Putin.

    • BCinBCS
  • WUSRPH

    Trump proves again that it is alright for him, but not for anyone else to do what he would. Screaming about the recounts…after he said he would not pledge to accept the results…..hypocrisy as usual. If there is going to be any changes it will have to come quick because the Electors meet on the 19th and thanks to Bush V. Gore that cannot be delayed no matter what the evidence might be.

    • John Johnson

      Hypocrisy abounds…and a major contributor is you. Isn’t that the key trait of a spinmeister? Weren’t you a professional spinmeister?

    • WUSRPH

      great quote from Huffington-Post’s article about Trump now claiming he won the popular vote, too, because 3 million illegals votes for Hillary…He got that number from Alex Jones.

      “Now it seems that Trump won’t even fully accept the results of the election even though he won it.”

  • John Bernard Books

    Dems and their games…
    “If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it? The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.”
    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/11/the_democrats_real_strategy_in_launching_recounts.html

    Apparently dems didn’t get the message on Nov 8th….America is sick of them.

  • John Bernard Books

    They had a deal…
    “Reince Priebus tells “Fox News Sunday” that Clinton’s team “cut a deal” with Trump’s team specifying that once The Associated Press called the race in favor of one candidate, the other would call within 15 minutes to concede.
    Priebus says that’s just what happened election night.”
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TRUMP_THE_LATEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-11-27-13-29-53

    you mean Hillary lied?!?…….

  • SpiritofPearl
    • WUSRPH

      You just don’t understand the true purpose of the Legislature. . The purpose of the Legislature is to reward the worthwhile for their goodness. It is not to help the unworthy and the poor, sick, etc. They are all that way because they deserve to be since God does not do that kind of thing to worthwhile people.

      • John Johnson

        Some might think that the government has decided that they know what is best for we commonbreds and have taken our money to do with as they please, over and above what the Constitution calls for, and what we want. We then see billions disappearing that no one in government can account for, and billions that are lost to fraud and lack of oversight. You will write it off as “being just a small percentage” of the money that flows through the system, but why shouldn’t the government we entrust our money to be held to the same standards that large corporations operate under? Balance the books, account for stockholders money, or (1) go bankrupt, (2) get fired, and/or (3) go to jail.

        I know you will offer up some wordy retort defending our government’s current mode of operation…that is what a life long political spinmeister does…but just know that you are wasting your effort on me. In my mind, the bottom line truth speaks for itself; smoke screens and “yeah, but’s” are simply obfuscating the facts.

        • BCinBCS

          …why shouldn’t the government we entrust our money to be held to the same
          standards that large corporations operate under? Balance the books,
          account for stockholders money, or (1) go bankrupt, (2) get fired,
          and/or (3) go to jail.

          And exactly how often does that happen to corporations and their owners/directors/board members?

          • John Johnson

            Top dogs lose their jobs all the time for non-performance. The stockholders demand it; Wallstreet monitors how they are doing. The really bad ones go bankrupt and restructure, sellout or dissolve. As far as jail time…it happens much more often in the private sector than in government.

          • Jed

            why do you always do this? stop responding as if the basic premise was valid.

            it doesn’t matter whether or not we really treat corporate executives that way, *because politics and business are not the same thing.*

            stop giving credence to their (his) lame arguments by responding to them as if they deserve a response.

          • BCinBCS

            Jed, I respond because his basic premise is invalid. Although it is usually an act of futility, I try to disabuse him of his wrong-headed ideas.

            I am a firm believer in Keynesianism so I heartily agree with you on deficit spending. And before JJ’s head explodes because of the idea of government debt, he should know that paying down the debt in good times, especially to control inflation, is also Keynesian.

          • Jed

            but your response was to the facts, not the premise.

            the facts don’t matter if the premise is unfounded.

      • SpiritofPearl

        Calvinism – a sinful philosophy. “Ye shall know the elect because they are rich.”

        • John Johnson

          Someone please tell Pearl that no one elected to higher office at the fed or state level is not rich or supported by the rich… for obvious reasons. This fact is not differentiated by which party they represent.

        • WUSRPH

          I kind of remember what Jesus is said to have said about rich men entering heaven and about putting aside all your wealth to follow him…..but that is not the word you get in many of these Mega Churches…..I doubt JC would recognize what they preach as His teachings if He came back today.

          • John Johnson

            You are right. He would not like it. His teaching says we should open up our arms to all in need, which includes those in sheep’s clothing who would do us harm. In other words, we aren’t going to last long. So, in that respect, we are asked to martyr ourselves just like the radical Islamists. They give their lives while taking out as many infidels as they can; we are supposed to just open the door to those who want what we have and turn up our throats if that is what they want more than what we offer. Bingo…a Christian martyr.
            I’m not going out like that, nor am I offering up my progeny for same.

  • SpiritofPearl

    “Comey’s Revenge” from the Israeli perspective:

    http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.751016

  • WUSRPH

    With Trump now claiming that “millions of illegal aliens” voted for Hillary—with no proof of course other than Alex Jones’ mouth–you can bet money on my suggestion of the other day that the GOP in Texas and nationwide will be doing all it can in the coming years to restrict voting. (See my post from earlier this week)…Since the federal government can set conditions on who gets to vote in federal elections (all other election are up to the states) I would almost be willing to bet that they will try to pass a FEDERAL LAW requiring proof of citizenship to vote for federal offices. I am sure that they the Texas GOP will try to do it for Texas elections.

    • John Johnson

      And what is wrong with having to prove citizenship? This ought to be good. Can’t wait for your response.

      • WUSRPH

        There is nothing inherently wrong with limiting voting to citizens….(Although you can make a good argument that anyone who is under the authority of the government, subject to its laws and taxes, etc. should have a voice especially since they are counted for redistricting purposes and such things as qualifications for federal funds, etc.)..What is inherently wrong is when a law, as with the Voter ID law and this proposal, is deliberately intended to make it more difficult for the poor, the aged and various minorities to vote by adding another financial cost (an indirect poll tax) by forcing them to obtain a copy of a birth certificate or naturalization papers (when they exist). It is the purpose of why they are doing something that I object to. In both cases, (Picture ID and citizenship) there is virtually no evidence that the kind of fraud that such a law is allegedly designed to combat happens. The State of Texas, in fact, admitted in court documents that by its estimates 600,000 potential legally qualified persons could be blocked from voting by the picture ID law with the great majority of them being potential Democratic voters. I doubt the figures will be as large for a birth certificate, but it may still be a couple of hundred thousand or more. (As you may be aware, the State is now doing everything it can to avoid providing birth certificates to the children of non-documented parents even though they were born in the US and are clearly citizens under the 14th Amendment despite having lost a lawsuit brought by some of the parents.)
        In addition, there is also my personal feeling that government, bankers, businesses and every other type of institution or entity already knows too much about us…..much of which is none of their damn business.

        • John Johnson

          There are always excuses, or in your mind compelling reasons, for not demanding that people have an ID to prove that they are citizens of the U.S. and to have to present same when they vote. Who knows…maybe some of the issues you mention will be addressed in any new legislation submitted. This law needs to be passed.

          • WUSRPH

            And after that what comes next, voter IQ tests? We certainly don’t want our government being controlled by people unable to understand the truth you preach do we?

            You can always find a reason to restrict the rights of those who disagree with you…..

            It is WHY things are done, not necessarily what is done, that makes a difference.

          • John Johnson

            Where do you pull up this stuff from? How about just giving everyone an ID that is eligible for one? Forget about what it takes to do it…just get it done…and don’t charge one cent for it.

          • WUSRPH

            Because that would be a NATIONAL ID and the GOP and many others, including me, have always opposed it. They even opposed and effectively killed a standardized driving license.

            You always go for the simple…..overlooking that even the simple solution can often be complex….For example, what standard or proof are you going to require to determine who :”is eligible for one” and how are you going to check to make sure that the “proof” is valid? I know, that can be worked out…but it ain’t as simple as you think. Of course, it never is.

          • John Johnson

            Geez, times have changed. If our border control over the last 20+ years was up to snuff, we would not have to be asking “how does one prove?” How does one prove eligibility for a welfare subsidy?

          • BCinBCS

            Personally, I like the requirement to know the number of bubbles on a bar of soap as a requirement for voting…worked in the 50’s.

          • John Johnson

            Wow! Are you OK?

          • WUSRPH

            As usual, you appear to totally unaware of the kinds of things that Blacks had to put up with back them. Questions like that were commonly asked of Blacks trying to register to vote in states like Mississippi and Alabama, etc. with literacy tests for voting…But, then they have nothing to complain about or remember, do they? They should just “get over it” and we should all stop worrying that some folks might think that was a good idea even today.

          • John Johnson

            There you go, once again, looking straight backwards and trying to project forward. You are terrible at it, as your track record here on BB proves. What compells you to keep doing it. You condemn on speculation. Can’t you just shut it down until you see what happens? I, at least, gave Obama that first term courtesy.

          • BCinBCS

            “projecting forward”?

            This sort of voter suppression is going on right now.
            (Cf: My previous Chicago Tribune post.)

          • John Johnson

            Get up to speed. We are talking about getting rid of voter suppression and illegal voting by making changes.

          • BCinBCS

            Except that one has nothing to do with the other.

            Voter suppression is being instituted by Republicans so that they can maintain power. It has nothing to do with illegal in-person voting which rarely happens.

          • John Johnson

            It makes no difference what you think regarding suppression vs illegal…it is about knowing who is a citizen and who is not…for many reasons other than voting. Right now, no one has a clue. Do you not see a need to know who is and isn’t?

          • BCinBCS

            You do not need to know who is and isn’t a citizen for voting. Voting by non-citizens is relatively rare and is not comparable with the large disenfranchisement that occurs when voter I.D. laws are passed to prevent in-person voter fraud.

            It is my opinion that any resident should be allowed to vote. Show a utility bill or lease and you should be able to vote.

          • John Johnson

            And that is just plain stupid..

            Amendment XIV

            (The proposed amendment was sent to the states June 16, 1866, by the Thirty-ninth Congress. It was ratified July 9, 1868.)

            Section 1

            [Citizenship defined; privileges of citizens.]

            All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

          • BCinBCS

            You counter my argument that I.D. laws are designed for voter suppression with a quote defining citizenship from the Constitution?

          • John Johnson

            No, hardhead…I have never denied that their might be some voter suppression out there. What I have always advocated for is a Citizens ID Card, to insure that only citizens are allowed to vote and receive any and all benefits afforded citizens by law. You want to argue this point, and your goofy statement about letting everyone vote who could produce a utility bill just showed your ignorance of the Constitutional Amendment I posted.

          • BCinBCS

            …your goofy statement about letting everyone vote who could produce a
            utility bill just showed your ignorance of the Constitutional Amendment I
            posted.

            JJ, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution does not say a single word about who can and who cannot vote.

            You make yourself look very bad when you insult my intelligence and then make such an ignorant mistake.

          • John Johnson

            The citizens right to vote? The phrase appears for the first time in the Fourteenth Amendment, which says that states shall lose congressional representation “when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime.” It should have been included with the 4th.

            Do you really want to argue whether or not a non-citizens…someone who snuck across the border..should be allowed to vote by presenting a utility bill?

          • WUSRPH

            You. of course are right about the 14th Amendment, but do not get him started on the 14th Amendment. He will start claiming that it does not apply to illegal aliens or even that it was only meant to apply to the children of former slaves. Both are arguments used by those who would deny citizenship to millions. Both are as valid as the Trump/Alex Jones claim that millions of illegals voted for Clinton.

          • John Johnson

            I think that everyone born here, by law, is a citizen. Those born to U.S. citizens abroad are citizens. Those entering the country legally are afforded an opportunity, in most cases, to obtain citizenship. Other than these three scenarios, one is not eligible. Seems pretty clear to me. Anyone trying to block any person falling into these categories is at odds with the law. Pretty clear to me.

          • BCinBCS

            Counting bubbles on a bar of soap was one of the many ways that blacks were prevented from voting. More recently, there was this:

            The emails to the North Carolina election board seemed routine at the time.

            “Is there any way to get a breakdown of the 2008 voter turnout, by race (white and black) and type of vote (early and Election Day)?” a staffer for the state’s Republican-controlled legislature asked in January 2012.

            “Is there no category for ‘Hispanic’ voter?” a GOP lawmaker asked in March 2013 after requesting a range of data, including how many voters cast ballots outside their precinct.

            And in April 2013, a top aide to the Republican House speaker asked for “a breakdown, by race, of those registered voters in your database that do not have a driver’s license number.”

            Months later, the North Carolina legislature passed a law that cut a week of early voting, eliminated out-of-precinct voting and required voters to show specific types of photo ID – restrictions that election board data demonstrated would disproportionately affect African Americans and other minorities.

            A review of these documents shows that North Carolina GOP leaders launched a meticulous and coordinated effort to deter black voters, who overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. The law, created and passed entirely by white legislators, evoked the state’s ugly history of blocking African-Americans from voting – practices that had taken a civil rights movement and extensive federal intervention to stop.

            The new bill shortened early voting by half, cutting one of the Sundays when black churches held their “Souls to Polls” drives. It eliminated same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting. It also proposed changes that, to Stein and other opponents, made no sense unless you were purposely trying to discourage voting. For example, it
            canceled an existing rule that let 16- and 17-year-old high schoolers to pre-register to vote in civics classes or when they got driver’s licenses. And it took away counties’ ability to extend poll hours on Election Day during extraordinary circumstances such as long lines.

            More of this story at:

            http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-north-carolina-voter-id-law-20160902-story.html

          • John Johnson

            You obviously don’t like things the way they are. Seems like O could have forced changes regarding voter suppression back when he had control of both houses. Especially after Reid and his nuclear option was pushed through. Quit looking backwards. We need a U.S. Citizen’s ID card no matter what it takes to implement the program. We wasted a thousand times the cost of doing so by maintaining 900 military outposts/bases around the world and losing billions at home and abroad that no one can account for.

          • BCinBCS

            You are really rich. You blame all ills on the Democrats when they were supposed to solve ever problem that this country had during the 9-10 months that they had a majority while giving the Republicans a pass on doing nothing (or making thinks worse) during the seven years when they were in the majority.
            That’s rich, simply rich.

          • John Johnson

            I am no Republican. Haven’t been since mid-’07. You keep wanting to put me, and those like me, in a box. It just won’t work. Round peg; square peg. I am neither. Most who voted for Trump aren’t. One of these days that might sink in.

          • BCinBCS

            If you are not a Republican then why do you support practically all of their policies and rail against practically all of the Democratic policies?

          • John Johnson

            Why do you think I do?

    • José

      Wouldn’t it be swell if the taxpayer citizens insisted that any such law be justified before it gets implemented? Exactly how many invalid votes would it prevent? And let’s see some solid evidence, not these bogus numbers which surely came not from the mouth of Alex Jones but a different orifice.

      • WUSRPH

        We will get a better picture of just how far the Trump/Sessions Dept. of Justice is planning to go to restrict voting and other rights by who gets appointed to head the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Sections in the DOJ. I’m not sure whether he is an attorney, but if he is, I’m betting on the current Secretary of State of Kansas who has been leading a national crusade against voting rights. He met with Trump last week.

        • John Johnson

          And this would be a bad appointment? Do you think we have a border problem? Do you think it would be good, sound policy to know exactly who is here and their status one way or the other, or should we just keep-on-keeping on with promised changes that go unfulfilled from one administration to the next?

          I think this is one thing we ignorant Trump voters do understand…uber liberals see no problem, and the major employers of the undocumented like things just like they are.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, Trump’s campaign motto was “Make America Great Again” and despite him never stating when this time was when America was great, most people seem to think that the 50’s and 60’s is the time to which he alludes.

            If that is true, you should remember that illegal immigration was not the nation wrecking catastrophe during those years that it is made out to be today.

            So, if we want to return to those times, was America not great then or is illegal immigration not a threat today?

          • John Johnson

            Are you drinking? Go back and read what you wrote in the morning. That might be the most disconnected stream you have ever posted.

          • WUSRPH

            In many ways, for many people (leaving out most Blacks, Browns, Yellows, poor and aged) the 50s and the early (pre-Vietnam) 60s were a “great time”….The economy was booming, wages were increasing, the doors to education and the professions were opening (again, except for the aforementioned), millions moved up into the Middle Class, the suburbs were exploding, people were able to take vacations and buy boats and sociologists speculated about what where we all going to do with the leisure time that automation and the future would bring. The government passed Medicare and expanded Social Security so you did not have to worry so much about Mom and Pop’s future…Ah, it was a good time (again, except for the aforementioned)…..Of course, Trump, JJ and most like to forget that much of that was because of actions by governments—Federal, State and Local—and laws like the GI-Bill, labor organizing and all those evil, socialist things.

          • BCinBCS

            And due to the “cream” being split up only among whites.

          • John Johnson

            The “cream”??? Only whites? If I was your mentor, I would tell you to go to bed and quit showing your ass tonight.

          • WUSRPH

            You are being too generous, BC……NOT all whites enjoyed the cream…..the poor, the uneducated and the aged got little more than the minorities….LBJ tried to fix that with the Great Society and it worked to an extent especially for the aged who, as a group, were moved out of the poverty category to at least the Middle Class by government programs. But, Vietnam and Richard Nixon ended most of the experimentation that LBJ’s programs had created……..

          • BCinBCS

            Yes, W, you are right. I was speaking “relatively”. Almost all of the poor whites were better off than the blacks and, if not, they certainly believed that they were.

          • John Johnson

            There you go again trying to place everyone in a designated box…either liberal pro-gov, or conservative anti-gov. That’s what you were paid to do for umpteen years. It’s in your blood.

            I don’t fit in either…nor do millions of those who voted for Trump.

          • Jed

            you forgot women.

          • WUSRPH

            While the days of women’s liberation and advancement were more in the late 60s and early 70s….the early 60s did see the introduction of the pharmaceutical birth control pills, which have to be rated as an advance for women. But, you are right, most white women at least were were still stay-at-home wives dependent on the male.

      • John Johnson

        What justification does it need other than the obvious?

  • John Johnson

    Here’s one for you subjective, speculative posters to ponder. I don’t believe Obama loyalists like Valerie Jarrett received the same msm vetting that Trump’s son-in-law just received in this WaPo piece. The hypocrisy wears me out.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-fathers-scandal-the-genesis-of-jared-kushners-unflinching-loyalty/2016/11/27/1e9497ba-b378-11e6-840f-e3ebab6bcdd3_story.html?wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation

    • donuthin2

      I have no idea of the vetting that Valerie Jarrett received, but this creep needs to be vetted to the max.

      • John Johnson

        “Creep”? Really? I find his education, fealty and political leanings appealing. What has he done in his lifetime that is so detestable to you? I would be interested in knowing.

        • WUSRPH

          He married badly.

        • donuthin2

          And now all of a sudden you respect a college education?

          • John Johnson

            Hahaha. I never said that I didn’t. I spent lots of money on the degrees my kids received.

            I have said that college was not for some, and that they could be highly successful without it; I have said that requiring all high school students to pass Algebra II is ignorant; I have said that college tuitions are too expensive; I have said that colleges are administratively top heavy; I have said that colleges seem to become more liberal by the year; I have said that those going into public teaching should receive free college educations.

            Trump’s Harvard education and law degree have to be worth something. It sure cost a lot.

    • BCinBCS

      JJ, in no way is the WaPo article vetting. It is merely a collection of public domain information. There has been almost no vetting of any of Trump’s advisors and cabinet picks.
      Don’t be so sensitive.

  • BCinBCS

    Hey, how about once putting your money where your mouth is. You show me the information where and how extensively they were vetted. Who is in charge of the Trump vetting operation? Who and how many are they interviewing? Who has been rejected during vetting?

    • John Johnson

      The point is, Disconnected Tonight Person, that the public is not privy to the vetting info gathered by a President elect that I am aware of. If you know of any from past admins that they have made public, please enlighten me.

      • BCinBCS

        JJ here is what you wrote in your original post:
        I don’t believe Obama loyalists like Valerie Jarrett received the same msm vetting that Trump’s son-in-law just received…

        And here is what you complained about to me about no vetting of Trump’s picks:
        How do you know. How do you make such definitive statements?

        So, I use your words to rebut your first statement: “How do you know? How do you make such definitive statements?”

        • John Johnson

          I was referring to the public vetting that the msm media offers up…as you well know. Why be so obtuse. You wanted to school me on personal, in-house vetting that we both know is never disclosed…unless by a so-called “leak” attributed to an unnamed source.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ as you know, the MSM is like a dog with a bone. It will run with that bone until it finds a newer, tastier one.

            Thus it is with Trump and his appointments. When Trump picks advisors who are well outside the bounds of normal political and social discourse, those picks become the new bone for the press. After all, it’s about viewership and advertising dollars and if the populous wants bread and circuses, bread and circuses are what they’ll get.

          • John Johnson

            Good night. You are all over the place. I can’t take anymore.

    • SpiritofPearl

      He gets his news from talk radio. I blocked him because he’s lazy.

      • John Johnson

        You blocked me because you don’t like being disputed. You like warm and fuzzies like you get from your buds. I get it.
        PS I also know you “peek”. You haven’t blocked anyone. I know because you slipped and responded directly to me one night after too much wine.

  • Shelly H.
    • Jed

      so much for the only elector who understood the electoral college.

      • John Johnson

        So much for a guy who said he was going to override the will of the majority of voters in his state. He must have realized that what happened to the young Chicago Cub fan who interfered with a catchable foul ball and cost them a playoff series was nothing compared to what he was going to face. Mr. Sisneros came to his senses.
        Maybe now the general public will realize that letting people with nothing better to do run state parties and elect these yahoos is ignorant and dangerous.

  • tightloops

    Sisneros is going against the oath he swore to represent the voters’ will in his area. Now he’s acting out of conscience? Give me a break!!! This guy is a publicity hound and he’s just in this for himself and to Hell with what the voters say. He might make some money off this controversy. If he were a good Christian he would step down rather than break his oath to represent the voters’ will.

    • Jed

      “If he were a good Christian he would step down rather than break his oath to represent the voters’ will.”

      if he were a good christian, you would no doubt put him on a cross.

  • Nancy Davenport Ganiko

    What is faithless in my opinion is that you became an elector at all. You knew who the two candidates were and you knew one of them would win!!!!! Hillary with her advocacy for abortion up to the day before birth!!!! Or Pro life Trump.
    You say you wrote in s prolife candidate.

    I don’t believe your reasoning and I feel insulted that we the Americans overwhelmingly voted in Donald Trump only to deal with people like you causing chaos and distractions exactly like Hillary’s hero and mentor Saul Alibsky teaches them to do!

    • WUSRPH

      “Overwhelmingly voted in Donald Trump”….Only in the Electoral College. He lost the popular vote by more than 2 million……

  • wkj1970

    Is this position as a State Elector a paid position? If so, he needs to return any and all funds received while in that position.

    • WUSRPH

      Nope…at the most he might have been able to get his mileage to and from the Capitol on the 19th.

    • Jed

      agreed. if he wasn’t going to stick around and help save the republic from trump voters, he should be keel-hauled.

  • John Bernard Books

    This blog has deteriorated into chaos since Erica and I have left….lunacy reigns…

  • WUSRPH

    The Washington Post has complied a list of 282 specific promises Trump made during the campaign. JJ was really hard on Obama for not fulfilling all his promises (although he refused to recognize those the did). I wonder if he will use the same standard for Trump. Of course, not…He’s already told us that you should never take what Trump says literally….Cuz he’s different and exaggerates a lot..

    • John Johnson

      Gosh…only 282? That should be easy. Less than one a day in his first year.

      • BCinBCS

        And I thought that we’d never agree. 😉

    • BCinBCS

      W, I have been collecting Trump’s campaign promises in a MS Word file for later comparison with what he actually does. If WaPo already has a list of all of his promises then I would like to bookmark it for later. Would you please post a link to the list?

      • WUSRPH

        I can’t but it is in today’s paper.

      • WUSRPH

        While you are looking at the Washington Post today you might also look at an opinion column by Michael Gerson in which the author holds that the fact that Trump is turning out to be such a hypocrite when it comes to his “promises” is, in fact, a very good thing for America. According to the author, the fact that Trump won’t do what he said he would do….and never intended to…is perhaps our greatest hope for the future.

        • José

          That might matter if Trump supporters actually cared about consistency and truthfulness. The record indicates that they do not. It’s hard to change the opinion of someone who is blindly and willfully stupid.

  • SpiritofPearl

    The Trump administration will be the most corrupt in American history:

    • John Johnson

      You have a conclusion; now go find the evidence.

      • BCinBCS

        Here’s the dynamite, here’s the fuse and here’s the match. Now JJ wants evidence that there is the possibility of an explosion.
        SMH

        • John Johnson

          And you call yourself a scientist? That’s rich.

          “…Evidence that there is the possibility”??? Your statements are definitive absolutes. Do you know the difference in theory and fact? Hypothesis and proof?

          • BCinBCS

            Ya JJ, I do know those differences. What I don’t know is with which statements you are having a problem.

    • WUSRPH

      He is really going to have to work at it to top the records of the Grant and Harding Administrations….The primary difference will probably be that neither Grant or Harding appeared to be involved in the corruption. It was the people they appointed and those around them but with Trump the potential conflicts of interest and the opportunity to make bucks out of his office are right in the Oval Office itself.

    • BCinBCS

      Krugman’s third and fourth to the last paragraphs should be required reading for everyone who voted for Trump.

      Destruction of democratic norms aside, however, think about the tilt this de facto bribery [of Trump and his associates through their business interests] will give to U.S. policy. What kind of regime can buy influence by enriching the president and his friends? The answer is, only a government that doesn’t adhere to the rule of law.

      Think about it: Could Britain or Canada curry favor with the incoming administration by waiving regulations to promote Trump golf courses or directing business to Trump hotels? No — those nations have free presses, independent courts, and rules designed to prevent exactly that kind of improper behavior. On the other hand, someplace like Vladimir Putin’s Russia can easily funnel vast sums to the man at the top in return for, say, the withdrawal of security guarantees for the Baltic States.

      • Jed

        “Could Britain or Canada curry favor with the incoming administration by waiving regulations to promote Trump golf courses or directing business to Trump hotels?”

        except: isn’t scotland just right now kvetching that they did exactly this for trump and he burned them?

        rule of law ain’t what it used to be.

  • WUSRPH

    Great article in the last The Economist on its analysis of the voting precincts in the mid-west and Pennsylvania that elected Trump by giving him many more votes than Romney had received in the same boxes. It even has some potential good news for the Democrats.
    The primary finding, of course, was that they the dominant feature of the precincts was that the majority of the population were whites who had not graduated from college. This was no real surprise….but, being good analysts, The Economist went on to see if they could find any other “statistically significant” characteristics of the people and the areas that might explain some of Trump’s attraction to them. What they discovered—and this is the good news for the Democrats—is that the people in the districts were Trump did best all have horrible health statistics, higher rates of common diseases like diabetes, are more likely to be obese and less likely to be active and have shorter life spans and higher rates of substance and alcohol abuse. The result is that the Economist found that “Trump’s voters that won him the election—those in counties where he outperformed Romney by large margins—live in communities that are literally dying”.

    • John Johnson

      You mean in places where hard working people going back 20 yrs or so started watching their jobs disappear when all the factories shut down. Hard working people with high school educations who actually made things. Having already lost jobs to robotics, they then lost the rest of them to the Chinese.

      Being offered “training” for other lines of work that was nowhere around, they found a way to survive on the government dole. They ate poorly, and smoked and drank with their bitter family and friends.

      The Economist piece is right…they are in poor health. They lost faith and grew more angry, and went to seed.

      You look down your nose at these people; you constantly make snide comments about them as if a degree in fine arts and a job being a spinmeister holds more value than someone capable of building something of value with their hands. Is this the compassionate side of the Democratic Party we have heard so much about over the past 30 years? Weren’t you the party who was promising this group that you would take care of them? What has changed?

      I think I know…these people finally realized that you were full of sh*t. You just wanted their vote. You were no different than the lowly Repub’s who you blamed for this “global economy” mess. They figured out that bought votes by the bi-political’s was happening on both sides of the isle.

      You lost this election because these life long Dem’s in the “blue” blue collar states turned against you. The once beloved are now the enemy, and now subject to your ridicule and scorn.

      This is telling. All your Dem compassion for this group is now gone. You are phoney’s. The Repub elitests are phoney’s. Trump may turn out to be, but they were willing to take a chance on him. I was willing to take a chance on him.

      You made your own bed, now sleep in it.

      • BCinBCS

        I find it hypocritically sad that you conservatives care so much for these poor down-on-their-luck ex-factory workers who “found a way to survive on the government dole” yet when the exact same people but with brown skin “found a way to survive on the government dole” they were welfare queens.

        When a helping hand is offered to someone and that person not only rejects the help but assaults the giver, it is not unreasonable that the giver may have a lower opinion of that person. This is the reason that you are no longer seeing the “compassionate side of the Democratic Party”.

        I think that most liberals are willing to let those that switched to Trump along with those who held their noses while voting for him and those that were outright supporters stew in their own juices. It’s the epitome of chutzpah to blame the liberal reaction toward those who chose such an overwhelmingly flawed individual for the highest office in the land.

        • John Johnson

          The Timbuktu Bugle just did a study to find out about blacks in the Dixie region of the Southeast who voted for Hillary.

          The dominate feature, of course, is that they are mostly uneducated…but the Bugle took it a step further. They found that this group is overweight, suffers in large part from diabetes and heart disease, and is prone to indulge in drugs and alcohol, and might die sooner, rather than later.

          Good news for the Republican Party.

          WUSRPH SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF HIMSELF FOR THE WAY HE DECIPHERED THE ECONOMIST PIECE…AS FAR AS YOUR DEFENDING IT…I HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT YOU ARE JUST LIKE A BLITHERING TEA PARTY EXTREMIST WHO IS UNABLE TO THINK FOR HIMSELF AND CAN ONLY REPEAT THE PARTY RHETORIC.

          • BCinBCS

            Projection, much?

            I did not defend The Economist article, I was pointing out your hypocrisy (and thinking for myself).

            Liberals still are concerned for others but our concerns have diminished remarkedly for those who would do us harm.

        • SpiritofPearl

          Bingo!

        • WUSRPH

          It would be easy to just let these people go their way to their early graves hopefully having realized by then that Trump was all a fraud…..but even a compassionate conservative, if any still or ever existed, cannot justify that. They are suffering….some from their own doing and some from the effect of events they could not control….and as human beings it is our obligation to try to help them both for humanitarian reasons and because, when they finally realize that Trump is not their savior, they may get even more outraged and even more dangerous to the Republic.

  • WUSRPH

    The next time JJ attacks my record of predictions—-keep this one in mind from July 3, 2013:

    Wendy Davis and reality

    Today Paul Burka did a piece on how he was criticized
    and called “a wet blanket” for his suggestion that the Wendy Davis phenomenon has to face reality.
    I entered a comment on that issue and was immediately attacked for saying she
    was only an “image”….My response to that any my original comments are below in
    case anyone is interested.

    Reality can always seem to be cold to those who don’t
    want to face it. If Davis runs for anything but re-election to the State Senate
    it will have to be a down ballot race where the current enthusiasim for her can
    help outweigh the millons more the other guy will have…As I have said before,
    to me that is Attorney General.

    As to her being the “hottest thing since Ann
    Richards” people forget that Richards won in 1990 with less than a
    majority of the vote and was helped by the fact that her opponent kept stabbing
    himself with his loose tounge…And she was so hot that he got beat four years
    later. It takes more than an “image” to win and, ufortunately, that
    is all the Democrats have at the moment

    By “image” I mean that most people know little more about
    Davis than they have read or heard in the last few days. What they have is an
    image of an attractive woman willing to stand up and fight….which is good to
    start with….but you need a lot more to win a statewide race….You need a
    statewide organzation and a real GOTV and voter identification system. She
    might be able to borrow the OBama setup….but remember even with all its
    capabilities, Obama has never come close in Texas in the general….Nor has
    anyone else even when they spent $100 million (Sanchez and “the dream
    ticket”).It would take a Sharpstown Scandal-level voter revolution PLUS mult-millions
    for her to have any real chance, and no one I know who has been involved in
    Texas politics for more than two weeks, sees that happening.

    You also can’t imagine what the GOP rumor machine will do with her two
    marriages and young mother situation. There is a lot to admire in her
    accomplishments, but when they are through spreading their vile you probably
    won’t be able to recognize her. Ask Tony Sanchez about how he is in business
    with Mexican drug cartels and how he is responsible for the torture
    killing of a DEA agent…or Bill White about the Houston Cop he helped kill…All
    lies… but all believed by many when the GOP was through with them.

    Yes, The demographic trends, etc. are on the Democrats side, but the likelihood
    is that it will be another 15 to 20 years before than makes any difference in
    the general election. And even then, someone is going to have to find a way to
    get Hispanics to vote their strength—which no one has been able to do yet.

    The reality of the situation is that Sen. Davis’ best course is to run for
    re-election to the State Senate….but if she has to reach for the stars NOW, as I have said before, she would
    have a much better shot at becoming the Attorney General than the governor. She
    probably has a real future, but let’s not throw it away now just because recent
    events make us feel good.

  • BCinBCS

    We have certainly fallen through the looking-glass.

    David Petraeus as a Secretary of State nominee after wall-to-wall campaigning by Trump about Hillary’s classified e-mails?

    If his hands are any indication, he may be small but Trump certainly has a huge pair of balls.

    • SpiritofPearl

      When does the “draining the swamp” part begin?

      • WUSRPH

        But Petraeus was just sharing those classified e-mails with his mistress….and Trump has no problem with real men having mistresses……

        • BCinBCS

          I like how Andy Borowitz over at the New York Times put the Petraeus consideration:
          Trump Administration Ethics Rule Strictly Prohibits Sharing of Classified Information Except in Cases of Trying to Get Laid

          • WUSRPH

            Did you see that Petraeus might have to get his parole officer’s permission to take the job? He has to have approval of his employment to make sure that he is not exposed to criminal or other harmful elements. I doubt that the DOD would pass the test.

  • John Johnson

    “Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.”
    Emerson

    http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2016/11/29/legitimize-illegitimate-fears-donald-trump

  • Bruce9

    Is Cisneros not aware of the NYC Meeting with Evangelicals? Where Dr. James Dobson said he believes President Donal J Trump accepted Lord Jesus Christ? Is he praying for the newly elected President to be God’s vessel?
    He has that responsibility. Granted, even though Trump has said he is a Presbyterian, was/is that a nominal faith?
    I think he should be treated as a baby Christian.

    • José

      Sisneros, no doubt, is aware of the many other evangelical Christians who have denounced Trump’s policies and campaign practices, and who find his newly professed faith statements shallow, suspicious, and unconvincing.
      Sisneros understands that Christians need to be guided by a personal relationship with the Lord rather than a fallible human such as Dobson.
      Sisneros also understands that, despite what you say, Mr. Trump is NOT the President nor is he even the President Elect until the votes of the 538 electors are cast and counted.
      Perhaps Trump’s election year conversion is sincere. That does not automatically make him acceptable to citizens who think that a leader must try to live a holy life and govern in a manner consistent with Scripture. Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton have a better record of church life and theological inquiry than Trump. Wouldn’t it be nice if they were afforded just as much opportunity by the Religious Right?

      • Bruce9

        Sounds like ‘sour grapes.’ Dem 3rd Party supporter? LOL

        #PizzaGate: The Pizza-Related Pedophile Ring(Clinton’s)
        Comet Pizza and Ping Pong,
        Besta Pizza, Politics and Prose,
        Beyond Borders and Terasol
        are all business entities on the
        same block in NW Washington,
        DC (technically, in Chevy Chase,
        Maryland).

        All four of these businesses
        have associations with the
        Clintons. Two of these businesses
        have overt associations with
        the Clintons AND with pedophilia;
        Beyond Borders and Besta Pizza.
        Terasol bistro had a pedophilia
        symbol on its website, which has
        since been taken down.

        Comet Pizza has has become
        embroiled in an emerging
        scandal, due to the #Podesta
        Emails batch, released by WikiLeaks
        on November 6, 2016 – and also
        due to the lurid Instagram posts
        made by the restaurant’s owner,
        James Alefantis.

        Hillary Clinton fundraisers
        were held at Comet Pizza.
        Restaurateur, James Alefantis
        is friends with Hillary’s 2016
        Presidential Campaign Manager,
        John Podesta and his brother,
        lobbyist Anthony Podesta.
        Alefantis also owns the steak and
        seafood restaurant next door,
        Buck’s Fishing and Camping.
        Two doors down from Buck’s is
        Besta Pizza, owned by Andrew Kline,
        Bill Clinton’s appointee, for the
        Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit
        of the DoJ. The Connecticut Avenue Besta
        Pizza is a franchise of the Besta
        Pizza national chain. For years,
        the Besta Pizza logo (at least for
        the one on Connecticut Ave.)
        included a pizza slice containing a
        symbol well-known by law
        enforcement to signify pedophilia.

        This is a side-by-side comparison
        of Besta Pizza’s old logo next to
        an image that symbolizes “man-boy
        love”, which was hacked from the
        FBI by WikiLeaks and soon
        afterwards, declassified in April
        2016. After the WikiLeaks story broke,
        in early November, Besta Pizza
        quickly changed their logo .The Wayback Machine website,
        where I obtained the image
        above last week, no longer has
        any archives regarding Besta
        Pizza. (By the way, “Besta”
        means “beast” in Portuguese).Allegedly, an underground tunnel
        connects all three venues,
        according to pictures of the alleged
        excavation (with ping pong table
        in the background), posted on
        Alefantis’ Instagram, which is
        covered by this site, created to
        chronicle the discoveries of citizen
        investigators. The site was created,
        in part because Alefantis, sensibly
        for a change set his restaurant’s
        Instagram account to “private”.Unfortunately, many of the original
        4chan posts have also been taken
        down, as these people are in fear
        for their lives. Another hard worker
        in this citizens’ investigation is
        Brittany Pettibone, who has
        exhaustively explored the perverse
        posts on Alefantis’ Instagram
        account, in turn posting her findings
        to her Twitter and YouTube accounts.On the other side of Comet Pizza on
        Connecticut Avenue is the Politics and
        Prose bookstore, which was purchased
        in 2011 by former Hillary Clinton senior
        adviser and speechwriter, Lissa Muscatine.
        Across the street is Beyond Borders, a
        charity focused on Haiti and funded by
        the Clinton Foundation. Two doors from
        that is Terasol, a “French bistro and
        artisan gallery”, whose website used
        to feature the adult-on-underage girl
        pedophilia symbol, a heart within a
        heart:

        Compare the image above with the
        FBI’s declassified symbols, below.
        The symbol used by Terasol
        additionally contains a small toddler’s hand, within an adult hand.
        #PizzaGate: The Pizza-Related Pedophile Ring

        http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/pizzagate-the-pizza-related-pedophile-ring/

        You were saying?

      • Bruce9

        and this, BREAKING:

        NYPD ANNOUNCES They Are PREPARING TO ARREST HILLARY CLINTON on PEDOPHILIA & TREASON CHARGES!! THE PATRIOTS HAVE WON!!
        A person with insider knowledge of the widening
        investigation into Weiner says that the evidence against Hillary Clinton
        is overwhelming and undeniable.

        “They found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times,” he said.

        Prince elaborated, I know, and this is
        from a very well-placed source of mine at 1PP, One Police Plaza in New
        York – the NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants
        and the additional arrests they were making in this investigation, and
        they’ve gotten huge pushback, to the point of coercion, from the Justice
        Department, with the Justice Department threatening to charge
        someone that had been unrelated in the accidental heart attack death of
        Eric Garner almost two years ago. That’s the level of
        pushback the Obama Justice Department is doing against actually seeking
        justice in the email and other related criminal matters.”

        Then Prince said that the rats were scrambling in every direction, “NYPD was the first one to look at that laptop.” “Weiner and Huma Abedin, his wife – the closest adviser of Hillary Clinton for 20 years – have both flipped. They are cooperating with the government.They
        both have – they see potential jail time of many years for their
        crimes, for Huma Abedin sending and receiving and even storing hundreds
        of thousands of messages from the State Department server and from
        Hillary Clinton’s own homebrew server, which contained classified
        information. Weiner faces all kinds of exposure for the inappropriate
        sexting that was going on and for other information that they found.”

        Prince continued, “There is all kinds
        of criminal culpability through all the emails they’ve seen of that
        650,000, including money laundering, underage sex, pay-for-play, and, of
        course, plenty of proof of inappropriate handling, sending/receiving of
        classified information, up to SAP level Special Access Programs.

        “So the plot thickens. NYPD was
        pushing because, as an article quoted one of the chiefs – that’s the
        level just below commissioner – he said as a parent, as a father with
        daughters, he could not let that level of evil continue.”

        http://totalworldnews.com/nypd-announces-preparing-arrest-hillary-clinton-pedophilia-treason-charges-patriots-won/

  • SpiritofPearl

    Mr.

    • Jed

      “Unlike most evangelicals he did not sell his soul to the devil:”

      he also didn’t do his job.

      can’t vote for trump? good. now vote for somebody else. that was your job.

      • SpiritofPearl
        • Jed

          Don’t wiki me! All anyone needs to know about it is in the constitution.

          • SpiritofPearl

            Here

          • Jed

            are you sure you know what you are arguing (or what i am)?

            i am suggesting that he *is* obligated to vote his conscience – that is the job.

            he should have stayed on and voted for clinton or a third option, as i said previously. that is what the electoral college is for, and that is what he was chosen to do (whether state party members understood that or not). what part of this do you disagree with?

          • SpiritofPearl

            I am

          • Jed

            you’re right it isn’t going anywhere, you’re not reading very carefully. you just “interpreted” my statement to be the exact opposite of what i just said.

  • Dev De Silva

    He’s probably a rich man now with some “contributions” from Soros.

    • WUSRPH

      It’s funny how George Soros has become the number one evil force to rightists. Liberals have the Koch brothers, but the way the rightists feel about Soros has some different, more disturbing aspects…..Protocols of Zionistic.

  • bunka1

    Religion and politics. The eventual downfall of a nation.

    • Bruce9

      Correction:”Sin.” Always.

  • WUSRPH

    Don’t you love the way Trump frequently threatens to jail AND remove the citizenship of people who do thinks he does not like? Flag burning is disgusting…..but it is also a protected act under the First Amendment…..I expect that the ACLU will have an active time over the next few years….that is, until he orders it to be abolished.

    • José

      Even Scalia understood that.

      • WUSRPH

        You can say many things—mostly bad–about Scalia but at least he had read the constitution. Trump hasn’t gotten around to that yet. Maybe they should give him one of those little pocket copies so he can look up something if someone refers to it in a conversation or in a memo.

    • Jed

      i think trump just asked for about a thousand flag burnings in the next few months.

      • WUSRPH

        I hope not…and not only because I find the practice objectionable but also because The Donald would probably stir up his folks to attack the burners.

  • Bruce9

    RIGGED SYSTEM : Obama Caught Spending $29 Million in Taxpayer Funds to Help Hillary in the November Election

    http://totalworldnews.com/rigged-system-obama-caught-spending-29-million-in-taxpayer-funds-to-help-hillary-in-the-november-election/

  • donuthin2

    Who is the Bruce 9 goober? A name change for someone that has been blocked?

    • SpiritofPearl

      A

      • donuthin2

        He is blocked. What a crazy.

    • José

      Whoever the child is, he learned a lesson from the Trumpzis. When someone challenges your facts, change the subject and SHOUT! Cowardly but effective, I reckon.

      It’s sad how many people get taken in by Alex Jones, Breitbart, etc. Please report the pest to TM staff. Flooding the blog with pages of irrelevant misinformation the opposite of a free and lively discussion. We don’t need another Robert Morrow.

  • WUSRPH

    There are at least two, if not three, pre-sessions conferences this week. Maybe RG or somebody covered one and will do a new thread….Hope.

  • WUSRPH

    It is interesting how outfits like Goldman-Sachs cover their asses so successfully….get one of your former partners and a big man in hedge funds singed up with Trump early….while also supporting Hillary…that way you come out on trop either way the election goes. At least that’s sure what it looks like with Trump’s supposed choice for Secretary of the Treasury…..Someone who made his bucks out of such things as the mortgage crisis, after having helped create it…Wall Street must by very happy today…..now that Trump has made it clear that all that breaking up and sending people on Wall Street to jail stuff people like JJ said Trump would do was just that—talk.

    • John Johnson

      Old, white, uneducated, diabetic, fat people who drink and smoke and live off the government are now your enemies; black people who posses the same traits are still to be revered. Go figure.

      Furthermore, your speculating is OK with me. For the last decade or so, since we have been trading licks on this sight, your speculation batting average is just above the Mendoza line.

      Lastly, I have read that FDR hated Joseph Kennedy because of his ties to the Germans, and his bootlegging. I believe that Donovan, the British guy who started their undercover intelligence operations, traveled to DC to clue FDR in on

      • WUSRPH

        Mangled and fractured fairy tales of history, as usual. The problems you cite, other than the bootlegging, came years AFTER the SEC appointment, They involved Kennedy’s activities as US Ambassador to Britain—an appointment FDR gave him at least partially as a reward for the outstanding job he actually did in getting the SEC up and running. Kennedy was not considering running AGAINST FDR but was thinking about running in the 1940 election when FDR, as everyone expected, retired after two terms. Instead, Roosevelt ran for a third term, blocking Kennedy and VP John Nance Garner (of Texas) and others from running as they had all planned to do. If you are going to try to use history as an excuse, it helps if your tale is somewhere close to being accurate.

        Old white, uneducated, etc., etc. people are no more my enemies than are black people with the same traits. Both are to be helped to overcome those conditions…..equally and without prejudice against either group….I do not believe in Herrenfolk Socialism like so many of your side.

  • WUSRPH

    If Clinton had won I always expected the Trumptarians to run out and buy more guns to protect themselves from the evil she represented but what bothers me after Trump’s “win” (sic) is the fact that several of my more responsible friends from the left of center are talking about arming themselves. They are clearly overreacting but say they think they may need some protection so that they just won’t go quietly when “they” come for them. Calm down folks……The old shotgun I have in the closet will be all I need….If I can move all those boxes to get to it.

    • Jed

      so you don’t think we should be arming ourselves – just the shotgun?

      • WUSRPH

        I do not see spending the money on a new gun….even one of those semi-automatic GI-Style rip-offs that make some little men feel SO BIG….when you have already have a trusty old shotgun…I figure most of us would only be able to get off a shot or two before they overwhelmed us anyway…..Civilians against pros have a poor record when it comes to being able to accomplish anything…

  • SpiritofPearl

    Another swamp denizen — heading up the Treasury Department. Where is JJ? He’s been had.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/steven-mnuchin-treasury-secretary_us_582caddbe4b058ce7aa8b9c0

    ———–

    Another “fresh” face – Mitch McConnell’s wife:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/elaine-chao-transportation-secretary-231925

  • BCinBCS

    Well, the number of post on this blog are dwindling so I thought that it’s time to stir the pot. The following tweet was sent by David Yankovich and it has unleashed a firestorm of re-tweets and Face Book posts. What’s your opinion?

    We hate Donald Trump like you hated President Obama.

    However, we hate Trump because he is racist, you hated Obama because you are racist.

    • donuthin2

      Probably too truthful to be comfortable. Most will not acknowledge it or even recognize it in themselves.

    • José

      Yeah, I get tired of superficial comparisons and lame explanations. There was a lot of hooey going around when people answered why they were voting for Trump. Only two made any kind of sense. Either it was a visceral and irrational hatred of anyone named Clinton, or it was a total disgust with the status quo leading to an anarchistic desire to burn the system down to the ground. Naturally I disagree with both sentiments but you gotta admit that they are true and consistent in their own way.

  • SpiritofPearl

    Another swamp serpent headed for Trump’s cabinet – Commerce:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-wilbur-ross_us_582b4c04e4b01d8a014abacb

    • WUSRPH

      Things are getting so bad for JJ’s hopes that The National Review, the voice of “traditional” conservatism that did an entire issue on why not to vote for Trump in the primaries and was soft on him during the fall, is praising his cabinet choices. I guess the “commonbreds”, as he calls himself, and other advocates for the little man against the BIGs are finding out that, when it came time to make decisions, Trump turned out not to be one of the after all.

      • SpiritofPearl

        All

        • Jed

          what odds did they put on a GOP sweep of all branches of government?

          that low, huh? yeah, i’m clicking over there ever again.

      • donuthin2

        Unfortunately when an outsider, one with no experience in the political arena are elected, they are most dependent on the bureaucrats and end up being ineffective agents of change.

        • WUSRPH

          Some truth in that….but it is my experience that some of the career “bureaucrats” have the best insight into what needs to be changed and how to do it. Their experience gives them insights into things that an outsider might not see. Unfortunately, it is often the newcomer who is the most reluctant to make anything but the most superficial and “news release worthy” changes.

          • BCinBCS

            There have been worse presidents in the past but in recent history, two of the three worst presidents for the United States have been Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush (notice I didn’t include Nixon). I thoroughly expect Donald Trump to be the third Musketeer.

          • donuthin2

            I certainly didn’t intend to be critical of bureaucrats, as I think most are very hard working and generally under rewarded. But if they have been around, they are probably partially responsible for the current situation but understand what needs to be tweaked to make it better. Tweaking is not wholesale change which is what some are looking for.

      • Jed

        “I guess the “commonbreds”, as he calls himself, and other advocates for the little man against the BIGs”

        that’s spelled “Big’s.”

      • BCinBCS

        I like what Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) said:
        This isn’t draining the swamp — it’s stocking it with alligators.

  • SpiritofPearl

    Here’s a

  • John Bernard Books

    The anointed One’s legacy…
    “Federal Debt Tops $19,900,000,000,000—On Black Friday”
    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/federal-debt-tops-19900000000000-black-friday

    Hopefully Prez Trump will get it turned around soon so he can quit blaming Bush…..

  • WUSRPH

    So, is Romney’s surrender a sign of his wanting to be Sec. of State so badly that he will swallow his pride and integrity? Or, a patriot who wants to do the best he can for his country and believes that, in that position, he might be able to limit some of Trump’s possible mistakes? The end of the GOP establishment? Or what?

    If its the first, at least he waited longer than Ted Cruz.

    • donuthin2

      I mostly liked Romney and have always been puzzled that he never really got traction. I can’t believe he would allow himself to serve in the Trump administration. Maybe the Bushes have the most integrity of all. It is to their credit that they have stayed quietly on the sidelines.

      • Jed

        “I mostly liked Romney and have always been puzzled that he never really got traction.”

        he’s a mormon, and we are a nation of religious bigots. plus, mormons are cray-cray. ;O)

      • Jed

        :Maybe the Bushes have the most integrity of all. It is to their credit that they have stayed quietly on the sidelines.”

        staying quietly on the sidelines in these dark times is to no one’s credit.

  • WUSRPH

    Hey folks…It has been two weeks. What about a NEW THREAD?

    • John Bernard Books

      comment about this…
      “Federal Debt Tops $19,900,000,000,000—On Black Friday”

    • donuthin2

      Doesn’t look like a very high priority for the new owners. Wonder if it will continue?

      • Jed

        i’m betting not. EG seems to have blamed some of us for her unhappiness in her career. maybe they believe her, so they may be hoping we’ll all go away.

        i, for one, am running out of places to go, however. can’t even go to CNN anymore now that it has adopted a rightist slant (has become more obvious in their headlines just in the past few days).

        • WUSRPH

          They named the new top bosses at TM yesterday….maybe things will get sorted out soon.

        • SpiritofPearl

          There’s

  • WUSRPH

    Two minor items:
    Suppose you saw where the Trump Cabinet is estimated to be the RICHEST as a group in modern American history. Really looking after the interests of the underclasses there, isn’t he? Natrue’s “Winners” all (in the way Trump understands the term–ie. $$$$) even if, as is apparently in the case of the new number 2 man at Commerce, it’s daddy’s money.

    Also, wonder how much the Carrier deal cost the State of Indiana (Mike Pence, Governor) in tax abatements, job retraining grants and other taxpayer-funded corporate welfare? This way of saving jobs could get quite expensive.

  • John Bernard Books

    I can’t admit a fitting demise for Burqua blog than them hiring WASSUP as a blogger.
    But…but….but JBB if Burqua blog shuts down what will the bored state workers do all day……

  • SpiritofPearl

    Draining the Swamp – Week Four:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/goldman-sachs-power-white-house-231998

    Goldman-Sachs moves to a place of honor in Trumpland.

    • donuthin2

      My, my SOP, you still haven’t figured out, as has most of his supporters, that nothing he said could be taken literally or even figuratively. It was all said in jest and never intended to be taken seriously.

      • SpiritofPearl

        Anyone

        • donuthin2

          I think you are mostly right but the scary thing long term is that almost half the voters believed his diatribe, which means we have a low IQ populace. Low information can be fixed; low IQ is a much bigger challenge.

          • SpiritofPearl

            Jefferson’s

          • WUSRPH

            Low information can only be fixed if the other party has a mind open to receiving data and knowledge that goes against their fixed beliefs. As we have seen with JJ and the Troll, facts, figures, testimony and all kinds of information just rolls off their concreted brains. They will believe only what they choose to believe. No one has yet figured out how to deal with that situation.

          • Jed

            that has gotten a lot worse in the past 25 years (rush, fox). a lot.

          • SpiritofPearl

            Reagan eliminated the Fairness Doctrine.

          • Jed

            we don’t have a low IQ populace, we have an apathetic one, even in the face of fascism.

            over 40% of the eligible voters didn’t vote (more than voted for either candidate), and another 5% or so voted for nobody relevant.

          • donuthin2

            I don’t really think it is low IQ as much as unwillingness to think objectively. Maybe the two are one in the same, but I don’t think they are quite the same.

          • SpiritofPearl
  • donuthin2

    Stock market has done remarkably well since the election. Because of the optimism that Trump has caused? Because of his forward thinking economic policies? Probably not much of either. I think it is largely because the stock market had been stagnant as most on both side of the political spectrum were sitting it out waiting for the outcome. Once the outcome, the half that liked it, jumped into the investment arena. Same thing may have happened if Clinton had won. Almost always after an election you see a significant uptick. Two years from now will be more telling.

    • WUSRPH

      Give us a couple of years of trickle down and Trumpinflation and the market may top 22,000…..before the bottom falls out. I’ve made a few bucks since Nov. 8, but I would gladly give them up for a different outcome of the election.

  • WUSRPH

    Reality from the Huffington-Post:

    “Though the specific terms of the agreement haven’t yet been disclosed ― Trump is formally announcing the deal in an event at Carrier in Indianapolis later on Thursday ― Carrier said on Wednesday that tax breaks from the state of Indiana were part of it.

    “The incentives offered by the state were an important consideration,” the company said in a statement that also said it was looking forward to a more business-friendly climate under the coming Trump administration.

    Both Trump and Sanders repeatedly bashed Carrier during the campaign after Carrier’s parent company, United Technologies, announced in February that it would eliminate 2,100 jobs, including 1,400 at Carrier and 700 at another subsidiary called United Technologies Electronic Controls. Trump’s deal apparently saves less than half of the total jobs, the rest of which will still be going to Mexico.”

    Good PR, but what about public policy?

    • BCinBCS

      Very informative post, W. Let’s look at what you wrote in a different way, however.

      Trump during his campaign stated repeatedly that he would prevent manufacturers from moving their operations out of the U.S. He threatened to levy a large tariff on any goods that they want to bring back into the country. Along comes United Technologies that wants to export 2,100 jobs to Mexico but Trump gives them a tax break to prevent the loss of 800 of those 2,100 jobs.

      To sum up, Trump, who threatened a tax on companies that export jobs has given a tax break to a company that is exporting jobs.

      And the long con continues.

      • Jed

        “long con” implies the motive wasn’t immediately obvious from the beginning.

        the is the long derp.

      • BCinBCS

        I have been delving deeper in the slice of the cake that is the Carrier deal and have found the best summary of why it is bad policy from Senator Bernie Sanders. Here is what he had to say: (emphasis is mine)

        Just a short few months ago, Trump was pledging to force United Technologies to “pay a damn tax.” He was insisting on very steep tariffs for companies like Carrier that left the United States and wanted to sell their foreign-made products back in the United States. Instead of a damn tax, the company will be rewarded with a damn tax cut. Wow! How’s that for standing up to corporate greed? How’s that for punishing corporations that shut down in the United States and move abroad?

        In essence, United Technologies took Trump hostage and won. And that should send a shock wave of fear through all workers across the country.

        Trump has endangered the jobs of workers who were previously safe in the United States. Why? Because he has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for business-friendly tax benefits and incentives. Even corporations that weren’t thinking of offshoring jobs will most probably be re-evaluating their stance this morning. And who would pay for the high cost for tax cuts that go to the richest businessmen in America? The working class of America.

        Let’s be clear. United Technologies is not going broke. Last year, it made a profit of $7.6 billion and received more than $6 billion in defense contracts. It has also received more than $50 million from the Export-Import Bank and very generous tax breaks. In 2014, United Technologies gave its former chief executive Louis Chenevert a golden parachute worth more than $172 million. Last year, the company’s five highest-paid executives made more than $50 million. The firm also spent $12 billion to inflate its stock price instead of using that money to invest in new plants and workers.

        Does that sound like a company that deserves more corporate welfare from our government? Trump’s Band-Aid solution is only making the problem of wealth inequality in America even worse.

  • WUSRPH

    Well it looks like the State of Indiana is only going to give Carrier $7 million in tax cuts….not that bad of a deal. It comes out to only $8,750 per saved job since the deal actually saves only 800 jobs. But the State ought to be able to get that back from the taxes the workers will pay. It is also noteworthy that Carrier still plans to close another plant and move another 1300 jobs to Mexico……Trump isn’t talking about them, however.

    • Jed

      gee, how many other states does Trump have VP who is also their governor to authorize these incentives?

      i can’t wait to see the other thousand of these deals that would be needed to match obama’s job creation record.

      meanwhile, i’m thinking of moving my factory to mexico. i’ll await your call, fuhrer.

      • WUSRPH

        I’d like to see how much Carrier is going to increase the cost of its products to cover the higher labor costs for those 800 jobs? Maybe the savings it will get from the 1300 jobs it is still moving to Mexico will be enough to hold down any increase. Inflation is inevitable unless the govt. actually starts paying taxpayers money to the companies to cover some of their costs. I doubt that will happen, so if Trump is going to make this autarky work he is going to eventually going to have to consider how to control the inflation that it will produce. Nixon’s answer (on John Connally’s advice when he was Secretary of the Treasury) was wage and price controls which worked for a few months but I doubt the Congress would give Trump the same powers they gave prior presidents to fool around with the economy.

        • BCinBCS

          According to Thursday’s PBS NewsHour, around 1,600 plant closures have already been announced. They did not give any data on how many people work in all of those plants. 1,600 plants closing and 800 jobs saved – Trump has his work cut out for himself.

          I took a lot of flak from JJ for voicing the apparently unreasonable suggestion that people in the Appalachian coal mining area should move to were there are jobs. I know that such a move would be disruptive but many Americans did it during the Great Depression and many blacks moved from the south to the north during the Great Migration initiated during WWI. In the mean time, today’s unemployed hope for coal jobs that will never return (despite what Trump promises) while about 300,000 manufacturing jobs go unfilled in other parts of the U.S.

          • WUSRPH

            I posted some data from the Economist’s special section on free trade a while back that showed that most Americans still have that “go west young man (or woman)” attitude when it comes to looking for new opportunities. The only real exception was the very kind of people that made up Trump’s margins—white, non-college educated, worse health statistics, etc. I posted about the other day. The better educated are still picking up and moving to seek out opportunity but more and more of those who the economic changes have left behind are staying put instead of moving to where they might find jobs. The reason for this change in behavior is not yet clear but it appears to involve several factors: the fact that they see no jobs they can fill out there (which means that job retraining has not worked or they have not taken advantage of it); the fact that all they own in the world is a home which they cannot sell for any semi-decent price (which suggests a need for some form or relocation assistance and maybe some govt. purchase program—-NB many businesses get “relocation aid” from the various state programs to attract them); and their physical and mental depression. Needless-to-say, it is a complex problem that will not be solved by simply giving the Carriers of this world tax cuts. One only hopes that someone in the Trump Administration will address the deeper problems.

      • WUSRPH

        Better be careful….He says there will be “consequences”….Of course, in this case it meant a deal costing the State of Indiana $7 million and the company got the okay on moving 1300 jobs to Mexico. I think most businesses will be willing to accept consequences like that.

        • Jed

          quick back of the envelope, i think i was off by a factor of 2000 or so (obama created 16M jobs, trump has saved 800 so far, so he is 1/20000 of the way there).

          lessee, that’s 10000 deals per term. so he needs to keep another factory from leaving the US at a rate of about 8 carrier factories per day to match obama’s job creation numbers. (assuming there is no recession during trump’s administration that cause job losses he can’t just buy back with taxpayer money.)

          are there even that many factories to save? wait, that was yesterday’s news, right? so he is already 15 factories behind pace.

          ;O)

          • Jed

            ps – almost forgot. $7M may be a bargain to save one factory, but how welll does that scale?

            at 10000 factories to save this term, the price tag would be $70000M. otherwise known as $70B. that’s the kind of number that GOP senators shut down the government over.

    • SpiritofPearl

      Mike Pence was about to lose his job when Trump saved him.

      • Jed

        that’s 801 jobs he has saved! 16.2M to go …

        • WUSRPH

          “Saving” jobs is good. “Creating new jobs” is even better. But he hasn’t done that. He has only saved 800 old jobs and allowed 1300 more to leave the country with his blessings. This means were DOWN a net of 1300 jobs. At that ratio of jobs saved to jobs lost he’s got a long way to go to come anywhere near Obama’s record of creating NEW, ADDITIONAL JOBs.

          • Jed

            losing jobs on every deal but making it up in volume.

          • BCinBCS

            😉

  • John Johnson

    How much longer will TM continue to support this blog that has been converted into nothing more than a group therapy site for angry, depressed Dem’s? Maybe Dr. Phil needs to be called in to take over the blog. He could also reach out to Erica, as it appears she left here battered and bruised. A journalism degree, and personally knowing people like Perry and Cruz does not make one a political guru. She might have been better off spending a few more nights in a Holiday Inn Express.

    • John Bernard Books

      No one hates like a dem…

      • St. Anger

        when democrats talk about equality, republicans call it “identity politics.”

        when republicans talk about equality … oh wait.

    • WUSRPH

      When you start along this line of attack I am always reminded of what Joseph Welch said to Joe McCarthy. Unfortunately, the answer is the same…You don’t.

  • BCinBCS

    There’s an article over at TPM about the Kaiser Family Foundation post-election poll about Obamacare. It seems that after more than 60 votes to repeal it, the Republican dog has finally caught the car and now doesn’t seem to know what to do with it.

    Only about one in four Americans wants President-elect Donald Trump to entirely repeal his predecessor’s health care law that extended coverage to millions, a new poll has found.

    The post-election survey released Thursday by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation also found hints of a pragmatic shift among some Republican foes of “Obamacare.”

    While 52 percent of Republicans say they want the law completely repealed, that share is down from 69 percent just last month, before the election. And more Republicans now say they want the law “scaled back” under the new president and GOP Congress, with that share more than doubling from 11 percent before the election to 24 percent after.

    It could be that some Republicans “got a protest vote off their chests, and they’re done with that,” [Kaiser CEO] Altman said. “They now have a more moderate position.”

    Americans were divided on next steps for President Barack Obama’s signature law. Overall, 30 percent said the new president and Congress should expand what the law does, and another 19 percent said it should be implemented as is. On the other side, 26 percent said the law should be entirely repealed and 17 percent called for it to be scaled back.

    Among Trump voters, 8 in 10 viewed the health care law unfavorably, and half wanted it entirely repealed.

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-obamacare-repeal-poll

    • José

      I’ve said it before. One of the most infuriating things about political discussion today is that a large faction of people simply do not care about truth or consistency. In four years, assuming that we are still around to see it, some of us will call attention to the long list of broken promises by His Trumpiness. Affordable Care Act, neither fully repealed nor replaced with anything better. Border wall, never started. Undocumented immigrants, millions still in the US and busy doing those jobs that we won’t do ourselves. Federal debt, growing even faster. Steel mills, remained shuttered. Coal mines, still closing. Fighting continues in the Middle East, China expands its economic and military hegemony, and Russia reasserts its influence over the formerly free nations of Eastern Europe. And few Trump supporters will realize just how badly they’ve been cheated.

      • John Johnson

        You’ve reached a conclusion, now show us the facts. Oh, you don’t have any yet? Guess you’ll just have to wait and see. Maybe you should switch to speculative structure instead of typing absolutes.

      • Jed

        trump voters don’t care about any of those things. they just want brown people punished for being brown.

        and they’ll get that.

        • John Johnson

          Oh, no doubt some racist people have animas for people of color, simply because of color, but most who rail against unenforced immigration laws would hold the same positions if all of those sneaking in, or staying past their visa expirations were white skinned, blond headed and spoke English. We either enforce the laws or we don’t.

          • WUSRPH

            The Obama Administration has deported more illegals during the last eight years than any other Administration in the past 50 years. Even Trump has praised Obama for that record…It seems someone was enforcing the laws….

          • John Johnson

            What a goofy statement. If laws were being enforced, we would not have record numbers still pouring in, and we would not be spending billions to house and keep people here instead of sending them back when they are taken into custody.

          • WUSRPH

            All I know is that Trump says Obama did a great job…You, of course, have told us several times lately not to believe what he says.

            P,.S. There are certain little obstacles to “sending them back when they are taken into custody”….such as their legal right to have an asylum claim heard….those who get sent back immediately are those caught at the border who agree to it…..otherwise they have legal rights…you would deny them that…but, until Congress changes the law and the SCOTUS signs off on it, the Obama Administration AND the Trump Administration will have no power to do anything else…I know this is an inconvenience, but up to now and hopefully in the future, this is a country of laws, not men…..

          • St. Anger

            it isn’t just about immigration, is it?

            what about the muslim registry?

  • John Bernard Books

    Should he
    “The crowd chanted “lock her up” at the first mention of Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton,”
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-thank-you-tour_us_5840c480e4b017f37fe3e536
    lock her up?

  • WUSRPH

    In the coming weeks President Obama will be making decisions on who he may pardon as he leaves office, something most presidents do as they are going out the door. Unlike both President Bushes he doesn’t have a bunch of former aides either facing trial or appealing for relief for a recent conviction…..but various groups are already petitioning him in behalf of former felons. Two interesting cases are a plea by the Congressional Black
    Caucus and Ethel Rosenberg’s children. The Caucus wants him to pardon early civil-rights leader Marcus Garvey who was convicted of mail fraud in the 1920s for selling shares in a shipping line to black Americans as part of a economic development effort. The Rosenberg children want their mother, who was executed for being a Russian spy in the early 1950s, pardoned because of what they argue was here limited role (if any) in the “atomic spy” case. The Rosenberg children are NOT asking for a pardon for their father, who was also executed, because the evidence against him is overwhelming but Ethel’s role has always been questioned. (None of the other spies in this or other similar cases were executed) Many argue that Mrs. Rosenberg was only indicted to put pressure on her husband, Julius, to cooperate with the investigation and that her role consisted of little more than typing up the information gathered by the spy ring. It will be interesting to see how many more names out of the past wind up on the list of requests and who, if any, Obama pardons.

    • John Johnson

      I guess you overlooked Marc Rich…and the only reason IRS, GSA and State Department officials are not under indictment is because O’s Atty Gen’s were serving at his pleasure.

      • WUSRPH

        I didn’t mention Clinton….and Marc Rich, plus some other guy in the same deal….probably should of to be fair…but Rich was never a member of the White House staff like those pardoned by G HW and G W..

        • John Johnson

          All those unindicted aren’t out of the woods yet, I am thinking.

          • WUSRPH

            You hope….but don’t hold your breath.

          • John Johnson

            I’m not. More important things to be addressed, now that the election is over. I won’t be looking back. I won’t be blaming Obama for any ill’s that befall us going forward as O did Bush for the past eight years.

          • WUSRPH

            That’s because Obama is not leaving the country to Trump in the midst of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. Something you conveniently overlooked.

          • John Johnson

            Hell, in your first few months start printing money and the problem is solved. Give taxpayer money to slimeballs who caused it, including bonuses, and all is OK. I don’t blame him for pointing the finger during his first term…it was the carryover that got to me.

          • WUSRPH

            Obama saved a million jobs in the auto business and associated businesses while he was at it. Trump’s already lost 1300 and he hasn’t taken office yet.

  • John Bernard Books

    You Burqa Blog key board warriors won’t appreciate this
    “On war protesters:
    “When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look at him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a p****”
    Gen. James “Mad Dog” Mattis

    but us vets will……

  • WUSRPH

    Come on JJ, quit hoping for the death of BB and come out and defend your man. I’d love to see you defend the Carrier deal where he blessed sending 1300 jobs to Mexico or the Secretary of the Treasury designee from Goldman Sachs whose bank BY ITSELF was responsible for 39% of ALL the foreclosures on reverse mortgagees–primarily sold to senior citizens. Or have you already become disappointed with him? Get the debate started.

  • WUSRPH

    Trump is talking to two Democratic US Senators about possible cabinet jobs….Sounds good for “bipartisanship” and “working together” and all that….BUT is it just coincidental that they are both seats the GOP might be able win (North Dakota and West Virginia) in special elections to fill vacancies?

  • John Johnson
    • St. Anger

      oh i grasp it, alright.

      dude is an econ professor at george mason.

      there is no academic department in the nation more compromised by anti-government “public choice” scholarship. you can always tell what they will say just by knowing what that sentence means.

      but i thought you didn’t listen to elitist, egghead, wimpy, pedant professors? only the ones who you already agree with?

      -jed

      • WUSRPH

        A country of laws, not men……

        But things change….as your new favorite professor says:

        …”It won’t matter that, two years later, these highly publicized retaliations are thrown out by a federal judge somewhere…”

        Well, Madison, Hamilton, Washington and the boys……It was a good idea while it lasted. Too bad it if it might stand in the way of The Donald making a point.

        • John Johnson

          Another goofy post. Do you read what you write before hitting send? We are talking unconventional here; I don’t think you will get many “everyone’s doing it” or “it has always been done this way” out of Trump. This, over the years, has been your standard excuse for the way out government entities continue to spiral downward without correction.

          • WUSRPH

            I expect him to be “unconventional”. I have no problem with that; but being “unconventional” does not mean that you are allowed or encouraged to do things that you know are illegal and/or unconstitutional. You still have to follow the law UNTIL the law is changed….that is, unless you believe that you are above the law. Trump may feel he is….I, and I hope the majority of the American people don’t agree.

            The kind of govt. interference in the economy that will be required to accomplish what he says he intends to do (assuming he means it) goes beyond even what FDR proposed and passed in the first days of the New Deal that the SCOTUS subsequently struck down. I doubt he can get much of it passed by this Congress, even if it is dominated by the GOP. In fact, he probably will, in proportion to their strength, get more votes from Democrats than from Republicans for some of the things he would have to do to accomplish his stated goals .

            As to the merits of what he did…I ask you to consider the feelings of the 1300 Carrier works who will loose their jobs under the Trump deal with the company. I wonder how many of them voted for Trump, only to have him wash his hands of their fates? He got his publicity. They lost their livelihoods. A great day for Trumptarianism.

          • John Johnson

            More friggin pedantry from the King Pedant. You have no understanding of what his goals are and how he is going about accomplishing them. You are a retired government worker and know nothing about how businessman conducts business as opposed to a politician. Just hide and watch.

          • WUSRPH

            I see you had to duck the question about the 1300 Carrier workers whose jobs he surrendered for a PR stunt. But, then what’s 1300 jobs and families when you can make yourself look good. He claims not to be a politician…but he has proven he is better at claiming victory out of a defeat than any of them.
            As to what he wants to do and how he will do it; none of us know exactly what he intends to propose and that includes Trump. But we know what he has said he will do—-bring back the jobs, save the coal industry, rebuild the steel mills and force companies to stay here and to invest the billions they have abroad at home while making America the No.1 in manufacturer again. (Which may be hard to do since we are already No. 1 in the world in manufacturing).
            Almost anyone with any knowledge of economics, politics, government, business (or even how to sell peanuts to airlines) can see that will require a fundamental change in the relationship between business and government…and that it will cost trillions in either government spending or cuts in revenues or major price increases and inflation and/or a international trade war and economic crisis or a combination of all those and more. Which it is or whether it is all of them is unknown…..perhaps he will give us a better view as he takes office….but, again, he may not…..After all, you keep telling us our mistake is that we take what he says and treat it like he means it.

          • John Johnson

            What do you know about selling anything except bullshit in the form of what your bosses wanted to sell to the public? Since most weren’t listening, and you had a loose mandate in the form of an earlier vote, you did with us as you wished…with our money. And you call Trump a huckster. The smell is still all over you…but, of course, you can’t smell it. All you are doing now is projecting sour grapes, and speculating on what and how Trump is going about things because it is a technique and position that is foreign to you. How could anyone expect a bookworm historian to understand how the real world of the small businessman and blue collar worker actually works? Your mentor seems to think we just let factories shut down, offer some elementary training in another job field and then walk away. He seems to think that they can walk away from upside down mortgages, load up in the family car with family and most precious belongings hanging out all the windows, and work their way across the country to whereever these new jobs are. Where is that? A modern day dustbowl rush from the Panhandle to California? Those middle aged, fat, diabetic, smokers and drinkers who have been out of work for a decade or more? The ones whose deaths, according to you will aid the Democratic Party you love so much?

            As far as Carrier goes, I don’t guess you comprehended the position of the guy who wrote the WaPo link I posted. He summed it up well in my opinion.

          • WUSRPH

            I read it…I understand what he said…and even agreed with some of his analysis (although he’s making the past out to be better than it was with that crap about the big business owner in the past feeling a responsibility toward his workers. Maybe in a mom and pop small business, but never at US Steel.) but, unlike you and Trump, I also care about those 1300 jobs and more importantly the people behind the number.

            As to just letting factories shut down and folks loading up the car and heading west and all those colorful anecdotes, no one has advocated any of that. What we have done, however, is try to outline some of the things that will be required to do what Trump says he intends to do and their potential consequences. For America’s sake, I hope he succeeds…but not at the cost of what America is supposed to stand for.

          • John Johnson

            “…but not at the cost of what America is supposed to stand for”???

          • WUSRPH

            Representational government; the rule of law, not man; checks and balances; separation of powers; freedom of speech, religion and assembly….little things that may stand in he way of a megalomaniac exercising his will.

          • John Johnson

            Wow, you are delusional.

          • WUSRPH

            Nope…just concerned by the possibility of rule by a megalomaniac with neo-fascist beliefs who has never had to face having to adjust his will to reality….We will learn a lot the first time either the SCOTUS or the Congress says NO to one of his schemes. I must admit, however, the fact that many of those he has named for his Cabinet is not ones you would like makes me a little bit less apprehensive….

      • John Johnson

        I applaud those who espouse what, in my mind, makes sense. Occasionally, my mind is changed. You, and others, want to place those like me in a category which just doesn’t quite fit. I have some stout conservative leanings, but advocate for some social and corporate reform which the right wing considers liberal. I like what I see thus far. I like how this guy summed up the history of business globalization. Larry Summers offered a dissenting view today to this piece. Needless to say, I think he is an idiot.

        • St. Anger

          that level of nuance seems inconsistent with the sorts of things you actually say about professors. you even use the term itself as an insult.

          i’m betting you didn’t know the guy was a professor until i told you.

          • John Johnson

            Overall, I think that the university system is failing us. I could go into great detail describing why, but you have already read what I have posted over the years. I will not post wordy explanations every time the subject comes up. Recent campus protests just reinforce my feelings. Having experienced Erica’s short stent here does the same. Get a journalism degree from a school like the University of Missouri, use $10 words appropriately, go directly to work for some heralded publication, work your way up and “presto chango” you are an “expert”. I think most “professors” take the same path. Forget the fact that neither have ever drawn a paycheck from the “real world”. There are, of course, exceptions…unfortunately, very few.

          • John Johnson

            Sorry…I paint with a pretty broad brush when addressing college professors, attorneys, politicians and their “advisors”.

            PS I read the guys tag at the end of his piece.

  • WUSRPH

    But, unlike you I don’t kick people when they may be down…..

    • John Johnson

      Who are you referring to? Erica? Give me a break…she is a public figure who broadcast her opinions about subjects and dissenters in direct terms. They were often pointed; often pointed toward me. Did you find me whining? What about old, Molly? She was you liberals’ hero, wasn’t she? She never suffered a dissenting fool gladly. You and your lot are such hypocrites yet you choose to hang that term on everyone else.

  • WUSRPH

    I guess if you had been in charge we would have just stood by and watching first the financial system (saved by actions taken by the Congress while Bush was president with some implementation by Obama) and then the heart of our industrial system collapse. Talk about a recipe for an international depression greater than the Great Depression.

    • BCinBCS

      Letting those businesses fail during the Great Recession would have been a prime example of ideology triumphing over practicality. Saving them will have a decades long negative monetary effect on the U.S. while letting them fail would have had a centuries long negative monetary effect.

  • John Bernard Books
  • John Bernard Books

    Can the dems recover….
    “America needs a sane Left. At its best, the Left balances right-wing excesses. Where the Right elevates the individual, the Left attends to the good of collectives. Where the Right values social solidarity, the Left values difference. The Right emphasizes the best parts of our common traditions; the Left is sensitive to how those traditions have left certain people vulnerable, marginalized, or disenfranchised.”

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442710/american-left-right-tim-ryan-nancy-pelosi-radicalism-balance

    It would help if the left’s leadership wasn’t Batshyt Crazy…..

  • BCinBCS

    As those of you here in Texas know, it has been cold and wet for the last few days and it should stay that way for a couple of more but I am basking in the warmth of schadenfreude as the obstructionist Republicans try to figure how to fulfill their policy and campaign promises. The main glow comes from their dilemma concerning Obamacare. The following is an excerpt from a TPM article by Josh Marshall:

    A couple weeks ago, Paul Ryan was boasting that he might take down Obamacare and Medicare in the days just after the inauguration, in one combined action. Just a few days ago, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy announced that Repeal and Replace could be set aside in favor of Repeal and We’ll Look Into It. But Senate Republicans are saying Obamacare repeal could be a years’ long process.

    Indeed, Senate Republicans seem so gun-shy of confronting Obamacare that you have top Republican Senators making the case for Obamacare to reporters – even if not all of the reporters realize it.

    Here’s Lindsey Graham from Lauren Fox and Tierney Sneed’s piece from yesterday.

    ‘Once you say that everybody should be covered, can’t be denied coverage because they are sick – which most Americans would agree with that – you put yourself in a box. Insurance is about young people who are healthy buying insurance like you all to pay for me and him,’ Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said, pointing to the oldest reporter in the scrum. ‘If you don’t have to buy insurance until you get sick, most people won’t. That’s where the mandate becomes important.’

    Graham added: ‘Somebody’s got to work through this problem. If we’re going to accept the proposition that you can never be denied coverage because you’ve been sick, then somebody’s got to create a system where people participate.’

    What he’s explaining there is Obamacare. He even seems to be arguing for the mandate which ended liberty in 2012.

    Ah, I love the warmth!

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/why-are-gops-now-asking-dems-for-helping-killing-obamacare-and-medicare

    • SpiritofPearl

      Unhappy Trumpsters find out they’ve been had:

      https://trumpgrets.tumblr.com/

      Oh well, there’s still Roe v. Wade to give them hope.

      • BCinBCS

        Yup, breaks my heart.
        /s

  • WUSRPH

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442665/trump-carrier-bailout-economically-unsound?utm_source=nr&utm_medium=satemail&utm_content=williamson&utm_campaign=carrier&utm_term=VDHM

    An excellent article from The National Review that puts the Trump/Pence giveaway to Carrier in perspective. Real conservatives have this problem with using government funds (whether in revenues or tax breaks) to bribe business.

    • WUSRPH

      Here is a nasty thought….has anyone heard whether there is anything in the Trump/Pence deal that sets any controls on which of its employees Carrier has to keep? For example, is there anything that would stop it from firing all those who are just about to qualify for retirement? This could save the company some real bucks and pass the cost of taking care of the workers onto the taxpayer. Nah, no American company would do such a thing.

  • Baconator

    Perhaps he would be a poor attorney (for whatever that opinion is worth), but he’s right at least that Texas (and 20 other states) has no Faithless Elector law. If there’s another law that legally binds him to elect Trump, please educate us.

  • BCinBCS

    I recall this being proposed but since the state legislature hasn’t been in session, I thought that its passage had to wait for the legislature to convene. It turns out that this sort of nonsense does not require a vote…but the Satanist ride to the rescue.

    From Jezebel:

    In December, Texas will impose new rules requiring all fetal remains to be buried or cremated, a sneaky way to impede abortion access and make patients feel just a little worse, all at the same time. The Satanic Temple, the nation’s best and foremost trolls, declared today that under federal religious freedom laws, their members must be granted immunity from the new rules.

    Texas’s new rules (not a “law,” since it didn’t go through a legislative process, but a bureaucratic one), stipulate that fetal remains have to be buried or cremated by hospitals or healthcare providers. The rules won’t apply to miscarriages or abortions that occur at home, and healthcare providers won’t be required to obtain death certificates for fetal tissue, which could have created privacy concerns.

    Nonetheless, the Satanic Temple sees the whole thing for what it is: a naked bid to elevate fetal tissue to the status of a human being. In a press release, Satanic Temple spokesperson Lucien Greaves called the new rules, which go into effect December 19, “a direct violation” of the group’s religious beliefs.

    ‘Texas health officials are baldly imposing the view that the fetal tissue is elevated to personhood—a religious opinion that conflicts with our own,’ Greaves is quoted as saying. ‘If Texas is going to treat the disposal of fetal tissue differently from the disposal of any other biological material, in contradiction to our own religious beliefs, they need to present a compelling state interest for doing so. Of course, there is no such state interest, and it’s perfectly clear the demand for fetal tissue burial is a punitive measure imposed by sadistic theocrats. It’s clear these officials deem harassment an acceptable form of pushing their misguided religious agendas.’

    The Satanic Temple, you will recall, said the same thing about anti-abortion legislation in Missouri, saying their members should be immune from those aswell, because Satanic tenets hold that the body is inviolate and shouldn’t be subject to outside influence. In both cases, they cite a law that conservatives fervently love, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), a federal law passed in 1993 and mirrored by state laws in 20 states. The Satanic Temple is insisting that Texas provide a ‘compelling reason’ why the state shouldn’t honor their religious beliefs.

    http://jezebel.com/satanic-temple-says-texass-new-rules-on-fetal-burial-vi-1789616487

    • SpiritofPearl

      Remind

      • WUSRPH

        It is just another step toward giving “personhood status” to the fetus……It also reminds me of the old Catholic prohibition on cremation and the requirement that limbs, etc. that were amputated be giving a proper burial. (Such as Santa Anna’s leg). The idea was that they body had to be whole or capable of being restored to whole when it rose from the grave at the time of Jesus’s return and that meant it could not be simply destroyed. The rule kind of sounded like there were limits to Jesus’s power to restore everything from dust and ashes if he wanted to do so…..which ran counter to a whole bunch of teachings about God’s power…

        • SpiritofPearl

          Even

    • José

      Are there any fines or penalties for disobeying “bureaucratic rules”? What happens if folks just ignore this foolishness?

  • WUSRPH

    I sure admire Trump’s self-confidence that things he wants to do will get adopted….like his 35% tariff on products produced by a plant that moved offshore……There are two possible explanations for his confidence….Either he does not have any doubts that the Congress will go along OR, more likely, he doesn’t recognize that in our system the Executive proposes but the Legislative enacts.
    I did notice that at least one GOP solon spoke out against the idea, recognizing that it will, in effect, result in a 35% increase/inflation or more in the cost of the goods to the American consumer….that is unless Trump finds someone way to forbid the ultimate seller from raising the price….I guess he could try to shame them into eating the cost…..but more likely it would have to require some sort of a individualized price control system, which the Congress would also have to approve. I look forward to seeing just what Trump will eventual propose…..it gets more complex every day…Too bad our Congress can’t just pass a law authorizing the Executive to do whatever it wants without congressional approval….like the Reichstag did in 1933….it would make it so much easier for Trump to fulfill some of his promises and threats…..FDR tried something like with the early New Deal legislation, but the SCOTUS shot it down for violating the Separation of Powers….I suspect that the current court, even with a Trump “conservative” nominee added, would likely have similar doubts about letting the President in effect make law by proclamation but I could be wrong……

    • John Johnson

      I never said “just do it.” I have always advocated for change, which entails developing a working plan and selling it to congress. The term I have used repeatedly is “wait and see”…which you refuse to do, because that would entail your shutting up and would give you nothing to pontificate and speculate about.

      The big question is this…would higher consumer prices be a bad thing? Would the public be willing to pay a bit more if it meant a much stouter economy with the jobs created and our money staying here instead of going overseas?

      This would have to be “sold” to the public as well as to legislators, and could not be enacted at the stroke of midnight on a certain date. It would entail a gradual rollout with all sorts of facets covered.

      I look forward to what Trump and his administration come up with. Trade laws are not equitable, and allowing US corps to continue to just move around the world from one secondary country to a third, fourth and fifth one, in search of the cheapest labor, will just continue to kill off the middle class in this country. Small manufacturing will just continue to disappear.

      Another aspect seldom addressed is the proclivity of large US businesses to hire and acquire visas for foreign engineers and biotech personnel because they get them for half the price they are paying US educated professionals. My brother-in-law has done this for years.

      It would seem that the large, US based multinational corps have no real fealty to America. It is all about the dollar and pleasing Wall Street. I look forward to this attitude being changed…either by gentle persuasion, or by force.

      • WUSRPH

        All I am trying to do is make you think thru some of the realities involved in the promises Trump has made and accept the fact that, doing so, will require much more governmental intervention in the economy than American’s have accepted at any time but grudgingly during WW I and II.

        I also hope you realize that you are not talking about “just a bit more” when you so blissfully suggest that somehow the American consumer can be propagandized into accepting the idea of major price increases for some sort of generalized good. I’d like to think that many are willing to make some sacrifice for the public good….but there are certainly many who will not and many others who cannot afford to do so.

        For example, if Trump’s ill-thought out idea were to be adopted, you are, in effect, talking in many cases about at least a 35% INCREASE in the cost to the consumer of hundreds of items American consumers purchase every year. To do otherwise is to assume that that companies who have never manufactured the compatible goods in the US (and thus would not be subject to the punishment tariff) would not raise their prices to the level you would be forcing on American-owned companies and/or not take advantage of the price difference to drive American-owned companies out of the business. Expecting them to pass up either or both opportunities is just not a realistic expectation.

        Even if the result were to drive all these companies to bring the production of the affected goods back to the U.S., it would still likely produce higher costs for the American consumer. Because of our higher production costs, the returned companies would still have to price their goods at more than strictly foreign-manufactured goods, hurting their sales and prospects, or, to offset that, increase their level of automation and reduce their need for workers.

        To overcome this problem, Trump would then either have to place a tariff on the competing foreign-produced goods—again inflating the cost—or offset the differences to US firms by either special tax treatments or subsidies which would most likely increase the national debt.

        • John Johnson

          I will address just one of your “yeah but’s” because all of your objections start with the 35% increase you spit out. If we started taxing every imported good tomorrow at that rate, we would be in big trouble. This is a journey, not a quick trip. Lots of details to be worked out…certainly by brighter minds than me…and that goes for you, too. You are a doubter; you are not a supporter; you will continue to kick and scream every step of the way. I choose to be optimistic and wait and see what transpires. There have always been “you can’t do that” naysayers railing against innovation since man started walking upright. You are simply our generation’s contribution to that sect.

          • WUSRPH

            But the 35% penalty is EXACTLY what Trump twitted he would do on any goods produced in a plant moved from the us…He made the threat again today…..I can only take him at his word.

          • John Johnson

            And well he might…as the harshest penalty at the end of a well thought out, totally vetted and agreed to plan…initiated and implemented gradually over a set period of time.

          • WUSRPH

            If it is going to be “well thought out, totally vetted and agreed to” it is apparently going to have to be by someone other than you or Trump.

        • donuthin2

          Reality? Isn’t reality out the window with any enthusiastic Trump voter?

    • dave in texas

      Article I, Section 9.3 forbids ex post facto laws.

      • WUSRPH

        Yes, it say that…but the Congress has passed and the courts have upheld laws such as tax laws passed in the middle of a session that cover back to the first of the year. So it does not appear to be total.

  • John Bernard Books

    Drain the swamp…
    “One faces criminal convictions for ambulance-chasing and the possibility of a year in jail. Another announced her resignation from her seat after being investigated by state auditors and the Texas Rangers. A third failed to fully disclose his business interests in a company that’s been the subject of an FBI investigation.
    Yet all three state lawmakers won their re-election bids — handily — earlier this month. Voters overwhelmingly chose to send state Reps. Ron Reynolds of Missouri City and Dawnna Dukes of Austin and state Sen. Carlos Uresti of San Antonio, all Democrats, back to the Capitol, a sign of voters’ capacity for exoneration or apathy — or both.”
    https://www.texastribune.org/2016/11/26/these-texas-politicians-easily-won-re-election-des/

    all dems….

  • SpiritofPearl

    Carrier

    • WUSRPH

      I suspect that a large portion of the $16 million that Carrier has agreed to invest in the plant over the next 10 years will be for further automation to allow it to function with less workers. Some one should come back in three years to count up the casualties among workers, particularly among older workers who “cost” more.

  • John Bernard Books

    Are dems tone def…
    “PELOSI: “Well, I don’t think people want a new direction.”
    https://news.grabien.com/story-pelosi-i-dont-think-people-want-new-direction
    If we can drag the repubs down to our level, we win.

  • WUSRPH

    I spent my life trying to do things to make life better for others…while you spent yours running a titty bar and selling peanuts to airlines. I will match mine against yours any time.

  • WUSRPH

    I agree. There is no substitute for real experience. I have real experience with government….how it works and how to make it work (and when necessary, not work). You do not. So, I match my ability to judge what is likely with yours every day. But go ahead and dream……

    • John Johnson

      Go ahead and speculate in definitive terms. You just keep doing it. Aren’t you tired of eating crow or have you come to like the taste?

      Experience in government, huh? In business, you supply what the customer wants or you fail and go out of business. It works the same way in government, doesn’t it? Your party just got tossed, and the mainstream Repub’s just got beat up, but rode Trump’s coat tails into another term and control of things. Is you are truly wise instead of just educated, you should be able to understand this. Government and governing change just like everything else. Your glory days are over. Quit fighting it.

      • WUSRPH

        I guess, then, it was your “failure to supply what your customer wanted” that explains your business troubles after 9-11….and here you had led us all to believe it was because of unfair trade laws, excessive regulation, BIG banks and fanciers abusing all the rest of us, airline mergers that should have been blocked by anti-trust laws that were not being enforced, Muslim terrorists, and companies that had no feeling of loyalty to their country that led long-time customers to shut their doors to you. But, according to you, it was your failure all the time.

        You do make on good point—-the GOP (and the Democrats) in Congress will control what happens to Trump’s promises……He (and you) are probably going to have to learn that the hard way. It will be fun to watch.

        • John Johnson

          Oh, you are good at hopping around all over the place and obfuscation…but why wouldn’t you be? You made your living at it, didn’t you? I’ve made my “wait and see” pitch to you, but that’s not going to happen, is it? What would you do with all that free time and urge to pontificate?

          • WUSRPH

            No, I made my living trying to pass laws (and kill some) to makea better, safer life for the people of Texas…and, with a bit of pride, I can say that I played at least a small role in doing that in many areas from the helping senior citizens stay in their homes to better public schools to trying to keep family famers on the land to the safety of police officers. You took a different road. You are proud of what you did….but you deny others the right to be proud of their efforts…Why? Could it be that your life has been so much less than you expected?

          • John Johnson

            It did not bother me. I have had peaks and valleys like most everyother small businessperson. Some were due to mistakes I made; others, like after 9/11, due to circumstances beyond my control. Se la vie. I am happy, comfortable, and still involved in several exciting endeavors. It is, however stupid for us to continue to chirp about our personal backgrounds. My apologies.

  • WUSRPH

    Poor Taiwan. Abandoned by most of the world….living within minutes of the military might of China… and now used as a pawn by Trumptarians to rattle China’s cage with a phone call and contact for which advance planning was done BEFORE he was even nominated. Poking China with a stick in its most sensitive area may have made Trump feel like a big and powerful man…and it has gotten China’s attention….It is a shame that the Taiwanese are likely to be the ones to suffer from China’s anger. But what are a few Taiwanese after all?

    • José

      Others have raised another important point. The PRC has more influence than anyone else on keeping the North Korea regime in check. The Pyongyang gang is dangerous. We need a good working relationship with Beijing for the sake of world peace. Instead we have someone who regards foreign affairs as just another way to make a fast buck. That’s what we get all because a minority of American voters decided to pick a corrupt businessman instead of someone who is, you know, trained in government and diplomacy.

      • WUSRPH

        What Trump will (hopefully) learn some day (before it is too late) that it is not a one-way street. We may be the most powerful country in the world (which we are) BUT that does not mean that we can always expect to get our will or that we can needlessly antagonize another country. As you note, China is the only country in the world that is in a position to influence North Korea (other than by military means). A few phone calls to Pyongyang telling them China will not object if they do some more things to unsettle the South Koreans and the Japanese would be a good way to show Trump that both sides can use the telephone to stir up trouble.

        • John Johnson

          China, Russia and Iran have been testing us during Obama’s reign. They grow bolder by the month because lines in the sand mean nothing to O. They know that with certainty ever since Ayssad gases his own people and O crawfished. The Chinese build a base in contested South China Sea waters; the Russians shoot down a jet over the Ukraine; Iran commandeers a US Navy boat, humiliates the crew and we do nothing. In fact, we never get an explanation of exactly what transpired. Now Trump is firing subtle shots across some bows. There is a message in them; a message that should have been sent months ago.

          • WUSRPH

            “Subtle shots”? More like slaping Red China in the face and expecting it to trun the other check. These guys are not Christians….they have a pride that goes back more than 4,000 years….They were pushed around for a century….They will not stand for it again. They told us that in Korea in 1950…..Is Trump willing to risk the lives of thousands of Taiwanese to make a point?

      • John Johnson

        “….quick buck”???

        • WUSRPH

          You apparently missed his phone call with the Turkish president Erdogan when he spent half the conversation trying to boost his business Turkish business partners and his trying to use his contacts with the British alt rightist to kill a wind farm near his golf course. But what’s wrong with using your position to benefit your business interests?

          • John Johnson

            Yes, I did.

    • John Johnson

      The Taiwanese obviously aren’t afraid. They have waved a hand at us for decades. Why are you, if they aren’t? Make up your mind…do you think we should support the little guys or not?

      • WUSRPH

        I support helping Taiwan, as we have been doing and are doing….but we do it quietly without deliberately antagonizing Red China….but, let’s be clear…The half-hour after Red China decides to end the charade, Taiwan ceases to exist….unless we are willing to go to war with them to stop it…..The current Taiwanese government is pushing towards trying to revert to a “two China” system….. Trump’s stupidity has just encouraged that idea but Beijing will never allow that.attempt.

        • John Johnson

          My guess is that the phone call will be the end of it. What better way to show the Chinese that things are about to change? It’s a message, and I’m sure it was received loud and clear. Kinda Reaganesque.

          • WUSRPH

            And don’t be surprised when they do something to send us a message that goes beyond simply complaining…..Letting up their pressure on North Korea for awhile is my guest. They had just voted to increase the sanctions, but now it may just take them awhile longer to get around to it. Two can send signals……The danger is that if we do it….and they respond…and we respond and they respond……and ? Trump needs to learn that he is not in some trivial real estate negotiation with a business rival. This is serious business…with much more serious possible consequences than who gets to operate a hotel somewhere.

          • John Johnson

            Trump had a phone call. That’s it. It was deliberate and has nothing to do with hotels. It has to do with the Phillipines and Japan. As far as North Korea goes, the Chinese have just as much to gain by putting the clamps on them as we do. The Chinese understand crazy, as do we.

          • WUSRPH

            What’s crazy about a dictator using the threat of nuclear weapons to stave off threats and keep his regime in power? That’s just what Khrushchev and Castro did in Cuba in 1962 and it worked out so well that Castro was still in power till the day he died…..The North Koreans are not as crazy as you would like to think…….They are just using a variation of the strategic doctrine that some think has kept the world from a major war since 1945. It’s called MAD for Mutual Assured Destruction. It’s working too.

          • John Johnson

            Make up your mind on what position you want to take. You are bouncing around all over the place.

          • WUSRPH

            Because I can recognize the other’s position and goals does not mean that I sympathize with them or approve of their behavior. It’s called taking an “objective” look. You “have to know where they are coming from” in order to deal with them…North Korea is a threat. It must be brought under control…..but encouraging (as Trump sounded like he was with Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia) to similarly arm themselves is not a solution. It just makes the situation worse.

          • John Johnson

            I’m sorry…I simply disagree with you. You sound like Chicken Little. The sky is not falling. you are a retired state employee who served his employer well. You are history. You are scared. A guy was elected President who you cannot fathom being there. Why do you insist on pounding on him for every move he makes at this point in the game? Appointments and selections? Come on…no one was vetting O’s initial picks like this…nor those of previous Presidents.

            We all have preconceived notions…It reminds me of my wife announcing that my daughter was coming home from St. Ed’s with a new boy friend…she told her mother to warn me that he had a pierced earring. I chewed on that, dug through my wife’s jewelry box and found the biggest clip-on loop earring I could find.

            When I went to the front door to welcome them, I had that earring clipped in my nose.

            Much to my surprise the young man she brought had removed all hardware prior to arrival. He looked at me knowing I was making a statement; she looked at me with eyes wide, and laughed out loud.

            We were cordial to him all weekend, but he never came back. She realized she never wanted to bring him back. It worked out well.

            Messages are delivered in both aggressive and shuttle ways.

          • WUSRPH

            I guess you can deliver messages by shuttle…..I remember Henry Kissinger doing it by shuttling back and forth between Jerusalem and Damascus some years ago.

            Funny that just yesterday you were apologizing for attacking people for what they did in their life, but hours later here you are again making it sound like my having worked for the people of Texas was something to be ashamed of and something that makes my views less worthy than yours. But then a businessman whose business virtually collapsed around him after 9-11 as the world changed and made what he did obsolescent is always more than qualified on any subject…But then it all was because of unfair trade laws, excessive regulation, BIG banks and fanciers abusing all the rest of us, airline mergers that should have been blocked by anti-trust laws that were not being enforced, Muslim terrorists, and companies that had no feeling of loyalty to their country that led long-time customers to shut their doors to you.

          • John Johnson

            I have no comment.

  • SpiritofPearl

    Now

    • WUSRPH

      I have faith (or hope) that the checks and balances, etc. in our system will keep the threat under control…but to perryphrase Ronald Reagan: “Trust, but verify”….We have to stand on guard for the signs and speak and act if it happens.

      • SpiritofPearl

        How? Who? When?

        I hadn’t planned to spend my old age fighting Nazis, but here we are.

  • John Bernard Books

    Wait dems cheated?
    “Michigan’s largest county voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, but officials couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 610 of 1,680 precincts during a countywide canvass of vote results late last month.
    Most of those are in heavily Democratic Detroit, where the number of ballots in precinct poll books did not match those of voting machine printout reports in 59 percent of precincts, 392 of 662.
    According to state law, precincts whose poll books don’t match with ballots can’t be recounted. If that happens, original election results stand.
    “It’s not good,” conceded Daniel Baxter, elections director for the city of Detroit.”
    http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/05/recount-unrecountable/95007392/

    dems are corrupt….

    • John Johnson

      This will be ignored by most. They only want to read and hear what they want to. Alternative viewpoints are poo-poo’d right out of the shoot.

  • WUSRPH

    It looks like we are going to have a “faithless” elector from Texas anyway. Sisneros may have resigned his post but now an GOP elector from Dallas says he won’t vote for Trump.

  • Alan Schellhase

    Another group of texans who’s word isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. Whether it’s legal or not is not the point. A pledge is as binding as a handshake. Can’t trust’m as far as you can throw’m.

    • José

      It’s awfully peculiar to hold electors to a higher standard than the candidate himself.

      At the most basic level, both the candidate and the electors owe their allegiance to the US Constitution. If Trump cannot uphold his pledge then the electors have a responsibility to select someone who will.

      • BCinBCS

        In a nutshell. Well said.

  • Alan Schellhase

    They should be ashamed of them selves.

  • WUSRPH

    What did you think about the Trump meeting with Al Gore to discuss Climate Change? Supposedly put together by Trump’s daughter who is concerned about the issue. Most politicians would find it hard to change their position on Climate Change, especially if, like Trump, they had gone so far out to declare that Climate Change is a Chinese plot. But it won’t bother Trump if he changes his stand. He’s done it on so many issues so many times what is one more. It might piss off a bunch of GOPers who are on record as opposing it…but, if he needs to explain or excuse a change in position (assuming there might be one), Trump could always say:

    “I have strong doubts that man’s activities have played a major role in bringing about a change in our climatic conditions…..It may well just be mother nature going thru one of her period changes…BUT the fact is that it is happening and we have to react to it…..”.

    • SpiritofPearl

      Gore looks bloated.

    • José

      Last week Nancy Pelosi spoke with Donald Trump about policy matters. When she raised the subject of women’s issues, Trump handed the phone over to his daughter, Ivanka! Weirdo. But it did make me think that if Donald Trump is elected President, perhaps our best hope is that he will delegate a lot of the actual governance to Ivanka. Of all the Trumps who spoke at the convention she had the most mainstream stances on a number of important topics.

  • John Johnson
    • WUSRPH

      Better men than Trump have tried to get a control on military spending…..starting with Harry Truman (who headed a special committee during WW II that sought it out) and Dwight Eisenhower, who warned us about the military-industrial complex. But when they start with that “the safety of the country is at stake” line most people back away….After all, the military will say, what’s a few wasted dollars if it saves the world.

      • John Johnson

        You just keep coming up with “yeah but’s”. Times they are-a-changing. We have had nay-sayer’s all along the way. I am adding you to the current list.

  • John Johnson

    Can anyone smell the death of this site but me?

    When prolific posters start “blocking” pointed dissenter’s, they are announcing that they “can’t take it”.
    They are telling all that they are looking for a warm place to huddle with people that agree with all their takes on any given subject and can’t stand pointed and critical, personal, and dissenting comments.

    Pearl and I are cases in point. She left the main stream, and is now an “also ran”. She now posts, but gets little response. I post, but because my tone has grown harsh, you regulars shy away.

    This blog was created for civil political conversation, but took its natural course of progression. It is dead. TM should give us one last chance to say goodbye to each other before they pull the plug. Dave and Beerman are two guys I would enjoy having a beer with.

    • John Bernard Books

      But what will the bored state workers do?
      I blame it on the dem policy of identity politics and their inability to see more than DNC talking points.
      Rush said it well recently no one hates like a dem.

    • donuthin2

      I’ve only blocked two as it was a total waste of time to wade through their gibberish. I think most of us are doing as you have suggested and that is taking a wait and see attitude. But you have become more cynical, and less interesting in the last couple of years. Your absolute hatred of Obama and Clinton has made you seem less rational. Trump is all of the things you once said you hated about politics.

      But I agree, the owners seem to have no interests in continuing the site. It was best when Burka was his best. He had the unique ability to lay out issues in a way that encouraged posters on both side of the issue would post their thoughts which were stimulating.

  • WUSRPH

    I wish people would stop fussing about the amount of time Trump is taking to pick a Secretary of State. I hope he takes all the time necessary cuz he’s got to get this one right. He rushed a few other picks…and they look more than questionable, with the possible exception of the Dept. of Defense…With the White House staff he has lined up to advise him especially on national security matters, it is more than vital that he be very careful with this pick that is if he intends to pay any attention to whoever he finally picks rather than play it by ear. I even hope he goes beyond the four to six or is it 10 names he is looking at now to find someone who is truly qualified and who will not be afraid to tell him so when he goes off the rails, as he is more than likely to do. Colin Powell?

    • WUSRPH

      Henry Kissinger has been up to the Tower to see Trump. Maybe Trump should make him the Secretary of State. After all, as the man who opened the door to better relations with China, it would be appropriate for Henry to slam the door shut again.

    • Jed

      you think more time spent on the choice will make it less “questionable”?

      have you been paying attention?

  • BCinBCS

    It would appear that the Democratic party has some fight left in them and plan to use some of it.
    From Politico:

    Senate Democrats are preparing to put Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks through a grinding confirmation process, weighing delay tactics that could eat up weeks of the Senate calendar and hamper his first 100 days in office.

    Multiple Democratic senators told POLITICO in interviews last week that after watching Republicans sit on Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court for nearly a year, they’re in no mood to fast-track Trump’s selections.

    But it’s not just about exacting revenge.

    Democrats argue that some of the president-elect’s more controversial Cabinet picks — such as Jeff Sessions for attorney general and Steven Mnuchin for treasury secretary — demand a thorough public airing.

    “They’ve been rewarded for stealing a Supreme Court justice. We’re going to help them confirm their nominees, many of whom are disqualified?” fumed Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). “It’s not obstruction, it’s not partisan, it’s just a duty to find out what they’d do in these jobs.”

    Senate Democrats can’t block Trump’s appointments, which in all but one case need only 51 votes for confirmation. But they can turn the confirmation process into a slog.

    Any individual senator can force Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to hold procedural votes on nominees. Senior Democrats said a series of such votes are likely for many of Trump’s picks.

    Democrats could conceivably force up to 30 hours of debate for each Cabinet nominee, which would be highly disruptive for a GOP Senate that usually works limited hours but has big ambitions for next year. The minority could also stymie lower-level nominees and potentially keep the Senate focused on executive confirmations for weeks as Trump assumes the presidency and congressional Republicans try to capitalize on their political momentum.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-cabinet-democrats-senate-232136

  • BCinBCS

    I hear that Ben Carson is somewhat confused about how his HUD job is supposed to be possible since Paul Newman is dead.

  • BCinBCS

    Is this because Trump lies or is it because he wants to enrich himself while President? The answer is: both.

    Following Trump’s disastrous call with the President of Taiwan, Trump’s team is in full-on damage control mode. The chat was staggeringly short-sighted, an unprecedented break with diplomatic tradition and was swiftly condemned by China. It’s unclear as of yet just what exactly the fallout will be. But worse than the effects was the cause.

    Trump claims he harmlessly picked up a phone call and wound up talking to the President of Taiwan. He was, in his version, merely too stupid to understand that this might have diplomatic implications. After all, he has been skipping intelligence briefings. It stands to reason he would be ignorant of this protocol.

    But there’s something else going on here: Just two weeks ago, Trump’s company decided it wanted to make a play for Taiwan’s property market. Long before “The Call,” Trump’s organization sent employees to Taiwan to scope out the situation.

    Is it true that Trump is looking to obtain more property in foreign lands even as he is being told that he must divest himself of his properties in order to be President? Here’s what the Shanghaiist wrote:

    The mayor of Taoyuan confirmed rumors on Wednesday that US president-elect Donald Trump was considering constructing a series of luxury hotels and resorts in the northwest Taiwanese city.

    A representative from the Trump Organization paid a visit to Taoyuan in September, expressing interest in the city’s Aerotropolis, a large-scale urban development project aimed at capitalizing on Taoyuan’s status as a transport hub for East Asia, Taiwan News reports.

    And back to the original article:

    So Trump’s call appears to have been motivated, at least in part, by his business interests. He was willing to set the stage for a global standoff with China over a few Trump-brand hotels in Taipei. The conflict of interests the experts warned us about? This story has all of it and then some.

    First, Trump is probably lying about who called who. Sources in Taiwan say it was “Taiwan-friendly” Trump staffers (many of whom either are currently or were Trump organization employees) organized the call.

    But it gets worse. As usual, Trump’s organization decided to lie about what happened. Shamelessly. Blatantly. Outrageously lie. They shot out a statement denying they ever went to Taiwan in an official capacity.

    A spokeswoman for the Trump Organization, Amanda Miller, said that the company had “no plans for expansion into Taiwan,” and that there had been no “authorized visits” to the country to push a Trump development project.

    Miller might want to check Facebook before lying because the employee who went to Taiwan to expand the Trump brand, Anne-Marie Donoghue, openly bragged about it on social media in post on her personal page. She specifically stated that her visit to Taiwan was “work.”

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4c7c3bc6d70ac1b6646a6120688c906e4d5c3343129f6daab30081b6d7c874f4.jpg

    Oh snap! Busted!
    And he’s not even President yet. I can’t wait to see what happens when he has Executive powers.

    http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/politics/trump-org-denies-trying-to-build-hotels-in-taiwan-forgets-to-delete-facebook-brags-about-it/

  • BCinBCS

    I don’t know how many that read BB want Obamacare updates but assuming that there are a few, here’s the latest:

    Paul Ryan and the House Republicans are saying that they want to repeal Obamacare immediately and replace it in three years (during the next Congress). The Republican Freedom Caucus has said “wait a minute there”.

    Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), the next chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, told Politico on Monday that a plan to replace Obamacare in three years “will meet with major resistance from Freedom Caucus members.” Meadows said that the replacement should not be “left to a future Congress to deal with.”

    “It should be repealed and replaced, and all of that should be done in the 115th Congress,” he told Politico.

    Meadows said that the plan to replace Obamacare will be “the first big fight I see coming for the Freedom Caucus.”

    Food fight! Food fight!

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/obamacare-replacement-freedom-caucus-gop-232215
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/freedom-caucus-obamacare-replacement

  • John Bernard Books

    Or why JBB and JJ are smarter than a pedant….
    “Liberals have their own activist workshops and reading groups, but these rarely instruct students in an intellectual tradition, a centuries-long canon… [Great Books] are powerful tools for preparing the next generation of activists to succeed in the bewildering ideological landscape of the country that just elected Mr. Trump. [The New York Times]”
    The pedants are too busy teaching Machiavelli’s Prince and Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and that
    “They’re progressives — and progressivism is an ideology that has little if any interest in learning from the greatest books, ideas, and thinkers of the past. And that’s because, as the name implies, progressivism is a theory of historical progress. It doesn’t see itself as an ideological project with premises and goals that had to be established against alternative views. Rather, at any given moment it identifies itself with empiricism, pragmatism, and the supposedly neutral, incontestable examination of facts and data, which it marshals for the sake of building a future that is always self-evidently superior (in a moral sense) to everything that came before.”

    Its hard to be humble when you’re self-evidently superior (in a moral sense) to everything that came before.

  • John Bernard Books

    Not only will I be shutting down Burka blog….
    “For years, Republicans in Congress have been eyeing an overhaul of the federal workforce — by reducing the number of workers and curtailing benefits and pay while making it easier to fire bad employees.
    Now, with a president-elect who has promised to do much the same, 2017 could be the best time in recent memory to make sweeping changes affecting those who work for the bureaucracy.”

    http://www.rollcall.com/news/policy/gop-readies-cuts-federal-workforce-trump#sthash.u00TM2AJ.dpuf

    but but JBB what will bored state workers do……

  • donuthin2

    I probably could look it up but am admittedly too lazy. I understand the underlying principle of the electoral college but I don’t quite understand the role of electors if they are required to represent, absolutely, the outcome of the election in their state. Seems like a redundant process to me.

    • SpiritofPearl

      Depends on the state as to the obligations for electors and outcomes for so-called “faithless” electors. Jesus has nothing to do with it.

      If it were “redundant,” the winner of the popular vote by almost 3 million ballots would be inaugurated on Jan. 20th.

      • donuthin2

        No as the winner of the popular vote in each state would get so many electoral votes based on each states law and they could be cast accordingly without electors.

        • WUSRPH

          You have to remember that the first presidential selection were not based on a popular vote. In fact, there was no clear requirement for any popular vote. In fact, only 6 of the 10 states that participated in the election in 1789 used any form of a popular vote to determine how the electors would vote.. with only about 40,000 votes were cast in the states that did have voting…This was just over 1% of the population……The situation was the same in 1792 when again only 6 of the then 15 states used popular votes…and only 26,000 total votes were recorded.

          • donuthin2

            So what role does the individual elector play if he is expected to merely reflect the vote in his state which they apparently pledge to do. In what case would it be legitimate for electors to cast their electoral votes in a way that does not reflect the popular vote.

          • José

            Since the electors are who the voters actually elect it stands to reason that they are the same as any other candidate. That is someone who makes a promise before the election and then acts differently afterwards.

          • donuthin2

            lol, probably

          • WUSRPH

            Probably none accept in the highly unusual circumstance that something happens between the election and the day the electoral college votes that requires that someone else get the job. Say finding out that the candidate is totally unqualified for some reason (a Russian puppet) or he dies and the VP is such a bad choice (Dan what was his name from Indiana) that no one wants him….

        • SpiritofPearl

          What problem would thst solve?

    • Jed

      “I don’t quite understand the role of electors if they are required to represent, absolutely, the outcome of the election in their state. Seems like a redundant process to me.”

      obviously.

  • WUSRPH

    Another GENERAL! This time for Homeland Security…..Trump is sure loading down his Administration-to-be with a bunch of retired military…….Maybe he thinks they are more likely to follow his orders without question…(Remember, back in the campaign when he was talking about ordering torture that was both illegal under US and international law (in fact that qualified as a war crime) he was asked what he would do if some general said “No”..and his answer was, “if I order it, they will do it”.)……Funny he’s picking all these generals when, also during the campaign, he indicated that he had a fairly low opinion of generals (“I’m smarter than all the generals”.)

    As a Navy fan, I just want to know why no Admirals?

    • SpiritofPearl

      A group

    • donuthin2

      A few years ago some retired generals came back to Texas to head up some government entities. They were miserable failures. While they obviously had been successful in the military, they had no skill sets for running the agencies. They had absolutely no regard for budgets, the process, diplomacy with constituents or any background on the mission of the agencies. They brought in some of their old cronies, some of which were better than they were, but for the most part ill prepared to do the job.

    • José

      It does resemble a junta.

  • John Bernard Books

    Time for dems to face facts, Hillary lost because they didn’t cheat enough….
    “Penny Crider and I just got back from helping watch the recount at Cobo Hall in Detroit. On Nov. 8th (election day) the election officials at 8:00 pm shut down the polls. They then reconciled the differences from the machine count and the voter count on the computer. At this point a Metal tag/seal with a serial number is put on the box and the box was taken away.

    Penny’s precinct, Detroit Precinct #152 had an unbroken seal and everything looked proper. The tag on the box said 306 and the book said 306 and the ticket said 306, so there should be 306 paper ballots on the box, right. Well when they pulled out the ballots the stack seemed short and when they finished separating the two page ballot to count the Presidential page only guess how many ballots were in the box? 304 no, 299 nope, 200 nada, how about 100 wrong again. There were only exactly 50 paper ballots in a locked sealed box that again was supposed to have 306.”
    http://www.theamericanmirror.com/detroit-recount-observer-box-marked-306-ballots-50-inside/

    Wherever there is a dem we have voter fraud….

  • José

    kilocomment (noun)
    1. 1000 comments
    2. The aggregation of posts on the BurkaBlog after the hosts neglect to initiate a new thread for a period of about a month

    We’re getting close.

    • WUSRPH

      Some of us are just trying to keep it alive…I wish others would join in….even Roadgeek and company…

      • Jed

        “even Roadgeek and company…”

        no need to go out of your way to court the fascists. they’ll be here soon enough.

  • WUSRPH

    Is anybody from Texas going to get anything? We have just as many—as better—-opponents of the EPA to head that agency as Oklahoma but that state’s anti-climate changer got the job. Texas has certainly sued the EPA more times than Oklahoma…It deserved the post.

    • Gunslinger

      Would this be payback for Texas going with Ted Cruz during the primary?

    • donuthin2

      Who was the Tx candidate for EPA Administrator?

      • WUSRPH

        Can’t remember her name right know….I need to Google it…but she was the former head of the Texas Commision on Environment Quality where she never met a polluter she did not like.

        • donuthin2

          Interesting. I assumed she was the one. She was a Perry lapdog and evaluated all evidence in view of how she could make it align with Perry’s agenda. Not very well respected in many quarters.

    • BCinBCS

      According to WaPo:
      (emphasis is mine)

      Donald Trump’s transition team has issued a list of 74 questions for the Energy Department, asking agency officials to identify which employees and contractors have worked on forging an international climate pact as well as domestic efforts to cut the nation’s carbon output.

      The questionnaire requests a list of those individuals who have taken part in international climate talks over the past five years and “which programs within DOE are essential to meeting the goals of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan.

      Damn, George Orwell was smart!

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/09/trump-transition-team-for-energy-department-seeks-names-of-employees-involved-in-climate-meetings/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_climatescientists-1230p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.fccde235a963

  • WUSRPH

    How long do you think it will take before Dan Patrick announces the filing of a bill here like the one they passed in Ohio today that makes an abortion illegal after a heartbeat has been detected? A week? Nah, probably tomorrow.

  • BCinBCS
  • BCinBCS

    Well isn’t this interesting?

    I found this information over at LG&M where they were commenting on an article from the Shorenstein Center:

    (From LG&M) A new Harvard Kennedy School study finds that Hillary Clinton received more negative press coverage over the entire course of the presidential campaign than Donald Trump:

    (From Shorenstein) Criticism dogged Hillary Clinton at every step of the general election. Her “bad press” outpaced her “good press” by 64 percent to 36 percent. She was criticized for everything from her speaking style to her use of emails.

    As Clinton was being attacked in the press, Donald Trump was attacking the press, claiming that it was trying to “rig” the election in her favor. If that’s true, journalists had a peculiar way of going about it. Trump’s coverage during the general election was more negative than Clinton’s, running 77 percent negative to 23 percent positive. But over the full course of the election, it was Clinton, not Trump, who was more often the target of negative coverage (see Figure 1). Overall, the coverage of her candidacy was 62 percent negative to 38 percent positive, while his coverage was 56 percent negative to 44 percent positive.

    (From LG&M) Consider how utterly astonishing this finding ought to be, at least in any halfway sane world (obviously I’m positing a hypothetical here). Donald Trump is, by an enormous margin, the least-qualified candidate to ever receive a major party nomination for president. This is true even without reference to his extensive history of personal corruption, his lack of any apparent interest in public policy, his overt unapologetic racism, sexism, etc. etc.

    It gets worse:

    (From Shorenstein) Even those numbers understate the level of negativity. Much of the candidates’ “good press” was in the context of the horserace—who is winning and who is losing and why. At any given moment in the campaign, one of the candidates has the momentum, which is a source of positive coverage. Figure 2 shows the tone of the nominees’ coverage on non-horserace topics, those that bear some relationship to the question of their fitness for office—their policy positions, personal qualities, leadership abilities, ethical standards, and the like. In Trump’s case, this coverage was 87 percent negative to 13 percent positive. Clinton’s ratio was identical—87 percent negative to 13 percent positive. “Just like Tweedledum and Tweedledee,” as Barry Goldwater said dismissively of America’s two parties in the 1960s.

    (From LG&M) How’s that for fair and balanced?

    You can believe, as I do, that Hillary Clinton was a flawed candidate in all sorts of ways, and that belief is still just completely irrelevant to evaluating this level of false equivalence. It’s as if the sports media were to compare a far from optimal NFL quarterback — say, Trevor Siemian — to somebody who has never even played football, only to reach the conclusion that neither was a “good” quarterback.

    http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/12/the-apotheosis-of-false-equivalence
    http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/?platform=hootsuite

    • José

      Not surprised. When profit based media companies push their news services to fight for readers then the reports become more sensational and superficial and less analytical and critical. More people are going to read an article about a rumored and unsubstantiated Clinton transgression than a deep dive into her policy positions. More people will follow the latest Trump bluster and boasting than a detailed explanation of how his proposals are nonsensical.

    • dave in texas

      This problem of false equivalence and slanted coverage is a longstanding issue. I can’t recommend highly enough What Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias and the News by Eric Alterman. It came out in 2003 and pointed out this almost exact thing about the coverage of Al Gore and George W. Bush. One of his main points, and it may be even more true today, is that the right has been whining forever about the “liberal media” and how that’s served to “work the refs” so to speak, so that reporters bend over way past backwards to avoid the appearance of bias and in fact go so far as to actually slant their coverage to favor the right. It’s a great read and more relevant than ever.

      • BCinBCS

        Amazon has new hardcover copies of the book for $1.00 plus $3.99 S&H. It’s $9.18 at B&N.

        I get constant complaints about the “liberal press” and how there are no conservative news outlets from my conservative friends. It doesn’t seem to register when I start naming Fox and Breitbart and the Wall Street Journal, etc. I did a little research and printed a full page of conservative media sources for them yet two weeks later I was again hearing complaints about the liberal media and how there are no media sources for conservatives. I don’t know if I can change concreted minds with a book but it would be worth buying if it would make even the slightest difference.

        • dave in texas

          I’m at a loss as how to make people see the truth of this kind of thing. My dad is a really smart man, but he absolutely cannot be convinced that the media is not some kind of liberal monolith. It’s a measure of the success of rightwing propaganda that this belief is so completely entrenched in the public consciousness, despite measurable evidence (and there’s a ton of it in Alterman’s book) to the contrary.

          • John Johnson

            It is because if you turn the channel on your tv away from Fox News you are going to get liberal. Every major station has a liberal lean; all but one of the cable networks. Most of our parents don’t read anything but the local paper, but watch the tube all the time. I read the major newspapers, and flip around on cable news. I hardly ever watch the major networks. There are both startup liberal and conservative pap mills, but I’m not reading them, and I have the distinct impression that the press leans left.

          • dave in texas

            The facts, though, don’t line up with your distinct impression. I’ll grant that most reporters themselves probably lean left. But, and it’s an important but, most of them are professionals and report the facts of a story responsibly. Read the Shorenstein report. Read Alterman’s book. The coverage, more often than not, is more positive toward conservatives than liberals. 50 years of ‘working the refs’ has paid off handsomely.

          • John Johnson

            There you go again. Someone wrote a book; it has to be true. ”

            “Are you going to believe me or your lying eyes?”

            I watch, read and listen. I have a distinct take on how things lean by personally evaluating…I do not depend on someone telling me how it really is. If I am wrong, it is because someone is doing a poor job of convincing me otherwise.

          • WUSRPH

            But you have a bias yourself. You have repeatedly made it clear that you believe that everyone has a bias, which is true, and that no one can be “objective”—putting side their bias, which is not.. You have claimed that all government, public, foundation, business etc. reports–except the ones you agree with–are slanted by the bias of the author or are bought and paid for “opinions”. A good example is the way you reacted to my presenting the North Korean’ argument for why they are building nuclear weapons….You just could not understand how I could do that. You don’t even believe in the scientific method. This makes it impossible for you to objectively evaluate anything.

          • Beerman

            WUSRPH, it is too cold for golf today, so here is my thoughts on this subject:

            The American people have been communicated to like children, by the main street media, Internet blog nonsense and social media, and with extreme dishonesty. And, those who want to believe the worst will believe the worst. Many people just dismiss any fact that doesn’t agree with their bias, because they can find some source of information, somewhere, that will agree with them.

            Ignoring and not having confidence in the MSM is a prime example of being uninformed, misinformed or not wanting to be informed. We are no longer living in the Information Age. And, It is difficult to tell what’s real and what is make-believe?

            Freedom of the press in America gives every columnist/blogger their right to bias, but opinions with factual arguments, not conspiracy lies, tend to be more persuasive for people that make up their own minds.

            “With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another.”
            –George Christeph Lichenberg

          • WUSRPH

            Something is really wrong with many American’s ability to think when you have numerous people believing that a pizza parlor was a front for a pedophiles ring involving Hillary Clinton…and even more so when some fanatic starts implying the same thing about another pizza joint in Austin……Making the situation even worse is you have people like Gen. Flynn’s son spreading the story even after the shooting on the grounds that the rumor had not been disproved yet. More and more I think people like Flynn’s kid are guilty of the same sin that Joseph Welch tagged Sen. Joe McCarthy with—a lack of a sense of decency.

          • bsweany

            UNSUBSCRIBE.

          • WUSRPH

            ??

          • Beerman

            Question and answer to Joe McCarthy: “Have you no sense of decency, sir? However, what’s the point in asking? The answer is painfully clear.”

            Appropriate for many of today’s politicians and their surrogates.

          • Jed

            “Something is really wrong with many American’s ability to think”

            thanks gwb. critical thought is no longer part of education, because it’s hard to test with multiple choice.

          • dave in texas

            That’s right, here I go again with actual facts and not just what I feel might be true. You sneeringly write “Someone wrote a book; it has to be true.” Your continual repeating of that phrase would lead a person to think that you believe that if it’s in a book, it can’t possibly be true. I watch, read, and listen, too. The difference is that I don’t dismiss completely out of hand information that doesn’t agree with my preconceived notions.

            Believe it or not, there are perspectives (and actual pesky facts!) besides your own “distinct take.” What you have is personal observation and anecdote, and the plural of anecdote is not data. The study and the book are both chock-full of verifiable facts that call into question your insistence that the media is in the bag for liberals.

          • John Johnson

            Always appreciate your take. You are a gentleman.

          • Jed

            “the plural of anecdote is not data”

            actually, yes it is.

    • John Johnson

      Maybe you should read more on the subject…look up the piece in yesterday or today’s WaPo which says just the opposite. In WaPo no less. The paper who led the charge in biased reporting.

      • BCinBCS

        I went back seven days and could not find a Washington Post article refuting what I posted about the greater negative press coverage that Hillary Clinton received. The only story about media bias was one that pointed out that the coverage of the campaign was overwhelmingly negative.

        Do you have a link?

        • John Johnson
          • WUSRPH

            from the story:

            “Not only was Trump’s press coverage uniformly negative, it was also more negative in tone than Hillary Clinton’s. In the general election, 77 percent of the coverage of Trump was negative as compared with 64 percent of the Clinton coverage. (For the entire campaign — including the primary — Clinton had the more negative coverage — 62 percent to 56 percent.)”

            Clinton’s was more negative.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, both stories are about the same study. The difference in negativity is the time period over which it was measured. Clinton’s press coverage was more negative than Trump’s over the entire campaign, 62% negative to Trump’s 56% negative.

            ETA:
            I see that W beat me to the answer.

          • John Johnson

            Well, what are we actually talking about? Trump vs Clinton, aren’t we?

            Clinton caught flack from everyone when she was running against Bernie; and Trump got some neutral, public interest pieces and interviews when no one thought his candidacy would last more than a month or so….but that has nothing to do with the biased reporting since the primaries ended.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, are you trying to re-write history?

            Donald Trump’s whole campaign strategy was to be constantly in the news for the negative things that he did and said. His hope and need was that it would be covered by the press. Now that he has won, you are trying to say that the lies, bad behavior and other outrages reported were bias on the part of the media. And, on top of all of this you are trying to claim that Hillary didn’t suffer from media “equivalency” and “both sides do it” for her horrible crime of having a personal computer server that at least three of her previous predecessors also had and of being a serial mass murderer. (I’m sure that she will be arrested soon and Trump will “lock her up”.)

          • John Johnson

            The link I posted was from the WaPo, the paper that blasted Trump the hardest and all but gave Hillary a walk. You either go along with what was printed or you don’t. I’m not trying to rewrite anything.

          • BCinBCS

            As versus the New York Times which was all things anti-Clinton, all of the time? But even so, the research was done by the Shorenstein Center, not WaPo.

            An interesting outcome of the study was that the Comey letter seems to have had a much greater affect on the negativity of the press coverage in the crucial final weeks of the campaign where more than a third of her coverage was devoted to the “scandal”.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d8bff5efbd208aa8a15cc2234a5c52283d40a4546068aa5981aaf895d3eaf637.jpg

            This additional negative press coverage of what turned out to not be any wrong-doing reversed the favorable vs. unfavorable coverage between her and Trump almost certainly being a deciding factor in Trump’s victory.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a28ce6ead2776bf4ca0600398658d34ab354fedd6af7ae3b0c8dc829fb9f227c.jpg
            .

  • John Bernard Books
  • WUSRPH

    Interesting point in an article in the Washington Post about Trump tweeting to attack people who says anything about him he does not like. Compares it to the Nixon “enemies list” but notes that Nixon kept his list secret—-he just turned the IRS, the FBI loose on them….while Trump tweets the names for the world to see. Could it be that Trump wants to send a message to his “Red Hats” to go after the person? Of course, that won’t stop him from using the government to punish them later…but he apparently likes to see them publicly “warned” for their sin of challenging The Donald.

  • WUSRPH

    A hamburger king who does not believe in the minimum wage or paying overtime as Secretary of Labor. I guess they can rename it the department of Anti-Labor.

  • John Bernard Books
  • WUSRPH

    There Is hope for the future of the BB. RG posted a new thread of questions to and answers by Atty. Gen. Paxton. It is good to have him back with TM. (At least I hope he is back). His background and experience will help make sense of the legislative session and some of the complex issues. It will be good to get the straight facts coupled with informed opinion from somebody who knows what he is talking about—a rare thing in the world today when the babble of people like me is sometimes given as weight as a seasoned observer like him.. Of course, this does not mean that I will always agree with his interpretation….but I will always respect it.

  • WUSRPH

    The Washington Post did a story on the “despair vote” that I talked about earlier. The article is based on a new Penn State study of more than 3,000 voting precincts nationwide. It found the same pattern of Trump’s margin coming from the counties with the highest mortality rates and lowest health figures plus opioid abuse. Tags it as the “biggest story” to come out of the 2016 elections. Also notes other studies that show that overall the US has a declining life expectancy, etc. It is a tragedy that in a land of such wealth and resources so many have lost faith. They voted for Trump because he promised change…..what will happen if he fails to deliver is something I don’t think we want to think about.

  • WUSRPH

    The guaranteed Trump appointment: A former general who has worked for Goldman Sachs.

  • WUSRPH

    Here’s another article of interest: Why people believe lies.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/why-people-believe-trump-lies-and-conspiracy-theories-2016-12

  • WUSRPH

    Remember not long ago I speculated that the GOP would go try to shorten early voting as one of its next steps to curtail voting by certain groups. Well, The Donald is on the bandwagon.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/309738-trump-questions-merits-of-early-voting

  • donuthin2

    What you get when you vote for change without any idea of what the change will be or even what change you want is what we are going to get. It will result in even greater frustration than what we have seen with no solution in site. We’ll see how it goes. Even old cooters, excluding a few of us, voted for him and first thing their sacred ss will be at risk. Would guess that is not what they expected.

    • BCinBCS

      Unfortunately for the U.S., Trump will allow the GOP to privatize Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid but they will be clever enough not to change it for current participants. Those old cooters won’t lift a finger to protect either program for the next generations. After all, “I got mine; the hell with yours”.

      • John Johnson

        Where did you get your crystal ball?

        • WUSRPH

          Based on the plans already announced by major GOP figures who have been chomping at the bit for years for the opportunity to reserve most of the accomplishments of the 20th Century (and some of the early 21st). And, the choices he has made for such posts as Health & Human Services, EPA, HUD and Interior.

          • John Johnson

            I think you meant “reverse”. While lots is definitely going to change, I don’t look for SS to take a hit. Medicare is a different story. It is the most mismanaged and wasteful of all the retirement programs. It is a joke.

            The physicians, hospitals drug manufacturers,and device suppliers are stealing us blind. Having four parents all over 90 to tend to has opened my eyes to the racket. Being on it myself, I know that it encourages old folks to go to the doc or emergency room for every little issue, and once there they prescribe every redundant test known to man. I could go on.

          • BCinBCS

            Paul Ryan has repeatedly stated that he wants to convert Social Security to a 401k type system.

  • WUSRPH

    A true cabinet for JJ”s commonbreds……dominated by the nation’s biggest Wall Street financers and a bunch of generals (not an enlisted person in the group) and topped off by the appointment of the head of the nation’s (world’s) largest corporation as secretary of state.

    • WUSRPH

      Of course, they could all be the equivalent of FDR’s pick of Joe Kennedy as the first head of the SEC (I’ve told the story before) and, armed with the knowledge of how the BIGs run everything, be able to successfully drain the swamp and restore the government of the people, for the people and by the people. That assumes they all made the trip to Damascus and got hit by the holy light of Trump’s message. What is going to be particularly interesting will be to see how all these guys get along and work together (or don’t). You don’t get to the levels they did without being at least a minor megalomaniac used to having your own way…and here they will be all be working “for” (in theory) the biggest megalomaniac of all.

      • BCinBCS

        Already General Mattis (Sec. of Defense) is opposed to the radical ideology of General Flynn (National Security Advisor).

        I’m not holding my breath waiting for these hyper-elite Republican appointees to begin looking out for the common-breds.

      • John Johnson

        Just because he has picked Wall Street elitests to head up departments does not mean that changes will not be implemented. Who knows more about the way the big financial institutions operate? These guys or Elizabeth Warren? How about we all just wait and see. If it is business as usual, no one will be screaming more than me. Trump is on probation as far as I am concerned. It is the same courtesy I afforded Obama.

        • WUSRPH

          As I said, it could be FDR and Joe Kennedy….but I’m less than sure of that.

          • John Johnson

            We’ll see

  • WUSRPH
    • BCinBCS

      From that article:

      So what comes next? China, we can be certain, is preparing to fill America’s shoes. And in Europe, the crypts of nationalism have been opened; in time, they will once again release their demons upon the continent – and the world.

      I never believed that World War III would ever happen but now it is a possibility. Do you think that Trump and his supporters understand the probability of how another European war will escalate? (I guess that nuclear winter is one way of combatting global warming.)

      • WUSRPH

        I wish I knew the way the world is going to go…or even that I had enough confidence in my ability speculate with some degree of confidence in my views. I see so many things in motion and so many uncertainties. Trump’s behavior and actions may have a lot to do with it…..Needless-to-say, I am more than concerned, but, regretfully, in this case I may have to agree with JJ that we have to wait and see.

    • John Johnson

      The piece is interesting…even compelling…but, in my mind, just another “the sky is falling” offering.

      We are not abandoning the South China Sea region, as Trump’s calculated call to the Taiwanese indicates. We are not abandoning our NATO friends; he was just letting them know that they needed to pay up…as I understand they have already started doing.

      Do you think with his picks from the military ranks that we are going to concede the Middle East to the Russians? Not me.

      Do you think he will let Russia and the Chinese switch from the dollar to the Tuan as the world monetary standard? Do you think he is going to allow our financial institutions to be so entwined with other biggie’s around the world that their downfall means that we have to prop them up or suffer a economic hit right along with them? I personally think we have been funneling Fed funds into Duetch Bank for months now to keep from taking a major domestic hit. So do others with more knowledge than I.

      • WUSRPH

        I think you are putting too much stress on “do you think he will”……One thing The Donald is going to have to learn—and I hope it is not the hard way—is that there are many things he may not want to happen over which he either has no control or where the “cost” of influencing events is more than he may be willing to pay. We have tremendous influence in the world….but we do not run it.
        For example, I doubt China, at this point, wants to make the Tuan the monetary standard. That would take away some of its ability to manipulate the value. But, if China wanted to impose a rule that all financial dealings with it had to be in Tuan, it could…and nothing Trump could do would change that without doing significant harm to America’s economy.
        I am particularly concerned about Trump’s view of himself as being some sort of fantastic negotiator who can sit down with anyone and make a deal. That may work when the question is who gets to build this or that project. But the stakes in international negotiations are far, far beyond anything he has even negotiated and the interests of the other side can be some much more complex. In the negotiations he has been involved in both sides wanted a solution…..but that is often not the case in international affairs. Trump’s advisers understand that. But he may not. (A good case study would be LBJ’s frustrated efforts to “make a deal” with the North Vietnamese where no deal was ever going to be possible. There is also Chamberlain’s “peace in our time” agreement with Hitler at Munich when Hitler gleefully signed a “deal” he never planned to honor.).

        • John Johnson

          Oh, I agree with you. He is going to run into walls. I think he has before. I don’t think you build anything in the NE, and especially NYC, without knowing how to negotiate through the red tape and union roadblocks. I am optimistic; but skeptical. I was so tired of the same-old-same-old, that I was willing to take a chance. Chance takers are not all morons. Changes are no doubt coming that are not going to be pleasing to Obama and his supporters, but that is what the majority of states wanted if not the majority of voters. I simply refuse to think that Trump is going to “twist off”, and I pray he doesn’t. In a few short months we are going to have our answers.

          • WUSRPH

            I, for one, am worried about the fact that you and Trump are putting so much emphasis on his being some sort of a miracle negotiator. He seems to believe that he can sit down with some and make a deal…..but history tells us that international dealings are much, much more complex and much, much more danger than negotiating to build a project. My concern is not that Trump will “twist off”, whatever that may mean, but more that he will not understand the limits and constraints on his actions or the motivation and interests of his opponents may be far different than anything he has ever dealt with before. His experience has been with people who wanted to make a deal and what was involved was finding the right mixture of conditions. I doubt he has ever dealt with an opponent whose interests are best served by not agreeing or one who will agree with no intention of honoring the agreement. (e.g. LJB in Vietnam and Chamberlain at Munich with “peace in our time”.) .

          • John Johnson

            No doubt about it. He is on new ground. So was Obama. He was unqualified to be President. So is Trump, if you want to talk “conventional”. Those of us who voted for him did so because he was not conventional. It is a gamble, and one we were willing to take.

          • John Johnson

            I have realized that I enjoy debating with you. I also realize that I got too pointed, personal and angry in my posts over the last several months. I like this back-and-forth. In order for this site to survive, we are going to have to “keep it clean” and attract new poster’s. I am committed to taking a new attitude if you are. When angry, I lash out. I am truly sorry about the personal affronts. I know you served the State admirably. I apologize again for the personal attacks.

        • John Johnson

          I failed to respond to your Middle East comments…I have never been a proponent of stepping in and forcing regime changes just because of oil. I have never advocated for invading a country because some dictator threatens your daddy. I have never advocated the overthrow of a dictator like Kadify because you don’t know what you are going to get afterwards. We now know. It is one thing to protect Israel; undermining surrounding governments, quite another. We have no business doing so. Sanctions work. Sending our young men and women, and to a lesser extent, our trillions to exact our measure is criminal. That’s my take.

  • WUSRPH

    What to make of a president-elect who won’t be briefed by the intelligence community…..turning down briefings that are designed to keep him informed about what is happening in the world…..and who openly disputes the findings of the CIA….apparently because he thinks he knows more about Russia than they do……A president should always take what he is told with a degree of skepticism…and reach out to as many sources as he can. Normally, would think someone with as little experience in foreign/military/security affairs would be anxious to learn…..But then, as he told us during the campaign, he knows more than al the generals and apparently all the intelligence analysts, too. A dangerous trend?

    • John Johnson

      Let’s see…who is still calling the shots? Obama, right? Didn’t I read that while he has been in office he has chosen not to personally receive daily CIA updates? Trump is busy getting his team in place. He has over a month to get caught up on what is going on before he takes the helm.

      • WUSRPH

        It is clearly gong to take him a lot longer than a month to “get caught up”…..a year or two at the minimum is more likely.

        • John Johnson

          There is no doubt a learning curve. If a community organizer can do it, I believe Trump can.

          • WUSRPH

            The difference—and the major problem—may be that Trump does not understand that there is so much that he does not know and needs to learn. His megalomania may be so extreme that he thinks he knows all he needs to know about everything and will try to “wing it”…After all, “I know more than all the (fill in the blank)” ..If that happens, his “missteps” may make George W. Bush’s actions in Iraq and the Middle East look like great diplomatic achievements. I’m not that impressed with some of his advisor choices, but at least many of them have experience in these areas. One can only hope that he listens to their advice.

          • John Johnson

            I appreciate your using the modal verb “may” in your post. It denotes possibility instead of certainty. It is a welcome change.

          • St. Anger

            he was being polite.

            those things are patently obvious.

          • John Johnson

            You are new to this site, aren’t you? You’ve missed a lot.

          • St. Anger

            you might also have said “if a constitutional law professor can do it, i think trump can.”

            which sounds a whole lot stupider, don’t you agree?

          • John Johnson

            When one of the most heralded liberal constitutional law professors in the country, Jonathan Turley, says that Obama was acting unconstitutionally, I listen.
            Furthermore, I would rather have a businessman in charge of running the country than a guy who has zero practical knowledge of running anything.

          • BCinBCS

            Well, so far Trump is doing a “heck of a job”, so there’s that.

          • John Johnson

            List your grievances. I guess you can’t disagree with his picks, but what else? He hasn’t started governing yet and you are already wailing.

          • WUSRPH

            List NO. 1:
            Needlessly poisoning relationships with China
            Conducting private business during his telephone calls with foreign leaders
            Deliberately undermining public confidence in the intelligence community
            Picking/and even considering a holder of the distinguished “Friend of Russia” award as
            Secretary of State
            Lying/exaggerating his “accomplishment” in the Carrier deal……giving his blessing to them moving 1300 jobs to Mexico.

            It will get longer.

          • John Johnson

            If I had been a life long bureaucrat, I might see things as you do. I like Trump’s “message” to the Chinese; I don’t believe all the bs about his touting his personal business in foreign leader phone calls; I like Tillerson’s qualifications and downplay the view that he is going to put Exxon’s well being in front of the country’s (he is leaving a wealthy man; you think he is going to use his position to accumulate more personal wealth?). I agree that the Carrier deal is open to criticism…but it made a point, as well.

          • WUSRPH

            There you go with the personal attacks on someone’s past again…I was never
            a bureaucrat. Always a political aide.

            As to the phone calls, you get more like Trump every day…choosing to believe only what you want to believe no matter what the evidence. The Trump folks never denied what has been reported about his conversations with the Turkish president and the Brit politician, among others.

            When you want to make a deal with someone–say China—you don’t begin by hitting them in their most sensitive point as he has deliberately done twice now. You save that for later in the talks when you need something to break a deadlock. It’s is like telling someone that his mother is a XXXIUORHUIyu and then thinking he is going to sit down and have a friendly visit.

          • WUSRPH

            The Chinese are not some puny little boy down the street that you can frighten by threatening the punch them—as Trump has been doing….They are a proud, powerful nation that has many ways to make their unhappiness felt…..They could well begin by cashing in their $1.3 Trillion dollars worth of US govt. securities timing it for just that moment when the GOP is again playing chicken with the debt ceiling. How would the man from Goldman Sachs like to have a bill for $1.3 Trillion dropped into his hands at that every moment that the Treasury is scrambling to pull in every dollar it can to keep us under the limit? ..Two can play tough guy.

          • John Johnson

            Saying bureaucrat instead of aide is a personal attack? Really?

            Having never negotiated as a businessman…only from a political perspective…I know Trumps moves are foreign to you. I understand them.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, other than the quality of his advisors, the quality of his picks for Cabinet positions, his stated policies and his actions so far, he’s doing a “heck of a job”.

            When is he supposed to start doing all of those wonderful things that you said that he would do? So far, with a small number of exceptions, he appears to be wandering about, blindfolded bumping into the china knocking it onto the floor.

            Also what WUSRPH said.

          • St. Anger

            Do also prefer businessmen when filling other positions completely unrelated to business?

            If recruiting a skydiver, would the businessman get your vote?

            Obama has read the constitution, which appears to be more than either you or trump can say.

          • John Johnson

            Yep…we are all dummies, and you Hillary supporters are all Mensa qualified.

            I just picked out one because he is a liberal and deemed one of the legal experts on the Constitution. I understand there are differing views…and there always will be.

          • St. Anger

            i agree that you *are* a dummy, as evidenced by the fact that you seemingly missed my point.

            it isn”t enough that you can find someone to agree with and so can i. relative numbers on each side are relevant (cf. climate change deniers), as is the strength of the claims on either side.

            ps – this is jed. i told you that once already. dummy.
            pps – as for mensa qualified, you say that like an insult. you and your < 28% of deplorables can go on thinking it makes sense to give the most important job in the world to a fellow dummy.

          • John Johnson

            Hahaha. Sorry I missed your informing me about your moniker change.

            I love Mensa members; I just don’t respect the mentally challenged, who hold themselves up as being candidates, calling the rest of us,who simply disagree with them, dummies.

            With regards to climate change, I think most of us know we humans are adding to it; the question is “how much”? The extremists seem to think if we just do away with fossil fuels, everything will become hunky dory. I happen to believe that all sorts of cycles well out of our control plays the bigger role.

          • BCinBCS

            Many of those “other cycles” contributing to climate change are the direct result of the worsening of the climate due to man.

            Ocean rise is accelerating because glacier melt has not only added water to the ocean but also because that water is acting as a lubricant allowing glaciers to slide faster into the ocean.

            Human produced CO2 has warmed the planet defrosting the permafrost releasing huge amounts of methane, a gas that is four times worse than carbon dioxide in its climate warming ability.

            Increased temperature and longer periods of higher temperatures encourage the growth of bark beetles and stress the trees on which they feed causing vastly more tree deaths. This increased loss of trees results in less CO2 absorption, but more importantly, is he cause of more and greater fires that add even more CO2 to the atmosphere (and burn up even more CO2 absorbing greenery).

            Actually JJ, why the hell am I listing this for you? You apparently agree that the climate is warming and you are smart enough to know the horrible consequences of that warming so why do you oppose doing something about it whether it is cause mostly or somewhat by man? The result of global climate change will be catastrophic to mankind so why would you not do everything in your power to avoid it? Why would you not want to limit anthropomorphic warming no matter what it contribution?

          • WUSRPH

            Just ask him the one question that should be enough:

            What if you are wrong?

            If we do things to limit the damage or somehow reverse it and it turns out to have not been all necessary, what have we lost? If we don’t we certainly will lose a lot more.

          • BCinBCS

            Agree. Besides the small downside cost, there is a huge upside reward for businesses and society, as well.

          • John Johnson

            Well, Chicken Little, we have had global climate change that is documented over eons long before we introduced hyrocarbons to the environment. They used to grow crops in Ireland that no longer withstand the increased cold. What say you to that? The climate in the world ebbs and flows; tree deforestation and use of fossil fuels no doubts contributes, but to what extent? That is the question. Your group would seem to think that we are expierencing something now that is unique to the past couple of generations. If you believe in evolution, how can you not understand that this tide of change, with relation to temperatures, is not cyclical over any given period of time?

          • BCinBCS

            JJ asked: “If you believe in evolution, how can you not understand that this tide of change, with relation to temperatures, is not cyclical over any given period of time?

            Because of data and facts.
            What proof do you have that we are in a short term cycle?

            BTW although the effects of evolution can occur in a relatively short time, centuries, most evolutionary changes occur over a very long time, multiples of millenia.

  • John Bernard Books
  • John Bernard Books

    Dems say “if we can drag republicans down to their level they win”
    “In an opinion article published this week, the communications director for Hillary Clinton’s campaign – Jennifer Palmieri – highlighted a small electoral victory that ironically captured the reason for my party’s ultimate defeat. “As I like to note, Clinton received more votes for president than any white man in history,” she crowed.
    Got it. White men bad, women good.
    In Palmieri’s political world, she believes that we can cruise to electoral dominance if we build a coalition of voters based on identity politics. In other words, if Democrats can get a particular slice of Americans to the polls – women, Jews, ethnic minorities, gay men and lesbians – we will win.”
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/12/08/im-democrat-but-clinton-staffer-jennifer-palmieris-twisted-logic-is-exactly-why-lost.html

    One has to wonder about people who vote dem…..

    • John Johnson

      Divide and conquer has been their mantra for decades.

      • John Bernard Books

        Yes but who among us is so easily fooled…..

  • WUSRPH

    Trump’s latest positions of concern:

    He doesn’t believe the Russians hacked the US election
    “No one knows” whether there is climate change or not.

    Both disputed by experts…And one shows a total lack of understanding of the scientific method.

    I have a question for him:

    What does it mean for the future of this country and of the world if you are wrong?

    One can only hope (and pray) that he considers that before he acts.

    • BCinBCS

      It would appear that Trump’s victory is a combination of overt help by the FBI and Russia.

      New York Magazine has an interesting story about the “true-blue” Republicans who put their party above principle and country.

      What is more interesting in the Post story [about Russian interference in the U.S. election] is the response of various officials to the revelations. The Obama administration declined to publicize, wary of being seen as intervening on Clinton’s behalf.

      According to the Post, Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell “raised doubts about the underlying intelligence and made clear to the administration that he would consider any effort by the White House to challenge the Russians publicly an act of partisan politics.” Other Republicans refused to join the effort for reasons that can only be understood as a desire to protect the Republican ticket from any insinuation, however well-founded, that Russia was helping it.

      Even the most cynical observer of McConnell — a cynical man to his bones — would have been shocked at his raw partisanship. Presented with an attack on the sanctity of his own country’s democracy by a hostile foreign power, his overriding concern was party over country. Obama’s fear of seeming partisan held him back from making a unilateral statement without partisan cover. No such fear restrained McConnell. This imbalance in will to power extended to the security agencies. The CIA could have leaked its conclusion before November, but held off. The FBI should have held off on leaking its October surprise, but plunged ahead.

      Of the many causes of the election outcome, one was simply that Trump’s supporters in government were willing to put the system at risk in order to win, and Clinton’s supporters were not.

      http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/12/trump-mcconnell-putin-and-the-triumph-of-the-will-to-power.html

      • BCinBCS
      • John Johnson

        Wow! Is this the first time your eyes have been opened to the stinky political process? Reverse the scenario…what do you think the Hillary regime and Dem party would have done…would be doing? What about the questionable Bill Clinton intervention which helped secure the big uranium deal for the Canadian guy who gave the Clinton foundation millions? Can you smell the smell?

        • BCinBCS

          Having the Russians alter the outcome of our presidential election is way past smelling bad. It’s not even comparable to politics-as-usual.

          I’m only licking the icing of the uranium deal but I do know that it had to be approved at the federal level so it certainly wasn’t simply a real estate transaction brokered by Bill.

          The Clintons did not enrich themselves while in the White House as opposed to Trump who appears to believe that it is a perk of the job.

          • John Johnson

            “Licking the icing”? “Approved at the Fed level”? You mean Hillary’s State Department? Yeah…no conceivable reason to tie that together.

            Are you capable of putting an objective puzzle together?

          • BCinBCS

            Yes. I know JJ everybody in government is corrupt and is a Democrat so federal approval is the height of cronyism and corruption. What was I thinking?

  • WUSRPH

    There he goes again…..slapping the Chinese across their face by declaring that the US is “not bound” by the one-China policy it agreed to 44 years ago when the US and China restored relations. Trump apparently thinks we can use the Taiwanese as some sort of chip in a great game of diplomatic poker with China. The problem is that, unless we are willing to go to war against China, the Chinese are holding four aces in any struggle over Taiwan. I pity the poor Taiwanese who are being using and who will be the ones who have to pay for any mistake Trump makes in this dangerous game.

  • WUSRPH

    So it looks like we will have some sort of an inquiry into the Russian hacking (that The Donald says did not happen)..but I bet it will be fairly quick and private behind the closed doors of the intelligence committees. Whatever the “public” (remember them—the people for whom all those folks in Washington are supposed to work) will be told will be minimal. It will have to rely on leaks. The result will be that The Donald will be able to cloud the waters enough that it will all blow over.

    Wouldn’t it be fun if it were like the Senate Watergate Committee? John McCain could play the Howard Baker role asking every witness “What did the president (elect) know and when did he know it?” but, alas, it won’t be anything like that. Of course, there is always the possibility that Trump did not know….either for the sake of “plausible deniability” or because Vladimir did it all on his own.

  • John Bernard Books

    Rick Perry joins Trump team
    “Donald Trump has selected Rick Perry to be energy secretary, according to two sources directly involved in the transition and selection process.”
    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-chooses-rick-perry-to-be-energy-secretary/ar-AAluhOT?ocid=sf

    Perry and Trump making America great again….

  • WUSRPH

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2016/12/13/daily-202-ayn-rand-acolyte-donald-trump-stacks-his-cabinet-with-fellow-objectivists/584f5cdfe9b69b36fcfeaf3b/?utm_term=.c96d5cc8580d

    The SECRET is out…..We thought he was just hiring Wall Street…but it turns out that Trump is actually packing his Administration-to-be with avid fans of Ayn Rand! Seems everybody down from Trump including the Secretary of State says her books are what inspired them. Objectivists all……John Galt for world leader!

    • John Bernard Books

      I’m officially putting you on suicide watch…..

    • SpiritofPearl

      I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that Trump hasn’t read Ayn Rand. And his acolytes are even less likely to have done so.

      • WUSRPH

        They have all told reporters, etc. that they have and that her books had the greatest impact on them. They could be lying, but they are all the types who would have been impressed by her super hero philosophy.

        • SpiritofPearl

          The

          • WUSRPH

            I can tell you fro experience that Rand’s two major books, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, were the kind of thing passed around in fraternity houses during the time Trump and his cabinetees were in school. He probably read it while in military school. The super hero man of total integrity was the kind of thing they would like to read. That was in addition to the Playboy Adviser.

          • SpiritofPearl

            Trump has limited ability to concentrate. I don’t believe he could finish much less understand these books.

  • John Bernard Books

    Trump another JFK!!!!!
    “Bill Gates compares Trump to JFK
    Bill Gates said Tuesday that President-elect Donald Trump’s potential to bring innovation to the U.S. resembles that of President John F. Kennedy’s.”
    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/310139-bill-gates-trump-resembles-jfk-in-his-ability-to-innovate

    No wonder dems love Trump….

  • John Bernard Books

    Dems are cheats….
    “Detailed reports from the office of Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett show optical scanners at 248 of the city’s 662 precincts, or 37 percent, tabulated more ballots than the number of voters tallied by workers in the poll books. Voting irregularities in Detroit have spurred plans for an audit by Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson’s office, Elections Director Chris Thomas said Monday.
    Who did they over count for?
    Democrat Hillary Clinton overwhelmingly prevailed in Detroit and Wayne County.
    http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/12/vote-audit/95358702/

    Voter fraud is prevalent whenever a dem is present….

  • WUSRPH

    The Washington Post says it best:

    “President-elect Donald Trump’s choice of Rex Tillerson thrust the oil executive into the long-standing U.S. foreign-policy divide separating those who value pragmatism and dealmaking from those who attach greater importance to principles, human rights and democracy.”

    America once the shinning lantern to the world.

  • WUSRPH

    It looks like Trump is getting ready to slap the Muslim world across the face…..just as he’s been doing to China…..This time by moving the US embassy to Jerusalem in a clear sign of US support for the Israeli position that Jerusalem is their Capitol.

    This would be considered a major insult to the Muslim world which, like Jews and Christians, views Jerusalem as a Holy City to its faith…..It would be particularly offensive to Palestinians who want at least part of it to be their Capitol too when they get their own state. But Trump’s aides are sending signals that he will move our official embassy to Jerusalem shortly after he is elected. This would make the US the ONLY NATION with is embassy in Jerusalem…

    As the Washington Post put it: “Jerusalem sits in the middle of the contested land, figuratively and literally. To avoid the appearance of favorites, the United States and every other country place their embassies in and around the commercial city of Tel Aviv and drive to Jerusalem to meet government officials.”

    • SpiritofPearl

      He’s going to get slapped back. We will all pay the price.

      • SpiritofPearl

        I have a friend, a secular Jew, whose father had a cousin who was one of the first prime ministers of Israel. She has family and friends in Israel with whom she communicates frequently.

        She says Israel is collapsing from within, caused by friction between the hawks and the doves and Bibi’s intransigence, that many Israelis who can are leaving.

        Sound familiar?

  • SpiritofPearl

    Trump’s authoritarianism reflects a long-standing sentiment in the GOP and, remember, half of it is genetic:

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/the-gops-age-of-authoritarianism-has-only-just-begun.html

  • donuthin2

    It takes only a short time to undo things that have taken decades to accomplish. The Clean Air Act and Clean Water Acts have been remarkably successful. Trump and his appointees will probably succeed in undoing much of the progress in short time. It will be amazing how quickly attitudes in the respective agencies will change to accommodate him. Not sure there is enough committed resistance to stop it.

    • WUSRPH

      I question whether we really want employees of federal agencies actively resisting the policies of the Administration in power, whether it be a good one or a frightful one like Trump’s is likely to be. Government employees are there to implement the policy decisions made by their duly elected/appointed superiors in compliance with the laws passed by the Congress. They can and should provide advice as to what is good or bad policy, but it is not their role to make policy or to resist it. If they view the policies as being wrong or damaging to the country or illegal or unconstitutional, they should resign and make their judgment known to the public. Anything else is a clear violation of the rule of law. Remember, if they do it to Trump, they can do it to his replacement in four years.

      • John Bernard Books

        Fed employees should resist the policies of the Trump admin so they can be fired.
        Oh he*l just do an across the board cut of 30% effectively immediately.

      • donuthin2

        I totally agree but if the appointees have integrity, there will be a line which they will be unwilling to cross and will resign rather than cross it.
        Perry’s appointees to various agencies, TCEQ in particularly, reportedly would allow him to interfere with some of their permitting decisions interfering with their independent judgement which is totally unethical on both their parts as well as probably illegal. It is ok for him to pick his appointees, subject to senate approval, that have philosophies similar to his, but for him to telegraph the decision he is looking for is totally inappropriate.

        • WUSRPH

          It will be interesting to see how Trump deals with “independent agencies” of the federal govt. after he makes his appointments. I doubt he will understand what “independent’ means and will expect all of them to jump at the crack of his whip. They may…..but it will be worth seeing when one of them (maybe by a 3 to 2 vote or something) denies his WILL.

  • WUSRPH

    Here is a link to 60 specific promises (as specific as he ever got) that Trump made during the campaign which the Washington Post is tracking. No action on any yet.

    http://tinyurl.com/jrcl3sp

  • WUSRPH

    The Washington Post gets it right again:

    “Donald Trump accused Hillary Clinton of being under the “total control” of Goldman Sachs. Yet the president-elect now wants its executives as treasury secretary and head of the National Economic Council, the latest example of how the bank always turns up in the White House.”

  • John Bernard Books

    Why do dems cheat?
    “Voting machines in more than one-third of all Detroit precincts registered more votes than they should have during last month’s presidential election, according to Wayne County records prepared at the request of The Detroit News.
    Detailed reports from the office of Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett show optical scanners at 248 of the city’s 662 precincts, or 37 percent, tabulated more ballots than the number of voters tallied by workers in the poll books. Voting irregularities in Detroit have spurred plans for an audit by Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson’s office, Elections Director Chris Thomas said Monday.”
    http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/12/records-many-votes-detroits-precincts/95363314/

    Its called voter fraud….

  • DP Livingston

    this guy is a disgusting scumbag and I hope to God Texas and other States move to enact laws to make it a felony to not vote in accordance with your district results. . . . .And now that he has been outted as a complete fraud for his lies about 911 all decent people should find him a most revolting human being.

  • Neuro Mancer

    What a dick.

  • Anthony Beachboy

    LMFAO!!!