Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Tea Party Bigots with guns talk about killing Muslims - Thank You Pres Pussy Grabber


Emboldened by the election of Donald Trump and fearful that Sharia law will soon be imposed in their community, a group of Tea Party conservatives gathered at a seafood restaurant in Kernersville, North Carolina, last week and said they are preparing to counteract what they call a Muslim plot to conquer the United States.
Most of those who showed up admitted that they belong to militia groups, and presenter Tom Jones laid out an elaborate conspiracy theory he said was being planned by the “progressive left,” and the Muslim Brotherhood:
“The Muslim Brotherhood is behind all that terrorism and violent acts, but they’re also here operating in America in a very stealthy mode. They’ve infiltrated the judiciary. They have judges that are elected to the bench. These judges are expected to make rulings from the bench here in America according to Sharia law even though it’s not a Sharia court. If you’ve got a Muslim judge he’s required to try you under Sharia law. These people are in high positions of influence often behind the scenes in government, academia, medicine, the media.”
Frank del Valle, who was also present for the meeting, then asked Jones:
“Do you have any recommendations as to how we could stop this? Because my only recommendation is to start killing the hell out them.”
Yet another participant, Robert Watkins, who is also a former field director for the Koch-backed Americans For Prosperity and an activist with Faith and Freedom Coalition, claimed that one of the Women’s March organizers, Linda Sarsour, wanted to impose Islam on the entire United States:
“All those women who showed up in D.C. who appear to be mainstream and supported her, raved about how she’s so great don’t realize that she’s the same one who agrees with Sharia law and will be person who stands beside them and also the same person who slices their neck.”
Later in the program, Jones told the two dozen attendees:
“I don’t know how you say ‘deep doo-doo’ in Arabic, but we’re in it. We’re in deep doo-doo, ya’ll. This is serious stuff. This is not games. These people do not play. If I put a gun to your head and ask you what you believe, you may not be able to tell, but I guarantee you these people can tell you what they believe.”
That prompted Del Valle to proudly announce:
“I’ll shoot them before they can ask me.”
It would be reassuring to think that the FBI and Justice Department will be keeping a close eye on these moronic hatemongers, but does anyone really believe a racist Islamophobe like Attorney General Jeff Sessions will do so? It’s a lot more likely Sessions would show up at one of their meetings to offer moral support.

GOP slowly realize that people like Obamacare and DON'T WANT TO LOSE IT or get inferior care.


It's the first long "district work period"—recess in less euphemistic terms—for Congress, the first chance they have to come back home and face constituents after a month of this new, disastrous Trump administration. In a reflection of just how bad things are going, more than 200 Republicans are hiding out this week, refusing to meet with their voters, and it's largely because of Obamacare. Because even if they're unwilling to look voters in the face when they tell them they want to take their health care away they're feeling the heat.
President Trump, who remains popular on the right, has mused about a replacement plan that is even more expansive than the original. The conservative news media are focused more on Mr. Trump's near-daily skirmishes with Democrats and reporters, among others, than on policy issues like health care.
[…] From deeply conservative districts in the South and the West to the more moderate parts of the Northeast, Republicans in Congress say there is significantly less intensity among opponents of the law than when Mr. Obama was in office.
"I hear more concerns than before about 'You're going to repeal it, and we're all going to lose insurance' because they don't think we're going to replace it," said Representative Mike Simpson, a Republican who represents a conservative district in Idaho. […]
"I was here in 2009 and 2010, and we're not getting the anti-Obamacare calls like that," said Representative Brett Guthrie, a Kentucky Republican who is on one of the committees tasked with rewriting the law. "I think people are going to hold us accountable for making sure we not only repeal, but we have a law in place that creates a better opportunity for people."
The demands from conservative-leaning constituents in districts like Mr. Guthrie's are plainly shifting. In a nationwide CBS News poll last month, 53 percent of Republicans said they wanted to change the law to make it work better while 41 percent said they wanted to abolish it.
It was all so easy when it was all about President Obama, and not about people's actual health and lives and stuff. And now, well now Republicans are still up the creek with little more than an outline that won't just help those still uninsured, but take insurance away from millions. It's not just Obama supporters talking about that now.

Pastor walks out on Pres Pussy's FL Demonic Rally: My daughter was crying in Fear!


Joel Tooley, lead pastor at First Church Of The Nazarene in Melbourne, said that both he and his daughter were traumatized after attending President Donald Trump’s rally in Florida over the weekend.
In a lengthy Facebook post written after Trump’s Saturday rally, Tooley explains that he had not supported the Republican presidential candidate but he felt that attending a presidential speech would be a good civics lesson for his daughter.
Tooley writes that he was disturbed by the “almost church-like” way Trump supporters sang Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the USA.
“People were being ushered into a deeply religious experience…and it made me completely uncomfortable,” the pastor recalls. “I felt like people were here to worship an ideology along with the man who was leading it. Don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t the song per se – it was this inexplicable movement that was happening in the room. It was a religious zeal.”
Tooley describes First Lady Melania Trump’s reading of the Lord’s Prayer as “theatrical and manipulative.”
“I can’t explain it, but I felt sick,” he notes. “People across the room were reciting it as if it were a pep squad cheer. At the close of the prayer, the room erupted in cheering. It was so uncomfortable.”
After the president began speaking, Tooley says that Trump fans squared off against protesters in the crowd.
“Two ladies in front of them began seething and screaming in their face while shaking their Trump signs at [the protesters],” he writes. “As they continued chanting, the people around them became violently enraged. One angry man grabbed the lady’s arm – that’s when I went into action. I barged through the crowd and yelled at them to back off.”
“My 11-year-old daughter was clinging to my arm, sobbing in fear,” Tooley reveals. “The two angry, screaming ladies looked at me, both of them raised their middle finger at me in my face and repeatedly yelled, ‘F*#% YOU!’ Repeatedly.”
I have been in places and experiences before where demonic activity was palpable. The power of the Holy Spirit of God was protecting me in those moments and was once again protecting me and my daughter in this moment.
I raised my voice and calmly said, “These ladies have the right to do what they are doing and they are harming no one; this is America and they a right to express themselves in this way. They are harming no one.” A couple of other people around me stepped in and supported me in protecting them as a barrier, as well.
My daughter was shaking in fear as she clung to me. The one man behind the protesters shoved himself forward, grabbed the lady by the arm and screamed with multiple expletives, “I’m going to take you out! This is my president and nobody has the right to disrespect him and nobody has the right to keep me from hearing him!”
Tooley states that he eventually lost track of what Trump was saying because of the ongoing scuffles.
“My kid was shaken – she had just seen some of the worst of humanity,” the pastor laments in his Facebook post. “But, at the end of the day, what I felt from his leadership in this experience was actually horrifying. There was palpable fear in the room. There was thick anger and vengeance. He was counting on it.”

DRIP, DRIP, DRIP: The Pres Pussy Grabber Russia Story keeps going - One Drip at a time.


Every day there is a fresh outrage emerging from the murky bog of the Donald Trump administration.
Every day there is a new round of questions and a new set of concerns that raise anxieties and lower trust.
Every day it becomes ever more clear that it is right and just to doubt the legitimacy of this regime and all that flows from it.
The latest round involves the former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn, who this week was forced to resign following disclosures about his communications with the Russian ambassador on the same day that then-President Obama announced sanctions against Russia for its interference in our election to help Trump and damage Hillary Clinton.
The official reason given for requesting Flynn’s resignation was, according to the White House press secretary, Sean Spicer: “The president was very concerned that General Flynn had misled the vice president and others.”
Continue reading the main story
Spicer continued later, “The evolving and eroding level of trust as a result of this situation and a series of other questionable instances is what led the president to ask for General Flynn’s resignation.”
Spicer further stated, “The White House counsel reviewed and determined that there is not a legal issue, but rather a trust issue.”
If you are thinking, “Something about this just doesn’t smell right,” you’re right; it stinks. This doesn’t add up and it leads to a multiplying number of questions to which we don’t yet have answers.
The president was made aware of Flynn’s communications weeks ago, and apparently didn’t think it prudent to alert the vice president or to correct the record when the vice president said that Flynn had not discussed the sanctions with the Russian ambassador, when indicators pointed to the fact that he did.
Flynn lied. Trump knew Flynn lied. But Trump kept Flynn in his circle of confidence and apparently left the vice president out of the circle of knowledge. Why?
In tweets the president has posted since Flynn’s resignation (or firing — you choose how you want to cast it), Trump has seemed more upset by the fact that Flynn’s lies were leaked and reported than by the original transgression.
Furthermore, the president’s tweets and limited public pronouncements on the matter would lead reasonable readers and listeners to conclude that Flynn would still be on the job if his dealings had not become public.
This is an office culture issue. If the boss — in this case Trump — is a pathological liar who forces underlings to repeat and bolster his lies, what signal does that send to everyone else who works in that environment? That lying is not only accepted but also valued, that lying is simply a rhetorical device, a propaganda tool that is inexcusable only when not exercised with skill.
Trump knew exactly who he was getting when he hired Flynn, who had been fired by the Obama administration. Flynn is a habitual liar who lied so much when he ran the Defense Intelligence Agency that, according to The New York Times, “subordinates came up with a name for the phenomenon: ‘Flynn facts.’ ”
Trump doesn’t mind a lie if it serves him; he does apparently mind if the liar is intentionally, maleficently trying to deceive him.
But even here, there are questions. It’s not clear whether Trump was aware of Flynn’s conversation with the Russians when it happened, or that he didn’t in some way direct it or receive a report of the call from Flynn himself after it happened.
Furthermore, Flynn’s communications with the Russians are not the only calls of concern. The New York Times reported Tuesday:
“Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials.”
What was the nature of these calls? Why were they made? Was anyone in the Trump orbit aware of Russian plans to hack the Democratic National Committee or the Clinton campaign? Were they made aware in any way of when emails would be leaked?
Two things bear repeating ad infinitum:
In July, at a televised campaign event, Trump said: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Then in October, an hour after the release of the “Access Hollywood” tapes of Trump boasting about sexually assaulting women, WikiLeaks began to dump the Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s hacked emails on the internet.
Coincidence? Maybe. But that would be one hell of a coincidence, considering all the other reinforcing “coincidences”: Trump’s inexplicable, inexhaustible praise of Russia and Vladimir Putin; Putin’s failure to respond to Obama’s sanctions; an explosive report last week from CNN that read: “For the first time, U.S. investigators say they have corroborated some of the communications detailed in a 35-page dossier compiled by a former British intelligence agent.”

What we know only makes what we don’t know feel all the more ominous. But I believe that facts are forthcoming. Reporters are digging like a crew of coal miners hopped up on a case of Red Bull, and sources in Washington are leaking to anyone with a press credential.
Drip, drip, drip it goes until the dam breaks and the truth spills.

Sen Sanford -R, admits that INSURANCE FOR PRE EXISTENCE is not assured.


Mark Sanford has been trying to shoot straight recently. Chris Hayes forced his hand.
The excerpted video clip begins with a constituent asking Sanford if he supports the Individual Mandate. Sanford said no. The constituent then questioned how he would cover preexisting conditions. Of course, Republicans cannot give a coherent answer to this issue because all their proposals are flawed or are giveaways to corporations.
“Let me ask you this,” Chris Hayes said. “I remember covering the first Affordable Care Act fight. A huge problem for Democrats was the status quo bias. Folks are scared about something new and uncertain when it comes to healthcare. You guys are on the opposite side of that same kind of status quo. The question is, can you look your constituents in the eye and across the sort of Bell Curve of the different kinds of ways that people might be affected by the system, look them in the eye and say, ‘You will be better off. I guarantee you; you are going to have care, you are going to have coverage if you have it now.”
Sanford started to stammer.
“I hate the issue of political guarantee,” Sanford stammered. “It’s because they rip apart so quickly.”
“Wait,” Hayes interjected. “The answer to that is no, right?”
“Yes,” Sanford stammered as he realized he told the truth. “Well, the answer is we don’t know with precision. I think what is going to happen is that the two ideas are going to get melded. You are probably going to have a little bit of Obamacare, and you’ll have a bit of the free market.”
My blood boils every time I hear that nonsense about the free market and the ACA. I rebuffed that in this post where I wrote the following.
Please do not buy into the fallacy that Obamacare was a government takeover of health care. Not because your anti-Obamacare politician says it, means it is true. You interact with your healthcare system through your doctor, your hospital, and your drug store.
Your doctor works for herself or himself, or for a private corporation. Your hospital is a private corporation. Your drug store is a private corporation. The drug companies that supply the drugs to the drug store are private corporations. The companies that supply the tools to the hospitals are private corporations. The supplies used in the doctor’s offices are private corporations. The insurance companies that pay the bills are private corporations. It cannot be a government takeover if the system is run almost entirely by the private sector via private corporations and private doctors.
Before Obamacare, there were much fewer rules governing what these corporations could do. Corporations are profit centers. They have a fiduciary responsibility to make a profit for the people who own the corporation, the shareholders. As such they always try to minimize their cost. Obamacare is mostly a body of rules, regulations, and taxes intended to ensure that the service they provide falls within guidelines, the ultimate goal being the good health and safety of every American. It is no different than the government mandating a speed limit through research to keep us relatively safe. It is no different than the government making some substances illegal to prevent unnecessary deaths. Obamacare ensures that everyone has access to healthcare. …
We should only be fighting for Obamacare repeal if the results were Medicare for all, a single-payer solution that ensures all Americans have health insurance and health care.
Let’s keep the calls, emails, faxes and our bodies at the Congresspeople and Senator’s offices going. We must not allow them to win the narrative or the health care war.

Monday, February 20, 2017

Republicans get in power and RUIN THE ECONOMY: We need to fight now to prevent the DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY!!


Republicans are never good for the economy and the middle class

Krugman’s article “On Economic Arrogance” is a must read. He wrote the following.
According to press reports, the Trump administration is basing its budget projections on the assumption that the U.S. economy will grow very rapidly over the next decade — in fact, almost twice as fast as independent institutions like the Congressional Budget Office and the Federal Reserve expect. There is, as far as we can tell, no serious analysis behind this optimism; instead, the number was plugged in to make the fiscal outlook appear better. …
The Trump team is apparently projecting growth at between 3 and 3.5 percent for a decade. This wouldn’t be unprecedented: the U.S. economy grew at a 3.4 percent rate during the Reagan years, 3.7 percent under Bill Clinton. But a repeat performance is unlikely.
For one thing, in the Reagan years baby boomers were still entering the work force. Now they’re on their way out, and the rise in the working-age population has slowed to a crawl. This demographic shift alone should, other things being equal, subtract around a percentage point from U.S. growth. …
Yes, Reagan presided over pretty fast growth. But Bill Clinton, who raised taxes on the rich, amid confident predictions from the right that this would cause an economic disaster, presided over even faster growth. President Obama presided over much more rapid private-sector job growth than George W. Bush, even if you leave out the 2008 collapse. Furthermore, two Obama policies that the right totally hated – the 2013 hike in tax rates on the rich, and the 2014 implementation of the Affordable Care Act – produced no slowdown at all in job creation. …
Kansas, dominated by conservative true believers, implemented sharp tax cuts with the promise that these cuts would jump-start rapid growth; they didn’t, and caused a budget crisis instead. Last week Kansas legislators threw in the towel and passed a big tax hike.
At the same time Kansas was turning hard right, California’s newly dominant Democratic majority raised taxes. Conservatives declared it “economic suicide” — but the state is in fact doing fine.
In other words, history proves that every time Republicans experiment with the fantasy that tax cuts and tax regulations create faster growth and a good economy, they’ve failed. And in fact, Democrats come into power, clean things up and make things better compared to the past Republican administration. Americans must learn this lesson once and for all.
Robert Reich wrote an article specifically on Trumponomics that everyone should read. The rhetoric does not match reality.

Jake Tapper asks: 'Has Everyone Lost their minds?' about letting Milo speak at CPAC.


e annual Conservative Political Action Conference’s (CPAC) decision to invite alt-right figurehead  Milo Yiannopoulos has grown more controversial after a video surfaced of him defending pedophilia. In particular, CNN’s Jake Tapper slammed Yiannopoulos’ invitation to attend the conservative event by noting that victims of pedophilia do not want to see their suffering treated lightly.
In a first tweet, Tapper wrote that a conservative friend of his who was “molested as a child” was “horrified” by the video of Yiannopoulos, noting his friend “could not be more distraught by this Milo tape.”
Tapper continued:
Friend of mine, conservative, could not be more distraught by this Milo tape. Was molested as a child. Horrified.
My friend, a survivor of sex trafficking: "Milo straight up defended abusing 13 yr old boys...Please don't let that be normalized"
More from survivor of sex trafficking: "Please please please don't let that mess he said go away."

How on earth can CPAC defend this?
Was planning on ignoring for the most part, for those saying "stop publicizing him." But friend reached out & pled w me to say something
And sometimes that's what journalists do - give voice to the voiceless. In this case, a survivor of sex trafficking HORRIFIED by Milo.
Preying on children is the definition of evil. Justifying it in any way is sick and disturbing.

Has everyone lost their minds?
Tapper was not the only person to express disapproval over CPAC’s invitation to Yiannopoulos. A board member of the American Conservative Union also expressed concern on Sunday. Ned Ryun wrote in a tweet, “There’s nothing about this that’s amusing. This isn’t about free speech. This is about basic decency.”