Many of you, like me, feel the BERN, and some of you, I’m sorry to say, are becoming frustrated, because  Hillary’s ever increasing delegate lead makes her the most likely nominee.  Please don’t be frustrated, and please don’t give up.  Please do everything you can for Bernie, short of trashing Hillary.  Lets leave intra-party filth-slinging to the Republicans.  It suits them so well.  Keeping-on is not a wasted effort, because, either way, Bernie matters!

As he has been for most of the past year, Bernie Sanders is on the road. On Thursday, he was scheduled to hold a town-hall meeting at the Twin Arrows Casino, east of Flagstaff, Arizona. You read that right: the seventy-four-year-old Vermont senator was set to issue his trademark call for a “political revolution” and to demand more income and wealth redistribution at a capitalist mecca in one of the most conservative states in the Union.

That, in itself, says something about Sanders and the historical significance of his campaign. He has cast aside many of the rules and adages of American politics, one of which is that it’s hard for liberals, never mind self-described socialists, to win support in the Sun Belt. And although Sanders now seems unlikely to win the Democratic nomination for President, he has achieved much more than that.

In reaching out to the young, the idealistic, and the disillusioned, he has earned far more votes than virtually anybody in the Democratic Party (or the punditry) expected. He has expanded the political space, bringing controversial issues like rising inequality and political corruption, which had previously been considered the province of leftists and policy wonks, into their rightful place at the center of the discussion. And by refusing to accept corporate money and basing his campaign on individual donations, he has reinvigorated American democracy.

It is obvious that Sanders has, in the process, put a scare into Hillary Clinton’s campaign. What is perhaps less widely acknowledged is how close he came to upending it…

…But it is also evident that, in the past ten months, Sanders has defied the pundits, alarmed the comfortable, and inspired the young. He has turned what looked to be a political coronation into a lively and hard-fought contest, forcing his opponent to modify her positions and raise her game. He has demonstrated that Presidential campaigns don’t have to be beholden to big donors. And he has shown that, surprisingly enough, there is still a place in American politics for an independent-minded speaker of uncomfortable truths. What’s more, he isn’t done yet.  [emphasis added]

Inserted from <The New Yorker>

Hang in there!!  You are imitating Star Trek by going where no one has gone before.  Your efforts for Bernie now are paving the way for an Elizabeth Warren in 2024, and a Jeff Merkley in 2032.

However, it is also possible for all your hard work and generous giving to go for naught.  The next President will appoint two, or probably three, Supreme Court Justices,  A Republican would give us a count of 7-2 in favor of SCROTUS (Republican Constitutional VD).  Elections would become strictly ceremonial, because Republicans would determine who is allowed to vote.  A Republican President would cause the US to devolve into a permanent Republican Reich.  Therefore, whichever Democrat wins the nomination, we mist vigorously support that Democrat, while we remain thankful to Bernie for putting and keeping progressive ideals on the table.

For the first time, since he began murdering and maiming the residents of Flint, Sturmbannführer Rick Snyder (R-MI) testilied [sp. intentional] before Congress.  Even though it is well documented that Snyder’s aids knew the water was poisonous before hew switched the water supply to the Flint River, Snyder claimed ignorance until just recently.  It should come as no surprise that Congressional Republicans defended him.  I suspect that some were envious enough that he got to kill and injure blacks, that they want to help him get away with it, as there is certainly no valid justification for defending him.

The good news for Flint, Mich., residents who attended the third and final House Oversight Committee hearing on their town’s water crisis was that Republican Gov. Rick Snyder and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy were both castigated on a public stage.

The bad news: The hearing was as divided as ever, with Democrats almost exclusively focusing their ire on Snyder, and Republicans going so far as to praise him. During three hearings on Flint over February and March, only three individual members of Congress have broken partisan ranks in the blame game.

At Thursday’s hearing, Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) called on McCarthy to resign, while ranking member Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) called on Snyder to resign.

All three hearings in the committee have been partisan tugs-of-war over whether to focus on Snyder’s shortcomings (Democrats’ preference) or the EPA’s (Republicans’ preference). Chaffetz has noted multiple times that Congress has jurisdiction over EPA’s funding, not over Michigan’s state government. Hence, Republicans feel that EPA is the appropriate target.

On Thursday, three Republicans not only defended Snyder, but praised him.

“You’ve accepted far more blame for this problem than you deserve,” Rep. John Duncan (R-Tenn.) told Snyder, adding that Flint’s economic problems date back “long before you took office.”… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Morning Consult>

Perhaps McCarthy could have done more to push the issue. such as declaring a federal emergency in Flint sooner than she did, but the truth is that Snyder’s she did inform Snyder’s aides on multiple occasions, and they hindered the EPA’s ability to stop the crisis.  Shifting blame to her, is just a smoke screen.

Rachel Maddow covered the story quite well.

An article in Mother Jones has several more video excerpts.

Herr Snyder is using a “poor me” stance, saying that he will have to live with the deaths and disabilities for the rest of his life.  I know authentic remorse, when I see it from my volunteer work with prisoners, and Snyder was just trying to evoke pity.  If his remorse was authentic, he would be spending the State’s money on his victims, not on his own civil and criminal defense.  If his remorse was authentic, he would resign.  For now he should be charged, tried, convicted, and imprisoned.  And every Republican that has praised and defended his crimes should join the ranks of the unemployed in November.

Every Republican in Office

Is One Republican Too Many!!!

President Barack Obama has nominated Merrick Garland to take the place of deceased and descended Antonin “Sturmbannführer” Scalia.  I’ll need more time to research, before I can offer an opinion oh his choice, but I can tell you this:  Garland would be an improvement over Scalia, because it would be virtually impossible to be as bad.  I can also tell you that he deserves a fair vote, whether I like him or not.  Needless to say Republicans are apoplectic.

President Obama on Wednesday nominated Merrick Garland to serve on the Supreme Court, setting up a protracted political fight with Republicans who have vowed to block any candidate picked by Obama in his final year in office.

Garland, 63, is a longtime Washington lawyer and jurist who is chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Considered a moderate, Garland is widely respected in the D.C. legal community and was also a finalist for the first two Supreme Court vacancies Obama filled.

In announcing his choice in the White House Rose Garden, Obama said he followed “a rigorous and comprehensive process” and that he reached out to members of both parties, legal associations and advocacy groups to gauge opinions from “across the spectrum.”

He said Garland “is widely recognized not only as one of America’s sharpest legal minds, but someone who brings to his work a spirit of decency, modesty, integrity, even-handedness and excellence.” …

Inserted from <Washington Post>

Here’s a clip of the announcement.

Bought Bitch Mitch (R-KY) has reaffirmed that Garland will not get a vote.  Snake in the Grassley (R-IA) has reaffirmed that Garland will not get a Judiciary Committee hearing.  All of the sitting Republicans who previously voted for Garland, when he was confirmed to the DC Circuit now oppose giving him a vote.  Here are some of the statements Republicans made about Garland then, in 1992.

…

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

“Merrick B. Garland is highly qualified to sit on the D.C. circuit. His intelligence and his scholarship cannot be questioned… His legal experience is equally impressive… Accordingly, I believe Mr. Garland is a fine nominee. I know him personally, I know of his integrity, I know of his legal ability, I know of his honesty, I know of his acumen, and he belongs on the court. I believe he is not only a fine nominee, but is as good as Republicans can expect from this administration. In fact, I would place him at the top of the list.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)

“I have nothing against the nominee. Mr. Garland seems to be well qualified and would probably make a good judge — in some other court.”

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)

“He has a high position with the Department of Justice and, by all accounts, does a good job there. There will be a number of judgeship vacancies in the D.C. trial judges. He has been a trial lawyer. He would be a good person to fill one of those. I would feel comfortable supporting him for another judgeship.”

Then-Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ)

“I believe Mr. Garland is well qualified for the court of appeals. He earned degrees from Harvard College and Harvard Law School and clerked for Judge Friendly on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and for Justice Brennan on the Supreme Court and, since 1993, he has worked for the Department of Justice. So there is no question, he is qualified to serve on the court.”

Then-Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC)

“I have no reservations about Mr. Garland’s qualifications or character to serve in this capacity. He had an excellent academic record at both Harvard College and Harvard Law School before serving as a law clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. Also, he has served in distinguished positions in private law practice and with the Department of Justice. Moreover, I have no doubt that Mr. Garland is a man of character and integrity.”

Then-Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT)

“[T]he nominee has the character and is highly qualified for the position.”

…

Inserted from <Think Progress>

Whether or not Garland is qualified has nothing to do with this seditious attempt by Republicans to block his nomination.  They are hoping they can find a way to steal the Presidency and make the appointment themselves.  Now, I have to admit that a Republican President’s appointment could not be much worse than Scalia, even an appointment by Trump or Cruz.  However consider this.  The next President will appoint the replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

I consider it highly unlikely that Garland will be confirmed.  Republicans may try to save face by going through some of the motions, but they will only be stalling for time.  Therefore, it is imperative that the next occupant of the White House be a Democrat.  I know that many of you aren't very keen on Hillary, but if she is nominated, it is imperative to work as hard for her as we would for Bernie.  Do you question that?

Do you want Trump to replace Ginsburg?