HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » LAGC » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Missoula, MT
Home country: USA
Current location: Deep in Red State Hell!
Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 5,165

About Me

Godless democratic socialist, look towards northern Europe for inspiration on what role-models our economy should aspire towards. Love the ACLU and donate heavily to them each year, wish they'd get with the program and defend the Second Amendment with as much fervor as they do the rest of the Bill of Rights. Proud member of the 99%.

Journal Archives

A Brief History of the Candidacy of Donald J. Trump

Late Spring 2015

Bill Clinton has a private telephone conversation with The Donald at the same time the billionaire investor and reality-television star was nearing a decision to run for the White House, according to associates for both men. Clinton encouraged Trump's efforts to play a larger role in the Republican Party and offered his own views of the political landscape.

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bill-clinton-called-donald-trump-ahead-of-republicans-2016-launch/2015/08/05/e2b30bb8-3ae3-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html

June 16, 2016 - Donald Trump Enters the Race

The Donald: "We're being invaded by Mexican immigrants -- drug dealers and rapists -- we need to seal the border, build a wall, and make Mexico pay for it!"

(Donald seizes an early lead in the GOP polls.)

Next up: Carly Fiorina begins to rise in the polls...

The Donald: "She's an ugly bitch -- just look at that face -- can you imagine that as the face of our next president?!"

Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-insults-carly-fiorinas-appearance/

(Carly slips in the polls, as Donald continues to rise...)

Next up: Jeb Bush begins to gain traction...

The Donald: "His brother didn't keep us safe! We were attacked under his watch! He LET those terrorists in, he allowed 9-11 to happen!!"

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/19/politics/donald-trump-jeb-george-w-bush-9-11-jeb-bush/

(Jeb Bush plummets to single digits in the polls and never recovers...)

Next up: Ben Carson begins to rise in the polls...

The Donald: "He's pathological like a child molester! There's no cure for that!"

Source: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-ben-carson-pathological-child-molester

(Ben Carson collapses in the polls, Donald rises further...)

Next up: Ted Cruz climbs in the polls...

The Donald: "He's a Canadian! A foreigner! He's illegimate just like Obama born in Kenya!"

Source: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-01-14/donald-trump-attacks-ted-cruz-over-his-canada-birth

(Ted Cruz's momentum halts, begins to slip slightly in the polls...)

Next up: Big Dawg calls back up The Donald, asking for a status report.

The Donald: "Takin' them down one by one, tearing up the Republican field."

Bill Clinton: "You're the man, Donald. Please proceed."

NYT: Some Inconvenient Gun Facts for Liberals

FOR those of us who argue in favor of gun safety laws, there are a few inconvenient facts.

We liberals are sometimes glib about equating guns and danger. In fact, it’s complicated: The number of guns in America has increased by more than 50 percent since 1993, and in that same period the gun homicide rate in the United States has dropped by half.

Then there are the policies that liberals fought for, starting with the assault weapons ban. A 113-page study found no clear indication that it reduced shooting deaths for the 10 years it was in effect. That’s because the ban was poorly drafted, and because even before the ban, assault weapons accounted for only 2 percent of guns used in crimes.

Move on to open-carry and conceal-carry laws: With some 13 million Americans now licensed to pack a concealed gun, many liberals expected gun battles to be erupting all around us. In fact, the most rigorous analysis suggests that all these gun permits caused neither a drop in crime (as conservatives had predicted) nor a spike in killings (as liberals had expected). Liberals were closer to the truth, for the increase in carrying loaded guns does appear to have led to more aggravated assaults with guns, but the fears were overblown.

One of the puzzles of American politics is that most voters want gun regulation, but Congress resists. One poll found that 74 percent even of N.R.A. members favor universal background checks to acquire a gun. Likewise, the latest New York Times poll found that 62 percent of Americans approved of President Obama’s executive actions on guns this month.

So why does nothing get done? One reason is that liberals often inadvertently antagonize gun owners and empower the National Rifle Association by coming across as supercilious, condescending and spectacularly uninformed about the guns they propose to regulate. A classic of gun ignorance: New York passed a law three years ago banning gun magazines holding more than seven bullets — without realizing that for most guns there is no such thing as a magazine for seven bullets or less.


Pretty spot-on article... the author goes on to point out that more than 10 percent of murders in the United States, for example, are by intimate partners. Most risky is right after a violent breakup when a woman has won a restraining order against her ex. One "common sense" solution that both Democrats and Republicans might be able to agree on is temporarily prohibiting the subjects of these restraining orders from possessing a gun, which has been found to reduce these murders by 10 percent.

Other approaches that could win bipartisan support deal with working more with gangs to support high-risk children and reduce delinquency and adult crime. "If the left can drop the sanctimony, and the right can drop the obstructionism, if instead of wrestling with each other we can grapple with the evidence, we can save thousands of lives a year."

I would agree.

Trump again won’t rule out a third-party run

Donald Trump is not ruling out a run for president as an independent if things go south for the front-runner in the Republican race.

"I'm going to have to see what happens," he told George Stephanopoulos in an interview that aired Sunday on ABC's "This Week." "I will see what happens. I have to be treated fairly."

Trump was responding to a Wall Street Journal report that Republican operatives are considering banding together donors from the other GOP campaigns in a bid to knock Trump off the top spot.
If Republican operatives succeed in knocking Trump off his perch, their plan could backfire if he then runs as an independent.

A July Washington Post-ABC News poll found that in a hypothetical general election matchup between Bush and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, Clinton led 50 percent to 44 percent. But throw a third-party Trump run into the mix, and the poll found that he would tear support away Bush and give Clinton a 16-point lead.


PJ Media: I Compared My Obamacare Options to My Current Plan, and Surprise, Surprise

So I saw this nasty piece of conservative propaganda trending on Yahoo! News just now:

It happens that I started a new day job as a principal engineer a couple of weeks ago. It's for a Very Large Company, VLC. It has a health insurance plan that is, if not the absolute best one I've ever had, a nicely adequate one. It's what's called a "high deductible" plan, but that means a $1500 deductible, with both a health savings account to which the company contributes, and a flexible spending account. Looked good to me. With my contributions to max out both the HSA and the FSA, my net deduction from my pay is around $600 a month -- but remember, that's almost entirely pre-tax money going into accounts I can use to pay for health care of various sorts.

Because of the ACA, however, they were required to notify me I could opt out of their plans, and choose instead a plan from the health insurance exchanges.

Okay, so just to reassure everyone I haven't completely lost my mind, when this option was offered, I immediately said "you mean I can opt to buy my own expensive and inadequate coverage instead of going with the company's plan they pay for?" And, reassuringly, the HR person explaining these plans answered, "Yes, that's about it."

I did get curious, though: what would that option be?

So I went to Connect for Health Colorado, the Colorado exchange website and ... well, tried to sign up. After filling in a long page of personal information, I tried to submit it, and got an error


So I thought I'd do a little quick investigating to see if he was telling the truth.

So I went to Colorado's exchange site:


Clicked on the blue "Sign-In/Shop" button on the top-right, then chose "Individuals & Families" from the drop-down list.

Then scrolled down to the lower-middle: "Browse Plans" (you don't even have to sign up and make an account and enter anything to see prices and plans, like that guy was claiming)

I just entered a Denver zip code (80123) and a date-of-birth making my fake persona age 50 like I presume is around the age of the author of that piece is, based on his profile picture, then left "Start Coverage" date to 01-01-2016 and ticked the "Health" coverage type leaving "Dental" blank.

Well lo and behold... I did find some cheaper shitty Bronze and Silver plans like he was saying that had high deductibles, but if you scroll down further I was able to find a decent Gold EPO plan (Cigna Vantage Flex Gold 1400) that cost less ($589.41/month) than what he is paying now through his private employer and has a slightly lower deductible.

In short, he's a bald-faced liar! Claiming that none of the Obamacare plans are any good in comparison.

I suppose that's just par for course for right-wing media, but I found it quite funny how I could debunk this guy's story in less than 5 minutes just by visiting the Colorado exchange site that he claimed "stumped" him, trying to sign up.

U.S. Violent Crime Rates Continue Sharp Decline

The latest batch of nationwide FBI crime data, released Monday, shows that in 2014, violent crime in the U.S. continued its long decline. The murder rate was down. The robbery rate was down, too.

"The story is actually better than we all anticipated it would be," says John Roman, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute's Justice Policy Center. "Violence is down a little bit. Property crime is down a lot… and all of this suggests that crime in America is continuing to move in the right direction.”

Earlier this month, I joined a number of fact-checkers in pointing out that a breathless New York Times story, "Murder Rates Rising Sharply in Many U.S. Cities," was misleading. The 30 cities cited by the Times weren't randomly selected; rather, they appeared to suggest their own selection because they were cities that had experienced a recent rise in killings.

That the Times got that story wrong mattered because it appeared right in the middle of a debate over the existence of a so-called “Ferguson Effect”—the (false) idea that the Black Lives Matter movement has somehow been emboldening criminals. But a Vera Institute of Justice senior research fellow looked at the most recent homicide data from 16 of the 20 most populous U.S. cities, and found that just three showed a statistically significant increase. And homicide rates often fluctuate; in recent years, Chicago's has moved both up and down, pointing to no real trend at all.


AIIIEEE!!! The sky is falling!! The sky is falling!! Gun violence EPIDEMIC!! We must do something about the GUNZ!!!

The reality is: despite the sensationalist MSM playing up these rare acts of mass violence, American cities and streets haven't been this safe in a long time.

Looking better each and every year.

WOO-HOO! For the First Time, My Healthcare Premiums Are Going DOWN!

So it's October 1, which means the 2016 Obamacare rate schedules are out on the Idaho exchange.

After hearing all the horror stories about how the plans were bleeding money and to expect big premium rate increases again this year, I was bracing for the worst. Well, guess what? For the same Blue Cross Silver Choice 4000 PPO plan I've had since March 2014 with a $0 deductible and $1000 max out-of-pocket, with my same base income of $12,000/year (working part-time while attending school full-time at age 38 -- yeah, I know, better late than never, right?) instead of paying $70.33 per month for my premium, it dropped down to $65.28/month!

Granted, it's not going down by much, but its a hell of a good sign that it isn't still increasing astronomically year after year, after jumping from $26.27/mo. in 2014 clear up to $70.33/mo. in 2015. Well, technically the raw premium still is, so we still need to do something to reign in the overall growth of healthcare costs in general, but at least if the advance tax credits keep up -- $254/month for 2016 vs. $183/month for 2015 all things being equal -- at least the bite will be mitigated somewhat...

I Officially Changed My Party Affiliation from "Republican" to "Unaffiliated" Today...

Like many others living in deeply red states like here in Idaho, where whomever wins the GOP primary ends up winning the general, we did the only thing we could try to stem the tide of Tea Party mania running roughshod over state politics. Thanks to many of us Democrats and Independents who crossed over and voted in the Idaho Republican primary in 2014, we were just barely able to deprive Tea Party candidate Russ Fulcher from unseating incumbent governor Butch Otter who earned the right-wing's ire for being the only Republican governor to actually implement our own Obamacare exchange despite intense conservative opposition. Indeed, had the Supreme Court case gone the other way, Idaho's working poor would have still been protected from being cut off from the Obamacare subsidies since, unlike every other Republican-controlled state, we had our own exchange (thanks to Governor Otter) and weren't relying on the federal exchange (healthcare.gov) any more. Governor Otter only barely survived the Republican primary with 51.4% of the vote, or only 12,000 more votes than Russ Fulcher. Our actions felt justified at the time.

Well today, I had enough. I just can't bear the stench of my official affiliation being associated with them any more. Maybe it's just as well the Teahadists start winning some primaries just to wake the more moderate voters up from voting knee-jerk Republican on general election day, even if we do have to suffer a few humiliating losses and some truly detestable characters getting into office in the meantime. I just can't bear the thought any more of people looking up party registration statistics and saying "Oh, but so many Idaho voters are registered as Republicans, they must really like Republican policies." BULLSHIT! Many of us only did so out of pure pragmatic political considerations, but enough is enough. I will not help pad their numbers any longer.

For the first time in a long time, at least since I've been voting ever since I turned 18 in 1995, we have some real choices here on the Democratic primary next year, not just for president but some of the candidates down-ticket as well. I, for one, am really looking forward to washing my hands of feeling forced to vote in the GOP primary out of pure political necessity, and being able to go back to voting for whom I really want to see win for a change. For unlike the Idaho GOP primary which is closed (meaning you have to register as a Republican to participate), Idaho Democrats have rightly kept their primary open, meaning even unaffiliated and independent voters can participate. While I'm not completely sold on the national platform (even though I agree with over 90% of it) and don't feel comfortable officially registering as Dem yet, I am more than happy to finally shed the Repuke label and get back to casting my vote for whom it really matters, for someone whom I really hope can actually represent me when it comes time to legislate and govern. I hope others in the same boat will consider joining me and helping further marginalize the Clown Car party.

Conservatives Are Turning Against FAUX News

Megyn Kelly and FAUX News Facebook pages getting hammered right now.

FreeRepublic is up in arms: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3321643/posts

I'm sure Rush Limbaugh will be joining the fray tomorrow as well.

Rupert Murdoch thought he was in control of his brood, but he let loose a Frankenstein monster.

Donald Trump IS going to run third party when he gets shoved out of the race by the GOP Establishment.

We're looking at another 1996 situation folks. Democratic electoral landslide worse than Clinton v. Dole.

A Little Friendly LTTE to My Local Newspaper

The primary purpose of a government constitution is to recognize and protect individual rights. Such a sacred document should only be amended when absolutely necessary, and only in the case of expanding rights, not limiting them. This was the case with the Bill of Rights -- the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Every once in awhile, misguided populist sentiment forces constitutional amendments to be rammed through that limit rights, instead of expand them. This was the case with the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which allowed for the Prohibition of alcohol, until it was rightfully repealed by the 21st Amendment, some thirteen years later. This was also the case with Article III, Section 28 of the Idaho Constitution, banning certain people from getting married.

The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and the Supreme Court of the United States of America has affirmed that it does indeed protect the right of all adults to enjoy all the benefits of marriage. The U.S. Constitution also trumps state constitutions, whenever the latter violate those rights. It's time to remove that obsolete, hateful language from the Idaho Constitution and restore freedom and dignity to Idaho.

Should be published sometime this weekend.

What's with the Huckster and All the Anti-Gay Bigots Comparing Indiana to Saudi Arabia Lately?

I don't get it. Huckabee et. al. on all the news circuits, peddling the same talking points.

Are they trying to say that just because Saudi Arabia treats LGBT folks like shit that Americans should shut up about it when they (social conservatives) do it here?? Because "at least we're not as bad as those evil Muslins??"

Sure seems like they are setting the bar pretty low, and seem so "concerned" with anti-gay treatment abroad all of a sudden...

Either that or it's just one big Freudian slip as to their ultimate end-goals here...
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next »