#not to be negative but seriously what are these current election results who is voting for a literal convicted felon who idolises hitler

[nemurin-dreamy]

mami pmmm would NOT have missed that shot can we PLEASE start hiring magical girls to kill fascists

[antoine-roquentin]

The trust before streets mentality, as currently used, means that the state has to first of all establish buy-in before doing anything. Concretely, if the goal is to make the streets safer for pedestrians, the state must not just build a pop-up bike lane or a pedestrian plaza overnight, the way Janette Sadik-Khan did in New York, because that is insensitive to area residents. Instead, it must conduct extensive public outreach to meet people where they’re at, which involves selling the idea to intermediaries first.

This is always sold as a racial justice or social justice measure, and thus the idea of trust centers low-income areas and majority-minority neighborhoods (and in big American cities they’re usually the same – usually). Thus, the idea of trust before streets is that it is racist to just build a pedestrian plaza or bus lanes – it may not be an improvement, and if it is, it may induce gentrification. I’ve seen people in Boston say trust before streets to caution against the electrification of the Fairmount Line just because of one article asserting there are complaints about gentrification in Dorchester, the low-income diverse neighborhood the line passes through (in reality, the white population share of Dorchester is flat, which is not the case in genuinely gentrifying American neighborhoods like Bushwick).

I’ve equally seen people use the expression generational trauma. In this way, the trust before streets mentality is oppositional to investments in state capacity. The state in a white-majority nation is itself white-majority, and people who think in terms of neighborhood autonomy find it unsettling.

The reality of low-trust politics is about the opposite of what educated Americans think it is. It is incredibly concrete. Abstract ideas like social justice, rights, democracy, and free speech do not exist in that reality, to the point that authoritarian populists have exploited low-trust societies like those of Eastern Europe to produce democratic backsliding. A Swede or a German may care about the value of their institutions and punish parties that run against them, but an Israeli or a Hungarian or a Pole does not.

In Israel, this is visible in the corona crisis: Netanyahu’s popularity, as expressed in election polls, has recently risen and fallen based on how Israel compares with the Western world when it comes to handling corona. In March, there was a rally-around-the-flag effect in Israel as elsewhere, giving Netanyahu cover to refuse to concede even though parties that pledged to replace him as prime minister with Benny Gantz got 62 out of 120 seats, and giving Gantz cover not to respond to hardball with hardball and instead join as a minister in Netanyahu’s government. Then in April and May, as Israel suppressed the first wave and had far better outcomes than nearly every European country, let alone the US, Netanyahu’s popularity surged while that of Gantz and the opposition cratered. The means did not matter – the entire package including voluntary quarantine hotels, Shin Bet surveillance for contact tracing, and a tight lockdown that Netanyahu, President Rivlin, and several ministers violated nonchalantly, was seen to produce results.

In the summer, this went in reverse. The second wave hit Israel earlier than elsewhere, and by late summer, its infection rate per capita was in the global top ten, and Israel had the largest population among those top ten countries. In late September it reached around 6,000 cases a day, around 650 per million people. The popularity of Netanyahu’s coalition was accordingly shot; Gantz himself is being nearly wiped out in the polls, but the opposition was holding steady, and Yamina, a party to the right of Likud led by Naftali Bennett that is not currently in the coalition and is perceived as more competent, Bennett himself having done a lot to moderate the party’s line, surged from its tradition 5-6 seats to 16.

Today the situation is unclear – Israelis have seen the state fight the second wave but it was not nearly as successful as in the spring, and right now there is a lot of chaos with vaccination. On the other hand, Israel is also the world’s vaccination capital, and eventually people will notice that by March Israel is (most likely) fully vaccinated while Germany is less than 10% vaccinated. Low-trust people notice results. If they’re disaffected with Netanyahu’s conduct, which most people are, they can then vote for a right-wing-light satellite party like New Hope, just as many voted Kulanu in 2015, which advertised itself as center, became kingmaker after the results were announced, and immediately joined under Netanyahu without trying to seriously negotiate.

The story of corona in Israel does not exist in isolation. Low trust in many cases exists because people perceive the state to be hostile to their interests, which happens when it does not provide tangible goods. Many years ago, talking about his own history immigrating from the Soviet Union in the 1970s, Shalom Boguslavsky credited the welfare state for his integration, saying that if he’d immigrated in the 1990s he’d probably have ended up in a housing project in Ashdod and voted for Avigdor Lieberman, who at the time was running on Russian resentment more than anything.

In Northern Europe, perhaps trust is high precisely because the state provides things. My total mistrust of the German state in general and Berlin in particular is tempered by the fact that, at queer meetups, people remind me that Berlin’s center-left coalition has passed universal daycare, on a sliding scale ranging from 0 for poor parents to about €100/month for wealthy ones. This more than anything reminds me and others that the state is good for things other than dithering on corona and negatively stereotyping immigrant neighborhoods.

Such provisions of tangible goods cannot happen in a trust before streets environment. This works when the state takes action, and endless public meetings in which every objection must be taken seriously are the death of the state. It says a lot that in contrast with Northern Europe, in the United States even in wealthy left-wing cities it is unthinkable that the municipality can just raise taxes to pay teachers and social workers better. Low trust is downstream of low state capacity. Build the streets and trust will follow.

[mean-scarlet-deceiver]

If the engines held democratic elections (like for president), which engine would win?

I mean, Nonny… context matters so much here.  

Who decided that there needs to be an engine president (STH, the inspectorate, the government, the engines themselves)?  

Who does “the engine president” represent? North Western engines? Sodor engines on all the railways?  

When is this taking place?  

What are the responsibilities, powers, and, not least of all, perks?  

Do they get to form a forking cabinet?

Is it term-limited, or subject to recall/votes of confidence? Is there a separate “ceremonial head” that does… well, to be frank, all the appearances stuff that so many of Our Friends like to do… or is it all wrapped up into one role?  

What is the length of the term? Are they subject to recall? Is this a new and unprecedented thing that breaks new ground in locomotive government, or a long-standing “management likes us to have play this game, and we sure as hell treat it like a game”?  

…  I know, I know. I’m the most fun and chill ask blog ever.  

All right, fine. I’ll try to just answer the question.

 #1: Thomas is the only engine I see actually going for it no matter what the context. (Capricorn Sun, babe!)  

Also, no matter what the context, he’d be quite good at it, too! Thomas takes responsibilities Seriously.

However, even if he managed to not sound like an arse during his ‘campaign’ and rub engines the wrong way (a big if), there would be too much backlash of “gah, not you, you get to be the Face for everything around here.”  

So, the more traction he got, the more blowback he would get. No winning for poor Mossy. Too many engines would do a write-in spite candidate. (And, if Thomas won anyway, I’m not sure he could handle the loud and negative opposition.)  

#2: I’m going to buck the current canon and fanon trends and say Edward could throw a hat into the ring. But all the above context would matter a lot in his case. 

Of course, he would know more about that context (and any and all behind-the-scenes politics that lead to this moment) than anyone. If this is a new thing, not only is he starry-eyed and enthused, but he saw the election being called a year before anyone else did, and has followed all the whys and wherefores.  

Meaning that he knows way too much to win a democratic election. 

Also, he would probably have much more fun supporting and advising a dark horse candidate.  

#3: Henry’s reaction depends entirely on which side of the tracks he happened to wake up on some particular morning.  

It could range to “ambitious, I’m running” to “cynical, let me tell you why this is stupid” to “hello, I am now a political pundit, watch me pontificate about the Issues.” But I think the spinner of Henrican Moods is most likely to land on:  

I’m going to mickey the hell out of all candidates. It’s going to be so much fun to watch from the sidelines with popcorn!  

Bonus: Despite all his mockery and affected indifference, at some point one of the candidates will, much to their own surprise, get some shockingly good advice from Henry.  

#4: Gordon thinks running for office is vulgar. He’s still mentally in the 18th century, where you sit for president!

And, apparently, where you sulk, when somehow this results in you garnering no supporters whatsoever. (Except Henry. After happily criticizing him the entire time, Henry would loyally—and with absolute secrecy—vote for him.)  

The kicker is that Gordon would be as good in the role as Thomas. (Again, I’m assuming that you’re asking more for “current day” than “it’s still 1930.”) In fact I think he’d prove fantastic. No one around here got politically conscious earlier than Gordon did! And he’s developed considerable grace and perspective since then, and would take his duties seriously. Like the Chester Arthur of engines?—no one ever thought he’d do anything but deliver his friends whatever they wanted, but, once in office, all the sudden he developed a code. In Gordon’s case, some breadth of vision.  

But he won’t win just by sitting around with his nose in the air. So I guess we’ll never prove it!  

#5: No matter what the context, unless a grounded!Henry (already not guaranteed to happen) can manage to rope him into his own “let’s just mock from the peanut gallery” zen, James will at once go for it… and lose. He’s, like, the designated runner-up in any scenario like this. Unless enough of the others rally around him as the “eff you, Thomas” candidate…  

#6: … but Percy, I think, is the most likely “eff you, Thomas!” candidate.  

The malcontents would go looking for a real “wth” option in order to demonstrate just how serious they are about Anyone But Thomas, and someone would suggest Percy, and a rando would be like, “yeah, someone with actual deputation experience!—hell, who saved an engine’s life. someone who doesn’t think they’re the center of the universe! and who also has plenty of non-Sodor rail experience—wait a sec. Quick, someone jot this down. We’re doing this.”  

Percy is shocked to be drafted, and (mostly) relieved if he loses.  

If he wins, he will have to be forcibly stopped from offering the position to Thomas or from at least appointing Thomas vice president. (“There is no vice president role?” “There is now!” “You can’t do that.” “You’ll find that I can! Because I’m—” “Yes, yes, goddammit, because you’re the president. Whose bloody idea was it to introduce you to Hamilton?”)  

#7: One of the few engines who would be a 100% “lol! nope” and who would hold their ground even if spontaneously chosen.  

Because Toby is sane, that’s why.  

(On the other hand, he would think Henrietta deserves to be First Lady. So there is that…)  

#8: So, there’s a real possibility that after all the vote-splitting and drama, Duck winds up the winner that no one expected.  

But everyone as one sort of… glances his way, raises an eyebrow, and… wants to be pleased; like, maybe they somehow get a great outcome?… there’s just the one universal reservation… 

And Duck immediately says he’ll be appointing someone diplomatic, like Percy or Edward, as Secretary of State, in order to do all the “sensitive negotiation”… plus someone charming, like Thomas or James, to do the ceremonial stuff… so that he can focus on being their executive.  

Everyone cheers. Like, did democracy just work?

#9: Donald immediately joins Henry in the “peanut gallery who is having the most marvelous time” category.  

A lot of engines wind up here, of course. It’s just that Donald and Henry are the most delightfully incisive and wicked about it.  

And they do have a marvelous time.  

#10: Douglas immediately joins Henry in the “I have actually just had a political awakening and all the sudden I have a lot of Ideas” cohort.

So, in the Sodor spectrum of political commentary: Edward is the idealistic one; Donald is at the other end of “look, sometimes yah just hafta stab a bastard in the rear bufferbeam before he can do it to yah first!”; Henry is the one trying to reconcile the two in a sane, realistic way, so basically the wonk; and Dougie is a straight-up populist, who always manages to find the position that actually makes sense to those not paying a lick of attention.  

#11: Oh, Oliver. I love you. But, if you decide to go the “run” route, then you are “the guy who comes in fourth.”  

He might not, though. He might get so pissed off at his polling numbers that he effectively drops out. Then he’s available to broker some surprisingly shady (yet shrewd) backroom deals…

Come on. Is that not the face of a machine boss?  

If the trucks get to vote, Oliver could organize them and deliver them to whom he pleases.

#12: Ugh. This is more the writers’ fault than anything else, but, since she has no RWS sanity in which I can ground her and counteract the stupidity... Emily’s plotline is inevitable:

She chirpily supports someone else (literally, anyone—whoever she first bumped into) and denies the fact that she’d rather be running herself for too long.  

Until finally she can take it no more, and does something stroppy. 

Might help broker that backroom bargain with Oliver, though. And come out feeling very good about it. She’s a damn king-maker.

[bopinion]

2020 / 47

Aperçu of the week:

I dissent! (Ruth Bader Ginsburg)

Bad news of the week:

Why am I actually surprised? It was clear that Donald Trump would fight against an unfavorable election outcome for him. It is well known that the Republicans are bad losers, since they know that they are simply entitled to the political leadership of the USA. It was foreseeable that loudspeakers like Rudolph Giuliani or Tucker Carlson would now finally, albeit invisibly, think they had evidence of an anti-American conspiracy in their hands. It was to be expected that disappointed voters of a defeated demagogue would take to the streets to demand their own version of the truth as reality.

None of this comes as a surprise. But the Republican establishment's stupid adherence to Trumpism does. It was clear that the two "sons by profession" Donald Junior and Eric, or various Fox News presenters, lacked insight in their public statements. But Mike Pompeo, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, etc. are coldly calculating, lying opportunists - but they are certainly not stupid. Why do they hold on to something that should go down in the history books of American politics as an absurd episode, but not as the beginning of a new era? Are they really looking for the perspective salvation of their "Grand Old Party" on the horrifying aberrations of the last four years?

The first week after election day I was shocked that (almost) half a democratic nation voted for an autocrat - this time with a sighted eye. The second current week I am shocked at how the Republican establishment is lacking in identity and standing. I remember how, at the beginning of the pre-election campaign, practically all the party's officials made disparaging remarks about this self-centered, ignorant newcomer to politics, who seriously thought he could lead this proud party. Level of mental disorientation: about 10%. Then he actually won the ticket and one had to stand behind him in the name of the greater good, he would lose and one could soon forget this abnormality. Level of mental disorientation: above 25%. Then he triumphed over Hillary Clinton and you rubbed your eyes in amazement, would contain him confidently ("The office is stronger than the person") and make the best of it, the main thing was that you were back in power. Level of mental disorientation: well over 50%. Then this guy turned out to be a lazy and unteachable tyrant, raging in the staff tableau and on Twitter, not giving a damn about responsibilities and "checks and balances," confusing official authority with personal loyalty, pushing allies and partners to the side in favor of dictators, and isolating himself and his country in international politics, lost the midterm elections and his approval ratings dropped, proved incapable and unwilling to face any social challenge - and he was allowed to continue and simply waved him through as a presidential candidate. Level of mental disorientation: a good 90 %. Then he polarized worse than ever, dismantled state institutions, slandered political competitors, lost the Popular vote and the Electoral College, refused to recognize them, and there is talk of electoral fraud, dreams of a second term in office, and at least expects to run with him again in 2024. Excuse me? Where do we stand now? At over 100%?

Of course, you can change your political positions over many years, even revise them. One makes compromises and forges appropriate and timely coalitions of convenience. In a classic party career, you not only gain political experience, but also companions - in negative terms, dependencies. Nothing welds people together like a common corpse in the cellar. But you never lose your ideals, you have to stand for something. Actually, there are only two possible interpretations of this distortion of reality, which is in principle incomprehensible. Either there is a secret master plan, which I simply haven't understood yet. Or the Republicans are now showing their true face. And that would be a pretty ugly one.

Good news of the week:

It used to be called hocus-pocus or abracadabra before the rabbit was pulled out of the cylinder. The current magic word is BNT162b2. The biotechnology start-up BioNTech from Mainz, Germany, seems to have succeeded, coupled with the resources and market power of Pfizer, the second largest pharmaceutical company in the world, in developing a truly highly effective vaccine against the coronavirus with hardly any side effects. What is fascinating for the amateur is that the vaccine is not, as it is usually the case, a miniature version of a pathogen that tricks the body into believing that it is diseased so that it can produce antibodies against it. Rather, a messenger substance consisting of ribonucleic acid building blocks simply tells the corresponding cells what to do without any detours. Sounds so simple that one almost has to ask oneself why nobody has thought of it so far.

Now follows the fireworks of stock market explosions, interpretative sovereignty and false laurels that are common in breakthroughs. Donald Trump, for example, claims that the new vaccine is due exclusively to his "Operation Warp Speed", although the decisive interim financing came from the German government. And Pfizer too has somehow forgotten that they just jumped on a moving train, but maybe the PR department just doesn't know that. Anyway, it's the result that counts.

Really? Of course it is to be welcomed that there seems to be an effective remedy against the current scourge of mankind soon. At least if the final test series are positive and the relevant authorities carry out their market approval procedures meticulously but please quickly. But the really good news of the week for me is a different one, namely the development of BioNTech itself.

The two founders and masterminds of the company are not only a married couple, but also the children of Turkish migrants. That has rolemodel character in society. And with private venture capital (which, by the way, came mainly from two entrepreneurs in our district) and public funding, they succeeded in bringing an innovative flash of inspiration to market maturity. And not in Silicon Valley, but in the German province, where - typically German - you actually only get a loan when you can prove that you don't need it. In this country, "venture" is associated more with recklessness and risk than with the spirit of research and opportunities. This has rolemodel character in economis. If neither of these things turns out to be the exception, but rather a paradigm shift, I look forward to the future of the "old continent" with much more basic confidence. Yes, we can (also).

Sense of achievement of the week:

Ten weeks ago (2020/37) I wrote about the problem of nuclear waste. For which there is simply no solution. And now I get three answers yesterday. All three from the same sender: "Nuclear for Future". The name is program, of course. With a few empty Phrasen, it is explained that renewable energy is not yet sufficiently available and that nuclear energy is better than fossil fuels. Well, then I know now... ;-)

The great thing about it is that I seem to have been targeted by lobbyists. Some PR professional gives me the relevance to invest work in me. Even though it's only a few clicks for copy and paste, it makes me a little proud. And is my sense of achievement of the week.

By the way: yesterday was Friday the 13th - what a timing!

[schraubd]

Unthinkable Thoughts, Part II: What if the Democratic Party Corbynifies?

Today, seven British MPs -- including Luciana Berger and Chuka Umunna -- announced they were leaving the UK Labour Party and would sit in Parliament as independents. It is, as I understand it, the biggest breakaway of sitting MPs from Labour in recent history (the last comparable action was in 1981, when four senior Labour officials -- two of whom were MPs -- left to form their own party). There were quite a few issues that prompted these MPs to decamp, including perhaps most prominently the almost complete failure of Labour to commit to fighting against Theresa May's Brexit catastrophe. But of course, looming large on the horizon was the ongoing problem of antisemitism -- a disease ripping through Labour at both the grassroots and at the most senior levels. The Democratic Party in the United States is not like UK Labour. People who try to argue otherwise are acting in transparent bad faith -- and not just because three-quarters of Jews voted Democratic in the last election, while Corbyn's Labour party polls below 20% in the Jewish community. It is insulting to the American Jewish community to suggest that we can't see antisemitism before our eyes; if the Democratic Party was a toxic place to be a Jew, we -- by which I mean Jewish Democrats, the Jewish majority, not whatever ZOA hack is tweeting their 304th comment of the week at Ilhan Omar -- would be saying so. In reality, Jews remain well entrenched in the Democratic community. Antisemitic incidents remain quite rare, and when they do occur they're handled with considerably more grace and decisiveness than comparable acts across the aisle. However, as I stressed in my last post, this is not a series about what is, or even what is likely. Unthinkable Thoughts is about what could be, what is now within the realm of possibility. The question, then, is what happens if the Democratic Party becomes "Corbynified"? Last week, referring to the great Ilhan Omar "AIPAC!" controversy, Anshel Pfeffer declared that Jewish Democrats had just experienced their first "Corbyn moment". The main feature of that moment was not what Omar said, exactly, or in how it was responded to by the Democratic Party as an institution. Indeed, along those metrics, this scandal was a rather minor affair: she did trade upon antisemitic tropes, but she quickly apologized and the party as a whole disavowed them. Can't ask for a better result. Rather, the scary portion of the incident was in the metadebate -- the discourse about the incident that coursed through sectors of the internet in the hours and days following. It was here where things went well beyond (fair) critiques that Omar's words are the subject of a multi-day media frenzy whilst GOP antisemitism of comparable gravity are given a pass. Instead, we saw the development of a narrative where Omar did nothing wrong, and the contention otherwise is yet another case of Jews smearing good patriots with illegitimate "antisemitism" charges, acting as Israeli stooges, being the face of American racism, and just in general sabotaging the left. Along side this condemnatory narrative was a celebratory one -- that Omar was speaking forbidden truths, that she was telling it like it is, and -- most importantly -- the fact that it made Jews uncomfortable is a point in her favor. In this corner of the internet, Omar scored points because of, not in spite of, how she upset the Jewish community. This, for me, is the heart of what I mean by "Corbynifying" (at least along the axis of antisemitism). It denotes a state of affairs where Jewish terror and misery is part of the point -- it's an active desideratum, it signals that one's orientation towards the Jewish community is on track. With a few exceptions (exceptions who are both quick to be trotted out but whose loyalty to the cause is always kept under close watch), in a Corbynified party Jews are viewed as part of the enemy camp, and so complaints from Jews about antisemitism are viewed much the same way as complaints of racism are heard by the GOP -- presumptively in bad faith, and if anything a signal that the party is getting things right. This is, as I've written before, the antisemitism that keeps me up at night. And we're at the point where this future is, if not yet "likely", than certainly "thinkable". It's worth noting that a "Corbynified" Democratic Party does not necessarily mean a friendly Republican Party. More likely, it'd mean a Democratic Party and Republican Party that are deeply hostile to Jewish values. I've remarked before that trying to imagine what I'd do as a Jewish voter in the UK is the one thought-experiment that generated sympathy for the predicament of "Never Trump" Republicans, and that sentiment carries over. And it must be stressed: right now the Democratic Party as an institution is not "Corbynified", or anything close to it. It's just not, and the people insisting otherwise are almost exclusively those for whom Corbynification is clearly their desired political future. Yes, there is a loud cadre of self-described leftists on the internet that is ecstatic about any seeming break-up between Jews and Democrats. Then again, there's also a loud cadre on the internet that is screaming "Barbara Lee is a sellout!" because she endorsed Kamala Harris instead of Bernie Sanders. I feel pretty confident the latter will be very disappointed by the outcome of the 2020 primary. Loudness on the internet is not a reliable proxy for actual popular support. But still. It's easy to forget that when Corbyn first entered the race to head up Labour, he was considered a fringe joke (a mistake that was also made about our current President). It turned out there was a very large swell of latent progressive energy waiting to be activated, and -- worse yet -- one of the things that activated and mobilized them was the antisemitism. Again -- this is central to Corbyn's appeal in the same way that Trump's racism was central to his appeal. Part of what Corbyn's voters like about him is that they view him as putting the Jews in their place. And so the question is whether there is a similar latent energy in a sector of the American people that burns with a similar desire. It is a feature of Jewish history that these things can seemingly turn on a dime (I just read an account of how Jews reacted to emergent antisemitism in late 19th century Germany that felt alarmingly topical -- one of the main themes was how the community went from "we're basically fine, outside a few cranks anti-Jewish sentiment is a thing of the past" to having a 5-alarm fire raging around them). Yes, right now Jews are well entrenched in the Democratic Party. But can I imagine a world where Jewish Democrats are systematically targeted for primary challenges -- always somehow being viewed as "too conservative", "too accommodationist", "too establishment", "too Clinton-esque"? I can. I don't think it's likely, and I don't think they'd necessarily succeed. But yes, I can imagine it. More importantly, we need to reflect seriously on how antisemitism can generate votes and energize coalitions. Too often it is taken as an article of faith that "antisemitism hurts our movement" -- that an antisemitic party is weaker than the one which is successfully fighting antisemitism. I don't think this can be taken for granted. Antisemitism is one of the most powerful mobilizing forces the world has ever seen. It seems wholly within the realm of possibility that a political movement which successfully harnesses antisemitism will be more successful than one that does not. The effectiveness of the "Soros" line of attack is demonstrative of this -- antisemitism, right now, is aiding conservative political movements in America. The Republican Party at least seems to believe that deploying these antisemitic tropes makes it stronger than it would otherwise be. Indeed, the ties that bind antisemites together often cross normative partisan lines, and that creates significant opportunities for political growth. Antisemitism links together a range of vaguely "anti-establishment" and "anti-elitist" perspectives that, paradoxically enough, mean antisemitism is likely a great entry point for a host of new Democratic voters (consider the left-right convergence around the French "yellow vest" movement). It would not remotely surprise me if there is a decent-sized clutch of independent-to-right-leaning voters who are suspicious of big financial institutions and angry about what they see as corruption in Washington, who tend to associate Democrats with coastal elitism and "New York money", and for whom Jews represent at least a plausible avatar of what connects what they think is wrong with America and what they think is wrong with Democrats. If this is right, then the path to resolving the  "What's the Matter with Kansas" question is making a grand gesture that says "I reject coastal financial domination." We joke about how antisemitism is the "socialism of fools", but the reason it's earned that label is because the easiest way to signal "I'm standing up to the banks", "I'm standing up to the elites", and "I'm standing up to the unaccountably powerful" -- all in one go -- is to signal "I'm standing up to the Jews". Such a message, it's plausible to imagine, be very well received among that set. It offers a pathway to turning reddish-purple voters blue. Finally, it has to be emphasized that this is not solely a home-grown problem of the left. The right -- and particular Bibi Netanyahu -- shares a sizable chunk of the blame. Indeed, it is actively and I think intentionally trying to accelerate these dynamics. Much of contemporary politics is organized around negative partisanship, and the brazen of alignment of Netanyahu with Trump and other forces of far-right reactionary politics has very predictable effects. We can have a thousand conversations about nuance and Israeli society not being a monolith, but the fact is low-information voters aren't going to know much more about Israel than what it's government is doing, and if the government of Israel is blasting "WE, THE JEWISH STATE, ARE JUST LIKE TRUMP, ORBAN AND BOLSONARO" at 160 decibels, it's going to leave a sour impression on those people for whom Trump, Orban, and Bolsonaro are not friendly faces. But the fact that blame would be overdetermined is not much of a consolation for ensuing political homelessness. If the Democratic Party ceases to be a home for the Jews, it would signal more than just a realignment. It would almost certainly mean that the liberal politics that much of the Jewish community has rallied behind for the past half-century will have finally failed. And it's hard to imagine that any of the candidates that might emerge in its place -- from Corbynista socialism to Trumpian authoritarian populism -- will be particularly favorably disposed to the Jews. via The Debate Link http://bit.ly/2TU8SrD

[kpopisking]

NGT48's Maho Yamaguchi assaulted by two men:

 Translation of all Tweets from Maho and transcripts of live broadcast. PLEASE SPREAD for international coverage.

Maho Yamaguchi apologizing at the third anniversary event of NGT48, Jan. 10. 2019

Scroll down for updates! (Last updated Jan 11th, 2:40am JST)

NGT48 just finished their third anniversary event a few hours ago. Maho was forced to perform on stage as if nothing ever happened, then apologized for "causing trouble and confusing for everyone"... Please look at how worn out she is and the bags under her eyes. She has lost 4 kilograms in two weeks due to stress.

Please help this story get international coverage. Don't let AKS and the NGT management get away with this... They are a powerful company with major influence and they are trying to cover everything up in Japan with lightening speed while releasing no statements whatsoever. I tried to send this to CNN, but I'm not sure if I was able to submit it correctly.

Below is a detailed outline of how the entire story unfolded, and a direct translation of everything that Maho has put out on her social media accounts (although some have already been deleted on her account). I translated everything myself over the last few hours, I'm sorry if there are mistakes but I am pretty sure everything has been translated accurately.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Outline

Maho Yamaguchi is a 23-year-old woman in Japan who is working as an idol. She was assaulted at the doorstep of her own dorm room by two men who claimed to be fans, but this news did not come to light until Maho took it upon herself to share her story in protest on Twitter and on a live broadcast application called SHOWROOM, in which she confessed that her assault was planned by some of her own teammates, and that her agency who once promised to take action on this matter has now betrayed her, as after a month of waiting they have decided to conclude the matter by telling her that she is being paranoid.

Maho is part of the group NGT48 which is a sister group of AKB48, the biggest idol group in the world and one of the top-selling groups in Japan. I know CNN has picked up AKB48 in the past for their music videos in which they were accused of exploiting young women by making them dance and pose in their underwear.

First, she started a live broadcast on her SHOWROOM account on the night of January 8th. The broadcast was forcefully interrupted before it reached 4 minutes. Here is a translation of the transcript of the broadcast.:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Written Transcript in Japanese (Twitter)

Video clips from the actual broadcast in 2 parts:

Part 1 (Twitter)

Part 2 (Twitter)

"I've been trying to send Mobame (mobile mail service to the fans) ... but it's not going through since my account has been stopped.

I wish I could confess the truth and everything that happened, because nothing will get solved if I don't tell the truth, and people may go through the same thing that I went through, but I've waited for an entire month, and they haven't done anything to solve the problem...

Even though Mr. Imamura (the manager of the group) told me that he would "Make NGT a clean group"... that "NGT will become a completely new group"... that he would "fire those who are behind all the bad things happening"... he hasn't done any of these things...

Since all of the members' personal information has been leaked, I can't stand the possibility of myself or my team members who have been so honest and hardworking go through the same horrifying experience that I went through..

Fortunately I was lucky enough to get out of it alive, but if I had been killed, what would they have done? Then there would be no going back... everything would be too late...

I don't understand why things that are not allowed in other groups are allowed in NGT... I don't feel alive anymore...

Even in the recent Aikabu elections (elections in which idols receive votes from fans and compete for a higher stock value...), I was having so much fun trying our best with everyone in Team G, ever since I got assigned to Team G it's been so fun everyday, I've been so full of energy, laughing with everyone, I was so happy just to be with everyone... But now... I don't understand why things are turning out to be this way...

Is it bad to be hardworking and serious? Is it righteous to be dating? (Referring to the group's no-dating policy)

I don't understand such nonsense. I don't get it anymore.

I don't understand why the one who has been taking the job seriously all along has to go through such a thing. Is it because I have been too serious? Why do I have to go through such a fearful experience?

I really wanted to say it out loud, but because they said they would take care of the matter, I waited this whole month even through I was scared. But in the end they didn't do anything. The wrongdoers are still at large.

...I just don't understand.

What would they do if something happened to someone and there was no turning back? I really want to tell the truth but it would cause trouble to the people who are taking care of me... but I can't anymore..."

Then she posted the following account of the incident on Twitter. Some of Maho's posts have since been deleted, but here is a direct translation of what she posted on Twitter on January 9th in order.

"I wish everything was a lie but it isn't. I called a member I could trust for help when I was assaulted. She stayed with me and listened to the assaulter's testimony until the police came, and the staff were there as well. She couldn't help but cry hearing the names of the members coming out of the assaulter's mouth. I can't stand this current situation where those who are taking their jobs so seriously are not able to work without worrying in a safe environment."

"The police has already been informed. It is true that some of the members from my group were involved in this case. The assaulters were arrested for assault and battery, but they have already been released."

“You can choose not to believe me if you want. The reason why this is not out in the press is because I asked for the fact that I am an idol, a member of NGT to be hidden. The fans are full of kind people, and I didn’t want the public to think badly of them just because of a few bad people, and despite the fact that I am a victim, I didn’t think that this would not end up giving the group a negative image. So I asked my for identity to be announced as a 23 year old freelancer.“

“I’m so sorry. Everyone. It was not in my intention to destroy everyone’s dreams. But if I don’t speak up, nothing is going to change. I don’t want the other members to go through what I’ve gone through. Because these things must be prevented before they happen. I’m so sorry. I had no choice but to say it. I’m sorry. I wish I could go back to a month ago where I was just a normal idol.”

“I wish I didn’t have to say such a thing. I don’t want to cause trouble To the people who are looking after me. I don’t want you all to hate NGT so I stayed silent for the past month even though it was so hard for me. I even told the press not to release the information that I was a member of NGT. All because this group was so important to me. And because I believed that everything will be taken care of, and that those responsible would be punished accordingly.”

"But now a month has passed after entrusting this case with the agency, trying to protect the group. It was decided that nothing would be done. Mr. Imamura (manager) heard everything there is to hear about the members from the police and promised to punish them, and yet, here he is now, trying to pretend nothing ever happened by telling me that I am being paranoid. An incident like this happened and I stayed silent for the group just to be betrayed."

“I don’t want you to hate NGT. There a lot of girls who take their jobs very seriously and are working hard. But I can’t stand to see them go through the same thing that I went through. I don't want those who are important to me to feel the same agony that I am feeling. Even though I would be just fine to be the only one crying, I can't stand seeing everyone else cry out of fear and anger. So I am going to tell the truth."

"I was assaulted at the end of last month by two men. One member from my group informed the assaulter the time that I would be coming home after the showcase, another had given the assaulter the location of my house and my room, and another member was guilty of instigating the assaulter to go to my house. Must those who choose not to connect with their fans privately have their personal information exposed to the public and be assaulted?"

“Is it my fault for not dating and falling in love, and for taking my job as an idol seriously? Is it my fault for not agreeing to connect privately with the fans? Why is it that abiding by the rules in this group results in someone going through such a horrifying experience, why is it that those who take the job seriously and work hard are not protected in this group, is it the person who is betraying so many fans by connecting with a selected few privately that is righteous? I don’t understand how this can be forgiven.”

“I never missed a hand shaking event, even when I was not feeling well. Because there are fans who look forward to the event. Because there are people I won’t be able to see the next time. Because I don’t take the fans coming to see me for granted. This was a policy that I chose to stick to, one that I promised to keep forever. But they made me break it… I’m scared that the bond that we’ve managed to build together is going to break as well…”

“Even though such an incident has taken place, they’ll make me ‘take a break’, then conceal everything as if nothing ever happened… Maybe Mr. Imamura (manager) doesn’t understand the fear of being assaulted because he’s a man, I can’t even go outside by myself anymore because I’m too scared. Even if I move house, my parents’ home address and phone number has already been leaked, where can I find a place to escape to…”

Then Maho tweeted the following account of the incident as a screenshot.:

"I always take great care to be very cautious, so every time I enter my house and my room, I always pay close attention to my surrounding to make sure I am safe. As usual on that day, I made sure that there was no sign of anyone in the hallway, entered my room and quickly tried to close my door. Then a hand appeared out of nowhere and tried to force the door open. The hand grabbed my face and tried to push me down. I fought frantically to force him out. Because I thought he would kill me if I lost, so I fought with all my might so that I wouldn't die, and I was almost about to suceed in forcing him out. Then another man appeared from the room right across mine. It was the room that one of my members were living in. The second man took over the first man and proceeded to grab my face, and tried to push me down the same way. I tried to scream for help, but my voice wouldn't come out because of fear. After a minute of trying I was finally able to scream ‘Help me help me!’ The man out his hands over my mouth. I thought they were going to lock me inside the house and kill me. Then the elevator rang, and as the man got distracted for a moment, I jumped out the door into the hallway because I thought if they proceeded to enter my house they would lock me inside and do something to me. But my feet wouldn't move and I couldn't escape. I tried to call the police but they took my cellphone."

After this news got out to the public, the management kept their silence for an entire day. Today was the third anniversary of NGT48, and the members held an anniversary showcase to celebrate. Surprisingly, the show started like it usually does with no formal announcements touching on the subject whatsoever, almost as if nothing had ever happened.

Maho Yamaguchi, bowing her head in apology in front of an audience at the NGT48 3rd anniversary event, Jan 10, 2019.

One member even shouted during the show, “Thanks to your support, we were finally able to celebrate our third anniversary show with no problems! Please continue supporting us!"

At the beginning, two of the members were missing from the show; Maho and her closest friend in the group. Then suddenly at the 6th song, Maho appeared and sang a duet with the team leader. After performing the song, Maho and the team leader remained on stage. Maho slowly started talking, although visibly shaken and having lost a considerable amount of weight from stress. Here is a translated transcript of what she said.:

"I am very sorry for confusing everyone with what happened. (Bows) As I told you previously, I chose to present the matter in this way because there was something that I wanted to protect, but I feel terribly sorry that it ended up causing trouble for a lot of people that have been looking after me. I was able to talk to the people at AKS (the company managing the Japanese idol groups AKB48 and its sister groups), and as I hope that this becomes an opportunity for NGT48 to head towards a new direction, I will try my best to assists as the vice-captain of Team G. Please continue to support NGT48 (voice shaking)."

A lot of people are shocked at how the incident has turned out, as the management has not stated a word on this topic, but has instead chosen to make Maho who is the victim throughout this entire incident apologize for what she clearly has no reason to apologize for.

There are clear assumptions to the identity of the perpetuators, as Maho has unfollowed four members from her group and deleted previous celebratory posts about them after implying about the incident in early December.

Many fear for Maho's mental health and are afraid that the management company will hide this incident and pretend that they are at no fault. Please help us make this story get international coverage so that we can get justice for Maho.

Thank you very much.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

UPDATES ( Jan 11th, 2:40am, JST)

The management has released a statement saying that a member was indeed involved in this case, as she "accidentally" told a fan what time Maho will be returning to her dorm... What kind of girl tells a stranger who approaches her on the way back home what time her teammate would be returning to her room, knowing the risks? Such a blatant lie.

Now what is strange, is that Maho said that she saw the second man come out of the room right across from hers. That means they were able to get into the building by somehow getting through the auto-lock system at the entrance. Sources are unclear at this point, but according to some fans who claim to be acquainted with the assaulters, the assaulters were actually the boyfriends of the alleged members who have had access to the building for a while. Maho and other members had been complaining to the management to stop letting them invite their boyfriends over, but for some reason, the management have been very easy on them and have not punished them. Maybe because a parent of one of the alleged members is the president of one of the sponsors of NGT. The assaulters got away without getting charged for battery in the end because they did NOT break any rules as they were let into the building by their girlfriends, and were just trying to "scare" Maho because they weren't fond of her telling on them. The management did not want to let the public know that this was being allowed to happen, obviously. They asked Maho to stay quiet and in exchange, promised her that the alleged members would be punished. This did not happen, and Maho got angry, naturally.

__)

A Japanese fan started a Change.org petition to fire the current Theatre Manager, and for the staff to apologise to Maho. Please sign and share. We really can’t let a precedence to be set for this. For people to believe that they can just get away with assaulting a girl and blame her for it. 

[newsnigeria]

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/us-nato-in-the-black-sea/

SF video: What’s behind the growing activity of the US and NATO in the Black Sea

The growing activity of the US and NATO in the Black Sea

What’s behind the growing activity of the US and NATO in the Black Sea

NATO is preparing a package of measures to counter Russia in the Black Sea region. This package includes the deployment of NATO warships to the Black Sea to guarantee ‘passage’ of Ukrainian ships via the Kerch Strait, U.S. ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison stressed during a press briefing on April 2.

Hutchison said that the prepared package “beefs up the surveillance, both air surveillance as well as more of the NATO country ships going into the Black Sea to assure that there is safe passage from Ukrainian vessels through the Kerch Straits, the Sea of Azov”.

Earlier the US State Department announced that the Black Sea package is a response to the challenges the US and NATO face in the region, “not merely because of the Kerch Strait incident,” but because “Russia is threatening the alliance all along the eastern flank, not just in the north.

The public announcement of a possible NATO operation in the Kerch Strait is itself a move undermining the shaky stability created after the incident of November 25, 2018, when Russian coastal guards detained 3 ships of the Ukrainian Navy, which were attempting to enter the Kerch Strait in a way which violated the established norms and rules. Then, Moscow’s actions gave rise to large-scale hysteria in mainstream and Ukrainian media outlets. However, the situation developed no further. Ukraine’s “partners” limited their response to formal declarations. It was clear that the Kiev government was the side that had provoked the conflict. Before and after the Kerch Strait incident Ukrainian ships were passing the strait after going through the formal procedures established in this area.

If NATO naval forces together with or in some form assisting Ukrainian forces were to make an attempt to break through the Kerch Strait by force violating the established rules of passage, this would be seen by Moscow as an aggressive military action, which would provoke an equivalent response. In other words, a military clash could be expected. In such an event, the situation might escalate further. The media and political importance of such developments could be compared with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, which became the formal pretext for the start of the First World War or the annexation of the Sudetenland by Nazi Germany before the start of the Second World War.

At the beginning of 2019, it seemed that despite the unfriendly rhetoric between the United States and Russia, there were actually no valid reasons for organizing the next armed incident, at a minimum, or in the worst case, for starting a war. However, there are a number of factors which may nudge Washington towards pushing for an escalation in the Black Sea region.

On March 25, President Donald Trump officially signed a declaration recognizing the Golan Heights as part of Israel. This step met with a negative reaction from almost all important regional and international players. The Trump administration has now destroyed one of the last fragments of the post-World War 2 international security system. This action as well as previous blatant violations of international law will have negative consequences for the entire system of international security and international law. Following this, global players can be less and less concerned about even the formal justification of their actions from the point of view of international law and can increasingly rely on military power, sanctions and informational pressure, coups and other “hybrid” methods to achieve their goals. As we see, Washington is the forerunner in the employment of such approaches. Now, the White House is interested in diverting international attention from the current situation and from the expected consequences of Golan-style decisions.

The failure of the Venezuelan blitzkrieg forced Washington to reconsider the approaches employed to force regime change. The inability of the US to fully delegitimize and overthrow the Maduro government is based on several factors:

the insufficient support from the local population for the US puppet; the decision of the military to support the legitimate government; the resolution of Maduro himself and his inner circle, who unlike the former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014, were not prepared to sit by indifferently while power was seized by the henchmen of external forces. The strong stand of China and Russia in support of Venezuela and the surprising inability of the Trump administration to set up a strong anti-Venezuelan coalition even at the regional level. So far, most of the US regime change partners have limited their participation to formal declarations or, like Columbia, to a lack of opposition to the actions of US agents. So, the US operation has entered a new phase. The economic and diplomatic pressure on the Maduro government has increased, and the country has experienced a series of large-scale “accidents” targeting critical objects of the energy infrastructure. The Maduro government openly blamed hostile actions by the US for the recent series of blackouts. There are signals that the US is preparing for a military operation in the region, on its own or within the framework of a formally created coalition to put an end to the resistance of Caracas. To ensure the success of this operation, Washington has to carry out actions on the periphery to distract attention from the Venezuelan issue.

The situation in Ukraine ahead of the second round of the presidential election is not stable. Experts and analysts have serious doubts that Poroshenko actually gained fairly the 16%, which allowed him to proceed to the second round. It is suggested that from 3 to 8% may have been obtained fraudulently. Even if the incumbent president really did get 16% of the vote, the entire structure of voting demonstrated that the Ukrainians are frustrated by the destructive policy of the ruling regime and the status as a Western colony obtained by Ukraine in 2014. The arbitrary development of this situation could create conditions in which the US and the associated European bureaucracy would lose their influence in Ukraine, and as a result, the money spent on bringing Kiev to vassalage. In the event of the escalation of the political struggle, a possible outcoume could even be that Ukraine would split further into two political antagonists along the west-east line. If the Washington establishment wants to keep the situation under control, it must create the conditions in which Poroshenko could achieve victory. Or should Vladimir Zelensky win, he must be limited in his ability to maneuver and de-escalate relations and even start a dialogue with Russia. He must also be prevented from starting a more or less independent dialogue, ie not that of a vassal, with the European Union.

A military provocation in the Kerch Strait with the support of NATO warships would be suitable for achieving all the goals just described. Moreover, the logic of NATO’s actions includes damage to the infrastructure of the Crimean Bridge or at least its significant damage during the incident. This would have a resounding informational effect and would create significant problems for the economy of Crimea.

Another interesting point is the declaration that Russia “is threatening the alliance all along the eastern flank, not just in the north”. The entire format of such rhetoric raises eyebrows. If, in the case of the northern front, such statements can be justified with the complex configuration around Kaliningrad and the specific historical experience of the Baltic countries and Poland with Russia, the statement about the Russian threat in the south is a rude propaganda cliché.

Hutchison stressed that Russia is threatening “Romania, Bulgaria, and Ukraine, as well as Georgia”. But there are some issues. Georgia is separated from Russia by mountains, is not a NATO country and does not experience territorial claims from Russia. Moreover, Russia still categorically refuses to consider the inclusion of South Ossetia and Abkhazia into its own territory. Almost 30 years have passed since the actual independence of these republics, and almost 11 years since the last aggressive war unleashed by Georgia with the support of NATO. Ukraine is also not a NATO country, and recent years have shown that Moscow has no desire to conduct full-scale military operations on its territory. Bulgaria and Romania do not have a land border with Russia and both states have working bilateral relations with Moscow. Even more strikingly, US statements do not even mention the second most significant military state of NATO, the country whose military potential exceeds the combined military potential of Bulgaria, Romania, Georgia and Greece – Turkey, which by the way, is located on the southern flank of the military bloc. This statement by a representative of the Washington establishment is another vulgar example of Psaki-style rhetoric that has little to do with democratic values, freedom, or a desire for justice. They themselves do not believe in it. They know only that a few others do believe in it. Thus they simply mock the masses, who they consider to be sheep. Such statements demonstrate that Washington is seriously considering conducting aggressive actions in the near future in several directions at once.

Donate

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

[starllightss]

hi this is not related to an anime hehehe but woah goddamnit elections here in my country is like a fucking chaotic. some ppl wanted a man without a concrete plan/platform who is a son of a corrupt dictator to win the presidency.

he is a frequent debate skipper and goddamn people here in my country praise him for not attending one wtf. 🙄

oh and he also said that his goal is "unity" and i find it funny and frustrating at the same time coz he unites corrupt politicians HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

then there's one of the presidential aspirants who is a woman (the only woman who is running for the seat actually). she had been serving the people even before she had her political career and she's done a lot during her term as the vice president (yeah she's our current vp) especially during the pandemic and yet people insult her (some are ridiculous insults, some are fake news, and some are below the belt). anw she's my bet, i'll vote for her but goddamn i'm kinda losing hope for this nation 😩

sorry for this long awful rant about my country's politics it's just fucking frustrating amd i feel safe here 😅😅😅

Oh, anon! Don't feel sorry! My ask box is a safe space for your political, social, and culture views-- no seriously, it's fine!

I share the same sentiments with you bc I probably know what you are talking about 👀👀👀 anyway politics had always been frustrating and tbh ppl are just taking democracy for granted.

But man, so many internet trolls being used these days to influence the decision of the society. I have a friend who is working in the local government and at one time, she admitted that the local leader tasked them to create socmed accounts to post positive stuff about his leadership and reply to the negative stuff lmaooo

anyway, only a few months left and we'll see the result of that election and im sure ppl will not let that son of a dictator to rule!!

[thegalley]

Election Update:  A Clean Sweep for Cannabis

CNN’s November 7th headline announced Legal Weed Wins Big in Election and went on to describe the success of adult recreational cannabis use measures nationwide. Cannabis industry leaders were pleased with the election outcome as fifteen states approved its medical use and eleven more established recreational use guidelines. 

John Hudak is a senior cannabis policy advisor at the Brookings Institute who follows election outcomes on cannabis matters. Adult cannabis use laws passed in Arizona, Montana, New Jersey and South Dakota with substantial margins and he called the election “a resounding win for cannabis which is moving the industry out of the shadows of illegality”.

Mr. Hudak points to the Scotts Company that is acquiring hydroponics equipment businesses, which count cannabis growers among their largest customers. He also noted a public demonstration of cannabis support by Scotts executives which contributed $800,000 in support of New Jersey’s legalization campaign.   

The voters of the Garden State spoke and passed the state constitutional amendment permitting adult cannabis use by a wide 67% margin. New Jersey’s favorable cannabis vote is expected to influence similar legislation under consideration in neighboring New York and Pennsylvania. 

The New Jersey Governor, Philip Murphy, has been a long-time supporter of cannabis and regulatory reform. Speaking to the media shortly after the polls closed, Mr. Murphy commented that “Adult use marijuana passed convincingly tonight, marking a huge step forward in racial and social justice and for our economy.” 

From a financial perspective, cannabis will provide the state with a much-needed tax revenue source. The state is in a strong position to capitalize on cannabis sales because there is little local competition as with the closest cannabis-legal states far to the north in New England. Although New Jersey’s law did not include specific regulatory requirements, those are being developed by a subcommittee and expected to gain legislative approval without delay.

When New Jersey’s cannabis dispensaries are allowed open, over 130 million adults will be within driving distance of a legal retail outlet. The Marijuana Business Journal forecasts that New Jersey could realize $950 million tax dollars on cannabis sales and also provide tens of thousands of new jobs. 

The state’s economy has been seriously damaged by the coronavirus pandemic and their unemployment stands at 16.6 % - the second highest in the nation. New Jersey economists are encouraged by the likely expansion of employment in the cannabis industry and many believe it can put a meaningful number of its citizens back to work. With new jobs projected as an unexpected benefit, the cannabis industry is perceived more favorably as new jobs become available. 

Arizona’s Proposition 207 legalizes possession of up to an ounce of cannabis for adults and establishes a dispensary system for retail sales. The state’s measure also allows people convicted of minor cannabis crimes like possession of small quantities to have court records cleared through the expungement process.

At the national level, legal cannabis is on track to become a nine-billion-dollar business. While this projected revenue may not elevate cannabis to F-500 status, as legalization gains voter approval around the country, the business has gained credibility. New tax revenue is welcomed by state treasuries seeking fresh revenue streams from previously untapped sources such as cannabis cultivation and retail dispensary sales.

Other cannabis legalization victories in Montana, Mississippi and South Dakota are expected to encourage neighboring states to adopt legalization so that they might also share in these new tax sources. 

Cannabis use studies confirm that demand is at record-setting levels. With law enforcement attending to more pressing enforcement matters, in addition, the current legal prohibitions seem to have had little negative effect on consumer purchasing.  The reality at the state budget level is that an untapped tax revenue cannot be ignored, and many are seizing the opportunity, legality notwithstanding. 

For the moment, the question of when the federal government will call for cannabis decriminalization remains open to debate. Historically, President-elect Biden has not supported a taxed and regulated cannabis system. Mr. Biden does understand the reality of cannabis use and he supports penalty reductions for minor offenses such as possession of personal-use quantities. While this federal action would signal modest progress, it’s not likely to bring about meaningful change as those actions would be required at the state and local levels.

The President has said he would support cannabis penalty reforms like expungement of individual court records of minor cannabis convictions. He also favors federal legalization of cannabis for medical purposes and believes that recreational use decisions should remain at the state level. Mr. Biden announced his cannabis views on his campaign’s website making his favorable position known. 

Going forward, the most likely Executive Branch support for favorable federal cannabis policy will be that of the Vice President, Kamala Harris.  Committed to “sharing her views on cannabis” with President Biden, Ms. Harris believes that prior presidential efforts to slow drug trafficking were ineffective and cites the Reagan Administration’s substantial efforts as an example. Mrs. Reagan’s Just Say No program has been evaluated as ineffective in stemming the flow of drugs throughout America’s younger generations. Post program assessments confirmed that just telling young people to refuse drugs without any supportive treatment didn’t work. Accordingly, Ms. Harris supports cannabis decriminalization and regulation at the state level, leaving the federal branch out of the discussion. 

Also of interest is the proposed rescheduling of cannabis to a Class II Drug. Those in favor of this change believe it would allow researchers to study the effects of cannabis use without unwanted attention from federal law enforcement authorities. While Mr. Biden has promised to consider rescheduling, many cannabis supporters prefer to have it treated like alcohol and removed from the Controlled Substance schedule altogether. 

The cannabis rescheduling option is controversial, and the new administration has many important matters pressing for attention. The good news for cannabis is that policy decisions will be formulated by the White House senior staff which is directed by Mark Mulvaney. A longtime advocate for marijuana regulatory reform Mr. Mulvaney will be guiding the conversation with the President’s advisors. Cannabis industry leaders are delighted to have an influential voice in the Oval Office regarding matters of federal cannabis policy. 

From a financial perspective, cannabis equities continued to increase in value in response to the surge of cannabis support by voters nationwide. Canopy Growth equities rose 10% in value and Aurora Cannabis shares increased by 20%. Encouraged by the election results, the CEO of Canopy Growth remarked that “ballot results clearly support adult-use marijuana legalization across geographic and party lines”. 

CNN Business reported a “triple whammy” of good news for cannabis:

Recreational use was approved in Arizona, Montana, New Jersey and New Mexico; New Jersey and Arizona are both pegged as billion-dollar markets; major cannabis players are positioning themselves to take advantage of legalization; cannabis industry leaders believe legalization is the “new normal” and congress will likely enact federal cannabis reform legislation in the near future. As former Speaker of the House, John Boehner, remarked, “when cannabis is on the ballot, it wins, and it is the one topic on which America is united.”

How the cannabis industry will develop over the next few years remains to be seen but the future appears positive. Some of the more enthusiastic projections suggest that the cannabis segment could employ 10-15% of the US workforce and contribute as much as $100 billion to the nation’s economy. Imagine what the industry might look like if it were legal.

The future of the American cannabis industry looks very promising with legalization efforts making progress at the state level and there’s still hope in Washington. 

Looking back, most will recall the election of 2020 as one that marked a year of exceptional progress for the cannabis industry. 

[edwintfcj173-blog]

15 Things Your Boss Wishes You Knew About bitcoin mining

How can we convey to if something is pretend or authentic in nowadays’s entire world? One example is, a dollar Monthly bill, a driver’s license or a vote within the election. How can we determine whether or not it’s valid or not? The answer? We continue to keep a history of it. Such as, Every dollar Invoice includes a serial variety which is recorded from the financial institution. Your driver’s license variety is recorded via the DMV and voting information are applied to trace who voted and who didn’t, so the identical human being received’t be able to vote two times. Everytime you would like to confirm that a doc is legit, you just search it up with the applicable authority.

We even have Notaries, people who are accredited by The federal government to work as witnesses to attest and record the validity of pieces of data or identities. You’ll recognize there’s another thing that all these mechanisms have in frequent - These are all centralized, which suggests there’s a central authority, regardless of whether it’s a financial institution, state office, or person that has the ability to concern and validate data. These central authorities have lots of power, and as you understand ability may possibly occasionally corrupt. So what takes place if one particular of these authorities wants to change the specifics or perhaps possibly modify historical past a bit? This my sound considerably fetched, but even our planet heritage is simply a document stored by historians inside a centralized method.

The phrase “Background is written with the victors” tells us that points can in some cases be distorted by All those in electrical power. For those who don’t imagine that’s attainable, here’s an actual life illustration. Now, most money is just a document of who owes what to whom. A result of the subprime disaster in 2008, almost a thousand corporations during the US gained above 630 billion dollars that never ever existed before. Other organizations experienced debts wholly taken out. Some would argue this bailout was justified, however you can’t deny that somebody made a decision to change the records of how much money was owned and owed. This can be why Bitcoin was born. It was the very first variety of cash that eliminates the need for a central authority.

Its records are held by Absolutely everyone, not simply by central banks. And when everyone seems to be preserving monitor and verifying the information, well, Meaning which you could no more change the ledger of transactions Anytime one thing doesn’t add up or as it’s a lot more convenient. You actually have to get started on getting accountable. But money isn’t the only real location where decentralization can Perform a job. Does one keep in mind those big encyclopedia books we accustomed to depend upon when it arrived to investigate? Encyclopedia Britannica used 100 full-time editors and in excess of 4,000 contributors to publish what we regarded as being the authority on knowledge. Just think about the ability the editors of these books experienced in selecting what was worth mentioning, condemning, condoning or ignoring. Nicely, the final volume of encyclopedia Britannica was published in 2010. Nowadays, data is way more decentralized with about one hundred thirty thousand Energetic editors that keep distinctive Wikipedia internet pages. The chance of any of these “likely rogue” unnoticed is far scaled-down since Just about every edit is community and may be confirmed by any individual. Decentralization cuts down the risk for corruption, fraud and manipulation. Blockchain engineering is a different and impressive method to implement decentralization.

Inside of a nutshell, Blockchain technology is a solution for the situation of centralization. It’s a method for keeping information by Everyone, without any have to have for just a central authority - a decentralized method of maintaining a ledger that is definitely pretty much not possible to falsify. I mean, when lots of eyes are observing and verifying every little thing that’s becoming performed, it’s actually tough to interrupt the rules unnoticed. You will be questioning why could it be known as Blockchain? Nicely, visualize we’re sustaining a shared ledger with several web pages of documents. Just about every website page begins that has a sort of summary in the site in advance of it. If you modify a part of the preceding web site, you’ll even have to alter the summary on the current site. Therefore the web pages are literally linked, or chained jointly. In technological phrases, internet pages are termed blocks. And because Every block is associated with the data with the former block, we have a series of blocks, or simply a blockchain. Many individuals feel that Satoshi Nakamoto, the mysterious inventor of Bitcoin, developed Blockchain know-how. Technically he only designed the very first authentic life implementation of it - Bitcoin. The truth is, that term blockchain is rarely even described in Satoshi’s primary whitepaper.

The closest he concerns expressing Blockchain is “chain of blocks”. Now that you really know what blockchain technological innovation is, we nevertheless have two main inquiries to answer - how does it in fact function, and is also blockchain likely to alter our long run? Enable’s get started with the first problem. Yet another way to talk to this query might be - how do I make a program that allows the creation, verification and updating of records by Every person? Nicely, you'll find four aspects a blockchain really should actually have a life of its very own. The very first thing required to assistance a blockchain can be a peer-to-peer network - A community of personal computers, also known as nodes, which can be equally privileged. It’s open to everyone and everyone.

This is largely what we have already got now with the online world. We'd like this network to ensure we should be able to communicate and share with each other remotely. The next ingredient is cryptography. Cryptography may be the art of protected communication within a hostile setting. It lets me to validate messages and show the authenticity of my own messages, even though destructive players are around. We want cryptography as a result of 1st element. Recall, I claimed any person can be involved in this community - like negative actors. It’s good that I can connect, but I also will need to be sure my conversation will come by way of unaltered. The third aspect is actually a consensus algorithm. It is possible to switch the technological phrase “algorithm” Together with the term “rule”. This suggests we need to agree about principles on how we incorporate a fresh web page, generally known as a block, to our information. There are many forms of consensus procedures, in Bitcoin’s scenario we utilize a consensus algorithm often known as Proof of labor.

This algorithm states that to ensure that someone to get paid the ideal so as to add a completely new website page to our ledger they have to obtain a solution into a math problem, which calls for computational power to solve. Computers across the community run calculations to solve the math difficulty As well as in doing this, take in lots of Strength. To put it differently they are doing many do the job. That’s why when one of these finds the quantity that solves the trouble and displays it on the community, they’re basically displaying a “proof of labor”. Think about it since the node’s way of saying: “Hey, I expended a substantial amount of Electricity in this article in fixing this issue initial, so I’m entitled to write the subsequent page”. As I discussed prior to, there are other consensus algorithms that don’t demand so much Strength, This can be just the algorithm type that the Bitcoin blockchain employs. There are positives and negatives to distinctive algorithms, but so that you can run a decentralized ledger you’ll should pick one, in any other case It will likely be seriously tricky to achieve a consensus with so Many individuals from the community.

At last, our past factor is punishment and reward. This aspect is definitely derived from activity principle and it will make sure that it will be in people today’s best curiosity to often Adhere to the principles. So far, we’ve put in place a network that features a way to speak securely, and follows a list of rules for achieving consensus. Now we’ll glue these components jointly by providing a reward to people today that assist us keep our information and increase new web pages. This reward is actually a token, or coin, which is awarded each time a consensus has been achieved along with a new block is additional to our chain. Then again, undesirable actors who seek to trick or manipulate the process will end up shedding the money they used on computational electrical power or their coins is often taken clear of them. Ultimately, the essential thing to remember would be that the punishment and reward procedure operates on psychological behaviour. It turns The principles on the technique from one thing you'll want to abide by into anything you’ll want to abide by, due to the fact It'll be in your best curiosity to take action. This was just an exceedingly high amount clarification of what a blockchain is made up of.

But due to the fact then, far more individuals have started to investigate Bitcoin and blockchain, and possess witnessed the advantages they offer; either in apply, or as an investment. So there you've got it, the 5 things of a truly open, community, decentralized blockchain. Up until these days there are actually only a handful of blockchains that have about one,000 genuinely impartial individuals, and as such is usually considered as decentralized - Bitcoin, Ethereum and Monero to call several.

In case you’re believing that it sounds like loads of exertions To place a blockchain in motion, you’re Totally proper. But This is when Ethereum is available in. Ethereum is actually a Do It You blockchain in which all these 5 elements are currently in motion. All you have to do is Make the correct Answer in addition to it. But that’s a whole distinct whiteboard episode you could check out later on.

Now Allow’s move on to a different time period maybe you have listened to - A personal, or closed blockchain. This phrase refers to providers that monitor and Restrict the gamers who can be involved in their blockchain. It’s a little like how the net, which can be open to Everyone and anyone, differs from an Intranet - an internal network of company desktops. Whilst I believe some companies will discover value in operating personal blockchains to enhance their inner procedures, it’s significantly from everything thrilling inasmuch as it has practically nothing to carry out with decentralization. To bitcoin value emphasise this somewhat a lot more Allow’s Evaluate open up, general public blockchains to shut, non-public kinds. A general public blockchain is open up to Most people, it’s transnational and borderless. It’s censorship resistant, and it doesn’t call for any third social gathering. It’s also neutral - there’s no these kinds of detail as a “superior”, “lousy”, “unlawful” or “lawful” transaction, there’s merely a “valid” or “invalid” 1.

A private blockchain on the other hand, is restricted to licensed participants only, and It is ruled by a handful of entities. In the words and phrases of Andreas Antonopoulos, typically of personal blockchains you don’t actually need a blockchain, you are able to just share a spreadsheet between the individuals. The full idea of blockchain was to decentralize a approach by way of most people, Which’s just the opposite of what A personal blockchain does. The functions of the community blockchain, on the other hand, make tremendous Gains. There’s no one issue of failure. The documents are immutable, often known as tamper proof. And eventually, it’s censorship resistant in order to’t genuinely remove a file or end it from obtaining released - providing it follows the consensus guidelines. In advance of we close nowadays’s lesson we nonetheless have one particular major dilemma to reply - Is blockchain technologies the subsequent large detail? I believe you might have heard of different startups which are utilizing blockchain technological know-how to unravel some type of a difficulty.

Normally when I listen to of this sort of a company I question two issues: Very first, are they using a community or private blockchain? Because if they're not utilizing a community blockchain there’s probably not just about anything pretty disruptive here. Second, do they even have to have a blockchain? If you recall initially of this lesson, we talked about the hazards of centralization.

But these hazards are only meaningful if there’s a lot at stake. Such as, the queue into the pharmacy is managed in the centralized method but I don’t genuinely care given that there’s not a great deal at stake and it’s actually much more efficient this way. Blockchain technologies is excellent at decentralizing, but it surely’s also quite inefficient, slow and Strength consuming. One example is, Bitcoin’s community requires ten minutes on ordinary to verify a transaction. Not The best waiting time for purchasing a cup of coffee at a seven-eleven. The sole reason to decide on Blockchain technological innovation as your Answer is If the challenge is actually centralization. In the event you don’t have to decentralize a thing, you almost certainly don’t should use blockchain technology and they are improved off with a few centralized solution.

The truth is it will probably function greater. To sum it up, Blockchain technological innovation is actually disruptive, but at this time only a handful of use conditions genuinely need it. So the actual issue Is that this: at the current minute, is our entire world All set For additional sophisticated blockchain implementation than what Bitcoin previously features? Inside the early 2000s, there have been a great deal of Amazons, Googles and Facebooks that in no way caught on to the modifications they presented... Nowadays, quite a few of those blockchain startups experience a similar destiny.

[sportsfromseoul]

Popular opinion

If there’s one thing that I won’t miss about working in a relatively conservative liberal arts institution (and, really, there are many things that I won’t miss, but that’s another issue...), it’s appeals to “considering different perspectives” that are thinly veiled cover for false equivalency. And that’s what I have seen this week in the American news media’s coverage of the Georgia-6 election results. Taking seriously the Republicans’ glee about Democrats being “0-5 in House special elections” as some sort of endorsement of the current regime and its policies is at best irresponsible and at worst dangerous. Democratic candidates lost races in Kansas-4 and Montana-At Large in addition to Georgia-6. The last time that a Democrat was elected to any of those seats was 1997. Democrats had held South Carolina-5 until 2011, but it’s been trending red ever since and even its Democrats have been blue dogs basically forever. News flash: parties don’t cherrypick appointees from seats that they’re afraid of losing! These results shouldn’t have been surprising to anyone. Pretending like they are, or that these losses represent something about the Democratic Party being “in crisis,” is, in a word, ridiculous. And by doing so, I think that most major news media outlets have succumbed to a perceived critique of their “bias” in “negative” coverage of, oh, you know, that whole Russia thing. So, they’ve opted for false equivalency instead: show that you can be “fair and balanced,” too!

Fuck that noise. While I, too, would like to see the Democrats tack further to the left instead of towards the center, I don’t think that we can look at these special election results as total failures, either. Everything still rests on turnout in 2018 and making the case that getting rid of the people who are propping up the criminal, anti-democratic executive branch is imperative. Vote for progressive candidates if they are running in your district. But if they’re not, you still need to fucking vote, and to vote Democrat. And in order to make that case, we need to resist false equivalency and keep calling out evil shit for what it is: evil shit.

[ljgrealestate]

Only a few weeks remain until the royal commission hands down its final report. Its recommendations could be deadly in the hands of overzealous politicians approaching a federal election.

Many industry professionals will be hoping that cooler heads prevail when Commissioner Hayne’s final verdict is unveiled next month. It has been a challenging 12 months for the Australian financial services industry, with many casualties and a deeper sense of uncertainty about what the future will look like.

Unfortunately, the royal commission final report will be published in an election year; a notorious time for poor decision-making and short-sightedness by those who run the country. Once the two major political parties grow tired of punting the negative gearing debate around, they will no doubt pick up Hayne’s final report like a political football and continue their embarrassing mudslinging match until the last vote has been counted.

This is the real threat to the Australian mortgage industry; Hayne’s recommendations, on their own, pose little risk to the stability of the lending landscape and the viability of thriving, popular markets like the mortgage broking channel. But in the hands of politicians who will stoop to great depths to win a federal election, the recommendations from the royal commission could be catastrophic.

Here are a few things to look out for when the final report is published on 1 February:

Customer living expenses

The latest research from Digital Finance Analytics (DFA), which involves a survey of 52,000 households, has reported that approximately 40 per cent of home loan applications were rejected in December 2018, up from 8 per cent in December 2017. It’s fair to say that lenders have tightened up considerably.

One area that the royal commission focused on during 2018 was customer living expenses, specifically the use of the Household Expenditure Measure (HEM).

Clarity on mortgage broker duties

In his interim report, Commissioner Hayne noted that it is not clear what would be the content of a “customer first” duty for mortgage brokers.

“In particular, it is not clear how this form of duty is intended to differ from the duty to act in the best interests of the client that the Corporations Act imposes on financial advisers. Nor is it clear, if the two forms of duty are to be given different content, why the duty a mortgage broker owes to a borrower should differ from the duty a financial adviser owes a retail client,” he said.

Hayne made these remarks after considering the evidence given to the royal commission in the form of a letter from former CBA chief executive Ian Narev to Stephen Sedgwick. The letter outlined that broker loans were associated with higher leverage, are more likely to be interest-only, have higher LVRs and higher interest costs than those originated by the bank directly.

“There is no reason to doubt the accuracy of these findings,” Mr Hayne said. “They were the findings that ASIC recorded in its Review of Mortgage Broker Remuneration published in March 2017.”

The big questions

In the 10th chapter of Hayne’s interim report, he posted 15 questions about consumer lending, which he will presumably clarify via recommendations made in the final report next month. These questions should be front of mind for anyone working in consumer lending.

As you will see, there is a clear focus on the role of the intermediary, the role of the lender and the responsible lending guidelines outlined in the NCCP Act:

What duties does an intermediary owe to a borrower?

What duties should an intermediary owe to a borrower?

How can entities’ systems be improved to detect and prevent breaches of responsible lending obligations by intermediaries?

Are “introducer” programs compatible with responsible lending obligations?

Do broker contracts, as they stood at the time of the hearings, meet the statutory requirement imposed by Section 912A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to have arrangements in place to manage conflicts of interests? Do broker contracts, as now made, meet those requirements?

What should be disclosed to borrowers about an intermediary’s obligations to the lender and to the borrower?

What should be disclosed to borrowers about an intermediary’s remuneration?

What steps, consistent with responsible lending obligations, should a lender take to verify a borrower’s expenses?

Do the processes used by lenders, at the time of the hearings, to verify borrowers’ expenses meet the requirements of the NCCP Act? Do the processes now used meet those requirements?

Should the HEM continue to be used as a benchmark for borrowers’ living expenses?

Is the offer of a credit limit increase, where the customer has consented to receive such marketing, consistent with the NCCP Act obligation not to provide credit that is not unsuitable for the customer, having regard to their requirements and objectives? Is the offer of a credit limit increase based only on information held by the bank about a customer a breach of the NCCP Act obligation to take reasonable steps to verify the consumer’s financial situation?

When an employee or intermediary is terminated for fraud or other misconduct, should a licensee inform their clients of the reason for termination?

When an employee or intermediary is terminated for fraud or other misconduct, should a licensee review all the files or clients of that employee or intermediary for an incidence of misconduct?

Are certain types of add-on insurance, by their nature, poor value propositions for customers?

https://www.ratemyagent.com.au/real-estate-agent/linda-debello/reviews/4-58-groth-rd-boondall-aandvu http://ljgrealestate.com.au/property/4-58-groth-road-boondall-qld-4034/ https://youtu.be/n-9VakTna0k https://youtu.be/HksWDitbetY

  KPMG chief economist Brendan Rynne attributed recent price falls to lending controls imposed by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA), as well as state taxation measures, which he said has a “significant effect” on the housing market.

Mr Rynne added: “There has been a falling-away in foreign interest, notably from China, and lending to domestic buyers has got stricter, while housing supply has increased.

“This is why prices have declined – but we believe that process will reach its peak over the next few months and then go into reverse later this year.”

However, despite forecasting a price recovery in 2021 across Sydney and Melbourne, KPMG noted that its forecast was predicated on current credit conditions and warned that a further tightening off the back of the financial services royal commission could prolong housing market weakness.

“To the extent, this availability of credit becomes tighter beyond what we have assumed in our analysis, then our house price forecasts are likely to be optimistic,” the KPMG report noted.

“It is important to highlight that an overreaction to the Hayne royal commission by the domestic banking sector that results in a tightening of credit more than what would be considered necessary to achieve ‘normal’ prudential lending standards could have a seriously negative effect on dwelling prices in Australia.”

[contact-form]

Only a few weeks remain until the royal commission hands down its final report. Here are a few things to look out for when the final report is published on 1 February:

Only a few weeks remain until the royal commission hands down its final report. Its recommendations could be deadly in the hands of overzealous politicians approaching a federal election.

Only a few weeks remain until the royal commission hands down its final report. Here are a few things to look out for when the final report is published on 1 February: Only a few weeks remain until the royal commission hands down its final report. Its recommendations could be deadly in the hands of overzealous politicians approaching a federal election.

[badthingstrumpdidtoday]

A Summary of Bad Things Trump Did This Week, 2/5/17-2/11/17

It’s been quite a week indeed. While we may not have been able to provide daily coverage on the bad things Trump did, here’s a summary of this week’s worst offenders.

Trump says that a new healthcare law to replace the ACA may not be ready until 2018

Source: The New York Times

Mr. Trump acknowledged that replacing former President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act is complicated, though he reiterated his confidence that his administration could devise a plan that would work better than the law — despite having provided few details of how such a plan would work.

“You have to remember Obamacare doesn’t work, so we are putting in a wonderful plan,” Mr. Trump said.

Speaker Paul D. Ryan has vowed to move legislation for a replacement for the Affordable Care Act by the end of March. But some Republicans are worried about a political backlash if they repeal the law without an adequate replacement — potentially throwing millions of people off their insurance — and have urged a more methodical approach.

Trump threatens to defund California over potential sanctuary state status

Source: CNBC

In a 2016 analysis by WalletHub that ranked most and least federally dependent states, the Golden State came in at number 46 on the list.

However, the University of California receives at least $9 billion in an assortment of grants, financial aid and research—all of which could be imperiled if Trump made good on a threat he made last week to deprive the university of funds in response to protests that roiled the school.

Trump claims that any negative polls are fake news

Source: The Hill, Independent

Image taken from Donald Trump’s Twitter page

Trump also said that "everyone knows" he calls his own shots, "largely based on an accumulation of data."

"I call my own shots, largely based on an accumulation of data, and everyone knows it. Some FAKE NEWS media, in order to marginalize, lies!" he tweeted.

An article in the Independent always provides coverage of these recent tweets, and can be read HERE.

Betsy DeVos confirmed as Education Secretary by tie-breaking vote from VP Mike Pence

Source: The New York Times, The Washington Post, Reuters

Despite a majority of Republicans voting in DeVos’ favor, two broke ranks and voted against her confirmation:

The two Republicans who voted against the nominee, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, said Ms. DeVos was unqualified because of a lack of familiarity with public schools and with laws meant to protect students.

“I have serious concerns about a nominee to be secretary of education who has been so involved in one side of the equation, so immersed in the push for vouchers, that she may be unaware of what actually is successful within the public schools, and also what is broken and how to fix them,” Ms. Murkowski said last week when the two announced their opposition.

The Washington Post and Reuters provide additional coverage of the confirmation results, which can be found HERE and HERE.

Trump incorrectly claims that murder rates in the US are highest they’ve been in 47 years

Source: CNN

"I'd say that in a speech and everybody was surprised because the press doesn't like to tell it like it is," Trump said during a meeting with US sheriffs at the White House. "It wasn't to their advantage to say that. The murder rate is the highest it's been in I guess 45-47 years."

But the reason there's no reporting on a 45- or 47-year high murder rate is because the US murder rate isn't even close to such record highs.

Trump repeatedly cited this faulty figure during his presidential campaign as he sought to paint the US as besieged by crime unseen in decades presenting his leadership as necessary to clean up the country.

The reality is that the US murder rate in 2015, the latest full year available, was lower than it was 45 years prior.

Jeff Sessions confirmed as Attorney General

Source:  Reuters

Sessions was confirmed by a Senate vote 52-47, almost exclusively along part lines. The New York Times provides a breakdown of how the Senate voted HERE.

Trump reports he’s surprised at how big the job of being president is in an interview with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly

Source: Independent

The leader of the free world told Fox News interviewer Bill O'Reilly he works "long hours" and often gets only about four or five hours' sleep a night.

Mr Trump said that at the start of his presidency he has been surprised by "the size, the magnitude of everything" and being president can be a "surreal experience in a certain way".

Trump’s national security adviser Michael Flynn reportedly discussed potential American sanctions on Russia with the Russian ambassador

Source: The New York Times, NY Daily News

Despite his initial claims otherwise, Flynn is reported to have spoken to Russian ambassador regarding the Trump administration’s stance on Russia, among other things:

Throughout the discussions, the message Mr. Flynn conveyed to the ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak — that the Obama administration was Moscow’s adversary and that relations with Russia would change under Mr. Trump — was unambiguous and highly inappropriate, the officials said.

The accounts of the conversations raise the prospect that Mr. Flynn violated a law against private citizens’ engaging in diplomacy, and directly contradict statements made by Trump advisers. They have said that Mr. Flynn spoke to Mr. Kislyak a few days after Christmas merely to arrange a phone call between President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and Mr. Trump after the inauguration.

This information directly contradicts statements given on the subject by Vice President Mike Pence, which the NY Daily News reports on HERE. That article by the Daily News also goes on to state that Flynn later backtracked on his statement regarding whether sanctions were discussed during the phone call:

Flynn initially denied the allegations but later walked that back, telling the Post through a spokesperson "that while he had no recollection of discussing sanctions, he couldn't be certain that the topic never came up."

Trump takes aim at Senator John McCain over criticism of mission in Yemen

Source: CNBC

The Arizona Republican, who was briefed on last month's mission, told NBC News on Wednesday that he cannot call it a success "when you lose a $75 million airplane and, more importantly, an American life is lost."

In addition to the death of Chief Petty Officer William Owens, the mission resulted in the death of an 8-year old child.

Donald Trump thinking seriously about potentially moving U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem

Source: CNBC

Trump’s remarks to Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom may signify an increasing divide between his and the previous administration’s stances on the Israel-Palestine conflict:

The inflammatory promise – made on the campaign trail – has been condemned by the international community.

Observers worry such a symbolic move could spark renewed violence in Israel and the Muslim world, and risks showing the US is no longer interested in pursuing a two-state solution.

Trump reportedly to approve weapons sale to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain that was blocked by Barack Obama

Source: The Washington Times, Independent

While the White House declined to discuss its plans, one U.S. official directly involved in the transfers told The Washington Times that a roughly $300 million precision-guided missile technology package for Riyadh and a multibillion-dollar F-16 deal for Bahrain are now in the pipeline ready for clearance from the new administration.

The deals, if approved, would send a significant signal about the priorities of the new administration, where the security challenge posed by forces such as Islamist jihadi groups and Iran is taking a much greater precedence in setting foreign policy.

Additional coverage from the Independent can be found HERE.

Trump brings up voter fraud in meeting with several current and former U.S. Senators

Source: Politico

Trump reportedly began discussing voter fraud due to the presence of former Senator Kelly Ayotte, who was defeated in her recent bid for reelection:

The president claimed that he and Ayotte both would have been victorious in the Granite State if not for the “thousands” of people who were “brought in on buses” from neighboring Massachusetts to “illegally” vote in New Hampshire.

According to one participant who described the meeting, “an uncomfortable silence” momentarily overtook the room.

Hillary Clinton narrowly won New Hampshire’s four electoral votes over Trump by nearly 3,000 votes. Ayotte’s margin of defeat was even slimmer: 743 votes.

Trump promises to win fight over travel ban, while referring to potentially signing off on a new order

Source: BBC

Despite his original travel ban having been temporarily blocked by a judge in Seattle, Trump refers to possibly drafting and signing off on a new order instead:

Flying to Florida on Friday afternoon, the president told reporters: "We'll win that battle. The unfortunate part is it takes time. We'll win that battle. But we also have a lot of other options, including just filing a brand new order."

It is unclear what a new order might look like. Mr Trump said it would change "very little".

Want to learn more about how we can stop more bad sh*t from happening?

Donate to charities dedicated to fighting against the Trump agenda.

Learn from former congressional staffers on best practices for making your representative listen to you.

Register to vote in the November 6, 2018 Congressional midterm elections, save the date, and vote!

Learn how to run for office or get involved in your local political party.

Attend peaceful political protests and know your rights as a protestor.

Support organizations dedicated to investigative journalism and protecting our First Amendment rights.

Be sure to follow for tomorrow’s Bad Things Trump Did Today.

[danithebelcher]

Dear Members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions,

We are a collection of current and former career civil servants at the U.S. Department of Labor (the “Department”). We write in our capacity as private citizens to express our serious concerns about Mr. Andrew Puzder’s nomination to serve as the Secretary of Labor, and to request that the Committee vote against Mr. Puzder’s nomination. None of us has joined a letter like this one before; we feel compelled to do so now because of our serious concerns as to whether Mr. Puzder would be able or willing to serve as a conscientious steward of the statutes that the Department is charged with enforcing and the precious rights that the Department is responsible for protecting. We believe that three specific factors disqualify Mr. Puzder from serving as the head of an agency whose primary mission is to protect America’s workforce: (1) Mr. Puzder’s own business practices; (2) his derisive public comments about his restaurants’ employees and other low-wage workers; and (3) his equally troubling public comments and behavior towards women.

First, we are alarmed that Mr. Puzder has presided over a company, CKE Restaurants, whose franchises have repeatedly been found responsible by the Department for violating employment laws—namely, the Fair Labor Standards Act and Occupational Safety and Health Act. It is true that there may be worse offenders in the fast food industry. Nonetheless, conducting business in an industry where others routinely violate the law is no license for engaging in similar conduct. The Secretary of Labor should be someone who exhibits exemplary behavior as an employer, not someone for whom violations of employment laws is routine.

In the anti-discrimination context, Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr. have had more federal discrimination lawsuits brought against them since 2000, when Mr. Puzder took over, than any other major hamburger chain. At least one of these cases has resulted in a consent agreement with CKE itself, not merely with its franchisees, implicating Mr. Puzder’s failure to take the necessary steps to eliminate CKE’s discriminatory practices. Although the Department does not enforce Title VII, the Department does enforce anti-discrimination law in other contexts, such as in our review of federal contractors’ compliance with anti-discrimination mandates. The Secretary of Labor should be a leader in opposing employment discrimination, not the head of a company that is a leading defendant in discrimination lawsuits.

It is also true that many of the violations at CKE restaurants have occurred in facilities operated by franchisees rather than by CKE itself. However, our experience as the guardians of our nation’s employment laws has taught us that such violations often occur as the result of incentives or practices created by the franchisor. We were therefore unsurprised to see a recent report that CKE corporate has apparently sent a memorandum to its franchisees setting forth a company policy that workers are prohibited from speaking to the press. When franchisors wish to impose policies on franchisees and take a strong stand against violations committed by their franchisees, they have the means to do so: most franchise agreements require franchisees to comply with the law and not to generate negative publicity. We are not aware of any instances in which Mr. Puzder elected to use such provisions to curb the unlawful behavior of his franchisees. Notably, the franchisor of the world’s largest restaurant chain has done so.

Regardless of whether CKE, as a franchisor, is legally liable for the violations perpetrated by its franchisees, it has a moral obligation to use its considerable power over its franchisees to ensure that they are complying with the law. A Secretary of Labor who has experience in business could well provide a valuable perspective that would help inform the policy decisions the Department makes every day. However, such an individual should be a leader in his or her own industry in complying with the law—not someone who has benefited from violations of the law, even if formal legal structures protect him and his company from liability.

Our concerns about Mr. Puzder’s business practices are magnified by his public comments that demonstrate hostility to the laws that the Department enforces. We are particularly disturbed by Mr. Puzder’s widely publicized comment that replacing employees with automated machines would be desirable because machines are “always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there’s never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case.” Our concern about this comment is not the acknowledgement that work is becoming more automated—the rise of automation is a reality that it is proper, even wise, for a Secretary of Labor to acknowledge.

However, Mr. Puzder’s remarks reveal insensitivity to employees’ rights, their needs as human beings, and the importance of protections against discrimination. We fear that Mr. Puzder’s comments evince hostility to the enforcement of workers’ rights that is antithetical to the public-facing role that the Secretary of Labor must play. The Secretary of Labor is the highest public official tasked with protecting workers against employers who discriminate against them, fail to maintain a safe workplace, or deny employees statutory rights to take leave. Many of us regularly interact with workers as part of our duties, and those interactions have taught us that workers listen to what the Department’s leaders say and take cues from them when deciding whether and how to exercise their rights. Having a Secretary of Labor who has publicly complained that his own workers demand vacation, compensation for injuries, and the right not to suffer discrimination would send a terrible message to workers considering whether to turn to the Department for protection and to vindicate their rights. That message, if associated with the Secretary of Labor, would undermine the Department’s mission.

We are similarly concerned about Mr. Puzder’s comments about his restaurants’ employees as being (at varying times) either “the worst of the worst” or “the best of the worst.” We find extremely troubling Mr. Puzder’s degrading tone towards his own restaurants’ employees and other low-wage restaurant workers. No individual deserves being described as “the worst” merely because he or she is employed in a low-wage industry or lacks education or job training. Such descriptions further stigmatize a struggling subset of workers in ways that are harmful and hurtful to them and those of us who care about them. Such comments also express a lack of empathy for and understanding of the struggles and challenges faced by large numbers of vulnerable American workers. We believe that such empathy and understanding are critical qualifications in a Secretary of Labor, regardless of what policy solutions that Secretary may choose to offer to address the problems that low-wage workers face.

We are also extremely concerned about Mr. Puzder’s comments about women. Striving for equality for women in the workplace is central to the efforts of the Department. Mr. Puzder’s enthusiastic embrace of the sexualized advertisements his company has run makes us worried that Mr. Puzder is ill-fit to grapple with the subtle ways that perceptions of women in the workplace affect their everyday working experience. (One of us once heard a colleague ask, quite seriously, whether it would violate workplace rules of civility and prohibitions against sexual harassment to view Mr. Puzder’s ads on a government computer. We think the question is a good one.) Mr. Puzder has proudly embraced those sexualized advertisements. He not only said that, “I don’t have a problem with our ads,” but even went so far as to boast that his brand has taken on his own personality. Mr. Puzder unapologetically declares, “ugly ones [i.e., women] don’t sell burgers.” A nominee to become the Secretary of Labor should be ashamed of having made such a statement.

Our concerns about Mr. Puzder’s attitudes towards women are exacerbated by the allegations we have heard regarding his personal involvement in acts of domestic violence. Although Mr. Puzder’s ex-wife has subsequently withdrawn her allegations, the fact that she aired them anonymously on “The Oprah Winfrey Show”—something she would have no incentive to do if her charges were being made falsely for personal gain—gives us pause about Mr. Puzder’s personal conduct. These allegations, combined with Mr. Puzder’s sexualizing comments about the women in his commercials, make us worry that Mr. Puzder is incapable of fostering a supportive and fair workplace for the thousands of women who work at the Department and the millions of working women across our nation.

Because of his business practices and his degrading public comments about low-wage workers and women, we strongly urge the Committee to vote against Mr. Puzder’s nomination as Secretary of Labor. Our concerns about Mr. Puzder are not premised on any policy disagreements some of us may have with him. Rather, we firmly believe that this nominee has not demonstrated a sufficient commitment to, or faith in, the laws that the Department is charged with enforcing. We do not take this step lightly; we take it because America’s workers deserve better. We thank you for considering our views.

[allineednow]

Here's your 'Putin Did It!' Survival Guide...

This article first appeared in November 2016 on GR.

As the Duran reported, it was only a matter of time before the ‘Putin Did It’ (see The Duran Lexicon for more) line crept back into the news in light of a re-opened FBI investigation, following the discovery more incriminating Hillary Clinton emails. Sure enough, Howard Dean, the guy who ended his own presidential campaign by acting like a crazed hooligan on stage, has said that now the FBI and Putin are on the same side.

This comes days after Putin reassured the world that he really doesn’t want, need or care to meddle in the US election. Of course the usual suspects from the western mainstream media don’t hear Putin because he’s too damn reasonable. It appears that western mainstream media are confounded by Putin’s calm, his consistency, his logic and moreover from the fact that he doesn’t seem too perturbed about the issues that western pundits go hysterical over on a daily basis.

To be able to make life simpler for those who ‘question more’ in the following week,  I’t come up with a list of the varieties of people who say ‘Putin did it’ and why.

1. THE OLD ANTI-SOVIET COLD WARRIOR WITH IMAGINARY NUKES AT THE READY

This is an group of people who lost their raison d’etre following the Soviet Union's prohibited break-up. Like the members of the CPSU who rallied against the leadership of Gorbachev in 1991, the loss of power equally devastated this wide variety of person. The lack of the USSR meant that they could talk about nuking Moscow in order from Communism; to & lsquo; rsquo & free the people. In an instant they went from being defenders of freedom, to trigger happy weirdos.

But life has recently got a lot better for them. These people go home at night faking the leader of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation isn't  Gennady Zyuganov  however Vladimir Putin. To them the Soviet Union is back and so too is the wonderful crusade against it.

Many of these people couldn’t care less about Hillary Clinton’her crimes against everybody from Bernie Sanders to foreign heads of state and s mails. They’re happy that a mainstream political figure has allowed them to once more feel relevant. The USSR is back, it has to be destroyed by any means necessary and the former Goldwater supporter Hillary Clinton is their type of gal. Put on your cowboy boots…

2. THE PATHOLOGICAL ANTI-RUSSIAN RACIST

This group has roots which date back far beyond America’s ascension as a world power. Unlike the previous group, these people are no laughing matter. Where the anti-Soviet cold warriors have a particular Dr. Strangelove worth to them, one which even in 1960s America wasn’t fully taken seriously, the anti-Russian racists have been spreading vile propaganda in the west for centuries.

To these people, Russians are barbaric by design. They are expendable and their country is fit as they see fit to be used by powers. This mindset reached a fevered pitch during the so-called ‘Great Game’ between Britain and Russia from the mid to late 19th century.

The kind of propaganda held that Russians have no education no culture, no civilisation and most importantly,  that Orthodox Christianity is a poor faith vis-à-vis varieties of Western Christianity. This was said in spite of Orthodoxy’s direct connection.

When Sir Halford John Mackinder suggested that Russia should be used as a region that the west must control in order to better dominate the Orient this mindset was later elevated to the realm of pseudoscience. According to these people, rsquo, Russia wasn &;t even worthy of colonising, it was a motorway that ought in order to get to the final destination to be pacified.

These ideas consequently became highly dangerous under the Nazis and were refined. Hitler sought Lebensraum or living space for the German race. To be able to achieve this, so Hitler could use the land to provide resources for the races, mainly Russians, Slavic populations, had to be eliminated.

Their attitudes have a similar origin, although few of those & lsquo; Putin Did It & rsquo; brigade associate themselves with Hitler. It is a deep set mindset whereby those of western European lineage and those of a Western Christian persuasion believe they're implicitly superior to Russians, black people, Jewish people, Orthodox Christians, Arabs, all Asian people and indigenous peoples of the Americas and Oceania.     Russia is the target because unity and of the power of the Russian state. But do not be fooled.   These folks are old fashioned western racists, they’re just more careful about whom they publicly insult these days.

3. THE BORING, WILFULLY IGNORANT LIBERAL

‘Putin isn’t a liberal therefor he MUST be bad’: so goes the mantra of those who speak about Russia in a negative light and blame them for everything from the local health food store running from inedible garbage to the fact that their loser kids failed a recent maths examination.

For them, Russia has a DUTY to be a state, because that’s the way the world should be. There’s a racist element to this thinking. Because they see Russia as a state of ‘white folks,’ they expect Russia to do as European nations do and adopt the post-identity liberal way where to quote the song Lola by The Kinks ‘Girls will be boys and boys will be girls It’s a mixed up muddled up shook up world’.

They're incensed not by Russia’s alleged lack of democracy but because Russia is democratic and actively decide to do things the Russian way instead of the liberal European way. Of course this doesn’t match the story Putin is currently forcing Russians to have what they need in a way that is totally undemocratic.

In the event you’re looking for don, logic’t attempt a conversation with one of these liberals. These people know nothing about Russia, they cannot think anyone who looks vaguely wouldn’t want to be like liberals that are good. It must be a result of ‘oppression’.

The insincerity of the pseudo-compassion is exposed. Most of these people reckon they are pros that are Putin and can tell you composed stories concerning all you will need to know about Putin from his childhood to & lsquo; rig the election & rsquo;.

Less familiar to such people will be the titles, Alexander Yakovlev, Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais.   These folks are often wilfully ignorant that western bandits such as George Soros acted in collusion with Russian traitors from the 1990s to stave the Russian folks. When they hear that in the liberal 1990s, young men were committing suicide left and right, the elderly were starving and homeless, young women who would have been scientists, teachers, athletes or musicians were forced into prostitution; they just tend to cover their ears. To them, the precious story is more suitable than the fact of what Russia’s experimentation did to the lives of Russians.

So go on, ignore reality, and don’t choke on your gluten free smoothie. Keep calm and remember lsquo, & the problem;Putin did it’.

4. THE ‘CAN’T HAPPEN HERE’ TRUE BELIEVER

Unlike the groups, I pity these people. These are the people who were brought up to think ‘the west is the best’. In the west the truth is told by the newspapers and in other areas they're full of lies. Western politicians are honourable men and women who go to improve the lives of their countrymen. There is t and everywhere else there isn & rsquo; free speech. In the west, everybody is honest.

WRONG!

These folks are confounded to lean that powers are as bad or worse than the faraway places they’ve are vastly underdeveloped and backward vis-à-vis the west. These people still believe the myth even though the age of Wikileaks, new media such as  The Duran and RT, social media and an inter-connected world, has made such beliefs increasingly difficult to maintain.

For them, the clichés about ‘truth justice and the American (or French, or British, or Swedish or Dutch) way’ must be clung onto because it makes them feel safe in the world and absolves them of any guilt for voting for war criminals and con-artists.

5. HILLARY CLINTON

She does deserve her own category. Seneca said, “Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful”. This quote goes a long way in describing the modus-operandi of Hillary Clinton. She'll say anything to anyone so as to gain some type of advantage that is electoral, economic or general.

I truly think that Hillary Clinton understands that Putin did NOT do it. But she has found a way to simultaneously exploit wicked racists stupid liberals , old Cold Warriors and believers. It was outside her, those of the world and just after Putin and Trump said some vaguely things about one another that Hillary Clinton started blaming Putin for every one of her own ills.

This demonstrates that the ‘Putin did it’ line is a child of opportunism rather than ideology. Had Trump and China's leaders said vaguely things about each other ‘China did it’ might have easily been her mantra.

However, Donald Trump was underestimated by Hillary Clinton. To quote George W. Bush, perhaps she even ‘misunderestimated’ Trump. Where many less independent minded leaders would have buckled under pressure and eventually said, ‘yes Putin is bad, sorry Mrs. Hillary you can spank me now’, Trump stuck to his principles and he should be lauded for it.

Trump has consistently said that although he doesn’t have a relationship with Putin he would like a good one because, collaboration between superpowers is far better than conflict, because a common policy on ISIS is much far better than a hypocritical and confused one and because Putin is a man who inherently controls respect, something which Donald Trump finds rightly admirable.

The moral of the story is, Hillary Clinton can fool a lot of the people a lot of the time but she cannot fool everybody all of the time. Donald Trump’s has made this especially so.

So there you have it. Your ‘Putin Did It’ survival manual. I have a feeling that over the next week it will be useful.

The original source of this article is The Duran

Copyright ©Adam Garrie, The Duran, 2017

[honeybeelily]

A question was asked....

....of me over the weekend. I have no idea in what way the comment was meant as it was via lovely Facebook but it has been bothering me. I did not reply back. I have not said anything still. However I have spent a great deal thinking about this small, insignificant comment.

“Has anyone told you the election is over.”

I was awake watching the results on November 8th. I was there with fellow Americans, the nation, and the world watching the results unfold with bated breath. I was one of the 65,800,000+ Americans that was devastated by the results, unable to catch my breath.

Yes, I know the election is over.

I was angry. I was disappointed. I was disgusted. A man who had no problem saying "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful [women]—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything ... Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." was elected of the free world.

To be fair, Hillary wasn’t my original candidate either. Yet we aligned on many different topics the most. The longer Cheeto ran, the more I desired her to win for I felt she stood more for democracy than he did. But that didn’t matter, did it? Even though she was the more popular candidate she still lost the election.

After a while, politically I went quiet. I retreated from the news and social media to digest the loss as much as I could. To focus on the things I could directly control like the safety of my staff against hate and abuse. Yet even that came under scrutiny. “Then just move.” Yes, because I can just pack up and move to some magical place that racism, hate, bigotry, sexism, misogyny, and ignorance doesn’t exist. Like I don’t have responsibilities and obligations that I can just drop and move. You know, a husband and career.

I shed tears when I heard the electoral college voted Cheeto into office. Again I was angry but I tried to keep quiet. “Give him a chance.” I thought. “Maybe it was all a show and he will actually do right by America. Maybe I was wrong.” I hoped and prayed more than I ever have in my entire life. After a very long and painful 2016, I prayed that 2017 would be kinder, wiser, and more loving than any year before.

Then January 20th, 2017 happened.

The day I gave up any form of faith as I watched how Melanie show clear signs of abuse. Something I am unfortunately intimately familiar with. The day I watched the first President I had ever voted for leave the oval office for the final time. The day I felt that everything negative about humanity had won. The day we became the most divided.

Within 24 hours my greatest fears for this nation were confirmed. Our President accused that millions voted illegally for Hillary even though there is zero proof to support this (Actually, some woman did illegally vote, for him). Betsy DeVos was announced as the choice for Education Secretary. You seriously think this woman deserves to head education? We are already struggling with educating our young and we want to condemn them further? I remember public school and there are far worse school’s than mine.

Executive action to repeal the ACA which will end up restricting health insurance to millions of people from the man that wants to reinstate “Pre Existing Conditions” back into play. This would effect my family just like the millions around the country. Oh, don’t forget there is no replacement plan on the table last I heard.

However the bad news didn’t stop there, did it? Scott Pruitt to head the EPA. Climate change removed from the White House Website while scientists are being silenced about it (You know, national parks setting up alternate twitter accounts to continue to inform people of science facts.) Not to mention the other multiple federal agencies ordered not to speak to the press. Instead we are getting “Alternate Facts” which are utter bullshit.

He pledged to sign FADA, a legalized form of discrimation against the LGBTQ community. The ban on Green Card & Visa holders from 7 middle east countries and detaining them from their families and responsibilities for “The Security Of The Nation” while conveniently leaving out Saudi Arabia where he has a business and, where one could argue, many terrorists can come from too. It also supports discriminating against a person’s faith. Don’t forget the Muslim register that could go into effect. *Cough* Like the persecution of Jews *Cough*

The Senate wanting to strip away a woman’s right to bodily autonomy and the health care associated with it. Pushing the Pro-Life agenda without having any plan in place to support the children you are forcing us to have. And don’t you dare give me the bullshit about keeping my legs closed when there are studies showing that sexual activity builds a closer and healthier relationship with your spouse. Or the long term environmental effects each life has. You know, the fact this planet cannot sustain life if we continue down the path we are currently on.

Keystone XL & Dakota Access pipelines are going forward again. Cheeto and cabinet members still using their personal electronics for government duties and responsibilities. Wasn’t that what you were all upset about with Hillary? #Thefuckingwall. Not only is this one of the dumbest things he wants to implement, it does not foster any good will with other countries which we really need. I would rather spend my tax dollars on education, infrastructure, health, and science.

I’m sure I’m missing several other key pieces of information but I think you get the idea. If you voted for Cheeto, for whatever reason, I do not hate, dislike, or unlove you. I respect you used your American privilege to vote for who you thought was right. I will not attack, torment, or be prejudice of you. But I do not have to respect him as many of you did not respect Obama. I will not say his name, he has not earned it in my book. Yes, I know the election is over. But did you know…

In the words of Agent Carter “..Doesn’t matter if the whole country decides something WRONG is something RIGHT. This nation was founded on the one principle above all else: The requirement that we stand up for what we believe, no matter the odds or consequences…..When the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world. ‘No, YOU move.’ “

I will not stand quietly by as people’s rights are taken away out of fear. I will not quietly stand as a dictator tries to silence the people, which violates our most sacred amendment, the first amendment. I will not stand by as our rights are attempted to be taken away by a proven Nazi (Bannon). I will not stand for injustice, racism, hate, bigotry, sexism, misogyny, and ignorance. I will not fear.

I will march. I will call my representative. I will read and educate myself. I will have discussions. I will advocate for every man, woman, child regardless of the color of their skin or the choice of religious faith. I will stand for your right to your opinion even if they are on the opposite sides. I will be peaceful in my protest but I will also refuse to move. Let me be the first to say that I’m sure I don’t have all the facts. I’m sure there is more to everything than we will ever know. I’m sure more information will continue to come out and we will all have to navigate the waters of journalism and decide what is truth nor will we all agree. But I will fight for you, myself, friends, family, strangers, and mostly importantly our future.

“A day may come when the courage of men fails, When we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, But it is not this day.

An hour of woes and shattered shields, When the age of men comes crashing down, But it is not this day…..this day we fight.” -Aragorn

Yes, I know the election if over. But do you know the #Resistance is revived?