Think Donald is Divisive? Meet Mike Pence

AFL-CIO: Clinton Says No To TPP

SEIU: To Win Economic Justice, We Must Win Racial Justice

Powerful video by the SEIU – Service Employees International Union:

Pence’s Record: Heavens No!

Trump as a Role Model?

Trump VP Pence’s Legislative History

TrumpIn his usual hissy-fit style, Donald Trump announced Mike Pence as his running mate on Twitter as opposed to a press conference. It seems Trump was mad because his choice was leaked before he could get in front of the fawning media. What a mature person Republicans have nominated. But this is about Trump’s VP pick, so here are some bullet points from Mike Pence’s “legislative” career, courtesy of On the Issues (with a few of my own thoughts, of course):


  • Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
  • Declare preborn as persons under 14th amendment. (Feb 2009)
  • Voted NO on monitoring TARP funds to ensure more mortgage relief. (Jan 2009)
  • Voted NO on $60B stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy. (Sep 2008)
  • Voted NO on revitalizing severely distressed public housing. (Jan 2008)
  • Voted NO on regulating the subprime mortgage industry. (Nov 2007)
  • Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation. (Nov 2007)
  • Voted YES on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006) [Has no problem signing on with a serial adulterer/divorce lover. Funny how that religion thing works.]
  • Voted YES on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
  • Rated 7% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
  • Rated 0% by the HRC, indicating an anti-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
  • Rated 22% by the NAACP, indicating an anti-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
  • Voted NO on enforcing against anti-gay hate crimes. (Apr 2009)
  • Voted NO on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges. (Mar 2006)
  • Voted YES on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror. (Nov 2001) [Because a bunch of kids saying Christian prayers would simply melt the hearts of terrorists who hate Christians.]
  • Let schools display the words “God Bless America”. (Oct 2001)
  • Rated 17% by the NEA, indicating anti-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
  • Constitutionally guarantee parent’s right to educate kids. (Jan 2011) [So the un-educated Red States will remain that way.]
  • Voted YES on barring EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. (Apr 2011)
  • Voted NO on enforcing limits on CO2 global warming pollution. (Jun 2009)
  • Voted NO on tax credits for renewable electricity, with PAYGO offsets. (Sep 2008)
  • Voted NO on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (May 2008)
  • Voted NO on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
  • No EPA regulation of greenhouse gases. (Jan 2011)
  • Voted YES on deauthorizing “critical habitat” for endangered species. (Sep 2005)
  • Voted NO on assisting workers who lose jobs due to globalization. (Oct 2007) [Who votes NO about something like that?]
  • Campaign Finance Reform is censorship. (Feb 2008)
  • Voted NO on protecting whistleblowers from employer recrimination. (Mar 2007)
  • Loosen restrictions on interstate gun purchases. (Oct 2011)
  • Ban gun registration & trigger lock law in Washington DC. (Mar 2007)
  • Voted NO on expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Program. (Jan 2009)
  • Voted NO on giving mental health full equity with physical health. (Mar 2008)
  • Voted NO on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Jan 2007)
  • Voted YES on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay. (Feb 2006)
  • Voted NO on restricting no-bid defense contracts. (Mar 2007)
  • Voted YES on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists. (Feb 2005) [Because OF COURSE, if a terrorist can’t get a license, he’ll never try driving without one; but hey, let ’em have all the guns they want.]
  • End Birthright Citizenship… (Apr 2009)
  • Voted NO on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Mar 2007)
  • Voted NO on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Jan 2007)
  • Member of the House Republican Young Guns. (Sep 2010) [Or as I call them, the Pop-Gun gang]
  • Member of the Tea Party movement. (Aug 2010)
  • Designate first weekend in May as Ten Commandments Weekend. (Apr 2011)
  • Voted YES on eliminating the Estate Tax (“death tax”). (Apr 2001)
  • Reduce the capital gains tax . (Jan 2001)
  • Replace income tax & estate tax with 23% sales tax. (Jan 2011)
  • Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)


By the way, this is evidently the Trump/Pence logo:

trump pence logo

Twitter’s having a grand old time with the sexual innuendo.

Terrorist Attack in France Is An Opportunity For Fox To Attack Obama

If you haven’t heard, there’s been an apparent terrorist attack in Nice, France. An unidentified man with a large truck ran people down for about a mile, then started shooting at others before he was killed by police. Its been reported that he had guns and grenades in the truck. Its also been reported that he yelled something at the crowd suggesting it was payback for France’s fight against terrorism.

President Obama called it a “horrific terrorist attack”. You know that somewhere on a RWNJ radio program some dumb-ass conservative is complaining that the President didn’t use these exact words, in precise order: “act of terror”. But over at Fox News, the conservative headquarters for sexual harassers, Trump’s potential VP pick, Retired Lt. General Michael T. Flynn, couldn’t resist using France’s tragedy to get in a shot at our President. First at minute 2:19. Then again at 5:55.

Ask yourself – do conservatives, the people who mocked the French with “freedom fries” when that country dared to call out Dubya’s rush to war in Iraq (while inspectors were still doing their job and finding no WMDs), do they really give two fucks about the liberal French? I’d say about as much as they really cared about 4 dead Democrats in Benghazi. Like Benghazi, conservatives see this as another ghoulish opportunity to attack Democrats.

And how long do you think it took for RWNJs to go after Hillary? Not long –



Because no one can keep up on Twitter with Donald and his tiny fingers.

“When will we learn?” WTF? There was something we could have learned that would stop a guy from driving a truck off the road in a matter of seconds??? What a dumb-ass.

 This is a presidential response:

This Week in @DemGovs Leadership

Bernie Sanders Endorses Hillary Clinton for President

Sanders introduces Hillary Clinton with his endorsement, followed by her speech.

Full Speech: Obama at Dallas Police Memorial

A Knowledgeable Person On HRC’s Emails

Jay Hatheway, professor of history, chair of the Department of History at Edgewood College in Madison, Wisconsin, and ex-military Special Forces top secret control officer in Europe, wrote a “Guest Column for the Wisconsin State Journal. In it, he lays waste to the Republicans’ beating of the Hillary-emails dead horse. Here is the bulk of it:

The partisan attacks against Hillary Clinton and her alleged misuse of classified documents is fundamentally flawed.

For the most part, journalists and politicians have avoided any discussion about the actual process of classification: Documents do not simply appear as classified on a server; someone must be the classifier. In the case at hand, Secretary Clinton was an original classification authority.

She was given this authority by Executive Order 13526, signed into law Dec. 29, 2009, by President Barack Obama. It allowed the secretary a free hand to classify or declassify at will as long as classification guidelines were followed. All Cabinet members have this authority.

What is missing in the current discussion is precisely an acknowledgement of this authority. While one may disagree with what is or is not classified, many of Clinton’s critics assume documents are self-classified. Who exactly do the critics believe assigned a classification level in the first place?

Absent a discussion about this process, it is obvious that the attacks on Clinton have no real merit. That the FBI could judge certain email chains classified is obfuscation. How can anyone second guess an original classification authority or designate except to argue that there is a disagreement over what ought to be classified?

But that is the point: the classification level was not the FBI’s to determine. It was exclusively the business of the secretary of state in virtually all of her electronic communications.

In a similar vein, how can members of the House claim to know what the proper classification level was or wasn’t. They couldn’t know unless they were inside of Clinton’s head. Should the secretary determine that her communications were in fact not to be classified, then they are not, all objections aside.

The intent of designating a person as an original classification authority is to give that person the specific ability to classify as she or he sees fit. The issue then boils down to whether or not something should be classified or not classified in the first place, and the guidelines give original authorities wide latitude depending on the subject matter in question.


In short, this endless saga seems to be a misdirection, and since most Americans do not know about the classification process, they can be manipulated when they hear “top secret.”

The entire affair is political theater at its worst, and the real losers are the American people.

Insight from someone who actually knows a thing or two; how refreshing.

hat tip

*A YUGE Hat Tip to Democurmudgeon

Trump, the “Racial Healer”