[QUOTE=chappy;408446][URL]http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/20/facebook-posts/no-michele-bachmann-did-not-say-there-are-no-illeg/[/URL][/QUOTE]

It is amusing that they seem to be saying that the spoof was riffing on something Trump did say, and on her praise of the Donald. "Pants on Fire" is high praise for satire. :grin:

[url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/20/us-usa-defense-bergdahl-trump-idUSKCN0QP29X20150820]Bergdahl lawyer slams candidate Trump over 'traitor' comments[/url] | Reuters

More free PR for da Trumpsta! The really interesting thing, especially if the lowball estimates of his true wealth are accurate, is that he can run his campaign much more cheaply than any other non-hopeless-case candidate because all the free PR his well-calculated eyebrow-raising utterances generates means he'll need far fewer ad buys to 'stay visible'. I'm reminded of another genius at self-promotion, Muhammad Ali, who based a lot of his public antics on those he had seen from a flamboyant pro wrestler of his youth named Gorgeous George. As Ali later admitted, it was all calculated to 'put butts in the seats,' and succeeded brilliantly. Analogously, Trump's opponents and detractors really do need to watch more pro wrasslin to see how it's done, and not keep falling for the bait.

What about Deez Nuts?

[QUOTE=firejuggler;408517]What about Deez Nuts?[/QUOTE]

We'll see in another 20 years when he actually meets the minimum-age requirement.

An article dated the 19th, but just ran across it, about how Google search rankings could be used to skew voting preferences. I'll have to track down the PNAS article to get more details; not sure what to think. Kind of scary if that's all it takes to manipulate people.

[URL="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548.html#.VdqFkflVhBe"]http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548.html#.VdqFkflVhBe[/URL]

Norm

[QUOTE=Spherical Cow;408641]An article dated the 19th, but just ran across it, about how Google search rankings could be used to skew voting preferences. I'll have to track down the PNAS article to get more details; not sure what to think. Kind of scary if that's all it takes to manipulate people.

[URL]http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548.html#.VdqFkflVhBe[/URL]

Norm[/QUOTE]
I think it's always been the case that most so-called "democracies" have their major elections decided by a few powerful people, perhaps just one person, who control the media. TV and newspapers used to be the main channels for manipulating voters, but these days whoever controls electronic media giants like Google will decide who wins an election.

I suppose the 2000 US Presidential election was an exception. On that occasion it was the Secretary of State for Florida who succeeded in deciding who should win the Presidency.

[QUOTE=Brian-E;408666]I suppose the 2000 US Presidential election was an exception. On that occasion it was the Secretary of State for Florida who succeeded in deciding who should win the Presidency.[/QUOTE]

And the then-governor of Florida was related to one of the 2 candidates how?

[QUOTE] Quote:
Originally Posted by [B]Brian-E[/B] [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=408666#post408666"][IMG]http://www.mersenneforum.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif[/IMG][/URL]
[I]I suppose the 2000 US Presidential election was an exception. On that occasion it was the Secretary of State for Florida who succeeded in deciding who should win the Presidency.[/I]

And the then-governor of Florida was related to one of the 2 candidates how? [/QUOTE]

Of course, the question is rhetorical.

However, the fact remains that the Harris creature might not have succeeded if five voters in black robes had not interrupted a count which was legal under applicable Florida law. Also, let us not forget the "pinstripe riot" staged by Republican operatives to disrupt the recount.

[QUOTE=kladner;408716]Of course, the question is rhetorical.

However, the fact remains that the Harris creature might not have succeeded if five voters in black robes had not interrupted a count which was legal under applicable Florida law. Also, let us not forget the "pinstripe riot" staged by Republican operatives to disrupt the recount.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/the-florida-recount-of-2000/[/url]

And yet, Bush still would have won had the recount gone forward.

Most importantly, had the Democrats not run the worst campaign in a half century they would have won. (only topped by the Democrats next presidential campaign four years later.)

You could argue that world famous legal hypocrite Justice Scalia once again threw State's Rights (and strict Constitutionalism and Judicial review) to the wind when it suited his conservative political agenda, and I would completely agree.

[QUOTE=chappy;408721][url]http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/the-florida-recount-of-2000/[/url]

And yet, Bush still would have won had the recount gone forward.[/QUOTE]

You neglected to include the qualifier "probably," which litters the article you linked. More importantly, you fail to mention the crucial fact that the rosters of eligible voters were [url=www.nytimes.com/2004/07/10/us/florida-list-for-purge-of-voters-proves-flawed.html]gerrymandered for Bush to begin with[/url]. Key line there in re. the [strike]election[/strike] appointment in question: "Florida undertook a similar purge of voter rolls in 2000."

And I haven't even touched the persistent rumors re. the Diebold voting machines, which make stealing modern elections as easy as HFT algos/hardware in the stock markets make it to steal hoi polloi's money.

But a funny thing has happened to my mind-set since then: I no longer give a rat's patootie about such stuff, since it has become eminently clear to me that:

[1] The U.S. in in no way, shape or form the advertised 'representative-democratic republic' (and I see that former President Carter recently publicly stated similar sentiments);

[2] It is Big Money, Big Media and the NatSec Deep State, not "the people", who determine the major-party nominees for the Presidency, and the same is increasingly the case for lower offices (Congress, governorships, etc.). Re. the Deep State, before anyone claims this to be in the realm of tinfoil-hattery, [url=http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/books/2014/10/18/review-national-security-and-double-government-michael-glennon/tUhBBdSj8s0WW1HoWUf20M/story.html]here is a link to a 2014 Boston Globe Review[/url] of an excellent recent book on this subject; and here is a link to a [url=http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Glennon-Final.pdf]PDF version of the book in question[/url] freely available online at the Harvard National Security Journal website;

[3] There is by now so little difference in the actual policies carried out by members of the 2 major parties that it simply doesn't matter whether the Red Team or the Blue Team wins. Obama's actual policies have been just as warmongerish and Big Money-beholden as those of his predecessor, and similarly both Hillary and Jeb! are completely corrupted by lust for money and power. The only 2 candidates who are not (yet) complete puppets of the above interests are Sanders on the D side and Trump on the R side. Trump may be a blowhardish egomaniac who says some pretty 'out there' things, but in terms of actually threatening to start wars or resume the Cold War in deadly earnest, he scares me less than any of the other Repugnican creeps. Which is why neither Sanders nor Trump can be allowed to get their respective party's nomination, unless he is first co-opted by the Dark Side, perhaps by way of a late-night 'this is all the secret dirt we have, or can manufacture, on you' talking-to by some scary folks in black hats and black SUVs;

[4] The Rule of Law applies only to the little people, by way of keeping them from getting uppity.

The hate next door: Unexpected faces of the Neo-Confederacy
 

[QUOTE]It is far too easy - and all too human - to make sweeping judgements about people based solely on limited experience and unlimited assumptions. But it is important to work past that genetically encoded human defect for any number of reasons, not the least of which are that: (1) knowledge is power, and (2) stereotyping is not. Please join me below the fold for an exclusive and detailed look at the surprising demographics of[URL="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/25/1414925/-The-hate-next-door-Unexpected-faces-of-the-Neo-Confederacy"] the fast-rising Neo-Confederate movement of North Carolina.[/URL]

[/QUOTE].

[URL="http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/party-that-mocked-presidents-lack-of-experience-favors-one-with-no-experience-whatsoever"]Party That Mocked President’s Lack of Experience Favors One with No Experience Whatsoever[/URL]
This is the published in the [I]New Yorker[/I]. Google's news aggregator describes the site/article thusly:

"The New Yorker (satire) - ‎2 hours ago"

That the [I]New Yorker[/I] is satire is actually news to me - but this portion definitely corresponds with that characterization:
[QUOTE]As for the former Hewlett-Packard C.E.O. Carly Fiorina, Priebus said that the excitement her résumé is generating among the Republican faithful is totally understandable. “Like a lot of Republicans, I’d love to see Carly take on ISIS,” he said. “She’s shown she can destroy a large organization.”[/QUOTE]

The Borowitz report is satire. Though, sometimes satire doesn't work these days, thanks to the subjects.

[QUOTE=chappy;409523]The Borowitz report is satire. Though, sometimes satire doesn't work these days, thanks to the subjects.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. It is the same phenomenon as Onion stories being picked up as real.

[URL]http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/cutting-losses-kochs-to-sell-scott-walker[/URL]
[QUOTE][URL="http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/cutting-losses-kochs-to-sell-scott-walker"][B][SIZE=3]Cutting Losses, Kochs to Sell Scott Walker[/SIZE][/B][/URL]
WICHITA ([URL="http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report"]The Borowitz Report[/URL])—Saying that “things just didn’t work out,” the billionaire Koch brothers have decided to put Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker up for sale.

The Kochs, who earlier had [URL="http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/kochs-defend-purchase-of-scott-walker"]purchased Gov. Walker with great fanfare[/URL], announced their plan to sell the politician in a terse statement from Koch Industries headquarters in Wichita.

“Scott Walker is a fine individual, and we wish him well,” the Kochs’ statement read. “We are confident that he will be a good fit for some other billionaire industrialists.”
[/QUOTE]

[URL]http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/06/politics/sarah-palin-energy-secretary/index.html[/URL]

[QUOTE]"I think a lot about the Department of Energy, because energy is my baby: oil and gas and minerals, those things that God has dumped on this part of the Earth for mankind's use instead of us relying on unfriendly foreign nations."[/QUOTE][QUOTE]"I'd get rid of (the Energy Department). And I'd let the states start having more control over the lands that are within their boundaries and the people who are affected by the developments within their states. If I were in charge of that, it would be a short-term job, but it would be ... really great to have someone who knows energy and is pro-responsible development to be in charge."[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;409737][URL]http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/06/politics/sarah-palin-energy-secretary/index.html[/URL][/QUOTE]
The feel-good answers, honed as a beauty contestant, continue to support her challenges.
[URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/sarah-palin-beauty-queen/"]Sarah Palin Beauty Queen[/URL]

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/11/its-been-hell-lawmaker-resigns-another-expelled-following-mich-sex-scandal/[/url]

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;410264][url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/11/its-been-hell-lawmaker-resigns-another-expelled-following-mich-sex-scandal/[/url][/QUOTE]Wow, now that is one bizarre story.

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;410264][url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/11/its-been-hell-lawmaker-resigns-another-expelled-following-mich-sex-scandal/[/url][/QUOTE]Behind a paywall. Anyone prepared to summarize or to give an alternative link?

[QUOTE=xilman;410271]Behind a paywall. Anyone prepared to summarize or to give an alternative link?[/QUOTE]

Summary:
[LIST=1][*]Lord, what fools these mortals be.[*]Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.[/LIST]Two very religious (by their own accounts) Tea Party legislators, each married to someone else, have an affair. Fearing disclosure, they concoct a scheme to make it appear that someone is trying to smear the guy with allegations of shenanigans with a gay prostitute. They hope that this will be far more salacious, and thereby divert attentions from what is really going on.

[QUOTE=kladner;410274]Summary:
[LIST=1][*]Lord, what fools these mortals be.[*]Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.[/LIST]Two very religious (by their own accounts) Tea Party legislators, each married to someone else, have an affair. Fearing disclosure, they concoct a scheme to make it appear that someone is trying to smear the guy with allegations of shenanigans with a gay prostitute. They hope that this will be far more salacious, and thereby divert attentions from what is really going on.[/QUOTE]Thanks!

I still find it mildly ridiculous that anyone should be in any way interested in the sexual activities of anyone else, but that's life. I never claimed to understand it very well.

Is anyone [i]really[/i] interested in the details of how and with whom I interact for personal bodily services? Is anyone [I]that[/I] interested in how often and with whom I have dental treatment or head-pruning?

[QUOTE=xilman;410276]Thanks!

.....[/QUOTE]

You are very welcome! I had fun cooking up the response. :smile:

[QUOTE=kladner;410277]You are very welcome! I had fun cooking up the response. :smile:[/QUOTE]Good!

IMAO, people should (a) have fun and (b) put some effort into their responses.

[QUOTE=kladner;410274]Summary:
Two very religious (by their own accounts) Tea Party legislators, each married to someone else, have an affair. Fearing disclosure, they concoct a scheme to make it appear that someone is trying to smear the guy with allegations of shenanigans with a gay prostitute. They hope that this will be far more salacious, and thereby divert attentions from what is really going on.[/QUOTE]Am I right in assuming that at most one participant is male?

From your description, two husbands married to two wives could be having an affair with each other but your choice of "[B]the [/B]guy" suggests otherwise.

[QUOTE=xilman;410279]Am I right in assuming that at most one participant is male?

From your description, two husbands married to two wives could be having an affair with each other but your choice of "[B]the [/B]guy" suggests otherwise.[/QUOTE]

Oops! :gah:The participants are male and female. They are both in hetero marriages with third and fourth parties.

[QUOTE=kladner;410274]Two very religious (by their own accounts) Tea Party legislators, each married to someone else, have an affair.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the behind-the-paywall synopsis, but - at the risk of my being seen as a pitnicker - 'twouldn't be much of an affair if they were married to each other, would it? I recall a funny Calvin & Hobbes daily strip along these lines - Calvin is home sick on a school day, lying in bed, thermometer in mouth, watching a daytime TV soap opera whose content is rendered via speech bubbles. I paraphrase:
[i]
*kiss* *smooch*
"Darling, I have a madly impulsive idea! Let's run off together and get married!"
"But dear, we already [b]are[/b] married ... or did you mean to each other?"
[/i]
[QUOTE=xilman;410276]I still find it mildly ridiculous that anyone should be in any way interested in the sexual activities of anyone else, but that's life. I never claimed to understand it very well.[/QUOTE]

It may be ridiculous in general, but when it comes to people who do just that in a mass sense by publicly waxing indignant over certain practices they find repugnant/wicked/sinful/bad/naughty/evil/what-have-you and in many cases even advocate legislation which coerces the government into 'taking an interest', then are caught in flagrante, they are entirely fair game, IMO.

What nobody stressed is the fact that these two idiots had (a football team of) kids at their homes, which may have to suffer (from the scandal, broken families, whatever). It is a pity when men/women think with their penises/clits (or viceversa? :rant:)...

I think the real money quote is this one:[quote]In May, the two allegedly concocted a scheme to conceal their relationship.

Courser reportedly tried to get his former aide, Ben Graham, to send a mass e-mail suggesting Courser had been caught having sex with a male prostitute. It called Courser a "bi-sexual porn addicted sex deviant" and Gamrat a "tramp."

Such claims, Courser said, would make the affair seem "mild by comparison."[/quote]Just follow the logic here. They figured that if people found out that there was an affair involved that "at least it wasn't a gay affair". The horror!

It's also interesting how some people look at the possibility of redemption. Todd Courser, the male half of this couple stepped down while awaiting a vote to remove him saying:[quote]Whether it was the third vote or the fourth vote or the fifth vote, they were going to eventually get me," he said according to the Associated Press.

He added: "It's been hell."[/quote]Cindy Gamrat, the other half of this dynamic duo asked for something a little less onerous in a speech before being [STRIKE]voted off the island[/STRIKE] forced out in a 91-to-12 vote:[quote]I firmly believe in restoration and redemption. I have done everything I can to redeem this situation, and I'm sincerely sorry for what this has caused. I still believe my actions warrant censure, but not expulsion.[/quote]I guess if you're really, [I]really[/I] sorry that makes it all right.

[QUOTE=LaurV;410301]What nobody stressed is the fact that these two idiots had (a football team of) kids at their homes, which may have to suffer (from the scandal, broken families, whatever). It is a pity when men/women think with their penises/clits (or viceversa? :rant:)...[/QUOTE]

I agree. The "Ranty", see above, expresses me well, in that regard. Thinking with "the little head" of whatever gender can lead to very bad results. I speak from experience[U]s[/U], unfortunately, but probably most people can.

Don't know if politicians behaving badly deserve a thread of their own, but there was a [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/09/03/state-lawmakers-deny-making-out-in-car-at-minnesota-park/"]story[/URL] linked from the above story from Michigan, also on WaPo's political blog:[quote=WaPo]Last month, a park ranger in Minnesota issued citations to a man and a woman, who, he reported, were "making out" in a car.

The reason you're reading about that encounter here, on a Washington Post political blog, is because the man and woman who received the public nuisance citations are Minnesota state lawmakers.

They're denying the ranger's account, which was noted in court records.

State Reps. Tim Kelly and Tara Mack, [COLOR="Red"]both Republicans[/COLOR], were issued citations following an incident that allegedly occurred on Aug. 25 in a park in Eagan, Minn., according to the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

"The two, [COLOR="Red"]who are married to other people[/COLOR], were in Lebanon Hills Regional Park in Eagan when they were allegedly spotted by the officer 'making out' in a parked car about 4:30 p.m., according to documents," the Pioneer Press reported." The officer's notes claim Mack was half undressed when he approached the vehicle."[/quote]Just by luck, they have a good excuse: it was all a mistake![quote]"I was driving down to Red Wing through Eagan last Tuesday and met Rep. Mack to pick up some documents regarding South Country Health Alliance," Kelly said in his statement. "When we met, a park ranger approached my vehicle and told me I was double-parked. I disputed his characterization and got out of the car to take a picture. He became visibly agitated and returned to his own car.

"Approximately ten minutes later, he returned to my vehicle with a parking ticket citing a nuisance. When I asked what that meant, he responded 'whatever I want it to mean.'"[/quote]Too bad the park rangers haven't got their body cams yet. Maybe she was just keeping the documents secure....

Well, how many 10 minutes she needs to pick up some documents? Hehe, this is like in the joke with the wife cooking something in a pot and telling the husband "I go to Jane (a neighbor) for 5 minutes, please don't forget to stir into that pot every 10 minutes"

[url=http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/09/14/grief-without-wisdom-joe-bidens-empty-authenticity/]Grief Without Wisdom: Joe Biden’s Empty Authenticity[/url] | Counterpunch

I briefly considered tuning in to Colbert's new vehicle until I saw the guest list for the inaugural night.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;410388][url=http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/09/14/grief-without-wisdom-joe-bidens-empty-authenticity/]Grief Without Wisdom: Joe Biden’s Empty Authenticity[/url] | Counterpunch
[/QUOTE]

Bob's rule #3, for every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;410388][URL="http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/09/14/grief-without-wisdom-joe-bidens-empty-authenticity/"]Grief Without Wisdom: Joe Biden’s Empty Authenticity[/URL] | Counterpunch[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;410453]Bob's rule #3, for every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.[/QUOTE]
Right, and only the original action requires any energy to carry it out. The criticism is effortless.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;410453]Bob's rule #3, for every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.[/QUOTE]Care to publish the earlier-numbered rules?

One of my observations is: people complain.

No matter what proposal is made, there will be those who complain about it.

When one proposes a project, those above have to piss on it to make it their own.

An Evangelical responds to Sanders' speech at Liberty U
 

I think this is very cool. I hope it is real. I love it when scriptural language turns on (some of) its adherents.

[URL="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/16/1421659/-An-Evangelical-responds-to-Sanders-speech-at-Liberty-U"]These[/URL] are excerpts from a [URL="https://clyp.it/eusxalwe"]17 minute audio clip[/URL], to which I have not listened. I might get around to it.

[QUOTE]He was convicting the Christian leaders and the religious leaders in that university, and calling us out for being complicit in the abandonment of those who suffer, the least of these, and siding with the powerful and rich, the masters of this world. And he was convicting us and calling us out, and we scorned him, and we stared him down; and, with sour faces, we thought, "Who is this wacko, and why do all these people seem to follow him, seem to like him – this wild-haired Jew, crying out from the wilderness of the political left, in his hoarse voice?"[/QUOTE]

[url]http://gawker.com/the-arrest-of-a-14-year-old-for-making-a-clock-is-the-e-1731061138[/url]

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;410524][URL]http://gawker.com/the-arrest-of-a-14-year-old-for-making-a-clock-is-the-e-1731061138[/URL][/QUOTE]

This is sickening.

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;410524][url]http://gawker.com/the-arrest-of-a-14-year-old-for-making-a-clock-is-the-e-1731061138[/url][/QUOTE]

Completely unsurprising especially coming from a very conservative region of the country. He's dark skinned and has a Muslim name- he must be a terrorist!!! The level of Islamophobia in my country is truly saddening. It's only 'slightly' out of the realm of possibility that half of the current GOP candidates, if elected, would round up all Muslims and place them into WWII style internment camps.

[QUOTE=Primeinator;410574]Completely unsurprising especially coming from a very conservative region of the country. He's dark skinned and has a Muslim name- he must be a terrorist!!! The level of Islamophobia in my country is truly saddening. It's only 'slightly' out of the realm of possibility that half of the current GOP candidates, if elected, would round up all Muslims and place them into WWII style internment camps.[/QUOTE]

Believe me. I know. I grew up a little over 200 miles south of the scene of this bigotry and ignorance.

If such threatening things as circuit boards had existed for the general public in my time there, they would not have bothered with the cops. They would have given him a severe beating and sent him back to class.

[QUOTE=kladner;410577]Believe me. I know. I grew up a little over 200 miles south of the scene of this bigotry and ignorance.

If such threatening things as circuit boards had existed for the general public in my time there, they would not have bothered with the cops. They would have given him a severe beating and sent him back to class.[/QUOTE]

Sent him back to class? That is much better than stories event recently (last 20 years) of blacks being drug to their death by being tied to a rope attached to a motor vehicle. It is horrifying that such hate/bigotry/ignorance still exists in modern America. I have a lot of very conservative friends and acquaintances in Kansas and many of them stereotype all Muslims as terrorists. It's absurd and illogical but they are completely resolute in this asinine ideology. I have a real fear that Islamophobia in America is only going to get worse in the next few years regardless of whether a Republican or Democrat is elected next year; however, I think that if Republican is elected, diplomacy with Islamic nations is going to take a turn south.

[QUOTE=xilman;410497]Care to publish the earlier-numbered rules?

One of my observations is: people complain.

No matter what proposal is made, there will be those who complain about it.[/QUOTE]

Rule #1 Everything takes longer and costs more than expected, even when
taking into account Bob's rule #1

Rule #2 The first thing to do in a crisis is determine who to blame

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;410586]Rule #2 The first thing to do in a crisis is determine who to blame[/QUOTE]How is that productive?

:confused:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;410617]How is that productive?

:confused:[/QUOTE]

It makes people feel better when they can blame someone else. It makes the accuser feel more productive.

o Re. last night's GOP debate #2, from the various appalling snips I read in the news this a.m., sounds like the candidates were trying to outdo each each in terms of things like

- Which country they'd start bombing or 'regime-changing' first; [url=http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/carly-fiorina-russia-vladimir-putin-energy/2015/06/25/id/652307/]e.g. Fiorina[/url]:
[quote]I wouldn’t speak to Vladimir Putin. I would act instead, and do four things immediately ... Rebuilding the Sixth Fleet, rebuilding the missile defense program, I would begin conducting very aggressive military exercises in the Baltic states and I would arm the Ukrainians.[/quote]
As a friend commented, [i]"If that isn’t more dangerous, absurd, and ignorant than ANYTHING Trump has said, I don’t know what is. And what is amazing is that the punditocracy acts as if this woman is smart…It isn’t ONLY incredibly ignorant, its incredibly dangerous – and talk about pandering…"[/i]

- On which day of their first week in office they would pull out all the stops to defund Planned Parenthood;

- Just how dangerous vaccinations are to 'Merican children;

- Just how dangerous public schools are to 'Merican children.

Did I miss any other GOP-beloved hot-button psychopathies?


o Re. Joe Biden: wait, there's more! Much more:

[url=http://www.ibtimes.com/joe-biden-backed-bills-make-it-harder-americans-reduce-their-student-debt-2094664]Joe Biden Backed Bills To Make It Harder For Americans To Reduce Their Student Debt[/url] | Business Insider
[quote]Despite opposition from Wellstone and other liberals, Biden became a prominent Democratic supporter of legislation in 2000 to further restrict bankruptcy protections. The initiative was backed by one of Biden’s top supporters: Delaware-based credit card titan MBNA. Not only had the company’s employees collectively become one of his largest campaign contributors, the firm had employed Biden’s son Hunter right out of law school and later paid Hunter Biden consulting fees while his father pushed the bankruptcy bill. MBNA’s top executive had purchased Biden’s Delaware home for a price that Biden’s political opponents depicted as a sweetheart deal to a powerful legislator.[/quote]
JoePa's surviving son Hunter - he of the erstwhile MBNA money drop - is now deeply involved in the E. Ukraine fracking industry. You know, the same industry that requires ongoing massive US subsidies to prop up the 'democratically elected' (the polite term for 'US-led putsch') Ukraine government and a full-blown restarting of the Cold War to keep the evil Russkies at bay.

But wait! There's even more: [url=http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/15/opinion/david-brooks-the-biden-formation-story.html]The Many Occasions Joe Biden Took Credit For Writing The Patriot Act[/url] | NYT. When you've lost the elite-fellating media organ known as the Gray Lady...

o Of course while JoeB's special area of financial 'expertise' may lie with the credit-card-debt-merchantry industry, Hillary is [url=http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-rakes-big-money-two-goldman-sachs-speeches-one-week]no slouch, either, when it comes to having her palms greased by Big Finance[/url]. Why do the Goldmanites so admire her? I can only surmise that [url=http://www.nytimes.com/1994/03/30/us/hillary-clinton-turned-1000-into-99540-white-house-says.html]her sheer trading genius[/url] has even the market-rigging experts at Goldman in awe. And unlike poor Martha Stewart, who actually went to jail because she dared do some small-potatoes dubious trading stuff using stock in her own firm, we can rest assured Hillary's 100-bagger-in-under-a-year is totally legit. After all, if it weren't, she'd surely be behind bars or at least under investigation by now, right?

.

Hate
 

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;410759].[/QUOTE]

At last night's debate a SPOS got up and asked Trump what he intended to do about:

(1) Muslims
(2) The 'fact' that Obama is a Muslim
(3) The 'fact' that Obama is not a U.S. Citizen
(4) The 'fact' that there are many Muslim training camps inside the U.S. whose
purpose is to kill us all.

I have finished reading an article on AOL about this incident.
People are calling out 'Donald' for not correcting the man. But no one
seems to be asking why 'Donald' did not call out the man's hatred.

Following the article were comments from a very large number of respondents
agreeing with the falsehoods and spewing venom and hatred of their own.

Putting aside the falsehoods, one must ask:

How do these SPOS get to be so hateful?
Why would it matter if Obama were a Muslim? These people are the ones
who scream about religious freedom.

It is one thing to oppose the president because of his politics. It is another
to spew the kind of hatred coming from these people.

I was strongly opposed to a number of prior presidents. But I did not HATE them.

Where does this hatred come from? Could it be that these people are simply mentally ill?

Let me add:

[url]http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/16/opinions/moghul-islamophobia-america/index.html[/url]

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;410764]At last night's debate a SPOS ....[/QUOTE]

That word is not in the eurospeak dictionary. Eurospeak is a subset of English and consistent of the 1.500 most common words. You may want to clarify that word for a Google search only turned up Special Police OfficerS.

[QUOTE=tha;410775]That word is not in the eurospeak dictionary. Eurospeak is a subset of English and consistent of the 1.500 most common words. You may want to clarify that word for a Google search only turned up Special Police OfficerS.[/QUOTE]

It isn't a word. It is an acronym.. Subhuman Piece Of Sh*t

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;410764].... and asked Trump what he intended to do about:
[/QUOTE]

Richard Nixon stepped down during his sixth year in office after a succesful reelection in order to avoid an almost certain impeachment. Trump will not win the Republican nomination, not be elected president, but otherwise he certainly would be the first president to be impeached and in the first year in office to be precise. No need for a militairy coup.

[QUOTE=tha;410778]Richard Nixon stepped down during his sixth year in office after a succesful reelection in order to avoid an almost certain impeachment. Trump will not win the Republican nomination, not be elected president, but otherwise he certainly would be the first president to be impeached and in the first year in office to be precise. No need for a militairy coup.[/QUOTE]

This isn't about Trump. It is about the very large group of hate-filled people who
support the Republican candidates.

Republicans -- the party of hate and intolerance

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/20/ben-carson-says-he-would-not-support-a-muslim-for-president/[/url]

[QUOTE]Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson said he would not support a Muslim for president, stating that he believes a president’s faith matters and that Islam is not consistent with the Constitution.[/QUOTE]

[url=www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/09/is-everything-carly-fiorina-says-a-lie-including-and-and-the.html]Is Everything Carly Fiorina Says a Lie, Including "And" and "The"[/url] | naked capitalism

[url=www.theonion.com/article/extension-cord-stage-steals-spotlight-jeb-bush-dur-51343]Extension Cord On Stage Steals Spotlight From Jeb Bush During Campaign Rally[/url] | The Onion

Re. Ms. Cord's qualifications: she is colorful - while remaining well-grounded in key policy areas - energizing, and plugged in to the needs of the people. What's not to like? I expect Jeb! to be far from the last GOP candidate who finds himself tripped up by the lady. Rumor has it that while she has been keeping a low profile since the aforementioned rally, she remains coiled and ready to strike at any time. Go team Orange!

[QUOTE=ewmayer;411010][url=www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/09/is-everything-carly-fiorina-says-a-lie-including-and-and-the.html]Is Everything Carly Fiorina Says a Lie, Including "And" and "The"[/url] | naked capitalism
[/QUOTE]
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.
[URL="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/1998/09/bill_clinton_and_the_meaning_of_is.html"]Bill Clinton and the Meaning of "Is"[/URL]
[url]http://youtu.be/j4XT-l-_3y0[/url]
[YouTube]j4XT-l-_3y0[/YouTube]

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/09/28/jeb-bushs-argument-that-democrats-appeal-to-blacks-with-free-stuff-its-popular-on-the-right/[/url]

[QUOTE]In other words, Bush is saying something that a lot of Republican and independent voters believe — something that they had on the tips of their tongues when pollsters called in 2012.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/02/when-asked-about-school-shootings-jeb-bush-says-stuff-happens/[/url]

[QUOTE]President Obama and Democrats quickly condemned comments made Friday by Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush, who said that there isn't always a useful government solution to mass shootings and other crises because "stuff happens."[/QUOTE]

[url=www.theonion.com/article/no-way-prevent-says-only-nation-where-regularly-ha-51444]‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens[/url] - The Onion

[url=www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/10/clinton-outdoes-tsipras-in-kolotoumbas-with-her-reversals-on-tpp-bank-regulations.html]Clinton Outdoes Tsipras in Kolotoumbas with Her Reversals on TPP, Bank Regulations[/url] | naked capitalism

“The big problem with Hillary is it is hard to believe she stands for anything other than her desire to exercise power. ”

[QUOTE=ewmayer;412368][URL="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/10/clinton-outdoes-tsipras-in-kolotoumbas-with-her-reversals-on-tpp-bank-regulations.html"]Clinton Outdoes Tsipras in Kolotoumbas with Her Reversals on TPP, Bank Regulations[/URL] | naked capitalism

“The big problem with Hillary is it is hard to believe she stands for anything other than her desire to exercise power. ”[/QUOTE]

I can't trust anything she says, now. Not that I ever did. [INDENT]Campaign rhetoric, full of sound and fury, etc., etc.
[/INDENT]She does not have Bill's touch, which made his treacheries seemingly more palatable in the short term to many. I did not trust him before his election, and he more than amply repaid my mistrust.

[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/us/politics/after-boehner-house-hard-liners-aim-to-weaken-speakers-clout.html[/url]

[QUOTE]To get to the broader goal of confronting Mr. Obama, they want to alter the fundamental power structure of the House by reducing the power of the speaker in favor of greater authority for the rank and file.[/QUOTE]

Ben Carson and an alleged shooter
 

[URL="http://www.inquisitr.com/2482302/ben-carson-told-popeyes-gunman-you-want-the-guy-behind-the-counter/"]"....You want the guy behind the counter."[/URL]

[QUOTE]After a media backlash against his advice for shooting victims, Ben Carson talked about his encounter with a gunman in a Popeye’s restaurant. There are just two problems. First, Carson did not rush the shooter as he advised other victims to do. And second, the encounter may not have happened at all.


The GOP presidential candidate became a lightning rod after telling the hosts on [I]Fox and Friends[/I] that he “would not just stand there and let them shoot me.”
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=kladner;412408][URL="http://www.inquisitr.com/2482302/ben-carson-told-popeyes-gunman-you-want-the-guy-behind-the-counter/"]"....You want the guy behind the counter."[/URL][/QUOTE]

Give Carson credit - he's doing a pretty good job at taking himself out of the running without looking like a 'quitter'. Keep opining, Ben! Do share your innermost inanities and smooth-talking psychopathies, and put your chicken-hawkishness on full glorious display.

[QUOTE=kladner;412408][URL="http://www.inquisitr.com/2482302/ben-carson-told-popeyes-gunman-you-want-the-guy-behind-the-counter/"]"....You want the guy behind the counter."[/URL][/QUOTE]

Just to put on the table...

The Canadian election is T-9 days or so away. And the [URL="http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/election/nanos-poll-liberals-gain-advantage-as-election-enters-holiday-weekend-1.2604318"]Liberals are ahead[/URL].

I know that most people think that only the United States of America occupies North America, but that's not true.

[QUOTE=chalsall;412421]Just to put on the table...

The Canadian election is T-9 days or so away. And the [URL="http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/election/nanos-poll-liberals-gain-advantage-as-election-enters-holiday-weekend-1.2604318"]Liberals are ahead[/URL].

I know that most people think that only the United States of America occupies North America, but that's not true.[/QUOTE]

We have waited far too long to see Harper kicked out. I am a bit hopeful this time around.

[QUOTE=chalsall;412421] And the [URL="http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/election/nanos-poll-liberals-gain-advantage-as-election-enters-holiday-weekend-1.2604318"]Liberals are ahead[/URL].[/QUOTE]
It's hard to translate between the different nations and cultures, but that's a progressive party, I guess? I just want to raise this, because the word "liberal" is very confusing in politics. In The Netherlands, the Liberal party refers to the most right-wing of the mainstream parties (though there is a far-right party which is, horrifyingly, currently the most popular here). (And yes, right-wing is vague too.)

[url]http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-debate/410449/[/url]

[QUOTE]The responses reminded me of a distinction Chris Hayes makes in his excellent book, Twilight of the Elites, between “institutionalists,” who want to make existing institutions function better and “insurrectionists,” who want to tear them down and start again.[/QUOTE]

Couldn't stomach to watch any of the blather/pander-fest, especially after having a few seconds of the hype-filled super-bowl-esque intro inflicted on my senses.

Did follow a few post-debate live-blog discussions, and contrasted those with the late local n00z, which had apparently anointed HillBillary as Queen a long time ago, and was busily fitting all the happenings into that pre-set 'narrative'.

I do hope Bernie's 'enough with the e-mails!' was more public show of magnanimity than otherwise, because I consider 'one law for the elites, quite another for the plebs' to be as substantive an issue as can be.

[URL="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fed-officials-seem-ready-to-deploy-negative-rates-in-next-crisis-2015-10-10"]Fed officials seem ready to deploy negative rates in next crisis[/URL]
[QUOTE]Federal Reserve officials now seem open to deploying negative interest rates to combat the next serious recession even though they rejected that option during the darkest days of the financial crisis in 2009 and 2010.

“Some of the experiences [in Europe] suggest maybe can we use negative interest rates and the costs aren’t as great as you anticipate,” said William Dudley, the president of the New York Fed, in an interview on CNBC on Friday.[/QUOTE]

@Ross: More suitable for the MET thread? But consider - the level of upward wealth transfer from multiple bubble-bust-bailout cycles and 7 years of ZIRP is apparently not enough for the plutocrat-serving folks at the Fed, now they propose to resort to out-and-out asset theft. When Dudley says "the costs aren’t as great as you anticipate", he means of course, the costs to "the Fed's narrow constituency." Because you can bet that those negative rates sure as hell won't be on *loans* to hoi polloi. (Making all the more inane the notion that "the prospect of us stealing their savings will encourage them to run and spend, spend, spend, and then borrow to spend some more.")

---------

Re. the opinion I gave in my previous post about "what debate were the MSM pundits watching, exactly?", here a post from NC which puts some numbers on the disconnect between the punditocracy and reality:

[url=www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/10/sanders-debate-results-as-case-study-of-the-modern-versailles-hall-of-mirrors.html]Sanders Debate "Results" as Case Study of the Modern Versailles Hall of Mirrors[/url] | naked capitalism

And while we have both subjects in play, here is Matt Taibbi on Hillary's attempt last night to pin the real dangers of the still-[too-big/too-crooked/too-un-reined-in] financial sector not on the rackets operating in plain sight with the blessing and generous subsidization of the US government but on a spooky, mysterious "shadow banking" sector which certainly is worrisomely huge and unregulated - but in China, not the US:

[url=www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/hillary-clintons-take-on-banks-wont-hold-up-20151014]Hillary Clinton's Take on Banks Won't Hold Up[/url] | Rolling Stone

The first (orange text) is predebate, gambling site odds. The second is post debate. According to the pool of people wagering on the election (which some economists think is an accurate prediction model) Jeb!'s campaign is on it's last leg. [URL="http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/jeb-bush-cnbc-republican-debate/"]Nate Silver agrees.[/URL]

Since I think Kasich has at least a 25% chance of winning the nomination, making the 18 to 1 a steal from a return on investment betting strategy.

The ribs refer to a bet I have going with a friend (he has Jeb! winning the nomination--I have the field) and I'm feeling pretty good about [URL="http://bogartssmokehouse.com/"]my ribs[/URL].

[QUOTE=chappy;414268]The first (orange text) is predebate, gambling site odds. The second is post debate. According to the pool of people wagering on the election (which some economists think is an accurate prediction model) Jeb!'s campaign is on it's last leg. [URL="http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/jeb-bush-cnbc-republican-debate/"]Nate Silver agrees.[/URL]
Since I think Kasich has at least a 25% chance of winning the nomination, making the 18 to 1 a steal from a return on investment betting strategy.
The ribs refer to a bet I have going with a friend (he has Jeb! winning the nomination--I have the field) and I'm feeling pretty good about [URL="http://bogartssmokehouse.com/"]my ribs[/URL].[/QUOTE]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED, to find that GAMBLING is going on in this election!

(Where can I collect my winnings?)

In Honor of the (current) thread title
 

I suppose it really belongs in Silly Pictures, but Hey!

The Case for Bernie Sanders -Matt Taibi
 

"The [URL="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-case-for-bernie-sanders-20151103"]media response to the Sanders campaign[/URL] has been alternately predictable, condescending, confused and condescending again."
[QUOTE]
The tone of most of the coverage shows reporters deigning to treat his campaign like it's real, like he has a chance. John Cassidy of [I]The[/I] [I]New Yorker[/I], for instance, swore he wouldn't be patronizing about the Sanders run. "Indeed, I [URL="http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/welcome-to-the-2016-race-bernie-sanders"]welcomed Sanders to the race[/URL]!" Cassidy [URL="http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/welcome-to-the-2016-race-bernie-sanders"]wrote recently[/URL].


But Cassidy's hokey "Welcome to the 2016 Race, Bernie Sanders!" piece from last spring had a small catch. It basically said that Sanders was welcome because he would be a boon to the real candidate, Hillary Clinton. "[Sanders] can't win the primary," Cassidy wrote. "And he will occupy the space to the left of Clinton, thus denying it to [U]more plausible candidates[/U], such as Martin O'Malley." (!)


Noting that Sanders held positions that were "[U]eminently defensible, if unrealistic[/U]," Cassidy nonetheless said he was glad Sanders was running, because he would "provide a voice to those Democrats who agree with him that the U.S. political system has been bought, lock, stock, and barrel."


This passage he wrote just after arguing that Sanders cannot win and was only useful insofar as he would help the bought-off candidate win.

So what Cassidy really meant is that the Sanders campaign was allowing people who are justifiably pissed about our corrupted system to blow off steam, before they ultimately surrender to give their support to the system candidate.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=kladner;414977]"The [URL="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-case-for-bernie-sanders-20151103"]media response to the Sanders campaign[/URL] has been alternately predictable, condescending, confused and condescending again."[/QUOTE]

I liked this passage from the above Matt Taibbi [i]Rolling Stone[/i] piece:
[quote]Sanders is a clear outlier in a generation that has forgotten what it means to be a public servant. The Times remarks upon his “grumpy demeanor.” But Bernie is grumpy because he’s thinking about vets who need surgeries, guest workers who’ve had their wages ripped off, kids without access to dentists or some other godforsaken problem that most of us normal people can care about for maybe a few minutes on a good day, but Bernie worries about more or less all the time.

I first met Bernie Sanders ten years ago, and I don’t believe there’s anything else he really thinks about. There’s no other endgame for him. He’s not looking for a book deal or a membership in a Martha’s Vineyard golf club or a cameo in a Guy Ritchie movie. This election isn’t a game to him; it’s not the awesomely repulsive dark joke it is to me and many others.

And the only reason this attention-averse, sometimes socially uncomfortable person is subjecting himself to this asinine process is because he genuinely believes the system is not beyond repair.

Not all of us can say that. But that doesn’t make us right, and him “unrealistic.” More than any other politician in recent memory, Bernie Sanders is focused on reality. It’s the rest of us who are lost.[/quote]

Three Republican presidential candidates, Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee and Bobby Jindal, spoke at the recent National Religious Liberties Conference organised by someone called Kevin Swanson, who closed out his conference with an awe-inspiring speech. I find his advocation of putting a millstone around some parents' necks and drowning them at the bottom of the sea particularly arresting. For our edification, Mr. Swanson's performance has been saved for posterity in the recording below. Does anyone know if the three GOP presidential candidates were actually in the audience at the time to cheer Mr. Swanson on in his epic release?

[YOUTUBE]ZxMS3KNPa38[/YOUTUBE]

(Source: [URL]http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/kevin-swanson-god-will-judge-america-harry-potters-homosexual-mentor[/URL])

[QUOTE=Brian-E;415514]Three Republican presidential candidates, Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee and Bobby Jindal, spoke at the recent National Religious Liberties Conference organised by someone called Kevin Swanson, who closed out his conference with an awe-inspiring speech. I find his advocation of putting a millstone around some parents' necks and drowning them at the bottom of the sea particularly arresting. For our edification, Mr. Swanson's performance has been saved for posterity in the recording below. Does anyone know if the three GOP presidential candidates were actually in the audience at the time to cheer Mr. Swanson on in his epic release?

[YOUTUBE]ZxMS3KNPa38[/YOUTUBE]

(Source: [URL]http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/kevin-swanson-god-will-judge-america-harry-potters-homosexual-mentor[/URL])[/QUOTE]

Yep. Republicans. The party of bigotry, intolerance, irrational fear, and unbridled hate.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;415519]Yep. Republicans. The party of bigotry, intolerance, irrational fear, and unbridled hate.[/QUOTE]

And the bat shit crazy Ben Carson just said that (paraphrased)

In war, nothing matters but destroying the enemy. It is OK to kill
innocent women and children.

See:

[url]http://theweek.com/speedreads/587962/ben-carson-says-aversion-killing-innocent-women-children-just-political-correctness[/url]

More hatred. A popular complaint about Muslims is that their attitude is
"kill the infidel".

What then, is this?

The Media, Not Bernie Sanders, Is Going Negative By Scott Galindez, RSN
 

In the 5m44s video associated with [URL="http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/33410-the-media-not-bernie-sanders-is-going-negative"]this article[/URL], (which I can't embed because it is on Vimeo), Sanders refuses to take the baiting by reporters, and returns repeatedly to his call for debating substantive issues. I think it is a great lesson on how to handle media trolling: patiently and persistently returning to the issues. He does refer to positions and votes known to be different from Clinton's, but insists that she is a long-time colleague whom he likes, but with whom he has differences of opinion.

[QUOTE]The mostly irresponsible corporate media keeps creating stories about Bernie Sanders going negative. Let me give you an example: Jonathan Martin of The New York Times pressured Bernie Sanders with repeated questions about Hillary Clinton’s donations from employees of Goldman Sachs. More than once, Sanders said, “You will have to ask her,” but Martin pressed on. In the end, the title of his article was “[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/18/us/politics/bernie-sanders-presses-hillary-clinton-on-her-views-on-banks.html"]Bernie Sanders Presses Hillary Clinton on Her Views on Banks[/URL].” It was Martin who did all the pressuring to create the story he may as well have already written.

The exchange took place during a press availability in Cedar Rapids in July. It was clear that Martin had his story in mind, and he pressed and pressed until Bernie said enough that he could write a story claiming that Bernie was pressuring Hillary. Maybe I shouldn’t have called Martin out individually, but I was embarrassed to be a reporter as I watched Martin act like a vulture.
[/QUOTE]

The real secret to Bernie Sanders’ success -By Alexander Heffner
 

Reuters:
[URL="http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/11/12/the-real-secret-to-bernie-sanders-success/"]Comparisons between Sen. Sanders[/URL] and previous progressive candidates, and discussion of the entrenched two-party system.

[QUOTE]At the Iowa Democratic Party’s celebrated Jefferson-Jackson dinner, Sanders urged citizen activists not to “turn [their] backs on the political process.” He reiterated, “You are not on the sidelines of these struggles; you are in the middle, and that is what our campaign is about.”


This is Sanders’ effective message for his supporters outside the political orthodoxy: We need to operate within the Democratic Party in order to achieve a progressive agenda.


History demonstrates that alternative party candidates – including Theodore Roosevelt’s Bull Moose platform in 1912, Ross Perrot’s two independent bids in 1992 and 1996, and Ralph Nader’s green presidential campaigns — are destined to reinforce the status quo rather than upset it.
[/QUOTE]

In a potential stumbling block for his Presidential ambitions, a new study indicates that the average American [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report)—In a potential stumbling block for his Presidential ambitions, a new study indicates that the average American can stand only four seconds of exposure to Senator Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican."]can stand only four seconds of exposure to Senator Ted Cruz[/URL], the Texas Republican.

[url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/13/us-usa-election-carson-trump-idUSKCN0T21KK20151113]Carson’s comeback to Trump’s insults: ‘Pray for him’[/url] | Reuters

LOL, I do love a good down-and-dirty shitfight. But if you read what The Donald said, he did not actually liken Carson to a child molester, he simply analogized the alleged incurability of pathological-liarhood with that of child-molester-hood. Clearly said analogy was not accidentally chosen, but still.

The Donald Show will not run a full season.
He fired himself with his first speech on entry into the political arena.

[url=www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/11/hillary-clinton-appeal-to-911-to-defend-wall-street-donations-was-bad-but-this-was-worse.html]Hillary Clinton Appeal to 9/11 to Defend Wall Street Donations Was Bad, But This Was Worse[/url] | naked capitalism
[quote]On Saturday night the Democrats held a successful debate – and by successful I mean that the party successfully hid it from public view, getting half the rating of the weekday version. Ceding all kinds of eyeballs to Republicans in a bid to protect your front-runner seems to me like the opposite of a political party’s job, but I guess that’s why they pay Debbie Wasserman-Schultz the big bucks.

That front-runner, Hillary Clinton, is taking some heat for oddly deciding to relate her campaign donations from Wall Street to aiding Lower Manhattan after 9/11. Depressingly, the crowd cheered, clearly conditioned to react to any invocation of September 11 like trained seals (obviously the overlay of the Paris attacks played a role). Only when mentioned by a Twitter user later in the debate did the full recognition of the strangeness of that comment shine through. Here’s some commentary by the establishment organ The Economist:
[i]
Mrs Clinton’s reply combined indignation, an irrelevant appeal to feminist pride, and a bizarre riff about the September 11th attacks, by which she seemed to imply that taking money from big banks was her way of making sure that the terrorists behind that 2001 atrocity did not win… Readers with furrowed brows may be assured that it made no more sense when Mrs Clinton said it.[/i][/quote]
Main thrust of the NC piece is on Hillary's bogus narrative of the global financial crisis, which nixes any 'comprehensive plan' she may have for dealing with the out-of-control financial-fraud sector as a non-starter. Of course actually dealing with said fraud would put her at odds with many of her mega-campaign donors, hence the need to peddle a straw-man narrative.

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/18/ben-carsons-campaign-made-a-u-s-map-and-put-a-bunch-of-states-in-the-wrong-place/[/url]

[QUOTE]"The United States lags behind the rest of the world in both the quality and quantity of every aspect of geography education," National Geographic writes in its Geography Awareness Week materials.[/QUOTE]

People's efforts to figure out the meaning of Trump's campaign are beginning to resemble the fervent and provocative efforts to explain David Lynch's movie [I]Lost Horizon[/I].

Here's one that caught my eye today:
[URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/11/19/10-examples-that-prove-donald-trump-is-getting-donald-trumpier/"]Donald Trump just turned it up to 11. Here’s proof.[/URL]
[QUOTE]b) Trump is engaging in an elaborate self-sabotage, saying ever more outlandish things in hopes that he provokes such an angry reaction at some point that he is provided with an escape hatch from the race. Many of the adherents to this theory believe that Trump never imagined he would get as far as he has in the race, and now that his bluff has been called, he is desperately trying to find a way out. Of course, he hasn't been able to find one because it seems as though no matter what he says, his support grows.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/republican-rhetoric-muslims-cost-35461786[/url]

[QUOTE]"They've now latched onto Muslims as an easy target with no consequences," Mogahed said. "We've really moved the threshold of what is socially acceptable."[/QUOTE]

[URL]http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/11/28/457680483/high-chance-that-2-rooms-are-hidden-behind-king-tut-s-tomb-egypt-says[/URL]

Grain storage rooms!

:cmd:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;417501][URL]http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/11/28/457680483/high-chance-that-2-rooms-are-hidden-behind-king-tut-s-tomb-egypt-says[/URL]

Grain storage rooms!

:cmd:[/QUOTE]

And since they go back nearly 5000 years, them thar fancy silos are nearly as old as the earth!

=======================

[url=http://prospect.org/article/donald-trump-evidence-our-degeneracy]Donald Trump: Evidence of Our Degeneracy[/url] | American Prospect

NC reader 'DJG' [url=http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/11/links-112815.html#comment-2518916]does a nice taking-to-task[/url] of this thesis:
[quote]It isn’t clear to me why Adele Stan has decided that Trump is a peculiar emanation of U.S. degeneracy. The other candidates include the professional ignoramuses Carson and Huckabee, who somehow are not signals of degeneracy? What we are witnessing is that the Romney and McCain wing, the “reasonable” Republicans who want only to destroy the welfare state, “reform entitlements” (and dip into any related trust funds), and engage in a “muscular” foreign policy of endless war and endless war profiteering, have lost control of the message in the run-up to the Republican primaries. Donald Trump is saying in public what the polite crowd has said in private, although, according to Stan, Rubio and Jeb Bush the Twelfth are not signs of degeneracy.

And that is only the Republicans. Hillary “Libya!” Clinton and her dynastic politics and slush-fund foundation are not signs of degeneracy, of course, nor are the photos being republished regularly of the gang in the situation room offing bin Laden, the head of a competing gang, by remote control.

And degeneracy implies that there was once a higher position that one has fallen from. What would that be? [I suppose we can now trot out some “Greatest Generation” footage…][/quote]

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/29/jeb-bush-trump-is-uninformed-and-preying-on-peoples-fears/[/url]

[QUOTE]Donald Trump is "uninformed" — but would be a better president than Hillary Clinton, according to GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2015/1204/Donald-Trump-and-Ted-Cruz-second-coming-of-Barry-Goldwater[/url]

[QUOTE]He promises to eliminate five government agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service, Department of Energy, and Department of Education.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://time.com/4137173/bernie-sanders-time-person-of-the-year-poll-win/[/url]

[QUOTE]“A lot of people have given up on the political process, and I want to get them involved in it,” Sanders told TIME in a September cover story.[/QUOTE]

Some links on the hypocrisy of the GOP establishment calling Trump's anti-Muslim demagoguery "un-American" and "unconstitutional":

[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/opinion/trumps-anti-muslim-plan-is-awful-and-constitutional.html]Trump’s Anti-Muslim Plan Is Awful. And Constitutional.[/url] | New York Times

[url=http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/12/donald-trump-michelle-malkin-internment]Actually, Conservatives Have Been Praising Internment for a Long Time[/url] | Mother Jones

[url=globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2015/12/cheney-calls-trump-un-american_8.html]Cheney Calls Trump "Un-American"; Republican Establishment in Chaos; Congressman Asks Trump to Step Down; Reflections on Un-Americanism[/url] | Mish

[QUOTE]Cheney Calls Trump "Un-American"[/QUOTE]:sick::ick: Cheney?!? :ouch2:

[url]http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/23/walker-asks-supporters-money-erase-campaign-debt/[/url]

Walker spent $90k a day to try to get people to like him.

[url]http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2015/12/14/cruz-seeks-donations-walker/77315990/[/url]

Cruz wants to help his buddy out!


Spending money on a failed campaign and then not being able to pay for it? Walker would have been the perfect Republican Commander in Chief.

Make your web browsing experience more brain-cell friendly:


[url]http://brooklynhacker.com/post/135850406380/holiday-hack-erase-donald-trump-from-the[/url]

George Pataki dropped out of the race yesterday.
[URL="http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/29/politics/campaign-2016-who-is-in-who-is-out/"]The campaign for the Presidency: Who's in, who's out[/URL]
Republicans out:
[QUOTE]OUT
Lindsey Graham: Graham was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives in 1992 before he ran successfully at the national level for the U.S. House of Representatives in 1994 and for the U.S. Senate in 2002. He ended his campaign earlier this month.

Bobby Jindal: Jindal was elected governor of Louisiana in 2007, becoming the first Indian-American governor in U.S. history. He easily won re-election in 2011 but has declined to run for a third term. He announced his candidacy in the 2016 presidential election in June, and bowed out in November.

George Pataki: Pataki served three terms as New York's governor, including during the September 11, 2001, attacks. After speculation that he would run for President in 2008 and 2012, Pataki entered as a 2016 candidate in May. He exited Tuesday.

Rick Perry: Perry left office as Texas governor in January 2015 and declared his presidential run in June. He announced he was dropping out in September.

Scott Walker: In 2012, Walker became the only U.S. governor in history to win a recall election, following his effort to limit collective bargaining power for public sector employees. He won re-election in 2014, and in July, he declared his run for president. In September, he quit the race.

NOTE:

Jim Gilmore: Gilmore was elected governor in 1997 and served until 2002. Gilmore was a contender during the 2008 presidential election, and in July, he filed paperwork to run for president in 2016. While he has not dropped out of the race, he has not qualified for a debate or campaigned often in key states to be included in the list.[/QUOTE]
Democrats out:
[QUOTE]OUT
Lincoln Chafee: Chafee became an independent after losing re-election to the Senate in 2006 and was elected governor of Rhode Island in 2010. Partway through his term, Chafee switched to the Democratic Party. Chafee declared he would run for president on the Democratic ticket in June. He ended his long-shot bid in October.

Lawrence Lessig: Lessig has headed efforts to change the role of money in politics, organize a national constitutional convention and march against political corruption. Lessig launched a presidential campaign for the Democratic nomination on September 9, 2015. He dropped out in November.

Jim Webb: Webb, a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and a Marine, was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2006 and served one term. In July, he announced his Presidential run. In October, he announced his departure.[/QUOTE]