Trump had a phone conversation with the Prime Minister of Australia. Trump was rude, they exchanged words, and Trump hung up on him, 30 minutes early. Trump later boasted about “being tough” on our allies, about how everyone takes advantage of us and it’s time to be “tough,” since (he implied) every previous president was a chump.
He sounds like a schoolyard bully, who ends up with no friends, just those who are afraid of him. His lack of diplomatic skills, his bellicose nature, his need to belittle others–will turn the USA into a pariah nation. He is looking for a fight. I hope we don’t all get hurt to prove how “tough” he is.
How long will the Republican leadership cower in fear?
A friend in Australia sent this news report about Trump’s first week in office.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Worse is that he and his cronies are breaking gall the rules an laws that made America a safe place here people want to live, to invest, and to visit.
HE is killing America.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Insulting country leaders to the point of shutting down not only communication but imports: So many citizens have no idea of how all of the things they buy, buy, buy so magically show up on our store shelves…
LikeLike
Per Sky News….a worldwide reputable news source
But Turnbull says ” the call did not end abruptly and Trump didn’t hang up on him. He even said Trump agreed to honor Obama’s agreement to take the illegals, despite his tweet against the deal:”
LikeLike
Link please. TIA, Duane
LikeLike
If fact checking keeps the left in jobs rather than sucking the govt coffers Trump has kept his promiseand Lofty might want to try tom browns site for fact checking
LikeLike
Here’s a comment by Jon Stewart from Colbert’s program a couple of nights ago: “It has been eleven days, Stephen, eleven fucking days! Eleven! The presidency is supposed to age the president, not the public.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
It strikes me that Diane has often written and commented how disruption is not good for children, they need stability and nurturing. Now we are learning that constant disruption of public policy is also not such a good thing for citizens. But it is very good for pharma companies who make antacids, proton pump inhibitors (Nexium, Prevacid), and beta blockers that treat high blood pressure and migraines.
LikeLike
GregB
“disruption is not good for children” But if may be just what the country needs to recover from Trump. Trump will supply enough of his own self inflicted disruption to accomplish some of the task for us.
The rest is up to us ‘ Trump has made many promises none that he intends to keep when it comes to the economic interests of the American people. He will do the creative destruction as workers lose jobs at Boeing and other American manufactures . When nations as a reaction to Trump cancels orders and disrupts commerce. it is up to us to see that he wears it. That is where mass protest comes in.
“the grassroots backlash they’ve provoked could be their undoing. Shrewd rulers never like to see large numbers of people turning out in the streets against them, and for good reason. It creates all kinds of problems; if continued, it can even help bring them down. Just ask Richard Nixon, or the old communist bosses of Eastern Europe, or tyrants throughout history. In Trump’s case, the massive, self-confident resistance now unfolding is precisely the kind of thing that gets under his notoriously thin skin. It’s also the kind of thing that, if sustained, can push a rookie president into making mistakes—overreaching, getting distracted, and alienating allies or the undecided.
An unmistakable roar of resistance has sounded across the land, and it shows no signs of going away. On the contrary, masses of people appear eager to take to the streets again and again, for however long it takes to get the job done. Feel the power. And get ready for Act II, and beyond. ”
https://www.thenation.com/article/protests-are-putting-trump-on-notice-youre-in-for-a-fight/
LikeLike
eliminate the plural on cancel and disrupts .
LikeLike
Agree with this sentiment, Joel. But it’s a heavy price to pay. I’m reading an obscure Dürrenmatt play and came across a quote that fits: “I’m only dangerous to the regime as long as I run directly against it as a human in the name of humanity and not as some politician in any random direction.” (Ich bin den Regime nur so lange gefährlich, als ich ihm als Mensch im Namen der Menschlichkeit entgegentrete und nicht als Politiker im Namen irgendeiner Richtung.)
LikeLike
How to win friends and influence people.
I wonder how long it will be until even Republicans have had enough and rebel.
I am not holding my breath but it is one thing after another after another after another.
Brinkmanship with Iran, antagonizing our closest allies.
I think the psychologists are right, the man is unhinged.
LikeLike
What has dismayed me the most is how the #NeverTrumpers have made their deal with the devil and are trying to figure out how to get back to business as usual.
LikeLike
Thank you for sharing this. I wish Project 1 would do this for every week and send it to us.
LikeLike
Do they cower in fear or do they remain silent to protect their greed? He is the Trojan Horse. He got them through the gate and into the White House. Trump Thunders As GOP Plunders. I think that’s how it goes. Is there a Patriot in the bunch?
LikeLike
Trump Thunders As GOP Plunders. Good line for a bumper sticker.
LikeLike
If the malignant narcissist Littlefingers Donald Trump and his Rasputin, Steve Bannon, start a war with China, Australia might end up on China’s side.
LikeLike
Everybody like Australia, 45 is showing what a true AH he is.
LikeLike
For those of us self-diagnosed as Acronym Impaired Deficiency Syndrome what is AH?
LikeLike
I think it is a particular type of hole.
LikeLike
Diane and Lofty,
Your hatred for the Donald – the President – blinds you from the fact that he won but I counter with a different version of the medias interpretation of the phone calls – fake news as usual to malign and continue to make the left happy – I guess the Berkley crowd riot after destroying some of their own property because they don’t like free speech – yes, those who clamor for tolerance
How about the AP report that Trump threatened the president of Mexico? The AP reported that Trump called the president of Mexico and said, “Look, if you don’t take care of those bad hombres down there that you’ve got, we’re gonna send in the American military to do it.” The AP claimed that Trump told the Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto that if he didn’t take care of the bad hombres down there that we would send in the US military. The Washington Post and others in the Drive-Bys ran with the AP story.
Even the AP story, if you read deep enough down there, the article admitted that Mexico denied that version of events. It doesn’t matter, it doesn’t matter, ’cause the president of Mexico is not a credible source. He was on the call, but his sourcing is not credible if he doesn’t go along with the primary narrative of the story. The narrative is that Trump got on the phone, bullied the president of Mexico and threatened to send troops to get rid of bad hombres.
Even the foremost purveyor of fake news, CNN, and they are. I don’t think there’s anybody even close to CNN in terms of fake news. Maybe BuzzFeed running a close second – But CNN clearly leading the pack in fake news. They even called the AP out on their report. Even CNN, the primary purveyors of fake news, questioned the AP report that Trump called the president of Mexico and said we’re sending the troops in if you don’t get rid bad hombres down there.
CNN said that the readout of the call that they saw showed that Trump was offering aid, not making threats. He was offering to help the president of Mexico get rid of the bad hombres they’ve got down there. Hauuuge difference.
And then Australia. The first thing you have to understand, the current prime minister of Australia is practically a carbon copy clone of the new left-wing child socialist in Canada, Justin Trudeau. Media are having conniptions over Trump’s phone call to the Australian prime minister. His name is Malcolm Turnbull.
Now, in this call Trump supposedly denounced as dumb the deal that Obama had struck where the United States would trade some illegal aliens from Central America for the 1,200 refugees from Iran and Iraq and Afghanistan, refugees that Australia will not let into their country. What this is really all about is that there’s central American refugees and Australia won’t let ’em in.
Australia won’t let ’em in, they send them here, and Trump said to hell with that and even addressed this at the prayer breakfast today, telling people our country is under assault. There are people taking advantage of our country, and it’s gonna stop. And he said, “I don’t want you to be nervous what you hear about these calls.” And he’s talking about these two news reports about the phone calls he had with these two leaders in Australia and Mexico. And he was calming, he was comforting.
Australia has been under intense pressure from its citizens to not allow immigrants into their country. This is something that you’ll not know if all you’re reading today is the story about Trump’s phone call to the Australian prime minister. But the citizens of Australia don’t want any part of these worldwide refugees and illegal immigrants because they have been flooded with boat people, many of them coming from Muslim Indonesia.
“Australia’s two leading political parties, the ruling Liberal-National coalition and the Labor opposition,” both of Australia’s main parties, “both support tough asylum policies.” They have a coalition government there, and it “made Australia’s asylum policy even tougher when it took power in 2013,” 3-1/2 years ago, “introducing Operation Sovereign Borders, which put the military in control of asylum operations” in Australia. You think what’s happening here is strange? In Australia, they are dead serious.
They don’t want any part of it. They don’t want any of these boat people refugees from Islamic nations and Indonesia, they don’t want Central American refugees, they don’t want illegal immigration. They’ve seen what’s happened to Europe. They see what’s happening the United States. As such, there’s an agreement. Obama had an agreement with Australia. “Okay, whoever you don’t want, send it to the United States.” Did you know that, folks?
“Fine, if you don’t want the Muslims from Indonesia — if you don’t want the boat people from Central America or wherever else they’re from — then send them to the United States. We’ll take some of them.” “The government says its policies have restored the integrity of its borders…” Even if asylum seekers are found to be actual refugees, they’re not allowed to be settled in Australia. They’re sent to an offshore processing center. What Obama said is, “Go ahead and send them here!” And that’s what Trump’s objecting to. We’re not just gonna keep our borders open. I mean, the rest of the nations of the world cannot dump their problems on us.
That’s all he’s saying, exactly what he said he would do during the campaign.
Let me give a slight correction on this Australia business. I want to get this battened down exactly what happened, here. It’s very close, but it here’s what really happened. Obama was trading people from Central America for 1500 or so Muslim refugees from Iran and Iraq and Afghanistan that were languishing in Australia, essentially in New Guinea.
So Obama agreed to take the militant Islamist refugees off of Australia’s hands in exchange for trading 1500 or so people from Central America.
This all raises the question, why would Australia be willing to take peaceful — so-called peaceful — Central American refugees but not those from Muslim countries? I mean, who are the real Islamophobes here? It isn’t Trump! Trump is just doing what he said he was gonna do in the campaign, and that is defend and protect this country and make sure the other nations of the world do not take advantage of us. Anyway, McCain fell for the fake news side of this and called the Australian ambassador and said (impression), “It’s not a big deal. I’ll fix it. Don’t worry about it.”
So, please, wait till Lofty fact checks stories before bloviating! Lofty must have a dictionary of negatives he can view when posting….
LikeLike
Jack D. Ripper couldn’t have said it better! Anything to add about fluoride and bodily fluids?
LikeLike
Really, you are a real pip.
“Lofty must have a dictionary of negatives he can view when posting … ”
I tend to use Google to find out what fact checkers have to say on issues like all the allegations you keep pumping out from your obvious alternative misinformation, rumors, gossip, and lies alleged news sites.
This is what I found from The Washinton Post:
Australian PM, Trump offer mixed messages on refugee deal
“Australia’s prime minister insisted Thursday that a deal struck with the Obama administration that would allow mostly Muslim refugees rejected by Australia to be resettled in the United States was still on, despite President Donald Trump dubbing the agreement “dumb” and vowing to review it.” …
“Turnbull declined to comment on the report, which also said Trump abruptly ended the expected hour-long conversation after 25 minutes as the Australian attempted to steer the conversation to other topics.”
“Turnbull told reporters the strength of the relationship between the two nations was evident in that Trump had agreed to honor the deal to resettle refugees from among around 1,600 asylum seekers, most of whom are on island camps on the Pacific nations of Nauru and Papua New Guinea. Australia has refused to accept them and instead pays for them to be housed on the impoverished islands.” …
“Yet shortly after Turnbull made those comments to reporters, TRUMP took to twitter to slam the deal”
“Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. “Why?” Trump Tweeted. “I will study this dumb deal!”
How can even you deny the facts now that the Malignant Narcissist sent his little fingers flying on Twitter?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/australian-pm-wont-comment-on-report-of-terse-trump-call/2017/02/01/e375c898-e8ec-11e6-903d-9b11ed7d8d2a_story.html?utm_term=.e11868d630d5
Do you know that you can also use your little fingers to search Google and use reputable fact check sites to do the same thing? There is no reason to wait for me to fact check anything you allege.
Trump’s deplorable malignant narcissist attention span must have really been tested at 25 minutes. An hour, forget it.
He probably had to hang up early ending the call to another world leader so he could run out and jump up and down on his favorite pogo stick, and I’m sure that his Rasputin Steve Bannon was jumping up and down right next to him.
LikeLike
Really Lofty,
Your pick of the WAPO as a fact checker on Trumpisms? That is a “pip” – you should have picked the NY TIMES or any of the California papers as “reliable” choices – the AP and SNOPES are more examples of the comic pages –
What a joke for a reply
-your list of negatives are getting to the point of being redundant – better get the Oxford Lofty
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
It is a full-time job for someone to check Trump’s alternate “facts.” He said during the campaign that the Unemployment statistics released by Bureau of Labor Statistics were phony, a hoax, fake news. He said real unemployment was 35-40%, not 4.8 or 5.1.
The numbers came out today and he took credit for the 4.8 or 4.9.
LikeLike
Yes the unemployment figure as around five but i guess they forgot to add the numbers who dropped out of searching and therefor not counted
So please go back and get the numberit might be around 10 or higher
LikeLike
Mr. Pip must be talking about more alternative facts that don’t exist.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics is one of the agencies that collects the data and publishes the reports the media uses. This is the primary source for anyone interested in real facts and not the malignant narcissist’s alternative fantasy facts.
Here’s what bls.gov has to say about employed and unemployed full and part- time workers.
16 years and over
106,611,000 work 35 hours or more
11,263,000 work 1 to 34 hours for economic or noneconomic reasons
3,618,000 are not at work
Part-time workers
5,143,000 for economic reasons.
20,750 for noneconomic reasons
Unemployed
6,888,000 looking for full-time work
1,409,000 looking for part-time work
These numbers add up to 157,130,000
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat08.htm
According to the US Census population clock, the U.S. has a population of 324,479,154 @ 4:37 pm on 2-3-17 (This is another primary source for data collection that the media refers to. They do not report alternative facts.)
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat08.htmwww.census.gov/popclock/
According to the U.S. Census 29.1 percent of the population is under 18 years, and that number is 94,423,434
14.9-percent are persons 65 years and over. That number is 48,347,394
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat08.htm
How many Americans between 18 and 65 gave up and are not looking for work?
Politifact attempted to answer this question and answered it:
“That means 20 million people are of normal working age, not in college and not working. That’s less than one-quarter the amount repeatedly cited in the blogosphere. So the 90 million number is exaggerated.” Their ruling: We rate the claim Mostly False
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jul/30/blog-posting/are-90-million-americans-not-working-or-looking-wo/
How many Americans between 19 and 65 don’t work because they don’t have to? How many are disabled? How many are stay at home mothers or fathers? How many stay home as full-time caregivers for older family members?
PEW research reports on that number.
The number of fathers who do not work outside the home has risen markedly in recent years, up to 2 million in 2012.1 High unemployment rates around the time of the Great Recession contributed to the recent increases, but the biggest contributor to long-term growth in these “stay-at-home fathers” is the rising number of fathers who are at home primarily to care for their family.
Still, the largest share of stay-at-home fathers (35%) is at home due to illness or disability. This is in sharp contrast to stay-at-home mothers, most of whom (73%) report that they are home specifically to care for their home or family4; just 11% are home due to their own illness or disability.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/06/05/growing-number-of-dads-home-with-the-kids/
Social Security disablity insurance is coverage that workers earn.
56 million Americans, or 1-in-5, live with disabilities. Thirty-eight million disabled Americans, or 1-in-10, live with severe disabilities. Disability is something many Americans, especially younger people, think can only affect the lives of other people. Tragically, thousands of young people are seriously injured or killed, often as the result of traumatic events. Many serious medical conditions, such as cancer or mental illness, can affect the young as well as the elderly. The sobering fact for 20-year-olds, insured for disability benefits, is that more than 1-in-4 of them becomes disabled before reaching retirement age. As a result, they may need to rely on the Social Security disability benefits for income support. Our disability benefits provide a critical source of financial support to people when they need it most. …
Despite the increase, the 9 million or so people getting a Social Security disability benefit represent just a small subset of Americans living with disabilities.
https://www.ssa.gov/disabilityfacts/facts.html
LikeLike
Lofty,
I must have missed the stats on the discouraged worker who dropped from their BLS record search – they recorded only the numbers for which are still searching not those who have given up – as well as the other heading – none of which I referred to
You can find that BLS figure under discouraged workers in Excel format – I stand corrected but I believe the figure was in the thousands – close to 530,000 –
I don’t remember saying 90 million – Politifacts is not the BLS but I know you know that Lofty –
LikeLike
Do you dream of spooning with your hero, the malignant narcissist who also believes in alternative facts and alternative fact check sites that don’t exist?
LikeLike
Lofty
Your retorts are pathetic and seemingly dwell in the sewer that the liberals only have left – name calling. I know you are intelligent enough to converse in a a cogent manner and stick to the topic. As your derogatory name calling becomes useless and redundant one is perplexed as to points you make. You, in your own inimatable way, are a prime example of why many could no longer swallow the left ideology and thay got tired of the name calling and no longer need the echo chamber of your bubble. Your fear of Trump is causing you to. Be unhinged as well. I challenge you to try dropping the negative adjectives in replies in constructing answers –
LikeLike
And this isn’t name calling? “dwell in the sewer that the liberals only have left”
Who gave you permission to call me “Lofty”. And you probably think that isn’t name calling. Only a few of my closest friends have ever called me “Lofty” and you clearly will never be my friend.
LikeLike
I’ll let other readers on this site judge if my responses that come with links to your ranting comments are constructive. It is obvious that you are incapable of an unbiased response.
How many workers gave up looking for a job and have no income? You never provided a link to a primary source to support your allegations.
LikeLike
Lofty,
I provided you with 3 media newspaper article to show you for the first time the left has “discovered” U-6! I do not believe they ever reported it during B Hussein O’s 8 years . Since you couldn’t “google” like you previously asked me – here goes -added note –
Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.
Unemployment rate 5.0 percent in March 2016, U-6 at 9.8 percent …
https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2016/unemployment-rate-5-0-percent-in-march-2016-u-6-at-9-8-percent.htm – 75k – Cached – Similar pages
Apr 5, 2016 … Unemployment rate 5.0 percent in March 2016, U-6 at 9.8 percent … Known as U- 1 through U-6, they encompass concepts both narrower and broader than the official unemployment … Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization for States – Bureau of …
https://www.bls.gov/lau/stalt.htm – 69k – Cached – Similar pages
Jan 27, 2017 … They are published in the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ monthly Employment … Discouraged workers (U-4, U-5, and U-6 measures) are persons who are … Persons employed part time for economic reasons (U-6 measure) are …
Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm – 54k – Cached – Similar pages
U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian …
You will be able to view previous years and should be able to mathematically add the percents of U-6 to the reported 4 or 5 % reported…..<unless you use Common Core math- otherwise you may miss the Game!
LikeLike
And you see this as former President Obama’s fault?
“Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.”
CNN reported July 2, 2010: 7.9 million jobs lost – many forever.
“The job losses during the Great Recession were so off the chart, that even though we’ve gained about 600,000 private sector jobs back, we’ve got nearly 8 million jobs to go,” said Lakshman Achuthan, managing director of Economic Cycle Research Institute.”
Presidents, including the malignant narcissist President Littlefingers Donald Trump, are not responsible for job growth in the private sector.
Fortune Magazine reports, “In a recent report, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York highlighted the erosion of what it calls “middle-skill jobs.” These are relatively comfy jobs that don’t demand a lot of schooling — folks in sales, office and administrative workers, production workers and the like. The Americans that held these jobs once earned a decent living, which meant buying a home and retiring comfortably, all without a college degree.
“Those days are long over (since around 1980, actually). The Fed crunches some pretty disturbing numbers that imply America’s jobless problems today will probably not go away even when the economy fully recovers.” …
“So how bad off is the middle class? The Fed offers a distressing glimpse: In 1980, three-quarters of all U.S. workers were employed in middle-skill jobs. By 2009, that figure plunged to two-thirds. Whereas machine operators accounted for 10% of the nation’s jobs more than three decades ago and administrative jobs comprised 18%, their shares spiraled to about 4% and 14%, respectively, by 2009.”
http://fortune.com/2011/11/28/middle-class-jobs-gone-forever-but-theres-hope/
Automation is responsible for more than 80 percent of those job losses in the private sector, not former President Obama.
If you are open to learning what happens to jobs when disruptive technologies or innovation plays a major role in the end of careers, here’s a link to a partial list.
“Many careers simply vanished due to this disruptive technology. Knowing we have not a clue what the world or marketplace will be like in 5 or even 10 years, how can educators and young people plan around such factors.”
https://www.quora.com/What-professions-or-careers-have-virtually-disappeared-due-to-disruptive-technologies-or-innovation
The United States is a republic with a private sector capitalist economy. Capitalism is an economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
Up until the age of Trump, most job loss has been in the private sector due to technological changes and innovation.
U-6 unemployment caused by the great recession, technology and innovation in the private sector is not the fault of President Obama, and since Littlefingers had frozen hiring in the public sector, there are no jobs there to be applied for.
What choices do the U-6 unemployed have? Retrain and relocate if that is an option. If these unemployed are not earning money and can’t borrow money to pay for retraining in expesnive private sector schools (like Trump University), and they don’t have the money to relocate to another city or state where a job might exist, was President Obama supposed to pay for that out of his own pocket since Congress has approval of the federal budget?
Promise of Jobs Lures Many to For-Profit Schools: NPR
“Many for-profit colleges and universities sell their services based on a near-promise: Our degrees will get you a job. But there is no reliable way of measuring success rates when it comes to employment. That doesn’t stop students from piling up huge debt in the hopes of getting a dream job.”
http://www.npr.org/2010/11/23/131548529/for-profit-schools-lure-students-with-promise-of-jobs
And what happens when the U-6 unemployed are unwilling to move and the private sector is not creating new jobs in their area?
Trump U. made ‘impossible’ promises, Texas AG said
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/02/trump-university-lawsuits-legal-battles/85238384/
LikeLike
Lofty,
The Labor Department has six different categories to express unemployment, and the U-3 is what is always reported. The U-6 number includes the people who are out of work and have been out of work so long they’re no longer looking. The U-3 number is designed to only measure employment among people who are unemployed but want to work and those who are working.
The U-6 number is always going to be a much higher percentage because it includes the people who’ve been out of work so long, they’ve exhausted their unemployment benefits, they still haven’t found work, and they’ve given up looking. Meaning, they’re not showing up to register for benefits. They’re not following any requirements to report where they’ve looked for jobs.
And<This is an important article since it begins to show the media knew but didn’t report the figures totally during B Hussein Os administration, but now Trump is in and we begin to find a different figure – I wonder if the TIMES, WAPO and AP etc are going to support this at some time>
CNBC: http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/03/jobs-unemployment-rose-slightly-but-more-realistic-rate-is-higher.html “Unemployment rose slightly in January, but a more realistic rate is even higher.” So here is the acknowledgment that during the entire eight years of Obama, they knew that there was a more realistic portrayal of the employment and unemployment situation in America, and they ignored it. Now that Trump is in office, not only are they gonna report it, they’re gonna acknowledge that it is more realistic.
LikeLike
Correction
Part-time workers
5,143,000 for economic reasons.
20,750,000 for noneconomic reasons
LikeLike
Mr. Pip,
You are a chip off the skull of Rasputin-Goring Steve Banning.
LikeLike
In the interview with MSNBC Chris Matthew, KellyAnne Conway said there was Bowling Green “massacre” in 2011–which never happened. She admitted that she “misspoke” for “terrorist suspects” in the twitter. Ah yeah, speaking of fake news. Inconvenient truth for Queen of Alternative fact.
LikeLike
Same guy who had something crawling up his leg when Hussein O won Now he has something brown running down same leg
LikeLike
Thanks to Sean Davis
LikeLike
Aha! Now it all makes sense.
LikeLike
No, this country already has a free press, that isn’t perfect since the people who work there are human, but does a lot better job reporting the news without fear of being assassinated like journalists in Putin’s Russia, and then there’s the Alt-Right press that you allegedly depend on that spreads misinformation, lies, rumors, gossip, and Hate.
What this country needs is the Fairness Doctrine back for all news sites even those on the Internet but with the GOP Congress attempting to get rid of “Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reforms, a bipartisan amendment that required drilling and mining companies to disclose any payments they make to foreign governments? I don’t think honesty and/or balanced reporting in the media is a goal for the GOP.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/rex-tillerson-tried-to-get-this-rule-killed-now-congress-is-about-to-do-it-for-him-214725
LikeLike
Lofty,
I noticed you said the following – “What this country needs is the Fairness Doctrine back for all news sites even those on the Internet but with the GOP Congress attempting to get rid of “Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reforms, a bipartisan amendment that required drilling and mining companies to disclose any payments they make to foreign governments? I don’t think honesty and/or balanced reporting in the media is a goal for the GOP.”
When I heard the word Fairness I remember way back that the FCC trashed this – it wasn’t going to be “fair” but a way for who ever is in power to rid the opposition – so I Googled and this is what I found: “In a 1985 report, however, the FCC, led by President Reagan appointee Mark Fowler, concluded that the fairness doctrine was doing more harm than good: It caused stations to be unwilling to air reports that included controversial viewpoints; it put the government in the dubious position of evaluating content; and it was no longer needed since the number of broadcast outlets had grown considerably, the report said. The FCC also expressed concern about the doctrine’s constitutional soundness. Many were convinced that the First Amendment rights of broadcasters were being hindered. Two years later, the FCC finally rejected the doctrine in a decision involving pro-nuclear power ads that ran on a Syracuse TV station. The agency’s action was upheld by a federal appellate court.”
And from SCOTUS – it is hard to understand why the federal government must police the airwaves to ensure that differing views are heard. The result of a reinstituted fairness doctrine would not be fair at all. In practice, much controversial speech heard today would be stifled as the threat of random investigations and warnings discouraged broadcasters from airing what FCC bureaucrats might refer to as “unbalanced” views.
Tested in Court The fairness doctrine’s constitutionality was tested and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in a landmark 1969 case, Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC (395 U.S. 367). Although the Court then ruled that it did not violate a broadcaster’s First Amendment rights, the Court cautioned that if the doctrine ever began to restrain speech, then the rule’s constitutionality should be reconsidered. Just five years later, without ruling the doctrine unconstitutional, the Court concluded in another case that the doctrine “inescapably dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate” (Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241). In 1984, the Court concluded that the scarcity rationale underlying the doctrine was flawed and that the doctrine was limiting the breadth of public debate (FCC v. League of Women Voters, 468 U.S. 364). This ruling set the stage for the FCC’s action in 1987. An attempt by Congress to reinstate the rule by statute was vetoed by President Ronald Reagan in 1987, and later attempts failed even to pass Congress.
As defined by proponents of the doctrine, “fairness” apparently means that each broadcaster must offer air time to anyone with a controversial view. Since it is impossible for every station to be monitored constantly, FCC regulators would arbitrarily determine what “fair access” is, and who is entitled to it, through selective enforcement. This, of course, puts immense power into the hands of federal regulators. And in fact, the fairness doctrine was used by both the Kennedy and Nixon Administrations to limit political opposition. Telecommunications scholar Thomas W. Hazlett notes that under the Nixon Administration, “License harassment of stations considered unfriendly to the Administration became a regular item on the agenda at White House policy meetings.” (Thomas W. Hazlett, “The Fairness Doctrine and the First Amendment,” The Public interest, Summer 1989, p. 105.) As one former Kennedy Administration official, Bill Ruder, has said, “We had a massive strategy to use the fairness doctrine to challenge and harass the right-wing broadcasters, and hope the challenge would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited and decide it was too expensive to continue.” (Tony Snow, “Return of the Fairness Demon,” The Washington Times, September 5, 1993, p. B3.)
I hoped all the reference are there for you….In this blog maybe the FCC feels that its not following the Fairness Doctrine
LikeLike
Lofty,
In a quick search I found the NY TIMES has noted the U-6 numbers and noted it to be 9.4 % – Trump Said Unemployment Rate Wasn’t Real. Here Are Some Other Options.
Neil Irwin @Neil_Irwin FEB. 3, 2017
“But Mr. Trump made amply clear in his campaign that he doesn’t care for the way that government agencies and mainstream economists summarize the state of the job market. The unemployment rate, he said in December, is “totally fiction.” He claimed at one point during the campaign that the real jobless rate was not the number below 5 percent widely cited by economists, but something like 42 percent.
There is certainly a filament of truth in that. The unemployment rate counts only people who say they want a job and have looked for one in the last month — meaning that millions of Americans who dropped out of the labor force during the aftermath of the 2008 recession do not count as unemployed by the standard definition…. No one forces you to treat the standard unemployment rate as gospel; it’s just a convention, and any economic analysts worthy of their spreadsheets use a wide range of data to assess how things are going.
So if the White House wants to choose a different measure of job market health to emphasize on the first Friday of every month, we’re all ears. The nice thing about a convention is you can change it.
I thank you for your “convention” and the BLS page you ripped out but you missed the other 42 pages of info needed to find the total – thats from the article – not me Lofty
LikeLike
JS Scheidell, Trump is either Bannon’s Puppet or Putin’s Puppet.
LikeLike
Lofty,
I add one more article from CNS that notes the “real” number – Real Unemployment: 9.3%
By Michael W. Chapman | December 2, 2016 | 12:05 PM EST
(AP)
(CNSNews.com) – Although the “unemployment rate” in the United States for November is 4.6% — a rate last reached 9 years ago in August 2007 – the “real unemployment” rate is much higher, more than double at 9.3% nationwide….
LikeLike
Lofty,
I did not call one human being in that post a name – it was a reference to your “retorts” and the liberals resorting to using negative name calling drudged from the sewers.
But Diane referred to Trump calling the BLS a hoax and fake news – maybe – just maybe – he was aware that the “convention” of the stats that they reported were “bent” to reflect an agenda?
we all have a responsibility to stay on top and verify the stories and news that we get and including making the new President accountable for his administration and actions –
LikeLike
If Trump thought the BLS unemployment data were false when he was a candidate, why does he now think they are reliable?
LikeLike
Diane,
One needs to ask him – but to further guess – maybe because the WAPO, NY Times and the AP are now producing numbers which reflect the U-6 issues?
LikeLike
And you ignored my request for links to the sources that you use to support your obviously biased and wrong-headed allegations.
You seem incapable of seeing that when you use the term “liberal” in a negative way, it is an ad hominem attack based on decades of misinformation and stereotyping from the Alt-Right hate media machine that instilled this bias in your thinking that “liberal” is bad and/or negative.
What is a liberal and do they all believe and act the same? The answer to the 2nd part of that question is no.
Merriam-Webster’s definition of liberal: believing that government should be active in supporting social and political change
Dictionary.com: Adj. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs; especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.
Synonym: progressive, broad-minded, unprejudiced, beneficent, charitable, openhanded, munificent, unstinting, lavish.
What about conservatives: adj. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change
Synonym: opposition to change, moderation, orthodoxy, preservation, traditionalism, etc.
When you base your argument on “maybe he knows something the rest of us don’t” (he meaning the malignant narcissist President Littlefingers Donald Trump), then you have no solid foundation for your thinking.
The very fact that Littlefingers has been identified as a malignant narcissist is enough to dismiss him as anyone to be trusted. He’s 70 years old and has a long established, documented history as a con-man, a racist, a serial misogynist, who has little respect for the law, who is a serial liar, and is a fraud.
LikeLike
Lofty,
I gave you the 3 pages of info from the BLS with links to info I used to add to your view regarding the U6 and I also gave you the newspapers with sources/dates and authors I used to support the info that the left media is now on board with providing –
I must have missed – base your argument on “maybe he knows something the rest of us don’t” this in notes I sent – never said that, but I stand corrected….
You seem incapable of seeing that when you use the term “alt right” that it is an ad hominem attack based on all conservatives and republicans and Tea Party individuals stereotyping the right and “liberal left” hate media machine instills bias in your thinking of that only your side is correct –
Well, I didn’t trust the last guy in office for 8 years – so what – I didn’t spend my time and effort maligning his character or physical anatomical anomalies – and how many times does one have to be called the trump card to cut all conversations – you’re a racist. Maybe you need to spend more time ensuring he is accountable and does what he promised in the debates and speeches. Hold him to the fire….
I am a conservative and a republican and i differ from the liberals and democrats on a number of specific topics
In general I disagree that government action is necessary to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all and I don’t see why the Dem left policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve problems. Reagan quipped “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”
Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems. Reagan quipped “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”
And stop worrying over age as an issue – Thomas Jefferson once said, ‘We should never judge a president by his age, only by his works.’ Try that for change in the upcoming years….
LikeLike
You repeatedly attack others on this site for not reading what you write, but like the malignant narcissist Littlefingers Donald Trump, you are often not clear and leave what you say open to translation as you rant on and leap all over the place while ignoring many of our points.
And I did not say age was an issue. I used his age as an indication of how long Littlefingers has been a con-man, a fraud, a racist, a serial liar, and a serial misogynist, etc.
I’ve said what I wanted to say. I’ve provided links to my sources. You can rant on all you want but not with me.
By the way, if you can use the term “liberal” as an ad hominem, we can use the term “Alt-Right” to describe you and him and the rest of his deplorables.
LikeLike