Okay, spoiler alert!  Donnie Dumbass said he might testify at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on his criminal behavior.  I don’t know about you but I waited on pins and needles wondering if he might actually show up and, if so, what brilliant piece of information he has hiding in his back pocket that would clear his oh-so-sullied name.

Alas, it was not to be.  After what, for him, is considered careful review, he declined.  He whined that the process is “unfair.”  His “lawyer du jour,” Pat Cipollone, whined that Bill Clinton had a fairer hearing in 1998.  Why, yes, this WOULD be the same Bill Clinton the Republicans impeached with no crime at all!  Totally fair!

Listen, I get it.  I know that if I stood accused of some crime (or in the fair case of Clinton, no crime at all) and held the perfect evidence to prove my innocence, the very first thing I would do is circle the wagons and refuse to participate because I can question the fairness of the process, instead.  Personally, I’ve ALWAYS been astounded that laws can be negated just by saying the process is unfair.  It seems like rather a fixable loophole.  Still, Trump invoking the “Meanie-pants” defense is going to be hard to overcome.

So…feel free to go on about your business.  Donnie isn’t going to testify, after all.  The rest of us will just have to make our decision based on all of the other witnesses who DID testify that Donald Trump, using assets of the United States of America, tried to bribe a foreign national into helping him personally…

So…Gordon Sondland now stands accused of inappropriate behavior with three different women, once in 2003, once in 2008, and again in 2010.  Did he do it?  Who knows.  He said/she said.  If he did, he should pay the appropriate price, whatever that may be.  But…

Doesn’t the timing seem just a bit suspicious to you?  Only after Sondland makes clear he was working Trump’s Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine he get accused of bad behavior?  My first notice was from ProPublica, an ostensibly left-leaning outlet.  But left-leaning outlets can be wrong, too.  More, left-leaning outlets might be a little TOO quick to accept junk during an investigation.  Remember Dan Rather?  He had a solid story that Bush 43 is a deserter but fell for fake documents to back the story up.  Too quick.  Story dead.  (Bush 43 is still a deserter, though, imho…)

Maybe ProPublica has been taken in.  Maybe not.  Maybe Sondland did as charged.  But I’m certain that Gordon Sondland’s misbehavior has zero affect on his testimony under oath: “Was there a Quid Pro Quo?  The answer is yes!”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’ve been thinking about  our harsh and brutal society, recently.  One of the messages that plays over and over is that ours is a world of winners and losers.  We focus mightily on the winners.  But what about the losers?

If you’re great at business deals – or just a great con-man – you get to be in the “winner” category.  But what if you’re too honest or just bad at such things?  Do those people deserve to suffer?  Can our society REALLY not do ANYTHING to help people who can’t help themselves?

Many philosophies teach balance in all things.  If that’s a correct position, then for every “winner” there has to be a “loser”, yes?  We’ve all heard about the guy who finds a priceless art work at a garage sale and makes a mint.  What about the schmoe who sold the piece, not realizing what it was?  No, I don’t think he should be cut in.  I’m thinking a guy like that might well have gone through his entire life making choices like that – selling the priceless art work in a garage sale for five or ten bucks.

I think our society is rife with people like that – people with a lifetime of poor choices and mistakes dogging their today.  I know it’s a “wouldn’t it be great” concept but I think our society should pay more attention to the people who LOSE in deals…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have a friend who poses a question from time to time.  He asks, since semi-automatic weapons have existed for over 100 years but mass shootings are a relatively new phenomenon, what changed?  I have an answer for him.  He’s conservative in his politics and a gun rights advocate so I don’t think he’ll LIKE my answer but I think I’m correct.  What changed?

The radicalization of the right by corporate media.

The conservative bubble spends massive amounts of time, money, and energy making sure the conservative base stays worked up; angry and afraid.
“They’re coming to take your guns.”
“They’re coming to take your jobs.”
“They think you’re stupid.”
“They want to destroy Christmas.”
“They say you’re a racist.”
“They want to make you a slave.”

It’s no wonder people get angry and set out to “defend” themselves.  None of those things are true, of course, but the consumers of the conservative bubble will not accept any information from outside the bubble and those message just keep repeating – so they don’t KNOW the messages are false and they get angry.

So that’s my answer.  That’s what changed.

The radicalization of the right…

So, according to my limited survey, when it comes to the impeachment inquiry hearings there are two groups in this once-great nation: people who understand that Donald Trump DID commit the crimes he stands accused of committing – and conservatives.  This is because when it comes to the impeachment inquiry hearings there are two groups: those who watched and/or listened to the testimony –  that is, paid attention to the actual witnesses testifying under oath – and conservatives – who preferred to wait until Fox “News” (or whichever of their surrogates) told them how to feel.

I heard the Armstrong and Getty show the other day.  I’m paraphrasing but one of them was asking, if a person truly believed that Trump and tinkle-down economics was the truth, the light, and the way, why WOULDN’T a person lie to defend it?  They even pondered whether it might be a moral obligation to lie to defend a position, assuming one truly believed Voodoo Economics might someday work and Trump is probably the guy to make it happen.  There was a bit of back and forth on the topic and NONE of those Einsteins could refute the question.  (Yes, I’m clear that defending fraudulent conservative positions is their job…)

There’s an answer.  It’s an honest answer whether conservatives like it or not.  It applies whether conservatives confess it or not.  This is a life rule:

ANY position that relies on falsehood for it’s defense doesn’t deserve to be defended…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I served in the United States Air Force.  I’m proud of my military service but I’m not a Hoo-Ra, Gung-ho vet.  I only did four years…during peacetime.  (Although Reagan DID invade that tiny island with the rusted guns…)  I’m VERY aware many other military members contributed FAR more.  So, proud, yes, but it doesn’t define me.

From time to time, though, I find myself a bit surprised when the “military man” in me gets riled up by something.  A recent example?  Donnie Dumbass “impulsively” (read: likely on orders from Putin) decided to pull American troops back in Syria.  He CLAIMS he’s getting America out of “forever wars” but actually just redeploys them to a different theater of combat: Saudi Arabia – so Americans can die defending the King instead of Saudis.  The order was so unexpected and implemented SO quickly, American troops grabbed what they could but left the installations intact.

A couple of days pass.  ISIS fighters are escaping from jails and the Turks are killing Kurds and driving them away.  FINALLY, Trump realizes he has left oil supplies undefended in the area (the ultimate sin in this once-great nation) and sends troops back in to protect the oil.  But in the meantime?

Russian troops have captured and occupied American military installations!

I don’t care if you’re left or right.  If you’ve ever worn the uniform are you pissed off?  The Commander-in-Chief of the American military has just handed over American military installations – voluntarily – to the Russians, Syrians, and ISIS fighters we’ve been fighting this whole time.  American soldiers have died over there and Donnie Dumbass just…walks away.

The fact that he might be just a fucking idiot is the very BEST possibility to explain this perfidy.  But I have YET to see Trump defy the wishes of Putin.  Hillary was right: Trump IS Putin’s puppet.

If you think I’m wrong about the bases, I’d like to hear opinions on why but in this case, I’d like you to begin your response with your service dates.  I understand that a lifelong civilian might not “get” what the big deal is.  I do NOT understand how a person who wore the uniform could ever justify such betrayal…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I keep hearing about which of the Democratic candidates is doing well or not doing well with the African-American community.  I suspect it’s a media-driven “issue.”  It seems like a back-handed “concern,” to me.  Could blacks in this once-great nation ever be more concerned by any of the Democratic candidates than they are by Trump?

Trump is openly racist.  He publicly and proudly calls White Supremacists “very good people.”  (Sidebar: the very BEST evidence against “White Supremacy” is White Supremacists…)  He has a guy working for him, Stephen Miller, who actively promotes white nationalist literature and racist propaganda.

My guess is that the black community knows that white people might empathize but will NEVER be able to fully understand the black experience in this country.  The idea that one of the candidates or the other might not fully “get it” is just an inevitable part of the package but I’d bet there’s no confusion about who represents the truest threat to African American advancement in the United States…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And, finally…boobies!

It seems a woman and her husband were working in their own garage putting up drywall, which, in this case, included installing fiberglass insulation.  For anyone who has never been around the stuff, fiberglass can be VERY uncomfortable to the skin.  It itches and manages to stay around FAR longer than anyone wants.

So, the couple took off their shirts, ostensibly in an effort to remove the fiberglass from their skin.  From the article: “When her stepchildren, aged 9, 10 and 13, walked in, she “explained she considers herself a feminist and wanted to make a point that everybody should be fine with walking around their house or elsewhere with skin showing,” her lawyers wrote in court documents, The Associated Press reports.”

Not from the article: it seems possible, to me, she got caught in an embarrassing moment and put on a brave face with the only explanation she could think of at the time…

But now she faces charges.  (Apparently, the ex-wife saw an opportunity to “get” the current wife…)  The consequence is possible jail time, fines, and having to register as a sex offender for the next 10 years.  HE wasn’t charged with anything…

There’s a LOT here.  On the one hand, women should not be barred from being topless under any circumstances unless men are, too.  (You know, no shoes, no shirt, no service…)  On the other hand, there’s a movement out there called ‘Free the Nipple‘ that advocates a woman’s right to be bare chested and suggests that sexualizing breasts is an inappropriate response.  And there’s the rub…if you will.  I see that as a philosophical position with no practical application.  Women’s breasts ARE sexualized in our culture by both men AND women.  The very best, I think, women can hope for is that men won’t behave like animals.  (But they will ’cause we are…)

Apparently, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals agrees, rightly in my opinion, that women should not be punished for being topless in public.  How could it possibly be worse to be topless in the privacy of one’s own home?  I can’t help but notice, though, that the 13 year old who came out into the garage is a boy.  Like it or not, step-moms breasts are going to fuel 13-year-old-boy’s…um…private imaginings for years into the future.  I feel certain he wasn’t “harmed,” though…

It’s quite the conundrum…

Donnie Dumbass is at it again.  Apparently, he tweeted this morning that he’ll consider testifying in the impeachment probe.

If I were a betting man, I’d bet he won’t.

But he DID just try to give conservatives a new talking point Americans are going to have to push back against.  It won’t slow the process but it WILL slow the public debate.

Of course, Pelosi has whipped him again.  She has agreed to let him.

He’ll back down from the “consideration” by dinner.  The Don of the Trump Crime Family is a coward who, it seems, CAN NOT tell a truth.

“You’re just making people vote for Trump.”  I hear this from time to time.  I guess it’s supposed to be some kind of manipulation.  “Stop saying mean things about me or the Trump crime family or I’ll vote for him again!”

It’s kind of a stupid line.  If the police investigate a bank robbery, are they just forcing you to rob a bank?  Did you steal from your boss because you discovered a grand jury investigation into embezzlement somewhere?  So, how does investigating the crimes Trump has committed FORCE YOU to vote Trump?

No, you’ve made a choice.  It’s a tough choice to enforce, too.  In order to maintain your pretense that there’s something – anything – decent and honest about Donald J. Trump, you have to force your head so far up the conservative bubble you can’t even breathe anymore.  But it’s a price you’re willing to pay, I know.  (In fact, the lack of oxygen to the brain probably makes it even easier to stay safely in the cocoon of the conservative bubble…)

The trumpsters are NOT watching the hearings.  IF they “know” anything about the process, they’ve heard it from some opinion-monger, free to say anything.  My current understanding is that nothing – and I mean nothing – will sway those who have put their faith in stubborn, false pride.

I get it.  You thought you saw something in the guy.  Great.  But when it became clear he was something other than advertised, you stuck with it because you had already pronounced yourself dedicated…

I’ve seen that kind of thing before.  Some people think they can’t ever go back and review a decision they’ve made because it might make them look weak.  You look FAR weaker in being unable to admit error than in staying the erroneous course…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For the record, I’m pretty sick of the official arm of the Democratic party telling me that people really want somebody who will do nothing – the incremental, baby steps model – and that Americans calling for change are “too far left.”  When did the concept of America doing what’s best for the largest number of Americans become an idea that’s “too far left?”

I know, we’re stuck with whomever the DNC foists upon us.  But don’t lie to us and pretend it’s “what people want.”  If the people had been interested in a do-nothing, incremental, baby steps President, Hillary would be in the Oval Office right now.

The lie gave us Donald Trump…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Roger Stone – one of Trump’s closest friends and advisors – has been convicted of all 7 counts he was facing.  It only took the jury a few hours to decide.  His conviction throws Trump’s written testimony to Congress into question…because, apparently, Trump lied – in writing!

Here’s a bit of nuance: the Constitution of the United States – the document that once defined this country and still might – says the President enjoys the absolute right of Pardons – except in cases of impeachment.  (Emphasis mine.)  THAT, I think, is why Nancy Pelosi initially called her inquiry an “impeachment inquiry.”  Trump started tossing out the promise of Pardons as an inducement to his cronies to carry out their tasks, legal or not.  Invoking the i word blocks him.

Stone seemed, to me, to be a little too relaxed when found guilty.  My guess (it’s not clever. It’s everyone’s guess.) is that he’s counting on one of those awesome Presidential Pardons to make this all go away.

I’d like to see Nancy bring it back into the impeachment inquiry, now that we know Trump lied in his statements, so that Trump can’t pardon Stone…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Prince Andrew went on television in England to “explain” about his relationship with convicted child molester Jeffery Epstein.  You just KNOW the royal house had meeting after meeting trying to decide how best to spin the story.  They went with “I don’t recall.”  I wonder how much money was spent working up THAT brilliant defense.  Here, I can help:

Andrew DID allow that it was likely poor optics (my words) to continue the relationship with Epstein after his initial conviction as a pedophile.  You think?  But let’s get real, here.  Who ELSE was going to fix the pervert Andrew up with all those underage girls?  I mean really, what choice did Andrew have?  Well, yeah.  He COULD have tried relationships with women his own age but, apparently, he wasn’t up to that challenge…

As a sidebar, EVERY story I’ve seen about Epstein has included a reference to a woman named Ghislaine Maxwell.  (Jizz lane?  Really?)  I want to know why she isn’t in jail.  By all accounts, she’s the one who groomed the girls Epstein and Andrew raped but never met and don’t recall.  Why hasn’t she even been charged with anything?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In an unexpected development, Trump went to the hospital for an unexpected and unannounced check-up yesterday.  Of course, the White House “spin” is that this is just his regular check up, no big deal.  Maybe it is.  Trump has always announced his other checkups in his schedule, though.  Oh, and the claim is that Trump just took advantage of “a free weekend” to get started on his annual physical.

Two things: One, I didn’t know the US President HAD “free weekends.”  (Hell, the work schedule is the ONE reason I’ve never sought the job!  It might interfere with my golf…)  Two, really?!?  This is a “free weekend” for Trump?  This weekend during the impeachment hearings when all of the testimony under oath says Trump did the crimes he’s accused of committing?

Okay, maybe it’s a free weekend and an unannounced, unscheduled start to a physical.  But maybe it’s all those “hamberders” catching up to a fat, old man under serious stress…

Donald J. Trump, ostensible President of the United States, broke the law and keeps breaking the law.  He’s a criminal, a lawbreaker, an offender, a villain, a malefactor.  He’s a culprit, a wrongdoer, a sinner; a fraudster, a swindler, a conman, a miscreant.  It’s not a secret.  He did it on national television, fercrissakes…  But, I still get challenged by my conservative brethren from time to time, “WHAT LAW?!?!?!”  (You have to read it like that…)  So, as a public service, here you go:

United States Code, Title 52 section 30121, paragraph a.1.A and a.2.

“§ 30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals (a) Prohibition It shall be unlawful for—(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election; (B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or (C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or (2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.”

That’s the law, right there, although I’ve emphasized the relevant points.  It’s important to remember, I’m no lawyer.  This is certainly NOT an exhaustive “list.”  This would only be ONE count.  (Perhaps his request to China constitutes a second count.)  But violating this law gave Congress every right to investigate, at least as far as the Constitution of the United States is concerned – meaning it’s NOT a “witch hunt.”  Every time Trump tells one of his minions not to respond to Congressional subpoenas, he’s committing Obstruction.  (That’s one count, two counts, three counts, etc.)

I’m very aware that the opinions inside the conservative bubble ALL say something else.  But…opinions being what they are (um…useless) it’s more important to note that people are NOT free to pretend anything they want when they’re under oath.  So the opinion-mongers of the conservative bubble (people free to lie) all say Donnie Dumbass is being unfairly maligned but the witnesses testifying under oath (facing possible penalties for perjury) have pretty much agreed Trump did what he’s accused of doing.

So conservatives can no longer honestly argue that Donnie didn’t break the law.  You CAN argue that Presidents can do whatever they want, including breaking the law.  But be forewarned: you’re arguing that ANY President can do whatever he or she wants, including breaking the law – even a DemocRAT President.  Future protestations that some DemocRAT President broke the law will go unheard.  Besides, with the help of the conservative base, the system will have been SO broken by Donnie that no mechanism will exist to intervene.  Thanks for that, conservatives.  (And make no mistake: history will forever record that it was conservatives who brought down the United States…)

For my part?  I don’t want ANY Presidents to be allowed to break the law.  I don’t care which party they pretend to represent…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

One of the ways the conservative bubble is trying to gin up anger amongst it’s consumers is pretending that impeaching trump over his crimes is really just trying to overturn the will of the people.  They keep reminding Trump supporters that they voted for Trump (duh!) without reminding those same supporters that MORE Americans voted against Trump, peculiarities of the Electoral College notwithstanding.

So…technically, even if the true and only goal of the impeachment was about overturning the 2016 “election” – it isn’t – it IS in keeping with the wishes of the majority of Americans…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I keep posting these pieces to Facebook so people can see them and comment but you don’t have to wait for me to copy and paste!  You could simply come to my site ‘The Bacon Press‘ and sign up to have them delivered directly to your inbox.  (The link at the bottom, on the right, says ‘join’ but you don’t actually have to ‘join’ anything.  It just needs your email address.  Oh, damn…does anybody USE email anymore?)

I have to say, I think it’s funny that Donnie Dumbass has gone – TWICE, now – to public events only to discover what REAL Americans actually think of him.  He went to game 5 of the World Series where he was greeted by boos and calls to “lock him up.”  So, then he goes to a UFC bout where he’s greeted by even more boos.  Okay, so in fairness the UFC crowd DID include some of his supporters, who cheered.  Of course, one cannot ignore the possibility that his supporters came specifically to prop up the fragile ego of our national embarrassment.  I guess he should stick to the safe zones of his little Nuremberg rallies where the crowd is carefully controlled to include only those who will sing his praises…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Okay, so as I score this, it looks very much like most (all?) of those who participated in the criminal phone call – I mean, those who were actually on the line listening – have agreed that the President broke the law.  Several have now testified under oath that they were so concerned by what they heard they reported the matter to their appropriate supervisors.

On the other hand, opinion-mongers and talking heads are certain that the President didn’t do anything wrong – because he said so.  After all, what criminal ever lies about their crimes?  “Look at the transcript,” they say.  For clarity, there IS no “transcript” at this point.  What the White House provided is called an abstract.  It (supposedly) shows what happened in the call but it is NOT an actual word-for-word record.  THAT document has been withheld.  (Because who DOESN’T withhold proof of innocence when that exists?)

This is the trick of the cons going back to the launch of Fox “News”; opinions in place of facts but pretended to be just as valuable.  Of course, opinions are NOT just as valuable.  Many statements presented as “opinions” are, in fact, bold faced lies.  But one can’t take legal action against an “opinion”, right?

Some of the less…sophisticated consumers of conservative bubble drivel try, from time to time, to prove some assertion or another from the bubble by taking it into court.  It’s ALWAYS a mistake.  I remember when conservatives were having a great time pretending Obama was born outside of America.  Oh, how easy it was to just insist that, no, that’s not what a Hawaiian birth certificate looks like – as though most of them had ever seen a Hawaiian birth certificate themselves.  As long as it’s just agreed-upon conservative blather, the conversation can go on forever.  But if some true believer – say, Orly Taitz – makes the mistake of trying to PROVE something in an actual court of law the case is universally summarily dismissed – usually with prejudice (meaning they can’t bring the case again…)  All it really proved is that Orly Taitz doesn’t understand things…

So the opinion-mongering blatherers are on about how Trump is totally innocent and the greatest thing since…some other great thing.  But Trump’s crimes are undergoing legal processes, now.  The trumpsters can insist anything they like but the court action will prove larger in the process.  It had better, anyway.  If the trumpsters succeed in letting Donnie get away with these high crimes and misdemeanors, they will have “protected their President” but “destroyed their country.”  Lovely…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now I see some of the farthest right voices are threatening civil war if Trump is called to answer for his crimes.  Nice.  Here’s the thing: the LAST time conservatives were deceived into betraying their country and took up arms, TRUE Americans kicked their asses.  It was bloody, costly, and destructive – and we’ll do it again, if you force us.

Ironic, isn’t it?  Conservatives pretend to LOVE the Constitution but are willing to trample it under foot because some opinion-monger told them a lie they prefer to believe.

Smart people – TRUE Americans – are eschewing “opinions” in favor of “journalism.”  If you’re going to start actually killing people – you’d better make damn sure your facts are true and not just assertions of the opinion-mongers…

I know how it happens.  It starts innocently enough.  Someone you know, a friend or just an acquaintance at a party, suggests you give it a try.  You KNOW the right answer, “No.”  You explain that you’ve heard the stuff is dangerous.  It destroys families.  It destroys minds.  It destroys lives.
“Nah,” comes the answer.  “That’s just what the government wants you to believe.”
You stick to your guns – at first.  But it comes up again…and then again.  Eventually, you agree to a little bump, if for no other reason than to get your friend/acquaintance off  your back about it.

You’re surprised by what happens.  You feel strong.  You feel empowered.  You feel like you’re part of something bigger than yourself.  The next morning, you feel a little nauseous but you can’t shake the way you felt after that first little bump.  All of the other information is still in your head: how dangerous it is and the kinds of problems that can happen – but it felt so…good…

So you bump again.  Not much.  Just a little.  Not every day but once in awhile.  The warnings about the risks begin to fade in your memory.  The empowerment, the feeling of belonging, the energy are strong attractants.  You’re still a bit wary but before you know it, you’re bumping on a regular basis convinced you’re still in control of when and how much.  YOU choose…but that feeling…

You can’t really say when it changed.  You WERE in charge.  YOU chose when you bumped and how much.  You could take it or leave it, once, but at some point, you found that you needed the next little hit.  Somewhere, inside, you had concerns but you managed to talk yourself out of them, convincing yourself, instead, that you’re still in charge.  You haven’t been driven by the need to this next bump – bigger, now, than the one before.  No, this is your choice, this one last bump.

But it isn’t the last.  Before you know it, you’re fully involved.  People around you begin to notice.  Your closest inner circle begins to express concerns, first among themselves, then to you directly.  But you just want more.  The bump may not be as satisfying as that first one but you keep on chasing.  Before too long, there’s nothing – nothing – you won’t do to protect your supply.

Over time you surrender your dignity, your honor, your principles – anything to get that next little bump.  Your conversations become difficult to follow.  You don’t notice, perhaps, but the people around you surely do as your conversational contributions become peppered with half-truths, falsehoods, and outright delusions.  The more you bump the less stable you are.  Your brain becomes addled with an inability to discern fact from fiction.  Slowly, you lose your ability to think straight.  Logic becomes replaced by assertions and unsupportable opinions…

Your inner circle, the people who had been trying to warn you off of the stuff, begin to distance themselves from you.  People NOT trapped in that world can readily see that you’ve become unstable, dangerous, and, frankly, unpleasant to be around.  Wrath seems to be a feature, not a bug of your habit.  They explain that you’re not being rational.  They try to intervene.  They want to help.

But you just dismiss them – furiously – and denounce them and their efforts.  What do THEY know?  “Fuck them,” you tell yourself, angrily.  “They don’t understand…”
The more people try to help, the more the rage grows.  Eventually, it becomes clear to the people around you that you’re NOT going to give up bumping.  You’re going to cling to that feeling for all you’re worth.  Your dedication takes it’s toll on everything – everything.  Friends, co-workers, even your own family actively try to distance themselves from you.  Your support network falls away – frustrated by your loyalty to something so destructive, saddened that you’re lost and can’t even see it.

Soon, the only people who will have you are those who are also trapped.  You find yourself in a feedback loop that reinforces the notion that the world just doesn’t understand and only those brave enough to bump in the first place “get it.”  It’s a world of paranoia, delusion, and anger – and you’re trapped…

This is your brain on Fox “News.”  Why, what did YOU think I was talking about?

I’ve got to say…I wish Hillary would just stay out of it.  She’s out, these days, suggesting that Tulsi Gabbard, the Congresswoman from Hawaii, is likely a Russian asset being groomed to run a third party candidacy.  Okay, in fairness, Hillary didn’t mention Tulsi by name.  She said the Russians have “got their eye on somebody who’s currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third party candidate”.  Party Democrats seem to be enjoying a whisper campaign against Tulsi along those lines.

If this was the only time Hillary tried the Russian bot story, I would STILL have a problem with it.  But Tulsi Gabbard was the vice-chair of the DNC when said DNC pre-sold the Democratic nomination to Hillary and then had to move Heaven and Earth (and millions of votes) to deliver.  When Tulsi discovered what the DNC was doing in the back rooms, she stepped down and, later, decried the development.  This did not sit well with the Democratic power structure and Tulsi has been persona non gratis ever since.

So maybe the Democratic power structure has decided to call anyone they don’t like Russian bots.  Still, it does seem strange, to me, that one of the voices that exposed the DNC/Hillary deal back in 2016 is now a target of such “charges.”  For the record, Tulsi denies any interest whatsoever in running a third party campaign.  For MY part, I still think Tulsi is a “good Democrat” – meaning a party loyalist, even if the party isn’t loyal to her.  (Tulsi is a progressive “good Democrat.”  Officially, that’s her second strike – integrity being the first…)

And Hillary?  Well, she charged Jill Stein with the same thing.  It seems like Hillary sees Russians everywhere, these days.  In fact, Hillary has several explanations for why she couldn’t beat Donald Trump.  NONE of them have to do with her lousy campaign…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yesterday, two astronauts went on a spacewalk to repair something on the international space station.  That doesn’t seem like much of a story these days, does it?  So, spice it up a bit.  Both astronauts were women!  Did they both rip off their spacesuits and engage in hot girl-on-girl action?  No.  They just did their job.  I know, it’s supposed to be hailing an historic event.  The first all-female EVA.  Ooohhh!  Ahhhh!  It kind of feels like a back-handed compliment, to me.  “Wow, even a woman could do it.”

The Russians sent the first woman,Valentina Tereshkova, into space in 1963.  Apparently, women have been perfectly capable of working in space just as long as men have done.  It’s just that the men wouldn’t let them.  Perhaps the headline should read, ‘Men Finally Pull Their Heads Out Of Their Asses And Make Use Of ALL Of Their Assets.’  It seems that’s all that has really happened.  Still, congratulations to the two women, Christina Koch and Jessica Meir, on their hysteric – or, rather, historic – event…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’m kind of counting on the UK’s version of our Donnie Dumbass, Boris Johnson, to deliver on his promise of delivering a no-deal Brexit.  The move will do serious harm to the world economy.  Donnie Dumbass is doing what he can do wreck the American economy and with Boris throwing in, a downturn is nearly inevitable.  Even trumpsters might understand…okay, no, not trumpsters but an economic downturn will almost certainly support a change in the current maladministration.  So I’m a little disappointed to see that in Great Britain, the grown-ups are still running the show.  In blocking the no-deal Brexit scheduled for later this month, my hopes of an economic downturn hurting Donnie’s chances dim, a bit…

I don’t understand my conservative brethren.  I mean, I do, really.  I know they’ve been trapped by the conservative bubble where they’ve been taught to ignore facts and reality in favor of preferred opinions.  These guys ALWAYS have the same opinions: our guy is great, your guy (or gal) sucks…

In response to the Trump crime family’s most recent crimes – enlisting foreign powers to help Donnie Dumbass return to the White House so he can betray America some more – I saw a story, this morning, talking about the times the Obama Administration refused to respond to subpoenas.  The piece claimed 9 times.  Of course, it was an opinion piece so it can claim anything it wants.  For example, it included such undeniable items as when one person was invited – not subpoenaed – to speak to Congress and chose not to.  It DID mention a couple of actual subpoenas but, for example, in one case, the Obama Administration declined because the issue was already with the Sour Cream Court…

So the part the confuses me about my conservative brethren is NOT that they’ve made a conscious decision to be spectacularly wrong about every issue.  To me, the confusing part is why they insist on making the deceivers – Heritage, Cato, American Enterprise, and the Hoover institute among so many others – keep writing new stories.  It seems…odd.

THEY don’t care about the details or facts of any situation.  WE aren’t going to accept bullshit issued by conservative “think” tanks since it never – and I mean never – matches reality.  So…if you don’t care what’s in the story and we’re not going to buy the bullshit anyway, I think you only need two stories.

One, our guy didn’t do it and two, your guy did far, far worse.  I suppose you could have a third, just to shake things up – our guy didn’t do it AND your guy was far, far worse.

So, for example, the first one, ‘Our Guy Didn’t,’ they could just write: “Oh, those crazy libtards are at it again.  They’re blaming our guy even though they haven’t got one shred of evidence and we all know, with or without evidence, that our guy would never do anything like what they’re suggesting.”  The second piece, ‘What About YOUR Guy?’ would be straightforward enough.  “Oh, those crazy libtards, who hate our country, are at it again.  They’re trying to blame our glorious and perfect (insert name of candidate or politician here) but they just ignore when they’re own guy did the same thing.  There was that one time they did that thing, remember?  Then there was that second time they did a thing, and then there was that third time, remember that?  THAT was the truly bad thing and nobody should ever look at any behavior of our guy until the DemocRAT suffers for the things we can pretend he/she did…”

Then, just to shake things up a bit, they do a mash-up.  “Oh, those crazy libtards are at it again.  They’re blaming our guy even though they haven’t got one shred of evidence and we all know, with or without evidence, that our guy would never do anything like what they’re suggesting.  But those crazy libtards, who hate our country, are at it again.  They’re trying to blame our glorious and perfect (insert name of candidate or politician here) but they just ignore when they’re own guy did the same thing.  There was that one time they did that thing, remember?  Then there was that second time they did a thing, and then there was that third time, remember that?  THAT was the truly bad thing and nobody should ever look at any behavior of our guy until the DemocRAT suffers for the things we can pretend he/she did…”

See how easy it is?  Three simple (emphasis on ‘simple’) stories to cover any situation…

I’ll tell you this: if the “think” tanks didn’t have to spend so much time ginning up fraudulent stories to keep the faithful on board, they could turn their attention to other ways of undermining this once-great nation to the benefit of the privileged elite…