DONALD TRUMP’S LATEST GREATEST HITS

 1. I Don’t Know A Thing About It 

 2. Ghislaine Get Me Off The Hook

 3. Jeffrey Who?

 4. Hey MAGA, Go Annoy Barack Instead

 5. I Want The Two Jimmys Cancelled 

 6. That Colbert KissCam Skit Wasn’t Funny 

 7. Don’t Take Alina Away

 8. My Way (Unauthorized Trio Version w/Frank Sinatra and Elvis Presley)

 BONUS TRACK: J.D. Talk To Rupert

New Poem: LOOKING FOR THE NEXT BARACK

Loosely inspired by Colin Hay’s long-ago song “Looking For Jack”

media pundits looking for the next Barack
admiring Pete Buttigieg’s bomber jacket
waking up to read about Deval Patrick
some day, some way
the electorate will swoon like Chris Matthews

Democratic donors looking for the next Barack
someone cool, mostly unflappable
makes people rest easy after Trump
respects the markets and past trade deals
won’t raise the 1%’s taxes

some day, some way
a majority  will find him excellent
and they’ll cheer him, boo obstruction
drink in his aspirational smile
again accept change only in increments

New Poem: Not Giving Way

big old dinosaurs stomp and roar
yellow orange President
wants to re-persecute immigrants
to further harden hearts without minds
maintenance man from recent past
talks of circular firing squad
almost 18 months before election
House mother tells young daughter
I’m not ready to advance your ideas
just wait your turn, stay patient
then a few years later,
I’ll think about it and say no
>
hey reasonable dispassionate Democrats
the middle of the political road
will lead to the barbed-wire ditch
and re-elections and rationalizations
and third-party scapegoating
>
I don’t want to live through this again

Why progressives will always be subordinate in the Democratic Party.

Someone in media/film writing I follow on Twitter retweeted the following statement from a person I'll not name here.  It's the perfect summary of the centrist, big donation-dependent wing of the Democratic Party (who think they've become a little more liberal because Tom Perez, who talks a good game about the party's future and unity, was elected DNC head over Keith Ellison) and the contempt they still hold for the more progressive (i.e. Bernie Sanders supporting) membership.

Democrats are your friend who'll die single, waiting for a person too perfect to exist.

Republicans are the guy who fucks whoever is there.

London's GUARDIAN on Ferguson.

"The flames of Monday night’s unrest were manufactured, but not by media. They were stoked for hours, by McCulloch, who riled up the crowds needlessly until night fell; they were fueled for days, by Missouri governor Jay Nixon, who whipped up hysteria with his pre-emptive “state of emergency” and his calling-in of the National Guard. The flames were fanned for hundreds of years, by the white supremacy and structural racism that have wreaked economic, physical, psychological and spiritual violence upon black Americans for centuries."

Article in its entirety:http://www.http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/25/obama-ferguson-prosecutor-politicians-protesters-get-it?CMP=edit_2221

The morning after the 2014 Midterms.

Boldly stating what most progressives/liberals/sort-of-left-of-centers don't want to hear:
It made no difference whether or not the Democrats held onto the Senate.
The President is a mild, Wall Street loving, confrontation-averse centrist who capitulates to the Right instead of governing in the fashion of Great Society era LBJ (omitting Vietnam from this assessment).
As Bill Richardson mentioned last night, expect more Executive Orders in terms of policy implementation.
And, perhaps, the ultimate Obama capitulation is on the way: approving the Keystone XL pipeline.
And, also, more Endless War to be passed onto the next occupant of the Oval Office.
Finally, expect to hear the words "We don't have the votes" even more often.

P.S.: A special mention of those Democrats (Allison Lundergan Grimes in particular) who couldn't and wouldn't stand up for the positive policy changes that actually occurred during the previous six years (namely health care).

Maureen Dowd on the state of the President.

Column by Maureen Dowd of THE NEW YORK TIMES about Barack Obama, titled "Alone Again, Naturally": http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/opinion/maureen-dowd-alone-again-naturally.html?hpw&rref=opinion&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpHedThumbWell&module=well-region&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well&_r=0

A key passage from the column:

The extraordinary candidate turns out to be the most ordinary of men, frittering away precious time on the links. Unlike L.B.J., who devoured problems as though he were being chased by demons, Obama’s main galvanizing impulse was to get himself elected.

Almost everything else — from an all-out push on gun control after the Newtown massacre to going to see firsthand the Hispanic children thronging at the border to using his special status to defuse racial tensions in Ferguson — just seems like too much trouble.

The 2004 speech that vaulted Obama into the White House soon after he breezed into town turned out to be wrong. He misdescribed the country he wanted to lead. There is a liberal America and a conservative America. And the red-blue divide has only gotten worse in the last six years.

 

The man whose singular qualification was as a uniter turns out to be singularly unequipped to operate in a polarized environment.

 

His boosters argue that we spurned his gift of healing, so healing is the one thing that must not be expected of him. We ingrates won’t let him be the redeemer he could have been.

 

 

New poem: AND I AM TELLING YOU I'M NOT GOING TO FERGUSON.

The President triangulates:
Midterms
I don't want to rock the boat
Midterms
I'm already sending the Attorney General
Midterms
My presence in Ferguson
makes white bigots more bigoted
Midterms
It's a local situation there
Midterms
I don't want to risk showing anger
Midterms
I can't risk being seen as strident
in criticizing white policemen
for treating all young black men
as potential criminals
Midterms
I imagine myself going to
Michael Brown's funeral
and having someone on Fox News
compare me to
Tom Bradley criticizing
the verdicts for the LAPD cops
at the Simi Valley trial
for the beating of Rodney King
in 1992
Midterms
Let's all support
My Brother's Keeper program
and turn the page on this episode
Midterms
Polls
Midterms

Trying to parse a Presidential-selfie Tweet from a beloved poet.

At the risk of criticism from some for bringing this to people's attention, here's a recent tweet from Los Angeles' poet/comic Rick Lupert:
Ahh Obama's selfie at the Mandela funeral. To think of the fun we could've had if we had camera phones during the black plague.

I'm trying hard to understand the outburst of apparent humor/social comment above regarding a photo taken by the President at the memorial service for Nelson Mandela.  Would it have been less offensive/source-of-joke to Mr. Lupert if a White House aide had snapped it with a cameraphone/tablet?  Or is the point meant to be that the solemnity-blended-with-celebration occasion has been just as demeaned by a President-taken selfie as those on the Right were trumpeting with regards to President Obama's shaking of Cuban leader Raul Castro's hand?

Or is this merely a time-juxtaposition joke about taking selfies during the black plague which tipped over into unfunniness when yoked to the Presidential selfie?

Why Senator Ted Cruz will stay on the nation's radar a bit longer.

Yes, Ted Cruz makes Joseph McCarthy look like William F. Buckley, Jr.  But he hits a gigantic nerve with feel-don't-think conservatives across the USA.

Witness these comments on Cruz' Facebook page (commenters' names redacted):
Good that they have a Senator who understands the Constitution and the gravity of the current state of affairs.
Please don't crumble! You are all we have!!
Ted Cruz for president!
WE DONT LIKE OBAMA, REMOVE HIM FROM OUR WHITEHOUSE! !!!
Illegal Immigration, and Obamacare, this is not the country of my youth. STAND YOUR GROUND or we are ruined

Visit the alternate universe blaming Harry Reid--rather than GOP obstructionism--for government shutdown.

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23HarryReidsShutdown&src=tren

Some examples from the above link:
Now that Harry Reid shut it down government, the Stay Puft man is going to walk through New York.--Dana Loesch, conservative pundit

Democrats want to kill the TeaParty. They know gov't run media will lay blame upon them & the statist GOP will pile on--Victor Nikki

Why is it ok for Pres Obama to stand on principal but not ok for GOP?--Representative Jeff Duncan

#HarryReidsShutdown because he's fine w/ forcing Americans to purchase what he has exempted himself and his minions from!--Jennifer McFarlane

HarryReidsShutdown because they could care less about what Americans truly want!!!!!--Andrew

Harry Reid would rather shutdown the government than have an honest debate about how Obamacare is ruining our economy.--Amanda Carpenter

Will Michelle Obama tell me to drink water when thirsty pro bono?--Rufus Kings

STOP SAYING most are blaming Republicans for #HarryReidsShutdown! NOT TRUE! Reid is ARROGANT NAZI SCUMBAG! #BlameHarryReid--Debra Pianalto

The choice is clear: Shut down the thing that is shutting down America by #DefundingObamacare #HarryReidsShutdown--Representative Jeff Duncan

This is another step by the Kenyan to turn America into a 3rd World Country. What a shame. #HarryReidsShutdown #tcot--Dan Freeman

And finally, as rebuttal to the above:
#HarryReidsShutdown Don't like a law? Defund and disobey it. Blame someone else for your recalcitrance. All better now. Stay strong, Harry.--Gail James

NEW YORK magazine commenter on runup to war with Syria's Assad.

"Ribonucleic" had this to say in a comment on a Jonathan Chait column on the NEW YORK magazine website:
Given the US history of lies about WMD, given the bum rushing of the UN inspectors, given that Assad had no reason to use chemical weapons in a war he is winning, given that the rebels had everything to gain by having Obama's "red line" crossed, you'd think that people would be demanding the highest standard of proof (i.e. Assad boasting about it on national television) before going along with yet another bombing of yet another Muslim country with yet another connection to desired energy resources. But no. the war drums pound, someone in the ruling party says the magic word "Hitler", the media parrots the official line, and the wheel of blood beginss another turn...

Here's a link to the column by Chait (who seems to support intervention on humanitarian grounds, but dislikes Tuesday's presentation by Obama Administration officials):
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/09/obamas-terrible-national-security-argument.html

Bradley Manning's defense attorney on Manning's prison sentence.

From the GUARDIAN coverage of Bradley Manning's 35-year prison sentence for whistle blowing:

Here's a summary of the news conference with David Coombs, defense attorney for Bradley Manning:

• The Manning legal team is formally applying to President Barack Obama for a pardon "or at the very least [to] commute his sentence to time served". Requesting a pardon, Manning will tell president Obama he acted "out of a love to my country, and a sense of duty to others".

• Manning, who will be imprisoned at Fort Leavenworth, comes up for parole in seven years, Coombs said. If parole is not granted he would receive a new parole hearing each year. Coombs vowed to master the legal intricacies of parole requests and to carry the Manning case forward. 

• Coombs held out hope that Manning would be released "in the near term": "I'm hoping that he goes on with life and becomes productive. If so this doesn't have to define him."

• Coombs described shock and sadness at the length of the sentence, which he depicted as unfair. After the sentence was read he and his legal team cried, Coombs said. Manning did not cry. "He looks to me, and he says, 'It's OK. IT's alright. I know you did your best. I'm going to be OK. I'm going to get through this."

• Coombs said the trial was unfair because it was closed. "A lot of stuff that happened would not have happened, because the American public would see it and say, 'that's not fair,'" Coombs said. 

• The long sentence would discourage future potential whistleblowers, Coombs said: "This does send a message, and it's a chilling one."

• The Edward Snowden case emerged at an inconvenient time for the Manning defense, Coombs said, in the sense that government frustration over whistleblowers was redoubled. "But it also had some benefits for us," Coombs said, "because it brought attention back to [Manning's] case."

GUARDIAN article about President Obama and "open debate" re NSA spying.

A couple of excerpts from the article by Jennifer Hoelzer:

"The NSA (along with the FBI, DEA and CIA) continually declares the law is on its side and portrays its opponents as ridiculous dreamers who believe safety doesn't come with a price."--Hoelzer quoting Tim Cushing writing about the NSA on techdirt.com.

This from Ms. Hoelzer (highlighted by me):
I think it's hard for the American people to trust their president when he says he respects democratic principles, when his actions over the course of nearly five years demonstrate very little respect for democratic principles.

I think the American people would be more likely to trust the president when he says these programs include safeguards that protect their privacy, if he – or anyone else in his administration – seemed to care about privacy rights or demonstrated an understanding of how the information being collected could be abused. Seriously, how are we supposed to trust safeguards devised by people who don't believe there is anything to safeguard against?

I think it's understandably hard for the American people to trust the president when he says his administration has the legal authority to conduct these surveillance programs, when one of the few things that remains classified about these programs is the legal argument that the administration says gives the NSA the authority to conduct these programs. This is the document that explains why the administration believes the word "relevant" gives them the authority to collect everything. It's also the document I'd most like to see, since it's the document my former boss [U.S. Senator Ron Wyden] has been requesting be declassified for more than half a decade.

Read the article in its entirety: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/13/obama-open-debate-nsa-spying

THE NATION on Bradley Manning.

Excerpt from Chase Madar's article in THE NATION "The Trials of Bradley Manning:
There is a proper response to the hypocritical and dysfunctional inconsistency of our secrecy laws, and that would be the swift declassification of some 99 percent of our state secrets (government documents are classified at the rate of about 1.83 million per week), with real security for the tiny remainder of legitimate secrets (nuclear launch codes, for example). And for the record, neither Julian Assange nor Bradley Manning has ever called for “total transparency,” a straw-man position often attributed to them by the self-important guardians of extreme government secrecy.

Instead of more open government, we are getting more secrecy, more prosecutions of whistleblowers and the altogether creepy “insider threat” program, which requires officials to report on the infosec failings of colleagues or face prosecution. (This institutionalization of mutual suspicion is not limited to national security organs but extends to agencies like the Education Department and the Social Security Administration.) Progressives who naïvely believe the solution is more congressional oversight should note that many in Congress have been pushing for even more leak probes and harsher prosecutions than the president.

Obama has launched eight prosecutions based on the Espionage Act of 1917—more than all previous presidents combined, who together have managed only three such trials. Maybe he feels he has nothing to lose, since this clampdown placates the national security apparatus and wimp-proofs his right flank, while those who care about civil liberties were probably not going to vote Republican anyway. As a result, the former constitutional law professor who ran as the whistleblowers’ best friend in 2008 is now their scourge.

It would take great powers of imagination to blame any part of our recent military debacles on leaks and whistleblowers. If someone had leaked the full National Intelligence Estimate on Saddam Hussein’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, would more people have decided—like then-Senator Bob Graham, who voted against the invasion after reading the unredacted report—to oppose the war before it began? If the Afghan War logs had somehow come out during Obama’s months of deliberation before escalating that conflict, would he have made the same decision—one that has yielded only thousands more civilian and military casualties?

But it is Bradley Manning we have put on trial, not the impresarios of war, not the CIA torturers or their lawyers. The Iraq War, which began with a lurid overture of secrecy and lies, is now getting its dissonant coda: a private court-martialed for telling the truth, a trial unfolding behind a thick wall of official secrecy, in which the court’s media center was, on the day of the prosecution’s closing statement, patrolled by armed soldiers peering over the shoulders of typing reporters. “Pfc. Manning was not a humanist. He was a hacker,” said prosecutor Maj. Ashden Fein. “He was not a whistleblower. He was a traitor.” The past decade has witnessed the carnage unleashed by militarized cluelessness. In the story of Bradley Manning, who has been the ethical citizen and who the rampaging criminals?

The full article can be read at http://www.thenation.com/article/175512/trials-bradley-manning?page=0,0#axzz2akyLbxf1

Tom Bradley in 1992 vs. Barack Obama in 2013: how can one react to injustice when an African-American authority leader?

"In the aftermath of the riots, critics suggested that the usually mild-mannered Mayor Tom Bradley had actually made the already tense situation that much worse soon after the verdict came down when he declared, "Today that jury asked us to accept the senseless and brutal beating of a helpless man." It was a statement many said fanned the flames of the L.A. riots, but Bradley never apologized to his critics."

From a 2007 Jesse Singal article in TIME.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/la_riot/article/0,28804,1614117_1614084_1614509,00.html #ixzz2Z3XLaNqG

Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama called on Sunday for "calm reflection" following the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

The president, in a statement, acknowledged an emotionally charged climate but concluded that "we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken."

Obama called Martin's death a tragedy for America.

"I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher," he said.

"I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son. And as we do, we should ask ourselves if we're doing all we can to widen the circle of compassion and understanding in our own communities.

"We should ask ourselves if we're doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis," Obama said.

A Florida jury on Saturday night found Zimmerman, a neighborhood watchman, not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter in a shooting that grew from a confrontation as Martin, 17, walked home from a convenience store in February 2012.

The verdict closed a case that gained national attention and sparked public outcry, much of which focused on race. Reaction generated protests across the United States, including outside the White House.

Obama said in closing his statement that Americans asking "ourselves, as individuals and as a society, how we can prevent future tragedies like this" is one way "to honor Trayvon Martin."

It's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.  If Obama had dared to give a Bradley response, then he'd be blamed by white racists for inciting violence.

I remember seeing the ugly spectacle of affluent white people booing Tom Bradley when he made a ceremonial appearance at the Playboy Jazz Festival in 1992.

We should be past the 1940s when Jackie Robinson had to display no reaction to prejudice.

If Barack Obama continues to dispense symbolism, then he should be willing to make the bigoted a bit more uncomfortable with their bigotry--and, like Bradley, not back down and "make nice" to those with malice in words, minds and actions.

New poem: SECURITY STATE POEM

I keep my mouth shut
backandforth.
I keep my mouth shut
upanddown.
I say nothingnothingnothing
except:
Who will be this season's judges
on AMERICAN IDOL?
Look at that dog opening a door
on YouTube.
Will it be worth it to rejoin
the new MySpace?
But people want to see:
who I'm e-mailing
who is e-mailing me
who I called on the phone
who called me on the phone
and who I called on the phone
in a foreign country
that already has cameras
taking pictures of
people just walking
down city streets
Should I be afraid?
Or should I trust the President
as much as (or more than)
many people trusted
the previous President?

American Idiocy: A Twitter commenter on Edward Snowden.

Posted (by someone who I won't reveal here) as a response to a Salon.com article about Edward Snowden remaining in Hong Kong:
" @Salon And he is so self righteous. Ugh!  Watched too many Superman/Batman films I guess.  He shd be prosecuted."
Here's a link to the article: http://slnm.us/eNM4ihA

Re the NSA spying revelations--plus a prediction.

Must say: pretty disappointed with former Lefty warriors against Bush Admin surveillance lining up to defend Obama Admin surveillance.--Tom Belknap via Twitter.

To add to Mr. Belknap's observation:
This won't stop people (from centrists to "progressives") from voting for Hillary Clinton in 2016 (in part to "make history") and later discovering she's keeping the chain of throwing a superwide surveillance net over Americans unbroken.

Sharing an e-mail from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) re Guantanamo, WikiLeaks and detention.

Dear Mr. McCarty:

 

Thank you for your letter regarding the United States detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.  This is an important issue, and I welcome the opportunity to share my point of view with you.

 

I continue to support the closure of Guantanamo Bay, consistent with the need to prosecute, transfer, or hold the remaining detainees appropriately. 

 

Upon taking office in January 2009, President Obama ordered that the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba be closed within a year.  He also established task forces, which reviewed U.S. interrogation and detention policies and evaluated how individuals currently held at Guantanamo should be handled – whether to prosecute them, transfer them to the custody of other nations, or continue to detain them in other circumstances.  For various reasons, as you may be aware, the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay is still in operation today. 

 

I have long felt that Guantanamo has tarnished the American image abroad and done great harm to our Nation's efforts to combat international terrorism.  In 2007, I introduced the first legislation in the Senate to require closure of the facility.  I continue to believe that the United States is capable of handling the detainees at Guantanamo Bay through alternatives that utilize the strengths of the American justice system without compromising national security, including the option of prosecuting detainees for violations of U.S. law or the law of war – both in federal criminal courts and military commissions. 

 

Our federal courts, judges, and prosecutors are the best in the world.  They have proven to be fully capable of dealing with extremely dangerous persons, classified intelligence, and other factors, as was the case with Ahmed Ghailani, a former Guantanamo Bay detainee.  On January 25, 2011, a federal judge sentenced Mr. Ghailani to life in prison for conspiracy to destroy the United States embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.  This case shows that despite recent criticism of putting terrorists on trial in our federal court system, federal courts continue to deliver the punishment that terrorists deserve. 

 

On April 24, 2011, the organization WikiLeaks released over 700 files related to Guantanamo Bay detainees.  This was the fourth leak of classified U.S. government documents by WikiLeaks; previously, the organization released files related to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and cables from the U.S. Department of State.  I believe these leaks have seriously harmed the national security of the United States. 

 

In regard to the Guantanamo documents themselves, I believe they demonstrate that, in addition to terrorists who participated in attacks against the United States, innocent individuals were wrongly imprisoned for years at Guantanamo Bay.  The documents show that many of those detained at the facility should not have been. 

 

Again, thank you for your letter.  Please be assured that I will continue to do everything necessary to achieve the goal of closing Guantanamo in an effective and safe manner.  If you have any additional comments or questions, please feel free to contact my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841.

Sincerely yours,


  Dianne Feinstein
         United States Senator