Laws And Elections Matter

William Barr has now become something even more dangerous than a soggy diaper covering Trump's ass and hauling Trump's water. Barr is threatening to become for Trump what comrade Lavrenty Beria was for Joseph Stalin. I know that sounds like an exaggeration but I cannot overstate the danger posed to our democracy by a lawless president aided and abetted by an attorney general who deems the partisan interests of that president to be more important than the constitution and the rule of law.

We all know William Barr is a liar. He demonstrated that when he lied about what was in the Mueller report. How shamelessly partisan and dangerously unethical Barr has now become is far too evident. In the January 17, 2020 issue of the New York Magazine Intelligencer there is an article entitled, “William Barr Going After Trump's Enemies One By One.” The author, Jonathan Chait, began by reporting that “...the Department of Justice is exploring yet another probe of James Comey, the former FBI director turned Trump antagonist,...” As Mr. Chait wrote:

 “No single case is egregious enough to prove bias on its own. The pattern of selective prosecution under Trump’s Department of Justice, and his fanatically partisan Attorney General William Barr, has become evident in a series of cases that all resemble this one. The connecting thread is that Trump’s enemies are scoured for any violation that can be found, and held to the strictest letter of the law, while his allies are given broad latitude...”

The contrast between the DOJ dropping criminal charges against Michael Flynn and overruling the Justice Departments own sentencing recommendations for Roger Stone while going after Andrew McCabe, James Comey and other perceived Trump enemies could not be clearer. And it does not end there. As Mr. Chait points out:

“... Barr has appointed John Durham to undertake another even broader investigation into the FBI and the intelligence community’s Russia investigation. The probe appears to be aimed at other Trump antagonists, such as former CIA Director John Brennan. Barr has thrown his weight behind the probe, visiting foreign countries and asking their cooperation.”

In regard to demonstrations and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances Mr. Barr would appear to condition that right on a partisan basis. As Maggie Jo Buchanon wrote in a very important article in American Progress:

“When armed protesters stormed the Michigan state legislature to protest public health orders, for example, Barr was largely quiet—a stark contrast to his willingness to quickly denounce the Black Lives Matter protests occurring throughout the country as “hijacked” by far-left extremists without providing evidence to back up his claim.”

Even public health has been politicized by Trump and Barr:

“Just days after Trump specifically ramped up attacks on Democratic governors for their public health orders aimed at ending the spread of COVID-19, Barr announced that the DOJ would formally begin reviewing and challenging state public health orders.”

If all of that does not send a chill down your spine consider this report by Ms. Buchanon:

“... given what these actions suggest regarding Barr’s willingness to use the might of the Department of Justice to support Trump’s political allies, it is important to keep in mind that the DOJ has recently requested emergency powers from Congress. 

While Congress did not give in to Barr’s request, the scope of what the attorney general sought was sweeping. Under the proposal, the DOJ would have been able to petition individual judges at the district court level to indefinitely suspend certain court proceedings—effectively, giving the department wide latitude to significantly delay certain arrested individuals’ ability to appear in court.”

So much for the sixth Amendment. And then, as if this was not bad enough, we were treated to the spectacle of peaceful demonstrators being attacked with tear gas, rubber bullets and men on horse back so that Trump could stage his ill advised photo op in front of St. John's Episcopal Church while holding a bible upside down! It was William Barr who personally ordered those protesters cleared!

Add to this outrageous attack on peaceful demonstrators Trump's June 1 remarks to the nation in which he, Trump, positioned himself as "the president of law and order" and promised to dispatch "thousands and thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel and law enforcement officers" to cities across the US. and you have a threat so grave that it caused General Mark Milley, the top US commander, to issue “a memo to military leaders reminding them of their oaths to protect the US Constitution and the "right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly".

I urge everyone to heed the words of General Mattis who honestly called Trump a "threat to the constitution."  All soldiers take an oath to defend the constitution, but, in spite of many former military leaders now speaking out against Trump, we cannot depend on generals and admirals to oppose their commander in chief even when he is breaking the law. That means it is up to we the people to defend our democracy from would be despots. Anyone who does not vote Trump and his soggy diapers out of office this November is failing to protect the constitution, the rule law, and our democracy.

Would You Buy A bridge From Him

People who have a “Make America Great Again” hat and/or a “Keep America Great” hat are already buying crap as chocolate from Trump, and they believe him when he blames the Democrats for the taste. So if you are one of those Trump chumps the answer is yes, you probably would buy a bridge form him.

People who have a worthless diploma from Trump U have already been Trumped, and it is unlikely that they would also buy a bridge from him. Although, I cannot be too sure of that -- some of the people can be fooled all of the time.

Whether people who have contributed to the Trump Foundation would also buy a bridge from him depends on whether they cared about where the money was going or whether they were simply trying to curry Trump's favor. People who try to curry Trump's favor by making contributions to Trump's organizations or paying Trump directly should know that they are on an installment plan and the price for what they want from Trump will keep going up because Trump does not even meet Simon Cameron's standards* for an honest politician. As the Washington Post says: “President Trump made 18,000 false or misleading claims in 1,170 days” Furthermore, Trump will throw anyone and everyone under the bus in a New York minute.

Trump touts the use of Hydroxychloroquine as a simplistic answer for the simple minded. That simplistic answer is, in fact, one of the planks in the bridge Trump is hawking. Most of the side effects of Hydroxychloroquine are known. How effective Hydroxychloroquine is in preventing or curing Covid-19 is not known. People, such as Trump, who think they can ignore social distancing and protective masks because Hydroxychloroquine will protect them are idiots. The reason I said, “such as Trump,” in the previous sentence is because Trump is implying if not expressly telling us that he is relying on Hydroxychloroquine to protect him. Quick remedies for the virus and the economic disruption are very important components of Trump's sales pitch, and he damns the pundits who say they doubt that he is even taking Hydroxychloroquine.

Trump knows his reelection is in peril if people do not think the country is doing well under this leadership. So, like Herbert Hoover during the great depression, Trump is trying to paint a rosy picture of our situation and our prospects. Prosperity and a cure for Covid-19 are just around the corner, don't you know? The precise corner is to be determined at a later date, but you can bet that Trump is prepared to blame his wrong turns on the governors of blue states in particular and on his political opponents in general; this apparently includes all of the former presidents who know what an incompetent charlatan he is.

I should add here that Trump is becoming more desperate and dangerous as the election nears and the polls show him losing. He does not care how many people will die because he is trying to open up the country too early. He does not care how many people have to be deprived of their right to vote in order for him to win. He does not care about how many fake investigations the worst attorney general in the history of the nation has to conduct to smear Trump's opponents or how many truly bad decisions have to rendered by the Supreme Court Moscow Mitch has delegitimized. All that matters to Trump is that he is reelected and remains in office long enough for the statute of limitations on the crimes he has already committed to run out while he is still immune from any criminal actions against him. Reelecting Trump should be a bridge too far for anyone who loves this country, its laws, its people, and its system of government.

*The greedy SOB won't stay bought.

Repub-Speak

Alright, boys and girls, I know you have a dictionary or consult one online occasionally, but many words do not mean what you think they mean -- at least not as used by Republicans. An obvious example of this is, “Democrat Party.” There is no such thing as a Democrat Party; it is the Democratic Party. The list of words and terms below is partial and is meant to help you follow the impeachment hearings, the trial in the senate, and what could be called debates if you are inclined to dignify the arguments of the side that has no valid facts or evidence.

Coup, also known as a coup d'etat, is defined as: "[t]he sudden overthrow of a government, differing from a revolution by being carried out by a small group of people who replace only the leading figures.”

In Repub-Speak coup is defined as the impeachment and attempted removal from office of a POTUS who is also the leader of the Republican Party, regardless of how lawless, incompetent, compromised, and/or dangerous to this country and its laws that POTUS may be!

Impeachment: Is set forth in the constitution.  It is similar to a grand jury in that the House of Representatives prepares articles (one could say the charges) that are presented in a trial with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court serving as the presiding judge and all of the Senators serving as the jury.

In Repub-Speak impeachment is a coup d'etat unless it is the impeachment of a Democratic President – preferably over some sexual transgression because descriptions of salacious behavior are so much fun.

Deep State: Apologists for Donald Trump like to babble about the deep state as part of their drain the swamp scenario and as part of the false claim that Trump is being persecuted by the triple digit IQ crowd. According to Wikipedia:

Deep State "... [c]onspiracy theorists believe that there is 'a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry that is effectively able to govern the United States without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process',[11] or consider the deep state to encompass corruption prevalent among career politicians and civil servants.[12]” (Emphases added)

The deep state theory is particularly helpful to Donald Trump at this time because it is non-elected, career civil servants who are now showing their commitment to the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States by obeying the lawful subpoenas from Congress and honestly testifying about what has been described as Trump's dirt for aid scheme in regard to the Ukraine. Unfortunately for Trump and the apologists trying the use the deep state conspiracy theory to discredit all witnesses in the impeachment hearings, the Civil Servants who have testified, at no small risk to themselves and their careers, have also displayed a dedication and an ethical code that tells us the Civil Service Act is serving us well. I might add here that Trump's Romneyesque approach to draining the swamp seems to assume that the swamp will drain itself in disgust if he keeps crapping in it. How many of the people close to Trump have been indicted, and/or pled guilty to committing crimes, or have been convicted of committing crimes? A corrupt president will appoint corrupt people to important positions, thereby creating the swampy conditions the right wing dumb asses say they object too and the Civil Service Act was designed to prevent to the extent that it can be prevented without forbidding presidents from appointing their cabinets and other members of their administrations.


Wisteblower is defined by Wikipedia as “... a person who exposes secretive information or activity that is deemed illegal, unethical, or not correct within a private or public organization.”

The person who blew the whistle on Trump linking a visit to the white house and military aid to the Ukraine with a publicly announced investigation of Burisma and the Bidens did so anonymously but in full accordance with the whistleblower protection acts. The Republicans said the Whistleblower's allegations were not based on direct evidence, that they were unreliable hearsay, and should not even be considered. But in defiance of Trump's repeated denials, Gordon Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union and what could be called the President's special envoy to the Ukraine, has described that linkage as a quid pro quo. Furthermore, Mr. Holmes testified that he heard Trump asking if President Zelensky agreed to investigate Biden.

Investigations: We all know what investigation means in normal usage, but as used in furtherance of political objectives (usually with the goal of digging up dirt that can be used against your opponent) investigation does not necessarily mean an attempt to uncover hidden or unknown facts. As Fiona Hill testified and our intelligence agencies have confirmed, Vladimir Putin and Russia have put out a false conspiracy theory that contends that it was the Ukraine that interfered with our 2016 election on behalf of Hillary Clinton. And a lousy job they did of it. So lousy, in fact, that no one with an IQ above eighty can believe that they even tried because the did not. This whole theory about Ukrainian interference in our election is utter nonsense propagated by Russia to deflect and draw attention away from the fact that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election on behalf of Putin's man ho, Donald Trump, and they are at this very moment trying to interfere with the election of 2020. Yet here we have Reublicans such as Diaper Devin Nunez screaming for the investigation of Ukrainian interferance in the 2016 election!

Burisma Holdings Limited is a holding company for a group of energy exploration and production companies based in Kyiv, Ukraine. It is a company with an unsavory reputation for corruption. But when Republicans talk about Burisma and corruption they are inferring that Joe Biden is part of the corruption because his son Hunter took a position on the board of Burisma after the corruption of that company was exposed. No one is arguing that Hunter Biden did not show bad judgment in taking that position. We all agree that, as the son of Vice President Biden, Hunter should have avoided even the appearance of creating a conflict of interest for his father. There is, however, absolutely no evidence that Hunter's position at Burisma had any influence on Joe Biden's actions let along any corrupt influence. Furthermore the falsity of the equivalencey the Republicans are implying between this and Trump trying to extort the aid of the Ukraine in furtherance of Trump's personal political goals is patently obvious.

Missing witnesses: The Republicans falsely claim they have not been allowed to call any witnesses. This is untrue; Messrs Morrison and Volker were witnesses the Republicans requested. Witnesses the Republicans claim they want to call are Hunter Biden and the whistleblower. They want to call Hunter Biden so they can send the hearings down a rabbit hole of false equivilancies and irrelevant distractions, and they want the whistleblower (who according to Republicans has nothing but hearsay to offer) in order to draw attention away from the real evidence by challenging what they insist is the source of the information that started the impeachment process. In lodging their complaints about not being able to call Hunter Biden and the whistleblower the Republicans are demonstrating the hypocrisy that has become a trademark of the twenty-first century Republican Party. Why won't Trump allow Mulvaney, Bolton, Pompeo, et al to testify, and why is the Trump administration fighting all requests and subpoenas for relevant documents, emails, etc.?

GOP First Or Country First

Bary Goldwater famously or infamously said “Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in defense of liberty is no virtue.” But liberty does not mean anarchy even to Barry Goldwater who also said: "Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

We often see the lunatic right and the religious right as the same because of evangelicals supporting people like Roy Moore. While it is true that a large percentage of the right wing nut cases are religious fanatics, however, there is a significant percentage of those nut cases who are not that religious or are only religious when it is convenient to be so. There are also a large enough number of very religious people who are not right wingers. In other words, the religious divide is probably not as much of a problem as tribalism and an ideology demagogues market and sell in absolute terms and with a religious fervor that leaves no room for questioning or examining the underlying assumptions regardless of how obviously spurious those assumptions may be.

With nothing to sell but the bogus economic hypothesis of “trickle down” the Republicans have resorted to pandering to the tribalism of less educated white people who think their tribal values are under attack from those other, lesser people. And the federal government actually has the nerve to tax those white people in order to help those lesser people have a better life they do not deserve the Republicans say. That is the Republican cocktail – add one part xenophobia and one part anti government phobia, then shake vigorously. Ah, but fear not, the Donald will greatly diminish the state to create a new birth of freedom and liberty (read anarchy) where the virtuous majority can crush the undeserving minority to set things right again! Bleach those sheets and white hoods because the klan will ride again. It sounds a bit like communism with a peculiarly odious American twist? The dictator of the proletariat will destroy the government to free us! From what? From reason and a sense of social responsibility perhaps? Never in our history have we had a President as nihilistic and destructive as Trump, nor a political party as nihilistic and destructive as the Republican Party has now become! I would go so far as to say that with the help of his party Donald Trump is trying to install in this country the same sort of kleptocracy that the Russian oligarchs have installed in Russia. And yes, there is solid evidence of collusion and/or a conspiracy between Russia and the Trump Campaign to defeat Hillery Clinton.

Now that Special Counsel Mueller's investigation is coming ever closer to the White House, Trump and the diapers trying to cover Trump's butt are using the old fascist tactic of discrediting and smearing an impartial investigator they see as a threat. In this case they fear that the truth Mr. Mueller is likely to uncover will set them free of their political offices, and it damn well should! The right wing disinformation machine has been cranking out vile accusations against Mueller, the Department of Justice, and the FBI only to watch most of it slide down the wall into a putrefied heap. Ah but then! Then, much to the surprise and delight of people with an IQ of less than eighty, solid evidence emerged proving that FBI agents and investigators actually have political opinions and that some of those agents and investigators are not even mindless reactionaries. Oh, happy days!

Over the summer Mueller fired one of his investigators, Peter Strzok, who was on loan from the FBI. Mr. Strzok was fired because he sent and received text messages in 2015 and 2016 calling Trump an idiot and saying that the prospect of Trump's election is “fucking Terrifying.” News of the firing of Strzok and the text messages describing Trump in accurate but disparaging terms had the Republicans all a twitter and they pounced with both feet. During the hearing in which Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein testified the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee assailed Mueller and his investigation regardless of the fact that Mueller had fired Strzok and that in one of his earliest messages Strzok had also called Bernie Sanders “an idiot like Trump...” As Mr. Rosenstein pointed out it would be unrealistic to think that investigators or agents have no political opinions. The real test is whether they can set those opinions aside to conduct a fair and impartial investigation. I might add here that if you say agents and investigators cannot set those political opinions aside you would be hard pressed to find anyone who could investigate any Democrat because an overwhelming percentage of law enforcement officers and investigators are Republicans.

But facts and/or the truth are not what Republicans on the house Judiciary Committee want. What they want is to cover Trumps ass and end the investigation, and they are more than willing to lie and dissemble in order to protect Trump. Hey guys, how about a renewed witch hunt? That is what the Chairman of the judicial committee, Bob Goodlatte called for when he told Attorney General Jeff Sessions to appoint a second special counsel to investigate a host of Clinton-related matters.  Now that will fix Trump's problem won't it.  Just yell “and so's your old lady” and all of Trump's culpability in the Russian hacking and interference in our election will go away.  Gee, I bet Trump will even stop acting like Putin's man ho!

When it comes to absurdly assailing Mr. Mueller and the FBI in total disregard for the safety of this country, however, it would be hard to beat Rep. Jim Jordan. While performing a very credible imitation of the late Joseph McCarthy Tail Gunner Jim Jordan (R-OH) used the Strzok's texts

“...'to assert, without any evidence, that the FBI both paid for the Fusion GPS dossier on Trump and used it as the basis for a foreign-intelligence surveillance warrant. Jordan portrayed Strzok as a rogue “James Bond” and revived a failed congressional GOP effort to fire Mueller – with the twist of assembling a new probe to go after Mueller’s team.

'You can disband the Mueller [probe], and appoint a special counsel to look into this,' said Jordan, his voice raising.”

You would have to be deaf, dumb, blind, and stupid not to see where the Republican Party is taking us. It is far away from anything resembling truth, reason, or patriotism. Our country and its political system came under attack from a foreign adversary that is still using those tactics against us. We must have the truth about the culpability of a president who appears to do the bidding of Vladimir Putin and appears to have conspired with Russians to defeat Hillary Clinton. We need that and other information to protect ourselves!

The shell game the Republicans are playing in regard to investigating the Russian matter is indicative of the way they approach everything because what they are doing cannot stand the light of day. Just look at the way the Republicans are trying to rush through their tax cuts and hose jobs bill without allowing time for debate or a proper examination that would reveal just how badly the middle class is getting screwed. It is not unlike like the FCC removing the consumer protections of net neutrality without any proper hearings or the approval of congress. If 2018 does not see the voters expel from the body politic the debilitating and life threatening cancer that has become the Republican Party than American democracy will deserve to die from the terminal stupidity of the voters and/or the people who did not bother to vote!

Diapers And Despair

Real wages have been dropping for decades while eighty percent of the wealth of this nation has floated up into the hands of the wealthiest two percent of our citizens. Furthermore, the loss of manufacturing jobs that required only a high school education makes it tempting to put blue collar workers on the endangered species list. Add to this the Republican Party selling fear and loathing and obstructing all of the Democratic Party's* efforts to get us out of Bush's recession and it is not surprising that the result is the elevation of people who would be laughed at in saner times. The problem is that Donald Trump and Stephen Bannon are far too destructive to be funny. But that is the whole point if you are a Trump chump. “Burn it down,” they shout. “Burn it all down!” There is no reasoning with hard core Trump supporters; facts and logic cannot penetrate the fog of despair or the wall of anger they have erected! There is a reason why we often use mad an anger interchangeably. Figuratively speaking the Trump chumps are rioters burning down their own neighborhoods and destroying what little they have in protest over what they feel has been taken away from them. “That'l show 'em, -- those snooty billionaires, corrupt politicians, and know it all intellectuals.”

Most Republican politicians know we have never had a President who so boldly flouts his conflicts of interests, his ignorance and his incompetence. Most Republican Politicians know that Donald J. Trump is so unsuited for the office that he presents a serious danger to our country. Unfortunately Senators such as Flake, Corker, and McCain who will publicly criticize Trump are the rare exceptions. Most Republican politicians quake in fear over the 30% of the voters who are nihilistic Trump chumps and now control the Republican Party. In cowing to those base supporters, the Republican politicians are putting their careers ahead of the best interests of this country, and in doing so they can no longer be called “public servants.”

What has brought all of this to mind is House Intelligence Committee Chairman Diaper Devin Nunes' (R-Calif.) recent announcement of a joint probe by his panel and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee into the uranium deal that Senator Grassley is also looking into. How absurd this probe is can be seen by the fact that “at a news conference, Nunes grew testy as multiple reporters asked him how his role in the probe jibes with his pledge earlier this year to step aside from his panel’s investigation into Russian interference.” Furthermore, as Mother Jones also reported, Dianne Feinstein and other Democratic members Judiciary Committee have finally had enough of what they rightly consider the “GOP efforts to pursue matters Democrats see as gambits to distract or provide cover for the Trump administration.” The straw dog that finally broke the camel's back as far as Dianne Feinstein is concerned is Grassley's focus “on inquiries into matters such as the sale of a uranium company to Russians while Clinton was secretary of state, and allegations that the Justice Department soft-pedaled its Clinton probe.” Like most of the public, Senator Feinstein obviously thinks the real issue is Russia's interference in our election. It should also be pointed out that Snopes found the allegations about Hillary Clinton and the sale of a Uranium company to Russia to be false.

Another indication of how much the Republicans are trying to hinder any investigation of Trump or his campaign is the case of Barbara Ledeen. “Barbara Ledeen, a longtime conservative activist who works for the Republican senator Chuck Grassley on the Senate judiciary committee – which is now investigating alleged links between the Trump campaign and Russia” decided in 2015 to launch her own investigation into Clinton’s use of the server. At the time, she was a staffer on the Senate judiciary committee.

“She sought out the help of an unnamed defense contractor and also turned to Newt Gingrich, the former Republican speaker of the House, for help. According to the FBI notes, Gingrich 'wanted to speak to others about the project' and asked Judicial Watch, the conservative activist group, for financial assistance.

Judicial Watch allegedly turned to another, unnamed, contractor who was familiar with the 'deep web and dark web', according to the FBI files. The parties were concerned about what they would do if they came across any emails that contained classified information. According to the FBI investigation, the project was later halted.”

Barbara Ledeen is still on Senator Grassley's staff although he claims she is no longer involved in the committee's Russia investigation.

It is difficult not to despair over an entire political party, the Republican Party, acting like a diaper covering Trump's ass, but that is where we are. Fortunately, we still have the Mueller investigation. We can also work hard to replace many of the soiled diapers during the elections of 2018. Perhaps I am being too optimistic but I disagree with people who say that a huge loss in 2018 will not cause the Republicans to impeach Trump. If the Republicans see the threat of losing general elections by supporting Trump to be at least as great as the threat of losing primary elections by impeaching Trump there are bound to be Republicans of conscience who will do the right thing. A good example of this is Watergate. The impeachment of Richard Nixon was a no win situation for all Republicans. Since they had nothing to lose by doing the right thing they did the right thing!


*I hate to get Trumpian about this but I have heard one too many Republican moron call the Democratic Party the Democrat Party. I guess the tag line for that should be Re-pube Party speak!

Portrait Of Deplorable

When Hillary Clinton said  "You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables," the news media and Trump jumped all over it. As most politicians know stating percentages as a figure of speech rather than an accurate quantification is usually going to leave you open to charges of mis-characterizing the evidence, and the reaction to Hillary Clinton's statement was predictably critical: “how dare she disparage millions of voters!”

As reported by David Corn of Mother Jones, Trump said “that [claiming] half of his supporters were racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and Islamophobic and belonged in a "basket of deplorables..." disqualifies Hillary Clinton because "you can't lead this nation if you have such a low opinion of its citizens."

Fortunately in this same article David Corn reveals Trump's hypocrisy by telling us that during a June 2015 interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News Trump disparaged millions of voters by railing against what he characterized as “so many people who don't want to work...” Trump went on to say that “we have a society that sits back and says we don't have to do anything. Eventually, the 50 percent cannot carry—and it's unfair to them—but cannot carry the other 50 percent.”

Trump, of course, is trying to make Hillary Clinton's “basket of deplorables” comment an issue by saying that it is comparable to Romney's 47% comment. I find that laughable. Is there really anyone who can look at Hillary's statement and the Donald's and not see how much closer Trump's statement is to what Mr. Romney said? Hillary thinks Trump is actually doing her a favor. She is so sure of this will not fly as an issue that she has walked back the quantification but not the characterization! The result is that the question of what and/or who is deplorable is rapidly becoming the issue, and that is much to Hillary Clinton's advantage.

As the Huffington Post reported in its article about Trumps racial comments: 

In addition to the endorsement and support of David Duke, Donald Trump's “...white supremacist fan club includes the Daily Stormer, a leading neo-Nazi news site; Richard Spencer, director of the National Policy Institute, which aims to promote the “heritage, identity, and future of European people”; Jared Taylor, editor of American Renaissance, a Virginia-based white nationalist magazine; Michael Hill, head of the League of the South, an Alabama-based white supremacist secessionist group; and Brad Griffin, a member of Hill’s League of the South and author of the popular white supremacist blog Hunter Wallace.”

Now that is certainly a something full of deplorables, but it gets much worse because of who Trump has brought into his inner circle, his campaign staff. In an article in Mother Jones entitled, “How Donald Trump's New Campaign Chief Created an Online Haven for White Nationalists” Sarah Posner wrote:

"We're the platform for the alt-right," Bannon told me proudly when I interviewed him at the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July. Though disavowed by every other major conservative news outlet, the alt-right has been Bannon's target audience ever since he took over Breitbart News from its late founder, Andrew Breitbart, four years ago. Under Bannon's leadership, the site has plunged into the fever swamps of conservatism, cheering white nationalist groups as an "eclectic mix of renegades," accusing President Barack Obama of importing "more hating Muslims," and waging an incessant war against the purveyors of "political correctness."

Not being content with the deplorable Mr. Bannon Trump added as his deputy campaign manager the deplorable David N. Bossie who, The Washington Post tells us, “...rose to prominence as a relentless Republican congressional staffer, hell-bent on tearing down the Clintons at all costs. After Bossie was caught engaging in unethical behavior, House GOP leader forced his ouster.”

It does not matter how much Kellyanne Conwoman tries to spin it, Trump's own well publicized statements about Muslims, Mexicans, women, etc. make it clear that his appointment of such a deplorable campaign staff is no accident, nor is it an accident that he has the support of white supremacists.

Apparently good things come in bunches as do deplorable things if you are Trump. At long last Donald Trump is drawing some very overdo scrutiny. Kurt Eichenwald in a News Week article entitled “How The Trump Organization's Foreign Business Ties Could Upend U.S National Security” writes in part that:

“...A close examination by Newsweek of the Trump Organization, including confidential interviews with business executives and some of its international partners, reveals an enterprise with deep ties to global financiers, foreign politicians and even criminals, although there is no evidence the Trump Organization has engaged in any illegal activities. It also reveals a web of contractual entanglements that could not be just canceled. If Trump moves into the White House and his family continues to receive any benefit from the company, during or even after his presidency, almost every foreign policy decision he makes will raise serious conflicts of interest and ethical quagmires.”

And that makes the refusal of Trump to produce his tax returns deplorable! What else is he hiding? We might find out some of it because according to Reuters “New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said on Tuesday he had opened an inquiry into the Donald J. Trump Foundation to ensure the Republican presidential nominee's charity was complying with state laws governing nonprofits.”

Gee I wonder why. Could it be because of what appears to be a bribe the Trump foundation paid to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. As Media Matters Reports the broadcast news media has chosen to concentrate on the very flimsy accusations about the Clinton Foundation rather than the very real scandal of the Trump Foundation. According to Media Matters:

“In 2013, the Donald J. Trump Foundation donated $25,000 to a PAC supporting Bondi’s re-election. As The Washington Post explained, “At the time, Attorney General Pam Bondi was considering whether to investigate fraud allegations against Trump University. She decided not to pursue the case.”

In addition to the bribery scandal there is what The Washington Post described as purchases by the Trump Foundation of a football helmet and a six foot Portrait of Donald Trump, both of which were then given to Donald Trump. I might add here that unlike the stellar contributions made by the Clinton Foundation the contributions of the Trump foundation are paltry and largely Trump serving.

So add Donald Trump to your list of deplorables!

 Where are your tax returns Mr. Trump? And where is the IRS letter informing you of the audit you allege?

Hillary's Categorical Politics

1. Gender.
Hillary Clinton is a woman ergo women should vote for her if she is not acting like Michele Bachmann, right? That is what Hillary thinks. She has gone out of her way to talk about anti-choice Republicans, pay inequality etc. It is a good thing to discuss those issues, but gender is not determinative if your male opponent is also on the right side of those issues. Younger women in particular were offended by Madeleine Abright's comment that there is a special place in hell for women who do not support other women. They thought Ms. Albright's comment was condescending. I agree with them. I also agree with them when they say the ground breaking precedent we would set by electing Hillary as the first women President should not be determinative. Younger women refuse to base their vote on gender because there are too many other issues they care about. Older women who still bear the scars from their battles for gender equality feel differently. Those older women consider the precedent of electing a female President important enough to make it the deciding factor in regard to who they vote for.

I think the issue of gender, and I am not taking about what many people call gender issues, is a mixed bag for Hillary. While her gender will undoubtedly sway many older women in Hillary's favor, there will also be a backlash. I have to agree with women who say the backlash will come mainly from men frequently called “male chauvinist pigs” that tend to be Republicans anyhow, but we cannot rule out a backlash from independent male chauvinist pigs that are predominately blue collar workers. And, although I do not think we should pander in any way to male chauvinist pigs, I have to point out that blue collar workers in general are a group the Democratic Party is trying to woo. So in a general election, and probably in the primaries as well, some of the advantages Hillary might derive from her gender will be negated by an adverse reaction to her using gender as a political issue. I might add here that Republican women also detest Hillary Clinton. I don't know why, but it will hurt her in the general election if that election is close.

2. Race. 
The next categorical issue is race. Hillary and Bill Clinton have always been popular with African Americans and Hillary is playing that for all it is worth. The problem for her is that Bernie Sanders has a stellar civil rights record, and he is as committed as Hillary is to ending institutional racism. Many African Americans (particularly younger ones) are likely to swing over to Bernie's side as they get to know him better. Hillary is trying to counter that with the Obama card. Hillary Clinton has tied herself so closely to Barack Obama that one would think she took his mantle and had it form fitted to her. She has obviously appointed herself the militant guardian of his legacy, and she will use sharp barbs and hyperboles to defend his record from what she perceives to be the grave threat posed by any and all criticism. Indeed, she accused Bernie Sanders of trying to undo President Obama's accomplishments and thereby destroy his legacy. In this regard she is treating Obama's legacy with all the fervor of an orthodox fanatic!

The election of President Barack Obama set a very important precedent, and he has been one of our better presidents. I do not blame African Americans for taking pride in his accomplishments, but I am sure many of them agree that we should not canonize him. Many people, I am among them, were frustrated by the slow pace of the changes he was able to bring about, and there is still a lot of work that remains to be done. I do not claim to speak for African Americans but I am sure that many of them will see Hillary's idolatry of Obama as politically inspired pandering and therefore condescending.

3. Establishment. 
The last category is one Hillary has seized upon while trying to run away form it. It is “establishment,” and she is like the monkey who will not let go of the shiny object even though she cannot remove her hand from the bottle unless she does let of that object. The shiny object in the bottle is the package of things the establishment bestows on its chosen one. Some of the things in that package are endorsements from prominent citizens, Super Delegate Votes, and Money - lots and lots of money with which to buy an election. The money comes from Wall Street and Plutocrats who are hoping to buy what they want from Hillary. And thanks to the Democratic National Committee Wall Street and the Plutocrats can now spend a lot more money on getting Hillary Clinton elected. As the Washington Post reported:

 “The Democratic National Committee has rolled back restrictions introduced by presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008 that banned donations from federal lobbyists and political action committees...

.

Reformers complain that the new rules have already changed Washington ethics. They provide opportunities for “influence-buying by Washington lobbyists with six-figure contributions to the Hillary Victory Fund,” said Wertheimer...”

Okay so it is easy to see why Hillary Clinton wants to discard the establishment label while hanging on to the establishment. The problem is that Citizens United, the corrupting influence of money and a Political Establishment that depends on that money are some of the things Bernie Sanders is running against! In that regard, Hillary cannot deny being a part of the establishment while she has that clearly labeled bottle with all of its goodies on her hand! Observant voters deeply recent the unfair advantage the establishment is trying to provide to Hillary. All reformers know our economic system is rigged to our disadvantage and so is our political system. Is it any wonder that we think it will take a political revolution to get this country moving in the right direction again?

Unfair to Middling

It's unfair: there are idiots to the right and reformers to the left; what's a Wall Street Plutocrat to do? The Republican demagogues are eager to do the plutocrats' bidding, but the idiots they exploit are so viciously retrogressive and nihilistic that the Republican demagogues cannot win national elections. Come on, Carson and Trump, you have to be kidding! Ah, but hope springs eternal for the Wall Street Plutocrats. They still have the power of money. They can still create super-packs, and they can create think tanks to tell the bought politicians what to say. The progressives, like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, may be pushing Democrats like Hillary Clinton to the left, but those progressives have not won yet! The Democrats that are sympathetic to the Wall Street plutocrats or who are financially dependent on those plutocrats offer a third way between the idiots and the progressives.

In other words, the plutocrats are trying to take advantage of a split they see in the Democratic Party. Of that split JIm Tankersley wrote in the Washington Post:

“... One side believes what's gone wrong for the middle class is that wealthy and powerful players have rewritten the tax code, trade deals, labor law and other policies in order to advantage themselves, at the expense of workers. Middle-class stagnation, in this view, is a choice that can be corrected by shifting power back to workers, at the bargaining table and elsewhere.

The other side, the Third Way side, believes [or wants us to believe] that the stagnation is a natural consequence of a globalizing economy, which has disproportionately benefited people with high skills and people who own stock, businesses and other forms of capital. That's the story Kodak is meant to represent. Its demise wasn't imposed by someone else's policy choice, it was a failure of the company to adapt. To boost the middle-class, by that logic, workers need to be given the means to adapt.”

Notice that in the preceding paragraph Mr. Tankersley referred to the non-progressive side as the “Third Way” side. This is because the Plutocrats have established a “ Wall Street-funded Democratic think tank called Third Way.” As Richard Eskow reports in commondreams.org:

“Third Way has released a lengthy report that argues an inequality-based, populist theme will doom Democrats. Its board member, former White House Chief of Staff (and JPMorgan Chase executive) Bill Daley, even insisted to HuffPo’s Stein that Sanders’ political positions are “a recipe for disaster.

The Third Way report is available online. It introduces a number of catchphrases, often paired in threes: the Hopscotch Workforce, the Nickel-and-Dimed Workforce, and the Asset-Starved Workforce; Stalling Schools, the College Well, and Adult Atrophy; the Upside-Down Economy, the Anywhere Economy, and the Malnourished Economy.

Sadly, most of the content amounts to Misleading Minutiae, Gimmicky Wordplay, and Downright Deception.”

As Mr. Tankersley so aptly wrote: “Third Way’s argument against inequality as a leading source of our current economic woes puts them directly at odds with leading economists, including Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz. “Politicians typically talk about rising inequality and the sluggish recovery as separate phenomena,” Stiglitz wrote in 2013, “when they are in fact intertwined. Inequality stifles, restrains and holds back our growth.”

So now we come down to the Democratic Debate held last night and what we can learn from it (besides the fact that it was an incredibly stupid idea to schedule it at a time that put it up against college football, particularly Pac 12 football, particularly in the second largest television market in the nation where NFL stands for No Football Locally and fans really follow the college teams!).

What the Democratic debates have revealed so far is that even Hillary Clinton with her connection to Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Wall Street has embraced the Progressive explanation for what “has gone wrong for the middle class.” The one thing no one can accuse Hillary of being is stupid. She would not have moved to the left if she did not think a progressive agenda is a winner!

After the October 16 debate Paul Krugman Wrote” 

“Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders had an argument about financial regulation during Tuesday’s debate — but it wasn’t about whether to crack down on banks. Instead, it was about whose plan was tougher. The contrast with Republicans like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio, who have pledged to reverse even the moderate financial reforms enacted in 2010, couldn’t be stronger.

“For what it’s worth, Mrs. Clinton had the better case. Mr. Sanders has been focused on restoring Glass-Steagall, the rule that separated deposit-taking banks from riskier wheeling and dealing. And repealing Glass-Steagall was indeed a mistake. But it’s not what caused the financial crisis, which arose instead from “shadow banks” like Lehman Brothers, which don’t take deposits but can nonetheless wreak havoc when they fail. Mrs. Clinton has laid out a plan to rein in shadow banks; so far, Mr. Sanders hasn’t.”

During the last debate Hillary pointed out what Paul Krugman wrote in this article. What Hillary did not mention was this important caveat from Robert Borosage in his July 17 article in Campaign For America's Future:

“... in what is becoming a signature of the Clinton campaign, the fundamental problem is addressed with underwhelming reforms. To abandon the culture of short-term speculation, Clinton does not call for a financial speculation tax that might slow computer-driven, nanosecond trading programs. She does not endorse taxing the income of investors at the same rate as the salaries of workers. She doesn’t mention breaking up too-big-to-fail financial institutions or reducing the bloated size of our financial community that helps drive risky financial transactions. She doesn’t penalize companies for excessive CEO compensation packages.”

I might add here that most economists, including Paul Krugman, say that repealing Glass Steagall was a mistake.* I favor restoring Glass Steagall, but I would not argue with Mr. Krugman about what else needs to be done. I cannot tell you whether Hillary Clinton will strengthen what Mr. Borosage called "underwhelming reforms," but her rhetoric is making Wall Street nervous.  The bottom line is that the incompetence of the Republican Party and the emergence of Roosevelt Democrats is dreadful news for the Wall Street Plutocrats who are afraid that their privileged position might actually become middling.

*There are also economists who disagree with Mr. Krugman about whether the repeal of Glass Steagall was a cause of the crash of 2008.  See Glass Steagall Matters!

Witch Hunts and Inquisitions

When a political party has no viable policies or proposals all it has left to sell is fear and loathing. And how do you stir up fear and loathing? You do it with witch hunts and inquisitions!

Can You Benghazi?

In his Sept 30, 2015 article, “Kevin McCarthy's Truthful Gaffe About Benghazi” E. J. Dionne Jr. wrote:

“Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the likely successor to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), told Fox News’s Sean Hannity explicitly on Tuesday night that the Clinton investigation was part of a 'strategy to fight and win.'

He explained:'Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought.'”

In Making this stunning admission Representative Kevin McCarty added to the infamy a Senator named Joe attached to the McCarthy surname. I say “stunning admission” only in that it was unbelievably foolish for a high ranking Republican to actually say this out loud and in public! It is rather fitting, however, for a guy named McCarthy to confirm what everyone who was paying the slightest attention already knew about the Benghazi inquisition. Grand inquisitor Issa ruined his credibility during Benghazi hearings, and grand inquisitor Gowdy (or is that gougey) is well on his way to doing the same thing.

Can You Say Planned Parenthood Hearings? 

Alright, lets take a deceptively edited film that was surreptitiously shot (or is that shat) by an unscrupulous anti-abortion group, add some outrageous accusations and lies to it, and start another grand inquisition based on the deceptions. Go ahead, Carly Failurina and her ilk will praise it; they will never question it - at least not in public. And make sure that the witnesses you call find it almost impossible to answer what are supposed to be questions about it because you are constantly interrupting them, usually with absurd accusations. Here are just a few examples of how the alleged planned parenthood hearings are being conducted by the Republican inquisitors.

As Kimberly Truong wrote in Mashable:

During the testimony of Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, Representative Chaffetz (R. Utah) “...presented a slide claiming that Planned Parenthood's money spent on breast exams has been reduced, while money spent on abortions increased.

Though he claimed that the slide came straight from Planned Parenthood's annual reports, Richards' lawyers told her otherwise, after she said she'd never seen the slide.

'My lawyers just informed me that the source of this information is Americans United for Life, an anti-abortion group. I would check your source,' she said.”

I might add here that the chart was as deceptive as one would expect given its source.

In the following exchange between Ms Richards and grand inquisitor Gowdy, Esq., Mr. Gowdy makes us all wonder what the hell he was taught in law school!

"'I appreciate the way you like to frame the issue — that you're the reasonable one and those of us who have a contrary position are not reasonable,' Gowdy said. 'That's exactly the last answer you gave.'

When Richards argued that he was twisting her words, Gowdy interjected: 'It's not always what you say, just sometimes what you mean,' seeming to wink his right eye at her."

If someone had said that to a witness Mr. Gowdy was representing and he did not start hurling objection such as “badgering the witness, misrepresenting the evidence, and assuming facts not in evidence,” he would be guilty of legal incompetence or malpractice. How the hell did he know what she meant? Is he the Amazing Kreskin?

*Update: Discussion and Correction of Chaffetz Chart.

Robert Borosage Nails It

For decades now I have been saying that the ratio between short term and long term investors is way out of balance. Long term investors have traditionally looked at the stability of a company, its book value, and its potential. The research and development that allowed companies to get ahead of the competition or at least keep pace with the competition was considered essential by long term investors who wanted steady growth and a steady appreciation of the value of the stocks they purchased. Short term investors, on the other hand, have always been risk takers who are looking for quick rewards. They do not think much about long term growth. If the system is not rigged “betting the spread” is a more a accurate description than "playing the spread" because short term investors are gambling.

In short, it was my opinion that the number of short term investors and their economic power exposed the long term investors to much more risk than was desirable. I must admit that my view was the view of an informed layman. As such it was simplistic. What is actually happening is far more complex and far worse than I realized!

Check out Rober Borosage's July 17, 2015 article, “Hillary on Quarterly Capitalism: Big Challenge, Timid Reform,” on Campaign for America's Future. In this article, Mr. Borosage uses Hillary Clinton's comments to show us how bad it really is. He begins his article by saying:

“Last week, Hillary Clinton opened an important 'conversation' about what she calls 'quarterly capitalism' or excessive 'short-termism.' She noted how the rules have been rigged to pressure executives to focus on the next quarter’s stock return rather than the long-term health of the company. The result, reaching new extremes in recent years, is that large public corporations are using 'eight or nine of every 10 dollars they earn' to pay out dividends or purchase stock buybacks. CEOs suggest that they would hold off making significant long-term investments if that meant missing the next quarter’s targeted return.

This 'culture of short-term speculation' is 'out of balance,' and fixing it, Clinton argues, is vital to 'save capitalism for the 21st century.'

In stark contrast with Republicans presidential candidates who want to cut or eliminate capital gains taxes, Clinton calls for reforms that will reward longer-term horizons. She suggests she wants to revive what used to be called stakeholder capitalism, with corporations focused not simply on shareholder return but on insuring that workers, consumers, communities, the country and the globe share in the rewards of long-term growth.

But in what is becoming a signature of the Clinton campaign, the fundamental problem is addressed with underwhelming reforms. To abandon the culture of short-term speculation, Clinton does not call for a financial speculation tax that might slow computer-driven, nanosecond trading programs. She does not endorse taxing the income of investors at the same rate as the salaries of workers. She doesn’t mention breaking up too-big-to-fail financial institutions or reducing the bloated size of our financial community that helps drive risky financial transactions. She doesn’t penalize companies for excessive CEO compensation packages.

Instead, she offers five areas for reform – four essentially exhortations and one of substance. This gives her scope for rhetoric that echoes Sen. Elizabeth Warren while offering policies that won’t offend Silicon Valley or Wall Street donors.”

Mr. Borosage goes on from there to accurately describe in detail the problems Hillary identifies and the timid reforms she advocates. Believe me his discussion is well worth the effort to read it!

I want to add here that Hillary's rhetoric goes beyond trying to appease the left. It is not just a sop to the much vaunted Elizabeth Warren wing of the party or to the people supporting Bernie Sanders. It is rather a recognition that the party of Roosevelt has awakened and is now demanding that we do something about the threat posed by the unbridled greed of the plutocrats. Hillary's inability to propose effective reforms to meet this crises is also indicative of the problem posed by the influence of money on our political system. Sadly, I have to say that even her anemic response to the problems caused by such a rigged system is more desirable than the Republican Party's Hooveresque denial that there is a problem or, in the alternative, their denial that the problem is caused by a lack of regulations and a rigged system that enriches the rich at the expense of everyone else. Those GOP morons actually want to double down on their failed trickle down policies!

Bless Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. They have changed the rhetoric, and that is a first step. Unfortunately it will take someone who is not beholding to Silicon Valley and/or Wall Street to do what we so desperately need done.  Could Bernie be the answer?

Loom of Gloom

As Hunter Thompson demonstrated, fear and loathing can be a commercial venture as well as the propaganda tool of dictators, demagogues, and other ambitious people who have nothing positive to offer. So here we have the right wing weavers spinning away on the Loom of Gloom in an effort to create enough fear and loathing to cover up the fact that the Republican Party is too morally and intellectually bankrupt to offer any real solutions or any positive programs that will benefit the people of this great nation. Those right wing weavers are aided and abetted in doing this by the drama casters and writers who know that lurid accusations and descriptions designed to create and promote fear and loathing will draw the rubes to pitchmen who pay handsomely for the audience. Most news outlets (the ones owned by Rupert Murdock being the most notable exceptions) demonstrate a shred of journalistic integrity by not printing or presenting obviously spurious accusations or stories by known liars such as Andrew Breitbart and the character assassins who continue perpetuate his scummy blog (or is it bog). The problem is that the news organizations are quickly given the cover they need to present questionable  stories and accusations when the lies are repeated by politicians such as Rand Paul or, even less excusable, when the lies are repeated by the Fox disinformation factory.

I might add here that books carry more weight than blogs or news stories even though the sources of information in the books are often as questionable as the sources of erroneous news stories. The reason I am bringing this up is because of a new book entitled Clinton Cash... by Peter Schweizer, and published by HarperCollins, which is owned by the king of right wing prevaricators, Rupert Murdoch.  As Media Matters warns:

“Media should be cautious with Republican activist and strategist Peter Schweizer's new book Clinton Cash. Schweizer has a disreputable history of reporting marked by errors and retractions, with numerous reporters excoriating him for facts that "do not check out," sources that "do not exist," and a basic failure to practice "Journalism 101."”

In spite of the shady reputation of the author, the known sensational falsehoods presented as facts by so many of the so called news outlets owned by Murdoch, and the warning issued by Media Matters and others a quick Google search will bring up the following, and this is just a partial list:

Fox News-Apr 20, 2015

Laura Ingraham told viewers Monday on “Special Report with Bret Baier” that the latest scandal to plague the presidential candidacy of Hillary ...

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy: Hillary Clinton's Scandals Finally ...
Breitbart News-20 hours ago

New Book, 'Clinton Cash,' Questions Foreign Donations to Foundation
Highly Cited-New York Times-Apr 19, 2015

Revealed! The Scandal Rand Paul Promises Will Derail The Clinton ...
In-Depth-Forbes-Apr 20, 2015

Only one presidential candidate voted for war with Iraq: Hillary Clinton
Opinion-Baltimore Sun-Apr 20, 2015

Getting back to basic facts in the next Hillary 'scandal'

Blog-Washington Post (blog)-Apr 21, 2015

So far even though the Republicans have been throwing shovels full of crap at Hillary Clinton none of it has stuck.  It looks to me like they have just launched another swift boat full of crap.  I say this while having to admit that I have not put on my waders to slop through the muck that is too likely to infest Schweizer's tale.  I must also admit that I am not inclined to pay for privilege of finding out how smelly that muck is.  If I am going to pay for fear and loathing I would rather have Hunter Thompson's heirs profit from it than Rupert Murdoch and some disreputable political hack who apparently has no conscience.

Don't Shame Our Ancestors

A Gallup Poll shows that only 39% of the respondents have a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party and only 37% of the respondents have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party. All right, So what the hell are you going to do about it?

They who say “I can't” never will! They who say “what is the use” are useless! The brave men and women who were attacked and beaten by police officers during the voting rights march in Selma Alabama in 1965 did not throw up their hands in despair. They did not say I can't; instead they moved forward, and the violence they faced only strengthened their resolve to overcome. They bled for you and they prevailed. Similarly, the brave men and women who fought for collective bargaining, fair wages, and safe workplaces did not give in to despair; they continued to fight and they bled. To give you just a few examples of what it cost: 19 coal miners were killed in the Lattimer Massacre in Hazleton, Pennsylvania in 1897 and 17 miners were killed in the Anaconda Road Massacre in Butte, Montana in 1920. It was not until the National Labor Relations Act was passed int 1935 that the blood and suffering of many Union Members in many places over the years finally paid off.

What would those brave civil rights leaders who were beaten, shot or hanged for demanding their basic human rights say to those of you who sat at home during the mid-term elections, thereby meekly submitting to the unconscionable laws Republican Legislators and Republican Governors passed in an effort to keep you from voting. What would the brave union members who were beaten and/or killed when they stood up to the plutocrats say to those of you who sat at home during the mid term elections and let the greedy and/or the stupid re-elect Republican Legislators and Republican Governors such as Scott Walker, who actually boasts about suppressing the vote and union busting? If you are willing to give up your right to vote or refuse to exercise that right there really is no hope! And if you think unions do not matter anymore Click Here.

The reason why people are becoming so disillusioned is because we are moving backwards. Real wages are slipping, college educations are once more becoming something only wealthy kids can afford, and everyone is afraid of being laid off of work. Believe me, I can understand the angst. It does not help when one of our major political parties (the Republican Party) is pandering to lunatics and putting its own interests ahead of the interests of this country. If you think that statement is hyperbole let me remind you of just a few of things the Republican Party has done:

1. Shut down the government.
2. Damaged the full faith and credit of the United States by holding the debt ceiling hostage thereby threatening to make the United States default on it its debts.
3. Threatened to shut down the Department of Homeland Security.
4. Threatened to shut down the Federal Aviation Administration and thereby extorted the busting of the aviation labor unions.
5. Tried to privatize Medicare with the Ryan voucher plan.
6. Have consistently opposed all plans to reform the tax code if those plans eliminate the incentives to export our jobs or remove overseas tax havens for companies and wealthy individuals.
7. Interfered with crucial nuclear energy negotiations with Iran by sending the “Dear Ayatollah” letter. This is a clear violation of the separation of powers stated in the Constitution and a violation of the Logan Act.
8. I might add that Republican Presidents have also inflicted on us the worst Supreme Court ever!

Although the Republican Party is far worse than the Democratic party, it easy for me to understand why people are unhappy with both parties. The problem is that bad trade agreements and radical Republicans passing anti-labor laws have decimated the labor unions thus making both parties more dependent on the plutocrats for campaign contributions. Citizens Untied greatly exacerbated the problem. MONEY RULES! There is no doubt about money ruling. But you still have a voice and a vote. Generally speaking the smaller the election (or the fewer the number of voters) the easier it is to buy the election, but that does not hold true if a large number of people opposing the money interests engage with their neighbors and get them to the voting booths. When people get involved Mr. Got-bucks will often spend a ton of money to no avail. So the first rule if you want to change things is to get involved on a local level. Support worthy local candidates who will not gerrymander all the lunatics into safe congressional districts, and who will represent labor unions. Labor Unions protect jobs, even none union jobs. Believe me, the last thing a labor union wants is a bad trade agreement. Unions depend on companies making things here, whereas businesses chasing cheep labor have a strong incentive to export your job. The next thing to do is e-mail politicians about issues and sign petitions regarding crucial issues. People who write and sign petitions are usually activists and that makes politicians pay attention. Congressmen are particularly vulnerable because the smaller the district is the more important the activists become.

As the next election approaches ask yourself a very simple question: In this day when corporate profits are higher than ever and the disparity between what the top two or three percent is paid and what the average person is paid is greater than ever, what the hell is trickling down? The answer to that question should tell you to vote against trickle down Republicans who want to cut taxes for the rich and cut all earned benefits programs such as Social Security and Medicare!*  And I do mean it should tell you to get off your butt and vote! If you do not think your vote counts just look at the dismal results of the last mid-term elections. The low voter turn out during those mid-term elections allowed the most militant right wing lunatics to create a congress in their own image!

Hey, no one is asking you to go out there like your ancestors did and bleed for the cause. We concerned citizens are simply asking you not to waste the economic miracle your ancestors struggled so hard to achieve just because you are too damn lazy to pay attention and vote! Do not ignore the primary either. Elections do not just decide which party runs the government they also decide the direction that party will go. The lunatics have taken over the Republican Party because they are the activists and largest block voting in the primaries. I now say it its time for the progressives to become the activists and once again make the Democratic Party the party of working men and women!

*Just take a look at the latest budget proposed by the Greedy Old Plutocrats.  This topsy turvy (Republican) budget actually presumes that the poor in this country have too much money and the billionaires have too little.  This budget also makes it perfectly clear that the proposed tax cuts for the rich will come out of your hide!  

Idiot's Delight:

How are the Republicans celebrating their mid-term victory? Apparently they are celebrating by playing the political equivalent of idiots delight. The rules are quite simple: first you defund President Obama's executive order regarding immigration, regardless of the fact that nothing in the order requires any funding. This, I guess, pleases the idiots who make up the Republican base without causing harm to others; not a bad deal when you think about it. The other thing you do is file an expensive and frivolous law suit against President Obama regarding the Affordable Care Act. Given the fact that we now have the most politicized and worst Supreme Court in our history, this suit does have the potential to be harmful! I am, however, trying to demonstrate some optimism about this suit by saying that even the five injustices of our Supreme Court would not stoop to ruling illegal the sort of executive order that has been issued by every President since WWII.

I might add here that there is no fact the Republicans will not ignore or lie about. Ronald Reagan was the President who granted undocumented immigrants amnesty, and both Reagan and G. H. W. Bush used executive orders to prevent the deportation of undocumented immigrants. So did Reagan and G. H. W. Bush violate the Constitution? And what the hell is it about the executive order regarding immigrants that would prevent Republicans from passing a comprehensive immigration reform bill, other than the fact that they feel so insulted by the order that they are going to pick up their toys and go home? Picking up their toys and going home seems to be what Republicans do best.  I wish I had a job that required so little time in the work place.

Blogging:

On October 6, 2011 my brother, Randy Smiley, reacted strongly to the idea that social media now rules and blogging is dead. Tell that to “Huffington Post, Dailykos, Think Progress, and Fact Check,” he wrote. I would go a bit farther and say that many newspapers, magazines, reporters, and news services also have blogs. In many ways blogs are like magazines or newspapers. The communication is primarily in one direction; it goes from the author to whatever audience the author is able to draw.  It is difficult and annoying for the reader to leave a comment on a Google Blog. It is much easier to leave a comment on a Word Press Blog, but there is a trade off. Google blocks most of the spam, whereas Word Press merely marks it and leaves it to the blogger to throw it out.

Obviously, blogs were not really meant to be interactive. That is why so many people are finding Face Book, and G+ more attractive, which is as it should be. Far too many people were trying to interact with family members on blogs. Doing so was awkward and far too public. I suppose that twitter also has a place in this fast pace world, but the number of characters it allows makes it far too restrictive for any in depth discussions.

I like the idea that a private individual can become influential by creating a blog like Digby's Hullabaloo. Granted that the odds are greatly stacked against your blog ever becoming that influential, but displaying your rants, opinions or stories where they are available to the public still offers something in the way of catharsis. It still allowed my brother to yell “TAKE THAT, ASSHOLE!” I am afraid that I also display that kind of anger far too often in this blog, but that is, at least to some extent, what this blog is for. It is why I have a blog rather than face book. It allows friends and family to ignore the political opinions they do not like without having to ignore me. I might add that some of them also find my fiction that objectionable, but that is their problem. If they do not like it, they can join the vast majority of the people in this world by not reading it.