Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: August 2017


Eleanor Sheehan,Popsugar US 9 hours ago

A Catholic nun’s explanation of the term “pro-life” from 2004 is resurfacing after recent antiabortion events. On PBS’s Now With Bill Moyers, Sister Joan Chittister explained why being against abortion doesn’t mean you’re pro-life.
Here’s the full quote:
“I do not believe that just because you’re opposed to abortion that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.”
Chittister’s position is not only informed by her faith, but also her academic experience: she’s written over 50 books and has multiple degrees (including a doctorate).
The crux of Chittister’s point is that there’s a difference between advocating for birth and advocating for that child’s entire life. If antiabortion proponents are truly “pro-life,” then those same legislators would not argue for defunding programs like those that provide school lunches or health care. Many who oppose abortion also oppose access to contraceptives. Antiabortion congressmen have consistently also advocated for defunding Planned Parenthood, which provides women with birth control options.
Liberals have pointed to Chittister’s quote as an argument for the social benefits that Republicans hope to limit without providing feasible options for women if they cannot obtain abortions.

Please Donate

Advertisements

Trumped again!! MA

Marina Fang,HuffPost 17 hours ago

President Donald Trump, who will visit Texas on Tuesday for a first-hand look at Hurricane Harvey’s deluge of rainfall, flooding and destruction, may have already made preparedness for similar natural disasters more difficult.
Less than two weeks ago, Trump rescinded an Obama administration federal rule that required federal, state and local agencies to take steps to enhance buildings, highways and other infrastructure with protections from flooding.
Trump’s rollback of the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard was part of his executive order billed as a plan to streamline infrastructure projects. He signed the order earlier this month at Trump Tower in New York, minutes before the fiery press conference during which he blamed “both sides” for the deadly violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, incited by a white supremacist rally.
Flanked by cabinet officials and aides, Trump heralded the order as part of his administration’s efforts to rid industry of what he sees as onerous and unnecessary regulation. He called such rules “a massive, self-inflicted wound on our country.”
“No longer will we allow the infrastructure of our magnificent country to crumble and decay,” Trump said at the Aug. 15 signing.
The rule, signed by Obama in 2015, cited the growing risk of flooding from rising sea waters caused by climate change, which Trump has claimed is a “hoax.”
Yet flooding intensified by climate change has become a dire concern in coastal areas like the southern United States. For years, scientists have warned that the threat of extreme storms like Hurricane Harvey will only worsen because of climate change, and that many U.S. cities and states are ill-prepared for large-scale flooding.
“Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge,” climate scientist Michael Mann wrote on Monday. He said that scientists know “with great confidence” that climate change “worsened the flooding.”
The storm, which federal officials have called a “historic” and “landmark event,” dumped at least 30 inches of rain over the weekend, with even more on the way. Recovery efforts on Monday focused on rescuing tens of thousands of displaced people, amid water-filled highways and homes.

 


It started when the first Europeans landed in what is now known as America. The Indigenous people (Native Americans) accepted them in some cases and rejected them in others. The history is not as clear  as stated in many history books. Once here (in America) the Europeans pushed their culture on to the Native Americans often in a most painful way rather than understanding the existing culture norms and accepting them as a different culture that could be used as a means to assimilate. These incursions and finally dominance by force has  caused the loss of  several cultures which we are now trying understand with what little of them remains. The recent rallies of Alt right and other White Nationalist groups have had the shouts of “America for Whites, go back where you came from” and other Racial statements. Is there any thought given to who actually should go back where they came from? If it were left up to the Native Americans , I am sure the same shouts could be heard. It is unfortunate that so many people are exerting what they call “white privilege” to cover their nefarious deeds and urged on by the President of the United States. Our European allies are looking at this country with mouths agape as our “TOTUS” continues on a tear to reverse anything done by previous administrations without a first or second thought about the ramifications that may ensue. Unfortunately his base supporters are so caught up in the campaign style rhetoric that they cannot understand how his Presidency and the actions associated with will affect them now and later. Our current administration lead by the Tweeter in Chief and less by the neer do well  GOP Congressional members appears more like a cat trying to cover up in a too full litter box.

Please Donate


‘Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call’d,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself. (2.2.38-49)

This Excerpt from Shakespeare speaks of a name being a cover for what the name covers. What would we call the current Leader(?) of the free world? A person who had no real desire to be President and is unwilling to learn the job. The actions of this person has apparently a single purpose and that is to be adored. That desire has lead us to a tweet storm, campaign style rallies with no subjects, abrogation of the duties of the office and obvious support of Racism in America. It is bad enough that under our (American) system of government,  Racists have a public voice but now they feel empowered by the our so called leader. Our neer do well Congress is largely absent in this issue as they are surreptitiously eroding our rights to suit the money people who support them. Our Congress has done nothing to maintain the progress made over the years and that lack of  attention to detail has allowed the rise of Donald Trump. The staunch supporters of Trump have failed to understand that their issues should be laid at the feet of their elected officials as they have been in office for a lot longer than Donnie.  If we  as voters do not pay close attention to what the Congress is doing, we will be doomed to have  years of poor governance followed by an economic collapse. We should remember that no changes occur in a vacuum and ignoring what our elected officials do out of the public view is more important than what is presented publicly.

Please Donate


Andrew Tarantola, Engadget Thu, Aug 24 9:00 AM PDT

The American criminal-justice system’s sentencing system is among the fairest and most equitable in the world … assuming you’re wealthy, white and male. Everybody else is generally SOL. During the past three decades, America’s prison population has quadrupled to more than 2.3 million people. Of those incarcerated, 58 percent are either black or Latino (despite those groups constituting barely a quarter of the general US population). The racial disparity in America’s justice system is both obvious and endemic, which is why some courts have started looking for technological solutions. But can an artificial intelligence really make better sentencing recommendations than the people who designed it? We’re about to find out.
Human judgment can be dangerously fallible. That’s why, as the ACLU found in 2014, black and Latino men are not only more likely to go to prison than their white counterparts, their sentences are nearly 20 percent longer. And the more severe the crime, the bigger the disparity. In 2009, black Americans made up 13 percent of the country’s population yet constituted 28 percent of all inmates serving life sentences and more than 56 percent of both those serving life without parole and those serving a life-without-parole sentence for a conviction that occurred when they were kids. What’s more, studies have shown that anything from when an official last ate to how well the local sports team is performing can generate wild swings in how sentencing decisions are made. And that’s where the cold, calculating and empirically-based logic of AI is supposed to come in.
A study out of Cornell University from February suggests that, at least in decisions of whether or not to grant bail, AI may provide a significantly fairer alternative to human judges. In its machine-learning policy simulation, the Cornell team calculated that such systems can cut crime rates by 24.8 percent without increasing jailing rates by denying bail to the most dangerous offenders. Even more impressive, they may be able to reduce the US prison population by a whopping 42 percent without affecting the crime rate by releasing arrestees with minimal likelihood of committing more crimes. But the key is that these benefits would extend equally to blacks and Latinos as they do to whites.

Police officers from the 77th Division gang unit handcuff three men
But AI is not the legal silver bullet that some had hoped for, at least not yet. Take the case of Eric Loomis v. Wisconsin. Loomis had been convicted of fleeing the police in a vehicle and sentenced to six years in prison. The duration of his sentence was influenced by his “high-risk” status, which was determined by Compas, a risk-assessment program employed by the court. The problem is, nobody knows how Compas works, save for Northpointe Inc., the company that sells it. The software is proprietary, its algorithm opaque, and the way in which it weighs various factors in its decision-making has been ruled a trade secret.
There is simply no means of legally coercing Northpointe into divulging how its software works. Loomis tried, arguing that his legal team should be able to examine the software and challenge the validity of its recommendations all the way up to the Wisconsin Supreme Court (SCOTUS declined to review the case in June).
The court eventually ruled against Loomis, reasoning that the software returned the same result a human judge would have, given Loomis’ actions and criminal history. However, in that decision, Justice Ann Walsh Bradley noted a ProPublica study from 2016 that found black defendants in Broward County, Florida, “were far more likely than white defendants to be incorrectly judged to be at a higher rate of recidivism” by the software.
“This study and others raise concerns regarding how a Compas assessment’s risk factors correlate with race,” Bradley wrote. Therefore, it should be employed only to provide “the sentencing court with as much information as possible in order to arrive at an individualized sentence” rather than be the deciding factor itself.
So here we are, with human judges who can’t seem to stop stepping on their own prejudices (however subconscious) and closed-source sentencing software that can’t be trusted by the public. Luckily, Montgomery County, Ohio, appears to be taking Justice Bradley’s advice and developing a hybrid solution to better serve its community.

Montgomery County Juvenile Court Judge Anthony Capizzi has teamed with IBM to adapt the company’s Watson AI system to work within the judicial system. It’s part of a pilot program aimed to help judges better understand the nuances of a kid’s home life and, in turn, make better decisions in regard to his or her care.
Judge Capizzi sees around 30 cases in an average docket, with only about six minutes to spend on any individual kid. There’s certainly no time to be fumbling with paperwork. That’s why Capizzi’s court is leveraging Watson’s cognitive abilities to develop a digital case-file system that surfaces all of the most relevant information to the case at hand.
“This is really a care-management system,” Capizzi told Engadget, “the distinction being that a case-management system tells the court what’s happened in the past, what’s going on with that child, that family, that court over the last three, five, 20 years. It doesn’t give you any indication of their capability for the future.”
With this system, however, the judge is afforded a more-complete view of the child’s life, her essential information displayed on a dashboard that can be updated in real-time. Should the judge need additional details, he can easily have it pulled up. “If I have 10 care providers in my region, can Watson tell me — because of where that child lives, their educational background, their limitations, their family — is there a better one for that child versus the nine others?”
But it’s not as though Capizzi blindly follows Watson’s recommendations. He points out that when making decisions in child-custody matters, he’s already receiving a number of competing recommendations — from law enforcement, probation officers and mental-health providers. “In the end, the judge makes the decision — I make the tough call,” he said.
“It gives me a better ability to synthesize what I know,” he explained. “It allows me to learn information quicker and in a concise way. It gives me the ability to read hundreds of law-review articles, maybe thousands of law-review articles in a matter of a day or two. … Watson can do that better at this point than any one or two or three individuals.”
Capizzi expects Watson’s computational ability to be fully realized within the next 18 months. As more and more information is fed into the system, Watson should begin returning increasingly accurate recommendations, which should help foster trust in the system. The eventual goal is to apply the digital case-file system across all 88 of Ohio’s counties and potentially serve as the model for a national program. And not just for juvenile or family courts. Capizzi envisions a day when every criminal court has access to this sort of technology. “The courts are only successful, I think, if they have the broadest, most unbiased information available to make decisions,” he said.
Granted, there is still a danger of Watson becoming biased based on the information being fed to it — just as is the case with any machine-learning system. However, Capizzi is steadfast in his belief that by combining the relative strengths of humans and AI, not only will the courts operate more efficiently, they’ll be able to markedly improve the service they provide to their constituents.
“Courts have to change,” Capizzi concluded. “Technology is changing every aspect of life, and I really think this gives our courts a more efficient way to get work done.”

Please Donate


This Presidency has brought more grief to American than any attack. The TIC (Tweeter in Chief) has conducted this administration much like he has conducted his businesses. He has shown a willingness to lie in order to get what he wants and does not consider the effect of his actions. His staunch supporters are giving him what he wants and that is admiration and cheers. Many of them feel let down by the Government however they have  forgotten that they have elected the same representatives over and over while not holding them to task over their actions or lack of. What is not clear to them is that the folks they deem  the enemy are actually not but are folks who are experiencing the same problems. There was a time about 80 years ago when another small man with a big voice and a warped mind convinced a country of people that certain people of different ethnicities and colors were responsible for their problems. This compromised entire neighborhoods and eventually countries. Once the people were convinced millions of people were murdered while the economy drifted into chaos, ending in devastation of their entire country. While it is true the economy improved through industries building war machines, the eventual downfall was a country being bombed into submission with the resulting devastation taking years to recover from. In America we have factions that espouse the same ideals that this former Dictator did and are apparently “OK” with our President. This is the person that his die hard followers seemingly love and adore. It is unfortunate that too many cannot see the folly of their adoration but when the effects of his actions really hits home with them what reaction can we expect ? Do We want to go through another internal conflict that will result in many lives lost-again?

Please Donate


Eliza Newlin Carney
August 24, 2017
It’s easy to reject racism when it waves a torch or a Nazi banner. But what about when it wears a suit and tie?
When it comes to hatred and discrimination, white supremacists and neo-Nazis stand in a class by themselves. But the public condemnation heaped on far-right nationalists, and on President Donald Trump for pandering to them, should not be reserved just for the nation’s most blatant racists.
For most Americans, it’s instinctual to reject those who wave Ku Klux Klan–style torches or banners bearing swastikas. But what about the racists who boast law degrees and sparkling resumes, and sport suits and ties? These haters, too, have flourished in the Trump administration. And their policies of bigotry, safely cloaked behind mainstream-sounding think tanks and federal commissions, can do as much or more damage as the thugs on the street.
The poll taxes and literacy tests of that period may be gone, but they’ve been replaced by GOP-authored voting restrictions, such as voter-ID laws and barriers to registration, that disenfranchise African American and Latino voters.
This is particularly true in the arena of voting rights, which lies at the heart of recent clashes over Confederate monuments that were, for the most part, built at the height of the Jim Crow era. The poll taxes and literacy tests of that period may be gone, but they’ve been replaced by GOP-authored voting restrictions, such as voter-ID laws and barriers to registration, that disenfranchise African American and Latino voters.
President Trump isn’t the first Republican to bandy about unsubstantiated claims of widespread voter fraud, or to use racial code words to rally white voters. But Trump’s call before the election for his supporters to monitor the polls in “certain areas,” and his baseless claims following Election Day that three million to five million noncitizens had voted illegally, took the GOP campaign to intimidate and challenge nonwhite voters to a new level.
Most importantly, Trump’s “election integrity” commission, established in May and dominated by conservatives who have built their careers on promoting voter-fraud myths and ballot restrictions, may set the stage for sweeping new national restrictions on registration and voting. The commission’s de facto head, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, has pushed to require voters in his state to show proof of citizenship just to register.
Advertisement

Another commission member, J. Christian Adams, is the president of a group that has repeatedly threatened legal action against local election officials, typically in jurisdictions dominated by African American or Latino voters, if they don’t purge their voter rolls. That group, the Public Interest Legal Foundation, is just one of several conservative organizations devoted to imposing new restrictions on voters in the name of battling supposed voter fraud—which numerous credible studies have concluded is virtually nonexistent.
The best-funded of these groups (with a budget of $4.6 million in fiscal 2015) is the so-called American Civil Rights Union, which also uses lawsuits as a means to force voter-roll purges in minority-dominated voting jurisdictions. There’s also True the Vote, which announced plans in 2011 to recruit one million citizens to serve as poll watchers in 2012, and which was investigated by the Justice Department following allegations of voter intimidation.
The newest such group on the scene, run by former Trump campaign aides and dubbed Look Ahead America, has announced plans to block “fraudulent” votes by deploying poll watchers carrying video cameras. (The group’s main purpose, its organizers say, is to register new conservative voters.)
They are not on the streets swinging clubs alongside neo-Nazis and white nationalists, and they use legal briefs and positions papers, not violence, to achieve their aims.
The conservatives leading the charge against supposed voter fraud cast themselves as patriots protecting the integrity of the vote. They are not on the streets swinging clubs alongside neo-Nazis and white nationalists, and they use legal briefs and positions papers, not violence, to achieve their aims. But a string of court rulings have found their voter restrictions in Texas, North Carolina, and elsewhere are both unconstitutional and explicitly discriminatory.
Last year, a federal appeals court rejected a package of North Carolina voting laws, enacted in 2013, on the grounds that many of its restrictions targeted African American voters “with almost surgical precision,” a finding upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. The year the omnibus bill was enacted, conservative activist and GOP precinct chairman Don Yelton told The Daily Show that it was “going to kick the Democrats in the butt,” and that if it “hurts a bunch of lazy blacks that want the government to give them everything, so be it.”
Conservatives who champion voting restrictions may not have the same motives as white nationalists, but the outcome of their actions, from the perspective of targeted groups, is the same, says Wendy Weiser, director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice.
“The aims of vote suppression, in fact, reinforce the aims of the white supremacist groups,” says Weiser. “And if folks claim to oppose the white supremacist groups, they should also oppose the agenda of those groups and efforts to undermine African American and minority political power.”
After all, the Klan first arose during Reconstruction to stop blacks from participating in politics—in particular, from voting. Sound familiar?

Please Donate


This is an excerpt of an extensive article  posted in the American Prospect

Justin Miller August 24, 2017

Tax Cuts for the rich. Deregulation for the powerful. Wage suppression for everyone else. These are the tenets of trickle-down economics, the conservatives’ age-old strategy for advantaging the interests of the rich and powerful over those of the middle class and poor. The articles in Trickle-Downers are devoted, first, to exposing and refuting these lies, but equally, to reminding Americans that these claims aren’t made because they are true. Rather, they are made because they are the most effective way elites have found to bully, confuse and intimidate middle- and working-class voters. Trickle-down claims are not real economics. They are negotiating strategies. Here at the Prospect, we hope to help you win that negotiation.

Please Donate


Opinion piece from Colorado sums up the Trump Presidency(?) MA

Opinion: Dyer Times

By Joel Dyer – August 17, 2017

Before I say anything else, I want to thank Heather Heyer for being strong enough, brave enough and committed enough to attend the counter demonstration against the racists in Charlottesville who gathered under the guise of protesting the removal of a Confederate statue last weekend. All of us here at Boulder Weekly are so sorry she was murdered by and because of these people. I’d also like to thank and send our condolences to Susan Bro, Heather’s mother. We can not imagine your loss and pain. Your ability to raise an extraordinary daughter, forgive her killer and even manage to thank the president for his eventual short-lived condemnation of the various racist hate groups responsible for Heather’s death is a powerful lesson for all of us. I for one fear I would not have your strength of heart if I found myself in your current circumstance.
Mostly, I just feel angry and confused. I do not understand how we got here.
Oh I get the frustrated electorate, the disenfranchised workers whose jobs went overseas, the white backlash to the Democratic Party’s disingenuous and divisive use of identity politics, the generally accepted political position that rural America doesn’t matter and the electoral college. I understand how Trump got elected, but I don’t understand how we got here, in the midst of a full-fledged race war with a white nationalist, neo-Nazi, white supremacist sympathizer as the leader of the free world. Make that the leader of the United States because the rest of the free world has nothing but disgust for Donald Trump and does not see him as the leader of anything except the radical racist fringe of American society.
On Tuesday, Aug. 15, I believe we moved past the point of no return. I really do. Trump’s third, and most honest, response to the violence in Charlottesville left no path forward to heal a nation and avoid future violence so long as he remains in office.
Sure it was already going pretty badly: Trump/Russia, North Korea, Venezuela, mass deportations, a White House infested with racist pseudo intellectuals whose defense for everything is “fake news.” But even with that backdrop, the events of the last week crossed a new and irreversible line.
For nearly eight months we have waited for our political system to self-correct. We have waited for establishment Democrats to understand that the protesting crowds in the streets are as angry at them as they are the Republicans. For eight months we have waited for Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Lindsey Graham or any other supposed leader in the Republican Party to acknowledge that Donald Trump is a nearly illiterate, narcissistic, racist, money launderer clearly being influenced by the foreign mobsters and oligarchs who have been propping up his flailing businesses for decades. And for eight months these Republican “leaders” have left him in power in hopes that his pen would eventually sign Republican legislation that would give still more tax breaks to the rich at the expense of the poor before the inevitable impeachment comes.
Sure, some of them have been mildly critical of Trump, but mostly he has been treated as nothing more than a controversial, outside-the-mainstream political figure.
Well that’s not good enough. Not now. Not after he finally showed his true colors. Make that color. White is all that matters to this man. Like his Klan-marching father before him, Donald Trump is a white supremacist and we now know with certainty what he means when he says “make America great again.”
I am a lesser person than Heather Heyer’s mom. I do not accept Donald Trump’s belated, half-hearted condemnation of the racists groups who participated at Charlottesville. He has been encouraging and pushing these same racists towards violence and hatred for many years. Think about it.
As far back as 1973, Trump was sued by the Justice Department for racial discrimination for refusing to rent apartments in one of his developments to African Americans. And then there was his self-funded ad campaign calling for the death of the Central Park five — five young black men who were eventually exonerated of a notorious 1989 rape of a white woman. Even after being found innocent thanks to DNA testing, Trump was still insisting that they were guilty as late as 2016 while running for president, a wink to the racist right in this country that also refused to accept the DNA results. Then there was the “birther” movement. Trump became the most ardent supporter of this conspiracy theory put forward by the racist right, which sought to delegitimize the first black president of our country. In the past two years he has refused to denounce or strategically delayed denouncing the support he has been publically given by figures associated with the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, white nationalists and the alt-right.
When he does denounce their support due to political pressure, he always makes sure they understand his criticism is not real.
Consider his ever-shifting positions on Charlottesville. His initial response to the violence was to blame both the alt-right rally attendees and the counter protestors, without mentioning Heather Heyer’s name or her death, or calling out the KKK and neo-Nazis by name. And when he did finally acknowledge Heyer’s death, he refused to call it an act of terrorism. Then two days later, under extreme pressure from his own party and advisers, Trump finally criticized the KKK and Neo-Nazis as bad people who did a terrible thing. As a result, he was immediately criticized by the likes of Klan leader David Duke who reminded the president via Twitter he was elected by white America. So the very next day, to the astonishment of many in his own administration, Trump reverted to blaming the “alt-left” for the violence in Charlottesville and again claimed that both sides played a role in the tragedy that ensued. His flip-flop obviously worked with his racist base, as evidenced by the immediate praise heaped upon him for his brave honesty by Duke and infamous white supremacist Richard Spencer.
In addition, within hours of his Monday wink-wink criticism of the KKK and neo-Nazis, Trump was busy retweeting the words of a right-wing conspiracy theorist whose crazed theories help fuel the violence and hatred of the radical right. The very same guy who caused an idiot to show up with a semiautomatic rifle to a pizza parlor in 2016 because he thought Hillary Clinton was running a child sex ring out of the restaurant.
And then… then the president of the United States — a man completely embroiled in controversy over his sick lack of compassion and wrong-headed handling of the death of a young, innocent woman who was mowed down by a car driven by a neo-Nazi — retweeted a cartoon of a train with his name on it mowing down and killing a person labeled “CNN.”
This doesn’t anger me because I’m overly sensitive to journalists getting picked on by the president. Nor am I so naive as to believe that the president was just being funny with a mistimed joke — although he has shown himself capable of such stupidity.
I am angry and frustrated because the president of our country is a sick, deranged, racist who must, and I believe will, be removed from office. And if it doesn’t happen really soon, the streets of our country will be filled with far more blood than that of Heather Heyer. Charlottesville is spreading like a cancer and next time the victims are likely to be on both sides… in no small way thanks to the ignorant hate-filled rhetoric of the president. Did I mention he equates Confederate leaders Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee — who tried to destroy the United States in order to preserve slavery — to Thomas Jefferson and George Washington?
There are a lot of people who have to share the blame for the existence of a President Trump. Two-out-of-three white men voted for Trump as did the majority of all white women. Evangelicals overwhelmingly supported Trump, presumably more for his impact on the makeup of the Supreme Court than his sexual assaults on women, support of racism and claim that he has never asked for forgiveness because he has never done anything wrong. And establishment Democrats put forward the only candidate so flawed and unpopular that she could actually lose to Donald Trump, and they had to rig the DNC against her rival just to get her onto the final ballot. There is plenty of blame to go around, but pointing fingers doesn’t help anyone at this point.
Voting for Trump can be forgiven. Washington needed a wake up call, and by golly it was sent. But if you still support Donald Trump after Tuesday, you may need to look in the mirror and consider the hard fact that you may be a racist by way of enabling racism. I don’t like using such a broad brush, but it seems unavoidable when speaking to those who are still supporting this clearly racist president.
This is no time for pride and insecurity. A lot of good people voted for Trump for a variety of reasons that seemed justified at the time. But now it’s time for those who voted for Donald Trump to stop supporting and enabling him.
We do not have a year or two to wait for Special Council Robert Mueller’s investigation to conclude. At this point, such a lengthy timetable is simply irresponsible governing by Republicans. They must be made to understand that their belief that they still have a small window of time to exploit Trump as their useful idiot before he’s removed from office is simply no longer true. The longer they wait, the more blood that will be on their hands.
This is not a political game. Our nation isn’t heading for a cliff that we can suddenly steer away from at the last minute. We have gone over the cliff and are in freefall, and the only parachute that can prevent our deadly impact is the swift removal of Trump from office.
The revolution is underway and it is being televised. With the exception of those who rely solely on Fox News for information, we are all seeing it everyday. From the protests at Standing Rock to the Women’s March to the shooting at a congressional baseball practice in Alexandria to the deadly riots in Charlottesville, the one thing that is crystal clear is this: Time is up on the Trump presidency and things are getting more violent by the day.
Congress has every right to impeach Trump tomorrow based on his obvious incompetence and clear inability to fulfill the duties of the office, which though not specifically written down anywhere, include not dividing the nation by race and starting a civil war by giving support to neo-Nazis, the KKK and alt-right, including the racists he has actually given jobs to in his administration.
Leaving Trump in power — a twisted, self-centered man, willing to do anything to stay in office for even a few more months — will result in more blood in the streets; maybe a nuclear war; the further destruction of our democratic processes byway of the interference from his mobster, oligarch pals from the former Soviet Block; the further and possibly irreversible degradation of the planet via global warming; and possibly a full-scale revolution, including a race war like we have not seen since the 1960s.
All of this can be avoided if just a few hundred elected officials in Washington D.C. can be persuaded to find their spine and think about our country as opposed to their own political fortunes and those of their corporate donors. I have no doubt they will be persuaded sooner rather than later. It’s just a matter of how many more people have to die before they are scared enough to do the right thing. And as for those wealthy corporate donors, in case our elected friends in Washington haven’t noticed, they are already running from this president as if he were the plague because they understand that being associated with him could be the end for their businesses. There is a lesson there for Congress: It’s time to start running.
Remove this president before it’s too late.

Please Donate


It appears that calmer heads need to prevail on what responses are issued surrounding Donald Trump. Personally I have grown tired of covering the idiocies of this administration as the surprises and non surprises will keep coming. What’s left is  proactive information which is true and as honest as possible. MA 

Politics
Bryan Logan, Business Insider 6 hours ago

The intensity of President Donald Trump’s public remarks on controversial issues has ratcheted up alongside the collective indignation media personalities have expressed in response to it.
That’s what former Breitbart editor Ben Shapiro asserted in a CNN interview on Wednesday night.
“One thing Trump has benefited from, is that the left is constantly reacting to everything he says with an enormous level of passion and I think that’s actually a negative,” Shapiro told CNN host Don Lemon.
Shapiro was speaking about the reaction within left-leaning media circles that followed Trump’s freewheeling rally in Phoenix, Arizona, a day earlier, where Trump reiterated his remarks about a deadly white nationalist protest that erupted in Charlottesville, Virginia, earlier this month.
While conservative media largely applauded Trump’s remarks on Tuesday night, some commentators on left-leaning media outlets called the president’s behavior “unhinged,” a “disaster,” and “downright scary and disturbing.”
Trump began his remarks by reading from a script, before he lashed out at the journalists and news outlets that covered him. After the Arizona rally, some commentators questioned Trump’s fitness for office and his mental health.
Shapiro argued that liberal media tends to take an emotional stance on Trump when the president goes off the rails.
“Instead of doing objective analysis of where he was not telling the truth, they jumped to extraordinary critiques of his mental health and talking about how he was crazy and how he was morally bereft,” Shapiro said of Trump.
“All that does is it plays to his crowd. His crowd thinks that the media is out to get him. His crowd thinks that the media have a particular emotional animus for him, personally.”
Shapiro pointed to Lemon’s own Tuesday-night response to Trump as an example.
Lemon defended his choice to take a position on Trump’s fiery remarks at the Phoenix rally, but insisted that having a point of view is not the same as being biased, or harboring personal hostility toward Trump.
Shapiro responded to that assertion: “Whether it’s true or not, that’s the way a lot of his followers are going to take it.”

Please Donate

%d bloggers like this: