[TheZookie007]

In other political news:

New York Times: "Robert Mugabe Resigns as Zimbabwe’s President, Ending 37-Year Rule"

which just goes to show that even a man who wishes to become a tinpot dictator, or who actually begins to act like one, is not above the law and can fall from power just as easily as he rose to it. (Let's hope the 115th Congress of the United States takes note.)

[andrat2000]

In other political news:

New York Times: "Robert Mugabe Resigns as Zimbabwe’s President, Ending 37-Year Rule"

which just goes to show that even a man who wishes to become a tinpot dictator, or who actually begins to act like one, is not above the law and can fall from power just as easily as he rose to it. (Let's hope the 115th Congress of the United States takes note.)

Yeah after 37 years of Trumpelstilsken as dictator. GOP accepts this and support it as long as it is their dictator. This party has changed to the worse over the last 100+ years.

[Real]

Anyway, I broke my regular rule of staying away from politics in the OT section to see how the end of net neutrality might be playing among my fellow BEAers.  If this doesn't budge the Trumper cult, what could?

It won't budge it, rather it will make it even more entrenched. If neutral unbiased sources of news cannot use the "Internet airwaves" as freely as right-wing propaganda sources can, and if your local TV news station is swallowed up by the extreme right-wing Sinclair group, the American populace will be even more uninformed than it currently is.

The death of Net Neutrality will be a death knell for American representative democracy. It may sound over-the-top to say so but it is true. What is worse is that since America is looked up to as an "example" of how to do things, expect anti-Net Neutrality legislation to be passed in other countries as well.

It's not over-the-top at all.  Republicans have clearly already demonstrated that they prefer the tyranny of their brand to freedom. 

This means the internet goes the same way as traditional media - to be meted out on the basis of profits and personal views of corporate elites.

There's literally no one this benefits except rich people who want to gouge customers and restrict information. 

You almost have to be in awe of how they've lined up their cultists like baby birds, ready to eat up anything they regurgitate. 

Then when Racist Uncle Joe has to pay $7.99 a month to an ISP to access his **24** page, it will all be the Liberals' fault.

How do you combat such wanton tribalist pride in ignorance?

[TheZookie007]

It's not over-the-top at all.  Republicans have clearly already demonstrated that they prefer the tyranny of their brand to freedom. 

This means the internet goes the same way as traditional media - to be meted out on the basis of profits and personal views of corporate elites.

There's literally no one this benefits except rich people who want to gouge customers and restrict information. 

 

I know! That's what baffles me the most! Right-wing, left-wing, independent, whatever -- if no one has access to information, freely, then everyone suffers, not just "dem libruls". Everyone.

You almost have to be in awe of how they've lined up their cultists like baby birds, ready to eat up anything they regurgitate.

Then when Racist Uncle Joe has to pay $7.99 a month to an ISP to access his **24** page, it will all be the Liberals' fault.

How do you combat such wanton tribalist pride in ignorance?

I don't know. I honestly don't know. All I know is, we all have to fight this with every breath we have, while we still have the ability to do so. All of us do.

[rtpoe]

http://www.battleforthenet.com/

Write, call, go to rallies on December 7.......

http://verizonprotests.com/

Keep in mind, Commissioners Jessica Rosenworcel and  Mignon Clyburn want to keep the Net Neutrality rules in place.

[TheZookie007]

http://www.battleforthenet.com/

Write, call, go to rallies on December 7.......

http://verizonprotests.com/

Keep in mind, Commissioners Jessica Rosenworcel and  Mignon Clyburn want to keep the Net Neutrality rules in place.

Yes. We must all fight, Fight, FIGHT, until these fuck-faced motherfucking ratfuckers are done.

[rtpoe]

If anyone asks you why Net Neutrality is important, the short response is to ask them if they like their cable company. Because that's what the Internet could very well be like without it.

[TheZookie007]

Or, ask them if they even have a choice of cable provider...and imagine if they (like 70% of Americans) didn't have one.

[rtpoe]

And to further screw over honest Americans, there's a fight for control of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. You know, that independent agency that protects bank customers like you and me from predatory practices (and has gotten the Big Banks like Wells Fargo to GIVE BACK billions in ill-gotten gains)?

Seems Director Richard Cordray resigned on Friday, but before Deputy Director Leandra English could move in to the office as Acting Director - like the rules in the legislation creating the CFPB said should happen - El Presidente told Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, that he could too be the Acting Director!

There's a real legal fight brewing, since there's conflicting rules in place about appointments and Senate approval and all that. But all you, the consumer, need to know is that Mulvaney loves the banks and doesn't think they need all those crippling regulations....

[TheZookie007]

And meanwhile, they want to impose the latest attempt to implement "trickle-down economics" on us all via the "tax reform" bill now in the Senate. Fun fact: "trickle-down economics" has never worked. Ever. Don't take my word for it: ask the CEOs who all but admitted that, no, giving them a tax break would not make them invest the savings in creating jobs, etc.

And let us not forget that this tax bill would directly benefit the current occupant of the Oval Office, financially. Ethics? Never heard of 'em.

[TheZookie007]

Some positive news from the south, for once.

Snopes: "Georgia Lawmakers Preparing to Axe Paperless Voting Systems After Post-Election Controversy"
The state had been using completely paperless voting machines, prompting a lawsuit alleging that the practice made election results indeterminable.

[TheZookie007]

Oh, and speaking of ethics:


The Independent (UK): "Donald Trump's White House ethics lawyer resigns"

An ethics lawyer in President Donald Trump’s White House has resigned after spending nearly a year working on financial disclosure issues.

James Schultz said he had discussed the matter of his departure with Don McGahn, lead White House counsel, “very early on...I was interested in continuing with private practice and saw this as a tremendous opportunity to go serve and get things up and running and the plan was to move on about this time”, Mr Schultz said.

He is moving to law firm Cozen O’Connor in Philadelphia, where he previously worked prior to the White House position.

Mr Schultz said his resignation late last week was not related to the ongoing alleged ethics violations of members of the Trump administration, including advisors Kellyanne Conway and Jared Kushner, husband of Ivanka Trump.

“These are typically year to about 18-months type positions,” Mr Schultz told Politico.

Mr Schultz also took a shot at members of the news media, saying they “unfairly criticise this administration... even when they’re not justified”.

The lawyer said the White House counsel’s office has been more “onerous” and gone beyond legal requirements for staff divestments and recusals.

He also said he would be among the host of former administration officials available for comment on the ongoing controversies.

“I will be out, but I don’t plan to make a career out of being a pundit on TV,” he said, but that it would “be something I’d be willing to do”.

Mr Schultz noted he would not take the path of Office of Government Ethics former director Walter Shaub, who is someone “out there trying to make a name for themselves in that space by being critics in order to set themselves up for other positions down the road”.

Mr Shaub recently filed a complaint against Ms Conway’s comments made on television regarding who to vote for in the 12 December special election in Alabama, pitting Republican Roy Moore against Democrat Doug Jones.

“Nobody knew who Walter Shaub was before [Mr Trump] became president ... He immediately thrust himself into the limelight instead of being helpful on the issues where he could have been. It was more about him than about ethics,” Mr Schultz said.

In response, Mr Shaub said: ”I wish Jim well. I hope he’s better at his next job, or at least lasts a full year in it.”...

[andrat2000]

Oh, and speaking of ethics:


The Independent (UK): "Donald Trump's White House ethics lawyer resigns"

An ethics lawyer in President Donald Trump’s White House has resigned after spending nearly a year working on financial disclosure issues.

James Schultz said he had discussed the matter of his departure with Don McGahn, lead White House counsel, “very early on...I was interested in continuing with private practice and saw this as a tremendous opportunity to go serve and get things up and running and the plan was to move on about this time”, Mr Schultz said.

He is moving to law firm Cozen O’Connor in Philadelphia, where he previously worked prior to the White House position.

Mr Schultz said his resignation late last week was not related to the ongoing alleged ethics violations of members of the Trump administration, including advisors Kellyanne Conway and Jared Kushner, husband of Ivanka Trump.

“These are typically year to about 18-months type positions,” Mr Schultz told Politico.

Mr Schultz also took a shot at members of the news media, saying they “unfairly criticise this administration... even when they’re not justified”.

The lawyer said the White House counsel’s office has been more “onerous” and gone beyond legal requirements for staff divestments and recusals.

He also said he would be among the host of former administration officials available for comment on the ongoing controversies.

“I will be out, but I don’t plan to make a career out of being a pundit on TV,” he said, but that it would “be something I’d be willing to do”.

Mr Schultz noted he would not take the path of Office of Government Ethics former director Walter Shaub, who is someone “out there trying to make a name for themselves in that space by being critics in order to set themselves up for other positions down the road”.

Mr Shaub recently filed a complaint against Ms Conway’s comments made on television regarding who to vote for in the 12 December special election in Alabama, pitting Republican Roy Moore against Democrat Doug Jones.

“Nobody knew who Walter Shaub was before [Mr Trump] became president ... He immediately thrust himself into the limelight instead of being helpful on the issues where he could have been. It was more about him than about ethics,” Mr Schultz said.

In response, Mr Shaub said: ”I wish Jim well. I hope he’s better at his next job, or at least lasts a full year in it.”...

[sarcasmON] This Mr. Schultz sounds like he is pumped full with ethics spilling out of every pore of him [/sarcasmOFF]

[andrat2000]

It looks like right wing extremist nazi terrorists tried like always spread fake news. This time they tried to launch a fake story by the nazi terrorist agents infiltrating "Washington Post" News with a nazi terrorist woman that tried to convince "Washington Post" she got preggo 25 years as a young woman below majurity age by Roy Moore (strange wording to bypass the board control scripts) and she had to do abortion.

But since the "Washington Post" has strong journalistic standards (compared to right wing nazi terrorist news sources) they realized the woman was making up the story. After this they observed her. And finally they found out she was meeting with an agency of right wing nazi terrorists called "project veritas" who are into discredit mainstream media by launching complots and conspiracy theories. Always good to catch nazi terrorists in their works before they can do more harm. Unfortunately they are still running free in the wild.

[TheZookie007]

The man behind the intentionally-misnamed Project Veritas is abominable.

Now I have seen everything:


Shareblue: "Trump’s GOP could be first party in modern age to shut down its own government"
Republicans control the White House, House, and Senate. And they still cannot get even the most basic tasks done.

Republicans were rocked earlier this year by their failure to repeal Obamacare amid a wave of protest from the American people. Desperate to walk away with at least one major legislative success this year, they are now struggling to pass a tax scheme which is nearly as unpopular.

But Republicans have much bigger problems now than simply a lack of big-ticket right-wing bills. They may not be able to fund the government at all.

The deadline to pass a major routine spending bill is looming in early December, and Donald Trump already injured budget talks by insulting Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer on Twitter.

Republicans are increasingly worried that standoffs on everything from the Chi!dren’s Health Insurance Program to protections for DREAMers will result in Democrats bolting, their own party split, and — ultimately — a government shutdown.

This would be a monumental humiliation for Republicans, as Bloomberg Politics reporter Sahil Kapur noted:

If there's no deal by 12/8, it'll be the first time in the modern age that a party in control of the House, Senate and White House shuts down its government.

Government shutdowns have happened in recent memory. In 2013, a gang of lawmakers, spurred on by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, shut down the government for weeks in an attempt to force Democrats to “defund” Obamacare. And in 1995, then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich forced a shutdown after being “snubbed” by President Bill Clinton on Air Force One.

But both of those cases were Republican lawmakers trying to hold a Democratic president hostage. If a shutdown happens now, it would be nothing more than a self-inflicted wound for the Republican Party, and further proof that they are either incapable of or uninterested in governing — or both.

Republicans have staked their entire party platform and ideology on the idea that government doesn’t work. But their every bumble and misstep prove that only one part of government is essentially nonfunctional: the Republican Party.
[/size]