I’ve never been very interested in Donald Trump. To be honest, until today I had never actually heard him speak two consecutive sentences. Trump has given several interviews lately, and based on watching them and/or reading the transcripts, I must say the man strikes me as a complete idiot. Next to him, the “P” woman looks slightly above average in intelligence.
Trump addressed his “pro-life” stance with Savannah Guthrie of NBC News and George Stephanopoulos of ABC News. Here are his words of wisdom on the subject.
Donald Trump appeared stumped when asked [by Savannah Guthrie] about the legal principle that served as the cornerstone for the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion….
Guthrie: “Is there a right to privacy in the Constitution?”
Trump: “I guess there is, I guess there is. And why, just out of curiosity, why do you ask that question?”
When pressed to explain how his position on the right to privacy “squares” with his anti-abortion position, Trump responded: “Well, that’s a pretty strange way of getting to pro-life. I mean, it’s a very unique way of asking about pro-life. What does that have to do with privacy? How are you equating pro-life with privacy? ”
Guthrie asked, “well, you know about the Roe v. Wade decision.” Trump responded, “yes, right, sure. Look, I am pro-life. I’ve said it. I’m very strong there.”
Trump left the interview still not seeing a connection between a woman’s right to choose whether or not to have an abortion and the right to privacy. What a loon!
On ABC’s Good Morning America, George Stephanopolous asked Trump directly about the fairly recent change in his abortion stance.
Stephanopoulos: At that time, you were also pro-choice. Now you say you’re against abortion. When did you change your mind on that?
Trump: I would say, you know, a while ago. Quite a while ago.
Stephanopoulos: Why?
Trump: Because a number of cases, but in one particular case, I had a friend and I have a friend. And he would– did not want a child and his wife didn’t want a child. And they were going to abort. And they didn’t do it for very complicated reasons. And now they have the child. And it’s the apple of his eye. And he said, “Thank God.” He changed also, by the way. “Thank God, I didn’t do it.” And I’ve seen that, and I’ve seen other things. And I am pro-life.
That makes a lot of sense. Some rich golfing buddy of Trump’s didn’t want a baby but then changed his mind after the baby was born. Therefore all women must be forced to bear children they don’t want.
David Brody: You talk a lot about business obviously, but talk to me a little bit about how you see God. How you see God in everything from what happened to your brother (he died of alcoholism at the age of 42) to how your life is today.
Donald Trump: I believe in God. I am Christian. I think The Bible is certainly, it is THE book. It is the thing. I was raised and I gave you a picture just now and perhaps you’ll use that picture I found it from a long time ago. First Presbyterian Church in Jamaica queens is where I went to church. I’m a protestant, I’m a Presbyterian. And you know I’ve had a good relationship with the church over the years. I think religion is a wonderful thing. I think my religion is a wonderful religion.
[….]
Brody: Do you actively go to church?
Trump: Well, I go as much as I can. Always on Christmas. Always on Easter. Always when there’s a major occasion. And during the Sundays. I’m a Sunday church person. I’ll go when I can.
He’ll go on Christmas and Easter and when he can the rest of the year? I’m not sure Trump understands the evangelicals any better than he understands the U.S. Constitution. Maybe Trump is actually secretly auditioning for a new reality show? He can’t possibly be serious about running for President of the U.S. Can he?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
We have gone through the Mirror to a new perverse American Wonderland.
The true lessons from the last two elections have been pretty clear. Voting for “throwing the bums out” just brings worse bums into play. Also, voting for relative unknowns hoping that will change the direction of the country because of their ‘outsider’ status doesn’t work either. Sooner or later, they all become part of the problem. The current crop of new faces is a pretty good indication that voters should be using better criteria than change, hope, not part of the DC establishment, and talks a good talk. I wake up feeling like Alice who went through the looking glass into some perverse alternate reality. The problem is that there really seems like there’s no way back.
The displeasure is obvious in the polls. For the last two elections, folks voted for ‘outsiders’ and got even more dysfunctional government. This latest crop of newbie politicians seems to come in with a ready-made interest group on their coattails. The interest of the general populace isn’t even in the equation any more. We’re worried about unemployment, paying for expensive basics like food, health care, and gas at the pump while the current crop of elected officials just keep inventing surreal crises that simply feed their base’s interests and their donor’s pockets.
Right now, the majority of voters are screaming none of the above. Congress and the White House are hopelessly out of touch with the priorities of the electorate. When the public says its concerned about the economy, it doesn’t mean they are obsessed with the Standard & Poor’s downgrade of US debt instruments. I told you that after they got their tax cuts for billionaires through, raters would do that during the debt ceiling fight, right?
The Tea Party and the White House seemed to be in cahoots–despite seemingly being at odds with each other– to funnel what’s left of US wealth into the Wall Street Gambling Casino by either giving tax breaks to businesses who flee the country for higher stakes or rich people that buy ‘financial innovations’ that create risk and volatility in markets . This all happens along with funneling federal projects straight to them through no-bid government contracts and privatization schemes. These things also enrich market parasites like brokerage firms and insurance companies. I don’t get why people don’t connect these charades with the dismal economy and vote their interests. Maybe it’s because there’s really no one to vote FOR any more. There are only folks to vote against. Angry people do not make good decisions as a general rule.
President Obama has gotten no bounce from his reelection campaign announcement, with his job approval rating dropping by 7 percentage points since January, his personal popularity at a career low and 57 percent of Americans disapproving of his handling of the economy. Yet he leads the potential GOP field.
There are chances for the Republicans in next year’s elections, with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, in particular, nipping close to Obama in the latest ABC News-Washington Post poll. Economic pessimism, its highest in two years amid soaring gas prices, raises serious political peril for the president. But he benefits from two factors: personal approval that, while down, still exceeds his job rating, and substantial doubts about the opposing party’s lineup.
Forty-three percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say they’re satisfied with the choice of candidates for the GOP nomination for president next year, compared with 65 percent satisfaction with the field at exactly this point four years ago. Nearly as many leaning-Republicans are dissatisfied with the field as are satisfied, and far more have no opinion of their potential candidates: 17 percent now vs. 3 percent at this point in 2007.
If those three are my choices, I’d rather opt out of the election and the country. This is dismal! No one is really satisfied with the presidential line-up. I don’t know about you but my choices at the local level have been abysmal for years. If there’s one candidate that really looks like they could actually make a change, a group of anti-abortion nuts, businesses, or other niche interest group comes out of the woodwork to tank them. Our political system is like the proverbial septic tank letting the worst float to the top.
Obviously, money drives races any more. It’s unlikely we can get that changed unless every state starts a ballot initiative for some kind of campaign finance reform. Politicians are like crack addicts that are unlikely to go to rehab and more likely to sound like Charlie Sheen and his ‘winning’ chimera. The problem is that now we have narrow interests funneling money into advertisements–ala swiftboating–that look like the message come from grass roots movements but are they really are the same old, same old that bring the same old, same old to Washington. It’s only a new face. It is not a new person or an agenda of real change.
I’m still amazed to find any one that doesn’t see the astroturf in the Tea Party with the now obvious funding of the Koch Brothers and the like. I’m sure that the investigation into all those ‘little’ donors to OFA will turn out finding yet another, perverse form of bundling. As Caro from Make Them Accountable believes, it’ll probably show that a bunch of Goldman Sachs people bought prepaid debit cards and had a hey-day. The media is so corporate any more that they won’t focus on the jobs crisis, they’re running with the political pack to funnel more public assets to their stockholders. Only the farthest reaches of Internatlandia appear to still be on the good side of the New American Looking Glass.
What a mess! I’m beginning to think we’re just on the verge of the collapse of the empire and there’s not much we can do about. The last ten years have been all about the wrong things. Just today, the UK Guardian released information on the relationship between big Oil and the Blair government’s decision to invade Iraq. I’m just assuming that there’s a Dubya/Cheney set of meetings and memos there too. More proof to support our well-founded skepticism of any motive but obscene profit-seeking from the already powerful and wealthy. We know that entire Iraq debacle was as contrived as ignoring the policies that would create jobs and growth and actually do something about the federal debt and deficit. The emphasis recently on tax cuts has simply exacerbated all the problems but is still held up as the panacea. The arm waving and speeches are just distractions from the real agenda. Sadly, some folks still want to believe that those fresh faces really are more than just masks.
It’s like we’ve all gone through the mirror to some evil wonderland. Help, we’ve fallen through and we can’t get up or out!
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Former Republican Sen. Rick Santorum announced Wednesday that he was forming an exploratory committee for a possible presidential run. His slogan was, and remains on his website, “Fighting to make America America again.”
On Thursday, the left-wing website ThinkProgress noticed the connection between Santorum’s slogan and Hughes’ poem. They caught up with Santorum at a New Hampshire event Thursday. Reporter Lee Fang asked Santorum about his use of the phrase:
FANG: Today, you unveiled your new campaign slogan, “Fighting to make America America again.” But was it intentional that this line was borrowed from the pro-union poem by the gay poet Langston Hughes?
SANTORUM: No, because I had nothing to do with that so …
FANG: Oh, alright thanks. Wait, did you have a clarification there? Was it just a coincidence?
SANTORUM: I didn’t know that. The folks who worked on that slogan for me didn’t inform me that that’s where it came from, if in fact it came from that.
Santorum he has read some of Langston Hughes poems, and the one he borrowed from is pretty well known. But Santorum claims he had “nothing to do with” choosing his own Campaign slogan! Watch the video (h/t Think Progress)
I knew Santorum was stupid, but this is really amazing. Langston Hughes was sympathetic to the Communist Party, although he never officially became a member. He was also initially opposed to African Americans fighting in WWII because of the way they were treated in the U.S. He was also gay, as Lee Fang told Santorum. Please follow me below the fold.
Individuals familiar with the [Obama 2012] campaign told Roll Call Friday that the FEC has been investigating the financial records of Obama’s previous campaign. The scope of the probe, which began approximately two years ago, is unknown. Presidential audits typically take years to complete and can cost millions of dollars….
The FEC was not required to audit the president’s campaign because Obama chose not to accept $84 million in federal funds following the Democratic National Convention in 2008….The potential for the FEC’s audit became increasingly more likely as the FEC questioned some of Obama campaign filings. In all, the FEC wrote 26 letters to Obama for America warning the campaign that if it did not adequately respond to the agency’s questions that it “could result in an audit or enforcement action.”
These letters totaled more than 1,500 pages of questions and data that outlined compliance concerns — including the longest one ever sent to a presidential candidate.
The article says that the Obama campaign has spent millions on legal fees since 2008 and has had to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Treasury department because of “unverifiable contributors.”
Like me, you may recall stories about how the Obama campaign had disabled software that would catch people who had already given the maximum or people who were using false identities. I located this relevant article from the October 9, 2008 LA Times.
Barack Obama’s money machine is fueled by the likes of Martha Murphy, a grandmother who has donated 104 times for a total of $2,475.34.
Murphy has used her credit card to donate in amounts as small as $10. “It is amazing how it adds up,” she said.
The Democratic candidate’s donors also include “Derty Poiiuy,” an individual with a scatological sense of humor who has given $950. “Mong Kong” has contributed $1,065 and lists an address in a nonexistent city. “Fornari USA” gave $800 and listed the address of an apparel store of that name near San Francisco.
The Republican National Committee filed a federal complaint this week, alleging that some of Obama’s small donations are illegal because they come from foreign nationals or exceed the limit.
Obama’s contributions have also exposed a loophole in the law, which does not require disclosure of the identities of donors who give $200 or less, making it impossible to determine whether they are legitimate without a federal audit.
I realize nothing will probably come of this, but it would be nice if it at least got enough play to be embarrassing for Obama’s campaign staff. I really don’t think Obama himself is capable of guilt or shame.
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Federal deficits always go up big and automatically during two events. That would be wars and recessions. We have had two wars going on for about 10 years now and we’ve had the deepest recession since World War 2. Getting rid of the two wars and solving the residual problems of unemployment would eliminate any potential future fiscal crisis. Any economist will tell you this. It’s not a secret we keep from the world. Passing huge tax cuts and laws that remove nearly all capital and all types of businesses incomes from the pool of revenue sources only exacerbates the revenues problems you get during recessions and expenditure run-ups that come from running wars.
We’ve had excessive war spending before. Our country was born with a lot of money borrowed from the Dutch. The Civil War and both World Wars–especially number two–placed our federal deficit and debt at astronomical levels of GDP. Did our country crash and burn because of the actions of John Adams, Abraham Lincoln or the spending during World War 1 or World War 2? Did you feel that life in the 1950s and 1960s and the children born then were oppressed by excessive debt?
Of course not.
Federal Debts and Deficits are functions of the size and health of the economy underlying the obligations. We have plenty of taxable assets and businesses making money. You can tell how risky the market for our Federal debt is by looking at the yields on Government bonds and Treasuries. The current yields for Treasuries are listed right here. They are at near historic lows and they are still selling. Nothing in that market indicates any reticence by any participant to buy American Debt obligations. The ability to tax and raise taxes as well as print money is a unique function of government. We can do both. If we’d have let the Dubya Bush tax cuts just expire we would’ve closed the deficit gap and reduced the debt by more than anything than is on the table right now. That would include the disingenuous and malfeasant Ryan plan. It also includes the the one that will come from the White House today at 1:35 est.
We need to put taxing capital back on the table. That includes dividends, capital gains, and vast inheritances and trust funds. We need to remove tax loopholes and subsidies to corporations. We do not need to remove the last vestiges of safety nets standing. There appears to be no one brave enough in Washington DC to say that but I will join the bow tie set in shouting just that. It is time to stop subsidizing incompetent business owners and time to invest in the country and its people. Washington DC has the nation’s priorities all wrong.
The White House provided no more specifics on the four steps to be offered in his afternoon speech at George Washington University. But an official said his plan would “borrow” from the recommendations of the 2010 fiscal commission that Obama empaneled, but whose proposals he never fully embraced.
“The president will make clear that while we all share the goal of reducing our deficit and putting our nation back on a fiscally responsible path, his vision is one where we can live within our means without putting burdens on the middle class and seniors or impeding our ability to invest in our future,” the official said.
Republicans–as eloquently stated by former budget Director David Stockman–have a tax fetish. Republicans are refusing to put any taxes on the table. Rand Paul is considering filibustering the increase in the debt ceiling. It appears some of these folks are so disturbingly ideological and economics-disabled that they will let the US go “bankrupt” in the only way possible it could do so. They will allow the US to default on its debt obligations. The Republican Party seems ruled by insane people at the moment. The Democrats, however, are ruled by folks that appear to be playing into right wing memes to appeal to some independents. So, why are we only left with poisonous choices?
Some of the Democratic base is finally waking up to the truth about Obama. He has no core Democratic values. We’re about to see a Democratic president put the cornerstones of Democratic policy on the bargaining table in an effort to appease some folks during the re-election cycle. I’m wondering if it’s all not just a little too late. Ever since the real economists left the building, White House Policy has grown more and more Republican.
Key liberal groups, which helped elect Obama in 2008, are raising concerns that he has given up political ground to Republicans, allowing the message of reducing government to trump that of creating jobs and lowering the unemployment rate.
Seizing on Friday’s deal, which would cut $38.5 billion from the fiscal 2011 budget, activists on Tuesday threatened to sit out the 2012 presidential campaign if Obama goes too far with further cuts.
“The fundamental problem in our country right now is unemployment and a jobs crisis, not a deficit crisis,” said Deepak Bhargava, executive director of the Center for Community Change, an advocacy group for the poor. “It appears the president is fighting on the wrong terrain and is conceding that the only thing we should be talking about is how to bring down the deficit.”
The clash over government spending — coming as Obama prepares to make a major speech on fiscal discipline Wednesday — is the latest example of the frayed relations between the president and a broad coalition of union and activist groups.
The details of the budget compromise as well as the way that the Health Care Reform act was rammed through congress have shown that Obama is more than eager to get something, anything passed than to fight for reform that would actually reflect either public opinion or traditional Democratic Values. Poor black women from the District of Colombia were nearly the first ones thrown under the budget cutting bus. Which previous US Democratic President would have sold them out?
To get the trade-off on the policy riders, Democrats had to give on spending — to the tune of the largest budget cuts ever. There’s a $1.1-billion cut across the board for discretionary spending and dozens of nips and tucks all over government, from Justice Department programs to subsidies for co-ops in the new health care law to the Pell Grant program for low-income college students.
DeFazio said Monday that Democrats haven’t put enough pressure on Obama.
“That’s what the House did wrong in the last Congress, and in part why we lost is we never pushed back, no matter how wrong he was or how off-base he was; we never pushed back,” DeFazio told MSNBC.
“There are a number of us in the caucus now pushing back very hard on our leadership,” DeFazio said. “Who knows where they’ll end up, but maybe we can take enough D’s with us to make them uncomfortable and to make them stick with making the president act like a Democrat.”
The Democrats’ frustration with Obama is hardly new. Liberals were furious in December when the president caved to GOP demands that Congress extend tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. More recently, many liberals have questioned the wisdom and constitutionality of launching military attacks on Libya with prior approval from Congress.
Behind closed doors, Democratic leaders are frustrated that Obama hasn’t been more involved in the big policy fights of recent months, including the spending battle.
The way to get to this President is through his re-election efforts and his ego. Hopefully, a few groups will stop facilitating the cave-ins and start fighting for the country’s interests. You can watch the President’s speech on CSPAN at this link. I have my bucket o’ Nerf balls ready and I’m warming up for the first pitch of the 2012 presidential campaign season. Join me as we share the pain and none of the gain.
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
The Sky Dancing banner headline uses a snippet from a work by artist Tashi Mannox called 'Rainbow Study'. The work is described as a" study of typical Tibetan rainbow clouds, that feature in Thanka painting, temple decoration and silk brocades". dakinikat was immediately drawn to the image when trying to find stylized Tibetan Clouds to represent Sky Dancing. It is probably because Tashi's practice is similar to her own. His updated take on the clouds that fill the collection of traditional thankas is quite special.
You can find his work at his website by clicking on his logo below. He is also a calligraphy artist that uses important vajrayana syllables. We encourage you to visit his on line studio.
Recent Comments