The Watering Hole, Saturday, June 11th, 2016: Front Pages

While “news”papers in New York run the gamut of “journalism” from the gutter (New York Post) to the “elite” (New York Times), we’ve always had The New York Daily News somewhere in between. As a lifelong New Yorker, I grew up with the Daily News and the NYT in my house, as my dad would read both: the DN mainly for the sports, and the NYT for ‘real’ news. Back then, the Daily News didn’t usually use the kinds of front covers that the New York Post has been famous for, but the times they are a-changing, and “New York’s Hometown Paper” has lately been going all out on the 2016 Presidential election.

Last night I was reading a very interesting Daily News political opinion piece, written by conservative Tom Nichols, regarding Hillary Clinton’s recent “foreign policy” speech in which she focused on how dangerous Donald Trump’s so-called “foreign policy” could be. At one point in the article, a shot of one of the pertinent Daily News covers was included, which led to the Daily News 2016 campaign covers photo gallery that I’m offering for your entertainment today.

Some of them are priceless, including several referencing Ted Cruz’s idiotic “New York values” line, such as “Take the F-U Train, Ted!”, which includes a small inset that starts with “WE GOT your NY values right here, Ted!”, so very typical of New Yorkers.
Some are just plain groaners, such as the recent “Weak End at Bernie’s”, or (regarding Bernie Sanders’ ‘meeting’ with the Pope) “He Said, See Said”.

But the best ones are about NY’s own (to our eternal shame) Donald Trump. The Daily News and New Yorkers have known The Donald for a very long time, and, as the saying goes, “familiarity breeds contempt.” I won’t spoil it for you. Just enjoy the covers (and skip through the obnoxiously ubiquitous ads, sorry about those.)

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

The Watering Hole, Saturday, June 4th, 2016: (R)s vs “Modern Technology”

Is there something about Republican politicians’ brains that makes them forget that modern-day recording technology exists? And when I say “modern-day recording technology”, I mean everything from plain video cameras to audio tape recordings to “smart” phones that record audio/video unobtrusively.

Over the last decade and more, Republican politicians and pundits have continually denied saying or doing certain things, when video and/or audio recording of their words or actions proves that they did.  How can they continue to deny, deny, deny, and often continue to deny even when confronted with the actual evidence?  Perhaps they are so against any kind of progress that they can’t even admit to the existence of even such ‘ancient’ technological breakthroughs as video cameras?  Psst…(R)s…they DO exist–have you ever seen a “movie”?

Sometimes the Republicans’ unfamiliarity and discomfort with technology can have humorous results – remember “it’s a series of tubes!”, and Strom Thurmond asking a hearing witness to “speak into the macheeeeene”?  And no one used video evidence directly contradicting someone’s lies better than Jon Stewart, whose “roll 212” meme was comedic gold, particularly in the infamous Jim Cramer interview.

These days, with The Donald and his Trumpets (or Trumpettes, if they’re female) lying then denying on a daily basis, it’s more important than ever to remind the liars of their lying lies. And, while I’m still not a Hillary Clinton devotee, I have to admire the fact that her campaign put together a handy reference guide in advance of her “foreign policy” speech the other day, providing the exact Trump quotes on which she based her comments in the speech. A few examples:

[Clinton] “He has said that he would order our military to carry out torture…”

TRUMP: “Don’t tell me it doesn’t work — torture works… Waterboarding is fine, but it’s not nearly tough enough, ok?”

and

[Clinton] “He says he doesn’t have to listen to our generals or ambassadors, because he has – quote – “a very good brain.”

TRUMP: “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things…my primary consultant is myself”

and

[Clinton] “He says he has foreign policy experience because he ran the Miss Universe pageant in Russia.”

TRUMP: “I know Russia well. I had a major event in Russia two or three years ago, Miss Universe contest, which was a big, big, incredible event.”

It would be nice if the “news media” and “journalists” would remember, and remind their audiences, that actual reality-based non-partisan proof exists that puts the lie to what any candidate for the U.S. Presidency claims, but particularly in the case of such a delusional arrogant professional liar like Trump.  It is vital to our nation’s future that Trump and his ilk be thwarted, and that their bigoted, bullying, ignorant “philosophy” (yes, I know, “philosophy” is too cerebral a word to use in this case, but…) be relegated back to the fringes of our culture where it belongs.

 

This is our daily Open Thread–what’s on your mind this weekend?

TWH 03/16/16 New Obama Conspiracy Revealed!

Mole

Guaca, The Zoo’s underground reporter digs up a new exclusive.

 

According to anonymous sources within the Democratic Party, there’s a conspiracy afoot to deny the nomination to both Hillary and Bernie and nominate Obama for a third term. Polling seems to indicate that neither candidate will garner enough delegates to win the nomination outright, which means superdelegates will control the outcome. A conspiracy amongst the superdelagates would guarantee neither gets enough votes on the first round to lock up the nomination, thus throwing the convention into a brokered nomination, out of which Obama will get the nod.

Officials high up in the White House figured out a way around the Constitution’s prohibition against 3rd terms. It seems that in the course of adopting certain amendments, like abolishing slavery and allowing people to vote regardless of the color of their skin, no one bothered to repeal the language that counted black people as 3/5ths of a person.

Since Obama is only 3/5ths of a person (or 60%, for you math wizards out there), by the end of his 8 years in office, he will only really have completed 4.8 years (or 60% of 8 years, for the math wizards). Since Obama hasn’t completed two full terms in office, he would be eligible for a third term.

OPEN THREAD 

TWH 3/9/16: Not Benghazi

Benghazi was, apparently, not the real scandal regarding the U.S. military intervention in Libya.

Prior to reading the above-linked article I thought Libya was the right way to intervene for ‘regime change’: a civil war breaks out, a faction calls for outside help and recognition, the US helps that faction with air power, limiting the exposure for Americans to lose their lives in the conflict. This was done earlier in Bosnia, where US assisted NATO airstrikes helped put an end to a Christian genocide of Muslims.

What I did not know was that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton actively pushed for war and undermined diplomatic resolutions. That’s the true scandal. But it’s not the one Republicans talk about. Why? Because Republicans by far and large support war. It’s their only jobs program.

Bush broke Afghanistan and Iraq, and, as a byproduct, Syria. Obama broke Libya. I doubt we here in the US can even come close to understanding the unfathomable human suffering going on in those countries on a daily basis.

Drone strikes aren’t the answer. You don’t bomb a populace into submission. If all you’re going to do is bomb them, you have to bomb them into extinction.

Diplomacy is the only path to peace. And by diplomacy I mean reaching out in friendship to rebuild a broken society and bombed infrastructure. It won’t be easy. We’ve given ‘terrorists’ and would-be ‘terrorists’ millions of reasons to hate us, to mistrust us. But if past performances is a predictor of future performance, the prospects for diplomacy under another President Clinton appear dim.

OPEN THREAD

The Watering Hole, Wednesday, October 28, 2015: U.S. Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of the Ten Commandments

So many folks claim the U.S. Constitution is based on the Bible that I thought I’d check it out. Using “The Google” and other advanced research tools, I discovered a rare unpublished U.S. Supreme Court decision, Roe v. McCarthy (1958) 357 U.S. 579, that examined the constitutionality of the Ten Commandments.

In this case, Roe, an unnamed Godless heathen atheist suspected of ties to the Communist Party challenged a subpoena issued by McCarthy’s Communist witch-hunt committee. The Supreme Court largely sided with Roe. Fortunately for McCarthy, he died about a year and a half before the decision was handed down.

Here’s a brief synopsis of the Supreme Court’s holdings. Continue reading

The Watering Hole, Monday, March 16, 2015: Again With The Benghazi?

On November 24, 2014, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (or NAMBLA) issued a report with the sexy title “Investigative Report on the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012.” If you’re a Conservative, you probably just had an orgasm reading that sentence. Whether it was over the word “Benghazi” or the word “NAMBLA” I won’t say, but I’m sure you’re titillated. Benghazi. Say it loud and the games start playing. Say it soft as you sit there while praying. Benghazi. You’ll never stop saying “Ben-gha-ziiiiiiiiiiiiiiii.”

Anywho, this report from this Permanent Select Committee, was to be the “definitive” report on what happened. “Definitive.” So if you were the type of person who understood what words mean, you would think that would be the end of it. Just because the conclusions negated all of the talking points the lie factory at Fox News Channel was pumping into the public discourse, that doesn’t mean Republicans are ever going to let go of it. After all, Hillary Clinton continues to be America’s most admired woman for 17 of the last 18 years. So naturally Republicans (being the Conservatives they are) will decide they need to personally attack her character. It’s what Conservatives do when they can’t win on the merits of their argument, which is usually on account of their argument has no merits. As with Benghazi. There was no stand down order or denial of air support. The CIA said they had adequate security. Secretary Clinton had asked for increased funding for security and was denied by the Republicans. So was it necessary for the Republicans to put out this?

We need to know why the security at our embassy was left inadequate. Why were requests for additional security denied? Why was our response insufficient? Why were some members of the administration slow to acknowledge a terrorist attack had actually occurred? It is simply unacceptable for so many questions to remain unanswered. And it is unjust and simply wrong for anyone to withhold evidence that may lead to the answers.

Gee, Rep Susan Brooks, did you read the report your party put out less than four months ago? None of those questions are unanswered anymore. So you can stop with Benghazi being the pretense to insist on seeing Hillary’s server. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Benghazi and everything to do with Hillary Clinton and her husband, what’s-his-name, Bill. They are terrified of her. (And him. Republicans did everything they could to take him out, and he’s still as popular as he ever was.) And as we all know, Conservatives are highly motivated by fear. It makes no difference if what they fear is real or imagined. They attack the person (or thing) of whom they’re afraid. And forget about any of the things they say making any sense, especially when their fear is based on something imaginary. Forget about their solutions being cost-effective, or even worth a penny of the money being spent. Bose Speaker John Boehner, last seen drinking in a Minneapolis airport men’s room, crying about his latest humiliation on the House floor when those damn Tea Party bastards screwed him on the Homeland Security Funding bill, has been spending millions and millions of your tax dollars to fund these investigations and lawsuits, none of which serve the interests of the American people.

No, the goal is clear – to bring down Hillary Clinton the way they failed to bring down her husband. They want access to her server so they can dig up dirt on either of them, in the hopes of finding evidence of something illegal, in much the same way the Whitewater investigations went from investigating a land deal on which they lost money to a stain on a blue dress (which may have been blue and black or may have been white and gold, nobody can say for sure.) They’re desperate. You can smell it. On second thought, don’t. As with most things in which Conservatives get involved, it smells badly.

This is our daily open thread. Feel free to discuss Hillary Clinton, e-mails, Benghazi, or anything else you wish to discuss. Just don’t subpoena my server.

Wednesday, March 11, 2015: Hump Day!

Breaking Gnus

Breaking Gnus

BOEHNER SEEKS ARREST WARRANT FOR HILLARY CLINTON

Court records from the Southern Texas Federal District Court indicate that John Boehner is seeking an arrest warrant for the arrest of Hillary Clinton for violating a law that will be enacted as soon as a Republican President is elected. A copy of the future law was attached to the application for the arrest warrant.

The law will make it a federal offence to be a Registered Democrat, punishable by the loss of the right to vote, the right to run for public office, and the right to a fair trial. The law that will be enacted on January 20, 2017, within hours of the swearing in of a Republican President, will be retroactive to January 1, 2015, the date Republicans gained control of the Senate following the disastrously low turnout in the 2014 elections that sealed the fate of the Democratic Party.

So far, the District Court Judge has yet to make a ruling on Boehner’s request for Hillary’s arrest, expressing reservations of acting on the retroactive application of a prospective law.

The Boehner camp is already gearing up, however, for an all-out press-release barrage accusing Hillary of breaking a federal law. Indications point to comparing this new revelation about Hillary with the news about her breaking email laws that had not yet been enacted and her role in Benghazi.

OPEN THREAD
UNLESS, OF COURSE, REPUBLICANS WILL, IN THE FUTURE,
RETROACTIVELY BAN FREE SPEACH