consultants are sandburs

Friday, November 25, 2016

Jill Stein - Green Party - Swing State Election Recount?

This Guardian item, stating in part:

Amanda Holpuch in New York -- Friday 25 November 2016 16.57 EST
Jill Stein, the Green party’s candidate in the US presidential election, has formally filed a motion for a recount in Wisconsin on Friday as her funding effort for counting the votes again in three states passed $5m.

As more money flooded in for her effort – which aims to fund recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, all states where Donald Trump narrowly beat Hillary Clinton – she admitted she had no hard evidence of fraud but said the systems were vulnerable.

Her campaign team said it would formally file in Wisconsin before the 5pm ET deadline to do so; the recount motion deadlines for the other two states are next week. Less than half an hour before the deadline, the Wisconsin elections commission confirmed it had received the recount petition.

Her move has split opinions, with some energized by the thought it has potential to show defeated Democrat Clinton is the rightful election winner, and those who see Stein’s intervention as an expensive gimmick to promote the Green party.

The party's efforts to regain lost ground with blue-collar voters could be a factor in next week's election for Democratic leader in the House of Representatives. Tim Ryan, whose northeast Ohio district encompasses blue-collar Youngstown, is challenging veteran leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco. Ryan has emphasized his ability to talk to working class voters and said in announcing his leadership run that people "need to know we understand that they elected us to fight for economic opportunity for all."

The headline of this post is a combined two paragraphs, online at Reuters, here.

STRONGER TOGETHER did not cut it.

No STRONGER.

Moreover, no TOGETHER.

Alienate folks including the young who shall suffer long-term consequences, and you're apart from them, not TOGETHER with them. Especially with superdelegate and "HILLARY VICTORY FUND" crap in place before a FAIR primary season; and you've un-TOGETHERED a whole hell of a lot of the electorate, who see slogan TOGETHER as an insulting lie. As in, "Know your place and vote it; we be the lesser evil so cave in per usual, accordingly, and silently would be better than with any noise."

Well.

Gee.

Together was Podesta, the Clintons (foundation and spouses and offspring), Debbie Wasserman Schultz, billionaires, and current DNC stooges in lockstep with Madeline Albright or otherwise. Add Goldman/Wall Street and it is - RAPACIOUS TOGETHER.

BELTWAY TOGETHER is a phony route to attracting progressives or rust-belt suffering families.

There is no TOGETHER of me with that nasty crowd, so what about you?

In thrall to big money and liking that; or having a different and better dream?

------

Bernie and Ellison did line up and salute the flagpole, but were they together with anyone really besides each other, Tulsi Gabbard, and those inspired to attend the massive Sanders rallies? Was there much Beltway entrenchment Bernie or Ellison could identify with as of value to them or their supporting crowds?

Should either have felt TOGETHER with entrenched ignorant hubris more allied with Wall Street and Huma scenarios for Muslims than with suffering voters being screwed by banks and business and the uber-wealthy, still, and as usual? If so, why?

Ellison has race TOGETHER with Obama, but little else. Middle of the road do-nothing corporatism was uninspiring as shown in Obamacare passage - a grossly uninspired sop to the health insurance industrial complex, instead of resembling actual healthcare reform.

If single payer; a fifteen buck minimum wage; debt relief for students hosed via tuition abuse while legislated to be without a bankruptcy out as accorded Trump casinos; tax reform against corporations, banks and 1%'ers; and better services and assistance levels for ordinary folk had been part of TOGETHER, then TOGETHER might not have been so unpopular as to lose an election, top to bottom of the ticket.

Clearly, Hillary/Podesta hurt everybody besides Republicans, and retooling ought to start with a strong populist/progressive person heading DNC. Then add like minded DNC board members, and Trump might be held to a single term.

We know, spoils being at stake, that the Dems hope Trump will not succeed enough to earn a second term. How will they work with Trump in the upcoming term, with that in mind?

Can you say, GRIDLOCK TOGETHER?

And, back to the headline, is it time for Pelosi, (not anyone's progressive by any measure), to go further into the background and turn over House leadership to a progressive? If not to a progressive, then at least to a blue-collar lunch-bucket district Rep. such as this Tim Ryan candidate poses himself to be?

Think about it -- THEY WHO WILL NOT BE NAMED could have the crappy Ryan in their leadership post; Dems could have the better one
.

Thursday, November 24, 2016

Rothschild Investments

image: The Economist
Trump appoints a Commerce Secretary nominee, Wilbur Ross, a fact more widely reported than this Wikipedia extended fact version of the Wilbur Ross background:

In the late seventies, Ross began twenty-four years at the New York office of Rothschild Inc., where he ran the bankruptcy-restructuring advisory practice. In the eighties, after quickly expanding the reach of Resorts International to Atlantic City, Donald Trump found himself in financial trouble as the real estate market in New York City bottomed-out. His three casinos in Atlantic City were under threat from lenders. It was with the assistance and assurance of Ross, then senior managing director of Rothschild Inc., that Trump was allowed to keep the casinos and rebuild his businesses ultimately engineering one of the greatest turnaround in US business history.[7] In the late nineties, Ross started a $200 million fund at Rothschild to invest in distressed assets. As the U.S. bubble began to burst, he decided he wanted to invest more and advise less. On April Fools’ Day 2000, the 62-year-old banker raised $450 million to plunge into fallen companies.[8]

So, when Trump branding began as an outgrowth of the casino bankruptcy scene the branch to a drowning man was reached out by a Rotchschild/Ross hand. This link.

‘Middle-of-the-road thinking has overstayed its welcome’ ‘The Democratic party can’t win if it smells like corporate influence.’ Two sub-headlines, Guardian; as part of navel gazing by election losers.

The headline does not include all Guardian item sub-headlines, while identifying each pundit/politico taking a try at tea leaf reading. One of those headlines is attributed to Ilya Sheyman, the executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action, with this "rings-true" part of the statement from Sheyman (of the Soros faction):

In February 2016, the Democratic National Committee ended its ban on donations from federal lobbyists and political action committees – a policy put in place by then-candidate Barack Obama in 2008.

At last, corporate money could flow in unchecked. The Democratic party would have the resources to win up and down the ballot. Right? Wrong.

In fact, the rule change symbolized a deeper disconnect between the Democratic party and the voters it relies upon. Millions of those voters made known their outrage at business as usual via the Bernie Sanders insurgency, to no avail. In November, millions of once-Democratic voters stayed home. The result: a catastrophic electoral rout – despite a hideously despised Republican nominee.

Voters don’t want a Democratic party that smells like corporate influence. For the Democratic party to reclaim its greatness, it must be its best self: the party of the people.

The first step is to clean house. It’s time for a leader like Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Keith Ellison, and for a return to Howard Dean’s winning 50-State Strategy. The inclusive, progressive and populist agenda that emerged from last summer’s Democratic convention was a great one. It’s time to pair it with a surge of investment in on-the-ground organizing and an embrace of candidates who can bring new voters and energy to the party.

That item bore a terse sidebar summary, " Millions of voters made known their outrage at business as usual via the the Bernie Sanders insurgency, to no avail."

It is easy in the abstract to opine, "All that money was no help," where the next cycle the difficulty will be turning it, and its hooks, down. The Clintons found no such difficulty, THEY SIMPLY TOOK THE MONEY, ALL THEY COULD, HAND OVER FIST; but they splattered things big time, so the Inner elitists face the problem, "Don't change, grub the cash with all ties it implies but project the image you are above that," which is the DWS-DNC-Billary ploy (which Bill got away with in the '90s), but which proved a roadmap to major failure this go-round.

The money quote within the larger quote above is:

In fact, the rule change symbolized a deeper disconnect between the Democratic party and the voters it relies upon. Millions of those voters made known their outrage at business as usual via the the Bernie Sanders insurgency, to no avail. In November, millions of once-Democratic voters stayed home. The result: a catastrophic electoral rout – despite a hideously despised Republican nominee.

Note the "Ellison" reference in the final paragraph of the extended quote. "The first step is to clean house. It’s time for a leader like Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Keith Ellison, and for a return to Howard Dean’s winning 50-State Strategy."

If the regulars stymie Ellison's bid, it will be hell to pay. Expect instead Ellison possibly taking top spot, surrounded by stooge-regulars to hold him in check; i.e., more of the same. Unless a real lesson was learned, which is unlikely given human nature with money being the sick political influence drug of choice that oils the gears of grinding erosion of anything like a good life for all but the monied, then without that lesson greed will remain the key motivation of powers behind the throne. And public virtue will remain priced to buy.

CHANGE was a cracker-jack slogan. Now what? The real thing? Get serious. There is still a DWS-like remainder of Dems. There is Joe Biden waiting. The Trump cabinet appointments bode ill, but so far they have been met by all talk and no action from the Dem establishment. Hand wringing without reform will be seen as being as phony as a Trump promise.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz defeating Tim Canova in the one Florida House primary was a decided blow to reform. She did her acts; she's reelected; what message do you think her henchpersons will try to have us infer from that?

INSTEAD: DO IT.

CHANGE.

REPLACE SLOGAN CHANGE WITH HONEST CHANGE.

TRY IT AND LIKE IT, ELLISON INVITES. But can you envision Amy K. honestly and wholly aboard that train? I cannot.


In closing, again, the money quote from the above extended quote is:

In fact, the rule change [of accepting lobbyist money] symbolized a deeper disconnect between the Democratic party and the voters it relies upon. Millions of those voters made known their outrage at business as usual via the the Bernie Sanders insurgency, to no avail. In November, millions of once-Democratic voters stayed home. The result: a catastrophic electoral rout – despite a hideously despised Republican nominee.

If staying home with Trump capturing the spoils which he now is dispensing crassly out of Trump Tower did not register on the spoils seekers of the DNC; then staying home again and again until they wake up and the message gets through may prove necessary; but when eight years of GOP-lite ushered in with slogans of change gave us nothing but Obama dividing spoils, (and Holder sending nary a single Wall Street crook to the slammer being the prototype of the Obama Whitehouse), delivery on the promise never happened and that did not cut it.

Ellison heading DNC would be merely a start. DNC reform up and down and sideways, i.e., CHANGE around Ellison; now that's a story worth living.

We await the 2018 midterm elections to see what's talk vs. action.

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Eight years later, what's the verdict? Is this a lesson-message for Trump boosters in anticipation?




And, however you read those tea leaves, we nonetheless have to trust and place hope in Ellison, for now, for DNC leadership. Then see who, if Ellison succeeds, he is surrounded by, and such.

_____________UPDATE______________
Last image, this link.

Compare.

Nobody's big surprise. It should gall all progressives. Yet more of the DWS mentality at play - top down, after all DWS happened on the Obama watch. Entrenched party recognition factor: They'd rather lose with schlock and compromised mediocrity {love of Goldman included - can you say Geithner) than win with better people - a bothering Obama legacy. Like the half-baked healthcare garbage that came out of Hope, Change, and other postures.

FURTHER: No, please, not Joe from DuPont. Nor his henchmen henchpersons. The NYT item noted:

Mr. Obama’s advisers, some of whom discussed the party leadership race at a White House meeting last week, have talked about whether Labor Secretary Thomas E. Perez and former Gov. Jennifer Granholm of Michigan would be willing to run for the post. Mr. Perez met with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. last week and had lunch Tuesday in the White House Mess with Valerie Jarrett, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, while also visiting with David Simas, Mr. Obama’s political director.

Some in Mr. Obama’s circle were even holding out hope that Mr. Biden himself could be persuaded to step into the chairmanship as a unifying force for a party reeling after losing the presidency and making scant gains in the House and Senate.

But Mr. Biden’s office said Tuesday that he was “not interested in being D.N.C. chair,” though he plans to “remain deeply involved in helping shape the direction of the Democratic Party moving forward.”

Don't these folks have anything like an upward sloping learning curve? Flat liners lost, Trump won, so the flat-line learning curve crowd has seen its best chance be not good enough.

Step aside. Time for, no bullshit this time but actual reactive -

CHANGE

Dumping superdelegate mischief is step one. Those wanting to convene should run to convene. As to who "superdelegates" are -- They, this last cycle, were reactionary problems;, not super in any fashion, even if allowed a free pass to convene as delegates.

Mop the mess.

Let Keith do it. He's equal to the task, and wants responsibility and authority for doing that job.

________________
credit: the three images, each from this pinterest page.

Saturday, November 19, 2016

Ellison.

Steve Timmer in a Strib Op-Ed on the Ellison DNC chairmanship candidacy, here. Also, enlarge the screen capture of a web search, same topic, at the left. Dylan wrote, "You better start moving or you'll sink like a stone, the times they are a-changing." A still true tune, post-election.

"Her turn" failed big time. Progressives did not stand well with being taken for "lesser evil" granted, and they handed that stuff back by staying home or by protest voting.

CHANGE?
Best noted by a forwarded email:


And who brings you this "great opportunity" remaindered-item going-out-of-business sale? See, email footer:


See, Steve Timmer, LEFT.MN, here, here, here and here.

So why should progressives bail out the merchandise shelves of an operation from which they were effectively excluded, disenfranchised and marginalized, in the course of the "Hillary Victory Fund" starting, operating, and ultimately getting trumped? Answer: they shouldn't.

Progressives were never ones who felt it was "her turn." That came from current Inner Party functionaries, intent on taking progressives for granted yet again, as always, as "where else can they go" nonentities, of value only at the lesser evil ballot box stage but otherwise scorned as pariahs who should know their place in the greater globalization world view and scheme of things; CFR global corporatism being the rule and progressives a troublesome exception to it.

Let the Hillary Victory Fund's own architects and engineers bail out the overstocked shelves they now face, post-whomping. They can buy out remaindered buttons, bumper stickers, and other ware. Let Podesta pay a share, Madaline Albright too, and there are a pictured three Minnesota entrenched-elite millionaires who had a hand in Hillary Victory Fund shenanigans and who, hence, also should each be held to pay their share.

And then some. They were DWS allies; and DWS ways and means were a big, big part of the Inner Party's hubris and error.

Others may disagree, but I donated to Tim Canova, and that was a direction apart from Podesta land. Apart from Blankfein land. Apart from Clinton family and foundation. I paid my dues that way, and have no inclination to support those who scorned my class in the course of schmoozing Wall Street and foundation donors; i.e., schmoozing the class the old model Clintonian DFL and DNC embraces and serves, while in office.


Better start changing . . .

____________UPDATE____________
Ellison paid his party dues at the convention, and is paying his dues now, while seeking to lead the DNC.

Young Turks re Ellison; here. Ellison is not acting as a firebrand. He is acting as an insider with an answer to doing better next time. Bet on him heading the DNC into a better future, (from a class/progressivism focus rather than a corporatist/globalist perspective).

Redifining how to pose questions, within the party's campaigning, would clearly accompany an Ellison DNC appointment.

(Last, the background image used in the Young Turks report - how does that grab YOU as a changing of the guard?)

____________FURTHER UPDATE___________
Again, the Young Turks item is the one to watch, if you are only to watch one video. It lays out a truth; change is needed.

The same theme, again focused on Ellison, from The Nation:

The Democratic National Committee must change, radically, if it is going to be prepared for the challenge of opposing President-elect Donald Trump and the most right-wing Congress in American history. The DNC that could not stop Trump must be replaced by a DNC that can stop Trumpism.

That will require not just new leadership but different leadership. The DNC needs a chair who has an intersectional and activist organizing vision like that of former Minnesota senator Paul Wellstone, who taught us that “There is an elementary aspiration which undergirds the humane impulse in our history and our culture and binds us together as political activists. This is a simple, irreducible, indisputable aspiration. It is the ‘dream of justice’ for a beloved community, in which the level of terror in people’s lives is sharply reduced or maybe eliminated. It is the belief that extremes and excesses of inequality must be reduced so that each person is free to fully develop his or her full potential. This is why we take precious time out of our lives and give it to politics.”

Wellstone spoke those words after the heartbreaking election of 1984, in which Ronald Reagan won a 49-state landslide victory that led many Democrats to imagine that their party needed to ease up on its historic commitment to economic justice and its emerging commitment to a broader vision of social justice. Wellstone argued that the naysayers were misguided, that a turn inward that betrayed the “democratic wing of the Democratic Party” represented an abandonment of the future. He was right, on so many moral and political levels.

Wellstone’s vision lives on with those who worked with him on behalf of economic and social justice and peace—and on behalf of a grassroots-focused and boldly progressive Democratic Party. One of Wellstone’s allies was a young lawyer from Minneapolis named Keith Ellison, who would become a congressman and is now emerging as a potential front-runner for the chairmanship of the DNC,

May the Green Bus live again, in spirit. At a national and international level, once Trump's had his one term.

Monday, November 14, 2016

Economist.

Link.

Friday, November 11, 2016

Miscellany.

Starting here.

Fool's paradise - as soon as this video hit YouTube, super-kitsch soundtrack and all, one had to wonder if phony was going to work. (It didn't.) Debbie scripted it or might have. It fits her.

"Help" from friends. Help like that had to be "downsized and explained" in ways some may view as convincing.

Three related YouTube links, each part of the plot; here, here, and here. Collectively as good an explanation of the Trump victory and its message to mainstream politics and mainstream media, as I have seen/heard. Same guy as in two of the items, (Chomsky being the other), in another helpful short item.

Richard Wolff, Oct. 2016, an hour-and-a-half long. Worth your time. Your choice to watch or not. Good help in understanding "the market" and resource allocation: How it works. Who it works for. Who wants regulation and government reach into business. Etc:

Mid-item, commentary about an Obama White Paper.

End with Chomsky.

______________UPDATE________________
MPP has two postmortems. Invenium Viam stating in part:

It’s easy to see why guys like Chris Matthews, Chuck Todd, and others will look for self-justification by claiming that “nobody knew.” OK, so an occasional writer for an obscure blog in Minnesota that’s read by a few hundred people might count as “nobody.” I get that. I guess what they really mean is “nobody … who counts.” And that, in a nutshell, is the problem — discounting not only the opinions of political writers in the hinterlands who disagree, but the opinions of voters in the hinterlands who disagree.

However, film-maker Michael Moore is NOT nobody. He’s been involved with the political left as long as I can remember. He has street creds. And he has a national rep.

HE counts. Moore predicted a Trump victory in an article on his blog last July: [... read that MPP item for further content and for links].

Dan Burns wrote:

– Don’t get all hung up in the ranting, finger-pointing, and recriminations that will likely dominate the online left for a while.

– Live in the present and avoid wallowing in worst-case projecting doom and gloom. It sounds like a facile cliche right now, but consider that there may be something to the one about every problem being an opportunity in disguise.

– This will potentially provide the left with a lot of new allies, within the business community for example. Be aware that compromise, of the win-win sort, can be a good thing.

– Challenges are what make life interesting. Right?

He could also have written, "Don't take yourself or events too seriously; as long as you're sucking air and well fed, Trump is a distance away from the guy who fixes your car, or delivers to your home from Amazon. Buses will still run. And remember key points such as when your neighbor loses his job it's a "downturn;" but if you lose yours then it's a full blown bigger than '29 depression. Perspective matters."

Not that I can speak for him, but that seems consistent with what Burns wrote.

In closing, do YOU really think Trump got fair press treatment? This image, bottom banner line, speaks to that question; and now the press acts bewildered? They did try to sell status quo, but votes matter more than punditry/propaganda.

______________FURTHER UPDATE______________
A positive outlook, but with risk of bad outcomes, is the thought Trump has a clean plate and we need to ask to whom does he owe in all this friendship/enmity in terms of the spoils. He was dreaded in part by the comfortably entrenched, as outsider. Put more directly, he campaigned on fighting the gridlock while the Clintons (and Paul Ryan) own and prosper by and are the gridlock. Other side of the silver lining, the clouds for now suggest disaster or gridlock redux once the beltway populace get hunkered in; that being business as usual, disaster, or improvement awaiting time's disclosure. Cut the man slack. He is to serve as President, Commander in Chief.

Other thought, has anyone heard any lobbyists crying (besides Podesta Group)? Norm and Tim presumably are comfortable with things, and likely expect staying where they are; ditto, Vin Weber.




Thursday, November 10, 2016

Hoping for something positive from TRUMP winning. Good is possible.

This brief video, as a large part of why I am not overly upset with our voters.

Also, given the cold comfort Paul Ryan consistently provided his party's presidential candidate, Trump might just squeeze that little piss ant a bit.

It would be nice if he did. Instead of listening to bad advisors and being pure disaster. Being Nixon-redux or Reagan-redux.

Was Wall Street ever especially kind to Donald? Does he owe them repayment in kind? Was he ever beneficiary of favorable loan rates, willing lender modifications short of forcing corporate bankruptcy litigation, cushy speaking engagements for six-figure cash each pop; was any of that stuff Donald's? Such a history might have earned Trump's goodwill, However, events that actually transpired might lead Donald to want to clop some Wall Streeters upside the head to get their attention prior to reminding them who won.

Good might result if Trump shows due appreciation for Wall Street's collective backing of and heavy betting on Clinton, the horse they'd purchased over time via speaking fee installments and such, who placed instead of winning in a two horse race where place/show are irrelevant and without payoff.

Leaving such speculation aside, then supplementing the impact of the opening video in defining Clintonism in the raw, do not ever forget what the below image of smarmy upscale schmoozing sycophancy demonstrates; i.e., a grave insult to working folk and small business folk at the mercy of big banking; i.e., insult to the traditional backbone of the Democratic Party:


A final thought on (hopefully) being rid of the Clintons: Now it is time to stomp-hard-and-long on Chelsea if she shows any ongoing political inclination whatsoever. (Trump disposed of JEB! on the other side, a good accomplishment given how dynastic ambition has undeniably led to bad government). Do that, for the good of the Democratic Party and what it should be and what it resembled a bit before Bubba's new way of co-opting Republican agenda items.

Bubba's presidency deep-sixed welfare, boosted NAFTA and it's job losses, failed miserably at generating any decent healthcare reform, and started the private prison industry's grip that finally has now been undone at the federal level by Obama. Enough is enough.

There is a lesson many could learn from progressives not sheepishly lining up for yet another shoring. It seems progressives stewed over what was done to them by the supposedly lesser-evil party and enough of them this time either stayed home or cast Trump (or other) protest votes. Good could arise, if that lesson is learned; now. If not, progressives should repeat a "shoring boycott" if mischief gets repeated next cycle, and onward until the lesson gets learned. The nation will NOT skid straight to hell if they do boycott; that risk being greater if they don't.

MINNESOTA DFL:
GET THE MESSAGE. RETURN TO ROOTS. LEAVE ARKANSAS MISTAKES, MALE AND FEMALE, TO HISTORY.

Wednesday, November 09, 2016

Nobody's good idea; except for DNC knuckleheads, and superdelegate minds.

And the corporate press. So dumb, expect it to flourish.

Expect it to be floated. Expect it to sink.

Did I say corporate press?

I believe that idiot pack at DNC then and now would have preferred it as it shook out - losing with the Clintons instead of winning with a progressive such as Bernie Sanders.

They got their wish.

And you can just picture Joe in the picture. Second from the left.

Give the DNC to Elizabeth Warren, if gender is your pivot issue; otherwise to Bernie's Army. Those who've horsed things up big time should MOVE ON.

Going to DC: Jason Lewis and Donald Trump. Please, not Mills III too. Please Donald, live out your term.

Bernie would have won.

With coat tails down ticket.

Holding onto the party reins by the likes of Goldman Sachs was more important to too many over running the best and most honest Dem candidate. The superdelegate party insiders got exactly what they deserved. Defeat. The spoils to the Republicans, for running an ass. We can only hope it Berns. Big time. Elizabeth Warren would have had a good chance to be the first female president, one with a conscience.

Now those two spouses should retire to their Foundation and take their troublesome daughter and Greek hedge fund promoter son-in-law with them, into final, permanent, well-heeled but unending oblivion.

The superdelegate laden DNC braintrust took an entire downticket loss with her, they did. (Likely Debbie Wasserman Schultz kept her Florida House seat. Somebody can go and look it up. Somebody else.)

Podesta is a winner too. Just with a public/private email SNAFU is all.

And now that awful Pence, a heartbeat away. Long live Trump. (At least surviving his term in office.)

_________________UPDATE_______________
PARIAH WATCH: A friend forwarded a DWS too-sweet email - an after-the-debacle missive from a key engineere of the very problem that puzzles her; a pariah that seems to not ever be going away (like india ink or a bloodstain on your favorite shirt):

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Date: Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 9:46 AM
Subject: hard to believe
To: ------privacy respected-------


We have reached a moment for which we were not prepared nor expecting. I am sure you feel as bereft as I do right now. We all wanted this presidency so badly for our country, for our future, for our children, family members and people we know, love and cherish.

But it was not to be.

And now, although this is fresh pain and as Hillary said, we will feel it for a long time, we know what we have to do.

We. Must. Fight.

Whatever challenges come our way, I promise you that I will continue to fight hard to protect the families of South Florida. I’m going to need you by my side.

Before that hard work begins, I want to say once again, thank you!

With your help and unwavering support, I will continue serving my South Florida constituents in Washington. I couldn’t be more grateful for everything you’ve done.

So much could be said. Everyone on the planet knew from the time you and cohorts, Debbie, used Bernie as if an enemy, instead of one who might have prevented bad judgment by a gender-biased moron - with apologies in advance to all morons, I had to use a word for DWS, it was there, and morons of the world, sorry for the insult.

This DNC saboteur says, "I never expected ..." when even a deaf, dumb and blind pinball player would have said early, "Debbie don't." She did. It sucked. It gave Trump - not the GOP who in large measure left him hanging - but Trump alone, the spoils.

Great job Debbie. We are so enthralled that through it all your seat and paycheck survived while you unleashed havoc by being gender biased, and hateful toward progressiveness.

Now, please, Debbie. Shut up. Go away. You are a pariah to a vast portion of the nation's citizens.

A cynic might say "work together" thoughts instead of "Must Fight" rhetoric would make the lady less like Paul Ryan, but it's beyond her capacity. And beyond her will. She IS and WANTS TO BE the Paul Ryan of the second-place party.

In the way and won't move. With a cadre of cohorts. None of which have anything "super" about them, having only rigged their system toward clearly apparent failure, going to bat with a crook, over gender.

Thursday, November 03, 2016

Wikileaks.

PODESTA ON MY MIND
This link


STRONGER TOGETHER:

Photo credit

Tuesday, November 01, 2016

So what email correspondence have YOU had, with John Podesta?

Podesta email disclosure as a window into that which regular mortals do not normally glance, nor have a chance to.


Which individual in that image would you guess, if any, to not be close enough to John Podesta to have email and message and phone access with John Podesta?

Lloyd? Now that is a man who stands the center of a more exclusive cabal.