Ragnarök: Trump Day 50 Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, And The Dim-Out Bluexit

Was today a national holiday? It should be. Not only did today confirm candidate Trump kept his promise to bring back jobs, jobs, jobs, – we also lived to see one of the great comic capitulations of world history.

As usual we will forgo the important news in favor of the comedy. Ladies and gentlemen and children of all ages we hereby reference unto you “Bluexit”. Bluexit? It’s a long article at New Republic, the bastion of self-hating white boys, wherein someone who considers himself a serious writer and thinker typewrites some truly funny comedy material. Consider this sentence from “Bluexit”: It seems clear now that only the personal integrity, wit, eloquence, and thoroughly lovable family of Barack Obama kept the Democratic Party stumbling along, gut-shot, for this long. Comedy gold!

The premise of “Bluexit” is that the “blue” states should exit the United States because the “red” states that voted for President Donald J. Trump have won the battle for the future. The comedy of “Bluexit” declares that the blue states contribute so much wealth to the nation that the red states would collapse without the wonderful minds, tolerance, and cultural creatives that inhabit the blue states. “Bluexit” would allow those tolerant culturally creative minds to create a blue heaven here on earth once they separate from the horrible working class people that inhabit the red states.

Such tolerance! Such humility and modesty! Such brilliance!

The “Bluexit” article does understand the debacle that now confronts the losers of the last election. Here are some choice sentences of capitulation to the Trump vast victory:



We give up. You win. [snip]

We’ll turn Blue America into a world-class incubator for progressive programs and policies, a laboratory for a guaranteed income and a high-speed public rail system and free public universities. We’ll focus on getting our own house in order, while yours falls into disrepair and ruin.

In short, we’ll take our arrogant, cosmopolitan, liberal-elite football—wait, make that soccer ball—and go home.

Shocking as your electoral victory felt to us in Blue America, we should have seen it coming. To paraphrase Virgil “the Turk” Sollozzo from The Godfather, the Democrats, with all due respect, had been slipping. Twenty years ago, could any organization as stone-cold crazy as the Tea Party have gotten to them? The staggering defeats that Democrats sustained, at every level of government, in the midterm elections of 1994, 2010, and 2014 have now reduced them to the largely impotent, makeshift, regional party they were from the Civil War all the way to the Great Depression.

That string of unrelenting electoral catastrophes should have tipped us off that there was something deeply, alarmingly wrong at the core of the party. Losses of that magnitude, over that period of time, are like a bright red dashboard light you’ve never noticed before that suddenly starts flashing insistently. Accompanied by a shrill beeping sound. And a voice repeating, “Warning, warning!” And a plume of smoke pouring from under your hood.

Yet the party elites drove blithely on, chatting on their cell phones about their demographic advantages and the imminent demise of the Republican Party, until the air bags had deployed, the steering wheel had come off in their hands, and the rims of their tireless wheels were grinding sparks off the curbside. At this point, there’s no retooling this burnt-out Chevy Cruze into a vehicle still capable of going coast-to-coast.

This letter is not intended as one more postmortem on what went wrong: on how the media should have done a better job, or how Hillary Clinton was a bad, bad, terribly bad candidate, the worstest candidate that ever was. Granted, it was Clintonism as a political philosophy, as practiced not only by both Clintons but also by President Obama and many others, that put the final stake in the heart of the Democratic Party as a national entity. The Clintonist project of taking the oldest and most diverse political coalition on earth—one organized around liberal economic principles that had held it together for generations—and re-centering it around conservative economic ideas and a hodgepodge of social ideas that nobody could agree on, was probably the worst political move since the Republicans tried to pretend in 1932 that the Great Depression was already over. (WASN’T THE DEPRESSION TERRIBLE? read their billboards lining the rail tracks between New York City and Washington, D.C.) It seems clear now that only the personal integrity, wit, eloquence, and thoroughly lovable family of Barack Obama kept the Democratic Party stumbling along, gut-shot, for this long.

Throughout much of the country, particularly anywhere outside a city in your Trump States, the Democratic Party barely exists anymore—and there’s not a damned thing we can do about it, at least for the moment. It will take decades of patient work and deep investment to rebuild the party and reassert its dominance in state legislatures. Richard Mellon Scaife and the Koch brothers and ALEC and other right-wing pioneers spent years in the conservative wilderness before they were able to cement their control of the nation’s political apparatus. And the demographic shifts that Democrats so patiently—and foolishly—counted on to change everything will now be stalled and undermined at every turn. A few years of Republican border and refugee policies, and we’ll be headed back to the ever-whiter America that preceded Lyndon Johnson’s 1965 immigration reforms. The federal and state judiciaries—which, thanks to this election, Republicans will now fill with far-right ideologues—will rubber-stamp every one of the voter suppression tactics the GOP currently employs, along with any new devilry that Trump and his insurgents dream up. And once the president delivers on his campaign promise to Jerry Falwell Jr. and other evangelical leaders by making it legal for churches and other nonprofit organizations to funnel tax-deductible donations directly to political candidates, we can expect a fresh Niagara of cash to pour into our elections, one that will make Citizens United look like a dry crick during climate change.

As it stands, your empire of Trump States now extends from Brownsville, Texas, to the Upper Peninsula of Michigan; from Coeur d’Alene to Key West. Future historians, if there are any, will be amazed to learn that just eight years after President Obama’s bailout of the auto industry—against the united and adamant opposition of the Republican Party—saved Michigan, Ohio, and maybe Pennsylvania from being reduced to large, smoking holes in the ground, all three of those once-blue holdouts voted to join Trump territory. Most of our country, at least as measured by physical terrain, has adopted your worldview. Your incessant self-pity and sense of injury on behalf of white people, and white people only. Your insistence that you remain the stronghold of “traditional values,” even as you adopt the most radical of ideas, and elect the most openly irreligious and irreverent president in our history. Your penchant for flushing any and every inconvenient truth down the memory hole of your favorite media complex, run by a gaggle of foreigners and cynics up in your hated New York.

The white child that wrote this comedy masterpiece previously wrote The Myth of the Smug Liberal In the dawn of the Trump era, there is no stereotype more lazily deployed than the condescending coastal liberal who lives in his own bubble. Into the comedy club rides Obama worship leftist numbers dude Nate Silver who today published There Really Was A Liberal Media Bubble – Groupthink produced a failure of the “wisdom of crowds” and an underestimate of Trump’s chances. Comedy gold!

In between diatribes against “bitter” white people, there is more comedy gold to be mined. The “you’ll miss me when I’m gone” juvenile temper tantrum of Bluexit is more Blue Velvet than serious political discourse. That those brilliant creative minds about to build a utopia of blue somehow missed the obvious collapse of their chosen political party is never explained by this juvenile temper tantrum disguised as a New Republic excretion.

Hey, wanna destroy California? Have California pay for the pension promises it has made but not funded. Make California fully fund the pension funds that are supposed to pay for the promises the state has made to its workers and the state of California would collapse insolvent. Just look to Detroit and that collapse of that city which used to live in the blue utopia. None of this is explained by the ‘hate whitey’ white boy that wrote this drivel.

That lonely boy that wrote that self-pitying “good-bye, I’m leaving, and you’re gonna miss me, sniff sniffle, you really are, and then you’re gonna cry and miss me, sniff sniff” included 1994 in his “analysis” to avoid the truth that it was Barack Obama that destroyed the Democratic Party. We recall in 2008 the Dims braying about how they would rule for 40 years because of their utopian golden calf.

This is just the latest self-hating white boy, like haiku writer Chris Bowers whom we wrote about in 2011, giving up on the hard work of appealing to the voters. What is the response of the Obama Dimocrat Party to the Obama authored debacle? It’s “well, bringing in a new electorate from other countries didn’t bring us victory, so let’s bring in the kids and maybe they’ll bring us the new world order we seek“:

Billionaire George Soros fuels Democrats’ push to lower voting age to 17

Yeah, that’s the ticket – bring in a new new electorate in the latest vain attempt to change reality, Dims.

What is reality? What is the single way to win? As we wrote a long time ago, Donald J. Trump’s secret sauce was jobs, jobs, jobs! Make America Work Again!

Candidate Donald J. Trump understood election 2016 was about jobs, something that eluded the New Republic white boys and Hillary2016. It was about jobs. A new study from Wesleyan of all places, blames Hillary Clinton’s loss on her lack of ads about policy. Hillary2016 offered insults against Trump, but no vision on how to bring back jobs.

Today, on day 50, the Obama Dims hit the great wall of jobs, jobs, jobs!

It’s more a promise of great things to come than a fait accompli:

“We’ve had many big announcements from CEOs,” Cohn said, basking in the “sunny” jobs numbers amid gray skies and rain in Washington. “Remember, those jobs are not in these numbers. Those jobs will come in the future — they’ll come three, six, 12 months from now. So we think there’s enormous demand for American workers built into the system.”

Spicer said the jobs report, in which the unemployment rate declined to 4.7 percent, was “great news.”

Not a bad way to start day 50 of this Administration,” Spicer tweeted at 8:57 a.m.

Manufacturing and construction jobs rose nicely. It’s a beginning that Obama derided.

The all white anti-white racists at the New Republic should “Bluexit” themselves. We also want race-baiters like Obama to Bluexit themselves. Dumbass Nate Silver can Bluexit himself. Well, a lot of people should Bluexit.

We need a national holiday to have the time to make a Bluexit list.

Obama Dims should Bluexit themselves and let decent Americans work from Day 50 onward with the POTUS with the Mostest to Make America Great Again.


181 thoughts on “Ragnarök: Trump Day 50 Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, And The Dim-Out Bluexit

  1. This excerpt from Chris Bowers (now at DailyKooks) which we highlighted in 2011:


    “Here is the thing: I don’t care if Democrats ever make up any ground among Reagan Democrats, as long as we lock up the support of expanding groups like the creative class, white non-Christians, Latinos and Asians for a generation. I’ll take that trade any day of the week, and twice on Sundays. Importantly, it feels to me as though we can make that trade if Barack Obama becomes the nominee, but that we will be making the opposite trade if Hillary Clinton becomes the nominee. While Clinton’s advantage among Latinos and Asians does not make it a perfect match, Obama’s primary coalition is far closer to the coalition we need for an expanding future of the Democratic Party, while Clinton’s primary is a lot more like the coalition we have been chasing after for the past twenty-five years or so. It is in this demographic sense that I partially accept Obama’s message about “moving beyond the political divides of the past” and into a new America. I’m tried of the old coalitions, and eager for the promising new ones that hold such tremendous potential for a generational progressive majority.

    I am so sick of chasing after the “Reagan Democrats” whose backlash against the civil-rights movement has held progressivism in America back for so long. While I freely admit that there are many people opposing Hillary Clinton for equally chauvinistic and offensive reasons as there are people opposing Barack Obama, overall those voters are probably a minority of the same Reagan Democrats after which I am tired of chasing. I’m just sick and tired of this group being the dominant swing voting block in the United States, and I want to move past it. Demographically speaking, Obama does appear to be the candidate who can do that better than Hillary Clinton, and I freely admit that is one reason I would prefer for Obama to be the nominee.”

    Yeah, that’s the ticket!

  2. Soros pushing the Dimocrats to lower the voting age doesn’t surprise me at all. When Philippine President Marcos declared martial law there in 1972, he pushed for a new constitution in order to cement his hold on power. One of the things he did to ensure its passage was to lower the voting age to 15 years old, because he knew that he could intimidate kids and their parents.

  3. All the spy stuff is crazy. The country has gone so wrong.

    What I do not understand, is that if BO issued an EO to spread confidential if around 14 agencies that are leaking, why doesn’t Trump just un-EO it? Is he hunting for leakers?

    What is he waiting for?

    The turds need to be flushed down the toilet.

  4. “Have California pay for the pension promises it has made but not funded.”
    California is number 1 for highest poverty rate in US along with a lot of other members of the “Blue Utopia”

    ” The 13 states for which the SPM rates were higher than the official poverty rates are those with the orange shades. These states were Alaska, California, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, and Virginia. The SPM rate for the District of Columbia was also higher.”


  5. SHV, great bunch of facts in the census data you provided. Does not sound as if New Republic boy knows those facts.

    In the blue utopias there is great disparity of income. NY gets away with a great deal because of Wall Street. It does not occur to New Republic boy that a lot of money from the reds flows into the blue cities, let alone food and fuel. In the blue states there are a lot of people who will join with the reds in case of Bluexit.

    What the boy (however old he is, 80?) who wrote the article does not get is that in any campaign be it military or political, the first to fall to the revolution is the countryside. The last bastions of the old order are the cities.

    What is amusing to us, is how like The Hunger Games the argument of the New Republic boy is.

  6. Betty, as in our reply to SHV, the county information you posted paints a bleak future for the Dims – which somehow New Republic boy did not read. There’s this from Nate Silver’s site:


    Purple America Has All But Disappeared
    Counties are increasingly super red or super blue, with less and less in between. [snip]

    More than 61 percent of voters cast ballots in counties that gave either Clinton or Trump at least 60 percent of the major-party vote last November. That’s up from 50 percent of voters who lived in such counties in 2012 and 39 percent in 1992 — an accelerating trend that confirms that America’s political fabric, geographically, is tearing apart. [snip]

    In an increasing number of communities like Baldwin County, Alabama, which gave Trump 80 percent of its major-party votes, and San Mateo, California, which gave Clinton 80 percent, an entire generation of youth will grow up without much exposure to alternative political points of view. If you think our political climate is toxic now, think for a moment about how nasty politics could be 20 or 30 years from now.

    Advantage GOP. New Republic boy better rethink Bluexit, if he has a brain to think with.

  7. Shia LaBeouf won’t be quiet, he keeps doing his zombie talk when the page is refreshed..

    Such a shame about him. I saw him in what I think was his first work, for a time HBO had a series (“Project Greenlight”….?) where they put together young people to work on a project… aspiring actors did the acting, aspiring writers wrote the script, etc. He was in I believe the first season, and I thought he did a good job – he was just a kid. Then I think the next thing might have been the robot movie whatever it was and he got famous. Then he just got crazy.

  8. Granted, it was Clintonism as a political philosophy, as practiced not only by both Clintons but also by President Obama and many others, that put the final stake in the heart of the Democratic Party as a national entity. The Clintonist project of taking the oldest and most diverse political coalition on earth—one organized around liberal economic principles that had held it together for generations—and re-centering it

    I was going to come right down and comment when I read that, but I kept reading, and sure enough admin addressed it. But I really am glad to know that it’s all Hillary’s fault… she wasn’t running as Obama’s 3rd term, no, HE ran as her 1ST term lol Poor Obama, so great, but surrounded and tainted by all the (Clinton) losers around him lol

    It seems clear now that only the personal integrity, wit, eloquence, and thoroughly lovable family of Barack Obama kept the Democratic Party stumbling along, gut-shot, for this long.

    To the RNs out there – can my stomach suffer permanent damage from laughing too hard?

  9. You know how Mormaer often ends a comment with “Lucky Trump”? Well, someone (Mike? Mark?) posted a comment a few days ago, saying how much he appreciated Mormaer’s comments, and ended it with “Lucky us”. I thought that was so clever, and I meant to say it more timely! So to whomever that was, that was a clever (and true) ending to a comment! lol

  10. I love the idea of Bluexit, but there’s a practical problem.

    It would leave the entire West Coast in the hands of people who have neither the ability nor the will to defend it from foreign aggression.

    And that would imperil Red America.

    So I propose a small modification.

    We wait for California, Oregon, and Washington to secede.

    Then we declare civil war, and wipe out everyone in the West Coast cities.

    We then re-annex those newly red states into what will most assuredly be a more perfect union.

  11. Did the video at 10:02 change? Or is someone gaslighting me? lol

    It stopped auto playing, but the video that is there doesn’t feature Shia and friends chanting at all, which was playing with the auto play… maybe I have fallen asleep and am dreaming lol

  12. Hey….. *I* live in a west coast city….
    So do I, unfortunately.

    That’s ok. We’ll have to move anyway if Bluexit becomes a reality.

  13. My modest proposal was basically tongue-in-cheek.

    I don’t actually relish the idea of annihilating our friends and family that happen to live in West Coast cities.

    But behind my gallows humor, I’m trying to make a serious point.

    California is currently working on a initiative.

    We cannot let them secede. If they attempt it, we will have to go to war with them to bring them back into the union.

    We simply cannot entrust California liberals to repel an attack from North Korea or China.

  14. Meant to say:

    California is currently working on a “Calexit” initiative.

    I messed up the title portion of the link. However, if you click on the link, it will take you to a web page that talks more about Calexit.

  15. Just look to Detroit and that collapse of that city which used to live in the blue utopia. None of this is explained by the ‘hate whitey’ white boy that wrote this drivel.
    Indeed, the piece contains this gem:

    “I would love nothing better than to see Detroit, one of our greatest cities, restored to its former glory.”

    Detroit has been run by Dems for the past 50 years.

    If you knew how to restore her, why didn’t you do it?

    Or more to the point: Why did you ruin her in the first place?

  16. I think one of the most horrible things behind white-hating is the stench of the genocide of ancient man. I was amazed at the genetic information being compiled and analyzed through National Geographic’s Geno project. I was not going to give them my DNA but we did my Mothers before she passed away. They give you an analysis of where your ancestors are from and how much DNA you carry from ancient man. That would be, non-Homosapien. The primary carries of the DNA of ancient man are eastern Europeans who carry 5-10% of their DNA from ancient man.

    Theories on the extinction of ancient man have changed, in that they did not become extinct, but were assimilated into the more dominant species.

    All this is most politically incorrect as we may not talk about respect for this form of racial/species diversity. They tell us we are all the same and we all have the same DNA. That might eventually become so if mankind survives long enough, but for right now, it is not true. This makes agitation of the racial issues so particularly monstrous.

    And they are collecting this information on the population. There is the National Geographic project and I think Ancestory.com has something similar. One wonders to what ends it might be used.


  17. Johnathan Swifts essay entitled A Modest Proposal called for the Irish who were starving at the time he wrote it to eat their babies. Clearly, he did not mean it. He was playing the role of procateur.

    The problem with New Republic Boy is his is not a parody. He means it–every word of it. And that is idiotic. Or perhaps simply a shining example of the elitism derived from an Ivy League education—Columbia in his case, where they have that marvelous school of journalism, where Goebbels is the dean.

    That is not to say he is entirely wrong. There are salient differences between the rural and urban communities, and red states vs, blue states. Those differences are cultural, and economic. And they determine how much government–and how much liberty–because that is the trade-off those disparate societies are comfortable with.

    The solution inures in a reinvigorated federalism. One that reverses the structures of the New Deal and the Great Society which built the New Rome otherwise known as Washington. Let the role of the federal government revert to the limited government envisioned by the framers–national defense, currency, etc. And, a constitution based on original intent as opposed to the living constitution promoted by the Warren Court which allows judges to substitute their judgement for the will of the people.

    That would substantially reduce the power of the Deep State which has subverted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to the point that we are no longer a republic and the welfare of the people is no longer respected.

    Powers presently held by the federal government, other than those enumerated by the framers would revert back to the states. They would become masters of their own ship. California could have the culture it alone determines. California can make whatever extravagant promises it desires, with the sole proviso that they alone would pay for them.

    That would be my “modest proposal”, and I am serious about it, provided there is a will to do so. Put differently, why should the red states suffer when a blue state president is in office, or a blue state feel that it is suffering when a red state president is in office. Let them be captains of their own ship. Let them sink or swim accordingly.

    Finally it creates a perverse incentive for state governments to make exorbitant promises to get elected and then rely on the federal government to bail them out when they get in trouble.

    I say let California live as they wish and govern as they wish, but when their mouth overloads their collective asses financially, t

  18. Anti-Trump actor Shia Labeouf trolled by the autists at 4Chan who replace his flag with a MAGA hat.🤣

  19. Gillibrand, once thought to be a blue dog, has turned out to be a narrow minded obstructionist left wing jackal. More no votes against Trumps appointees than any other senator. She was deeply offended by the stupid remark of a senator that he liked them I don’t remember what his word was but the gist of it was Rubenesque, etc. She demanded to be taken seriously. Well, with a voting record like hers its obvious that the is not a serious person, willing to participate constructively in the governing process.

  20. We should think about a new hat MDPI: making the democrat party irrelevant.

    And another: MBMI; making big media irrelevant.

  21. I met Gillibrand here in East Hampton back when I was a democrat and she was first running for Senate. She is nothing if not ambitious and IMHO will do almost anything for power. As soon as she was elected to the Senate she became Schumer’s bitch…does whatever she’s told. No doubt she thinks she is white house material. I
    met her husband at the same time and she seemed totally in control there. FYI She sends her campaign literature out in English and Spanish.

  22. Good advice from our top fighter pilot and ace in the Viet Nam War.

    President Trump knows much of this.

    But it never hurts to review it now and then.

    I particularly like the distinction between being respected (good) and being popular (bad).
    “Here’s what I learned over the years. Know the mission, what is expected of you and your people. Get to know those people, their attitudes and expectations. Visit all the shops and sections. Ask questions. Don’t be shy. Learn what each does, how the parts fit into the whole. Find out what supplies and equipment are lacking, what the workers need. To whom does each shop chief report? Does that officer really know the people under him, is he aware of their needs, their training? Does that NCO supervise or just make out reports without checking facts? Remember, those reports eventually come to you. Don’t try to bullshit the troops, but make sure they know the buck stops with you, that you’ll shoulder the blame when things go wrong. Correct without revenge or anger. Recognize accomplishment. Reward accordingly. Foster spirit through self-pride, not slogans, and never at the expense of another unit. It won’t take long, but only your genuine interest and concern, plus follow-up on your promises, will earn you respect. Out of that you gain loyalty and obedience. Your outfit will be a standout. But for God’s sake, don’t ever try to be popular! That weakens your position, makes you vulnerable. Don’t have favorites. That breeds resentment. Respect the talents of your people. Have the courage to delegate responsibility and give the authority to go with it. Again, make clear to your troops you are the one who’ll take the heat.”
    ― Robin Olds

  23. Here’s another stupid article. It’s from The New Yorker. The article is about the elections in Holland. The article mostly is an attack on Trump. The article is really stupid in it’s essence. Here’s what gets us laughing:



    On the day of Donald Trump’s election, I happened to be in Amsterdam. That night, while people in the U.S. were still going to the polls, I found myself sitting in front of a room full of nervous-looking Europeans at Paradiso, which is normally a music venue, taking part in a public panel discussion about what was happening across the ocean. One of the other panelists was Ruth Oldenziel, a Dutch professor at Eindhoven University and a highly regarded America watcher. Although I am American, I have no doubt that Oldenziel knows more about the inner workings of the U.S. political system than I do, so it was with some relief that I heard her declaim, regarding Hillary Clinton and the building fear of a Trump upset, “Don’t worry—she’s got this.”

    Now that we are on the eve of a Dutch election that many see as a test of whether European nations will follow the U.S. in handing power to nationalistic demagogues, I thought it only fitting to check back with Oldenziel. This time she was circumspect. “We are all worried,” she said.

    How dumb is this dumbass??? That Oldenziel dummy was entirely completely and absolutely wrong about Trump and his chances of victory. So what does the dumbass writer from The New Yorker do? Why he goes to the woman who got it completely wrong to ask her opinion again.

    The New Yorker should have asked someone who accurately forecast Donald Trump’s victory for election analysis, not this Oldenziel cluck who got it wrong.

    Let’s say you have dinner at a restaurant or a home of a friend and are served a really horribly tasting meal. Would you ask that cook or restaurant for their recipe so you can cook the same swill at home? No, you get recipes from good cooks. You should get political analysis from those that got it right.

    The rest of the article is mostly dumb. It’s mostly a running series of attacks on Trump and Wilders.


  24. HoldThemAccountable, we watched this story when Sessions on Friday asked 46 AGs to resign . We suspected that some of the resignations would be accepted, not all. That is what happened. Some resignations were accepted but not others, and the possibility that once received more resignations would be turned down. For some reason Bharara, a favorite on several Big Pink posts, decided to announce he would not resign. At that point we knew he was out.

    Why Bharara did not issue the requested resignation letter is odd. But for him to announce publicly on Twitter that he would not resign and that he would have to be fired was outrageous and at that point he had to be fired.

    Why did any of this happen? The bets are that it has to do with Schumer. Few are sure of what is going on however regarding Schumer v. Trump. Perhaps President Trump decided he did not want a Schumer guy in charge of such an important office and PDT wants his own guy in that job. There’s a lot to do in that office so a PDT appointment should be made ASAP.

    Bharara, who did excellent work, was about to make an announcement, likely in early April, on whether or not to indict Mayor De Blasio. Bharara also has a trial of several Cuomo aides coming up and many believe that is a build-up to indictment of Cuomo himself. Why Bharara made his public declaration against resignation is a mystery only he can answer.

    If the President asks for your resignation, you send in your resignation. It’s that simple. You don’t wave a red flag in front of a bull. If Bharara calculated that he could get away with defiance against President Trump, he was wrong and just got poked by the Trump horns.

  25. That WAS comedy gold, thank you. And someone needs to remind Moonbeam that if he wants to run away from home he should stop asking for handouts.

  26. Turf fight – Fox News reporter allegedly accosts Gateway Pundit correspondent
    Anne Sorock | 3/11/2017 – 6:00pm
    A metaphor for many battles taking place now in D.C.

    What allegedly happened at a routine White House briefing yesterday may be the latest skirmish in the larger conflict between the D.C. insider class and outsider challengers.

    Tensions between legacy Washington, D.C., media and new-entrant reporters who have been granted access under the Trump Administration came to a head Friday in an alleged attack leveled at Gateway Pundit’s Lucian Wintrich by Fox News Radio reporter Jon Decker.

    As reporters entered Friday’s White House press briefing, witnesses reported that Decker loudly, and allegedly physically, accosted Wintrich personally, calling him a “Nazi,” and saying of the site, “they hate blacks, Jews, and Hispanics.”

    Wintrich asserted that Decker physically blocked him from entering and that he will be pressing charges against the Fox reporter.

    After the incident, Politico reported that Decker’s actions were applauded by several White House reporters, who “shook Decker’s hands as he walked back to the Fox News radio booth.”

    Decker also sent an email to the entire White House reporter email listserv, noting that the White House “has admitted Gateway Pundit into today’s White House Press Briefing.”

    While some in the White House briefing room say the White House should be open to any and all outlets, others have expressed concern with certain outlets being legitimized via their White House credentials.

    Fox News confirmed Decker was reacting to previous tweets Wintrich had posted. According to a White House Correspondent in the room, several reporters shook Decker’s hands as he walked back to the Fox News radio booth.

    The recent admittance of Gateway Pundit and other new outlets to the White House press pool has ruffled many feathers across the ideological spectrum. Gateway Pundit has been attacked by several left-leaning and legacy media outlets and D.C. insiders as “fake news.”

    Gateway Pundit, ranked 1,242 in terms of its internet traffic, saw its profile rise most recently due to its 2016 election coverage supporting Trump. Jim Hoft, the founder of Gateway Pundit, recently announced plans to host a rival dinner (the Real News Correspondents’ Dinner) to the White House Correspondents Association Dinner, the latter of which President Trump had announced he will not be attending.

    Decker, who is on the board of the White House Correspondents Association and has been a member of the White House Press Corps since 1995, is also an adjunct lecturer at Georgetown University.

    Born and raised in Washington, D.C., his resume includes such as outlets as PBS, NBC, and Reuters. He received his B.A. and a masters degree from the University of Pennsylvania, his law degree from George Washington University (in D.C.), and attended the Sorbonne in Paris.

    Bretibart News White House reporter Lee Stranahan called the accusations against Decker “serious,” suggesting that his credentials should be revoked, and another correspondent who witnessed the events, Andrew Feinberg, tweeted that despite his dislike of Gateway Pundit, its reporter had a right to attend the press briefing:

    Decker appears not to agree that outlets like Gateway Pundit enjoys such a “right.”

    An email to Decker seeking comment has not been returned. But in a statement to Business Insider, Decker denied any physical contact took place:

    Decker said in a statement provided to Business Insider that he had a “conversation with a representative from the online publication Gateway Pundit” but that at no time did he get physical with him.

    “The conversation was straightforward and direct,” he said. “I also informed the full White House pool that this representative was present in the Briefing Room. At no time did I accost or assault this individual. More than a dozen witnesses will attest to this fact.”

    A Fox News representative also denied the assault allegations to Business Insider and said that Decker, a lawyer, was upset with some of Wintrich’s previous tweets and sought only to notify other members of the press corps that the Gateway Pundit writer was attending the daily briefing.

    Why would Decker feel the need to announce to the room that someone from Gateway Pundit was there?

    This sounds like D.C. media trying to control the process and staking out White House press briefing seats as its own territory.

  27. Posted by sundance

    Don’t listen to the Western media version of what Syrian President Bashar al-Assad says. It is important to listen to his words directly:


    CNN has intentionally broadcast a filtered version of this interview focusing on the “foreign invaders” perspective. However, pay close attention to the 06:15 point of the video above where Assad discusses President Trump and his policy, and how Assad (correctly) views Turkey as facilitating ISIS.

    “We have hopes that this administration in the United States is going to implement what we have heard, taking into consideration that talking about ISIS doesn’t mean talking about the whole terrorism; ISIS is one of the products, al-Nusra is one of the products, you have so many groups in Syria but they are not ISIS – but they are al-Qaeda. They have the same background of the Wahhabi extremist ideology”. [ie. The Muslim Brotherhood]

    Asked about cooperation with President Trump specifically, President Assad expands:

    “In theory, yes. But practically not yet. Because there is no link between Syria and the United States on a formal level. Even their raids against ISIS which I have just mentioned, which are only a few raids, have been without the cooperation or consultation with the Syrian Army, or the Syrian government – which is illegal as we always say. So theoretically we share those goals, but practically – not yet.”

    Do you have personal contact with the United States, direct or indirect:

    “No. Not at all. Indirect we have so many channels but you cannot bet on private channels. It should be formal, that way we can talk about direct discussion with another government.”

    Interesting interview.

    Here’s the CNN filtered view of the interview.

    Pay particular attention to how CNN claims that Turkey is fighting ISIS, which is in direct contradiction with all known information, including the mouth of Bashar Assad himself who says that Turkey is facilitating

  28. Should be video link of Assad interview.

    Wondering how US sending 2500 soldiers to Syria today is working out.
    I think we should have stayed out..
    Nothing good happens in that hell hole.

  29. SHV
    March 11, 2017 at 6:47 pm
    Yes, he let all the banksters off the hook in the 2009 financial crisis.

    He did not do his job.

    Now he is fired.

  30. I would be surprised if the US sends troops into Syria.

    What makes sense to me is a partnership with Russia to defeat ISIS.

    Russia takes care of ISIS-in-Syria. We handle ISIS-in-Iraq.

    Ground troops, lots of them, will be required in both countries. We learned that lesson in the Iraq War “surge” that finally defeated Al Qaeda.

    Conventional wisdom is that the American public will not tolerate a ground war.

    I think the conventional wisdom is wrong.

    What we don’t tolerate is LOSING and INCOMPETENCE.

    The US has the most powerful military on earth. ISIS doesn’t even have an air force.

    A ground war between the two should be over in a matter of weeks, if not days.

    Trump’s right: MacArthur and Patton must be spinning in their graves.

  31. The only way to destroy ISIS is to have boots on the ground. Simply bombing them is not going to do it as the Vietnam War proved. If it means helping Assad’s troops physically occupy captured ISIS territory in order to completely eliminate them once and for all, then I’m all for it.

  32. Didn’t know this happened

    EXCLUSIVE: Former Secret Service Agent Warns Trump ‘Not Secure’ in the White House
    AP PhotoThe Associated Press
    11 Mar 2017
    A former Secret Service agent who served in the security details of both Presidents Bush and Obama warned on Saturday that President Donald Trump “is not secure in the White House right now as it stands.”
    Dan Bongino, who was also an instructor at the training academy of the Secret Service, was commenting on Friday night’s reported breach of the White House complex, at least the seventh such incident in recent years.

    Bongino stated: “If one guy with a backpack and Omar Gonzales with a bad knee could get near the residence of the White House, can you tell me with a straight face that a forty-man tactical assault team with heavy weapons wouldn’t take that place down?”

    Bongino was referring to a 2014 incident in which Gonzales penetrated the north portico doors of the White House, reportedly brandishing a three-and-a-half-inch folding knife in a back pocket.

    “This is inexcusable,” Bongino said of the latest incident. “How many of these are we, as the citizenry, going to tolerate, whether under Barack Obama or now President Trump, before there is enough citizen outrage that the Secret Service actually does something?”

    Bongino is the author of the bestselling 2013 book Life Inside the Bubble: Why a Top-Ranked Secret Service Agent Walked Away from It All. He also previously ran as a Republican for Congress and the Senate.

    ‘Troubled Person’ Arrested at White House

    He was speaking in an interview set to air Sunday on this reporter’s talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” broadcast on New York’s AM 970 The Answer and NewsTalk 990 AM in Philadelphia.

    “The secret service is not ready right now to defend the White House,” he charged. “They’re not. I know that may make people uncomfortable. And frankly, Aaron, I am really getting tired of some of the talking heads on cable news who have never done one minute in the shoes a secret service agent.”

    “They have no idea what the security plan of the White House actually looks like on the ground. They’re all sitting here brushing it under the rug, going, ‘Oh no.’ ‘They were prepared.’ ‘This was a manageable incident.’ ‘This was how it was supposed to work.’ You really believe this is how it was supposed to work?”

    Regarding Friday night’s breach, Bongino warned, “Do you think that what happened today is not being beamed into every terrorists’ head, going, ‘Look at this fellows.’ I am sounding the alarm hoping and praying with fingers crossed that somebody wakes up and finally does what needs to be done.”

    Bongino offered some security upgrade suggestions: “They need to fix the fence. Reinforce the manpower on the north and the south grounds. Add special weapons teams. Get the best technology in there right now. Clearly the technology sensors and cameras are not working as planned. Get them in there yesterday. There’s no other solution.”

    Bongino outlined what he says are three major problems facing the Secret Service and the White House security plan.

    Problem number one, according to Bongino, involves staffing:

    They have had a brain drain of catastrophic portions in the Secret Service. They lost some of the best agents. If this wasn’t a public radio show that people could hear, I could tell you the names of ten or twenty top-notch, tier one guys who left the president’s detail just in the last 5 years who I still communicate with… They have had an even worse brain drain in the uniformed division side. They are responsible for the perimeter of the White House.

    …You can’t run a security agency without security officers who know what they’re doing. You just can’t.

    Problem number two, Bongino contended, is a lack of political will to address the purported security flaws:

    The management of the Secret Service right now is grossly unprepared for the evolving threats. Grossly. They say they are but they have no political will because a lot of them are out there – not all – but a lot are looking for their next consulting job. They are just praying that nothing happens on their next watch. They don’t want to be the ones to go on Capitol Hill to say this whole security plan around the White House needs to be fixed.

    And problem number three involves the actual security plan, he says:

    They are way too concerned right now, the management, with the optics of White House security. That we can’t make this look like an armed camp. The prior staff didn’t like that. There other entities around the White House that want to preserve the historic look of it. But do you want a secure White House grounds or do you want it to look pretty?

    CNN reported on Friday night’s breach:

    A man carrying a backpack was arrested Friday night after breaching security at the White House complex and was discovered by a Secret Service officer by the south entrance to the executive residence, officials said.

    The incident happened just before midnight while President Donald Trump was at the White House.

    The suspect, who had a California driver’s license, told Secret Service officers that he was there to see the president.

    Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

    Read More Stories About:

  33. Don Suber reports that along with Preet’s excellent work, he had also become a “shakedown man” for the Dems — letting Wall Street law breakers, who gave big donations to the DNC, pay big fines rather than be prosecuted.


    Preet’s also the guy who had Dinesh D’Souza jailed for illegal campaign donations on Obama’s orders — yes he committed a crime, but Dinesh was the first person EVER to get jail time for it.

  34. Good to know about Preet… Dinesh should have never gone to jail.

    Sounds pretty crooked all in all. Dem puppet man.

    Guess we know where he will land

  35. If Bharara calculated that he could get away with defiance against President Trump, he was wrong.
    Maybe Donald gave Bharara special mention last fall just so he could “throw him away” now.

    I’ve been enjoying the following situation for a week. Ransomware has taken down the state Dem caucus network. It couldn’t be Russia, right?

    [Pennsylvania] Senate Democrats hope to have some IT systems online by end of week
    HARRISBURG, Pa. – Leaders in the Senate Democratic caucus are hoping to have some of their IT systems back online by the end of the week, state Sen. Jay Costa told FOX43 Wednesday.
    Senate Democratic lawmakers and their staffs were the target of a ransomware attack late last week that has held their data hostage unless the caucus pays the attackers a ransom.
    ” Folks are adjusting well and they recognize the predicament that we’re in,” Costa (D – Allegheny County) said. “They’re basically resorting to their own devices to be able to communicate.”
    The FBI and Microsoft, which loaned out more than 100 laptops to workers after the cyber attack, are working with the Democratic caucus to get to the root of the attack.
    “I just think it might have been something as an opportunity target as opposed to Democrats are being targeted,” Costa said….

  36. Hi, admin
    March 11, 2017 at 12:33 am

    Nate Silver says:

    “If you think our political climate is toxic now, think for a moment about how nasty politics could be 20 or 30 years from now.”

    Nope. Hillary and the democrats couldn’t even win 2% of the 3,141 individual counties in America.

    When up to 60% all the voters in 3,084 American counties voted republican (really Trump, which is think/hope is a new political party);

    And up to 60% of all the voters in 57 American counties voted democrat. The future doesn’t look dark to me at all. And when I start to falter I love coming here and reading your post full of bold truths.

    When I really think about that map I linked the wisdom of our Founding Generation astonishes me.

  37. I feel like I made that comment too complicated. I tried to fix it but got lost again.

    I found a new drink it is: 2 oz of Jamison’s two Tablespoons of pure Maple syrup and a splash of bitters and a big ice cube.

    It takes the lumps out almost as good as Trump’s dad, but forget about thinking strait.

  38. I used to comment on other sites, as well as here. I did so on Taylor Marsh until she left Hillary and went all in for Obama. I did son on No Quarter, but no longer blogged there because Larry went all in for Romney, whereas I and others liked what Newt was saying. I still have a tremendous respect for Larry Johnson who is a truth giver. A third site I used to comment on was Red State, until I was banned from further comment. Here is what occurred.

    When that hurricane hit the East Coast right before the presidential election, I passed along information available to the internet about the power of the intelligence community, or the deep state, to influence weather patterns. The HAARP technology was my surmise at that time. And the subsequent interview of Woodward by Andrea Mitchell later confirm my suspicions–talking about a new top secret technology deployed in Iraq in 2006 to turn the tide of was. Later still NOAH and other federal agencies concerned with weather have began forcing their employees to sign agreements pledging on penalty of criminal prosecution not to disclose any agency business. And now, with the revelations of Vault 7 by Wikileaks we learn of a vast arsenal of deep state capabilities which can be used for legitimate reasons and for illegitimate ones. So at this point, my early speculations in this area may not seem nearly so far fetched. The issue now is not so much whether this is tin foil hat stuff, than are we open minded enough to realize that when such capabilities exist, they will be used unless there is strict accountability and when you are talking about the CIA under Bush and Obama, there was no accountability, only a desire to buy politicians and advance their agenda. Eric Schmidt at Google is the worst example of this. Unfortunately, this was too much for Erickson and his crowd to tolerate at the time, and whether they have opened their eyes since then really doesn’t matter. I mentioned ace fighter pilot Robin Olds above, and one of his insightful comments about effective military leadership. There was another saying of his which I did not cite, but will now. It concerned MIG pilots, but it applies with equal force and effect to deep state habituaes who have murdered our bill of rights, etc. The guy you don’t see is the one that will kill you.

  39. The guy you don’t see is the one that will kill you.
    That calls to mind something Jefferson said: the price of liberty is eternal vigilance

    And my caveat to that would be: accepting the party line of big government is not vigilance, it is indolence.

  40. I think this was all about Preet.

    He was virtue signalling his independence.

    Plus, like other Obama holdovers, he was loathe for new players to uncover his mistakes, etc.

    In particular, his cozy relationship with Wall Street, despite his reputation as a latter day Elliot Ness, of the Indian variety.

    Do not be at all surprised if he ends up as chief counsel for one of those banks.

    A generation ago, I received a subpoena to appear before an Organized Crime Strike Force Grand Jury in Brooklyn.

    They believed that some of the collective bargaining agreements we had negotiated were sweetheart deals with a then Mafia controlled union, i.e. Teamsters Local 295.

    They were wrong, and it took me 9 hours with the attorney who was head of the Organized Crime Strike Force and his lead FBI investigator to convince them that what had definitely been true with other companies on JFK airport, was not true of us.

    A couple years later, when Judge Webster became attorney general, he abolished these Organized Crime Strike Force entities (which were created a generation earlier by Bobby Kennedy) and vested those powers in the US Attorneys offices.

    Thereafter, you will never guess who came looking for a job with our company:

    The former head of the organized crime strike force.

    Which is why I say, do not be surprised if Preet becomes general counsel for one of the banks he fined but never prosecuted their bad guys.

    There are plenty of clues there.

    More than enough not for Trump not to keep him on.

  41. I had lunch today with a friend who sells excess medicare coverage. He is a graduate of Claremont College and University of Chicago Law School. He also knows how to navigate the precious medals markets without getting burned–I envy him for that. He is a Trump supporter, and as a market analyst, which is his hobby, he worries that Trump is positioning himself wrongly. It is fine for Trump to claim credit for the rise of the stock market and the job growth which has occurred since he took office. But these are not permanent conditions, those markets can rise as we have seen but they can also fall for any number of reasons. Therefore, the wiser course for Trump would be to adopt a yes but approach, with the assurance that long term progress is what counts. Fundamentally, he needs to build a margin of safety into his positions, so when supervening events occur which create downside pressures, his opponents who give him no credit for what is occurring now, cannot hoist him by his own petard when things change.

  42. Betty the force of the Jamisons is with you. 🙂 But you got your point across.

    Regarding your observation that the Dims will have difficulty in the future expanding beyond the paltry number of counties they received in 2016, we agree. But… be aware that the Dims think we are completely nuts in believing the obvious.

    The Dims are so deranged they do believe that the Russia story is for real because they have convinced themselves of that absurdity, not because of any evidence. The Dims further believe that in 2018 they will do well because traditionally the party in control of the White House loses seats. The Dims further believe that come 2020 President Trump will be such a failure he will be lucky to escape unimpeached. The Dims further believe that in 2020 because of the President Trump failures and the great Dim resurgence in 2018 they will return to power in both the Senate and White House in 2020, maybe even the House.

    The Dims of course are nuts. 2018 should be a good year for the out party but there are so many Dim seats in states Trump won that only a catastrophic President Trump economic failure could bring about a Dim senate control.

    As to 2020, if President Trump remains in good health, he will win bigly. Already his 2020 campaign is up and running (Keep America Great!) and by 2020 it will be a fearsome machine able to win even if Dims run billionaires like Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, Iger, and Cuban to weaken Trump.

    Furthermore, if President Trump accomplishes just one quarter of his agenda he will be a very powerful opponent.

    Lastly, the notion that millenials will save the Dims in future years ignores the trajectory of the young becoming more conservative once they begin to pay taxes and have children.

  43. Wbboei, the gossip in Dim circles is that Preet will run for political office.

    If De Blasio is indicted this election year (like next month) or barely escapes indictment, then Preet could run as an incorruptible reformer who was thrown out by President Trump. That’s a winning formula in very Dim NYC.

    Preet might have made a very smart, very calculated move with his defiance of President Trump. Preet might have his cake and eat it too. In anti Trump NYC, and very heavily Dim NYC, Preet might be able to play both sides. “Yes, my office led to the indictment of a Dim Mayor and I was also fired by President Trump – so vote for me!”

  44. This segment is very important for anyone who hopes to understand the leaks which are occurring. Some of them coming from Obama operatives inside the CIA are designed to take down Trump. These are political appointees at the top of that agency, and one level down. The other leaks which show the American People how invasive the surveillance truly is from an agency that was never supposed to be spying on American citizens, and has steadfastly denied doing so, which we now know is a lie, come from mid level and retired agents who are loyal to this country. And who praytell is to catch them? The FBI–who we know know uses the Geek Squad to spy on the American People as well?

  45. It is fine for Trump to claim credit for the rise of the stock market and the job growth which has occurred since he took office. But these are not permanent conditions, those markets can rise as we have seen but they can also fall for any number of reasons. Therefore, the wiser course for Trump would be to adopt a yes but approach, with the assurance that long term progress is what counts.
    I’ve been thinking the same thing, and I’m surprised Trump hasn’t been doing this.

    During the campaign, he kept emphasizing that America is perilously close to a 100% debt-to-GDP ratio, which he said is the point of no return for an economy. Aren’t we still in that boat? Yes, it looks like Trump is making progress on increasing the GDP. But Mnuchin is also raising the debt ceiling (again).

    I feel certain that the economy is going to crash sometime during Trump’s first term. I don’t think there’s anything he or anyone else can do to prevent it. So I think that while he’s cheerleading the surge in the job and stock markets, he should also caution folks that our debt situation is still very precarious.

  46. admin
    March 12, 2017 at 1:29 am

    Preet is a mechanic. He went after selected corporations for the Chicago machine gone national, Obama and Jarrett, fronted the DOJ who was the “bank” in collecting kick-backs and extortion to pass out to foot soldiers and fellow caporegime in their criminal organization. Sessions got rid of the thug. His extortion racket is over for now. Now he wants to be an underboss like Holder and Schumer moving the money machine along. New York will of course welcome him since that is how their established political system is made up selling “indulgences” or fines and showboating their virtue. His prosecutions against other Democrats was enforcement for getting too big for their britches or too greedy and or missing quota. His staged defiance shows he wants to run his own outfit.

  47. I think this is a good and creative metaphor


    Bill Mitchell‏Verified account @mitchellvii Mar 10

    I look at the new healthcare bill like a big ocean liner. You have to move it before you steer it. It’s just starting to move.

  48. What I find hopeful about the healthcare bill is that as soon as it came out, Trump said something like, “now it’s time to negotiate!”. That suggested to me that he didn’t expect it to be in the best form at first.

  49. I’m always amazed how unpopular Trump is in NYC, he lives there, his business is there providing jobs, he helped turn the city around.
    Too many people with way too much money with inflated egos and short term memories.

  50. lorac,

    I think Trump supporters need to raise their voices to hold him to his campaign promises. Our healthcare system is being used to loot our wealth and provide corporate welfare.

    The government has no economic incentive to prolong your life past retirement age. The way they restrict access to the latest treatments by classifying them as “experimental” is a horror.

    The 30% markup for discontinued coverage is way too much and we need competition opened across state lines.

    The populous is Trumps leverage and if we do not raise our voices, he does not have so much excuse to use it.

    These pukes need to provide us with healthcare worth buying instead of rigging the system to make us buy crap.

  51. If you hear about a big blond woman arrested for picketing Trump over healthcare at Maralago, it might be me.

  52. I was listening again to Dr. Pichinic’s comments, and noted something he said that resonated in a different context.

    He said that there came a point during the Bush years when the CIA decided it did not want to be part of the public, or subordinate to its control. And when that happened they went rogue.

    Eric Schmidt is the head of Google. He is also a vendor to the CIA. And he is also the architect of get out to vote support systems for the dimocrat party. Several years ago, there was a report that he developed a universe of information on every American voter, and gave it to Pelosi, who was amazed at how detailed it was, and how it could be used to guarantee a permanent democrat majority along with their other strategems.

    A few days ago, Schmidt appeared before a big data group. He told them that big data is bigger than any nation. He told them there will come a time when major corporations will be competing for its services, and coming to them on bended knee begging for their services.

    We must therefore come up with a way to reign in this CIA-big data-democrat nerd, and all that he stands for. Bezos at Amazon is following the exact same model, through his contract with the CIA and his ownership of WashPo and his vertical integration of our economy, which is enough to subject him to anti trust scrutiny.

  53. correction: there will come a time when NATION STATES will be competing for its (big data’s) services, and coming to them on bended knee begging for its (big data’s) services.

    Question: what does Schmidt mean by this?

    Answer: he means big data, like the CIA, sees itself as bigger than any nation state, and the king of the new world order.

    That is what we need to watch out for.

    Simply put, Google is at the heart of this conspiracy against Trump.

    Therefore, Google and Schmidt need to be investigated.

  54. Lu4PUMA
    March 12, 2017 at 9:02 am
    Then you believe this is not an opening offer that Trump is praising, which will useful in starting a negotiation, where the final settlement will be measured and signed or vetoed based on the criteria he laid out in the campaign? You believe that Trump is endorsing this offer on the merits, and believe this is the best his side can do.

    In negotiation, a statement that this is the best we can do is the kind of rhetoric that signals this is an opening offer. It is a way for Ryan to convince the donor class that he represents their interests. It is very different from something along the lines of this is all we will do and if anyone believes otherwise they can go pound sand.

    Lest we forget, Trump is a negotiator. And a negotiator never accepts the initial offer from the other side.

    That is not to say you should forgo picketing a Maralago.

    In fact, I would encourage you and your friends to do exactly that.

    Trump could use those photos to impress upon Ryan that the people who voted for Trump are furious, they do not meet his criteria, soif it comes down to a choice between himself or Ryan, Trump will not hesitate to campaign against Ryan, in his election which occurs in 2018, whereas Trump’s will not occur until 2020.

  55. wbboei
    March 12, 2017 at 10:38 am
    It is not an issue of what I believe. It is an issue of what the program is that they are promoting. And that is crap.

  56. Lu—I am with you 100%.

    But try looking at it not as an end position but as a beginning one.

    If the end result of this process, which is likely to take 200 days, does not meet Trump’s campaign promises, and he signs off on it, then your position is correct.

    But what I also said is true. It would be constructive if you did protest, to remind him of what he promised–not that he has forgotten, and to convince the donor class that they will not get what they want, then when the bill you want becomes law you can take ownership of it and be proud of what you and Trump accomplished.

  57. This is an important video.

    It spells out what the real goal of globalism is.

    For those who have no idea what they are promoting

    As Clapper would say:


  58. This, more than anything, will kill the big media beloved messiah, and those who supported him.

    Put differently, this will be his enduring legacy.

    A clear showing that Obama showered billions of taxpayer money on the CIA to develop hacking systems that allowed them to spy on all Americans (as opposed to foreign powers), in clear violation of their mandate, while assuring the public that they were not doing this.

    The first step will be to indict the wrong doers, which will include Brennan. It may also include Eric Schmidt.

    The second step will be to tarnish the senators who knew about this overreach and failed to stop it.

    The third step will be reform, which will involve a total restructuring of our intelligence agencies.

    Here is the reaction of the man who developed one of the top anti virus systems in the world—John McAfee.

    He says the vault 7 disclosures were a nuclear attack on the CIA.

    As we lean from other sources, this was done by patriots in that agency, both active and retired, who saw what Obama was doing to the American People and could not live with it.

    The next dump is rumored to include the pedopholia dumps which reach deeply into the venerated political class, and include I am sure, both parties.

  59. Reuters

    7h ago | 00:54
    U.S. troops deploy near Syria’s Manbij as Assad calls them ‘invaders’

    By Tom Perry | BEIRUT
    Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said U.S. forces in Syria were “invaders” and he had yet to see “anything concrete” emerge from U.S. President Donald Trump’s vow to prioritize the fight against Islamic State.

    Assad has said he saw promise in Trump’s statements emphasizing the battle against Islamic State in Syria, where U.S. policy under President Barack Obama had backed some of the rebels fighting Assad and shunned him as an illegitimate leader.

    “We haven’t seen anything concrete yet regarding this rhetoric,” Assad said in an interview with Chinese TV station Phoenix. “We have hopes that this administration in the United States is going to implement what we have heard,” he said.

    The United States is leading a coalition against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

    In Syria, it is working with an alliance of Kurdish and Arab militias. Their current focus is to encircle and ultimately capture Raqqa – Islamic State’s base of operations in Syria.

    This week, the U.S.-led coalition announced that around 400 additional U.S. forces had deployed to Syria to help with the Raqqa campaign and to prevent any clash between Turkey and Washington-allied Syrian militias that Ankara sees as a threat.

    Asked about a deployment of U.S. forces near the northern city of Manbij, Assad said: “Any foreign troops coming to Syria without our invitation … are invaders.”

    “We don’t think this is going to help”.

    Around 500 U.S. forces are already in Syria in support of the campaign against Islamic State.

    Assad said that “in theory” he still saw scope for cooperation with Trump, though practically nothing had happened in this regard. He dismissed the U.S.-backed military campaign against Islamic State in Syria as “only a few raids”, and said a more comprehensive approach was needed.

    The U.S.-led coalition is currently backing a campaign by its Syrian militia allies to encircle and ultimately capture Raqqa, Islamic State’s base of operations in Syria.

    Assad noted that the Russian-backed Syrian army was now “very close” to Raqqa city after advancing to the western banks of the Euphrates River this week – a rapid gain that has brought it to the frontier of areas held by the U.S.-backed forces.

    He said Raqqa was “a priority for us”, but indicated that there could also be a parallel army attack towards Deir al-Zor in the east, near the Iraqi border. Deir al-Zor province is almost completely controlled by Islamic State, also known as ISIS.

    The Deir al-Zor region had been “used by ISIS as a route for logistics support between ISIS in Iraq and ISIS in Syria, so whether you attack the stronghold or you attack the route that ISIS uses, it (has) the same result”, Assad said.

    With Russian and Iranian military support, Assad firmly has the upper hand in the war with rebels who have been trying to topple him with backing from states including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

    U.N.-led peace talks in Geneva ended earlier this month with no breakthrough. Assad said he hadn’t expected anything from Geneva. He added that deals brokered locally with rebels were “the real political solutions” since the war began.

    The so-called local “reconciliation” agreements are the government’s preferred method for pacifying rebellious areas, and have often been concluded after years of government siege and bombardment.

    In some cases, the rebels have been given safe passage to the insurgent-dominated province of Idlib. The opposition says the agreements amount to forced displacement.

    “We didn’t expect Geneva to produce anything, but it’s a step and it’s going to be a long way,” Assad said. He added that it would be up to Syrians to decide their future political system, and there would be a referendum on it.

    Assad also praised “crucial cooperation” between Syria and Chinese intelligence against Uighur militants who have joined the insurgency against him. He said ties with Beijing were “on the rise”.

    China and Russia last month blocked U.N. sanctions on Syria over accusations of chemical weapons attacks during the war.

    (Writing by Tom Perry; Editing by Toby Chopra and Dominic Evans)

  60. I have noticed there are no mags with pictures of the President or First family on It’s covers in the grocery stores.

    Their way of not acknowledging, or respecting, his Presidency.

    During the fakers regime, it was non stop love fest. I use to turn them around to the back as a protest lol.

  61. In negotiation, a statement that this is the best we can do is the kind of rhetoric that signals this is an opening offer. It is a way for Ryan to convince the donor class that he represents their interests. It is very different from something along the lines of this is all we will do and if anyone believes otherwise they can go pound sand.
    I would bet serious money Trump knows that the current proposal is just the opening bid of a protracted negotiation.

    A few days ago, Trump put out the following tweet:

    “Despite what you hear in the press, healthcare is coming along great. We are talking to many groups and it will end in a beautiful picture!”

    The clear implication is that the end result will not be the same as the initial proposal, that the bill will be modified as a result of feedback from the various stakeholders.

    It’s true that Ryan needs to be able to tell the donor class that he did all he could to represent their interests. But I think it’s also true that Ryan’s ego is very much tied up in this thing. Crafting the GOP alternative has been his baby since Obamacare’s inception. Trump is wisely letting Ryan fight for his proposal with all his heart, all his soul, and all his mind, until it fails. Only then will Ryan admit defeat, and be ready to consider some fresh ideas.

    Trump cannot yet directly take on the GOPe. He doesn’t have enough power yet. Winning an election is not enough. He needs to show that his election wasn’t a fluke, that it wasn’t the result of a populist temper tantrum on the part of the voters. He needs to show that he won because he’s a WINNER. The way he demonstrates that is by continuing to win now that he’s president: Winning on jobs, winning with North Korea, winning with Russia, and so on.

    At some point, the GOPe will realize that they can’t beat him, so they’d best join him, if they hope to be able to send their kids to college someday.

  62. Tony, thanks for sharing that article on Afghanistan and their thoughts on Trump vs obummer
    I second that emotion. I hope that everyone gets a chance to read that article. It’s not very long.


    Excerpted below is are some comments from the Afghanistan ambassador:

    Trump continually asked “How can you win? What does Afghanistan need to win?” in reference to our fight with terrorism. Trump wants to win. Sincerely. All the Obama administration wanted to do was not lose.

    The Obama administration was hesitant with us. The enemy could sense that. When the Obama administration announced its plans to pull troops out of the region, they announced the exact date they would do it. All our enemies had to do was wait [Obama] out. They knew the date they had to hang on until — which gave them the will to fight. They used that time to recruit and build up resources.


    March 12, 2017 at 12:23 pm


  64. This is an important video.

    It spells out what the real goal of globalism is.


    I really like this kid (Styxhexenhammer666). He’s smart, and persuasive.

    But I wish he would stop playing with Satanism. It puts him in grave danger.

    In one of his early videos, he describes how he turned away from Christianity, because he couldn’t understand how an omnipotent and loving God could permit suffering in the world.

    Or how the early Catholic church could have tortured nonbelievers.

    There are good answers to these objections.

    He will find them if he makes the effort to seek them.

  65. My friend told me the other day that stark enthusiasts for war always underestimate its cost, which far greater than they could have imagined. Senseless killing, or the death of an innocent child have caused many to question the existence of a benevolent god, although there was a branch of theology subscribed to by some of the founders that while God created the universe, God took no active role in it thereafter. I was looking for something Marilyn Voss Savante said on this subject, in response to Matthew but was unable to find it. Instead I found a book about the civil war that described the enormous loss of life–greater than the total losses in all wars before or since, and the loss of civilian life which butchers like William Tecumseh Sherman who burned Atlanta and looked the other way when his men engaged in an orgy of destruction rape and death which claimed over 50,000 civilians unseen until WWI when the Red Army beasts took their vengeance on German civilians. That war changed everything. It destroyed the South for two generations, and it created the class of elitist families in the North that have run our nation into the ground for profit and power. Here is a short excerpt, which should be read by every social justice warrior who believes in white guilt and scapegoating. The half a million deaths which occurred to end slavery were 95% white deaths, and if you want to indulge the view of the noble black man, talk to the Blackfoot Indian tribes who suffered far greater losses at the hands of brigades of black soldiers than they ever did with that idiot George Armstrong Custer.
    In the middle of the nineteenth century, the United States embarked on a new relationship with death, entering into a civil war that proved bloodier than any other conflict in American history, a war that would presage the slaughter of World War I’s Western Front and the global carnage of the twentieth century. The number of soldiers who died between 1861 and 1865, an estimated 620,000, is approximately equal to the total American fatalities in the Revolution, the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, and the Korean War combined. The Civil War’s rate of death, its incidence in comparison with the size of the American population, was six times that of World War II. A similar rate, about 2 percent, in the United States today would mean six million fatalities. As the new southern nation struggled for survival against a wealthier and more populous enemy, its death toll reflected the disproportionate strains on its human capital. Confederate men died at a rate three times that of their Yankee counterparts; one in five white southern men of military age did not survive the Civil War.

    But these military statistics tell only a part of the story. The war killed civilians as well, as battles raged across farm and field, as encampments of troops spread epidemic disease, as guerrillas ensnared women and even children in violence and reprisals, as draft rioters targeted innocent citizens, as shortages of food in parts of the South brought starvation. No one sought to document these deaths systematically, and no one has devised a method of undertaking a retrospective count. The distinguished Civil War historian James McPherson has estimated that there were fifty thousand civilian deaths during the war, and he has concluded that the overall mortality rate for the South exceeded that of any country in World War I and that of all but the region between the Rhine and the Volga in World War II. The American Civil War produced carnage that has often been thought reserved for the combination of technological proficiency and inhumanity characteristic of a later time.

    The Civil War confronted Americans with an enormous task, one quite different from saving or dividing the nation, ending or maintaining slavery, or winning the military conflict–the demands we customarily understand to have been made of the Civil War generation. Americans North and South would be compelled to confront–and resist–the war’s assault on their conceptions of how life should end, an assault that challenged their most fundamental assumptions about life’s value and meaning. As they faced horrors that forced them to question their ability to cope, their commitment to the war, even their faith in a righteous God, soldiers and civilians alike struggled to retain their most cherished beliefs, to make them work in the dramatically altered world that war had introduced. Americans had to identify–find, invent, create–the means and mechanisms to manage more than half a million dead: their deaths, their bodies, their loss. How they accomplished this task reshaped their individual lives–and deaths–at the same time that it redefined their nation and their culture. The work of death was Civil War America’s most fundamental and most demanding undertaking.

  66. Sherman was perhaps the darkest figure in American history. But because the union army was victorious, and the victors write history, none of this came out. But they so stop short of calling him a hero. Before the Civil War, there were newspaper reports in Ohio that he had lost his mind. During the war, he burned Atlanta and raped the south. And after the war, he was given command of the entire US army and in a cable to the president he stated explicitly, my policy toward the American Indian is one of extermination. Change one word in that cable and it reads like a cable from Himmler to Heidrich in re. the Jewish problem, etc.

  67. But I think it’s also true that Ryan’s ego is very much tied up in this thing. Crafting the GOP alternative has been his baby since Obamacare’s inception. Trump is wisely letting Ryan fight for his proposal with all his heart, all his soul, and all his mind, until it fails. Only then will Ryan admit defeat, and be ready to consider some fresh ideas.
    That is a great insight.

    Ryan is a Catholic charismatic which explains his absolutism/

    Ryan is a policy wonk, which explains his passion for detail and inability to see the forest for the trees.

    Finally, Ryan is a globalist, which explains all the rest/

    Those characteristics made him an easy mark for Biden.

    Any sensible person would be embarrassed as hell to lose a debate to Biden.

    But not Paul Ryan.

  68. gonzo: did you watch the video which I posted above interviewing MacAfee?

    If not, please do so.

    It is mindboggling.

    It will be the Obama legacy.

  69. A dangerous candidate for the #2 position in civil rights division, according to powerline. I suspect Christian Adams would concur.
    A wise trial lawyer once told me that if you’re trying a case in which you have to make more than two “yes-but” arguments to the jury, you need to settle the matter. The defense of Dhillon amounts to a series of “yes-buts.”

    Yes, she was an ACLU leader, but it was because she wanted to defend Sikhs from discrimination. Yes, she contributed money to Kamela Harris, but Harris’ opponent (allegedly) was even further to the left (I discussed this defense in my first post). Yes, in San Francisco she became “a different kind of Republican” and dismissed social issues because it is about winning rather than about philosophy. But she was very conservative in college and law school.

    I haven’t seen the “yes-but” regarding her support for a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, though I’m sure one can be concocted.

    “Yes-buts” shouldn’t cut it for a position as crucial as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. The Civil Rights Division has been Ground Zero for radical leftism. To reverse this, the Division must be headed by a rock-solid conservative — as close to the equivalent of a Neil Gorsuch as the administration can find.

    Harmeet Dhillon, for all of her good personal qualities, does not fit that bill.

  70. gonzotx
    March 13, 2017 at 1:13 am
    I don’t think Ryan is a policy wonk, that to me is greatly exaggerated
    Maybe not.

    But he has that reputation.

  71. What is an “extreme liberal”?

    That was the question posed the other night on one of those late-night talk shows nobody watches by someone named Trevor Noah, or maybe it was Noah Trevor.

    “I go like, what is an extreme liberal,” he said. “Like, what is that?”

    Like, you’re kidding dude, right? I don’t think he’s an American, and he doesn’t seem very funny.

    “What is this thing you’re afraid of?” he went on. “Health care for everybody, free education, is that what you’re afraid of?”

    Free education. Yeah right. I wonder what Noah Trevor got on his SATs.

    Anyway, perhaps this foreign fop needs some free education as to what an extreme liberal is.

    An extreme liberal is someone like Leonardo DiCaprio, who flies around on his private jet delivering impassioned speeches on the dangers of climate change.

    He or she still has a Hillary Clinton bumper sticker on the family Tesla, right next to “COEXIST.”

    They run through the streets rioting and setting fires and yelling “Smash the State!” and then when they get arrested, they write on Facebook how “terrified” they are of going to jail just before spring break.

    They believe that Christian bakers who won’t provide wedding cakes to lesbians should be imprisoned, but unvetted Muslim “refugees” who believe in stoning gays, Sharia law, female-genital mutilation and honor killings should be admitted to the U.S. and put on welfare, no questions asked.

    Anyone who has a different point of view from them is “Hitler.”

    They still really believe Elizabeth Warren is Cherokee.

    They think Obama deserved his Nobel Peace Prize.

    They call anyone who disagrees with Hillary a sexist, with Obama a racist, and with Barney Frank a homophobe.

    They love soccer and hate football — except for Colin Kaepernick.

    They nodded in agreement when Jill Stein suggested the Russians had used “floppy discs” to hack into voting machines in Michigan that weren’t even connected to the internet.

    They follow Chelsea Clinton on Twitter and desperately hope she runs for Congress.

    The women just got new tattoos on their backsides — “Nevertheless she persisted.”

    They want a special prosecutor appointed to go after Sean Spicer for commenting on the great February job numbers 38 minutes early.

    They believe Francis is the greatest pope ever.

    Some of their favorite phrases: settled science, settled law, common-sense gun control, reality-based, and “That’s not who we are.”

    Extreme liberals watch the Oscars.

    They really believe The New York Times and CNN are on the level.

    They support free choice on abortions, but not school vouchers.

    Extreme liberals believe that cities and states have the option of defying federal law and court rulings on immigration, but not on gay marriage and abortion.

    They think cigarette smoke is the deadliest carcinogen ever, but marijuana smoke is totally medicinal, dude.

    They’re very concerned about the “War on Women” and the campus rape epidemic, but think it’s OK to allow male sex offenders into girls’ locker rooms because it’s a matter of tolerance and who are we to say they aren’t “self-identifying” as women that day?

    They believed that a few warm days last month were a sign of impending catas­trophe in the “climate,” but shrug off this weekend’s Arctic blast and impending snowstorm as mere “weather.”

    They think George Wallace was a Republican.

    You are much more likely to be an extreme liberal if you have a trust fund or work for a nonprofit.

    They fantasize that Donald Trump wants to do to them what they were planning to do to the rest of us if Hillary Clinton had won the election.

    They totally support the First Amendment, except for anyone who disagrees with them, in which case they should be thrown into jail.

    They fervently believe in mass transit — for everybody other than themselves, because they’re way too important to have to waste their time waiting for a stinky bus.

    They support full civil rights for the homeless until some free-range Americans decide to camp out in front of their Beacon Hill mansions, at which time the extreme liberal indignantly calls 911 and demands immediate removal of the “bums.”


  72. Well, Gonzo

    It looks like you were right about Ryan . . .

    Here is Larry Johnson’s take on Mr. Blue Eyes

    Despite the perception of Ryan as a policy expert — a brand carefully manufactured by friendly D.C. reporters — the speaker has devoted himself to relentless fundraising. Records show Ryan spent much of the year flying to resorts and huddling with lobbyists to raise huge amounts of cash to maintain his party’s control of the House of Representatives. The Team Ryan joint fundraising committee, hosted by McGuireWoods on Thursday morning, is allowed to raise as much as $244,200 per person.

  73. Continued from 12:23
    There is some light reading on the cover of a Rag called InTouch:
    (Lite because Matt earned this karma)
    Matt Lauer’s $200M Divorce
    The fight that ended it all
    The Cheating Charges That Tore Them Apart
    His wife is walking out after 18 years
    Extreme anger, cruelty and humiliation – inside their tortured marriage
    Plus Now Today show is looking for his replacement

  74. Shifting health care reform onto the states makes sense, but the Republican plan botches the job


    You’ve heard it time and again: The Affordable Care Act was a federal takeover of the health care system, an overweening piece of legislation that President Barack Obama shoved down the throats of a balky public on a party-line vote. For years, Republicans have deployed themes of federal arrogance and overreach to underwrite their attacks on health reform.

    Now the Republicans have an alternative, the American Health Care Act. Part of its appeal, they say, is that it returns authority to the states. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan’s earlier template for the legislation makes the case concisely: The states “should be empowered to make the right tradeoffs between consumer protections and individual choice, not regulators in Washington.”

    Ryan’s assertion raises an implicit challenge, one that Republicans themselves have not wholly thought through: Why bother with national health reform at all? At the core of our federal system is the principle that the states should retain control over their own affairs unless there’s good reason for Washington’s involvement. Yet the ACA is a federal statute, and the progressive push for health reform has had a doggedly national focus. Even the Republican “replacement” stops well short of total devolution to the states. Why?

    The question is more challenging than health reform’s supporters generally acknowledge. There’s a kernel of truth to the claim that Obamacare needlessly impinged on state prerogatives. But the question does have an answer. Because of underappreciated legal constraints on their ability to tax and spend, the states can’t go it alone. The federal government really does have to take the lead.

    A more refined understanding of the need for federal action serves as a rebuke to those who claim Congress can just wash its hands of health reform. And it offers a yardstick against which to measure the new American Health Care Act, which would leave intact the very obstacles that have long prevented the states from tackling reform on their own. Unless Republicans change their approach, their talk about federalism should be seen for what it is: empty rhetoric that masks a refusal to allow any level of government to achieve near-universal coverage.

    State-by-state reform might have more effectively built public support for change
    Strictly as a strategic matter, the campaign for national health reform needs some defending. On at least a half-dozen occasions during the 20th century, federal reform efforts had gone down in flames. Massachusetts’s coverage expansion in 2006 seemed to offer a more promising path: Maybe supporters of reform should rack up some wins in the states before tackling the issue at the national level.

    By way of comparison, consider the march to same-sex marriage. When the Supreme Court invalidated state bans on same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges, fully 35 states already allowed it. Before Obamacare, in contrast, only two deep-blue states had significantly expanded coverage, Massachusetts and Hawaii. Judged solely on that metric, the progressive commitment to a national solution seemed premature.

    Nor was there a self-evident functional case for federal intervention. It makes a lot of sense for the federal government to act, for example, when states can impose costs — “externalities,” in the economic jargon — onto other states. Federal environmental laws, for example, aim to prevent states from sending their air or water pollution to their neighbors.

    But concerns about externalities can’t justify health reform. If New York declines to adopt near-universal coverage, that doesn’t hurt Connecticut or New Jersey. The country can tolerate a patchwork of state insurance rules. Indeed, because the federal government has generally stayed out of the business of regulating insurance, it already does.

    Nor are states locked in a race to the bottom that prevents them from embracing health reform. We might see such a race develop if, for example, a state’s adoption of a coverage expansion led sick people to flock to the state. If that happened, no state would want to be the first mover, even if most of the states would prefer to expand coverage.

    But the data tells us that sick people rarely move in response to coverage expansions. In a 2014 study, two Harvard researchers examined migration patterns in response to Medicaid expansions in four states. They found “no evidence of significant migration effects.” A similar 2016 study estimates “that the migration effect of Medicaid is very close to zero,” a finding echoed in other research.

    Other arguments for federal intervention also fare poorly. In some circumstances, national action is thought necessary to prevent states from discriminating against historically disadvantaged minority groups. Think here of the Voting Rights Act, which is supposed to stop states from jerry-rigging their voting rules to dilute the political power of blacks or Latinos.

    Is there a civil rights case for federal oversight of health care?
    It’s hard — not impossible, but hard — to see health reform as analogous to a civil rights statute. Yes, members of minority groups benefit disproportionately from coverage expansions. And yes, states might resist expansions partly because of insensitivity to minorities’ interests. But the same can be said in many other policy domains. Take education, for example. Many states can (and do) rely on property taxes to finance local schools. Wealthier communities get well-funded schools; minority communities, not so much.

    Appalling as that might be, it’s not generally thought sufficient reason for a federal takeover of public schools. Outside the enclave of federally protected rights, the risk that states might behave badly has generally not been thought an adequate justification for national action. If it were, lingering discrimination would be reason enough to oust the states of their authority to tax and spend, spelling the end of federalism in any meaningful sense of the word.

    When it comes to financing health care, the states are hamstrung
    So why do we need federal health reform? Here’s the answer: money.

    During a recession, the federal government can run a budget deficit. Most economists think that’s a good thing because federal spending can stimulate the economy and bolster the safety net. States don’t have that luxury: They’ve all got to balance their budgets every year. (Vermont is the lone exception.)

    When a recession comes, state tax revenues take a hit at precisely the moment that lots of people lose their jobs and their insurance. (Indeed, revenues take a hit because of the job losses.) To cover the newly uninsured, states will have to spend more, requiring the imposition of new taxes or cuts to other state spending, either of which will exacerbate the recession. Coverage expansions thus commit states to an economic policy that could harm them during downturns.

    This is what I call the countercyclical trap, and it’s the single biggest obstacle to state-level reform. Here, Massachusetts is the exception that proves the rule. When it expanded coverage, it had one of the lowest rates of the uninsured in the country, which reduced the size of any new fiscal obligations. And, with Sen. Ted Kennedy’s help, Massachusetts cut a sweetheart deal with the Bush administration to get an extra $1 billion in Medicaid funding to support Gov. Mitt Romney’s vision for conservative health reform. Massachusetts could thus manage — barely — to expand coverage. Other states without its advantages can’t afford to.

    The problem runs deeper. A state that’s looking to expand coverage can always ask its taxpayers to foot the bill. But many of those taxpayers will complain, with some justice, that it’s unfair to ask them to bear the whole burden. If you get health coverage through your job, you already face a reduction in take-home pay commensurate with the value of that coverage. Your friend who works at a similar job but doesn’t get health coverage is paid somewhat better. Should you both be taxed equally in order to subsidize insurance for the higher-income worker?

    From the state’s perspective, it’s both easier and more equitable to adopt a law penalizing businesses that fail to offer insurance. These pay-or-play laws have a clear political logic: Employers should live up to their end of the social bargain. They have a certain economic logic, too — an employee who starts getting coverage because of a pay-or-play law will see an offsetting wage reduction. That employee will thus “pay” for his own coverage, reducing the need for broad-based tax increases.

    The trouble is that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, or ERISA, disallows state laws that “relate to” the design of employee-benefit plans, including health insurance. Although there’s some legal ambiguity, ERISA means that the states probably can’t adopt pay-or-play laws.

    Here, Hawaii’s experience is instructive. Its scheme for near-universal coverage depends on a robust pay-or-play law. That law is still on the books only because Hawaii got Congress to adopt a special exemption from ERISA. Without a similar carve-out, the other 49 states will find it hard to achieve near-universal coverage.

    The compromise: Washington provides the money, states the policies
    Because of the countercyclical trap and ERISA, federal money must be the lifeblood of health reform. At the same time, however, the weakness of the other justifications for national intervention implies a rough division of responsibility: The feds should finance the bulk of any coverage expansion, but the states should be allowed to adopt their own distinctive approaches to health reform.

    To a large extent, the ACA honors that division of responsibility. Its subsidies and the Medicaid expansion are financed almost entirely with federal money. The states retain authority to regulate their insurance markets and were given the option of establishing their own health care exchanges. The Obama administration also proved willing to grant broad waivers to states seeking exemptions from Medicaid’s rules.

    In some respects, however, the ACA is stricter than it needs to be. Take, for example, the rule requiring insurance plans to cover all the “essential health benefits.” It sets a comprehensive baseline package protect consumers, but it also makes insurance more expensive, which can put it out of reach of some of the very people who need it most. The tradeoffs are genuinely hard.

    Why not let states to choose their own essential benefits package? You shouldn’t reject the idea just because you think some states will make stupid choices. The point of federalism is that states get to make their own choices, stupid or not, unless there’s a good reason for federal intervention. As the Yale professors Jerry Mashaw and Ted Marmor argued 20 years ago, “[t]here is no agreed-upon ‘best’ health insurance (or medical care) system that a state could offer.” What if a policy that seems stupid turns out not to be so stupid after all?

    The same goes for many of the ACA’s insurance reforms: age banding, coverage of preventive services, even the individual mandate. To be sure, the federal government must establish guardrails to prevent the sale of junk insurance and to assure that states have a plan for achieving near-universal coverage. But there’s a lot to like about giving states more flexibility.

    The ACHA doesn’t do the job right
    Republicans may talk the talk of devolving health care policy to the states, but that’s not what the American Health Care Act does. Instead, it starves health reform of the funding upon which it depends.

    Most significantly, Republicans intend to phase out the Medicaid expansion and to impose a hard cap on federal contributions. If a recession forces a state to exceed its cap in a given year, any overruns will come out of its Medicaid payments the following year. With that kind of shortfall, the states will have to make savage Medicaid cuts to make ends meet.

    Republicans also want to slash the subsidies that make insurance affordable in the private market. Under the ACA, no one making less than four times the poverty level has to devote more than 10 percent of her income toward private coverage; most pay much less. The American Health Care Act would erase that affordability guarantee and, instead, extend age-based subsidies that would be much too meager for most people to afford coverage.

    If federal money is withdrawn, states will be stuck. Because of the countercyclical trap and ERISA, they won’t be able to enact and sustain coverage expansions on their own. The end result will not be the diversity that federalism celebrates. It will be a uniformly crappy system that leaves millions of the sick and poor without coverage.

    It doesn’t have to be this way. A group of Republican senators led by Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Susan Collins (R-ME) has floated an alternative, the Patient Freedom Act of 2017, that retains the ACA’s funding streams while giving the states more room to choose how to use that money. That’s a model that deserves serious attention from both Republicans and Democrats. It might enable partisans on both sides move past the rancorous debate over the ACA.

    For now, however, the Republicans seem intent on dismantling coverage gains across the entire United States. Their proposals trade on the rhetoric of states’ rights, but they would have the perverse effect of inhibiting state power. That’s bad for federalism — and bad for the country.

  75. Shifting health care reform onto the states makes sense, but the Republican plan botches the job



    Here’s my summary of the above article:

    Ryan’s AHCA plan aims to cede more control to the states. Which raises the question: Why not cede ALL control? That’s what federalism is all about, right? Why should the federal government be involved in health care at all? One word: money. There are two reasons states can’t fund health care reform themselves:

    (1) THE COUNTERCYCLICAL TRAP. During economic downturns, it’s easier for the fed to do deficit spending.

    (2) THE ERISA ACT OF 1974. A state that wants to expand coverage can always ask its taxpayers to foot the bill. But that’s unfair. If you get health coverage through your job, you already have a reduction in take-home pay. Your friend who works at a similar job but doesn’t get health coverage has higher take-home pay. It’s unfair to tax both of you equally. It’s more equitable for the state to adopt a law penalizing businesses that don’t offer insurance. The problem is that such “pay-or-play” laws violate the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. ERISA disallows state laws that “relate to” the design of employee-benefit plans, including health insurance.

  76. Let me elaborate slightly on point (1) above:

    (1) THE COUNTERCYCLICAL TRAP. During economic downturns, it’s easier for the fed to do deficit spending. And it’s precisely during economic downturns that people lose their jobs, and therefore are most in need of help buying health insurance.

  77. And here are my rebuttals to points (1) and (2) above:

    (1) THE COUNTERCYCLICAL TRAP. Is deficit spending ever a good idea? Should the fed do it just because it can?

    (2) THE ERISA ACT. I have a problem with one of the premises: “Your friend who words at a similar job but doesn’t get health coverage…” Doesn’t happen in real life. If your friend doesn’t get health coverage from his employer, he probably has a minimum-wage job, and pays no taxes anyway.

  78. I hope Trump knows what he is doing, he is really pushing this Ryancare and it’s a disaster. He will be blamed, not Ryan.
    I say let it implode first, let the Dems own it.

  79. Matt Lauer’s $200M Divorce
    The fight that ended it all
    The Cheating Charges That Tore Them Apart
    His wife is walking out after 18 years
    Extreme anger, cruelty and humiliation – inside their tortured marriage
    Plus Now Today show is looking for his replacement
    Looking to replace Matt?

    After its clear that he is a dutiful husband??

    After she promised to death do us part???

    And she did him wrong

    That would be the Sharia interpretation

    And NBC is all in for bringing half of the middle east to this country

    Just as long as their gated communities are safe

    But the idea that Matt would have to give up his $19 million per year position

    When he is worth far more than that

    And not even an offer to go back to the farm club, i.e. msnbc

    With former superstar now has been Brian Williams

    And crazy Joe

    And daddy’s little goyl Mika

    Only adds insult to injury

    I feel for poor Matt, really

  80. Besides all of you there are a few bloggers in other venues I would also like to meet–Roger Simon @ pjmedia, Richard Fernadez @ Belmont Club, Larry Johnson @ no quarter, and Steiff@ red state.

    Federal Workforce Anticipates Catastrophic Cuts In The Trump Budget

    by streiff

    The Trump administration’s budget is due to be released on Thursday and it is already generating feelings of dread inside the Beltway:

    President Trump’s budget proposal this week would shake the federal government to its core if enacted, culling back numerous programs and expediting a historic contraction of the federal workforce.

    This would be the first time the government has executed cuts of this magnitude — and all at once — since the drawdown following World War II, economists and budget analysts said.

    The spending budget Trump is set to release Thursday will offer the clearest snapshot of his vision for the size and role of government. Aides say that the president sees a new Washington emerging from the budget process, one that prioritizes the military and homeland security while slashing many other areas, including housing, foreign assistance, environmental programs, public broadcasting and research. Simply put, government would be smaller and less involved in regulating life in America, with private companies and states playing a much bigger role.

    The cuts Trump plans to propose this week are also expected to lead to layoffs among federal workers, changes that would be felt sharply in the Washington area. According to an economic analysis by Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics, the reductions outlined so far by Trump’s advisers would reduce employment in the region by 1.8 percent and personal income by 3.5 percent, and lower home prices by 1.9 percent.

    “These are not the kind of cuts that you can accommodate by tightening the belt one notch, by shaving a little bit off of a program, or by downsizing a few staff here or there,” said Robert Reischauer, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office. “These are cuts that would require a wholesale triage of a vast array of federal activities.”
    Indeed. If true, this action alone would be ensure Trump’s legacy.

    There are several different aspects to the impact of this decision. Yes, it would require entire programs to be folded. That is a good thing. The federal does some things really well… like drop largish bombs on various benighted heathens. I really sucks at some things… job training, education policy, housing policy, etc. The problem here is twofold. First, cabinet secretaries become captured by their bureaucracies and enamored of what that bureaucracy says it can do. They push for more bureaucrats, because more is better. Programs that don’t function all that well get incremental cuts that end up 100% of the organization’s budget being spent on salaries. Then you have a gaggle of bureaucrats jerking one another off by writing memos on what they would do if they were only fully funded. The only way out of this loop is by deciding that the things the government doesn’t do well, like providing affordable housing, just need to go away.

    The fact that this will reduce federal nannyism and make government more responsive are features we should all applaud regardless of our political affiliation.

    The one interesting point in the story is the obsession on how these cuts would affect the Beltway economy. Like a lot of folks, I have had the experience of being out of work. I don’t wish it on anybody. Well, not very many people, anyway. Ever since the Hunger Games erupted on the scene many observers have drawn the analogy between the wealthy and coddled Capitol City and our own Beltway. There is a lot of truth there. That economic loss the analyst bemoans reflects tax dollars extracted by duress from the outlying districts, or states. It is money that has a better use some other place than in paying bureaucrats to manage our lives.

  81. In the memorable words of Pelosi, those laid off people will have a lot of leisure time to paint, to sew, and to be creative.

    That being the case, unemployment for them as well as us could be a very enriching thing.

    On the other hand, Pelosi might say she was referring to private sector layoffs when companies move offshore with her approval.

    For loons like her government layoff under any circumstances is unthinkable.

    Until now . . .

  82. Outris, oh that is so ridiculous.

    And anyway, he wasn’t shot because he stole something, he was shot because the cops saw him walking in the middle of the street – blah blah – and then he tried to take cop’s gun, ran away not following orders, and then came charging BACK at the cop, refusing to stop.

    It’s like with Trayvon Martin. They said he was killed for being black and carrying skittles. Ah, no he got killed because he was pounding someone’s head into the concrete and the guy fought back.

    The media should really be ashamed.

  83. US Army Veteran 🇺🇸‏ @US_Army_Vet2 19h19 hours ago

    Muslim Gang Brutally Tears Woman Apart Killing Her►http://bit.ly/2khLZ2q @DebFreedomVoice @KNP2BP @Lrihendry #USA🇺🇸

  84. From the tweet I posted above

    These false sharia accusations are routinely made against non-Muslims in Muslim countries in order to exact some gruesome revenge for the crime of being non-Muslim. They are made against women who speak out. False accusations under sharia (Islamic) law are retribution for some perceived insult or petty jealousy, and are sanctioned by Muslim societies to quench the unending, insatiable thirst for blood, as commanded in the Quran and by the “holy prophet” Muhammad.


    Since 2003, the United States alone has spent more than $1 billion in American taxpayer funds on programs to develop the rule of law in Afghanistan, including efforts to improve a judicial system that incorporates Islamic Sharia law and legal protections for women, according a watchdog agency appointed by Congress—the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR).

    Meanwhile, European countries have reportedly devoted tens of millions more.


    “Unlike so many abuses against Afghan women that unfold in private, this killing in March prompted a national outcry,” it adds. “For Farkhunda had not burned a Quran. Instead, an investigation found, she had confronted men who were themselves dishonoring the shrine by trafficking in amulets and, more clandestinely, Viagra and condoms.”


  85. Absolutely no way should we be taking anyone here who has not evolved past the 7th century when Islam began. There should not even be a question.

    If the left and 3rd wave women would put up a fuss (oh, AND the MEDIA), we’d have more power to keep them out.

    Shame on dems
    Shame on 3rd wave “feminists”
    Shame on the media

  86. Peter McLoughlin‏ @pmclauth 21m21 minutes ago

    EU blatantly parades it is a Fascist institution. Rule of law,until it suits EU politically,then suspends the rules.

    The European Parliament has lifted French far-right leader Marine Le Pen’s immunity from prosecution after she tweeted pictures of so-called Islamic State (IS) violence.
    Ms Le Pen is under investigation in France for posting three graphic images of IS killings in 2015, including the beheading of US journalist James Foley.

    Her position as an MEP has so far meant she could not be prosecuted.

    Ms Le Pen is currently running to be French president.


  87. I really want Le Pen to win Pen to win. Geert Wilders Netherlands election is sooner – maybe this week….? – if he wins, that might help propel LePen further. She looks to win the first contest, but not the second… but I think the second isn’t until May.

  88. Very recently, the Netherlands incumbent has been deporting people and spraying rioters in the street with water bombs. People say it’s because he’s trying to act tough in order to steal some of Wilders’ voters.


    Dutch leaders clash in tense elections debate

    Rotterdam (Netherlands) (AFP) – Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte clashed with his main rival anti-Islam MP Geert Wilders on Monday, as they laid out starkly opposing visions of their country’s future in an election campaign now consumed by a diplomatic row with Turkey.

    Two days before Wednesday’s crucial general election, The Netherlands is mired in a war of words with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, which has provided fodder for Wilders and his uncompromising anti-immigration stance.

    “You are being taken hostage by Erdogan. Close the Dutch borders,” Wilders told Rutte, as tempers flared in the 30-minute head-to-head televised debate.

    “That’s a totally fake solution,” Rutte shot back, “you want Nexit, you want The Netherlands out of Europe. You know what it will cost … don’t do it.”

    Wilders, who says he is on a mission against the “Islamisation” of the country, has promised to shut Dutch borders to Muslim immigrants, close mosques and ban sales of the Koran.

    He also wants to follow the British and pull the country out of the European Union which it helped found.

    Polls suggest Wednesday’s results could be close, with Rutte’s Liberal VVD returning as the largest party in the 150-seat parliament by a whisker.

    more at link


  89. Charmian Neary‏ @CharmianNeary 52m52 minutes ago

    Linda Sarsour is not a feminist. She is paid to represent the interests of the Arabs she fronts for. No feminist supports Sharia.

  90. Ryancare is the litmus test of Ryan’s leadership, and future as Speaker, i.e.

    1. On October 16, Ryan told his colleagues: I am not going to defend Donald Trump now or in the future.

    2. Ryan refused to campaign with Trump

    3. Ryan was elected Speaker after Boehner flamed out.

    4. Ryan won his election.

    5. Ryan promised Trump and the country that he would have a health care bill passed in the first 200 days

    6. Ryan let the insurance lobby write the bill

    7. Ryan assued Trump and the country that this bill will pass.

    8. That bill was scored by the CBO and found to be more costly than Obamacare

    9. It will not pass the House.

    10. It will not pass the Senate.

    11. Therefore, Ryan is twisting in the wind.

    12. Sooner or later he will beg Trump for help.

    13. At that point, Trump will push him aside and negotiate a bill that meets his criteria.

    It is clear that the President and the senior Trump administration team are not happy with this bill’s lack of conservative support. The President and his team were assured by Ryan that conservatives would, in fact, be on board with it in the beginning, something that has turned out to not be accurate. Interestingly, much more so than Ryan and his House GOP leadership team, the White House is much more open to significant negotiation on the details in a healthcare bill—including the structure, vehicle, timeline and more. Several senior White House aides confirmed to Breitbart News that while the administration is publicly touting the bill as the party line, the President is much more willing to wheel and deal on this front than Ryan loyalists on his team would have anyone believe.

    “The President gave Ryan a chance,” one source close to the President said. “If he doesn’t get his act together soon, the President will have no choice but to step in and fix this on his own. He’s the best negotiator on the planet, and if this were his bill not Ryan’s it would not be this much of a mess.”


  91. Voice of Europe‏ @V_of_Europe 11h11 hours ago

    LIVE: Great debate by Geert Wilders against the prime minister: strong, relaxed & humor, a true leader. #1vdebat

    It’s already up on youtube, but I can’t find any versions yet with English subtitles.

  92. He recently had some threats against his life, and suspended his campaign for a short while.


    Voice of Europe‏ @V_of_Europe 10h10 hours ago

    Voice of Europe Retweeted De Telegraaf
    Geert Wilders was wearing a bulletproof vest during his debate with the prime minister. #1vdebat

  93. The main objection that conservatives in the House had against Boehner was that he would not negotiate with them on the details of major legislation, but would instead negotiate the bill in secret with lobbyists and ram it down their throats.

    It appears that Ryan is attempting to do the same thing.

    It also appears that this strategy is not working.

    I have got to believe the conversations between the President and his chief of staff (a Ryan supporter) are interesting.

    I think Trump sees Ryan as an egotistical fuck up who could not pour piss out of a boot if it had the instructions on the bottom side.

    As the say, revenge is a dish best served cold, and all Trump has to do at this point is sit back and watch Ryan fail.

  94. Charles Murray‏ @charlesmurray 4h4 hours ago

    At what point will it be accepted that insurers must be required to treat the nation as a single gene pool? We do not earn our genetic luck.

  95. …who could not pour piss out of a boot if it had the instructions on the bottom side.

    hehe that’s a good one lol

  96. This guy is such a pig. He was in that (IMO) stupid show, King of Queens


    Patton Oswalt ‏Verified account @pattonoswalt 17 Aug 2013

    Women enjoy rape. Grow the fuck up, all of you.

  97. lorac
    March 13, 2017 at 10:04 pm
    ……..The media should really be ashamed.
    I agree, but for the media to be ashamed is probably a bridge to far. 😬

  98. …who could not pour piss out of a boot if it had the instructions on the bottom side.

    hehe that’s a good one lol


    I also like “… who could not lay sod without instructions saying ‘the green side goes up'”.

  99. Absolutely no way should we be taking anyone here who has not evolved past the 7th century when Islam began. There should not even be a question.
    I’d be willing to consider amending the Constitution to explicitly ban Islam.

    Yes, I went there.

    Islam is fundamentally incompatible with Christianity. And America is a Christian nation.

    Conservatives like to slam Dems for being too politically correct to say “radical Islamic terrorism”.

    But that phrase itself reeks of political correctness.

    The proper phrase is “ORTHODOX Islamic terrorism”.

    ISIS is merely following their holy book. They are Quran-believing Muslims.

    The so-called “moderate” Muslims are really secular Muslims.

    They observe some of the Islamic holidays and traditions, but they don’t believe in the Quran.

  100. As the say, revenge is a dish best served cold, and all Trump has to do at this point is sit back and watch Ryan fail.
    Yep. I think Wbboei has nailed it.

    If you’ve read “The Art of the Deal”, you know that the one thing Trump won’t forgive is disloyalty.

    He is secretly furious with Ryan for repeatedly stabbing him in the back.

    In public, he praises Ryan, saying stuff like “he grows on you like a fine wine”.

    In private, I think he can’t wait for Ryan to fuck up the Obamacare replacement, so he can push him out of the way.

    And replace him with a Speaker who is on the same page as Trump.

    That’s Trump’s real agenda: Repeal and replace Ryan.

  101. I don’t think there are any secular Muslims, either you believe in the Quran, or you don’t. Your either Muslim or your not.
    It’s like saying you don’t believe the Bible is the word of the Lord, and then saying your Christian.
    I know there are passages left up for interpretation, but with the Quran, I think that Muslims are really not allowed that freedom.
    Those that try to “moderate” the Quran, are quickly brought into the errors of their ways.

  102. I remember when people always thought Hillary knew what she was doing and had cards up her sleeve, cause she was so brilliant, cough, cough.

    I am hoping that is actually true with Trump regarding this awful healthcare bill and ryan.

  103. matthew77
    March 14, 2017 at 9:40

    ….Repeal and replace Ryan.
    Wish we had a “like” button. 😄. That would make a good t-shirt.

  104. matthew77
    March 14, 2017 at 9:29 am

    Wow…as a Jewish American I’m offended when you say America is a Christian nation. America is a democratic nation that guarantees freedom of religion. If I recall correctly, there were Jewish Americans involved in the birth of our Democracy.
    The Islam is that there is a political aspect which is in opposition to our Democratic freedoms.

  105. I don’t think there are any secular Muslims, either you believe in the Quran, or you don’t. Your either Muslim or your not.
    It’s like saying you don’t believe the Bible is the word of the Lord, and then saying your Christian.
    I have had many colleagues who consider themselves Muslims, yet don’t believe in jihad, as the Quran commands.

    If they self-identify as Muslims, who am I to disagree?

    I know many people who self-identify as Christians, but who don’t believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God.

    Even Pope Francis doesn’t believe that Genesis should be taken literally.

  106. Matthew… Islam is not just a religion, it’s a totalitarian ideology with a religious arm. So rather than say it’s not compatible with Christianity or Judaism, I think it’s more appropriate to say, Islam is not compatible with democracy, with the western world…. what do you think?

    I’m typing on my phone – gonzo I don’t know how you do it…

  107. Matthew… Islam is not just a religion, it’s a totalitarian ideology with a religious arm. So rather than say it’s not compatible with Christianity or Judaism, I think it’s more appropriate to say, Islam is not compatible with democracy, with the western world…. what do you think?

    I’m typing on my phone – gonzo I don’t know how you do it…

  108. I suspect moderate Muslims are in the western world, not in Islamic countries. They have sharia police to make sure people obey the Koran in Islamic countries. ..

  109. Wow…as a Jewish American I’m offended when you say America is a Christian nation. America is a democratic nation that guarantees freedom of religion. If I recall correctly, there were Jewish Americans involved in the birth of our Democracy.
    The Islam is that there is a political aspect which is in opposition to our Democratic freedoms.
    When I say that America is a Christian nation, I simply mean that most Americans self-identify as Christians:

    “Eighty-three percent of Americans identify themselves as Christians. Most of the rest, 13 percent, have no religion. That leaves just 4 percent as adherents of all non-Christian religions combined — Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and a smattering of individual mentions.”


    But you’re right: It’s the fact that Islam is not just a religion that makes it dangerously different from all the others.

    That’s why I would be totally comfortable with banning it.

  110. We will have to agree to disagree, they may self identify as Muslims and say they don’t believe in Sharia or the Quran, but I don’t believe that is compatible with being a “Muslim”.

  111. The present Pope is a trip. If it weren’t for For Catholic religion, I don’t think Christianity would exist today. It may not survive him.
    With all its warts, it has stood against the evil hordes that would destroy Christianity, I have no doubt.
    I can understand different interpretations of the Bible, most of it, I don’t even umderstand in truth, but it would be a real stretch to me , to consider oneself a Christian, but deny the Word in whole.

  112. Matthew… Islam is not just a religion, it’s a totalitarian ideology with a religious arm. So rather than say it’s not compatible with Christianity or Judaism, I think it’s more appropriate to say, Islam is not compatible with democracy, with the western world…. what do you think?
    I would say that Islam is not compatible with Christianity or Judaism or democracy or the West or women’s equality or human decency.

    I would agree that the problem is that Islam is not just a religion.

    It’s a way of life that seeks to impose itself on its host country.

    Islam’s stated goal is to establish a caliphate, i.e. to take over the world.

    When our founders enshrined religious freedom in the first amendment, they had in mind something very different from Islam.

    They envisioned patriotic Americans, living authentically American lives, worshipping God as they understood Him, in whatever manner they wished.

    They never intended to appease people who said, “Oh by the way, part of my religion involves overthrowing America”.

    Screw that.

  113. We will have to agree to disagree, they may self identify as Muslims and say they don’t believe in Sharia or the Quran, but I don’t believe that is compatible with being a “Muslim”.
    Actually, I think we’re basically on the same page here.

    Self-identifying Muslims disagree on what it means to be a true Muslim.

    Just as self-identifying Christians disagree on what it means to be a true Christian.

    I’m perfectly happy for Muslims to have a discussion about what it means to be a true Muslim …

    Somewhere else.

    Let them move to the Middle-Eastern, African, or Indonesian hell-hole of their choice, while they figure it out.

    When they learn to play nice with the other religions, we might let them in.

  114. The Founding Fathers had it right on the separation of church and state. The Christians have had times when they were not something you would want to claim any relation to, also. And their use of religion to control women through their beliefs about conception, should give warning to all freedom loving people, that they could be malevolent again.

    Religion is just like everything else, it’s not what you got but how you use it. Islam is not a religion of peace and tie it to Sharia Law, you have a theocracy. And it is used like a weapon hiding behind religious protections.

    What if any Islamic entity lost their non-profit/church standing for promoting the politics of Sharia Law?

  115. Lu4PUMA
    March 14, 2017 at 6:16 pm
    The Founding Fathers had it right on the separation of church and state.


    Not what separation of church and state means.
    That’s the problem with what has happened in this country — too many people who know a little bit mistake themselves for being educated & smart.

  116. Lu4PUMA
    March 14, 2017 at 6:16 pm
    The Founding Fathers had it right on the separation of church and state.


    Not what separation of church and state means.
    That’s the problem with what has happened in this country — too many people who know a little bit mistake themselves for being educated & smart.

  117. Lu4PUMA
    March 14, 2017 at 6:16 pm
    The Founding Fathers had it right on the separation of church and state.


    Not what separation of church and state means.
    That’s the problem with what has happened in this country — too many people who know a little bit mistake themselves for being educated & smart.

Comments are closed.