« Commuted -- Open Thread | Main | A Reminder: The United States is a low-taxed nation »

January 20, 2017

Comments

From President Trump's Inaugural Address:

The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action.
So true. And we shall see what we shall see.

Maybe we can find out what he actually believes! Which was hard to do in such a short campaign season.

This is my 4th inauguration since moving to DC. I don't recall any vandalism, tear gas or pepper spray at the prior 3.

whitehouse.gov: (The Trump Version)

Now arrives the hour of action...

As Lin Manuel Miranda's George III puts it...
"President Donald Trump... Good luck!"

I don't recall any vandalism, tear gas or pepper spray at the prior 3.

From what I've seen, which is as of yet quite limited, the vandalism seems to be the work of a specific group. Most of whom look like the usual crew of 20-something anarchist wanna-be's wearing black bandanas around their faces.

They tend to show up everywhere and make enormous PITA's of themselves.

That's probably right.

Now, where's my tax cut?!!?

Most of whom look like the usual crew of 20-something anarchist wanna-be's wearing black bandanas around their faces.

And I guess we really don't know who they are, or whether someone sent them. We need to be very careful about attributing violence to people these days.

Keep in mind Sarah Kendzior, and a quote from Trump that she has discussed many times:

"You know what solves it? When the economy crashes, when the country goes to total hell and everything is a disaster. Then you’ll have a [chuckles], you know, you’ll have riots to go back to where we used to be when we were great." [Interview link]

Yeah, false claims of Berniebro chair throwing in Nevada got spread all over the place.


http://www.snopes.com/did-sanders-supporters-throw-chairs-at-nevada-democratic-convention/

And I am not being snarky. The mainstream press is often lazy and biased and can't always be trusted. Which is unfortunate given our new President can't be trusted on anything.

It seems that the mainstream press is having a hard time adjusting to the fact that Trump is perfectly okay with lying about everything, lies large and small, whether about something that can be disproved in 30 seconds or 30 days.

Really, it's quite a sight to see when a Trump tweet goes out and it gets repeated in the press as gospel truth - because no one lies to them and/or the President (or P-elect) wouldn't spread lies! - and then after they dutifully repeat it it is walked back, or disavowed, or repudiated, or explained to mean the opposite of what it means, etc.

Granted they are in a hard spot - when POTUS says/tweets something it's difficult for them to ignore it until they can investigate the truth of the matter asserted and only then report what he said and whether it's true (or even makes sense).

This goes to the norm breaking touched upon in lots of places - it's very hard for US democracy (or really any democracy) if those in power have no problem spreading lies and BS publicly and repeatedly. So, up until now, we expect POTUS to tell the truth, and if he's inclined to give a misleading impression, such statements are generally carefully worded so that they can be explained to mean something else later and not a "lie."

This is part of what so pisses me off about Paul Ryan, he knows the media won't challenge him on his lies about, e.g., the ACA and Medicare, because they don't expect to be lied to and he has his policy wanker reputation.

The sad thing (or one of them) will be that if the press ever does catch on to this and adjusts accordingly, all the politicians or that next POTUS that are not inclined to operate in Trump's manner will be handicapped and at a disadvantage.

I'm generalizing and probably overstating the truthiness of politicians in the above, but Trump really is playing a completely different game.

Most of whom look like the usual crew of 20-something anarchist wanna-be's wearing black bandanas around their faces.

Yep. They show up all the time, expressly to break stuff, in situations where there's enough crowd cover to make it harder for them to get caught.

Any big enough protest, you'll see a clump of those morons.

I guess it's on us to determine the truth. One way we can do it is to figure out who benefits from certain narratives.

It's problematic that some events occur for which no video evidence exists. (The until-recent history of police violence against certain racial groups is an example of this.) Truth is going to be difficult to discern in some cases, and people will have to use their own judgment. Sadly, this may reinforce the tendency of people to judge situations according to preexisting biases, so people have to try to be open-minded and apply common sense at the same time.

Nobody ever said that the pursuit of truth is easy, especially under authoritarianism. But the beneficiary of violence in this weekend's anti-Trump protests is Trump, whether the perpetrators are misguided anti-Trump people, or Trump saboteurs. He's even said so.

As to Trump himself, and his lies, I think we are safe never to believe his self-promotion, and always to believe the worst unless proof exists otherwise. At least we'll be prepared to fight under that plan.

Anyone notice this ?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/19/bureau-land-management-federal-lease?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

yes, i saw that. The House rules now include a clause such that any legislation which would transfer public land to a state, private person, or tribe, does not have to consider the lost real value or lost income.

basically, if Congress wants to give away public land, they can do so without booking the lost value to the nation.

read that, then read the new White House statement on energy policy, posted within an hour of the inauguration. and take two guesses about where that's all headed.

hint - you'll only need one.

and melania's bio page on the white house website has a brief, tasteful plug for her timepieces and jewelry line on QVC.

Not looking to pick on Melania, who basically seems like somebody who didn't really ask for any of this First Lady business. But doesn't anybody in that circle have any sense of propriety?

Proprietor, they understand.

It has begun.

No missiles so far. Maybe we were being pessimistic.

No missiles so far. Maybe we were being pessimistic.

I thought I read that he was going to take the weekend off.

Truthiness on the new presidential website.

The bbc has a nice graphic comparing 2009 and today's crowd:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38682574

From one of my tax news feeds:

Tax credits couldn’t be used to pay for health insurance plans that cover abortions under legislation scheduled for a House vote on Jan. 24.
The bill (H.R. 7) would disallow refundable credits and small employer health insurance credits for plans that include abortion coverage. House Republicans have previously passed bills with similar language, including as part of legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

The legislation is sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.).

A very minor addition to the degradation overtaking the US: Nigel Farage hired as a political analyst by Fox News.

The Department of Justice was scheduled to argue that the Texas voter ID law had a discriminatory intent on Tuesday. Trump administration has already asked for a postponement.

John Gore, a key lawyer defending North Carolina's bathroom bill, has been appointed as deputy assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s civil rights division.

The civil rights division is already slated for significant funding cuts:
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314991-trump-team-prepares-dramatic-cuts

I'm pretty sure the Count left because his performance art wouldn't be able to top reality. Including that thing that he was going to be banned for.

the official bio of POTUS Trump from whitehouse.gov.

it's hard to know what to say.

Including that thing that he was going to be banned for.

for the record, the "thing he was to be banned for" was in reference to people bringing AR-15s to public town hall discussions of the ACA.

not saying his comment wasn't de trop, just offering some context. it's easy to forget things.

Honestly, I totally missed the rape threat part of whatever, but maybe I wasn't reading that carefully, or maybe I'm kinda dumb. Either way, moot.

Wow, he actually got to the third paragraph before the first definitively false to fact (as opposed to merely hype) statement. One wonders whether he, or his website folks, think nobody reading there will know that he didn't really graduate from Wharton?

Or is it just an indication that reality-free will be a hallmark of the administration? Quell surprise.

Donald J. Trump once killed a grizzly bear with his bare hands in the Australian outback, garnering millions of newly red votes through viscous trading in cattle prod futures and winning from day one for the American worker and against China and the bad things.

Donald J. Trump, man and President, Winner, you should see the Mar a Lago, really, the best.

Ugh, are you subbing for the Count?

maybe we have left "truthy" behind and are now in the world of "truth-ish"

When Stephen Colbert coined "truthiness" he also came up with "factesque" which I think is even better.

Left "truthy" behind?

Hell, you can't even see truthy in the rear-view mirror any more. It's just a distant glow on the horizon.

Or maybe that's a hydrogen bomb. We'll find out soon enough.

Reaching back to Roger Zelazny's Lord of Light

"No?" Yama smiled. "Well, it was your simile to begin with, not mine. What's truth, anyway? Truth is what you make it."

Nothing new under the sun.

...aaaand, Trump signed his first executive order.

The tyranny begins.

I had my gall bladder removed today. Seems appropriate. The Ramones' I Wanna Be Sedated was my theme song.

A Fallows valedictory provides some historical perspective to 'American Carnage*':
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/american-carnage-the-trump-era-begins/513971/

*My first thought on hearing that was it could be the title of the next Green Day album..

Most of these are terrific

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2017/01/21/the_best_protest_signs_from_the_women_s_march_on_washington.html

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/21/anything-at-all-can-happen-in-the-age-of-trump/#comment-341405

A lot of material about a ( horrible) Heritage foundation plan the Trump Administration might support, though as Jon points out, it is impossible to tell what Trump means to do and he probably doesn't know himself.

Thanks, ugh.

I'm waiting for the tweet response to "85% of men have larger hands than Trump"

For all women, and in memory of Carrie Fisher:

https://twitter.com/RebeccaLWelch/status/822725574095343616/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

My sister was at the London March, and although the BBC is saying it was approx 80-100,000 strong, she was at the anti-Iraq war march of 1 million, and she says in her opinion, FWIW, this was much more than 100,000.

Can we keep him chasing shiny objects for four years?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-white-house-disputing-inauguration-crowd-size

Also slate has added more signs to that link.

Can we keep him chasing shiny objects for four years?

I keep waiting for him to say "you look marvelous!".

I'm here all week, try the veal.

The entire Washington press corp is appalled at Spicer's statement, which Ari Fleischer (vomit) said on twitter was likely something Trump commanded Spicer read.

And apparently even loathsome toad Charles Krauthammer can't believe Trump's antics at CIA today (if I'm reading the twitters correctly).

Might stay up to watch SNL L tonight.

Speaking of SNL, Laura Rozen on twitter just now:

"The eeriest thing of all would be if SNL does Trump CIA remarks and Spicer briefing word for word."

my wife and I were at the Boston march today. a great big sh*tload of people, I guess 100 or 125K, which for Boston is a hell of a lot. took the train into town from Salem, extra cars and I guess an extra train was needed.

big crowds and people barking at me through a bullhorn and trying to get me to chant along with "this is what democracy looks like!" pretty much push all of my cranky introvert buttons. crappy drumming, too. so there were one or two near-meltdown moments when I really wanted a cookie and a nap, but my wife and our friends got me through it.

the Arlington St UU church had their bell-ringers playing patriotic songs and protest classics like "we shall overcome". they still ring by hand which was pretty cool. and we all sang along. plus, bubbles, because UU, of course.

No problems, no issues, no cop hassles, no anarchist black bloc asshole kids to break stuff and generally piss everyone off. The usual amount of "aren't we all awesome!!" self-congratulatory glad-handing, but that just comes with the territory.

Mostly just a hell of a lot of people expressing their displeasure with the new POTUS and his agenda.

It was a pretty good day.

Good on ya' russell.

Also, one of the signs I saw on twitter was "So bad, even introverts are here."

Seattle march was peaceful and mostly silent, though one group kept trying to get chants going. We did do "wave cheers," with a cheer starting at one end of the march and rippling to the other end. Those were fun.

Possible anarchist sighting at an intersection, where a lot of people all in black were hanging out, but happily none of them joined the march.

Seattle news orgs are saying this was the biggest march in city history, with 100,000 there. Pre-march estimates were more in the 50-75,000 range. It should be noted that the police were terrific.

CaseyL's wave cheer reminds me to tell anybody who's interested that what you all call a wave, or possibly the wave, in England is called a Mexican wave. American friends were very taken aback the first time they heard it.


888. ARTICLE 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
10. Punitive Articles

Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.


Do you think the number 88 here is just a coincidence?

And now NYTimes reporting that Trump not happy with Spicer.

His Donaldship has received the rare honour to have a species of animal named after him and His Hair apparent:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38661250

All Hail Precedent Mothellini!

Could he be removed on the narrow ground of mental incapacity? Politicians tell blatant lies on a regular basis but the claim that the media made up the quarrel wth the CIA isn't one he could expect to get away with. Even the lie about the imaginary Muslim celebration after 9/11 was more rational-- he was appealing to bigots. Here he has been going directly after the CIA which has been a big story and then pretending the media made it up. There is no way to see this as rational even from the most amoral perspective. There is no ideology driving this lie. It's pure narcissism. Trump himself must always be right even if it involves telling lies that nobody could be expected to endorse. If he keeps doing this now that he is President it seems like you could argue for removal on the grounds that he is delusional. I don't expect Republicans do do this easily, but if we have an episode like this on an almost daily basis things might change.

We would then have Pence who will be as bad or worse on policy in every way-- frankly, on foreign policy many of Trump's critics are as sickening as he is, just in different ways. But they aren't delusional like this on a personal level.

How do you fight this?

Good question, bobbyp.
The obvious lies are part of the same process:
https://mobile.twitter.com/rascouet/status/823035518313267202

How do you fight this?

We can start by insisting on our status as the majority of the country, by focussing on issues (using facts to support our views), and stop helping him by making false equivalencies (for example, "many of Trump's critics are as sickening as he is"). That would be our first step.

in principle, the best way to fight back against lying and a general disregard for the truth is to tell the truth and insist on being told the truth. it's a lot of work.

as a practical matter, maybe check this out. (D)'s and lefties of all sorts tell lies, too, no doubt, but it's easier to cut through the BS when it's balanced. that, and many of us simply like their policies better, and don't want the (R)'s running roughshod over the place.

plus, Trump just kind of takes it to a new level. it's not about left and right so much as it's about toxic bullying weirdness vs common decency.

what brought down McCarthy and Nixon - and, for that matter, Bill Clinton - wasn't their political stance, it was their inability to bring their personal issues and weaknesses to heel.

It's day 2 and Trump is already heading down that path.

I think if he ends up being overly toxic to the intelligence commununity or the (R)'s in Congress, they'll find a way to throw him under the bus.

I think if he ends up being overly toxic to the intelligence community or the (R)'s in Congress, they'll find a way to throw him under the bus.

You never know. I wouldn't count on it though. The Republicans are as toxic as Trump is, and is buying into his brand of toxicity, and the intelligence community is subject to his authority.

Putin is a factor here. The unarmed majority of the United States is now under the control of Vladimir Putin. Any "rogue" intelligence community, by itself, is going to have trouble fighting Putin's.

Sorry for my failure to edit.

This article by Jessica T. Mathews, is a very good summary of foreign policy, and Trumpism. Anyone who believes false equivalencies that some people are putting out there is deluded.

The Rs in Congress can't throw Trump under the bus (impeachment and removal from office) without help from the Ds - and why would the Ds cooperate to install Pence if Trump is destroying the GOP and its brand?

I think Trump will be President for 4 years unless he chooses to leave, which wouldn't surprise me.

To all those who marched yesterday, it may not be so easy in the future:

http://www.juancole.com/2017/01/protesters-increasing-criminalization.html

Too bad, sapient. You want a coalition to get rid of Trump, you're going to have to deal with people you dislike more than me. Republicans have to be part of it unless you wish to wait four years. And the replacement will be Pence. And " false equivalence" as a charge was first used in my experience by conservatives attacking people who criticized our support for mass murderers. It is still used in the same way.

What's your plan, Donald?

I read the Matthews piece-- I agreed with much of it, but not other portions. American values pushed by neocons-- give me a break. I was reading Commentary back in the 80's. As for liberal humanitarians, I won't restart that argument here, but. It was revealing that she had three groups and left out the fourth-- people on both left and right who despise our interventions without liking Trump's self contradictory position that we shouldn't intervene but we should run a protection racket, torture people and steal their oil.

The point is simple-- you could probably find a very wide range of people who regard each other's views with varying degrees of loathing who would agree in private ifnot always in public that Trump's personality makes him unfit for office. The question is whether these people think this problem is serious enough to unite to push him out. For Republicans the problem will be their own voters. If Trump falls on his face on his promise to bring back good jobs and create a " terrific" health care system, some may turn against him. With Democrats the issue will be whether they really believe Trump is uniquely risky or do they think he is useful in destroying the Republican brand. That lesser evil thing is always handy. With Trump as your opponent the bar is as low as it can get-- one just has to get voters out in enough states. So they might want to wait four years.

With Trump as your opponent

Is Trump your opponent? If so, what are you going to do about him, and why are you giving me advice? Are you willing to sit on the sidelines and analyze, and to wait four years, and hope that "one" has to get voters out? "One" would have thought that the bar was low enough for that during the election, wouldn't "one"?

To all those who marched yesterday, it may not be so easy in the future

I'm sure there will attempts to criminalize dissent, as there have been before and always will be.

Something like 1 out of every 100 people in the US showed up yesterday. Something like 3.5M people, give or take. That's a lot of people to lock up.

Plus, there are always people who are not deterred by having their actions criminalized.

None of this is new or ground-breaking stuff. More people - something like 10M more - voted for somebody other than Trump than voted for him. The constituency for Trump is not large enough for him to be able to suppress dissent.

Nixon won 49 states, and had a private army of spooks on the job, and he couldn't do it. And Trump doesn't have Nixon's chops - Trump can't restrain himself, at all, he's going to go from one bizarre outburst to the next. The number of people who are going to be willing to align themselves with that, long-term, is limited.

All in my opinion, of course.

For those who think that the R's will impeach Trump: they can certainly impeach, but a conviction (and removal from office) requires D votes.

Which they might not get.

Now ask yourself this: how does Trump react to having his GOP "allies" try to get rid of him, and the only folks voting to keep him are on the other side?

Yeah, it'll get seriously ugly. Coyote ugly.

Best strategery for the GOPers is to encourage Pence to make lots and lots of KFC runs for Trump.

I am not planning on running for President, so no, Trump is not my opponent in the sense being used above. And the advice up there was general, not meant for you personally. Are you the Democratic Party establishment?

One thing I plan to do is write my Congress people and suggest that if Trump can't restrain himself, he should be removed from office on the grounds of mental instability and that for this to happen they will have to work with Republicans. It will take awhile, but if Trump keeps this up the Republicans might decide they need him out.

I am going to start attending JVP meetings more regularly. My wife and I agreed with a friend that we will go to the next march we hear about. A letter urging rejection of Pruitt and Mnuchin ( sp?) and Sessions and maybe Flynn is next. Probably those should be separate letters. But I could not care less about your approval, sapient, so just assume I am lying and in fact secretly support Trump.

JVP = Jewish Voice for Peace

Are you the Democratic Party establishment?

Is that who you mean when you say "you", Donald? When I'm responding to one of your comments and say "you" I mean "you", Donald.

so just assume I am lying and in fact secretly support Trump

I am glad to know that you have a list of things to do besides criticizing Trump's opposition party.

Sounds like JVP is the US equivalent of Jews for Justice for Palestinians, an organisation a friend of mine helped set up. More power to you, Donald.

russell, on your piece doubting Trump's ability to meaningfully stifle dissent, as my mother would say: from your lips to God's ear.

Ugh: The Rs in Congress can't throw Trump under the bus (impeachment and removal from office) without help from the Ds - and why would the Ds cooperate to install Pence if Trump is destroying the GOP and its brand?

Maybe because they place a higher priority on not trashing the country than on destroying (temporarily) the GOP?

Snarki: Now ask yourself this: how does Trump react to having his GOP "allies" try to get rid of him, and the only folks voting to keep him are on the other side?

Trump simply switches parties. It's not like he's a lifelong Republican. And he has a demonstrated ability to turn on anyone who he thinks has crossed him. The Republicans will want to be sure that they have the necessary Democratic votes locked in, in both houses, before they start.

It might be bad English -- I am not sure-- but I think a fair number of people use " you" in a generic way. Sometimes it is possible to tell from context which meaning is being used. In my replies to you ( singular) I went back and forth between the two, so it probably wasn't clear.

Girl from the North Country-- yeah, I like JVP a lot. One doesn't have to be Jewish to join. They are considered far left, but hit the sweet spot in my opinion where they want a solution to the IP conflict where everyone gets along and is satisfied. That sounds motherhood an apple pie like-- very obvious, but to their right some groups see Palestinians mainly as an obstacle, while further to their left it gets ugly, where some people daydream of an Algerian solution.

They also, of course, are good on fighting Islamophobia. Both the IPnissue and Islamophobia will take on new urgency with Trump.

Impressively detailed article on your new Education Secretary:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/betsy-dick-devos-family-amway-michigan-politics-religion-214631

sapient, you're not being helpful here. Not even a little. You're just making this personal to avoid confronting substantive policy differences, as well as the inconvenient truth that lesser evilism makes a catastrophically failed Trump presidency more useful to the party you demand we unquestioningly ("why are you giving me advice?") support than a marginally successful Pence presidency.

You're not really offering much of anything here other than criticizing critics of Trump's opposition party. "One" would have thought that if playing DNC commissar was enough it would have been during the election, wouldn't "one"? And yet despite that, here we are... but I suppose you don't change horses in midstream...

sapient, you're not being helpful here. Not even a little. You're just making this personal to avoid confronting substantive policy differences, as well as the inconvenient truth that lesser evilism makes a catastrophically failed Trump presidency more useful to the party you demand we unquestioningly ("why are you giving me advice?") support than a marginally successful Pence presidency.

You're not really offering much of anything here other than criticizing critics of Trump's opposition party. "One" would have thought that if playing DNC commissar was enough it would have been during the election, wouldn't "one"? And yet despite that, here we are... but I suppose you don't change horses in midstream...

Blah, my mouse is double-clicking.

Pompeo comes up for confirmation tomorrow.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/22/cia-nominee-leaves-door-open-to-torture-making-senate-vote-a-test-of-principles/

I know emails are the least effective method or so I have heard ( no idea why), but it is a bit late. I just emailed my two senators to oppose this defender of torture.

Maybe because they place a higher priority on not trashing the country than on destroying (temporarily) the GOP?

That would depend on the circumstances. Making the choice even tougher is the undeniable fact that destroying the GOP (in its current state) would be very beneficial for our country.

Decisions, decisions.

But simply mere speculation at this point, and thus moot.

Better to plan concrete actions, no matter how small, to oppose the giant orange combover.

I think it does matter, bobbyp. If people want Trump out sooner than four years, it's going to require Republican help. Do his personality defects make him dangerous enough to make this worth trying?

People can think about this and start writing their Congress people about it while also opposing him on other things-- right now, people like Pompeo, Pruitt, etc..l

Interesting story about Devos' brother (the Blackwater guy)...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-domestic-conspiracy-that-gave-trump-the-election_us_587ed24fe4b0b110fe11dbf9

People can think about this and start writing their Congress people about it while also opposing him on other things

Agree. I doubt the R's will impeach him, but who knows. I can't imagine the Democrats objecting (speaking as DNC commissar).

Yes, Nigel. Erik Prince, the Mercers, the rest of the gangsters: they're scary as hell, and we probably don't know the half of it. Not that I'll give in to fake news, mind you. But the Blackwater legacy is worse than creepy.

bobbyp: Making the choice even tougher is the undeniable fact that destroying the GOP (in its current state) would be very beneficial for our country.

The trouble with this superficially appealing (to lefties, or even just Dem-leaners) proposition is the law of unintended consequences. Who is to say that what replaces the GOP (even in its current state), because something surely will, will be any better? The rise of ignorant, nativist, racist, antisemitic, mysogynistic populism has been horrifyingly fast, and as I have said elsewhere, each step on the way has simultaneously presaged something worse and legitimised it: Baby Bush to Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin to Donald Trump. It's hard to contemplate at the moment, I know, but there could in fact be something worse than Donald Trump. The trouble with getting rid of him before the four years are up (desperately appealing though that is) is this: what would happen to his angry, prejudiced, fact-free followers? They would feel cheated and disenfranchised.

This is by way of saying that I think before getting rid of him is a good idea, his followers need to be thoroughly disillusioned with him and if possible with his whole project, and not easy prey for the next Strong Man leader. A difficult thing to carry off, I do realise. This is, I think, the mature and sensible view, but I admit that if I were ruler of the world I might not have the self-discipline to delay getting rid of the orange one.

This is, I think, the mature and sensible view, but I admit that if I were ruler of the world I might not have the self-discipline to delay getting rid of the orange one.

Ummm, no. I'm not sure what you think "hitting bottom" looks like, but I think it's here. We can't afford to go further down, but thanks.

Kellyanne Conway this morning: "You're saying it's a falsehood, and they're giving — our press secretary, Sean Spicer, gave alternative facts to that."

"alternative facts"???
Gee, it would be so convenient is we could make rocket motors out of sand and water -- after all, those are readily available. So we create alternate facts that say that those will combust.
Any engineer who came out with something like that would be gone in an instant.

The interviewer, Chuck Todd, was reduced to sputtering: “Wait a minute. Alternative facts? Alternative facts? Four of the five facts he uttered . . . were just not true. Alternative facts are not facts; they're falsehoods.”

I used to think that comedians were going to have a great time doing parodies of this administration. But what do they do when faced with people who are beyond parody?

How much do I love Scott Lemieux? A lot.

I'm not sure what you think "hitting bottom" looks like, but I think it's here. We can't afford to go further down, but thanks.

You know sapient, I remember having this discussion with pro-Iraq war people, who said "But it's worth it to get rid of Saddam, because anything would be an improvement." But in fact, what has followed Saddam has been worse, by almost any metric. Appalling though Trump is, what followed could be worse if he is got rid of in a way that increases his following. And appalling as most of the modern GOP is (particularly the post-Tea Party version), the replacement could possibly be worse. The opposition needs to be smart, as well as energetic and committed.

Apposite:
https://mobile.twitter.com/cjcmichel/status/823256557295116288
"Instead of deserting the leaders who lied to them, they would protest they had know all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness."
(Hannah Arendt)

Maximum, maximum smart, creative publicity for every instance of Trump betraying the "forgotten America" he made all his promises to, like the case of the more expensive mortgages, would be an excellent start.

Although Nigel's Arendt quote might show why that wouldn't work as well as one might hope.

And appalling as most of the modern GOP is (particularly the post-Tea Party version), the replacement could possibly be worse.

No, GftNC. You are incorrect. The same people could (and probably will) do worse things, but they need to be stopped now. They are a minority. They are in power because of an anti-democratic fluke in our system that favored slavery. We've been fighting since our nascence, and it won't ever completely end. We've had the upper hand, and we need to get it together again.

We aren't Europe. We aren't the Middle East. We're humans, and are similar, but our history is different. Our struggle is constant, and we have to keep it down.

I saw some good signs, yesterday, but one of my favorites was "First they came for the Muslims, and I did said 'Not this time, motherfnckers'!" I saw that Hilzoy tweeted it.

We can't wait any longer.

Yes, I saw that Gloria Steinem said "If they start a Muslim registry, we'll all register as Muslims." I love that, my heart thrills to it, and again to "Not this time motherfuckers!"

I fully and completely support opposing each and every repressive measure. All I'm saying is that the half of the country that voted for Trump isn't going anywhere, and their existence needs to be factored into any long-term plan. And if any way can be found to lessen their attraction to fascist strongmen, that would be an excellent idea as well.

Might be a good time to reiterate this

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2017/01/commuted-open-thread.html?cid=6a00d834515c2369e201bb096efcf7970d#comment-6a00d834515c2369e201bb096efcf7970d

In other words, I'm not going to tolerate the notion that people have to provide schedules and to-do lists in order to prove bona-fides. And I will be giving time outs first and sorting it out with the front pagers later. A lot of things going in my personal life, so if I wake up to a 5 alarm blaze in the comment section, I'll put out the fire and then sort things out later. So, no matter how confident you are that _you_ aren't the problem, if you really like commenting here, you'll make sure that you try to avoid being part of the problem. Nuff said?

All I'm saying is that the half of the country that voted for Trump isn't going anywhere

Trump did not receive the votes of half of the country.

lj, please revise the posting rules to include "no schedules or to-do list asking". It's really getting hard to keep up.

Nigel, I follow Casey Michel on twitter too. His voice is really important.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad