Welcome To The Show

The Financial Times might be stating the obvious, or the “bleeding” obvious, as the Brits say, but it will always be worth repeating.

In an editorial endorsing Hillary Clinton, the writers partly blamed “a media which have become more polarised than ever” for the rise of Trump:

In the search for higher ratings, too many have been happy to strike a Faustian bargain with Mr Trump.

It’s happened before, and will happen again, so long as access to voters is controlled by the ratings machine. In 2008 the pop star mentality boosted Barack Obama to stardom.

The big difference here is that Faust traded his soul to the devil in exchange for unlimited knowledge, not for Nielsen numbers.


First one to find me a Supreme Court Justice gets a free corned beef sandwich.

Transgender Pride Flag on Rainbow Outhouse on highest peak in NC
Transgender Pride Flag on Rainbow Outhouse on highest peak in NC

— Leo McGary, West Wing

By Blue Bronc, a Trail Mix Contributor

Looking at the two cases the Supremes recently gave certioari – sex offenders not allowed to use social media,  Packingham v. North Carolina, 15-1194, and transgender children using the restroom,  Gloucester County School Board v. G.G.

They would not bring these in unless a consensus has been sort of agreed to in at least a 5-3 ruling, striking down the school board, as a tie ruling leaves it open until they get a nine Justice court. Also, the court feels comfortable stepping out against the far right pressure, even with the giant pumpkin with a dead orange possum on its head possibly ending up in the White House.

The social media restriction sounds like a no brainer.  It will not hold.  It is too hard to enforce and a First Amendment issue.  How do you stop someone from communicating?  I have friends who no longer use email because they use social media, usually Facebook.  Can the felon be forced to use certain communication techniques or methods?  What if a fool stated the felon could only use telegraph?  Fine, fifty years ago.  But, not available today.  Use a landline, but no longer available in places today.  Unless a prosecutor comes up with something novel, the restriction is gone.

The potty problem is more contentious.  But, the bulk of the Justices do not live in a vacuum, they can see there is a new world taking the place of the old, and trying to stop that takeover is a loser.  They have been doing the support of the change for a few years now.  And there is no reason for them to go backwards anymore.  Scalia is gone and his heavy thumb on Thomas is too.  Not that it is an improvement that the Justice is asking questions now.

The case of the Virginia school board dictating where a transgender male student is to go to pee is also looking like a loser.  Although the stay was issued supporting the school board by a 5-3 decision, it was by a Justice stating he voted for the stay to bring the case in later.  Well he and the other liberal Justices have found their conservative supporter.  Otherwise I would have expected to see them bring the North Carolina case and another opposite case sometime later, once they had a nine Justice court again.

A decision for the transgender youth to use the restroom will carry a great deal of significance beyond the school board case.  It will be used to knock down the North Carolina case, no peeing in this state you freaks, of the McGory fame.  The same will be used to strike away the other states who setup road blocks to the Obama order to allow use of restrooms and other gender specific locations by transgender school children.

Photo credit: Outhouse courtesy of Neil Gottlieb

More Posts by Blue Bronc


It’s All Politics and It’s Ugly


By Jamie44, a Trail Mix Contributor

It very well could be that the Clinton’s are too ambitious (signal Julius Caesar).  Rising from barely middle class they may be greedy.  When you peer too closely at some of the interrelationships of sex, wealth and power they may just have played a little too fast and loose with all that is noble.  

Now that I have disclosed the awful truth why is this couple so hated beyond all reason to the exclusion of the exact same actions as virtually ever politician who has ever existed on the face of the earth?

More importantly this year, why is the woman in this mix expected to dance backwards in high heels to prove, that in her absolute superiority, the men shouldn’t be jealous of her mind, accomplishments, and basic decency for having a Conservative Brain and a Liberal heart.

Did George W. Bush “lose” 21 million emails?

Does Trump & other politicians get six figure fees for speaking?  Did Trump “endorsements” for his institute earn more than a million while bilking others out of their life savings?

Then there are the sex scandals.  Let’s face it: The men (all of the them) have used wealth and power to acquire willing or unwilling comfort, companionship and cohabitation.  The lady has been married to one man for 40 years.

picture-of-the-dayIn eleven days, there will be an election.  On one side we have an ignorant and arrogant man with absolutely no knowledge of the world and issues, whose only qualification for the office is a bunch of right wing haters, who has to pay people to praise him because no one he knows actually likes him.  The woman, whatever her failings, is brilliant, accomplished, and has decades of experience — and genuinely liked by all who have known and worked with her.

It’s all politics folks.  Make the best of it and go vote.

More Posts by Jamie44