Donald Trump and the Deathly Fallout (Part 15)

[GreyhoundFan]

50 minutes ago, CrazyLurkerLady said:

I don't understand why he's so determined to start a war. It's like he's insulting and/or bombing everybody he can think of in hopes of starting a war with one of them. Or is it just that he's so used to building himself up by putting others down and now he can do that on the ultimate level? 

I am so, so scared. 

He's like a kid who doesn't understand this is not a video game. Lives are at stake.

 

I truly despise Jeffrey Lord. "CNN pays man to call President Trump the ‘Martin Luther King of health care’"

Quote

CNN’s strategy for coverage of President Trump drones on. This morning on the network’s “New Day,” host Alisyn Camerota moderated a debate over Obamacare between CNN contributor/steady Trump supporter Jeffrey Lord and CNN political commentator Symone Sanders. The news peg for the discussion was President Trump’s threat to withhold federal subsidies to health insurers that provide coverage to low-income customers.

“Obamacare is dead next month if it doesn’t get that money,” Trump told the Wall Street Journal. The dealmaker in Trump wants to use this eventuality as bargaining leverage: “I don’t want people to get hurt. What I think should happen — and will happen — is the Democrats will start calling me and negotiating.”

So there appear to be two options under consideration in the Oval Office: One is to continue supporting Obamacare, which has produced an all-time-low uninsured rate in the United States. The other is to strangle Obamacare and push people toward a derivative of the House Republican leadership’s American Health Care Act, which failed after a frenzy of lobbying from the White House. According to the Congressional Budget Office, that bill would have boosted the uninsured population by 24 million by 2026.

The White House’s attempts to gather Democratic votes for a scheme of this sort, said Lord on CNN, qualifies as an historic moment. “I want to say something here that I know will probably drive Symone crazy, but think of President Trump as the Martin Luther King of health care,” Lord argued. “When I was a kid, President Kennedy didn’t want to introduce the civil rights bill because he said it wasn’t popular, he didn’t have the votes for it, etc. Dr. King kept putting people in the streets in harm’s way to put the pressure on so that the bill would be introduced.”

The reaction from Sanders:

“You do understand that Dr. King was marching for civil rights because people who look like me were being beaten — dogs were being sicced on them,” said Sanders, who finished the thought with this: “Let’s not equate Martin Luther King Jr., humanitarian and Nobel Peace Prize winner, to the vagina-grabbing president Donald Trump.”

“Oh, boy,” said Camerota.

Translation of Lord’s argument: Any tactic to marshal support for legislation qualifies you as the Martin Luther King of your issue, notwithstanding your record on vagina-grabbing.

Veteran Lord watchers recognize this tactic, though, of course, they never would have predicted this loony wrinkle. What Lord enjoys best is to craft defenses of Trump that rely on history. A memorable instance came in December 2015, after Trump made his much-discussed proposal to promulgate a ban on Muslim entry into the United States. Asked for his take on the situation, Lord argued that, hey, President Franklin D. Roosevelt did something similar, and everyone regards him as a great president. Specifically, he noted that FDR had signed proclamations clamping down on certain populations — including “Alien Enemies — Japanese” (No. 2525); “Alien Enemies — German (No. 2526).” Trump himself appeared to copy Lord’s argument when pressed on the same issue.

There’s a never-ending debate about how television outlets should handle Trump aides like counselor Kellyanne Conway. They have tended to spread falsehoods and absurdities in their interviews, so shouldn’t producers simply stop having them on air? MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, for instance, told this blog, “I don’t necessarily want to hear from the White House on almost anything.”

The likes of Jeffrey Lord and Kayleigh McEnany fall into a different basket for CNN. CNN pays for their services in defending Trump. The network has created a market for their stupidities. Jeff Zucker, who runs the place, found that the network’s stable of conservative commentators didn’t necessarily want to go on air in defense of Trump. So he hired a crew of them. And he owns the work that they do on air.

WTDH? I am crafting a letter to Jeff Zucker to encourage him to stop paying Jeffrey Lord.

[47of74]

CNN commentator Jeffrey Lord really stepped in it when he compared President Putinfluffer to Martin Luther King Jr.

variety.com/2017/tv/news/jeffrey-lord-cnn-trump-martin-luther-king-1202029840/

Quote

CNN political commentator Jeffrey Lord raised a few eyebrows on Thursday morning by comparing President Donald Trump to Martin Luther King Jr.

Lord said Trump should be thought of as the “Martin Luther King of health care” during an appearance (via Skype) on Alisyn Camerota’s “New Day.” Fellow CNN commentator Symone Sanders, a Democratic activist, fired back immediately.

“Jeffrey, you do understand that Dr. King was marching for civil rights because people that looked like me were being beaten,” she said. “Dogs were being sicked on them. Basic human rights were being withheld from these people merely because the color of their skin.”

“So let’s not equate Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a humanitarian and Nobel Peace Prize winner, to the vagina-grabbing President Donald Trump,” she concluded.

My questions to Mr. Lord would start with what the fornicate is wrong with him?  Along with inquiries about whether he: (a) was dropped on his head as a child; (b) ate lead paint chips growing up; and (c) if he lived under transmission lines as a kid or something?

 

[ADoyle90815]

The scary thing is that we have someone who is batshit crazy with his finger on the button, and I'm not talking about North Korea here. He's going to get all of us killed at this point.

[47of74]

1 hour ago, ADoyle90815 said:

The scary thing is that we have someone who is batshit crazy with his finger on the button, and I'm not talking about North Korea here. He's going to get all of us killed at this point.

Yeah, Donald J. Putinfluffer having his cheeto stained fingers on the button has led to plenty of sleepless nights for me. 

[GreyhoundFan]

Since we could all use a laugh: "The White House’s Easter Egg Problem Gets the Late-Night Treatment"

Quote

Jimmy Kimmel took some cracks at the White House on Wednesday for the trouble it seemed to be having with the annual Easter Egg Roll.

“This sort of thing should be the easy stuff,” Mr. Kimmel sighed.

This year, the company that typically provides wooden eggs for the event resorted to Twitter to remind members of the Trump family that the deadline for orders was nearing. And the problems seem to have continued. Mr. Kimmel says he thinks he knows why: President Trump assumed the Easter Egg Roll “was a menu item at P. F. Chang’s.”

“White House stress secretary Sean Spicer tried to downplay the issues at his press briefing this afternoon. He did it an interesting way. He invited a group of children into the room, and he told them the egg roll doesn’t matter because there’s no such thing as the Easter bunny anyway. He’s had a rough week.” — JIMMY KIMMEL, using his preferred term for Mr. Spicer

Conan O’Brien piled on, too.

“They’re having trouble organizing Easter at the White House this year. That’s right, instead of an A-list musician, there’s going to now be a military band. That’s what they say. And instead of eggs, there’s going to be golf balls, and instead of children, there’ll be old white guys.” — CONAN O’BRIEN

“Of course, Easter’s where Christians celebrate the return of Jesus. Yes. Unfortunately this year Jesus can’t return, because he is Middle Eastern, and he has been detained at the airport.” — CONAN O’BRIEN

...

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Argh: "Trump has a strange new plan to threaten Democrats. It’s a sick joke."

Quote

President Trump likes headlines that portray him as a man of action, so he’s probably pleased with the barrage of Thursday headlines about his latest move on health care. ABC News, CNN, the Wall Street Journal, and many others all inform us that Trump is “threatening” to sabotage the Affordable Care Act to force Democrats to make a deal with him on its future. “Threaten” is a verb that is laden with action, purpose, and intimations of concealed leverage and power. Awesome!

But the basic logic of this threat is extremely shaky. Here’s the problem: Trump could do a great deal of damage to the ACA if he wanted to — but it’s unclear why this would help him realize his own stated goals.

Trump’s new threat is that he will cut off so-called cost-sharing reductions, which subsidize insurance that offers lower out-of-pocket costs to 7 million lower-income Americans. For all the details, see this piece by Jonathan Cohn; the short version is that, if Trump does this, premiums could skyrocket and insurers could flee the individual markets, causing them to melt down and ultimately pushing millions off coverage. As Cohn notes, Trump is basically “threatening to torpedo insurance for millions of Americans unless Democrats agree to negotiate with him.”

Trump told the Journal that “Obamacare is dead next month if it doesn’t get that money,” adding that “Democrats will start calling me and negotiating.” Politico quotes two senior officials further explaining Trump’s thinking:

“POTUS wants to use [the subsidies] as leverage,” the senior official told Politico. “When Obamacare fails on its own, the Dems will want to come to the table.”…

“I don’t think Trump really wants to cut the subsidies, because he’d get blamed for people losing insurance,” a White House official told Politico. “But right now, it might be his biggest way to force people to do something.”

“Dems will want to come to the table,” and this will “force people to do something.” Missing from this explanation is why this would force Democrats to the table, and to what end he hopes this will occur. The basic problem is that Trump is asking Democrats to cooperate with him to bring about an outcome that would be worse than the one he is threatening them with.

The health-care bill Trump is championing would result in 24 million fewer people with health coverage. Those people are getting insurance both on the individual markets and through the Medicaid expansion, which would be phased out, resulting in 14 million fewer people on that program. But if Trump makes good on his threat to tank the individual markets, that might bump at least 10 million people from coverage, while leaving the Medicaid expansion in place (though it would do plenty of other damage as well). Thus, Trump is basically telling Democrats: “If you don’t give me the money, I’ll shoot only one hostage, rather than both of them.”

Trump wants Democrats to willingly buy in to a worse outcome than the one he is currently dangling as a threat. But if Democrats don’t play along, he’ll likely take the blame for the fallout. A recent Kaiser poll found that 75 percent of Americans want the Trump administration to make the law work, and 61 percent say that Trump and Republicans will be responsible for any problems they cause with it. To extend the hostage analogy, Trump is threatening to kill one of the hostages in a scenario which would leave only his fingerprints all over the murder weapon.

Now, it is possible to envision scenarios in which Trump and Democrats do try for a deal on health care. That would involve both sides getting some of what they want while conceding ground in other areas. But this leads to the real problem with Trump’s threat and demand for a deal: There are no indications that Trump envisions any outcome which, from the point of view of Democrats, is less awful and regressive than the plan he’s currently pursuing.

Indeed, if anything, he and Republicans are moving in the other direction: the latest effort toward a deal would allow states to jettison ACA regulations in a way that would essentially hollow out protections for people with preexisting conditions, to win over conservatives. But this is already costing the bill more support from moderates. Politico reports that vulnerable GOP Rep. Mike Coffman, who is taking heavy fire from his Colorado constituents for supporting the GOP bill, is now saying it would be “tough” for him to support such a deal. Thus, it’s likely that the only route to a deal — as Trump himself has defined it — would require moving the bill to the left.

Getting Dems to deal with him is Trump’s own stated goal, but it’s unclear whether Trump has given a moment’s thought to what outcome such a deal would be designed to progress toward. The unnamed aide who said Trump’s threat will “force people to do something” inadvertently got this exactly right. Trump treats the word “deal” as some kind of magically irresistible end in itself. But under these circumstances, the only known endpoint — the supposed “deal” — is worse than the “threat.” Why should Dems feel any incentive to respond to such a threat?

Of course, it did garner Trump action-packed headlines. Which might be the only true goal here.

...

Fuck you, Cheeto.

[laPapessaGiovanna]

I remember the relief when, after the Bush era wars, the USA elected Obama. Hopes were so high that he was given the Nobel  prize for Peace (prematurely imho). Maybe Obama didn't live up to the sky high expectations. Unfortunately none can really say tRump isn't living up to the worst expectations ever. 

I aam a bad person I know, but those who didn't vote for Clinton because she was too hawkish, should be dispatched to Syria asap.

[GreyhoundFan]

"What’s really behind Donald Trump’s flip-flops"

Quote

Nobody ever said that Donald Trump was a man of firm principle. Indeed, apart from a couple of rancid ideas about race and foreigners, one struggles to find anything Trump has consistently believed over the course of his life when it comes to political issues.

But recently Trump has racked up an unusual number of flip-flops, with some interesting implications for the rest of his presidency. To begin, let’s look at what he has changed his mind about just in the last few days:

• He now thinks NATO is no longer obsolete
• He won’t label China a currency manipulator
• He now thinks the Export-Import bank should stay
• He now likes Janet Yellen and may renominate her as Fed chair
• The federal hiring freeze he ordered has now been lifted

You can look at each of these reversals and come up with an ideological interpretation. For instance, on the economic ones, you might say they represent the ascendance of the Wall Street wing of Trump’s advisers.

But what they have more in common is the maintenance of the status quo.

Here’s how it works. Trump the candidate makes all kinds of promises about radical change, blowing up the system, sweeping into Washington and remaking it from top to bottom. Many of the things he says are substantively ridiculous and born of ignorance, but none of his aides bother to tell him. Because who really cared back then? He wasn’t going to sit down for extended policy instruction, and the campaign seemed to be working pretty well anyway.

But now he’s president, and instead of just making statements he’s making policy. So when one of these issues comes up, there’s a good chance someone will say, “Well actually sir, that could be a really bad idea.” They’ll explain why, and since Trump doesn’t really care about the substance of any of it, he’ll change his position.

In many cases, the flip-flop is a simple matter of Trump learning about something he never understood. When he tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act, he lamented that “nobody knew that health care could be so complicated,” when in truth everyone except for him understood how complicated health care is. The result was the collapse of the repeal effort and the maintenance of the status quo. Something similar happened in his recent meeting with Chinese premier Xi Jinping, as he told the Wall Street Journal:

He said they hit it off during their first discussion. Mr. Trump said he told his Chinese counterpart he believed Beijing could easily take care of the North Korea threat. Mr. Xi then explained the history of China and Korea, Mr. Trump said.

“After listening for 10 minutes, I realized it’s not so easy,” Mr. Trump recounted. “I felt pretty strongly that they had a tremendous power” over North Korea,” he said. “But it’s not what you would think.”

His eyes now opened to what any number of people in the State Department or the National Security Council staff could have told him, Trump will presumably be less likely to initiate some kind of confrontation with China in order to force them to “take care of the North Korea threat.” In other words, the status quo is maintained, even if it’s not a particularly good one, because the alternatives are worse.

There are other flip-flops that don’t actually require Trump to do anything, or even realize he’s doing nothing. For instance, during the campaign he repeatedly promised to get rid of Common Core, which he hasn’t followed up on because Common Core isn’t a federal program at all (it was an agreement among states to adopt a set of standards). Trump never understood that, but by now he has probably forgotten about the whole thing.

...

But as the flip-flops pile up, there are also political consequences, particularly for the 2018 midterm elections. Even if some of those reversals are in the direction of sanity, that won’t register with the people who voted for Trump. Most of them have no particular opinion about Chinese currency manipulation; they just liked the sound of sticking it to the Chicoms. The more Trump looks like just another politician or just another GOP tool of Wall Street, the more likely they are to stay home in 2018 (particularly without a Democratic presidential candidate who can be cast as a villain).

Between now and then Trump may end up disappointing almost everyone on the Republican side in one way or another. Democrats, on the other hand, will still have plenty of reasons to remain angry — and enthusiasm for the president is much more fragile than anger at the president. If Republicans fail to do the big things they promised — repeal the ACA, enact tax reform — it will only contribute to the disillusionment among Republican voters, which in some places is already happening. And that’s not to mention the promises Trump can’t possibly keep, like bringing back all the coal miner jobs.

Rest assured, there are more flip-flops to come. I wouldn’t be surprised if before long, Trump says to an interviewer, “Nobody knew that being president could be so hard.”

I have a solution to that last line -- he could resign.

[onekidanddone]

From the WoPo

Quote

As he wrote on Tuesday morning, “I explained to the President of China that a trade deal with the U.S. will be far better for them if they solve the North Korean problem!” The public lobbying comes on the heels of what Trump described as “in-depth discussions about North Korea’s serious nuclear problems and how to respond to them” during last week’s summit meeting. “North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them! U.S.A.”

But in a recent interview, Trump acknowledged that the issue is, well, complicated. In a conversation with the Wall Street Journal, the president said he came into his first meeting with Xi convinced that China could curtail North Korea’s nuclear threat. Xi had to explain Chinese-Korean history to Trump, who then realized something important: “After listening for 10 minutes, I realized it’s not so easy,” he told the Journal. “I felt pretty strongly that they had a tremendous power North Korea. … But it’s not what you would think.”

Reeeealy Donie.. not so easy? Awww health care is  hard, international relations are hard. Who would have ever thought being president was difficult? Can't I just text Obama and ask him to come back?

[GreyhoundFan]

"Trump’s ‘Obamacare’ fixes don’t impress insurers"

Quote

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration released limited fixes Thursday for shaky health insurance markets, but insurers quickly said those actions won’t guarantee stability for millions of consumers now covered.

While calling it a step in the right direction, the industry is looking for a guarantee that the government will also keep paying billions in “cost-sharing” subsidies. And President Donald Trump says he hasn’t made up his mind on that.

Republicans contend that the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, is beyond repair, but their “repeal and replace” slogan hasn’t been easy to put into practice, or politically popular. So Thursday’s action was intended to keep the existing system going even as Republicans pursue a total remake.

Many of the changes follow recommendations from insurers, who wanted the government to address shortcomings with HealthCare.gov markets, including complaints that some people are gaming the system by signing up only when they get sick, and then dropping out after being treated.

But the White House remained mum on the biggest concern. Insurers, doctors, hospitals and the business community have asked Trump to preserve ACA cost-sharing subsidies that pare down high deductibles and copayments for consumers with modest incomes. They’re separate from the better-known premium subsidies that most customers receive.

“There is still too much instability and uncertainty in this market,” Marilyn Tavenner, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans and the industry’s top lobbyist, said in a statement. “Health plans and the consumers they serve need to know that funding for cost-sharing reduction subsidies will continue uninterrupted.”

Estimated at $7 billion this year, the subsidies are under a legal cloud. Without the payments, experts say the government marketplaces that provide private insurance for about 12 million people will be overwhelmed by premium increases and insurer departures.

...

The changes announced Thursday include:

— A shortened sign-up window of 45 days, starting with coverage for 2018. That’s about half as long as the current open enrollment season.

— Curbs on “special enrollment periods” that allow consumers to sign up outside the normal open enrollment window. Insurers say these have been too easily granted, allowing some people to sign up only when they need costly treatment.

— Allowing an insurer to collect past debt for unpaid premiums from the prior 12 months before applying a consumer’s payments to a new policy.

— Giving insurers more flexibility to design low-premium plans that can be tailored to young adults.

“While these steps will help stabilize the individual and small group markets, they are not a long-term cure for the problems that the Affordable Care Act has created in our health care system,” Seema Verma, the Trump administration official responsible for the markets, said in a statement.

Analyst Larry Levitt of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation said the new rules will be “meaningless” in encouraging insurance companies to stay in the market if the government ends cost-sharing subsidy payments.

The changes come as insurers are figuring out their plans for 2018.

Consumers likely won’t know for certain what sort of choices they will have until late summer or early fall, a couple months before open enrollment begins.

This year saw premium increases averaging 25 percent for a standard plan in states served by HealthCare.gov. Some insurers say they’ve lost hundreds of millions of dollars, and many have pulled back or are considering it.

Most communities will have competing insurers on the public marketplace next year, but a growing number will be down to one, and some areas may face having none.

All eyes are now on Anthem, a big Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurer operating in several states that has yet to announce its intentions for 2018. CEO Joseph Swedish has said his company would not commit to participating next year. Swedish and other insurance officials have said the government has to stabilize the marketplaces.

Dave Dillion of the Society of Actuaries says growth in underlying medical expenses could drive coverage prices up another 10 percent or more.

Nonetheless, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says the ACA markets will be stable next year in most areas.

In Washington, Republicans are trying to resolve an impasse between hardliners and moderates that has prevented them from getting their own health care bill through the House.

Meanwhile, the legal issue over the cost-sharing subsidies also remains in limbo. A U.S. District Court judge found that Congress did not specifically authorize the payments, making the expenditure unconstitutional. The case is on hold. Congress could approve the money, but that would be a politically difficult vote for Republicans.

He's going to do everything he can to screw the American public.

[GreyhoundFan]

Uh-oh: "What restaurant inspectors found wrong in Trump’s Mar-a-Lago kitchen"

Quote

Florida restaurant inspectors found numerous violations in the kitchen at President Trump’s private club, Mar-a-Lago.

Inspectors from the Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation cited more than a dozen violations in reports from a Jan. 26 inspection at Trump’s “winter White House” in Palm Beach, the Miami Herald first reported. The violations included several that were categorized as high priority, which “could contribute directly to a foodborne illness or injury,” according to the agency.

In two kitchen coolers, the inspectors found that meats were not being stored at the proper temperature and that fish served raw or undercooked had not “undergone proper parasite destruction,” according to the reports.

Inspectors also cited the club for reach-in and walk-in coolers that were not properly maintained, no hot water or hand-drying device at an employee sink and more basic violations, such as employees who were not wearing hairnets while preparing food for customers.

“These infractions were part of a routine inspection and were not complaint-based,” Stephen Lawson, communications director for the Department of Business & Professional Regulation, said in a statement.

“The infractions were corrected on site,” he added, “and the establishment was immediately brought into compliance.”

The general manager at Mar-a-Lago could not immediately be reached for comment.

In the past, Trump has revealed his affinity for cleanliness.

As The Washington Post’s Tom Sietsema reported, food safety is a top priority for Trump.

“Trump, a reluctant hand-shaker who has been known to chew out double-dippers at parties, told CNN that the fast-food chains’ cleanliness is part of their appeal,” Sietsema wrote. ” ‘One bad hamburger, and you can destroy McDonald’s,’ said Trump, ever the businessman with an eye on the bottom line.”

The Miami Herald reported that the state inspection came just days before Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited the club. Most recently, Trump hosted Chinese President Xi Jinping.

...

 

[Audrey2]

I just had to post this. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/13/mar-a-lago-food-safety-violations-donald-trump

Quote

Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump’s exclusive Palm Beach country club where the US president has an increasing fondness for entertaining world leaders with dinner and diplomacy, has been cited for a number of serious food safety violations by Florida’s restaurant inspectors.

During a routine visit in January, just days before Trump hosted a now infamous meal on the terrace with the Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe, inspectors found three “high priority” violations, including offering diners potentially parasitic raw fish and storing meat in broken coolers at too high a temperature.

Ten other noted violations, which include the presence of rusty shelves in a walk-in cooler and kitchen staff being unable to sanitise their hands properly because of an absence of hot water at sinks, were deemed less serious under Florida’s stringent food safety regulations, yet still damaging to the reputation of the upmarket club that charges a $200,000 initiation fee, and $14,000 a year for membership.

So, in other words the same exclusive club of Donald "Make Government Smaller" Trump wants to make people sick, due to their neglect of food safety standards. With Trumps frequent entertaining here, it would be interesting if his desire to cut inspectors (yes, I know the inspectors are from the state of Florida, but safe food handling standards tend to be nationwide) ends up making some of the people Trump is wining and dining sick. 

 

@GreyhoundFan, great minds think alike! I was working on my post when yours posted.

[onekidanddone]

37 minutes ago, Audrey2 said:

I just had to post this. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/13/mar-a-lago-food-safety-violations-donald-trump

So, in other words the same exclusive club of Donald "Make Government Smaller" Trump wants to make people sick, due to their neglect of food safety standards. With Trumps frequent entertaining here, it would be interesting if his desire to cut inspectors (yes, I know the inspectors are from the state of Florida, but safe food handling standards tend to be nationwide) ends up making some of the people Trump is wining and dining sick. 

 

@GreyhoundFan, great minds think alike! I was working on my post when yours posted.

Sigh.  Obeying the law is  hard.  Who knew?

39 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Uh-oh: "What restaurant inspectors found wrong in Trump’s Mar-a-Lago kitchen"

 

Rut Row... I wouldn't normally wish food poising on anybody having had it myself. I'll make an exception in this case. For Agent and his spawn, the adults not the young one.

[candygirl200413]

So like with this whole North Korea thing, I'm honestly become more terrified. Obviously knew how bad Trump and his cabinet would be but that plus the horrendous military actions that have be taken is just really scary.

[JMarie]

10 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Sigh: "Trump Signs Law Taking Aim at Planned Parenthood Funding"

 

I feel bad for the next president (who will be a Democrat), because he or she will have to spend so much time reversing all of Trump's stupid decisions before actually leading the country.

[iweartanktops]

I'm going to risk sounding really stupid. But if another country decided to bomb the United States, where, exactly do you think they would focus? Would it be the WH? Any random city? Multiple places? 

Just curious. Totally not nervous or anything. 

[JMarie]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/politics/ivanka-trump-jared-kushner-passover-tourism-canada/index.html

Quote

The Four Seasons Resort is hosting "Pesach on the Mountain," a 10-day kosher ski vacation, billed as "an exclusive Pesach vacation that offers supreme accommodations" on its website. The 2017 accommodations were sold out. Passover tourism is common, as the holiday requires the observant to remove all leavened products from their homes, use separate dishes that only come out once a year, and deep clean their cooking equipment.

Ivanka and Jared went on a ski trip less than a month ago.  So even if they never went on the weekly jaunts to Florida, there's no way any regular boss would let them take two vacations in just the first fourteen weeks of the new year (let alone a ten day vacation).

And why are they going to Canada?  Isn't America good enough anymore??

[apple1]

7 hours ago, iweartanktops said:

I'm going to risk sounding really stupid. But if another country decided to bomb the United States, where, exactly do you think they would focus? Would it be the WH? Any random city? Multiple places? 

Just curious. Totally not nervous or anything. 

I had the same train of thought yesterday after I heard about the MOAB.

[onekidanddone]

6 hours ago, JMarie said:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/politics/ivanka-trump-jared-kushner-passover-tourism-canada/index.html

Ivanka and Jared went on a ski trip less than a month ago.  So even if they never went on the weekly jaunts to Florida, there's no way any regular boss would let them take two vacations in just the first fourteen weeks of the new year (let alone a ten day vacation).

And why are they going to Canada?  Isn't America good enough anymore??

Their jobs aren't really jobs.  I think they just sit around in the west wing getting paid to look pretty.

[VelociRapture]

14 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

I remember the relief when, after the Bush era wars, the USA elected Obama. Hopes were so high that he was given the Nobel  prize for Peace (prematurely imho). Maybe Obama didn't live up to the sky high expectations. Unfortunately none can really say tRump isn't living up to the worst expectations ever. 

I aam a bad person I know, but those who didn't vote for Clinton because she was too hawkish, should be dispatched to Syria asap.

We should bring back the draft. But only for those who voted for Trump. Especially middle class or rich white Americans. And especially the middle class or rich white American women.

 

8 hours ago, iweartanktops said:

I'm going to risk sounding really stupid. But if another country decided to bomb the United States, where, exactly do you think they would focus? Would it be the WH? Any random city? Multiple places? 

Just curious. Totally not nervous or anything. 

Best guess? Major metro areas. Most likely DC because it's the center of government and it would send a big message. But you get the biggest impact from targeting high population areas. Exact locations would depend on the country attacking and range of the bombs, but places like Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Philly... New York City for sure. And if they're lobbing nukes... well guys... I live 1.5 hours outside New York, but I should probably say my goodbyes now just in case.

I just hope I see the news early enough. At least being 1.5 hours away could buy me time to try and get my daughter, dog, and myself somewhere safe - I'm thinking I'd head East on back roads towards Rhode Island. It'd be a safer bet than trying to get further North. I'd have to hope husband could survive on his own as he works close to home - I wouldn't be willing to risk the baby by waiting around and he wouldn't want me to. 

... is it sad that I've thought this out?  

ETA: Attacks on major Trump owned businesses could be possible too. For instance, Mar-a-Lago.

Edited Again: I may have panicked slightly. I'm pretty sure we'd be safe from the initial blast being more than 50 miles away from the city (I believe we're 76 miles from Grand Central.) The nuclear fallout would likely be a much bigger problem for us personally.

[GreyhoundFan]

16 minutes ago, VelociRapture said:

We should bring back the draft. But only for those who voted for Trump. Especially middle class or rich white Americans. And especially the middle class or rich white American women.

 

Best guess? Major metro areas. Most likely DC because it's the center of government and it would send a big message. But you get the biggest impact from targeting high population areas. Exact locations would depend on the country attacking and range of the bombs, but places like Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Philly... New York City for sure. And if they're lobbing nukes... well guys... I live 1.5 hours outside New York, but I should probably say my goodbyes now just in case.

I just hope I see the news early enough. At least being 1.5 hours away could buy me time to try and get my daughter, dog, and myself somewhere safe - I'm thinking I'd head East on back roads towards Rhode Island. It'd be a safer bet than trying to get further North. I'd have to hope husband could survive on his own as he works close to home - I wouldn't be willing to risk the baby by waiting around and he wouldn't want me to. 

... is it sad that I've thought this out?  

I live 17 miles from the White House. Believe me, ever since Agent Orange slithered in there, I've worried about the proximity.

 

Gee, who knew that other countries would be offended by the tangerine toddler's Tweets? "North Korea blames Trump and his ‘aggressive’ tweets for tensions"

Quote

TOKYO — North Korea accused President Trump on Friday of “making trouble” with his “aggressive” tweets, amid concerns that tensions between the two countries could escalate into military action. 

Tensions have been steadily mounting in recent weeks, as North Korea prepares for what it is calling a “big” event to mark the anniversary of the founder’s birthday Saturday, and the Trump administration warns all options are on the table. 

Expectations for a nuclear test or missile launch in the lead-up to Saturday’s celebrations in Pyongyang have not come to pass. Instead, there are signs that the regime is getting ready to hold a huge parade this weekend, perhaps showing off new missiles — something that would qualify as the “big” event it had heralded. 

The U.S. has sent an aircraft carrier strike group to the Korean Peninsula region, and Trump has repeatedly tweeted that if China won’t use its leverage to rein in North Korea, the United States will act. 

Vice President Pence arrives in Seoul Sunday on the first leg of an Asia tour, and will doubtless reiterate the U.S.’s strong alliances with South Korea and Japan and their determination to stop North Korea’s nuclear program. 

But North Korea’s vice foreign minister said that Trump was “becoming more vicious and more aggressive” than previous presidents, which was only making matters worse.

“Trump is always making provocations with his aggressive words,” Han Song Ryol told the Associated Press in an interview in Pyongyang. “So that’s why. It’s not the DPRK but the U.S. and Trump that makes trouble,” he said, using the official abbreviation for North Korea. 

Han also repeated the regime’s common refrain that North Korea was ready to act to defend itself. 

“We’ve got a powerful nuclear deterrent already in our hands, and we certainly will not keep our arms crossed in the face of a U.S. preemptive strike,” Han told the AP.

As for when the next nuclear test would take place, he said “that is something that our headquarters decides.” 

His message chimed with a statement from North Korea’s Institute for Disarmament and Peace published Friday, that it was the U.S. pushing the Korean Peninsula, “the world's biggest hotspot,” to the brink of war by bringing back a naval strike group. 

“This has created a dangerous situation in which a thermonuclear war may break out any moment on the peninsula and pose a serious threat to the world’s peace and security,” the statement said. 

North Korea has a habit of fueling tensions to increase the rewards it might extract from the outside world if it desists. Previously, North Korea has agreed to return to denuclearization talks in return for aid or the easing of sanctions.

Trump is tearing up that old playbook, analysts say.  

“This approach to North Korea is relatively new,” said James Kim of the Asan Institute of Policy Studies in Seoul. “The approach in the past has been very calculated.”

...

Sigh. I hope there is a world left after the tangerine toddler resigns, is impeached, or has the inevitable stroke or heart attack that is coming his way.

[onekidanddone]

8 hours ago, iweartanktops said:

I'm going to risk sounding really stupid. But if another country decided to bomb the United States, where, exactly do you think they would focus? Would it be the WH? Any random city? Multiple places? 

Just curious. Totally not nervous or anything. 

Major cities NYC, DC, LA. Also I think the mid west to take out the missile silos. I've thought about this often in my perpetual state of fear.

5 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I live 17 miles from the White House. Believe me, ever since Agent Orange slithered in there, I've worried about the proximity.

 

Gee, who knew that other countries would be offended by the tangerine toddler's Tweets? "North Korea blames Trump and his ‘aggressive’ tweets for tensions"

Sigh. I hope there is a world left after the tangerine toddler resigns, is impeached, or has the inevitable stroke or heart attack that is coming his way.

In most despot family rulers they end up attacking their own for power grabs. This holds true for he current administration. Agent, Agent's children, Pence, Bannon, Kushner, Spicy, Rayan, Sessions, and the rest.  None have souls. None have ethics. All have a cold blooded need for power.

[GreyhoundFan]

10 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Major cities NYC, DC, LA. Also I think the mid west to take out the missile silos. I've thought about this often in my perpetual state of fear.

In most despot family rulers they end up attacking their own for power grabs. This holds true for he current administration. Agent, Agent's children, Pence, Bannon, Kushner, Spicy, Rayan, Sessions, and the rest.  None have souls. None have ethics. All have a cold blooded need for power.

I so agree. It's like a real-life Hunger Games, except that I don't know if I want any of that group to be standing at the end. Where are the nightlock berries when we need them?

 

This is an interesting perspective: "Liberals have to avoid Trump Derangement Syndrome"

Quote

I didn’t really believe that there was such a thing as Trump Derangement Syndrome — hatred of President Trump so intense that it impairs people’s judgment. It’s not that I didn’t notice the harsh, unyielding language against him — I’ve said a few tough things myself — but that throughout the campaign, Trump seemed to do things that justified it. Once elected, instead of calming down and acting presidential, he continued the stream of petty attacks, exaggerations and lies. His administration seemed marked by chaos and incompetence.

And then came the strike against Syria. On that issue, Trump appears to have listened carefully to his senior national security professionals, reversed his earlier positions, chosen a calibrated response and acted swiftly. I supported the strike and pointed out — in print and on air — that Trump was finally being presidential because the action “seems to reflect a belated recognition from Trump that he cannot simply put America first — that the president of the United States must act on behalf of broader interests and ideals.” On the whole, though, I was critical of Trump’s larger Syria policy, describing it as “incoherent.” My Post column was titled, “One missile strike is not a strategy.”

From the response on the left, you would have thought I had just endorsed Trump for pope. Otherwise thoughtful columnists described my views as “nonsense” and a sign that the media has “bent over backward” to support Trump. (Really?) One journalist declared on television, “If that guy could have sex with this cruise missile attack, I think he would do it.” A gaggle of former Obama speechwriters discussed how my comments were perhaps “the stupidest” of any given on the subject.

...

Conservatives seem to understand Trump’s about-face better than liberals. Many of Trump’s strongest backers — Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, Laura Ingraham — are distraught by Trump’s embrace of Obama-like policies. Andrew McCarthy wrote in National Review, “When it came to foreign policy, I was worried that the 2016 election would be a case of Clinton delivering the third Obama term. Instead, we have Trump giving us the third Clinton term.”

Liberals have to avoid Trump Derangement Syndrome. If Trump pursues a policy, it cannot axiomatically be wrong, evil and dangerous. In my case, I have been pretty tough on Trump. I attacked almost every policy he proposed during the campaign. Just before the election, I called him a “cancer on American democracy” and urged voters to reject him. But they didn’t. He is now president. I believe that my job is to evaluate his policies impartially and explain why, in my view, they are wise or not.

Many of Trump’s campaign promises and policies are idiotic and unworkable. It was always likely that he would reverse them, as he has begun to do this week on several fronts. Those of us who opposed him face an important challenge. We have to ask ourselves, which would we rather see: Trump reversing himself or Trump relentlessly pursuing his campaign agenda? The first option would be good for the country and the world, though it might save Trump from an ignominious fall. The second would be a disaster for all. It raises the quandary: Do we want what’s better for America or what’s worse for Donald Trump?

I'm not sure I agree with Fareed 100%, but he makes an interesting point. I don't know that I can cheer on anything Agent Orange does. I think I can be either more or less upset, depending on his actions. Maybe he'll actually do some good. Hopefully I can be happy if that happens. I guess we'll see.

[47of74]

44 minutes ago, VelociRapture said:

We should bring back the draft. But only for those who voted for Trump. Especially middle class or rich white Americans. And especially the middle class or rich white American women.

 

Best guess? Major metro areas. Most likely DC because it's the center of government and it would send a big message. But you get the biggest impact from targeting high population areas. Exact locations would depend on the country attacking and range of the bombs, but places like Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Philly... New York City for sure. And if they're lobbing nukes... well guys... I live 1.5 hours outside New York, but I should probably say my goodbyes now just in case.

I just hope I see the news early enough. At least being 1.5 hours away could buy me time to try and get my daughter, dog, and myself somewhere safe - I'm thinking I'd head East on back roads towards Rhode Island. It'd be a safer bet than trying to get further North. I'd have to hope husband could survive on his own as he works close to home - I wouldn't be willing to risk the baby by waiting around and he wouldn't want me to. 

... is it sad that I've thought this out?  

Probably manufacturing centers too would be on the list for hostile powers.  I know with a John Deere plant that could be quickly retooled to make military equipment instead of farming / construction equipment that where I live in Iowa there was concern that we would be attacked sooner in the event of war because of all the manufacturing being done.

I remember when I worked down in the Quad Cities on a regular basis I had figured out a number of alternate   routes from Dubuque to the Quad Cities.  That was back when we had the 2008 floods so I wanted to have alternate ways of getting to work and back home in case 61 was flooded.  Or if there was a major accident where 61 was closed - one time I had gotten stuck on 61 for about 1/2 hour due to an accident but could have easily gotten around it and gotten to work on time if I had known what side roads to take. 

[GreyhoundFan]

How true: "We don’t know where Trump stands. Neither does he."

Quote

So much for Donald Trump, the “America First” populist champion of the forgotten working class. The president now sounds pretty much like a garden-variety globalist, defending the “rigged” system he denounced during the campaign.

Then again, who knows how he’ll sound next week? He hasn’t even been in office for three full months, and Trump may already be the most erratic president we’ve ever seen. We have no idea where he really stands because, well, neither does he.

Remember when Russia was good and President Vladimir Putin was a potential partner in fighting the Islamic State? Now Russia is bad because it continues to support Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, who killed civilians, including “beautiful babies,” with chemical weapons. Russia’s support of Assad, of course, is nothing new. But Putin, who no longer compliments Trump, kept Secretary of State Rex Tillerson cooling his heels before deigning to meet with him. Horrible!

Remember when China was bad because it “eats our lunch” in trade deals? Now, after Trump established personal chemistry with Chinese President Xi Jinping during a summit last week at Mar-a-Lago, Trump declines to repeat his long-standing allegation that China manipulates its currency. And as for the North Korea threat, which Trump once said China could easily resolve, the president now realizes it’s complicated. There’s a historical context for the relationship between China and the Koreas. Who knew?

“We’re not going into Syria,” Trump told the New York Post. Those on the receiving end of the 59 cruise missiles launched last week might be puzzled. There are roughly 1,000 U.S. personnel inside the war-torn country, and the number is inching up. Trump used to believe in nonintervention. Now he’s being cheered by those who want the United States to take a much larger role in the Syrian civil war.

Similar confusion abounds in domestic policy. First it was vital that Congress tackle health care before moving on to tax reform and other initiatives. Then, after the debacle of the ill-fated American Health Care Act — which Trump decided to avidly support, despite the fact that it reneged on his promise of “insurance for everybody” — Trump was ready to move on to other issues. But now, maybe health care is back as a priority.

Both parties support corporate tax reform, so it wouldn’t require much “Art of the Deal” magic to make it happen. Why hasn’t Trump moved in this direction, which could give him an actual accomplishment to brag about? I have no idea, and I doubt Trump knows, either.

It was inevitable that a rookie president with no experience in government at any level, much less the highest, would have a ridiculously steep learning curve to climb. It was also inevitable that Trump’s lack of focus and his tendency to be distracted by whatever cable news is yammering about at any given moment would hamper his ability to get anything done.

A truly first-rate staff could help. Instead, however, Trump has populated his West Wing with warring factions that battle one another with a ruthlessness the characters in “Game of Thrones” might find excessive. Currently on the outs is Trump’s chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, the “economic nationalist” who wants to sharply curtail immigration, erect trade barriers, reduce U.S. commitments overseas and destroy what he calls the “administrative state.”

Bannon, who used to run Breitbart News, would be the scariest character in the administration if he were better at bureaucratic infighting. He was seen as the motivating force behind the attempts to impose a Muslim travel ban, which were stalled by the courts. He urged all-out support of a health-care bill that Trump reportedly had doubts about — and went to Capitol Hill to order GOP House members to support the measure, which just stiffened their opposition.

...

If Bannon is toast, that’s good for the nation and the world. But Trump still lacks a White House team capable of executing his vision, or any vision. The answer to Casey Stengel’s question — “Can’t anybody here play this game?” — is an unambiguous no.