Politics Plus

Well I think I have turned the corner with this flu/cold.  I have done more sleeping today which has put me behind, but that is better than feeling crappy.  I may go to physiotherapy tomorrow but it will only be for traction, no exercise as such as I still feel weak.  As I sit here, I can hear two of my cats snoring . . . damn it sounds like a freight train rattling through the house.  Thanks to Nameless for doing yesterday's Open Thread, and to Judi and Joanne for their maiden voyages.

Puzzle — Today’s took me 2:54 (average 4:42). To do it, click here . How did you do? 

Fantasy Football

Boy, did my balls (footballs, guys, footballs!) ever get deflated last week by TC's Teabag Trashers . . . 29.88 more points!  Arrggghhhh!!!!!  He must be feeling better!

TomCat ready for football action!

* Rank change shown is from week 6 – 7

Short Takes 

Washington Post — Congressional Republicans shooting themselves in the foot isn’t new. What’s tragic about the Benghazi hearings is that they displace the serious inquiries that we desperately need about the direction of our foreign policy.

The United States invaded Iraq more than a decade ago. The assault — with costs including nearly 4,500 U.S. soldiers killed and more than $2 trillion and counting — destabilized the entire region. The Islamic State grew in the ruins. No viable government has been created, and U.S. troops are going back in.

With all the US action in the Middle East, the saber rattling in Ukraine, indeed the rhetoric around the Iran nuclear deal, what country is considered to be the greatest threat to world peace?

The real scandal is not the partisan witch hunt now known as Benghazi in the US Capitol.  The real scandal that Republicans won't investigate because it would also mean investigating and admitting their own complicity, as well as Democrats doing the same, is the role of the US in international affairs . . . the role of the US as the seeming policeman to the world.  Have a look at another article in Salon which notes

Nowhere is this more evident than in the American Right’s bewilderingly impassioned obsession with the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi — a fanatic fixation that verges on the unhinged.

Unhinged indeed, and totally misguided.

From the House needs a Speaker file . . .h/t Joanne Dixon

A little levity from Senator Cory Booker

The Speaker's name is Bose, well known, and I understand non-partisan!

Slate — h/t Nameless — During her shift at Portland, Oregon’s Purringtons Cat Lounge on Sunday, Mary Numair looked out the street-facing windows and saw a woman carrying a sign that read “Abortion Kills Children.” Numair had noticed a group of protesters about a block away, gathered outside one of Portland’s Planned Parenthood health care centers. “I thought [the woman] might be lost. I said, ‘Hey, you’re gonna feel real silly. The protest is down that way,’ ” Numair, 29, told me. “She said ‘No, I need to stand here.’ I said, ‘Fuck this shit,’ went back inside, and started making my sign.”

I hope you'll read the rest of this short article.  Hats off to Mary Numair! Personally, I don't know why people are so hush hush about yeast infections, but then I have caught myself speaking of them in hushed tones.  As I understand, yeast and thrush are the same infection — fungal candida — (only thrush is more common in men according to a male diabetic friend of mine), just in different parts of the body.  As a diabetic, I get them when I take anti-biotics which is why I dose up on acidophilus when taking anti-biotics.  Everyone's body has some candida but it is kept in check by the good bacteria within the body.  Unfortunately, broad spectrim anti-biotics kill the good bacteria leading to yeast or thrush infections.  Why should anyone be denied care for such a problem? Planned Parenthood rocks!

My Universe — 

Dad . . . I want to tell you a secret!

I have done a lot of sleeping and resting since Thursday last week, yet still I am miserable and spend most of the days sleeping when I can.  It is day 5 and although I am still miserable, I think so far Sunday was worse, so maybe I've turned the corner . . . maybe.  Nameless, you know him as SoINeedAName, dear friend that he is, is bringing you tomorrow's Open Thread.  I very much appreciate him for this.  Virtual hugs dude!

Puzzle — Today’s took me 3:05 (average 4:45). To do it, click here. How did you do? For those that don't know, we always do the 48 piece classic.

Short Takes 

Alternet — Chomsky described how Republicans gravitated toward an increasingly radical base in the 1980s and '90s. 

"[Republicans] became so dedicated to the interests of the extreme wealthy and powerful that they couldn't get votes. So they had to turn to other constituencies, which were always there but were never politically mobilized. So they turned to Christian evangelicals, the nativists who are afraid they're taking our country away from us. People who are so terrified they have to carry a gun in a coffee shop."

Chomsky makes some good points about the American political system, of where the parties are standing.  Yes he bashes Republicans, but he does not spare Democrats either.  Listen to the interview above.

The Guardian — People who expose wrongdoing on national security and intelligence issues around the world are often given weak or no protection and are often subject to retaliation, creating a “chilling effect on people speaking out”, a United Nationsreport has found.

The report by David Kaye, United Nations special rapporteur for freedom of opinion and expression, outlines an extensive case for governments to revise whistleblower laws to enhance public-interest disclosures and the flow of information, protect whistleblowers and ensure the confidentiality of sources for journalists and others who release information into the public domain.

We have seen what happened to Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning and others who have blown the whistle on government and corporate actions. And Americans are not unique in this.  The UN appointed a Special Rapporteur in 2013 to investigate and provide recommendations.  In the Conclusions section of the rapporteur's report on page 21, the first conclusion is as follows:

58. A common thread ties together the right of access to information, the protection of sources of information and the protection of whistle-blowers: the public’s right to know. Human rights law protects the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, while also permitting restrictions of the right on narrow, specified grounds. When the right and the restriction clash, as they are often purported to do, Governments and international organizations should not adopt laws and policies that default in favour of the restrictions. Rather, laws should favour disclosures of information in the public interest. In cases of source and whistle-blower disclosures, public institutions have most of the power — the power to intimidate, to investigate, to prosecute. They also have greater access to information and, thus, the ability to make their case, while the source or whistle-blower typically has only a window into broader policies and practices, hindered by secrecy laws that preclude an adequate defence. If a disclosure genuinely harms a specified legitimate State A/70/361 22/24 15-12531 interest, it should be the State’s burden to prove the harm and the intention to cause harm. States and international organizations are urged to adopt or revise laws accordingly, consistent with the well-recognized centrality of the right to freedom of expression and access to information in democratic governance.

Read the section Conclusions and Recommendations.  You might think this makes sense, isn't this what we have?  If it is, how do we explain Edward Snowden living abroad, or Chelsea Manning sitting in military prison?  How does the UK explain William McNeilly's dishonourable discharge from the Royal Navy?  You might also find the OHCHR report to the United Nations helpful.

Roamin' the Web @ Wonkette

There was no intention to do so, but ​If I have violated a copyright, please advise and I will remove them.

Over the past 2 days, I have seen pictorial comparisons of Bernie Sanders to Christopher Lloyd from Back to the Future fame (also the TV sitcom Taxi).  Here is one, while the other is, I think, a strong statement on Hillary's handling of the Republicans at the most recent Benghazi hearing.

Washington Post — “It never was about the most perfect guy with the most perfect voting record; it’s about the person that’s willing to govern in a way that allows conservative ideas to at least come to the forefront, which he has said he is willing to do,” Salmon said. “I think conservatives all over the country ought to be doing cartwheels. . . . We’ve been dealing with eating crumbs off the table. Now we’ve got an opportunity to sit at the table and actually partake in the meal.”

Oh my!  Anyone who thinks that getting a simple vote on who the next Speaker should be, is a simple matter, needs their head examined.  And what does it mean to people like Salmon to "govern in a way that allows conservative ideas to at least come to the forefront"?  There is no doubt that the Republicans are a badly fractured party.  I find no truth in the name "the Freedom Caucus".  It is more likely the anarchy Caucus!

My Universe — h/t Ted W and Carol B Care2

This gives new meaning to coughing up a hairball!!!

Well I am still very much down with primarily a cold and aches . . . and it doesn't seem to be letting up yet, unfortunately.  And yes, I am drinking lots of fluids (I can put a racehorse to shame!) and getting lots of rest (hibernating bears should be so lucky!).  I take no responsibility for passing the bug through my posts!

Puzzle — Today’s took me 3:04 (average 5:47). To do it, click here. How did you do? For those that don't know, we always do the 48 piece classic.

Short Takes 

The Fiscal Times — If it succeeds, we will again confirm the power of money in politics, in a manner more pernicious than campaign contributions. This represents a bid to directly purchase Congressional votes. Even if we rolled back Citizens United and moved to publicly financed elections, this brazen yet constitutionally protected activity would remain a feature of our politics.

…  As long as there are billionaires and greed, their money will flow through our political system, seeking a high return on investment. 

This is a prime example of how the rich get richer and ordinary people pay for it.

A reminder of who the fiscal conservatives are . . .  (h/t Carrie B)

Alternet — After host George Stephanopoulos quoted conservative critics, like Byron York, who claimed Clinton won the day, Fiorina countered by saying that “she did reasonably well,” but that the hearings demonstrated “that she won’t be held accountable until we have a nominee in a general election debate who will hold her accountable.”

There goes Fiorini again!  . . . off in her own little bubble universe!

“I think there were a lot of Democrats on that committee who were focused on salvaging the nominee on their part,” she said.

And there were even more Republicans who were solely focused on killing Clinton's candidacy using public funds for their partisan witch hunt.

The committee consists of 12 members, 7 Republicans and 5 Democrats. That's an overpowering number of Democrats based on Fiorini's words.

From Wikipedia

She fails to address all the investigations that did not occur to the same degree but which have greater loss of life: (just to name three)

• 9/11 attack by al Qaeda on the WTC in New York with 2,977 killed;
• Oklahoma domestic terrorist bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in 1995 with 168 killed, 680+ wounded;
• USS Cole attack by Al Qaeda in 2000 with 17 dead, 39 wounded.

​

From  Benghazi Article by Nameless

Benghazi does not even come close to these acts in terms of investigations by Congressional committees, nor in deaths.  Yet Republicans are wasting time and money as they continue to push for something that does not exist.  No disrespect is meant to Ambassador Chris Stevens and the other three who were killed at Benghazi, but where is the equivalency?  What most Republicans, including Fiorini, also fail to mention are the budget cuts to security at US embassies promulgated by Congressional Republicans.

NY Times — Before an audience of mostly students in an auditorium at George Mason University, Mr. Chafee made it official in early June that he was running for president. He argued that his experience at all levels of government and his ability to work with people from different parties made him uniquely qualified for the job. However, his quirky call for a change to the metric system overshadowed his announcement. “I happened to live in Canada as they completed the process,” Mr. Chafee said that day. “Believe me, it’s easy. It doesn’t take long before 34 degrees is hot.”

Lincoln Chaffe?  Now admittedly, I am a foreigner, a Canuck to be sure, and I had never heard of Chaffee.  To me, it seemed he just suddenly appeared in the Democratic primary race, like a puff of smoke . . . and then he was gone.  I didn't get a chance to watch the Democrats debate, what with Canada having its own debates during the now decided federal election.  The NY Times reported his stance on some of the issues. In The Atlantic, reporter Molly Ball asks a simple question, "Why Did Lincoln Chafee Even Run?".  In my opinion, Chafee seemed to be milquetoast. I'm not sure that Ball came to any firm conclusion other than "He was a bad candidate but a lovely guest—quiet, polite, unobtrusive."

My Universe — ALERT!!!