Rock band Third Eye Blind taunts Republicans at concert during RNC

Rock band Third Eye Blind taunts Republicans at concert during RNCThe rock band Third Eye Blind frustrated some guests at a charity concert held during the Republican National Convention on Tuesday. In tweets posted on the official Third Eye Blind account, the band indicated it was pleased the show upset some in the audience. “I have never been more disappointed,” wrote a Twitter user named Liza White.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Why Democrats Hear a Secret Racist Dog Whistle and Republicans Don’t

One of the biggest misconceptions about Trump supporters is that they see President Trump the same way his critics see him, and yet they like him anyway. The implication of that belief is that all Trump supporters are racists because they damn-well-know they support a leader who is one. Hardly a day goes by without some stranger on Twitter telling me in ominous tones that I will someday pay dearly for being a racist “apologist.” They assume I see President Trump the same way they see him.

In my book Win Bigly, I describe how the public is watching two movies on one screen. In Movie 1, Trump is a monster with many flaws, racism being at the top of the list. In Movie 2, President Trump ran on a platform of being a Republican who disdains political correctness, and the predictable outcome of that is non-stop accusations of racism. As a public service, I compiled some of the plot differences in the two movies, roughly in the order they happened, so you can compare the two scripts. I won’t try to convince you to switch movies. I’m only making the point that Trump supporters literally don’t see what anti-Trumpers regard as obvious.

Housing Discrimination Scene

Movie 1: In 1973, five years after the Fair Housing Act, Trump’s business settled a claim that it had discriminated against African-American applicants, thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: Employees of Trump’s company, whose incomes depended on their job performance, discriminated against African-American applicants in the belief that other potential tenants would be racists and less likely to want to live in a diverse building. Housing discrimination of that type is illegal. The Trump organization settled the suit out of court and took steps to make sure it wouldn’t happen again. There are no facts in evidence of Trump’s inner thoughts from 45 years ago.

 

Central Park Five Scene

Movie 1: In 1989, Trump paid for a full-page ad in the New York Times calling for the death penalty for five African American men falsely accused of rape, thus proving he is a racist. He has never apologized, thus confirming he is a racist.

Movie 2: in 1989, Trump paid for a full-page ad in the New York times saying it was time to get tough on crime, including perhaps using the death penalty. The ad made one indirect reference to the Central Park incident as an example, at a time the police and prosecutors believed the accused were guilty. The ethnicities of the accused was neither mentioned nor implied in Trump’s ad. The topic was crime. When the accused were later cleared, Trump did not apologize, which is normal for him. He doesn’t apologize for anything.

 

Birtherism Scene

Movie 1: Prior to running for President, private citizen Trump promoted the conspiracy theory that President Obama might have been born in Africa, thus proving Trump is a racist.

Movie 2: Questioning a rival’s eligibility for office, for any reason, is normal politics. We observe Trump using every available form of persuasion against any critic who gets in his way. For example, during the 2016 Republican primaries he also questioned whether Ted Cruz was a Canadian citizen (he isn’t), and wondered aloud if Cruz’ father might have been involved in the assassination of President Kennedy (he wasn’t). In order to believe Trump was acting racist in questioning President Obama’s birth certificate, one must also believe he would not use the same tactic against a white candidate if the opportunity presented itself. In Movie 2, that seems deeply unlikely.

 

“They’re rapists” Scene

Movie 1: During the speech in which Trump announced his candidacy, he referred to illegal immigrants from Mexico as “rapists,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump noted that one of the big problems with illegal immigration from Mexico is that there are criminals in the group, and this country doesn’t need any more crime. This message was consistent with his tough-on-crime stance. The call-out of rape in particular might have been inspired by stories such as this one from Huffington Post, one of the President’s most vocal critics.

 

Failure to disavow KKK Scene

Movie 1: In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, candidate Trump hesitated to disavow David Duke and the KKK, thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump disavowed David Duke, the KKK, and White Supremacists multiple times, both before and after the Jake Tapper interview. Trump said he couldn’t hear Jake’s question because of a faulty earpiece. Trump seemed confused and/or hesitant about the question.

During the Tapper interview scene, Trump asked for a list of who he was being asked to disavow, clearly signaling that he sensed a trap coming. Would Trump next be asked to disavow non-racist groups that supported his tough-on-immigration stance? The media had already branded those supporters as racist too. In trying to avoid that obvious trap, Trump fumbled the question and made things worse. But racism was never the problem.

Hiring Steve Bannon Scene

Movie 1: Steve Bannon is a known white supremacist, so having him on the campaign staff and later briefly as an advisor in the White House proves Trump is a racist.

Movie 2: Steve Bannon is tough on illegal immigration, and tough on immigration from Muslim-majority countries with poor government records. His critics have framed him as being a racist because of it. People who know him personally say he isn’t.

 

The Racists Support Trump Scene

Movie 1: Racist groups support Trump because they hear his secret racist dog whistle, thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: Racists approve of Trump’s tough immigration policies in part, one assumes, because they think it will allow fewer non-whites into the country. Non-racist Trump supporters support Trump’s immigration policies because they place a high priority on law and order. Different groups can like the same thing for different reasons. For example, target shooters like guns, and murderers like guns, but that doesn’t make target shooters murderers.

 

Trump’s Awkward Language About “the blacks” scene

Movie 1: Trump once referred to African-Americans as “the blacks,” thus proving he is racist.

Movie 2: Trump says almost everything differently than the average person, and he doesn’t obsess over political correctness.

 

Judge Curiel Scene

Movie 1: President Trump said a “Mexican” judge couldn’t be fair, thus proving he is racist.

Movie 2: President Trump spoke about the judge using the common vernacular, in the the same way Americans typically talk about their own ethnic backgrounds. Ask a neighbor whose grandparents immigrated to the United States from Italy to describe his family and he’s likely to say, “We’re Italian.”

Trump mentioned Judge Curiel’s Mexican heritage to point out that it could be a source of bias in the Trump University case because the media had successfully framed Trump as being racist against U.S. residents with Mexican roots. In the context of a legal case, it can be good strategy to question a judge’s impartiality. The intended effect of it is to influence the judge to bend over backwards to avoid the appearance of bias. In this situation, Judge Curiel had to rule on when to schedule the trial, and he chose the option that had the best appearance of fairness, scheduling it after the election, as Trump preferred. Trump’s legal strategy probably worked.

 

Charlottesville Scene

Movie 1: Trump called White Supremacists “fine people,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: Trump has publicly disavowed white supremacists numerous times, both before and after running for president. In the context of Charlottesville, the “fine people” he was referring to were non-racists who prefer keeping confederate statues for historical/cultural reasons. The anti-Trump wing of the media distorted President Trump’s statements to fit their racist narrative, saying incorrectly that he referred to the racists with tiki torches as the “fine people.” He didn’t.

For a longer explanation, see my blog post on the topic.

 

Calling NFL Kneelers “Sons-of-bitches” Scene

Movie 1: President Trump referred to the African-American football players kneeling during the national anthem in protest of police brutality as “sons of bitches,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump would criticize any American who disrespected the country. The main topic of the NFL protests has been police brutality, but the method of protest strikes many observers as disrespect for the flag.

 

Shithole Scene

Movie 1: During a closed meeting, Trump referred to people from several non-white-majority countries as “shit,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: In the context of immigration, Trump referred to some countries as “shithole countries” as a shorthand way of saying they have poor educational systems and low-performing economies. During the meeting, Trump asked for an explanation on the pros and cons of favoring those countries for immigration versus a merit-based system.

 

Animals Scene

Movie 1: President Trump referred to illegal immigrants as “animals,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump referred to MS-13 gang members as animals and the media took it out of context to mean immigrants in general.

 

The Roseanne’s Tweet Scene

Movie 1: Roseanne tweeted that Valerie Jarrett, who is part African-American, was like a cross between the Muslim Brotherhood and Planet of the Apes. Years earlier, Roseanne once tweeted that Susan Rice, who is African-American, was a man with big swinging ape balls. President Trump did not disavow Roseanne’s comparisons of black people to apes, thus proving he is racist.

Movie 2: Roseanne said she didn’t know Valerie Jarrett was part African-American, and neither did most Trump supporters who couldn’t deduce her ethnic background by looking at her. That suggests Roseanne uses insulting monkey references no matter the assumed ethnicity of the target. President Trump did not disavow Roseanne’s tweet because the accusation that it was intentional racism was fake news. Trump supporters see Roseanne’s Planet of the Apes reference as a humorous comparison to the character played by Helena Bonham Carter, a white actress. And Trump supporters understand that white people routinely compare other white people to monkeys. For example, parents call their own grandkids monkeys. And they sometimes refer to large white men as big apes. In Movie 2, Roseanne made a terrible mistake, but it wasn’t an intentional racist reference.

 

Muslim Ban Scene

Movie 1: President Trump succeeded in banning several Muslim-majority countries from immigration to the United States, thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump banned immigration from countries with dysfunctional governments because it is hard to do background checks without reliable government records. The focus on Muslim countries is because Islamic terrorists can more easily blend in with Muslim refugees than they could with non-Muslim refugees, and we know they have tried to do exactly that.

As I often say, we humans are not good at knowing which movie is the “real” one because the facts in evidence often fit more than one explanation of the past. So instead of looking to the past, I recommend seeing which movie best predicts future scenes.

For example, if you had been making predictions based on these different movies, Movie 1, predicted that President Trump would not be popular with Israel, and he wouldn’t take the bold step of moving the American embassy to Jerusalem. But both of those outcomes are compatible with Movie 2.

Movie 1 would have predicted there is no way President Trump would grant a posthumous pardon of African-American boxer Jack Johnson because it wouldn’t fit the racist dog whistle script. But Movie 2 is compatible with the pardon. Same with the pardon of Alice Johnson.

Movie 1 would have predicted that President Trump would underplay the fact that black unemployment reached its best level in the history of America. That’s the sort of accomplishment that would make his racist supporters stop hearing the secret racist dog whistle. It doesn’t fit. But President Trump’s frequent highlighting of gains for African-American citizens fits Movie 2 perfectly.

I realize no one reading this post will change movies because of it. My only point today is that mainstream Trump supporters are not knowingly supporting someone they believe to be a racist. It only looks that way to the folks trapped in Movie 1.


Learn how to find out whether you are in the right movie by reading my book, Win Bigly.

 

 

The post Why Democrats Hear a Secret Racist Dog Whistle and Republicans Don’t appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Why Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Republicans are Natural Allies (or should be)

One of the big changes in our national consciousness, thanks to President Trump, is that many of us are starting to see politics in terms of “deals.” We are also thinking about a growing economy. Compare that approach to the Obama/Bernie/Clinton worldview that is more about wealth transfer in a world of scarcity. For my purposes today, you don’t need to decide which approach is better. I only make the claim that we are more focused on the Art of the Deal than at any time in American politics. This is one of the many ways President Trump is in our heads.

And the deal-making mindset, along with some lucky coincidences, has created the greatest opportunity for improvement that the African-American community has seen in decades. At the same time, Republicans have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to earn a larger share of the black vote in 2018 and beyond. All we are missing is the right deal. Is there a potential deal that is good for President Trump and the GOP while also being good for BLM?

Yes. And it isn’t even hard.

I’ll get to that deal after some necessary context. (It’s worth your time.)

You probably remember that candidate Trump famously asked African-American voters during the campaign “What the hell do you have to lose?” It sounded like a weak offer when I first heard it. But combined with his deal-making approach to politics, you could also see it as an invitation to pitch some ideas. The door is open.

Some of you might recall that when Colin Kaepernick started the kneeling trend in the NFL, I publicly offered to help translate any ideas he might have for improving the lives of black Americans into “Republican language” so there would be some hope of persuading the group that held the most political power. I never heard any specific suggestions from Kaepernick. But as I often say, he gets full credit as a Master Persuader for capturing our attention and holding it. He has skin in the game, he broke no laws, and he turned a back-burner issue in America into a front-burner issue. I give Kaepernick an A+ for American activism. Was Kaepernick offensive to people who love the flag and respect the police? Absolutely. That’s why we paid so much attention. But he didn’t break anything except for the way we think, and that was his objective.

As of this writing, Kaepernick only got us halfway to where he wants us to be. He lacked specific suggestions for improvement. Black Lives Matter has been similar. They get high marks for attracting attention, but they have so far been more provocative than helpful. I need to pause here to tell you that BLM has a wide range of personalities and priorities in it. On one extreme you have folks who are anti-police, anti-borders, pro-violence, and other unhelpful positions. But other chapters support the rule of law, including support for police, and are looking for practical solutions to real problems. If you dislike the extremists in BLM, consider supporting the BLM leaders who are focused on peaceful and practical solutions. That’s the mindset that gave us Martin Luther King Jr. I think that worked out for everyone.

Black Lives Matter (NY Chapter), under the leadership of Hawk Newsome, just came up with a set of suggested improvements that can — with a little negotiating — appeal to both Democrats and Republicans. If both parties like what they see, Republicans have the stronger hand because they are in power at the moment. The tie goes to the party that can make things happen. Love him or hate him, President Trump does make things happen. And he likes making deals. In other words, BLM of NY is answering President Trump’s invitation with a “What do you have to lose?” offer of their own.

If you have the time to hear my persuasive pitch of BLM-NY’s ideas on video, see them here. For the full persuasive effect, watch the video before reading the “spoilers” that follow. But this blog post can be consumed without watching the video.

I contacted Hawk Newsome to see how I could help his cause after watching a video in which he flipped a crowd of Trump-supporters from haters to friends in about five minutes. It was one of the most impressive acts of persuasion I have ever seen. Watch it here and see what I mean. This isn’t the BLM you thought you knew.

Hawk shared with me an early version of his chapter’s suggested improvements for the country. Again, I was impressed. The suggestions were beneficial to Americans in general, not just the black community, although that group might feel they have the most to gain, and perhaps they do. This was the same sort of persuasion strategy that got President Obama elected twice. Obama emphasized his policies, not his color, and that approach allowed people of every ethnicity to support him. BLM of NY figured out how to do the same thing. They offer practical suggestions that are designed to be good for people in general. I can support that.

Prior to publication of BLM-NY’s suggestions, I ran them past a prominent Republican to see what he thought. To my surprise, the prominent Republican — who shall remain nameless for now — told me BLM was thinking too small. So he offered as an alternative some bigger themes that I’ll share with you first because these are quite compatible with BLM’s priorities.

A Prominent Republican’s Vision for Improving Black Lives (because they matter):

  1. Create safer neighborhoods to attract jobs and create optimism.
  2. Fix school bureaucracies in communities where students are failing.
  3. Create apprenticeships for unskilled adults
  4. Address the opiod epidemic directly and by improving the environment.

You probably think those are good priorities. BLM agrees. And if I took it further and asked you which group thinks Charter schools are a good idea, you might be surprised to learn that the answer is “both.” On the big stuff, and on much of the small stuff too, BLM is entirely compatible with Republican ideals. When you are trying to make a deal, it helps to start with the parts upon which you agree.

Now I’ll share with you the BLM-NY list of suggestions. These ideas go directly to improving the credibility of the police. Republicans want the police to be credible too. Republicans also like good data, the rule of law, voting participation, and legal decisions that are free of bias. That’s what BLM-NY is focused on too. Here’s their list. Notice that every suggestion is useful for citizens in general, not just one ethnic group.

Ideas from Black Lives Matter – New York

  1. Prosecute and jail police that falsify reports.
  2. Police must call an ambulance if defendant complains of illness.
  3. Voting rights for people in prison
  4. Independent prosecutors for police killings of unarmed civilians.
  5. Comprehensive national database of police shootings.
  6. New York holiday for Day of Remembrance for victims of police brutality.

I’ll discuss these points in order.

Prosecute and jail police that falsify reports.

I think most Republicans would agree that a police officer who falsifies a police report must be held accountable. Republicans like the rule of law, and they like honesty. So far, BLM and Republicans are on the same page.

Police must call an ambulance if defendant complains of illness.

You might not know that people in police custody have died while begging for medical care that was not granted. I think we’d all want access to emergency medical care if we were in police custody. You might see some abuses of the system, but I think we’d all agree this one is worth discussing.

Voting rights for people in prison

I’ve never understood why prisoners lose the right to vote. Voting makes people feel part of the system. It seems like one of the few psychological influences that can nudge law-breakers toward becoming law-abiding. Realistically, only a small percentage of convicted criminals would bother to vote. The prickly part is that most would (presumably) vote Democrat. But Republicans can compete for those votes, and should. A good start would involve taking the lead in returning the vote to that class of folks.

Independent prosecutors for police killings of unarmed civilians.

Why not try independent prosecutors for police shootings of unarmed civilians? You could test it in one city or more and see how it goes. Budget-wise, I suspect we’d be better off in the long run with this sort of credibility-improving process. Perhaps you’d get less after-verdict violence. It’s worth discussing, and probably worth testing somewhere.

Comprehensive national database of police shootings.

Republicans will argue that the data does not show police are more violent with black suspects. African-Americans will tell you their lived experience says otherwise. BLM-NY offers the only sensible way forward, recommending national standards for reporting police violence against unarmed civilians. Who hates better data?

New York holiday for Day of Remembrance for victims of police brutality.

New York can decide on whether or not it wants a Day of Remembrance for victims of police brutality. I think the idea as proposed is divisive, framing the situation as one in which police are the bad guys. The point of the suggestion is to keep the problem of police violence against unarmed citizens in our thoughts, but I’m sure there’s a more productive way to do that. For example, if BLM and the GOP find a way to work together on some parts of this list, no one will forget that anytime soon. I prefer focusing on the positives.

Now consider how perfect the set-up is for a win-win deal between African-American voters and the GOP. President Trump’s biggest political problem is the perception that he’s a racist. Improving the economy and the job market doesn’t fix that problem, although it helps. But taking seriously BLM-NY’s list of suggestions — in some negotiated and improved form — would be a game-changer.

President Obama was hugely popular among black voters, but there is a sense in the African-American community that he didn’t deliver. Democrats have no charismatic leader at the moment, and not much power at the federal level compared to the GOP. Never before has the GOP been in such a strong position to make a play for a good portion of the African-American vote. All they need to do to get the ball rolling is take BLM-NY’s suggestions seriously as a basis for a deal. And BLM-NY is making that easy by presenting practical ideas that are not race-specific.

I spoke with Hawk again yesterday and both of us had just watched the recent viral video of a police shooting of an unarmed man in a hallway as it had been recorded on the police officer’s body cam. When you see the video you can understand why the cop opened fire. The man was reportedly armed, according to the initial call to police, and refused to keep his hands where he was ordered to keep them. In this case, the body cam protected the police officer as well as the reputation of the police by showing us exactly how the tragedy unfolded. Hawk and I were left wondering if a greater focus on body cams for police would be a practical approach to building confidence between the black community and police. I don’t know the answer, but here again we see a practical idea that I assume Republicans can embrace.

And to that I say, why the hell not?

 

The post Why Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Republicans are Natural Allies (or should be) appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Kid Rock Already Has Republicans Gunning for Him, Pro and Con

[[tmz:video id=”0_qrqbzd7x”]] Kid Rock’s getting a big endorsement, and a big thumbs down, even before he officially runs for a Michigan Senate seat — in other words … welcome to politics, Kid! We got former U.S. Senator and New York Governor George…

Permalink

TMZ Celebrity News for Music


Rock band Third Eye Blind taunts Republicans at concert during RNC

Rock band Third Eye Blind taunts Republicans at concert during RNCThe rock band Third Eye Blind frustrated some guests at a charity concert held during the Republican National Convention on Tuesday. In tweets posted on the official Third Eye Blind account, the band indicated it was pleased the show upset some in the audience. “I have never been more disappointed,” wrote a Twitter user named Liza White.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Little Republicans: Planned Parenthood

Little Republicans: Planned Parenthood

Little Republicans: Planned Parenthood 0:39
If you don’t understand it… don’t defund it
Submitted by: Magic Beans
Regular
Keywords: Planned Parenthood Repulicans GOP PSA democrat little republicans magic beans bush trump fiorina walker kids
Views: 389

Funny Or Die | Funny Videos, Funny Video Clips, Funny Pics

Little Republicans: 2nd GOP Debate

Little Republicans: 2nd GOP Debate

Little Republicans: 2nd GOP Debate 3:25
The actors are shorter, but the words all come from the candidates themselves.
Submitted by: Magic Beans
Regular
Keywords: politics cnn debate republican trump fiorina little republicans bush gop fox news kids magic beans recap sanders clinton hillary planned parenthood ronald reagan meg schmidt eric wysocki asher brown medical marijuana abortion pro life immigration rand paul chris christie scott walker donald trump jake tapper salem radio carly fiorina ben carson john kasich mike huckabee marco rubio womens health foreign policy reagan library 2015 presidential debate pro choice jeb bush
Views: 13,948

Funny or Die | Funny Videos, Funny Video Clips, Funny Pictures

America: If these Republicans became POTUS

I wanted to answer the question, what would America be like if these people actually became the President of the United States? For extra fun, I gave all of the would-be Presidents nicknames, and actually called all of them President (Fill in your favorite) because if actually reading something like President Huckabee doesn’t run a chill up your spine, I don’t know what will.

President Jeb “I swear I can’t be worse than Dubya, or can I…” Bush

President Jeb, having said that his brother’s Iraq War was correct, even with hindsight (one of the most ridiculous things said by a candidate this year, and this is a field including Mike Huckabee and Bobby Jindal I remind you). So, I think it’s safe to assume Bush III would lead us into Middle East War III.

President Scott “Terrorists are cowards who are afraid of freedom, but darn it, I’ll stop same-sex marriage if it’s the last thing I do, because I love freedom THAT much” Walker

I’ll admit it, that nickname was a bit longwinded. But, the first part of it, he actually said, and we can only imagine that he whispered the rest of that to himself later that night. The scariest of all things is that he is actually a legitimate contender for president. He has a lot of terrifying statements and policies, but for now, let’s just focus on the fact that he would waste a significant amount of time trying to get a Constitutional Amendment to prevent same-sex marriage. Rather than something like, oh, I don’t know, comprehensive campaign finance reform. But, that would hurt his overlords the Koch brothers.

President Ted “Guns Blazing, Texas Man” Cruz

As a firm opponent of any gun ownership checks or restrictions, a Cruz administration would likely block legislation that looked to remedy situations that contributed to school shootings and astronomical gun violence numbers that much of America deals with. Immigrants would be in a tough spot as he has frequently spoken out against the DREAM Act and any paths to citizenship for undocumented residents. Oh, and, if he stays true to statement’s he made, we could see social security dismantled. Lovely.

President Rand “Sort-of-Libertarian, Flip-Flopper” Paul

The Flip-Flopper himself, President Rand Paul. His reversal from his original budget plan proposed in 2011 that slashed spending on everything to his 2015 budget plan that gave more money to the Pentagon and our war making potential has been shocking. The good news is, I can finally tell the people that say “I don’t agree with Rand, but at least he has his principles” that they are full of it. A Rand Paul Administration would be a bizarre mix of almost Libertarian-every-person-for-themselves kind of thing and an apocalypse, because that is exactly what would happen if we suddenly ended discretionary spending, aid to foreign countries, taxes, etc.

President Marco “I love the middle class but let’s kill it!” Rubio

President Rubio would proudly deliver his inauguration speech, peppering in nuggets about how his family immigrated her, worked hard, and were able to enter the middle class. Then, the next day he would immediately start working towards killing the middle class by refusing to raise the minimum wage and allowing corporations and the mega-rich to take advantage of huge tax loopholes. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

President Rick “I really want to be, but never will be President” Santorum

It’s been a long slog for the defending Iowa caucus champion. According to the former Pennsylvania senator, people with pre-existing conditions “should pay more.” Yikes. Sounds like Obamacare, a piece of legislation that is literally saving thousands of lives would go under the knife with President Santorum. Also, President Santorum has said there would be no porn allowed in America if he had a say. You can come after our health care, and our human rights, but we will not stand for our porn to be attacked. Ever.

President Chris “Sit down, Shut up, and Listen to what I’m saying” Christie

After only taking 8 years to run NJ into the ground with the most credit downgrades in state history, peak crime years, drop in education, and other things, President Christie promises us that he will rebuild America in only 4!

President Bobby “I will castrate you” Jindal

If his previous statements are anything to go by, he would call for chemical castration of sexual predators and the end to LGBTQ rights. Also, everything would be in English under President Jindal, because we can’t have other countries thinking we are soft for tolerating ethnic minorities that speak other languages in their homes. President Jindal, an America where everyone is terrified.

President Donald “You all laughed then, but now I’m President” Trump

President Trump would spend most of his first day as President rubbing it in the face of everyone who doubted him and vaguely and aggressively saying he will make America great again. Later in the week, he would repealed Obamacare by executive action and close the border with Mexico entirely. Almost everyone loses in this surely desolate future, except the Donald himself, and SNL.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.



Comedy – The Huffington Post
ENTERTAINMENT NEWS-Visit Mobile Playboy today for the hottest adult entertainment online!

News in Brief: Frustrated Republicans Argue Pope Should Leave Science To Scientists Who Deny Climate Change

WASHINGTON—In response to a 184-page papal encyclical that urges immediate action to address the environmental and social consequences of global warming, a coalition of frustrated Republican leaders issued statements Thursday arguing that Pope Francis should leave scientific matters to scientists who deny climate change. “Frankly, it’s not really anyone’s place to make declarations about climate science or global temperature changes unless they’re a scientific expert who has spent years rejecting the concept of climate change,” said former Florida governor Jeb Bush, who added that the pope had neither studied climate science nor ever been among the 3 percent of researchers who stand in opposition to the overwhelmingly dominant position held by the scientific community on climate change, so he had no business speaking on the subject. “Personally, I would never trust anyone as an authority on climate change unless they had done years of research and …





The Onion

Indiana Republicans Look For Path Forward After Mike Pence ‘Religious Freedom’ Mess

WASHINGTON — In Indiana these days, no one, including the GOP, is happy with Gov. Mike Pence (R).

On April 2, Pence signed a revised version of Indiana’s widely denounced “religious freedom” law, closing the door on a controversy that had brought national scorn to his state and cost local economies valuable tourism dollars.

“It didn’t do our brand any good, for sure. One, it didn’t do the state brand any good. Two, it didn’t do the Indiana Republican Party brand any good. And three, it didn’t do Mike any good. And that’s pretty obvious,” said former Indiana GOP Chair Jim Kittle.

Since that time, Pence has kept his head down and largely stayed out of the spotlight. But behind the scenes in Indiana, many Republicans are still seething and looking for ways to retake control of the party’s direction. And the results of those discussions are likely to become more public in the coming days, now that the Indiana General Assembly has wrapped up its legislative session.

One Republican operative in the state, who declined to be named in order to speak openly, said the Religious Freedom Restoration Act controversy brought to the forefront “a simmering disconnect between the [former Gov.] Mitch Daniels-era people and the Mike Pence people.” Others took issue with that description, saying the real divide is broader: between Pence and, essentially, the rest of the state Republican Party.

Daniels, who served from 2005 to 2013 and is now the president of Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, still inspires intense loyalty among many Republicans in the state. He helped bring the state party out of the wilderness after 16 years of Democratic governors. Daniels made fiscal issues his focus, declaring a “truce” on social issues (although he did sign a bill defunding Planned Parenthood in 2011).

Pence, on the other hand, was known as a strong social conservative in Congress, where he served from 2001 to 2013. When Pence ran for governor, he followed in Daniels’ footsteps and largely stayed away from social issues. But the RFRA controversy has seemingly confirmed many people’s lingering fears that Pence would revert back to his old self and steer the party, and the state, far to the right.

“There’s always been kind of, in the back of people’s heads, a concern about what Mike Pence could end up doing to hurt [the successful state GOP] brand,” the Republican operative told The Huffington Post.

RFRA was not on Pence’s agenda. Rather, it was pushed by the GOP leaders who control the state legislature. But Pence essentially became the face of the bill — and, for many in the country, the face of discrimination in Indiana.

On March 29, Pence went on ABC’s “This Week” to try and mitigate the growing controversy over the law he’d recently signed. He repeatedly refused to answer the question of whether the measure would allow businesses to deny service to same-sex couples, and his evasion turned the simmering controversy into a full-blown mess. (Pence later said he didn’t believe the measure would allow for that, although he acknowledged that the law had to be clarified to make that explicit.)

But the damage was done. Organizations pulled their conferences from the state, musicians canceled concerts and businesses said they would give Indiana a wide berth.

“We continue to be stunned by just how wide and deep the animosity is — in Republican strongholds — against Governor Mike Pence (R) and the Republican Party, in that order,” wrote Ed Feigenbaum, who covers the ins and outs of Indiana state politics, in the April 13 edition of the newsletter Indiana Legislative Insight. “While undoubtedly there is a different narrative in out-state rural areas that were not subject to the same intense media coverage and social network squawking as in Central Indiana, urban areas, and college towns, the big takeaway is that the Governor and his party are in deep trouble.”

That trouble shows in the polls. A recent Howey Politics Indiana (HPI) poll shows Pence’s favorable rating at just 35 percent, and his unfavorable rating at 38 percent. And in a recent poll from the Human Rights Campaign, 53 percent of Indiana voters said that Pence’s signing of RFRA made them feel unfavorably toward the governor. Only 38 percent said they felt favorably.

“I’ve been covering Indiana politics for three decades, and I don’t recall a sitting governor experiencing that kind of decline over this short period of time like we’ve seen here,” said Brian Howey, publisher of HPI.

The dissatisfaction with Pence spilled into public view on April 15, when Bill Oesterle, the CEO of Indianapolis-based Angie’s List, announced his resignation and his intention to return to politics. Oesterle ran Daniels’ 2004 gubernatorial campaign, is a major donor in the party and was a vociferous critic of RFRA.

Immediately, speculation in Indiana centered around whether Oesterle would challenge Pence in a primary, presenting a pro-LGBT candidate who would no doubt have strong appeal — and fundraising potential — in the business community.

Oesterle is still figuring out his plans, but he recently told Indianapolis Star political columnist Matthew Tully that he may instead look to shape the party from the outside, with a new political organization to counter the influence of social conservatives.

“The primary chatter underestimates the work that is needed,” he said. “It diminishes the magnitude of the work that has to [be] done. That’s the work of putting the party in a position once again in which it has the support of the majority of the voters in this state. We have, because of what has been done, the very real risk of permanently alienating a large bloc of Hoosiers. That’s going to be hard to overcome.”

Kittle called Oesterle “a fabulous guy” and “a good friend.” He said Oesterle could have an impact on the Indiana GOP by perhaps serving “as a conduit for some folks who, at this point, think this party has gone too far to the right.”

But it’s not just the moderate wing that’s mad at Pence — he has managed to anger the right as well. Many conservatives who supported RFRA were incensed when the governor agreed to the legislative “fix” that prevents businesses from denying services to same-sex couples.

Twenty religious leaders, including a pastor who had literally stood behind Pence at his private signing ceremony for RFRA, held a rally this week, where they rebuked the governor for his “betrayal” of them. And there is speculation that Pence could even face a primary challenge from the right when he’s up for re-election in 2016.

“I think it would be very hard for anyone — assuming Mike’s going to run, and I’m virtually positive he is — so assuming he runs, I think it would be very difficult to win a primary [against him],” said Kittle. “I don’t think it would be helpful, either, because it could then put the Republican Party at an even further disadvantage [in the general election]. We didn’t win by a landslide last time.”

Neither Pence’s campaign nor the Indiana GOP returned requests for comment.

On Thursday, Pence received his first Democratic challenger: former Indiana state House Speaker John Gregg, who narrowly lost to Pence in 2012. In his announcement, Gregg said that under Pence, “Indiana has been given a bad name.”

In the meantime, Pence is picking up the pieces. The state recently spent $ 2 million to bring in a public relations firm to help rebuild Indiana’s image in the wake of the RFRA fiasco. Feigenbaum told HuffPost it was a good sign that Pence recently hired Matt Lloyd, his communications director from his time in Congress, to run his press shop in Indianapolis.

“Matt is a big-time, big-picture guy who knows how to maneuver Pence around petty politics and through serious politics,” said Feigenbaum. “[He] understands the politics of policy, unlike some other Pence aides.”

“I think Mike’s really going to have to reach out to diverse communities, whether it’s the business community, which has been very supportive of him up to now, or it’s the LGBT community,” said Kittle. “I think he does understand that this was not the right time and the right thing to do. It was a mistake. I believe he feels that way. I think he’ll have to express that.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post

Chemistry.com gay - First Date 300x250

60% Of Young Republicans Support Legalizing Weed

Republicans understand the need to blaze. A new survey found that 60 percent of  the GOP’s young members(those under the age of 34) support the legalization of marijuana.

Reports NPR:

Nearly two-thirds of Millennials who identify as Republican support legalizing marijuana, while almost half of older GOP Gen-Xers do, according to a recently released Pew survey that could be an indicator of where the debate is heading.

While the Pew Research Center survey published on Friday shows a 14 percentage point gap between Republicans and Democrats under the age of 34, six-in-10 GOP-leaning Millennials still said they favor legalizing cannabis. Seventy-seven percent of surveyed Democrats in the same age group held that view.

For those aged 35 to 50, the same 14 percentage point gap between Republicans and Democrats was evident, but the respective percentages were somewhat lower. In that age group, 47 percent of Republicans favored legalization, as opposed to 61 percent of Democrats.

As Pew notes: “The debate over marijuana also comes ahead of the 2016 presidential election, when both political parties are fighting over the coveted Millennial vote as this group of eligible voters swells in size, even if its members do not consistently show up on Election Day.”

Since we know Republicans like to get loose, this survey shouldn’t come as much of a surprise. The timing is good too because the party is trying to look younger, less racist, and more inviting to the political world.

In related news, marijuana is now legal in Washington D.C.


Photo: YouTube

The post 60% Of Young Republicans Support Legalizing Weed appeared first on Hip-Hop Wired.

Hip-Hop Wired

Bill Maher Dares Republicans To Impeach Obama 'So He Can Kick Your Ass A Third Time'

On Friday, Bill Maher put a fine point on what it’s like to try to reason with Republicans when it comes to Benghazi: “It’s like trying to relate to someone who’s tripping when you’re not. Sorry, we don’t see the spiders.”

But instead of calling for an end to the Benghazi witch hunt, Maher taunted Republicans to finally put up or shut up. During his final new rule of the night, the host insisted that Lindsay Graham and company finally try to impeach Obama, not because they’ll win, but because it will give the president a bump in his approval rating.

He summed things up with a final call to action: “Go ahead, haters, make Benghazi your big issue, please. Put Barack Obama back on the ballot in 2014… so he can kick your ass a third time.”

Watch the clip above. The final new rule begins at 3:26.
Comedy – The Huffington Post
ENTERTAINMENT NEWS-Visit Mobile Playboy today for the hottest adult entertainment online!