• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    pm317 on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    Catscatscats on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    pm317 on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    william on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    pm317 on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    lucyk on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    Earlynerd on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    Ga6thDem on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    Sweet Sue on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    pm317 on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    pm317 on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
    pm317 on Trump opens mouth, inserts gar…
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    October 2018
    S M T W T F S
    « Sep   Nov »
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    28293031  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • What May’s Brexit Deal Tells Us About The EU and Britain’s Future
      So, May has a Brexit deal. It’s a terrible deal, which makes the UK subject to many EU laws, and which doesn’t allow Britain to withdraw from the deal if the EU doesn’t want it to. This has caused ministerial resignations, and Corbyn has come out against it. But the interesting part is what the […]
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

20 Reasons.

I’ve been rolling a thought around in my head for the last couple of days. We have roughly 20 days left before the election. There are good reasons to flip the House and Senate that nothing to do with Trump and one reason that is directly related to Trump.

Voters should know that they have a choice in how their lives will shaped. They get to decide what kind of government will work for them. But maybe, just maybe, they need to see how their choices affect them directly. It’s low hanging fruit to go for issues that divide us. But what affects each of us, regardless of party affiliation?

So, I am proposing 20 Reasons to Flip the House in the run up to the election. Each day represents a specific reason that affects each voter and presents them with a choice. But I need your help. It’s going to take a bit of research to fill out an essay a day for the next 20 days and I don’t want to miss anything. Can you think of 20 Reasons with me? Put your suggestions in the comments below.

Here are some of the reasons I’ve come up with so far:

1.) Net Neutrality

2.) Pre-existing conditions

3.) Energy Independence

4.) Infrastructure

Put your reasons in the comments below.

Go!

Advertisements

45 Responses

  1. Safer Gun Laws

  2. 5) Immigrants and Immigration, it effects US economy in an adverse way, (Maine lobsters, Iowa farmers, California fruit pickers….) and I think that most people can understand; I am not even going to bring up the inhumanity of trump’s inhumane policies at the border.

  3. Don’t know how I feel about Warren and 2020 but this is a strong start.

    • I hope pm317 and no one takes offence from what I’m about to say.

      I will vote for whoever the 2020 Democratic nominee is. The importance of getting Trump and/or Pence out is paramount.

      I worry that there are still too many people who will not vote for a woman for president. The election in 2016 showed that. Too many voters, especially after the leaked Democratic committee e-mails decided to withhold their votes from Hillary and voted for Jill Stein.

      For people who are trying to keep afloat financially, promising free tuition and other programs will not appeal as they may not have the ability to pay additional taxes for the programs. The Democrats must have programs and platforms to appeal to the working classes.

      Rethuglicans have been able to appeal to the traditional Democratic base by using “lower taxes” as the inducement to vote against their best interests without realizing the harm that they are causing themselves.

      As someone whose younger brother was the favored child, I was livid at what the DNC did to Hillary in 2008. I would love to see a Democratic female president in the future, but winning in 2020 is so important to that future that I think it would be wrong to nominate a woman again.

      I hope that the purists who would not vote for Hillary in 2016 have had the opportunity to see the consequence of not voting for the better candidate (i.e., Hillary) and will be more accepting of the Democratic nominee.

      • I share your concern about a woman candidate, whoever it is not being able to make it. Especially with media in how they will prop up or destroy a female candidate.

      • JMS, I strongly agree with you on this. I am happy with just about any of the Democrats rumored to run, actually winning this incredibly crucial election in 2020–but they have to win. Running some candidate who says the right things, and makes one feel good, does no good whatsoever, if he or she loses. Winning is all, at least this time, if not for the forseeable future, given the alternative of fascism from the Republican side.

        Now, people can argue as to who has the better chance of winning. I do not think that Harris or Warren is likely to win; I just don’t think that they would appeal to the Midwest voters so essential in the stupid electoral college system. Maybe I’m wrong here, but I don’t want to take the chance to find out. We could look at projected polls closer to the primaries, but those are going to be fixed by various sources, to try to impel us to nominate the losing candidate. We have only one chance at this, and we have to get it right.

        Actually, I am not happy with any of the projected candidates in terms of their chance of winning. Biden, whom I do not like much, may have the better chance, but the more he campaigns, the less impressive he is. I’d almost support Bloomberg, not because i l love him, but he is strong on the two key issues of climate change and gun control. But he is unlikely to appeal to enough Democrats. They talk about Bullock, governor or Montana. Ordinarily, I would not want a moderate Democrat from a Red State, but if it takes that to win, it would not be so bad, if he were decent on most key issues. Bill Clinton was also not popular with the Democratic Left, though I doubt that Bullock is as gifted as Clinton. Amy Klobuchar is the one woman candidate who might have the best chance, as she is not as incendiary a candidate as Harris or Warren, and is from the Midwest. She is not particularly charismatic, but maybe that will not hurt her; she is obviously bright and dedicated, with a prosecutorial background.

        The danger is that the Left, which never liked Hillary, is going to demand someone “further Left,” as the price for them engaging in the race. They are incredibly self-indulgent and foolish, as they think that if only people got a chance to vote for their agenda, they would win elections, but it is not true, at least not now. People are not going to want to see their taxes raised so that everyone can go to college for free. Maybe they should, but they won’t. Nor does campaigning on Medicare for all, get the votes of those who will blanch at the estimated cost. We need universal health care, and Hillary knew more about this than anyone, and would have improved the ACA as a path to that end; but the idiots on the Left didn’t think that was enough, they are all or nothing.types.

        No elections are exactly the same, but this has the feel of the run-up to 1972. Liberal college-age Democrats like me were very upset at how the establishment forced Humphrey into nomination in 1968, and they did a lot to take over state electoral structures, which was good, except that they then used their influence to get McGovern nominated, who of course was routed in the election, which sent the liberals into disrespect and retreat, allowing Carter to be the nominee in 1976, the winnable election, where someone more gifted and liberal than Carter could have changed the course of the country for the better. I am much afraid that Warren or Harris would do a good deal worse than Hillary in a national election; why should they do better, unless one thinks that things will look so bad, that any Democrat would win? If that is not the case, I don’t think either of them would galvanize the voters necessary to win the electoral vote,, though they would draw excited crowds to their rallies, just like McGovern and Dukakis did/

        • William,

          I agree with you as well.

          It’s really hard for the party that has the presidency to keep it for more than 8 years. I think that Democrat would have had a hard time winning in 1968 after the Kennedy and Johnson presidencies. All the social upheaval in 1968 made Nixon appealling to most voters.

          FDR was able to win in 1940 after winning in 1932 and 1936, but his achievements in stabilizing the country had much to do with it.

          Dukakis was a decent man, but Reagan’s popularity was enough to carry over for Bush 41 to be elected.

          I think Carter has been underrated. We would have been better off, in terms of energy and climate change, if Carter had a second term. It does appear that Reagan’s campaign colluded with Iran to prevent the release of the American hostages so that Reagan could win the election.

          https://sandiegofreepress.org/2017/04/ronald-reagan-colluded-with-a-foreign-government/

          After Hillary lost, I felt that if people felt better off during Obama’s 8 years in office, it would have helped her win. Unlike Bush 41, Obama did not have Reagan’s type of popularity to help her.

          • “I think Carter has been underrated. We would have been better off, in terms of energy and climate change,”

            I voted for Carter twice (my first two Presidential votes), and I’m still glad I did.

          • As for 1980, not only did Reagan collude with Iran during the campaign, but Ted Kennedy split the Democrats badly during the nomination process. John Anderson didn’t help, of course, but he didn’t pull enough votes from Carter to make the difference.

        • I often think McGovern might have done better in ’72 had he been willing to talk about his war record during the campaign, but he was intensely private about that. I don’t think most voters were even aware that he was a decorated hero in WWII (Distinguished Flying Cross, among other awards), unlike Nixon who never saw combat in his desk job in the Navy.

          And, of course, he was the victim of Nixon’s army of dirty tricksters.

          As for Humphrey, in many ways I think he’s one of the great tragic figures of American politics. One of the truly great progressive activists of the mid-20th Century, who was offered the VP slot by Johnson in a successful attempt to bring the left wing of the party into the fold in ’64. By ’68, he found himself stigmatized for Johnson’s escalation in Vietnam (which he personally opposed) and his career never recovered.

      • It’s sad that this is where we are in this day, but I agree with you completely.

        • Sue, I always appreciate your reading my admittedly lengthy comments (!), and of course your intelligence, and capacity to perceive the heart of any particular matter.

        • Again, let us not forget that Hillary did not “lose”, the election was stolen from her and that she won by 3 million votes. Had there been any other nominee other than trump, she would have won. I do not believe Russia would have helped Cruz, Bush, Rubio, or any of those other guys who were running.

          The majority supported and voted for Hillary, both men and women, and we cannot ever minimize that historic moment she was cheated out of. All the more reason not to fall back to the usual all male run..

          I don’t see any of the men who might run who would be better than Harris or Klobichar (and while I like and agree with Warren, she doesn’t have the gravitas that either Harris or even Klobichar have. I will NOT vote for a guy because we have fallen into the trap of believing that only a man can win. That’s precisely why we have not yet had a mre qualified woman as president. We instead chose to vote for a mediocre man who have really done nothing that has advanced and make our country better for everyone. Why settle for that again?!

          I think we should take advantage of the overwhelming response from women since the MeToo movement and the Kavanaugh debacle, coupled with the continued old white guy patriarchy clearly doing anything to stay in power by any means necessary.

          Enough is enough and if not now, when? There is never going to be the “PERFECT” moment for a woman to run. The time is NOW more than ever.

          • Kathleen,

            I agree with much of what you have written. There was so much that undermined Hillary and she did not get the plurality that she needed in enough states to win in the Electoral College.

            While the Me Too movement is helping women and the 2016 election has energized women, it’s still an uphill climb for female candidates. Phyllis Schafly and her campaign against the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s and 1980s set equality back by at least a generation.

            2016 also showed that the old, white, guy patriarchy will fight to remain ascendant, as with the Kavanaugh nomination and confirmation.

            My problem with Harris or Klobichar is somewhat of the same problem I had with Obama. Obama became the darling of 2008, because of a great speech that he gave in 2004. He did not have much of a track record as a legislator in Illinois, my home state. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004. He would have been sworn in early 2005 and barely 2 years later announced that he was running for president. He did not have the temperament (i.e., not a fighter like Hillary) to stand up to Rethuglicans. He did not have the gravitas of Hillary. He needed more experience, but in 2008 the DNC decided to make him the nominee.

            To a great extent, we have tRump because we had Obama first. Obama was a poor negotiator during negotiations with Rethuglicans on the budget, the deficit, social programs, and climate change. Obama issued executive orders because he did not fight Rethuglicans. Those executive orders have been reversed by tRump.

            I believe that by putting Obama’s appeal before Hillary’s experience, the DNC discounted the experience needed to become a president. So it was easier after the “transformative” campaign of 2008 for a CEO nominee (i.e., tRump) to win, especially with voter suppression, Russian collusion and whatever else.

            Warren does not have gravitas. I found the op-ed piece by a conservative interesting reading this morning. The link is below.

            However, as I initially stated, I will vote for the nominee, whoever it is, in 2020. With so much on the line as a result of tRumps actions since his inauguration in 2017, winning is paramount. A Democratic candidate who loses in 2020 will delay progress on climate change which could doom us all.

            The time will be right for another female candidate in the future. Let’s see how Harris and Klobichar do in the meantime. Let’s see what they accomplish and how they develop.

      • “Too many voters, especially after the leaked Democratic committee e-mails decided to withhold their votes from Hillary and voted for Jill Stein.”

        There’s probably some truth to that, although I suspect more of them just decided to sit the election out as a silent protest because nobody in their right mind expected Trump to win. The effect ended up being the same.

        The emails are still a sore spot for me, but I’m not going to contribute to putting a petulant 6 year-old in the White House over them.

        • Truly I think that was an issue. There were too many complacent people who figured they did not need to vote. One thing the left needs to do is get with the program of voting every election. The whole email thing orchestrated by Putin would never have done anything without the help of the media.

      • Agree, big time. It’s time to unified against evil.

    • People are not liking the timing of this from her.

      • Exactly. It’s seems as though she has been played by tRump. It’s also taking attention away from the mid-terms.

        • Unfortunately, Warren cannot defend herself against trumps attacks. He’s allowed to fight back against anything and everything, but she is not allowed to prove that she was telling the truth..

          Trump questioned her honesty about her heritage. Clearly all here know that if a woman had said the same about a man, HE would be allowed to prove them wrong and would be applauded for doing so.

          Aren’t we sick and tired of this double standard enough to stand up and defend why Warren did what she did? If we let trump get the best of her because she dared prove him wrong, we are the ones being played.

          • Kathleen,

            She is entitled to defend herself, of course.

            It’s how she is defending herself, the decisions and the timing of those decisions that are questionable. Those decisions reflect on her judgment. Voters evaluate judgment when electing someone.

            I’ve been a Democrat, now a Democratic PUMA, since I was 12. I do not usually read conservative op-eds, but I was intrigued into reading the column because of the headline.

            See paragraphs 4, 5,12, 13 and 14 in the link to Ross Douthat’s column above.

            It comes down to choosing your battles and in responding with the results of a test, she has given tRump the ammunition to continue to use against her.

          • JMS,

            There was no “reply” under your post, so I am posting under my name.

            You say Warren has a right to defend herself but then go into all of the ways she is doing it wrong. What’s the right way to defend yourself against a guy like trump who is never held accountable for anything? It’s precisely because we don’t apply the same high standards to men is because we keep settling for mediocrity. I think it’s far worse to give our country to another mediocre, incompetent man because we are afraid to run a woman again. I doubt any of the guys running would have the first idea how to fix the cornacopia of problems trump, obama and bush left us.

            Don’t you think it’s a pattern we’ve seen before, especially with Hillary, since she always defended herself AND she got the same response from people that you are applying to Warren?

            The “plurality” you speak about in those 3 states where trump squeeked by with some 70,000 votes among these states is a bit suspicious. Voting machines can be hacked and the votes changed without detection – it has been proven. Check out the documentary “Hacking Democracy” which was produced by HBO back in 2006. It clearly proved on videotape how this can be done. Unfortunately, neither Congress nor the American people listened. I will never accept that she lost the electoral vote knowing what I know about the vulnerability of these voting machines and the Russians known hacking in the 2016 election.

            Again, it appears no woman will suffice, but look at the men who are waiting in the wings! What makes them better than the women? NOTHING. I hope and pray that women running for president are not summariliy excluded because we can’t risk that the country won’t vote for them over a man. I am convinced with what happened to Hillary in 2008 and 2016, the MeToo movement and the outrage women feel after what we witnessed with Kavanaugh, that this anger will last way past 2020. Women are fed up and tired of waiting for the PERFECT moment for them to claim their rightful place at the table. Women are needed to govern now not later. Men have failed and we cannot keep giving them a chance to fail again. Too much is at stake and we’ve waited too long already.

          • Kathleen,
            I am also using the “reply” under your post to continue the discussion. It appears that I have offended you by offering my opinion, for which I apologize and to which I want to remind you that I am not the enemy.

            In 2008 and in 2016, I contributed to Hillary’s campaigns with donations to the best of my ability and with my vote. I do want to see a female president.

            I do believe that Warren has a right to defend herself. As I re-read my previous comments, I did not enumerate the ways she seemed to be doing it wrong as you believe I did. Warren’s choice of timing in releasing the information is a problem because it detracts from the effort to secure a Democratic majority in the House and Senate. The results showing that she is 1/64th or 1/1024th can be used by tRump against her, especially the 1/1024th result. The point of the op-ed that I linked to was to state that it is necessary to be careful how and when to engage tRump. The information released by Warren, while it validates her family history, is also being criticized now by Native American tribes because it does not link her to a specific tribe.

            Hillary has been under attack since 1992 and she had defended herself. I’m sure that the attacks, over the period of 20+ years, undermined her 2016 campaign. She did win the popular vote despite Bernie Sanders, Russian interference, voter suppression and perhaps even voting machine hacking. And yes, there is a double standard for women.

            As for voting machine hacking, it is an issue of which I am aware. Congress should mandate, by law, minimum standards for voting machines, instead of each state setting its own standards. There must be accountability even with proprietary software. It will only happen with a Democratic majority in the House and Senate with a Democratic president to sign it into law.

            As I said previously, I will support whomever the Democratic presidential nominee turns out to be. Yet I would hate to have another candidate ascend to that office who was as inexperienced as Obama. The problems from Trump, Obama and Bush will require more than one person to solve. A president can only do so much.

            I hope to see a woman as president before I die and I am not expecting perfection. Hillary was a threat to Rethuglicans from 1992 on because of her education, experience and strength. These mid-terms will bring more women into office and eventually the presidency. I hope the time for a female president is sooner rather than later, but defeating tRump in 2020 is mandatory. That is the way to hold him accountable.

    • I think it’s bizarre. The Right is having an absolute field day with this. She should talk policy.

  4. Climate change would be an important reason to flip the House and Senate.

  5. […] Source link […]

  6. Here are several, some related to Trump, some not.

    Obtaining Trump’s tax returns
    Re-opening the House investigation of collusion with Russia
    Subpoenaing the orders given to the FBI in Kavanaugh investigation
    Stopping additional tax cuts for billionaires
    Keeping the deficit from exploding still further
    Stopping the Republicans in Congress in their attempts to destroy the FBI and DOJ
    Winning state legislatures, stopping vote suppression
    Winning state legislatures, fixing extreme gerrymandering
    Restoring one person, one vote, in states
    Saving Medicare
    Saving Social Security
    Saving the ACA
    Money for spending on education in states
    Protecting access to the ballot box
    Protecting the right to safe and secure election systems
    Providing Constitutional checks on Trump’s efforts to create a dictatorship
    Protections for consumers
    Avoiding a repeat of the debacle of 2008, due to lack of restrictions on banks gambling with people’s funds
    Investigations into violent Nazi groups
    Enforcing the tax codes
    Keeping the Republicans from skewing the tax laws still further in their favor, thus bankrupting the country
    Funding FEMA and FDA
    Stopping increased oil drilling
    Protecting the environment, including endangered species

  7. Thanks, RD. Yours is an excellent idea, to let people know just how many things are at stake, and how at least some of them can be made better if Democrats win many seats and statehouses.

  8. Everybody is blackmailing trump!

  9. I guess people are talking about this again! Saw some bitch on southpaw say everything about BC makes her uncomfortable. Huh, we have a fucking a assaulter with the moral depravity unseen ever in the WH right now. They just voted to make an assaulter and a pervert sit for lifetime on SCOTUS. We had a Bush presidency with torture and waterboarding and an unwanted war that killed 3000+ soldiers and don’t know how many maimed and with ruined lives. Republicans are running roughshod all over norms and that thing called the constitution as usual. But we are talking about Bill Clinton’s hillbilly consensual affair and sympathizing with that bitch Broderick who either lied under oath then or is lying now, supports trump/Kavanaugh and is a Republican pawn. All these 30 year olds (looking at you Ezra Klein), casting aspersion in BC’s direction with everything that is going on now, have they seen the man talk? Lewinsky fell head over heels and ran with the opportunity. Good for her. Why should Hillary answer for any of the things those two did?

    Here is a thread worth the rebuttal that it is.

    • another thread

    • JFK had many admirable qualities, but sexual restraint was not one of them. The person whom Chris Matthews views as an icon, slept with probably dozens of women in the White House, including a well known TV reporter, two young secretaries, actresses, and the girlfriend of a dangerous mob boss. LBJ boasted that he got more _______ in a month than Kennedy got in a year. I think that boast was when he was VP. It was well know that GHW Bush was carrying on an affair with a well off woman who lived in DC. Newsweek was going to print the story, but got talked out of it. All we hear about is Bill Clinton. We heard about him in the ’90’s, we heard about him in the aughts, we hear about him now. And all we hear about him is this, nothing about the peace and prosperity, and the high regard he was and still is held in, by world leaders.

      And these media people cannot stop, it is a compulsion. They just have to show us how moral they are, although I’m sure many of the men and some of the women in media have had all sorts of affairs, with peers and subordinates. It is perverse, they want to blame Bill, and then Hillary, in related or unrelated contexts, as being the ones responsible for everything they don’t like about the world. If only they could have gotten Jesse in! Or Nader! Or if Obama could just run every four years! Or Cuomo, the man whom Democrats begged to run over and over, but who deigned not to, meaning that the only Democrats who won elections between 1968 and 1992, were Carter and Clinton. And no matter what horrible things are going on in the country, they would rather focus on Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, and Monica Lewinsky. It is like some Puritanical ritual, but the stocks and the whipping posts are illegal, so they do this. And if Democrats never take over the Congress again, and if people who don’t salute pictures of Trump are summarily shot, they will still huddle in their cocoon of Clinton hate. It is a strange sickness, and I don’t even know what weird mixturer of prurience, repression, and egotism is at the heart of it. Mitterand’s mistress attended his funeral, along with his wife, no one thought anything of it. In this country,we have people like Trump and Gingrich and Henry Hyde carrying on open affairs while preaching about morality, and the media shrugs. But the Clintons are the media’s scapegoats, excusing their own personal flaws and immoralities,,and making them feel virtuous and superior, while the country burns.What a godsend MeToo has been to them, they get to talk about Clinton and Lewinsky some more!

      • This person makes the most sense and has a few other sensible comments in that thread. Everybody is jumping on the #metoo bandwagon without understanding the parameters of it.

        • Everybody = mostly Democrats

          • It is not just “counterproductive to the aims of the movement” (although to some in the movement, it is exactly what they want), it is stupid, illogical, grossly unfair, and destructive to the Democratic Party and the people whose interests it tries to represent, since Republicans don’t give a damn about any of it, and thus it is only Democrats like Franken who lose office because of it.

            I swear, we are likely to have a country where the Republican fascists run everything, take away all benefits, all protections; while the “consolation” for Democrats is that they can force the few Democratic men left in office to resign, and they can vent their despair and anger upon Bill Clinton. Any halfway reasonable person should comprehend that having a consensual sexual affair is not a crime, it is not a sin, it is not something which one has to abjectly apologize for to placate some people who now think that every sexual interaction between a man and a woman is some form of sexual assault by the man. Obviously, Bill Clinton was indulgent, and very foolish to have done this, and of course very unkind to Hillary by doing it. And he above all, should have realized that the Republicans were out to get him for anything. Keeping his penis in his pants would have been a service to all the people he was trying to help with his policies. So that is his fault and his shame. But he was a fine President, and he still cares about helping the country, as with the Clinton Foundation, doing more for humanity than any of these self-righteous would-be moral arbiters.

            This was bound to happen, of course, which is why to me the MeToo movement is a very mixed thing overall. Rape is a terrible crime, and should be punished as the law demands. Attempted rape is also a serious crime. Using or threatening violence, beating up someone, are also serious matters. Having a consensual affair is none of that. And spare me this idiocy about “position of power.” She was an unpaid intern who took the job to be able to try to seduce him. She was 22, that is well above age. There are countless actresses who have deliberate affairs with their directors; many female attorneys who have developed some kind of intimate relationship with an older partner at their firm, and some result in marriage. Unseemliness is not an assault on anyone. This is so obvious, at least to me, that I get so upset at the unfairness, and even worse, the utter self-destructive collective stupidity of people who ignore all the incredibly important issues we face, and the most important midterms in American history, and would rather lecture about Bill Clinton, as if his falling on his knees and committing suicide would somehow purge the country, and turn all the evil out there into pleasantness. But I guess it is more fun for them, at that, since all the rest of it seems so difficult. I think that in past ages this was called ritualized sacrifice. Oh, and of course this is the Republicans’ and the compliant media’s inevitable revenge for the Kavanaugh saga. Because of course a man who had a brief consensual affair which for understandably lying about, he was impeached, is the same as a man who is credibly accused of attempted rape.

      • This is one of the most cogent and impassioned things you’ve written William. When you retire from the bar, you really must dedicate yourself to a book about history and politics.

        • Sue, thank you for the lovely compliment. It makes writing some of these worthwhile. I know that I should have tried to go into a career in journalism or historical analysis, and perhaps I could have had a major forum, not that everyone would agree with my views! Also, research was far from my favorite thing, I prefer the grand analysis, tying things together in a significant theme.. I guess at some point, with fame, one can hire researchers! I always think that I have a very good grasp of how things fit together historically and socially, but one has to have those footnotes, at least in academia. On the other hand, there are some people, mostly political figures, who write books of just opinions and ideas, without numerical data points. And too many of these contain arguments which are not consistent or logical. When I took my Comprehensive and Oral exams for my PHD in what is essentially the human side of Organizational Behavior (I ran out of money, alas, did not get the kind of part-time consulting jobs I was promised, so I could spend another two year on a dissertation, so went into Law, since I had already passed the Bar), one of my advisors said, in praising my essays, “I don’t exactly know exactly what it is that you do, there, but it is very satisfying to read,” What I can do is see different sides of an argument, even though I might reject some of them; at least I can anticipate a counterpoint, and be satisfied that my position can surmount it. So I always stated my views,anticipated some possible objections to them, and then responded to those,to greater effect.

  10. This and more is BC’s legacy! What is wrong with people?

  11. Paul Krugman’s Tuesday NY Times op-ed column is on line tonight. He’s written about climate change.

    Here’s the link.

  12. Budget Deficits
    Weak Privacy and Personal Data Laws
    Rollback of Financial Reg’s on Banking
    Rollback of Clean Water Act
    Cyber hacking US Infrastructure safety
    Drug Cost
    Corrupted politically Biased Rule of Law in a Democracy
    The rise of Fascism in the US and Globe
    Science based Government Policy Vs Bullshit
    Financial Based Tariff Reform
    Senate Reform 2 size fits all is antiquated not representative
    Abolish Electoral college Reform
    Bar political Gerrymandering
    Supreme Court Term Limits
    Introduce Disaster Insurance for Federal, State, and Individual’s in Disaster Prone area’s based on risk occurrences
    Place Limits on Office of Presidency (Pardon), Trade, War Powers, Signing statements
    Gun Control no weapons of war
    Restrict Election Funding Dark Money
    Gut Citizen United
    Adopt Separation of Church and State in Criminal Code
    Strengthen Public Corruption Laws
    Remove all Immunity for Public Governments and Government employees from criminal prosecution
    Remove immunity from Criminal Prosecution for Politicians or their Representatives who commit Voter Suppression.

  13. Keep cancer gas out of the air.
    Keep cancer juice out of the water.
    keep cancer gravy out of the food.

    Don’t let ‘Kentucky Mitch’ steal our Social Security money.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: