Thursday, June 29, 2017

Donald Trump is killing romance. Is there nothing this guy cannot ruin?

Me, killing romance? You know that's not true, right Ivanka?
Courtesy of The Sacramento Bee:  

In the treacherous, amusing and sometimes rewarding world of online dating, Donald Trump has become the newest way to find – or reject – a romantic match. 

“Did you vote for or do you support Trump? Then I’m not your man. It would never work,” one user says in the opener to his bio on Tinder, a popular mobile dating platform that boasts 26 million matches per day. 

“Trump voters please swipe left, and go to your room and think about what you’ve done,” wrote another Tinder user, referring to the way to dismiss a potential date in the app. 

“What I’m looking for . . . well, in this crazy day and age, first and foremost, someone who did not vote for Trump,” says a profile on Bumble, a dating app in which women make the first move. 

Since his election, the president has become a new measure of compatibility – much like someone’s age, religion, wanting kids or simply finding things in common. Dating, online and off, is more supercharged with politics than it’s ever been, said online dating experts who specialize in matchmaking. 

“His presidency has created this new deal-breaker,” said Laurie Davis Edwards, a relationship coach and founder of the website eflirtexpert.com. 

“I’ve never seen it like this before, where people say ‘no’ to Trump supporters, or they only want to date other Trump supporters,” she said. “It tells me that people are valuing politics much higher as a preference than they were before. ... It’s another example of how massively our dating culture has changed over the past four years, partly because of politics and also because of technology.”

This may seem a little tongue in cheek, but would YOU date a Trump supporter?

Because I most certainly would not!

In fact I would take it even further than that and reject a potential employee who voted for Trump.

In my mind that speaks to your intellect and your judgment.

Trump supporters may have all kinds of excuses for why they cast their vote, but not one of them would satisfy me.

They had access to the same information that all of us had, so if there was not enough reason contained in all of those facts to persuade them to reject his candidacy then they are a lost cause and cannot be trusted with anything of any real importance.

So Donald Trump has fake Time magazine covers with his face on them all over this golf clubs. Why am I not surprised by this?

Courtesy of WaPo: 

The framed copy of Time magazine was hung up in at least five of President Trump’s clubs, from South Florida to Scotland. Filling the entire cover was a photo of Donald Trump. 

“Donald Trump: The ‘Apprentice’ is a television smash!” the big headline said. Above the Time nameplate, there was another headline in all caps: “TRUMP IS HITTING ON ALL FRONTS . . . EVEN TV!” 

This cover — dated March 1, 2009 — looks like an impressive memento from Trump’s pre-presidential career. To club members eating lunch, or golfers waiting for a pro-shop purchase, it seemed to be a signal that Trump had always been a man who mattered. Even when he was just a reality TV star, Trump was the kind of star who got a cover story in Time. 

But that wasn’t true. 

The Time cover is a fake. 

There was no March 1, 2009, issue of Time magazine. And there was no issue at all in 2009 that had Trump on the cover. 

In fact, the cover on display at Trump’s clubs, observed recently by a reporter visiting one of the properties, contains several small but telling mistakes. Its red border is skinnier than that of a genuine Time cover, and, unlike the real thing, there is no thin white border next to the red. The Trump cover’s secondary headlines are stacked on the right side — on a real Time cover, they would go across the top. 

And it has two exclamation points. Time headlines don’t yell.

Yeah only Donald Trump gets two exclamation points worth of excited about Donald Trump.

Time Magazine is now demanding that Trump have the phony covers removed, while everybody associated with the clubs or the Administration acts like they have no idea how such a thing ever happened:  

The Trump Organization did not respond to questions this week about who made the cover and why it was displayed at Trump clubs. White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders declined to say whether Trump had known that the cover wasn’t real. 

“We couldn’t comment on the decor at Trump Golf clubs one way or another,” Sanders wrote in an email.

Yeah, who's in charge of the decor at Trump's golf course anyway?

Surely THAT is the person who the press should be focusing on.

Unless they are assuming that Donald Trump is such an insufferable megalomaniac that he ordered the fake covers made up just to give the impression that he was more important than he actually was in reality.

That would mean he was somehow unhinged.

And NOBODY is saying that, right?

Right?

P.S. By the way.
And NONE of those is a phony. 

Wednesday, June 28, 2017

Former NATO Ambassador finds it "dismaying and objectionable" that Donald Trump "continues to deny the undeniable" when it comes to the Russian cyber attack.

Oh I like him!

This was testimony provided today during a hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee during a hearing focused mainly on Russian interference with elections in Europe.

In other Russian interference news today we learned that the Intelligence Committee has struck a deal to their hands on those Comey memos.

And what has Donald Trump been doing while all of this is going on?

Well he is going on his Instagram page to share those heavily edited videos which claim that a CNN producer admitted that CNN's Russian investigation is a witch hunt.

A post shared by President Donald J. Trump (@realdonaldtrump) on

A post shared by President Donald J. Trump (@realdonaldtrump) on
It should be pointed out that these videos have not been vetted by other news outlets, and that this Project Veritas is the work of James O'Keefe who famously used deceptively edited videos to attack ACORN, which resulted in their closure.

Here is how the Washington Post reported on the videos:  

The latest video was apparently shot earlier this month using a hidden camera by a man having a private conversation with Bonfield, who is not involved in political coverage, catching him making several off-the-cuff remarks.

Yet the video includes several journalistic evasions and shortcuts that would likely elicit outrage from critics if a mainstream news organization had employed the same techniques. 

For example, it never mentions that Bonifield is a producer of health and medical stories, raising questions about how relevant his views are, and how informed he is, about CNN’s political coverage. It also doesn’t disclose that he is based in Atlanta — not in Washington or New York, where most of CNN’s coverage of national affairs and politics are produced. 

Instead, the video identifies him a “supervising producer,” suggesting a senior decision-making role. O’Keefe, who appears on the video as a kind of master of ceremonies, furthers this impression by saying the footage describes “the real motivation behind our dominant media organizations.” 

But CNN said Bonifield speaks only for himself. In a statement, it said stood by him and that “diversity of personal opinion is what makes CNN strong. We welcome it and embrace it.” 

The network said it had no plans to take any disciplinary action. The video also doesn’t identify the man to whom Bonifield is speaking, nor does it provide any clue about how he came to record Bonifield.

So in other words this is a CNN employee, who does not work nor have any real knowledge of the Russia investigation, sharing his personal opinion on what is very likely a heavily edited video created by an organization famous for misrepresenting the truth.

RT of course reported this as one of their top stories.

The takeaway from all of this is that while numerous investigations into Russian interference continue forward, the man who is supposed to be keeping this country safe from such attacks, is doing nothing to project us from the next one, and is instead sharing what is most probably fake news in an attempt to shut down at least one of the journalistic investigations.

Can you say "Acting guilty?"

By the way, according to Mother Jones we already have plenty of evidence that Trump is guilty of aiding Putin's attack on America.

Creepy Donald Trump continues to be creepy.

Courtesy of Buzzfeed: 

President Donald Trump on Tuesday interrupted his call with the new Irish prime minister to bring attention to a reporter, saying, "She has a nice smile on her face, so I bet she treats you well.

"The reporter, Caitriona Perry, who has been the Washington correspondent for the Irish public service broadcaster Raidió Teilifís Éireann since 2014, shared the "bizarre moment" on her Twitter feed and it quickly went viral.

Here was what the reporter said about the incident to RTE:

"One minute we were outside the window and the next minute I'm meeting the President of the United States," Caitríona told RTÉ Entertainment after her encounter with the US Commander in Chief. 

"Usually we would shoot from outside the window of the White House and that's what we were expecting today but instead we were invited inside to witness the President's call to the Taoiseach. When we went in he was already on the phone but I caught his eye and he called me over."

Well of course she "caught his eye," she is an attractive woman, and he is a notorious pussy grabber. 

In fact I would bet that the entire reason that all of the reporters were invited inside was so that he could get a better look at her.

As you might imagine the comments on Twitter were mostly outraged.


Great, just another reminder that we have destroyed the integrity of the presidency by allowing the Russians to install a vulgar, misogynist, ignorant, moron into the Oval Office.

Mother of young woman killed by bear asks for our help.

We have had an unprecedented number of bear attacks in Alaska this year, two of them fatal.

One of the fatal ones involved a young biologist named Erin K. Johnson who was killed by a black bear while collecting geological samples near the Pogo Mine at the time of the attack.

Erin's mother is a fan of IM, and she reached out to me last night asking if I would post a link to a memorial fund established in her daughter's name.

I said of course I would.

Just click here to visit the Erin K. Johnson Memorial Fund.

The money will go toward science education and youth outdoor activities, which seem like very worthy causes to me. 

I can only imagine this mother's immense grief at losing her daughter, and hope that at least with donations from kind strangers some good can be done in her child's name.

Thank you for reading this and for any support that you feel you can provide.

Sarah Palin really wants to prove to the naysayers that she WILL sue the New York Times. I'm a naysayer, and I say no she won't.

Courtesy of the New York Times:

Sarah Palin, former vice-presidential candidate, filed a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times Company on Tuesday, saying the newspaper had published a statement about her in a recent editorial that it “knew to be false.” 

In the lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Ms. Palin contends that The Times “violated the law and its own policies” when it linked her in an editorial to a mass shooting in January 2011.


The article points out that it issued a correction both online and on Twitter, however apparently that is not good enough for the attention whore.

Ms. Palin said in the lawsuit that The Times’s response “did not approach the degree of the retraction and apology necessary and warranted by The Times’s false assertion that Mrs. Palin incited murder.”

Aww, poor baby. So upset that somebody called her out for her inflammatory rhetoric.

However perhaps Palin and her attorney should carefully read the end of this Times article: 

In a statement, a spokeswoman for The Times said, “We have not reviewed the claim yet but will defend against any claim vigorously.”

I would contend that the Times has vastly more legal resources at their disposal than does this dried up has been. 

And if she thinks they will settle with her, then she probably does not realize that the Times is engaged in almost constant litigation for one reason or another, and does not make a habit of settling.

It would take literally no time at all, in fact I volunteer my services as a resource, for the Times to establish a pattern of Sarah Palin inciting violence against others.

I know there are multiple folks in Alaska who would be willing to testify, as would the family of the now deceased Joe McGinniss who were harassed to aggressively they were forced to change their contact information.

Hell, one of her supporters even threatened to shoot me at the school where I worked.

And let's not forget that she even fomented violence within her own family, which led to a brawl on the streets of Anchorage and her son brutalizing his fiance while waving a gun around.

No the truckloads of evidence available to paint Sarah Palin as an individual who aggressively fanned the flames of hatred and inspired death threats and even acts of violence all across the country will prove insurmountable to any legal team that Palin could afford to put together.

Having said that I actually hope that she calls my bluff and goes for it.

I have been writing about the lunacy surrounding Donald Trump for far too long now, and I welcome the opportunity to write about Sarah Palin getting her ass handed to her yet again.

House members, many of who want every American to own a gun, are now demanding taxpayer money to pay for private security in the wake of the Virginia shooting.

Courtesy of McClatchy:  

House of Representatives lawmakers want $25,000 each to hire private security right away to protect them in their home districts, an unusually quick, bipartisan response to the shooting of a Republican House leader and others at a baseball practice. 

A House panel has approved providing an immediate $10 million for the rest of fiscal 2017, which runs through Sept. 30, for that purpose. 

Representatives could use the money to pay for an off-duty police officer or private security guard at town halls, fish fries, meet-and-greets or other public events in their districts. 

The legislation would also add $7.5 million for Capitol Police to bulk up threat assessment and security measures in Washington for fiscal year 2018 — especially when lawmakers gather in groups — and $5 million for members to invest in cameras, door buzzers, key cards and panic buttons in representatives’ district offices. 

The Federal Election Commission is considering allowing lawmakers to use campaign funds to secure their residences, as well.

Well it's a good thing I've taken my irony shots, or this overload might put me into a coma.

Keep in mind that the House is majority Republican, and that those Republicans have fought aggressively against gun registration, back ground checks, and for allowing more citizens to have conceal carry permits.

But now that somebody has directed the gunfire which kills thousands of Americans each year in THEIR direction they want more taxpayer money to keep them safe?

No, screw that!

If they want to feel safer let them purchase their own gun, and carry it with them wherever they go.

Isn't THAT what they have been telling us to do to stay safe?

Australia's number one religion is "No Religion."

Courtesy of Buzzfeed News:

The proportion of people reporting no religion increased to 30.1% in 2016 – up from 22% five years ago, and nearly double the 16% reported in 2001. Those aged from 18 to 34 were most likely to report not having a religion (39%) than other age groups. 

Those aged 65 years and over were more likely to report a religious affiliation. 

Christianity is still the most common religion (52% of Australians identified as any of the Christian denominations) but has been declining in popularity in Australia for the past 50 years – in 1966, 88% of Australians identified as Christian and by 1991 it was 74%.

 Just more good news on the march toward global enlightenment.

Hopefully America will soon catch up, though at last count there were still only 22.9% of us.

Finally, somebody has the guts to call out a White House spokesperson for attacking the media and spreading disinformation.

I think that might be my favorite White House press corps moment since Mellissa McCarthy's Sean Spicer impersonation for SNL.

That reporter's name is Brian J. Karem, an award winning journalist who once went to jail to protect a source.

After the exchange Karem also tweeted this:
Definitely has a point.