Wayward Landlubber

     The term, conservative used to imply a cautious person, deliberative, with a respect for tradition and social norms. Republicans have long bragged about their conservatism while disparaging their Democratic opponents. As in most things political, these comparisons were exaggerated. Neither party has been successful in fulfilling their promises, though the Democrats have had some notable success in social and human rights since the last half of the twentieth century. And some unrecognized success in economics. Republicans started admirably in the last half of the nineteenth century to extend the blessings of democracy to all Americans (except for native Americans), but have fallen in that commitment in recent decades. For most of this time both parties were lead by people of intelligence who discouraged radical moves within each party. I may not have agreed with those intelligent people, but their party did not appear to be an existential threat to those of us on the opposite side.

I'm retired and have a small 401-K, which I needed to roll my retirement fund into at 70 1/2.  We have hope, but feel like dopes.

     There are many reasons to question our treatment of people coming across our southern border, many of them seeking refugee status. None of the obvious reasons seem to matter to those people who stridently support Donald Trump and his party. Maybe we should consider a lesson of refugees rejected from entering Roman territory in the fourth century CE. Yes, I know conservatives have no respect for history either, but then what do they respect, besides authoritarian strongmen?      The Goths, Germanic tribes living in Germany, were being pressed by the Huns westword movement. Those barbarian tribes, among them the Visigoths, sought to cross the Danube for the safety of Roman territory. They were met with grudging acceptance but often treated with extreme cruelty. Roman officials sometimes forced these starving people to trade their children into slavery in exchange for dog meat. Steven Miller would have admired this treatment, forgetting that his early forebears might have been among

Why do men call their nether regions, the tiny area hidden by Trumps orlap, their "junk"? 

I will be honest. I have no more experience with macro-economics than rightwingers, though I can stumble through a definition. Here is where I, and other Liberals like me differ from our self-righteous rightwingers: we do not criticize people who have more knowledge than us. We don't disavow people with degrees, or experience because we don't agree with them. You know, like climate scientists. Many of us have actually done some reading of both sides of the macro-economic debate. Since we actually acknowledge history, we have noted a few, seemingly inescapable lessons favoring the Keynesian side of the balance sheet. Free-market economics, Laissez-faire economics, trickle-down economics, or any of the rightwing approaches to running the economy, have failed, indeed have never succeeded for any but a tiny few. It leads to austerity which leads to an economic collapse, which leads to the rise of right wing extremism and some kind of military strife.  After the Free-market economy

Some simple facts for the simple-minded: 1) fishing does not mean catching fish. 2) hunting does not mean bagging game. 3) playing the lottery does not mean winning the lottery. 4) gambling does not mean winning your bet. 5) voting does not mean watching your narrow viewpoint get put into law. If sometimes you are rewarded with a success, that is great. If your success seems guaranteed, you are cheating. If you are cheating, your actions make victims of the greater number. Yes I understand that in the case of gambling and the lottery, the house must win far more than the bettor, and thus, we enjoy the misery inflicted on the house. In the other three instance, there are environmental and economic consequences for such winning, and you, the cheater, must not be rewarded. 

The court case that established in the early 19th century the principal of Innocent until proven guilty in the US was Coffin v US. In 1795, some 8 years earlier, the British barrister, Sir William Garrow coined the phrase and ruled that accusers must be robustly tested. Presumably, in both cases the prosecution was not hampered by the defense team, with the  connivance of the Attorney General, and allowed the witnesses to be tested. One may surmise that it had its start in the 16th century Magna Carta.  Republicans are so sure that Orange Julius was denied his chance to prove his innocence, that they won't shut up about it. What they fear is that those Damned Liberals, are going to take that noble law away from them. Them, meaning those people so intent on fighting the deep state, that they welcome the shallow state. They need not worry. We Liberals are responsible for these improvements in jurisprudence. It is a long tradition that preceded the Magna Carta by a millennium (that is

I never had much respect for Jefferson Beuregard Sessions. Being a Republican was part of it, but being a racist piece of shit from a state where too many racist shits still exist was the most important reason. Yes, I know that the Republican party adopted those racists in 1972, but until recent years there were honorable people within the GOP. We have not heard much from Jeff Sessions lately. Maybe he feels in his own mind shame for his connection to Donald Trump, and the yeoman's work he did to get Trump elected. I for one, have raised him from the "Well of the Souls" where I had him. Jeff Sessions, of all of the recycled sycophants connected with Trump had the distinction of recusing himself for his meetings with Russian officials when Trump was a candidate. More importantly he stood up to President Trumps bullying. Perhaps too, he is no longer a racist piece of shit from a state where too many racists still persist.  There is a lesson here, I think. Trump is recycling

I'm of the generation that came of age at a time when the book, I'M OKAY, YOU'RE OKAY, was published. It was a time of great social upheaval and generational conflict. By the time I reached middle-age Rush Limbaugh, and his toxic spawn had changed that theme to, we're okay, you're a liberal piece of shit. We tried to find ways to accommodate those people. They saw only weakness in that selfless act. It is not enough that we find areas of compromise on some things with the right wing. We must capitulate. There is only one answer; it is good or it is evil, in that binary view. FINE! I am no longer merely opposed to you. I'm am your enemy. We're okay, you're a right wing piece of shit. In time, those who outlive us will have rebelled against you people and your take no prisoners view. If that does not happen, I will resist you till they close my eyelids and fold my cold, dead hands on my chest.

The recently fired, LT. Col. ALEXANDER VINDMAN, was quoted as saying ,"In America, right matters."  What he did not count on was that it is right , as in right-wing, that matters. We can no longer count on the word right being accepted as an adjective, it has now become disappointingly, a noun for what is wrong.

"Don't worry, there's an app for that."

My mother died from lung cancer, from second-hand smoke. My dad smoked until he was in his 50's. I know the misery of lung cancer through my mother's suffering, and for others I have known who suffered the disease. Some politicians, especially Republican politicians, sought to prevent us from learning the link between smoking and cancer. For those people a fat stogie was a symbol of their contempt for science. Among those science deniers was Rush Limbaugh. Those science deniers became climate change deniers.  I have great empathy for anyone suffering from any cancer. Sometimes those people are innocent bystanders. Others have been cowed into accepting the hogwash that science deniers have spread like cream cheeses on a bagel. I do not extend those feelings to Mr. Limbaugh. He has learned the meaning of karma.  So light up a big Cuban cigar, Rush. Smoke to your hearts content. I wish you a miserable end.

I'm a great fan of Billy Crystal, the actor, the humorist, the director. He manages to plumb the depths of human compassion in whatever he does. Not so, William Krystol, the neo-con and conservative commentator. I have been at odds with Krystol my entire adult life. I'm pretty sure that I have seldom been at odds with Billy, the better, Crystal.  William Krystol has announced that he is now a Democrat. I welcome him, cautiously. That is what Democrats do. We have a broad coalition which prevents us from getting the things many of us want, but tries to offer hope to those who have been made to fear FDR-style Democratic Socialism. What these people fear puzzles some of us but we continue to play the long game. Usually it works. In short, we have an active if not populous reform wing. Republicans no longer have that small group of loud reformers. They have been taken over by a reform-school wing of right-wing reactionaries that offended even John McCain. We can thank such luminari

The tech community, as well as various democratic governments, is asking the question, is it Huawei or the highway? This may be the ugly truth before us. I don't particularly care. Corporate capitalism has given us a similar, my way or the highway conundrum. They say, we must accept Free-market economics, or nothing else. "Anything less would be socialism, and we can't have that." Similarly the Republican party is telling us that we must accept their truncated view of Democracy or find another country. My way or the highway, deal with it. Donald Trump has forced the GOP to accept his political viewpoint (even though he could not articulate his viewpoint) or else. They have dutifully fallen into line.  I will not! Nor will I move. The salient fact about all authoritarian governments is people get tired of them and they get overthrown, or have to waste lives and resources to remain in power. Sooner or later, some bright innovators will find a way to compete with Huawei