US Presidential Contenders

[Buster's Uncle]

Bakrama sucks SO hard, but you've got to be kidding even so.

[Rusty Edge]

I'm of the opinion that it takes a lot of time &/or distance to gain perspective on a president. It's hard to know what lasting good or harm was done while they are still in office.

But that was one question that at least makes you think "What have they done?"   

Well, I didn't even touch on The Great Recession, because then I just start blaming everybody for one thing or another, and it's an extensive list.

But I generally come down on the Bush/Cheney administration as being  mean and wrong, and Obama as being unqualified, and learning on the job.

[Rusty Edge]

http://www.advocate.com/election/2016/5/28/rachel-maddow-reveals-why-bernie-sanders-wants-barney-frank-dnc-committees-video

Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy and former congressman Barney Frank will retain their high-ranking positions on the Democratic National Committee, the Party confirmed Saturday, according to The Hill.

The decision comes just one day after attorneys for the presidential campaign of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders issued a scathing letter to DNC officials launching a formal credentials challenge against Frank (who co-chairs the party’s Standing Rules Committee), also demanding that Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy be removed from his position on the DNC’s Standing Platform Committee.

As out MSNBC anchor Rachel Maddow reported Friday, the Sanders campaign sent its letter to DNC officials that evening, warning that Frank and Malloy were "self-proclaimed partisans intent on marginalizing [Sanders] supporters.

“The lawyers for the Sanders campaign said… They’re demanding that both Governor Malloy and Mr. Frank be disqualified from their respective positions with the Standing Platform and Rules Committees,” Maddow explained.

“The Sanders Campaign then ends this letter with a threat,” noted Maddow. “If the Committee doesn't kick Gov. Malloy and Barney Frank out of those leadership positions the Sanders campaign will essentially grind the process of the convention to a halt. … They will gum up the works so nothing happens.”

Maddow noted that she initially thought the Sanders campaign was threatening to sue the Democratic Party, but then clarifies that “what they’re threatening to do is to bring the Democratic convention to a halt unless Barney Frank and Dannel Malloy get replaced.”

While the MSNBC anchor explained the potential consequences if the demands made by the Sanders campaign are met, she neglected to dig into the justifications Sanders's attorneys provided for making such demands.

Western Massachussetts paper The Republican reports that the Sanders campaign is “looking to force a contested convention,” and blasting Frank and Malloy as “aggressive attack surrogates” for the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Former Rep. Frank, the first member of Congress to voluntarily come out as gay, has made no secret of his “animosity towards Senator Sanders,” alleges the letter. It points to a 1991 spat between the two congressmen, where Frank accused Sanders of “unduly [denigrating] the institution [of Congress] and a lot of the members.”

“After Senator Sanders won the New Hampshire Democratic presidential primaries in February, Mr. Frank wrote an opinion piece in which he professed his ‘resentment’ toward the Senator,” the letter continues. “And Mr. Frank’s invective against Senator Sanders has only intensified as Senator Sanders has notched additional primary victories.”

The Connecticut governor, on the other hand, has lambasted Sanders for his opposition to a federal gun control bill, and has a long history of openly supporting Clinton’s campaign, argues the letter. It dismisses Malloy, the co-chair of the DNC Standing Platform committee, as an “incendiary critic” of Sanders.

"The appointment of two individuals so outspokenly critical of Sen. Sanders, and so closely affiliated with Secretary Clinton's campaign, raises concerns that two of the three Convention Standing Committees are being constituted in an overtly partisan way designed to exclude meaningful input from supporters of Sen. Sanders' candidacy," the letter concludes.

At press time, the Sanders campaign had not responded to the DNC's dismissal of its request.

Watch Maddow break the news of the Sanders campaign letter on her eponymous MSNBC show below, with the relevant discussion beginning at the 5:30 mark.

----------------------------------

Maybe the DNC will be worth watching this year.

[Buster's Uncle]

Maddow is a political thinker always worth listening to -tries really hard to be fair- but her biases are there on her sleeve to be taken into account.  No idea who she's rooting for - it could go either way, the woman v the actual progressive.

I can totally see Bernie playing hardball - but gumming up the works on purpose wouldn't be like him.  But pushing his agenda would.

[Rusty Edge]

As for the Libertarian VP process, the efforts were made to open up the VP debate and nomination process to others ( failed presidential candidates/ runners up ) . It failed.

The field has thinned- These are the qualifiers.

Gov. William Weld – 192 votes ( Johnson's choice. )

Larry Sharpe - 161  ( He has been jabbing at Johnson for endorsing Weld and for a lack of philosophical purity )

Alicia Dearn – 104  ( She's a champion of the cause, and willing to work with anyone. Apparently she took the elephant by the horns in a move that some se as a sellout. A comment from her facebook "Your choice to bring Weld onstage and demand point-blank that he swear his allegiance... had me speechless. You rock!"   Austin Petersen has also endorsed her.

Will Coley – 61 (A white Muslim academic, maybe too far out of the main stream for today's America)

Judd Weiss – 46 ( Who said he'd only run with McAfee. McAfee has now endorsed  Dearn. )

Derrick Grayson – 33

When Balloting begins, it will follow the same process as for President. They are seeking a majority of the aprox. 800 votes. If there is no majority, the lowest vote getter will be dropped and they will vote again, etc.

[Rusty Edge]

She's jumping the gun here. Weld's not a done deal. But this OpEd was too good to pass up in terms of my sig line.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/05/23/other-than-the-libertarian-partys-vp-candidate-wholl-defend-the-constitution/

[Other than the Libertarian Party’s VP candidate, who’ll defend the Constitution?
 By Jennifer Rubin May 23

Only one vice-presidential candidate has been selected for the 2016 presidential race, former Massachusetts governor William Weld, who has been tapped by Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson, the former governor of New Mexico. Weld made headlines analogizing Donald [Sleezebag]’s proposed roundup of illegal immigrants to the beginnings of the Holocaust (at the 3:14 mark):

Holocaust allusions should be used sparingly and, to quote Melania [Sleezebag], Donald [Sleezebag] is “not Hitler.” That said, it’s not inappropriate to sound the alarm about a mass roundup of suspected illegal immigrants, the civil liberties that would be trampled upon in conducting such a sweep and the mass hysteria that [Sleezebag] is whipping up in demonizing illegal immigrants as “killers” and “rapists.” When a presidential candidate talks favorably of the infamous roundup of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II, Americans regardless of party should be outraged.

Unfortunately, in the Republican primary too many [Sleezebag] opponents — including his final competitor, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) — were chasing after [Sleezebag]’s extremism on immigration. They therefore were frightened to criticize him loudly, consistently and unsparingly for his egregious comments and unconstitutional proposals. [Sleezebag] simply outplayed them in stirring up xenophobia; they, in turn, were ill prepared to condemn a plan that any self-described constitutional conservative should recognize as beyond the pale.

Weld’s comment reminds us how deficient the presidential debate will be without a robust voice from either major party to defend limits on executive authority and all provisions of the Bill of Rights. [Sleezebag] now slavishly embraces the Second Amendment for the sake of the endorsement of the National Rifle Association (which, like many conservative groups, suffers from amnesia and low standards in accepting a candidate so long as he delivers a few canned lines). In the case of a roundup of suspected illegal immigrants we are looking at potentially wholesale violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. (Would any of the judges on [Sleezebag]’s list approve a mass dragnet?)

On many issues, such as the First Amendment, both Hillary Clinton and [Sleezebag] are eager to curb political speech, either by constitutional amendment or statutory gambit to reverse Citizens United. [Sleezebag] would go beyond what any politician since the Alien and Sedition Acts has advocated in wanting to deport millions of illegal immigrants, ban Muslims and “open up” libel laws to go after critics.

Admiring their handiwork in shoving a list of agreeable judges under [Sleezebag]’s nose, self-described conservative “scholars” turn a blind eye to the raft of undemocratic and unconstitutional measures [Sleezebag] has championed on everything from ordering the military to commit war crimes to “shutting down” parts of the Internet. As Bruce Fein recalls:


Among other things, Mr. [Sleezebag] has taken up arms against the Eighth Amendment prohibition of torture, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment requirements of due process, the First Amendment’s protection of religious freedom, the Article VI prohibition of religious test oaths, the Article I, section 8, clause 11 proscriptions of presidential wars, and the War Crimes Act of 1996 that implements international law.

But candidate Mr. [Sleezebag] reserves his nuclear arsenal for freedom of speech. He would close down the Internet because some evil people might be influenced by its content to commit terrorism. . . . Mr. [Sleezebag] sneers at defenders of free speech as “foolish people.”

[Sleezebag] is the person members of the conservative Federalist Society (reportedly) are enabling? (One would think the lawyers involved would be bursting with pride and eager to claim authorship, yet they remain anonymous helpers for a man who shares none of their devotion to the Constitution.)

In throwing its lot in with [Sleezebag] and abandoning defense of constitutional limits and democratic principles, the GOP abandons of one of its historic roles in restraining government and protecting individual rights. (It did give us the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments, right?). It is regrettable that the GOP is leaving it to the Libertarian Party to now to defend the Constitution.

Weld is an able former attorney and admirable in his willingness to speak out against [Sleezebag], but at least one of the major parties needs to be a stickler for constitutional governance. Those conservatives who squawk about Democrats’ disregard for constitutional principles but support [Sleezebag] have lost the constitutional high ground. (In comparison with [Sleezebag], Clinton seems like Antonin Scalia.)

Rather than enabling [Sleezebag] and trying to convince fellow Americans that [Sleezebag] can be pinned down on judicial selection or can develop even a rudimentary understanding of the Constitution, maybe these Republicans should look for an alternative center-right candidate who would take it to both major parties’ nominees when they seek to trample on this or that constitutional provision. Shilling for [Sleezebag] — hoping he’ll maybe, possibly, once in a while act within constitutional strictures — is foolhardy and dangerous. Conservatives who care about the Constitution should refuse to do so and should call out those who are trying to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes. ]

[Rusty Edge]

Weld won.

[Buster's Uncle]

Keep up the Libertarian reporting.

[Rusty Edge]

Well, the convention is essentially over, and everybody is probably on their way to dinner, or the airport, or Disney.  Or maybe they went to see what MegaCon was all about.

They adopted the platform, which called for abolition of the death penalty.

They chose the frontrunner Gary Johnson, and accepted his choice for VP Bill Weld. The two most pragmatic and least idealistic in the fields. Johnson said he couldn't win without Weld, because Weld has media connections, was a fundraiser for Romney, and has raised a quarter $Billion in his career. Johnson is a millionaire, but his campaign isn't flush with funds.

I suspect the defining moment was Alicia Dearn's calling Weld out, and he stepped up and  pledged to be a Libertarian for the rest of his life.

I think that's important that they have a ticket that could govern if elected. Johnson had more spending vetoes than all of the other governors combined in his time, his state was #1 in job growth, and he advocated marijuana reform long before there were 24 states & the District of Colombia which legalized it for medical and/or recreational use. Weld championed gay marriage decades before the Democratic Party. Weld also left office with a smaller budget in real dollars than when he was elected.  Both of them were Republicans in Blue states, so they know about being tough on spending and about what it takes to accomplish something.

People like to know that their vote isn't a throw away.

Johnson and Weld are on their way to New York to start getting media exposure. Basically last time nobody knew who he was. The plan is to get exposure, and argue for inclusion in the polls. As it is, they need to poll 15% to get included on the debate stage, which is impossible if they aren't listed.

Some convention attendees wanted a more exciting candidate. What he lacks in charisma he makes up for in honesty, which should shine next to Hillary and her donor.

Meanwhile, the guy who founded the Cato Institute is thinking about firing up his PAC. I think he was hoping for Rand Paul this year. Still talk of the Koch brothers contributing, although it's to the party rather than to Johnson.

Well this year, anything could happen, and already has. At present we have a socialist, a reality TV star, and the wife of a president who was impeached & acquitted for lying to a Grand Jury. Could a two term governor from the sun belt really be an outlier in such an election?

[Buster's Uncle]

No, you make him sound excellent, and I think a lot of your judgment.

[Rusty Edge]

From Alicia Dearn for VP Facebook


[Alicia Dearn for Vice President

4 hrs ·
..

Now that the vote is completed, I wish to explain myself.

I learned that the poll companies (and perhaps CPD) stated that they wouldn't include libertarians without Weld. They've agreed to include us if he's the pick. No Weld, and we get shut out again.

I learned this over the lunch recess while I was preparing for my speech. It was a really good one too.

The GJ campaign didn't ask me to quit or tell me that. I got that message directly from someone outside the party.

We can't fight for Liberty with our hands tied behind our backs. So I asked Weld to swear to me that he wouldn't screw us. And he did. He seemed sincere. I said real libertarians need a seat at the table and I got his, Gary's and Ron's word that we would not be shut out and that our principles would be protected.

I did it so that we can have ballot access and make gains for all down line libertarians.

It was force by non-libertarians but I took it so we can stop force and oppression going forward.

It was awful. I'm not bullish on Weld and I was honest about that. But we need to advance for the sake of liberty and the sake of our country.]

--------------
That's the thing. A real showing nationally makes ballot access so much easier everywhere. Alicia has been doing work as a lawyer with ballot access, and as a candidate trying to get poll recognition for the party.  In fact, she wrote off over $150K for ballot access work for Johnson in 2012.

She's taking some heat as a sell-out. Right now she's the Libertarian I most admire.

[Buster's Uncle]

Go!

[Rusty Edge]

https://www.facebook.com/Alicia-Dearn-for-Vice-President-1063437850384191/

She has a couple of videos that are worth watching, on the left, below her photos.
They speak to me like Reagan's Morning in America spoke to others, back in the day.

[Rusty Edge]

NeoCon Bill Krystol, editor of The Weekly Standard announced Sunday that there would be an independent presidential candidate. Among those who haven't publicly refused him are Mitt Romney, Marco Rubio, and Tom Cotton, at 39, the youngest US Senator. Cotton has held that seat since 2015, and his prior qualifications amount to one term in The House.

The GOP has already condemned this. Of course, if the GOP were a carcass, I would have already stamped it "CONDEMNED".  When a party purges itself for ideological purity to the point that it is so small it can suffer a hostile takeover by an opposition party donor, it's doomed to defeat.

You can thank yourself for that, Bill!

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/29/bill-kristol-will-independent-candidate/

[Rusty Edge]

Dearn is taking a lot of heat on facebook, and has closed comments.

This would have been mine today-



FORBES Quote of the Day


“I think that the good and the great are only separated by the willingness to sacrifice.”

- Kareem Abdul-Jabbar