The Commentariat -- May 26, 2016

... With Current Lease about to Expire, Washington Family Finds New Temporary Housing. Julie Davis of the New York Times: "President Obama and his family plan to move to a mansion in the upscale Kalorama neighborhood of Washington, a mere two miles from the White House, when he leaves office in January, according to people familiar with his plans. Mr. Obama, who has said his family will remain in the capital until his daughter Sasha completes high school in 2018, will rent the 8,200-square-foot, nine-bedroom home, the people said.... The house -- valued around $6 million, according to several real estate websites, with an estimated monthly rent of $22,000 on Zillow -- is owned by Joe Lockhart, a former press secretary and senior adviser to Bill Clinton." -- CW

Kelsey Snell of the Washington Post: "The House voted late Wednesday night to approve a measure to bar the government from paying federal contractors that discriminate based on gender identity or sexual orientation. Members erupted into cheers Wednesday night after the measure, sponsored by Rep. Sean Maloney (D-N.Y.), was approved 223-195.... But Republicans are pushing back in a broader effort to preserve 'religious liberty' from Obama's recent actions.... The House also voted 233-186 to approve a measure introduced by Bradley Byrne (R-Ala.) that would exempt religious groups from Obama's directives to contractors and public schools." -- CW

** Andrew Taylor of the AP: "Republicans controlling the Senate passed legislation Tuesday to block new Obama administration rules that require financial professionals to put their client's best interest first when giving advice on retirement investments like individual retirement accounts.... The regulations are aimed at blocking financial advisers from steering clients toward investments with higher commissions and fees that can eat away at retirement savings.... The White House says President Barack Obama will veto the Senate measure, which advanced under a special process that did not allow Democrats to filibuster it." Thanks to Akhilleus for the link. See also his commentary near the end of yesterday's thread. CW: This is Republicans going out of their way to allow con-men to screw ordinary Americans. Pretty remarkable, especially in a presidential election year. ...

     ... If you're looking for some overarching Republican "philosophy" here, I think it goes like this: Americans should have the freeedom & take the responsibility to plan for their own retirement years. (Socialist Security is practically bankrupt!) Then unscrupulous financial "advisors" should have the freeedom to con said Americans out of their retirement investment plans. So the rich yet richer & the poor get poorer.

Alan Blinder of the New York Times: "In a forceful challenge to the Obama administration's stand on transgender rights, officials in 11 states sued the federal government on Wednesday, arguing that it had no authority to direct the nation's public school districts to permit students to use the restrooms that correspond with their gender identity." -- CW

Linda Greenhouse on the latest developments in Zubik v. Burwell, a/k/a Wicked Obama v. Sweet Little Nuns. "... this is not a case about nuns. It's a case about women who should not, by reason of their particular employment, have to forfeit the right to comprehensive health care that the law makes available to other women in the work force. Wishful thinking, perhaps, but an urgent task." -- CW

Alexander Bolton of the Hill: "Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) is fighting to stay on as head of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) amid a roiling debate within her party about whether she should step aside before the Democratic National Convention in July." -- CW

Andrew Sorkin of the New York Times: "A 2007 article published by Gawker's Valleywag blog was headlined, 'Peter Thiel is totally gay, people.' That and a series of articles about his friends and others that he said 'ruined people's lives for no reason' drove Mr. Thiel[, billionaire co-founder of PayPal,] to mount a clandestine war against Gawker. He funded a team of lawyers to find and help 'victims' of the company's coverage mount cases against Gawker. 'It's less about revenge and more about specific deterrence,' he said on Wednesday in his first interview since his identity was revealed. 'I saw Gawker pioneer a unique and incredibly damaging way of getting attention by bullying people even when there was no connection with the public interest.'" -- CW ...

... Tom Levenson in Balloon Juice: "... what you have here is an insanely rich guy gaming the legal system to destroy a media outfit that pissed him off." -- CW

Presidential Race

Rosalind Helderman & Tom Hamburger of the Washington Post: "The State Department's independent watchdog has issued a highly critical analysis of Hillary Clinton's email practices while running the department, concluding that she failed to seek legal approval for her use of a private email server and that department staff would not have given its blessing because of the 'security risks in doing so.' The inspector general, in a long awaited review obtained Wednesday by The Washington Post in advance of its publication, found that Clinton's use of private email for public business was 'not an appropriate method' of preserving documents and that her practices failed to comply with department policies meant to ensure that federal record laws are followed. The report says Clinton ... should have printed and saved her emails during her four years in office or surrendered her work-related correspondence immediately upon stepping down in February 2013. Instead, Clinton provided those records in December 2014, nearly two years after leaving office.... The 83-page report reviews email practices by five secretaries of state and generally concludes that record keeping has been spotty for years. It was particularly critical of former secretary of state Colin Powell...." -- CW ...

... The report is here, via the New York Times. ...

... Steven Myers & Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times: "Mrs. Clinton and her aides have played down the inquiries, saying that she would cooperate with investigators to put the email issue behind her. Even so, through her lawyers, she declined to be interviewed by the State Department's inspector general as part of his review. So did several of her senior aides.... Security and records management officials told the inspector general's office that 'Secretary Clinton never demonstrated to them that her private server or mobile device met minimum information security requirements,' the report said." -- CW ...

... A. J. Vicens of Mother Jones: "Two State Department staffers in the office of the executive secretariat -- the people within State who coordinate the agency's work internally -- told the IG's investigators that they discussed their concerns about the use of a personal email account with their boss. 'According to [one] staff member, the [boss] stated that the Secretary's personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further,' the report states, adding that there's no evidence that the agency's internal legal office reviewed or approved the arrangement. The report notes that the other employee who raised concerns was told to 'never to speak of the Secretary's personal email system again.'" -- CW ...

... Paul Waldman in the Washington Post: "Get past all the abbreviations and government-speak, and what it comes down to is that Clinton should never have used a personal email account, no matter how secure she thought it was, for department business, and that she repeatedly failed to consult with personnel who should have been aware of how her personal system worked." -- CW ...

... Amy Chozick of the New York Times: "Voters just don't trust her.... It is not just that the inspector general found fault with her email practices. The report speaks directly to a wounding perception that Mrs. Clinton is not forthright or transparent. After months of saying she used a private email for convenience, and that she was willing to cooperate fully with investigations into her handling of official business at the State Department, the report, delivered to Congress on Wednesday, undermined both claims." -- CW

Assholes Before the Fact. Jason Horowitz & Maggie Haberman of the New York Times: "A bitter divide over the Middle East could threaten Democratic Party unity as representatives of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont vowed to upend what they see as the party's lopsided support of Israel. Two of the senator's appointees to the party's platform drafting committee, Cornel West and James Zogby, on Wednesday denounced Israel's 'occupation' of the West Bank and Gaza and said they believed that rank-and-file Democrats no longer hewed to the party's staunch support of the Israeli government. They said they would try to get their views incorporated into the platform, the party's statement of core beliefs, at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia in July." ...

... CW: Even if I were largely in agreement with West's & Zogby's positions, I'm disgusted by their decision to demagogue this stuff at the convention. Those of you who have questioned Sanders' judgment win big here.

Michael Scherer of Time: "Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe invited the Chinese businessman whose donations to him have been named as a focus of Justice Department investigators to a 2013 fundraiser at Hillary Clinton's personal Washington, D.C., residence. Wang Wenliang, a Chinese national with U.S. permanent residency, briefly shook Clinton's hand at the Sept. 30 event, a representative for Wang told Time. An American company controlled by Wang made a $60,000 contribution to McAuliffe's campaign three weeks before the fundraiser. Less than a month later, a separate Wang company pledged $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation, the first of several donations that eventually totaled $2 million." -- CW

John Santucci of ABC News: "During an appearance on 'Jimmy Kimmel Live!' Wednesday night, Donald Trump admitted that he wasn't sincere when he made glowing comments about Bill and Hillary Clinton prior to his bid for the presidency. Kimmel asked ... [Trump] about his once-effusive take on the Clintons.... 'So you were full of s***?' Trump's response? 'A little bit,' he said, laughing." -- CW ...

... Ben Schreckinger of Politico: "Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have seemingly agreed in principle to give the world the debate it's been waiting for. Appearing on ABC's 'Jimmy Kimmel Live' in a show that aired Wednesday night, Trump said he would be willing to debate Sanders if proceeds from such an event went to charity. Within minutes of the statement airing, Sanders had agreed to the idea. 'Game on. I look forward to debating Donald Trump in California before the June 7 primary,' he tweeted early Thursday morning." -- CW ...

... Steve M.: "In a bizarre year like this, of course a Sanders-Trump debate could happen. But if it does happen, it won't be a debate.... Trump will spend most of the 'debate' either agreeing with Sanders (on trade deals, on the need for more jobs) or chiding him gently.... Trump's goal will be to use the words of Sanders as a club to beat Clinton with. Sanders won't see that coming, though he certainly won't object when it happens. He'll pile on. It's not going to be a great moment in the history of Western democracy. Sorry, kids." ...

... CW: Steve is assuming that Bernie is a chump. Steve's pretty smart, so he might be right. But I think Sanders is just as likely to turn on Drumpf & defend -- if not Hillary -- democracy over Trumpian totalitarianism. Played right, a debate with Trump could cement Bernie's status as an all-American hero. Played in Cornel West fashion, Bernie would expose himself as an unstable crackpot. Either way, I think a Sanders-Trump debate would help Clinton.

Ben Kamisar of the Hill: "Donald Trump cut into a handful of prominent Republican figures during a Wednesday rally, even lightly chiding those who ultimately came around to endorsing him for president. The presumptive GOP nominee lashed out at 2012 nominee Mitt Romney, saying he 'walks like a penguin.'" CW: He's said it before. ...

... Jenna Johnson of the Washington Post: "Despite his promise to unite the Republican Party, Donald Trump attacked New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez -- the chairwoman of the Republican Governors Association -- on Tuesday night and accused her of 'not doing the job.'" CW: Martinez is a Latina woman -- for Drumpf, knocking her is a two-fer. ...

... Arrested Development. Jose DelReal & Jenna Johnson of the Washington Post: "A fresh string of attacks by Donald Trump this week on rivals in the GOP establishment -- including one delivered against a prominent Latina governor in her home state -- raised new doubts about his ability or desire to unite the party's badly fractured leadership.... The revived feuding this week has only added to the concerns of holdouts such as House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), who reiterated Wednesday that he was not ready to endorse Trump and remained opposed to some of his core policies." CW Newsflash: Trump may think he knows how to "act presidential," but he does not have the psychological capacity to put propriety before ego. He has the same level of self-control as a cranky two-year-old. ...

... Digby in Salon: "Throughout the GOP primary people have been shocked at the cretinous behavior of Donald Trump.... It's been clear that he has no limits. And yet, for some reason, the media is shocked each time he proves it again. This week was no exception. [Tuesday] all anyone could talk about was the audacity of his latest atrocious comments to the Washington Post's Robert Costa.... It's his way of deflecting the attention away from his vulnerabilities to what he sees as his strength --- his willingness to bludgeon his enemies.... It's about intimidation.... This is primitive stuff." -- CW 

CW: Tuesday, before the State Department's inspector general released his report on Clinton's email usage, Ken Vogel & Marc Caputo of Politico reported that "Donald Trump, who in recent days has accused Bill Clinton of rape and suggested he and Hillary Clinton may have had a role in the death of one of their close friends, plans to focus next on the Whitewater real estate scandal, Politico has learned." ...

     ... Both Vogel & Caputo are good reporters, so you might reasonably assume that they had persuaded a source inside the Trump campaign to reveal this tidbit. But no. Rebecca Savransky of the Hill: "One of Donald Trump's aides accidentally emailed a reporter from Politico to ask for information about the Whitewater real estate deal. The aide, campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks, meant to respond to Trump campaign adviser Michael Caputo, but instead contacted Marc Caputo.... The email included text from a message Michael Caputo sent to a Republican National Committee researcher asking him to 'work up information on HRC/Whitewater as soon as possible.'..." Just not ready for prime-time. ...

... MEANWHILE, Trump fires the new national political director he hired way last month. Something about "clashes" and "backbiting." ...

... CW: That's funny, because Trump is so Great, you'd think his campaign would be Great, too. Never mind this report last week (May 19) by Emily Smith of the New York Post's Page Six: "... Hope Hicks and campaign manager Corey Lewandowski were seen having a public screaming match on the street in Manhattan on Wednesday night.... One witness told us, 'Hope was screaming at Corey, "I am done with you!" It was ugly, she was doubled over with her fists clenched. He stood there looking shocked with his hands on his head.'"

"The Voters They Deserve." Jonathan Bernstein of Bloomberg: "Republicans had encouraged, or at least tolerated, schoolyard taunts and far-fetched conspiracy talk long before Trump's campaign.... By giving a megaphone to people like Pat Robertson, Herman Cain, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina, Republicans showed their voters what counts as a 'normal' Republican presidential candidate -- and it isn't all that different from Donald Trump. Republican voters had many well-qualified candidates in 2016, but they had been taught by their party to ignore normal qualifications, and they did so. That same observation can be made about how Republicans have tolerated and promoted bigotry, forging a path for Trump to go even further." -- CW

News Lede

New York Times: "Provocative new research by a team of investigators at Harvard leads to [the] startling hypothesis ... that Alzheimer's disease stems from the toxic remnants of the brain's attempt to fight off infection..., which could explain the origins of plaque, the mysterious hard little balls that pockmark the brains of people with Alzheimer's. It is still early days, but Alzheimer's experts not associated with the work are captivated by the idea that infections, including ones that are too mild to elicit symptoms, may produce a fierce reaction that leaves debris in the brain, causing Alzheimer's." -- CW

Comments

[PD Pepe]

Bill O'Reilly has a thing for the word "killing." He has written (with the help of Martin Dugard) faux historical books all with this word in the title, killing respectively Jesus, Lincoln, Kennedy, Putin and Reagan. These books are highly readable, fast paced, works of popular history of dubious nature. We live in a country where "Killing Reagan" was , by a large margin, the best selling work of nonfiction in 2015. Now Bill has come up with another, only not in book form. He is attesting that the Black Lives Matter movement is responsible for all these killings of black people. Yowsa! If you've ever listened to Bill converse with a guest whose take on something is different from old Bill's it's like listening to a parent instructing or/and overriding a child's plea to have his say. A few guests have walked off saying they could not get a word in edgewise. I have worried about O'Reilly for years (at present he is in a snit about the transgender potty places) because he has established himself as a powerful connection with an audience: he's the most popular cable-news host today by a three to one margin over his closest competitor, Rachel Maddow. His most recent and present guest of late has been Trump and the two quibble and nibble on bits and pieces like two buddies in a bar. Bill's fans are Trump fans that help fan these flames of making the Republican front runner the one who won the race. So here's O'Reilly with video doing his thing. Notice how he says at the end, "good debate"––he always says this to certain contrarian guests who want to scream, "What fucking debate!"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-oreilly-black-lives-matter_us_57465f7ee4b055bb1171385f

[Akhilleus]

PD,

Every time I go into a bookstore in my area, O'Reilly's "Killing" books are prominently displayed. I've always thought the decision to employ this word and that particular verb form illuminating (and it may have been the choice of some editor at the publishing company but I sincerely doubt it).

First, the tense indicates that, for O'Reilly, these "killings" (even though Reagan wasn't killed), are always happening, the outrageous affront, the vicious attacks by meaner, lesser men, continue to live in the present. It also smacks of the standard issue Confederate sense of victimhood, put upon superiority (his heroes are all white men who were victimized by running-dog mongrels and beset by begrudgers of all stripes; heroic righteousness brought low by villains--too bad he couldn't paint the Romans and Jews who killed Jesus as liberals). In short, he and his "co-writer", Martin Dugard, are writing about O'Reilly: the upright, gallant hero viciously attacked from all sides by those jealous of his might and his power. There's also the obligatory connection to violence. Must have that.

In some ways, they remind me of Mel Gibson movies. Mel Gibson, for years now, has been making movies about put upon heroes, heroes who stand above the fray and "do the right thing" but are horribly tortured and killed for their righteousness by dirty fiends. The most obvious one being Gibson's film "The Passion of Christ" a two hour exercise in extravagant and violent torture and sadism. And who is to blame? Not the Romans. At least not in Gibson's mind. It was the dirty Jews who killed Christ. Natch.

But back to Loofah Boy...

O'Reilly loves to portray himself as a history junkie, a claim easily thrown out with the dirty bath water. His book on Lincoln is reportedly full of errors, as are all the others, errors that would have been all too easy to pick up, especially if one's history chops were as keen as reported. Here's one I noticed in a quick perusal one day. In his Lincoln book, O'Reilly claims that Grant and Lee met only once. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Civil War history will recall that during their meeting at Appomattox Court House, Grant famously reminded Lee that they had met once before, during the Mexican War. That was just too easy. No history buff worthy of the name could have let that slide. It's not a lie. It's just ignorance and carelessness and a cavalier relationship with facts.

But the fact that the "killing" books are so popular (as works of mostly fiction and unsubstantiated suppositions designed to make the books less boring--O'Reilly once ripped standard, ie, actual, history books as boring) speaks to the problem the country faces exactly because of the fact-free reporting by O'Reilly and his Fox colleagues, and the general sentiment abroad in the Confederacy that facts are whatever you want them to be.

Donald Trump is able to get away with making shit up at the drop of a chapter 11 filing because people like O'Reilly have gotten rich by demonstrating that facts are unnecessary. Wingnut fiction has replaced facts for millions of Americans.

And speaking of replacing, since I began by mentioning bookstores here in the south. I don't know about other areas, but you can tell a lot by walking through a bookstore about local culture and what people here care about. The largest bookstore hereabouts, is littered with wingnut screeds masquerading, like O'Reilly's fairy tales, as actual history. The titles are nearly always giveaways, including, as if through some shibboleth agreement, words like "Patriot" and "Freedom" in some combination. Also, I've noticed over the last few years the startling diminishment of the philosophy section (most of which is taken up by eye rolling titles like "The Apprentice and Philosophy". It used to be its own section. Now it's shoehorned in between religion (pretty much 99.9% Christian) and Bibles. Philosophy used to take up, I would guess, about 100 feet of shelf space. As of yesterday it was down to 20. The remaining space has been given over to Bibles.

Oh well, as Nietzsche once said, "to live is to suffer, to survive is to find meaning in the suffering."

I'm trying, Freddy, I'm trying.

[Nancy]

Years ago I had the misfortune to read "In Cold Blood" by Truman Capote. To this day (and it's been at least 40 years) I'm sorry I ever picked that book up to read.

It occurred to me just now after reading that Trump plans to debate Sanders (and thanks Bernie for humiliating yourself and your country, you self-aggrandizing little shark-jumping putz) that Donald Trump is doing to our nation what those two ex-convicts did to that family in Kansas. He is terrorizing us. And we are powerless to do anything about it. We depend on the media to be our watchdog, but it seems they're nothing but lap dogs. I'm truly frightened. Are you?

[MAG]

@Nancy: Not frightened yet, but completely angry with the gutless media for not doing more to call out Trump. Tho' some are beginning to show a bit of spunk. Yesterday when Marie highlighted the 'long lost/hidden lawsuit' filed against Trump for sexual harassment in the early 90's by a Florida woman. I found the outrageous details have been exposed in several media outlets. The Boston Globe gave it a lengthy feature. What gets me, is the avoidance of connecting the dots. Almost same day/same time/same week...that Trump's peccadilloes are outed, he's loudly charging Clinton as a rapist/Hillary as an enabler. Guess which story garners the bigger online headline displays? or the teevee coverage?

Following up on that lawsuit story, NOW the 'victim' has put it all in the past, ...and even says she'll vote for him. He'd make a good president. Agggggggh!

@Ak: Southern bookstores are so prim & proper. Years ago I illustrated a book, the cover had a line-drawn little woman in the (ahem) altogether. Because the title of the book was "I Haven't A Thing To Wear" it seemed a fitting illustration. It sold well on the coasts and northerly areas, but in the sleepy old South it had to be replaced with a new cover done by another artist—a rose on a solid color background. Did get some satisfaction when many years later Henri Bendel used my book in a full page NYTimes Magazine ad. And, once I saw it posted in old books for sale at several hundred dollars in new, unused condition! (Original cost $3.95).!!!

Back to your point about facts being ignored and the unfounded stories that Trump keeps bringing up/making up crap is disgusting that he appears to continually get away with it. Or, is there a greater media scheme to let him play it his way to arrive at catastrophic denouement where he is consumed in a disastrous, never-to-recover from embarrassing episode? Probably wishful thinking on my part—nothing at this point seems to affect this Teflon Don.

[Nancy]

The Washington Post article (linked above, DelReal and Johnson) states that "...Trump had been expected by many political strategists and party leaders to extend olive branches to his foes and vanquished opponents..." Who expected this? It's like expecting a 15-year old high school bully to do the same. He just doesn't get it. When are people going to understand that? We are not dealing with an emotionally mature individual. Stop framing him like he is.

[Nancy]

One more and I'll stop. I'm clearly not up to the level of discourse on this site, so always reluctant to comment and usually sorry I did after I hit "Create Post."

I love how the media characterizes Trump's indecent, boorish, cruel, juvenile, vile criticisms of others "strategy."

Pul-leez. This isn't strategy. It's a fat little man being mean. He's a fat little perch-mouthed mean girl.

I used to say there was no difference in the Trumps and the Kardashians in terms of trash level, but I was wrong. The Kardashians are nicer.

[Nancy]

Clearly not up to proofreading either. Sorry about that.

I meant criticisms of others AS "strategy."

[Patrick]

Nancy: "perch -mouthed mean girl." I like it. Add "on Twitter" and I think you captured the essence of the boy.

After lots of his chickens start roosting, he may learn about Snapchat and move there. Better odds of being able to deny he ever wrote something.

But he'll still be a middle school mean girl.

[Akhilleus]

MAG,

It seems that even when terribly unflattering stories about Trump appear, even those connecting him to rape, criminal activity, and the mob, they have little effect. A nice judge decided that Trump's trial for fraud connected to his Trump University scam would be too distracting for the poor man during the campaign, so it has been delayed. Meanwhile, hearings and investigations of Hillary Clinton's actions continue apace with the press buzzing eagerly about looking for the tiniest problem. I fear that the media, en banc, as it were, won't realize that it's their job to out sleazy, criminal rat bastards like Trump until it's too late, then we'll hear all the mea culpas like we heard after the press backed The Decider's murderous war of choice "Oh, sorry, we didn't know..."

Assholes.

And by the way, love the cover design for that book. Looks like a little Eve action going on. I'm guessing the undressed damsel wasn't demure enough for certain refined tastes. Perhaps this picture of Melania Trump, supporting the NRA being circulated by the Trump campaign, is more to the liking of present day Confederates. Now there's a conservative Republican icon for you. Always classy, those Trumps.

[Ophelia M.]

"600 Prominent American Writers Express Their Disgust At Trump in Open Letter To The American People"

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2016/5/25/1530576/-600-Prominent-American-Writ

[MAG]

Beginning to see signs the Media is getting more critical. Pile on, please! The WaPo has an editorial on the " lies, lies, lies " of one DT, Concluding with..." ...the Republican Party, the media and voters cannot pretend that Mr. Trump is a normal candidate. Mr. Trump is pathologically dishonest and morally bankrupt." An echo similar to the ongoing HuffPost lines after every Trump story.

@Ak: Hah! my little damsel's exposed ta-tas are positively wholesome compared to the opulent backside of the Missus Trump pic that you linked! (P.S. the illustration was done back in the days when Studio Art line drawings were the thing!) like to think my style has evolved! But, thanks!

[Akhilleus]

This Sanders/Trump debate...Jesus, I don't even know what to say.

But it is becoming clear that many of Bernie's supporters will not vote for Clinton, which is the same as voting for Trump. And if they actually do vote for Trump to show their displeasure and spite HRC, they may well join the ranks of previous pissed off (and very misguided) Democrats (and by the way, Bernie isn't even a Democrat!) who in 1968 and 1980 gave us two of the worst presidents in history (and if you count the Democrats who voted for Ralph Nader, that makes the three worst presidents in modern times, with The Decider being, hands down, the worst of all time).

A little history for you:

"In 1968 and 1980, insurgent liberal challengers—Eugene McCarthy and Ted Kennedy—captured a popular wave of anti-establishment sentiment but failed to win their party’s nomination. In November, many of their supporters veered sharply to the right, voting for candidates who didn’t necessarily share their political views but who served as a convenient outlet for the expression of their broader frustrations. In both cases, this block of Democratic defectors helped deliver the election to the Republican Party."

Something for Sanders fans to think about as they warm up the popcorn for the coming carny sideshow. All we need now is an undercard match between the bearded lady and the pinheaded boy.

[Gloria]

I am with you Nancy in that feeling of anguish, but we are among friends, and your points are always of interest. I do take issue with "mean girl" though. I have sons and I won't let them throw those "girl" insults (run like a girl, girly men, etc). I don't believe I'm sensitive, but I ask my sons how is "girl" an insult. I understand the contexts, but I feel it is one of those invisible ways of diminishing girls that slip into language and shape our views. Words matter. Trump is not a mean girl, he is a nasty, narcissistic, over-grown man-child, as Warren said, a small insecure money grubber. He is a loser, a rapist, a liar, a shrew, a bully, a fantasist. We have such a rich field of pertinent insults, "girl" is way too flattering.

[LT]

All this mean girl and man-child/bully comparison makes me think that a good video could be made that compares Trump's nasty comments with well-known film bullies. As much as people seem to want to follow him, maybe the revulsion the film characters are intended to evoke will wake people up to how revolting and childish Trump really is. I do think, though, that he is a lot like Regina George in Mean Girls because he is more of a girl style bully. He is too wimpy to be physical bully. "In a nutshell: Regina (Rachel McAdams) is the Queen Bee of North Shore High School’s bully trio the “Plastics.” She’s an exception from the mostly physical bullies on this list, but her quick tongue ensures that she’s just as lethal.

Bullying offenses: Trash talking. Rumor starting. Gossip sharing. Backstabbing. And, worst of all, slut shaming.

Meanness rating: 8. Regina loses a point for lack of physical bullying, but her penchant for talking smack about anyone and everyone makes her one of the meanest bullies to ever grace the silver screen."
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/04/10-of-film-historys-meanest-bullies/255394/#slide7