April 21, 2017

Agenda-Driven AP Twists Words in Criticizing Trump’s Initial Comment on Latest Paris Attack

The press’s determination to gin up criticism of President Donald Trump at every conceivable turn was on clear display yesterday at the Associated Press.

In its timeline coverage of the Paris terrorist attack which left one police officer dead and two seriously wounded, the AP twisted Trump’s comment that it “looks like another terrorist attack.”



Friday Off-Topic (Moderated) Open Thread (042117)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 6:00 am

This open thread is meant for commenters to post on items either briefly noted below (if any) or otherwise not covered at this blog. Rules are here.


Positivity: How the upcoming canonization affirms the Fatima apparitions

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 5:55 am

From Fatima, Portugal:

Apr 21, 2017 / 03:02 am

The canonization of Fatima visionaries Francisco and Jacinta Marto has been hailed as an exciting moment for the Church, but the rector of the Marian shrine has said that it bears an even greater significance in terms of putting a spotlight on Our Lady’s message.

“I think the canonization in a certain way helps to give credibility to the apparitions and to the message of Fatima,” Fr. Carlos Cabecinhas told CNA.

This is an “indirect credibility,” he said, but one which nonetheless “makes us look to the protagonists of the events of Fatima and to see their holiness, the holiness with which they challenge us to live this message.”

April 20, 2017

Mea Culpa Attempt at NY Times Over Bogus Pats’ White House Photo Comparison Is Itself Bogus

The New York Times is trying to make it look like it’s doing everything it can to back away from the tweet it published Wednesday afternoon showing a bogus comparison of turnouts from the 2015 and 2017 White House appearances of the players and front office personnel of the Super Bowl champion New England Patriots. In truth, it’s doing everything except the one thing it should do.



Context: GA-06

Filed under: Taxes & Government — Tom @ 4:27 pm

Donald Trump spent $600 million as he won the presidency in 2016 during an 18-month campaign.

Hillary Clinton spent $1.2 billion as she lost the presidency in 2016.

In less than three months since Trump nominated Tom Price to head HHS, Jon Ossoff raised (and appears to have spent most if not all of) $8.3 million to get through the first round of a race for one of 435 seats in the House of Representatives.

Ossoff’s spending, if replicated in all House districts for the purposes of comparing his spending to the national spending by Trump and Clinton) would equate to $3.6 billion — six times what Trump spent to win, and three times what Hillary spent to lose.

It still couldn’t buy him a majority of the vote, while he and his supporters are likely to again spend as much or more during the next two months.






New York Times Politicizes Patriots’ WH Super Bowl Champs’ Visit With Bogus 2017 vs. 2015 Photo Comparison

At this point it seems that there is nothing the New York Times won’t fabricate in the their nonstop attempt to discredit anything and everything associated with President Donald Trump. Yesterday the @NYTSports Twitter account tweeted photos supposedly comparing this year’s turnout of Super Bowl champion New England Patriots players and personnel at the White House to the analogous event in 2015. The Times clearly wants those who see the tweet to believe that scores of Patriots players and front office personnel stayed away this year rather than be seen at the mean, evil Trump White House.



Thursday Off-Topic (Moderated) Open Thread (042017)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 5:55 am

This open thread is meant for commenters to post on items either briefly noted below (if any) or otherwise not covered at this blog. Rules are here.

April 19, 2017

Positivity: Actor Gary Sinise awarded Walk of Fame star, praised for pro-military activism

Filed under: Activism,Positivity,US & Allied Military — Tom @ 6:24 pm

From Hollywood:

Actor Gary Sinise was honored this week with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, not just for his acting roles in films and TV, but also for his wonderful and important work for our military veterans and our troops serving still today.

Sinese, best known as “Lt. Dan” in the hit movie “Forrest Gump,” now stars as Agent Jack Garrett on the CBS crime drama “Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders.”

But the actor is also well-known for his tireless work for our troops, Fox Insider reported.

As he introduced the 62-year-old actor, fellow actor and life-long friend Joe Mantegna said, “There’s no living person in our industry that does more for our military than Gary Sinise.”

He’s been doing this great work since long before this 2011 BizzyBlog Positivity post.


Daily Caller: USA Today’s ‘First Protected DREAMer Deported’ Claim Is False (See Update)

UPDATE, 3 p.m.: Per Jazz Shaw at Hot Air (bolds are mine), “CNN is now reporting that one aspect of the story is more complicated. A second check of Montes’ records by DHS reveals that he actually did have his DACA status renewed in 2016, good through 2018. BUT… that status is dependent on following the rules, including getting permission before leaving the country. In light of that, his DACA status was null once he left country (whenever that happened) prior to being detected illegally crossing the border back into the United States in February. Net result? The same situation applies. He was no longer covered by DACA.”


Apparently, and quite unlike during the Obama administration, there are people sitting in establishment press newsrooms monitoring every move the Immigration and Customs and Enforcement agency makes, ready to pounce any time it thinks the agency might have made a mistake in detaining or deporting someone. Just before 5 p.m. Eastern Time Tuesday afternoon, USA Today thought it had hit the jackpot, blasting out an email claiming that the “First Protected DREAMer” had been “deported under President Trump.” The Daily Caller has reported that USA Today is wrong.



Wednesday Off-Topic (Moderated) Open Thread (041917)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 5:55 am

This open thread is meant for commenters to post on items either briefly noted below (if any) or otherwise not covered at this blog. Rules are here.

April 18, 2017

(UPDATE: Moved to Semi-Live Blog) GA-06 Special Election: Dems’ Darling Doesn’t Live in the District

9:30 p.m.: Turning this post into a semi-live blog.


(Results link is here.)

April 19, 7:20 a.m.: Ossoff ended up with 48.10 percent, and there will be a runoff against Karen Handel, who got about 20 percent. That’s a decent enough showing for Handel that the June 20 faceoff between the two will be heated indeed.

11:50 p.m.: Going to have to go to bed, as Fulton County (which I believe is suburban portions of the county, and leans more Dem than the other two counties, but which I believe is still majority GOP in registration) has problems:

Fulton County officials said due to data error from one of the cards, they will have to manually go through hundreds of cards to find the culprit. The Fulton Elections Chair did not give a timeline.

So Drudge, unless he has inside info he hasn’t revealed, will be left hanging for hours wondering if he’s really right.

11:30 p.m.: Nothing has changed … (smh)

11:15 p.m.: It’s been just under an hour, and only 2 precincts have been counted in that time. Grrr. One might be tempted to think that a Democrat Secretary of State is withholding bad news, but Georgia’s SOS is a Republican. I’m sick of this. Going to catch up on sports for about 10 minutes, and will be back.

11:00 p.m.: The Times is conceding that “Our guess he (Ossoff) gets 45%; needs 49. Seems small, but very hard.” Why it’s only “49″ and not 50 makes no sense, unless they mean 49 percent of the rest of the votes. They have not called the race.

10:55 p.m.: None of Drudge’s three links have a below-50 percent call, but his “Runoff in June” headline remains.

10:45 p.m.: Well, the problem is that Chrome doesn’t refresh the state results properly. So I’m using Safari for results, and hope it refreshes properly. As of now, though (zheesh), no new news.

10:40 p.m.: Somehow the New York Times has slightly more up-to-date numbers than the State of Georgia, and Ossoff is down to 50.3 percent. Update: The state site now matches. They’ve counted 2 precincts in the past 45 minutes. They have almost 100 left. Surely they can move faster than this.

10:30 p.m.: Drudge is headlining there will be a runoff in June, but the AP story to which he is linking doesn’t say that, and Ossoff still clings to a 50.43 percent majority (which hasn’t changed for about the past 30 minutes). I have found no evidence of a call yet.

10:25 p.m.: Got interrupted by news-related phone calls, but here’s the latest. With just over half of the precincts counted, Ossoff is barely above 50 percent. That said, he’s been there for some time even as the most recent votes came in, so it could be that bluer precincts are the ones which haven’t been counted.

I didn’t get to my main grip before, and I will now. These results, regardless of the ultimate outcome, prove that the nation’s move towards no-excuses “early voting” has been a horrible mistake that should be (but I bet never will be) undone.

Tens of thousands of GA-06 voters cast their ballots, likely without knowing that Ossoff doesn’t live in their district. A number of previous polls have shown that not living in the district is a deal-killer for a significant minority of voters (I want to say 20 percent just to be conservative, but I think it has generally been higher). Thus, in this case, early voting was hugely uninformed voting compared to what was known on Election Day (it always is; it’s just a question of how uninformed). That’s why balloting should be limited to Election Day except for the absentee-balloting reasons that were present over a decade ago — and please don’t waste my time with dishonest arguments about how Election Day balloting discriminates against certain groups. It’s hogwash, and the people making those arguments know deep-down that it’s hogwash.

9:55 p.m.: At this point, the State of Georgia website is showing Democrat Ossoff with 51 percent of the vote with about one-third of precincts counted. But he appears (emphasis: appears) well on his way to dropping below the magic 50 percent threshold. Before any precincts were counted, i.e., with absentees and early voting, he had 68 percent. I wish I would have taken a screen shot. In other words, Election Day voters are by my back-of-envelope estimate giving him 40 percent or even less of the vote. (Update: Later info indicates that it’s more like 42 percent.)

Everyone expected Ossoff to do well in early voting, but the 68 percent exceeded almost all expectations.


Well, well. Democrat Jon Ossoff, running for Congress in Georgia’s Sixth Congressional District, doesn’t live in GA-06.

Regardless of party, this blog has always considered a congressional candidate’s failure to live in the congressional district involved an automatic disqualifier.

So should the voters who really live in GA-06.

The good news is that we now know this.

The bad news is that The Hill and CNN (HT Hot Air) reported it — on Election Day, or perhaps last night.

This leads to the far worse news that the Georgia Republican Party and its various operatives, with NO OTHER NATIONAL OFFICE RACES to monitor; the national Republican Party, with all of its resources; and all of the District’s Republican candidates — who know that if Ossoff somehow gets half the vote today, it’s over — didn’t figure out that he doesn’t live in GA-06, meaning that he can’t even vote for himself in today’s election.

I wonder how long the local left-leaning media has known this, and not reported it? UPDATE: Apparently it’s been known for some time, and I stand corrected in that sense. I’d still argue that it only became known today, if they were even paying attention, to the majority of those who voted early.


Tuesday Off-Topic (Moderated) Open Thread (041817)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 6:00 am

This open thread is meant for commenters to post on items either briefly noted below (if any) or otherwise not covered at this blog. Rules are here.


Positivity: Kansas project helps clients escape the predatory loan cycle

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 5:55 am

From Salina, Kansas:

Apr 17, 2017 / 04:10 pm

In 2015, Shannon found herself swimming in debt from a title loan. She faithfully made the $200 monthly payments. Unfortunately, the entire $200 went to interest.

“I kept paying the interest on it and wasn’t getting anywhere,” she said.

None of it went to pay down the original $900 loan.

“The first time I took a loan out, I was behind on rent,” Shannon said. “Then something else came up and it got out of control. I could never see getting myself out of the hole. I thought the loan would be a burden that would be over me forever.”

The Kansas Loan Pool Project, which began in 2013, has assisted 127 people get out of predatory debt. The program is a collaboration with Sunflower Bank in which the predatory debt is refinanced into a traditional loan. In all, more than $80,000 worth of debt has been refinanced through the program. …

Go here for the rest of the story.

April 17, 2017

Attn. NBC Legal Dept.: Chris Matthews Says IRS Leaking Trump Tax Info Would Be ‘Good’

In early March, Nick Kristof at the New York Times solicited a felony in a tweet by virtually begging someone at the Internal Revenue Service to leak Donald Trump’s tax returns. On Monday, Chris Matthews was more interested in settling the supposedly questionable matter of whether Trump’s prior returns are under audit, but he went down the same path. During his Hardball broadcast, he effectively wished the IRS would leak the answer, and appeared to be supporting such lawbreaking when he said, “That would be a good leak.”



NBC’s Andrea Mitchell: Letting States Direct Money From Planned Parenthood Is ‘A Killer Decision’

On Thursday, “President Donald Trump signed a bill Thursday undoing an Obama-era regulation that prohibited states from withholding money from Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health clinics.” On NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday, Andrea Mitchell’s sense of cruel irony was utterly absent, as she described the bill potentially affecting the nation’s largest abortion provider as “a killer decision.”