Wednesday, October 07, 2026

“Blood In The Face”

I dunno. Sounds like Markwayne to me. It’s got his name on it, anyway.
Posted by at No comments:

He’s Also An Expert On Space

Because his head’s full of it.
Posted by at No comments:

Lazarus And Dives

The "real economy.”
Posted by at No comments:

Costs Are Up, Performance Is Down

Why Trump fantasized about Iran nuking San Diego.
Posted by at No comments:

“Context Is All”

Now at least I understand why HHS is so desperate to discredit any connection between measles and cause of death.

MAHA, huh?🤔 
Posted by at No comments:

💦

Uh-huh. Paxton can’t face reality, either. It must be something in the GOP water.
Posted by at 1 comment:

Tuesday, October 06, 2026

OTOH

If you read the article which Marc Elias references (he’s promoting the work of his group, and Steven’s is responding to a tweet by Elias), the argument is concocted by a GOP lawyer and the conspiracy theorist Tina Peters. It goes like this:
Peters, Martin and other conspiracists have long pushed the false claims that voting machines are compromised because they use some foreign-made parts. Election deniers claim that poses a national security risk.

Now, they want the Trump administration to use that as justification to seize voting machines. And they believe that the commerce secretary already has authority to do that — a view that legal experts say is way off base.
The authority for this is an EO Trump issued in 2019. It gets convoluted after that (what conspiracy theory doesn’t?), but the crux of the biscuit is that the “foreign parts” make the matter a national security issue and Lutnick has the authority to seize all election machines in all 50 states; because of the EO.

Yeah; him and what army? I mean, the logistics of it alone make it farcical. And what about states where voting has already started? There’s a fundamental problem of evidence, you see. To even say it’s a national security emergency requires some basis other than crude xenophobia. That works for Peters and Martin, but it’s the same nonsense that lost over 60 times in courts in 2020. No evidence, no court order. Or:
One small issue: The 2019 order doesn’t convey that authority to Lutnick at all. No federal official can seize control of election administration from the states and counties, who hold the power [to] run elections under the U.S. Constitution.

For that reason, such an effort would be blatantly unconstitutional and get struck down in the courts, David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, told Democracy Docket.

“I can’t say this any more clearly: The Commerce Secretary has no authority,” Becker said. “If the Commerce Secretary tried to exert authority, first of all, the states would laugh at him.”

“The administration has been relying upon conspiracy theorists to push election policy for over 20 months now,” he added. “These conspiracy theories have led to really bad policy decisions, whether they be executive orders or the SAVE America Act or DOJ lawsuits — and every one of these efforts has failed.”
As I said: him and what army? (And no, the military couldn’t get involved. Don’t chase down other rabbit holes.) Not only is lack of evidence an impediment; so is lack of a legal basis to act. The evidence of fraud, malfeasance, corruption, would have to be established for every machine in all 50 states. Not every individual machine; but enough proof to invalidate all machines in all 50 states. Good luck with that. Then there’s the legal basis for the claim. Electoral fraud might be the legal claim, but again, that would have to be shown in every contested race. All 500 of them?

This ain’t 2020 and one election result. And do you still remember how well that turned out?

And it’s still not an issue of national security. Nowhere near. The nation is not at risk from election fraud, especially if the evidence of fraud is that you didn’t like the outcome. Or think you won’t.

This is not “this.” This is a sad joke.

An aggressive state AG could bring a RICO action. Maybe. But that would be swatting a fly with a sledgehammer. And besides, discussing nonsense with the POTUS is protected by the 1st amendment  You might turn it into a criminal conspiracy. But that wouldn’t convince Peters she was wrong. Or stop anyone from espousing her ridiculous theory.
Posted by at 1 comment:

This Would Be The Rallies Even Fox Isn’t Covering?

Uh-huh. So much so that: The human binky is keeping grandpa happy by treating him like a mushroom.🍄‍🟫  "Ominous”? Really? From this guy? The guy who says this? What about the “fact” we have to pay $4 for gas so Iran can’t have a nuke? To use on El “A”?

The guy who’s this divorced from reality?
The only “ominous” thing is that this guy is the POTUS.
Posted by at No comments:

That’s A Lot Of Cable

And streaming. In a bad economy, people cut those expenses. 

I understand this purchase was heavily leveraged. That’s usually what sinks these mergers, in the long run. A lot of money to pay back; not enough income to do it.

Honestly, I think Ellison now controls a lot of fossil channels whose best days are behind them.
Posted by at 2 comments:

Bad Advice

And did bad advice lead to this position? Or is Trump just a racist xenophobe?
Posted by at No comments:

🤖 Give Us Your Money

And all of this will yield $42 trillion a year just to repay the debt incurred to build the thousands of data centers nobody wanted. And if it ends in default, we’ll be too big to fail. BAIL OUT! 😈 But don’t call it “socialism.” Lagniappe: this 👇 sounds like something I’d have come up with in the 5th grade.
Posted by at No comments:

Brett Kavanaugh Says This Is Fine, ad nauseum

Posted by at No comments:

When Your Party Controls Congress And The White House….

... and you think this is a smart thing to say.

Is he off-script? Or did someone actually put this in the teleprompter?
Posted by at 3 comments:

Trump Is On The Ballot

Todd Blanche had better hurry up and get those 1000 election monitors out to the polls.
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, October 05, 2026

You Wouldn’t Know Any Of Them

They’re all from Canada. He’s referring to his promises. They say that to him.
Posted by at No comments:

“Think Of It”

Don’t think too hard about it; could induce brain damage. Or terminal despair that this is our President.

Or:
Even though diesel prices have retreated about 20 cents from the recent peak, diesel has still skyrocketed about 77% this year, leaving it on track for the biggest annual percentage increase since AAA started tracking in 2000.

Of course, suspending taxes on fuel does not change the main problem: The world is facing a major refinery shortage.

Refineries in the Middle East and Russia have been damaged by war. Making matters worse, China is holding back fuel exports to avoid a shortage at home.
Funny Trump never mentions those salient facts. China is responding to what we did in Iran. And Iran responded by attacking refineries in the region, in countries helping us. Nobody named Trump could have foreseen.
Refineries in the United States are attempting to bridge the gap, but they’re already running as hard as they can.

“This does save the consumer money in the short term, but it doesn’t solve the underlying issue,” said Andy Lipow, president of Lipow Oil Associates. Over the weekend, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky vowed to double down on his country’s punishing attacks on Russian oil refineries. “For Ukraine, this is an existential threat. The only way to bring Moscow to the table is to destroy the Russian refinery system,” Lipow said. “I expect the drone attacks to continue.”
I still question how much dyed diesel will make its way to truckers. Making it available certainly won’t drop the price of taxed diesel.
Posted by at No comments:

James Talarico Is “Dangerous”

The blue areas are the major metropolitan areas: Dallas-Fort Worth; Houston; Austin; San Antonio; El Paso. And the Valley and heavily Hispanic areas of South Texas which have turned against Trump. All those red areas are where Trump wants to put more data centers. They may not turn blue; but they also may not vote. Call it the “Angela Paxton pitch.” Abbott needs those campaign events. Because he’s “very confident about where” he is. He also knows Trump is on the ballot.
Posted by at No comments:

Clueless

The people in those “spaces” are the same people Trump is always touting as the number of counties he won. People vote, not land. Those people don’t want to be near those data centers, either. But Trump thinks land votes, and nobody lives outside the cities of America (how could they? He can’t imagine it.).

I know that almost all of his electoral support in Texas comes from outside the major cities. And they don’t want data centers near them, either. They are making that quite clear to Abbott, who is running behind Hinojosa in part because of his support for data centers.
There’s that, too. People in rural areas feel like they’re being screwed by people with money; lots and lots of money.

They’re right.
Posted by at No comments:

Look! Over There! 👉 Shiny Thing!

But will it lower the price of diesel? "Then Christ got died”? I ain’t listening’ to that (life’s too short), but is the CC right?
Trump: "The Fake News New York Times 'reported' on my Great, PACKED Rally in Ohio that, 'the place was not full. Some upper sections were almost completely empty.' In actuality, thousands of people were unable to get in. The Arena was totally MAXED OUT, including all upper sections. What does happen at all of my SOLD OUT Rallies, is that the people in the upper sections tend to migrate down to the Main Floor — The 'migration' process always happens! The Times knows this, and so does everyone else. I never have empty seats — Never have, and never will! Because of their dishonesty, I have cinematographers shooting the various Arenas where I speak, in that some of the Fake News likes to dishonestly report lies and untruths. In actuality, my Events for very good Republican Politicians are probably more crowded than ever. There are no empty seats, there haven’t been for years, and there never will be. The Rallies are 'HOTTER' than ever. They are all 'happenings,' and they never happened before, and will never be duplicated again. The Networks refuse, however, under any circumstances, to show the Crowds, but you can hear the thunderous applause, and know that it represents thousands and thousands of people. Watch tonight, for example, in the Great State of Nebraska, where I’ll be heading soon. See you later! President DONALD J. TRUMP"
It was a high school basketball arena. It held 4500 people. The NYT reporter was in the room as lowering the price of diesel.people started leaving. They exited the arena.

Not that this has anything to do with the price of diesel.
He thinks he’s lowered the price of diesel.  Dyed diesel is fuel that has not been taxed for road use. It’s used for off road vehicles like tractors and the like. Allowing truckers to use it might lower the price slightly for truckers. Or it might not.
 "One doesn't have to pay federal and state excise taxes on dyed diesel, but it really doesn't ​shift the amount of ⁠overall diesel manufactured for domestic purposes," said Tom Kloza, chief energy adviser at Gulf Oil.

"It would help less than it sounds like, and the version the administration can do without Congress wouldn't lower pump prices at all," said Gregg Ibendahl, an agricultural economics professor at Kansas State University. "It's a much safer idea than the ⁠export ban — ​mostly because it does less."

"While expanding access to the tax-exempt diesel could provide some relief ​to eligible end-users, it would not change the underlying wholesale diesel price," said Preben Sørli, analyst at Rystad Energy. "Refiners would still receive market price for their fuels, and the main effect ​would be lowering federal tax revenues. It would do little to change supply or market fundamentals."
In other words, the price might just go up. One problem is, truck stops may not want to carry dyed fuel. The  dye is quite permanent, so IRS agents can inspect trucks for illegal use. That means truck stops may not want to carry it, because it will stain their equipment. Truckers may not want to use it, either; for when it’s illegal again, but their trucks are stained.

Besides, the savings will be $0.24 a gallon, or $50 to $72 per fillup (that’s an absolute fillup. It would really be a bit less.). On a fuel cost of $1200 to $1800. So, save $72 to get your truck stained from fuel tank to exhaust pipe; and hope the inspector in three months is understanding.

All because Trump needs to look like he’s doing something, and has no idea what he’s doing.

My guess: this won’t make any difference at all, because dyed diesel won’t be readily available to truckers.
Posted by at No comments:

Fucking Socialism!

FOX: Does that disturb you to hear this growing movement of democratic socialists in the United States who think it is the government's job to make sure you live a dignified life?

El-Sayed: I assume you went to good public school. And you get to drive on good roadways or wish the roads are good? When you put your garbage out, someone picks it up?
FOX: I understand thinking that some people have too much money. We are engine of the world for these things and people end up being billionaires as a result.

El-Sayed: The issue is not that some people have too much money. It’s that the engine that created their opportunity to make money is being underfunded…

FOX: You said you wanted to choke them out.

El-Sayed: I don't want to choke anyone out. I want to make sure everyone can breathe. Right now, you have an economy where people are getting choked out because they don’t have the basic means for a dignified life because we are more focused on allowing a billionaire to make another billion…
Sounds like populism to me. Which I’ve been told is bad….
FOX: You look at places in Europe, what you get is people waiting so long…

El-Sayed: Do you know average wait time for cardiologist in America is? 2-1/2 months. A lot of other countries don't wait as long to see a cardiologist. The idea that you point to another country and say they failed on this statistic—that we’re not also failing—that is a problem.
STOP MAKING SENSE!
FOX: In your home state only 25% of fourth graders can read proficiently… So, why should we think the government will do a great job with healthcare?

El-Sayed: Those public schools are deeply under funded we pattern it based on property tax and property value. We have a great military because we choose to invest in it. Imagine we chose to invest in healthcare. I love America, I believe in American exceptionalism. The idea we have mediocre healthcare system when we are the richest country in the world, that is a choice we make…
Choose people! And call it what you want.
Posted by at No comments:

Vote 🗳️ Early And Often!

I don’t think I’d ever heard of Angela Paxton until her husband’s impeachment. I knew Paxton was married, I learned later she was in the Lege, but…statewide notoriety? Not until the impeachment. So, this ad was a…choice.
Posted by at No comments:

AI 🤖 Is Going To Save Us!

 Or not:

A new open-source tool is making waves in the Mac community by helping users reclaim valuable storage space taken up by Apple's AI models. Called "RemoveMacAI," the tool disables Apple Intelligence on macOS 27, removes its downloaded models, and prevents them from being downloaded again.
It’s not exactly the black and white video of the man hurling a sledge hammer into the giant screen to free the docile viewers from their captivity. But the interesting thing is, Apple didn’t make AI optional. You will accept it if you accept iOS 27, and it will chew up 12GB of memory whether you want it or not. You want 🤖, don’t you? Or don’t you?
With the Apple models gone, you lose all Siri-related AI features, Writing Tools, Genmoji, Image Playground, ChatGPT integration, summaries, smart replies, inline predictions, Photos Clean Up, Spatial Photos, and Xcode predictive completion. Even so, plenty of users appear happy to make the sacrifice to free up space, especially on non-upgradeable Macs with 256GB of storage. The profile reportedly persists across updates. And if you're wondering, dictation still works.
Personally, I can live without all that. And appreciate the space removing it would free up. I barely use my Mac anymore, and while my phone includes Apple apps I don’t need, I don’t feel the need to clean them off, either. 

But still, it would be nice to have the choice, especially with the amount of space AI takes up. I know it’s supposed to make us all happier and more productive and feel personally fulfilled…

… but what if it doesn’t? What if it’s the gift we didn’t ask for, and don’t want?
One could charitably say Apple is just trying to keep up with the Joneses.
Posted by at 1 comment:

🇬🇱🐧 🤷‍♂️

US negotiators wanted sovereignty over Greenland — and Fox News for the Greenlandic people.

Berlingske has spoken to numerous sources with knowledge of the nine months of negotiations between Greenland, Denmark and the United States.

According to Berlingske’s reporting, the negotiations were far more dramatic than the public had previously been led to believe — and at one point came close to completely breaking down.

The threat of a US “takeover” of Greenland reportedly remained just beneath the surface throughout the talks.

And perhaps one of the most remarkable details: according to Berlingske, the Americans at one point proposed that all Greenlanders should be given access to the Trump-friendly Fox News — so Greenlanders could get a different picture of the United States than what the Americans regarded as “fake news.”
All that, and we ended up with the same agreement we had before. IOW, Trump didn’t get what he wanted.
From the Premier of Greenland’s Facebook page: “Today, I had the honour of receiving the “Premio Internacional” award on behalf of the people of Greenland 🇬🇱 I received this award because the people of Greenland have always stood up for democracy and for our right to self-determination. That deserves recognition.

The past few months have been extraordinarily busy, and Greenland has received an enormous amount of international attention. My work has taken me to many places, but throughout it all, I have carried all of you back home with me in my heart.

Because no matter where in the world my work takes me, I am there to represent Greenland and our people. 🇬🇱💙”
Why can’t we have a head of state like that?
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, October 04, 2026

Depends On How You Define “Socialism”

In European history (which is our basic cultural heritage), roads were owned by kings. Who also provided whatever rough justice and security there was. Rich people had private roads, even in London, as late as Blake’s day. They bought their own fire protection, too. And police were more likely to favor the rich, because that’s who paid for them. Education was a private matter, too. Even libraries were private.

Ben Franklin, radical socialist that he was, started the public library idea. Police eventually became a public obligation, as did firefighters, and open public roads available to all. (We still have gated communities. Blake would recognize that.)

All socialist, really. 

I just visited my college town where, as I’ve said before, the city built a hotel in the 50’s, because they needed one to help attract commerce. Height of the Red Scare, but nobody thought anything of it. It’s still in use, btw. LBJ started the LCRA in the same decade (as a U.S. senator) to provide electricity to rural Central Texas. It still operates.

If that ain’t socialism, what is?

The point is, we did this before without screaming about it. That started with Reagan and the Chicago School of Economics, which was so anti-Keynesian it proved Keynes right. And we’re still all Keynesians (well, by Milton Friedman’s standards). We just call it capitalism because we still think socialism is the doorstep to communism and Soviet domination. 

Seriously. Why else is it scary? I mean, even MTG has given up on the Commies scare.

I agree progressive policies are popular. But people are still voting for labels. And word is the Latino bloc has turned against Trump, but not so far as for Democrats. So you can’t really say AOC’s positions are secretly super popular. They may secretly be popular; but getting people to vote for the actual candidates connected to those policies is still another matter.

And will be, for awhile.
Posted by at No comments:

Has Anyone Notifed Todd Blanche…

... that Alito is talking to a journalist?

Oh, that’s right. The Supremes aren’t subject to independent ethical oversight.

Congress really should do something about that. (Aside from the title in Article III, the Court really is a construction of Congress.)
Posted by at No comments:

So, 4 For Every Polling Place In Houston?

Or 20 per state?
Posted by at 3 comments:

AI For Dummies

First question on AI.

Is the problem superintelligence or distorted intelligence?

This is a question I tried to address in this piece. I can add the following additional comment here.

I believe the debate is being obfuscated by equating goal-driven, autonomous behavior with intelligence. Plants and insects have goal-driven, largely autonomous behaviour. But this isn’t what we mean by intelligence in general.

Intelligence is general-purpose and holistic, and is typically well-adapted to its environment.

There is no doubt that current AI models have impressive capabilities. But in attempting to achieve these capabilities, AI labs may be creating distorted intelligence rather than superintelligence, as I explain in this article.

This matters because the dangers we should watch out for, the kinds of policies and regulations we should adopt, and the hope we should hold depend on the answer to this question.
Is AI even intelligent? The distortion starts there, with how we understand “intelligence.” I understand calling it “distorted intelligence,” but I’m watching MS NOW report on the White House chatbot which no longer answers questions about who won the 2020 presidential race, or whether inflation in 2024 was the worst ever. All within the space of a few days.

You can’t change a dog’s training that quickly. Nor that absolutely.
Second question on AI.

We are told repeatedly that AI is going to transform every aspect of our lives – jobs, productivity, inequality, science, communication, daily activities, social order, and politics, among others.

But this promise (or threat) is coupled with the rhetoric that such an important technology, with all of the risks and competitive pressures that it entails, should be left to experts or to “technocracy” (perhaps construed broadly to include some regulators).

These two statements are hard to reconcile in a democratic society.

If anything is half as important as AI is said to be (and I agree, AI is potentially very important and transformative), then involving democratic voice is essential. If something will shape our future in a democratic society, then its direction is for democratic institutions to decide.

My instinct is that democratic voice is essential, and relying too much on technocracy could be both dangerous and counterproductive.

The counterargument that AI’s direction can and should be entrusted to technocracy would go something along the following lines. First, democratic decision-making has become imperiled in our age of polarization. Second, AI is sufficiently complex that most citizens won’t have a deep enough understanding to meaningfully contribute to the debate (and even to the question of what we want from AI). Third, competition between different labs, and perhaps competition between the US and China, creates enough discipline for a socially beneficial direction of AI to be adopted. Fourth, today’s AI leaders are enlightened and ethical enough that within the framework created by competition, they can be broadly trusted.

There are many aspects of this counterargument that I do not find convincing. Taking them in order: polarization can be overcome, and big decisions and challenges sometimes bring societies together; in fact, delegating key decisions to technocracy without democratic input may diminish trust in institutions and experts, and may worsen polarization. Second, democratic voice does not require citizens to write code or design new models; the debate should be informative enough that citizens can weigh in about what type of future they want and how they trade off the costs and benefits of different options. Third, competition doesn’t seem to be a good disciplining framework; on the contrary, competition sometimes brings the worst out of both organizations and people. Fourth, if three decades of work on political economy and institutions has taught me anything, it is that we should not bank on the ethical grounding of unconstrained leaders.

But, still, I do not mean to immediately dismiss the technocracy option if there are more compelling arguments for it.

The question is, then, whether there are any circumstances under which such important decisions can be delegated to AI experts and technocracy.

One final secondary question: even if we managed to get democratic input in the United States or even in Europe, AI will shape the lives of everyone on this planet. How do we ensure that the voice of nearly 6 billion people who don’t live in the US, Europe and China also contributes to the debates on AI?
I suppose it can be transformative and important, but where’s the evidence (v. hype and speculation) for that? AI, properly understood, is a tool. So is the cell phone in my hand. But I don’t need to turn over massive resources of society to my cellphone (indeed, it uses enough resources I remain blithely ignorant of, which is bad enough). AI is being sold as the tool we must acquiesce to. But isn’t that like saying I really should put my hammer in charge, since I can’t drive nails without it?
Third question on AI.

A question that also remains unasked is whether the AI boom can continue without leading to a massive increase in inequality.

A recent paper by Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh runs the numbers on how much revenue the AI industry needs to generate to recover its massive investment (summary and a link to the paper can be found here: https://t.co/QIGcoObcVc).

Van Nieuwerburgh’s arithmetic should make us more concerned. AI investments will average about 3.6% of GDP annually between 2025 and 2032. Van Nieuwerburgh calculates that, using a 10% rate of return, the industry would need to generate annual revenues of about $3.7 trillion by 2032 to recover these costs (growing from its current levels of about $200 billion or so). That is significantly more than 10% of current US national income, and will likely remain around 10% of national income by 2032, even if GDP growth rose from its current level.

The rise in inequality may not stop with the capital share. My work with Pascual Restrepo documents that (automation-driven) increases in the capital share of national income are typically associated with rising labor income inequality as well (see, for example, https://t.co/2D9KUL3QfM). The same may happen in the next several years, boosting inequality further.

A large fraction of this revenue will go to capital income. That means a massive increase in the share of capital in national income, which has already risen substantially over the last 25 years or so – now standing at an all-time high of about 47% (https://t.co/IuYldl173r).

Capital income is much more unequally distributed than labor income, so a massive increase in the capital share of national income will translate into a very sizable surge in inequality.

What is missing from our current debate is any discussion of a fundamental dilemma these numbers pose: can the AI boom avoid both an economically costly crash and a huge increase in inequality? If the industry reaches these revenues, inequality surges. If the industry does not become profitable, a crash, with substantial costs in terms of lost output and jobs, becomes likely.

My assessment would be that the industry is unlikely to reach levels of revenue Van Nieuwerburgh calculates. First, diffusion has been and will likely continue to be slow. Second, competition from open-weight models, which are getting better, will limit how much proprietary models can charge. Third, despite important advances, I still believe that AI models will not be able to automate entire occupations anytime soon, thus limiting their value to businesses as cost-saving devices.

Whether this leads to a crash or not is more complicated and will depend on whether various AI companies are bailed out and what kind of support they receive.

Nevertheless, even if revenues fall short of these gargantuan amounts and we avoid a dramatic surge in inequality, I expect that the diffusion of AI will push up inequality between capital and labor and within labor.

If inequality does surge, a further question becomes central: can our democracy survive such astronomical levels of inequality?
What is the value of the tool? And who is it valuable to? And how many narcissists does it take to insist humankind must do as the handful of narcissists say?
Posted by at 1 comment:

Perspective

In December? All 4500 of them?
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, October 03, 2026

Smartest Man In The World

Which is why he says this: He’s so smart, only he understands how this can happen. He’s so smart nobody else knows what it means.
Trump: "All these fake polls don't account for one thing -- they don't account for the fact Trump is out campaigning. They never thought this was gonna happen. And it's their fault because they unleashed us and we're gonna really gonna do -- as the coach would say, let's go and kick ass."
Smartest man in the world. He says so. He didn’t miss anything at all.
Posted by at No comments:

Count The Clock That Tells The Time

Trump: You know who wants it? Professional sports and amateurs that would like to play tennis at night, would like to play golf a little bit without having to run home after 14 holes. People don’t want to have to change their clocks. It's a lot of work for a lot of people. They're running around for two days changing all the clocks in their house

Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, a state that I won by 35 or 40 points. He's got to do it
He’s the king of Arkansas. Cotton must obey! Cotton did it to himself.

(“We want to get away from this ridiculous custom of turning your clocks back, forward, being late for dinner, being late for very important meetings.” Isn’t that an argument for eliminating DST? Asking for a friend.)
  He really thinks the clocks control the sun; and the seasons.  And if he can control the clocks….
Posted by at No comments:

🌞 🕰️⏰

Trump does think DST controls the sun:
In his posts Friday and Saturday, Trump also highlighted support for the “Sunshine Protection Act” from Brian Rolapp, the CEO of the PGA Tour.

“Even the highly respected PGA Commissioner, Brian Rolapp, needs it for the completion of Golf Tournaments in the Winter, when they just plain run out of sunlight,” the president wrote on Friday.
The last time we tried this (to save energy), Congress repealed it less than a year later. It was that unpopular. Congress has been spectacularly out of touch for the past two years, so I don’t think permanent DST would be any more popular again. But Trump’s argument here underscores the mindlessness of his argument.

One response to Cotton’s position is to just start school later in the day in winter. Easier to change the tilt of the planet, or to change to year round school (why do we shut school down for three months?). Changing school hours means parents have to stay home later; and most parents work. The days of June Cleaver in the kitchen in heels and pearls all day, are long gone. So that wouldn’t please parents a bit. My memory of Chicago is that dusk arrived at 4 p.m. Push that back to 5, but you’ve pushed school starts to 9. What’s gained?

The PGA, OTOH, doesn’t have to acknowledge school or work or store hours schedules. It gets dark earlier in winter regardless. There are the same number of daylight hours, whatever the clocks say. Those hours are diminished in winter, wherever you are in the northern hemisphere. The PGA has to schedule around those hours regardless of the clocks. It’s not like Congress can legislate more hours of sunlight in the seasons.

Unless Trump thinks they can, which is a far bigger problem than many we have with him. 🌅
Posted by at 3 comments:

Dear GOP: SEND MORE MONEY TO TEXAS!

My literally favorite part about this is that the GOP raised a ton of corrupt superpac money from shakedown after shakedown and they are burning it in Texas - like $7 million a day. And Paxton’s numbers are getting worse.

The arc of the moral universe is long. But it bends towards justice.
Thanks, appreciate it.

—The Democrats  😎
Posted by at 2 comments:

Cutting Out The Middleman

Also known as a short circuit.
Posted by at No comments:

Like I Said…

Don’t Mess With Tex-Mex.
Posted by at No comments:

🌊

Gee, I wonder why: Strait of Hormuz live tracker: 1 transit in 24 hours. 147 ships waiting to transit. Status of strait: closed for 217 days. Before the war, 120 to 140 ships traveled the Strait daily.
Trump’s past 24 hours of desperation:

— posts Sen. Tom Cotton’s cellphone number and tells people to call him over daylight saving time
— again tries to scam voters with fraudulent promises $5,000 checks to every adult citizen if Republicans win the House and Senate
— says if Democrats win it will be “a 1929 disaster” and an economic depression, essentially admitting he believes his term will lead to a Great Depression
— tells a Mobile, Alabama rally to close their eyes and “pretend I’m on the ballot”
— says he’s giving $100 checks to 20 million seniors
I don’t know why he thinks year-round DST will earn him any plaudits.* If he hates changing the clock that much, just eliminate DST. That would probably be slightly more popular.  Either way, it’s not going to preserve a GOP Congress.


*It seems he thinks it will control the sun; it will change the tilt of the earth:
“I don’t know about anyone else, but a table full of very distinguished people just told me that they HATE, immediately after a mandatory time change, going home at night – and it’s DARK,” Trump wrote.
He really does think this is a big issue in November. 🤷‍♂️

I lived in Chicago for a year. I got up in the dark in winter, and went home in the dark. On the Gulf Coast, I’d get in the dark, and go home (if I wasn’t retired) … in the dark. It’s called “winter..” It happens in the northern hemisphere as well as the southern (well, when you get to Antarctica). It’s why we have lights. All DST does in winter is make us get up earlier in the dark. Not too bad in summer; but terrible in winter.

It’s bad enough Hallowe’en takes longer to get dark; now he wants to fuck with Christmas Eve?

And we can eliminate that despair after the time change by just…eliminating DST! Win-win! (Because I agree: adjusting to winter is that much harder when you mess with the clocks. So stay on God’s time, the way Greenwich intended.)

Loser.
Posted by at No comments:

How Many Lawyers Does DOJ Have?

Will Trump challenge the vote certification in 2026 like he did in 2020?

He’d have to challenge each federal district he didn’t like, individually. That would involve ballots from several counties, in some cases. And from all the counties if he challenged a Senate race.

In Texas, that would be 254 counties. Choose your fight wisely.

And what evidence does he have? In 2020: none, which was why 60+ cases were dismissed. A federal civil suit is not a fishing license. You can’t sue and then say “Now let’s look for evidence in their possession.” Especially when you’re challenging elections. There’s a reason Trump had his minions storm the Capitol. It was his last chance, having exhausted all the others. He can’t do that this time. He has to go to the states and make his cases there. In EAC federal district, and each state for Senators.

How many lawyers does the DOJ have? They’ve lost 25 court cases seeking voter records without any legal authority to have them. No reason to think they’ll do better in November-December. And so far all their claims of “illegal voting” have dwindled down to: nothing. The proven cases amount to less than one vote per year, in myriad elections.

The best and most sensible advice is this:

"Don't give Trump any more power than he actually has," Berman said. "When it comes to elections he has very little power."

Ultimately, he predicted the fight ends with a whimper. "I think at the end of the day, Trump's going to see his party losing, blame someone else, and decide to fight the next fight, and go golfing," Berman said.
Although I don’t think Trump actually fights anything. He’ll bitch and moan and then retreat to the Oval and glue up some more plastic gold. And convince himself he can put up monuments to himself nobody can tear down, and prove it by planning once again to demolish the JFK memorial.

Until Congress pulls all the rugs out from under him.
Posted by at No comments:

Double Bubble

Wait a minute... Double what up? 

Trump has absolutely no idea what he’s doing.
Posted by at 1 comment:

Buying Votes With Pennies

Trump: "I am pleased to announce that my Administration will, immediately, begin sending 'Checks' of nearly $100 to over 20 MILLION wonderful Seniors to help pay for their Medicare Part B premiums, which we have already reduced by significant amounts. This money will come from the Medicare Improvement Fund, a pointless 'Slush Fund' that has only been used by Dumocrats in Congress to pay for the Waste, Fraud, and Abuse for their Special Interest friends, and drive up Healthcare costs. We are finally using this Fund, along with my Most Favored Nations Deals, to substantially LOWER costs for our Seniors. I pledged to protect and preserve Medicare and Social Security, which were on the verge of RUIN by Joe Biden, who foolishly and maliciously let tens of millions of Illegal Aliens into our Country, and we are doing just that for America’s Seniors. This is separate from the equally substantial Refund 'Checks' we are sending to One Million Americans who were overcharged for their Unaffordable Care Act plans by Joe Biden.

Because I delivered on this very important issue for the American People, they can also rest assured the highly popular $5,000 Trump Dividend will be distributed to every U.S. Citizen if, and when, the Republicans win the Midterm Elections! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP"
A) Next to nobody is going to read all that, let’s face it.

B) Medicare Part B premiums have gone up this year, not down.

C) The “checks” are going to be a one time payment of $90. 

D) It represents about 45% of the monthly premium. Once.

Try not to blink, or you’ll miss it. And don’t get too excited; there are 68 million people on Medicare. So 2/3rds of us, get bupkis.

As the Lovely Wife said: “Throw me a roll of paper towels, dude.”
Posted by at 1 comment:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)