Republican Poltroons In Wisconsin Seeking to Kneecap Dems Need To Be Made To Pay

As a born and bred Wisconsinite (Milwaukee) , it upsets and outrages me no end to see how the GOP swine in that state are such sore- ass losers they're now trying to repeal the voters' will. In case you haven't heard,  GOP state lawmakers worked into the night Monday to advance Republican legislation to scale back the power of the incoming Democratic governor and attorney general, limit early voting and change an election date to help a conservative justice keep his seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

There is no way to put it other than outright blatant,  Banana Republic-style tyranny - which needs to be stopped in its tracks.  Because this is nothing less than a transparent effort to repeal the results of the midterm elections which didn't go the way the Wisconsin 'pukes wanted. Well, hell, the Colorado 'pukes didn't see things work out either, as the state Dems got a trifecta - snaring the governorship, AG, as well as both state houses. But you don't see Colorado Republicans (with a majority in the state Senate) trying to mash things up for incoming Dems  in a lame duck session. Displaying sore loser vitriol in a sick, scorched earth and sour grapes reaction.

But see, in Wisconsin it's a different animal given how much the state is gerrymandered by the same Reeptard swine.  As reported last night on Maddow, the Dems in the Nov. 6th midterms won the popular vote for the Wisconsin State Assembly by 53% to 45% and yet - get this - because of systemic gerrymandering the Reeps still kept 64 % of the seats in the Assembly to the Ds 36%.   That means that come January,  despite the colossal win for Wisconsin Dems, the Reeptards will still control the state legislature.

And now the bastard filth want to consolidate their power even more by limiting the incoming  Governor's power as well as making the new Dem attorney general report to THEM instead of to the Governor. No, folks, you cannot make this shit up. This is happening in plain daylight in Wisconsin.  All this while these execrable maggots also amp up voter suppression, by dialing back early voting. They've since seen they lost big for major state offices because so many citizens early voted - and they want to stop that. But see, that's the only way the Reeps can win, by cheating, by denying votes.  (This change, mind you, would also cost the state nearly $7 million more tax dollars to implement.)

Bottom line: the Reep swine are doing everything they can in this lame duck session, at any cost, to strip power from the Democrats -  who just beat the holy Hell out of them in the Nov. 6th election. They want to make sure the Dems don't gain any more ground and get any more power - if the Reeps can keep them from getting it.  As Maddow put it, "this is the new Republican playbook" - or in Janice's parlance, "the vermin playbook".

But hold strain! This shit is going down in other GOP loss states too! In Michigan now, Republican lawmakers are attempting similar efforts to those in Wisconsin before new officeholders are sworn in.  Again, we behold the same sore loser temperament as the 'pukes try to rein in power for the newcomers so they can't have the leverage the 'pukes had in their term. It just shows the degenerate nature of these imps that they could stoop so low to resort to anti-democratic perfidy to get their way, when the elections - the voice of the voters- kicked their sorry scum asses out.

Drafted in secret, the  GOP Wisconsin legislation was rushed to the Joint Finance Committee on Monday for its only public hearing. Legislators and outraged citizens scrambled all weekend to parse more than forty serious changes to state law embedded in the 141 pages of text. The legislature is expected to vote on the bills today and then signed by ex- Gov. Simpleton Scott Walker.

Among the numerous provisions included in the legislation are ones that would limit early voting to two weeks; give Republicans more control of the state agency overseeing job creation; curtail the governor's ability to write state rules and adjust public benefits programs; and allow lawmakers to replace the attorney general with private attorneys at taxpayer expense.

Look,  the ratfucker Wisconsin GOOPs  have made no effort to hide their intentions: to continue their hold on state government, even at the expense of core democratic principles like respect for the separation of powers and majority rule. The  Repuke legislation would nullify the decision-making of Wisconsin’s voters, who rejected Republicans for every statewide office in the November midterms.  This means it is time for political warfare, and strenuous, aggressive protests - not just phone calls and emails (more on this later).

In written testimony, Democratic Gov.-elect Tony Evers asked Republican lawmakers to abandon their lame-duck session instead of trying to “override and ignore what the people of Wisconsin asked for this November.”   As Gov-elect Evers put it:

"This is rancor and politics as usual,”    Adding:

“It flies in the face of democratic institutions and the checks and balances that are intended to prevent power-hungry politicians from clinging to control when they do not get their way.”

Bingo!

At a stop in Wausau yesterday, Mr. Evers said he would consider litigation should any of the measures become law, telling reporters:

"We will actively be looking at either to litigate or do whatever else in our power to make sure the people of Wisconsin are represented at the table," .

What's else can be done?  The citizens of Wisconsin and Michigan need to summon their voices, passion and resources and pound the offending Repukes into submission. Mount serious major protests in every venue but especially the state capitols of Madison (WI) and Lansing.   In addition, citizens of both states need to take their protests directly to the front of GOP goons' homes - make their presence (and outrage)  known  - loud and clear!  Go to the state directory, consult their names and addresses, and mount targeted protests accordingly.  The top two GOP vermin to single out? Robin Vos -  Republican Speaker of the Wisconsin State Assembly-   and Scott Fitzgerald, the Senate majority leader.

These repigs have to be made to understand they can't hide in their homes as they mount such treachery to democratic values.  Flooding GOP lawmakers with calls and emails is a good first step - but phone calls and emails can always  be ignored- especially by entitled tyrant swine.. Protesters with signs screaming right in front of their homes can't.  This is the time to bear down!

This is clearly an attempt to undermine our democracy in Wisconsin," said Josh Kaul, the Democrat who beat Republican Attorney General Brad Schimel and would lose many of his powers in the legislation.  So what to do? Well, if the Reeps get away with their perfidy the new Dem AG will have to report to them. Plus, slimeball Walker swears he will appoint Schimel as a Waukesha County judge before the two complete their terms.

Never mind. Wisconsin citizens, if I know them as I believe I do, will get out and manifest their outrage in open defiance and mass protests - carried out in the state capitol, in Milwaukee and Green Bay,  and in front of the homes of these degenerates who have the gall to call themselves "lawmakers".

Wifey doesn't agree that encouraging mass protests, including in front of the offenders' homes, is the way to go. ("It will backfire!")  But I say it is,  especially when the Reep maggots disrespect the voters' will to such a foul extent. They have to get it through their thick heads that elections have consequences - and if they won't admit or concede them- the citizens (of both Wisconsin and Michigan) will have to do it for them.

Given, however, the main votes have been taken, the only hope going forward is for Evers and company to file lawsuits, and the Wisconsin and Michigan voters to turf these reprobates out when the first chance arises.

Enough said!

See also:

'They’re Throwing A Fit': The GOP’s Desperate Power Grabs Show How Weak The Party Has Become

After Rebecca Dallet's WI Win, Is The "Far Left" Still Driven By Anger? You Bet!

The most odious, noisome swine ever elected to the presidency - and with the help of Russkies- is Donald Trump. But the coming Blue wave will smash his snowflakes in November. And yeah, it is driven by anger and hate - for many of us, if not all.

"Tonight we proved that when the people rise up and stand together we can beat the special interests. We beat the NRA and the millions of dollars flooding into our state..."  -  Rebecca Dallet in victory speech last night.

The news of the 12 point  state supreme court victory in Wisconsin - by Rebecca Dallet - a confirmed liberal, has the Repuke snowflakes in a major meltdown.  This was prompted by the first time ever a liberal Dem has won an open seat in Wisconsin in 23 years. Yes, even in their sleep they are now mumbling "Fear the wave! Fear the wave! BWAHHAHAA!" referring to what will be coming at them in the November midterm elections. And the Dallet victory even prompted WI  Reeptard Guv  Scott Walker to tweet last night in near hysterics:

"Tonight's results show we are at risk of a #Bluewave in WI. The Far Left is driven by anger and hatred - we must counter it with optimism and organization."

Yeah, you mean like the NRA helping to organize and throw money at your little GOP hack pawn, Michael Screnock?  The toad who was endorsed by the NRA within 24 hours of the Parkland FL shooting?  The cretin who lost by 12 points in what was supposed to be a slam dunk election?

As for anger and hate, you better believe it- well for many of us - maybe not all. (Wifey and I are in competition to claim who hates Trump more. So far I have the edge based on my numerous anti-Trump blog posts.)  Those emotions have been driven by the spectacle of  the gross abomination in office and his multiple travesties inflicting untold damage on our nation, including its civil fabric.  These range from his incessant lies and disruption to appointing sociopaths, criminals and misfits to important agency positions - like Scott Pruitt in the EPA, and Betsy DeVos at Education. Oh, also appointing the loser, swamp rat and Uncle Tom Ben Carson at HUD - just busted for spending $31,000 on a dining table. (Oh wait, my bad. He blamed that purchase on his wife.)

The resulting corruption not to mention the efforts to undermine laws such as pertaining to due process, civil rights, voting rights, as well as protection of our food and water supply, have indeed incited the righteous anger of millions of citizens - mainly on the Left. If you want to call them (certainly wifey and me)  "angry Far Left" be my guest, but they will be coming at the GOOPrs in 7 months.

Screnock himself, clueless whack job that he is,  made both forced and unforced errors, including sending out NRA mailers to voters still appalled by the Parkland massacre, and also bragging how he would "defend the gun rights of the NRA".   So all the money the gun promoters tossed into the state didn't do any good and arguably made the loss even bigger than it might have been.

Meanwhile,  delusional Trumpkins have been ruminating about "the Lefties having the uncanny ability to get sudden heroes like Stormy Daniels and David Hogg" - obviously referring to how these two have recently taken over the 24/7 news cycle.  Daniels with her exposure of "unprotected sex" with Dotard (and spanking him with a  Forbes magazine) and David Hogg embodying moral outrage in his crusade to control some of the most lethal weapons in the nation.

But the Right's bloggers give us too much credit. We didn't "create" -  or by serendipity -  get  "sudden heroes" falling into our laps to siphon some of Trump's media oxygen.  No, Trump did that to himself, as well as his FOX -ite pawns - like Laura Ingraham-  who made the mistake of attacking a 17 year old kid for his gun control stance.   Now, having lost the last of her advertisers, she's evidently "gone on vacation" a la Bill O'Reilly (Remember that?)

As for Trump, we on the Left didn't put him in bed with Stormy or pay her to spank him, he did that himself. Just like he colluded with the Russians,  for which Mueller is building an airtight case right now.

As I warned in an earlier blog post, the Righties can joke all they want about "snowflakes" or "Trump derangement syndrome" or even mock "far left hate" but whatever the name, there is a rising energy field right now . This "field" is largely in the form of  angry blowback to Trump and his litany of crimes and hired criminals, and will be manifested in a massive voting turnout in November.

The Left has been massively organizing by the millions  - especially the women who backed Hillary Clinton- and are now enraged an admitted pussy grabber stole (with Russian help)  her job of destiny. Not only organizing but fielding candidates and winning in state elections.  As a recent TIME article on 'The Avengers' pointed out (Jan. 29, pp. 27-33):

"Progressive women described undergoing a metamorphosis. In 2016 they were ordinary voters . In 2017, they became activists, spurred by the bitter defeat of the first female presidential candidate at the hands of a self-described pussy grabber. Now, in 2018, these doctors and mothers and teachers are jumping into the arena and bringing new energy to a Democratic Party sorely in need of fresh faces."

Adding:

"Call it payback, call it a revolution, call it the Pink Wave inspired by marchers in their magenta pussy hats and the activism that followed. There is an unprecedented surge of first time female candidates....running for offices big and small - from the U.S. Senate to local school boards."

This ought to worry the Repukes and their groupies given "women candidates energize women voters". This, combined with potential depressed turnout on the Right,  holds the potential for a 'blue tsunami",  not just a blue wave in November.

The Right's minions are correct that their little swine Doturd got in despite the Access Hollywood tape, i.e. with him bragging about "grabbing pussies".   But they also need to know that when the moral payment comes due in seven months, it will be millions of  former Hillary supporters and others who will exact their pound of flesh. What's that old saying? "Payback is always a bitch".

Today's WSJ editorial ('The Wisconsin Canary', p. A16)  nailed it:

"Trump's chaotic and polarizing governance has motivated the left to turn out it big numbers while turning off some Republicans, especially in the suburbs."

While it is certainly true that anger and hate of Trump isn't a necessary condition for a motivated voter turnout, it definitely helps. And so in Wisconsin may have played a role for many in "marching over ice and snow to vote in Madison and Milwaukee."

The Right knows that  WSJ - as well as Scott Walker's take - is at least partly true, which is why it's quaking now especially after Rebecca Dallet's terrific win. But this is just one of many to come - compliments of  aroused citizens ready to take back their nation from the barbarian hordes and enemies of the Constitution.  And most especially from the ignorant, authoritarian buffoon defecating all over the highest office in the land, leaving it without a  scintilla of dignity or respect. As Charles Blow put it in his NY Times column today:

"Trump isn’t smart, savvy or sophisticated enough to run this country. He has a skill for demagogy and emotional manipulation, and he exercised that skill in its full power at precisely the right time to convince enough of America that he should be president.

But Trump has only one mode — inferno. He starts fires, fans flames and also throws them.

At the risk of laboring the metaphor, burnout is inevitable.

Not even the most ardent Trumpsters can maintain their enthusiasm, even if they maintain their support. There is just too much chaos, too much noise, too much lying, too little coherence."

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/p-m-carpenter/78552/the-absolute-almost-unspeakable-scourge-of-donald-j-trump

WHO Are The Real "Snow Flakes"? Conservos, Of Course!

"Waaaah!  Da Dems is mekkin' me cwy bout Donald!"


A trope making the rounds in much of the media is that there is a certain coddled enclave of college kids who are terrified by certain speeches, and go wacko insane with protests. The examples include the responses of University of California, Berkeley students  to Milo Yiannopoulos and Middlebury students to Charles Murray - both  trotted out as evidence.

The term "snow flake" has been used disparagingly to refer to those students who apparently demand quarantines from diverse political opinions .   Thus, just as a snow flake easily melts so too do these Left- leaning students when confronted by hard right positions that some claim elicit "micro aggressions".  But not so fast.

First, there is the massive error of selection bias in the Right's narrative and reporting.  No where is it referenced that literally thousands of on campus lectures occur across the ideological spectrum every year with no kerfuffle or controversy. Millions of students from east coast to west go to their classes, participate in various organizations and attend lectures without incident. Imagine then how many times Murray, Coulter or Shapiro have delivered lectures without controversy.  This indicates the attention to the few explosive protests - especially by the left - distorts the narrative because it takes no note of the thousands of lectures that went off with no issues. Sadly, conservative columnists (like Holman Jenkins, Marc Thiessen and Michelle Malkin) would have us believe raucous protests are the norm when they are the exception.

Second, the selective focus on the snow flake is even more askew than depicted. Is it really true that all the snow flakes exist on the left? I don't believe so. In fact, the bulk of evidence indicates the Right, including Alt-Right, are even more sensitive about bold political speech than the Left.  Any time a call is made for stronger gun regulation - such as after the Vegas massacre-  watch their bonkers reactions. (Including stocking up on all the AR-15s, ammo, and 9 mm Glocks they can carry home.)

In the wake of the massive town meeting health care protests - during which "Trump Care" and the abolition of the ACA was being vigorously protested- the Right's gnomes, such as in ND,  even wanted to pass laws making such protests "illegal assemblies".  How snowflake can you get?

Consider also the case of Wisconsin where Governor Scott Walker and his rubber stamp lawmakers are considering "campus free speech" legislation to curb the right to free speech on the left. This would be passed in order to protect the tender little ears of conservatives from speech they may not wish to hear. Such as the truth that the denial of contraception access via the ACA will definitely lead to more abortions.  Or the truth that there is absolutely no justifiable use for semi-automatic weapons other than to slaughter other  humans.  Ugh! Can't say that!

Or, consider Donald Trump - perhaps the biggest snow flake of all -  understandable given his unstable, fragile and immature temperament combined with his woeful lack of even basic knowledge. For example, after seeing press reports of Sen. Corker's remarks about the White House being an "adult day care center" (see my Oct. 11  post)  he blurted out on Twitter that he would consider "repealing licenses for the media". He was totally unaware that no such licenses exist nor could he do that even if they did exist. He is not a dictator, after all, though he appears not to grasp even that.

Then there was Dotard's intolerance at the sight of NFL players exercising their free speech rights by not standing for the anthem. Never mind these protests were not about the flag or anthem per se, they were the vehicle for getting attention to uneven racial treatment in the country.  But their use should not have been questioned by a snowflake like the Dotard. (And now even some spineless, wishy- washy owners - like Jerry Jones asserting they will fire or suspend players who refuse to stand.)

So the Right's hurling of the "snow flake" derogatory sounds damned near close to a selective defense of free speech to me.  I.e. you either adhere to OUR version of free speech, e.g. being able to carry guns to ACA protests, OR you are a snow flake!

I  say, if you can't handle NFL players kneeling for the anthem in a protest you can't bitch about college kids ripping into Coulter, Murray and Yiannopoulos .  Also relevant here is what Princeton President Christopher Eisgruber recently conveyed to his entering class:

"The art of disagreement is not only about confrontation, but also about learning. It requires that we defend our views...and, at the same time, consider whether our views might be mistaken."

This is a crucial observation and bears emphasis. It also allows us to question the validity of any speech for which no learning is possible, or  speakers who challenge the values that make such learning possible. Such speakers, say like Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos tend to use a university's commitment to free exchange to promote positions that threaten the fabric of society as a whole.  As an extreme example, one can cite the Nazis marching in Charlottesville chanting "Jews will not replace us!"

Or take Ann Coulter's indefensible remark at the CPAC conference in 2002:

"We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals by making them realize that they could be killed."

The Right media columnists' claim that instead of vigorous protesting (including blocking) we are obliged to "argue"  with such hateful dreck is imbecilic. How can I reasonably argue with someone like Coulter who wants to intimidate me with a death threat? It is the intellectual equivalent of saying "Kiss my ass!"

What we have then from Rightist hacks like Marc Thiessen is a rhetorical sleight of hand claiming it is "intolerant" to inveigh aggressively against intolerant speech and essentially disallow it.  We are instead expected to put on our numskull caps and graciously extend equal standing and dignity to hateful claptrap issuing from the likes of Coulter or Yiannopoulos. In other words, we are never ever to sanction a callous disregard of democratic norms via callousness. As I pointed out in previous posts this is nonsense given Hitler used this very idiom to secure power in the Reichstag - then proceeded to destroy democracy in the Enabling Act.

Now, it is true not all conservative speech is hateful speech and we owe it to ourselves to make that distinction. Truth be told most conservos aren't like Coulter, Richard Spencer or Yiannopoulos. But if they DO hold toxic views, in whatever guise, they will have to expect passionate displays and protests given those view are antithetic to free speech itself since they are based on intolerant memes.  This means students have every right to push back aggressively against hateful speech that is itself self-defeating and worthy of no argument or dignity.

Some conservatives like Thiessen want to proselytize their hate without pushback and exact judgment without themselves being judged - but this is a no go. A non-starter.  Why? Because when they are aptly called "racist" or "sexist" or "homophobic" they clutch their pearls and cry 'Foul!'  In such an instance one must question who the real snow flakes are.

The new standard clearly is that if you can't handle aggressive pushback when you come out with hateful and ignorant dreck, then maybe you aren't really about actual speech at all.

See also:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2017/07/was-splc-wrong-to-educate-middlebury.html

That REEPO Debate: More Fun Than A Barrel Of Monkeys

Okay, I admit it'd be hard to surpass a barrel of yelping, cackling monkeys all going at each other  -in terms of hilarity. But the Republican (prime time) debate last night came pretty close. It also showed, probably better than anything else - how batshit crazy and out of touch the whole lot of them are. But were there some kernels of hope for a Lefty? Definitely, and I plan to pick those out from the general stream of deranged nuttiness..

Let's start from the beginning where the question was asked - unfairly I believe: Was there any candidate who was unwilling to pledge support to the eventual Republican nominee and swear off a third-party run?  Of course, Trump raised his hand to assorted catcalls from the peanut gallery - also provoking an outburst from Rand Paul explaining the Donald's "only hedging his bets because he's used to buying politicians".

Rand may have a point, but let's face it: this would be the best thing to happen for the Dem nominee, whoever it is. Even Bernie Sanders could be handed a landslide victory if the Donald is the opponent, or runs as an Independent - taking at least as many votes from the GOP as Perot did back in 1992.

Now, back to the other deranged aspects of which there were many, but I highlight the standouts:

Next, Foxie  News darling Megyn Kelly put Ben Carson in her sights, with the cameras catching him in 'deer in the head lights' mode.  Megyn recounted previous basic mistakes Carson made in various forums, including: suggesting the Baltic states are not part of NATO,  not knowing the main political parties in Israel and (no kidding!) believing Alan Greenspan had been Treasury Secretary instead of former Chairman of the Federal Reserve.  Any one of these bonehead errors would ordinarily disqualify a candidate as surely as Rick Perry (in 2012) failing to recall the DOE as one  of the main federal agencies.

Megyn correctly asked if all his drops weren't "basic mistakes"  and "raise legitimate questions on whether you're ready to be president?"

Ben asserted "I could take issue with all those but we don't have time" then changed the subject and lamely said "we will have an opportunity to explore all those issues". Uh no, Ben. See, you were supposed to have a ready answer for your incompetence and you blew it.

After watching Ben's inauspicious performance on stage it might be better if he instantly - and voluntarily  - changed places with Carly Fiorina at the "happy hour" debate.  At least Fiorina looked halfway presidential, Carson looked like he couldn't qualify for dogcatcher in Dogpatch, NC.

Carson's ridiculous answers - even with limited time - showed me the man needs to spend his time another way, perhaps helping out in soup kitchens in Baltimore- especially as penance after his outrageous putdowns of progressives.. In concert they raise serious questions about how well he understands the country not to mention the international scene.

Did he reassure anyone? Not at all, just made them wince even more - and as I told wifey: "How the hell did this bozo even make it onto the stage. How did he ever become a Hopkins neurosurgeon?"

 Marco Rubio's turn came next and 'Cisco Kid' was asked how he could claim to be presidential caliber given his limited experience. This had to be one of the softball questions and Rubio  delivered his usual canned nonsense about "being Senator from one of the most diverse states". Maybe, but that's not the same as governance. Realizing that perhaps, he added "this cannot be a resume competition". Uh, yes it can!

Jeb Bush didn't do much better, and was reminded of his previous gaffes. But the question also let this POS brag how he "balanced every budget"  and was nicknamed "Veto Corleone" but no word on the deplorable state his budget cuts left Florida's ecology sinking in literal slime and pollution.  Bush also showed he either didn't understand Common Core (which he supposedly backs) or was trying a last minute attempt to wiggle out of supporting it. He claimed he favored "state solutions" when the whole idea of Common Core is a centralized educational template that would ultimately be issued from the federal gov't. You can't have each state doing its own Common Core. That defeats the very definition.

Megyn Kelly then went for Trump's jugular - perhaps because she was irate after reading a blog post of mine on how 'the Donald' paddled Katy Tur in her interview with him. So Megyn was out for revenge.  Megyn, bless her agitated soul, eyed Trump like a female boa eyes a paralyzed mouse and said menacingly:

“You’ve called women you don’t like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals,” as if she was barely able to contain her revulsion.  Trump shot back "Only Rosie O'Donnell" but Megyn shot back 'No, it wasn't!"

To toss in some more acid, she recalled that Trump's "made several disparaging comments on women's looks and once told a contestant on 'The Celebrity Apprentice'  that it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees.” She asked: "Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president and how will you answer the charge when Hillary Clinton is likely to be the Democratic nominee that you are part of the war on women.?”

Of course, the Donald was way too smart to take the bait, and instead launched into a minute's worth of fulsome bollocks on how he "doesn't have time for political correctness" and "this country doesn't have time either"

In fact, the only times  I thought Trump was truly on the ropes were when he was questioned on his Repub bona fides, namely his past published remarks in favor of single payer health care - which he now claimed to have rejected (unconvincingly). Then he was asked about his donations to the Clintons whereupon he delivered the lamo answer "I donate to everybody and always expect something in return". When asked what he got in return for a donation to Hillary,  he snapped: "I got her to come to my daughter's wedding!" 

  Could Trumpie be a liberal "Trojan horse" as some wild conservo conspiracy theories allege?  That might be in the minds of some voters and viewers after this exchange. But seriously? The real issue for voters ought to be Trump's decorum and political competence. To my mind while he survived the debate - and may even get a 'bump'- he aroused more questions than answers.

Ted Cruz came next and averred he knew "where $18 trillion in debt came from" - but really didn't.

Christie was  then given a chance to convince voters why he ought to be Prez given how New Jersey's balance sheet has basically ended up in a sea of red. If Christie couldn't handle his own state economically how could he manage the nation? Of course, 'Mr. Crisco'  the Doughnut Boy dumped it all on the previous D -administration.

Then there was Scott Walker, who stood at his podium with a half drunk, quizzical stare:  a visage that resembled Alfred E. Neumann with parts of Dean Martin grafted on. Asked a question (by Megyn Kelly)  on his recent decision to outlaw abortions even for women facing  critical complications the maggot didn't blink an eye. Nor would be do so for a young female who'd been raped. As far as the drunken stupor Scott - with the Alfred Neumann -Dino Martin stare- it was no biggie. "Most Americans" would agree with his position. Let's not forget this turd had originally not embraced such an extreme position on abortion rights and only changed his stripes after entering the race.

 Huckabee's turn was next and was as extremist and insane as one would expect him to be, bloviating about how he'd invoke the 5th and 14th amendments to defend the "personhood rights of the unborn child". Those who've read my earlier posts on the Huckster grasp that I view him as unhinged, and that response he delivered ought to now convince everyone else too.

The 5th amendment against bearing witness against oneself, for a fetus or zygote? Seriously? The entity isn't even conscious, you nitwit! And the 14th amendment, the same one used to liberate the slaves in the Confederacy?  Are you serious? Who is the fetus a slave to? Its mommy?

By far the most constructive interlude in this circus  arrived in a raw and revealing exchange (baited by the Foxites)  between Chris Christie and Rand Paul over national security, federal eavesdropping and the collection of personal data. Christie pounded his fat chest in self-righteous indignation - as most pro security tools do - bragging on his U.S. attorney bona fides after 9/11 and actually dealing with the pain and fallout. Fine as far as it goes but missing Paul's point that you don't need to scoop up every record to catch the bad guys.

When Christie shot back 'How else would you do it?" Paul responded, 'By getting a warrant!" which is exactly correct, and for once Paul and I agreed on the issue of the 4th amendment - which I wish more Reepos embraced as fiercely as they do the 2nd.

Christie was wrong when  - after Paul's 'get a warrant' response - he dismissed it as a “ridiculous answer,” because  "It’s impossible to know who’s who at the start". But, in fact, there are ways to separate good guys from bad and yes, from the start.

Former NSA code breaker Bill Binney commenting on Keith Alexander's NSA spying testimony and breaking up plots two years ago, put it bluntly:

"I  don’t understand this being bamboozled into thinking that you have to do this to find bad guys. That’s false. There’s very simple principles you can use to find out who is the bad guy and who isn’t and you can do this without violating anybody’s privacy”.-

So Rand Paul was quite justified in firing back to Christie's nonsense:

.

“You fundamentally misunderstand the Bill of Rights,”

That spontaneous back-and-forth was literally debate gold, because it was simultaneously fiery, spontaneous  and substantive, a perfect distillation of the two sides of an essential argument about the value of our civil liberties. (One that, too often, hasn't come up often enough since the insinuation of the "Patriot Act" into the national fabric.) It was, to my mind, what a real debate ought to feature much more of.

 Some FOX lubbers will hurl brickbats at the network for - as one commentator called it  - presiding over an "inquisition" rather than a debate. But come on. They were basically foxed...uh boxed into a corner, given they've always been tagged as the REPUBLICAN network. Hence, in order to show more objectivity and not be accused  of pro-Democratic partisanship, the question panel had to be provocative.  As Frank Bruni put it:

 "They took each of the 10 Republicans onstage to task. They held each of them to account. They made each address the most prominent blemishes on his record, the most profound apprehensions that voters feel about him, the greatest vulnerability that he has."

Which was terrific because it meant you were hearing from the candidates themselves, not merely regurgitated slop from their handlers and focus group gurus. This ensured the debate was lively, and also made it possible to pick out the genuine morons and crazies - which alas, was all of them excepting Ohio gov John Kasich - who actually sounded rational in his response about using state Medicaid.

Bruni again:

"On this night, the network that pampers Republicans provoked them instead. It was great television, and even better politics."

Indeed. And in using this technique FOX did us all a solid favor by showing just how unhinged all of these clowns really are. The frightening thing, as Janice noted, is that one could actually become President if the Dems don't pay close enough attention and play their cards right - as opposed to assuming it'll be a cakewalk.

See also:

http://www.salon.com/2015/08/07/fear_loathing_at_the_gop_debates_behold_the_the_autocratic_xenophobic_war_hungry_spectacle_of_the_modern_republican_party/

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/richard-eskow/63349/the-gop-debate-its-what-oligarchy-looks-like

No, Trump Isn't The Only Crackpot In the GOP Clown Cavalcade

Scott Walker - got away with a number of wacko assertions and actions while the media was all over Trump.

IN the land of the batshit crazy the guy that screeches the loudest and craziest is king. Well, maybe not quite - if you're only paying attention to the squeakiest wheel-  and ignoring  the others that might be just as batshit nuts. (Which could support Chris Hayes' thesis that the Donald's nutso spiels on immigration etc, are giving cover to his GOOPr compadres to tilt even more wacky Right).

After Trump's latest outburst on John McCain, asserting he really "wasn't a war hero because he got captured",  the whole media eye was focused on 'the Donald' while letting the other GOP screwballs get away with rhetorical murder. But what can anyone of intelligence expect from the corpora-press which has the attention of deformed ants and is incapable of blinking, walking and chewing gum at the same time, which is to say in this case, following three screwballs at once.

The Des Moines Register, to its credit, put Trump in his place with a blistering editorial ('Trump Should Pull the Plug On His Bloviating Side Show') where we read that Trump's recent comments:

"threaten to derail not just his campaign, but the manner we choose our nominees for president....his name calling has turned him into the distraction with traction- a feckless blowhard who can generate headlines...not by provoking thought but by provoking outrage."

Which is a no-holds barred calling out, including for Trump to bow out, but misses the point. That is, where is the responsibility of  the idiot Trump supporters for fueling and spurring on this obnoxious gasbag?  I mean, think of it, were it not for these supporters (''crazies" as McCain called them) Trump would have no oxygen, no credibility (via polls) at all. He'd be stuck somewhere around the 1 percent marker along with Lindsey Graham.

So, one cannot call out Trump as a "distraction with traction" and "threatening how we choose our nominees for president" without also calling out the numskulls and looneytunes who prop him up and fill his campaign venues. THEY are also responsible, and indeed, like the pro-Confederacy jokers, disclose how far our country has gone into the crapper. So far apart from Thomas Jefferson's ideal that the "minds of the people must be improved", i.e. to hold their government accountable.

Then there is the blind eye turned to the other crackpots, as I noted. Which makes one believe that it's fine to raise a hullabaloo about one whackjob candidate insulting one guy (McCain) but not other bozos insulting whole classes of citizens. (Ok, Trump did this too with his Mexican remarks, but his recent insult to McCain has left the other clowns - namely Jeb Bush and Scott Walker- to do their own thing).

Bush, for example, when asked at one gathering over the weekend if he'd allow a "path to citizenship" for immigrants, gave a flat out "NO!" for an answer. This is the character who wants Hispanics to believe that because he can speak a bit of good Spanish he's almost one of them. Don't be fooled for a second. This slime ball is no better than his disgusting warmonger brother, only better at concealing the imp within.

Then there's Scott Walker, the candidate who decided to quit college just months short of a degree, disclosing an unserious nature and an inability to complete a complex objective. Not only did this jackass (the same weekend as Trump's gaffe) sign a state budget that erodes tenure for college professors,  he also signed a 20-week abortion ban into law with zero exceptions for rape or even severe fetal abnormalities.

Even worse, which should command every thinking American's attention (and that of the Des Moines Register) is that Walker - if elected- would do whatever he "deemed necessary to terminate the Iran nuclear deal from day one even it means a military attack".

In other words, this stupid turd is gung ho to bring about the very scenario depicted in the horrific movie Threads,
The film is about 1hr and 47 mins long (and last I checked was available online), Brit-made, and if it doesn't scare the bejeezus out of you, you are either already brain dead, or a zombie and amongst the walking dead.

'Threads 'isn't for the squeamish or faint-hearted but I do think all those yammering for war or confrontation with Iran need to see it and let its message soak in. In fact, I think every critically-thinking red blooded citizen ought to see it, if for no other reason to be motivated to let reps and current presidential candidates  know this thing isn't on - not now or ever. If we could contain the Soviet Union with its 12,700 ICBMs for over 40 years , we ought to be able to contain Iran.

Though based on a hypothetical Soviet-Russian invasion of Iran, which possibility is no longer - since the present day Russians have plowed enormous investment monies into Iran and its reactors, the projected invasion of a U.S. and NATO strike force is accurate to any unfolding future scenario say if Walker got in and did what he said. From the initial strikes on a nuke reactor at Isfahan, to the accidental sinking of the Russian ship Kirov in the Straits of Hormuz, to the accidental exchange of 2 tactical nuclear weapons (with radiation blowing over Pakistan) and the escalation to a full scale nuclear war - with 3,000 megatons exchange (210 megatons on the UK alone) this movie will keep you on the edge of your seat.  Oh, then there's the scene at the end- following the timeline after the exchange and  nuclear winter- when a bat-eared infant with a pig face is born from a survivor.

But why did the media not hold Walker up to scrutiny the same way as they did Trump. Or, is the prospect of setting off a nuclear war less significant than saying a guy is no war hero?

In fact, Walker's whole spiel about what he would do regarding terminating the Iran deal is laughable. It was like looking at some drunken frat boy giving his rendition of a drunken presidential candidate at one of his former frat's beer keggers. It show why, when the clown was still a Milwaukee Alderman, most serious people dismissed him as either ignorant or brainless. No one believed he'd rise any further - certainly not to governor-  but I guess too many overestimated the IQs of Wisconsin voters who didn't do their due diligence.

Last night on 'All In',  Hayes' guest Matt Duss put the Walker episode into perspective, observing:

"Walker says here's what I'm going to do....put sanctions back...and I'm gonna talk to our allies...like he's going to make a few calls to our allies in Europe and they're just going to say 'Okay, you know you're right! This deal that we painstakingly negotiated two years...you're right it's just horrible...so forget it let's scrap it'   This is just unserious. It's completely ridiculous".

Which suggests the problem of the most bombastic getting the most attention while less bombastic (but crazier) get no notice at all, is again  - a problem of the media. If the media then paid less attention to Trump's bombastic balderdash and more to truly insane declarations and actions like Scott Walker's,  American voters would be prepared to think more and react less. But since the media only focuses on the campaign circus and most outrageous rhetoric and behavior, the crazier statements (made with less oomph) get ignored.

Look also at candidate Lindsey Graham this morning on CBS Early Show claiming Obama is "the Neville Chamberlain of our time because he believes over the next fifteen years Iran is gonna change its behavior....'cause this deal doesn't do a damn thing requiring them to change their behavior".

Showing what a stooge he is, and as he was exposed in a recent piece ('Why The Iran Deal Is A Risk Worth Taking')  in TIME by Joe Klein. Klein noted how warmonger Israeli PM Bibi "tells gullible American visitors what they want to hear" about Iran, the bomb and all, and one Israeil intelligence operative then laughing at "the brazen idiocy of it all" (implying Bibi is an idiot for telling it, but Americans are bigger idiots for buying it).  And then there's Lindsey Graham who "used the same line at an Iowa state dinner"

In other words, Graham didn't really believe it either. So he's another two faced turd who employs rhetoric when it suits his fancy. He talks about the big Iran  "nuclear threat" and Obama being "a new Neville Chamberlain"  to get constituents to dumb down just like Bibi does with  the gullible 'Muricans visiting him who are foolish enough to give him their ears and attention.

Yes, the manner in which we choose our presidential nominees is indeed "threatened" - but primarily by the media.   This corpora-media seeks to pose presidential campaigns as horse races as opposed to serious political processes in which all policy positions by whatever candidate need to be given their due and scrutinized. Not just those of the loudest or most brash.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/pierre-tristam/63095/donald-trump-isn-t-the-exception-he-s-the-republican-prototype