HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » louis c » Journal
Page: 1 2 Next »

louis c

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Boston
Home country: USA
Current location: Boston
Member since: Fri May 14, 2004, 05:52 PM
Number of posts: 8,652

About Me

IBEW----AFL-CIO

Journal Archives

The Permanent Danger of James Comey's Actions

I personally believe that James Comey had no idea of the ramifications of his actions by sending the letter to Congress indicating that he discovered new emails. I think he thought that the letter was benign enough that it wouldn't be as disruptive as it is. In his follow-up letter to FBI personnel, Comey said there was a danger that his actions could be "misunderstood".

The real danger from James Comey's letter to Congress is worse that just tipping the scales in this election. It has a long range, negative impact on our Democracy itself.

If this action is successful in electing Donald Trump, any future FBI director can do the same thing to anyone. Every elected official, Republican or Democrat, is subject to a public disclosure of any pending investigation, whether there is evidence to substantiate it or not. Every elected official then is in the "cross hairs" of any FBI director. What Senator wants to vote to deny confirmation if it looks like the appointee is most likely to be confirmed? Is there another J. Edger Hoover in our future, in which every public official has to act out of fear?

I believe this letter was issued out of an abundance of caution. I believe James Comey acted is his self-interest, rather than the public interest. His actions may have been self-serving in an attempt to protect his reputation. Never the less, his actions have set a very, very dangerous precedent that could send American Democracy back to the dark ages in which one unelected individual could shape our Republic in his image.

God Help Us.

Peaceful Transition of Power is NOT About This Time, It's About Next Time

The most likely scenario is that Hillary Clinton becomes the 45th President of the United States. Whether Donald Trump accepts that outcome or not is irrelevant in 2016 and 2017. The states will certify the results, the Electors will convene, Hillary will be declared the winner and the transfer of power will be from Barak Obama to Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump only amounts to a sore loser.

I know a lot of his supporters are making these onerous threats about not accepting the outcome. I know some of them. I hear them. His supporters, at least everyone that I know, have three things in common with one another. They have big mouths, no brains and no balls. Trump will be lucky if they vote, never mind take to the streets in a revolution. Take it from me. I'm a product of the late sixties and early seventies. I participated in huge demonstrations and rallies as a student. Both against the Viet Nam War and for Civil Rights. Those actions took organization, dedication, knowledge and passion. The Trump supporters that I know have only bigotry at the heart of their ideology. There is no doubt that some far right wingers will seize any opportunity to show their discontent for the U.S. Government, but they do that anyway. They will always do that, with or without Trump. Sort of like the Bundy Militia standoff or Timothy McVay's Bombing in Oklahoma City. I'm talking about uprisings in the Millions. That's just bull shit idle chatter from a bunch of bigoted assholes who get their information from one another in a donut shop.

No, I don't fear this time. In the long shot chance (God forbid) that Donald Trump becomes the 45th President and in the likely scenario that he loses re-election in 2020, what will that transfer of power be like? If he says his loss is rigged. If he refuses to hand over his office to the challenger that beat him. How will that look? Are you convinced that he will relinquish power peacefully? I'm sure not convinced.

This is more than about this election, but about America's future and the respect that the public officials, both Democrats and Republicans, have for the institution of our Government.

My Case Against Term Limits

I don't want to be limited in my choices. I like to vote on experience. I think experience counts for something.

When I fly on a plane, I like the thought that my pilot has a great deal of flying hours. When I need an operation, I like the thought that my doctor has performed numerous operations.

Let me judge when change is needed. If I want someone different, I'll vote for the newcomer, but that's my choice, not the government's.

By the way, we already have term limits for all elected offices. Two years for Congress, two or four years for Governors and six years for Senators. If you don't like the way they vote, or the way they act, vote them out of office. That's your right, but don't take away my right to vote for who I want.


Trump's Energy Proposals "Like an Old Snake Oil Salesman"

I have long used as an example of Donald Trump's con to the coal miners of this country as a scam. Being in favor of fracking and coal are contradictory positions. Cleaner, cheaper natural gas has replaced coal as the chosen fuel for our generators. Trump wants to increase natural gas production, which reduces our dependence of coal. But, he's fooled the miners who hold the signs that say "Trump Digs Coal". Trump has played these gullible workers as fools.

Now, an article appears in the Guardian that has industry experts saying the same thing. Trump is not a fool, he just thinks the rest of us are.


<snip>Other analysts concur. “Donald Trump’s promise to revive the US coal sector can only be realized by reining in hydraulic fracking,” said Jerry Taylor, the president of libertarian thinktank the Niskanen Center.

“That’s because low-cost natural gas (courtesy of fracking) has done far more to shut down coal-fired power plants and, correspondingly, reduce demand for US coal than has EPA regulations. Given that he promises exactly the opposite — moving heaven and earth to increase US natural gas production — Trump’s promises are empty.”<snip>

<snip>Ex-Conoco Phillips lobbyist Don Duncan compared Trump’s energy proposals to those of an “old snake oil salesman,” saying: “Trump’s energy cures are based on a lot of numbers that clash with energy industry data and scientific studies.”

Trump’s penchant for ignoring facts and hard evidence is also underscored by his attacks on global warming and the Paris accords. <snip>


Link to Article:
http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/trumps_promises_are_empty_energy_experts/?gclid=CJubwN_Y688CFUdehgodHfQK4g

The Gore 2000 Analogy to Trump 2016 is a False One

What Donald Trump has said, unambiguously, is that the entire democratic process is "rigged" and the results will be wrong. The fix is in and the outcome predetermined (unless he wins)

His surrogates, especially Kelly Anne Conway, point to Al Gores's dispute in 2000 as evidence that a candidate has to hold out their acceptance of the outcome and validation of the election.

Here's the major difference. Al Gore's recount was part of the process. Any state can be recounted, especially if it's within a state's legal percentage for an automatic recount (usually a half of a percent). Gore's lack of a concession before the Supreme Court decision in December was part of the process. No one is saying that any candidate for any office doesn't have the right to recount and validate votes in a close election. The process has laws and contingencies for that possibility. That's not what Trump is saying or implying. He's saying the fix is already in.

Let's use an NFL Football game analogy. The ruling on the field is a fumble by the offense, but it's a close call. That's like a state showing initial results that has candidate "A" with a half point lead over candidate "B". In the football analogy, we go to the video tape. In the political analogy, we go to a recount. That final result, either the ruling of the field stands or it is overturned, or the state validates or changes the winner after the recount. Both are part of the rules or laws. Whatever that decision, whether you like it or not, it is part of the process and proves that there is no fix in either case.

What Trump is doing is saying that the election (or game) is fixed, prior to the actual event. That the outcome is suspect, regardless of the calls on the field or their verification.

In the football analogy, the accusation would call into question the very integrity of the game. In Trump's instance, he calls into question the validity of American democracy, and to our country itself.

Mr. Trump, Do You Still Believe that Raphael Cruz was Involved in the JFK Assisnation?

That's a debate question for him.

Have we forgotten all the moronic accusations this flaming asshole has made this year?

President? I don't know another human being as disgusting as Donald Trump.

Sometimes, Hillary Clinton Might Rub People the Wrong Way......

.....However, in Hillary's case it's just a figure of speech. In Donald Trump's case, it's literal.

Wrong Track Numbers are Being Misinterpreted by Pundits

I can't count how many times political pundits and pollsters keep referring to this election as a "change" election because the polls show that 70% of Americans think the country is on the wrong track (or going in the wrong direction).

The 70% part is accurate, but who's to blame?

In the same polls, 53% of the people approve of the job Democratic President Obama is doing (43% disapprove) +10.

The same polls shows that the Republican Congress has an approval rating of just 18% (79% disapprove). -61

Wouldn't you think that these polls indicate who the people blame for that wrong direction?

Link:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/state_of_the_union/

Trump Supporters Talk of Rebellion and Assasssination at Rallies---Boston Globe




<snip>And if Trump doesn’t win, some are even openly talking about violent rebellion and assassination, as fantastical and unhinged as that may seem.<snip>

<snip>“If she’s in office, I hope we can start a coup. She should be in prison or shot. That’s how I feel about it,” Dan Bowman, a 50-year-old contractor, said of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. “We’re going to have a revolution and take them out of office if that’s what it takes. There’s going to be a lot of bloodshed. But that’s what it’s going to take. . . . I would do whatever I can for my country.”<snip>

Dear Mr. Dan Bowman, please leave the light on at the front porch. I believe you'll be getting a visit from the authorities tonight. WHAT A FUCKING DOPE YOU ARE.



Link:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/10/15/donald-trump-warnings-conspiracy-rig-election-are-stoking-anger-among-his-followers/LcCY6e0QOcfH8VdeK9UdsM/story.html

LA Times Polling Averages Distorted Toward Trump by One 19 Year Old Man in Illinois



<snip> A lone 19-year-old black man in Illinois is single-handedly (and unknowingly) changing the standings of the presidential election, The New York Times has found. Due to the 19-year-old Trump supporter's inordinate weight in a USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Daybreak panel, his poll answers are directly affecting national averages, like the one compiled by RealClearPolitics. <snip>


Link:
http://theweek.com/speedreads/654767/how-single-19yearold-man-illinois-wildly-skewed-major-poll-towards-trump

Link to NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/upshot/how-one-19-year-old-illinois-man-is-distorting-national-polling-averages.html?_r=1
Go to Page: 1 2 Next »