occupy the white house

Beyond the obvious beauty and grace of our First Lady, one must consider the historic importance of this photo. Our history books sweep under the rug the fact that the White House was built by African American slaves. For the next 150 years the majority of the serving staff of the so called “people’s house” were African American. In 1901 Booker T. Washington was the first African American to be received there as a guest by Theodore Roosevelt, to the horror of Washington society. They are all at last vindicated in our first African American first family. Note…It is my humble opinion that no matter what family should occupy the White House after January 2017, and the following generations for that matter, they will never equal the style, debonair, and class as that of the Obamas.


2

Lots of narratives have been going around about why Hillary lost. Most are placing the blame directly on the candidate herself, ignoring a few key points:

1. Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million votes. Yes. 3 million. To minimize this or not take it into consideration proves you are bias in your analysis of why Hillary lost. You don’t win the popular vote by 3 million if you are a truly bad candidate (Hillary also won every single debate). And for historical reference, Al Gore only won the popular vote by 500,000. Hillary won it by 3 million. 3 million votes is no small feat. You cannot ignore this fact if you want an un-bias analysis of why Hillary lost the election. The last two Republican Presidents lost the popular vote!

Also – both popular vote winners Al Gore and Hillary Clinton were hurt by progressives (Nader and Bernie) who got too comfortable after 8 years of a Democrat in the White House. Our side seems to shoot itself in the foot after 8 years in power. As we learned yet again – every vote counts, especially in the swing states. Because guess what? You can win the popular vote and still lose the election due to the electoral college. Progressives blew it big time for the second time in 20 years and hurt our popular vote winners Al Gore and Hillary Clinton. A cumulative 3.5 million more votes for the Democrats!

2. In U.S. politics, one party usually has power over the White House for only 8 years. Very rarely does a party hold onto the White House longer than 8 years. The last time was when Bush Senior won after Ronald Reagan, but then he quickly lost re-election to Bill Clinton. Democrat Al Gore couldn’t even win after Clinton left us with a surplus and booming economy. This usually happens because the side that isn’t in power tends to rise up, while the side that occupies the White House gets lazy and complicit. From a historical perspective, America was already headed towards a Republican Administration in 2016. Combine that with the racist backlash to Obama, and Trump exploiting the rise of worldwide racist nationalism, it’s no wonder their base turned out and ours didn’t. Remember – under Obama, the Democrats have lost 900 legislative seats nationwide and most of the Governorships and state legislatures, too (in addition to the White House and U.S. Congress). The backlash to Obama has been strong and was bound to hurt us in 2016. Point is – in American politics, very rarely does the same party occupy the White House for more than two-terms. This especially holds true when you combine that with racism and the rise of nationalism working against the first African American President. Conservatives were out for blood after 8 years of Obama, while our side shot itself in the foot by allowing Bernie to run as a Democrat (Nader all over again).

3. Just as in the United Kingdom (Brexit), there has been a worldwide resurgence in a nationalistic white working-class. Trump exploited this in a way Bernie Sanders never could have. Why? Because nationalism is being used to scapegoat immigrants and minorities. The 2016 election truly was an election about which party was going to turn out their base (whites vs. minorities). That’s why Hillary spent her time trying to convince us of the dangers a Trump Presidency posed to minorities. And if we had voted in levels similar to 2008, our base would have triumphed. But a core part of our base was missing – young voters that showed up for Obama but not Hillary. Why? Bernie fucking Sanders. Most of the “Bernie-or-Bust” voters I knew were young male progressives who puked at the thought of ever voting for Hillary. They even called Bernie a “sell-out” when he half-heartedly campaigned for her. What a shame. Because in the face of Brexit, every vote counted. Remember – Trump only won the swing states by a total of 80,000. How many “Bernie-or-Busters” were in the swing states? Seriously – never underestimate angry white men showing up at the polls (Brexit and Trump). Our side is much harder to turn out. That’s why every vote counted. And yes… I’m looking at you, college students!

4. Comey. The momentum the 3rd debate victory produced was lost after the Comey letter. The 3rd debate was the debate where “Nasty Woman” was coined. The closet thing the Hillary campaign came to naturally produced momentum. And it (luckily) came near the end of the election in the final stretch. Hillary was riding high after the 3rd debate domination – 11% polling lead. Everyone thought she was going to win and Nate Silver gave her over a 90% chance of winning. But then came the Comey letter. 

His letter also came after the release of Trump’s “pussy grabber” tape. The media narrative switched from “pussy grabber” to “FBI re-opens Clinton E-mail Probe.” The headlines became anti-Clinton rather than anti-Trump. And in American culture, media momentum is huge. That’s why they call it an “October Surprise.” Late deciding voters heavily broke for Trump due to the Comey letter and that’s what made the difference. 

Hillary ordered a complete analysis of the election and the Comey letter was the only new variable from her 11-point polling bump after the 3rd debate to election day. “Pussy grabber” was old news. “E-mails” became front and center yet again. This is why there is currently an independent review of Comey’s actions as we speak. Official protocol says to never release anything about a case if it may sway an election. Why? Because it might turn out to be false. Just like what happened. Comey ultimately retracted the letter in the final hours of the election, but the damage had already been done. Hillary was finished. Her 11-point debate lead – gone. That’s why there is currently an official investigation into Comey breaking official protocol and swaying the election in Trump’s favor. Once this investigation is complete, I’m sure you’ll be hearing from the Clintons.

5. Sexism. The 2016 election proved a far more qualified woman can still lose to a far less qualified man. Actually, Hillary was the most qualified person (man or woman) to ever run for the Presidency. Any man with Hillary’s accomplishments and qualifications never would have lost. It wouldn’t have even been close. Period.

6. Russian interference. We’ll never know exactly how much Russia swayed the election, but the influx of “fake news” targeting Hillary Clinton definitely had an impact on her public perception, especially in regards to her “trustworthiness.” Putin had a vendetta against Hillary because he held her responsible for the protests he faced after his re-election. He also thought Hillary would be far more aggressive and effective than Obama. He’d rather have a puppet and buffoon as President (Trump) than the brilliant Hillary Rodham Clinton.

7. The media. Hillary’s e-mails were made to seem just as bad as the millions of horrific things Trump did over the course of his 4-times bankrupt career. The false equivalence was mind-boggling. In the pursuit of trying to appear “un-bias” by saying both sides were equally corrupt, they ended up being bias against Hillary and helping Trump win the Presidency. The actual un-bias viewpoint is that nothing Hillary has done is anywhere near the level of deplorable things Trump has done. But the media made Hillary seem just as bad as Trump in order to give the impression that they were being “objective.” 

I truly hope the media did some soul-searching after the 2016 election. Tearing down Hillary and glorifying Trump – giving rise to his “cult-of-personality” has really bitten you in the ass, hasn’t it? Now you have at minimum 4 years of covering a manipulative propaganda artist con-man who just likes to play head games. Have fun!!

8. Republican witch-hunts. Republicans abused their power, which led to 8 separate Benghazi investigations. More investigations than Pearl Harbor, the JFK assassination, and 9/11. Yet Hillary was never found of any wrongdoing and came out victorious after her triumphant 11-hour Benghazi testimony. Unfortunately, after so many fake “scandals,” Hillary’s image had been damaged. Which was the entire point of these fake scandals – even if Hillary isn’t guilty, we can still accuse her of corruption and plant seeds of doubt. But rather than viewing the Republicans as the corrupt ones, manufacturing fake Clinton scandals and wasting tax-payer money, many Americans drank the Clinton hate kool-aid (even progressives).

All of these factors led to the “perfect storm.” Which is why we needed every single vote in every single state. Yet Hillary still managed to win the popular vote by 3 million despite Russian interference, Bernie mania, multiple witch-hunts by Republicans, 11-hour Benghazi testimony, sexism, a media hell bent on false equivalency, a rise in worldwide racist nationalism, one party historically only occupying the White House for 8 years, and the devastating Comey letter. 

3 million more votes. Despite it all. A majority of Americans agree with our vision and our values. By the millions. And that’s not even taking into consideration ID laws and voter suppression of minorities, which greatly decreased the amount we won by.

“But, you know, then at the end, we had the Russians and the FBI deal. She couldn’t prevail against that. She did everything else and still won by 2.8 million votes.

The finest vote counter in America is Nate Silver. He told you what costed the election.” ~President Bill Clinton

A political icon and legend. Was going for round 3 in the White House. And we all know she ran it the first two times.

anonymous asked:

I think the ghost asking anon means they wonder if you have ever looked into reports/claims of the founding fathers appearing as spirits. Such as the popular beliefs of Lincoln still roaming the White House and George Washington riding a horse through Gettysburg.

I heard Benjamin Franklin’s ghost has been claimed to haunt the Philosophical Society in Philadelphia. A cleaning lady in 1880 said she had an accounted with his ghost and this was not in the age were one were prone to concoct stories as such. He ghost has supposedly also been seen outside of the building–apparently he was doing a “jig”. You can read more about this here

Josiah Quincy III claimed to have a spiritual interaction while at Mount Vernon in the early part of the 19th century. Quincy had visited Mount Vernon to meet with Bushrod Washington, George Washington’s nephew in the spring of 1806 and it was a story that he himself had not remembered due to his age, however, it circulated around the family. Quincy was staying in Washington’s bedroom–the room where he also died. While staying in the room, his father supposedly saw Washington’s ghost. You can read more about this here. His ghost has been sighted in six different locations. You can read more about this here

A few have reported seeing the ghost of John Adams at his home in Quincy, near Boston where it is said to be rather “glum”. You can read more about this here. The ghost of Abigail Adams has reportedly been seen hurrying toward the East Room of the White House, which is where she used to hang her laundry [x]. She can be recognized by the cap and lace shawl she favored in life. It is also said John Quincy Adams haunts the House of Representatives where he died. You can read about that here

It has been reported that Thomas Jefferson plays his violin in the yellow room and his ghost has been seen a few times around the halls [x]. There have also been reports of people witnessing Jefferson’s ghost wandering the grounds and whistling, something that Jefferson was prone to doing as he toured the property [x].

There are no records of a James Madison ghost ever been seen anywhere but a few times at his plantation Montepelier in Virginia. You can read more about this here, however, the ghost of Dolley Madison sure enough has. Apparently, when the second wife of Woodrow Wilson, Edith Wilson, occupied the White House, she ordered gardeners to dig up the Rose Garden that Dolley had planted nearly a century ago. They never started because her ghost arrived to upbraid the workmen for what they were about to do to which the men fled from the scene. Not a flower was disturbed and Dolley’s garden continues to bloom today. You can read more about this here. She also haunts the Octagon house. 

Alexander Hamilton possibly haunts the home where he was initially brought after being shot in a duel with Aaron Burr; 27 Jane Street. The tennant says she has been aware of footsteps, creaking stairs, and the opening and closing of doors; and even the unexplained flushing of a toilet. On one occasion, she found the toilet chain still swinging, when there was no one around. She also has seen a blurred “shape,” without being able to give details of the apparition; her upstairs tenant reports that one night not so long ago, “a man in eighteenth-century clothes, with his hair in a queue” walked into her room, looked at her and walked out again. You can read more about this here

The ghost of James Monroe has been sighted around Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond, Virginia where he is buried. Monroe’s ghost has been said to rub his left shoulder as if reminiscing from when he was shot at the Battle of Trenton. His ghost is said to be calm and undramatic. The ghost of Monroe lingered in the Marble Cemetery in Lower Manhattan where he was initially buried in New York before sightings changed to where he was again laid to rest twenty-seven years later in a different place. There have been no sighting of Monroe at the White House or of his wife, Elizabeth Monroe, however, their two daughters Maria Hester Monroe Gouveneur and Eliza Monroe Hay are sometimes seen at the White House. Eliza’s ghost showed up during James Buchanan’s presidency and was rude, popped up out of no where and rearranged cards. Maria has been seen at the Decateur House where she appears distraught. You can read more about this here

nytimes.com
Opinion | Sally Yates: Protect the Justice Department From President Trump
What’s happening is beyond abnormal. It’s dangerous.
By Sally Q. Yates

The spectacle of President Trump’s efforts to humiliate the attorney general into resigning has transfixed the country. But while we are busy staring at the wreckage of Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ relationship with the man he supported for the presidency, there is something more insidious happening.

The president is attempting to dismantle the rule of law, destroy the time-honored independence of the Justice Department, and undermine the career men and women who are devoted to seeking justice day in and day out, regardless of which political party is in power.

If we are not careful, when we wake up from the Trump presidency, our justice system may be broken beyond recognition.

Over the past few days, many people from both parties have rightly expressed their dismay at how President Trump has publicly lambasted the attorney general, noting the president’s lack of loyalty to a man who has been consistently loyal to him.

And while this is indeed true, it misses the larger and more dangerous consequences of the president’s actions.

President Trump claims that it is very “unfair” that Mr. Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation, a recusal indisputably necessary given Mr. Sessions’ role in the campaign that is now under investigation. At its core, the president’s complaint is that he doesn’t have a political ally at the Justice Department to protect him from the Russia investigation. And he is apparently trying to bully Mr. Sessions into resigning so that he can put someone in place who will.

The president hasn’t stopped there. He has also tried to goad Mr. Sessions into re-initiating a closed investigation of the president’s former political rival. And all of this takes place in the wake of the president’s attempts to persuade the former F.B.I. director James Comey to back off the Michael Flynn investigation, and then firing Mr. Comey when he didn’t.

President Trump’s actions appear aimed at destroying the fundamental independence of the Justice Department. All the while, he’s ripping the blindfold off Lady Justice and attempting to turn the department into a sword to seek vengeance against his perceived enemies and a shield to protect himself and his allies.

It’s almost impossible to take all of this in. And while we risk becoming numb to the daily barrage of alarming news, we can’t lose sight of the fact that this is beyond abnormal. It’s dangerous.

The Justice Department is not just another federal agency. It is charged with fulfilling our country’s promise of equal and impartial justice for all. As an agency with the authority to deprive citizens of their liberty, its investigations and prosecutions must be conducted free from any political interference or influence, and decisions must be made based solely on the facts and the law.

To fulfill this weighty responsibility, past administrations, both Democratic and Republican, have jealously guarded a strict separation between the Justice Department and the White House when it comes to investigations and prosecutions. While there may be interaction on broad policies, any White House involvement in cases or investigations, including whom or what to investigate, has been flatly forbidden.

This independence is essential for the career men and women to be able to do their jobs. I served in the Justice Department for over 27 years, the vast majority as a career prosecutor in both Democratic and Republican administrations. I know from firsthand experience how seriously the career prosecutors and agents take their responsibility to make fair and impartial decisions based solely on the facts and the law and nothing else.

And the outcome of that analysis does not vary based on who occupies the White House. While some in the public may disagree with particular decisions, the Justice Department prosecutors and agents must have the independence to call it like they see it.

The strict separation between the Justice Department and the White House applies to even the most mundane of criminal investigations, and nowhere does it matter more than when the investigation reaches into the White House itself. In short, no one at the White House should have anything to do with any decisions about whom or what to investigate or prosecute. Period.

We must do more than rubberneck as we drive past this car crash. We all have a responsibility to protect our Justice Department’s ability to do its job free from interference. The very foundation of our justice system — the rule of law — depends on it.

Sally Q. Yates was a deputy attorney general in the Obama administration.

mattykinsel  asked:

So I'm Canadian n i wanna make sure I got this right: the civil war was about slavery but in a roundabout way both sides are correct but the anti confederate side is a bit more so.Because wasn't it about states rights, when the feds wanted to outlaw slavery and the state's were like like lol that's our job. So they fought over it but it was an awful hill to die on bc obvi slavery and rich folk who ran the state's (not everyone else) wanted to keep slavery. And nuance bc Lincoln was sketch too

Nah, it was pretty firmly about slavery and the expansion of it. The Confederate narrative about “state’s rights” is completely ahistorical. It only gained ground years after the war, when Jim Crow laws (laws specifically targeting black people) were getting passed all over the South. It’s part of a “lost cause” myth that was basically crafted from whole cloth to make neo-confederates feel better about themselves. Here’s a very basic rundown of what actually happened:

In the United States Constitution, slavery was explicitly protected and defended, but the slave trade was scheduled to be stopped in 1808. Some of the Constitution signers that were morally opposed to slavery thought it was a good enough compromise, and they figured that ending the slave trade would end slavery. The Southern plantation owners knew otherwise, since the slave population was large enough to replicate itself by that time (plus slave owners notoriously raped their own slaves and then enslaved their own children). So the Atlantic slave trade “officially” stopped in 1808, but slavery persisted, especially in the Southern States.

In 1820, the US congress passed a law called the “Missouri Compromise,” that basically said that for every new free state added to the Union, a slave state also had to be added. This persisted for a while, until you had a flood of new states and territories coming in after the (genocidal and expansionist) Mexican-American war, which ended in 1848.

Many northern white settlers wanted those new states and territories free of slavery, because they didn’t want to compete with plantation owners, and the abolitionist movement was gaining ground in the North. Southern states wanted the Missouri compromise to continue unabated. This resulted in the Kansas-Nebraska act of 1854, which basically said that the people moving into the new territories get to decide whether or not those territories allow slavery. This resulted in bloody contests between free states and slave states sending people to the new territories in an attempt to vote them “free” or “slave,” resulting in events like what is called “Bleeding Kansas,” where tons of people killed each other over whether or not Kansas would be a free or slave state.

All of these events became marquee issues for the 1860 presidential election, which was ultimately won by Abraham Lincoln, who advocated for the entire newly acquired west to be free states and to stop the expansion of slavery entirely. He won the election without a single southern vote (in most cases, he didn’t even appear on the ballot in the south.) So after Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration, South Carolina seceded from the Union, followed by a bunch of other states, with the sole purpose of maintaining the expansion of slavery. (Remember - at this point, Abraham Lincoln only vowed to stop the expansion of slavery - he didn’t campaign on ending slavery all together. In his first inaugural address, he even says that the slave states are protected under the constitution and that slavery, where it exists, should be protected).

But Lincoln’s attempts to reunify by promising he’d protect slavery where it already existed weren’t good enough, because the Southern states didn’t think slavery could survive unless it expanded west. So that’s what started the Civil War. After 2 years of fighting ended in something of a stalemate, Lincoln realized that if he made the war about ENDING slavery all together, he would get a flood of newly freed slaves ready to fight for the Union. Many slaves had already done heroic and badass acts against the confederacy (like Robert Smalls, a slave that hijacked a confederate ship and sailed it behind Union lines and gave it to the Union navy), so Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 that said that any new state captured by the Union would become a free state automatically. This led to a bunch of new excitement on the ground for the Union, and tons of black people joined Union lines and fought for their own freedom. (the Emancipation Proclamation remains controversial, however, because there were still states loyal to the Union that maintained slavery (namely Maryland and West Viriginia), and the Emancipation Proclamation didn’t free those slaves. It was a military strategy of Lincoln’s, not a moral statement, which makes it controversial).

In 1865, the Confederacy surrendered to the Union, and the 13th Amendment to the Constitution was passed, which finally outlawed chattel slavery in the United States (but noticeably not for prison labor, which is what makes this amendment so controversial today).  This started a period known as Reconstruction, where the North basically occupied the South militarily, and for the first time, black people could vote and run for political office. Many black people were elected into Congress during this time (including Robert Smalls). But the military occupation of the South turned a ton of white southerners off, and the KKK also started at this time as basically a militant anti-North rebellion force that terrorized black people and tried to get the US military out of the south. This came to a head in 1877, when Rutherford B. Hayes lost the popular vote in the presidential election, but neither candidate won enough electoral votes, and the opposing party, which didn’t have good enough representation in Congress, occupied the White House. This group promised Rutherford B. Hayes they would stand down and allow him to assume the office of the presidency if he promised to take the military out of the South, which he did, and that allowed for the KKK to basically take over the South.

During this time, tons of anti-black laws started getting passed all over the south, and a new myth about the Civil War started getting spread as well. The myth basically said that the war was actually about “state’s rights,” and that the south was trying to preserve their “heritage” from “northern aggression.” They avoided talking about slavery as much as possible. That myth still persists in the United States - but it’s total and complete bullshit. If you went back in time and asked a confederate general what he was fighting for, he’d say “the preservation of slavery” without blinking an eye. That’s just the historical facts.

Why there is no ACA replacement

Notice how “repeal and replace” is looking more and more like just repeal, despite the protestations of, well, everyone (including GOP governors and the insurance companies themselves)?

There’s a big reason for that.

The GOP doesn’t want you to know this, but the truth of the matter is the Affordable Care Act is their healthcare plan. No joke!

The right-wing Heritage Foundation created the framework for the law, including the individual mandate, in 1993 while the Clinton Administration was attempting to pass healthcare reform. The same framework became the health care law that Mitt Romney successfully passed and implemented when he was governor of Massachusetts.

When the Obama administration began to tackle healthcare reform in 2009, it didn’t start with Medicare-for-all (read: single payer) the way people on the left wanted. Aiming for compromise, they took the framework that led to the Massachusetts law and added a public option – essentially a Medicare buy-in option designed to compete against the private insurers to drive down premium costs.

Republicans and conservative Democrats balked at the public option, so it was jettisoned – leaving the same law Republicans had been championing for decades. Only not a single one of them voted for the ACA when it passed – and since then, they have done nothing but try to sabotage and get rid of the law.

Think about that: a conservative idea worked. It was imperfect. There were issues. But the law did what it was designed to do: make health insurance more accessible to Americans and ensure the policies they paid for actually worked for them. Yet Republicans, so aghast at President Obama, sabotaged their own ideas!

Anyone with half a brain knows the only ACA replacement that would work would be single payer. But the GOP will never go for that (especially with House Speaker Paul Ryan’s obsession with gutting Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security), so in gutting what was ultimately their own idea, they’re sentencing Americans to a lower quality of life and even death… just because they got all uptight over a black man occupying the White House for almost a decade.

The ACA is the Republican healthcare plan. They have nothing else.

In the Key of F- Ch. 1- Our House

Emma Swan’s been working hard to move on from a past of abandonment and self-hate as she rises to take over as principle pianist of the Boston Ballet. She couldn’t have done it without Killian Jones, the man who got her back into music and stood by her through hours of practice and crippling self-doubt, despite his continued struggle to adjust after escaping a life of abuse. When ghosts from the past and fears for the future threaten everything, will Emma and Killian be strong enough to face the changes? Or will everything they worked so hard for fall apart? Set 4 years after In the Key of G.

FFnet link here. In the Key of G link here.

Warning: Contains mentions of abuse.


Emma pushed open the big white door and was greeted by a screeching fire alarm and the smell of something that may at one point have been an apple pie. Whereas most people would run from a house in which every fire alarm was going off and there was a distinct smogginess to the air, Emma just rolled her eyes and let the door swing open wide. This was the Jones Brother’s house. If a fire alarm wasn’t going off at supper time no one was home.

There was shouting coming from the kitchen so Emma kicked off her boots and padded across the old hardwood floor to the epicentre of the burning located at the end of the entryway hallway. She grabbed a newspaper that sat on the hallway highboy as she passed by, picking her way around Lee’s sneakers that were left in the middle of the kitchen doorway.

Liam and Killian stood in the middle of the airy kitchen, yelling over the alarm. Liam waved his arms at the offending machine on the ceiling while Killian was scowling at it and telling Liam to just “pull down the bloody machine already.” Lee was no where to be seen but it was probably an apple pie he’d made that the older brother had overcooked. Boys.

Without saying anything Emma shoved the rolled-up newspaper at Liam’s chest so he’d stop flapping around like some sort of rabid bird and do something useful, then made her way through the kitchen and living room, throwing open the windows as she went. After a few more beeps the house went silent. Apart from Killian’s grumbled curses about the condition of dessert.

“Maybe you should finally learn to set that timer?” Emma asked with a smirk as she entered the kitchen again.

“And deprive you of saving us?” Liam asked with a laugh as he set down the paper. “Never.” Liam glanced over at the pie on the oven with an upturn of his nose. “Lee’s going to be angry we burnt his pie.”

Keep reading

trump damages institution of  presidency & sanctity of WH?

EXCERPT of Editorial on CNN by MICHAEL D’ANTONIO: “The fact that Trump could conduct stream-of-consciousness carping from the confines of the same White House that had been occupied by the likes of Lincoln, FDR and … suggests that he may not be aware of his surroundings. As he tweets about TV shows, we can see that his mind is too often fixed on matters beneath a president. And when he does focus on something important, like national security, he indulges in silliness about the “Rocket Man” (Kim Jong Un) or praises himself: “Wow, Senator Luther Strange picked up a lot of additional support since my endorsement.”

www.cnn.com/2017/10/08/opinions/corker-and-white-house-day-care-center-opinion-dantonio/index.html

It’s so angering seeing the racist khaki ass cracker occupying the White House all on Twitter tweeting a bunch of bullshit when Texas, Florida and Puerto Rico have all suffered tremendous losses and damages due to hurricanes in a matter of weeks. Houston isn’t even close to being back to normal. You can drive around Houston now and see so many neighborhoods where people’s homes have been completely gutted out because of the water damage. So many people are still without a permanent places to stay. That’s just for the city of Houston. Florida is going through the same thing and Puerto Rico is reportedly without power. All of the destruction to millions of Americans; this jack ass is on Twitter in his feelings because Steph Curry said he didn’t want to go to the White House.


Hate doesn’t even begin to describe how I feel about Donald Trump. His comments calling black athletes sons of bitches for protesting the anthem, but yet murdering Nazi’s are fine people just makes me even more angry. That fuck ass nigga had to be pressured into condemning the white supremacists, but was loud as he could possibly be at that Klan rally in Alabama condemning black athletes for protesting. Donald Trump is a sorry piece of shit and if you continue to support him, then you’re an even bigger piece of shit than he is.

4

A small, locally owned business, Wolf Creek Realty occupies the first floor of the white clapboard building. In addition to brokering house sales, they also handle short term vacation home rentals in and around Serendipity during the summer tourist season.

Conservatives are upset that Obama, after 240 years of white men occupying the White House, had challenged white privilege and had an impact on the world’s perception of black men in power.

For that, American conservatives picked the biggest example of white privilege to ‘unseat’ Obama and show that racist, unqualified morons still rule the world.

Trump is a giant GOP middle-finger toward black America.

Corrupt Senate Rejects Rand Paul’s Audit the Fed Bill

Even though it was supported by every Republican and even 100 Democrats in the House, the U.S. Senate blocked Rand Paul’s bill to audit the Federal Reserve.

Written by Andrew Taylor for ABC News:

The Senate on Tuesday blocked legislation calling for tougher audits of the Federal Reserve, rebuffing an attempt by Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul to give lawmakers greater oversight of the central bank’s moves on interest rates.

The 53-44 vote fell short of the threshold to overcome a Democratic filibuster. But the Kentucky Republican, who is seeking the GOP’s nomination for president, was joined by Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders, a White House hopeful who occupies the opposite end of the political spectrum from Paul.

The measure calls for the Government Accountability Office, a watchdog agency for Congress, to scrutinize the Fed’s monetary policy and offer recommendations to lawmakers on ways to address any perceived problems.

Congress, the White House and Treasury officials have traditionally been careful to steer clear of questioning the Fed’s independence to set policy, and current law blocks the GAO from reviewing the way the agency conducts monetary policy or reviewing internal deliberations.

“Nowhere else but in Washington, D.C., would you find an institution with so much unchecked power,” Paul said. …

Supporters of the bill say that the Fed has kept interest rates artificially low for decades, punishing risk-averse savings, prompting businesses to hoard cash and fueled booms — and busts — in the housing and stock markets.

“The Federal Reserve has the ability to create new money and spend it on whatever financial assets it wants, whenever it wants, while giving the new money to whichever banks it wants,” Paul said. “Low-income workers do not get the luxury of receiving the Fed’s newly created money first, nor do they do have the luxury of receiving the near-zero interest rates that the wealthy do.”

Why You Should Care about the California Senate Race in 2016

California will enter a new political era in 2016. Senator Barbara Boxer, who has been serving California since she was first elected in 1992, announced last month that she is not seeking re-election, setting off a firestorm of jockeying by potential candidates and speculation about whom the voters might select as her successor. What happens in the nation’s most populous state and largest state economy will have an effect across the country.

While nothing is guaranteed, it’s very likely that another Democrat will succeed Boxer: Democrats have a 15-point registration advantage statewide, and Republicans simply don’t have a candidate with the statewide favorability or profile to overcome that sort of headwind—especially in a presidential election year when turnout is higher. But which Democrat emerges from this high-profile contest might speak volumes about the future of the Democratic Party and progressivism in general. Not to mention: whoever emerges victorious from this race will be occupying a high-visibility position that could foster ambitions for the White House down the road.

Click through to read about the contenders…

An End to a National Disgrace.

A lot of people are going to talk today about why it’s a good and important thing that Harriet Tubman a woman whose bravery and courage are IMO without measure, will be replacing President Andrew Jackson on the US twenty dollar bill.  But I am not entirely sure what this would mean to some people outside of the United States for whom Jackson is beyond a face on one of the most widely circulated monetary notes in the world.

I wrote a masters thesis about a subject in Jacksonian America and lived in the politics of that world for a long time so I want to give you a sense of this man and why it is so important that today we are ending a practice of honoring him in favor of Tubman.

Andrew Jackson was President of the United States from 1829-1837.  The sanitized version of US history that I was taught in primary and secondary school describes Jackson as the first popularist and western president who reflected the will of the common man.  When I was first in school they had begun to regularly teach about his role in what is called the Trail of Tears but it was very much framed as a tragedy of his times.

The truth is that he made and shaped his times.

Jackson came to prominence as a Tennessee state militia general fighting Native Americans in the south east, and became a national hero after his victory over the British army at the Battle of New Orleans in 1815 (ironically after the peace treaty ending the War of 1812 had already been signed).  The United States for all intents and purposes lost the War of 1812 but the victory at New Orleans formed a central part in a re-writing of that history such that the American public very quickly thought of it as a war they had won.

Part of the romance of the Jackson myth is that he had a saber scar on his face given to him when he was a young boy by a British officer.  He also participated in a number of duels over gambling debts and insults to his wife Rachel who unknowingly to both of them he had married before the divorce to her first husband and been completed.

Those of you who watched the West Wing may remember him as the owner of a two ton block of cheese which was consumed by the public visiting the White House.

But it’s important to remember that “the people” of Jackson’s America were a bit like “the people” of Donald Trump’s America.  This was not everyone, but angry poor and aspirational white men who wanted their chance at the social and economic riches of the country that came from slave owning, unchecked monetary policy, and western expansion.  Jackson owned more slaves during the course of his life than any other US president save George Washington (and that’s actually debatable because many of Washington’s slaves belonged legally to his wife Martha).  

Jackson was owner of a massive plantation mansion that is a popular tourist destination in Nashville, Tennessee named the Hermitage after the palace of Catherine the Great of Russia.  The other day I had someone remark to me that Alexander Hamilton’s family bought and sold slaves.  He did have a role in the slave system but it’s actually quite difficult to prove that Hamilton himself owned slaves.  Jackson however owned more than 150 while he was president and more than 300 over the course of his life.

Jacksonian politics attacked and undermined every institution establishing itself in the early republic as elitist and unnecessary.  Much has been made of the irony of him being on the national currency when he destroyed the Second Bank of the United States and strongly opposed the issue of federal paper currency.  He and his supporters also attacked state universities and the federal military academy, crippling several and closing others, setting back scientific study and advancement in this country probably by decades.

But even if we weren’t talking about the politics of the angry white man in general… we are talking about the politics of genocide.  For you see the thing that Jacksonian politics truly stood for was the displacement and extermination of native peoples without the pretense of “civilizing” them.  The Cherokee Nation were the most assimilated and “civilized” tribe in North America at the time with courts and institutions modeled after European ones and integrated into American society.  

But unfortunately for the Charokee they lived on land that Jackson and his allies wanted.  On the map below the blue boarders were the original claims, red marks the extent of their territory at the Independence of the United States, and green their territory at the time of the Indian Removal Act.

It is worth knowing that Jackson himself is from the dead center of this territory.  These were his neighbors and people he knew well (both from business dealings and from killing them).  Passed in 1830 the Indian Removal Act authorized the president to “give” the native Americans living in the southeast land west of the Mississippi (land at the time described as the Great American Desert) for their ancestral homeland.  It was a straight and unabashed land grab under the guise of the rule of law.  Oh except it wasn’t.  Because the Charokee fought it in the federal courts and won.  Jackson, in response said  “…the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate.”  In other worse the rule of law has no role in Jackson’s America because no one would enforce it.  

Eventually the Charokee were forced from their land on a march across what is now three states to Oklahoma and along the way conservative estimates are that 4,000 men, women, and children died of cold, exhaustion and starvation in the single worst individual act of ethnic cleansing in this country’s history.  

There are very few men who have occupied the White House I, as a historian, would be comfortable in describing as monsters.  This one I do without reservation or hesitation.

Andrew Jackson first appeared on the the twenty in 1928.  Nearly a century of national shame is far too long.

They look at that, and here’s Trump talking about trade, in a ham-handed way, but at least he’s representing emotionally. We’ve had all the political establishment standing behind every trade deal, and we endorsed some of these people, and then we’ve had to fight them to get them to represent us.”

Now, let us stop and smell the perversity. Left parties the world over were founded to advance the fortunes of working people. But our left party in America – one of our two monopoly parties – chose long ago to turn its back on these people’s concerns, making itself instead into the tribune of the enlightened professional class, a “creative class” that makes innovative things like derivative securities and smartphone apps. The working people that the party used to care about, Democrats figured, had nowhere else to go, in the famous Clinton-era expression. The party just didn’t need to listen to them any longer.

What Lewandowski and Nussbaum are saying, then, should be obvious to anyone who’s dipped a toe outside the prosperous enclaves on the two coasts. Ill-considered trade deals and generous bank bailouts and guaranteed profits for insurance companies but no recovery for average people, ever – these policies have taken their toll. As Trump says, “we have rebuilt China and yet our country is falling apart. Our infrastructure is falling apart … Our airports are, like, Third World.”

Trump’s words articulate the populist backlash against liberalism that has been building slowly for decades and may very well occupy the White House itself, whereupon the entire world will be required to take seriously its demented ideas.

Yet still we cannot bring ourselves to look the thing in the eyes. We cannot admit that we liberals bear some of the blame for its emergence, for the frustration of the working-class millions, for their blighted cities and their downward spiraling lives. So much easier to scold them for their twisted racist souls, to close our eyes to the obvious reality of which Trumpism is just a crude and ugly expression: that neoliberalism has well and truly failed.

— 

Thomas Frank (please read all of this very good article)


This election cycle has been leaving me really knotted up and angry for a lot of reasons, one, Trump being pure evil, but two, it’s really been highlighting my problems with liberals as a group. And this article really does sum a lot of it up. I’m a rural liberal, who was poor, and I know those fears, and frustrations that Trump supporters are feeling. I can see why they turned where they did, liberals are abysmal to blue collar Americans, and have been for a long time.