Dog Brothers Public Forum


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 20, 2017, 12:47:41 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
100344 Posts in 2360 Topics by 1084 Members
Latest Member: Andy55
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 171
151  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Trump Transition/Administration, Sec State on: December 01, 2016, 02:18:24 PM
Regarding Sec. of State, I guess we'll all know soon enough. 

Romney was proven right on some things as compared with Obama.  I think his appointment would be a good thing, but tough for Pat-types to swallow after all the negativity both ways.

Rand Paul is to the left or non-interventionist side of Obama, Hillary and Trump on foreign policy.  Extremist in his passivity, IMHO.  Great on some domestic issues but that is another matter. 

Bolton is to the right or hawk side of Trump.  Would send a different signal, but not a very compatible voice nor a fight worth taking up with the senate unless Trump was endorsing Bolton's foreign policy and he isn't.

Petreus turned a war around, single-handedly in terms of leadership.  How that translates into diplomacy I don't know.  He admitted his mistake (eventually) when caught, plead guilty, paid the price.  I forgive him, but also don't know if that is worth the price of a fight for confirmation.

Sen. Corker I believe to be the wrong choice.

Giuliani, I am skeptical.  Would support him if nominated.

Newt Gingrich should be press secretary.

Where does that leave us, Trump's choice.  Maybe I pull for Romney IF they both do it for the right reasons, not to undermine each other.

Sec of State is on the short list in succession to be President.  (Ask Al Haig about that!)  It should be someone well respected, prominent and already vetted.  It also needs to be someone with real organizational skills.  That department needs to be turned upside down for a thorough cleaning and rebuilding.

152  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re. US Economy, Stock Market, Wesbury: Give thanks for the coming boom on: December 01, 2016, 10:27:18 AM
He will finally get the recovery he has been predicting the last years. It must be very exciting for him!

With my bias toward supply side policies, I also think the economy will boom - once good policies are fully enacted.

If there is certainty or at least consensus that much better policies are imminent, the market will anticipate that, in the reverse way that investors pulled back decisively when Pelosi-Reid-Obama-Clinton took control of Washington in 2007-2008.

The Reagan boom was preceded by the Volcker tightening that should have happened simultaneous with the tax rate cut stimulus.  A horrible recession filled the interim.

On Dec 13-14 the Fed will raise rates again, though only by 1/4 point and to levels that are still far too low.  That hike alone won't tank investment or the economy but a delay or roadblock in the 52-48 Senate of the tax and regulatory reforms we were promised perhaps will.

Any thoughts from others as to whether or not this market can continue to go up and up ahead of real growth even if we start doing things right?

Disclosure:  My money is not in the stock market.  My money was lost in a previous stock market.  Maybe it is still there, but it isn't mine anymore!

Wesbury has been more accurate than us - on the up markets.  He generally misses the crashes and corrections.
153  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: more psychobabble on: December 01, 2016, 10:00:08 AM
"NFL is corrupt for marketing its product like big tobacco.  Football is now labelled an addiction.

Football is hazardous to body and brain?  Who knew or would have guessed that a 200 to 300 pound person crashing into you at full speed knocking you off your feet and smashing you to the gournd could cause serious injury?"

While the left works to ban it, they continue to subsidize it, building stadiums for billionaire owners, millionaire players and mostly rich people who buy tickets, hence the thread name cognitive dissonance!

"If someone likes to play tennis and watch that all the time why would that not be called an addiction?"

Actually they do, but at least we don't subsidize it.  Or treat it or cure it.  Tennis addiction causes you to live longer, costing the country billions...

[Tennis trivia for ccp, what do we call a 90 mile an hour fastball in tennis?  A soft second serve.  ) ]

154  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Left and the Little guy, Bernie Madoff political contributions in 2008 on: December 01, 2016, 08:53:11 AM

Madoff Made Hefty Political Contributions to Top Officials
Published December 15, 2008
It reads like a who's who of liberal Democrats: Clinton, Corzine, Dodd, Schumer, Kerry, Markey, Rangel, Bradley, Lautenberg ... and yes, even Obama.
155  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / In MN, Republicans gained with high turnout on: December 01, 2016, 08:29:19 AM
Minnesota, the only state Reagan never won, had the highest voter turnout in the nation in 2016 and turned it's state houses Republican.

Liberal Dem Senator Amy Klobuchar won MN in 2012 by 35 points.  Hillary won in 2016 by 1.5℅.

The pundit class is still too shocked to explain this.
156  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Trump Transition/Administration, Mnuchin, Ross and Ricketts on: December 01, 2016, 07:55:26 AM
It looks to me like each came from Big Business to become an entrepreneur.  That's not all bad.
157  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Grannis: Closing the Obama Gap on: November 30, 2016, 10:16:27 PM

If will take 5℅ growth for 8 years to close the Obama gap.

3.1℅ growth is average growth, never achieved in an Obama year.
158  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Donald Trump has only himself to blame for his likely loss, Oct 23, 2016 on: November 29, 2016, 12:34:18 PM
Also, Cog Diss of the Left!  With the outcome prediction wrong, how does that change the underlying logic?  Trump is this bad and the alternative was that much worse!  Smug liberals refuse to eat their own words.  Let's get on with the recounts.

Knoxville News Sentinel

Trump has only himself to blame for likely loss  (WITH COMMENTS)

Fifteen days remain before Election Day, but it’s not too early to start the autopsy on Donald Trump’s candidacy and the wreckage of the Republican Party left in its wake.

There is no electoral path to the presidency left for The Donald. He knows there isn’t. So now he is trying to de-legitimize the election by claiming that it has been rigged by a shadowy global conspiracy to prevent him becoming president of the United States. (NOW WHO THINKS IT WAS RIGGED?) Trump is the one who has prevented himself becoming president by his foul mouth, repeated lies and incoherent policy statements.

Claiming that all Mexicans coming to America are criminals (DID HE SAY ALL?), drug dealers and rapists; repeatedly stoking the coals of “birtherism” in an effort to undermine the legitimacy of the nation’s first black president (BIRTH LOCATION IS RACE?); and Trump’s misogynistic view of women have proven caustic.

As a defense against the many women coming forward to accuse him of doing exactly what he told Billy Bush he did on the "Access Hollywood" bus, Trump has basically said that none were attractive enough to sexually assault. Was that a confession that if a woman was beautiful enough in his eyes, he would feel entitled to sexually assault her?

I have been black all my life, and for most of it I have been poor. But during none of it have I feared that walking out my front door would subject me to being shot(WRITER PROBABLY DOESN'T LIVE IN THE SOUTH SIDE OF CHICAGO). That’s ridiculous. So too is his invitation for Russian President Vladimir Putin to interfere in an American presidential election. How does an American presidential candidate justify asking Russia to get involved in our nation’s politics? Trump’s buddy, Putin (THEY'VE NEVER MET.), recently announced the completion of a rocket air defense system to fight the Islamic State in Syria. But ISIS does not have any airplanes. So where could Russia possibly aim its rockets in that area? Oh, U.S. aircraft operating in Syrian airspace.  (IT WAS PRES OBAMA WHO TURNED SYRIA OVER TO PUTIN.)

In his death spiral of a campaign, Trump is inflicting heavy damage on the GOP. (OR IS THIS EXACTLY BACKWARDS?) His refusal during Wednesday night's debate to state that he would acknowledge Hillary Clinton's victory -- should that be the will of the American people -- undermines our democracy and is unprecedented in American history. (NOW SHE DOES THAT.) He is playing a serious role in Democrats making gains in both the House and the Senate and possibly in state legislative races.  The reversals in the makeup of state lawmaking chambers (EXACTLY BACKWARDS AGAIN) could have a profound impact in the redrawing of congressional districts following the 2020 census and eliminate many of the gerrymandered Republican congressional seats. Think Texas. 

Some Senate Republican candidates have endorsed Trump, then unendorsed him, only to re-endorse him out of fear of his supporters in their states. What a pickle they are in. And the fratricidal battle for the soul of the Republican Party is already underway. There have been chants of “Paul Ryan Sucks” -- in his own state of Wisconsin. That is a party coming apart. (GOP NOW HAS 34 GOVERNORSHIPS, 70% of STATE CHAMBERS, HOUSE, SENATE and PRESIDENCY.) How does the GOP put this Humpty Dumpty back together again?

This Republican debacle is all the making of the GOP by getting in bed with the hypocritical and so-called Christian conservatives. (WHY DON'T DEMS COMPETE FOR THOSE VOTES?)  How do you square the call for character with Trump’s description of what he does to women? Perhaps the same way they voted for Ronald Reagan (WHO WON OVER 1000 ELECTORAL VOTES IN 93 STATES), whose wife checked with astrologers before allowing him to board an airplane, over Jimmy Carter, who got up every Sunday morning to teach Sunday school at his church (AND KNEW NOTHING ABOUT THE ECONOMY OR DEFENSE).

There was their embrace of the tea party. Let’s not forget that the Republican Party in the South was built on the resentment of Southern whites because nationally Democrats supported civil rights legislation (FALSE, DEMS VOTED AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT), overturning decades of Jim Crowism. They have lied too many times to their base over things they knew were untrue for political expediency.

Last week, Obama called for Trump to “stop whining.” Many in my community knew the rest of that sentence. But to rile the president, Trump brought Obama's half-brother from Kenya to get back at him. Does he believe the president really cares? Or that Clinton could pick him out of a crowd?

The only conspiracy to deny Trump the presidency is that found in the mind of this self-loathing narcissist. My mom drilled it into me that if you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. That is what the GOP has done -- only this time they are also getting up with ticks.  (HILLARY'S SUPPORTERS ARE NOW UNCONTROLLABLY SCRATCHING.)
159  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Epic stupid, Part II on: November 29, 2016, 12:11:04 PM

Amazing.  Not just obscure liberals either.  Tim Kaine!

The knee jerk reaction to this is not more stupid than the other situations where the rules and laws they propose (gun free zones?) are either already in place or wouldn't have prevented the carnage.  This one is just more obvious!  Gun control to prevent knife and vehicle attacks!  How about Somali-control?  Or radical-Somali-control.  The knowledge of this vulnerability swayed the election.  For the left, nothing learned.
160  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Cuba, Fidel Castro dead, finally on: November 26, 2016, 11:32:38 AM
Whatever the opposite of rest in peace is my wish here.

If this were a just world, 13 facts would be etched on Castro’s tombstone and highlighted in every obituary, as bullet points — a fitting metaphor for someone who used firing squads to murder thousands of his own people.

●He turned Cuba into a colony of the Soviet Union and nearly caused a nuclear holocaust.

●He sponsored terrorism wherever he could and allied himself with many of the worst dictators on earth.

●He was responsible for so many thousands of executions and disappearances in Cuba that a precise number is hard to reckon.

●He brooked no dissent and built concentration camps and prisons at an unprecedented rate, filling them to capacity, incarcerating a higher percentage of his own people than most other modern dictators, including Stalin.

●He condoned and encouraged torture and extrajudicial killings.

●He forced nearly 20 percent of his people into exile, and prompted thousands to meet their deaths at sea, unseen and uncounted, while fleeing from him in crude vessels.

●He claimed all property for himself and his henchmen, strangled food production and impoverished the vast majority of his people.

●He outlawed private enterprise and labor unions, wiped out Cuba’s large middle class and turned Cubans into slaves of the state.

●He persecuted gay people and tried to eradicate religion.
161  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Left loved the Electoral College before they hated it. on: November 24, 2016, 07:59:28 AM
They had a name for it and it guaranteed that they had the advantage in all presidential elections. They called it "The Blue Wall" and no ordinary Republican would ever again be able to climb past it.      Oops.

All you have to do to get rid of the EC is get 38 smaller states agree to give up power to NY and Calif.  They never talk of amending the Constitution, just 'getting rid of' things they don't like.
162  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left, SNL transgender joke backfires on: November 24, 2016, 07:46:25 AM
The media and the left are overlapping threads.

37 genders night be why they "we" lost the election.  Not funny to sensitive leftists.
163  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Even if Trump wanted to divest, it wouldn’t be easy. on: November 23, 2016, 07:49:29 PM
It's not like stocks where you can just click close this position.  It's not like Jimmy Carter's peanut farm.  He can't necessarily hire a stranger nor can he not talk to his children or shutter the business.  The voters should have thought of this.
164  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Thanksgiving on: November 23, 2016, 05:39:29 PM
Happy Thanksgiving everybody!

When the Washington Post or NY Times tries to debunk or 'factcheck' something to be false, you generally know it's true.  So it goes for the story of first or early Thanksgiving where Bradford the colony's first governor splits up the shared work growing and releases the beginnings of free enterprise and commerce in the first colony:

They don't happen to put their own take on it in the opinion section for some reason.  If you follow only the facts, they really are saying the story of success switching from parcels in common to individual parcels where each keeps the fruits of his or her own labor is true.
165  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Ellison: "We don't get no justice, you don't get no peace." on: November 23, 2016, 05:27:03 PM

Face the Nation missed it but the chatter is starting to break through.  Famous people reading the forum...

Scott Johnson links:

The membership in Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, Stokely Carmichael, ties to CAIR, Muslim Brotherhood, indirect ties to Hamas are all disconcerting.  9/11 denial.  What bothers me the most is the support for the cop killers.  I remember this from television news but Scott Johnson documents it.  Besides bad grammar, leading a group chanting "we don't get no justice, you don't get no peace" comes from the defense of cold blooded cop killers and charges back against police that were proven false.  This was in the 1990s 20 years ahead of today's Black Lives Matter violence and innocent cop targeting.
166  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / proud we have not had the kinds of scandals that plagued other administrations on: November 23, 2016, 05:08:15 PM
I would totally disagree with the part of Obama's Presidency being scandal free
Mr. McCarthy doesn't even get into the IRS and other scandals that seem to be covered up in the MSM hooplah...

.@POTUS: "I'm extremely proud of the fact that over 8 years we have not had the kinds of scandals that have plagued other administrations."
5:12 PM - 20 Nov 2016

Scandal free?  Good grief! 1) Fast and Furious comes to mind first.  Both 2) IRS targeting and 3) Benghazi helped push him over the edge for reelection. 4) Plane loads of cash to the world's number one sponsor of terror for hostages.  5) Hillary's email scandal was in his administration, and he was one of her unsecured pen pals.  6)  EPA poisoned a Colorado River, denied the extent of it by 2 million gallons.  7) How about the passing of Obamacare with a series of bald faced lies?  Cool Shovel ready projects.  9) Cash for Clunkers, removed Ford trucks off the roads right before gas went to $2 and replaced them with small Hondas and Toyotas - to help our economy!  10) Flying a separate plane to Martha's vineyard - for the dog, 11) Flying Michelle and Barack in separate planes to Hawaii,  Michelle and her entourage to Madrid,  12)  300 rounds of golf.

This link has several more:
167  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Pat Toomey's very different path to Victory in Pennsylvania than Trump's on: November 21, 2016, 09:37:18 AM
Amazingly the same small margin of victory with different voters, many crossover votes. Different candidates, different strategies.
168  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Media, Ministry of Truth Issues, Face the Nation, no questions on affiliations on: November 20, 2016, 10:15:47 AM
Just after I posted the Keith Ellison, Caroline Click piece published last week, John Dickerson questioned him on Face the Nation and not a single question about his past or present affiliations was asked.  Just given a platform to continue the campaign against Donald Trump.

I'm not surprised, just making note of it.
169  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Representative Keith Ellison, Caroline Click, anti-Semitism on: November 20, 2016, 09:46:21 AM
It is important that vague charges like racism or anti-Semitism are backed up with specifics..I was wondering what some of the specific charges are against Keith Ellison on anti-Semitism and Caroline Glick lays out that case very well here.  This could also go in the anti-semitism thread.  Note that she references the good work done by Scott Johnson at Powerline at the time the Keith Ellison was first elected.  Also note the hypocrisy that one side is putting on nominees about their past affiliations and past statements while they elevate this man who was a member and spokesman for Nation of Islam, with ties to CAIR, Muslim Brotherhood, indirect ties to Hamas, to party leadership.

The Ellison Challenge
17 Nov 2016
 The Democratic Party’s move toward antisemitism, a move made apparent through Ellison’s rise, is one movement the Jews mustn’t lead.

The Democratic Party stands at a crossroads today. And so do the Jewish Democrats.

Out of power in the White House and both houses of Congress, the Democrats must decide what sort of party they will be in the post-Obama world.

They have two basic options.

They can move to the center and try to rebuild their blue collar voter base that President-elect Donald Trump captivated with his populist message. To do so they will need to loosen the reins of political correctness and weaken their racialism, their radical environmentalism and their support for open borders.

This is the sort of moderate posture that Bill Clinton led with. It is the sort of posture that Clinton tried but failed to convince his wife to adopt in this year’s campaign.

The second option is to go still further along the leftist trajectory that President Barack Obama set the party off on eight years ago. This is the favored option of the Bernie Sanders wing of the party. Sanders’s supporters refer to this option as the populist course.

It is being played out today on the ground by the anti- Trump protesters who refuse to come to terms with the Trump victory and insistently defame Trump as a Nazi or Hitler and his advisers as Goebbels.

For the Democrats, such a populist course will require them to become more racialist, more authoritarian in their political correctness, angrier and more doctrinaire.

It will also require them to become an antisemitic party.

Antisemitism, like hatred of police and Christians, is a necessary component of Democratic populism.

This is true first and foremost because they will need scapegoats to blame for all the bad things you can’t solve by demonizing and silencing your political opponents.

Jews, and particularly the Jewish state, along with evangelical Christians and cops are the only groups that you are allowed to hate, discriminate against and scapegoat in the authoritarian PC universe.

From the party’s initial post-election moves, it appears that the Democrats have decided to take the latter path.

Congressman Keith Ellison from Minneapolis is now poised to be selected as the next leader of the Democratic National Committee. This position is a powerful one. The DNC chairman, like his Republican counterpart, is the party’s chief fund-raiser.

When a party is out of power, the party chairman is also treated like its formal leader, and most active spokesman.

Ellison is the head of the Democrats’ Progressive Caucus. His candidacy is supported by incoming Senate minority leader Sen. Chuck Schumer and outgoing Senate minority leader Harry Reid. Obama has indicated his support for Ellison. Sen. Bernie Sanders is enthusiastically supporting him.

Ellison made history in 2006 when he was elected to serve as the first Muslim member of Congress. As the representative of an overwhelmingly Democratic district, once he won the Democratic primary in 2006, he was all but guaranteed that he could serve in Congress for as long as he wishes.

As Scott Johnson, a prominent conservative writer who runs the popular Power Line blog website reported extensively in 2006, Ellison is an antisemite. He also defends cop killers.

As Johnson reported, Ellison was a long-standing member of the antisemitic Nation of Islam. During his 2006 congressional campaign, the local media gave next to no coverage to this association. But when it did come up, Ellison soothed concerns of Minneapolis’s Jewish community by sending a letter to the local Jewish Community Relations Committee.

In the letter Ellison claimed that he had only been briefly associated with Louis Farrakhan’s outfit, that he was unfamiliar with its antisemitism, and that he had never personally expressed such views.

The local media and the Jewish community were happy to take him at his word.

But as Johnson documented, he was lying on all counts.

Ellison’s association with the Nation of Islam dated back at least since 1989 and stretched at least until 1998. During that period, he not only knew about the Nation of Islam’s Jew-hatred, he engaged in it himself.

As Johnson noted, in 1998, Ellison appeared at a public forum as a spokesman for the Nation of Islam.

He was there to defend a woman who was under fire for allegedly referring to Jews as “among the most racist white people.”

Whereas the woman herself denied she had made the statement, Ellison defended and justified her alleged statement. Referring to her slander of Jews he said, “We stand by the truth contained in [the woman’s] remarks... Also it is absolutely true that merchants in Black areas generally treat Black customers badly.”

As Johnson reported, aside from engaging in anti-Jewish propaganda and actively promoting antisemitic messages and leaders, decades before the Black Lives Matter was formed, Ellison was a prominent defender of murderers of policemen.

After the September 11 attacks, Ellison likened the attacks to the Reichstag fire in 1933, intimating that the al-Qaida strike was an inside job. He then agreed with an audience member who said that “the Jews” gained the most from the attacks.

As a member of Congress, Ellison has been among the most hostile US lawmakers toward Israel. He has close relations with Muslim Brotherhood-related groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Islamic Society of North America. Both groups were unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism funding trial, implicated in funding Hamas and al-Qaida.

And now, Sens. Schumer, Sanders and Reid and President Obama along with the Democratic grassroots activists and other party leaders are supporting Ellison’s bid to serve as chairman of the DNC.

As Ellison’s statement about “merchants” makes clear, the Democrats’ Jew-hatred may not be of the “Jews are the sons of apes and pigs” variety. In all likelihood, it will be propagated through angry rhetoric about “bankers” and “financiers,” and “the rich.”

Ellison, a supporter of the antisemitic BDS movement, has libeled Israel by likening the Jewish state to apartheid South Africa. Under his leadership, we can expect for Democratic politicians to veer even further away from Israel and to embrace the slander that Zionism is racism.

The populist Sanders route seems more attractive to the Democrats than Bill Clinton’s moderate path because the notion is taking hold that Sanders would have been a stronger candidate in the general election than Clinton was.

This view is hard to accept. Most Americans reject socialism, and populist or not, it is difficult to see how Sanders would have sold his radical positions to an uninterested public.

The other problem with the “Sanders would have won” argument is that it misses the distinction between Trump’s populism and Democratic populism.

Trump’s populism stemmed from his willingness to say things that other politicians and authority figures more generally wouldn’t dare to say. Trump’s allegation that the political system is rigged, for instance, empowered Americans who feel threatened by the authoritarianism of the politically correct Left.

Trump’s opponents insist that his populism empowered white power bigots. But that was a bug in his ointment. It wasn’t the ointment itself. Trump’s willingness to seemingly say anything, and certainly to say things that were beyond the narrow confines of the politically correct discourse, empowered tens of millions of voters. It also empowered white bigots at the fringes of the Right.

Whereas empowering white bigots was a side effect of Trump’s populism, empowering bigots is a central feature of leftist populism. And this is where it gets dicey for Jews.

As Obama – and Ellison – have shown, when Democrats channel populism, they use it to demonize their opponents as evil. They are “fat cats on Wall Street.”

They are “racists,” and other deplorables.

There are scattered voices on the Left that are calling for their fellow leftists to revisit their authoritarian practice of labeling everyone who doesn’t walk lockstep behind them as racists and otherwise unacceptable. But for the most part, the populists are winning the argument by essentially demanding more ideological radicalism and more rigidity.

This policy is completely irrational from a political perspective. It’s hard to see the constituencies that will be swayed to support an angry, hateful party.

But this brings us to the Jews, who voted 3:1 for the Democrats, and to the American Jewish leadership whose support for Clinton was near unanimous.

When antisemitic, populist voices like Ellison’s began taking over Britain’s Labour Party, British Jews began heading for the exits. When push came to shove they preferred their individual rights and their communal rights as Jews above their partisan loyalties.

So far, this doesn’t appear to be the case among Jewish Democrats.

Consider the Anti-Defamation League’s unhinged onslaught against Trump’s chief strategist, former Breitbart CEO Steve Bannon.

While ignoring Ellison’s record of antisemitism and support for Israel’s enemies, as well as his ties to unindicted co-conspirators in funding Hamas, the ADL launched a scathing assault on Bannon, accusing him of being an antisemite.

The ADL’s assault on Bannon follows its absurd claim in the final days of the campaign that Trump’s ad criticizing George Soros was antisemitic. It also follows the group’s bizarre condemnation of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent video clip in which he stated the plain fact that the Palestinian demand that Jews be ethnically cleansed from the territory they wish to take control over is an antisemitic demand.

As many prominent US Jews on both sides of the partisan divide have made clear, the accusation that Bannon, whose Breitbart website is one of the most pro-Israel websites in the US, is antisemitic is appalling on its face. The allegation is simply unsubstantiated.

So why do it? Why allege that a friend of the Jews is a Jew-hater while ignoring the actual antisemitism of another man? The answer is depressingly easy to discern.

The ADL appears to be trying to give cover to the rising forces of antisemitism in the Democratic Party.

By falsely accusing Bannon and through him Trump of antisemitism, the ADL defuses the real problem of Democratic antisemitism. And if the ADL doesn’t think there is a problem with Ellison taking over the DNC, but alleges that Republicans hate them, then rank and file Jews will stay put.

The ADL of course isn’t alone in sending this message.

Following the election, Conservative and Reform congregations in major cities throughout the US organized communal shivas, to mourn Clinton’s defeat as if it was a death in the family. Such actions, along with characterizations of Trump and his advisers as Nazis or Hitler or white supremacists work to bind Jews to a party that is inhospitable to their communal interests while blinding them to the fact that Republicans do not hate Jews or the Jewish state.

For decades, American Jews have been at the forefront of every major social movement on in the US.

But the Democratic Party’s move toward antisemitism, a move made apparent through Ellison’s rise, is one movement the Jews mustn’t lead.
170  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care, Ramesh Ponnuru, National Review on: November 18, 2016, 11:34:15 AM

Yes, We Should Protect People with Pre-existing Conditions

by RAMESH PONNURU   ,  November 16, 2016 4:13 PM

There is a way to repeal Obamacare that accomplishes that goal.

President-elect Donald Trump has repeatedly said that he wants to replace Obamacare while keeping its protections for people with pre-existing conditions. I agree with Trump that Obamacare should be repealed and that people with pre-existing conditions should be protected, and recently wrote here about how these goals could be reconciled.

The key, in my view, is to alter an Obamacare regulation that prevents insurers from charging the sick more than the healthy. That regulation gives healthy people an incentive not to buy insurance: They can always buy it when they get sick. But insurance markets won’t work if only sick people buy insurance. That’s the reason the Obamacare legislation coupled this regulation with the infamous “individual mandate” requiring most people to buy health insurance.

Many Republicans have suggested a different regulation: Insurers could be required to charge people with pre-existing conditions the same as healthy people so long as those people had maintained their insurance coverage. That regulation would not create an incentive to forgo coverage; it would add to the incentive to get it. And so the mandate would no longer be needed.

At the same time, I suggested, the government should give people who do not have access to employer-based coverage a tax credit that would allow them to purchase catastrophic health insurance (or more extensive coverage if they supplement that credit with their own money). This coverage would no longer be subject to Obamacare’s definition of essential benefits; the states would return to being the primary regulator of benefits, as they were before Obamacare. But individuals would be free to buy insurance from other states, which would be particularly helpful if their own states’ regulations were too costly.

Michael Cannon, the Cato Institute’s health-policy expert (and a friend of mine), disagrees with both Trump and me. He raises four objections to my suggestions and advances his own alternative.

The first objection is that the new regulation would create perversities of its own. Every year the sickest people would choose the most generous plan, and insurers would try to make their policies unfriendly to the sick to counteract their efforts. This concern seems greatly overstated. The regulation should be drawn to provide a narrow protection: If you had maintained your insurance coverage, getting sick would entitle you to get coverage comparable to what you had at the same rate as healthy people. That should nullify this objection.

Cannon’s second point is that the tax credit is the equivalent of an individual mandate. The mandate fines you for not buying insurance. The credit gives you a tax break for buying insurance. Either way, you pay more taxes if you don’t buy insurance. So are they really the same thing? No. Obamacare attempted to make it illegal for people to choose not to buy health insurance. That’s why the individual mandate went to the Supreme Court. The mortgage-interest deduction didn’t, even though you could apply the same argument to try to present it as a “house-buying mandate.” Maybe the mortgage-interest deduction is good policy and maybe it isn’t, but it’s not a mandate. The same goes for a tax credit to buy catastrophic health insurance.

Third, Cannon argues that getting rid of Obamacare’s employer mandate and providing a tax credit to people who don’t have employer-based coverage would give employers an incentive to drop their plans. But we have had very little of such employer dumping even though the employer mandate has not been put into effect and individuals without employer coverage have been able to use tax credits on Obamacare’s exchanges. Again, the concern seems exaggerated. Republicans are leery of simply abolishing Obamacare’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions for both humanitarian and political reasons.

Fourth, Cannon says that replacing Obamacare along the lines I’ve discussed would “entrench Obamacare’s worst features into federal law, permanently, by giving them a Republican imprimatur.” To accept this conclusion requires both buying those three prior points and losing all sense of perspective. The replacement I’m talking about would get rid of the individual and employer mandates, the essential-benefits regulations, federal support for the exchanges, the medical-device tax, the Independent Payment Advisory Board, and more. The federal government would have a smaller distortionary role in health care than it did before Obamacare, let alone than the one it has played since then. For example, the federal government would no longer be giving people with access to employer coverage a much larger tax break than people without such access, and it would do a lot less to push people to buy the most expensive health plans available.

Republicans are leery of simply abolishing Obamacare’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions for both humanitarian and political reasons. Cannon proposes a way to handle that problem: Abolish as much of Obamacare as possible except for its regulations on pre-existing conditions. “Americans will see the actual costs of those supposedly beneficent and popular provisions when they cause insurance markets to collapse. The damage would be so swift and severe, Congress would quickly repeal the pre-existing-conditions provisions, filibuster or no filibuster.”

Either you can see instantly that this strategy is a terrible one or you can’t, so there’s not much to say about it. Besides this: I cannot imagine House and Senate Republicans’ pursuing it. — Ramesh Ponnuru is a senior editor at National Review.
171  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care, House Republican Plan, June 2016 on: November 18, 2016, 10:32:51 AM
For people without insurance through their jobs, the Republicans would establish a refundable tax credit. Obamacare also provides subsidies for people to buy insurance if they do not qualify for Medicaid.

It also includes long-held Republican proposals such as allowing consumers to buy health insurance across state lines, expanding health savings accounts, reforming medical liability rules and giving block grants to states to run Medicaid programs for the poor.

Also does not have all the answers.
172  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care, Ben Carson Plan on: November 18, 2016, 10:28:08 AM
Emphasis on Health Savings Accounts supplemented with major medical insurance policies.  He is right in the general concept, pay as much of the nation'a healthcare expenses with people's own money, first party pay.  Then let them buy policies they choose to cover their major medical with high deductibles, if that is what will bring their monthly and annual costs down.

This does not answer all the questions.

First-dollar coverage for out-of-pocket expenses and premiums to buy the insurance of your choice.
Your Money. Your Account belongs to you, whether you change jobs or cross state lines.
Transferable between family members, because each of us has different medical needs.
Save Medicare and Medicaid by putting beneficiaries in control:

Give Medicare beneficiaries a fixed contribution to buy the health insurance they actually want and need.
Give Medicare and Medicaid enrollees HEAs to cover first-dollar expenses and insurance premiums for coverage they get to choose
Modernize Medicare to keep pace with medical advances by gradually increasing the eligibility age (by 2 months each year) until it reaches age 70.
Treat Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries like the rest of us. Give Medicaid beneficiaries the same insurance coverage, doctors and choices that other Americans enjoy, with HEAs to provide first-dollar coverage, supplemented by a major medical insurance plan of the patient’s choice.
Save Medicaid by providing fixed-dollar support to the states, which must use the funds for premium payments and HEAs for beneficiaries — not wasteful state bureaucracies.
173  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: keep the individual mandate? on: November 17, 2016, 07:10:57 PM

Making a provision for pre-existing conditions is quite popular.  The individual mandate is not, but perhaps needed to keep people from waiting until they need expensive treatment to buy a policy.

Does someone, Trump, Ryan, McConnell, have another way of solving this?

I can think of some ways but they wouldn't be popular.
174  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Economics on: November 17, 2016, 02:55:46 PM
I think the argument is that this will replace welfare, not add to it.

In that case, this is an idea that Milton Freidman used to put forward.  He was making the point we could give them quite a bit directly in place of all the bureaucratic programs.

I am still skeptical that Ontario will do this in lieu of all other programs, they still get free health care for example.  Nor will they be able to keep it at 1320 or measure its success by how many people no longer need it.  I am also skeptical that formalizing the idea that all people are entitled to a decent paycheck whether they work or not is not in direct contradiction to crucial incentives to produce.

The current system of receiving a myriad of programs and free money that other people earned is “seriously demeaning”.

How about minimum income with a minimum work requirement, set at a humane limit of what each person is able to do, with a built-in incentive to get off of it.

Our welfare reform under Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich was mainly a work requirement to receive welfare and that had a tremendous result from my point of view.   Since then other programs have grown around that.
175  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Keith Ellison on: November 17, 2016, 02:43:52 PM

Ellison was on one of the big Sunday shows (Meet the Press or Face the Nation).  They went through a big election recap deciding that Democrats never reached out to rural America.  The host wondered what Dems were going to do about that.  Next up was Keith Ellison, possible choice to head up the party, 'we'll ask him what his party plans to do about this', nothing. Ellison told them essentially he would double down on all the progressive ideas they already were committed to.  Good for him, as they say.

Funny thing is, I can find no public record that Keith Ellison has ever been to rural area in the United States.  No record I can find he has ever set foot in a red county as defined by the Trump vote map.  

Ellison was born and raised in Detroit.  Went to college in Detroit, law school at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.  Lived in and represented north Minneapolis (where my rental properties are) in the state legislature, downtown St. Paul.  He most certainly knows Washington DC, the Capitol Building, CAIR headquarters etc.  He has visited Iraq (to oppose the war, during the war).  He's traveled to Mogadishu, Gaza, Mecca and Guantanamo.

The Trump map has better coverage than Verizon wireless.  Democrats won the big cities and about two other areas. To my knowledge, their is no public record or press account that Keith Ellison has ever set foot in a county marked red.  Yet he is the 'right person' to lead a national party that wants to connect with all of us...
176  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Canada testing guaranteed income on: November 16, 2016, 10:14:39 AM

"What Happens When You Give Basic Income to the Poor? "

Is income the only thing poor people are missing?

As we had with static scoring of massively different tax and spend alternatives here, does anyone believe that providing a comfortable income without working (along with legalization of marijuana) will have no effect on the incentive or disincentive to produce?

75% death tax will not affect the incentive to build wealth. 

Highest business taxes in the world is not why companies are leaving. 

And punishing capital investment is not related to productivity and wage stagnation, no connection.

Which side again has the deniers of science?  Or is economics not a science?

It fits perfectly with the mentality here with minimum wage law is how you raise incomes of 'minimum wage workers'.  Why can't Haiti pass a $15 minimum wage law or 1320/mo minimum income decree and vote itself out of poverty?  Is it possible something else is missing?

177  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues, Major Newspaper Endorsements 57-2 on: November 16, 2016, 09:56:36 AM

Can anyone guess which side that favored?

How much more help did she need?  Amazing that he overcame this kind of bias - or does anyone believe the bias was limited to the editorial page?

Note: previous post deleted out.
178  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Let them go! Time for the national divorce on: November 16, 2016, 09:36:22 AM
Foolishness, I think, but a couple of considerations.  If we lose the American southwest to Mexico, we still need the wall - just in a little further.  If the bluest areas of our coast secedes to Canada, can we keep some coastline away from the big cities to build ports, and could we please have the Canadian Rockies and  their conservative areas and oil in return?

This is all silliness, but wouldn't it be great if we could all live under the system we prefer instead of being ruled by others on either side.

Maybe the Founders should have set up a union of states instead of such a strong, all-knowing, all-ruling central government, and let the states run their own experiments on taxes, regulations, spending, marriages and abortion.  Just use the central government for necessary central functions like national defense.   

Oh wait, maybe they did!
179  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: American Creed. Constitutional Law, Madison's original Article 16 on: November 15, 2016, 06:03:22 PM
I support  Madison's original article 16 but I don't support the convention of the states. Open to further persuasion.

I would like to revise and extend my remarks...

The typical way of passing a new amendment, if I understand this correctly, is for 2/3rds of the House and 2/3rds of the Senate to pass a proposed amendment to send to the states where it must be ratified by 3/4ths of the state legislatures.

In this second way, the convention of the states can be called by 2/3rds of the states.  Then what comes out of that convention still needs to be ratified by 3/4ths of the state legislatures.

The fear is that some great sounding liberal thing will come out of this and all but the strongest of conservatives will be guilted into supporting it.  A right to (free) healthcare would be an example.

What has changed is that Republicans control more state legislatures than ever before.  If there was something urgent and ready to go that would really fix things, now might be the time.  Term limits for House and Senate would be potential examples.

I am still undecided on the term limits amendment and skeptical about starting about this process.  I still worry it will later be used against us.  The Founders were smarter than us and not that much has changed that hasn't already been amended, slavery ended and women voting for examples.
180  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Issues in the American Creed (Constitutional Law and related matters) on: November 15, 2016, 05:31:35 PM
How did he do this "single handedly?"

He does not strike me as having stood up the LEftist rebel (yes rebels - they are - not us) onslaught."

Of course every Senate republican who stood with him also had a hand in it and the public who never screamed in outrage that the vacancy wasn't being filled promptly.  This one-year delay was led by Mitch McConnell, not Trump, Paul Ryan, Rush Limbaugh or anyone else.  He spoke up early, was decisive, took an enormous risk and never wavered.

Same Senate Republicans who never defunded Obamacare did something heroic here, placed a bet that jeopardized their own power and required exactly this outcome, and they won.  Now Trump, all conservatives and presumably the American people are the beneficiaries.

To have done otherwise was to take an even bigger risk, what some of us thought was the irreversible end of the country as we knew it. 

Sean Hannity was ripping Mitch McConnell today in advance of the Trump inauguration for things he hasn't done wrong yet.  Mark Levin too, I imagine.  Maybe they should check their facts and give credit where credit is due.  This was a BIG deal.  MHO.
181  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Issues American Creed Constitutional Law, Trump's First Supreme Court Pick on: November 15, 2016, 05:10:58 PM
The list:
1. Keith Blackwell

2. Charles Canady

3. Steven Colloton

4. Allison Eid

5. Neil Gorsuch

6. Raymond Gruender

7. Thomas Hardiman

8. Raymond Kethledge

9. Joan Larsen

10. Mike Lee

11. Thomas Lee

12. Edward Mansfield

13. Federico Moreno

14. William Pryor

15. Margaret A. Ryan

16. Amul Thapar

17. Timothy Tymkovich

18. David Stras

19. Diane Sykes

20. Don Willett

21. Robert Young

The Promise:
"This list is definitive and I will choose only from it in picking future justices of the Supreme Court."
Note the plural on justices, applies also to future picks.

Some details:
Keith Blackwell is a justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia. He was appointed to the position in 2012. He had previously served on the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Before serving on the bench, Justice Blackwell was a Deputy Special Attorney General of the State of Georgia, an Assistant District Attorney in Cobb County, and a commercial litigator in private practice. Justice Blackwell is a graduate of the University of Georgia School of Law.

Charles Canady is a justice of the Supreme Court of Florida. He has served in that role since 2008, and he served as the court's chief justice from 2010 to 2012. Prior to his appointment, Justice Canady served as a judge of the Florida Second District Court of Appeal and as a member of the United States House of Representatives for four terms. Justice Canady is a graduate of Yale Law School.

Neil Gorsuch is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He was appointed to the position in 2006. Judge Gorsuch previously served in the Justice Department as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Judge Gorsuch was a Marshall Scholar and received his law degree from Harvard. He clerked for Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy.

Mike Lee is the Junior U.S. Senator from Utah and currently serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee. He has previously served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Utah and as a Supreme Court Clerk for Justice Alito.

Edward Mansfield is a justice of the Iowa Supreme Court. He was appointed to the court in 2011 and retained by voters in 2012. Justice Mansfield previously served as a judge of the Iowa Court of Appeals. He also teaches law at Drake University as an adjunct professor. Justice Mansfield is a graduate of Yale Law School.

Federico Moreno is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and a member of the Judicial Conference of the United States. He previously served as a state and county court judge in Florida. Judge Moreno is a graduate of the University of Miami School of Law.

Margaret A. Ryan has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces since 2006. Judge Ryan served in the Marine Corps through deployments in the Philippines and the Gulf War. She then attended Notre Dame Law School through a military scholarship and served as a JAG officer for four years. Judge Ryan clerked for Judge J. Michael Luttig of the Fourth Circuit and Justice Clarence Thomas.

Amul Thapar is a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, serving since his appointment in 2007, when he became the first South Asian Article III judge. He has taught law students at the University of Cincinnati and Georgetown. Judge Thapar has served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Washington, D.C. and the Southern District of Ohio. Immediately prior to his judicial appointment, Judge Thapar was the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Judge Thapar received his law degree from the University of California, Berkeley.

Timothy Tymkovich is the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Judge Tymkovich was appointed to the bench in 2003. He previously served as Colorado Solicitor General. Judge Tymkovich is a graduate of the University of Colorado College of Law.

Robert Young is the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Michigan. He was appointed to the court in 1999, and became part of a majority of justices who embraced originalism and led what one scholar described as a "textualism revolution." Justice Young previously served as a judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals. Chief Justice Young is a graduate of Harvard Law School.

William Pryor, 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, Atlanta, "titanium spine"
Joan Larsen, Michigan Supreme Court, former Scalia clerk
182  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Huffington Post Announces possible Bolton pick, "Extreme Militant" on: November 15, 2016, 04:52:41 PM
Donald Trump Leaning Toward Extreme Militant John Bolton As Secretary Of State

a)  Wouldn't it be our enemies that are the "extreme militants"?  And if so, wouldn't you want a pretty serious Secretary of State to organize against them?

b)  Didn't Hillary Clinton vote for all the same wars Ambassador Bolton supported?  Plus one additional in Libya that never was brought to Congress.
183  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Donald Trump on: November 15, 2016, 11:48:08 AM
I don't recall the bet we had.  Do I owe you since Hillary won or are we even.
Either way we both won because she lost

As I see it, I owe you two meals and you owe me one, all to be paid at the next forum gathering.  )

I was partly right on the first two, she shouldn't have run and she shouldn't have won the nomination.  And you were partly or nearly right on the final outcome.  Under the worst of circumstances she still won the popular vote and almost became President.

The Clintons would not have taken in all the fees on the scale they did if not for the promise she would become President.  I missed that fact in my prediction. Follow the money.
184  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Constitutional Law, The Court opening won the White House and Senate on: November 15, 2016, 11:29:51 AM
A comment on process and participants in the process, Mitch McConnell single-handedly made this Trump pick possible.  He single-handedly kept the balance from shifting from 5-4 conservative to 5-4 liberal, in the terms that most observers score it.  Trump Supporters should be careful criticizing people who helped set the table for him. 

Merrick Garland was a reasonable choice within the context that it was an Obama pick.  They had plenty of time to hold hearings had that been their priority, as the constitution suggests it is.  I was thinking it was wrong of them to refuse to address this, but then re-reading the clause, "advice and consent", refusal certainly was a form of advice and consent, especially since that decision would be judged by the voters shortly.

As it turns out, pushing this Supreme Court pick into the election is what won the election for both Trump and the Senate Republicans IMHO.  What else does this thrice married, trash talking, rich guy, show host turned statesman have in common with the Christian evangelical vote that he kept winning?  What else did he have in common with these Republican Senators, where they were keeping their distance but winning most of their same voters?

Whether you look at Roe v Wade, gay marriage or the Obamacare case, when the Court becomes no more than a political body, we lost our republic.
185  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / "Donald, Your word is your bond but your memory is short." on: November 15, 2016, 10:44:22 AM
“Donald, your word is your bond but your memory is short."

Alleged quote of Trump's former stockbroker.
Source, second or third hand via facebook, must be true...

His words also are sometimes intended as starting points in negotiations.
186  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Left Derangement Syndrome - Trump's fault or FBI's fault? on: November 15, 2016, 10:31:52 AM
.33 Blood Alcohol Drunk Driver Blames Donald Trump

But wasn't Trump's win Comey's fault?

.33% is more than 4 times the legal limit in MN.

She couldn't spell her name but she was able to articulate the motivation for her intoxication.

“I am upset over the outcome of the election and you should let me go home,”

No word on whether or not that is excusable situation in St. Paul.
187  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the Republicans on: November 14, 2016, 02:45:22 PM
Isn't he the moron who declared the real purpose of Gowdy's Benghazi committee was to "get Hillary" for political gain?

Bad gaffe.
188  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / US Senate Races 2018. The shoe is on the other foot. on: November 14, 2016, 01:02:11 PM
These races will affect pressure on legislative votes in 2017.

Democrats will be defending MANY seats in states that Trump won and almost won.

Joe Donnelly, Indiana, vulnerable

Claire McCaskill, Missouri, One of the few to openly back Hillary.

Jon Testor, Montana, partisan Democrat in a Trump state.

Heidi Heitkamp, North Dakota

Joe Manchin, West Virginia.

Bill Nelson, Florida, possible retirement.

Sherrod Brown, Ohio, the only thing left in Ohio that is ultra liberal

Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin, ultra liberal in a Trump state.  Scott Walker may run against her.

Tim Kaine, Virginia.  A Trump target?

12 possibly vulnerable Dems, 2 vulnerable Republicans, Flake, Arizona, Heller, Nevada.

I wrote previously that 60 R votes in the Senate ever is impossible.  I would like to retract that.

Debbie Stabenow, Michigan

Bob Casey, Pennsylvania, elected Trump and Toomey in a Presidential year

189  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Wesbury: Trump looking good on: November 14, 2016, 12:03:48 PM
Wesbury is quite good when he writes about this sort of thing.

"One of the Republicans' first tasks will be repealing much (but not all) of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. To get that done, they will use the budget reconciliation process in the US Senate, where they don't need to break a filibuster with 60 votes; instead, they only need a simple majority. The budget process can be used to eliminate (1) penalties for not getting insurance, (2) subsidies for buying government-approved overly-broad insurance packages, and (3) the expansion of Medicaid. "

Maybe deals can be made to get to 60 votes by using the reconciliation threat and writing bills that some red state democrats can sign onto.
190  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Trump Administration on: November 14, 2016, 11:55:05 AM
I have no problem with Preibus in this position.  Isn't it more managerial than policy?  And isn't Bannon getting a big policy slot?  RP has good relations with Paul Ryan, and IMHO there is plenty of common ground to be had with Ryan.  Congress is an equal branch of government, no need to pick an unnecessary fight with Ryan.

My thoughts also.  Preibus may be a great choice for this.  Trump got to see his public and behind the scenes work up close the last couple of months.  He found out he is effective, loyal and keeps his word.  No one saw that coming...

If Preibus is wrong for the job or not needed after the initial legislative surge, Trump is good at changing course on that kind of thing.

Ryan and Preibus are among the 'good guys', not RINOs.  The Republican House is a good check on Obama's policy agenda.  They have given most of these issues more thought over more time and know the legislative landscape better.  Trump may know some other things better.  Where they overlap, we need policies enacted.
191  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Republicans in control of Minnesota House and Senate on: November 13, 2016, 10:50:17 AM
News from the bluest of blue states, the only state Reagan never won.  Note the non-msm source.  Did you see or hear this yet anywhere else?
192  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Pence takes over transition from Christie on: November 11, 2016, 03:55:41 PM

I think this was the rarest case where the nominee's pick for VP actually did win him the election.  All the other factors in Trump's favor did too in this close election, but without the Pence pick, a rock solid conservative, fully qualified with unflinching loyalty that never wavered or stumbled, Trump would have lost.  Conservative voters came back ever so slowly and that was the evidence Trump now leans conservative and understands the seriousness of the job.  (The Supreme Court list also did that that but was not as visible in the campaign.) 

Might as well start grooming Mike Pence to be the successor.  Is it too early to say Pence/Rubio in 2020 with Trump retiring as a winner, with his agenda fully in place.  They really don't pay you much more to serve a second term.

That also can be Trump's reachout to the other half of the nation.  Enact my agenda and I will serve only one term.  Who could say no to that?
193  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Let them go! Time for the national divorce on: November 11, 2016, 03:40:26 PM
DDF:  "What I find odd, is that when conservatives were talking about it with Texas, many liberals were very much against it. Imagine that."

Worse yet, it was a disqualifier as an American and a human being to have had any affiliation with anyone in Texas or Alaska who ever was around anyone who express interest or curiosity about secession.  Todd Palin comes to mind.  I've tried to avoid those types of statements here though it does often seem that our differences are irreconcilable.

After the election in 2008 I think it was, Rush L made a proposal that we have two tax systems, red and blue you could call them, and then see which one people prefer and which one brings the most revenues and prosperity.  Now would be a GREAT time to do that.  The tax rate cuts will only be for people who want that and leave the old rate option in place for liberals who prefer that.   Corporate rates will lowered only for corporatrions that want that kind of thing.  Companies like Google, Facebook, Target and General Mills can all keep paying at the old, more responsible, corporate citizen rates.  Ease the regulations of Obamacare and bring back the old plans and better ones - but only for people who choose that, not force it on people.  If you like your 100% annual increases, you can keep your 100% annual increases.

I don't want to rule someone else or be ruled by someone else beyond the minimal set of rules it takes to have a prosperous and functioning society.  Let them ban their own gun ownership and limit their own soda sizes for anyone who wants that level of supervision.  We don't have to break up over this.  Some of my best friends are lefties.
194  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Way Forward, no end zone dance, just work to do. on: November 10, 2016, 08:03:22 PM
President George W Bush made this statement in his first press conference after the 2004 election that was perhaps the start of his rather sudden fall:

"The people made it clear what they wanted, I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and I intend to spend it."

This week conservatives and Republicans won the Presidency, Senate, House, 32 Governorships and close to 70% of the state legislative chambers across the fruited plain.  Someone wiser than George W Bush used to say something about the excessive end zone dance celebrations we often see, "act like you've been there before'.  That was former Minnesota Vikings Head Coach Bud Grant.  The play was designed to go to the end zone.  That's where you expected it to go.  You are a professional, paid to do that and you did it.  Give the ball to the referee and get back to your team ready to play the rest of the game.

If Republicans or Trumpists think they already won it all, achieved it all, have political capital and are going to stick it to the other side just because of the outcome of the close vote count on Tuesday night, they might soon learn otherwise.  There is work to do.  

21 million people will lose health insurance in January if Trump and the Republicans simply cancel Obamacare without having a better plan in place.  Whatever the legislation is, it needs to go through a 51-49 Senate where rules require 60 votes - depending on what the meaning of rules is.  There will be a fight.

Tax reform has been talked about since the Harding administration.  Yes it can be done.  No it won't be easy.

The Penny Plan to cut spending is simple.  Telling Sean Hannity you support it was easy.  But no one has ever done it.

The first Supreme Court nomination is all but ready, coming from a list made and released.  Getting and winning a vote on the nominee is another matter.  A couple of Democrats on the committee (and all their activists) might still be pissed off.

20 or so candidates opined on how they would defeat ISIS.  Trump was the least specific about it.  Yet ISIS controls a good part of the Middle East and has attacks already planned all over the west.  This isn't a debate question anymore.  The plan you're not going to telegraph to the enemy needs to be in place, like now.  Good morning Mr. President, here is your briefing.  Guess what?  The real attack on the homeland isn't in the briefing.  Have a nice day.

Building the wall isn't an artist's rendition anymore.  Deciding who to deport and how isn't a political hypothetical anymore.

And for the Republicans in Congress, writing or repealing real legislation isn't as simple as opposing a President from the other party.  Real laws have real consequences, unintended ones too.

Britain, Canada and Mexico have all signaled willingness to re-open trade deals.  There is a hint of an opening with China too.  That doesn't mean these countries will accept our terms.  Simpler and better trade deals is a great idea.  The threat of a 40% tariff on consumers, a trade war or a new depression is not.

How about the federal dilemma of addressing the legalization of marijuana happening in many of the states, still against federal law.  Is there going to be a civil war against Colorado, Washington, California, Oregon and Massachusetts over pot laws or is the federal government going to make accommodation for what is now a reality in the states?  Even if legalization was a bad idea...

Nice election.  Everybody deserves a little credit.  We defeated an incompetent, inexperienced candidate under federal investigation with no charisma by -300,000 votes.  

Now there is work to do.
195  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Non Citizens Voting on: November 10, 2016, 01:09:51 PM
Very good work, DDF.

Rachel Maddow states that Donald Trump talked about rounding up and deporting more than 10,000,000 people at the 23:20 mark in her/MSNBC's election night coverage here:

Which means, that by democratic admission on total numbers of illegals in the country (because she didn't dispute the number, and in fact used it as a quote against Trump), that the article posted by Doug yesterday, having 13-25% (per the article) of noncitizens casting votes (noting that at times, they are only discovered by their own admission during Customs interviews):

13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote

A poll by John McLaughlin confirms again we may have a significant problem with noncitizens participating illegally in our elections. Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.

This translates into untold numbers of fraudulent votes. Those are only the ones that admit to it. The number could be as high as 10,000,000. If there is no penalty, no danger of being discovered, and huge rewards awaiting, people who are prohibited from voting, could consider themselves foolish not to vote, especially when Barack Obama himself mentions it, if not encouraging it, (and I'm purposely citing SNOPES because of their liberal slant, in order to take away any defense of the matter):

Snopes: "The claim originates from an interview with Obama published on 3 November 2016, in which millennial actress Gina Rodriguez asked the president about a number of issues facing young Latinos. Many of the outrage posts were written around a video in which the majority of the president's response was edited out to give the misleading impression that Obama was urging undocumented immigrants to vote illegally.

In the full interview, it's clear Obama is urging Latino citizens to vote in order to give voice to members of their community who are precluded from doing so by lack of citizenship, not urging non-citizens to vote illegally. Rodriguez's question seems to be addressing a fear that voting will result in scrutiny on one's family which could result in deportation of undocumented relatives." End.

It is clear who Obama is addressing, per Snope's own admission.

The interview transcript:

RODRIGUEZ: Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens -- and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country -- are fearful of voting. So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?

OBAMA: Not true. And the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential in terms of who you voted for. If you have a family member who maybe is undocumented, then you have an even greater reason to vote.

RODRIGUEZ: This has been a huge fear presented especially during this election.

OBAMA: And the reason that fear is promoted is because they don't want people voting. People are discouraged from voting and part of what is important for Latino citizens is to make your voice heard, because you're not just speaking for yourself. You're speaking for family members, friends, classmates of yours in school...

RODRIGUEZ: Your entire community.

OBAMA: ... who may not have a voice. Who can't legally vote. But they're counting on you to make sure that you have the courage to make your voice heard.


Obama could not have possibly been referring to a citizen having "fear" to vote, because it is clearly established by law that any citizen can vote, and he clearly states that:

"there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera."

Obama made it a point, to make that portion clear, when he didn't have to, because there is no legal reprobation for claiming a legal right available to any citizen. The only reason he could make an issue of investigatory practices, is solely to inform people that are legally prohibited from voting.


1.) It is clear that Obama encourages the practice from his own words:

2.) Non-citizens by their own admission and through existing authorities have both admitted to voting and been caught doing so.

3.) There are at least 10,000,000 non-citizens in the country. Other sources claim it to be as high as 13.7% of the total population of which:

     a.)The term "foreign-born" includes naturalized citizens, legal permanent residents, visa holders and undocumented immigrants.

     b.) Making it clear, that it isn't just "undocumented" people that can vote illegally.

     c.) USCIS themselves state that in the last decade, 6.6 million naturalized citizens were admitted and that roughly .6 million are admitted annually.

 - (curiously, in 2008, a key election year, more than a million were admitted - bottom of page)

4.) Based on USCIS statistics, US Census figures (Table 1.1 of the following link) and the article quoted above, there are 21,707,000 people pending citizenship (6.8% of the current US population of 318.9 million) as of 2005 , plus, an additional 10-15 million people that are not documented (4.7% at 15 million), making a full 11.5% of the total population (36,673,500 people).

5.) Total voter turnout in 2016 was 130,840,000, with 231,556,622 being eligible to vote (56.5% of eligible voters, voted) , which means that of eligible voters, the numbers from #4.) now represent 16.59% of documented aliens that don't have citizenship in regard to votes actually cast, and undocumented people in the country represent 11.464%, combining to make a total of 28.054% if total population of the US were counted as "cast ballots, and of which 28.054%, 13-25% admit to voting illegally, comprising  4,771,734 to 9,335,434 illegal votes cast,

NOTING: that though the percentages from USCIC constitute the total documented population number regardless of age, that owing to lack of voter registration laws, there is nothing stopping them from casting a ballot for everyone in their household.

ALSO NOTING: that the above numbers only reference people that admit to the practice of voting illegally, based on percentages.

ALSO NOTING: That many "Dreamer" children ln liberally, are very politically active, and are the children of people not permitted. It bears mentioning, that the children of immigrants who are naturalized citizens, ALSO vote Democratically.


1.) There is no inherent right to immigrate to the US, and the idea that there is, perpetuated largely by the Left, needs to be rectified.

2.) Voter ID laws need to be in place.

3.) ALL electronic voting machines need to be removed immediately, and replaced with paper ballots.

4.) ALL polling sites need to be monitored by both CAMERA and multiple, non-serving, citizen representatives from each party represented on the ballot.

5.) STIFF voter and electoral fraud prison sentences of 10 years or more need to be in place.

6.) Voter and electoral fraud investigative units cannot be made up of any politicians, lawyers, nor any businessman and must have civilian oversight.

7.) ALL undocumented individuals need to be deported without judicial representation, to their point of entry into the States, including any children born to them on US soil, and the 14th amendment rectified, to avoid people from cheating existing immigration laws that other legal immigrants sacrifice much in order to obey.

Even though I posted it, I'm not finding the 13℅ figure accurate or reliable, it could be higher.  But for whoever did vote illegally, they risked that Trump would win and these crimes would be investigated and prosecuted. Illegal voting should come with a lifetime ban on future citizenship and legal voting.   Maybe that will slow it down.
196  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues on: November 09, 2016, 11:30:49 PM
A couple of election points:

1.  The media gave Trump 90% of the coverage in a 17-way race in the primaries.  Through wikilwaks we find out they were colluding with Hillary to get her the weakest opponent. Then in the general election the coverage switched to 90℅ negative on Trump including a 10 year old tape and 20 year old allegations all timed for October..  How did that work out?

2.  Fact Checkers, WashPost ran a Pinocchio summary at the end rating Trump worse than Clinton.  Reading through it I found that Trump was making valid points and the fact checker was just nitpicking his wording and with Hillary they completely ignored her most outrageous lies.  N
I'm not surprised, just making a note of it. 

3.  NY Times did a major editorial endorsing his opponent when Rubio was running about even.  He won by 8 points.

They get judged and paid on their clicks so I am mostly not putting links anymore in referrals to bad reporting and meaningless commentary.

The media is so biased yet people are sometimes seeing through that.
197  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / HRC never set foot in Wisconsin, the state where Trump clinched the election on: November 09, 2016, 11:13:16 PM

"Wisconsin is such a solidly blue state that Hillary Clinton didn't feel the need to campaign there in her general-election battle against Donald Trump."

OTOH, she made hundreds of trips to Iowa I suppose and lost there by even more.
198  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote on: November 09, 2016, 09:14:32 PM
13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote

A poll by John McLaughlin confirms again we may have a significant problem with noncitizens participating illegally in our elections. Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.

The Daily Signal logo
Must Reads
INTERNATIONALCOMMENTARYIranian women pass next to an anti-U.S. mural on their way to the former U.S. Embassy in Tehran.(Photo: Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA/Newscom)
Iran Is Wrong: Trump Can Absolutely Overturn the Nuclear Deal

HEALTH CARE NEWSWith Donald Trump's election to the presidency, it's become more likely that Republicans will be able to successfully repeal Obamacare. (Photo: Nate Chute/Reuters/Newscom)
How Republicans Can Start to Dismantle Obamacare With a Trump Presidency

SOCIETYCOMMENTARYDonald Trump should commit to protecting the free exercise of religion for all Americans of all faiths. (Photo: Jeff Malet Photography/Newscom)
Make Religious Freedom Great Again

Poll Shows Noncitizens Can Shape Elections
Hans von Spakovsky   / @HvonSpakovsky / June 02, 2015 / comments



Portrait of Hans von Spakovsky
Hans von Spakovsky
Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research.
A poll by John McLaughlin confirms again we may have a significant problem with noncitizens participating illegally in our elections. Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.

In our 2012 book on voter fraud, John Fund and I noted numerous cases of noncitizen registration and voting all over the country. Only a month ago, the Board of Immigration Appeals of the Executive Office for Immigration Review at the Justice Department held that a Peruvian citizen who illegally registered and voted in the 2006 congressional election could be deported for violating federal law. The only reason she was caught is because she applied for naturalization in 2007 and admitted in the INS interview that she had voted in an American election.

In 2014, a study released by three professors at Old Dominion University and George Mason University, based on survey data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, estimated 6.4 percent of noncitizens voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election and 2.2 percent voted in the 2010 midterm congressional elections.

Since 80 percent of noncitizens vote Democratic, according to the study, noncitizen participation could have “been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes [in North Carolina in 2008], and Congressional elections” such as the 2008 race in Minnesota in which Al Franken was elected to the U.S. Senate, giving “Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote” to pass Obamacare. The Old Dominion/George Mason study was sharply attacked by progressive critics, but the mounting evidence makes clear this is a real problem.

In 2013, McLaughlin, a Republican pollster, conducted an extensive “National Hispanic Survey” to determine the attitudes of Hispanic Americans on immigration issues. McLaughlin went to a great deal of trouble to try to make this survey as accurate as possible, including conducting 60 percent of the interviews in Spanish. In results that run counter to what the mainstream media seems to think about the attitudes of Hispanics, the results showed strong support for everything from increased border security and tougher enforcement of immigration laws to “stopping undocumented immigrants who are already here from getting food stamps, welfare, Medicaid and Obamacare benefits.”

But buried in the back of the survey on page 68 is a “Voter Profile” that reveals that 13 percent of noncitizen respondents admitted they were registered to vote (a violation of state and federal law), which matches closely the Old Dominion/George Mason study finding that 14.8 percent of noncitizens admitted they were registered to vote in 2008 and 15.6 percent of noncitizens admitted they were registered in 2010.

When these numbers were adjusted to take into account various factors, such as noncitizens “who said they were not [registered but] were actually registered,” the Old Dominion/George Mason study’s authors concluded that the true percentage was probably closer to 25 percent.

There is no doubt the registration rate of noncitizens varies depending on the jurisdiction, and the percentage of those voting is likely smaller. But whether the registration rate is 13 percent as McLaughlin found or 25 percent as the Old Dominion/George Mason study estimated, there seems little doubt that there are enough noncitizens registering and voting to potentially make the difference in close elections.
199  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 09, 2016, 08:35:26 PM
After alleged panic overnight, the Dow closed at a record high today on the news of the Trump election.  Or was there some other news...

The world didn't end as predicted.
200  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Trump Administration Agenda - Trade deals, NAFTA, Canada steps up, Britain on: November 09, 2016, 08:29:36 PM
Our best trade partner is ready to talk.

Canada open to renegotiating free trade with Trump
Theresa May has led UK political congratulations for Donald Trump after his US election victory.
The PM said Britain and the US had an "enduring and special relationship" and would remain close partners on trade, security and defence.

Britain post-Brexit needs trade deals.  Pres. O told them to go to the back of the line.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 171
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!