You Will Not Win

TikTok user @StellaMagz

@stellamagz

You will not win. #democrat #liberal #progressive #genz #congress #demsoftiktok #voteblue #conservatives #gop #republican #maga #desantis #trump #biden #politics #politik #politiktok #politicaltok #politicaltiktok #politcalnews #lgbtq #drag #dragshow #roevwade #feminism #nyc #woketok #woke #politicalanalysist #politicaltiktoker #fyp #foryoupage #fypシ #fypage #forupage #viral #viraltiktok #foryourpage #viralllllll #foryourpage

♬ original sound – Stella 🧿💙

People on the right are the biggest snowflakes on the face of the planet.

And you guys got me fucked up.

Not only do you lack the critical thinking skills to understand the difference between social cancellation and government cancellation, you lack the self awareness to understand that all you’re doing is projecting.

Every time you point your finger at a liberal for something, there are four more fingers pointing back at you.

You people claim to be “anti-censorship,” “anti-cancel culture,” and yet, you people are voting for politicians that are doing just that!

And I’m done with saying you’re incompetent — ’cause you understand exactly what the fuck is going on.

Your accuse liberals of needing “safe spaces,” but in places like Tennessee, laws have been passed making it illegal for someone to>

Thank A Republican

If you enjoy your electrical power from TVA, and all the other associated benefits that have come along for that ride, such as regional economic development, improved health, care & quality of life, etc., you can thank a Republican.

That man would be Nebraska Republican U.S. Senator George W. Norris (1861-1944), who served 5 terms in the House (10 years), and 5 terms in the Senate (30 years), the last term of which he became an Independent, and was defeated for re-election in 1942.

George W. Norris as a newly elected U.S. Senator, 1912.

Senator Norris was also a member of a somewhat contrarian group in the House of Representatives that, in 1910, brought reform to its practices, by reducing the autocratic control which the Speaker of the House then had.

He also authored the 20th Amendment, which abolished so-called “lame duck” Congressional sessions, fought for presidential primaries, and direct election of Senators.

He also saved TVA from being sold — more accurately, prevented Wilson Dam in the Muscle Shoals area of Northwest Alabama from being sold — to one of the wealthiest industrialists of his era, which POTUSes Coolidge and Hoover (especially), both GOPers, wanted to sell to private enterprise, bidding in which Alabama Power (part of Atlanta, GA HQ’d Southern Company) was a strong contender.

That man was Henry Ford.

In the May 22, 1920 edition of The Dearborn Independent, a Henry Ford publication also known as The Ford International Weekly, Henry authored a front-page article entitled “The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem” that was later translated into several languages and distributed widely.

Interestingly enough, Henry Ford was a rabid anti-Semite Nazi sympathizer, of whom Adolph Hitler spoke fondly in a March 1923 interview with the Chicago Tribune, who said,

Potential Supreme Court Nominee: Right Turn Only?

It’s said that, “a picture is worth 1000 words.”

In that case, here are two.

And 822 words.

---

The Supreme Court may be about to take a hard-right turn
If Donald Trump manages to install a new justice
September 21st 2020

RUTH BADER GINSBURG, the trailblazing liberal justice who died aged 87 on September 18th, will lie in repose at the top of the Supreme Court’s steps on Wednesday and Thursday. As mourners pay their respects, Donald Trump and his advisers will be huddling a few miles across town to pick a nominee to replace her. The choice, Mr Trump said on September 21st, will be revealed on Friday or Saturday — days before Ms Ginsburg is to be buried in a private ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery alongside Martin, her spouse of 56 years, an Army veteran who died in 2010.

Though she gained widespread celebrity as a lion of the liberal legal movement later in her career, Ms Ginsburg arrived at the Supreme Court as a moderate in 1993. The president who tapped her, Bill Clinton, said “she cannot be called a liberal or a conservative” as she has “proved herself too thoughtful for such labels”. Indeed, several progressive groups, including the Alliance for Justice, expressed misgivings at the time that she might not be bold enough on the bench.

Those worries gradually ebbed as Ms Ginsburg began a steady path to the left, leaving her, at the end of her career, paired with Sonia Sotomayor as the more progressive half of the liberal quartet of justices. But with Mr Trump in the White House

“My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” – Ruth Bader Ginsburg, SCOTUS Justice

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933-2020), aka “The Notorious R.B.G.,” has died.

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/100306972/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-champion-of-gender-equality-dies-at-87

May she rest in peace, and her memory be blessed.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933-2020)

---

Now, on to the matter at hand.

It’s time to study history once again.

The so-called “McConnell Rule,” which was actually no rule at all, but a political ploy by the Republican Senate Majority Leader from Kentucky, should be considered.

After all, turn about it fair play, and paybacks are hell.

But, before we continue in detail, NPR, which first reported the story of Justice Ginsburg’s death, wrote this:

“Just days before her death,
as her strength waned,
Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera:

“My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”

Justice Ginsburg was referring to comments that McConnell made following the unexpected death of SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia, while on a hunting trip in Texas on February 13, 2016.

And I mean to refer specifically to those comments.

Scalia’s body wasn’t even proverbially cold yet, and preparations for disposition of his mortal remains, and burial hadn’t even begun to be made, and the noxious Senator from Kentucky was already shooting off his mouth.

Russian Meddling in U.S. Presidential Election: How Should Congress Proceed?

There is clear, unambiguous evidence that “Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations.”

“Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections” is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment that has been provided to the President and to recipients approved by the President.”

A header appears upon EVERY page and states: “This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.”

Several “Key Judgments” are made in the report issued by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence which is dated 6 January 2017.

Among them:
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President elect-Trump. We have high confidence in these judgments.

• We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

• Moscow’s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia’s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency.

• Further information has come to light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of Russian motivations and goals.

Moscow’s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations — such as cyber activity — with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or “trolls.” Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin.

• Russia’s intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets associated with both major US political parties.

• We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence (General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.

• Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assess es that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying.

• Russia’s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and international audiences.

We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes.

—//—

Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking

President Obama in December. Some in his administration feared that intelligence about Russian interference in the 2016 election could be covered up or destroyed. Credit Al Drago/The New York Times

By MATTHEW ROSENBERG, ADAM GOLDMAN and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT

MARCH 1, 2017

WASHINGTON — In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.

American allies, including the British and the Dutch, had provided information describing meetings in European cities between Russian officials — and others close to Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — and associates of President-elect Trump, according to three former American officials who requested anonymity in discussing classified intelligence. Separately, American intelligence agencies had intercepted communications of Russian officials, some of them within the Kremlin, discussing contacts with Trump associates.

Then and now, Mr. Trump has denied that his campaign had any contact with Russian officials, and at one point he openly suggested that American spy agencies had cooked up intelligence suggesting that the Russian government had tried to meddle in the presidential election. Mr. Trump has accused the Obama administration of hyping the Russia story line as a way to discredit his new administration.

At the Obama White House, Mr. Trump’s statements stoked fears among some that intelligence could be covered up or destroyed — or its sources exposed — once power changed hands. What followed was a push to preserve the intelligence that underscored the deep anxiety with which the White House and American intelligence agencies had come to view the threat from Moscow.

It also reflected the suspicion among many in the Obama White House that the Trump campaign might have colluded with Russia on election email hacks — a suspicion that American officials say has not been confirmed. Former senior Obama administration officials said that none of the efforts were directed by Mr. Obama.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. Credit Alexei Nikolsky/Sputnik

Sean Spicer, the Trump White House spokesman, said,

In Response to John Goodwin’s FaceBook Post

A man named John Goodwin made a public post on FaceBook, which also included a link to an OpEd published in the Washington Post on November 9, 2016, which was written by Charles Camosy (PhD, University of Notre Dame), and entitled “Trump won because college-educated Americans are out of touch.” Dr. Camosy is an Associate Professor of Theological and Social Ethics at Fordham University, and the author of a book entitled “Beyond the Abortion Wars: A Way Forward for A New Generation.”

Mr. Goodwin’s FaceBook profile is sufficiently ambiguous of himself, though in his public post which is time & date-stamped 9:45AM, November 10, 2016, and ostensibly geolocated from Washington, D.C., he wrote of himself that, “I haven’t posted about the election mostly because 1) I do this for a living and most of you don’t,” which would lead one to suppose that at some level, he works in or with public policy, or more likely, with politicians.

I do not.

However, suffice it to say, that for many, many, many years, I have remained immensely interested in public policy, though I do not now, nor have I ever made my living from it, or influencing, or attempting to influence others in elected office.

In other words, I have taken the high road.

Mr. Goodwin’s public post to FaceBook is linked herein, as is the article upon which he expounded.

https://www.facebook.com/goody37/posts/10154328123133884

In order to fully understand the matter of discussion herein, I encourage the reader to fully read this item following herein, as well as Mr. Goodwin’s post, and the OpEd upon which he opined

I have responded to Mr. Goodwin’s post as follows:
His words appear italicized, and in “quotation marks.”
My commentary follows immediately after.

“…not everyone lives in big cities.”
• That is correct. The United States Census Bureau says that 80.7% of American reside in urban areas. In fact, they report that “the population density in cities is more than 46 times higher than the territory outside of cities.” So that leaves a whopping 19.3% in rural areas.

“I didn’t grow up with money.”
• Money had been invented by the time I was born. But seriously, someone votes for Donald Trump as if the wealthy are advocates for the impoverished or even the average American? C’mon. Mr. Born-With-A-Silver-Spoon-In-His-Mouth? Really?

“…not everyone went to elite colleges.”
• According to the United States Census Bureau, “in 2015, almost 9 out of 10 adults (88 percent) had at least a high school diploma or GED, while nearly 1 in 3 adults (33 percent) held a bachelor’s or higher degree.” I’m in the 33%. So I’m an elite. Thanks!

“You think they (people who eat at

Hillary & Trump: Two Deeply Flawed Candidates

By many accounts, the 2016 Presidential Election year is a complete campaign in the ass. Two deeply flawed candidates manipulated and exposed deeply flawed processes in both major political parties, not the least of which is for the GOP, how to vet their candidates more thoroughly, and have the ability to remove them from official party candidacy, and for the Democrats, how to maintain candidate neutrality, and prevent party officials from influencing candidates of the top officials’ choosing toward nomination. I predict many much-needed changes on the horizon for both parties… following the November General Election.

—/—

by Gary Cosby, Jr.
Used with permission

WARNING:  This is a long post. It is also my final political post before the election.

I am not an editorial writer but today I am going to play one on Facebook. First, let me say, everyone is welcome to comment; however, if your comment uses foul language or is abusive to anyone else, your comment will be deleted. One of the great problems we have today is our lack of ability to disagree and still have civil discourse; therefore, we will practice it or be censured. Keep in mind, this is my opinion and you do not have to agree with it. Thank your First Amendment rights for that.

By now, we all know this presidential election cycle has presented us with the two poorest candidates in memory, perhaps in all of American history. Certainly there have been poor candidates running for one party or the other throughout our history but not facing one another in the same election.

They have turned the presidential debates into bad Saturday Night Live skits. In fact, I doubt the writers of SNL would have been able to dream up anything this hideous. The American political scene will never be the same and

Mitt Romney demonstrates more hypocrisy, required Paul Ryan show several years tax returns

What’s that smell?

Oh… never mind.

It’s the hypocrisy cooking.

—

Paul Ryan gave Romney camp several years of tax returns

1:26pm EDT

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (R) listens to his vice president selection, U.S. Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) speak at a campaign event at the NASCAR Technical Institute in Mooresville, North Carolina August 12, 2012. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Mitt Romney released two years of his own tax returns to the public but that didn’t appear to be enough when he vetted running-mate Paul Ryan and other vice presidential candidates.

The campaign team for Romney, the Republican presidential candidate, reviewed several years of tax returns from Ryan and other, according to the head of Romney’s VP search process Beth Myers.

But Romney – a former private equity executive with an estimated net worth of up to $250 million – has refused to

Godly Social Values

You know, Jim, as I continue to reflect upon the issues about which we spoke this evening, I – being an ardent observer of