Link Roundup, 7/16/2016

From the LA Times: A full list of scheduled main stage speakers at the Trump convention. The list includes two soap opera actors, an obscure musician, a pro golfer, and the president of the UFC. Oh, and a black guy. They managed to get a black guy. So there’s no racism.

From the New York Times: Tim Tebow is the first of Trump’s C-list celebrities to pull his name from the above list.

From Politico: The RNC asked Sheldon Adelson to cover the $6m hole in the convention budget left by corporate walkouts.

From The Atlantic: Senator Tim Scott’s remarkably candid remarks about his experiences with capitol police have the potential to be game-changing. Are Republicans ready to listen?

From The Atlantic: More research is backing up the thesis of that old ‘gateway jobs’ post. Anyone who starts their career in one of the bottom-earning tiers is extremely unlikely ever to move up. Not every job is a ‘gateway job.’

From the GOPLifer archives: The Cruel Myth of the Gateway Job.

Chris Ladd is a Texan living in the Chicago area. He has been involved in grassroots Republican politics for most of his life. He was a Republican precinct committeeman in suburban Chicago until he resigned from the party and his position after the 2016 Republican Convention. He can be reached at gopliferchicago at gmail dot com.

Posted in Uncategorized
249 comments on “Link Roundup, 7/16/2016
  1. 1mime says:

    Gallup: ” Two-thirds of Americans oppose immigration plans advocated by Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump — building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and deporting immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. In contrast, 84% favor a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants living in the U.S., a plan backed by Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Notably, significantly more Republicans favor a path to citizenship than support building a border wall or deporting illegal immigrants.”

    Is the GOP not getting its mail?

  2. Sir Magpie De Crow says:

    GOP Convention cheers for the acquittal of a police officer involved in the death of Freddie Gray?


    If that isn’t confirmation that the GOP is truly disinterested in receiving significant portions of the black vote for the next 30 years, then I don’t know what the f*ck is.

    I hate to say this because I thought once it was a universal truth but I guess I’ll say it again…

    Being black and running away from the police should not be a death sentence and those responsible for something like that need to be held to account.

    The unfair end of a young man like Freddie Gray should never be the basis for applause.


    • Rob Ambrose says:

      They’re so far gone they don’t even understand WHY the things they say turn off PoC.

      They’re happy to have “the blacks” in the party, as long as they stay in their place, toe the line, and more or less keep quiet until it’s time to be trotted out to act as the token black guy to prove how non racist they are.

      They think that when black ppl say racists things, such as that police chief that spoke last night, proves that racism doesn’t actually exist. Because black ppl can’t be part of a racist system.

    • flypusher says:

      IIRC it is written into Baltimore police policy that bound prisoners must be belted in before transport. Gray wasn’t belted in. Someone had responsibility for doing that, but at this rate it looks like no one will be held accountable for that failure to follow policy. Depraved heart murder (what an odd phrase) has a pretty high bar, but can’t you at least get a negligence conviction somewhere?

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        I think they overcharged Fly. I probably wouldn’t have voted for conviction on murder it possibly even manslaughter.

        Criminal negligence? Sure.

      • 1mime says:

        Having worked around district attorneys earlier in my life, charges can be clever tools. Over charge and the jury won’t be able to convict under the law.

  3. Ryan Ashfyre says:

    Favorite moment of the night (antithetical to the whole sordid exercise, but stay with me here): Giuliani unhinged:

  4. formdib says:

    So maybe quite a bit of Melania Trump’s 2016 RNC convention speech was cribbed directly from…

    … Michelle Obama’s 2008 DNC convention speech.


    • Sir Magpie De Crow says:

      Gawd! That’s irony times infinity. I bet you even if you could show voters how the Trump campaign stole content from a speech made by the wife of their favorite despised Negro politician, they would still call you a liar.

      This election campaign has made fact checking (and the dismissive response from conservative Trumpkins) a valid reason for me to bang my head repeatedly into a concrete pillar.

      It’s not because I am a wacky “liberal”. It’s because I still think factual information about recent history and the realities of our world still matter.

      • flypusher says:

        Snark shamelessly stolen from another forum:

        Last night Donald Trump’s third wife talked about how loyal he is……
        While plagiarizing a speech from Obama’s first and only wife.

    • Ryan Ashfyre says:

      F-ups like this direct responsibility right at the top. Trump can’t manage his sorry excuse of a campaign, not even to save his own wife from humiliation. Pathetic beyond words.

      • Sir Magpie De Crow says:

        As I suspected my comment about Trump/conservative/GOP supporters not believing the possibility that Michelle Obama’s speech was plagiarized by the Trump campaign has born out.

        “Michelle Obama doesn’t own the English Language!”
        “Well I have expressed similar generalized sentiments before…”
        These comments are now popping up on Politico right now, one person even referred to Michelle Obama as a “squatter”.

        If people believe that I am sure they would also believe Pat Boone originally wrote and performed the song “Tutti Frutti”…

        Think about it guys and gals, people right now are using this absurd and embarrassing incident involving Melania Trump… something the Trump campaign could have easily avoided… to criticize Michelle Obama…

        You know, the first lady who was actually born in the United States.

      • 1mime says:

        How do you know it was not deliberate?

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        No, Ryan, cant be. He hires the “best people”.

        Looks like Trump has done exactly what I’d hoped. A brief acknowledgement of the issue, and a prompt firing of the speechwriter involved would have ended it.

        Instead, he’s doubling down, of course. Insulting the intelligence of the voters by saying it’s not plagiarized (” no no, you idiots. The sky isn’t blue. It’s green. Who are you going to believe? Me or you’re lying eyes?”). Then he blamed Hillary of course.

        By inisting on this ridiculous denial, Trump has, in journalism parlance “put pants on the problem”. He’s ensured that all we talk about.

      • 1mime says:

        And, you know why he’s doing this? Because the media has allowed it without challenge and because too many people don’t think for themselves. Trump knows this and consistent with his personality disorder, he will take full advantage any time he sees a weakness.

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        Mime, have you seen the side by side? It reaaaaaaaaaaally stretches any sort of credulity to think here is even the slightest chance this isn’t an entire paragraph directly lifted from MO’s speech.

    • flypusher says:

      Speaking of First Ladies, I doubt that most regulars here need for me to explain why this cartoon is racist and offensive:

      Michelle Obama also behaves like an adult. She’s a truly classy Lady, and I’ll miss her too.

      • flypusher says:

        The other cartoon sample (superhero Trump!) from that idgit is rather ironic, because his super low polls numbers amoung women, Blacks, Hispanics, etc. don’t bode well for his chances. Those cannonballs are going to leave a mark in real life.

      • 1mime says:

        Think back decades. Almost without exception, First Ladies have been poised, articulate, dignified. Michelle Obama fits right in plus she may be one of the best educated of all. Having to squelch those legal skills has taken some personal discipline. Don’t you know there have been innumerable times when any one of these FL wanted to bite some jerk’s head off for ugly, inane remarks about their husbands – but, didn’t, because – they’re classy and they’re FL.

  5. Sir Magpie De Crow says:

    So far my modest hopes of not seeing full tilt violence at the convention or event zone has been met (but we got three days to go).

    Still… it is shaping up to be an unrelentingly bizarre, stupid and embarrassing freakshow of needlessly discontent white people.

    Any aspiring democracy in the world has to be looking at this spectacle with some level of apprehension.

  6. Griffin says:

    Anyone else watching the freakshow that is the Republican convention? Is this what happens when you try to marry reality TV and religious fundamentalism? Did Willie Robertson just call Donald Trump America’s brother? Did Antonio Sabato Jr just say we’re headed on the path of being a 1970’s Eastern European communist country? Who is Antonio Sabato Jr? What am I watching? Am I awake? Is this all just a dream? Why do we exist? Is there life after death? I have to go lie down.

    • Ryan Ashfyre says:

      And this theme of politicizing mothers who’ve lost their children; gag me already, I’ve had enough of this.

    • formdib says:

      Stranger Things is on Netflix, but the Strangest Things are at the Republican National Convention!

      (Nyuk nyuk nyuk, easy joke. formdib out.)

  7. “Imagine the frustration, the irritation, the sense of a loss of dignity that accompanies each of those stops.”

    Indeed. I’ve been stopped for no discernible reason, too, and I’m a privileged freakin’ *white* guy. Go figure. And yet, despite the frustration, the irritation, and the sense of loss of dignity associated with such stops, neither Sen. Scott, nor I, have ever been shot to death by the police. In my case, it’s even more surprising, because I’m routinely carrying a (gasp) firearm!

    Gee, I wonder what it could possibly be that has prevented Sen. Scott and I from being shot to death by the police? Oh, yeah.


    • flypusher says:

      Care to explain what happened to Mr. Castile, then? If new video evidence contradicts the current account, your point will be valid. But if his girlfriend’s story holds up, then compliance isn’t the guarantee you’re selling.

      • 1mime says:

        Compliance? Dead people can’t speak. Do you honestly believe that every person shot by a policeman was uncompliant?

        Also, your references to military personnel having to obey the letter of the law or get booted….Are you stating that the military does not bend the rules? That the military hasn’t killed innocent people?

        This is much bigger than only compliance. Throw that red herring out in some other forum where it will work. Not here.

      • Fly, with respect to Mr. Castile, we don’t know yet, do we? We’ve seen the horrifying and tragic aftermath, but we don’t know what led to the shooting. So I don’t yet have anything to say on the matter.

        Speaking from personal experience, I’ve generally found that presenting my CHL during a traffic stop has had *positive* consequences. Cops are very well aware that the incidence of criminal behavior in the CHL segment of society is ridiculously low. At the same time, it is an armed encounter for both parties. So I’ve got my windows rolled down, dome light on, seat-belt on, my DL, CHL and my proof of insurance in hand, and both hands on the steering wheel *before* I come to a halt. (I do this because I’m right handed, carry on my right hip, and keep my wallet in my back right pants pocket. I *do not ever* want my hand to have to go anywhere near my sidearm whilst interacting with a LEO unless instructed to do so. Retrieving the necessaries from my wallet before stopping eliminates *that* problem.) I do *exactly* what the officer tells me to do, and nothing more or less. I follow the officer’s instructions slowly and deliberately, and I verbally repeat the officer’s requests to demonstrate that I understand those requests *before* doing anything. Effective, abundant and polite communication works wonders. And BTW, if you do have a CHL, and you do carry, and you haven’t given a *lot* of thought as to how you plan to conduct yourself during a traffic stop, then you’re an idiot.

      • flypusher says:

        One other thing Tracy, you put zero onus on the cops to do their jobs better. Consider the incident where Sen. Scott is stopped by security guy who doesn’t believe that he is a Senator. Wouldn’t you think that part of that job ought to be learning who the members of Congress are so that you recognize them, and updating that knowledge every 2 years? Can’t we all see the benefit of that?

        I want to see the bodycam or dashcam on the Castile case. That ought to settle the question.

        And having been stopped before, I know to do the same with the license/ insurance paper.

      • johngalt says:

        Thank your lucky stars you’re white, Tracy. I doubt you’d have the same experience in talking about your common gun fetish with police officers if you weren’t.

      • Fly, it’s not that I don’t put an onus on cops to do better, it’s just that I have something of an understanding of how terribly difficult, relentlessly, monotonously dangerous, underappreciated, thankless, and underpaid their jobs actually are, and you apparently don’t. That comes from having LEOs in the family, so I can’t really fault you for that. But I don’t have to put up with all the garbage being floated around here, either.

        If you ever get a chance to do a ride-along, you really ought to avail yourself of the opportunity. I guarantee it’ll be an eye opener. You’ll get a chance to see up close and personal all the sweet innocents cops interact with on a daily basis. Barring that, heck, just watch a few episodes of COPS – it’s instructive *and* entertaining.

      • 1mime says:

        I wonder how many of us regularly participate in blogs that offers so little in common with our personal beliefs. Why would anyone do so?

    • flypusher says:

      Lavar Jones did comply. He got shot anyway.

      Fortunately for Mr. Jones, he survived, and the video didn’t mysteriously disappear.

      • 1mime says:

        Maybe if the NRA and their supporters hadn’t passed laws restricting reports on police shootings, and maybe if cell phone video had been in wide use years ago, and maybe if police records “matched” actual events (See Policing the Police for that one), then, maybe, we would have a more accurate record of what role compliance played in the deaths that have already occurred. (Read Just Mercy, Bryon Stevenson). The absence of data is not accidental. Paper trails cause problems.

        As for what would happen if I were stopped by the police? First thing is, I wouldn’t be shot for reaching into my purse or pocket for my drivers license/uh gun, I would have been treated respectfully (and responded in kind), and I wouldn’t have been hassled for a minor vehicle issue….tail light out…Instead, I might have been told I had a problem that needed to be fixed, but not ticketed, not arrested, and certainly not shot.

        Compliance? Most black people are so wary of police that they are afraid anything they do will cause them to be shot. In fairness to police, with all the open carry and concealed carry of weapons, I’d be afraid if I were them too.

    • goplifer says:

      Compliance…oh my.

      Tracy, sometimes these posts make me shake my head. Truth: If you were black, you’d be marching down the street with a fist in the air and a rifle slung over your shoulder. There is no way in hell you would quietly put up with one day’s worth of what black Americans deal with.

      That’s what makes these posts so tragi-comic. MLK? f-that. You’d be with Brother Malcolm all the way. What Muslim name would you pick, I wonder.

      • Chris, try not be needlessly insulting. Marching down the street, armed or otherwise, is not my thing. I was raised to mind my own business. I was raised to revere the rule of law, and taught that an encounter with law enforcement is neither the time nor place to *contest* the law. (That’s what your court date is for.)

        You seem to think that because I defend our constitutional (and natural) right to self defense, and that because I’ve prepared myself to exercise that right, that somehow makes me a violent person. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve never physically harmed another human being as an adult, in self defense or otherwise, and have zero intention of ever doing so. That’s not to say I haven’t been in situations with the potential for violence, but rather because when faced with those situations, I’ve actively managed to avoid violence. Force is the *last* option for me, and as long as I’m presented with *any* other option, I’m utterly harmless.

        Could it be that perhaps you don’t trust *yourself*, Chris? Mayhap you’re afraid *you* would be the yahoo marching down the street? Or that you would be that guy who shoots his neighbor, or significant other in a fit of rage? That’s fine; good for you. It’s good to know one’s limitations. But perhaps you should refrain from projecting your own foibles on others.

      • Griffin says:

        Tiraq Tabatabai?

      • 1mime says:

        Perfection – so rare.

      • flypusher says:

        “Force is the *last* option for me, and as long as I’m presented with *any* other option, I’m utterly harmless.”

        It’s all too easy for the person standing in the sunshine to preach to those in the shadows. I do not doubt your peaceful intent, but it’s much easier to be peaceful, not to mention polite, when you are not being treated with suspicion and hostility and rudeness and even sometimes some unprovoked manhandling.

      • goplifer says:

        I didn’t say anything about being a “violent person.” That guy in the streets defending his rights and his basic human dignity is not necessarily a violent person. I am saying that you don’t strike me as a “yessir, whatever you say sir” kind of guy after you’ve been pulled over and searched for no reason for the fifth or sixth or twelfth time. You seem like someone would insist on his rights, to certain extremes if necessary.

        Something tells me you’d be just a touch less “compliant” after you’d been treated like a black senator:

        Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe you’d put up with it endlessly, with patient compliance.

        I can tell you this, I wouldn’t take that shit quietly. And I have nothing but the deepest respect for people who have the courage to put their lives and and comforts on the line to insist on justice for themselves and others. I’m on their side.

      • johngalt says:

        I wouldn’t take it quietly either, Chris. The only thing that mystifies me about BLM is why it took so long for these protests to materialize.

      • 1mime says:

        Education, JG. It opened up worlds that were closed to Blacks. Seeing how the other half lived, and gaining confidence, and courage from the sacrifices made by those who put it all on the line….which is why John Lewis is so inspirational.

      • 1mime says:

        Oh, another thing that got BLM going? They gave up hope on the institutions of democracy helping them. If it is gonna happen, they were going to have to do it themselves. Too many deaths, too much poverty, too little respect. It adds up until it topples over, then you fight back.

      • “You seem like someone would insist on his rights, to certain extremes if necessary.”

        Indeed, but a traffic stop doesn’t come anywhere close to fitting that bill, regardless of frequency. As for taking “that shit quietly,” your choice, my friend, but here’s the deal: in a traffic stop situation, you are going to come out on the short end of that particular stick *every* *single* *time*. So why bother? Why take the chance on a night in jail, conviction on an offence that renders you a prohibited person for *life*, or worse yet, getting shot and/or killed. Stupid is as stupid does, Chris. Actually Chris, this discussion is highly instructive, as it points out the chief difference between folks on your end of the political spectrum, and folks at my end of the political spectrum.

        Freedom begins with, and is meaningless without, self governance. Self governance is an acquired trait, dependent on the steady and persistent practice of the cardinal and Christian virtues: prudence, temperance, justice, fortitude, faith, hope, and agape. Objective virtue and objective morality are non-concepts for the left. Thus lacking any capacity for self governance, leftists like yourself instead seek to be governed by others. Tragically, those you choose to entrust with your governance (and your liberty) all too often suffer the same deficit.

        And so we find ourselves at this peculiar juncture, with leftist, racist goons gunning down cops in the street on a largely baseless pretext, instigated, encouraged and enabled by our own president. Simply pathetic. Chris, I presume you saw the Chicago crime stats I posted elsewhere in this thread. Tell you what, when that cancer spreads to your own little white-bread neighborhood, and the cops simply decide to stop enforcing the law for you because they are sick of your sniveling, excretory whining, leaving you to wallow in the abject misery of Hobbesian anarchy, don’t come complaining to me. You made that bed.

      • goplifer says:

        ***instigated, encouraged and enabled by our own president.***

        Jesus, Tracy. Find a paper bag and breath into it slowly…

        I got three words for you: Viking Lives Matter.

        Tell me you wouldn’t sign up for that cause if the need arose.

    • unarmedandunafraid says:

      Tracy – Can you re-read your post on how to act when pulled over by the police?

      Here’s how I handle being pulled over. I look in the mirror, and say is he after me? I pulled over and he stopped behind me, so yep, it’s me he wants. What the eff did I do?

      At my door, he says drivers license and owners card. I reach for the glove compartment. I don’t pay any attention to the speed that I make that movement. I don’t even notice if his hand rests on his gun when I hand him my owners and insurance card. Then I reach for my wallet in my right rear pocket. Again, no “MOTHER MAY I”, just reach and present. The officer may have stepped back and become more vigilant, I don’t notice.

      Why would I move slowly and announce every thing that I’m going to do. Never have. What’s different. You and your goddamn guns.

      • duncancairncross says:

        You guys don’t do what we do – here and in the UK
        Walk back to the cop car
        If there is one cop we sit down out of the rain (it’s not always raining in the UK honest) in the passenger’s seat
        If there are two cops we sit in the back seat
        The cop then runs all of the details across the computer and tells us to get back into our car and drive away
        The one time I was stopped in the USA (I had missed a speed limit sign) I started to get out of the car and got shouted at by the cop – he did let me off the speeding

      • duncan, think about it tactically for just a moment. Once you are out of your car you have freedom of movement, a tactical advantage over a cop seated in his or her car. If you have murder and mayhem on your mind, and your are armed, you very much have the upper hand. Conversely, if your are seated in your car with the seat belt on, with hands clearly visible, the officer has the advantage (assuming he/she approaches you correctly). Your only real option other than compliance is to drive away, starting a chase (which happens with depressing regularity). If the officer wants you in the back seat, he’ll put you there. (The front seat could work, but it’s kind of awkward with all the comms and computer equipment up there these days.)

        Unarmed, I’m sorry, but I can’t help it if you are a complete idiot. I’ll just pray that you don’t garner yourself a Darwin award. Traffic stops are among the most hazardous duties cops undertake; the majority of officer shootings occur during traffic stops. Observe the following video and watch how quickly things can go sideways. The next time you happen to get pulled over, remember that every cop has seen videos like this. Consider what’s always in the back of their mind, and conduct yourself accordingly.

        BTW, the officer killed in the last clip was murdered with a Ruger Bearcat chambered in .22 LR, a single action revolver based on a design over 140 years old. You have to manually cock the hammer as a precursor to firing a round. (You can see the perpetrator doing just that in the video clip.) The single action is revolver is the slowest operating mechanism extant. The .22 LR is a plinker round, regarded by most as little more that a toy. The Ruger Bearcat is what my children learned to shoot on, and is my go-to choice for introducing the shooting sports to newcomers.

        Tell me again, please, exactly which guns you want to ban?

      • duncancairncross says:

        Hi Tracey
        That is exactly my point – in most countries the police do not have to be paranoid
        They can interact with the citizens they work for and with in a civil polite and easy manner

      • duncan, as an anglophile myself, I think we can certainly agree that your quaint demesne, whilst not without its own peculiar foibles, is not subject to quite the same set of circumstances extant here on this side of the pond. I suggest you stay put.

      • unarmedandunafraid says:

        I am probably close to an idiot if not compete, but I can see a common thread in all those videos. Watch them again and see if you can pick up on it.

      • unarmedandunafraid says:

        compete > complete

    • Sir Magpie De Crow says:

      Tracy, have you ever thought about how those unrelenting incidents of humiliation that could potentially end in disaster (by an illogically fearful member of law enforcement of course) effect the mind of a minorities like Senator Scott.

      He is a black senator that was elected in South Carolina for god’s sake! As far as I’m concerned his successful election is a miraculous and unlikely event… and I don’t even like his politics. Truly one in a billion.

      Despite that profound political and historic achievement, Capital cops still regularly don’t know who he is?

      You should know something Tracy… “compliance” as you put it or even innocence is not a bullet proof vest. Too many dead black people throughout the history of the South in both the 20th century… and the 21st century prove it.

      I am sorry to break it to you, most black people today are no longer willing to be “compliant” to institutional racial bias or an ignominious end for themselves or their loved ones simply because “law and order” types like you are willing to buy any fantasy cooked up (by clearly morally compromised cops) to justify a bad shoot.

      Words of Advice: I don’t think you should ever claim you face similar situations or peril that minorities like Senator Scott faces in regards to law enforcement.

      Because you just f*cking don’t.

      • Magpie, I don’t claim to fully understand the “peril” that minorities face, nor do I claim that all cops are saints, or that justice is equally applied in all cases. Here’s a clue for you: so what? It doesn’t f*cking matter.

        If men (and women) were angels, no governance would be necessary. Newsflash: we are most certainly not angels, police and citizenry included. Open your eyes and look around you. Racist murderers are killing cops in the street. Over what? The mythological “hands up don’t shoot” malarkey. Look at what’s going on in Chicago: 254 black murder victims as of May 9, overwhelmingly at the hands of other blacks for those cases where charges have been proferred, but with 204 cases with no charges at all. 80+% with no charges! The police are not policing black neighborhoods in Chicago. Gee, I wonder why?

        You may think cops gunned down in the streets is some form of rough justice. You may think living without the “law and order” provided so ignobly and imperfectly by all those horrible cops practicing rampant “institutional racial bias” is a lark. But that would only be the case if you were a moron. You reap what you sow, Magpie. I don’t think you are going to particularly enjoy the harvest that your precious president has sown with such wanton abandon.

      • Sir Magpie De Crow says:

        Tracy, at what point did I ever imply or state that I like cops being gunned down?

        Since when did I ever say President Obama was my precious president?

        My message has been pretty consistent… if you murder an innocent person, if you violate the rights of someone else you must be held to account. Whether that guilty party be a common street criminal or a hard ass beat cop who takes out his frustrations on a teenage kid because he didn’t like getting a little verbal pushback at the end of a long shift.

        That means the shooters in Dallas and Baton Rouge made their beds in an early grave due to their actions.

        That also means the police officer who shot Walter Scott (who was later abandoned by a lawyer who saw the video that contradicted his client’s account) needs to be held to account in the court of law.

        Short of spelling out that position in crayon I don’t know what more I can say. You will however not have a “compliant” community if the police are held to a different legal standard than everyone else and given carte blanche to control the out of control “urban gorillas”.

        Look at what the corruption and cruelty and lack of true accountability among law enforcement has done in Russia. Look at how low the populace at large views the moral standing of those who are suppose to serve and protect.

        Almost everyone in that country has dashboard cameras in their vehicles because often that is the only means of protecting themselves from having to pay bribes, be abused or be punished for merely asserting their innocence.

        Can’t you see the parallels? Dashboard cameras there… smart phones and body cameras increasingly over here.

        Also, I fear no bitter harvest of Barack Obama. And I refuse to accept your conclusion I am in anyway a party to that bitter harvest.

        All I have tried to do is survive it.

        Are you really naive enough to think Obama has built in his relatively short time in office the infrastructure of current mistrust and disdain of police officers in minority communities?

        You remind me a little bit of some of those foolish conservatives who are incredulous that racial tension in this nation had not evaporated or was not significantly diminished by the first black president.

        As if that was within the realm of possibility for one man to dissolve decades if not centuries of skepticism and hostility to law enforcement… much less diminish the lingering racial animosity towards minorities in some stubborn parts of white America.

        The fact Obama lived long enough to actually be in office and serve his first term was utterly amazing to me.

        Martin Luther King was in my opinion an unbelievably consistent pacifist and inspirational figure of racial reconciliation. No one currently operating in contemporary American politics holds a candle to that well documented history.

        But guess what? He still got a bullet through his head for his troubles.

        Any bitter harvest you allude to has been sown decades ago before I ever existed or the current president.

        I am for justice. I am not reflexively on the side of black (former military) racist cop killers, deluded white supremacist murderers (like from South Carolina), native born terrorists inspired by foreign theocracies and I am also not reflexively on the side of police officer unions and their frequent bullsh*t excuses for members committing the unforgivable.

        Got it?

      • 1mime says:

        Sir Crow, I salute you. Thank you for being able to articulate so well the thoughts of so many of us here.

      • Sir Magpie De Crow says:

        To 1mine:
        No, thank you. As far as articulating my thoughts, I do try to the best of my ability

  8. objv says:

    fly and JG, both of you have brought up Colin Powell’s use of personal email while in office. WP had an article comparing his use compared to Hillary’s.

    “By the time Clinton took office, federal expectations for archiving electronic records were clearer than they were under Powell’s tenure. That does not absolve Powell for not being able to locate his records a decade later, or for not turning them over to National Archives back then. But it does mean that Clinton was held to a more definitive standard. Moreover, this common defense among her supporters is used to deflect the central issue: that Clinton exclusively used a personal account, and did not provide records until she was requested to, after she left office. That is the most relevant point, so the Democrats earn Three Pinocchios.

    The big difference here is indeed that last point: that Clinton had her own private server, and that she used it exclusively. Neither Rice nor Powell did that.

    Powell himself and Rice staff members (not Rice herself) received a limited number of emails containing classified information on their private accounts — two in Powell’s case and 10 in the case of Rice’s staff — but neither used private email on the scale that Clinton did. And the number of emails in Clinton’s case is much larger because of it: 110 that included classified information, Comey said.

    The second major point is that the expectations were different during Powell’s and Rice’s tenures; Clinton got very clear guidance about use of private email as secretary of state. The State Department’s inspector general addressed this point in its May report on Clinton’s email practices, according to The Post’s Carol Morello and Jia Lynn Yang:

    But the report also notes that by the time Clinton became secretary of state, the guidance on email use was much more detailed, suggesting that pointing to Powell is not an entirely fair comparison.

    And then there’s a third point: Clinton is running for president. If Powell and Rice were doing so, perhaps their email practices and other aspects of their secretary of state tenures would be more closely examined.”

    For the entire article:

    • flypusher says:

      No Powell and Rice aren’t running, but it is partisan hypocrisy to castigate Clinton for her e-mail arrangements, but not criticize them (or at least not until someone reminds you). Lots of people in high office are way behind on tech- that’s something that needs correcting. I don’t expect them to be writing code, but some basic Internet “literacy” is needed these days. But this is an error I doubt Hillary would make again. Just like I doubt that Trump is going to mend his ignorant, self-centered, bullying ways. I don’t like how she handled the whole e-mail issue, but Trump’s overwhelming unsuitability for the officer of President trumps that mistake. I would have rather both parties had nominated different candidates, but the choice is as obvious as a 2by4 to the head. Trump would be a disaster. He cannot do this job. He makes W look good, and W is absolutely the worst President in my lifetime (which includes Nixon).

    • There’s still a double standard; the political class are treated differently from everybody else. Try a single instance of the Hildebeast email stunt in the military as an enlisted, as an NCO of any grade, or as any rank of officer below a 2-star, and you *will* fry.

      When civilian authority flouts the rule of law, military respect for civilian authority inevitably decays. That’s not a sustainable situation in the long run. Military coup – just because it hasn’t happened here doesn’t mean it can’t happen here.

      • 1mime says:

        Military coup – just because it hasn’t happened here doesn’t mean it can’t happen here….

        Do you envision such an uprising Tracy? What quarters would such an uprising come from? The Bundys? White supremacists? Who?

      • johngalt says:

        Is Hillary the beneficiary of a “double standard”? Yes.
        Is this unusual? No.
        Do generals, CEOs, cabinet secretaries, etc., get away with things that buck privates, members of the secretarial pool, and interns get fired for? Yes.
        Is this a bad thing? I suspect that depends on whether you are a general or a private. (And don’t give me bullshit about Petraeus, who knowingly handed over classified information to a woman in his command with whom he was having an affair.)

        Did Hillary compromise national security? Maybe.
        Are you convinced that the U.S. government email systems are necessarily more secure than the one in the Clinton’s closet? If so, what in today’s headlines would give you that confidence?

        When the phone rings at 3am, with a national security crisis related to (a) a coup in Turkey, (b) a bombing in Delhi, (c) Russian troop movements in the Caucasus, or (d) China sinking a Japanese patrol boat near the Senkaku islands, do you have any confidence in Donald Trump knowing where those places are, much less making intelligent decisions? Do you have any questions that the person who just hired Omarosa from the Apprentice to be his minority outreach coordinator will surround himself with people who would help him make good decisions? If so, for goodness sakes why?

        Do I have to be thrilled with Hillary to think she is orders of magnitude better than the alternative? No.

        Do I lose a little respect for someone claiming to have a serious political debate while referring to one candidate by misogynist third grade name-calling (Wildebeest)? Why, yes, actually I do.

      • johngalt says:

        Even autocorrect doesn’t like “Hildebeast”.

      • 1mime says:

        Autocorrect: the goddess of the internet (-; She gets even in the most underhanded way….Do not make her mad!

      • flypusher says:

        “Do you have any questions that the person who just hired Omarosa from the Apprentice to be his minority outreach coordinator will surround himself with people who would help him make good decisions? If so, for goodness sakes why?”

        I also want to know why people buy into Trump being the law&order-keep-people-safe choice? Because he’s threatening to torture people? Because all the alpha male bloviating and strutting and posturing is so scary?

      • 1mime says:

        I keep trying to imagine him in a crisis, then I think about him participating in the budget, or …

    • unarmedandunafraid says:

      objv, I would have a few questions for the writer of the Washington Post article.

      First, where were the servers that Powell and Rice used?

      Then, if AOL or Yahoo servers were used, would you trust them more than a server setup by a government employee? Side note: I have never got a spam email from her server.

      Next, If Powell’s emails could not be retrieved, how do we know the number of “secrets” he sent or received?

      And finally, what were the guidelines for email during the Clinton? Were they strongly suggested or best practice or ???

      I’m not saying Hillary’s decision was correct. But the question for you is, is that it? In my opinion it’s like a thistle seed floating in the wind. So much commotion for so little payoff.

      • 1mime says:

        Ov is looking for absolution for her decision to vote FOR Trump. Logic be damned. There are two other candidates who will be on the ballot (Johnson, Stein) if she “really” doesn’t like Trump but “hates” Clinton….This is BS.

  9. tuttabellamia says:

    And on that note, I will end today by asking, wishing, and hoping that everyone in the city of Cleveland stays safe as the Republican convention begins. Peace to all.

    • Rob Ambrose says:

      I heard he settled on Omarosa after he was told that his first choice, Uncle Tom, was actually a fictional character.

  10. Rob Ambrose says:

    Shits getting real in Cleveland already.

    • 1mime says:

      Hold on to your britches, Rob. Many in the Bernie crowd are making a lot of noise about doing something similar. Our turn next.

  11. 1mime says:

    “New York magazine’s Gabriel Sherman is reporting that Rupert Murdoch and his sons Lachlan and James have decided to remove Fox News CEO Roger Ailes, following a sexual harassment lawsuit by former anchor Gretchen Carlson.
    Sherman reports, citing anonymous sources, that the three are in agreement that Ailes needs to step down, but that there is disagreement over timing–

    Read more:

    • objv says:

      Good. If Ailes behaved as alleged by Gretchen Carlson, he needs to lose his job.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Hello, OV.

      • 1mime says:

        . Indeed. Plus he needs a yuge financial penalty.

      • objv says:

        Hey Tutt! 🙂 I might not be contributing much in the next few days. *Cheers from Mime* I’m going camping tomorrow. I hope everyone enjoys the Republican convention. (Or not.) I’ll be catching up with you all next week.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        OV, for a moment there I thought I read that you were going “campaigning” tomorrow. 🙂

      • objv says:

        Nope, Tutt. I’m going to the Grand Canyon and not to the glorious city of my birth. (Cleveland, Ohio)

  12. flypusher says:

    This has come up for discussion before here:

    The thing that absolutely gobsmacks me is that there is no requirement to report police use of force. That needs to change, yesterday. You cannot begin to address a problem until you have properly defined the problem. You cannot define a problem with such huge gaps in the data.

    This is why so many smart phones in so many hands is a good thing.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Interesting analysis. I guess it comes part and parcel with being a minority. His words and actions are always under scrutiny, and for better or for worse, it’s assumed that deep down he identifies with members of his minority group, and if he doesn’t, he’s a traitor to his people, or a refreshing change, depending on who is making the determination.

        The man can’t win for lose.

      • 1mime says:

        For all who criticize President Obama for whatever reason, and he is not without fault, having a Black president blew the lid off a society that has been ignoring racial-based issues for a very long time. It can’t have been easy and it certainly has been difficult and painful to walk in his shoes. For all his shortcomings, I applaud his quiet dignity and his sense of humanity. I will miss him. I worry that with all the tumult, he remain safe.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Agreed, and for all those who say he’s an angry Black man, I don’t think he has an angry bone in his body. If anyone’s angry, it’s Mr. Trump.

      • 1mime says:

        I wouldn’t blame Obama if he was angry about many things, but from what I have observed, he is the kind of person who has more despair about what could be and the pain we are inflicting upon one another.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        For people who hate the thought of paying taxes, I found the economic analysis of increasing the size of the police force interesting.

        “The report from the White House estimates that spending an additional $10 billion to pay and equip more police officers would reduce the number of crimes nationwide each year by as much as 1.5 million. The economic benefits of those avoided crimes would total about $38 billion, according to the report.”

        On the subject of rhetoric, a favorite topic, both this link and a link inserted into the article close with the same quote.

        I don’t know what it means.

        “”The recommendation to increase the number of police is blind to history, and it’s blind to the present moment,” Butler said.”

        Mr. Butler probably is more explicit elsewhere, one hopes.

      • objv says:

        Both Obama and Trump have shown noticeable anger in public, but the narrative being promoted is that only Trump is the angry one.

        Tutt, I’d urge you to watch some of Trump’s speeches. While he has said some outlandish things, his usual way of speaking is that of an entertainer. Words come easily and unfortunately, it seems that he says whatever comes into his head at the moment. Most of what he says has to be taken with a grain of salt. His intention is to be provocative and I’m afraid the media has run with his most inflammatory statements.

        In contrast, when Obama speaks without a teleprompter, he has a halting way of speaking with long pauses and he says ahh often to give himself time to think. During his campaign, Obama was wedded to his teleprompter and avoided taking questions and speaking extemporarily. .

        Obama shows his anger with his body language. His jaw clenches and his eyes narrow when he does not like the questions he is being asked. One news host mentioned that that he could sense the hostility after one interview and some tough questions.

        In most ways Trump and Obama are opposites. However, I wouldn’t want to get on the wrong side of either. Tutt, watch Trumps speak if you have time. He’s usually quite relaxed and has a sense of humor.

      • flypusher says:

        Tell me objv, how are you rationalizing Trump’s utter cluelessness (Brexit being one very painful example)?

      • flypusher says:

        “Most of what he says has to be taken with a grain of salt. His intention is to be provocative and I’m afraid the media has run with his most inflammatory…”

        You honestly think this is acceptable in someone who is asking to lead the free world????? That this is somehow an improvement in having more pauses and stops to think in the abscence of a TelePrompter?????

        We don’t need an entertainer in the Oval Office.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        OV, I have watched some of Mr. Trump’s speeches and interviews, and I agree he can be funny and charming, and he does have the occasional quiet moment when he seems to be thinking before he speaks, but as even you admit, he says many things just to be provocative, and I don’t think that’s very presidential, where you have to take with a grain of salt every word uttered by the President of the United States.

        I would rather have someone with clenched fists and teeth who remains civil.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        OV, just as there’s concern about Mrs. Clinton curtailing the right to bear arms, I’m even more concerned about Mr. Trump curtailing the right to freedom of expression.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        I realize it’s ironic that I’m concerned about Mr. Trump’s curtailing of the right to free speech, while at the same time I’m complaining about Mr. Trump’s words (both content and style), but I’m not trying to shut him up or down. He’s free to say whatever he wants, however he wants. I just don’t think it’s very presidential of him.

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        It’s pretty shocking when you think about, the bullshit Trump and he rest of the GOP’ers get away with by the media.

        His words are supportive of police enough, sure, but his BODY LANGUAGE means he actually isn’t? I don’t know about these idiots, but since I’m not a body language expert (and neither are they) I’m inclined to take a person’s words at face value unless proven otherwise.

        Can you imagine something so absurd? Every word a POTUS says is generally carefully thought out by a team of advisors for exactly that reason: what a president says is important, and his words mean something. But niw, were scrapping actual words for perceived BODY LANGUAGE? GTFO of here with that garbage. I’m at the point where I can barely watch CNN, I end up screaming at the TV.

        When some idiot says “well, what I like about Trump is he tells it like it is, and that’s refreshing” I keep expecting something like “well, you do know that Politfact has only 11% of his TOTAL statements as ‘true’ or ‘mostly true’. The rest are either ‘half true’ (14%), ‘mostly false’ (17%), ‘false’ (40%) or ‘pants on fire’ (19%)”.

        Or when he says ” well, you knownibwas against the Iraq War” never do they say “well, actually there’s video of you on the Hiward Stern show expressing support, albeit tentative, before the war”.

        But they never do. They just go on like they concede the point, which if course makes the casual viewer conclude that he’s actually NOT a lying piece of shit.

        I think I need to step away from the campaign for a bit.

        But of course, I won’t. I’m hooked lol. I guess I’m part of the problem.

      • 1mime says:

        Now, now, Rob. You just have to stop reading so much Raw Story and watching all that librul media….you’ll be alright. The big problem with you is that you think too much….on your own…hasn’t anyone in America told you that you shouldn’t do that!?

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Rob, you’re Canadian, right? I hereby christen you an honorary US citizen!

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Rob, you’re more American than the President!

      • 1mime says:

        Oh, lord, Tutta, now you’ve gone and done it! How can anyone from Canada be more American than anyone from Kenya!?

      • “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

        Mission accomplished, Mr. President. That is, at least as far as urban black America’s relationship with law enforcement is concerned.

        Throughout the course of his presidency, Obama has consistently and repeatedly jumped to inaccurate conclusions regarding police conduct, and shootings involving young black men.

        “The Cambridge police acted stupidly…” (The officer involved was responding to a 9-1-1 burglary-in-progress; Prof. Gates was arrested on a charge of disorderly conduct.)

        “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon…” (Trayvon Martin was in the process of executing a “ground & pound” attack when he was fatally shot by George Zimmerman.)

        “The death of Michael Brown is heartbreaking, and Michelle and I send our deepest condolences to his family and his community at this very difficult time…” (Michael Brown attempted to wrest away officer Darren Wilson’s sidearm and *shoot him* with it. Brown was fatally shot after again attempting to physically attack officer Wilson. So much for hands-up-don’t-shoot.)

        “”What’s clear is that these fatal shootings are not isolated incidents. They are symptomatic of the broader challenges within our criminal justice system, the racial disparities that appear across the system year after year…” (Obama on Facebook just prior to the Dallas police murders.)

        “It just means all lives matter but right now, the big concern is the fact that the data shows black folks are more vulnerable to these kinds of incidents.” (Obama speaking in Poland the day of the Dallas police murders. The data also show that “black folks” are overwhelmingly responsible for the violent crime occurring in urban areas, but he neglected to mention that.)

        Words mean things. What the president chooses to comment on matters; what he says matters; what he doesn’t say matters. The president and his AG have consistently cast doubt on the conduct and integrity of law enforcement, and have consistently voiced sentiments of aid and comfort to those associated with individuals guilty of vicious criminal conduct. This has a deleterious effect on law and order. Cops are discouraged from policing; vicious haters are encouraged to commit violence. Obama has sown wind, and we are left to reap the whirlwind.

        Chicago, Obama’s hometown, has suffered under this terrible state of affairs for decade, and it’s getting worse. The numbers don’t lie:

        The second graphic is particularly startling. Blacks are committing murder (mostly against their fellow blacks) in Chicago at an astonishing rate. Even more disturbing, the vast majority of these murders go unsolved, indicating an inability or unwillingness on the part of law enforcement to enforce the law. And this is the model that Obama seems keen on bringing to the rest of the nation. That’s some transformation for you.

      • flypusher says:

        “The second graphic is particularly startling. Blacks are committing murder (mostly against their fellow blacks) in Chicago at an astonishing rate. Even more disturbing, the vast majority of these murders go unsolved, indicating an inability or unwillingness on the part of law enforcement to enforce the law. And this is the model that Obama seems keen on bringing to the rest of the nation. That’s some transformation for you..”

        I’ll comment on the earlier examples later when I have more time to Google, but about this one-really Tracy? You want to invoke the old Black-on-Black crime red herring, and you pick Chicago? A city with a police Dept that’s a cesspool of corruption and violence and coverups? They were literally running torture camps and beating confessions out of people (mostly non-White). You really think Obama was behind that? Laquan McDonald was gunned down for no good reason; the one video the cops neglected to destroy shows that clearly. And yeah, I know who the mayor is, and he ought to be impeached for the coverup, but I don’t see these sorts of shenanigans as the model Obama is so keen on bringing us. You cite unsolved murders- have you considered that there just might be a connection to the people in those rough neighborhoods being just as afraid of the police as they are of the gangbangers? The model the Obama, and the people in BLM who are serious about reform and not being trolls, and anyone else who wants a just society are so keen on bringing is to stop the coverups of police transgressions. Cops who abuse their authority need to be held accountable, and in the age of the smart phone and the surveillance camera, they cannot hide it anymore. So go Obama- more power to you on this issue.

    • objv says:

      fly, how are you rationalizing Obama and Hillary’s utter cluelessness? “JV team” comes to mind.

      • flypusher says:

        They aren’t clueless objv. They’ve made plenty of mistakes, but they know what is going on in the world. Trump didn’t even know what Brexit was about, and then praised the outcome in Scotland, of all places. I knew about this- what’s Trump’s excuse?

      • objv says:

        fly, wouldn’t it be clueless to use email using multiple personal devices connected to an unsecured, home brew server while abroad?

      • 1mime says:

        Fishing…….you’ve made your decision Ob, live with it because you will not convince anyone who regularly posts here of Trump’s qualifications to be president. Have a nice camp out.

      • objv says:

        Mime, I don’t kid myself about changing anyone from liberal to conservative, but if I challenge any of you to think a little more critically and if I provide any kind of balance to the daily drivel you receive through RawStory and the other lefty web sites, I feel I’ve done my part to grow my angel wings. 🙂

      • 1mime says:

        Well Ov, despite your best efforts, I am not convinced frankly of any of your arguments. Guess I’m just not smart enough to see how wrong I am in everything I believe, so don’t waste your time on me. Why don’t you try to help Donald Trump instead. Now, there’s a project begging for a miracle, uh, angel.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        OV, are you going fishing as well as camping??

      • objv says:

        Tutt, No, just camping and hiking on the North Rim. I’ve never been to the Grand Canyon and I’m really looking forward to this trip. My husband and I are going with a Hillary loving, liberal couple and I don’t want to ruin our friendship by getting political. Hopefully, I can get the argumentativeness out of my system by arguing with you guys (which is the Cleveland equivalent of y’all and not dependent on gender.) 🙂

      • flypusher says:

        “…if I challenge any of you to think a little more critically and if I provide any kind of balance to the daily drivel you receive through RawStory and the other lefty web sites, I feel I’ve done my part to grow my angel wings.”

        My opinion of Trump didn’t come from RawStory or HuffPo or DailyKos or any lefty site. It came from listening to HIS OWN WORDS, and long before run for office.

      • flypusher says:

        “fly, wouldn’t it be clueless to use email using multiple personal devices connected to an unsecured, home brew server while abroad?”

        More lame excuses and deflections. Using the home server was a bad decision. A bad decision that Colin Powell also made (yet you show no outrage over that). It is in no way as profoundly ignorant as not knowing anything about Brexit, especially when Trump claims that he is going to make better trade deals.

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        Come on OV, you can’t seriously think that you’re in the camp of critical thought in these debates, can you?

        As Paul Ryan says, it’s a binary choice. Of course the email thing was idiotic. But we need to look at the balance in totality.

        Is Hillarys use of a private email server in which there is absolutely no evidence of any damage done, which both previous SoS also did worse then a candidate who is a habitual liar (as I posted above, Politfact says that of ALL Trumps statements in this campaign, only 3% are ‘true’ and 8% are ‘mostly true’), has scammed millions from consumers via his phony university, has less foreign policy knolwedge then most ppl on this blog (and I mean that literally, without any hyperbole whatsoever), doesn’t understand the 1st amendment, wants to bring back torture despite the military saying they’ll refuse such an order? Do you REALLY believe that Hillary’s one big flaw (and it really is just that one. If there were more, you’d better believe the GOP would be allllll over it. But they aren’t. It’s emails, and that’s it.) is worse then Trumps overwhelming disqualifying traits and behaviors? You’re smarter then that, come on.

        And you also realize that Obama has the 2nd highest approval rating at this point in his administration in modern memory (second only to Bill Clinton)? So obviously , youre out of touch with what the American People like. America in general kinda think Obama is a pretty dam good president. Have you thought maybe that you’re the one who might want to do some introspection about why you believe what you do?

        There’s some critical thought that needs to happen here, all right. But I think you’re confused about where it needs to happen.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        OV, you have yourself a “Grand” old time in the Canyon. We’ll be here waiting for you when you get back. 🙂

    • objv says:

      fly, I was referring to speaking styles not fitness for office.

      If most people had an objection to people who speak easily running for office, neither Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan would have been chosen.

      • flypusher says:

        It’s not the manner of speech, it’s the CONTENT that’s the problem. The majority of what comes out of Trump’s mouth is juvenile and/or sexist and/or xenophobic and/or ignorant. And you want that guy representing our country.

      • 1mime says:

        A waste of time, fly.

      • objv says:

        No, I don’t want Trump representing our county, however, he is the lesser of two evils.

    • 1mime says:

      And, here’s a really fine article written anonymously by a policeman’s wife. A liberal couple, they don’t fit the stereotype but they do share concerns about living and dying and respect.

      • 1mime says:

        Diane Rehm (NPR) had a program on violence and relations between police and the black communities. Her guests were noteworthy:
        Paul Butler professor, Georgetown Law School;
        David Klinger professor, department of criminology and criminal justice,University of Missouri, St Louis
        Ronald Hosko president, Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund; former Assistant Director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division
        Kimberly Kindy national reporter, The Washington Post; part of a Pultizer-prize winning team that developed a database on fatal police shootings
        Ta-Nehisi Coates national correspondent, The Atlantic; author of “Between the World and Me”

        Here’s the transcript if you’re interested.

    • 1mime says:

      Police unions aside, part of the problem is that accepted police procedures – use of force, stop and frisk, targeting, etc. blur the line between appropriate police behavior and a step or two beyond. As the documentary, “Policing the Police” (Frontline, PBS) pointed out, the officers felt they were handling the “perps” appropriately while the man who was observing them was appalled. One of the officers he rode with on a night patrol pulled a kid’s arm back so hard and abruptly that he broke it – and, worse yet, the kid wasn’t doing anything wrong. It’s these stories that make your blood boil. Then, there are thugs who don’t respond to civility, and it appears police procedures are designed and applied for the worst situations to all people (a la Sandra Bland). This has to change but will take time.

  13. In a world where people actually think and come to conclusions based on fact and not what they want to hear and believe, something like Trump’s talking trash about Obama would be a complete failure. But here Trump is, implying the President is not against these policemen getting killed. Sadly, a ton of people, all Republicans, will not only believe this crap but will be glad to hear it and spread the news. And, like with Clivon Bundy, few if any Republican leaders will disavow this garbage. Probably because if they do, they will loose the next primary. Can not piss off the whacko, Alex Jones Infowars crowd!

    While I am not a pessimistic person, I am a realist. No cognitive dissonance for me:-)! I just do not see any of this changing. the Republican party has hung it’s hat, based it’s future, on a base of people who will believe anything as long as it is anti democrat and especially anti “the black guy, Barack Hussein Obama, the guys who was born in Kenya!”. The party can not let go of those votes. And it seems, at least to me, the rhetoric has gotten worse. Can anyone imagine what would have happened to the congressman who called Obama a liar during a speech on the floor of the Congress if that were LBJ? That congressman would have not had the ***** to do that. But civility is gone, probably for good. rational thought is history with almost half the electorate.

    I will bet $10,000 of Mitt Romney’s money that Trump gets at least 45% of the vote. That means 45% of the people think Trump is qualified to be President over Hillary.

    That is just insane!

    Here is Trump spreading his newest theory:

    • tuttabellamia says:

      Over the course of his presidency, Mr. Obama has tried very hard to be fair and speak for both sides of an issue, and I think this has hurt him in certain ways, especially in the case of the police shootings.

      He’s received flak from many in the Black community for not being forceful enough in condemning the shootings of Black people by the police, and he also gets flak from conservatives for not standing up for the police enough.

      So, he gets it from both sides, but guess which side makes the most noise and gets the upper hand? The side which doesn’t like him to begin with, the loudest side, the side which will use anything they can get their hands on to disparage him.

      That’s what he gets for trying to play fair, but I wouldn’t have it any other way. He needs to continue being true to himself and not go down to the level of those who always find fault with him.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        So, for people who don’t like President Obama, it’s easy to distort his sympathy for Black victims of police shootings into the view that he is not really opposed to police officers being killed.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        For people who don’t like the President, it’s not only easy to intentionally distort Mr. Obama’s words; it’s also easy to INTERPRET them in this way, out of sheer habit, from automatically assuming that anything he says or does must be malicious or just plain wrong.

  14. formdib says:

    So I’ve found it lightly ironic people posting New Yorker articles about Trump here (what better represents the hated New York Intellectual + Librul Media than The New Yorker?), but I can’t hold back. This article is fantastic:

    Title is in the url: “Donald Trump’s Ghostwriter Tells All”

    My favorite section is when Schwartz uses the advice he wrote in the book against Trump’s attempt to scam him of hundreds of thousands of dollars:

    “After chatting briefly about the party, Trump informed Schwartz that, as his ghostwriter, he owed him for half the event’s cost, which was in the six figures. Schwartz was dumbfounded. “He wanted me to split the cost of entertaining his list of nine hundred second-rate celebrities?” Schwartz had, in fact, learned a few things from watching Trump. He drastically negotiated down the amount that he agreed to pay, to a few thousand dollars, and then wrote Trump a letter promising to write a check not to Trump but to a charity of Schwartz’s choosing. It was a page out of Trump’s playbook.”


    • formdib says:

      “Minutes after Trump got off the phone with me, Schwartz’s cell phone rang. “I hear you’re not voting for me,” Trump said. “I just talked to The New Yorker—which, by the way, is a failing magazine that no one reads—and I heard you were critical of me.””

      • 1mime says:

        Wow! Well, let me state upfront that I am an avid reader of The New Yorker, which comports with my liberal views and my appreciation for well researched, quality journalism. Guilty as charged. This piece is amazing. What in the world are we in for if this man is elected?

        “Trump’s short attention span has left him with “a stunning level of superficial knowledge and plain ignorance.”

    • flypusher says:

      Trump is the master of parasite-capitalism. The first people he stiffed may have had no reason to expect it, but once the word got around the guy should gave been blackballed. Any bank that lends him $ deserves to fail.

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        If there is any justice in this world Fly, Trump will not only lose disastrously in November, but he will be ruined financially.

        Banks won’t lend to him. People won’t want to give money to his businesses.

        I truly think it’s important he be destroyed, not so much for any sense of vengeance, but to act as a strong warning to future demagogues who may seek to exploit the divisions in America for their personal gain.

      • 1mime says:

        Trump is a “means to an end” – for those who hate HRC and those who are racist and those who hate President Obama.

      • flypusher says:

        My net worth is considerably less than even the most lowball estimate of Trump’s worth (I so hope Mark Cuban is right about “just” $150G) but I’m proud to say that I have never stiffed anyone who I hired to do a job for me.

      • 1mime says:

        First up on the GOP stage is none other than Stephen Colbert, who crashed the Republican National Convention before its start “dressed up in his infamous Caesar Flickman (the annoying announcer from The Hunger Games) outfit and crashed the stage at the Republican National Convention.”

        (Courtesy –

        Pretty tight security, no?

    • Rob Ambrose says:

      I came here specifically to post this article. It’s deeply unsettling, when viewed in the context of a potential Trump presidency.

      Sadly, the ones who need to read it never will.

      • 1mime says:

        No, the saddest thing is that those Trump supporters who DO read it will totally deflect the importance of the information.

      • flypusher says:

        I wish the guy had spoken up back in January. Or at least after Super Tuesday.

      • 1mime says:

        Yep, lots of missed opportunities, but, like he said, he didn’t think Trump could get that far…..Now that he’s there, the media HAS TO STEP UP and expose this man….a man who brought the GOPe to its knees. Shock and awe, indeed.

      • formdib says:

        Exact problem with going to the New Yorker. Though his claims would have been challenged by more moderate or right leaning journalists, he really ought to have gone to them.

        No one of any conservative background will read this piece. No one who it stands to confront or change.

      • 1mime says:

        Do people with conservative backgrounds read? Don’t waste your breath or your time hoping any Trump supporters will ever read something like this article. The ones that amaze me are those conservatives who are repulsed by Trump but supporting him anyway. They won’t read it either because they’ve had to ignore fact in order to personally justify their vote for Trump. I still believe a large number of these disgruntled Republicans will support Johnson, the Libertarian candidate, or just not vote for prez period.

      • formdib says:

        Hey now,

        I’ll stick my neck out for conservatives and state that most that I know do read. I wouldn’t know what the data is from the larger perspective, and there’s always questions of quality, but I think generalizing them in that way isn’t very nice.

        There’s also the fact that conservative political books tend to be top sellers. That too is one of those questionable data points: ‘top sellers’ in books isn’t that many books due to how infrequently ANYBODY reads, and writers such as Glenn Beck and co. tend to expend a lot of effort driving book SALES but it isn’t entirely clear that anyone actually reads them.

        Plus there’s conservative print periodicals, blogs, so forth etc. yadda yadda yadda. But!

        I used to work at a bookstore. What’s interesting is that the conventional wisdom was that conservatives read history books, liberals read memoirs; conservatives read true crime, liberals read mystery; and conservatives tended to read biographies whereas liberals tended to read novels.

        In short, conservatives needed material that they could trust as ‘fact’, while liberals were okay playing looser with fact in favor of expression.

        I have no idea how true that ‘conventional wisdom’ is, but if it’s true it says something interesting about conservative v. liberal thought, and if it’s false it says something about our assumptions regarding conservative v. liberal thought.

      • 1mime says:

        That’s an interesting perspective. Funny, I worked at a bookstore throughout college, but being a different generation, didn’t observe the ideological reading people purchased. Good catch, though, and probably more relevant today.

        And, yes, I was being snarky. Wasn’t feeling very nice to conservatives today. My bad, as the kids say. I love to read anything of quality but absolutely fit the liberal profile you described – mysteries, biographies, novels, but I also read many news sources for factual documentation/thinking. Maybe there’s hope for me yet (-;

      • formdib says:

        FYI I did a quick search engine check to see if there is any documentation of the difference between liberals’ and conservatives’ rates of reading, and

        Don’t bother. It’s a shitshow, not even worth digging through for information. You’d find more open-minded and data-oriented information on popular nutrition sites.

    • 1mime says:

      “Trumping” the Trump! Can you imagine a Donald Trump being involved in the budget for the United States of America?

    • Rob Ambrose says:

      I guess the silver lining is that the the man this piece portrays is one who is likely to get humiliated in a debate against a prepared and knowledgeable HRC.

      A person who can’t keep a conversation going more then 2 minutes unless it’s directly praising themselves, and who can’t or won’t read a goddamn book once in a while, is not somebody whose going to come off well vs Clinton under the bright lights of the debate. There’s no where to hide on the debate stage, that is if he doesn’t back out.

      • flypusher says:

        To me, there is no greater shortcoming in someone who aspires to high office than to be clueless (and willfully so) about important issues. That’s what turned me off to Sarah Palin, and it’s #1 on my list (a very long list) of reasons why Trump is not qualified to be President.

      • 1mime says:

        Once again, IF Trump is “allowed” to equivocate, bluster, and NOT answer specific questions, and IF the moderators allow him to get away with doing so (just as they did except for Megyn Kelly, god bless her), he will get away with doing what has been “selling”. He depends upon domination and intimidation of media to avoid having to respond substantively. If the media does not nail him down, it will be just like the nomination debates. It won’t matter how substantive HRC is unless the moderators hold him to the same high content standard they require of HRC. So far, that has not happened. If Trump wins this election, the media will have contributed largely by NOT exposing him for what he is. He will have truly gamed the system.

      • 1mime says:

        Rob, here’s how a Donald Trump handles tough questions:

        CBS Interview, Lesley Stahl, asking Trump why he could criticize HRC’s vote as a senator supporting the war in iraq and ignore Pence’s same vote:

        “”You’ve used that vote of Hillary’s, that was the same as Gov. Pence, as the example of her bad judgement,” she said.

        “Many people have, and frankly, I’m one of the few that was right on Iraq,” Trump said in response.”

        Do you see how he equivocates and turns things around? A tough interviewer would have a harder question coming back following this misdirection by Trump. I’m afraid we don’t have many Tim Russerts left in American media circles.

      • flypusher says:

        We need the BBC reporters. They don’t let anyone dodge questions like that. They would have Trump throwing a frustrated temper tantrum in under a minute, I’ll bet.

      • 1mime says:

        The media has a responsibility to tell the hard truth and do the tough job.

  15. formdib says:

    Less glumness, more opportunity:

    Side note is that I simultaneously find it relieving to read an opinion editorial that treats politics as a series of choices we can make on how to live with each other and still hold onto our values, it still sucks that Trump’s candidacy has finally become so realized that we can have those sorts of conversations about his influence.

    • 1mime says:

      Good article, formdib. I noted the complete absence of any remarks about the evangelical influence and their treatment of womens’ rights. Guess you can only expect conservative authors too go so far in proposing change in the party (-; They also fail to plumb the fundamental issues within those sectors of our population who are struggling – quality education, health care, safe, affordable housing, transportation services….etc.

      Another point of concern is Paul Ryan’s plan on entitlement reform. All the changes I’ve read attributed to him are pretty radical. If that’s where Americans feel we need to start, then I’m misreading the mood of those nearing retirement or in retirement.

      Otherwise, some fine ideas, hardly rocket science to those who’ve been paying attention (this blog) – but good to see conservatives openly stating the obvious. Let us hope that their main readership aren’t all liberals.

      • 1mime says:

        Working towards more balance in understanding the dynamics of the divide in our country over policing and racism, Doug Muder of The Weekly Sift blog, expands upon the deeper problems contributing to these issues. He approaches the topic from “a third narrative that supports both the police who are trying to do their jobs without killing or being killed, and also the communities of color that feel constantly harassed by police and in danger of violence from them.not for or against policing and racism, but an acknowledgement that this problem is complex and it is getting worse.”

        He notes that: “the villains in my story are most of the rest of us, who are in denial about the true state of our country”.

        We need more deep thinking and journalism like this. We need to expand the discussion and the audience if we can ever expect change to be possible. We can all help.

    • Rob Ambrose says:

      Good article, seems like a step in the right direction. The comments are excellent too though, and make the point well that this isn’t an anamoly. Look at the GOP platform and one can see the GOP is doomed. There is not ONE voice anywhere in the GOP willing to suggest that maaaaaaaaybe the direction theyve gone since Reagen (deruglate, privatize, and whatever else you do, ALWAYS CUT TAXES FOR THE RICH!!) isn’t the way forward.

      A sign of a healthy party is that new voices with new ideas both exist, AND rise to the top.

      Where is the equivalent Warren or Sanders for the GOP? The voices that aren’t afraid to question the orthodoxy? Without these fresh ideas, and with strict adherence to established dogma (especially when that supply side dogma is increasingly debunked), how can the party grow?

      Trump is a phenomenon, but ifbit wasn’t him, it would be someone else eventually. Maybe not in 2016, but certainly SOMEbody wouldnhave come tonthe realization that the Republican Party is increasingly at odds with its base, and that there is a chasm as wide as the Grand Canyon between them for a smooth political operator to insert themselves.

      • 1mime says:

        The new voice for the GOP is the Freedom Caucus….it’s just not the voice you hoped to see emerge. And, lest any of us hope too much for a more rational voice to emerge – remember gerrymandering has pretty well quashed that in the House. It will take decades of census change OR a challenge through the courts to effect changes in that process. It’s worked incredibly well for the GOP in controlling and protecting their elected officials and their special interests.

      • 1mime says:

        Oh, and there is one voice in the GOP that is trying to bring about constructive change: Lifer.
        He deserves credit for putting himself out there AND for steadily offering educational examples through his blog of why change is needed and what it could look like.

  16. Rob Ambrose says:

    The suspected shooters name is Gavin Eugene Long. They mentioned he had an affiliation to an anti government group called the New Freedom Movement.

    I found a small group on FB but it doesn’t look like there’s any PoC there at all. Just looks like a right wing militia groupb(except their politics seem to be hard left, such as communism and anarchism).

    There’s a chance this is a white guy. Which, of course would mean it’s just a mentally ill lone wolf. I think I prefer that narrative to “TGE RACE WAR HAS STARTED!!” which is what it would be is the shooter (or, God forbid, shootERS) were black, regardless of any possible motivation.

    • 1mime says:

      Probably need to wait for police to corroborate details. Pres. O spoke concerning this incident and he made a request that makes sense. He asked that each of us make an effort to restrain our rhetoric to help ratchet down the tension. I don’t want this or any of the recent events to become political fodder. Hopefully, this won’t happen.

  17. Sir Magpie De Crow says:

    To 2nd amendment, law and order conservatives I want you to know… I support the police.

    • 1mime says:

      What could possibly go wrong?

      • Ryan Ashfyre says:

        You couldn’t ask for the tensions to be higher going into the RNC, particularly with all these latest shootings. It only takes one idiot with a gun.

      • 1mime says:

        “You couldn’t ask for the tensions to be higher going into the RNC, particularly with all these latest shootings. It only takes one idiot with a gun.”

        Well, that’ll never happen….everyone knows all the idiots will be at the Democratic Convention (-; Only geniuses need attend the Republican Convention…..

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        Who knows? “Open carry” probably hasn’t had as big a stage as it will this week . in other words, more “regular” ppl will see open carry in action this week then probably anybother time. Perhaps once they actually SEE how absurd and inappropriate it is for civilians to be patrolling American cities heavily armed, there willl be more political will to end it.

    • Rob Ambrose says:

      Kasich is such a coward. “I don’t have the right to suspend constitutional rights”.

      No, indeed you don’t. But please, point out the part where open carry is part of the 2A? There are restrictions on almost every single constitutional right, and the 2A is no different.

      You do not have the right to own grenades, for example. Or rocket launchers. So clearly, there are restrictions on the right to bear arms already.

      Even Scalia agrees that the 2nd amendment is not unlimited. There is nothing unconstitutional about restricting open carry

      • 1mime says:

        “There is nothing unconstitutional about restricting open carry….”

        Unless you have political aspirations…..and are a Republican.

  18. 1mime says:

    The fat lady hasn’t sung on “Never Trump”……….Watched an interview of the leader, a delegate from CO, Ms. Unruh – She had a lot to say – interviewer had a tough time getting a word in edgewise. Down to the wire now……then there is Cruz……..

    • Ryan Ashfyre says:

      mime, it’s over. The RNC’s already quashed any remote hope there was. Anti-Trump forces have neither the numbers nor the power/influence to push this through, no matter how much they want it.

      • Fair Economist says:

        I’ve been wondering, actually – can the delegates “blue flu” strike and just not show up? What happens if 300 of Trump’s delegates don’t show up for the vote?

      • 1mime says:

        Gosh, I’ve been pondering a clever reply to your “what happens if 300 of Trump’s delegates don’t show” and all I can think of is Trump will “just fix it”….why would anyone miss attending the “greatest Republican Convention of all time”!!!

      • Ryan Ashfyre says:

        Slice it however you want, Trump’s supporters would see that as much of a betrayal as voting against him. Political armageddon awaits regardless.

  19. Sir Magpie De Crow says:

    This is pure idiocy.

    Any “thoughtful” law abiding gun owner that thinks the security arrangement in the event zone for the GOP Cleveland convention is sensible has just lost touch with reality. People who think this is acceptable have fallen into some sort of candy coated AR-15 fantasy world, where all conventional human logic no longer applies.

    Banned items list includes:

    No locks (like one would use for a high school locker), no tennis balls, no laser pointers, no light bulbs, no bull horns, canned goods, water guns, no gas masks or (wtf!) strings in lengths greater than 6 feet…

    But if you have a license you can open carry with a semi-automatic rifle.

    Just like the Orlando shooter who owned guns legally. Don’t we all feel safe now?

    We now live in a country where there is a significant number of voters who believe we should interrogate and deport people based on their adherence to certain religious beliefs…

    But that there should be little to no restrictions on civilian use of weapons that were originally intended for special forces units of our military.

    Does anyone here think (for example) the out-of-state white supremacists who can legally own firearms will not be potentially trigger happy when met with the vociferous insults and taunts made by rightfully enraged minorities who are native to Cleveland Ohio?

    Forgive me if I think otherwise.

    I would ask people to consider this:
    How well will people accept that white supremacists (or belligerent Trump supporters) can carry weapons unmolested in a city that endured the sad spectacle of the shooting death of Tamir Rice?

  20. Rob Ambrose says:

    Shooting in Baton Rouge, two officers killed.

    Jesus, I mean…..surely this can’t go on forever. Will White America finally get that using state power to keep “The Blacks” in their place is not a long term strategy? Do they want a goddamn Intifada in America?

    • flypusher says:

      A pox on all the extremists and nutjobs. Ambushing police isn’t going to change anyone’s minds.

      • 1mime says:

        Right, but, what will?

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        I agree wholeheartedly. There is no contradiction between unequivocally calling an act wrong and seek justice while at the same time seek to address the grievances that caused it.

        Anybody who shoots and kills innocent people, and innocent cops, should be either killed before the can kill more, or apprehended, tried, and jailed for the rest of their life. With that said, these things aren’t happening in a vacuum.

        Unless we believe that black ppl are INHERENTLY criminal and murderous, we must come to the realization that these despicable acts are the result of specific policies and behaviors by the police. That in no way absolves this murderer, nor blames the innocent cops who were murdered. It simply States the obvious fact that these are happening for a reason, and until we address that, we will never stop this.

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        At the end of the day, there is blame on all sides, and killings like we’ve seen only make everyone less safe.

        When black ppl target and assainate cops, it makes all black ppl less safe during even routine police interactions, and when cops use excessive force and kill black ppl unjustifiedly (and then don’t face justice) it makes all cops less safe.

        The solution requires understanding and concession from all sides.

        And for God’s sake, invest money in policing. Look at how other countries do it.

        In Canada for example, the RCMP is the national police force and thus do all the “big” things like what the FBI does (anti terrorism, organized crime, forensics etc). They also do the vast majority of community policing across the country (pulling ppl over, setting up DUI checks, responding to local calls etc). They pay very well (I think you start at $70-$80,000) and thus have their pick of very qualified candidates. It’s HARD to get in the RCMP, as it should be. My buddy couldn’t get in because his marks in high school wenrt good enough (he had a high 80’s average) and then they do psychological tests. Needless to say, it’s very competitive.

        Then, you get sent to the RCMP academy in Saskatchewan where you live, eat and sleep policing for around 18 months. Then, you get sent to your first posting which is never in or near your hometown.

        THATS bow you get a professional police force. You can’t just throw a “help wanted” sign up, pay peanuts, and do a few months of training then give a guy a badge and a gun and tell him to police the same ppl he grew up with, or you end up with what America has: a generally amateur police force that is underpaid and undertrained and not at all equipped to handle the myriad of situations they might find themselves in.

      • flypusher says:

        “They pay very well (I think you start at $70-$80,000) and thus have their pick of very qualified candidates.”

        “You get what you pay for” is tried and true wisdom, but God forbid we actually ask people to pay the taxes for the vital services. I’m pointing the finger of blame at YOU, the taxes-are-theft crowd and the Norquist followers.

      • 1mime says:

        What is so tragic about this whole racial issue is that we continue to focus on symptoms. Poverty, education, health care, birth control, child care….this is where the real work needs to begin, then addressing the relationships, police training, guns are able to be addressed. Why is this so hard to understand? We know it’s hard to do, but as you note, Fly, our country is loathe to spend money on pre-emption for people who are perceived as second class citizens. When your whole attitude is: they’re just not working hard enough – you are also part of the problem. Babies having babies keeps the welfare/poverty cycle in high gear. Yet we make contraception so hard to get with such stigma that young women who might otherwise stay in school and acquire an education, are home raising children that society also doesn’t want. It’s a vicious cycle.

        As for police, in the documentary it ends positively noting that many police forces are learning new techniques for use of force, and better training, and, yes, paying officers more. Just like teachers….

    • 1mime says:

      Shooting/killing on either side only makes matters worse. I have been appalled at how the BR police handled events there. They certainly didn’t model their response after Dallas, and the actions of the mayor, police chief and District Attorney (who has absented himself on rendering opinions on these matters), have exacerbated the situation. This is a powder keg waiting to go off. Racism in LA is well established and the justice process is deeply flawed.

      I watched a Frontline (PBS) recording last night of a special documentary entitled: “Policing the Police”. It focused on Newark, NJ police. One hour long – it was thoughtful. Worth viewing.

    • unarmedandunafraid says:

      Is this it? The use of guns to fight the oppressive tyrannical government that 2nd amendmenters envisioned? The NRA should be proud.

      • Rob Ambrose says:

        If anything will finally get White America to pass strict gun control laws, it’s the threat that “The Blacks” might start snapping and shooting ppl.

      • 1mime says:

        You may recall that the Black Panther uprising during Reagan’s administration prompted passage of The Mulford Act essentially prohibiting open carry of loaded firearms. Armed, openly carrying Black Panther members patrolling neighborhoods to pre-empt abusive policing practices. hpps://

        As I noted to Tracy, and as is affirmed in the documentary (Policing the Police) – the police chiefs I have seen speaking out believe that more gun availability and legal open and concealed carry of firearms has made their jobs more difficult and dangerous. It also creates a tension and wariness that produces risky reactions, as the documentary illustrated. Police have to assume that anyone they stop has a gun. Of course, the reasons that are employed to justify a stop are suspect. When the man who investigated the NJ police (and had actually been with the officers on some of the incidents profiled) pulled the incident reports, they were far different than what had actually happened. Eye opening. And, this is just one city. Imagine Baltimore, Cleveland, Chicago, Baton Rouge, New Orleans, etc.

        Police jobs are difficult enough without adding in poor practices. Lots has to change but boy is it going to be a challenge.

      • Fair Economist says:

        Well, basically, yeah. Brutally oppressed group + free access to military grade equipment = a big mess. That’s the recipe that’s created a lot of chronic conflicts all over the globe. We’re lucky to have gotten this far before somebody realized these weapons can be used to snipe the police. It’s probably the MLK influence that saved us so far, but now that’s it’s happened we’re going to start getting copycats.

        Ideally we should get the bad cops under control *AND* get military grade equipment back to restricted access, but at this point we have to do at least one.

    • Rob Ambrose says:

      These cop killings are being condemned on all sides when they happen, as they absolutely should.

      Where is the same outrage when all the innocent black men are killed by cops? Not ALL black men killed by cops are innocent of course. Many are justifiable killings. But there are plenty that are flat out murder, and nobody gives a shit.

      Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, Phil Castille, Trayvon Martin, Alton Sterling, Walter Scott….all of these were flat out murdered, and not one of them had committed a crime worse then selling loose cigarettes or having a busted tail light. Where is the unanimous condemnation for their murders the way there is (rightfully) unanimous condemnation when cops are murdered?

      • flypusher says:

        I think the one most effective thing that the police could do to deal with this problem is to STOP COVERING FOR THE BAD APPLES. Don’t erase videos or say nothing if you witness murder (the McDonald case in Chicago), don’t hire people who have bad records from previous police jobs (the Rice case), crack down on the officers who fail to follow department procedures (The Gray and Garner cases).

    • flypusher says:

      An update, 3 officers dead, 3 wounded, 1 suspect dead, 2 possibly at large:

      This part is very odd:

      ‘Witness Brady Vancel told WAFB that he saw two people shooting at each other before authorities even arrived.

      “There was multiple gunshots going back and forth and back and forth before any police ever showed up. This was not a come-at-police situation,” Vancel said. “They weren’t targeting police at first, I don’t assume so, because these were men out here shooting at each other in an empty parking lot until the police showed and then it turned into a gun battle, I’m guessing to try to get themselves free or get out of the situation.” ‘

      • 1mime says:

        Are you suggesting that maybe the police fatalities were circumstantial to their showing up to an ongoing gun battle and the situation is being spun? The tragedy of any deaths, including the police, is horrible, but let us hope that the real story will emerge and not one that is fabricated to cover botched police activities of late in Baton Rouge during the protests.

      • flypusher says:

        The witness account would suggest not an ambush, unless the 2 guys were really devious- a “fake” gun battle to lure police. Who knows? But we’ll find out eventually.

  21. Sir Magpie De Crow says:

    Whatever happens during (and after) this election cycle… never forget.

  22. Ryan Ashfyre says:

    >] “From The Atlantic: Senator Tim Scott’s remarkably candid remarks about his experiences with capitol police have the potential to be game-changing. Are Republicans ready to listen?

    Hope springs eternal.

    • Griffin says:

      If that isn’t enough to do convince them to change their ways I don’t see what it is. This is seriously probably the LAST chance for the GOP to cease, or at least mitigate, it’s complete progression into a white nationalist party. Yes they were always going to lose 2016 and it was probably going that way anyways but for me if they ignore Senator Scott here while also embracing Trump that shows the party really has no core outside of being a platform for reactionary white populism.

      • Ryan Ashfyre says:

        Now that actually is reason for optimism.

      • 1mime says:

        Right on! People (other than whites) were born with “a pen and no paper”……I hope this goes viral among his peer group….and beyond. This topic should be a national debate topic in schools across America. Of course, debaters usually are smart….but being “smart” doesn’t always connote to possessing good judgement. Not to diminish the young man’s video, but the contrast between the thoughts expressed by him versus what we are likely to hear from our boy Cruz who has deigned to speak at the Trump convention will be a study in contrasts.

        For all his rhetoric and righteous indignation (well placed), is there anyone here who believes he is speaking purely to position himself for 2020? So principled – until it conflicts with self-advancement. If I were Trump, I’d vet that speech before it’s given….He may not like what he hears….Then again, ……

  23. formdib says:

    The articles on the RNC is a pretty good example of the difference between people who follow political literature and quote-unquote ‘most people.’

    Take it from a filmmaker: nobody cares what the budget is or who is performing in the supporting roles. The major elements that push product are a celebrity star and production value.*

    The celebrity star is Trump and the production value will be subsidized by the high end cameras, 3D graphics, and performances of the news media. None of the ‘voters’ give a shit whether the speakers are respected Republican elders of vaulted prestige, or Bob.

    Besides, celebrity doesn’t always work out in any constructive sense. Clint Eastwood was a good choice: a quality craftsman of character based dramas that run under budget and are always profitable, and yet his performance was rightfully denigrated as the perfect symbol of the “GOP” as Grumpy Old People arguing with an empty chair.

    Those articles may be variously interesting to us but are essentially non-news for any other purpose.

    * Both indie and Hollywood filmmakers like to say that ‘The Story’ is really what drives audiences, but everyone knows in their gut it has nothing to do with that. In the same sense, ‘ideas’ and ‘values’ are always preached as sought-after qualities in a candidate, but the cult of personality really seems to underwrite the big winner in any major review of the international history of democratic appeal.

    • Fair Economist says:

      Yeah, there’s enough meat at the convention for the media to portray it as a success, and they will really want to. There are some significant politicians there to get soundbites from, and the only place you’ll hear about the 2nd string celebrity speakers will be on the political comedy shows.

      Now if the *Democratic* convention had 2 prior presidents and many top elected officials boycotting, you’d never hear the end of it.

      • 1mime says:

        Ha! Good one, Fair Economist! I wonder, will there be even one former president attending the GOP Convention?

      • Fair Economist says:

        No. Neither Bush is coming. HW is pretty old and frail and I wouldn’t necessarily expect him to, although he could still address by video. W not showing is a snub, although it’s not clear who’s snubbing who (probably mutual). Of the unsuccessful candidates, Romney is snubbing and McCain has to go to a BBQ or something. Only Dole is showing up.

  24. Shiro17 says:

    “Hillary Clinton will pledge to introduce a Constitutional Amendment to overturn Citizens United within her first 30 days in office.”

    No doubt this is geared to address her trust issues. The success of such an amendment will no doubt be dependent on the exact words used. As long as it’s explicit in the amendment that any law Congress passes must be viewpoint and candidate neutral, I’ll be OK with that.

  25. Rob Ambrose says:

    Trump showing off his foreign policy chops in his bizarre rambling soeech to introduce Pence today:

    “So many friends in Turkey,” Trump said. “Great people, amazing people. We wish them well. A lot of anguish last night, but hopefully it will all work out.”

    I should point out, that’s ALL he’s had to say about it.

    Can you imagine this guy in the situation room, taking calls from global leaders wondering what America’s response to a coup in an important strategic Ally is? A country Trump almost certainly couldn’t point out on a map?

    • flypusher says:

      Turkey’s got me worried. I do not like military coups, but I can sympathize with some of the rebels’ motivations-Erdogan is actually becoming just the sort of too powerful executive the RW like to accuse Obama of being. I can see him using this as the perfect excuse to become even more repressive.

      • 1mime says:

        An alliance with Erdogan is an alliance with the devil…..The pundits I listened to last night brought up this salient point: Without Turkey as a bulwark , the middle east would likely collapse and ISIL cross its borders. It is an uneasy relationship for the U.S.but it may be a necessary one given other geo-political problems that are even worse (Syria/Iran/N.Korea). Erdogan is ruthless but somehow he has retained the support of the majority of the people who have democratically elected him president.

        What’s important here is world stability. The devil you know and all that stuff…..What a price to pay….The next president is going to have to hit the ground running….no time for a learning curve.

      • Turkey has a history of coups and an army which has historically seen itself as entitled to perform them whenever the elected government does something they dislike. In the 1990s, for example, there was a coup to remove an elected government which was going to make peace with the Kurds, something the army found unacceptable.

        I dislike Erdogan intensely, but in this case I must side with him: in a democracy, the army must be subordinate to the elected civilian government, not vice versa. Having tanks and guns does not give you a veto. I hope Erdogan takes the opportunity to reform the army to prevent this happening again.

      • 1mime says:

        Careful with what you wish for, EJ. Personally, I wish Erdogan would moderate his views and govern in the spirit of the democracy that put him in office. I’m afraid this coup attempt will harden him even more along puritanical lines. Then the people of Turkey will have to decide if this is the democracy they want.

      • vikinghou says:

        I smell a rat. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that the whole coup was fake and orchestrated to allow Erdogan to further consolidate power. He’s the Turkish Putin.

      • 1mime says:

        Re: Erdogan – He is putting the U.S. in a pretty tight box. This will be a most interesting international problem for O and SOS Kerry….One of those, damned if you do, damned if you don’t…..This is going to get reeeel messy.

        “Erdogan blames the coup on Fethullah Gülen, a Turkish cleric living in exile in Pennsylvania, and has called on the United States to extradite him. ”

      • 1mime says:

        More fall out from failed Turkish coup….This one is big…….Big stakes for U.S.

      • You’re right that Erdogan is scary, 1mime, and I dislike him personally. Were I Turkish I would vote against him. However, he came to power by winning a democratic vote; and he kept power this weekend due to people coming out to the street to support him. Those who carried out the coup had no legitimacy except that of their firearms. I don’t have to be an AK voter to side with Erdogan there.

        Sadly, Erdogan is probably going to use this to purge some of his internal enemies. We’ll have to see how far he goes. We’ve seen that he retains power because he has a popular mandate; the important thing is whether he’ll step down if and when he loses that mandate.

    • 1mime says:

      Oh, but he’s so superior to HRC…..He may have a “little” learning curve, but his foreign policy will be Great!! The Best!!

      • flypusher says:

        Notice how our little discussion has many times the substance of Trump’s vague comments?

  26. Fair Economist says:

    If you’re mentioning interesting RNC speakers, don’t forget former underwear model and recent Chippendale dancer Antonio Sabato

  27. flypusher says:

    Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson can relate to Senator Scott’s stories:

    I’ve hauled things far more dangerous than science books around a campus setting- want to guess how many times I’ve been questioned?

    Sadly, Sen. Scott’s best point, to not assume that just because something bad doesn’t happen to you personally means it doesn’t ever happen, falls on too many deaf ears and closed minds. I see this in so many comments sections online, and in some conservative people I know personally. There is this attitude that Black Americans are just ingrates and they should stop complaining, because after all, even being a 2nd or 3rd class citizen in America is better than being in Africa, right? Also they just ought to be polite and comply, because it’s never true that they’re being targeted for anything other than suspicious behavior. The fact that there are dash cams and people with smart phones recording police encounters chips away at some of the denial, but the people who are determined to never blame to police will probably never budge. One example- go look at any online discussion about the Tamir Rice shooting. Despite the fact that it is on video, some idiot will blame the kid for pointing his toy gun at the cops. That of course never happened, but that doesn’t deter the deniers. I can only hope a critical mass of people will face up to reality, and then we can deal with the issue despite the biased idiots.

    • 1mime says:

      Well said, Fly. I hope this “critical mass” votes so that we can “have” the conversation. I really believe this is a watershed election – due to the SC balance and so many issues that have festered without resolution – or, the wrong resolution. It has to stop.

      It will require a sea change in opinion and in action, and we cannot afford to wait until those who harbor these sad beliefs die off, because there is no changing their minds.

  28. 1mime says:

    The Atlantic article that documents the improbability of people who start off disadvantaged ever catching up is heartbreaking. It’s what Homer was alluding to when he commented that the GBI for many people is needed for the most basic needs, not a second career or the like. The suggestion that opportunity is there if people just work hard and save is sadly representative of the belief and total lack of understanding of the conditions those who begin life in poverty and neglect experience. Opportunity may be “better” than it was but there is still a huge underclass of people who can’t access it through no lack of effort on their part. They simply had the wrong parents, grew up in the wrong neighborhood, or had a pitiful education. Their aspirations are to survive, not thrive. Are there benefits people can access for help? Yes, but they are designed for short term assistance, which, while helpful, fail to provide long term recovery or assistance despite tremendous effort.

    Would a GBI help? I think it would, but even more helpful would be for people who are in good situations to stop judging people who struggle. Our disconnect extends beyond our political divide, it applies to our lack of respect for each person and our refusal to prioritize funding for the assistance that is most meaningful to help them break out. For women it’s affordable, accessible, non-judgmental birth control and pre-school and after school child care so they can work and their children will be safe. It’s making voting easier, not harder so that disadvantaged people not only can participate in our Democracy, but they can be empowered to bring about changes. It’s about quality and relevancy of education for children, and safe neighborhoods, and stable homes. It’s complicated, as the article pointed out, and amazing when even one child is able to make it out of the morass that they were born to die in.

  29. 1mime says:

    Frankly, I don’t understand how Sen. Scott can be a Republican, hearing his heartfelt comments about his experiences as a black man. If the Republican Party genuinely cared about the problems of Black and other minority people, he would be hugely valuable to efforts to make meaningful changes within the GOP. Therein lies the problem. The only value Black and other minority populations have for the GOP is their vote because they aren’t financial contributors and their needs drain resources. Fundamentally, it is my belief, that the Republican Party has personal disdain for people of color and consider them as inferior human beings.

    More difficult to understand are blue collar white voters, who sadly continue to reward Republicans despite neglect – even with such dubious candidates as a Donald Trump, and even with decades of intentional neglect. Obviously, Democrats haven’t sufficiently addressed their needs adequately, or communicated their efforts to help or they would logically receive blue collar white support.

    Yet, I applaud Senator Scott for speaking out. His words and his genuine emotion help validate the Black experience beyond politics.

    • Mime,

      Blue collar workers!

      I would look at basic prejudice for your answer. I know a woman on the lower level of the economic scale, a lesbian, her house lost half it’s value in 2007/2008, she was in a 20 odd year relationship with another woman who she could not marry and this woman is a right wing Republican.

      Her reason, which took a while to hear, was she “hates blacks!”

      Now, the republican party thinks this woman is a freak, her a lesbian. She is way too poor to be what we would think of as a Republican. But she votes right wing with a vengeance, votes against her own interests all the time. Agrees with cutting social security and medicare to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy. as long as “blacks” get benefits cut! Doesn’t matter if her benefits get cut!

      I would offer that there are many, way more like her than we think.

      • 1mime says:

        That doesn’t make me prejudiced for stating that people like this woman benefit more from the Democratic Party. It makes this woman pitifully ignorant. Racism and bigotry are not exclusive to the Republican Party, it’s just that their numbers there are so much more significant. That is fact.

      • flypusher says:

        We’ve had the decision before about people voting against their self-interests, or what you think their self-interests ought to be. As it is a free country, it is your right to decide that your own nose is against your idea of your own best interests, and to vote to cut it off to spite your face. That’s what this lady is doing, and the whole stigginit crowd. I’ll vote to keep my nose.

      • 1mime says:

        From Evonomics:

        “Leon Festinger’s account of events in “When Prophecy Fails”, first published in 1956 and a seminal text in social psychology to this day. “Tell him you disagree and he turns away,” Festinger continues. “Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.”

        My, my, the more things change, the more they remain the same………

        “”Festinger describes “Cognitive dissonance”. When reality clashes with our deepest convictions, we’d rather recalibrate reality than amend our worldview. Not only that, we become even more rigid in our beliefs than before.”

        1956. It takes a very long time to change peoples’ minds and hearts.

      • someone said “all Republicans are not racists. But most racists are Republicans!”

        I do not think it was always like that. but certainly now when i hear people talk about voter ID’s, they really are talking about stopping a certain group from voting.

        With trump the party is in a bind. the old dog whistle comments they used to make stand out more now what with trump being so out spoken. Only my opinion, but if the Republican party ever repudiated the Jim Crow element of the party, the guns for everyone, anytime, anywhere, segment of the party and the anti science element of the party, there would be no party left on a national stage at least!

    • Ryan Ashfyre says:

      Until Republicans confront their own racially tinged rhetoric and appeals, even powerful words like Sen. Scott’s will fall on deaf ears. It would be laughable if it weren’t so sad.

  30. tuttabellamia says:

    OV, this is in reply to you on the previous thread:

    I mentioned the circus-like atmosphere of the Trump campaign, and you mentioned clowns. I was thinking of “circus” more in terms of “spectacle,” a raucous atmosphere.

    I have made a point not to refer to Mr. Trump as a clown, because I find it offensive when people call President Obama a clown, and I really don’t want to go down to that level, to calling anyone with presidential aspirations a clown, or maybe I just can’t deal with the thought of a “clown” being elected president.

    I know that you intend to vote for Mr. Trump, and some people may wonder how a nice, educated lady like you would do such a thing. I will take the opposite approach and ask, if a lady such as you would vote for him, maybe there is something redeeming about Mr. Trump.

    I will not vote for him, but should he win the election, I will have to deal with it, he will be my president, and I will accord him the respect the office deserves, and I will also hold him to the same high standard as any president.

    • 1mime says:

      If elected, I will accord him the respect a president deserves…..

      Which is a hell of a lot more than has ever been done for President Obama.

      • 1mime says:

        I don’t know how many of you were able to view the town hall on violence that ABC News organized this past Thursday night with President Obama as the featured guest. Questions and comments were invited from the audience. TX esteemed LT. Gov Dan Patrick used his moment in the spotlight well to try to coyly box in President Obama. Obama wasn’t having any of it and set the record straight. This is why we have so much difficulty discussing this issue – people playing to constituencies rather than making meaningful constructive contributions.

        Here’s how it went down: “On Thursday Obama fielded a question from Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, a Texas Republican, who blamed the Black Lives Matter movement for the Dallas deaths, called the protesters “hypocrites,” and chastised Obama for “divisive” rhetoric.

        Standing before the president, Patrick’s tone was more measured, asking Obama whether police officers “really, in their heart, feel like you’re doing everything you can to protect their lives?” He then called on Obama to illuminate the White House in blue lights in tribute to the fallen police. (…read the subliminal message from Patrick – you side with Black people more than cops…)

        “The police have asked you to do that,” he told the president. “You’ve done it for other groups. It would send a strong message.”

        Obama said that he had been “unequivocal in condemning any rhetoric directed at police officers” and and rejected the critique that he not praised police for doing tough and dangerous work.

        “I appreciate the sentiment.” Obama said in a clipped tone. “I think it’s already been expressed, but I’ll be happy to send it to you in case you missed it.” The president also referred to data that show blacks and Latinos are more likely to be stopped, searched and arrested than whites. ” (….Dan Patrick – you’ve been checkmated in your attempt to embarrass the Prez. Pick on somebody with a little less grey matter than yourself.)

        “This is not just stuff I make up,” Obama said. “I’m aware that my words matter deeply here.”

    • flypusher says:

      “I have made a point not to refer to Mr. Trump as a clown, because I find it offensive when people call President Obama a clown, ..”

      I go by the adage “if the shoe fits, wear it.” Granted I’ve called Trump far worse than a clown, but I feel that his behavior has earned such monikers fair and square. My first impression of Trump, made back in the 80s, was OhDearGodWhatAColossalJerkThisGuyIs, and it’s only gotten lower since he started peddling all that birther garbage and went full xenophobe on the campaign trail.

      As for Obama, whether or not you care for his politics, or like him as a person, if you are honest you will admit that there is nothing clownish about his behavior.

      • 1mime says:

        I could not help but contrast the two presidents at the Dallas commemorative service. Once again, President Obama exhibited eloquence, class and deep understanding of serious issues without equivocating. The fact that he has survived BPWB (being president while black) in such style amazes me. Not many people could be so forgiving or gracious in the face of the taunts, slurs, and outright disrespect he has endured.

        Mr. President, I salute you and thank you, and wish you a happier, more fulfilling life ahead. America was lucky to have you for our leader during these difficult years. You will be missed.

    • objv says:

      Tutt, I’m a bit confused about your comment since I didn’t call anyone a clown except for Venezuela’s ex-president, Hugo Chavez. During his speeches, Chavez had the habit of clowning around for his audience.

      I would never call Obama a clown. I disagree with his political leanings, but I have respect for him as a person and as our president.

      I do not, however, respect Hillary. Clown would be the wrong word to describe her. Corrupt, dishonest, and secretive would be more accurate.

      I am not thrilled with the idea of a Trump presidency, but Supreme Court justices are appointed for their lifetimes and Hillary would no doubt nominate justices that would make the majority of the court liberal.

      In addition, Hillary would continue the push for a larger and more controlling government. I value the liberties this country has given me especially religious freedom. I would like everyone to have continued freedom of speech and the ability to make decisions based on religious beliefs. Guns, as I’ve noted before, are not that important to me, but others like Tracy, cherish the right to own and use firearms in a responsible way. I do not see Hillary championing these rights.

      To me the choice is clear. Trump will be getting my vote.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 454 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: