Wondering on Wednesday (v209)

Ready... Set... Wonder!

It's a busy slate of wonderment tonight, so let's dive right in.

Apparently much of Twitter was wondering what inspired Senator Lindsey Graham (R-White House) to dye his hair blonde... a suspiciously Trumpian shade of blonde. Photos are included in the Raw Story article I've linked here, just so you know.

Most folks know that the president had a couple of tweets flagged with a 'fact-check' marker, which drove Trump nuts, and then had a racist, dog-whistling, violence-promoting tweet  tucked behind a 'click-to-view' button. And, I learned, there's a Twitter account,  @SuspendThePres, that was re-tweeting everything the president tweeted and that account was temporarily suspended, after less than three days of 'Trumping.' And the tweet that did them in? Yeah, that racist, dog-whistling, violence-promoting one.

Trump's original tweet is still up, albeit hidden behind a warning, and he remains active on Twitter. In contrast, SuspendThePres' account was suspended for posting the same statement, rendering them unable to tweet, retweet, follow other accounts, or like any posts.  

So - if you're wondering - the president, who is clamping down on social media companies like Twitter, violates social medial platform standards, but is not suspended. But if you or I tweet exactly the same thing as Trump, we will be suspended.

A lot of people have been wondering what happened to the coronavirus pandemic, since no one's talking about it anymore. It' been pushed off the front page by protests, but have no fear - it's still a 'thing' and it's still a risk. According to the Worldometers coronavirus info page, as of 8:32 PM my time (12:32 AM GMT), there have been 6,566,476 cases and 387,878 deaths worldwide. And yesterday, in the US, we added 20,578 new cases and 1,083 deaths.

And one more thing on that: the president repeatedly says we have done more tests than any other country, but he normally bases that the sheer number we've done, which of course does not allow for comparing us and other countries. And, in case you're wondering, there are many countries that are doing (or have done) more tests per million people than us, which is something that he doesn't like and chooses to ignore.  Among them? Russia. Spain. Denmark. United Arab Emirates. Ireland. The UK. Israel. Latvia. Estonia. Australia...

What else is going on?  Well, of course, we had the response from the DC Episcopal bishop, Mariann Edgar Budde ,to the presidents bizarre photo op at St. John's, and the DC Catholic Bishop, Wilton Gregory, for Trump's visit to the St. John Paul II National Shrine. Those were, shall we say, less than positive.

And maybe you were wondering, where are the president's supporters on this? Have no fear - there are a couple of folks willing to defend him. For example, one-time presidential candidate and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker said that it was "Hard to imagine any other president walking out of the White House like" Trump did, with his entourage, police in riot gear, and protesters moved out of the way. And there was Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who was even more effusive in her former boss's defense.  She said, in part,

The president, standing up in front of the country, holding a Bible, standing before a church, that's a sign of courageous leadership. And that's the type of leadership that we need. 

Meanwhile, for what it's worth, Joe Biden met with protesters in Delaware,  met with black faith leaders, spoke with local leaders in Philadelphia, and reminded us this election is "a battle for the soul of our nation."

Others speaking out? Lots of military types. 

• Former Joint Chiefs chair Adm. Mike Mullen (Ret.), who said, among other things, "our fellow citizens are not the enemy, and must never become so;" American cities "are not 'battle spaces' to be dominated, and must never become so;' and "This is not the time for stunts. This is the time for leadership."
• Adm. James Stavridis (Ret.), former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, who said, in part,  "Here in these United States, we built laws, customs, and traditions that focus on the appropriate use of the military outside the country. The idea of “boots on the ground” and “dominating the battlespace” in our American cities is anathema to America."
• Former Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Martin Dempsey (Ret.), who tweeted "America’s military, our sons and daughters, will place themselves at risk to protect their fellow citizens. Their job is unimaginably hard overseas; harder at home. Respect them, for they respect you. America is not a battleground. Our fellow citizens are not the enemy. #BeBetter"

But the one that probably hurt Trump the most? Former Secretary of Defense Gen. Jim Mattis, one of Trump's Generals, the one with the cool nickname. Here's just a bit of what he said.

Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people - does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership.

That one would have had to hurt a normal person. Here's what it prompted in the president.

Please don't wonder for even a second whether Trump gave Mattis the 'Mad Dog' nickname  - he didn't.  It's a lie, and those we don't need to wonder about.

Wondering on Wednesday (v156)

There was mourning, and retrospection, and celebration today, as we paused, for a couple of hours, for the state funeral of President George Herbert Walker Bush, #41. And there was also wondering, it being a Wednesday.

I found much of the funeral very moving, but I was struck more by the comments of his pastor than I was by those of President George W. Bush. I think I tend to be more shocked by deeply personal comments from someone who has an 'official' role than I am by a family member, where it would be more shocking if those comments were missing.

As to any wondering about today's events, I do have to wonder why the medial seems so stuck on talking about president Trump and how he managed to sit next to President and Mrs. Obama without there being some kind of incident. I can only surmise that they missed the antagonistic tweets they're accustomed to seeing all day long.

Also on the wondering today? USA Gymnastics has filed for bankruptcy, apparently to protect their finances in a way that they never protected the hundreds of girls and young women who were victimized by Larry Nassar. According to Kathryn Carson, the chair of the organization's board,

Our organization is a financially solid going concern but for the hundred lawsuits that we do have out there. That is the primary reason that we made the filing, to use the Chapter 11 process as a vehicle for resolving those claims.

The organization's official statement noted, in part,

This filing will enable USA Gymnastics to continue to support its athletes, to fully operate and meet its responsibilities to the entire membership and to expeditiously resolve the claims made by the survivors of sexual abuse perpetrated by Larry Nassar.  

We owe it to the survivors to resolve, fully and finally, claims based on the horrific acts of the past and, through this process, seek to expedite resolution and help them move forward... 

I honestly wonder whether this will be better for the victims, who truly deserve to have these cases resolved once and for all, or if it will be better for USA Gymnastics.  I'm hoping it's the former.

Democracy is collapsing in Wisconsin - again - as the Republican majority passed legislation in the wee hours of the morning that limit the incoming Democratic governor. You know, that whole "will of the people" thing that Republicans have no problem ignoring when it suits them. Just ask Merrick Garland, right?

Among the changes they approved, and that lame duck gov Scott Walker has said he'll sign, are a cut in the early voting time period. I have to wonder why it is that those pesky Dems take so darn long to vote.

Why are they doing all of this?

We do not believe that any one individual should be able to come in and with the stroke of a pen eliminate things that went through the legislative process as a result of listening to the people of Wisconsin.

Those people of Wisconsin, they can apparently only be listened to once, it seems. So I wonder, why did they even bother having an election?

There's more wondering out there, of course -- but we'll have to save it for another Wednesday.

TGIF 9/8/17

Here are this week's random thoughts; deep thinking is coming tomorrow.

We ran into a friend at a festival here in town this evening, who told us the story of getting a ticket for running a red light on his commute to work. He said he immediately, without prompting, started explaining to the officer that he was listening to news radio and it was at the time that they were talking about Trump's decision on DACA that he got so angry and frustrated that he stopped paying attention land that's how he ran the red light.

Sadly, the officer wasn't having any of it, and our friend got no relief for the infraction. But, this is New York, and we historically have a hard time not acting on stuff that doesn't need action. How long before we codify 'listening to the radio' becomes a specific category of distracted driving, like texting or talking on the phone or taking a selfie? Or better yet, how long before we see 'It Can Wait - News Radio Stop" signs on the Thruway?

Speaking of New York, we're one of the states that has sued president Trump for his decision to end the DACA program. There are now 15 Blue states and the District of Columbia involved in the suit. Am I the only one who sees comedy in this? After all, one of the alleged reasons for the administration's decision to wind the program down was the threat of a lawsuit by Red states.

What's interesting is that neither the Red nor the Blue states are suing the right people: that would be the 535 member of Congress who can't, or won't, come to term on legislation that 'fixes' integration. Can the Attorneys General get together and take on Congress in court?

We learned in an earlier TGIF post that Wisconsin is 'investing' three billion dollars in incentives to bring Foxconn to Paul Ryan's district er - I mean - to a depressed area of the Badger state. Which is fine, I guess; I mean, if you're willing to take 250 million bucks out of the education budget and put it into keeping a professional sports team in Milwaukee, why wouldn't you be willing to bet the farm for a foreign company promising to bring jobs to your state?

Why is what's happening in Wisconsin relevant tonight? Well, because we're about to see a battle royale across North America for rights to bet a totally new farm on the new second headquarters for Amazon. Per the company's website:

We expect to invest over $5 billion in construction and grow this second headquarters to include as many as 50,000 high-paying jobs. In addition to Amazon's direct hiring and investment, construction and ongoing operation of Amazon HQ2 is expected to create tens of thousands of additional jobs and tens of billions of dollars in additional investment in the surrounding community.

Now we all know how much time the president has spent talking about the Foxconn project - #jobsjobsjobs and #MAGA and all that -- but how much time has he spent talking about an American company looking to make an investing in an American city and hiring American workers?

That would be zero. Zip. Nada.

Why?  Because Jeff Bezos, head of Amazon, owns the Washington Post. 'Nuff said.

TGIF.

Wondering, on Wednesday (v59)

Lord knows I'm not a Trump fan, but I have been doing my utmost best to watch the #RNCinCLE, as the Republican National Convention has been hashtagged, in an effort to figure out what the heck the Republicans stand for generally, or what Trump stands for specifically.

Similarly, I'll be watching the DNC next week for the same reason.

Why, I wonder, did the campaign go through all the effort to have each day of the campaign be 'themed' if there was apparently never any intention to pay attention to the theme? They may as well have had a skywriter flying over Cleveland than publishing a schedule and setting expectations for Making America Safe Again, and Making America Work Again, which is how the first two days were tagged.

Monday night was one of the most somber nights of television I can remember, as bruised person after bruised person stepped up to the podium and told tales of losing loved ones in war, in Benghazi, or at the hands of illegal immigrants, or it seemed, generally suffering from endless, crippling malaise.

Thankfully, we had Rudy Giuliani, who at least pumped up the room and brought some energy.  And there was Melania Trump, who didn't talk about anything having to do with safety but at least she defended her man, the plagiarism issue notwithstanding. Scott Baio and Antonio Sabato Jr.? They were on stage auditioning for the next round of Celebrity Apprentice; I almost expected Gary Busey and Omarosa to appear on stage with them, or with the Junior Duck Dude. Ted Nugent can't be all that far behind, right? Oh - and yes, again, the Trump campaign used music which they were not authorized to -- We Are the Champions, causing Freddie Mercury to roll in his grave, for sure.

Tuesday night, no one talked about jobs except Donald Trump Jr. who talked about working with blue collar mentors as he and his brother worked their way up in the ranks at the company. I wonder, because I don't recall him mentioning it, whether Ivanka also worked with the cement guys and the sheetrock guys? Chris Christie auditioned for Attorney General; Ben Carson talked about God and Lucifer. I'm not sure what else happened, those were the highlights of what I remembered and I missed Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and Kevin McCarthy - nothing to learn from them.

Tonight is Make America First Again, and so far it's been a quiet night; Laura Ingraham, and some other blond woman, and Eileen Collins spoke. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is up now, and for the first time the most prominent chant is not Lock Her Up, it's America Deserves Better, which is kind of thematic, I guess. He at least put together the two words that the various speakers the rest of the week haven't been able to: Trump Pence. You remember them, right?

I wonder how the Republicans in Washington, particularly the House Majority and the Senate Majority, feel about Walker's attack on do-nothings in Washington that are only making things worse and stifling conservative leadership which is, for better or worse, taking hold in statehouses across the country?  Did Walker really imply that we'd all be better off with those two majorities not being in place? Or was that wishful inference on my part?

As I'm writing this, the news just cut away to Donald Trump arriving at the Q center, something that nominees don't do until they accept their party's nomination. That he timed his arrival to ensure a cutaway from Ted Cruz is almost certain.

And what about Ted? He's running for President in 2020, of course. Nothing to wonder about there. He got a rousing cheer when he mentioned the Brexit, and the Constitution, and when he mentioned love. And other than congratulating Trump, he never mentioned the nominee's name. He encouraged his voters to not stay home come November, that too was clear. This was the most fun it's been all week.

If you're Mike Pence, and you're doing your big speech tonight, I wonder how the heck you're going to take the audience back?

The Sixth and First vs. the Second

In yesterday's post, I explained the real reason Kim Davis is in jail.

Among those who believe, erroneously, that  Davis is being persecuted for her religious views, for being a Christian, are some of the Republican presidential candidates. Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee have clearly come out on that side of the equation, as I noted yesterday. But where do the rest of the Rs stand on this?

Well, here's a sampling.

Front runner Donald Trump thinks that others in the Rowan County Clerk's office should be able to issue the licenses, or that frankly, people should leave town and get one somewhere else.

I would say the simple answer is to let her clerks do it. Now from what I understand, she's not letting the clerks do it either.  The other simple answer is rather than going through this -- because it's really a very, very sticky situation and terrible situation - 30 miles away they have other places they have many other places you get licenses. And you have them actually quite nearby, that's another alternative. 

He's half right - others in her office should be able to issue the marriage licenses, and in fact began doing so last week.  However, his suggestion that citizens cannot receive services in their own county because one elected official decides that her beliefs are more important than the law, is not acceptable.

Kentucky's own Senator Rand Paul says the answer is for states to stop issuing marriage licenses all together.

There never should have been any limitations on people of the same sex having contracts. But I do object to the state putting its imprimatur to the specialness of marriage, on something that's different than most people defined as marriage for most of history. So one way is just getting the state out completely, and I think that's where we're headed, actually.

Paul's answer is at least consistent with his beliefs in smaller government, and it removes the issue entirely by making marriage a contract between two parties with 'blessings' coming from a church if that's what you believe. But he too stays away from addressing the issue of an elected official not doing her job.

Rick Santorum, on his website, notes his respect for Davis, and vows to protect the First Amendment if elected.

I have great respect for Ms. Davis and her courage to stand up for her faith. In America we should not have to choose between keeping our job and practicing our faith. Today only reinforces my belief that the First Amendment Defense Act must be passed now at the Federal and state level. More and more people of faith will face the penalties Ms. Davis is now encountering if we do not make the necessary accommodations so people cannot just worship but live out their faith in their lives.

Santorum, like others, chooses to ignore the fact that Ms Davis is not just living out her faith, but insisting that everyone else live by her faith as well.

Similarly, Louisiana's Bobby Jindal  is on the wrong side of this. Speaking to the Huffington Post, he noted

I don't think anyone should have to choose between following their conscience and religious beliefs and giving up their job and facing financial sanctions. I think it's wrong to force Christian individuals or business owners. We are seeing government today discriminate against whether it's clerks, florists, musicians or others. I think that's wrong. I think you should be able to keep your job and follow your conscience. I absolutely do believe that people have a First Amendment right, a constitutional right. I don't think the court can take that away. 

And Wisconsin's golden boy Scott Walker?  He was "out there" in his response, (which is where he believes religious beliefs are practiced).

It's a balance that you've got to have in America between the laws that are out there, but ultimately ensuring the Constitution is upheld. I read that the Constitution is very clear, that people have the freedom of religion.  That means you have the freedom to practice your religious beliefs out there.

So, in general, these folks who would be president think that:

• it's OK for an elected official to put his or her personal religious beliefs above the law, and 
• it's generally OK for an elected official to impose those personal beliefs on everyone else,
• or that citizens should just find another jurisdiction to obtain the services they're entitled to,
• or that the government should just get out of the business of doing things that people may find objectionable.  

OK.  Let's pretend those are the right answers, the correct positions to have here. And let's say that I'm an elected official, and among my duties, I'm required to issue gun licenses and permits for folks who want to concealed-carry.

And let's say that it is my personal belief that guns kill people, and I steadfastly believe that 'Thou shalt not kill, and therefore I refuse to issue any gun licenses or concealed-carry permits.  And say that a judge orders me to issue the licenses and permits, and I not only refuse to issue them myself, but I also refuse to allow anyone else in my office to issue them. And say I try to get the Supreme Court to hear my case, and they refuse. And I still will not issue the permits, because of this 'heaven and hell' position my beliefs put me in (as Davis says), and so I go to jail.

• Would Mike Huckabee hold a rally for me, and petition the President to free me right now?
• Would Rick Santorum craft legislation to protect me? 
• Would Rand Paul suggest that the government get out of the gun permitting business, and have that just be a contract between two parties?
• Would Donald Trump simply send me to a different jurisdiction to avoid this "very, very sticky situation and terrible situation" in which I placed the citizens I was elected to serve?  

I think we all know the answer to that: Of. Course. Not.

Because a citizen exercising her personal right to practice her religion and live by her personal belief  that guns are killing machines and are against her religion, thereby barring other people from being able to exercise their right to own a gun? Well, that's a completely different constituency, and we know it's one that no Republican is going to defy.

These folks would be committing political suicide if they stood by me in a battle of the Sixth Commandment and the First Amendment vs. the Second Amendment.  I know it; you know it; and they know it. Add another twist - say I was a Muslim, or an atheist -- and we'd barely be able to see them in the rear view mirror.

These candidates should all take a page out of Carly Fiorina's book:

When you are a government employee as opposed to say, an employee of another kind of organization, then in essence, you are agreeing to act as an arm of the government. And while I disagree with this court's decision, their actions are clear. And so I think in this particular case, this woman now needs to make a decision of conscience -- is she prepared to continue to work for the government, be paid by the government, in which case she needs to execute the government's will, or does she feel so strongly about this that she wants to sever her employment with the government ...?

That is exactly the issue here. And that's exactly the right answer.

That we have so many people running for president who pretend not to understand  this, and who would not have the courage of this 'religious freedom' conviction if the belief-holder wasn't a Christian, and wasn't complaining about same sex marriage, is frightening.

Wondering, on Wednesday (v38)

So it's the eve of the Fox News meet-n-greet with a bunch of former Fox News employees and another bunch of current and former Fox News frequent flyers, which some people are still referring to as a Republican Presidential Candidate Debate.

Initially, I was wondering on Wednesday what I'd ask the Rs if I had the chance. You know, things like

• Mr. Trump, about that wall you're going to build along our southern border (and nobody builds a wall like you do), and have Mexico pay for, are you going to collect the money up front in a 'build as they pay' type of thing, or would your administration pay for the wall and then sue the snot out of Mexico to recoup the costs?

• Mr. Christie, you noted that you would punch the national teachers union in the face because they are the single most destructive force in public education today. Looking around at your fellow candidates, which of them do you think is the most destructive force in the Republican Party today? Please answer via punching the face of your choice.

• Mr. Walker, pretend for a moment that you have $250M to spend on anything you wanted to that would help move Wisconsin forward. How the heck did you decide that a new arena for the Milwaukee Bucks, who finished the past three seasons with a 94-152 record, was the right idea?

• Mr. Bush, be honest: don't you think your brother went to war with the wrong country after 9/11 because they tried to take out your Daddy?

• Mr. Cruz, why?

But then, I got wondering, what would happen if we took the candidates off the fake debate stage, and put them all in the Big Brother house and let them cull their own herd through alliances, HoH contests, and stuff like that? 

Or maybe if we put them together with the Real Housewives, we could vote for the last man or woman standing?  Or, could we maybe put them through the American Ninja Warriors Houston finals course?

I'm also wondering what it's going to take to get the media to start giving equal time to all of the candidates, instead of spending so much energy justifying the candidacy of His Hairness and trying to prove once and for all that Christie is a bully?

And, I'm wondering how the people who live in Texas (Cruz) and Florida (Rubio) and South Carolina  (Lindsey Graham) and Kentucky (Rand Paul) and Wisconsin (Walker) and Louisiana (Bobby Jindal) and Jersey (Christie)  and Ohio (John Kasich) really feel about their officials running all over the place trying to convince people to select them as the party's Presidential candidate, instead of them being focused on the people who have already elected them?

If you ask me, folks who are already elected as Senator, Governor, or some other position should step down if they want to run for a different one. 

Hey - I wonder - is that why no one ever asks me anything?

Throwback Thursday (v1)

Let's go back, this Thursday, to a simpler time.

When men were blissfully unaware of how a woman's body worked, except for two things: "that time of the month" and that a man would put his thingy in her nether region, and he enjoyed it, but only for religious purposes, or of course if the man wanted to assert his husbandly rights.  Men and women slept in separate beds, on television at least, and babies came from storks.

That must be the time where Republican men feel most comfortable.

First we had the one who reminded us that when he grew up, birth control had something to do with holding an aspirin between your knees.  And the guy who wondered if it was possible for a woman to swallow a tiny camera to allow a doctor to see inside her vagina and uterus, similar to how that works to allow a doctor to see a person's colon.  And of course we have all of the different versions of rape, which have been so carefully described by Republicans.

And now, joining them in the simpler time, we have Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Walker never went to college, we've been told, and there are some who think that should disqualify him from being President.

Me? I think his lack of sense is more disqualifying than his lack of parchment.

Walker blamed the media's 'gotcha' attitude in response to a question about social issues which some declared or exploring Republican presidential candidates (he's one of the latter) seem afraid to address.

And he said this:

I'll give you an example. I'm pro-life, I've passed pro-life legislation. We defunded Planned Parenthood, we signed a law that requires an ultrasound. Which, the thing about that, the media tried to make that sound like that was a crazy idea. Most people I talk to, whether they're pro-life or not, I find people all the time who'll get out their iPhone and show me a picture of their grandkids' ultrasound and how excited they are, so that's a lovely thing. I think about my sons, 19 and 20, you know we still have their first ultrasound picture. It's just a cool thing out there.

Seriously?

First of all, what the hell kind of conversations does Governor Walker have where "most people" he talks to, or "finds" will flash ultrasound pics at him? And does he really think that the one you get where they rub the gel and the wand on a woman's belly is the same as the one where they stick a condom-covered, gel-slathered probe into her vagina?

Ask any woman who has been forced, by a politician, to have a transvaginal ultrasound, and I'm guessing her description of the experience will not include the words "lovely" or "cool" -- no matter what the Rabid Badger believes. Because, when the test is done for medical purposes, as opposed to political purposes, it's usually to diagnose a problem with the fetus, not to add to a grandparent's brag book.

Can't we ask for better?  Please?