September 6, 2018 6:00 AM
Morning Reads — Thursday, September 6, 2018
It’s already Thursday and it still feels like Wednesday, but it’s almost Friday, so for that we can rejoice.
Peaches
-
Report: Georgia voters watch their ballots mysteriously switch
- Another local official resigns over racial comments
- Georgia Tech lands research grant on competition and business hurt by imports
- Lawmakers waste time studying issue that should be settled locally
- Augusta University sheds insight on student safety after crimes at Georgia colleges
- Carr announces anti-gang network
- Campaign to stop fake Medicare cards
- Big money funneled in for constitutional ballot issue
- Georgia is No. 2 in the nation for women-owned businesses
Jimmy Carter
- Trump and aides shaken by ‘resistance’ op-ed
- What will Google pay having missed the Senate hearing?
- Roy Moore is suing Sacha Baron Cohen
Sweet Tea
About Author
Jessica Szilagyi
62 Comments
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The Great Man. Montana. Tonight.
Sad, in a few ways:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/revealed-trump-inauguration-crowd-photos-were-edited-after-he-intervened/ar-BBMWxOE?ocid=ientp
It’s not just that Trump couldn’t accept an honest representation of his relative unpopularity. It’s not just that the Inspector General was clearly pressured to hide evidence of Trump’s efforts to alter photos. But, if you actually read to the end, it’s that the whole reason the Inspector General and all this info came out is because Trump was trying to find someone to fire for disloyalty- which was never found (because it was just employees presenting the photos honestly.)
In other words, From Day 1, this President has been the real source of Fake News.
I sense so much angst in the room and have for a while. I’m attaching a list of TGM ‘s accomplishments since he’s been Prez. Which of them infuriates you Libs the most? Lowest black and hispanic unemployment ever recorded? Record economic growth? Cutting of job stifling regs? Getting out of Paris Hoax Accords?? What? And please…be honest! Lets it all out!
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year-one-list-81-major-trump-achievements-11-obama-legacy-items-repealed
Why should any of us give you an honest answer? If I tell you a slight complaint on a technical aspect of a 2000 page bill all you are going to do is make fun of it, not really listen or care, do a Whataboutism on a topic that has no connection to the reply I made, and then call me a snowflake because my answer is only 90% aligned with yours.
If you think back, I hardly ever bust your chops and if I do it’s gentle and maybe cute. Nothing like I do the real morons. What is the issue you were gonna bring up?
You’re not the only one who replies to comments I make. What happens is you will say something, then someone will feed off it and then some one else will do a eye for an eye reply, and then you AWW NWWW them, and it keeps feeding off itself until we have 70 comments of back biting and pointless discord a fifth grade teacher would send us all to the principals office for conducting – and with the exception of maybe 5 comments of the 70, none of it has anything to do with what I or any original post started to talking about.
Lol!!!!! I am howling!!! I have never “AWWW NAWWWW ed” you! It’s a respect thing with you. With others not so much!! Give your issue. If I have to AWW NAWW some goober, I’ll start another post!
I said Awwe nawwed ‘them…’ I’m pointing out you are not the sole issue. Did you miss the whole feeding off each other vive..
You’re basically sore because we didn’t take your explanations as gospel? You’re presenting one side and it’s usually wrong!!
See, right there you just called his technical knowledge on a subject that some of us don’t have as wrong. Why? Is it because you have actual technical knowledge on the subject or because his whole point of view does not align with yours? Can you cite a technical source roving he is wrong? Instead of discussing the finer issue of what you or anyone else disagrees with, you disregard the whole topic instead of engaging.
We all have talents, technical experiences, and knowledge that have nothing to do with a political opinion, including you. I don’t question your knowledge on guns and how you technically use a gun. I don’t agree with you on some very specific points of gun policy, but I don’t disregard your knowledge of how to use one because I do. Why can folks a lot the same consideration to others?
Fake news (noun)
1. The term conservatives apply to facts or credible information or commentary conservatives object to, subject to capricious change, and especially as directed by cult leader Donald Trump.
Here’s an example of how I often experience the “dialogue” involving some on this site:
Post 1: “I can’t support a policy when it results in the separation of mothers and children indefinitely, when there is no legal necessity or policy justification for that, because the same law could be enforced without that end result, based upon the existing administrative structure and procedures.”
Reply Post: “LOL! Separation! Like how Obama separated patients from their doctors! Hilarious!”
And—- scene.
Arguing about politics. It’s enjoyable at times but it can be frustrating:
“You poked my heart.” — So perfectly symbolic.
But sadly, this is an example of a few toddlers trying to work out their differences. Some of the political discussions I read here look more like Caroline’s analogy of the chess player and the pigeon.
I would say the large majority of that list, probably easily over 80%, could be easily contested, through facts and science, as “accomplishments”, or otherwise attributable to Trump. But as has been pointed out about the futility of discussing facts, science, and nuance with you and some others, I won’t bother wasting my time discussing any of them.
No thinking about it necessary; Trump as cheapened and degraded the Presidency. What remains to be determined is how much damage is really being done, what and how long recovery would require, and the degree to which damage is permanent or very long-lasting, or not recoverable.
Have you been watching the Brett Kavanaugh hearings? Seems to me that the Democrats are doing a bang-up job degrading our institutions as well.
I’ve seen only a few minutes worth. Some untoward behavior in objecting to the rushing a hearing after a data dump of 40,000 pages of documentation with another 100,000 pages withheld, after refusing to act on the Garland nomination with 11 months in left in Obama’s term is comparably degrading. Absolutely.
It would be both rich and scary if Mike Pence was the author of the NYT op-ed, since unlike appointed staff Trump can’t fire him, and that Pence would become President if Trump is removed from office. The link to an Atlantic column on Pence below is a long read. It highlights why Pence as President would be a perilous as Trump’s has been.
.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/01/gods-plan-for-mike-pence/546569/
“Pence, Pompeo say they did not author ‘resistance’ NY Times Op-Ed”
“Trump on Wednesday called the anonymous writer “gutless” and raised the specter of treason, and urged the Times to identify the person to the government for national security purposes.
“The Deep State and the Left, and their vehicle, the Fake News Media, are going Crazy – & they don’t know what to do,” he said in an post on Twitter early Thursday morning.
“I’m draining the Swamp, and the Swamp is trying to fight back. Don’t worry, we will win!” he said earlier on Twitter.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-nytimes/pence-pompeo-say-they-did-not-author-resistance-ny-times-op-ed-idUSKCN1LM1RZ
I disagree with the NYT publishing an anonymous “Op-Ed” from an administration official. They should have labeled it as an article and done some research to verify it before publication.
Op-eds are subject to different standards. My understanding is the NYT efforts associated with the column were focused on verifying it was the writing of who it was supposed to be.
.
Drastic times sometimes require drastic actions.
The times set up a page not subject to their pay wall rules for anyone to ask questions about the writer and the methodology of board in verify who it is and what thinking went in to publish it.
It wouldn’t qualify for an article since op-eds are mostly opinions on subjects not facts.
As to the voting machines, I can testify they’re subject to flaws. About 10 years ago, when only one matter with two choices was displayed on the screen. I made my selection, the bottom of the two, but the machine selection the top. I canceled the selection and made my selection again, same result, and again canceled and selected, and same result again. The fourth time I deliberately touched the screen well the bottom, and the machine selected it.
Why do the administrators of this site allow Noway to continue ?
He has single handedly destroyed any semblance of civil discussion in the comment section.
He’s not well-informed, not clever, not humorous, nor insightful.
I have no problem reading positions that differ from mine, but this has become nothing more than juvenile trolling by a buffoon.
Maybe the simplest solution for me is to remove the bookmark and try elsewhere.
Morning reads are an open thread. It’s unfortunate comments here suck energy from other posts where commentary must be more germane. It illuminates the rot that directs the Republican party. That’s useful, from my perspective, in influencing to numerous centrists, some that lean conservative, RINO in the vernacular, to no longer profess to be Republicans.
Ahhh, a new perjorative. “Rot.” Tell me, Chats, do words hurled from the Libs offend your ears, too? Or is it my pointing out rampant Dim hypocrisy, that raises your hackles!?
So you’re upset about the word “rot” but not being called mentally retarded?
Keep in mind, the majority of the daily moderation was done by Jon. I miss him.
Question: is their anything your side has written that the moderator should shut yall down over? Or is it just me and the conservatives?
Noway- I think you raise an important problem– why is it always about “sides” with you? Why would “all” of anybody need to be the object of this site’s regulation?
We’re all individuals, here, and I think many make huge leaps of assumptions when trying to pigeonhole others’ political views.
As an example, Chats asked abt you personally- he didn’t lump in DTM. (although I remain suspicious that DTM is just your back up handle).
And I easily see some differences between you and others, like Mike.
So, it would be a indication of respect and maturity to treat us all as individuals, and not just lumping people into “sides”.
And, to answer your question generally, I would like all cursing to be off limits. And any names with curse words, or misogynistic name-calling. Some of us who you’ve lumped into the “liberal” “side” were right there next to you when curse words were being used against you. So…
(Noway focused Eye roll). I didn’t mention shutting any one down. Stop jumping to over dramatic conclusions that everything is about you… Mary Jesus and Joseph!
Define “your side”. As I keep telling you I am not a liberal. CENTRALIST remember, with a slight lean to the left.
Jon seldom mentioned kicking off anyone. His way was more like pointing out the silliness of lumping every person not in agreement with a posters point as being the enemy to their opinion.
Yes their are folks I take to task on what you call “the other side”. In fact I just gave Carline the Cliff notes version of the scold you got this morning about baiting right before this one.
Good grief…. When I go to vespers tonight I’m lighting a candle for your wife and sending out a prayer that she becomes the nice feminist you need in your world to smooth down your ruffled feathers. SMH
So, Noway and others, let me show by example how you can make concessions, and engender discussion, even if contentious discussion, but not worry that the concession means you’ve betrayed the political party or candidate of your preference:
I don’t mind Kavanaugh as a Justice. He’s definitely informed and qualified in knowledge of the law. I probably won’t agree with most of his rulings, and I sure hope he doesn’t become a rubber stamp. I do think he has a backbone, and he may use it from time to time.
But this is one of those things where – as in the popular poem- that those who object should learn to tolerate, because of the wisdom to know they cannot change the path to his becoming a Justice.
What still burns me is why Obama/Dems didn’t take the steps that Republicans did, and make Supreme Court nominations subject to 50% vote not 60%. They could’ve done that, right? Then they could have just gotten Justice Scalia’s replacement when it was their time. Seems a little too passive, and short-sighted to not have done that.
You can’t vote if the Senate Majority leader does not allow a hearing. Mitch refused a hearing for a nomination of a sitting president, because he could. The Federalist will get their conservative majority. Mitch’s life work will be done. The question is will the senate GOP settle for that or want more before they turn on Trump.
He was following The Biden Rule, which prohibited a vote on a SC court seat in a Prez election year. Or is that just ok when implemented by the Dems?
Because Joe Bidden was wrong in suggesting it, it’s okay for any one to do it at a later date? If a senator suggests it’s okay to have people named Ellynn shot, does that mean it’s okay to shot me? Again Mitch did it because he could. Don’t make either man any less wrong.
I don’t know how you were raised but I was raised with ethics.
Like two wrongs make a right.
It’s like a double-negative.
The Libs were savaging Mitch for not scheduling a vote on Garland when their own sitting VP had opined (played politics while in the Senate) that such a vote in a Prez election year was off limits. The Dems had no response other than to state that by not doing so was an affront to Obama ie…throw the “race” label out. Repubs were having none of it.
It’s is an affront to precedent and the constitution.
Must be a cheesehead thing.
Noway, just to clarify:
You support Mitch, and Mitch agrees with Biden.
So you clearly support Biden.
Pfff
If your referencing me, I did read before I posted… Yours wasn’t there when I started tying and posted 4 mins behind you… It’s a good explanation. I liked it.
Thanks, that does let me forgive the Dems.
If that happens the GOP is going to be paying for a generation. Of course, I think they already know they are toast. People who are confident of their support across the country do not pass the legislation they pass nor do they behave the way they do.
No they won’t. The money class will make it a memory.
They can try but until the millenials get way older and are outnumbered by another group of voters it’s not going to work.
Rep Meadows, backed by anonymous house dems, wants to open a house investigation into who the anonymous op-ed writer is…
Irony is officially lost.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm
I don’t see how anything about the op-ed is a national security issue at all. I can’t think of any national security decision that wouldn’t be made by a team and executed by a team, and each member of the team has made vows to uphold the Constitution. So disagreements and implementation “failures” aren’t national security threats so much as just the way things function.
One thing is clear though- that the Pres. uses the national security justification a lot, and potentially abuses it– from justifying tariffs, to trying to conceal documents from Congress (like documents involved in the Kavanaugh hearing), to revoking security clearance, and now potentially to upending protections to journalistic sources.
Imo, abusing national security justifications is like when other countries use “emergency powers” to silence the media and political opposition and public protest. It’s a dark path, and Congress should at some point soon pass a law that defines and reins in the way national security determinations can be made and justifications can be used.
The only national security threat is Trump.
Stop baiting. Try engaging and explaining… I’ve already given Norway a good scold today… I can do it again.
The Op Ed describes a cabal that intentionally refuses to follow the LAWFUL instructions of the President because they disagree. That is at a minimum insubordination and at worst, treason.
At the end of the day, we’ll find out that this is like 99% of what is in the media today, FAKE NEWS. The author will be some Obama holdover in a job none of us knew existed and that meet with the President one time. FAKE NEWS from the enemy press.
Did you miss the whole stop baiting theme for the day Mike?
You make some serious point, like the military not following civilian commend. But then you go all fascist with the press is the enemy silliness. You don’t have the trust the press but calling them enemies is a bit extreme.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/this-is-a-constitutional-crisis/569443/
Well, David Frum would agree with you on the coup part but he’s calling them cowards. Treason is reserved for things like conspiring against America with an adversary like Putin not for disobeying the President. Truly why aren’t you even upset that they are taking papers off of Trump’s desk and he doesn’t even know what they have been doing?
There is no reply button to Caroline’s post so I’m going to respond here.
What if the papers the cabal removed from the desk identified a critical threat to our nation? What if the papers were a devil’s advocacy piece meant to test alternative approaches for our national security. The removal of those paper indeed would have endangered our national security. That’s treason. It would aid our enemies.
As for the enemy press …. it is the press that is covering up for this secret society working against a properly elected president.
The advisors are saying that they are taking exactly that kind of thing from Trump because he’s not competent. Giving him that kind of information is something he is incapable of understanding. There is no deep state coup against Trump. Trump is attempting to blame someone else for the fact that he is unfit for office. If they had any guts they would send the evidence they have to the senate and start his removal from office. At this point they’re endangering the country but trying to have it both ways.
Besides Hee Haw, This was my window into the south as a child.
https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/celebrity/burt-reynolds-charismatic-star-1970s-blockbusters-dies-82-n907206
Handle is listed as a target.
https://www.axios.com/health-care-voter-campaign-2018-midterm-lections-664b9163-f6f7-435c-a00e-1ffbfd19303b.html
That should not suprise anyone. She only won by 4 points and things have gotten much worse for the GOP since then.
Interesting. Kemp and Abrams are tied in a new poll and Trump’s number have gone upside down in GA with 42 approve 51 disapprove.
https://politics.myajc.com/news/state–regional-govt–politics/dead-even-ajc-channel-poll-shows-georgia-governor-race-tied/h0XFd9yauWEe1xeizfnxiL/
Question: Do you think TGM’s two visits to support Kemp will have any effect on Kemp’s poll numbers as they approach the finish line? Or do you think the polls will remain close?
I don’t know what the polls are going to do. I would imagine though that Trump campaigning for Kemp is going to do nothing to help at best and drag him down at worst. If Kavanaugh goes on the supreme court Abrams odds of winning go way up because suburban women are going to treat Kemp like the plague. Kemp will get evangelicals which is 38% plus assorted others but when someone is on the court that says that birth control is the same as abortion, he’s advocating that women should have no control over their own bodies and he doesn’t even believe in science and facts. Women are going to be so ticked off and Kemp is going to recieve their wrath. Besides nobody knows exactly where he stands on a lot of these issues.
Now at least these comments were readable. I read the comments section in the hope for some semi-reasonable dialogue, not diatribes.