home

Wednesday Open Thread

It's a court day for me. Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Fainting and Medical Comparisons | Medical Updates on Hillary and Trump >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Wonder how it feels to be (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by ruffian on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 12:49:05 PM EST
    someone dying to be a big shot among the serious players on the international stage, but only having the mental capacity, industriousness, and temperament to be a reality TV star.

    Must eat you up watching it all play out from the outside and turn you into a bitter twisted bully jerk.

    Always a twisted bully jerk I'd say... (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 01:15:36 PM EST
    the bitterness may be new...and it seems to be damn near epidemic amongst white men of a certain age.  Bitter waves of gray.

    Parent
    A person has to be self-aware to realize why (none / 0) (#13)
    by vml68 on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 05:37:33 PM EST
    they are failing and be able to accept the fact that their competitors are vastly superior.

    From what we have seen of Tr*mp, his loss will be because the election is "rigged!", not due to any shortcomings on his part.

    Parent

    You wondered Ruff what mil temperature (none / 0) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 07:00:38 PM EST
    Around my husband was when it comes to Trump, only one person in his shop pro-Trump, but they are working extra hard to not talk politics. It is very difficult though in this bombastic climate to head down carry on.

    Parent
    This is well worth reading:

    Newsweek | September 14, 2016
    How the Trump Organization's Extensive Business Ties Could Upend U.S. National Security - "If Donald Trump is elected president, will he and his family permanently sever all connections to the Trump Organization, a sprawling business empire that has spread a secretive financial web across the world? Or will Trump instead choose to be the most conflicted president in American history, one whose business interests will constantly jeopardize the security of the United States?

    "Throughout this campaign, the Trump Organization, which pumps potentially hundreds of millions of dollars into the Trump family's bank accounts each year, has been largely ignored. As a private enterprise, its businesses, partners and investors are hidden from public view, even though they are the very people who could be enriched by--or will further enrich--Trump and his family if he wins the presidency.

    "A close examination by Newsweek of the Trump Organization, including confidential interviews with business executives and some of its international partners, reveals an enterprise with deep ties to global financiers, foreign politicians and even criminals, although there is no evidence the Trump Organization has engaged in any illegal activities. It also reveals a web of contractual entanglements that could not be just canceled. If Trump moves into the White House and his family continues to receive any benefit from the company, during or even after his presidency, almost every foreign policy decision he makes will raise serious conflicts of interest and ethical quagmires."

    Will this bombshell report be enough to finally sink Trump? Or will he continue sailing along like a ghost ship, aided and abetted by significant sectors of an east coast media more enamored with the entertainment value of a political horse race, than they are apparently concerned by this stiletto aimed directly at the heart of American democracy?

    The Trump campaign is already making an effort to falsely discredit the Newsweek article's author, Kurt Eichenwald, as a 9-11 truther. They key indicator here will be whether or not our fearless denizens of the Beltway cocktail circuit will once again allow them to get away with such preposterous claims.

    Stay tuned.

    don't hold your breath (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by mm on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 02:20:12 PM EST
    apparently the beltway/cable media is all atwitter with Trump going on the Dr. Oz show.

    As Norm Ornstein just tweeted:

    "He is playing you guys like a Stradivarius."

    Parent

    Mutually beneficial relationship (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by pitachips on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 02:48:46 PM EST
    The media types are willing participants. Has nothing to do with Trump playing anyone.

    Parent
    loud stupid tawdry and unsettling.. (none / 0) (#11)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 05:16:52 PM EST
    that's where the ratings are.

    Blame it all on the demise of the traveling carnival freak show..

    Parent

    Tr*mp, his campaign and the "basket of (none / 0) (#14)
    by vml68 on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 05:41:14 PM EST
    deplorables" at his rallies are the travelling carnival freak show.

    Parent
    symbiosis (none / 0) (#29)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 08:39:09 AM EST
    heard this story reported last night by Maddow (none / 0) (#17)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 07:35:29 PM EST
    Surprised no one has picked this up - not even Joe and Mika who spent good bit of time on the shocking revelations that no one pays attention to all the work Hillary has done for others for decades and, as a woman, she is subject to a higher standard.

    Only bright spot in last 24 hours has been all the press coverage of Obama in Philadelphia yesterday.

    Parent

    How (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by FlJoe on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 03:56:50 PM EST
    in the Holy He!! do these people get away with such bald face lies  
    Ivanka :  
    "There's no policy on Hillary Clinton's website pertaining to any of these issues, childcare, eldercare, or maternity leave or paternity leave for that matter. There's no policy that's been articulated on how to solve the problem."


    The media (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by mogal on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 04:24:35 PM EST
    lets them.  The Newsweek article about Trump and his foreign ties has almost been ignoored today.  

    Parent
    It (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by FlJoe on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 04:40:08 PM EST
    was a rhetorical question. Yep, Trump's shady international business dealing does rise to the level of "raising questions" not even from the"optics angle", but CGI and e-mails, OMG.

    Parent
    Coincidentally, we received (5.00 / 4) (#18)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 08:05:28 PM EST
    a HRC for President fundraising letter today, which included a full page (out of four) of policy positions, of which family leave was bullet point 3 out of 8. Ridiculous -- shameless, really -- to suggest she has been silent on this issue.

    Parent
    i like ivanka (1.00 / 1) (#24)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 12:18:34 AM EST
    she's posh. but i dont have cable so i dont get fox news.

    Parent
    Really? (5.00 / 4) (#28)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:43:40 AM EST
    A post about her being caught in a bald-faced lie to falsely attack her father's opponent - and your response is that you "Like her" because she's "posh"???

    Parent
    Ivanka shops at Prada and dines at Quattro's. (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:28:26 PM EST
    If that's not "posh," then I don't know what is. Ms. Trump's problem here, aside from being Daddy's pampered princess, is that she's punching way above her weight class by insisting upon speaking for the average American woman, who otherwise wouldn't make it halfway across the lawn at the Trumps' Mar Del Lago estate in Palm Beach before the dogs were unleashed on her.

    Parent
    No doubt she's quite "posh" (none / 0) (#56)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:48:41 PM EST
    Tends to happen when you grow up with a silver spoon.  OTOH - I can't believe someone responds to her lies with, "I like her because she's posh".

    Parent
    Where have you been? (none / 0) (#58)
    by vml68 on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:55:05 PM EST
    Apparently, all manner of sins are to be forgiven if you dress/look/are "posh"!

    Parent
    i like (none / 0) (#61)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:07:19 PM EST
    Chelsea too. if that helps.

    Parent
    Not really (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:49:39 PM EST
    It's not particularly relevant to your statement about Ivanka, which also wasn't relevant to post to which you initially responded.

    Parent
    NO!! (none / 0) (#62)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:10:29 PM EST
    That will not help you. You have committed the mortal sin!!

    You like Ivanka, and stated so publicly  

    Parent

    No "mortal sin" (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:47:38 PM EST
    Like whomever you want, but responding to Trump's bald-faced lie with "I like her because she's "posh""?

    Ridiculous.

    Parent

    at least linea (none / 0) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:19:41 PM EST
    owns it unlike your support for Trump.

    Parent
    Again (none / 0) (#68)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:23:11 PM EST
    You place your thoughts as others statements.
    Sorry, Just because you want me to be a Trump supporter, I am not.
    I support neither main party candidate, and have been quite plain about that, even before the Republicans official named Trump as their candidate.


    Parent
    We are with the majority there... (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 11:16:28 AM EST
    my friend...I think most people want no part of either one.  Amongst them some feel forced to choose between the two (aka vote against one), and others will look outside the two party box, and others still will just say f*ck it and stay home.

    The national minority, imo, are those who actually enthusiantically support either major party candidate.  Here at TL you can get a false sense of widespread support for Clinton, for obvious reasons, but TL is hardly representative of the body politic at large...obviously.

    Elections, especially elections like this go round, are not black and white affairs.  They are nuanced affairs where people end up pulling a lever for someone by wide and varied reasoning.  I got mine, you got yours, and I don't think anyone can honestly say with certainty what the right or moral thing to do is.  

    Well except to not vote for Donald, that I think we can say with certainty lol.

    Parent

    No, Trevor (none / 0) (#79)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 08:03:41 PM EST
    everything you say says you are a Trump supporter but you won't just come out and own it. Your posts are indistinguishable from Jimppj who at least admits he is a Trump supporter.

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#83)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 08:20:17 PM EST
    Nothing I say says I am a Trump supporter,

    Everything I say does indicate I cannot vote for Madame Sec, and in YOUR world,

    That means I support Trump.

    Sorry, but I do not live in your world

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#102)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 05:32:52 AM EST
    Trevor everything you say here enables Trump and is White Nationalist. Yes, I do not live in the White Nationalist world. So you are correct there.

    You do not have the same agenda as the Never Trump people because they are not obsessed with attempting to bring Hillary down like you are. They at least understand that attempting to take Hillary down will enable Trump and the white nationalists.

    The funny thing is though the GOP has been the white nationalist party since at least 1992 or before yet you've stuck with them apparently through all that.

    Parent

    Just curious GA (none / 0) (#106)
    by coast on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:51:02 AM EST
    What is the significance of 1992?

    Parent
    The GOP (none / 0) (#107)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:05:59 AM EST
    went down the road of white nationalism. Pat Buchanan was a featured speaker along with Pat Robertson. White nationalism has been a part of the GOP ever since 1964 and the GOP's promotion of Strom Thurmond but it was papered over by the Cold War. It came out in full flight in 1992.

    Parent
    So I guess we can throw out (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by coast on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 05:18:58 PM EST
    The Voting Rights act of '65, the Immigration act of '65, the Civil Rights act of ' 68.....and others to follow as being meaningless laws that helped no one except white people.

    I'll give you Strom Thurmond and raise you a Robert Byrd.

    Parent

    Marie (none / 0) (#67)
    by FlJoe on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:19:44 PM EST
    Antoinette was also considered "posh"(and no I am not calling for tumbrels).

    Parent
    And what did Marie's poshitude get her, ... (none / 0) (#71)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:47:05 PM EST
    ... other than a one-way trip to a scaffold at Paris's La Place de la Revolution in October 1793, nine months after her husband lost his own head there?

    And of Louis XVI's Bourbon successors, who were restored to the French throne after the fall of Napoleon 200 years ago, Lord Talleyrand once sighed and quipped, "Ils avaient rien appris, et rien oublié." ("They had learned nothing, and forgotten nothing.")

    Aloha.

    Parent

    How can a male who has spent his life (none / 0) (#94)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 12:05:14 AM EST
    in a state government job and is now retired  speak for any woman.

    You simply have no idea as to what the average working woman has to do.

    Parent

    Jim, why don't you actually address ... (none / 0) (#120)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 11:25:40 AM EST
    ... the topic that's currently under discussion, rather than troll individual posters in this thread?

    Parent
    Because you fly false colors (none / 0) (#128)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:00:22 PM EST
    You have no idea how it is for anyone out here in flyover country.

    Parent
    Someone who thinks Ivanka Trump (none / 0) (#134)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:42:10 PM EST
    has a lot in common with the average working woman, you should maybe try a little harder to just to speak for themselves rather than for an imagined "anyone in flyover country"..

    Parent
    Ivanka's business practices (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 08:41:16 AM EST
    pretty much mirror her father's. So I guess you like thieves and con artists as well.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#43)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 04:54:08 PM EST
    From all accounts I have read, she is said to be a rather impressive negotiator on the major real estate deals.
    Totally prepared, in contrast with her father who often shot from the hip

    Parent
    Ivanka's a bullschitt artist in a skirt. (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:20:56 PM EST
    Further, it took writer Prachi Gupta of Cosmopolitan magazine to finally call out Daddy's Little Girl during a phone interview, rather than the celebrated Mrs. Greenspan of NBC News.

    Parent
    Mississippi artist Steve Shepard (none / 0) (#45)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 05:23:05 PM EST
    is relentless on the subject of Real Estate developers.

    I have another of his drawings:

    "The Avenging Elvis Casting the Real Estate Developers into Hell Where They Belong"
     

    Dubya and Cheney figured prominently in the Dubya era art show booth where I first encountered him and his work.


    Parent

    Elvis as an (none / 0) (#95)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 12:08:34 AM EST
    environmentalist...???

    Surely this is meant as sarcasm...

    Or did the artist miss The Pelvis flying around the country in a private 707....sometimes landing in Denver for a steak sandwich..


    Parent

    When facts become mere matters of opinion: (5.00 / 4) (#12)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 05:21:37 PM EST
    Author Philip K. Howard argues that the breakdown of authority has caused our public discourse to degenerate into an abusive cacophony, because there's no longer any real public cost being assessed upon those who engage in obstructive and unreasonable public behavior:

    "Debate untethered from facts can lead anywhere. People who believe vaccinations cause autism can cause a resurgence of diseases that we thought we had conquered long ago. People who deny evidence linking global warming to carbon emissions won't even consider a moderate plan to wean ourselves away. [...] In government without human authority, irresponsible actions have few consequences, and irresponsible words have no consequences. Yell, hiss, lie -- whatever."

    Worth a read.

    It's (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by FlJoe on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 09:18:50 PM EST
    seems more like Philip K. Dick to me, a reality where Trump exists doesn't even seem possible.

    Parent
    carbon dioxide (1.00 / 1) (#22)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 12:03:50 AM EST
    not carbon emmissions and not carbon monoxide. right?  

    Parent
    But hey, thanks for playing.

    Parent
    lol. Carbon dioxide is precisely the point. (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 04:38:46 PM EST
    CO2 the main component of hot air, the fuel of bull$hit and politicians.

    Parent
    LOL! (none / 0) (#52)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:29:37 PM EST
    Touché!

    Parent
    From Josh today (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 09:10:03 PM EST
    He has never known a nation embracing peace, for as long as he can remember we have been a nation trying to get out of Iraq and deal with the betrayal of leadership that took us into the Iraq War. Josh believes that it was Obama's "turning of the page" that has led us to two different realities if you are the red guys or the blue guys. There were no consequences for thousands of innocent Iraqi lives. Now there are no consequences for lesser evils and lesser lies, and almost everything is a lesser evil and a lesser lie.

    Parent
    That turn the page (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:40:40 AM EST
    strategy certainly caused a lot of problems. People need to know what happened during the Bush Administration and Bush along with Cheney, Rice, Powell and many others should be made to appear under oath as to what went on during the Bush Administration.

    Parent
    Out of the mouths of babes (none / 0) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 10:49:35 AM EST
    Josh has it right to a point....

    We are very much two nations. One sends its children to fight.

    The others see their children make millions playing a game but trying to be relevant by sitting on the sidelines and disrespecting the flag that the other children fight for.

    It is even worse when they see people claiming that "they have the right" because the Constitution protects them. And when they see the President make the claim that commercial speech is protected by the Constitution they wonder if he is actually that dumb or if he is just furthering his agenda.

    So yes, Obama turned the page. And yes, thousands of people died because we invaded based on false information. But what reasonable CIC would not have? Every major intelligence agency in the world said Iraq had WMD's and we knew for a fact that Saddam had used them on his own people. And that Saddam was giving money to terrorists's families that had attacked Israel. His air force was violating his agreement that ended Desert Storm and he was paying money to corrupt UN officials in the Oil for Food program. And then the kicker. Instead of saying, "Hey! I don't have WMD's!" and inviting the UN in and cooperating with the search Saddam postured and strutted under the false belief that we were just a paper tiger.

    After all we had let Saudi Arabia slide even though they had supplied 13 of the 9/11 terrorists. What was a guy to think?

    Who made the decisions to change our intelligence organizations to be an electronic surveillance group that see some pictures but can't hear what is said?

    And who shall we demand stand in the dock for the ones that died after Obama, against all the advice of his Generals, ran from the terrorists and allowed them to birth ISIS?

    Six years have elapsed since Obama announced that the war was over. Well, the boiling soup that was Iraq has turned into Obama Brew that makes Shakespeare's witches brew look tasty.

    Who is responsible for the Christians who ISIS just hung on meat hooks like goats being slaughtered  to meet the requirements to become Halal meat.

    Can any of you imagine hanging upside down knowing your throat will be cut? And hearing it happen to the people next to you??

    Who will stand in judgement for allowing the "JV" to grow into as deadly an organization that the world has seen since Pol Pot sowed his killing fields?

    The Nazis hid their unspeakable crimes as best the could because they knew the world would come after them.

    ISIS celebrates and issues videos and taunts knowing that the keeper of western morals is controlled by...what I do not know.

    But I know who stands in the dock with Obama.

    All of us who voted for him twice.

    We are in Josh's book.

    We are our brother's keeper.

    And we have failed in front of God and the world and the disease of radical islamism continues to spread.

    Parent

    Oh dear God - make it stop (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 11:20:29 AM EST
    And when they see the President make the claim that commercial speech is protected by the Constitution they wonder if he is actually that dumb or if he is just furthering his agenda.

    You gotta love when someone reveals their own ignorance by calling Obama "dumb" for making a 100% correct statement.  

    Parent

    Aloha.

    Parent
    I don't see the proof you claimed (none / 0) (#41)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 04:33:45 PM EST
    in your Cornell Law School explainer.

    However, commerical speech is not given such deference. For a content-based regulation of commercial speech to be valid, it only must withstand intermediate scrutiny.


    Parent
    Look harder (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:13:45 PM EST
    Commercial speech, such as advertisments, has been ruled by the Supreme Court to be entitled to less protection under the First Amendment than noncommerical speech. Under the First Amendment, noncommercial speech is entitled to full protection, and any sort of content-based regulation is only valid if it can withstand strict scrutiny. However, commercial speech is not given such deference. For a content-based regulation of commercial speech to be valid, it only must withstand intermediate scrutiny.

    The false claim was that commercial speech is not protected under the Constitution and that Obama was "dumb" for saying it was protected.  The quote clearly indicates it is afforded less protection than non-commercial speech, but is nonetheless protected under the Constitution.  The standard applied to commercial speech is intermediate scrutiny, which is less than strict scrutiny (although higher than the rational basis standard).

    Parent

    Saying that an employee may say (none / 0) (#96)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 12:11:24 AM EST
    what they want is flat wrong.

    The protesters will be gone as soon as the owners see a drop in franchise popularity,

    Parent

    vague generalities vs vague generalities. (none / 0) (#126)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 12:53:54 PM EST
    The Washington Redskins issue is apparently what you and Jim are hamster wheeling over.  I'm guessing of course because neither of you bothered with either pointing to Obama's speech or mentioning the freakin' background.  Were we supposed to read your minds?  

    I must say that the Obama administration's prosecution of this issue makes your defense look like the most threadbare academic quibbling.  Show us somewhere they supported freedom of commercial speech if you want to make your point.

    Meanwhile, here's another speech by your Constitutional Law expert.

    Parent

    I was ready to blow off your recommendation (none / 0) (#31)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 09:04:42 AM EST
    Then I noticed that first quoted line:

    Debate untethered from facts can lead anywhere.

    Killer.    

    The Great Debates: assertion v. assertion.  spin v. spin


    Parent

    YouTube's Policy Change Hurting Independent Journa (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by CityLife on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 10:54:25 PM EST
    Tea Party winger pol calls for violence (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 10:01:29 AM EST
    Kentucky governor Matt Blevin gave a speech at the "Vale Voters Summit" (heh) suggesting that the election of Hillary Clinton may result in violence and bloodshed:

    "I want us to be able to fight ideologically, mentally, spiritually, economically, so that we don't have to do it physically," Bevin said Saturday. "But that may, in fact, be the case."

    He added, citing Thomas Jefferson's "blood of patriots and tyrants" quote: "The roots of the tree of liberty are watered by what? The blood. Of who? The tyrants, to be sure. But who else? The patriots. Whose blood will be shed? It may be that of those in this room. It might be that of our children and grandchildren."

    The he tried to walk it back saying he was talking about military service and the fight against terrorists.

    Uh, huh ... not even close.

     

    Another day (5.00 / 5) (#34)
    by FlJoe on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 10:03:20 AM EST
    another epic CNN fail, not a single frickin mention of yesterdays Newsweek story...nor a single question to be raised...nor a question of optics or a demand for answers(or even spin)from the Trump camp, but of course the CGI is once again prominently forced to defend itself against the same ridiculous allegations, that the press failed to previously laugh off the stage.

    Our country has already been destroyed....but look Dr Oz. I am becoming sick in the heart.

    I have tried and tried to brush the media's performance off as a mixture of incompetence and craven desire for ratings but it's more than that but it's even beyond that, there is an almost an evil malevolence afoot.

    Yesterday they spent much time ghoulishly parsing the detailed letter from Hillary's MD(while asserting it was still not enough) and then literally laughing at Trumps antics, just rascally Trump show boating his letter from his equally rascally doctor on a frigging reality TV show....stay tuned for more laughs tomorrow....meanwhile Hillary of course has questions to answer and bad optics to suffer through.

    America, it was nice to know you.

     

    OMG (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by FlJoe on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 05:56:44 PM EST
    CNN is defending Trump for his attack on the Flint.
    More or less just Trump being Trump, they excuse his mealy mouthed spawn as not being not used to the political, and of course they just had to throw in Hillary's deplorable comment.

    If churches that (none / 0) (#191)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 10:34:20 AM EST
    are predominately black don't want politicians making political statements then they shouldn't invite politicians to speak....

    They could start with Hillary and as a bonus they wouldn't have to listen to Hillary talk in poor imitation...

    Parent

    I suppose it would be easier (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 10:59:55 AM EST
    for you guys if things were the way they were a few decades ago, when you could just burn down a black church and get away with it. Problem solved.

    Ah, the good old days, eh Jim Bob?

    Trump's problem is that his sense of dignity and decorum have utterly atrophied ever since he started courting people who walk around wearing trucker's caps with miniature confederate flags on them.

    Parent

    He (none / 0) (#193)
    by FlJoe on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 10:49:09 AM EST
    is a rude liar, that lashes out at anybody who dares even politely question his vile spewage.

    Parent
    linea: "you fabricated a legal clause that does not exist in this law or any other law. there is no 'original birth certificate' caveat"

    You're punching way above your weight class here. I was not referencing any non-existent legal clause, but was clearly discussing the respective floor debates on HB 2 in the North Carolina legislature, and the stated legislative intent for passing the measure:

    "For the purpose of this discussion, I would offer to you that per the reasons offered by state lawmakers for the public record in their respective floor speeches -- which are found in the respective journals of the State House and State Senate, as well as the media -- the GOP majority's well-expressed intent in this instance was to:
    (a) Discriminate against North Carolina's LGBT residents by precluding local municipalities from enacting protective ordinances on their behalf; and
    (b) Discriminate against transgendered persons by requiring them to use public accommodations, i.e., rest rooms and locker rooms, according to their biological sex as determined by their original birth certificate."

    linea, if you have to resort to a willful misinterpretation of what I actually wrote in order to continue insisting that you're right, then you've lost the argument through reasons of your own intellectual dishonesty.

    The publicly stated purpose of GOP majority state legislators and Gov. McCrory in enacting HB 2 / Act 3 was twofold:

    • To deny North Carolina's LGBT residents any legal protections which might otherwise be afforded them as a designated protected class, by stripping them of that prior status per Charlotte's city ordinance; and
    • To bar transgendered students and persons from using the restroom and locker room facilities of their choice.

    Hypothetically, were Caitlyn Jenner to attempt to use the women's restroom in North Carolina, given her status as a high-profile transgendered female, she would likely risk arrest for violation of Act 3. (And that, of course, depends upon the willingness of local authorities to actually enforce the state law.)

    Jenner could then invoke as her defense at trial the very case you're making, but there's no guarantee that a North Carolina district court judge would recognize as valid her amended New York birth certificate with regards to her stated gender, as opposed to her biological gender at birth.

    Per state health department directive (which is a rule and not law), the State of New York only requires that a person first undergo "appropriate clinical treatment" before petitioning the court to legally amend his or her birth certificate per gender preference. But North Carolina actually requires someone to first undergo sex reassignment surgery before it will bestow such recognition, per Sec. 130A-118(b)(4), NCGS.

    And because Jenner has not yet undergone sex reassignment surgery, per North Carolina law she's still legally a man.

    Aloha.

    George Zimmerman testifies in Apperson trial (none / 0) (#5)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 02:30:39 PM EST
    Matt Apperson is accused of attempted 2nd degree murder.  

    Defense attorney Michael LaFay wanted to probe Zimmerman about his encounter with Martin to show the jury why his client may fear the man, but the judge found that reasoning to be irrelevant. Stone accused LaFay of attempting to retry that case.

    Both sides agree that the tension between Zimmerman and Apperson stems from their first encounter on Sept. 9, 2014, when they argued over Martin while driving side by side in Lake Mary. That run-in was coincidental, but the pair continued to bump into each other in later months because Zimmerman's doctor is near where Apperson works, attorneys said.



    Wrong link (none / 0) (#6)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 02:36:51 PM EST
    Here's the one with the quote from my first post

    The other link talks about Zimmerman being admonished by Judge Deborah Nelson (same judge!) for being a hostile witness.

    Parent

    Hard to decide (none / 0) (#180)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 12:03:09 AM EST
    ...which of those two deserves the most contempt.

    Parent
    From our "Hit 'em Where It Hurts" file: (none / 0) (#15)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 14, 2016 at 05:49:13 PM EST
    Due to the bigoted and discriminatory legislation (HB 2) recently enacted in North Carolina, Both the NCAA and the Atlantic Coast Conference have announced that all championship tournament events which might otherwise be scheduled in that state will henceforth be relocated elsewhere.

    Ultimately, that means that so long as HB 2 remains on the books as state law, ACC basketball tournaments and NCAA basketball tournament regional  and Final Four games will not be held in North Carolina.

    Ouch.

    That is an interesting (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by coast on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:02:53 PM EST
    Position coming from an organization that disallows male transgenders to participate based on identification only. Maybe NC could come to a compromise with the NCAA and simply follow the NCAAs requirement that males medically prove themselves before being allowed use a female restroom.

    Parent
    Or, maybe NC could repeal the offending law. (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:18:07 PM EST
    Just sayin'.

    Parent
    Or the NCAA (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by coast on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:19:49 AM EST
    Could truly support transgender sand not force them to take medical test to participate .

    Parent
    ... which is North Carolina's homophobic HB 2 / Act 3, and not repeatedly seek to change the subject because you have a chip on your shoulder and / or an axe to grind.

    Nevertheless, the NCAA has had a policy in place since 2011 regarding participation by transgender athletes in collegiate sports. That said, member institutions themselves have been slow to adopt those policy recommendations. Of the 37 Div. 1 conferences within the NCAA, only two -- Conference USA (CUSA) and the Mid-American Conference (MAC) -- have embedded those recommendations into their own policies.

    Much like the eventual acceptance of female athletes under Title IX, which the NCAA didn't accept until it was finally compelled to do so in 1981 (nine years after Title IX's enactment), the full inclusion of transgender athletes is likely to take a while. Very few things in this world happen overnight. It can be one thing to mandate a change in policy, and quite another to see that it's actually carried out fully in accordance with your directive.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    do you realize (3.50 / 2) (#168)
    by linea on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:41:56 PM EST
    how harsh you are to everyone? coast had a perfectly fine comment on a topic she is concerned about but you were dismissive and harsh. do you even realize you are doing this?

    Parent
    Yes he does (none / 0) (#190)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 10:24:31 AM EST
    He will tell you to leave before long.

    Parent
    it is TalkLeft and (none / 0) (#198)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 11:35:49 AM EST
    you are retro Right.   All racial animus and praising Northern Europe and critical of Southern Europe.

    I have read more bigoted tripe from you than anyone in recent memory.  A perfect example of a Trump supporter.

    Parent

    Now that (none / 0) (#65)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:18:09 PM EST
    Is a interesting concept

    Parent
    my impression (none / 0) (#74)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:49:53 PM EST
    is that state politicians passed this law in an election year because the citizens of that state favored the provisions of that law (i.e., to get re-elected).

    why should the voting citizens of that state be required to capitulate to a sports orgaization with, i assume, non-elected president and board members?

    Parent

    They're not being "forced to capitulate" (none / 0) (#78)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:57:02 PM EST
    They can do whatever they want - and other people and organizations can also choose to boycott them and take their money/tournaments elsewhere.

    Parent
    i do feel (none / 0) (#81)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 08:08:44 PM EST
    it's a dumb law. but i wonder - did the NCAA let their athlete members vote on this boycott? i suspect not.

    Parent
    Why should they? (none / 0) (#103)
    by Yman on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:02:00 AM EST
    And does it even matter if they do?  Large companies and government agencies rarely (if ever) have their employees vote on policy decisions.

    Parent
    ... to capitulate to anything or anyone. But that said, the NCAA and ACC are private organizations. And as such, they have every right to take their business elsewhere if they don't care for North Carolina's discriminatory environment and practices.

    Same for the NBA, which recently rescinded its decision that Charlotte, NC should host the 2017 All Star Game, and instead moved next year's game and its related events to New Orleans.

    North Carolina's GOP legislators are perfectly free to ban homosexuality and declare that black children are henceforth to be called "pickaninnies," if they so desire. But they best realize that such actions can have serious consequences for their state's business climate because most decent people tend to not patronize such places where obvious bigotry is openly celebrated and defended.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    So you agree (3.00 / 1) (#97)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 12:14:21 AM EST
    . to capitulate to anything or anyone. But that said, the NCAA and ACC are private organizations. And as such, they have every right to take their business elsewhere if they don't care for North Carolina's discriminatory environment and practices.

    That the NFL and its team members can fire the protesters when ever they want.

    Parent

    Fire them for what, Jim? (none / 0) (#100)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 04:43:39 AM EST
    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
    - The Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968)

    Disagreeing with the ignorant, race-baiting likes of you?

    If you don't like it, change the channel.

    Parent

    For not following team (none / 0) (#131)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:08:09 PM EST
    instructions that say they must stand and show respect for the flag during the national anthem at the beginning of the team's participation in a football game.

    Parent
    ... from an employee or student under direct threat of suspension or dismissal, then that flag really isn't worth the bunting it's printed on.

    Parent
    No can do (none / 0) (#130)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:07:19 PM EST
    Can't fire someone for exercising First Amendment Rights....

    Parent
    What I find more offensive (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:27:20 PM EST
    Is a member of the National US Womens soccer team taking a knee for her country's national anthem.

    What are these coddled immature athletes thinking.
    If you do not like what your country represents, or find major faults with it, do not try out for the national team.

    Anyone trying out for the national , I would think, would have pride in their country. Kneeling for the national anthem does not reflect that.

    I understand if they have issues certain things happening, and if they want to show their feelings with a protest, do not drag the national team and your teammates into it. Your team mates have joined together for 1 goal, to win a title for each other and their country.

    Parent

    So you think a Mickey D (none / 0) (#132)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:10:49 PM EST
    employee can't be fired for saying something that runs off customers???

    The First says:

    "Congress shall make no..."

    That's the government, not an employer.

    Parent

    You finally figured that out?!? (none / 0) (#185)
    by Yman on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 08:44:26 AM EST
    All these years of crying "free speech!" and complaining about private action when it's someone you sympathize with, and NOW you discover something we've known all along?

    Progress!

    Parent

    I work (none / 0) (#156)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:22:41 PM EST
    For the local County Government, and if I tried to make a political or activist statement while at work, I would be warned in writing , and fired if I tried it again.
    You may partake in political activism on your own time, but political statements while on the Boss's dime , not so much.


    Parent
    I owned a business (none / 0) (#181)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 12:07:19 AM EST
    You may partake in political activism on your own time, but political statements while on the Boss's dime , not so much.

    I didn't have a problem with that.

    Of course, my employees were all Black.  And since I retired, they now own the business.


    Parent

    You would be (none / 0) (#182)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 04:21:13 AM EST
    One of the few.
    You also believe in the cause, and no doubt would tolerate a potential revenue  loss by alienating clientele,
    Government workers are strictly forbidden
    The NFL risks a backlash by permitting this
    Yes, a vocal part of the media applauds these protests, but a good portion of their viewers do not.

    Parent
    You need to know ... (none / 0) (#186)
    by Yman on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 08:45:49 AM EST
    ... what the players' contract says before you can assume this type of conduct gives them the right to fire or punish him.

    Parent
    it's a dumb law (1.00 / 1) (#23)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 12:15:29 AM EST
    it would require that Caitlyn Jenner use the women's room at a stadium sporting event in North Carolina even if Caitlyn wanted to pull out the man-bits and use a proper standing urinal in the men's room (cuz the lines are shorter). dumb law.


    Parent
    That's not what the law says at all. (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 03:55:10 AM EST
    HB 2 amended Article 37, Chapter 115C, General Statutes of North Carolina to restrict a student's use of single-sex school restrooms on the sole basis of his or her biological gender:

    "Sec. 115C-522.2(b). Single-Sex Multiple Occupancy Bathroom and Changing Facilities. - Local boards of education shall require every multiple occupancy bathroom or changing facility that is designated for student use to be designated for and used only by students based on their biological sex."

    Similarly, Article 81, Chapter 143, General Statutes was amended to restrict a person's use of single-sex public restrooms on the sole basis of his or her biological gender:

    "Sec. 143-760(b). Single-Sex Multiple Occupancy Bathroom and Changing Facilities. - Public agencies shall require every multiple occupancy bathroom or changing facility to be designated for and only used by persons based on their biological sex."

    Further, the North Carolina LGBT community vehemently and rightly objects to the following language in Sec. 143-222.2(c), General Statutes, which was included in Part III of HB 2:

    "The General Assembly declares that the regulation of discriminatory practices in employment is properly an issue of general, statewide concern, such that this Article and other applicable provisions of the General Statutes supersede and preempt any ordinance, regulation, resolution, or policy adopted or imposed by a unit of local government or other political subdivision of the State that regulates or imposes any requirement upon an employer pertaining to the regulation of discriminatory practices in employment, except such regulations applicable to personnel employed by that body that are not otherwise in conflict with State law." (Emphasis is mine.)

    This provision was drafted specifically to strike down an existing ordinance in the city of Charlotte which prohibited discrimination in employment against residents on the basis of their sexual orientation. Further, another amendment to Sec. 143-222 prohibits private citizens from filing a civil action to overturn the new public policy.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    it is exactly what the law say!! (1.00 / 1) (#53)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:41:30 PM EST
    i'm exactly right! i read the actual law. i am more clever than you.

    Parent
    Seriously, is English your first language? (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:16:39 PM EST
    Because I'm really not sure that it is, since your reading comprehension ability leaves an awful lot to be desired. I don't think you're willfully misunderstanding what people are saying. Rather, I believe that you're simply struggling to understand, period.

    To your point, you very clearly said above that Caitlyn Jenner would be required to use the ladies' room:

    "[I]t would require that Caitlyn Jenner use the women's room at a stadium sporting event in North Carolina even if Caitlyn wanted to pull out the man-bits and use a proper standing urinal in the men's room (cuz the lines are shorter)." (Emphasis is mine.)

    But the law obviously says otherwise:

    "Public agencies shall require every multiple occupancy bathroom or changing facility to be designated for and only used by persons based on their biological sex." (Again, emphasis is mine.)

    Therefore, since Caitlyn Jenner is biologically male, she would be required by law to use the men's room in North Carolina, even though she now identifies as female.

    If English is in fact your second language, and you have trouble understanding exactly what I'm saying, then please don't be afraid to ask me for further clarification.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    thank you (none / 0) (#70)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:33:26 PM EST
    i will apologize and admit my mistake if i am mistaken. but i feel i am right and i feel i am more clever than you.

    i believe you are applying a common-language reading to the terms. the terms you are refering to are defined in the specific law. as written, Caitlyn would be required to use the woman's room; personal preference for standing urinal use due to excessive beer consumption notwithstanding. my english is excellent.

    Parent

    Well, then, my bad. (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:50:06 PM EST
    You're simply choosing to double down on stupid.

    Parent
    no!! (none / 0) (#77)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:56:33 PM EST
    now you are just being mean.

    i'm right!!

    i expained to you that you need to read the actual bill and read the actual definitions for the terms used. you are reading a law with legal definitions. you are ignoring what i am saying.

    you are being obstinate!!

    Parent

    Oh, for crying out loud! (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 08:19:56 PM EST
    I quoted the actual bill above and at length -- twice!! I even provided you with a fckn link to it! I've worked in and with state legislatures for the better part of 30 years. I know how to read and write statutory and session law.

    You don't know what the hell you're talking about, linea. If you want to bat your eyes at everyone here like some clueless right-wing coquette, then do so on your own time. It's readily apparent that I'm wasting my time trying to discuss public policy with a willful moron like you.

    Aloha, as in "Adios."

    Parent

    i'm flattered (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 08:48:45 PM EST
    that i am more clever than an actual lawyer.

    i read every line of that law very closely. and just now, i double-checked the relevant sections. you refuse to listen to me. i'm telling you that you are applying a common-language reading of "biological sex" when the law explicitly defines that term and within that definition Caitlyn would be required to use the women's room despite any alternative preference and despite having actual man-bits. See Section 1.2, 115C.521-2 (a)(1). i dont know why you can't be nice to me.

    Parent

    Too bad your own pernicious ignorance is not similarly handicapped.

    :-|

    Parent

    i was (none / 0) (#89)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 09:56:24 PM EST
    complimenting you in a post below for responding nicely to me and not calling me names - while you were posting this calling me PERNICIOUS: "having a harmful effect, especially in a gradual or subtle way."

    yes, i had to look the word up.

    why? why cant we just have a discussion without you calling me names?

    Parent

    You shouldn't be (none / 0) (#187)
    by Yman on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 08:47:59 AM EST
    i'm flattered that i am more clever than an actual lawyer

    I don't think Donald's a lawyer, but more importantly ...

    ... you're not.

    Parent

    My bad. (none / 0) (#85)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 09:19:50 PM EST
    HERE'S the entire text of HB 2, which was passed the North Carolina State Legislature in special session on March 23, 2016 and then signed into law by Gov. Pat McCrory the very same day as Act 3, North Carolina Session Laws 2016. And -- now pay attention here -- per the Charlotte Observer:

    "The N.C. General Assembly on Wednesday approved a bill that invalidates Charlotte's new legal protections for LGBT individuals, doing far more than striking down a controversial provision that allowed transgender people to use the bathroom of the gender with which they identify. Gov. Pat McCrory signed it into law hours later."

    Now, are you willing to take the local NC newspaper's word for it -- or are you still going to insist that you know better, regardless of the mountain of evidence otherwise?

    :-|

    Parent

    thank you (none / 0) (#88)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 09:50:44 PM EST
    for nicely presenting your argument and not calling me names (smile).

    but we are dicussing the odd legal definitions in HB2 not a newspapers interpretation of the law. so let's ignore the Charlotte Observer completely. the relevant section in HB2 is:

    "§ 115C-521.2. Single-sex multiple occupancy bathroom and changing facilities. (a) Definitions. - The following definitions apply in this section: (1) Biological sex. - The physical condition of being male or female, which is stated on a person's birth certificate.

    i'm going to assume you know absoluety nothing about Caitlyn Jenner and will refer you to I AM CAIT, episode: "Kiss and Make-up" [2016] where Caitlyn states that both california driver's license and birth certificate have been changed to the F designation. thus, Caitlyn's "biological sex" according you this law is female (irrespective of man-bits). am i wrong? i am brilliant! i am amazing! i'm the only person in the entire world who figured this out because i'm amazingly crafty!

    Parent

    You don't know what you're talking about. (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 10:10:36 PM EST
    I'm through here. You're completely impervious to both reason and rationality.

    Parent
    but i'm sure i'm right! (none / 0) (#92)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 10:20:06 PM EST
    ⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡ 5039;⚡️⚡️⚡️
    can anybody help me here?
    does anybody understand?

    ⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡ 5039;⚡️⚡️⚡️

    Parent

    It is always dangerous to be "sure" (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 10:59:12 PM EST
    that you are right. I don't think you are. It is very unlikely that the North Carolina Supreme Court would interpret that definitional section as you are reading it, that is, as saying that someone's "biological sex" can change as a result of an amendment granted by another state to the gender stated on that person's original birth certificate. To read it that way would go against the entire theme and purpose of the law, and is therefore very unlikely (to put it mildly) to be correct. I am sure the court would say that the expression "birth certificate" in this provision means only the original certificate issued at or just after the time of the person's birth.
       It is also very unbecoming (and unpersuasive), by the way, to describe yourself gleefully as being extremely clever. Others can say you are clever (if you are), but not you, yourself, I would suggest.

    Parent
    it actually (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by linea on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:54:23 AM EST
    distresses me to be told i'm unbecoming. at the same time, i'm confused why.

    NC has a process to change one's BC and clearly that "amended" BC is reconized by this law. there is no provision under any state law to distinguish between an "original" vs an "amended" BC and no provision under this law to reject the BC of other states as "invalid" unless reviewd by a NC court.

    i will admit i'm wrong if actual lawyers on this site find my reading to be a missinterpretation. but to assert that a person with both a CA drivers license and BC with a F designation could be prosecuted under this law for using a women's restroom because CA has a different criteria for changing one's BC doesnt seem a reasonable interpretation of this law. to me.

    i do feel i'm clever for figuring this out. i read the entire bill and researched the process in NC and CA for changing one's BC and i just wanted to feel acknowledged for having thought of the implications of this law defining biological sx via the BC rather than actual anatomy (which would be impractical for a law enforcement officer). i feel the law is a mess and badly written. i'm sorry.


    Parent

    Sorry you are confused. (5.00 / 3) (#111)
    by Peter G on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 09:16:23 AM EST
    I did not say you were unbecoming. I said one of your statements was unbecoming, and I tried to tell you exactly why. Your suggested reading of the statute was in fact clever. I (an "actual lawyer" - which by the way does not necessarily make my analysis right or even better than Donald's, for example) explained respectfully why I believe your analysis would be determined to be wrong. I am not the judge. You are entitled to "feel" however you want. I made a sincere suggestion about how other people may react to what you say or write about yourself, regardless of how you "feel" about yourself. I have also suggested to you (which you clearly reject) that in this crowd, at least, writing about information, thoughts, opinions, and analyses carries more weight than self-described "feelings."

    Parent
    In fact the large majority of commenters here - like DonfromHI (and me) - are absolutely not lawyers.

    Parent
    I think linea brings up a good point (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by ding7777 on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:26:48 AM EST
    In North Carolina you can get a new/amended  birth certificate reflecting the proper sex after a person has undergone sex reassignment surgery -

    But some states do not require sex reassignment surgery, like say NY.

    So if NC accepts out-of-state birth certificates for other situations,  then someone like Caitlyn Jenner, who was born in NY, could possess a new/amended  birth certificate without having sex reassignment surgery and could legally use a women's restroom

    Parent

    ... for measuring the extent to which HB 2 / Act 3 is discriminatory? No, she's not.

    Because HB 2/ Act 3 specifically bars plaintiffs from bringing civil action in state court, any challenge to its provisions would have to be filed in federal court. Further, due to the severability clause contained in Section 4 of HB 2 / Act 3, that court cannot simply strike down the measure as a whole, and would have to address each specific provision separately.

    In determining the validity of that challenge, a federal judge is first going to examine whether or not HB 2 / Act 3 violates federal law. In order to make that determination, he or she will likely look first to the North Carolina legislature's intent when enacting these policies.

    For the purpose of this discussion, I would offer to you that per the reasons offered by state lawmakers for the public record in their respective floor speeches -- which are found in the respective journals of the State House and State Senate, as well as the media -- the GOP majority's well-expressed intent in this instance was to:

    (a) Discriminate against North Carolina's LGBT residents by precluding local municipalities from enacting protective ordinances on their behalf; and

    (b) Discriminate against transgendered persons by requiring them to use public accommodations, i.e., rest rooms and locker rooms, according to their biological sex as determined by their original birth certificate.

    Federal case law generally precludes states and municipalities from enacting laws which target specific groups of people, when the primary motive for doing so is animus against that group. That's why California's Proposition 8 was ultimately struck down by District Judge Vaughn Walker in August 2010.

    Hypothetically, were the North Carolina Supreme Court to rule that someone like Caitlyn Jenner or Chaz Bono could use a public restroom per the information now contained on her or his amended California birth certificate, such an action would likely prompt Gov. McCrory to call state lawmakers into special session for the purpose of allowing the GOP majority to amend Act 3 to preclude the state court's ruling.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Thank you, Peter. (none / 0) (#101)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 05:32:10 AM EST
    The law itself is likely unconstitutional. No federal court will allow such a law to stand when the sole motivation for its passage is an open animus against a distinct class of people an a desire to discriminate against them..

    But North Carolina will repeal it first, once its citizens start noting the significant repercussions from its passage, such as the UNC Tar Heels and Duke Blue Devils having to travel out of state for the first two rounds of the NCAA basketball tournament.

    My daughter's alma mater Albany announced in late July that its men's basketball team has cancelled its Nov. 22 season opener at Duke in protest of Act 3 NCSL 2016 and further, the school will not schedule or play any games in North Carolina while the law remains in effect. Other programs are openly contemplating the same, including our University of Hawaii Rainbows, who are scheduled to play the UNC Tar Heels on Nov. 18.

    You don't mess with basketball in North Carolina. And by enacting Act 3, the state's GOP governor and legislative leadership ended up courting a serious nationwide backlash against the state which, as I noted in my opening post on this subject, is likely going to first hit North Carolinians where it really hurts -- on the basketball court. Legendary Duke Coach Mike Kryzzewski and his colleagues are already on record denouncing the measure.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    A federal judge's assessment (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by Peter G on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 04:37:13 PM EST
    of discriminatory animus by the state legislature in enacting a statute is the least likely ground for a statute to be struck down. Judges are very loathe to rule on that basis. I'm not saying it couldn't happen in this case, but as I think you can imagine, it's the last place a federal judge wants to go.

    Parent
    You made a mistake that Donald (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:03:56 PM EST
    did not correct.

    He is not a lawyer.

    Parent

    I didn't see it, or I would have. (none / 0) (#146)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 04:41:57 PM EST
    But how fortunate it is that we have you, because you're all about correcting factual mistakes and errors -- save, of course, for your own.

    Parent
    bananas (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by linea on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:00:43 PM EST
    (a) you fabricated a legal clause that does not exist in this law or any other law. there is no "original birth certificate" caveat.

    (b) the only intelligible reading of this law is: "Anyone with an F on their birth certificate uses the women's restroom and anyone with an M uses the men's.

    (c) therefore, Caitlyn is required by North Carolina statute to use the women's room [ PERIOD ] which was my original assertion.

    Parent

    Why should he? (none / 0) (#188)
    by Yman on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 08:50:57 AM EST
    Even if he did see it, he's not under a duty to try to correct someone else's false assumptions.

    Parent
    Sandra Bland lawsuit settled for $1.9M (none / 0) (#32)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 09:21:58 AM EST
    Link.

    Wonder if any further information will come out.

    In the rememberance (none / 0) (#36)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 11:00:02 AM EST
    of Dan Rather and the CBS news team that used a letter that everyone knew was fake....

    We have their children editing out Bubba's admission that Hillary had frequently collapsed.

    Wow.


    ROTFLMAO (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 01:53:16 PM EST
    Well, I guess when she shows up for the debate and doesn't fall over she will win. Right?

    Parent
    I told the campaign to send... (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 11:20:40 AM EST
    Bill on a 6 month sabbatical to dig wells in Africa with no access to media before he ruins his wife's chances but noooo, nobody listens to me;)

    Parent
    You mean the one ... (none / 0) (#38)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 11:26:13 AM EST
    ... where he immediately corrected what he said:

    'Well if it is, it's a mystery to me and all of her doctors, because frequently -- well not frequently, rarely -- but on more than one occasion, over the last many, many years, the same sort of thing happened to her when she got severely dehydrated.'

    Looks like you edited out that important bit of information.

    The hypocrisy burns ...

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#44)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 05:00:14 PM EST
    The official CBS explanation was , it was edited out in the interest of time, lol

    Really?

    All 1.7 seconds was edited out for time?  Lol

    They were cleaning up after Mr Bill

    In defense of CBS, networks will do that if the interviewee asks them , they claim they misspoke and would like that segment edited.
    If the media outlet likes the person, they will do that, if they want the scoop, and have no love for the person, they roll with it.

    Parent

    How (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by FlJoe on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:57:45 PM EST
    about some selective editing
    "It's nice to see a dad kiss his daughter," remarked Oz, according to NBC's Peter Alexander.

    Trump replied, "I kiss her every chance I get."

    The remarks were cut from the broadcast which aired Thursday.

    Disgusting, deplorable or just disturbing ?

    Parent
    Let's please not go there, and just ... (none / 0) (#69)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:24:19 PM EST
    ... accept the fact that Trump loves his children. And why wouldn't he, since they're clearly chips off the ol' block? You can't trust a single word any of them say.

    ;-D

    Parent

    Normally, no one would "go there" (none / 0) (#76)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 07:55:00 PM EST
    Eww!! (none / 0) (#87)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 09:32:13 PM EST
    LOL! That's way too much information!

    Parent
    If you think that was gross... (none / 0) (#90)
    by vml68 on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 10:05:07 PM EST
    I am going to assume that when someone asks you what you have in common with your daughter, you don't say "S*x".

    Parent
    But (none / 0) (#108)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:25:29 AM EST
    the question lingers, is Trump boorishly deplorable or deplorably boorish?

    Too bad we can't ship him back to the gilded age where hw would be properly shamed and shunned.

    Parent

    Perhaps after a pitcher of margaritas, ... (none / 0) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 04:56:05 PM EST
    ... we'll find Trump to be deboorishly plorable. As far as my preferred era for his time travel, I'd send him to Czarist Russia, circa 1917-18. That was indeed a wonderful time to be one of the elite.

    ;-D

    Parent

    More silly, baseless claims (none / 0) (#47)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:09:00 PM EST
    I guess if it's all you've got ...

    Parent
    Oh please (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:17:40 PM EST
    You are beyond silly.
    You are going to buy a 1.7 second edit for " time constraints" when the edit eliminates a rather embarrassing utterance.

    Keep pushing that meme

    Parent

    So you think that was all they edited? (none / 0) (#54)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:46:52 PM EST
    And yet - despite your baseless accusation that they did it because they liked him and were "cleaning up" for him - they aired the full clip the very next morning.  Heh.

    Keep pushing that pile of horse$hit.  You have enough for several farms by now ...

    Parent

    So showing the full clip (none / 0) (#98)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 12:23:37 AM EST
    to a much smaller audience somehow makes things right??

    Look. Show what the interviewee said. Period.

    If the editorial groups wants to carry water by explaining it was just a mistake, fine.

    But don't change the meaning by editing out something. That is lying.  

    And don't insult our intelligence by saying it was done to save 1.7 seconds of broadcast time.

    Parent

    A " much smaller audience* (none / 0) (#104)
    by Yman on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:07:45 AM EST
    You have no clue what the audience size is. But I love your hypocritical standard ("But don't change the meaning by editing out something. That is lying.").  Something you do all the time.

    Heh.

    BTW -You can't insult something that doesn't exist.

    Parent

    So you say I lie all the time? (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 08:07:01 AM EST
    Okie Dokie. I'm proud to be insulted by you. It does show your bias and bigotry...

    In the meantime the polls this AM shows Trump and Hillary neck and neck. The "lead" has evaporated.

    So keep on attacking, Sparky. The fun is just starting.


    Parent

    It's just a fact (none / 0) (#176)
    by Yman on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 09:00:01 PM EST
    You DO lie all the time, and you constantly edit quotes selectively.   Yet now you compassion about it.

    Funny stuff.

    Nothing to back up your "smaller audience" claim.   Well,  it'seems not the first time you just made $hit up and got called on it.
    BTW -  You're right.   I'm bigoted against wingnut liars.

    Parent

    i dont feel calling you names is fair (none / 0) (#178)
    by linea on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 09:19:29 PM EST
    i feel you are expressing your opinions from your perspective and i dont feel that's wrong. even though i suspect you might be shocked about my actual feelings on some issues i appreciate that you are always respectul to me and to others on this blog.

    however, i do feel i need to explain that the national polls mean nothing because of the electoral college and hillary stll has a lock on the needed states.

    Parent

    are they actually (none / 0) (#55)
    by linea on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:47:24 PM EST
    editing out the comment? if true, i feel it is malfeasance (misfeasance?) for the media to do such a thing. people should decide for themselves whether they feel it is a misspeak or (if one is so incline) a freudean-slip.

    Parent
    Yes they edited out (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:12:18 PM EST
    Bill Clinton saying "frequently" and left in "rarely."

    Parent
    "Freudian"? (none / 0) (#177)
    by Yman on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 09:02:48 PM EST
    Do you have any clue what that means?  Because you're not using it properly.

    BTW - They edited it for the evening broadcast and used the whole clip the next morning.

    Parent

    1.7 seconds, huh? (none / 0) (#57)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 15, 2016 at 06:53:23 PM EST
    Mon Dieu et sacre bleu! What are they hiding! Shades of Rosemary Woods and Watergate! Let's convene a committee and appoint a special counsel to investigate.

    Wingbats are often their own best parody.

    Parent

    on a non political note (none / 0) (#112)
    by CST on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 10:38:36 AM EST
    It's finally chilly!  Time to bust out the sweatshirts and cider.

    Now if only we could get some desperately needed rain as most of the state is now under extreme drought conditions.  Although they still aren't limiting water use in Boston (because there's an absurd amount of water in the water supply) they are in many other communities across the state and it has hit the local farms very hard.  In the summer time we usually get almost daily brief summer rain storms that break through the really hot and humid days - that just didn't happen this year - ever.  Hopefully the rain will return with the fall.

    I shall slightly shiver... (none / 0) (#119)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 11:23:44 AM EST
    in the evenings in shorts, t-shirt, and sandals for a wee bit longer...don't go Summer, I'm not finished yet!

    But hell yeah, bring some rain...I don't think I have a plant in the garden or a blade of grass alive right now.  Be nice to green up one more time before we go to orange and brown.

    Parent

    you guys (none / 0) (#140)
    by CST on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 03:26:50 PM EST
    are usually 5-10 degrees warmer than us, so it should last a bit longer down there!

    Personally Fall is my favorite season.  But I think that's true of most New Englanders - otherwise why would we still live here, it certainly isn't the rest of the weather.

    Parent

    Send some of that cool weather my way. (none / 0) (#141)
    by vml68 on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 03:43:25 PM EST
    A week ago, it dropped down into the 80s when we were getting all that rain from Hermine and it was such a relief. Back in the 90s now, with some relief when we get heavy afternoon thunderstorms, like right now!

    Though one thing, I do like about being in FL is that when my dogs want to go out in the middle of the night, in Dec and Jan, I don't have to bundle up to go outside. Most times, I can still go out in shorts and flip-flops.

    Parent

    My college roommate (none / 0) (#142)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 04:08:44 PM EST
    lives in Connecticut and I so want to visit her one time in the fall. She complains about the summers but they are downright balmy compared to what she grew up with in SC and I remind her of that. Though weather is strange and a couple of days this summer her weather was hotter.

    Parent
    I gave up (none / 0) (#160)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:33:14 PM EST
    Don't bother watering the lawn, let the crabgrss win, but even the crabgrass is having problems.

    The drought tolerant perennials I have I do water occasionally, and they are still doing well..

    Tomato's and raspberries still producing  ( I have a soaker hose for those)

    Parent

    I am ROFLMAO (none / 0) (#113)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 10:48:35 AM EST
    The whole world was watching Trump's news conference in which he was supposed to claim Obama was born outside the US.

    Instead they got 30 minutes of military leaders praising Trump and then.

    Hillary and her campaign of 2008 started the issue.

    I ended the issue. You know what I mean. (He made Obama produce a birth certificate.)

    President Obama was born in the US.

    Now let's get back to making America great.

    Here's a article with lots of links that you will probably not read. ;-)

    But the one thing I am really laughing at is how the Left claims that claiming Obama was not born in the US is racist or bigoted.

    It was a claim that he was not legally qualified to run.

    Really. How desperate of the Left.

    Nobody believed (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 11:26:51 AM EST
    that he was going to claim Obama was born outside the US in that press conference but he is getting trashed all over the place for lying that Hillary started the birther stuff.

    I have to say though what happens to his base which is 2/3 birthers who think Obama was not born in the US? The birther are who got Trump the GOP nomination.

    Parent

    Now (none / 0) (#114)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 10:58:14 AM EST
    that your Dear Leader has given you the green light, are we to assume you will be taking down the racist pictures of Obama from your web site?

    Parent
    yeah. (none / 0) (#115)
    by mm on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 11:05:57 AM EST
    you're rolling on the floor laughing at how foolish the bigoted left is.

    Just a big effing joke.

    And everything that con man racist just shoveled at you was a big fat lie, but go ahead, roll on the floor some more.

    Parent

    And of course, Jim, you offer as support (none / 0) (#116)
    by Peter G on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 11:06:25 AM EST
    a link to Breitbart which asserts the opposite of the truth. Typically, Tr*mp falsely accuses HRC of what he himself is guilty of.

    Parent
    Shorter (none / 0) (#122)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 11:40:17 AM EST
    Trump "after years of intense investigation and deliberation, I have come to the conclusion that despite what lying Hillary said, the sky is indeed blue".

    Why do I suspect the media will probably praise him for this?

    Parent

    Andy Borowitz says Pres. Obama is (none / 0) (#127)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 01:33:00 PM EST
    grateful to Mr. Trump for granting him ctizenship.

    Parent
    From the lnk linked (none / 0) (#135)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:45:54 PM EST
    According to John Heilemann and Mark Halperin in Game Change, the most ludicrous "othering" theory that Clinton allies engaged in was that a tape existed, somewhere, of Michelle Obama denouncing "whitey" -- and that Clinton herself believed it when consigliere Sid Blumenthal talked about it.
    But the Clinton campaign never pursued the idea that Obama was literally not American, and therefore ineligible for the presidency.

    A small group of hardcore Clinton supporters did. Specifically, anyone reading the fringe Web in the summer of 2008 could find the now-defunct blog called TexasDarlin, the now-defunct blog PUMAParty, and the now-conservative blog HillBuzz posting updates on the hunt for a birth certificate. It was a thin reed, and they knew it.
    "It looks like Obama was born in Hawaii, based on a recently discovered birth announcement found in a Hawaiian newspaper," one HillBuzz blogger wrote in July 2008. "It also looks like the reason Obama refuses to produce his actual birth certificate is that it very likely records dual Kenyan and U.S.  citizenship at Obama's birth."

    Now, if you want to tell me that Hillary isn't responsible for what her supporters did go ahead.

    Trump pushed the issue and Obama produced a birth certificate which ended the speculation.

    Parent

    You left out the part (none / 0) (#137)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:55:13 PM EST
    where Hillary fired the person. But you said it was Hillary that started it which has been proven time and again to be a lie and Trump lied about it too. No one is claiming anything about any bloggers until you brought it up today. Trump didn't say oh, some bloggers started it did he? And maybe you can explain why it went on for years and years in the conservative movement? I mean at least 2/3 of conservatives don't think Obama is an American citizen.

    Parent
    So she fired (none / 0) (#150)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 05:27:30 PM EST
    Now, if you want to tell me that Hillary isn't responsible for what her supporters did go ahead.

    Trump pushed the issue and Obama produced a birth certificate which ended the speculation.

    the person.

    She didn't call a press conference and tell the world.

    Why not?

    And she didn't call a press conference and denounce herself for saying, "As far as I know....."

    Trump is a problem solver. Condemning some blogger would have proved nothing. He forced Obama to provide his birth certificate.  

    Parent

    Trump certainly solved the problem (none / 0) (#157)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:26:59 PM EST
    of assembling all the morons, miscreants, disgruntled armed cranks more-or-less in one place and under one banner.

    Now all we need is a new Crusade to send them on.

    Parent

    Who's responsible for the putz (none / 0) (#138)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:56:54 PM EST
    who posted pictures of Obama growing watermelons on the Whitehouse lawn?

    Parent
    The sane person who was hopeful that (1.00 / 1) (#163)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:25:00 PM EST
    Obama would pass a true single payer plan instead of one that just covers his base...

    I never liked Obama but I think it was about January '09 when he stopped oil drilling and extended the recession that I realized that he truly hated America.

    Pretty obvious that Obama took his hatred of his father because his father abandoned him and blamed America for his leaving. You know, colonial power treats African student so bad he has to leave.

    Parent

    Your comments like these (5.00 / 2) (#165)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:31:54 PM EST
    are disturbing.....gut churning racism.

    Parent
    Really?? (none / 0) (#192)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 10:46:45 AM EST
    You mean my criticism of Obama is racism???

    Or pointing out Obamacare helped his "base but no one else?" You mean no whites voted for him and all blacks voted for him because they are poor?

    Really?

    The election of Obama was supposed to signify the end of racism in this country.

    But the Democrats and the Left have used his race to demonize anyone who disagrees with his, and their, political positions.

    The purpose is to shut down all opposition.

    Hasn't worked very well. Even worse, and this is the real shame, it has given ammunition to the David Dukes of the world.

    Parent

    can you provide an example (none / 0) (#195)
    by mm on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 11:12:59 AM EST
    of "the Left" using his race to demonize anyone who disagrees with his political positions?

    As far as I can tell, the GOP has ceased even pretending to try to govern.  They advocate no positions other than opposition to anything President Obama proposes.   They are simply incapable of governing.

    Parent

    "No whites voted for him.." (none / 0) (#196)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 11:25:02 AM EST
    translation: no whites I know and none of mah kinfolk..

    That type of wild-eyed, wild-swinging hyperbole belies the fact that statistically, the more education a person of "white"-european, asiatic, jewish, or latino extraction had, the more the likelihood that they voted for Obama..

    And conservative's ace in the hole is still the relative lower information voter.

    Parent

    Don't try to make things up (none / 0) (#199)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 11:36:20 AM EST
    when the quote is at the top of the page.

    Or pointing out Obamacare helped his "base but no one else?" You mean no whites voted for him and all blacks voted for him because they are poor?

    Obama won because whites voted for him.

    Proving that being dumb is not race related.

    Parent

    Pretty obvious that you let (none / 0) (#166)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:39:34 PM EST
    Dinesh D'Souza and his threadare armchair psychoanalysis of Obama stand in for having an original thought in your head. But then, why start now?

    Of course before D'Souza, in your mind, Obama was just another radical saying Burn Baby Burn and out to mo-lest the women folk..

    How is it that all of this "hate" on Obama's part is so obvious to people like you and D'Souza, and Glenn Beck and not to millions of others?

    People like Bush just make honest mistakes, but Obama's actions are rooted always in violent, primitive emotion..

    Parent

    Haven't paid attention to D'Souza (none / 0) (#197)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 11:26:40 AM EST
    too busy with my own analysis... ;-)

    First it was the Apology Tour.

    He went around apologizing. Not that America hasn't made mistakes but it has done good by a vast margin.

    Then we had the picture of him bowing to a Muslim prince.

    Then he did things like announcing when we would withdraw from Iraq.... either dumb or mendacious..and anyone, even I knew what would happen.

    tworivers (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 08:52:16 AM CST
    Actually we could argue over the reasons, but so what.
    The issue now is that when the Surrender Party pulls out of Iraq the world we see us as weak.
    Weak people and lambs get attacked.

    Then we have Libya...Benghazi....Russian reset...wrong side in Egypt....failure to support Iranian students...red line....giving Iran nukes...giving Iran nukes...bringing in Muslim refugees by the thousands that we can't vet...stripping the military...and on and on ..

    He is without doubt the worst president in our history.

    Parent

    Oh yes, you came up with that (none / 0) (#200)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 11:38:25 AM EST
    all on your own..

    Of course you did.

    After D'Souza sold fifty thousand copies of his "bestseller" to the Heritage Foundation that in turn communicated the salient points to Limbaugh-Beck-Ingraham-Levin-Hannity et al..

    The last time I saw Honest Abe D'Souza he was in handcuffs. And not in the usual way conservative christians like to use handcuffs..

    Parent

    worst in history.. (none / 0) (#201)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 11:46:16 AM EST
    and four out of the six right wing presidential scholars in the entire U.S agree with you resoundingly.

    Plus, six out of ten men's room wall scrawlers agree as well.

    Eight out of ten scat-flingers at the local zoo are also in agreement.

    Parent

    Legally not qualified (none / 0) (#124)
    by vicndabx on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 12:06:06 PM EST
    and yet....2009

    VAN SUSTEREN: The new president-elect, what are your thoughts? Pretty exciting, it's always exciting when we have a change of power, a transition, but what are your thoughts.

    TRUMP: It's very exciting we have a new president. It would have been nice if he ended with a 500 point up instead of down. It's certainly very exciting.

    His speech was great last night. I thought it was inspiring in every way. And, hopefully he's going to do a great job. But the way I look at it, he cannot do worse than Bush.



    Parent
    Well Bush set him a low standard in several (none / 0) (#136)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 02:47:26 PM EST
    areas but Obama beat him.

    Parent
    It's a breakneck race to the bottom.. (none / 0) (#139)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 03:02:16 PM EST
    which explains, to some extent, some of the slimy, race-baiting garbage anonymous cowards post on the internet..

    When in Rome..

    Parent

    You miss the point (none / 0) (#143)
    by vicndabx on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 04:26:19 PM EST
    According to you, questioning Obama's legitimacy isn't racist, it was merely about whether he was eligible. I gave you an interview where Trump didn't have any issue w/his election and expressed no concern about his eligibility and actually seemed positive about Obama's election.

    Apparently your boy can't think for himself.  Scary if he can be so easily influenced. Manchurian candidate indeed.  

    Parent

    It doesn't matter when Trump became engaged (none / 0) (#152)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 05:37:52 PM EST
    over the Birther issue, it has absolutely nothing to do with race or bigotry.

    The claim wasn't that he was born outside the country because he was black.

    Just that he was.

    And when the Left tries to play such a really dumb race card they turn off a lot of people who can't stand such illogical statements.

    Parent

    Obama being black and liberal and educated (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:07:00 PM EST
    and uppity, represents the perfect psychological OTHER for the Breitbart knuckle-walkers and sort of mental drool they revel in..

    The perfect receptacle for all their deep-seated misgivings and fears and hatreds..

    But, the best way to get a handle on where the Jim's of the world are coming from is to go to his favorite site and read the comments section for MLK day..

    Though lately these people are getting a percieved respite from being benighted cowards and liars by having a loud-mouthed bully to publicly hide behind and be inspired by -- before they slink back into their holes in a couple of months.

    Parent

    Who (none / 0) (#153)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 05:56:31 PM EST
    cares what the motivation was, it's a stupendous lie that he promoted for years and anybody who says otherwise is deplorably dumb.

    Parent
    Promoted for years??? (none / 0) (#164)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:30:11 PM EST
    Look, I just posted who started it in the words of her campaign manager.

    Trump got involved and solved the problem.

    You should thank him.

    lol

    Parent

    That you can't even be honest (none / 0) (#169)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:46:19 PM EST
    enough to acknowledge that Trump promoted it for months, further underscores what a joke you are.

    lol

    Parent

    And here are the facts (none / 0) (#171)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:57:26 PM EST
    from Politifact

    The allegation about Obama's birthplace tracks back to the bruising 2008 Democratic primary between Obama and Clinton.  According to a Telegraph article, as early as April 2008, a Clinton supporter passed around an email that questioned where Obama was born.

    "Barack Obama's mother was living in Kenya with his Arab-African father late in her pregnancy," it said. "She was not allowed to travel by plane then, so Barack Obama was born there and his mother then took him to Hawaii to register his birth."

    The cry that Obama was not a legitimate candidate grew much louder in June 2008.

    On June 7, 2008, Clinton conceded and called for all Democrats to rally behind Obama. Some in her party did not care to listen. By June 10, 2008, opponents to Obama were posting on a website called Pumaparty.com. PUMA stood for Party Unity My Ass. The website encouraged frustrated Clinton supporters to back the Republican nominee.

    So she let her people start it and never came out and refuted it.

    Parent

    Just (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 08:02:51 PM EST
    because you get your marching orders from fringe web sites doesn't mean sane people do.

    Parent
    Nobody ever said Bush (none / 0) (#173)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 08:34:45 PM EST
    "hates America", in effect declaring him the Enemy, like Al Queda..

    These as*holes really remind me of the Bircher-types who put up Wanted For Treason posters in Dallas in 1963..

    Parent

    I Googled Bush hates America (none / 0) (#175)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 08:59:37 PM EST
    and got 780,000 hits in .3 seconds

    Led by this one from your very own Rachael Maddow/

    Parent

    So what's your explanation (none / 0) (#179)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 10:47:42 PM EST
    for Bush's violent hatred Dr Freud/D'Souza?

    A combination of his father's semi-competence making him look bad, and the fact that only barely-literate anonymous hacks on the internet defend his legacy at every turn?

    Is he embittered from being spurned by "Miss Piggy" Rove one too many times?

    Because the Rapture didn't start on schedule on Jan 1st, 2000?

    Does the restless spirit of Karl Faye Tucker haunt his dreams?

    Parent

    These aren't fringe (none / 0) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 08:56:05 PM EST
    You've been played the fool by Hillary.

    Here's the facts.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#183)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 04:26:00 AM EST
    This did happen

    http://tinyurl.com/jhszgzn

    Obama slams smear photo
    By MIKE ALLEN 02/25/08 09:50 AM EST

    Obama campaign manager David Plouffe accused the Clinton campaign Monday of "shameful offensive fear-mongering" by circulating a photo as an attempted smear.

    "The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat front-runner dressed as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya," the Drudge Report said. The photo created huge buzz in political circles and immediately became known as "the 'dressed' photo," reflecting the Drudge terminology.

    Plouffe said in a statement: "On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we've seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it's exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world," said Plouffe.


    Parent
    Your (none / 0) (#184)
    by FlJoe on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 06:38:11 AM EST
    point being?  

    Parent
    i agree with this (none / 0) (#162)
    by linea on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:22:07 PM EST
    the conservative are wonky about the constitution and have huge debates about birth-right citizenship even regarding their own candidates.

    Parent
    Spoken like a man who ... (none / 0) (#148)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 05:00:00 PM EST
    ... posts on his own blog a photo-shopped image of President Obama in African tribal regalia and with a bone in his nose, and thinks it's funny.

    Parent
    Is that like showing Bush as a chimp? (none / 0) (#151)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 05:32:31 PM EST
    Why yes. Yes it is.

    If you can't stand the heat then stay out of the kitchen.

    Parent

    Donald did that? (none / 0) (#155)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 06:19:43 PM EST
    No he didn't. Nor did anyone else here.

    You're the only one willing to descend past the the gutter down into the sewer..

    Though, compared to the others at Breitbart, you could almost qualify as a poet laureate..

    Now, don't run away too fast; you might hurt yourself.

    Parent

    So? What does that mean?? (none / 0) (#167)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:41:52 PM EST
    The monkey and other vile pics were done by other Far Left suffers of the hate Bush Syndrome.

    If you don't like my response, don't visit the site.

    Parent

    How do you know it was even (none / 0) (#170)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 16, 2016 at 07:57:19 PM EST
    "the Far Left"? There were militant libertarians and isolationist righties who detested Bush as well.

    Not in your simpleminded, two dimensional universe of course, but in the actual real world..

    I would think your parents would've taught you that if you detest a behaviour, don't imitate it. You never heard that one?

    Parent

    Not bigoted at all (none / 0) (#189)
    by Yman on Sat Sep 17, 2016 at 09:01:24 AM EST
    Heh.  That's funny that you actually believe that.  Although not as funny as a link to Breitbart.

    BTW - It wasn't a "claim".  It was a bseless, conspiracy theory - an accusation made and repeated with no basis in fact, even AFTER his birth certificate was released.  IOW - it was a LIE.


    Parent