US Politics: Clown Show Edition

[awesome possum]

Old thread is over 400 posts, do continue.

 

On the subject of the Clown Show, let's see how some of the clowns are doing:

 

Chris Christie, in an attempt to join the "Hey far right wingnuts, look at me!" fray, on top of declaring that he'll end all legal marijuana if elected, has also vowed to completely defund Planned Parenthood

 

Gov. Chris Christie vowed Monday that if he's elected president in 2016 he will defund Planned Parenthood across the nation just like he's done in New Jersey.

 

The governor, speaking to residents in the conservative early-voting state of South Carolina, stressed that he defunded Planned Parenthood for six straight budgets.

 

 

 

Jeb Bush defends John McCain from Trump's dipshit criticism, although he supported the Swift Boating of Kerry because of course he did

 

 

Jeb Bush quickly jumped to McCain's defense.

 

"Enough with the slanderous attacks. @SenJohnMcCain and all our veterans - particularly POWs have earned our respect and admiration," he tweeted on Saturday.

 

But that outrage was missing ten years ago, when a political group attacked another Vietnam veteran -- then-Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic nominee who sought to unseat Bush's brother, the incumbent president, during the 2004 election.

 

Instead, Bush praised Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the group that lobbed attacks questioning Kerry's service record in Vietnam -- attacks McCain unequivocally criticized in 2004 as "dishonest and dishonorable."

 

When his campaign was asked if Jeb Bush saw a double standard, a spokesman rejected the premise.

 

 

 

Speaking of Jeb, he and Scott "soulless weasel eyes" Walker can't decide when to go to war with Iran if they're elected president:  Day 1 or Day 2

 

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) said over the weekend that the next president of the United States needed to be prepared to take aggressive military action on their very first day in office, including against Iran.

 

The presidential contender, who had promised to "terminate" the nuclear agreement with Iran upon his inauguration, made the remark while speaking with reporters at the Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa, on Saturday. Walker was asked about a criticism from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R), who asserted during a town hall last week that unwinding the agreement on day one was an unrealistic promise.

 

“One thing that I won’t do is just say, as a candidate, ‘I’m going to tear up the agreement on the first day,’” Bush said in Nevada on Thursday. First, said Bush, he needs to have his team in place. "That’s great, that sounds great but maybe you ought to check in with your allies first, maybe you ought to appoint a secretary of state, maybe secretary of defense, you might want to have your team in place, before you take an act like that.”

...
After Walker aides accused Bush of softening on his opposition to the agreement, the former Florida governor issued a statement to The Weekly Standard assuring that he “would begin immediately to responsibly get us out of this deal.”

 

 

 

Lindsey Graham is not often correct about things, but when he's right he's right, although even when he's right he's not quite on the mark

 

"What he said about John, I think, was offensive. He's becoming a jackass 

 

 

Becoming, Lindsey?  

[Marcus Agrippa]

I am just subbing for the hell of it.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

TGU,

If it's a federal law issue their holding can be reviewed by the SCOTUS. If the holding is purely based on State law their holding will stand. Are Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices elected? If so this is a perfect illustration of why I don't believe Judges should ever be elected by the General Public.

[Mexal]

TGU,

If it's a federal law issue their holding can be reviewed by the SCOTUS. If the holding is purely based on State law their holding will stand. Are Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices elected? If so this is a perfect illustration of why I don't believe Judges should ever be elected by the General Public.

 

They are. If you read TGU's post, he says it.

 

And let's not forget that the Gableman and Prosser elections were extremely close; Gableman won his race 51% to 49% and Prosser won by only 7,000 votes.

[Inigima]

TGU,

If it's a federal law issue their holding can be reviewed by the SCOTUS. If the holding is purely based on State law their holding will stand. Are Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices elected? If so this is a perfect illustration of why I don't believe Judges should ever be elected by the General Public.

Which, incidentally, Ted Cruz (and others?) has said he'd like to see done with SCOTUS in the wake of the gay marriage ruling.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Inigima,

Which, incidentally, Ted Cruz (and others?) has said he'd like to see done with SCOTUS in the wake of the gay marriage ruling.

:shocked:

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

ME posted this statement in the soon-to-be-closed thread, so I'm moving it over here to respond.

 

 

 

 

This statement is incorrect by nearly two orders of magnitude and I think it's important to see the real numbers to understand why this is such a big deal.  The Wisconsin Club For Growth and Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, either directly or through their subsidiaries, spent nearly $10 million on so-called "issue ads" supporting the campaigns of the 4 Republican justices currently comprising a majority of the Wisconsin State Supreme Court.  The dark money spending supporting the Prosser and Gableman campaigns represented about 5 times the amount of spending the candidates spent directly.  And let's not forget that the Gableman and Prosser elections were extremely close; Gableman won his race 51% to 49% and Prosser won by only 7,000 votes.

 

In addition, in Wisconsin, judges are prohibited from soliciting campaign donations.  However, because of this ruling, the Republican justices have ensured that they can solicit donations from corporations and individuals through dark money groups, can coordinate with the issue groups how the money is spent, with the only restriction being that it is not spent on an ad that is explicitly "vote for" or "vote against", and then when those groups are sued and appear before the State Supreme Court, they don't have to recuse themselves.

 

But I'm shocked...shocked, I tell you!...that our usual conservative suspects aren't in here complaining about the judiciary legislating from the bench, even though the justices essentially managed to re-write Wisconsin election laws.

 

 I wasn't aware of the dark money aspect of this. I'd seen numbers posted yesterday that both Prosser and Gableman had both recieved over 500k in contributions directly to their campaigns from The Wisconsin Club for Growth alone. There was a ton of interesting information regarding the recent history of this court that I'll cut and paste over here. I can't vouch for the veracity of these claims, but it made for some interesting reading.

 

 

 

 

 "There have been two John Doe investigations into Scott Walker's campaign. The first examined conduct during his time as Milwaukee County supervisor and led to the trials and convictions of six of his associates and staff. The second looked into illegal coordination between outside advocacy groups and Walker's staff furing the 2012 recall election campaign and was the ongoing investigation.

"The Wisconsin Supreme Court refused to halt either investigation previously. There have been half-a-dozen attorneys general running these shows, both Democrats and Republicans holding the chief investigator chair at one time or another. The last one, Schmidt, was a Republican.

"The Wisconsin Supreme Court as of 2011 had four conservative justices and three non-conservative justices (two liberal, and one votes-liberal- sometimes). One of the Supreme Court conservative justices - Prosser - was up for re-election in 2011. This is the justice with a record of breaking campaign laws as a legislator, which he admitted to, and a known temper, who called the former chief justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court a total biatch and allegedly choked another justice in an argument in her chambers, with four other justices present. This comes out during the campaign, and the alleged choking incident happened during campaign season. This information probably helps to tighten the race, along with this being the first high-visibility statewide election since Walker took the governorship. He's running neck-and-neck with a Democrat, Kloppenburg, and even falls behind in the votes, until a Waukesha County elections supervisor - Kathy Nicklaus, a Republican and former associate of Prosser during the time he admitted to breaking campaign laws - finds over 7000 votes for him that she missed for two days. She certifies the votes and Prosser wins. The votes she finds are initially just enough - by about 100 votes - to keep a recount from happening - the state pays for any recount when the margin of victory is less than 0.5% - but the full canvas of 1.5 million votes statewide drops Prosser's lead slightly and allows for the recount, which leaves Prosser with a margin of victory of 7000 votes. Prosser holds on to his chair and the Court stays majority-conservative.

"The chief justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court - Abrahamson - has had the seat for two decades, but she's an old Democrat. Initially the Republican-controlled state legislature tries to pass a law saying no one over 75 can be chief justice, in order to move her out of the chief chair, but that doesn't get anywhere. Plan B: the Republicans in the state legislature vote again on a constitutional amendment, originally submitted in 2013, that says the Supreme Court justices can choose their own chief justice, instead of going by seniority - the way it's been done for the past century and longer. The legislature fasttracks the second vote so that the amendment can go to the voters in April of this year, and it passes 53-47. Abrahamson gets voted out the next day by the four conservative judges, who vote by e-mail and don't even wait for the votes to come back from the three non-conservatives to give Abrahamson the boot. The new chief justice is a Republican. She voted for herself.

"One of the first cases they hear with a Republican in the chief seat is this suit against the John Doe investigation into Scott Walker's campaign. They don't wait for the new judicial session to start August 1. They rule not only to close the investigations, but to destroy or return the accumulated evidence. This is in line with a stayed decision from an earlier judge's ruling to stop the investigations and destroy the evidence. That judge was also a Republican." [pretty sure he's referring to Rudolph Randa, here.]

"One of the named organizations being investigated for alleged illegal coordination with Scott Walker's campaigns is the Wisconsin Club for Growth. The WI Club for Growth, along with two other conservative advocacy groups, gave between $8 million and $10 million to the election and re-election campaigns of the four conservative justices who then ruled in their favor on this investigation, and then who took the extra step of ordering all of the accumulated evidence and records, collected over several years, destroyed, to ensure that the investigations cannot be taken up again."

 

 

 

 

"That's part of the story Phaseolus left out.  About five years, ago, the Supreme court was presented with, and adopted without change or amendment, a new set of judicial ethics rules that basically  says only the individual judge gets to decide if there is a conflict that requires recusal.   The rules were written by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, one of the groups that sued to stop the John Doe investigation.

The Supreme Court adopted the rules by a 4-3 vote, with the justices voting in favor being the same 4 that voted to stop the investigation."

 

 

 Again, these are just posts from a thread regarding the same subject matter. I'm not claiming these as being gospel truth or anything, I just found them interesting and more than a bit disturbing.
 

[TerraPrime]

Did I miss a post or have people like Hayyoth and Commodore and others still not acknowledged that the Justices that received donations from the groups that are involved in the case ruling in favor of these groups is problematic? 

[DanteGabriel]

Did I miss a post or have people like Hayyoth and Commodore and others still not acknowledged that the Justices that received donations from the groups that are involved in the case ruling in favor of these groups is problematic? 

 

Because GESTAPO!!!!

[BloodRider]

Did I miss a post or have people like Hayyoth and Commodore and others still not acknowledged that the Justices that received donations from the groups that are involved in the case ruling in favor of these groups is problematic? 

I think their definition of corruption is necessarily.......    fluid.

[awesome possum]

So in the first post I mentioned that Lindsey Graham called Donald Trump a jackass for, you know, being a jackass.  Today Trump responded and, well... 

 

Trump explained to the thousands-strong crowd — and viewers watching the broadcast on TV —  that Graham gave him the cell phone number “three or four years ago."

 

Graham called Trump, hoping the business mogul could give him a recommendation to Fox News. Trump said he would see what he could do, and took down the senator's contact information on a Post-It note 

 

On Tuesday, Trump showed off the yellow note and read the number to the crowd, twice.

 

"He doesn’t seem like a very bright guy," Trump said of Graham.

 

The phone number went straight to voicemail but a recorded message said it was the inbox for Lindsay Graham. CBS News confirmed that the number is Graham's cell.

 

 

 

 

I swear this man is not content with just being part of the Clown Show, he is determine to create a circus in his own image.  

[Shryke]

He's the candidate the GOP deserves.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Lindsey "I'd let the government read my mail to protect me from Terrorists" Graham isn't very bright

[TerraPrime]

When you do things that even Reddit bans, you've achieved something. 

[DanteGabriel]

He's the candidate the GOP deserves.

 

When you've spent a couple of generations cultivating racism, xenophobia, chickenhawkery, faux-populist grandstanding, and anti-intellectual distrust of science in favor of emotional reactions, absolutely. Politically, Trump is the grandchild of Ronald Reagan.

[ThinkerX]

Short conversation at work today with a conservative coworker.

Coworker: Trump is doing good! We need to get him into the oval office. He'll straighten things out.

Me: Trump filed for corporate bankruptcy four times. Doesn't exactly seem responsible.

Coworker: But he's worth billions! That worked out for him. See, that's who we need as president - a businessman. He'll cut the budget, get costs under control.

Me: A businessman like the ones running this place? (USPS)

Coworker: Trump is higher quality.

Me: Trump also has a long history of hiring illegal aliens - even as he condemns illegal aliens in his speeches.

Coworker: Well, that's just politics. All politicians do that. That's why we got to get trump in office, because he's not a politician.

and from there into healthcare, where he talked about skyrocketing premiums while I pointed out that people in other first world countries pretty much laughed at what passes for the healthcare system in the US. His solution: too much corruption. Gotta bring these costs down. Didn't get the chance to mention to him that Trump supports 'single payer' (fully socialized) healthcare.

Ok...who else here has been having even vaguely similar RL debates with coworkers, neighbors, family members, or whoever? Speak up.

[TerraPrime]

That's less of a debate and more of an onslaught of randomly held beliefs not backed by facts.

[ThinkerX]

On my part or his? (I should also point out upper level USPS management is utterly incompetent.)

Come now...you've been having vaguely similar RL conversations lately.

[DanteGabriel]

On my part or his? (I should also point out upper level USPS management is utterly incompetent.)

Come now...you've been having vaguely similar RL conversations lately.

 

A friend of mine posted on Facebook an article pointing out that, for all his anti-Mexico rhetoric, Trump's clothing line is manufactured in Mexico. Mutual friend's wife posts on a comment on her post saying, "I bet you never had to struggle."

 

My friend, who had been a single mother for a while, says, in effect, "Huh? What? You're wrong, and I don't see what that has to do with Trump's hypocrisy."

 

Mutual friend's wife goes off on long rant about how she once had to be on food stamps and it wasn't enough and she was told she was the wrong color (white) to get more and the illegals are getting too much.

 

Ahhh, 'Murica.

[Hayyoth]

So in the first post I mentioned that Lindsey Graham called Donald Trump a jackass for, you know, being a jackass.  Today Trump responded and, well... 

 

 

 

 

I swear this man is not content with just being part of the Clown Show, he is determine to create a circus in his own image.  

He's delivering some epic level smackdowns. He's likely doing enormous damage to the brand but damn it I'm enjoying the crap out of his run.

 

 

On my part or his? (I should also point out upper level USPS management is utterly incompetent.)

Come now...you've been having vaguely similar RL conversations lately.

I'm sure the conversation took place but too be honest it sounds like  a means to demonstrate an imagined intellectual superiority over some strawman plebe.