Lazy Saturday Reads

Peruvian artist Hugo Lecaros

from the brush of Peruvian artist Hugo Lecaros

How’s your Saturday going?

I have a few odds and end reads  on Brazil and Venezuela that I’d like to suggest today.  I’m trying to take a breather from US politics so let’s look to two Southern neighbors with economic and political crises.  I’m going to start out with a few articles on Venezuela.  The country is having serious issues on the economic and political front.  It’s never good when one of our trading partners experiences such disruption.

Venezuela is experiencing hyperinflation which is something that is rare these days in places that we generally view as having functioning and non-politically manipulated central banks.  Usually, hyperinflation occurs in countries when the central government tries to solve its problems by printing money or devaluing its currency internationally and the central bank obliges. Venezuela’s debt is also out of control given the range and value of the countries assets.  Usually, these kinds of things will start transmitting instability to the region and to the country’s trading partners because prices of goods and services, interest rates, and exchange rates will fluctuate.

 There is civil unrest also as the country is experiencing food shortages and riots.  None of this is good and we’re really not hearing much about this in the traditional US media outlets.  Most of this analysis comes from the British Press and analysts focused on the region.

The rumour was there would be chicken.

Word had spread that a delivery of poultry meat was due at the Central Madeirense supermarket, and long before dawn a queue of shoppers was snaking around the block.

Kattya Alonzo was one of them. The 48-year-old mother of three was already planning to make the traditional chicken and rice dish arroz con pollo – if she could also find some rice.

“I haven’t been able to buy chicken in more than a month, so I was there early at about 4am,” she said.

At about 6.30, two trucks finally drew up outside the store, but before the drivers could start to unload, national guardsmen told them to drive on.

Perhaps it was not surprising that the mood outside the supermarket quickly turned ugly: frustration turned to despair, anger to violence. Before long, the incident on Tuesday had escalated.

Mobs tried to loot several bakeries and delis and another food delivery truck.

The unrest soon spread throughout this city of 200,000 just outside the capital, Caracas. Protesters shouted “We want food” as they blocked intersections with burning tyres and clashed with security forces.

Police and the national guard quickly controlled the outburst, with some 14 people reportedly arrested, and at least one person was injured, according to witnesses.

The protests were not related to marches in Caracas and other major cities, which were called this week by opposition leaders seeking to cut short the term of President Nicolás Maduro who they say has driven the country into the ground through mismanagement.

But spontaneous outburst such as the one in Guarenas may present a more serious challenge to Maduro’s rule than any efforts by his political rivals.

Things are not going well in Venezuela since global oil prices are down.  There are black markets everywhere since the food shortages began. Vendors get rich selling basics like diapers and milk.  The government has been trying to control prices but what this has done is lead to folks turning to side channels in black markets where the price is set by desperation and greed.  These black market shoppers are called “bachaqueros”  which is a play on the name of the bachaco leaf-cutting ant that carries several times its weight.  This place is no longer the socialist dream of the late Hugo Chavez who ruled the country for 14 years.  It is an example of socialism gone very wrong.

Epic Mural in Chile Mexican artist Jorge González Camarena, assisted by Chilean painters, Eugenio Brito and Albino Echeverría.

Epic Mural in Chile by Mexican artist Jorge González Camarena, assisted by Chilean painters, Eugenio Brito and Albino Echeverría.

It wasn’t always this way. Diego Moya-Ocampos, senior political risk analyst at IHS, says the current crisis is the result of years of “economic mismanagement” by the ruling socialist party.

Led by Hugo Chávez, the country’s firebrand former president, the country embarked on a wave of expropriation and redistribution with the charismatic leader offering  cut-price fridges, appliances and even new homes to poor Venezuelans.

Chávez wanted to create a socialist paradise, an ideology that has been reinforced by his successor Maduro following his death in 2013.

But the oil price collapse a year later served as a wake-up call for a country that chose profligacy over prudence in the hope that a rainy day would never come.

Oil accounts for 98pc of total exports and 59pc of fiscal revenues, but Moya-Ocampos says the price slide isn’t the country’s only problem.

“Even under Chavez and $100 a barrel oil, debt was rapidly rising and there were already food shortages,” he says, “This is ultimately to do with an interventionist model that is not sustainable and has reached a tipping point.”

Maduro’s declaration of a fresh three month state of emergency has sparked fears that the government will try to seize control of more private companies.

Many Venezuelans have already left the country, including Francisco Flores. “Venezuela has taken good working companies, given them to the poor but not equipped them with the skills to run them so they go bankrupt,” he says.

“That’s just a recipe for destroying a country.”

The NHS therapist, who now lives in London, says the regime is based on a principle of keeping everyone “equal but poor”.

Brazilian artist Adelio Sarro is known for portraits

Brazilian artist Adelio Sarro is known for portraits

I’ve always been interested in South American countries and their various economic crises.  The Mexican Peso Crisis is still taught in basic International Economics/Finance courses as a cautionary tale that’s frequently forgotten.   It’s also called The Tequila Crisis and happened while Bill Clinton was President in 1994. A country in crisis transmits economic and political instability to its neighbors through trade.  Here’s a an example of that from the current Venezuela crisis.  Coca Cola is one of those ubiquitous US products that basically is every where in the world.  Its recipe may be slightly different depending on the sugar dependency of a country’s consumers, but the trademark and product packaging are quite recognizable.  Venezuela’s access to Coke is gone.

And so we will have to chalk this up as another of those great successes of Bolivarian socialism. Yes, as I’ve been saying for some time now, this is not because of some misplaced zeal in making the lives of the poor better: it’s simply because messing with markets is not the way to achieve anything at all. Well, not unless your actual goal is to have a country run out of everything.

The news itself:

CARACAS, Venezuela— Coca-Cola KO -0.83% is halting production in Venezuela of its namesake beverage due to a sugar shortage brought on by the country’s economic crisis.

Production of sugar-sweetened beverages will be suspended in the coming days after local suppliers reported they had run out of the raw material, the Atlanta company said in an emailed statement Friday.

This isn’t even about the currency and import problems that have affected beer production:

The move comes as Venezuela’s economy is teetering on the edge of collapse with widespread food shortages and inflation forecast to surpass 700 percent. Last month, Empresas Polar, Venezuela’s largest food and beverage company, stopped production of beer because of a lack of imported barley.

I think teetering on the edge is using the wrong tense there. I think teetered would be better, making sure that we use the past tense. In any realistic sense that consumer economy has gone …

All countries have modified market economies.  Some markets function perfectly well with very little interference.  Some markets would not exist without government provision or if they did, would be prohibitively expensive.  There are three

Mexican Street artist Spaik and work in Michoacan

Mexican Street artist Spaik and work in Michoacan

primary agents in an domestic economy. That would be the government, the sellers, and the buyers.  Whenever any one of those agents gets into any market and has more unchecked power than the rest, you’re going to have issues. Market excesses can result from power and profit seeking private enterprise or from Government overreach.   You can find many examples of each throughout the modern history of many South American Countries.

Brazil is another country that is experiencing both economic and political troubles.   Its President was removed and is now fighting impeachment proceedings.

Brazil’s economy sank into the deepest recession in recent history last year amid low prices for key exports, soaring inflation and depressed confidence levels. Moreover, as the economy plummeted so did President Dilma Rousseff’s political career. A wide-spread corruption scandal and the economy’s abysmal performance caused approval levels to fall to all-time lows and resulted in the commencement of impeachment proceedings last year. On 12 May, the Senate voted to continue with these proceedings, forcing Rousseff to step down for a maximum of 180 days while a trial is conducted. Vice President Michel Temer took over as interim president and his first task will be to find a way to halt the sinking ship. However, a number of daunting challenges lie in Temer’s path and recent economic data remain poor: retail sales returned to contraction in March and the manufacturing PMI fell to the lowest level in over seven years in April.

A change in leadership will not be a magic bullet for Brazil’s economy and the recession is expected to continue throughout this year. FocusEconomics panelists see the economy contracting 3.7% in 2016, which is down 0.2 percentage points from last month’s forecast. For 2017, the panel sees the economy recovering slightly and growing 0.7%.

It’s never good when your president is impeached and on trial.  Rouseff was interviewed several days ago.   Dilma Rousseff argues that the Old Brazilian oligarchy behind ‘coup’ (FULL INTERVIEW).  This is her explanation of the events.

DR: I think it’s an impeachment process, to remove me from the office. Our Constitution provides for an impeachment, but only if the President commits a crime against the Constitution and human rights. We believe that it’s a coup, because no such crime has been committed. They put me on trial for additional loans [from state banks]. Every president before me has done it, and it has never been a crime. It won’t become a crime now. There is no basis for considering it a crime. A crime has to be legally defined. So we believe this impeachment is a coup, because it’s clearly stated in the Constitution that only a crime of malversation can serve as basis for impeachment. The actions currently under scrutiny do not, strictly speaking, fall under that category. Besides, Brazil is a presidential republic. You can’t remove a president or a prime minister who hasn’t committed a crime. We’re not a parliamentary republic, where a president can dissolve the congress, which, in turn, can call for a vote of no confidence out of purely political reasons. So it’s impossible to impeach a president in Brazil based solely on political reasons or political distrust. We believe that what’s happening now in Brazil is an attempt to replace an innocent president involved in no corruption-related legal proceedings in order for the politicians that lost the 2014 election to control the state bypassing the new election. That’s what’s happening. This is an attempt to replace the entire political program that includes both the social and economic development aspects and is aimed at tackling the crisis that Brazil has been going through in recent years with a program clearly neoliberal in nature. This program provides for minimizing our social programs in accordance with the minimal state doctrine. This doctrine is at odds with all the Brazilian legal norms regarding healthcare, construction and ensuring that our people have their own houses, availability of high-quality education and minimum wages guaranteed to the poorest part of the Brazilian population. They want to do away with these rights and at the same time they conduct an anti-national policy, for example, when it comes to Brazil’s oil resources. Significant subsalt oil reserves, lying 7,000 m below the surface, were discovered recently. The ministers were saying that exploring these reserves was impossible, but now we’re extracting a million barrels daily from subsalt oil reserves. Undoubtedly, they were saying that thinking to change the legislation in order to guarantee access to these reserves to international companies. Moreover, in terms of foreign policy, starting from Lula da Silva and throughout my presidency, we have been seeking to strengthen ties with Latin American, African, BRICS countries and other developing nations, in addition to the developed world – the US and Europe. I think that BRICS is one of the most important multilateral groups created in the last decade. But the interim government holds different views on BRICS and the importance we place on Latin America. They are even discussing the possibility of closing embassies in some African countries. We have very special relations with Africa. Brazil is the country with the highest percentage of population of African descent in the world, second only to African countries. We have a lot of people of African descent, so over the last few years we’ve been putting particular emphasis on our relations with the African countries, and not only Portuguese-speaking ones. This shows a wider approach to the world, as opposed to the traditional one, supported by those who have usurped the power now and are taking steps that are at odds with the program approved by the Brazilian people, by 54 mln votes, on the day I was elected.

AG_obra_zK9HNNghf8ca

Early 20th century Brazilian artist Francisco da Silva

Brazil’s crisis is being transmitted to its neighbors.   Again, this is always likely between close trading partners. The crisis country will not likely have their trading partners interests so much as their own, however.

Yet as Brazil is consumed by the worst political and economic crisis in decades, the country has turned inward. This has contributed to a regional power vacuum and a sense of paralysis when it comes to devising regional approaches to South America’s most pressing challenges. For example, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s increasingly blatant disregard for even basic democratic standards has seen a less meaningful regional reaction because of Brazil’s problems. Given Brazil’s dominant role in South America – representing roughly half its GDP, population and territory – its travails are inevitably bad news for the continent.

The current crisis is only part of the story. Even prior to reelection in 2014, when the government refused to acknowledge that Brazil’s economy was in trouble, Dilma Rousseff failed to articulate a coherent foreign policy doctrine. Brazil’s international strategy since 2011 was shaped, above all, by the president’s astonishing indifference to all things international and officials’ incapacity to convince Rousseff that foreign policy could be used to promote the government’s domestic goals.

Her predecessors knew better: Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002) helped establish a series of regional mechanisms to preserve democratic governance, thus reducing the number of external political crises that could hurt the Brazilian economy. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-10) promoted regional integration further to facilitate the entry of Brazilian companies into neighboring markets. Lula not only had a trusted foreign minister and a special adviser for international affairs, but also a highly active minister of defense who embraced foreign policy to promote Brazil’s interests, for example by using the newly established South American Council of Defense to enhance trust between the continent’s armed forces.

Paradoxically, just as the bitter political battle to unseat Rousseff is reaching its climax, the president has at last begun to accept the importance of foreign affairs. She and Vice President Michel Temer (poised to become president if she is removed from office) have engaged in an international war of narratives about the legitimacy of impeachment proceedings. Rousseff traveled to New York, where she denounced Temer as a “coup-monger” on the sidelines of a UN meeting. Temer reacted swiftly, giving interviews to major international newspapers, and sending allies abroad to make his case.

Rousseff also broadened her fight to regional bodies and leaders. In somewhat vague terms, she announced she would ask Mercosur to invoke its democracy clause, arguing that a democratic rupture was underway in Brazil. From New York, Brazil’s foreign minister and special foreign policy adviser traveled directly to Quito to make Rousseff’s case at Unasur. Maduro and Bolivia’s President Evo Morales are among those who agree Rousseff is facing a “coup.” For the government in Caracas, which recently assumed the temporary presidency of Unasur and will soon assume the presidency of Mercosur, it is an opportunity to try to draw attention away from the catastrophic situation at home.

It is easy to forget that we do have neighbors and some of them may have issues that will suddenly impact our economy in our own election year with so much focus on ISIS and the middle east.  This is one of the reasons I trust Hillary Clinton.  I can guarantee that if you ask her about either of these countries, their leaders, and their issues she will have insightful analysis and probably know the players personally.  Many of the biggest issues in these countries have roots in populist leaders of one extreme or another.   My guess is that the other two choices standing for President at this point will be clueless as to the situations, causes, and ramifications. You can tell that not only by their words and polices but also by the absence of discussion on these two important neighbors in crisis.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?  This is an open thread!!!  Please share!

 


Bring it on Home to Us! Live Blog: Kentucky & Oregon Democratic Primaries

samcooke-bringitonhometomenothingcanchangethislove(djcop

Good Evening!!!

So, we’re getting closer to the end of primary season and closer to having U.S. President Hillary Clinton!

Tonight, we’ll be watching the Kentucky and Oregon primaries .  Both are closed primaries which means only registered Democrats may vote.

May 17 Primaries at stake for the Democratic Primary.

Kentucky: 55 delegates at stake

(We already have votes being reported.)

Trump was declared the winner of Kentucky in a March Caucus. Right now, Clinton has 50% and Sanders has 37.8% with less than 1% reporting.

Oregon:  61 delegates at stake
Last poll closes at 10:00 PM CT

cover-large_fileThere are some things we need to watch tonight even though Hillary Clinton is quite close to sealing the deal.

 

 

Hillary Clinton continues to move ever closer to clinching the Democratic nomination with each successive primary contest, but Bernie Sanders could get more victories in his column on Tuesday when voters in Kentucky and Oregon head to the polls.

Oregon is the kind of progressive, activist state where Sanders and his kind of politics have long been popular. He is the favorite there. Clinton easily won Kentucky during the 2008 primaries, and it was expected at the start of this campaign that she would run ahead of the socialist Sanders in areas where Democrats are more conservative.

But Sanders’ victories earlier this month in Indiana and West Virginia, states that border Kentucky, suggest he could do very well in the Bluegrass State as well.

Here are some key things to watch for Tuesday:

Sanders’ Advantage: Oregon and Kentucky Have Small Populations of People of Color

Black voters have overwhelmingly backed Clinton during the primary season, and her performance in most states has been directly correlated to their African-American populations. So Kentucky and Oregon present big challenges for Clinton.

Nationally, African-Americans are 13 percent of the population. They are just 2 percent in Oregon, and 8 percent in Kentucky. (In this sense, Kentucky, while generally defined as in the South, is distinct from that region. The black population in neighboring Tennessee, where Clinton won, is 17 percent.)

Latinos (17 percent of the U.S. population) have generally favored Clinton as well, and they are only 3 percent of the population in Kentucky.

Eastern Kentucky Could Be Tough for Clinton

In the 2008 Democratic primary, Clinton won 118 of Kentucky’s 120 counties, getting 65 percent of the vote statewide, compared to Barack Obama’s 30 percent. In Kentucky’s Fifth Congressional District, the area where much of the state’s coal industry is based, Clinton won about 88 percent of the vote.

But that result may mean nothing now. Clinton also blew out Obama in neighboring West Virginia in 2008, only to lose resoundingly to Sanders in the primary there last week.

Many of the counties in Eastern Kentucky are part of coal country and have similar demographics to West Virginia: few college graduates, small black populations, high poverty rates, and declining economies. If the pattern from West Virginia holds, Sanders will be very strong in this region.

This area is also where Clinton’s controversial remarks about coal are likely to be most problematic.

So far, turnout appears light in Kentucky.

Kentucky Secretary of State spokesman Bradford Queen says say voter turnout has been slow since polls opened on a cool, rainy election day.

The top race on Tuesday’s ballot for Democrats is the presidential primary between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Republicans held a presidential caucus in March, which was won by Donald Trump. Other major races on the primary ballot include seats for U.S. House, U.S. Senate and the state House.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, left. and Kentucky U.S. Democratic senatorial candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes wave to supporters during a campaign rally, Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2014, at the Kentucky International Convention Center in Louisville, Ky. (AP Photo/Timothy D. Easley)

Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, left. and Kentucky U.S. Democratic senatorial candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes wave to supporters during a campaign rally, Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2014, at the Kentucky International Convention Center in Louisville, Ky. (AP Photo/Timothy D. Easley)

Oregon would appear to be more friendly to Sanders but the most recent polls show Clinton somewhat ahead.

Oregon would appear to be the perfect place for Sanders’ broadsides against income inequality and the “rigged” economic system. Portland certainly is, but the whole state isn’t as progressive as its most populous city. A poll released least week by DHM Research showed Clinton with a 15-point advantage in Oregon. This has led Sanders to try to pump up turnout in the state.

“If voter turnout is low, if young people and working people don’t send in their ballots, we will probably lose,” Sanders told The Oregonian over the weekend. “Needless to say, what I hope we’ll be seeing is a very large voter turnout.”

There’s reason to believe the Vermont senator will get his wish. Oregon has seen a big jump in voter registrations, especially among the under-30 crowd. “[T]here’s clearly a lot of interest out there,” Oregon Secretary of State Jeanne P. Atkins said. “We have more registered voters than we’ve ever had before.”

Sanders heads into the Oregon and Kentucky vote with momentum and confidence. Clinton has been trying to pivot to the general election for some weeks, and now her rival is pivoting too. Sanders, who has won primaries in Indiana and West Virginia the past two weeks, repeatedly points out that he polls very well against Trump, who is an insult-spewing bogeyman to many liberals.

 

The Clinton campaign has been spending time in Kentucky so we’re real hopeful here.  Grab the popcorn and a seat!!!


Monday Reads

coat-hangerGood Morning!

We have an interesting SCOTUS decision/nondecision just announced on the challenge to the Affordable Health Care’s provision for Birth Control.  Basically, they sent the case back to the lower courts.  I’ve noticed a lot of women’s groups are beginning to take notice of the assault on our reproductive rights.  Remember, Hillary Clinton will appoint the next Supreme Court Justice if President Obama’s selection continues to be the victim of right wing stalling.  This coming election means women’s lives are at stake.

In a surprise move Monday, the Supreme Court punted on a major Obamacare case challenging the law’s contraceptive mandate, and specifically, how it accommodates religious nonprofits that object to birth control. The Supreme Court sent the case back to lower courts to examine an alternative accommodation to the mandate that the court had been briefed on by both parties in the case after the oral arguments.

The move — which comes as the Supreme Court is down a justice with Justice Antonin Scalia’s death — allowed the court to avoid what looked like a split decision after March’s oral arguments. The Supreme Court was able to stay away from the thorny trade-offs between health care policy and religious freedom, a legal landscape that got much more complicated after the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2014’s Hobby Lobby case.

The challenge the court weighed in on Monday was Zubik v. Burwell. It was consolidation of cases brought by religious nonprofits, including The Little Sister’s of the Poor, who objected to the work-around set up by the Obama administration to provide contraceptive coverage to employees of organizations opposed to birth control on religious grounds. The non-profits said that even filling out the form or sending a government the letter declaring their objections to covering birth control was a burden on their faith, because it set in motion the process by which their employees received the coverage from their insurers, though that coverage was not paid for or part of the employer plans. Lower courts’ have overwhelmingly rejected the challengers’ argument that the workaround violated 1993’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), though one appeals court ruled in their favor. (That case was not among those consolidated for the Supreme Court).

In sending the case back down to lower courts, the Supreme Court signaled that it believed a compromise could be worked out that didn’t involve weighing the larger issues involved in the RFRA challenge.

“The Court expresses no view on the merits of the cases. In particular, the Court does not decide whether petitioners’ religious exercise has been substantially burdened, whether the Government has a compelling interest, or whether the current regulations are the least restrictive means of serving that interest,” Monday’s opinion said. The opinion also stipulated that whatever was worked out should not affect “the ability of the Government to ensure that women covered by petitioners’ health plans” have access to contraceptive coverage.

RFRA was at the heart of the Supreme Court’s decision in 2014’s Hobby Lobby case — which said that certain for-profit companies that object to birth control could use the nonprofit workaround that was on trial in Zubik.

claire no more wire hangersLyle Denniston writing for SCOTUSBLOG called it “A compromise, with real impact, on birth control”.

One reading of Monday’s developments was that the Court, now functioning with eight Justices, was having difficulty composing a majority in support of a definite decision on the legal questions.  Thus, what emerged had all of the appearance of a compromise meant to help generate majority support among the Justices.  With this approach, the Court both achieved the practical results of letting the government go forward to provide the contraceptive benefits and freeing the non-profits of any risk of penalties, even though neither side has any idea — at present — what the ultimate legal outcome will be and, therefore, what their legal rights actually are under the mandate.

Those uncertainties are now likely to linger through the remainder of President Obama’s term in office, which ends next January.  The appeals courts may well order the filing of new legal briefs, and may hold new hearings, before issuing a new round of rulings on the controversy.  However, the entire future of the ACA, including its birth-control mandate, may now depend upon who wins the presidential election this year and which party has control of Congress when it reassembles in 2017.

The two issues that the Court had agreed to rule on, and then left hanging at least for now, were whether the ACA mandate violates the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act by requiring religious non-profits that object to contraceptives to notify the government of that position, and whether the move by the government to go ahead and arrange access to those benefits for those non-profits’ employees and students was the “least restrictive means” to carry out the mandate.

Doing on Monday much the same that it had done in several temporary orders at earlier stages of this controversy, the Court accepted that the non-profits already had given the federal government sufficient notice of their objection to the mandate, and that the government could use that notice as the basis for going ahead to provide actual access, at no cost, to the employees and students of those institutions.

The pictures you’re seeing are from a Friday night event where activists here in New Orleans1936210_10153730068918512_9068407566361312432_n –including me–assembled and composed Wire Hangergrams for Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards who is supporting a 72 hour waiting period here in Louisiana.  We just can’t seem to keep these dirty old men out of our private parts!!! They don’t think we can make important decisions either.  This is really getting disgusting.

The Louisiana legislature on Wednesday passed a bill requiring women to wait three days before receiving an abortion, tripling the state’s existing waiting time in one of the most stringent regulations of its kind nationally.

Governor John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, has said he plans to sign the bill championed by anti-abortion groups. It passed with wide support from the Republican-controlled legislature.

The bill requires a woman to wait at least 72 hours after a state-mandated ultrasound for the procedure. The current waiting time is 24 hours, the same as in most states with waiting periods.

Only five other states require 72-hour waiting periods: Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Utah.

The measures are among a wave of laws being adopted by states as conservatives seek to chip away at the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision to legalize abortion.

I voted for the man but just couldn’t bring myself to work on his campaign even though he’d promised to not mess with things like No more wire hangersPlanned Parenthood.  You may recall I was incensed about an ad he ran.  I found the ad appalling.  He just seems to be another example of a man drenched in patriarchy who can’t keep his personal need to control the women in his life away from the rest of us.

This is another weird tale on fellow New Orleanian Wendall Pierce who actually physically assaulted a woman supporting Bernie Sanders.  Pierce has been an outspoken Clinton supporter which is fine.  This action is beyond wrong.

Wendell Pierce, the New Orleans-born actor known for his work in the HBO series “The Wire” and “Treme,” was arrested Saturday in Atlanta after he was accused of attacking a Bernie Sanders supporter,according to the website TMZ and online Fulton County police records.

Pierce was at the Loews Hotel in Atlanta about 3:30 a.m. when he began a political discussion with the woman and her boyfriend, according to the celebrity news website.

TMZ said a hotel source reported that Pierce, a supporter of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, grabbed the woman’s hair and slapped her in the head after learning she preferred Clinton’s Democratic rival, Bernie Sanders.

On Sunday, the Atlanta Police Department confirmed that Pierce had been arrested at that hotel, where he was staying as a guest.

“The incident did not rise to anything significant, so no special notification was made … it was treated like any other arrest a patrol officer conducts,” police spokesman Donald Hannah told WWL-TV in an email shared with The New Orleans Advocate. “Mr. Pierce made no indication he was famous, nor did the officer inquire.”

Police records show Pierce, 52, was booked and released on Saturday. He was booked on simple battery and posted an online bond of $1,000, the records indicate.

Pierce, who now lives in Pasadena, California, was raised in Pontchartrain Park, the first African-American postwar suburb in New Orleans, and was active in efforts to rebuild it after Hurricane Katrina.

The actor and producer has been in more than 30 films and nearly 50 television shows and has performed in numerous stage productions, including Broadway productions of “The Piano Lesson,” “Serious Money” and “The Boys of Winter.”

He is perhaps best known for his roles as Detective Bunk Moreland in “The Wire,” trombonist Antoine Batiste in “Treme” and Michael Davenport in the movie “Waiting to Exhale.”

wire hanger gram boxThis primary season needs to end.  The shenanigans in Nevada have shown how little control the Sanders campaign has over its most zealous supporters.  Things are getting way out of control.

Ben Carson is beginning to leak the short list for Trump’s VP and it isn’t a pretty one.  Many folks think that it will most likely be Jan Brewer but Sarah Palin’s name is on it.  So is Chris Christie’s which is basically no surprise to me.  I really doubt either of them would bring anything to the ticket since they’re as nasty and crazy as Trump himself.  They also don’t represent any new votes.

Ben Carson, the neurosurgeon turned presidential candidate turned unfiltered pitchman for Donald Trump and now part of the presumptive nominee’s vice presidential search committee, sat in the back of a Town Car with his wife, Candy, on his way to a televised interview. He had just explained to the reporter riding along that he wanted no role in a Trump administration when news arrived of a new poll naming him as the best-liked of a list of potential running mates.

“Who else was on the list?” he asked quietly, maintaining his usual inscrutable calm. The most favorably regarded contenders after himself, he was told, were John Kasich, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin and Chris Christie.

“Those are all people on our list,” he said.

Seriously!  Trump/Palin.  How much argle bargle could one country stand?

I’m making it short today because I have a long day so what’s on your reading and blogging list?  This is an open thread so please share!!!


Saturday Reads: Let the Record show that Donald Trump is a textbook Misogynist and Racist

31C71AEC00000578-3473482-image-a-31_1456945973359Good Afternoon!

It seems we’re finally getting a few journalists to investigate the appalling human relations history of Donald Trump and his well-documented racism and misogyny. The Republican party is lamenting this  because he’s their official standard bearer now. They would love to continue using code words instead of blatant bigotry. The rest of us better hope and pray that a few of the lemmings stop long enough to read up on  the man that is prepared to lead them over the precipice.  There is absolutely nothing redeeming about him.

I’m going to focus on some fairly long and intense investigations of Trump’s treatment of women as well as the astounding role that white identity politics is playing in this race.  None of these links are easy to read but every one should read them and share them.

Donald Trump’s campaign cannot stop attracting white supremacists.  Last week, David Duke argued that he would make a great Vice President candidate and “life insurance.” It’s very difficult to ignore that politics of “whiteness” and white resentment is an essential part of the Trump campaign.  (H/T to Jslat for this great link.)

But then, there’s the liberal commentator Jonathan Chait’s recent essay at New York Mag, “The Real Reason We All Underrated Trump,” in which he openly wonders whether Republican voters who’ve fallen for Trump are “idiots”:

“Most voters don’t follow politics and policy for a living, and it’s understandable that they would often fall for arguments based on faulty numbers or a misreading of history. … As low as my estimation of the intelligence of the Republican electorate may be, I did not think enough of them would be dumb enough to buy his act. And, yes, I do believe that to watch Donald Trump and see a qualified and plausible president, you probably have some kind of mental shortcoming. As many fellow Republicans have pointed out, Donald Trump is a con man. What I failed to realize — and, I believe, what so many others failed to realize, though they have reasons not to say so — is just how easily so many Republicans are duped.” 

It’s telling that Chait finds it easier to imagine that huge swaths of Republican primary voters are childlike and naive, rather than folks who quite rationally dig Trump’s direct appeals to their interests — their racial interests. Among Trump’s most notorious policy proposals is a moratorium on Muslims entering the country. He has called Mexican immigrants “rapists.” Maybe we should concede that these declarations are not incidental to his appeal among his supporters, but central to them. Calling them “idiots” posits that they’ve been duped, when perhaps Trump is saying precisely what they want to hear.

When Trump’s supporters aren’t being written off as intellectually incapable of knowing a huckster when they see one, their motivations are often ascribed to their being “working class.” But the working class today is nearly 40 percent people of color — and among people of color, Trump is profoundly unpopular. His coalition is nearly entirely white. Even the class part of the “working class” narrative is inaccurate; Trump’s supporters are wealthier than most Americans, and have higher incomes than supporters of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. The “working class revolt” explanation for Trump’s rise is overstated — and it can be a useful dodge to avoid talking about explanations involving racial grievance.

There have been outlets and pundits this election cycle who’ve shown they’re willing and able to dig into the role that racial grievance plays in How Trump Happened. Others haven’t, and continue not to. And that’s a problem.

The one thing that both the Sanders campaign and the Trump campaign have done for those of us that can see intersectionality of gender identity, sexual preference, religion, and race with justice, jobs, and opportunity is demonstrate that we have a serious cjones08082015problem in this country.  White, christian, male grievances are on display in each of those campaigns to the detriment of discussion of  actual issues. White straight male privilege shouts, screams, and violates everything that this county built on the idea of a melting pot based on representative democracy, and the idea of liberty and justice for all.

Trump’s treatment and characterizations of women should’ve been an automatic disqualifier for any political candidate. We’ve seen elected officials lose elections for all kinds of incredible comments about rape, women’s reproductive organs, and the role of women in society.  Donald Trump’s misogyny is part of his overwhelming appeal to white men who resent women.

Whiteness has always been a central dynamic of American cultural and political life, though we don’t tend to talk about it as such. But this election cycle is making it much harder to avoid discussions of white racial grievance and identity politics when, for instance, Donald Trump’s only viable pathway to the White House is to essentially win all of the white dudes.

cjones09122015This is piggybacking on Trump’s racist and bigoted comments on Mexicans, Muslims. and Black Americans.  Trump holds special contempt for women.  (The first two cartoons come from the mind and pen of claytoonz.com .)

Republican frontrunner and presumptive nominee for president Donald Trump once said that “smart women” act “feminine and needy” but that on the inside, they’re “real killers.” It is, he advised men, “one of the great acts of all time.”

On Friday, CNN pointed out that the description comes from Trump’s chapter on women from his 1997 book, The Art of the Comeback.

“The smart ones act very feminine and needy, but inside they are real killers,” wrote the erstwhile reality TV star. “The person who came up with the expression ‘the weaker sex’ was either very naïve or had to be kidding. I have seen women manipulate men with just a twitch of their eye — or perhaps another body part.”

Trump has taken heat for his sexist attacks on women over the years from comedian Rosie O’Donnell — who he called “fat,” “disgusting” and “a dog” — to Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly, who the candidate said was unfairly “aggressive” with him in a televised debate and then accused her of being on her period.

The Boston Globe went after Trump’s behaviors in the Beauty Pageant Business and the resulting stories are horrifying.  This is a good summation of the evidence by The Daily Mail.

It begins with the recollections of a pin-up model named Rhonda Noggle. 

Noggle joined Trump in his limousine with a group of scantily-clad girls as they left the Plaza Hotel’s Oak Room.

Upon hearing the ‘bimbos’ and the ‘gold diggers’ comments, Noggle decided she’d had enough.

‘I told him I would rather be with a trash man who respected me than someone who was a rich, pompous ass,’ she told the Globe.

‘And I got out. And I took a cab ride home.’

Trump, in an interview with the Globe, denied he had ever made the comments and doesn’t recall Noggle getting out of the car.

As the Globe put it, ‘Noggle’s assertion of sexist behavior by Trump foreshadowed allegations of misogyny, racial bias, and sexually aggressive behavior that would roil this brief and fractious deal – Trump’s debut in the pageant business in which he would in time become a major player.’

You can read the Globe’s April 17th expose at this link. It is amazing to me that stories of unwanted fondling and harassment actually were the basis of the only business where he’s had success. 0811wassermancolor

Trump’s involvement in the calendar model competition came at a time when his reputation as an eligible New York ladies’ man was at its peak. He was between his first and second marriages, and his personal life was regular fodder in the New York tabloid gossip pages. Two years earlier, he had been featured on the cover of Playboy magazine.

The case of American Dream Enterprise Inc. v. Donald Trump, et al. — told through hundreds of pages of court records, several sworn depositions, and in nearly two dozen interviews — shows a darker side of Trump’s playboy image.

It foreshadows a reputation for sexism and misogyny that sticks with him nearly 25 years later, in his presidential bid, in which coarse descriptions of women and perceived sexist comments have left him with extraordinarily high unfavorable ratings among women.

The foray into the Calendar Girls pageant, however, also ushered in Trump’s interest in the business of entertainment. He later bought the Miss Universe pageant and gained national renown for his reality show, “The Apprentice.”

“I don’t believe there would have been an ‘Apprentice’ if there wasn’t a pageant first,” said Jim Gibson, a consultant and longtime pageant host who guided Trump into the pageant business and eventually to the Miss Universe event. “That got him in the higher hierarchies of the television business. And it did exactly what Donald wanted to do: It built his name.”

4221396001_4801061240001_4801034125001-vsThe coverage of Trump’s records of sexual harassment is well-documented in The NYT’s feature article “Crossing the Line.”  It will bring back every horrible memory of every woman trying to earn a living and it will bring on every horrible nightmare every parent has of the kind of treatment they never want hoisted on their daughters.

Donald J. Trump had barely met Rowanne Brewer Lane when he asked her to change out of her clothes.

Donald was having a pool party at Mar-a-Lago. There were about 50 models and 30 men. There were girls in the pools, splashing around. For some reason Donald seemed a little smitten with me. He just started talking to me and nobody else.

He suddenly took me by the hand, and he started to show me around the mansion. He asked me if I had a swimsuit with me. I said no. I hadn’t intended to swim. He took me into a room and opened drawers and asked me to put on a swimsuit.

–Rowanne Brewer Lane, former companion

Ms. Brewer Lane, at the time a 26-year-old model, did as Mr. Trump asked. “I went into the bathroom and tried one on,” she recalled. It was a bikini. “I came out, and he said, ‘Wow.’ ”

Mr. Trump, then 44 and in the midst of his first divorce, decided to show her off to the crowd at Mar-a-Lago, his estate in Palm Beach, Fla. “He brought me out to the pool and said, ‘That is a stunning Trump girl, isn’t it?’ ” Ms. Brewer Lane said.

Donald Trump and women: The words evoke a familiar cascade of casual insults, hurled from the safe distance of a Twitter account, a radio show or a campaign podium. This is the public treatment of some women by Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president: degrading, impersonal, performed. “That must be a pretty picture, you dropping to your knees,” he told a female contestant on “The Celebrity Apprentice.” Rosie O’Donnell, he said, had a “fat, ugly face.” A lawyer who needed to pump milk for a newborn? “Disgusting,” he said.

But the 1990 episode at Mar-a-Lago that Ms. Brewer Lane described was different: a debasing face-to-face encounter between Mr. Trump and a young woman he hardly knew. This is the private treatment of some women by Mr. Trump, the up-close and more intimate encounters.

Michael Barbaro and Megan Twohey have documented a life long obsession with and oppression of women by Trump.  Read it and prepared to be angry.

Documenting all of the horrible things that Trump has said about women on Howard Stern led Chris Hayes to tell Michael Steele that he really would love to read each one and ask each Republican on his show if it represents his beliefs and the beliefs of the Republican Party.  The Stern comments are a case study in misogyny.

Donald Trump’s rise toward the Republican nomination has been fueled, in part, by his candid and often crude style — more Howard Stern, say, than Mitt Romney.

And the roots of Donald Trump’s rhetoric come, in fact, in part from The Howard Stern Show. Trump appeared upwards of two dozen times from the late ’90s through the 2000s with the shock jock, and BuzzFeed News has listened to hours of those conversations, which are not publically available. The most popular topic of conversation during these appearances, as is typical of Stern’s program, was sex. In particular, Trump frequently discussed women he had sex with, wanted to have sex with, or wouldn’t have sex with if given the opportunity. He also rated women on a 10-point scale.

“A person who is very flat-chested is very hard to be a 10,” he told Stern in one typical exchange.

Women make up a majority of the American electorate, and any of dozens of Trump’s remarks would be considered a severe blow to most candidates for public office. Trump has, in the Republican primary, proven largely immune to the backlash that the laws of gravity in politics would predict, but there are also suggestions that he has a deep problem with some women voters: 68% of women voters held an unfavorable view of Trump in a Quinnipiac poll released in December. In a Gallup poll also released in December, Trump had the lowest net favorable rating out of all the candidates among college-educated Republican women. And should he win the nomination, his comments are sure to become ammunition for Democrats against what they have long cast as a Republican “war on women.”

Trump has a history of making crude remarks toward women. He reportedly said of his ex-wife Marla Maples, “Nice tits, no brains,” and more recently, he has called Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly a “bimbo” and a “lightweight” and said she had “blood coming out of her wherever” during the first GOP debate.

It’s really hard to believe that one of the two major political parties can elect such an Donald-Trump-tweet-Hillary-Clintonincredibly flawed, hateful, misogynistic, racists, and bigoted candidate.  It is said that parts of  the Republican Party are still trying to draft an independent candidate.  The problem is that it’s not because of Trump’s statements towards women, people of Muslim faith, or people of racial and ethnic minorities.  It’s because some of the things he says are seen as too liberal, to dove like, and not really ‘evangelical christian’ enough.  This means they’re fine with the misogyny, bigotry and racism.

Two central figures in the draft talks are Kristol, who edits the Weekly Standard, and Erickson, a talk-radio host. While Kristol acts as a lone operator and has huddled privately with Romney and other Republicans, Erickson leads an organized group with former Senate staffer Bill Wichterman and others called Conservatives Against Trump, which has been meeting regularly for months.

Coburn, known for his fiscal conservatism, and Sasse have been atop the group’s recruit list for some time. Wichterman is among those who have reached out to Coburn. Friends of the 68-year-old former senator said he is listening but is unlikely to pull the trigger, in part because of health concerns.

Earlier this spring, Kristol had his eyes on Mattis, who is revered by conservatives for his public break with the Obama administration. The general, now a fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, met for several hours in mid-April with Kristol, Wilson and GOP consultant Joel Searby at the Beacon Hotel in Washington to go over how a campaign could work.

But soon after, Mattis backed away from the idea because he wasn’t ready to risk politicizing his reputation with a campaign that had little hope for success, according to two people familiar with his deliberations who requested anonymity to discuss those conversations. Mattis declined through a spokesman to be interviewed.

Kristol then reached out to Romney asking for a meeting to ask for his assistance. The two met May 5 at the J.W. Marriott hotel in Washington where they talked about possible contenders. Kristol detailed their discussion the next day to The Washington Post, which irked some Romney associates.

When asked this week to comment on further developments, Kristol declined.

“These conspiracies for the public good are time and labor intensive!” he wrote in an email. “In any case, things are at a delicate stage now, so I really should keep mum. Suffice it to say that serious discussions and real planning are ongoing.”

Potential candidates include a newbie Senator from Nebraska who is really a horrifying person all in his own right.   Sasse is an ideologue with some fairly strange ideas . c9a0fb89b7e82e00791282a6e5ae83ce

So what is a “Ben Sasse,” and how did he arrive at this wrong conclusion?

Sasse was elected to the Senate in 2014. In that cycle of Establishment vs. Tea Party Senate primaries, it was unclear in Nebraska which candidate, Sasse or former state Treasurer Shane Osborn,represented which side. It was such a muddle that FreedomWorks, one of the original national Tea Party organizations, switched its endorsement to Sasse after originally endorsing Osborn, prompting theresignation of one of its vice presidents. Since coming to the Senate, Sasse has amassed an arch-conservative’s voting record. He was recently the lone dissenting vote against a bill to combat opioid abuse, which he believes is a state- and local-government issue.

We’ve talked that the general election will get very ugly because it’s obvious that Trump is not shy about playing all the cards in his deck of hate.  I hope this kind of information continues to get out to the public.  Given Trump’s disapproval among women, women will be behind Hillary.  There is very little chance that his racist comments and ability to attract white nationalists will appeal to any racial minority.  This is the deal, however.  Whatever are we going to do with those white men and the few hangers on among them?  It’s not easy to ignore the privileged class.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?

As always, this is an open thread.  Please share everything and anything!!!


Friday Reads: Same as it ever was

a05276c851628116049753d217602f98

Shirley Bassey

Good Afternoon!

I’ve been perusing headlines today hoping for a sign of progress in a world gone mad.  No headline has obliged me yet.  So, let’s read a little bit of history repeating.

So, there’s an Oil Gusher in the Gulf again. This time it’s Shell Oil who’s the responsible culprit.  Quelle Surprise!  It’s characterized as “not a well-control incident”. So, what have we got once again?

The Coast Guard is responding to a crude oil spill from that reportedly discharged from a Shell subsea well-head flow line, approximately 90 miles south of Timbalier Island, Louisiana, Thursday.

Shell officials said they believe about 2,100 barrels (88,200 gallons) of oil were released in the spill. Authorities said Shell has isolated the leak, and the source of the discharge was reported as secured.

Shell added there are no drilling activities at the Brutus platform, close to where the leak is located, and the spill is not a well-control incident.

2e3068f4-1722-4c11-a662-624b7de8fbed

Nina Simone

I’ve said this a million times but you have to treat huge corporations like freaking addicts. They are profit addicts. It’s generally all they care about. There are very few corporations that don’t have direct ownership by a family head that’s basically built the business that really care about anything else. It’s like a benchmark of finance research on moral agency. 

You cannot trust a for-profit corporation to maintain/update its infrastructure. PERIOD. It’s a nonproductive cost to them in almost all instances. They suck at doing things that don’t immediately gratify their bottom line. When do we learn from this?

I’m still trying to digest this headline still:  “David Duke Wants To Be Donald Trump’s Vice President: Former KKK Leader Says He’d Be ‘Life Insurance’ For The Donald”  At least he’s honest that Trump’s Presidential slogan really is “Make America all about Straight White Men Again.”

Donald Trump can’t seem to stop receiving support from white supremacists. The latest example involves a mock campaign poster from none other than David Duke himself, the former Ku Klux Klan leader and Trump superfan, who seems to think he’d make a great vice president.

Duke tweeted Thursday a Trump-Duke ticket would be the New York billionaire’s “best life insurance” and offered up a photoshopped campaign poster to help out his chosen presidential candidate.

Of course life in the headlines wouldn’t be complete with out George Zimmerman doing something perfectly horrible and self-serving. Zimmerman is trying to auction off the gun he used to murder Treyvon Martin. His first attempt didn’t go so well. But, he’s still at it.

After the auction site pulled Zimmerman’s gun, stating that his listing didn’t jive with their missionto “provide a safe and secure platform for firearms enthusiasts and law-abiding citizens,” UnitedGun Group seemed to change its mind and briefly allowed bidding to resume. Bidding for the 9 mm Kel-Tec PF-9 pistol started at $5,000 and reached more than $65 million by 5.45 a.m. Thursday night, although that bid appeared to be the work of internet trolls. As of Friday morning, a hyperlink to the listing shows the auction was inactive.

GunBroker.com, another company that had listed Zimmerman’s gun on Thursday, pulled the item from its site after a national outcry that included condemnation from Martin’s family“We want no part in the listing on our website or in any of the publicity it is receiving,” it said in a statement, reported byUSA TODAY.

The GunBroker.com listing, reportedly authored by Zimmerman on Wednesday, described the gun as “the firearm that was used to defend my life and end the brutal attack from TrayvonMartin,” according to the Associated Press.

48f94373fd90dbbb6abf6438f8e4e26e

“Lady Day” Bille Holliday

Fox New oozes straight white male privilege and no one probably does it better than the O’Reilly Factor. Since Keith Obermann is no longer around to put Jesse Watters up for worse person in the world so here’s Scott Eric Kaufman’s stab at it.

On The O’Reilly Factor Thursday night, roving “reporter” Jesse Watters approached a number of people who looked young and asked them about how they felt about the presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, and not surprisingly, they all provided him with answers he saw fit to mock.

However, as is always the case, most of the millennials he interviewed actually bested him argumentatively.
“This country has become a joke,” one millennial who was being wrongly mocked for his ignorance said, “then Donald Trump is the punchline.”

Jesse asked another group of millennials why, “if Hillary is so tough, she can’t face questions from the press,” apparently having forgotten that she faced hours and hours of questioning before the press and the world about Benghazi and answered them all.

So my libertarian friend Ben gets things right some times which is why I’m sharing this and his comments with you.   He thinks my bit on the Shell spill is overreacting so don’t think he’s reformed completely yet!

“I love it. The son of a famous architect probably committed rape a few times, but he needs to go out of state for rehab, and when he comes back, he promises he’ll be super-sorry about the whole rape thing and won’t do it anymore. A local real-estate guy driving a Lamborghini at 100 mph down Tchoupitoulas crashes and kills his passenger, but the cops don’t release his name to protect his privacy. A surgeon is indicted on an accusation that he raped a woman repeatedly over the course of several years, and he’s allowed out on bond, but only if he promises not to contact her!

What, oh what, could be the common thread tying all of these men together? Surely, it’s not that they’re all well-connected and wealthy! “

And here’s the link to the article  on the architect’s son.  Believe me, if the dude was black or hispanic or a poor white crackhead, he’d have been shot or locked up forever in Angola. Access to justice has so much to do with money in this country it’s not even funny.  It also has a lot to do with race which is where intersectionality comes in and Bernie Bro Brains leave the building.

A Tulane University student accused in a string of January Uptown home invasions was granted permission by a judge Thursday (May 12) to stay at an out-of-state halfway house run by the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation as his case moves through court.

Oliver Jerde, 22, was arrested Jan. 21 after New Orleans police say officers caught him mid-burglary at a residence in the 800 block of Pine Street. Police then charged him in connection with two other break-ins, in the 1000 and 1200 blocks of Lowerline Street.

Victims of both the Lowerline burglaries told police they woke up from sleep to find a man standing over their bed, Jerde’s warrant said. One of those women said Jerde’s hand was over her mouth when she woke up. He was seen at one of the residences with a bottle of liquor, and he left a beer can at another scene, his warrant says.

The son of a prominent architect, the late Jon Jerde, Oliver Jerde posted a $150,000 bond four days after his arrest. As a condition of his bond, Magistrate Judge Jonathan Friedman allowed him to be released to River Oaks Hospital, a mental health and addiction treatment facility in Harvey.

You can find the Lamborgini murder story here.  This guy is out walking about too. The Uptown Surgeon Rapist story can be read here. 

So, this is from another New Orleans friend of mine  Glenn Louis DeVillier responding to a friend of his on FaceBook.

“At this point, all I can think is a few people just don’t believe a woman should be president.”

He was responding to this comment by Justin Rosario.

Dinah Washington

Dinah Washington

It’s strange, of the three people running for president, only one has released decade’s worth of tax returns and runs a huge foundation that is one of the most transparent charities in the country.

But she’s considered the most dishonest? Amazing what 25 years of propaganda will convince people of.

Ya think? Other ideas?  Here’s the Donald telling every one to go fuck themselves about ever seeing his tax returns.  Bernie and Jane just continue to lie and deflect.  At least Donald is upfront with his dishonesty.

Donald J. Trump said Friday that he doesn’t believe voters have a right to see his tax returns, and insisted it’s “none of your business” when pressed on what tax rate he himself pays — a question that tripped up Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential race.

Mr. Trump made the comments in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” as he continued to try to answer questions about his change in explanations over the last year about why he won’t release the taxes.

When the interviewer, George Stephanopoulos, asked Mr. Trump directly if he thought voters had a right to see his returns, something that presidential nominees have provided for roughly 40 years, the candidate replied, “I don’t think they do.”

Mr. Trump added: “But I do say this, I will really gladly give them — not going to learn anything but it’s under routine audit. When the audit ends I’ll present them. That should be before the election. I hope it’s before the election.”

When asked what effective tax rate he pays, Mr. Trump said: “It’s none of your business. You’ll see it when I release, but I fight very hard to pay as little tax as possible.”

Can you imagine Hillary Clinton getting away with that?

Okay, that’s enough because I’m cynical enough.

Take time to enjoy the voices of some really great jazz singers who I admire very much. It’s important to remember that sometimes the voices we continue to hear in the media aren’t the voices worth hearing.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?