Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[Michael West]

Thank you, Maine!

[Michael West]

It didn't in 2016, why should it today?

this banner got me temporarily banned for Facebook....

one suspects that the trumpanzees do not yet dare see what's staring them in the face

[digitaldog]

Keep tabs on your dinner guests.
From RollingStone:

Nick Fuentes, the hate leader who dined at Mar-a-Lago last year with Donald Trump and Kanye West, is calling for a genocide of "perfidious Jews" and other non-Christians. "When we take power," he said a Dec. 8 livestream, "they need to be given the death penalty, straight up."
Fuentes leads an "America First" movement of young white nationalists who call themselves "Groypers." One of the country's most insidious racists, Fuentes denies the Holocaust and has increasingly advocated for a violent form of Christian nationalism, as epitomized by his Friday remarks. "These people who are suppressing the name Christ, and suppressing Christianity," he said, "they must be absolutely annihilated."

[Robert Roaldi]

Keep tabs on your dinner guests.
From RollingStone:

Nick Fuentes, the hate leader who dined at Mar-a-Lago last year with Donald Trump and Kanye West, is calling for a genocide of "perfidious Jews" and other non-Christians. "When we take power," he said a Dec. 8 livestream, "they need to be given the death penalty, straight up."
Fuentes leads an "America First" movement of young white nationalists who call themselves "Groypers." One of the country's most insidious racists, Fuentes denies the Holocaust and has increasingly advocated for a violent form of Christian nationalism, as epitomized by his Friday remarks. "These people who are suppressing the name Christ, and suppressing Christianity," he said, "they must be absolutely annihilated."

Is he ok with non-white Christians?

[digitaldog]

Is he ok with non-white Christians?

Are white nationalists ok with non-whites?

[Robert Roaldi]

Are white nationalists ok with non-whites?

Must cause some havoc with his brain chemicals. If, for him, skin colour trumps christianity in his hate hierarchy, then the fact that Christ was born Jewish must cause him some internal confusion. OTOH, I have heard some evangelicals claim (Garner Ted Armstrong for one, if I remember right) that white Americans are descendants of one of the lost tribes of Israel, so I guess it's possible to live with nonsense floating around inside one's head. Once you allow in one form of craziness, then cramming in some others might be easy.


I only saw the headline but they're indicting a woman in Ohio for having a miscarriage. I hope there's more to it than that and that the headline was just clickbait.

It's going to be an interesting few months for SCOTUS. Although the majority of them feel some kinship with right-of-centre politics, which isn't itself bad as these things swing back and forth, I hope they have enough respect left for the rule of law to not bend too far into Trumpian dystopia. OTOH, they have been increasing the power of corporations over that of breathing citizens for a century now, so maybe money really does talk. Maybe it depends on who is paying them. Is there a free market of principles? It will be a wild ride if they come down on the side of a President having legal immunity. If, like Speaker Johnson believes, the US is actually governed by biblical ideas, granting the big cheese immunity is probably ok, since he represents god. And, well, god is for sure above the law. That's how feudal nobility got their power after all, from god, so why should POTUS be any less blessed. A lot of dead soldiers must be getting ready to spin in their graves right about now.

I see that the moral panic over illegal immigration is being ramped up again. To be sure, something should be done about it, and that would require a group of adults to sit down and come up with coherent policies. Conducting serious public policy discussions by drunken bar talk cannot possibly work. The wiki entry on illegal immigration to the US makes for interesting reading, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States. I have no idea how much that article reflects actual reality, but I'm pretty sure that what we hear/see in in social media is mostly propaganda. I was recently told by a friend in Florida that Biden has let in 10 million illegals, which comes out to 10,000 per day over his roughly 1000 days in office. How true can that be? The difference between that number and the wiki description is pretty large!

The satanic child abuse beliefs turned out to be horse shit, but some people still spent years in jail so even bullshit has consequences. One aspect that boils my blood is when politicians link one policy with another, e.g., no money for Ukraine unless you "seal" the border. This kind of childish horse trading happens in Canada too. Are they really not capable of tackling these unrelated issues one at a time? Is it all just partisan propaganda all the time now.

[digitaldog]

All evidence points to Jesus being non-white.
There was a "White Jesus" on the superb TV show "Reservation Dogs"

[digitaldog]

This week's attack on democracy:

[Robert Roaldi]

This week's attack on democracy:

What gibberish. Does anyone know what he's talking about.

[digitaldog]

What gibberish. Does anyone know what he's talking about.

One fellow here who posts acronym gibberish does. 💩

[Michael West]

What gibberish. Does anyone know what he's talking about.

Donna Twump Said"

"you see bags of crap coming into the voting areas,"

will he be ALLOWED at polling places???

[Robert Roaldi]

I listened to some audio from the "immunity" session at that court of appeals. I don't have any experience with the courts but Trump's lawyers don't seem to be the A-team, do they. What was their track record before representing him, does anyone know. Are they truly not very good or are they constrained by their client's instructions? It's all a bit third rate. I wish he'd just negotiate a plea deal and go away.

[digitaldog]

First Trump has to negotiate the civil war. Then the war in the middle east (one days work for him according to Trump). 

[Robert Roaldi]

It's possible that we're all wrong and that the courts are playing into Trump's hand https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/01/12/donald-trump-indictments-legal-system-00135151.

I guess it's a pretty cynical use of the court system but surely he's just the most recent and most public example. It's not as if this is the first time that the moneyed have used the courts to their benefit. Trump has been a bit more vocal than others about the quid pro quo of judicial appointments, I think, but he has never been subtle. This could be a hint of what it must be like to live in a corrupt country like Russia or others.


Poor Abbott in Texas is feeling constrained by the law, https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4404134-abbott-texas-border-shooting-migrants/. It sounds like he thinks the USA is at war with Mexico and therefore has the right to arbitrarily shoot people crossing the border illegally. I get it that illegal immigration is a problem but is it a summary killing offence?


I've been wondering about something else. Would aficionados of "state rights" be ok with Maine and Colorado's decision re the inclusion of Trump on ballots in their states?

[marvpelkey]

The problem with Trump is the same problem the U.S. (and other countries, I suppose) has faced/is facing with homelessness, border issues, rampant, and public, drug use etc etc etc. In the beginning, all these things were ignored, as much as possible, because they were just too uncomfortable and complicated to tackle. And the more they were ignored, the more they spun out of control.

And in Trumps case, the added reckless and dangerous response by many in power, has fed this animal, to the point he is now literally too powerful to stop, at least without some serious consequences. Who would have thought that a person running for president and the most popular candidate, would be more like a mob boss than a president. Of course the biggest difference, I suppose, is this mob boss has millions who will do his bidding, and a few who would likely even kill for him.

Truly bizarre.

[digitaldog]

Just in time for tomorrow's (COLD) Iowa Caucus.

[Robert Roaldi]

The problem with Trump is the same problem the U.S. (and other countries, I suppose) has faced/is facing with homelessness, border issues, rampant, and public, drug use etc etc etc. In the beginning, all these things were ignored, as much as possible, because they were just too uncomfortable and complicated to tackle. And the more they were ignored, the more they spun out of control.
.
.
.

Those issues continue to be mishandled, imo. I think that Trumpistan's party line is still that illegal drug use is due to "foreigners". As if somehow all the world's drug cartels are targeting the poor innocents here at home. What bollocks. Cartels sell to whoever wants to buy, it's a demand-side problem. The cartels are just competing on price. If they disappeared, local suppliers would surely ramp up production to meet the demand. Is this not obvious.

I don't know how to solve widespread homelessness any more than anyone else seems to. Those tent encampments in cities are awful. And it should be no surprise to anyone that desperate people will resort to crime to survive, so it's understandable that people want those places gone. But if all you is disperse them, it's not clear to me how that solves anything. Making it a law enforcement problem is unfair to the police. It may be one more depressing example of political governance failure. It's always the same, no one wants to do the difficult job of dealing with externalities. It's as if politicians don't know what they are there for.

[marvpelkey]

Regardless of who/what (more on that in a moment) is at fault for our drug and homeless problems, I would suggest these two are at the top or pretty close to the top of the list of issues which will not only persist, but continue to grow. As a former cop, I have witnessed, over 3o years, both go from "an issue" to a full blown out of control problem. And I sure don't have the answer to solve either.

However, regarding the drug problem, I have seen family, courts, politicians, the user and even the police, drop the ball along the way. Too difficult now (and maybe even back then) to coordinate all those responsible for a sound, appropriate solution. Not only did I deal with the issue(s) as a cop, but from a personal perspective, have a relative that has been a serious drug addict for all his adult life (mid 30's now). He is currently living (if that is what it is called) on the streets, with absolutely no prospect of turning himself around. Sadly, I expect he will overdose some day....

Regarding homelessness, I really saw it increase when our (BC Canada) provincial government shut down all the psychiatric, and drug, facilities and offloaded the responsibility/cost on local governments. Those facilities may not have been an optimal solution but they did provide shelter and care and forced the government agencies to take responsibility. I saw some good examples of persons forced into care, who received enough care to get themselves straightened out enough to transfer into shared/solo housing. That just doesn't happen anymore.

Couple the above with a court system which basically decreed that everyone had the right to a "home", without any support to cope with the outfall. This literally prevented police and other agencies from removing the homeless from local parks and other public places. It is now so bad that there are vast areas, including rest stops, that are over-run with filth, disease and crime to which many citizens no longer visit. And then financial trauma forced average people out onto the streets, with no place to go. Now we have old beat up motorhomes and trailers being lived in on many public streets and parking areas. Again accompanied by garbage and human waste.

And those in charge still have no appetite to spend the massive resources needed to solve these issues. And so, the problem grows......

Man, I got to go lay down now.......

[digitaldog]

He's showing more signs of senility:

Former President Donald Trump appeared to mistakenly refer to GOP rival Nikki Haley instead of Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., when discussing the Jan. 6 riot at a campaign rally in New Hampshire on Friday night.

"Nikki Haley, you know they, do you know they destroyed all of the information, all of the evidence, everything, deleted and destroyed all of it. All of it because of lots of things like Nikki Haley is in charge of security. We offered her 10,000 people, soldiers, National Guard, whatever they want. They turned it down. They don't want to talk about that. These are very dishonest people," Trump said.

Trump's gaffe comes as he frequently portrays President Joe Biden, 81, as confused and mentally unfit for office. The former president, 77, has previously confused politicians during his speeches. In September, Trump confused Biden with former President Barack Obama, saying "with Obama, we won an election that everyone said couldn't be won."

[Robert Roaldi]

He's showing more signs of senility:

Former President Donald Trump appeared to mistakenly refer to GOP rival Nikki Haley instead of Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., when discussing the Jan. 6 riot at a campaign rally in New Hampshire on Friday night.

"Nikki Haley, you know they, do you know they destroyed all of the information, all of the evidence, everything, deleted and destroyed all of it. All of it because of lots of things like Nikki Haley is in charge of security. We offered her 10,000 people, soldiers, National Guard, whatever they want. They turned it down. They don't want to talk about that. These are very dishonest people," Trump said.

Trump's gaffe comes as he frequently portrays President Joe Biden, 81, as confused and mentally unfit for office. The former president, 77, has previously confused politicians during his speeches. In September, Trump confused Biden with former President Barack Obama, saying "with Obama, we won an election that everyone said couldn't be won."

Apparently he doesn't remember taking an oath to protect the constitution. I'm sure he certainly didn't mean to if he did.