The Watering hole, Monday, May 30, 2016: Will America Elect Yet Another Overtly Racist President?

America is far from perfect. We have achieved many great things in our history, but it has been despite our flaws, not because of them. And among the worst of our flaws is this country’s history of racism and white supremacy. Yes, not just the racism but the white supremacy, too. We on the Left post many words decrying white supremacists, but we rarely admit our country has elected many white supremacists POTUS, and they weren’t all Conservatives and/or Republicans and at least a few were Progressives and/or Democrats. As a Liberal, that bothers me. I want what’s best for everyone, and the color of one’s skin does not determine whether one is a human being or not. But there are many people, white people in particular, who feel this is not so; they feel that one’s skin color DOES determine how human one is. And sadly, these people often get elected to public office, where they are able to put their racist viewpoints into law. A President Donald J. Trump would be such a racist president.

It’s bad enough that Trump lies, and lies, and lies, and lies, and lies, and lies, and, just for good measure, engages in promoting conspiracy theories. (This is not to mention the xenophobia, misogyny, birtherism and bullying tactics.) But Donald Trump’s overt racism is probably one of the least admirable things about him. And yet, it’s precisely the reason he is so admired among many of his supporters. White supremacist organizations of all kinds have been openly endorsing Trump, while he has renounced or even denounced so few of them. He had to lie (there’s no other word for it) and say he didn’t know much about David Duke, after the former KKK Grand Wizard publicly endorsed him, despite the fact that several years ago Trump publicly commented on David Duke and his association with the Klan. So why hem and haw over publicly rejecting his endorsement? Trump knew Duke was connected to the Klan. Is that not enough to say he doesn’t want Duke’s support? Why say he has to know more about him before commenting? And if Trump doesn’t want the support of white supremacists, why does he so often retweet their tweets? (He can’t claim he didn’t know when their screen name has “white genocide” in it.)

Many of Trump’s fans like him because, as they tell it, “He says what I’m thinking.” If that’s true of you, then you’re not thinking good thoughts. In fact, you’re talking like someone who wants to take us back to the 1940s and 1950s, when white men were generally (if often wrongly) perceived to be the most admired people in the country. (Are you Pat Buchanan, by any chance?) And you have a problem for which you should seek treatment. Trump appeals to people like you because he uses “Othering”, where all your problems are blamed on people who aren’t like you. In other words, people who are non-white, non-Christian, and non-American. Others. Others who can be scapegoated. It’s the very ugly secret behind Trump’s success to win the nomination of the party that, let’s be truthful here, appeals as hard as it can to low-information, low-effort-thinking, less-educated, and less-intelligent voters. People who have opinions not based on reality. Of course, as part of their juvenile “I know you are but what am I?”-style of debating, they accuse us of not being based in reality, because the way we see the world doesn’t match the way they see the world. I’m not just talking about the difference between the way Liberals and Conservatives see the world, I’m talking about people who believe so many things that are provably false. And they base their voting choice on who they think could best solve the problems of the world as they see them, meaning both their problems and the world. These people are either not very intelligent, or very afraid of something that isn’t going to happen to them. Do conservative voters in the Midwest states really believe ISIS is going to come to America and bring death and Sharia Law to them? Just because they’re taking over a country thousands of miles away from here, that doesn’t have the same history as our country, that doesn’t have the same religious makeup as ours, that wasn’t enjoying the same freedoms as ours, doesn’t mean it’s going to happen here. I mean, c’mon! I thought you folks loved our military. Have you no faith in their ability to defend us from whatever it is you imagine is going to happen to us? (And you are imagining it. It isn’t going to happen.) And whatever it is you fear is going to happen, do you really think an overtly racist president is the best choice to be commanding your military? Say what you will about Hillary Clinton (and many of you Trump supporters have been doing just that, even though much of it isn’t true, meaning grounded in the real reality), she doesn’t see our oversized military as the go-to solution where tact and diplomacy would work better. And neither does Bernie Sanders. And neither should you.

I really, really hope our country is better than to elect a crass, petulant, childish racist as our president. We deserve the consequences if we do.

Sunday Roast: Memorial Day

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

~Lt Col John McRae

This is our daily open thread — In Memoriam of those service members who died while serving their country.

The Watering Hole; Friday May 27 2016; Climactic (Anthropogenic) Climatic Disruption

Climactic: consisting of, involving, or causing a climax.
Climax: the highest or most intense point in the development or resolution of something.

Climatic: of or relating to climate.
Climate: the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region.

Disrupt: to cause (something) to be unable to continue in the normal way.

ACD – Anthropogenic Climate Disruption: Climatic Disruption resulting from human activity; potentially Climactic.

These carefully rendered and ordered definitions were included here for the benefit of any Republican or Tea Party (Congressional Sens-Reps or their voters) that might happen to pass by — unlikely I know, but I always try to be fair and helpful when possible. [See also: The cult of ignorance in the United States: Anti-intellectualism and the “dumbing down” of America].

That said, a closer and finely detailed examination of Anthropogenic Climate Disruption data becomes more revealing with virtually every passing month.

1. From February 2014: The March of Anthropogenic Climate Disruption by Dahr Jamal begins by pointing out that 2013

. . . marked the 37th consecutive year of above-average global temperature, according to data from NASA.

The signs of advanced Anthropogenic Climate Disruption (ACD) are all around us, becoming ever more visible by the day.

At least for those choosing to pay attention.

I’ll not try to summarize Jamal’s paper here — much much more can/will be gained via a careful read. It is, though, an excellent summary of the consequences of ACD already in place back then.

2. Next, more than two years later (just this week, in fact) there’s this: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration Has Passed the Point of No Return, also by Dahr Jamal. It’s a lengthy essay that covers the gamut of climate change impacts visible today, and most certainly is well worth close and serious examination. Here is a brief quote that sets the stage:

Climate disruption only continues to speed up.

NASA recently released data showing that the planet has just seen seven straight months of not just record-breaking, but record-shattering heat. It is clear, through the space agency’s data, that this year we are already well on track to see what will likely be the largest increase in global temperature a single year has ever seen.

The NASA data also show that April was the hottest April ever recorded, as well as the fact that it crushed the previous April record by the largest margin of increase ever recorded.

That makes it three months in a row that the monthly record has been broken, and easily at that, by the largest margin ever. When record-smashing months started in February, it was then that scientists began talking about a “climate emergency,” and since then our situation has only escalated.

The essay is detailed, lengthy, and filled with links to supporting data sources that demonstrate beyond all doubt that these indeed are dire times, and that it may, in fact, already be too late for there to be any hope of turning things around. The sole (slightly) positive comment in the entire of the essay is this: “Recent polling shows that now half of all conservatives in the United States believe that ACD is real, which is an increase of 19 percent over the last two years.” Wow. Is that great news or what. Doesn’t include any conservatives I know, but any port in a storm is welcome.

Following is a graph, prepared by Ed Hawkins, that shows monthly global temperature changes since 1850:

It’s hard not to notice the jump, so far, in 2016 temperatures; the times, they really are a-changin’, or so it would appear to the trained eye.

But not all eyes are trained. On the other side of the coin live the deniers. I won’t go into extensive detail, just quote a couple of their most egregious fools to demonstrate just exactly how far-fetched the wingnut reality actually is. First, courtesy of Fox News, Jesse Watters explains his concern that public schools in Portland Oregon are no longer going to “teach” the nonsense that supports ACD denial:

One city school district is closing the book on any materials in the classroom that question or deny climate change. The board in Portland, Oregon unanimously approving a resolution that calls for removing books and course materials that suggests climate change does not exist or that people are not at fault for it. . . . Aren’t students supposed to learn how to ask questions? And now we can’t read a book that ask questions.

[. . .]

So getting out of the ice age, how did the Earth warm up after the ice age? There were no humans there with cars and factories. I mean, how did things warm up? These are questions that only I have the answer to. I should be teaching these courses. These aren’t that hard. It gets hot, it gets cold, this spring has been freezing. It’s not getting warmer, it seems like it’s getting colder. Am I wrong?

Yes, Watters, you’re wrong. Of course you’re wrong. You’re very very very wrong. But that, of course, is nothing new or unexpected.

Next, a word or two from that tremendously gifted master of everything, our massively educated and schemingly beautiful billionaire Republican, our loved-by-millions-and-soon-to-be-tremendous-President, Donald Trump.

“Any and all weather events are used by the GLOBAL WARMING HOAXSTERS to justify higher taxes to save our planet! They don’t believe it $$$$!”

This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bullshit has got to stop. Our planet is freezing, record low temps,and our GW scientists are stuck in ice.

“I think that climate change is just a very, very expensive form of tax. A lot of people are making a lot of money. I know much about climate change. I’ve received many environmental awards. And I often joke that this is done for the benefit of China — obviously I joke — but this done for the benefit of China.”

Meanwhile, back in the real world,

March 2016 temperature smashes 100-year global record

▲Illustration shows that 2015 was the hottest year since 1880. (AFP/Getty Images)▲

The global temperature in March (2016) shattered a century-long record and by the greatest margin yet seen for any month. . . . Compared with the 20th-century average, March was 1.07C hotter across the globe, while February was 1.04C higher, and the trend continued in April. Apparently the overwhelming mass of global data has proven, beyond the barest shadow of a doubt, that ACD is, in fact, a FACT.

Or, as Trump put it,

“Global warming is based on faulty science and manipulated data
which is proven by the emails that were leaked.”

We’ll have to leave it there.

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole; Thursday May 26 2016; Of Mental Poverty and Shriveled Souls (aka Teabaggers)

Last Monday I received a letter from The Wilderness Society. It read:

Public lands enemy number one, Representative Rob Bishop, is back at it again! This time he intends to take down landmark sagebrush conservation plans by targeting a defenseless bird, the greater sage-grouse.

Greater Sage-Grouse. Credit: Mason Cummings/TWS

Through a national security bill, Rep. Bishop is trying to attach language that would undo publicly developed conservation plans and sell off critical sage-grouse habitat to the highest energy development bidder.

You can help us stop him in his tracks! Sage-grouse are not a threat to our national security. This is a thinly veiled anti-conservation move by Rep. Bishop that would trash one of the largest conservation successes in U.S. history. His effort would unravel years of conservation work by federal agencies, 11 western states and governors, and a diverse coalition of stakeholders. These plans, put in place in late 2015, merged the best science with local knowledge in a conservation plan for 67 million acres of sage-grouse habitat on public lands. Now years of work are in danger of being undone by one man. Tell your senators and representatives to stand up for the sage-grouse and its habitat!

Sincerely,

The Wilderness Society

The “Representative Rob Bishop” (R-UT)  to whom they refer is a wildly anti-conservation wingnut Congressional Teabagger who would, I’m sure, happily agree to kill off what’s left of the planet for the sole purpose of turning every square inch of land over to whomever can convert it into cash. Money. Because as we all know, cash is a far more useful and life-enhancing commodity than are those wastrel notions of public land and wildlife preservation. Who cares about a goddamed Sage Grouse anyway? They’re prolly not even good to eat — never seen ’em in the store, I know that for sure. Tree-huggers and environmentalists like to use the word Conservation, but Conservation ain’t got nothin’ to do with genuine Conservatism, ‘cuz look close, they be spelled differnt!

Anyway, I  immediately forwarded this, the Wilderness Society’s message, to my Senators (from whom I’ve not yet heard) and to my “Representative,” the Wingnut Conservative Teabagger Stooge aka Scott Tipton (R-CO):

Representative Bishop’s “Greater Sage Grouse Protection and Recovery Act of 2016,” a rider on this year’s House National Defense Authorization Act, is a thinly veiled anti-conservation measure. This effort would undo years of collaborative planning for 67 million acres across 11 western states and undermine the very protections that helped keep the bird from being listed as threatened or endangered. Please stand up to protect the survival of the greater sage-grouse.

The sage-grouse is not, has never been, and never will be a threat to the security of our nation. This rider has no place in the NDAA. In fact, the Department of Defense, Army, Navy, and Air Force made it clear through statements that the sage-grouse conservation efforts will not impede on the military’s readiness, operations or training.

After years of dedication by the federal government, Western governors and a diverse coalition of stakeholders, it would be a travesty if all of the plans were undone through a rider on a national security bill.

Please don’t let this or any other rider undermine the one of America’s greatest conservation achievements. Don’t meddle with the conservation plans — pass a clean NDAA!

Received this typical boilerplate reply from Tipton two days later, yesterday, on Wednesday the 25th. There was nothing even approaching a semi-salient notion in his thirty word response:

. . . the bill prohibits the listing of the Greater Sage Grouse through 2025, providing adequate time for effective state and local species conservation efforts to continue without heavy-handed federal interference. (highlights mine)

I mean, imagine it. Allow the ‘heavy hands’ of the Feds to act in the interest of a potentially  endangered species and its habitat preservation, and what’s the result? INTERFERENCE WITH THE CAPITALISTIC AMURKKKAN FREEDOM TO RAPE AND DESTROY ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING THAT’S GOT MONEY IN IT!! It’s in the Constitution, Right? Must be, ‘cuz a long time ago John Adams said this here:

[When European colonists first arrived in America] “the whole continent was one continued dismal wilderness, the haunt of wolves and bears and more savage men. Now the forests are removed, the land covered with fields of corn, orchards bending with fruit and the magnificent habitations of rational and civilized people.” ~John Adams, 1756 (as quoted by Barry Lopez in ‘Of Wolves and Men’)

Adams spoke those words some 260 years ago, back when the rape of the continent had just gotten underway. Today, however, we’ve come a long LONG way and have FINALLY reached the point where just about the only land left in the country — land that was once a “dismal wilderness, the haunt of wolves and beaus and [the archaeological remnants of those] more savage men . . .” — has FINALLY reached the point where “the forests are removed [and] the land [is] covered with . . . the magnificent habitations of rational and civilized people.”

YeeHaw. Progress. Finally. Money.

Rep. Rob Bishop is, like Teabaggers everywhere, a notorious hater of Public Lands along with the (implicit) preservation of both those lands and the wildlife thereupon. He is, unfortunately, currently the Chair of the House Natural Resources Committee, and has publicly stated that he is dead against the Antiquities Act — a law which 16 presidents of both parties have used to permanently protect public lands and historic sites via National Monument designation. The bottom line is that Bishop hates Public lands, along with any and all who might support the concept. As he recently said, anyone who supports the Antiquities Act of 1906 — the same law that was used to safeguard the Grand Canyon — should “die.” Meanwhile, in his home state of Utah, Bishop has unveiled a draft bill that would force the transfer and sale of tens-of-thousands of acres of public land in southeast Utah — a concept completely in violation of the wishes of Native American Nations in the area, including the Navajo, Ute Mountain Ute, and Zuni.

Damn Injuns. Who the hell do they think they are?

Bishop — apparently in consort with Teabaggers everywhere (including, sadly, SCOTT TIPTON of Colorado) — is determined to do whatever is necessary to rid this country of those gigantic tyrannies the gubmint has imposed on We the People: Public Lands (National Parks, Monuments, Wilderness, National Forests, etc.) along with the protections implied or imposed in re each and every wild inhabitant thereupon. Why?

Because Freedom  Money.

Rotten bastard(s). I’d rather live in a den of hungry Timberwolves than in a world filled with Teabaggers  DEFINED by the Mental Poverty and Shriveled Souls of Teabaggers!

OPEN THREAD

 

 

TWH 5-26-16

We were warned:

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. …

The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government. …

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests….

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

We just didn’t listen.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FIVN%2Fvideos%2Fvb.233116802464%2F10152687398387465%2F%3Ftype%3D3&show_text=0&width=560

THE BLUEPRINT:

The secret accumulation of knowledge — a gradual spread of enlightenment — ultimately a proletarian rebellion — the overthrow of the Party. You foresaw yourself that that was what it would say. It is all nonsense. The proletarians will never revolt, not in a thousand years or a million. They cannot. I do not have to tell you the reason: you know it already. If you have ever cherished any dreams of violent insurrection, you must abandon them. There is no way in which the Party can be overthrown. The rule of the Party is for ever. …

The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. …

We control matter because we control the mind. Reality is inside the skull. …

There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science. When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science. There will be no distinction between beauty and ugliness. There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — for ever

ARE WE THERE YET?

No. But we’re at the precipice and one foot is already extended out into open space. We have the illusion of free and open elections, and cling to this illusion in spite of the fact that nearly half of us cannot participate in determining the top two contenders for the Title. The two major political parties wrote the rules that make it impossible for any other party to pose a serious threat to their power.

And, what few people realize is that the two parties are but two faces of the same beast – the Oligarchy. The Oligarchy gradually adopted two faces to pit the masses against each other.

Maybe, deep down, some people realize this. Maybe this is the root fear the NRA feeds to keep gun sales strong. But maybe it is already too late to overthrow the Oligarchy through armed revolution.

Maybe we should just praise the lord and pass the soma.

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole, Tuesday May 24, 2016 – Environmental News and Food Politics

 

A history of snowfall on Greenland, hidden in ancient leaf waxes

An early study in this field finds that snowfall at one key location in western Greenland may have intensified from 6,000 to 4,000 years ago, a period when the planet’s Northern Hemisphere was warmer than it is today.

Read more here…

The Watering Hole, Monday, May 23, 2016: Why Do Donald Trump’s Positions Appeal To You When He Clearly Has None?

We on the Left often talk about low information voters more than they do on the Right, but that’s only because the Right depends on them so much to stay in power. Without the low information voter and the low effort thinkers, Republicans would never have been able to grab onto and retain the political power they currently enjoy and abuse, not only on the national level, but at the state level, too. An informed voter would never vote for a Republican unless that voter was a greedy, rich, selfish bastard who couldn’t care less about helping his or her fellow human beings who are in trouble (often due to Republican policies.) And face it. If you aren’t greedy, rich, or selfish, you really have no reason to vote for a member of a party that openly admits to doing things that help the super rich far more than they help you or anyone else you personally know. I mean, seriously, do rich people need more tax cuts? We are talking about taxing income beyond a ridiculously high point at which they’ll literally be bringing in (not necessarily earning) more money than they can possibly use in their life times or their grandchildren’s, so why do Republicans insist on lying and acting like taxing more of that income will take away all incentive to make money? That’s pure selfishness talking, not sound public policy. And if it’s sound public policy you want out of your public servants, then why on Earth would you vote for Donald J. Trump? What possible argument could you have?

It can’t be because of Trump’s positions on any of the major issues. In addition to the fact that Trump often speaks in incoherent phrases, he has often been unable to state a position and stick to it. Whether it’s on taxing the rich, paying down the national debt, a woman’s right to exercise her constitutional right to an abortion, the minimum wage, money in politics, defeating ISIS, following international laws, immigration, H-1B visas, border control, the Syrian refugee crisis, banning Muslims, being so popular with white supremacists, the KKK and David Duke, the multi-national Iran nuclear deal, or even healthcare in the US, Trump has often stated, then reversed, then modified whatever position he had, sometimes within hours. He expressed three separate and conflicting opinions on abortion in less than an hour and a half. And some of his current positions are in conflict with longstanding planks in the Republican Platform. Here’s the thing: Whichever position Trump had that attracted you to him is almost certainly changed by now, possibly to be the opposite. And if his current position is appealing to you, just wait until he gets criticized on it and it will change again. “Everything’s negotiable” to Trump, even the interest paid on treasury bonds, which is ridiculous, of course. But Trump’s typical low-information, low-effort-thinking supporter doesn’t know that, nor does he know that the people who hold the highest amount of our national debt are you and your fellow American citizens, not the Chinese, as Trump often infers but never states outright (as far as I know.)

It can’t be because of his “honesty” (about which he often brags). Trumps says a lot of things on the campaign trail that simply aren’t true, or even close to true. Sadly for our nation, studies have been showing that, regardless of your political ideology, the truth doesn’t seem to matter. It would appear, to many Conservatives especially, that what you feel to be the truth is what is the truth (to you, anyway). This could explain why Trump tells lies to appeal to Conservatives emotionally, even though the lies aren’t in the least bit grounded in Reality. It feels right to Conservatives, so there must be something wrong with the evidence. It’s a shame, but not a surprise really, the Republican Party has been so antithetical to funding public education. Despite the fact that the truth may not matter, it’s still important that people learn how to think critically about a subject, regardless of whether it’s politics or religion, instead of just accepting what they’re told as true. But critical thinking requires effort, and your average Joe Sixpack conservative has neither the desire nor the ability to put a lot of thought into things. So when they do put that small amount of effort toward a position on something, they often end up choosing the Conservative point of view, even when it provably isn’t the best choice, or even the one that will move them toward their ultimate goals, whatever they are. Donald Trump may at one time in his life said something you also believed. He once said he believed in a woman’s right to choose to undergo an abortion. Now, because he panders to a bunch of low-effort thinkers, he says abortion should be criminalized (despite its being a Constitutional right) and that the doctor should go to jail for performing one, not the woman because she is also a victim. That kind of “thinking” requires you to believe the woman was not choosing to undergo an abortion and that it was done against her will. Kidnapping is already a felony so why would any new laws be needed? If taking away someone’s Constitutional rights can be done by making it illegal to ever exercise those rights, then we should be able to solve our national gun problem by making it illegal to exercise your right to own guns. But that’s not how it’s supposed to work, so these Republican efforts to ban abortion by criminalizing the performance of one cannot possibly withstand Constitutional muster. And neither will Trump’s efforts to bring back waterboarding and other methods of torture (“even worse”). Nor will barring people entry to this country because of the religion they practice. Nor will deporting people born on American soil. Trump has held many different positions on many different topics, so which position on which topic makes you believe Trump would make a good President? Or an effective one? Or even a competent one? Because by the time Election Day comes around, it’s entirely possible that Trump will no longer hold that viewpoint you thought made him better than the rest. So why would you vote for him?

This is our daily open thread. Feel free to make fun of Donald Trump, or discuss anything else you wish.

The Watering Hole, Saturday, May 21st, 2016: Contents Under Pressure

Yesterday at work, after glancing at my calendar, I did a mental double-take, thinking, ‘holy jeez, it’s May 20th already, 2016 is going by too quickly!’ Later, after some Trump BS refocused my attention on the upcoming election, my thoughts changed to, ‘holy jeez, there’s still nearly six months until the election, I wish we could just jump ahead to November and get it done and over with!’

I doubt if any of us, during the campaign season that led up to King George being anointed by the SCOTUS, and even during the eight years that we (and the rest of the world) suffered through under the BushCo maladministration, ever thought that any candidate for the Presidency could come along who was even more unqualified than Dubya, and just as amoral as Darth Cheney. The stress of those years pales in comparison to what we, and everyone else in the reality-based world, are experiencing during this unbelievably mind-numbing Trump campaign.

A continual state of stress is unhealthy for an individual both physically and mentally, as we all can attest to. Is it any wonder that the heightened stress of these last several months is having an even worse impact on so many Americans than that of the Bush years, even with the never-ending war(s), the “you’re either with us or against us” mantra, and the economic crash that affected every American except those who caused it?

And after BushCo, the undercurrent of American racism, which slowly became ‘acceptable’ when President Obama won in 2008, turned into the norm in an ever-growing and ever-more-violent tide that has eroded the foundations of the Republic nearly to the point of collapse. Even if Donald Trump doesn’t win the Presidency, will the added pressure and stress of the national and international turmoil brought about by Trump’s – and his followers’ – jingoism, ignorance and hatred be too overwhelming to keep this Union intact?

Personally, I think something’s got to blow under all of this pressure, because it’s not going to ease anytime soon. It only leads one to question: when, how big, and how toxic will the fallout be?

This is our daily Open Thread – what’s on YOUR mind?

The Watering Hole; Friday May 20 2016; Conservative(?) Visuals

Thought today might be a good day to switch focus a bit, away from the verbal and more to the visual — cartoon style, for the most part. Near as I can tell, I’ve collected these things off-and-on across the last ten years, snagging most (if not all) from internet posts, maybe the occasional tweet. I’m not sure about attribution — the names are either really hard to read or absent completely. Oh well, I must say that whatever the case, I’m extremely grateful to whomever it was that produced each and all — they never fail to bring forth at least a chuckle, and occasionally a raucous laugh!

The first two are editorial cartoons from the (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, drawn by their long-time (progressive) ed. cartoonist Steve Benson back in 2006. Subjects obvious. 🙂

This next one is at least as apropos today as it was ten years ago!

Land of Oz revisited:

From some unrecorded moment following the passage of the ACA:

This one pretty much defines (much to their collective distress) wingnut gun owners:

Jesus making the rounds, courtesy of Betty Bowers:

Nazi vs. YeeHaw, philosophically defined (more or less):

Onward to current times and Paul Krugman’s analysis of Donald Trump:

Cartoon in ref. to Trump’s tweet in Dec 2015 when he went full Schmuck on Hillary, used the word ‘Schlong:

GOP’s favorite way to “govern”:

 

Here’s the perfect summary of the GOP’s view on the Paris Climate summit outcome:

And finally, this fabulous summary of what many of us wish would have been the reaction of Native American Peoples to the arrival of all those ‘illegal aliens’ and ‘undocumented immigrants’ from Europe:

That one’s somewhat reminiscent of the first Benson cartoon up top, speaks volumes that I’m sure no living wingnut could ever comprehend because, as John Stewart Mill noted many many years ago,

“Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most
stupid people are conservatives.”

OK, one more to make a Baker’s Dozen:

Touché.

“We’ll have to leave it there.”

OPEN HREAD

 

The Watering Hole; Thursday May 19 2016; Religious Liberty: The Scourge

“God? . . . who the hell is He? . . . Why confuse the issue
by dragging in a superfluous entity? Occam’s razor. Beyond
atheism, nontheism. I am not an atheist but an
eartheist. Be true to the earth.”
(Edward Abbey; Desert Solitaire, 1968)

I honestly don’t recall how long ago it was that I first read Abbey’s little masterpiece, “Desert Solitaire” — had to be somewhere within the last five decades, though, based on the book’s publication date. No matter. By the time I read it, I was already an atheist. Have since converted to a ‘nontheist’ and an ‘eartheist,’ however, thanks to Abbey’s clarification of concept. “Conversion” is also, I think, the word used in religious circles to describe what they consider to be ‘appropriate’ changes in religious belief. I presume, therefore, that my “conversion” from routine atheism to nontheism/eartheism is a consequence of the merger of commons sense with Religious Liberty, and is, therefore, one of those “unalienable rights” which we all share. Right?

Unlike a great many folks, however, I have no “faith,” no “belief,” no religious “practice” whatsoever; I consider “God” to be nothing more than an ancient myth, a ‘creation’ of the human mind to help explain the unknown, perhaps also as a useful means of controlling the minds and actions of the masses. I see no need in any of that; I’ve long felt that science and a cognitive mind should be sufficient to explain the origin(s) of everything that exists, if not today then surely by tomorrow maybe, or next week/year, etc. But none of that contributes to any sort of intolerance toward any and all who choose to believe differently. I will not tread on anyone’s belief(s) that differ from mine, nor will I ever make an effort to impose my “beliefs” on others. Belief should always be personal, never mandated. By anyone, by any entity. Period.

I’m constantly puzzled, however, by the fact that so many of the God-Religion inclined do not think (much less act) that same way. Intrusion with the intent to impose, to convert, or simply to induce fear has seemingly become a religious “standard” these days, and religious labels don’t seem to offer any significant differences, at least amongst the fundamentalists and their comrades. Islam (Shia, Wahhabi, Sunni), Christianity (Catholic, Protestant, et al.) — many participants are wonderfully tolerant, but far too many are the exact opposite. “Religious Liberty” has become a catch-phrase used by many to explain their intolerance for, essentially, any and all beliefs/attitudes/practices which differ from their own. Religious liberty is presumed to, in effect, allow any “believer” the right to impose, even discriminate, against any and all non-believers, and any subterfuge including lies, fear, and even induced hatred is considered legitimate under the wide umbrella of religious freedom. Why is that? Why should such practices be tolerated by/in a civil society?

Here are a handful of examples of such, each randomly  gathered in just the last day or two, that amply demonstrate — to my mind, at least — the absolute fallacy implicit in “Religious Liberty”:

1. Rev. John Hagee on how God will hold people accountable if they don’t vote for Donald Trump

“I’m going to vote for the candidate that’s going to make the U.S. military great. I’m going to vote for the party that is going to solve the immigration problem, not the one that has created the immigration problem. I’m going to support the party that brings jobs back from China … I’m not going to vote for the party that has betrayed Israel for the past seven years.”

He’s not demanding that everyone vote as he intends, but most likely that’s only because he knows he can’t. He knows he can, however, use fear and lies to convince those who respond to such that they’d better do as he says or face God’s retribution.

2. Trunews Host Rick Wiles: Obama And Satan Will ‘Rape Your Children’

“We’re living in a funhouse. In a house of horrors. The president — the fake president, he’s a fake president, he’s not a legitimate American president, he’s a fake and he’s been allowed to do these wicked things for eight years because there’s been no resistance to him, and now he’s going for it, he’s got the pedal to the metal. He’s coming into the schools to rape your children. Let’s be honest about it. Satan wants to rape your children. I’m telling you, there’s going to be confrontation in the country. There will be a group of people who just say, ‘This is it, I’m done, at this point, we resist and we’re pushing back.’”

I guess if one lives only on lies, they might as well be really big ones, since folks who believe such nonsense have no limits on the nonsense they’re inclined to believe — and then impose on everyone else because as we all know, LGBT people do NOT share the “Liberty” the rest of “us” are blessed with! God said!

3. American Family Association host Sandy Rios explains how the Lesbian Hillary Clinton embraces every sexual deviancy imaginable

“Hillary Clinton embraces every sexual deviancy you can imagine,” she said, before once again suggesting that the former secretary of state is a lesbian because “there have been more than rumors swirling about her own sexual proclivities since before she became first lady.”

“She’s an advocate of gay marriage, and I mean a strong advocate. She’s been endorsed by every radical homosexual activist group in the country, all the major ones, Human Rights Campaign and others, especially in New York. She gets that endorsement for a reason, you know, she gets it for a reason.”

Lies and accusations seem to have no limits whatsoever when directed at LGBT people, and/or anyone who publicly supports their implicit right to live as they wish.

4. Far-Right Pundit Steve Quayle notes that ‘God is using Donald Trump’ to ‘show the political sins of this country’

Steve Quayle declared that God is using Trump to reveal the sins of America, and that the Bible may even speak about the business mogul when it mentions the word “trumpet.”

“I believe God is using Donald Trump, whether you like him or hate him, I believe God is using him to trumpet the nature of what America believes and, in essence, we believe a lie,” he said. “‘Trump’ [sic] is in two times in the New Testament, ‘the last trump [sic] of God.’ The thing that’s fascinating for me is that God has used him as a prosecuting attorney to show the political sins of this country.”

Makes perfect sense, if you don’t think about it. Good reason to vote for Trump though, right? Right.

5. Then there’s Rep. Steve King R-IA) on school prayer

“Well, I was sitting [as] a freshman in high school when Murray vs. Curlett came down that ordered that there be no more prayer in the public schools. And I thought then, that was 1963, and I thought then, how are they going to stop us from praying in our schools? They could tape our mouths shut, that doesn’t do it. The only way they could stop us would be to empty the schools out. And in my mind’s eye, I can still see the images that were conjured up: two U.S. Army personnel standing there guarding the doors that were chained shut on our high school. … It was the image that came to mind, the only way to stop us from praying in public schools was to empty the schools out and guard them so we couldn’t sneak in and pray.”

Seems to me that no one has EVER said students are not allowed to pray in public schools. They can, in fact, pray whenever they wish to so long as they do it in silence and don’t disturb anyone in the process. The only restriction the law mandates is that prayer of any kind can not be imposed on the entire student body, a mandate that allows each and every student to worship (or not) as he or she wishes, not as any particular school administrator or teacher might prefer.

6. Finally, there’s this one. Rand Paul has a great idea, a clever way to halt once and for all the ‘right’ of a woman to enjoy any level of reproductive freedom. Paul’s plan: FETAL PERSONHOOD by Congressional mandate.

Here are some excerpts from Paul’s email on the matter:

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling forced abortion-on-demand down our nation’s throat. . . .

The time to grovel before the Supreme Court is over.

Working from what the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade, pro-life lawmakers can pass a Life at Conception Act and end abortion using the Constitution instead of amending it. . . .

A Life at Conception Act declares unborn children “persons” as defined by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, entitled to legal protection.

This is the one thing the Supreme Court admitted in Roe v. Wade that would cause the case for legal abortion to “collapse.” . . .

If you and other pro-life activists pour on enough pressure, pro-lifers can force politicians from both parties who were elected on pro-life platforms to make good on their promises and ultimately win passage of this bill.

But even if a Life at Conception Act doesn’t pass immediately, the public attention will send another crew of radical abortionists down to defeat in the 2016 elections.

No need to ‘grovel before the Supreme Court,’ in other words, since the fourteenth amendment legitimizes the concept of legislating ‘personhood’ to the fertilized egg. No more abortion, and probably no more birth control. Got to protect the fetus. Period. Of course, after the child is born, well, then to hell with health care, food, shelter, all that stuff. Some kids will be OK because their parents are well-off, but those poor kids, well, you know, lazy bums and all.

What puzzles me most on that issue is why the government thinks it needs to take action of any kind. I mean, there are no demands that a woman MUST take contraceptives, or that she MUST have an abortion. Nope, it’s strictly a matter of choice — unless or until some religiously over-wrought ‘movement’ demands the government protect THEIR “Religious Liberty.” As for the ‘liberty’ of others who believe differently? Nah. They don’t count.

“If a man’s imagination were not so weak, so easily tired,
if his capacity for wonder not so limited, he would abandon
forever such fantasies of the supernal. He would learn to
perceive in water, leaves and silence more than sufficient of
the absolute and marvelous, more than enough to console him
for the loss of the ancient dreams.”
(Edward Abbey; Desert Solitaire, 1968)

Ah, the virtues of “Eartheism”! Fantastic Contrast! Thanks for that, Edward Abbey.

OPEN THREAD

 

TWH, 5/18/16: The Argument for Revolution

A revolution in the United States is inevitable. Why? Because we make our own reality, and our reality is controlled by those who indoctrinate us to believe whatever the ruling class wants us to believe. Science? Facts? We distort both to conform to our indoctrinated reality. And, perhaps more crucially, the more educated we are, the more we distort reality to conform to our beliefs!
First, these studies:

Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government
Abstract:
Why does public conflict over societal risks persist in the face of compelling and widely accessible scientific evidence? We conducted an experiment to probe two alternative answers: the “Science Comprehension Thesis” (SCT), which identifies defects in the public’s knowledge and reasoning capacities as the source of such controversies; and the “Identity-protective Cognition Thesis” (ICT), which treats cultural conflict as disabling the faculties that members of the public use to make sense of decision relevant science. In our experiment, we presented subjects with a difficult problem that turned on their ability to draw valid causal inferences from empirical data. As expected, subjects highest in Numeracy—a measure of the ability and disposition to make use of quantitative information—did substantially better than less numerate ones when the data were presented as results from a study of a new skin-rash treatment. Also as expected, subjects’ responses became politically polarized—and even less accurate—when the same data were presented as results from the study of a gun-control ban. But contrary to the prediction of SCT, such polarization did not abate among subjects highest in Numeracy; instead, it increased. This outcome supported ICT, which predicted that more Numerate subjects would use their quantitative reasoning capacity selectively to conform their interpretation of the data to the result most consistent with their political outlooks. We discuss the theoretical and practical significance of these findings.

Kahan, Dan M. and Peters, Ellen and Dawson, Erica Cantrell and Slovic, Paul, Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government (September 3, 2013). Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 307. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2319992 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2319992

Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens
[T]he preferences of economic elites (as measured by our proxy, the preferences of “affluent” citizens) have far more independent impact upon policy change than the preferences of average citizens do. To be sure, this does not mean that ordinary citizens always lose out; they fairly often get the policies they favor, but only because those policies happen also to be preferred by the economically-elite citizens who wield the actual influence.
(Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page; American Political Science Association 2014.)

So, we live in an oligarchy. The oligarchy influences public opinion so that we favor what they want.
We are given choices in elections – choices between social ‘liberals’ and social ‘conservatives’. But never a choice for someone who would challenge the Oligarchy.
As this article is being written, Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee. Hillary is the presumptive nominee. Sanders has not given up, and may yet garner more pledged delegates than Hillary, but even if he does, it appears that superdelegates will hand the nomination to Hillary – already she has appointed about 70 of the 75 committee members and chairs for the upcoming Democratic National Committee.
Both Trump and Hillary will advance the fortunes of the Oligarchy. Sanders will not. We will likely be faced with the choice between a Fascist and an Oligarchist. Sanders’ supporters will be left out in the cold.

But how did we get here? Indoctrination.
Decades of “christian” private schools and homeschooling have indoctrinated a substantial portion of the populace to believe the very messages Trump espouses. Textbooks published by the Bob Jones University Press puts the imprimatur of God giving His Blessings on social and economic policies that benefit the very rich. Thus indoctrinated, these students become incapable of recognizing facts, of recognizing any reality, that conflicts with their indoctrination. Trump has tapped into these voters. They will not be dissuaded by any argument, any fact, any reasoning. And they are ready to take up arms if they do not get their way.
But what about the majority of us that were educated in public schools? You mean, public schools, that for decades have had their textbooks vetted by the Texas Board of Education? We’ve been indoctrinated too. Indoctrinated into a white-washed version of history.
Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.

Both private school and public school students don’t know history. But there is one major difference. Public schools teach history – names, dates, places. But they don’t teach the lessons of history. They don’t teach the ‘why did this happen’ and they don’t teach the moral lessons that we can draw from history. Private schools do, but their ‘moral’ lessons all point towards acquiescence to the policies that favor the ruling class.
The nation is primed for a charismatic leader, be it a Hitler or a Ghandi. Trump, by all measures, is another Hitler. Sanders is the closest thing to another Ghandi. Hillary is, neither. She is the face of the Oligarchy – the face of Big Brother. The Oligarchy won’t let Sanders have a chance – they are content with either Trump or Hillary.
But given a choice between Trump and Hillary, the inevitable outcome is revolution.

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole. Tuesday May 16, 2016 – Environmental News and Food Politics

A Major Source of Air Pollution: Farms

“A new study says that emissions from farms outweigh all other human sources of fine-particulate air pollution in much of the United States, Europe, Russia and China. The culprit: fumes from nitrogen-rich fertilizers and animal waste that combine in the air with industrial emissions to form solid particles—a huge source of disease and death.”

Read more here.

Open thread.

 

 

 

 

The Watering Hole, Monday, May 16th, 2016: Wrong, As Always

Recent opinion pieces at The Christian Post website demonstrate that the “Christian” right – and these aren’t all what I would consider to be real RWNJs – continues to steadfastly ignore reality.

On Earth Day, Dr. Richard D. Land posted “Earth Day: How Environmentalists Hurt the Environment”. Some excerpts:

Many advocates for drastic measures to combat climate change (i.e., global warming) assert that human caused global warming is now “settled science.”

And yet, recently published data from the Department of Energy reveals that the U.S. has reduced carbon emissions for the past fifteen years by more than 10%, more than almost the entire rest of the world combined. How did America accomplish such a feat? The answer is hydraulic fracturing or fracking, which involves releasing fossil fuel (oil and natural gas) trapped in rock formations by injecting millions of gallons of water and chemicals into the formations.

As a result of widespread usage of this controversial technology, the U.S. has become the world’s No. 1 oil and natural gas producer. As a direct consequence of fracking, the price of natural gas is one-fourth what it was a decade ago, and since America has a virtually inexhaustible natural gas supplies, people keep using more and more of this environmentally clean and very inexpensive fossil fuel. [Will someone please explain to me why anyone would want to literally undermine the land to access what is, by definition, a limited energy source?]

EPA studies declaring fracking can be done safely and cleanly moved U.S.A. Today to declare that “to help the environment and economy, keep on fracking” (4/19/16). U.S.A. Today also observed in the same article that fracking “has spurred a remarkable U.S. energy boom and . . . this boom has created jobs, boosted manufacturing and brought the USA closer to energy independence.”

Still, environmental activists on the left continue to oppose fracking, as well as the only clean energy “technology with an established track record of generating electricity at scale while emitting virtually no greenhouse gases: nuclear power.” In fact, in a “Pew poll of members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 65 percent of scientists want more nuclear power” (Eduardo Porter, NY Times 4/19/16).

Apparently Dr. Land is completely ignorant of WHY environmentalists – and any humans with a fairly basic knowledge of science and some critical-thinking skills – are against fracking and nuclear energy. Has he not heard about the earthquakes being caused by fracking? Is he somehow privy to exactly which chemicals are being used in fracking? The “EPA studies” that declared “fracking can be done safely and cleanly” did not say that fracking IS BEING DONE “safely and cleanly”, more simply that it “can” be done. (Here’s the Christian Science Monitor’s take on this.)

And “nuclear”?! Does “Fukushima” ring a bell? Sorry, but Indian Point is way too close for me to want any part of nuclear power. Not to mention disposal of nuclear waste, which has already been an environmental problem for decades. Or that nuclear facilities make lovely targets for terrorism. Where the hell has Dr. Land been?

Then there’s Ken Blackwell’s ridiculous drivel, “Trump is Bad But Not Worse Than Hillary”

[The blurb says “Ken Blackwell is the Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment at the Family Research Council. He serves on the board of directors of the Club for Growth and the National Taxpayers Union. He is also a member of the public affairs committee of the NRA. Mr. Blackwell is also the former Mayor of Cincinnati and a former Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission.” As Blackwell says in a different context below, “What more needs to be said?”]

“…no one should doubt Hillary Clinton’s determination to expand the state at every turn.
Trump the businessman has experience in confronting bureaucracy, and the Democrats are prolific regulators. President Barack Obama has imposed costly new rules at a rapid pace. Clinton likely would set new records.

Then there’s the judiciary. Antonin Scalia’s death has upset the delicate balance on the Supreme Court. Turning those appointments over to a liberal Democrat would lose the court for a generation, undermining any future conservative political victories.

America’s international security and standing also are at stake. Clinton had a disastrous hand in her husband’s presidency, noteworthy for the debacle in Somalia, unnecessary war in the Balkans, and broken agreement with North Korea. Then she was the first term Secretary of State for President Obama. What more needs to be said?”

1) What exactly has Hillary Clinton said or done to indicate a “determination to expand the state at every turn”? What is your definition of “expand”, and the vague phrase “at every turn”?
2) Trump the con-man has minions, er, “people” – the “BEST” people – to “confront bureaucracy” for him. And those minions don’t always win, either: it’s probably not a good idea to mention “Scotland”, “golf course” or “windmills” in front of The Donald.
3) Hillary Clinton is not a “liberal” Democrat.
4) WTF did First Lady Hillary have to do with Somalia, the Balkans, and North Korea? How does being “the first term Secretary of State for President Obama” disqualify her? And finally,
5) “What more needs to be said?” A whole hell of a lot more!

Donald Trump’s expected nomination comes as a disappointment for many Republicans. However, by every standard Clinton is worse. Conservatives might reluctantly vote for Trump. But, they should consider a vote
for him nevertheless, if he becomes a standard bearer of our platform. A platform that has made us the majority party in the United States.

Is Trump smart enough to do the right thing and are we smart enough to beat Hillary?

Politics is the art of the possible. That doesn’t mean abandoning principle. But if the good is unavailable, it means preferring the politically unattractive to the politically ugly. Too much is at stake for conservatives to treat the presidential election like a kamikaze mission or for Trump to be dumb.”

Two pieces about “Christian” megachurch pastor and devout Trump supporter Robert Jeffress demonstrate the extremely hypocritical and morally reprehensible “values” of religious conservatives. In one piece, Jeffress defends Trump’s childish tweet in response to criticism of Trump by another Evangelical, Russell Moore, with the equally childish (and un-Christ-like) argument that “Moore had it coming because he provoked Trump.” In the second piece, Jeffress calls Christians who won’t vote for Trump “fools”:

“Pastor Robert Jeffress, leader of the influential 12,000-member First Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas, declared Wednesday that Republicans who have vowed never to support Donald Trump if he becomes the Republican presidential nominee are “fools.”
“It is absolutely foolish to do anything that would allow Hillary Clinton to become the next President of the United States … at least Donald Trump has voiced a belief in a pro-life movement, he has at least talked about religious liberty as he did last Friday, you don’t hear either things coming from the lips of Hillary Clinton,” he continued.
“I believe any Christian who would sit at home and not vote for the Republican nominee … that person is being motivated by pride rather than principle and I think it would be a shame for people to allow Hillary Clinton four or eight years in the White House,” he said.

So much for ‘separation of Church and State’ – I’d like to see the IRS have a little talk with ‘Pastor’ Jeffress.

This is our daily Open Thread–talk about whatever you want.

Sunday Roast: Gone batty

Awww!  I love bats!!

I found this one on Buzzfeed, which led me to more bat videos on YouTube!

Nom nom nom.

OMGOMGOMG, I’ve overdosed on cuteness!!!!

This is our daily open thread — How much do you love bats?

The Watering Hole, Saturday, May 14, 2016: The Man Who Would Be Last

Last night’s closing segment of “Real Time” had Bill Maher addressing the accusation that Donald Trump’s popularity is the fault of Liberals. Like so many things Conservatives say, this is the exact opposite of the Truth. But as we all know, in political debate in America, facts don’t matter. They don’t. Regardless of political leanings, when people are confronted with facts that contradict something they believe, they will simply refuse to accept that they are wrong. Most of what Conservatives believe to be true is not, while a substantially lower percentage of what Liberals believe is false. Studies have shown that even Liberals normally willing to be persuaded by new evidence will still cling to about ten percent of their belief system against evidence to the contrary. By comparison, Conservatives are persuaded by almost nothing that contradicts their beliefs, even personal experience. To Conservatives, facts are just somebody’s opinion about Reality. What matters is what you believe to be true. Even when it isn’t. Here’s how Bill Maher responded:

One small but important clarification about something Maher said, the Boston Tea Party (the historical event after which the modern political Tea Party takes its name) was a revolt against a tax cut. King George cut taxes on British tea going to the colonies, thus making them cheaper to sell and harder for the colonists to compete. It was not, as many in the Tea Party movement believe, a tax increase being protested. But Maher is correct that these people have had their taxes lowered since Obama took office. And the problem isn’t that we’re taxed too much, it’s that we’re taxed too little, especially the wealthiest Americans. Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society, and a necessity if we want our government to do the things we actually want it to do. Conservative Republicans often complain about our national debt being too high, but it’s their own fault and something else for which they refuse to accept responsibility. They believed something demonstrably untrue, cut taxes because of it, but continued to increase spending while lying about its effect on the national debt. They constantly claimed that tax cuts for the rich would pay for themselves by bringing in more revenue. It was a position that defied logic and the facts, but they went ahead and kept saying, not only that it was true, but that it was good for America. Then they turned around and tried to say that money spent on social welfare programs and national infrastructure was unjustifiable when our national debt was so high. Yes, they actually tried to make that argument. They still do. No amount of spending on our military is too high to them, but try to find a couple of billion dollars to make poorer people’s lives better and it’s, “Sorry. No can do. There’s a war on.” Except that war is not being financed by a single penny of tax revenue, it’s being funded by deficit spending, the thing Conservative Republicans claim they hate so much. There’s a lot of hypocrisy and flat out denial of the truth when it comes to right wing thinking, so it should surprise no one that Donald Trump will be the Republican Party’s nominee to be POTUS. He’s completely unfit to hold public office, has no grasp of factual reality, and is completely clueless about the nature and purpose of being a public servant.

Donald Trump is incapable of being a public servant because Donald Trump serves one person, and one person only – Donald Trump. His policies are based on either pure fantasy or rampant racism and bigotry. He has no understanding about how diplomacy works, nor why it’s a good thing. He seems to think the POTUS personally negotiates trade deals and treaties with other countries, and that he can do better than all previous presidents have done. The man is not simply a narcissist. Anyone who thinks he or she is capable of being POTUS has to have a big ego to begin with or else they would become overwhelmed by the responsibilities. It’s true of President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary Clinton, Senator Sanders, Senator McCain, Governor Romney, Humanoid Dick “the Bruce” Cheney, and everyone else who has thrown his or her hat in the ring. But Trump’s narcissism is in a category of its own. He talks as if he’s never failed at anything in his life when Ivana and Marla could tell you otherwise. So can the several bankruptcies he’s filed for businesses that could not be called “successes.” And the lawsuit he’s facing for his sham of a school that made promises he had no intention of keeping. Yet he’s so thin-skinned that he constantly threatens to sue anyone who tells the truth about him. He even said he wants to limit the freedom of the press and make it easier to sue them for defamation when they say things about him he doesn’t like (such as truthful things, and things that really happened.) His campaign rhetoric has been so atrocious and despicable, that many white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and KKK groups have publicly endorsed him for POTUS. Even David Duke thinks he’d be a good choice for Trump’s running mate.

#TrumpDuke2016 It'd be Trump's best LIFE INSURANCE.The Zio NeoCon Mossad boys would not dare touch him if I was heartbeat from Presidency.

— David Duke (@DrDavidDuke) May 12, 2016

Apparently Mr. Duke hasn’t thought this out very far at all. I mean, is there any reason why Duke couldn’t be taken out first, then Trump, to prevent exactly what Duke threatened? A David Duke presidency? No, it would be much, much worse than any of that if Trump were to become POTUS. It would mean the end of America. It would mean an end to the greatest experiment in governance in the history of Civilization. Thanks to the Republican lack of support and outright disdain for Education dating back to the Reagan Administration, most Americans are unaware of just how unique this country is. For starters, in just about every other country on the planet, there is an official religion and it’s usually whatever religion the head of the country practices. The USA under our Constitution was the first country to say that would never happen here, and that people would be free to follow any religion they wished free of government interference. Christian Conservatives very much want to change that and make some unspecified version of Christianity our nation’s “official religion.” A President Trump would also bring an end to the rest of the First Amendment, too. Journalists would not be free to publish articles critical of Trump, and people would not be free to peaceably assemble to demonstrate against his inhumane, ill-conceived, and illegal policies. And do you really think the rest of the world will stand behind President Trump when he starts a war with China? No, if Donald Trump were to somehow win the election this November (and I can’t imagine how that could happen without massive Republican cheating and voter suppression of likely Democratic voters), he would be the last person to hold that office. This great country would cease to exist, and something truly evil would take its place. And someone like Ted Cruz and his dad could be in charge of it.

Daily. Open. Thread.

The Watering Hole; Friday May 13 2016; The Meaning of Life

Take all away from me, but leave me Ecstasy,
And I am richer then than all my Fellow Men . . .

In today’s human world,  the sad reality is that all that really counts is money, both the acquisition and the possession thereof — the more the better — all without any concern whatsoever for anything else, the earth and everything on it included. As a consequence, one need not look far to find massive evidences of human-directed destruction and contamination of virtually every aspect of the planetary environment from air to land to water to everything between, including virtually any and all life forms, humans included.

We (humans) are not all like that, thankfully. In fact, large numbers of “us” find infinitely more pleasure and purpose in hanging out with and observing critters who have zero interest in money or wealth; they don’t even know, much less care, what money is. No reason to know, because, after all, when your corner(s) of the world provide everything needed to make life meaningful, what would be the purpose of Money? It has no meaning to the talented, to the self-sufficient, to the gifted; it only has meaning to those who have no talent, no gift, no self-sufficiency, to those who can find no real meaning in life itself.

Below are eight photos — each and all from 2016 — which portray the genuine Meaning Of Life, a meaning which seems to, with every passing year, elude ever more humans, most especially those whose sole interests are Money, and Politics, and the presumed Power that comes along for the ride. But “Meaning” does NOT elude these critters!

The first four are of some local Colorado Front Range Canadian Geese including this year’s crop of goslings. I managed to get them to “pose” for me earlier this week, on May 9, when the little ones were roughly three weeks out of the egg. Already they’re out exploring the world — under the close watch of their moms and dads, of course — and already are more aware of legitimate survival techniques than the great bulk of humans of most any age. And they don’t have/need either a bank account or a gun, even!

Next are four photos of one of this year’s family of Sonoran Desert Great Horned Owls, courtesy of Arizona Naturalist and Photographer Denny Green, longtime friend and resident of Tempe, AZ. These feathered folk typically nest in Giant Saguaro Cacti which are, I’m sure, one of the planet’s safest domiciles.

Speaking of close-knit families! As for money, who needs it!

******

Finally, a bonus shot, this one from Thursday May 12:

Money and wealth, polytics, power — Bah Humbug!

Ill it becometh me to dwell so wealthily
When at my very Door are those possessing more,
In abject poverty –
(Emily Dickinson)

******

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole; Thursday May 12 2016; Trump Summarized

He preached upon “Breadth” till it argued him narrow —
The Broad are too broad to define
And of “Truth” until it proclaimed him a Liar —
The Truth never flaunted a Sign . . .

Those are Emily Dickinson’s words from roughly 150 yrs ago, but when one reads them today, it’s a really good trick to not find oneself immediately ‘thinking’ about Donald Trump. Perfect summation, I’d say; brief, but amazingly cogent and accurate.

Meanwhile, I’ve more or less analyzed the situation as it’s been presented, and have come up with a mere seven words which, to my mind at least, summarize the vast bulk of what Donald Trump really is. For clarity’s sake, I’ve included common definitions of each, which, taken together, result in what’s commonly known as a closed loop:

Stupid: annoying or irritating; troublesome; tediously dull, especially due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless; mental dullness; foolish; senseless.

Narcissist: a person who is overly self-involved, and often vain and selfish.

Xenophobe: a person who fears or hates foreigners, strange customs, etc.

Racist: a person who believes in the doctrine that one’s own racial group is superior to any or all other racial groups.

Misogynist: a person who hates, dislikes, mistrusts, or mistreats women.

Bigot: a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

Idiot: an utterly foolish or senseless person.

Stated another way, Trump is a Stupid, Narcissistic, Xenophobic, Racist, Misogynistic and Bigoted Idiot. Not exactly poetic I know, but still a (highly accurate) foolish and senseless closed loop — the very definition of the pinnacle of human crud. Something like that.

Others have their own notions as well, and some even use different words than I’ve noted above. For example:

Leonard Pitts in the Miami Herald:

So it has come to this: Trump 2016.

What first seemed a joke, then an unsettling possibility and then a troubling likelihood, became a grim certainty last week as Donald Trump, real estate developer turned reality show ringmaster turned would-be president, won an emphatic victory in Indiana’s Republican primary. His last remaining rivals, Ted Cruz and John Kasich, both dropped out within 24 hours, leaving Trump the de facto nominee of what used to be called, with some pride, the Party of Lincoln.

[. . .]

When you spend decades stoking people’s insecurities, resentment and outrage, when you devote thousands of radio and television hours to scapegoating the marginalized and demonizing the vulnerable, when you campaign on coded appeals to xenophobia, racism and misogyny, when you make facts optional and lies routine, when you prioritize expedience above integrity and embrace ignorance as somehow more authentically American, you may not credibly profess surprise when you produce a candidate who embodies all those traits.

Mark Sumner at Daily Kos indicts the Republican Party for Trump’s emergence from the political swamp. I can’t disagree.

When it turned out that their policies weren’t enough, Republicans made a bargain with racism to get the votes they needed to stay competitive. And when racism no longer made up the difference, they made a bargain with misogyny to get an edge. And when racism and misogyny together would no longer guarantee a victory, they added xenophobia and religious bigotry. They tacked on bullying, and mockery of science, and the politics of personal destruction.

Then someone forgot that there were supposed to be policies. And here we are. If you go long enough thinking that the ends justify the means, someone is bound to prove you wrong.

I note that both Pitts and Sumner left out Stupid, Narcissistic, and Idiot, but by golly they got the rest right!

Question remains, though: was it solely the Republican Party that gave us Trump, or did he have some ancillary help? I think the latter; here are a small handful of the reasons:

1. Conservative operative Roger Stone (who has called for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders to be killed):

A longtime political operative, Stone has built his reputation on controversy and dirty tricks. During his time on the Nixon campaign, for example, he reportedly created a fake identity, and made multiple donations to Nixon’s opponent from the Young Socialist Alliance. He then tipped off a local newspaper about those donations, to prove Nixon’s opponent was a left-wing extremist.

In 2008, he created an anti-Hillary Clinton group called C.U.N.T., which he said stood for Citizens United Not Timid. Stone later lamented that he could not think of a good acronym for B.I.T.C.H.

2. Katrina Pierson, the face of the Donald Trump campaign:

A former Democrat, [Trump Spokesperson Katrina] Pierson voted for President Obama in 2008, but decided to switch her affiliation to Tea Party Republican after hearing that Obama did not wear an American flag pin on his lapel.

3. Carl Paladino, 2010 (Republican) candidate for Governor of New York:

As a politician, Paladino was one of the original Tea Party heroes. He made headlines more than a few times for what many considered outlandish behavior — He once forwarded emails to colleagues containing racist memes and horse porn; he brandished baseball bats in the state capitol; he bragged about boycotting a gay pride parade; and claimed people on welfare need to be taught personal hygiene. While campaigning for Trump last month, he referred to president Obama as “raccoon in the basement.”

4. Sam Clovis . . . campaign’s national co-chair and senior policy adviser:

Clovis was well-known as a college professor and far-right radio host. He made waves during his time as a radio host for suggesting that President Obama only “claims to be black,” and that Obama’s racial makeup would make it difficult to impeach him.

Shortly after Clovis joined Trump’s campaign as a senior policy adviser, Trump announced his controversial plan to temporarily ban all Muslims from entering the United States. In an interview with the Guardian, Clovis defended the policy, calling it a “reasonable precaution.” “Our view [is that] there is nothing wrong with stepping back and taking a break,” he said.

There are numerous others involved, of course, but just those four seem to amply describe the “Stupid” and the “idiot” parts (resp.) of Trump’s campaign persona to date. Add to them the rest of his staff — Steve Mnuchin, Corey Lewandowski, Carter Page, Edward Klein, Paul Manafort, Michael Glassner, Don McGahn, Hope Hicks, Joseph Schmitz, Daniel Scavino Jr., Gen. Keith Kellogg, Dr. Ben Carson, George Papadopoulos, and Walid Phares — and the presentation of Trump as a Stupid, Narcissistic, Xenophobic, Racist, Misogynistic and Bigoted Idiot is fully explained. The lowest of the low — “foolish and senseless” — now clarified. Trump Summarized.

Or, stated a better and more poetic way,

Simplicity fled from his counterfeit presence
As Gold the Pyrites would shun —
What confusion would cover the innocent Jesus
To meet so enabled a Man!
(Emily Dickinson)

My suggestion for the New Trump Slogan:

The Best Offense is to be Offensive!

D.J.T. Q.E.D.

OPEN THREAD

 

 

TWH, 5/11/16, time-out, to contemplate the metaphysical nature of the universe

Half Dome

El Capitan

Earth, Wind, Water & Fire;
All played their humble part,
In creating,
Carving and shaping
That which we know as
Yosemite.

OPEN THREAD

feel free to contemplate the metaphysical nature of the universe, if the Spirit so moves you

The Watering Hole, Tuesday May 10, 2016 – Environmental News and Food Politics

Stop the Fracking Lies: Public and Workers Deserve Truth and Solutions About Energy

The Watering Hole, Monday, May 9th, 2016: Are We There Yet?

Here’s two (well, sort of – you’ll see what I mean) predictions about frightening futures, which we seem to be fulfilling here in the largest superpower on the planet.

First, an interesting article entitled “Neil Postman Predicted Trumpocalypse 30 Years Ago”, by Dr. Richard D. Land at the Christian Post. Dr. Land discusses a 1985 book by Neil Postman called Amusing Ourselves to Death. Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. An excerpt:

Postman started off his book by contrasting the two most dystopian visions of modern civilization’s future, George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1932).
Postman’s contrast of the two dystopian visions of the future is chilling:

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies . . .”

The Internet has changed the basic DNA of our culture, including our social and personal relationships and our information access. It has radically democratized communication, while at the same time condemning any effective editorial or verifying filter as the unwelcome control of a hated elite. Consequently, we are being engulfed not only in a sea of moral relativism, but information relativism as well. The immersion of our culture in Internet speak has brought us perilously close to a denial, if not a revocation of the late, great, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s statement that “you are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.” Now, opinions too often masquerade as facts, and fewer and fewer know the difference and increasingly fewer care.

As Postman pointed out, Huxley was trying to warn the future “that what afflicted people in Brave New World was not that they were laughing instead of thinking, but that they did not know what they were laughing about and why they had stopped thinking.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now a more pithy prediction in a similar vein, from Carl Sagan’s 1996 “The Demon-Haunted World”:
Have we arrived at any – or all of – these future visions?

This is our daily Open Thread – you know what to do.

Sunday Roast: Liberal Redneck

I saw a video by the Liberal Redneck on RawStory — which was HILARIOUS — so I clicked through to YouTube to see if he had any other videos.  He does!

Here’s the video that was on RS:

Have you ever noticed that people from the South speak way too fast or WAY too slow?  There’s no in-between!

Anyhoo, I’ll keep an eye out for the Liberal Redneck, because he’s really smart and does short videos that come to the point quickly and humorously.

This is our daily open thread — What tickles your fancy?

The Watering hole, Saturday, May 7, 2016: Who You Calling a God?

I want to talk about something that’s important to me and I know that along the way I’m going to greatly offend a significant portion of you wonderful people reading this. And even if it isn’t what I say that you’ll find offensive, I’m sure some of you won’t like the way I say it. But as the closing song in “Night Shift” (sung by Rod Stewart) goes, “That’s What Blogs Are For.” I am atheist. I do not believe in the existence of gods. To be clear, I do not believe in the existence of gods as they have been portrayed in most religions, entertainment depictions, and writings known to many. I don’t believe the set of gods worshiped by the ancient Romans and Greeks actually existed. Ever. Nor do I believe the “One True God” worshiped by Jews, Christians, and Muslims actually existed. Ever. Nor do I believe any of the other gods worshiped by billions of other people throughout human history actually existed. Ever. I do not believe that the Universe was created by some kind of sentient being, often, and for purposes of this discussion, referred to as “God.” I also do not believe that a Universe without God means we got “something from nothing.” People who say that do not understand the Big Bang theory. It wasn’t “nothing,” it was a hot, almost infinitely dense singularity that exploded, expanded outward, and eventually formed what we often think of as the “Universe.” And when I refer to “the Universe,” I am specifically referring to the Matter and Energy that directly resulted from the Big Bang event that created “our” Universe. I have reason to think there are things out there unrelated to our Big Bang, but I’ll eventually get into that in a later post. My point is simply that there is a scientific explanation for how things came to be (the Big Bang event being just one possible part of it; other scientific theories exist), and that there doesn’t need to be anything like a god to explain it all.

This may surprise some of your Christian relatives and friends, but in many other religions, the Creation of the Universe is explained in completely different ways. And what your Bible taught you is but just one of many thousands of unproven, and impossible to prove, explanations for how we came to be here. And it is no more valid than any of the others, no matter who told you otherwise. Because just like all the others, it relies completely on Faith and the cognitive dissonance needed to reject all the Science that says otherwise. It’s going to sound like I’m picking on Christians in this piece but remember a few things: I’m an American living in America. The vast majority of people I interact with believe one or another version of Christian thought. And whether or not they want to believe this, their set of beliefs about Creationism are just as much nonsense as your deity-based explanation for how we got here. But having grown up here, Christianity is the religion to which I’ve most been subjected, so I’m going to use it more than most others. But this is supposed to be more about gods in general.

Do I believe gods exist? No. Not the kinds of gods you’re thinking of. But being an ardent fan of sci-fi, especially of Star Trek, I believe there are many life forms throughout all of the universe (not just the Milky Way Galaxy), and that many of them reached different levels of Evolution far beyond our own. These creatures may be able to manipulate matter and energy simply with their own thoughts and could even bring into existence something like a Big Bang event that could eventually lead to people like you and me. (But not Trump supporters.) The important thing is that even if such beings do exist, I maintain that they would be NOTHING like the God described in the Bible (or any other deity-based religion.) And I certainly don’t believe they designed and created human beings. The human beings you see walking around today are the result of billions of years of Evolution, not the result of some being with great powers wishing us into existence, just as we are today. I mean, it’s pretty obvious we humans have genetic flaws, and remnants of body parts serving little or no purpose. Are you seriously going to say we were designed to get diseases from microscopic viruses we can’t see, and which seem to have no purpose for existence but to kill? By design? Really? That makes sense to you? A perfect being should be able to do better than we humans.

So, while I will agree that it’s possible there are sentient life forms capable of manipulating matter and energy, I don’t believe any of them could be confused for the God of the King James Bible, which can’t realistically exist. If he’s responsible for all Life on Earth, then he created horrible things that can’t be justified. And if He only meant to create Life here on Earth, then what purpose to the other stars in the Universe serve, or the other planets in our own solar system, for that matter? American Christians, particularly Conservative Christians, are often discouraged from asking too many questions about the religious stories they were taught as children. Dad says it’s true, so it’s true. And they never seem to want to question it because if it turns out Dad’s wrong about God, what else is he wrong about? And soon, Dad begins to lose his authority over his children, and they go off and learn truths about the world he’d rather they never learn. Which might not happen if he didn’t choose to lie to his children about the existence of God in the first place. It’s okay to be honest and tell them that we’re not here because some strange, sadistic, schizophrenic sociopath created us on a whim, then killed most of us when he didn’t like how we turned out, but that we’re here simply because the conditions necessary for life forms such as ourselves to evolve existed here and in few other places. Yes, it is random chance. No, there really isn’t any reason why we’re here. Does that mean Life has no purpose? Well, if you’re willing to accept the fact that we’re not here for any special reason, then your life’s purpose can be what you want it to be (within the acceptable norms of Society.) You want to help people less fortunate than yourself? Good for you. If you’re lazy, like me, you can help them by paying your taxes and letting the government do the heavy lifting. That’s what programs that help the poor are there to do. You can tell Republicans don’t want to help their fellow human beings. They’re more interested in helping those that have already helped themselves to more than their fair share.

Open thread. Have fun.

The Watering Hole; Friday May 6 2016; Zieg HEIL!! Drumpf Ist Hier!

Trump has nailed down the Republican candidacy for POTUS, and some are more delighted at the prospect of a President Trump than are others.

David Duke Hopes To Get Donald Trump To Embrace Full-Blown Anti-Semitism

Duke said it was high time “to start naming the enemy that’s orchestrating our destruction: If we don’t dispose the Jews, there is no hope for our people.”  . . .

He explained that Jews “control” the media, academia and the political world, “and I think that we’ve really got to start going full bore on that. I’m not saying that Trump has to but we’ve got to and that’s the only way we’re going to move people like Trump more toward doing the things we’ve got to do.”

David Duke Hails Donald Trump For Thwarting The ‘Jewish Supremacists Who Control Our Country’

. . . white nationalist leader David Duke celebrated Donald Trump’s “amazing victory” in the Indiana primary, which allowed him to become the presumptive Republican nominee for president, hailing Trump for terrifying wealthy “Jewish extremists” and exposing the “Jewish supremacists who control our country.” . . .

Duke urged listeners to “make sure that Trump understands that we expect him to follow through on these things and we expect him to be our White Knight, our advocate and our person.”

He said that white nationalists must continue to move the political center to the right in order to make Trump’s ideas more mainstream.

“This is a movement to take America back, and when we say ‘take America back,’ we know exactly what that means,” Duke said, “and I think everybody who says that knows what it means. And if we don’t keep putting that heat, if we don’t keep pushing the envelope over, we’ve got to be so far to the right — maybe that’s the wrong for it, ‘right-wing,’ ‘left-wing,’ doesn’t have much meaning — but so far to the right for our people that Trump seems moderate so that he will have space to move to the right himself because we’ve got to start an evolutionary movement to the right.”

David Duke: Donald Trump Comparisons May Rehabilitate Adolf Hitler’s Image

. . . whatever you want to say about Donald Trump, there’s no way you can say any of this stuff, it’s crazy, but they say this.

The truth is, by the way, they might be rehabilitating that fellow with the mustache back there in Germany, because I saw a commercial against Donald Trump, a really vicious commercial, comparing what Donald Trump said about preserving America and making America great again to Hitler in Germany preserving Germany and making Germany great again and free again and not beholden to these Communists on one side, politically who were trying to destroy their land and their freedom, and the Jewish capitalists on the other, who were ripping off the nation through the banking system. We have the same thing going on here with Goldman Sachs. It was a commercial, I saw that this morning and I was amazed by that commercial. It was a commercial against Trump but I don’t think it’s having the effect that they want it to have. . . .

You know, if you love your country and if you love, or at least what your country is supposed to represent, what it originally represented, because I don’t know if we can everything love our government — we certainly can’t love everything our government is doing today because the leaders of this country, the people who have control over this country, are purposefully wiping … If you’re a European person, the government is purposefully wiping you out and your families and your children and your future. They are purposefully transforming this country into a Third World nation. And if you want to see the direction of this country, just look at a Communist here, Bernie Sanders, running and winning a lot of victories in major states, and who is a former Communist and is a Marxist right now, folks.

And if that’s not enough, there’s this:

‘Hail Emperor Trump!’ White Nationalists Take Victory Lap Following Trump Win

Donald Trump’s presidential campaign has been energizing and electrifying white supremacists, and their excitement is hitting new highs now that he is clearly the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee.

The neo-Nazi site Daily Stormer, which endorsed Trump two weeks after his immigrant-disparaging campaign launch, is filled with posts celebrating the GOP candidate’s victory this morning. “White men in America and across the planet are partying like it’s 1999 following Trump’s decisive victory over the evil enemies of our race,” says one post, which also celebrates that “[t]he Jews are in full-on freak-out mode.”

[. . .]

“The fires of nationalism, the fires of identity, the fires of anger against the corrupt establishment are arising all around Europe, all around America, all around the entire world. So we just need to strap in, because the future is gonna definitely be interesting, and I believe we could have a switch in our direction even more…Hail, Emperor Trump! And hail, victory! ”

I have the distinct feeling that if the November election celebration should happen to belong to Trump, the first thing I’ll be reminded of will be the words of André Francois-Poncet, the French Ambassador to Germany who, on the night of Hitler’s rise to power as German Chancellor — January 30 1933 — wrote:

The torches [the marchers] brandished formed a river of fire, a river with hastening, unquenchable waves, a river in spate sweeping with a sovereign rush over the very heart of the city. . . . The onlookers, drawn up on either side of the marching columns, burst into a vast clamor. The river of fire flowed past the french embassy whence with heavy heart and filled with foreboding I watched its luminous wake.

Hitler’s slogans, oft stated, were Germany First! and Make Germany Great Again! The slogan that stuck, however, was different:

Do we really want to go there?

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole; Thursday May 5 2016; Guns and Roses Losers

My Life had stood — a Loaded Gun —
In Corners — till a Day
The Owner passed — identified —
And carried Me away . . .

Ted Cruz speaks for evangelicals and the right wing in general when he says:

“Listen, absolutely, yes. I think the first obligation of everyone in public office is to protect life. Life is foundational. In fact, as you look at the Declaration, that ordering of unalienable rights — life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness — I think is a very deliberate ordering.”

And when he says:

“It doesn’t make sense for grown adult men, strangers, to be alone in a restroom with a little girl. This is the height of political correctness. And frankly, the concern is not of the Caitlyn Jenners of the world, but if the law is such that any man, if he feels like it, can go in a woman’s restroom and you can’t ask him to leave, that opens the door for predators.”

And he really grabs them when he talks about what wingnuts everywhere perceive as serious threats to their Second Amendment “rights,” as in this:

“Following the tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, President Obama and Harry Reid lead an assault, not on going after violent criminals, which is what they should have done, but instead going after the Constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. And I led the fight to protect the Second Amendment in the U.S. Senate and we defeated President Obama’s efforts to undermine our rights.”

And on the campaign trail in Iowa, he wowed ’em with this bit of “wisdom”:

“The great thing about the state of Iowa is (that) I’m pretty sure you all define gun control the same way we do in Texas: hitting what you aim at.”

Ah yes. As every good gun owner knows, hitting what you aim at is the PURPOSE! of guns, and that PURPOSE! is what the Second Amendment is all about! It PROTECTS our RIGHT to hit what you aim at and KILL IT!  YeeeeeHawwwww!!

Seems to me there’s a serious discrepancy embedded in the premises noted above. On the one hand, the fear of transgender people seems to DEMAND that the Declaration of Independence’s ordering of unalienable rights, i.e. life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness which Ted Cruz considers to be a very deliberate ordering, is an ordering that does NOT apply to everyone, and clearly not to transgender people, or to LGBT people in general. Instead he seems to reckon that to lend them the ‘impression’ that they enjoy the same rights as everyone else would be a really dangerous concession, one that would open the door for predators and put the entire rest of the nation in grave danger.

All of which is something, of course, that guns could NEVER do. Right? Right. Except — as a recent report points out —

The American College of Physicians has been calling gun violence an epidemic since 1995, and though homicide incidences have decreased dramatically since the early 1990s, the medical community still remains deeply concerned, as more than 478,000 fatal and nonfatal violent crimes were committed with a firearm in 2011, according to the most recent data from the Department of Justice.

Gee. What’s up with THAT? Close to a half million violent CRIMES in only ONE YEAR were committed with GUNS? Nah, that’s just them commie democrats lyin’ to us again, trying to find a way to accelerate President Obama’s efforts to undermine our rights and confiscate our guns! — which of course has absolutely NO relationship to the fact that ALL “conservatives” everywhere know and believe that the first obligation of everyone in public office is to protect life. Right? Right.

The article also notes that

In February, several leading health associations issued a call to action asking Congress to develop policies that would reduce the incidences of gun violence. Many of the recommendations look similar to those proposed by gun-control advocates – including limiting the availability of assault weapons and closing loopholes that exist in background checks for those who buy guns at gun shows or from dealers – and they are expected to gain little traction in the GOP-controlled Congress . . .

Well, you know, they say there’s somewhere between 30 and 35 thousand people that die every year from gunshots, but prolly half o’ them’re suicides, so what’s the problem. Right? Right.

Problem obvious: 478,000 fatal and nonfatal (gun) crimes per year, 35,000 people dead from gunshots every year, but that’s nothing, really. Where our REAL problem lies is that them transgender people wanna use the wrong restroom, and if that’s allowed God will rain death and destruction down and destroy Amurkkka in the process!

And we haven’t even touched on the gay marriage stuff, and how many people are doomed cuz of THAT!

******

Has anyone published the numbers yet of how many die from gay marriage or how many transgender restroom assaults (and deaths) there are each year? Bet the numbers are really scary-scary! Most likely all-a-dem gun owners are really lucky that Life is foundational for DEM and not for THEM! Right? Right.

Actually, I’m guessing the number in those LGBT scenarios is probably zero even though I’ve not seen any confirming stats. I should ask Ted Cruz, maybe; bet he’d know. I mean, since Life is foundational, maybe there could be a tee-tiny flaw in the Second Amendment interpretation and expression? You gotta wonder.

Too bad Ted’s dropped out of the presidential race; maybe I should ask Trump. He’ll know. Right? Right.

Though I than He — may longer live
He longer must — than I —
For I have but the power to kill,
Without — the power to die –
(Emily Dickinson)

Remember always the “conservative” point of view: Guns are a RIGHT — the height of political correctness — no matter how many lives they might take. Personal Lifestyles, where no other lives are taken, are not, because “Christian Nation” and all, wherein The power to kill without the power to die is of prime import — even as the power to live one’s life as one chooses is forever open to challenge. By the righteous.

I wonder why that is?

OPEN THREAD

 

TWH, May the Fourth (be with you) 2016. Open Letter to the Ruling Class

An Open Letter to The Ruling Class from We The People

Dear Ruling Class:

• We The People are tired of running this country. We don’t want the responsibility that goes with being a voting member of a democratic republic. Please take away our right to vote.
• We the People are tired of thinking. Thinking takes too much effort. Please tell us what we need to know in as few words as possible. Three word phrases are great. Nice and catchy. Easy to remember. Short and sweet.
• We the People are tired of caring. We’re emotionally burnt out. Whether it’s abandoned puppies in animal shelters or polar bears starving in the Artic because of something that’s going on that takes too much thought to figure out – enough already. We get it. We’re supposed to care for these helpless creatures. But we can barely afford to feed our family and pay our rent. We just don’t have the emotional reserves to care about anything anymore.
• We the People are tired of deciding what’s best for us. We want you to decide for us on some of the most basic decisions, especially when it comes to being pregnant. We want you to make the decision on whether our women should have the option of having an abortion or having an unwanted child. We want you to decide whether we should have access to birth control. Or even if we should know about birth control in the first place. That’s just too much responsibility for us.
• We the People are tired of having our jobs shipped overseas. We want you to abolish the minimum wage, so that we may compete with workers in other countries on an equal footing. We know that in a competitive market, the lowest price gets the business and with the minimum wage, We the People cannot work for the lowest price.
• We the People are tired of public education. Our kids complain about homework and testing all the time. Frankly, we’re tired of our children whining. Please take mandatory schooling laws off the books so we don’t have to send our kids to school any more. We’re tired of Back to School Night, of Science Fairs, and endless fundraising. Since public schools are failing, We the People are tired of wasting our tax money on them. Parents that want their kids to receive an education should pay for it out of their own pockets. Unless they send their children to a Christian School. In that case, we want our government to pay for it. It’s only fair, because we are a Christian Nation.
• We the People are tired of hearing about things we can’t control. Things like the climate. Or safe drinking water. Or breathable air. Or safe food. We know you control the media, so please stop telling us we can’t drink the water or breath the air or eat certain foods. Time after time we have voted against GMO labeling. What part of “We don’t want to know” do you not understand?

We know that what is best for you is best for us, for you have told us so. And so we give you everything you want, and in return, you keep us safe from terrorists and gays and transgendered people using our bathrooms.

Oh, and thank you for repealing the assault weapons ban. We the People sleep soundly at night, comforted in the thought that we have more guns per person that any other civilized country on Earth. Just in case we need to kill an intruder. Or rise up in rebellion against a government that takes away our freedumbs.

OPEN THREAD