#those are Not the primary characters I associate with those VAs I just thought they were a good pair thematically

[clannfearrunt]

Sometimes locating a voiceclaim just consists of watching television normally and having a moment such as “oh wow Akira Miki is perfect for this character of mine”. And sometimes it’s more like desperately swinging a bat around going “I KNOW both of them technically fit the criteria I just described for this character but will the specters of Minami Takayama and Rica Matsumoto that haunt my fucking life PLEASE vacate the premises”

[hunterguyveriv]

An Old Voltron Fan’s rant

A Voltron-Old Timer’s unapologetic rant on certain factions of fans:

So it has been a week since Season-7 dropped and as a fan of the original Voltron since that fateful day in September, I have grown to love anything Voltron that is made and grow sad to see it’s inevitable end looming on the horizon. That being said some factions new fandom members have gotten really tiresome and annoying to the point that they need to grow up. Somethings you all may not agree with, but this is my view of the fandom.

I normally don't do anything like this but seeing nasty posts, posted to voice actors *referencing a particular Klance fan*, and to @bext-k and anyone else associated with Voltron: Legendary Defender who may be on Tumblr, I want to apologize for that part of the fanbase, you should not be hassled or have to write a letter apologizing for “apparent queerbaiting.” but I have to speak my mind, on the whole, the issue. As an old-time Voltron Fan, that person and his friends/supporters DO NOT speak for me! And if you are one of those who does happen to be in the LGBT Community and still loved everything about the season or disliked it but didn’t go to such extremes like some have, then this need not apply to and for that, sorry you have to see such ugliness from this post.

Over the seasons I have heard of the nastiness fans have had about certain things “needing to appear in “Voltron: Legendary Defender,” but then I saw it after Season first hand from a fan who proudly posted his nasty posts to a Voice Actress of the show. To that person and people like him, who the hell do you think you are? I understand that you are “UPSET” about many things reading through your childish “look at me” posts.

First let us take a look at the definition of “Queerbaiting:”

Queerbaiting, according to a definition I found is: “the practice to hint at, but then to not actually depict, a same-sex romantic relationship between characters in a work of fiction, mainly in film or television. The potential romance may be ignored, explicitly rejected or made fun of.”

Besides Shiro's flashbacks where else are these hints in the series? Can you list each and every instance which hinted to 2 male characters or 2 female characters hooking up? So a male character hugs a male character repeatedly so what? So male characters smile at one another, or hug, or cradle an injured person in their arms. We as humans do that in general because we are an affectionate race. That has nothing to do with "queerbaiting." Some may source “well Keith and Lance are always paired together on missions.” Yes, it’s to get them to quit getting at each other’s throats an congeal as team members both in and out of combat. Those are instances and occurrences that does not certain characters are or will be gay.

So you didn't get what you and so many others wanted, that doesn't mean you have to be a little child about it and be nasty about it! I wanted Keith to be Native American, even civilly requested it, because my people need more representation in the media, but you know what? It would be nice, even though it doesn't seem like it will happen, I still enjoy the series. Which by the way, speaking representation, did the LGBT community request or demand representation for the Native American community? How about the mentally handicapped, Jewish, Muslim, or countless others? When is too much representation too much that it damages the show?!

If you want all the representation or headcanons you want in the world start writing your own fan fiction and post it on websites like Archive of Our Own, Fanfiction.net, or even DeviantArt. Just don't act like a pathetic little child and throw a hissy fit because you didn't get what you want. It’s called life, you don't get what you always want.

I admit I was a bit perturbed that they, the showrunners, first revealed that they made Shiro gay. Mainly because it seemed like the LGBT representation was being forced down everyone's throats just to appease those who “ship” him with male characters. But you know what I for one am glad we got what we got from Shiro & Adam. And I know some of you are going to and have said before “But we deserved to see Shiro and Adam reunite!” NO WE DON’T!

1, Shiro and Adam were broken up, because Shiro went on a mission that he needed to prove to himself that he can do. Adam even said so himself!

2, Adam dying is something that happens in war, especially war where a less prepared race goes up against a more advanced civilization. And if you take issue because him dying because he was involved with a primary character then you might as well stop watching a bunch of series, because it happens ALL THE TIME!

3. It showed that Shiro even though they were broken up was regretful and still had to focus on liberating Earth from the Galra. He had no true time to mourn yes, but in times of War, you generally don't have that luxury to do so. You have to continue the fight until it is over.

4. As some have even suggested, his death helped focus Shiro during a time he himself wasn't sure about himself.

Another thing, yes representation of Native Americans would be nice, but what would it have to do with the story before and after the reveal of a Native American character? NOTHING! What does Shiro/Adam or even Zethrid/Ezor have to do with the story from the 6 previous seasons and anything made after Season 7? NOTHING! What would having a Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, mentally handicapped character have to do with the story before and after the reveal? Once again NOTHING!

The whole drive of the show is “War is Hell.” Hell on those oppressed, hell on those fighting it, and hell for those left behind, and hell for those who survive. Sure some budding romances will result from it which I am about to go into, but this, in a cartoon about a giant robot beating the shit out of monsters, other robots, and evil alien ships, should be the ONLY representation that should be focused on. Not ones to make you feel all hunky dory on the inside or accepted. The showrunners know what they are doing, but if you think you can do better then please, by all means, purchase the rights to Voltron and make your own version. War is not a sugar coated thing where everyone lives happily ever after if you want to continue believing that then go back to watching your anime shows made for kids like Pokemon, Dragon Ball/Z/Super and leave the more thoughtful series to the adults. ANd if there are some fellow old timers here with me, they are more than likely to agree.

And if you think I am being homophobic I’m not. I have been questioned my own sexuality since 1992 but had to keep under-wraps because of family or where I live. I am happy they - the LGBT community, got their representation for what it was, but I am just fed up with the whole issue being forced down our throats.

Now onto the couples thing… pairings/couples/ships WHATEVER!

Now this whole “ship/shipping” thing... it's nice/new/bizarre/and downright stupid to me. Back in my time, we didn't call potential couples “ships” or went batshit crazy over something that looked like a character was crushing on another when there is nothing there. The fan fiction and fan art is spectacular and in most cases breathtaking, but in recent seasons it has really gotten out of hand with Voltron. The whole Sheith issue, only “shipping Keith with other male characters, praising pairings while condemning others.

Speaking of which, why is it okay to “ship” Lotor and Allura together even though he used her, but it's not okay to ship Keith and Acxa together or Keith and Romelle together? And don’t you dare say its because “Keith is clearly gay/bi” or that “shipping him with anyone else besides Character X is toxic” excuse - because those excuses have gotten stupid, old, and annoying. But I’ll wait for you to give me one nice solid instance...

So he smiled at Lance after they captured Sendak and Lance said: “We make a good team” that doesn't mean anything, so he smiled at Rolo that could very well be a reference to The Walking Dead because both VAs at the time were from TWD, so he hugs Shiro... So what! Speaking from experience Brother-Friends do this. He and James looked at each other when he returned to Garrison Base - and your point is? They never really liked each other to begin with. “He hasn’t shown much interest in the opposite sex,” um excuse me have you watched Season 1 episode 3? He was always smiling towards Allura. Plus have you ever took into consideration that maybe because he was secretly struggling with inner demons, demons Shiro only knew about, that maybe he just didn't want to get involved with anyone until he feels ready too or that maybe those he knows just doesn't interest him?

For all, we know Acxa maybe that one character that interests him over Allura, Romelle, Pidge, Nyma, Olia, or any other character with the exclusion of Krolia for obvious reasons. Let's state the obvious, she is the first person he meets face to face (eventually) who is a Galra-Hybrid, someone like him who he has the potential to connect with better than his Galra Mother, the Blade, or even the Paladins. And believe me, being a mixed blood myself sometimes it is a lot easier for us in this situation to connect more, we know things that those who aren't in the situation feel. They seem to be looking out for each other, regardless of whether it goes against their current allegiances at the time. And I for one support the idea of him hooking up with Acxa or even Romelle for the sake of argument over the Paladins for my own reasons. And yes that is coming from an old-timer who used to believe “If it is ANYTHING Voltron then it has to be Keith and Allura. That is the way of it, the way it has been, and should always be” up until Season 2.

Now really address the whole claim “Keith isn't interested in women, so he is gay" or “when confronted by the former general taunts he says ‘Can’t we just fight!’ means he is gay” posts when taunted: Have you ever considered that during an intergalactic war, that maybe if he were interested in someone like Acxa, he wouldn't want the enemy to know? Best way to cripple your foe is to target and exploit his or her weakness, and there is no greater weakness to someone than those who hold their heart. Whether it is lovers, parents, siblings, and so forth. Season 6 is a great example of Haggar exploiting it because Keith loved Shiro as a brother. Zethrid and Ezor knew Acxa had a thing for the flippity hair paladin and tried to exploit it and nearly succeeded.

Exposing your enemy’s one true weakness is one thing that is a constant in shows like this, you all should know this and shouldn't have someone point it out. Guyver-I and Mizuki Segawa, Batou and Motoko Kusanagi - since he clearly has a thing for her, Raphael and Mona Lisa of 2012 TMNT series, Superman and Lois Lane, Shiro Amada and Aina Sahalin, Krolia and both her mate & baby Keith, Swamp Thing and Abby Arcane, and so many others! Even Sonic the Hedgehog’s weakness prior to all the Sonic Adventure tie-in comics was Sally Acorn. Each of their enemies has tried to and have exploited this weakness in an attempt to achieve victory. So just because someone doesn't react to taunts like “Oh it must be true love” the way others may have, DOES NOT mean they are gay. Especially if they are part of a warrior class, they may exhibit some feelings for one another out in public or with friends but when they are alone they are free to be themselves.

Now I am not saying you can't “ship” characters with who you want, but if you see things you don't like just don't post things against it. Dial it back a bit for crying out loud. I don't like the idea of Sheith, Klance, or LoKei, Huneith but you don't see me bashing it or saying “Keith is obviously Heterosexual” or some shit like that. I scroll past it. To my understanding from scrolling through Tumblr, Twitter, and Facebook - before admins started to crack down on them, making a post like that is just as bad as posting hateful comments on posts supporting a particular pairing.

And to say things like “Well if Ship-X or Ship-Y becomes canon I am done with the series!” Well, you know what I say to that or those who think they are entitled to something? There’s the Voltron Door, don’t let it hit you on your way out! The series has lasted 30 plus years and will continue to do so without your entitled ass. Sure there are things that were done that I didn't like, but it is not worth sending blackmail/death threats to those involved or being nasty to those involved that it prompts the showrunners to issue an apology letter just to make you feel good about your nastiness.

In my opinion they, the showrunners, should never have apologized in the first place for all your hurt little feelings. The one thing THEY SHOULD apologize for, in my own opinion is ending the series (WHICH WE ARE LUCKY TO HAVE AFTER EVERYTHING NEGATIVE THAT HAS HAPPENED) so soon if indeed Season 8 turns out to be the final one! I’d have like to see it go for another 5 more seasons while bringing in the Vehicle Voltron now that Earth has literally become part of the “Galaxy Alliance,” and is now a prime target with Voltron there. Yes, I say Galaxy Alliance because Earth and the Galaxy Garrison are now part of the Voltron Alliance/Coalition.

Anyway, sure I had my frustrations and joys with Legendary Defender as an Old-Time Voltron fan but I still enjoyed it immensely. And regardless of what happens in the next season (whether it continues or not) and after I look forward to anything Voltron. And for those who keep in mind: there is ALWAYS the next series! 2011’s Voltron-Force was well received for a time but faded into the distance for Voltron: Legendary Defender. But with the nastiness of certain fans, we ALL must prove we deserve any more seasons, a newer series 5 to 10 years down the line, or an animated or live-action movie.

Well this is the end of my rant, like don’t like, applaud or get offended by it I don't care, this is how I see the actions of a certain few of this fandom effecting the rest of us who enjoy the series for what it is and not what we want it to be.

[tl-notes]

Konosuba Episode 4 Notes

When she says “that” here, she refers to it as “その子 (sono ko),” basically referring to it as a child and showing how attached she is to it.

The way he says the part about the debt, (借金は減らない shakkin wa heranai) implies more that the debt isn't going down, which sounded to me like they are paying it back, just in small enough amounts that it’s not actually shrinking it (either due to interest making it grow or it just being so big the amounts they've paid are insignificant).

I don’t actually know whether that’s true or not, but it’s the impression I got from how the line was worded.

The line here “心配させやがって shinpai sase yagatte” is basically “you had us worried” with the yagaru (conjugated as yagatte) excluded. Yagaru is a word you stick on the end of a verb that someone else has performed to indicate disdain/displeasure with the fact they did it. Usually it’s pretty rude and common to use when you’re angry at somebody, but in some cases between friends it basically serves as emphasis—pairing it with “causing worry” like seen here is common, in sort of a “you motherfucker, you worried the hell out of us!” kind of way (but not quite that vulgar).

These arranged marriage meeting (お見合い o-miai) things are still a thing in Japan nowadays, though less common. Basically the idea is that someone looking to get married will go through a third party (an agency that specializes in that sort of thing, or their parents’ network, etc.) who will find them someone that seems like would be a good match, and arrange a meeting between the two (usually showing a picture first, or rather several pictures and short profiles to choose from among). There’s no guarantee it will go anywhere and not too much commitment involved, but the explicit goal (in the modern context) is to start dating with the intent of getting married in the near future. It’s actually kind of like a marriage-focused precursor to online dating services.

The word for father she uses here (translated as “he”), is chichi (父). It’s a totally normal way to refer to your father when talking to non-family members...but it’s also a homophone for boobs (乳).

Kamiwaza (神業, “godly skills” here)  originally refers to various rituals relating to kami, or feats of skill so impressive that they’re almost like something only a god could accomplish.

Probably it’s most common modern usage is in video games, to describe that sick 360 no-scope or something like this.

The original line just mentions her having to stop being an adventurer, it leaves any “with us” to be inferred by the listener.

In addition to laughing at “Lalatina,” part of the joke is that Darkness is speaking in very formal, “ladylike” language, which doesn't exactly suit her character (at least as we/Kazuma/Aqua know it). Also the delivery of that wa at the end of the line sounds to me like it was supposed to sound forced, though maybe I'm just reading too much into it.

As an aside, wa as a sentence-ender can be used in gender-neutral ways, particularly when said with a descending tone, but when used with a rising tone is considered both feminine and sort of associated with fancy high-class language.

It’s trivial, but the phrase used for “pure” here is “kumori no nai 曇りのない,” a somewhat less poetic version of the same thing Aqua used in episode three. Basically the concept in both is that the eyes are unclouded [by greed/hate/other vices/etc.].

The fish here are, of course, koi, a popular and prestigious (and expensive) type of fish to have in gardens—not only in Japan, but abroad as well (where they are typically imported from Japan). I think these seem mostly to be of the Taisho Sanke variety, which have a white base with red and black patterning (Taisho comes from the fact they were first bred in the Taisho period, and Sanke means three colors).

There is a surprising level of depth to koi breeding, and breeders will go through several stages of selection, hand picking only the best, eventually narrowing down a starting pool of often over 200,000 at birth to just a few hundred at the end of the process. There some videos in English you can find here or here, or just through some googling.

If you’re ever near Niigata and have access to a car, a drive through the koi breeding areas in the mountains is a great way to spend a day.

Two (extremely) stereotypical elements of those marriage meetings are the parents sitting in at the beginning before bowing out, giving the two potential partners some privacy, and the question “Do you have any hobbies? (ご趣味は？Go-shumi wa?),” using that specific (and polite) phrasing.

You may have noticed he said “kawaii (可愛い)” here, which was translated as charming. You may also have thought, “but isn’t kawaii cute?” Well yes it is, but it’s also got a broader number of uses than just that. If you break down the kanji, it’s made of 可, which is used for things like acceptable/permissible/possible, etc., and 愛, the kanji for love (a more caring type of love, with passionate love being 恋 koi). Add the “adjectivizer” -i ending, and you've got a word that describes something that invokes feelings of love/affection, and so can range from cute to charming to lovable—though granted “cute” is the primary usage nowadays.

The word here is “hiku (引く),” a verb meaning “to pull.” It’s commonly used in contexts like this one to indicate something is creepy/gross/etc., as the speaker (or subject) is “pulling” back; you know, like leaning back/stepping back to create some distance because eww.

The names here are Kasuma and Kuzuma, both of which are in fact taking words for trash/garbage/etc. (kasu and kuzu) and portmanteau-ing them with his name. As you can see, they feel much less forced in the Japanese, but I guess there’s not much you can do about that unless you want to go with like Assuma or Scuzuma, which are their own brand of cringe-y.

The word here is dogeza (土下座), which is the word for getting on your knees and bowing such that your forehead touches the ground (though people don’t actually always touch head to ground). It’s the ultimate bow, used for the most sincere of apologizing or begging.

The word used here is shinsei (真性), meaning an inborn part of someone’s nature.

The word she uses for “already over” is jigo (事後), meaning “post- / after the [whatever]” but, especially when used by itself like here, is a common euphemism for “after sex.”

The laugh here (and all the other times she uses it in this episode) is fuhi, short for fuhihi, is a common laugh associated with having bad thoughts, kind of like “heh heh heh” or whatever in English. It’s also apparently associated with a meme created when Mika from Idolmaster Cinderella Girls used it when talking about how cute one of the other girls was, which itself was a joke on how Mika’s VA laughed like that out loud (in an embarrassing fashion) at a live event once. I don’t think this is particularly related to said meme though.

I learn the weirdest things doing these notes sometimes.

Maybe my ears are bad, but I'm fairly sure she just says Kazuma here, not one of the “trashy” nicknames.

“Tough love,” here and often in Japanese, is ai no muchi 愛の鞭, the “whip* of love,” which takes on a bit of extra meaning when said by Darkness.

*It can also be like, rod/stick, the kind from “spare the rod, spoil the child,” but generally muchi is the word for whip/lash so that’s typically the mental image.

[pabluesman]

The latest rant:

Look familiar?

So the Comey hearing came and went and, much like that trip to Disneyworld you took when you were a kid in 1974, it didn't quite live up to all the hype. The left has been crowing that it is an indictment of trump and proof that he is a dastardly villain, missing only the black cape and handlebar mustache. The right has been shrieking about how trump has been completely vindicated, the Russia story is completely made up, and Democrats are nothing more than a bunch of crybabies. Both of these groups are wrong, and both of them are indicative of the fundamental problem with our government these days. In addition to casting some much-needed sunlight on the shadowy dealings of the trump administration (fewer than liberals want, more than conservatives care to admit), it highlighted the basic dysfunction of our government: that every action, hearing, press conference, photo opportunity, floor speech, legislative debate, and so on is less about running the country than it is about scoring partisan points. I realize at this point there are probably a bunch of you out there saying "Well, DUH," like I have taken complete leave of my senses and lost all capacity for critical thinking. To which I say, this is my blog, dammit, and I can say what I want. Moving right along ... Of course, I can't expect you take my word for it, can I? Therefore, I am going to go through the hearing (I read the transcript. Twice. And took notes.) and present my thoughts on each observation. But first, the cast of characters. There is James Comey, of course, and donald trump, and Loretta Lynch and Bill and Hillary Clinton make guest appearances. Then there's the Senate Committee on Intelligence, in alphabetical order: Roy Blunt, R-MO, present Richard Burr, R-NC, Chairman, present Susan Collins, R-ME, present John Cornyn, R-TX, present Tom Cotton, R-AR, present Dianne Feinstein, D-CA, Former Chairman, present Kamala Harris, D-CA, present Martin Heinrich, D-NM, present Angus King, I-ME, present James Lankford, R-OK, present Joe Manchin, D-WV, present John McCain, R-AZ (Ex officio), present Mitch McConnell, R-KY (Ex officio), absent Jack Reed, D-RI (Ex officio), present Jim Risch, R-ID, present Marco Rubio, R-FL, present Chuck Schumer, D-NY (Ex officio), absent Mark Warner, D-VA, Vice-Chairman, present Ron Wyden, D-OR, present So now the stage is set, and we can dive right in. First observation: every single one of the Senators, with the exception of Marco Rubio, Martin Heinrich, Angus King, Tom Cotton, and John McCain took a moment to thank Comey for appearing, and most of those took an extra moment to acknowledge his service to country (some, like Jack Reed, were fine with a simple "Thank you for appearing," while others were more effusive). However, Rubio, Hienrich, King, Cotton, and McCain simply dispensed with all niceties and jumped right in to the questioning. Whether this is a good or bad I will leave up to the reader to decide. What follows is a member-by-member accounting of what happened. I will attempt to remain as factual as possible; where I veer off into the realm of opinion I will very clearly identify it as such. So, in order of appearance ... Richard Burr, R-NC (Chairman) Senator Burr took several minutes to a) thank Director Comey for appearing to testify, b) provide an overview of the Senate Intelligence Committee's mission in general and in terms of this hearing in particular, and c) to provide the basic framework under which the other members would be operating (seven minutes for each member, and so on). He then turned things over to Senator Mark Warner. Mark Warner, D-VA (Vice-Chairman) Senator Warner took the opportunity to go into a little more detail as to the nature of the hearing: what it was about, what the committee hoped to accomplish by holding the hearing, and a brief summation of the relevant events up to that date. Richard Burr again Burr swore in Comey and advised him that he is now under oath. He recognized Comey and granted him the floor "for as long as you might need." James Comey, Former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Comey gave a brief history of events and expressed his confusion and concern over the multiple stories coming from the White House concerning the reason for his firing, after which the questioning began. Richard Burr some more Burr pretty much kept to hard facts. He asked if Comey's written testimony had been reviewed and/or edited by the Office of the Special Counsel (it hadn't). He asked if Comey had any doubt that Russia was behind the intrusion into the DCCC's and DNC's computer systems (he didn't). He asked if he had any doubt that Russia was behind cyber intrusion into state voter files (he didn't). He asked if he was confident that no votes in the 2016 were altered, either electronically or otherwise (he was). Comey also testified that, while trump was not directly under investigation, Comey was not able to get unanimous consent from his leadership in the FBI to publicly state this. The reasoning here is that the investigation was ongoing and one could never tell where it would lead (a la the Starr investigation into Whitewater which lead to the whole Lewinsky thing). In Comey's words, "when you start turning over rocks, sometimes you find things that are unrelated to the primary investigation that are criminal in nature." In short, Burr confined himself to things that could objectively be verified. Unfortunately, this would be one of the only times we saw this even-handed approach, as several of the other Senators appeared to have axes to grind and viewed Comey as the perfect sharpening stone. But more on that as we come across it. My opinion: non-partisan. Mark Warner again Senator Warner took a more partisan approach, albeit in the cloak of objectivity. His questions were respectful and factually based, but his overall tone suggested that he was trying to convict trump in this hearing and get it over with. My opinion: Somewhat partisan James Risch, R-ID Senator Risch was the first to really dive into the weeds. The first part of his seven minutes was spent trying to discredit a February 14th article from the New York Times in which the Times alleged connections between Russian operatives and trump associates. He asked why Director Comey did not issue a statement to correct the article. Comey replied that it is considered common practice to not do so when the investigation involves sensitive material as it might compromise security. Risch spent the rest of his time parsing the word "hope" in the context of trump asking Comey "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go." Comey maintained throughout that, given the fact that it was the President of the United States saying this in the Oval Office, even though it was not a direct order it would reasonably be taken as such, given the context. Risch replied "You don't know of anyone ever being charged for hoping something, is that a fair statement?" My opinion? Blatantly partisan, trying to get trump off the hook in much the same way Warner was trying to hang him on it, but the partisanship was much more naked here. Dianne Feinstein, D-CA Feinstein started by asking Comey why he thought he had been fired from his position as Director of the FBI. Comey responded that he didn't know for sure but that, based on what trump has said, he was fired as a result of the Russia investigation. Feinstein continued by acknowledging and paraphrasing what Comey had said to Risch: that the Oval Office could be an intimidating place, especially when the President is making a direct request. She then asked "But why didn't you stop and say, Mr. President, this is wrong. I cannot discuss this with you." Comey replied "I was so stunned by the conversation that I just took in. The only thing I could think to say, because I was playing in my mind -- because I could remember every word he said -- I was playing in my mind, what should my response be? That's why I carefully chose the words." My opinion: Feinstein's focus seemed to be mainly centered around wrongdoing on the part of the trump administration. I rate her as being mildly partisan. Marco Rubio, D-FL Rubio seemed to be focusing on the asks from trump of Comey:

Asking for Comey's loyalty.

Saying that he "hoped" the Flynn investigation would go away. Not a formal ask, but when the President says he hopes something happens, and he says this in the Oval Office, it's not a stretch of logic to interpret this as a strong request, if not a direct order.

Publicly state that trump personally is not being investigated.

To his credit, Comey did not comply with any of these. My opinion: Rubio was trying for a partisan advantage, but his line of questioning turned out to be a dead end in that area and it didn't pan out for him. I rate this as non-partisan, but not for a lack of trying. Martin Heinrich, D-NM Senator Heinrich was the slickest of the bunch in that he was able to score partisan points without appearing to be partisan at all. To start, he gave Comey the opportunity to make the following statement: "The Russians interfered in our election during the 2016 cycle. They did with purpose. They did it with sophistication. They did it with overwhelming technical efforts. It was an active measures campaign driven from the top of that government. There is no fuzz on that. It is a high confidence judgment of the entire intelligence community and the members of this committee have seen the intelligence. It's not a close call. That happened. That's about as unfake as you can possibly get." Heinrich then shifted focus to the trump team attempting to "set up a sort of backdoor communication channel with the Russian government using their infrastructure, their devices, their facilities." Comey testified to this point that, in a hypothetical sense (he refused to comment in an open setting as to specifics), it was easier for the Russians because "[y]ou spare the Russians the cost and effort to break into our communications channels by using theirs. You make it a whole lot easier for them to capture all of your conversations."

My opinion: Heinrich created a partisan result from a non-partisan line of questioning. Kudos for skill on this one, but it still misses the "trying to be objective about this whole thing" point. I rate his performance as partisan.

Roy Blunt, R-MO

In one of the most blatantly partisan approaches of the entire hearing, Senator Blunt attempting to cast doubt on Comey's credibility by asking why he continued to take calls from trump even after he told Attorney General sessions that all communications should go through the AG. Apparently Blunt has never heard of the notion that when the President calls, you pick up.

He then sought clarification as to whether Comey's notes were official documents or personal ones. Comey said they were personal, and nobody else seemed to have an issue with this.

My opinion: Blatantly partisan, and in a particularly clumsy and inartful fashion.

Angus King, I-ME (he caucuses with the Democrats, though)

Senator King jumped right of the gate with a question as whether, in Comey's opinion, the Russian interference in the election was a one-and-done thing, or would we see future attempts. Comey testified that "it is a long-term practice of theirs. It's stepped up a notch in a significant way in '16. They'll be back."

King then sought clarification as to whether or not the dinner with trump was trump's idea or Comey's. Comey said that it was initiated by a phone call from trump, and manages to get in a shout-out to his wife when he said that he had been forced to break a date with his wife to have dinner with trump (again, when the President calls, you pick up), saying "I love spending time with my wife and I wish I would have been there that night."

King's approach seemed to be to cast doubt on trump's veracity (not that this would take much), by asking Comey whether it was true that Comey had called trump, as trump had claimed. Comey said "I never initiated a communication with the president."

My opinion: King, being an independent, is by definition non-partisan. However, because he caucuses with the Democrats, we have to view him in that light. That being said, I would rate his performance as slightly partisan in questioning, moderately partisan in results.

James Lankford, R-OK

Senator Lankford, apparently, was the Designated Republican Shill for this hearing. He started his questioning by asking Comey why he thought trump's "I hope we can drop the Flynn thing" statement was such a big deal when it was never mentioned again by trump, the White House staff, the Director of National Intelligence, the Attorney General, the Department of Justice, or the head of the National Security Administration. He followed this line of reasoning to a (flawed, obviously) implied conclusion that a) either trump never said this, at which point Comey is lying (forget that he's under oath and all that), or 2) it was never a big deal in the first place and Comey is overreacting.

Lankford is also trying to paint trump in positive light by pointing out that, even though he has the authority to stop the investigation, he has not done so. Granted, there is a very real possibility that trump is not aware of this ...

My opinion: Lankford was noting more than the token Wild-Eyed Republican whose main goal of the hearing was to vindicate trump of any and all accusations of everything and show everybody that he's really an awesome guy and if everyone would just let him do his thing the country would be great again and everybody wold have money, and fame, and more money, and fancy cars, and the world would be a wonderful place.

Of course, this only applies to rich white male Republicans. Everybody else can go screw themselves, because they don't matter.

I rate Lankford's performance as ludicrously partisan.

Joe Manchin, D-WV

Senator Manchin was lobbing softballs. He asked Comey about trump's interest in the Russia investigation (almost identical to the question asked by Senator Angus King), giving Comey the opportunity to wax poetic about how this was not a Democrat or Republican thing but an American thing, that "this great experiment of ours is a threat to them," and that "as difficult as we can be with each other, we remain that shining city on the hill."

He then asked about Robert Mueller, and whether or not he would be "thorough and complete" in his investigation as Special Counsel. Comey replied by saying that he would indeed, and that Mueller is "one of the finest people and public servants this country has ever produced."

My opinion: Manchin is, to some people, a DINO (Democrat In Name Only) in that he has pretty strong conservative creds and there have been rumors that he may defect to the GOP. Given that, I don't know if we can tag him as being partisan; if anything, he was anti-partisan, slightly boosting the Republican case that trump is NOT a serial liar, philanderer, and cheat. Therefore I will rate this performance as non-partisan.

Tom Cotton, R-AR

Tom Cotton is one of the most partisan members of the Senate, but without the intellectual power of someone like Mitch McConnell (who isn't really the brightest bulb in the chandelier, but who is very canny and shrewd). Cotton's questioning began with trying to get Comey to state that there was no connection between Russia and the trump team. Comey didn't fall for it, and that line of questioning fell flat.

Cotton's next gambit was to focus on a New York Times article form February 14th, headlined "Trump campaign aides had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence," by asking "Would it be fair to characterize that story as almost entirely wrong?" Comey replied in the affirmative.

My opinion: First, the tactic of trying to exonerate trump failed, and failed big. Second, the focus on the NYT article is irrelevant ... it's not the first time a major paper got a story wrong (remember "Dewey Defeats Truman?"). I would rate this performance as not only wildly partisan, but also flat-out stupid. Not that I would expect anything else from Tom Cotton.

Kamala Harris, D-CA

Senator Harris asked many questions of Comey, all of which got the same reply: "I cannot answer that in an open setting." It seemed like she was going for the spear that would slay the trumpian dragon, but fell short. Of course, once the closed session began, she may have gotten something ... we won't know for sure unless the hearing transcript is declassified.

My opinion: Harris was going for the jugular, partisanship-wise. The fact that she failed had everything to do with her asking about sensitive material. I rate her performance as highly partisan.

John Cornyn, R-TX

Cornyn started his questioning with a legit question: if an FBI agent becomes aware of criminal activity, is he or she under a legal obligation to report it? Comey replied that he did not know about a legal obligation, but there is certainly an ethical one.

Cornyn then focused the rest of his time on the Clinton email thing,  hammering the point that a special counsel was not named despite repeated requests from Congress to AG Loretta Lynch to do so (including from Cornyn). Comey said that he decided a special counsel would have been "unfair" because "I knew there was no case there."

He finished up his questioning by asking "Do you think it's unreasonable for anyone, any president, who has been assured on multiple occasions that he's not the subject of an FBI investigation, do you think it's unreasonable for them to want the FBI director to publicly announce that, so that this cloud over his administration would be removed?" To which Comey replied that it was a reasonable point of view, but that it was inadvisable because of the possibility of "a duty to correct."

My opinion: John Cornyn has always had a naked hatred of the Clintons, and saw this as an opportunity to beat that dead horse one more time. I rate his performance as off-the-charts partisan, and also a bit ridiculous.

Jack Reed, D-RI

Senator Reed asked Comey if the direction in which the Russian investigation was headed could include the president. Comey said in theory, yes, but was not willing to make a definitive yea/nay statement.

My opinion: Reed appeared to be trying to convict trump right off the bat, but was derailed by Comey sticking to the facts as he knew them. I rate is performance as highly partisan.

John McCain, R-AZ

Senator McCain's questioning was not quite as unhinged as everybody is making it out to be. Yes, he asked why the investigation into Clinton's email server was closed while the trump investigation was not, but seemed unable (or unwilling) to grasp the concept of the Clinton investigation being completed while the trump investigation is still ongoing. Comey explained that the Clinton investigation had run its course and did not turn up any prosecutable offense, but the trump investigation is still in the early stages and it is too soon to draw conclusions.

McCain then asked about Clinton's involvement with Russian interference in the election by saying "you made the announcement there would be no charges brought against then-Secretary Clinton for any activities involved in the Russia involvement and our engagement in our election." Apparently, the fact that Clinton had no involvement with Russian interference -- except, of course, as the primary target and intended victim -- didn't register with him.

My opinion: Yes, he came off as a little nutty, as that crazy old uncle that keeps getting invited to Thanksgiving even though nobody really likes him and all he does is rant about irrelevant topics, but he was also using blunt-force partisanship to try to cast doubt on Comey's testimony. I rate his performance as highly partisan, and possibly as an indication of impending dementia.

So there you have it. The entire hearing, wrapped up in a nice little package. Now, I would like to make some observations here.

First, I find these public hearings to be more than a little ridiculous. Let's face it, with subject matter like this, nothing of substance is going to come out of a public hearing because so much of the relevant information is classified and forbidden from public consumption. These hearings are nothing more than political theater, a chance for some Senators to get some face time on camera and burnish their partisan reputations. Out of the two and a half hours of testimony, all we heard was what Comey had written in his seven page initial testimony, released a few days ago ... it was just massaged and tilted this way and that to show different faces.

Second, this hearing points to a larger issue: both parties are concerned more with the balance of power within Washington than they are concerned with the lives of those outside the Beltway. This is actually nothing new; it's only the prevalence of social media and the 24/7 news cycle that has given it more visibility. However, the fact remains that, in any given situation, Congress is going to act according to what is best for the next election cycle, or what will bring in the most campaign donations, or what will make the other side look as ineffectual and ridiculous as possible, and everybody who is not a member of Congress of a big donor to their campaign coffers ... well, if it works out in their favor, it is sheerly by accident.

Third, the fundamental thing that everybody seems to be overlooking here is that trump is not a legitimate president. Yes, he won the Electoral College, but only because a foreign power put their finger on the scales. He lost the popular vote. He has alienated virtually every world leader, so much so that the leaders of European countries are going to bypass the President and the White House and go directly to the states when it comes to the Paris Climate Accord. He has approval ratings that would make Nixon gulp.

donald trump is turning the United States into a second-rate Third World nation, and the Republicans are doing nobody any favors by going along with it in the name of bolstering their short-term agenda. The Democrats aren't helping, either, by painting all trump supporters with the same broad "they're all a bunch of idiot yokels" brush.

The partisanship has to come to an end. Republicans and Democrats need to put party aside for a bit and focus on country, and the people therein. Otherwise we are all doomed to an endless display of petty bickering and constant games of one-upmanship, and the people of the United States -- you know, the ones for whom these clowns are supposed to be working -- are going to bear the brunt.

Please like and share my page at http://ift.tt/2rN4zTA for more.