“Great day with the #President. A gracious host. And, he shot a 68! My recommendation, try the Trump Burger!” Kevin O’Leary, Self described Chairman of O’Leary Ventures and Beanstox, 5 X Emmy Shark Tank’s Mr. Wonderful, Wine Maker, Watch, Crypto, AI & Guitar Guy, Photographer & Chef Twitter/X post, January 12, 2025.
Yesterday, Donald Trump enjoyed a round of golf with one of his biggest fans, Kevin O’Leary of Shark Tank fame where he’s best known for treating contestants with rough handling disdain. Although O’Leary is only a cento-millionaire he’s a billionaire in self-satisfied narcissism and, as such, a self-satisfied MAGA enthusiast, particularly his enthusiasm for tax cuts, regulation decimation, banking regs in particular – basically anything that interferes with his pursuit of as many more cento-millions that are available.
In any event, O’Leary’s assertion that Trump shot a 68, on standard par 72 golf courses that would be four under par, a score that would be welcomed by most professional tour golfers. In truth, Trump is not a poor golfer, he has the ability to score in the mid-80s. As a former golfer I can attest that moving from scores in the mid-80s (roughly shooting 13 over par, on average) to a sub-par round of 68, especially Trump’s age (78) is spectacularly unlikely for all but the best players in that age range, for example, Gary Player or Lee Trevino. Trump is neither of those except in his delusional brain salad.
“Donald Trump is the worst cheat ever and he doesn’t care who knows,” Rick Reilly says as he describes a man he has known for 30 years. “I always say golf is like bicycle shorts. It reveals a lot about a man. And golf reveals a lot of ugliness in this president.
Rick Reilly, author Commander in Cheat, How Golf Explains Trump
It will not surprise Trump aficionados, of course, that Trump is a notorious golf cheat, known far and wide as among the most determined cheaters ever to don a polo shirt: simply google “notorious golf cheats.” His own hometown newspaper, The Palm Beach Post, ran a 2023 story, Donald Trump and golf: Fancy resorts, A-list partners, cheating at highest level, well worth reading. Among a wellspring of examples, he kicks errant shots back onto the fairway; he brazenly reports his scores on, for instance, a par five hole as a four although his golf partners counted at least nine shots; he tosses and kicks his shots out of sand traps; he improves his golf balls’ positions on the fairway; he also has his caddies cheat for him. How does he accomplish much of this? He has a supercharged golf cart so he can reach his shots before his partners!
In short, according to sportswriter and golfer, Rick Reilly, who came out of retirement to write Commander in Cheat, Trump cheats “like a Mafia accountant.” His misrepresentations go beyond just merely kicking a ball out of a sand trap, Reilly further reports: “I kept seeing on [Trump’s] Twitter feed: ‘I’m a champion. You should vote for me because I’ve won 18 club championships.’ Whoa! That’s a lie because [he] already told me how [he] did it. Whenever [I] open a new course, [I] play [the very first round] by [myself] and declare [myself] the first club champion.’”
Summing up, Donald Trump scoring a 68 would be a biblical miracle. And Kevin O’Leary telling the truth about it would be as well. . .
During August 2023 I wrote of ProPublica’s investigation of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s creative moral and legal accounting on his yearly financial statements. His failure to disclose two all-expense paid trips during 2019 to Indonesia and to the Bohemian Grove, an all-male retreat in northern California, were each financed entirely by billionaire Harlan Crow, a cofounder of Club for Growth and a major donor to the GOP. Well, today the self-fashioned untouchable, unshakeable Supreme Court justice filed a financial disclosure document that (quite belatedly) described a come to Jesus change of attitude, if only for a moment.
This is quite a turnaround. Recall that at the time of ProPublica’s April 2023 exposé, Thomas characterized his trips – as did benefactor Crow – as “hospitality” which he maintained was not reportable on his 2019 financial disclosure report. I fact, he took high road that only lifetime tenure in one’s government job offers by maintaining that all of this was just Mr. Crow’s hospitable way of spending some of his billions. And apparently Justice Thomas was also hospitable enough to accept free hospitality. And, despite the many many thousand dollars spent by Crow, Thomas maintained that hospitality doesn’t count as income or as a gift, noe would it sully his judicial neutrality should a case come forth impacting Harlan Crow or his buddies. And, what are you going to do about it, he seemed to say, “impeach me?” Well, actually, some suggested it.
Excedrin headache number 1 . . .
This has caused Thomas many headaches for the past two years. He wasn’t helped to escape the spotlight by his hospitable brethren Justice Sam Alito (who also got ensnared in the hospitality trap, see here). Moreover, lately, the upside down American flag catastrophe didn’t exactly cover Alito in a garland of roses. The public doesn’t seem to care for juvenile delinquents sitting on the highest court. Moreover, Rhode Island’s Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has been incessantly irritating the Court to produce an enforceable code of ethics, finding no joy there. So, it’s possible that Thomas thought that disclosing, four years late, his 2019 antics now would lighten his load a bit despite how miffed he must be at having to carry a load at all. Regardless, whether what amounts to a confession of wrongdoing will actually lighten his load, his belated report is directly below (emphasis added).
Let’s see how this is received by us, the public. The fact that Thomas pleads “inadvertently” to his failure to file in 2019 – after having had a world class team of lawyers advising him – wouldn’t be accepted as a plea for mercy by a judge, for example, like Sam “Hang ’em High” Alito, arguably, Thomas’s Old Gangster crony. So, from a PR standpoint, it would have been helpful have issued a press release explaining that he “regrets” something, anything related to what I’d guess he still believes to be a small faux pas.
Perhaps, like Alito vis-a-vis the upside flag episode, he could simply blame his wife . . . Yes, Clarence, let’s try blaming Ginni.
“Happy Memorial Day to All, including the Human Scum that is working so hard to destroy our Once Great Country, & to the Radical Left, Trump Hating Federal Judge in New York that presided over, get this, TWO separate trials, that awarded a woman, who I never met before (a quick handshake at a celebrity event, 25 years ago, doesn’t count!), 91 MILLION DOLLARS for “DEFAMATION.” She didn’t know when the so-called event took place – sometime in the 1990’s – never filed a police report, didn’t have to produce the “dress” that she threatened me with (it showed negative!), & sung my praises in the first half of her CNN Interview with Alison Cooper, but changed her tune in the second half – Gee, I wonder why (UNDER APPEAL!)? The Rape charge was dropped by a jury! Or Arthur Engoron, the N.Y. State Wacko Judge who fined me almost 500 Million Dollars (UNDER APPEAL) for DOING NOTHING WRONG, used a Statute that has never been used before, gave me NO JURY, Mar-a-Lago at $18,000,000 – Now for Merchan!”
I’m on record – before tonight’s Bachmann news – as a Bachmann denier. I simply did not believe she existed. No one so utterly congressloony could co-exist with gravity, the human nervous system, or the laws of thermodynamics. Well, I was wrong, tonight she has come down to earth, and, bless her heart, she had a few of her choicier words for Perfesser Newt Gingrich. . . About 15 minutes ago CNN’s Political Ticker reported: Bachmann: Gingrich was paid to ‘influence’ Republicans for Freddie Mac by CNN Political Reporter Shannon Travis Webster City, Iowa (CNN) – As Newt Gingrich denies he was paid to lobby Republicans for mortgage giant Freddie Mac, fellow Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann on Wednesday challenged Gingrich’s denial.
Bachmann threw in after a campaign event in Webster City, Iowa: “Whether former Speaker Gingrich made $300,000 or whether he made $2 million, the point is that he took money to also influence senior Republicans to be favorable toward Fannie and Freddie,” This, Mrs. B, is great stuff! Keep talking (a phrase I never thought I’d write within three paragraphs of the words “Mrs. B” or “Michele Bachmann”). “While he was taking that money, I was fighting against Fannie and Freddie,” Bachmann said.
Ma’am, despite your well-aimed jab at Gingo, to me, you’re still scarier than an octogenarian in leotards, but when it comes to blunting the efforts of the miserable Newt, well, with Gingo climbing the GOP polls, regardless of our political differences we must all come together, if only for this moment. Keep it up, Mrs. B!
New and irrefutable evidence proves Mitt Romney was separated from principles at birth, according to communication scientists and other unnamed sources. After a long period examining his political positions these experts “could find no other rational explanation for why Mitt Romney has flip-flopped on matters of national importance at such an exceedingly high rate,” according to the Flip-Flop Research Consortium. In their report, released today, the consortium provided a summary chart of a small representative sample of Romney’s “serial flip-flops,” set out below:
Mitt Romney 1
Mitt Romney 2
‘I’m not in favor of privatizing Social Security or making cuts.’
‘Social Security’s the easiest and that’s because you can give people a personal account.’
‘I saw my father march with Martin Luther King.’
‘I did not see it with my own eyes.’
“When I first heard of ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ I thought it sounded very silly”
”Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has worked well.’
On bin Laden – ‘It’s not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.’
‘He’s going to pay, and he will die.’
‘I supported the assault weapon ban.’
‘I don’t support any gun control legislation.’
‘I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose.’
‘I never really called myself pro-choice.’
‘Based on the numbers of American Muslims… I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified.’ [Ed., According to the Census this criterion would eliminate members of 25 U.S. religions.]
‘A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith.’ [Ed., Presumably, this would include cabinet positions.]
‘Roe v. Wade has gone too far.’
‘I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.’
‘I like mandates. The mandates work.’
‘I think it’s unconstitutional on the 10th Amendment front.’
‘The TARP program… was nevertheless necessary to keep banks from collapsing in a cascade of failures.’
‘When government is… bailing out banks… we have every good reason to be alarmed.’
On the so-called “Romneycare” ‘If Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it, then that will be a model for the nation.’
Again on “Romneycare” ‘What works in one state may not be the answer for another.’
‘I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.’
‘Ronald Reagan is my hero.’
‘I’ve been a hunter pretty much all my life.’
‘Any description of my being a hunter is an overstatement of capability.’
In 2003, Romney launched the Massachusetts Green Energy Fund, saying the program offered “an opportunity to capitalize on two emerging trends: the growing level of investment interest in clean energy and the importance of Massachusetts’ academic and corporate R&D in forming clean energy technology companies,”
On President Obama’s green energy programs These programs “invite cronyism and outright corruption”and should be disbanded.
July 11, 2011[ President Obama] “didn’t create the recession, but he made it worse, and longer.”
July 30, 2011 Asked about his July 11th assertion “I didn’t say things are worse.”
2009 “I think there is a need for economic stimulus. Americans have lost about $11 trillion in net worth. And government can help make that up in a very difficult time.”
September 2011 ‘I have never supported the President’s recovery act. No time, nowhere, no how have I ever supported the President’s stimulus.’
In 2008 On “Romneycare,” he bragged that it “helped get health insurance premiums down and got all of our citizens insured. If we can do that nationally, we not only help Michigan and the auto industry, but the entire nation.”
2011 “One thing I’d never do is impose a state’s plan on the entire nation, that makes no sense. I’ll repeal Obamacare.”
2006 Romney was against “rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from our country.”
2011 “I disagree fundamentally that the 12 million people who come here illegally should be allowed to stay here permanently. I think that is a form of amnesty and that it’s not appropriate.”
The consortium spokesperson explained that “the rate and number of flip-flops exceeds any we have encountered before.” This may indicate “that Mr. Romney has no connective tissue between the two sides of his brain which, in the average person, leads to a general consistency in beliefs.” The researchers did not imply that Mr. Romney was a “serial liar,” but suggested that, without the vital connective tissue that exists in the normal human brain between the two halves of the brain, he may have no ability to recognize that he’s taking contrary positions on most every issue he speaks about.” The spokesperson concluded by observing, “it’s either that or he’s just plain stupid. In that case, there’s nothing that can be done at this late date to remedy that.”
Updates will appear here as this vital research continues.
From our nemeses in the GOP, we constantly hear how the Obama administration has during its tenure failed to create any jobs whatever. Of course, that’s patently false. This, in turn, proves to already-made-up GOP and Tea Party minds that Keynesian style stimulus does not work. Of course, that too is patently false. Are you sensing a pattern? . . . Here’s a bit of outright lying beamed to us by FOX News, the GOP/TP’s media outlet, FOX Business’s Follow the Money, October 19, 2011:
BOLLING: All right, very quickly, guys. This is Harry Reid responding to Senator McConnell’s blame-game accusation.
REID : “The massive layoffs we’ve had in America today have, of course — are rooted in the last administration, and it’s very clear that private-sector jobs have been doing just fine. It’s the public-sector jobs where we’ve lost huge numbers.”
BOLLING: First of all, can I just point something out? Public-sector jobs have increased byalmost 160,000 since President Obama took office. What is he talking about?
STEPHEN HAYES (Fox News contributor): Yeah, you’re going to hear that clip again and again and again.
Yeah, Mr. Hayes, we are going to hear that Harry Reid clip again and again because it is true. And yes, we will hear and see the Bolling/Hayes palaver again and again because it is bombastically false, even for FOX News.
It’s interestingly wrong. Here we have Bolling and Hayes, FOX minions, insisting that public sector jobs have grown since 2009. This is from the network who has been first in promoting the firing of nearly every public sector employee in the nation. It is false that Bolling and Hayes do not know the numbers – public sector jobs have fallen since early 2009, and precipitously so since the end of the Census uptick in Jan. to April 2010. Bolling and Hayes simply lie, as does nearly the entirety of the GOP/TP. And to lie so bluntly when they firstly, know the truth, and secondly, they also know that the public sector job statistics are available to anyone who can reach the DOL netsite. The GOP/TP through its concerted effort has destroyed more than 550,000+ public sector jobs primarily in those state governments they control. Witness Wisconsin, Ohio, Maine, and Florida.
An August 30, 2011, the Census Bureau’s Annual Survey of Public Employment and Payroll,provided its most up-to-date public sector data. It’s summary: “The 90,740 state and local governments across the country had 16.6 million full-time equivalent employees in 2010, 203,321 fewer than were employed in 2009, according to estimates released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. The majority of these employees, 9.0 million, worked in education, followed by those working in hospitals (986,471), police protection (946,196) and corrections (731,692).
Part-time state and local government employees numbered 4.8 million in 2010, a decrease of 27,567 from 2009.
Local governments — which include counties, cities, townships, special districts and school districts — accounted for 12.2 million full-time equivalent employees in 2010, while state governments employed 4.4 million. Both figures showed decreases from 2009. The number of full-time equivalent employees is equal to the number of full-time employees added to the number of hours worked by part-time employees divided by the standard number of hours for a full-time employee.”
“Public-sector jobs have increased by almost 160,000 since President Obama took office,” Mr. Bolling?
Lies About Private Sector Job Growth Also on the GOP/TP List. Also, Republicans nearly en masse claim the Obama administration has failed to produce private sector jobs. In fact, since the Recovery Act took effect, the private sector has gained 1.4 million jobs. So urgently do they want to bury Keynes and communitarianism forever, they are desperately trying to keep this fact hidden from the electorate. However, the Department of Labor’s official blog, (Work in Progress) produced a stinging rebuttal to GOP/TP claims with a chart produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics Program.
Well, last week the Democratic Senate was halted in its attempt to pass a portion of the American Jobs Act, i.e., that portion that would help create hundreds of thousands of state and local jobs for teachers and first responders. Craven to the ‘enth degree, the GOP voted unanimously to prevent the measure from being voted on (joined, unfortunately, by Democrats John Tester (OH) and Bill Nelson (NE), and so-called Independent Joe Lieberman (CT)). Here’s Reid’s response: “By asking millionaires to pay an extra half a penny on the dollar, this bill would have created jobs by keeping our communities safe and ensuring that our children continue to have access to a high-quality education. Unfortunately, protecting millionaires and defeating President Obama are more important to my Republican colleagues than creating jobs and getting our economy back on track.Democrats agree with the overwhelming majority of Americans that teachers and first responder jobs are worth defending, while lower taxes for millionaires and billionaires are not.”
Unfortunately, we suffer from GOP capture of legislative business.
Perfesser Gingo, aka Newt Gingrich, a GOP presidential sorta-hopeful, was in full Gingo last night at yet another sorta-presidential debate. Showing off what makes him simultaneously interesting and tiresome, he pulled out one of his characteristic bits of “truthiness” (i.e. lying) when discussing “Obamacare” and “Romneycare.” Here’s the CNN transcript of the exchange between the Perfesser and Mitt Romney:
Perfesser GINGO: And candidly, Mitt, your plan ultimately, philosophically, it’s not Obamacare, and that’s not a fair charge. But your plan essentially is one more big government, bureaucratic, high-cost system, which candidly could not have been done by any other state because no other state had a Medicare program as lavish as yours, and no other state got as much money from the federal government under the Bush administration for this experiment. So there’s a lot of big government behind Romneycare. Not as much as Obamacare, but a heck of a lot more than your campaign is admitting.
COOPER: Governor Romney, 30 seconds. ROMNEY: Actually, Newt, we got the idea of an individual mandate from you. Perfesser GINGO: That’s not true. You got it from the Heritage Foundation. ROMNEY: Yes, we got it from you, and you got it from the Heritage Foundation and from you Perfesser GINGO: Wait a second. What you just said is not true. You did not get that from me. You got it from the Heritage Foundation. ROMNEY: And you never supported them? Perfesser GINGO: I agree with them, but I’m just saying, what you said to this audience just now plain wasn’t true. ROMNEY: OK. Let me ask, have you supported in the past an individual mandate? Perfesser GINGO: I absolutely did with the Heritage Foundation against Hillarycare. ROMNEY: You did support an individual mandate? Oh, OK. That’s what I’m saying. We got the idea from you and the Heritage Foundation. GINGRICH: OK. A little broader.
Capacity for Mendacity. That exchange is Gingrich attempting to weasel out of his support for an “individual mandate.” He oftengets away with it. He’s like an accomplished shell player – very good sleight-of-hand. He has many techniques that attempt to skirt outright lying. Gingo – master of mendacity, “given to or characterized by deception or falsehood or divergence from absolute truth.” [Emphasis added] (Merriam-Webster) Yes, divergence from absolute truth, that’s it, that’s the shell game. Gingo’s sneaky dishonest. He’s arrogant. He underestimates his listeners, as I say, he often gets away with it. Not here. The above exchange with Mitt Romney shows a few of his shell game tricks:
Major Category:Distinction without a difference. Shell players use verbal distraction during the play to interfere with the bettor’s concentration. Gingo attempts this early on:
ROMNEY: Actually, Newt, we got the idea of an individual mandate from you. Perfesser GINGO: That’s not true. You got it from the Heritage Foundation.
Here’s a deconstruction of Gingo’s comment:
“You got it from the Heritage Foundation” – “It” is the individual mandate concept.” Yes, it is true that Romney got the idea from Heritage. Gingo, though, is here trying to confuse Romney and the audience through another of his methods, over-literalism. The facts that will emerge as the colloquy continues will prove, of course, that Gingrich did indeed support an individual mandate, and has done so for more than a decade. Here, though, he hopes to befuddle Romney so much that he either drops the subject altogether or apologizes for mischaracterizing Gingo’s views. He’s using over-literalism to confuse, as you’ll see as we move along.
Gingo’s next comment moves his ploy forward:
ROMNEY: And you never supported them [Heritage Foundation]? GINGRICH: I agree with them, but I’m just saying, what you said to this audience just now plain wasn’t true.
Surprisingly perhaps, Gingo agrees that he agrees with Heritage about the individual mandate. His next comment is an attempt to paint Romney as a liar, “what you said just now plain wasn’t true,” referring back to Romney’s challenge that Gingo had agreed with Heritage about the individual mandate in regard to “Obamacare.” This is where he’s rolling out his use of the “distinction without a difference” ploy in earnest.
Expect this every time the Perfesser of Political Mendacity opens his mouth.
“I plan to be the firstpresident to be marriedfor the 4th time in the White House.” In the wake of his eighth-place finish (out of 10) in the Ames Iowa Straw Poll last Saturday, Professor Newt Gingrich is far off course as a serious candidate for the GOP presidential nomination. Known to his supporters as an idea-a-minute seer and scholar, he seems to have failed to convince those at the Ames BBQ. Mr. Gingrich gracefully acceded to our request to sit down with me and one of my unpaid staff members, who I prefer to call my next-door neighbor. So, early this morning we three somewhat bleary-eyed political junkies visited the famed Capitol Rotunda restaurant, the Disgruntled Toad. As we downed cup after cup of coffee and feasted on a delightful breakfast buffet, we spoke of Iowa. . .
Your Editor [Me, Editor]: Mr. Gingrich, may I call you Gingo? Gingrich: No. My Next-Door Neighbor (NDN): I told you he wouldn’t. Me, Editor: Well, you’re still not getting back your lawn mower. NDN: Yeah, yeah, that’s all I hear . . . Me, Editor: Excuse us, Professor. Gingrich: No.
Iowa? Where’s Iowa?
Me, Editor: Well, let’s move on, shall we? Professor, how do you feel about your finish in the Iowa straw poll Saturday? You garnered 2% of the vote. You were 8th out of 10 candidates. Do you consider that a repudiation . . .? Gingrich: Well, first off, as I told FOX’s Chris Wallace at last week’s debate, I wish you would put aside the gotcha questions. How I did in Iowa is irrelevant to my candidacy. Me, Editor: Yes, but how you finished in the poll does have some effect, after all. You are now viewed as a long shot for the nomination . . . Gingrich: Wait, wait a minute. Who says I was entered in the Ames Iowa straw poll? Me, Editor: Um . . . well your straw poll entry documentation for one thing. Your appearances there. Your name on the ballot. Your . . . Gingrich: Wrong. Clearly, anyone who says that I was involved in the Ames thing is lying. I was not there. I did not compete. I was not on the ballot. Ballots can be faked, photoshopped. . . Me, Editor: (Quickly, I show Mr. Gingrich the many news accounts and photos of him in Ames, Iowa.) But I have these pictures, and news stories, and your own words . . . Gingrich: Quit! Quit with these “gotcha” questions. I was in New Hampshire, a state whose presidential primary has importance, not Ames. I couldn’t find Ames on a map. The Ames thing is a beauty pageant. I have no doubt I’d have won, but I decided months ago to forgo such silliness. Manifest silliness. I was not there. Me, Editor: You maintain these hundreds of reports are fabrications. Gingrich: Yes. I was not there. I did not compete. Clearly, these news accounts and pictures are false. Can we move on, please, to some of my ideas? Ideas that can help revive our great country? Me, Editor: Well, I would rather speak more of the obviously false news accounts of your appearances in Ames, Iowa. That’s a big story.
An Executive Order A Minute
Gingrich: No, it is not. America is. Let’s talk about my ideas for America. I have two ideas a minute. Giuliani noticed that. And here’s the title of my new book, Let’s Talk About My Ideas. I Have 2 A Minute! Me, Editor: Interesting. That brings up an observation. Your books are more often co-written. There is speculation. How much, on average, do you contribute to the actual writing? Gingrich: As Reagan said to Carter in a 1979 debate, “There you go again.” You do that. You just asked another “gotcha” question. Look. My name’s on the cover. It’s in the biggest type face. That’s all I’m going to say on that matter. Now, about my ideas for America . . . Me, Editor: Please. Gingrich: First, as President, through an Executive Order – E.O. 1 – I’ll rename the country. I’ll call us “Cash Only.” No more credit buying. No more big deficits. In fact, here’s another idea. We’ll forgive our debt to others. E.O. 2 will do that. I’ll send a powerful message to others . Me, Editor: Which is . . . ? Gingrich: Another “gotcha”? Again . . .?Me, Editor: Proceed. Gingrich: So, as President, on day one, with E.O. 2, I’ll say to the world, “We’re going to see you straight. We’re not paying our debt at all. In fact, who says we owe anything to anybody? Show me the paperwork.” So That’s The First Hour Of My First Day As President. Already, We’re Completely Debt Free. Me, Editor: Sir, we all know there is more than ample paperwork. Countries from China to Saudi Arabia hold hundreds of billions of Treasury obligations . . . Gingrich: They can be forged. They can be manipulated. Computers can be hacked. People can be bribed. Me, Editor: So, do you plan to just blow off the entire amount we owe? Trillions? The world would collapse economically. The United States would be humiliated . . . Gingrich: Remember my first idea. We’re not the “United States” anymore, we’re “Cash Only.” NDN: I actually likethat idea! Me, Editor: That’s a good speech, NDN. Remember, you’re just here as an observer.
Medicare? Social Security? Easy Peasy
Gingrich: So, that’s the first hour of my first day as President. Already, we’re completely debt free. Next, I’d make Social Security and Medicare secure for future generations, and not like Eric Cantor or Paul Ryan would, not by a nasty form of privatization. Me, Editor: That’s intriguing. As you know, much has been suggested for many years by all political parties, economists, policy analysts . . . How would you propose to secure these programs? Gingrich: I wouldn’t “propose.” President Gingrich would do. It’s simple. It demonstrates my knowledge of history. I’d employ my mastery of policy. I’m futuristic. Me, Editor: This could be a magnificent demonstration of that. But I can only imagine fixing Medicare and Social Security and maintaining its stability, affordability, and viability would be complicated . . . Gingrich: Complicated? Not at all. It’s just that no politician has the ability to think my ideas. For both programs, I’ll invoke the Alien and Sedition Acts. Me, Editor: Excuse me . . . um . . . Gingrich: You don’t know the history. To keep Medicare and Social Security on the books, I’ll invoke one of the Alien and Sedition Acts, the Alien Act. It allows the president to deport any resident alien considered dangerous to our safety. Me, Editor: Have you read these centuries old laws? Under no possible interpretation do they apply to your purposes. But, even assuming they did, how are Medicare and Social Security recipients dangerous to our safety? How are they “aliens,” for Heaven’s sake? And did not Supreme Court Justice Douglas say that the Alien and Sedition Acts “constituted one of our sorriest chapters.” . . .? Gingrich: I remember a summary of it all in graduate school where I earned a PhD. in history. Regardless, the Alien and Sedition Acts were never held unconstitutional. In any event, applicable or not, on day one of my presidency, in the early afternoon, I’ll issue E.O. 3, and use the Alien Act to deport all persons receiving Medicare and Social security benefits to the Scandinavian countries: Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and any others in that group. They like socialist parasites. And such people are, by definition, dangerous to our security, are they not?” And what could be more “alien” to our values? Scandinavians love socialists, they would welcome these people. Me, Editor: But, but . . . but . . . but . . . they don’t mean “alien” like that, they meant it as in “immigrant,” not as in American citizens. Gingrich: Not in my dictionary. Clearly, you need to look up “parasite.” NDN: Right on, professor. I’m on Medicare and Socialist Security, and I agree with you. I’m a parasite. Me, Editor: Yes, you certainly are. . . And, Professor Gingrich, to be candid, your ideas in this area are stunning. Literally. I’m stunned. Numbed. I cannot feel my arms. Gingrich: Thank you. I’m unapologetically proud of my audacity. And since I’ll use E.O. 3. to accomplish it, I’ll bypass Congress, and, then, with E.O. 4, I’ll abolish the federal judiciary, permanently neutralizing their influence. And I’ve only revealed a few of my ideas. But most of all, as President, I will reduce the size of the federal government and the power of “imperial presidency” that President Obama has radically expanded.
Bidding farewell and good luck
NDN: Excuse me, Professor. I have a question. Maybe you have an idea. . . Suppose your neighbor borrowed your lawn mower, your car, your savings. He’s had these items for more than three years. You’ve asked for them back, a lot. But you get no reply. He gets you confused into working off an imagined debt to him by working full-time in his online publishing venture . . . Any ideas how to get out of this? Gingrich: Well, sure I do. First, you simply . . . Me, Editor: Well, I see our time is up. Thank you for your time, Professor. We’ve all gained from your insights and your crackerjack ideas. Two a minute. Well, I say, keep on noodling about America’s problems. Until next time, good luck on the campaign trail!
Heaven FORFEND!!! Wolf Blitzer, the shell that once had guts, is this minute explaining to whoever is the CNN moderator at this hour just how hurt and upset he is that Anthony Weiner lied to us all, and more: “He looked into my eyes and lied.” Gosh. That’s like peeing on the Pope’s shoes, huh?
Wolf Blitzer has on nearly every occasion, and for many years, spouted conventional wisdom. When in that period has he actually done journalism? He’s become one of the great bullshit artists on t.v. Plus, he often deems to lecture about morals and ethics. Surely, he’s not in the same absurd cadre as Glenn Beck, Bill O, or Gingo Gingrich, but he does go on. And just a few minutes ago he unloaded on Anthony Weiner. Weiner’s worst sin, it seems, was lying to Blitzer. The goofball moderator asks him, “Has he apologized to you?” No, he has not, and Wolf acted out being nonchalant about it, “and I wouldn’t expect him to.” Of course. Blitz did announce that Weiner must “man up,” that rightwing phrase so favored by essentially weak persons. Weiner must finally tell the absolute truth, Wolf directs.
Finally, and I hate (really) to beat this drum constantly, but as usual for the media in this circus performance, Blitzer didn’t even try to put Weiner’s situation in context. No mention of GOP sexcapades superstars, Senator David Vitter, or Ex Senator John Ensign, whose digressions are in a decidedly more professional league than Weiner’s Little Little League.
One astute blogger, Fixer, at Alternate Brain, asks the 64 Trillion dollar question, though, and, a la Blitzer, I deeply resent that he beat me to it:
When you say Anthony Weiner has to “man up” and come clean in his upcoming news conference, do you mean the way you and your colleagues in the press “manned up” about cheerleading us into the Iraq War?
Yesterday, on Greta Van Susteren’s On the Record, Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee got up on his hind legs to discuss wieners. Anthony Weiner’s wiener, to be exact. Reince was in high dudgeon, to be sure. A tornado of botheration was he:
“VAN SUSTEREN: All right, you say [Weiner should immediately] resign.
PRIEBUS: Well, yes. Obviously, after all that, the man is a creep and an incessant liar, and I think that’s pretty obvious. You don’t need an investigation to figure that out. What I think is more outrageous, though, Greta, is the fact that Nancy Pelosi, Debbie Wasserman Schultz of the Democratic National Committee is not calling for this guy’s resignation! I mean, the guy is an incessant liar. And listen, it was Nancy Pelosi, you might remember, who said that she was going to drain the swamp in Washington and clear the field of these kind of people. And what does she do? She calls for an ethics investigation. Now, either she condones the behavior or she calls for his resignation. That’s her choice.
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, you know, he’s still — I mean, it still makes sense to go through a process and give him a hearing. I mean, we’ve all pretty much reached our judgment about him. I mean, the pictures are quite damning. But he’s hired by the people in his district, you know?
PRIEBUS: Oh, really? I mean, do we need to really, though, Greta, spend taxpayer dollars on an investigation to determine whether or not Anthony Weiner is a creep? I mean, we know what the story is. We know what he did. The guy lied. He brought reporters back in the hallway when he knew he was lying, came back outside into the hallway, lied again. Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats ought to show a little bit of leadership and get this guy out of town.”
The Persistence of Memory. Recall that Priebus, the man with a surname as dead-on a term for wiener as Weiner, launched no righteous indignation at Ex-Senator John Ensign whose skedaddle from the Senate via resignation was a millimeter ahead of the posse he knew was about to expel him summarily. Remember too, Reince Priebus had no particular concerns about then Louisiana’s Congressman David Vitter whose prominence on the D.C. Madam’s “frequent rider” list might have garnered criminal solicitation charges in D.C. Vitter, for God’s sake, took calls from the Madam on the House floor, during votes! (Vitter, rather than resigning from the House, stayed on, then won his Senate seat in the next election. ) About Vitter, here’s what Priebus told Van Susteren , who, by the way, admirably held his feet to the fire:
VAN SUSTEREN: Is there a difference with Senator David Vitter, I mean, with the whole — with his whole little prostitution — he’s on a prostitution client list. Is that different? PRIEBUS: Well, I don’t know if it’s different. I mean, this is…
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, nobody called…
PRIEBUS: Frankly, I’m not relitigating the David Vitter situation. We have…
“Relitigating”? The Vitter sex machine was neither litigated, nor prelitigated. There’s the rub. Weiner, as far as we know today, is not alleged to have violated any law; Vitter, prima facie, many allege, appears to have done so. Priebus has a very selective moral sense – the very “moral relativism” the GOP goes on and on and on railing against. Of course.
Resign, Schmensign! Earlier yesterday, Priebus began his parade of hypocrisy. He appeared on MSNBC’s Martin Bashir show, calling Weiner a “creep,” as if creepiness were a violation of Senate rules. If that were true, how have Joe Lieberman, Mitch McConnell, and David Vitter remained senators?
Priebus also rages about Weiner’s lying to the press and the American people as well. That apple doesn’t fall far from the Republican tree either – John Ensign brought the lie to Shakespearean heights. And Newt Gingrich? Who can define the infinite space his lying occupies? John Ensign? Oy! Yet, of course, Priebus supports them all.
Stand Up For Weiner. Anthony Weiner appears as of now to have violated no law. He’s likely examining his psychological and moral life overtime. He lied about a sexual peccadillo, involving adults, between adults. He harmed many – principally his wife, Hilary Clinton’s closest aide at State. Yes, he embarrassed Congress, yet, Congress, with few exceptions, is an institutionalized embarrassment.
Anthony Weiner does have some sexual issues (who among us dares throw that first stone?), and he will deal with them; he did not, though, as Ensign did, canoodle with the wife of another man, both of them, mind you, members of his staff. Unlike Ensign, Vitter, Mark Foley, John Edwards, Newt Gingrich, and many others, Weiner never deemed to instruct us about the superiority of his own “family values.” Getting lectured by Ensign, Vitter, and Gingrich, is like getting ethical investment guidelines from Jack Madoff or Goldman Sachs.
Won’t You Stay, Just A Little Bit Longer. Mr. Weiner ought not to resign. Far worse have remained for more outrageous and potentially illegal acts. The House banking scandal sent Kentucky Congressman Carroll Hubbard to jail. Illinois’ Dan Rostenkowski went too. Real crimes; real disgrace; real candidates for expulsion.
Indeed, Mr. Weiner, as Congressman Weiner, has lost much of his legislative mojo. His inimitable rants at GOP congressloons may fall silent, although the boxer-tough congressman may fool us. For the progressive cause silencing the congressman would bring more silence to an already mostly passive Democratic House; for the GOP that would be a triumph. They do not happily abide news coverage of Mr. Weiner putting their hypocrisy, their incessant lies, and their simple meanness on display. He’s in trouble now, and he’s a friend of the progressive cause, and thereby a friend of the lost middle class and all those who aspire for small successes and a decent wage. I’ll not abandon him at his neediest hour. Let the Priebuses prattle on.
