It has been a fairly relaxing day, although most of it has been spent at the computer working on Friday's and Saturday's articles. That means tonnes of reading and other research. Tomorrow I have physio, closely followed by teaching ESL so time is short. Thanks to Lona for the supply of cat naps to which I avail myself from time to time.
Puzzle — Today’s took me 3:24 (average 5:23). To do it, click here. How did you do? For those that don't know, we always do the 48 piece classic.
Upworthy — h/t JL — Cats. We love them, but do they love us? We may never know. But there's one thing we know … cats hate patriarchy.
If you've ever tried to make a cat live up to your expectations of cat behavior, you probably already know this. They despise ALL systems of unequal power and expectations. Cats are over patriarchy.
Of course cats are so over patriarchy! Check it out. They are fully into catriarchy!
The New Yorker — After the stunning ISIS blitz in June, 2014, that captured tremendous territory in Syria and Iraq, Washington employed a so-called “Iraq First” strategy. The U.S.-led coalition committed to using air power to contain ISIS in Syria but gave preference to restoring Iraqi sovereignty. Priorities are now shifting, as Syria’s war spreads across continents. The United States would like to replicate the success of the Iran nuclear deal to press for coöperation among China, Russia, Iran, and the European powers, while also enlisting Turkey and the Arab countries that are heavily invested in Syria’s future. At the U.N., on Wednesday, Kerry warned Russia against striking targets beyond ISIS or Al Qaeda’s local affiliate. But, Kerry told the Security Council, “The United States supports any genuine effort to fight ISIL and Al Qaeda affiliated groups, especially Al Nusra.” If Russia has a “genuine commitment” to defeat ISIS, he said, “we welcome that effort” and will work to “deconflict” the respective American and Russian air campaigns in Syria. The bigger question is whether Iran’s interest in coöperation was maxed out with the nuclear deal—or whether old enemies could become unlikely partners in determining Syria’s future.
As said in The Nation "Similarly, each of Kissinger’s Middle East initiatives has been disastrous in the long run. Just think about them from the vantage point of 2015: … emboldening Pakistan’s intelligence service, nurturing Islamic fundamentalism, playing Iran and the Kurds off against Iraq, and then Iraq and Iran off against the Kurds, and committing Washington to defending Israel’s occupation of Arab lands."
Will Iran coöperate on Syria? It is hard to say. Russia is backing Assad and bombing Syrian rebel forces which also include ISIS fighters. As well, Russia has supplied weapons and materiel to Iran. But the US has nurtured Islamic fundamentalism which it now wants to defeat. It seems that the various countries are doing what is right for them while ignoring the people of Syria.
Huffington Post — Ray Halbritter, representative of the Oneida Indian Nation and an occasional Huffington Post blogger, says that instead, Snyder and other supporters of these names and mascots are denying Native Americans a simple request to be seen as equals in the eyes of their non-Native peers.
"They're so desensitized, they think Indian people are not real people; our children and our concerns are not real to them," Halbritter told HuffPost last year. "They don't think [the debate] is even real, they don't even think it's even worth bringing up or talking about. We're not human beings, we're not even part of humanity. And that's the problem. They think of us as just something to entertain them, or mascots — relics out of a museum."
Jeb: “But again, I don’t think politicians ought to be having any say about that, to be honest with you. I don’t find it offensive. Native American tribes generally don’t find it offensive.”
Ah, rich white privilege at it's finest with a rich white male Republican at the helm! Bush is reprehensible (I wanted to use some other nouns and adjectives but thought better of it since this is TC's blog) as is Snyder. I wonder where Jeb obtained his information about what Native American tribes find offensive, or not?
My Universe — I could not resist sharing this video with you. I don't know if it's just flip-flops that engenders this reaction or more. My cats like to use my shoes for sleeping on when they're not on the bed. Enjoy!
I have been a student of history for many years, so when I came across this article in The Nation, I wanted to share it with you. I remember many of the events and details enumerated, but the author puts them in context and shows the progression to today's US foreign policy in the Middle East.
We’re still paying the price of Henry Kissinger’s “grand strategies.”
The only person Henry Kissinger flattered more than President Richard Nixon was Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the shah of Iran. In the early 1970s, the shah, sitting atop an enormous reserve of increasingly expensive oil and a key figure in Nixon and Kissinger’s move into the Middle East, wanted to be dealt with as a serious person. He expected his country to be treated with the same respect Washington showed other key Cold War allies like West Germany and Great Britain. As Nixon’s national security adviser and, after 1973, secretary of state, Kissinger’s job was to pump up the shah, to make him feel like he truly was the “king of kings.”
Less well known is the way in which Kissinger’s policies toward Iran and Saudi Arabia accelerated the radicalization in the region, how step by catastrophic step he laid the groundwork for the region’s spiraling crises of the present moment. …
What the shah wanted most of all were weapons of every variety—and American military trainers, and a navy, and an air force. It was Kissinger who overrode State Department and Pentagon objections and gave the shah what no other country had: the ability to buy anything he wanted from US weapons makers.
“We are looking for a navy,” the shah told Kissinger in 1973, “we have a large shopping list.” And so Kissinger let him buy a navy.
By 1976, Kissinger’s last full year in office, Iran had become the largest purchaser of American weaponry and housed the largest contingent of US military advisers anywhere on the planet. By 1977, the historian Ervand Abrahamian notes, “the shah had the largest navy in the Persian Gulf, the largest air force in Western Asia, and the fifth-largest army in the whole world.” That meant, just to begin a list, thousands of modern tanks, hundreds of helicopters, F-4 and F-5 fighter jets, dozens of hovercraft, long-range artillery pieces, and Maverick missiles. The next year, the shah bought another $12 billion worth of equipment.
After Kissinger left office, the special relationship he had worked so hard to establish blew up with the Iranian Revolution of 1979, the flight of the shah, the coming to power of Ayatollah Khomeini, and the taking of the US Embassy in Tehran (and its occupants as hostages) by student protesters.
Read the rest of this very interesting, albeit long article. It certainly casts a brighter light on US foreign policy in the Middle East.
Pope Francis has just concluded his first visit to the United States. I am sure that the analysis will go on for weeks as American politicians and pundits try to grapple with, in my opinion, the admonitions of this Pope.
On climate change: "…to avert the most serious effects of the environmental deterioration caused by human activity. I am convinced that we can make a difference and I have no doubt that the United States—and this Congress—have an important role to play. …"
From Alternet: In response to a question during an interview,
"[Robert F Jr] Kennedy replied, “The public and press and corporate America begin recognizing that this is a moral imperative, that we can no longer lie to each other and lie to the public about global warming, that that’s a sin. A sin is an injury to a relationship, an injury to another person, and we are injuring whole generations of humanity as well as the rest of God’s creation. We need to start looking at it that way rather than looking at it as a political battle, or Republicans vs. Democrats, we have to understand that this is a moral issue.”
Kennedy is a Catholic so he speaks in somewhat religious terms but he is absolutely right in my opinion. Climate change IS a moral issue, and a moral issue is not necessarily a religious issue. Likewise, a moral issue is not a political issue, but in the US, and elsewhere, politicians, our elected representatives, must embrace climate change and find workable comprehensive strategies to save the planet, future generations, animals etc. Rape is morally wrong, yet that is what we are doing to the planet.
On abolishing the death penalty: "…every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes. …a just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation."
From The Nation "… Harry Blackmun, wrote in 1994 that he would no longer “tinker with the machinery of death.” And in 2008, John Paul Stevens wrote that his review of hundreds of cases had persuaded him that the penalty is both profoundly unworkable and unconstitutional.
What has Breyer learned to put him in such company? Plenty. In his dissent, he argued that the death penalty is seriously unreliable and arbitrary in application; he believes the long delays undermine its penological purpose; and he is convinced that we have executed the innocent."
I do not agree with capital punishment, which in my opinion is state sponsored murder. Look at the costs outlined in The Nation article: $3 million average cost to execute a death row prisoner versus $1.1 million to keep a prisoner incarcerated for life. Too many prosecutors amp up their conviction rates for political and career gain. And as Justice Breyer related "…we have executed the innocent." Once a person is executed, there is no going back, guilty or innocent.
On abortion: "The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development." (This was his only direct reference to abortion in the speech.)
"Francis talks of the “responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage” but then instead of continuing on to talk about the need to end abortion, he pivots to the death penalty."
When I think about the intersection of various issues, how can a society endorse the death penalty but take a very staunch conservative stance on banning abortion, even in the direst of circumstances like rape, incest or the imperiled life of the mother? To take the intersection further, how can a society then ignore children living in dire poverty where there is not enough food and social assistance (SNAP benefits) are cut back? I could link other things in like a living wage, but I think you get my point.
On same-sex marriage: The closest he came to addressing same-sex marriage was in a passage about the importance of family. "I cannot hide my concern for the family, which is threatened, …"
What is FAMILY anyway? Wikipedia defines family as follows:
"In the context of human society, a family (from Latin: familia) is a group of people affiliated by consanguinity (by recognized birth), affinity (by marriage), or co-residence and/or shared consumption (see Nurture kinship). "
Family is about commitment, love and nurture. There is no reference to the absolute imperative of "one man and one women" as conservatives espouse. The saying that "it takes a village to raise a child" is so true. But in the cloistered hall of St. Charles Borromeo Seminary, Francis did say more. Read more at Huffington Post.
On Iran and Cuba: "…This has required, and requires, courage and daring, which is not the same as irresponsibility. A good political leader is one who, with the interests of all in mind, seizes the moment in a spirit of openness and pragmatism. A good political leader always opts to initiate processes rather than possessing spaces."
Both sides, however, acknowledge that normal diplomatic relations have created a new framework for engagement—and a bilateral mechanism to conduct a dialogue about the issues that will need to be resolved before relations are fully normalized. …
From Alternet — The last American that the Pope named, the theologian Thomas Merton, was cited as a direct call on Congress stop partisan bickering and start showing constructive results. He called Merton “a man of dialogue and promoter of peace for people and religions” and then reminded Congress what statesmanship consisted of.
With regard to Cuba, Republicans are caught in the McCarthy era looking for communist boogiemen behind every door. But I also think that Republicans don't like having a defiant yet small nation just 90 miles off its shore.
As to Iran, in the 20th century, it was a large producer of oil and natural gas. There was heavy foreign investment in the oil and gas industry. But then in 1951, the new prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, nationalised all oil and gas works including US operations. In 1953, the US and Britain engineered a coup d'état taking back their oil and gas interests. But the nationist Islamic revolution of 1979 put Iran back in control. Is it any wonder then that such emnity should exist?Republicans however, hawks that they are, will never give up that which they think was theirs, but never was theirs. And Iran is not going to give up their sovreignty.
On the refugee crisis: "Our world is facing a refugee crisis of a magnitude not seen since the Second World War. … thousands of persons are led to travel north in search of a better life for themselves and for their loved ones, in search of greater opportunities. Is this not what we want for our own children? …"
Much like today's refugees, many of our ancestors from the 17th and 18th centuries were refugees fleeing religious persecution in Europe. Others were political refugees. Why do we balk at providing the same opportunities that we received?
On immigration: "We, the people of this continent, are not fearful of foreigners, because most of us were once foreigners. … Building a nation calls us to recognize that we must constantly relate to others, rejecting a mindset of hostility in order to adopt one of reciprocal solidarity, in a constant effort to do our best. …"
"Francis is clearly reminding his audience that the United States is part of a larger whole — one America in the Americas, where immigration is a deeply rooted part of history. He offers guidance on how to respond to the world's latest migrant crisis, urging lawmakers to treat migrants “with the same passion and compassion with which we want to be treated."
In his article in The Nation, George Zornick commented:
He continued: “We need to avoid a common temptation nowadays: to discard whatever proves troublesome. Let us remember the Golden Rule: ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’”
We should not have a muticultural society … America has done immigration so much better than the other countries because it's a set of values that people share, that defines our national identity—not race or ethnicity or where you come from. And when you create pockets of isolation—and in some cases, the assimilation process has been retarded because they slowed down—it's wrong … So I think across the board, education, English—being able to speak English—a common language is important. We need to get back to that. We're creeping toward multiculturalism and that's the wrong approach.
The Pope would be apalled at this xenophobic attitudes towards immigrants.
Lucia, who is my ESL student, fled Sudan with her husband because of the civil war. She fled to Uganda where she lived in poverty for about 8 years. During those 8 years, she gave birth to her oldest 2 children. There were unspeakable crimes committed against her and her family. They escaped Uganda and came to Canada. Here she has been welcomed and supported by myself and other members of my church. ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’
On poverty: "I would encourage you to keep in mind all those people around us who are trapped in a cycle of poverty. They too need to be given hope. The fight against poverty and hunger must be fought constantly and on many fronts, especially in its causes. …"
A petition at Daily Kos says (follow the link to sign):
Government programs that feed the hungry and heal the sick must struggle for funding, while billions of our tax dollars are still being sent to Big Oil in the form of tax subsidies and other special interest giveaways.
Now, we need to send Congress a message about the social spending we need and the corporate handouts we don’t.
Getting the Republican dominated Congress to stand by programmes such as SNAP, social security, Medicare/Medicaid, a living wage and more is like asking the sun to go away or the stars not to shine in the night sky. But all must continue to push and push hard for a more compassionate society.
On the arms trade: "Being at the service of dialogue and peace also means being truly determined to minimize and, in the long term, to end the many armed conflicts throughout our world. Here we have to ask ourselves: Why are deadly weapons being sold to those who plan to inflict untold suffering on individuals and society? …"
There can only be one answer to this question: GREED! Think of the NRA. Why does it push the 2nd amendment right to bear arms? Surely, with the numbers of deaths caused by guns in the US, it would back off. But it is ostensibly "owned and operated" by the weapons manufacturers who are in business to earn profits. How do you change this without changing the mindset of a nation?
On religious fundamentalism: "We know that no religion is immune from forms of individual delusion or ideological extremism. … But there is another temptation which we must especially guard against: the simplistic reductionism which sees only good or evil; or, if you will, the righteous and sinners."
All fundamentalism, whether Christian, Judaic, Islamic or any other religion or rite such as atheism, leads to the exclusion and marginalisation of many. As the Pope says, fundalmentalism is "the simplistic reductionism which sees only good or evil; or, if you will, the righteous and sinners." I doubt few of us, no matter what religion would see ourselves in such black and white terms. We also see this in the way that the right wing Christians in the US refer to the country as having been established as a Christian nation. Republican presidential candidate said that he had no problem with a Muslim becoming POTUS providing he recanted Islam, became a Christian, and took the oath of office on a bible. That is closeminded fundamentalism.
After the stresses of the last few days, I am feeling quite tired. Tomorrow is a grocery delivery day, and I have some extra cleaning to do for that.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today's took me 3:21 (average 4:37). To do it, click here. How did you do?
From The New Yorker: They don’t pay taxes. They circumvent our laws. They get free stuff from the government. They are America’s billionaires, and many would like to see them gone.
According to a new survey by the University of Minnesota’s Opinion Research Institute, the American people hold the nation’s billionaires in lower esteem than ever before, and a majority would like to see new laws enacted to deport them.
“They come here, take thousands of our jobs, and export them overseas,” one respondent said, in an opinion echoed by many others in the survey.
“They are part of a shadow economy that sucks billions of dollars out of the United States every year and puts it in Switzerland and the Caymans,” another said.
Images of hedge-fund managers arriving via helicopter in the Hamptons this summer have only reinforced the impression that authorities have turned a blind eye to their movements.
“Many of these people should be in prison, and the government is looking the other way,” one respondent said.
Stirring even more controversy is the billionaires’ practice of having babies in the United States and using the nation’s porous estate-tax laws to pass down untold wealth to the next generation.
“They should leave and take their children with them,” one respondent said.
At times, Andy makes a brilliant suggestion. This is one of those times. Lets start with the nevermind brothers.
A day after Jimmy Carter appeared on national television to talk about the cancer that's ravaging his body, Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz criticized the former president's administration in a speech in Iowa.
"I think where we are today is very, very much like the late 1970s," the senator from Texas said on the Des Moines Register's political soapbox stage at the Iowa State Fair.
"I think the parallels between this administration and the Carter administration are uncanny: same failed domestic policies, same misery, stagnation and malaise, same feckless and naïve foreign policy," Cruz said. "In fact, the exact same countries—Russia and Iran—openly laughing and mocking at the president of the United States."
Uranus Inspector could not be further from the truth. The real similarities are that Carter and Obama both are decent men, doing their best, and were sabotaged by Republicans. Republicans even made a secret deal with Iran, giving them better terms on the hostage release, in return for KEEPING OUR HOSTAGE CITIZENS CAPTIVE, so they could win the election. I think that covering up proof of which individuals committed this treason is one of the reasons that Republicans oppose the Iran deal now.
From MoveOn: If you have friends who’ve been tricked, duped, or bamboozled by the war lobby into opposing the Iran nuclear deal, share this new ad with them from our friends at Americans United for Change:
Please click through to share this wherever you can.
It’s another very hot very humid day. After today, we should get two temperate days, before the 90°+ weather returns on Saturday. Yesterday afternoon, I learned that my friend with cancer was in recovery, after a successful mastectomy. I feel quite relieved about that. Store to Door delivered groceries early. I have them put away. Now, if I can just stay conscious until after my articles are up and out, it’s A/C hunker time again.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today’s took me 2:21 (average 4:24). To do it, click here. How did you do?
On the evening of August 6th, when the news broke that Senator Charles Schumer would vote against the Iran accord, the Democratic Senate leader, Harry Reid, was as stunned as the rest of his caucus. The two men are close friends. When Reid became the leader, in 2005, Schumer was a backbencher, who mused about running for governor of New York. Reid took an interest in him, came to rely on both his fund-raising prowess with Wall Street and his counsel on a range of matters, and always advised his ambitious protégé, “Be patient, be patient.” Last March, when Reid announced that he would retire at the end of 2016, he endorsed Schumer to succeed him and announced that another contender, Richard Durbin, the Democratic whip (and Schumer’s former roommate), would stand down. For those progressives who questioned whether Schumer should be leader, Reid said that Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders would keep the caucus honest. Now, because of Schumer’s position as presumptive leader, Reid felt that Schumer should have informed him of his decision on the Iran deal, given its importance, according to a Senate aide. Still, when a White House official called Reid that night to ask if he would announce his support of the deal to counter Schumer’s opposition, Reid refused, saying he wasn’t ready, a close associate said. (A spokesman for Senator Reid later issued a statement denying that Reid was surprised by Schumer’s announcement. “Their relationship is as close as ever. On Iran, Senator Reid respects the decision of conscience Senator Schumer made and he did not raise concerns with the announcement or the timing.”)*
More than a week has passed, and Reid still wonders why Schumer decided to announce his opposition when he did. Schumer was the first Democratic senator to oppose the deal. And it was his timing, perhaps even more than the substance of his decision, that has upset his pro-deal colleagues and, most unmistakably, the White House. Josh Earnest, the President’s press secretary, said he wouldn’t be surprised if some members of the Senate Democratic caucus “consider the voting record of those who say they would like to lead the caucus,” and he went on to liken Schumer’s decision to oppose the Iran deal to his support for the Iraq War, in 2003. It always seemed implausible that Schumer—an AIPAC stalwart who boasted that he is Benjamin Netanyahu’s best friend on Capitol Hill—would oppose AIPAC and Netanyahu on a deal they both claim is an existential threat to Israel. (I have written about AIPAC’s influence on politicians for the magazine.) “Chuck was always among the least likely Democrats to support the deal,” a longtime close friend of Schumer’s told me. And, after Schumer’s announcement, Durbin said, “I always expected him to be against the agreement.”…
Click through for the rest of this highly informative piece. If your Senator(s) are Democrats, call them regularly to tell them to strip this Bankster-bought traitor of any and all party leadership positions.
From NY Times: Russians are experiencing the first sustained decline in living standards in the 15 years since President Vladimir V. Putin [R-RU] came to power. The ruble has fallen by half against the dollar, driven by the plunging price of oil, the lifeblood of Russia’s economy. As a result, prices of imported goods have shot up, making tea, instant coffee, children’s clothes and back-to-school backpacks suddenly, jarringly expensive.
The Russian people are learning first hand the steep price they have to pay for putting a Republican in charge of their nation.
From Alternet: Ann Coulter knows who she wants to be the Democratic nominee for president, and who that person is, well, it may surprise you.
She wants Hillary Clinton to be the nominee, and thinks that if Bernie gets the nod, he’ll beat whoever the Republicans come up with to run against him.
You won’t hear me say this often, but Ann Coulter is right.
If Bernie Sanders ends up being the Democratic nominee for president, and it looks more and more every day like he will be, his Republican opponent is going to have a very hard time beating him.
And that’s because of all the Democratic candidates running, Bernie Sanders has the best chance of capturing Republican votes.
I’ve seen how Bernie does this, up close and personal.
Despite its reputation as a place filled with liberal hippies, Vermont, like most of rural northern New England, is home to a lot of conservatives.
Anyone running for statewide office there needs to win these conservatives’ votes, and Bernie is great at doing that.
As much as I’d like to echo this author’s optimism, northern NH Republicans are more like the old time back woods Republicans that were somewhat progressive in their views and opposed to the old time Dixiecrats, that now hold the Republican Party in thrall. To get lots of Republican support, nationwide, Bernie would have to convince a lot of willfully ignorant voters, too lazy to want to learn, not to be afraid of media-hyped "Socialism". That’s a tall order, not because Bernie lacks skill, but because he would be trying to plow a swamp.
It’s official. The NWS has issued an excessive heat warning for Portland through Wednesday evening. It’s a good thing I rescheduled those medical appointment, because I accidentally avoided the surprise heat wave. On the other hand, I’m sure I rescheduled them to coincide with the next surprise heat wave. ARGH!! I slept most of the evening, so I was up moist of the night. I’ll need to hunker down under the A/C soon, but I have a ton of volunteer work to get done.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today’s took me 2:20 (average 4:40). To do it. click here. How did you do?
From Daily Kos: Living with a cat for the first time, you quickly pick up on its behavioral quirks, many of which are common among other cats. What you soon find out is that cats aren’t Republican. Here are 12 reasons why not:
1. Cats are curious about what you do in your bedroom, but they don’t try to legislate away your freedom to do it.
2. Cats may take away your cushion, but they’ll give it back to you with a gentle push.
3. Cats give you attention and sympathy when you’re sick.
4. Females are treated with importance in the cat world.
5. Cats make use of solar power, often all day long.
6. Cats lick their own problems and take care of other cats too.
What purrrrfect logic! I shared six reasons. Click through for the other six.
From TPM: As we move closer to next month’s vote on the Iran nuclear deal, I wanted to note some parts of the story that are not getting sufficient attention in the mainstream press. Even in Israel, where the the P5+1 deal is quite unpopular, there is increasing concern, at least among elites, at just how far Benjamin Netanyahu is willing to go in damaging US-Israel ties in his war against the Obama administration over the Iran deal. As JJ Goldberg aptly puts it, the campaign of incitement and maliciously phony charges of anti-Semitism against the White House are "effectively turning American Jews into Netanyahu’s cannon fodder" in war against Obama.
As Goldberg notes, charges that the President is a crypto-Muslim or an anti-Semite have remained until now at the very fringes of American political discourse. But as the anti-deal forces have struggled to make their case on the merits, they have now resorted to pulling the anti-Semitism canard deep into the mainstream, with almost comically tendentious claims that the President is "dog whistling" or Jew-baiting in his campaign to win support for the deal in Congress.
The big irony here is that the same Republican Supply-side pseudo-Christians, who are screaming anti-Semitism loudest, are campaigning to bring about the "end times". They preach that 144,000 Jewish witnesses, 12,000 from each tribe, will be saved. Other that those, they preach that all Jews, everywhere, that had not converted to follow Republican Supply-side Jesus, prior to the big-poof, will become crispy critters! It speaks volumes that “Butcher Bibi” (R-IS) is willing to ally himself with these Dominionist Republican hypocrites.
From Crooks ands Liars: [Jeb Bush keeps forgetting] That outside the wingnut bubble (and outside the Beltway Media bubble that enfolds it) not everyone has agreed to go along with the fairy tale that history began on January 20, 2009.
Kudos to Rachel! Believe it or not, I made today’s cartoon several hours before seeing this. With Strike Three having advisors like "Any Lie for War" Wolfowitz, I think I’m spot on!
I’m still recovering from the barf bath I had to take, while covering the Criminal Clowns. The forecast has already changed for the next few days. While 80°s weather is not a heat wave, it’s not the more comfortable 70°s weather I was expecting. I want to catch up on rest this weekend, because Tuesday is a volunteer day in prison.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today’s took me 3:01 (average 5:48). To do it, click here. How did you do?
Opponents are pouring millions into television and print ads attacking the agreement. Right-wing media have blasted the deal with extreme vitriol, doing everything they can to drown out the facts. But J Street is leading the fight to make sure that the voices of responsible journalists, leaders, and experts that support the deal are being heard loud and clear.
J Street is the organization for American Jews that represents their real interests and not the interests of the Republican Supply-side pseudo-Christian war mongers that control AIPAC. They have two more excellent video clips on the page. Click Through.
From The New Yorker: The billionaire Donald Trump shocked the American people Thursday night by proving to be considerably more heinous than they had previously thought, an instant poll taken after the debate shows.
According to the poll, viewers who went into tonight’s debate thinking that Trump was one of the most horrible people that they had ever seen were still totally unprepared for the depths of awfulness he displayed during the televised contest.
When presented with the descriptors “loathsome,” “appalling,” and “monstrous,” viewers who witnessed Trump’s interaction with Fox News’s Megyn Kelly said that none of those words did justice to how odious Trump was.
OK, Andy, if you say so. But isn’t saying that Hairball is more heinous than previously thought a lot like saying that the Pope is more Catholic than previously thought?
From Daily Kos: John Kasich sure has a convenient memory. Asked about how he’d respond to Hillary Clinton’s presumptive attacks, Kasich mentioned his father was a mailman (drink!), then digressed to talking about balanced budgets:
I was the chairman of the budget committee and the lead architect the last time it happened in Washington, and when we did it, we had great economic growth, we cut taxes, and we had a big surplus.
Oh yeah, mofo? You know what else led to that balanced budget in the late 1990s? Bill Clinton’s tax hikes in 1993, which Republicans absolutely howled would destroy this country. Of course they were wrong, and they helped usher in an unprecedented era of growth and prosperity.
John "KKK" Kasich doesn’t like the kind of prosperity that benefits the 99%, and for him to try to take credit for Clinton’s budget surplus is an absurd Republican lie.