Some Things To Chew On: "angry mob;" '[if] you admit to using pot in the past, you can be banned;” "“'I didn’t do anything illegal."

Trump and the November Elections

An LA Times piece on Trump has this sentence:

"He has taken to describing Democrats as “an angry mob,” “wacko” and “unhinged” and has said they seek to drive the country “maybe into poverty and ultimately into chaos.”

This is Trump's way, apparently, of firing up 'his base' to go out and vote.  Demonize the 'enemy.'   I can't comprehend how Republicans blaming Democrats for the level of conflict in DC these days can keep a straight face when they manufacture and then repeat inflammatory lies like this constantly.

An essay by Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stigletz

"Will the US electorate declare that Trump is not what America is about? Will voters renounce his racism, misogyny, nativism, and protectionism? Will they say that his “America First” rejection of the international rule of law is not what the US stands for? Or will they make it clear that Trump’s win was not a historical accident resulting from a Republican primary process that produced a flawed nominee and a Democratic primary process that produced Trump’s ideal opponent?"

He talks about the importance of turnout.  But lets also remember that in many states, the districts have been gerrymandered so they give Republicans a big majority of Congressional seats even though they get just a slight the majority in total statewide vote. And there's the voter suppression campaigns in many states  (which he does mention.)  And the massive disinformation campaigns which the president contributes so heavily to.   But given the vast number of people who don't vote, getting them to vote IS the best antidote for the Republican schemes to thwart majority rule.

And here's a Vox interview on the contradictions in people's views of government and voting:

"In the book, you cite Mitt Romney’s famous “47 percent” comment from 2013, in which he claimed that 47 percent of the population are dependent upon the government and will vote for the Democratic candidate no matter what. But data shows that it’s the so-called “red states” that contribute the least to the federal coffers and rely the most on federal services — and of course, nearly all of those states voted for Romney. What the hell is going on here?
Suzanne Mettler:  Yeah, this is quite frustrating. I spent a lot of time looking at the state of Kentucky to try to make sense of this. Kentucky is a very poor state. And when you look at congressional districts there, you find a bunch of them where the average person gets more than 30 or 40 or 50 percent of their income from federal social benefits.
Yet those same districts are electing very conservative members of Congress who promise to introduce work requirements for food stamps and repeal the Affordable Care Act and so forth. It’s really puzzling.
I think there are a couple of things that might explain this. One is that I found that people who benefit from more visible social programs, like food stamps, are much less likely to vote."

Honesty About Marijuana With Border Officials Leads To Being Banned

US Border Patrol Banning Canadians Who Admit To Having Smoked Marijuana, Ever“If you’re a Canadian tourist in Seattle and you’re over the age of 21, you can buy marijuana. But if on your next trip to the U.S., you’re questioned by border agents and you admit to using pot in the past, you can be banned,” he said. “It’s totally backwards and doesn’t make sense.”
Last year, more than a dozen members of Congress wrote to U.S. Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions, as well as to U.S. border officials, to express concerns about Canadians and other noncitizens being targeted at U.S. ports of entry.
“We ask that your respective agencies develop policies that ban penalizing noncitizens based on their use or possession of marijuana if they are visiting or residing in states that have enacted marijuana use laws,” the lawmakers wrote."

OK, Rep. Young, why is your party administration doing this sort of stuff.  Does this happen when Canadians cross the border into Alaska?


Hunting Ethics Breach With Appropriate Results

A member of the Idaho Fish and Game Commission resigned after posting pictures of himself and a family of baboons he had killed.  He was at first surprised at the protests against his actions and said,

“'I didn’t do anything illegal. I didn’t do anything unethical. I didn’t do anything immoral,' Fischer said.
'I look at the way Idaho’s Fish and Game statute says we’re supposed to manage all animals for Idaho, and any surplus of animals we have we manage through hunting, fishing and trapping. Africa does the same thing.'
But Steve Alder, executive director of the pro-hunting group Idaho for Wildlife, said he was glad — though not surprised — the governor had called for the resignation and suggested that this would be “a milestone” in how future commissioners might be selected.

It's good to see in a big hunting state like Idaho, that the reaction was swift and that Fischer, rather than deny any wrong doing and fight back, like so many are doing these days, wrote a letter that took responsibility and apologized.  

"In his letter of resignation, dated Oct. 15, Fischer apologized for sending the photos and said he hoped his actions “would not harm the integrity and ethic” of the Fish and Game Department.
“I recently made some poor judgments that resulted in sharing photos of a hunt in which I did not display an appropriate level of sportsmanship and respect for the animals I harvested,” Fischer wrote. 'While these actions were out of character for me, I fully accept responsibility and feel it is best for the citizens of Idaho and sportsmen and women that I resign my post.'”

I'd hope this would be the results of a similar incident in Alaska, but with our forever member of Congress' office wall full of animal heads, I doubt it.  But maybe forever will end Nov 6.  [Later in the day I saw this was reprinted in the Anchorage Daily News (ADN).]

Sexual Assault 

I’m a sexual assault survivor. And a conservative. The Kavanaugh hearings were excruciating.

The text of this story is worth reading, but more striking even is the picture that accompanied the story.

There's Kavanaugh testifying and behind him the men's legs are covered in long trousers and the women's legs are bare.  This may say more about our sexualized culture and the roles of men and women in it, than most articles I've read.  How many Senators' offices require women to wear dresses and heels?  Or if not require, let it be known they are preferred?