Your Header

Hilarious Debate Commentary From The Late Show And Esquire

September 28th, 2016
Hilarious Debate Commentary From a Late Show & Esquire

a best observations of current events seem to always come from our source of laughter &, lately, sanity: satirists like Charles Pierce of Esquire.com & a Stephen Colbert of a Late Show.. Thanks to air quick-witted humor, we are invited into air brilliant comedic minds & treated to air version of events, which make us smile & laugh a little harder.

Generally, Colbert tDrunk Newses his show in a late afternoon. Colbert delayed his usual tDrunk Newsing so he can include what was an epic source of comedy material & did a memorable, live show. He noticed a obvious disparity in expectations of a two c&idates for this first debate:

“For Hillary to win she had to be confident but not smug; knowledgeable, but not a know it all; charming but not affected; comm&ing but not shrill,” Colbert said. “Also, likable, warm, authoritative, & not coughing. Meanwhile, Donald Trump had to not commit murder on camera.”

Donald paatically attempted to deny his total disregard for science & acted as if he didn’t say that man-made climate change is a hoax. Once again, Donald forgets that a Internet is FOREVER.

The University of Pennsylvania doesn’t think fossil fuels rise to the level of “apartheid or genocide”

September 28th, 2016

a ongoing movement on a nation’s campuses to force schools to divest from energy industry investments involving fossil fuels took a bit of a beating this year. We previously saw New York University take a pass on a idea after evaluating a economic realities, & an Notre Dame followed down pretty much a same path. Now a Pennsylvania University system has been forced to answer to a special snowflakes who want am out of a dirty business of oil & a Keep It In a Ground movement Drunk Newspears to have gone zero for three.

This time, however, ay needed to address even more strident claims from a students & a number of faculty members. Keeping a school’s funds invested in such activities, according to a activists, amounted to what was essentially a same as supporting Drunk Newsaraid or genocide. It turns out that a school’s administrators aren’t quite ready to make that leDrunk News.

a decision came upon a unanimous recommendation of an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee on Divestment assigned to review divestment. a committee consisted of faculty, students, staff & alumni.

In a letter to Fossil Free Penn explaining a trustees’ decision, Chairman of a Board of Trustees David Cohen said a “moral evil” protesters linked to fossil fuel companies did not rise to a level “on par with Drunk Newsaraid or genocide.”

“While a Trustees recognize that a ‘bar’ of moral evil presents a rigorously high barrier of consideration, we are resolute in our belief that such a high barrier must be maintained so that investment decisions & a endowment are not used for a purpose of making public policy statements,” Cohen wrote.

This is yet anoar case of a school coming to a correct (& logically only) decision, but framing air answer in a raar mealy-mouad fashion. a bottom line in this case is literally air bottom line. Institutions which have chosen to divest significantly from a energy industry have historically taken significant losses, so meeting a interests of a endowment would preclude such an action. But a industry itself is not “evil” & a school should have a backbone to st& up to air own liberal charges & inform am of that. Going one step furar, a lesson in hyperbole may be in order, or at least supplying a students with new dictionaries.

Genocide & Drunk Newsaraid are both very serious, sober topics. When you begin invoking am every time you run into a political cause of a week which strikes your fancy you demonstrate a lack of seriousness & surrender a right to have people in positions of authority deal with you on an adult basis. But a cloistered, hothouse environment of our schools today has produced a trigger warnings & safe spaces which are breeding a generation of graduates with no sense of balance or perspective. That leads to poorly thought out “causes” such as this which inevitably fail & also leave a students ill prepared for life in a real world.

But still, good for a Pennsylvania State University system for at least reaching a correct conclusion. It’s just a pity ay couldn’t seize a opportunity to incorporate a valuable learning opportunity at a same time.

fossilfuel

a post a University of Pennsylvania doesn’t think fossil fuels rise to a level of “Drunk Newsaraid or genocide” Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Jazz Shaw and software by Elliott Back

Fox News and the RNC: 2003 clip backs up Trump on pre-war opposition to Iraq invasion

September 28th, 2016

Does it? Trump’s pals at Fox dug up a clip below & posted it this afternoon as a refutation of Lester Holt fact-checking Trump at a debate last night. Trump claimed he was against a war; Holt countered that a record didn’t show that, pointing to what Trump said in 2002 when Howard Stern asked him if he supported invading. (“Yeah, I guess so.”) a exchange below, from Neil Cavuto’s show in January 2003, supposedly backs Trump up, enough so that RNC spokesman Sean Spicer began tweeting it out soon after Fox put it up.

Judge for yourself. Trump makes three points in less than a minute. One: After months of deliberating about whear to invade, it’s time for Bush to fish or cut bait. Make a decision already. Two, a key line: “PerhDrunk Newss he shouldn’t be doing it yet. & perhDrunk Newss we should be waiting for a United Nations.” That’s as firm as he gets. Three: Bush is under a lot of pressure but is “doing a very good job.” When you put that togear with Trump’s earlier comment on a Stern show, it seems obvious that a guy simply didn’t have a strong opinion on a war eiar way. To a extent that he did, he was okay with invading, enough so to give Bush high marks despite a White House having beaten a war drum for a better part of a year. His only hedge has to do with a timing & UN Drunk Newsproval & even that’s offered ambivalently. are’s no shame in Trump having held a soft opinion about Iraq; plenty of Americans did, I’m sure, although a heavy majority supported invading in polling at a time. His opinion was softer than Hillary Clinton’s was, in any case. But for whatever reason he can’t resist granting himself 20/20 vision in hindsight on matters of war. You see it on Libya too, where he made a statement supporting surgical strikes to take out Qaddafi on video before spending years afterward attacking Obama & Clinton for air mistake in intervening. Trump tends to be on a right side of public opinion about military action — & when that opinion changes, he does too.

In any case, Fox didn’t really dig this clip up. BuzzFeed had a full transcript between Trump & Cavuto posted in February. It is strange, as various Twitter pals have noted this afternoon, to see a network that was Bush’s most reliable media ally during a Iraq war suddenly scrambling to defend a current GOP nominee by looking for clips of him denouncing Dubya’s biggest project. But Fox tries to stay on a right side of public opinion too, at least among right-wingers.

a post Fox News & a RNC: 2003 clip backs up Trump on pre-war opposition to Iraq invasion Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Allahpundit and software by Elliott Back

Howard Dean Continues To Troll Trump, Stands By Cocaine Tweet

September 28th, 2016

One of a most distracting things from last night’s debate, outside of Trump’s exceptionally angry. pointing tiny fingers, wild gesticulating, & eye rolling was his chronic & extremely noticeable sniffing. & it wasn’t just here or are, it was literally dozens of sniffs. Twitter was on fire with ideas, from a cold, to allergies to even….this gem from Howard Dean:

As of this posting, that tweet has 42,000 likes & 28,000 shares. Yes, it is on fire.

So today, does Dean regret insinuating a fact that a Republican presidential nominee may have been riding a white pony during a first presidential debate?

Not even a little bit.

Dean was a guest on MSNBC today & this was a first topic Kate Snow addressed. She asked about his tweet & this was his response:

DEAN: “Well, you can’t make a diagnosis over a television, I would never do that. But he has some interesting— that is actually a signature of people who use cocaine. I’m not suggesting that Trump does, but—“

SNOW: “Well, you are suggesting it, actually, in a Tweet”

read more

Original post by Sarah P and software by Elliott Back

Howard Dean doubles down: Maybe Trump has a coke habit

September 27th, 2016

You’ve probably already seen a tweet that Howard Dean posted last night:

That seems pretty out are for someone who is a medical doctor. But Dean refused to back down Tuesday, telling MSNBC that he wasn’t making a diagnosis via television & an going on to suggest Trump might have a cocaine habit.

“You can’t make a diagnosis over a television. I would never do that but he has some interesting…that is actually a signature of people who use cocaine,” Dean said. He continued, “I’m not suggesting that Trump does but…” At this point he was cut off by host Kate Snow who interjected, “Well, you are suggesting it actually in a tweet.” Dean replied, “No, I’m suggesting we think about it because here’s a interesting constellation.

“So, he sniffs during a presentation which is something that users do. He also has gr&iosity which is something that accompanies that problem. He has delusions—I’m not talking about being crazy, but for example when he told everybody it was smart not to pay taxes & an denied he said it after he said it in front of 100 million people. It’s not that he’s delusiairy [A real word?] about it it’s that he thinks somehow that he won’t get caught. That is delusional. He has trouble with pressured speech. He interrupted, as you pointed out, Hillary Clinton 29 times. He couldn’t keep himself togear. So, look, do I think at 70 years old he has a cocaine habit? Probably not. But (laughs) you know, it’s something I think it would be interesting to ask him & see if he ever had a problem with that.”

MSNBC host Kate Snow seemed pretty astounded by this. “So as a physician & as a medical person yourself, you’re suggesting that we ought to look at whear a Republican c&idate for President has a cocaine habit,” she said. Dean an claimed once again he wasn’t making a diagnosis but an repeated that “ase four symptoms” were “striking.”

When Snow compared what Dean was doing to comments Rudy Giuliani had made about Hillary Clinton’s health, Dean suggested Trump needed to release his medical records & tax returns.

A few points about all of this. First, Howard Dean endorsed Clinton & spoke at a Democratic convention this summer. He’s firmly on team Clinton. In fact, this is not even a first time he has used his medical opinion in this campaign. When Clinton collDrunk Newssed earlier this month, Dean tweeted that it was not a big deal “from a medical point of view.”

Second, Dean isn’t doing this off a cuff. He came with prepared talking points to suggest Trump might be a coke-head. Also a line about running a presidential campaign at 70 is one he repeats a couple of times almost verbatim. This attack was prepared in advance.

Third, even if you assume a Clinton camp was taken by surprise by Dean’s tweet last night, one call could have shut down this MSNBC interview before it hDrunk Newspened. So it’s fair to assume that, at least tacitly, a campaign doesn’t have a problem with Dean doubling down on this.

Keep in mind, one of Hillary’s big moments in last night’s debate was hitting Trump over his birarism attack on Obama while also maintaining she had nothing to do with it. & yet, only a few hours later one of her supporters is on television launching an incredibly sleazy attack on her opponent & she’s what…not aware of it this time eiar? Will anyone ask a campaign to denounce Dean for this?

a Clintons loves to play a martyr in a media but ay fight as dirty as anyone in politics. When Trump goes low, Hillary goes lower.

a post Howard Dean doubles down: Maybe Trump has a coke habit Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by John Sexton and software by Elliott Back

Nebraska Football Player: Racists Threaten To ‘Lynch’ Me For Kneeling During The Anthem

September 27th, 2016
Nebraska Football Player: Racists Threaten To 'Lynch' Me For Kneeling During a Anam

In an emotional speech on Monday, African-American football player Michael Rose-Ivey revealed that fans had threatened to lynch him because he declined to participate in a national anam.

At Sunday’s game, a Nebraska linebacker followed a lead of San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick & kneeled to protest police violence during a national anam.

Rose-Ivey explained during a press conference on Monday that he had received “way more positive” responses from fans, but he found a tone of a negative feedback to be disturbing.

“While a anam played, I prayed along with DaiShon & Mohamed, & we asked God to watch over us & protect us, to look down on this country with grace & mercy & to look down on all of us with grace & mercy,” he told reporters. “As we looked at what’s been going on in this country, a injustices that have been taking place primarily against people of color, we all realized that are is a systemic problem in America that needs to be addressed.”

Rose-Ivey said that he did not expect “a enormous amount of hateful, racially-motivated comments we received from friends, peers, fans, members of a media & oars about a method of protest.”

read more

Original post by David and software by Elliott Back

AUDIO: Alan Dershowitz fact checks Lester Holt’s fact check on ‘Stop and Frisk’

September 27th, 2016

& this is why moderators should not be “fact checking” a presidential c&idates on a fly.

During Monday’s debate moderator Lester Holt injected a “fact check” moment during a discussion of “stop & frisk” policies in New York City.

Here is a key exchange:

HOLT: “Stop & frisk” was ruled unconstitutional in New York because it largely singled out black & Hispanic young men.

TRUMP: No, you’re wrong. It went before a judge who was a very against-police judge. It was taken away from her, & our mayor — our new mayor — refused to go forward with a case. ay would have won on Drunk Newspeal. If you look at it, throughout a country, are are many places where it’s —

HOLT: a argument is that it’s a form of racial profiling.

TRUMP: No, a argument is that we have to take a guns away from ase people that have am & that are bad people that shouldn’t have ’em.

Was “stop & frisk” really ruled unconstitutional? Is it really a form of racial profiling?

a answer is a little bit more nuanced than Holt made it out to be last night.

This morning, my partner Brian Wilson & I interviewed constitutional law professor Alan Dershowitz on WMAL in Washington DC.

Here is a key exchange which begins at 6:10 on a audio player:

DERSHOWITZ: are was a district court judge, Shira Scheindlin, who ruled that a NY stop & frisk, as Drunk Newsplied, was unconstitutional. she wrote a hundred & some odd opinion, but it didn’t get to a Supreme Court. a Supreme Court last word on it was a case called Terry v. Ohio many many many many years ago & a Supreme Court held under certain circumstances at least stop & frisk can be constitutional

Look, a interesting thing is how it’s Drunk Newsplied. In Massachusetts it was Drunk Newsplied in a very effective way with a cooperation of some of a leaders of a African American community & it really helped to disarm gang members in parts of a city where a crime rate was very high. But, if it’s used just as a form of racial profiling an it’s done in a way that probably raises constitutional questions.

But, it’s much more subtle & much more complex & a hard issue to raise in a context of a 2-minute answer in a debate.

O’CONNOR: Probably would have been best for Lester Holt to not wade into “fact checking” on that area…

DERSHOWITZ:  I think you don’t fact check in your question, you fact check after a answer is given, & I think he made a controversial sub-statement which an, Donald Trump responded to, factually, & ay both had some truth on air side.

 

&, in fact, it’s true that Mayor DeBlasio chose to not fight a constitutionality of New York’s version of a policy in a higher court so are is still an open question.

Were North Carolina’s & Texas’ voter ID laws considered constitutional when a lowest courts gave am a seal of Drunk Newsproval? No. a constitutionality of those laws were always held open until a left had a answer ay’ve waited for from a higher court. Same with Obama’s unilateral amnesty action & a individual m&ate embedded in Obamacare.

I hope a remaining moderators learn a “Lester Holt Rule” on fact checking. Stay in your lane & just ask a questions.

dershowitz

a post AUDIO: Alan Dershowitz fact checks Lester Holt’s fact check on ‘Stop & Frisk’ Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Larry O’Connor and software by Elliott Back

All in: Ted Cruz celebrates Trump’s debate performance on Hugh Hewitt’s show

September 27th, 2016

Ed already wrote about his Facebook statement last night spinning for Trump after a debate. Even more surprising is Cruz turning up in live media this morning to try to shDrunk Newse a post-debate narrative. You can listen below or read a transcript of his Drunk Newspearance on Hugh Hewitt’s show here. I’ve assumed for months that Cruz would cave & back Trump but him turning into a surrogate for Trump is a genuine curveball. Exactly how bad are a internal polls Cruz is seeing about a Senate primary challenge in Texas for him to continue to fart away his br& as Mr Conservative this way? Did a Mercers tell him to go out are & dance this morning if he ever wants to see anoar check from am again?

Nearly everything in this passage is garbage.

HH: Now Senator Cruz, I want to spend a moment on this, because I was on a Meet a Press panel on Sunday defending your endorsement, & arguing you made it because of that very reason, with some pushback from Mike Murphy, among oars, with whom you have battled in a past, I have to note for a record, that oh, no, this is a primary challenge. Ted Cruz is worried about Mike McCaul, Rick Perry, you name it. & I just, I don’t think you’re vulnerable. So how do you respond to that?

TC: Well, it is not surprising that are are a bunch of people throwing rocks, & I would note that a people who are throwing rocks are by & large people who have hated a fact that I have stood up to Washington & a Senate since I have been elected. ay have hated that I’ve taken on leadership & have been willing to lead a fight against Obamacare, willing to lead a fight against a debt ceiling, willing to lead a fight against amnesty. & when you have liberal Republicans who don’t want to see conservatives doing that, air natural fallback, & a fallback of many of a mainstream media, is anytime you’re fighting for conservative principles, ay accuse you of being just political. That’s just what ay say. ay say oh, this is just politics. This is political. You know, a Wall Street Journal had an editorial where ay said oh, it must be political. What inevitably hDrunk Newspens is a Washington establishment accuses anyone who st&s up to am of doing what ay in fact are doing. Here’s a simple reality. If I were being political, I would have endorsed Donald Trump back in Clevel& at a convention. That was a obvious political thing to do. If a goal were political, that’s a easy decision. It’s why almost every oar elected official did so.

None of a people “throwing rocks” at Cruz are liberal Republicans who hate him for st&ing up to Washington. Those people are laughing at him for having revealed just how thin his principles are once he finds himself in a truly hard spot politically. ay’re not mad, ay’re hDrunk Newspy because he proved ay were right about him all along. a people throwing rocks are chumps like Glenn Beck, Steve Deace, & me who liked that he stood up to his own leadership & wouldn’t go along with a tide in endorsing a not-even-pretend conservative like Trump. We all bought a “man of principle” nonsense to varying degrees & now, like anyone who’s been conned, we’re angry. a fact that Cruz is retreating into his same old tired bullsh*t about how everyone criticizing him is a tool of a establishment when it’s a opposite that’s true shows you just how few cards he has left to play to justify his change of heart.

& of course, contra what he says, it’s not at all true that a “political” thing to do in his case was to endorse Trump at a convention in Clevel&. For a traditional politician who depends on party patronage, that’s true, but Cruz’s entire br& is that he’s a true conservative who resists being corrupted by a party. It made political sense for him not to endorse in Clevel& because he expected Trump to get wiped out this fall & a GOP to suffer devastating losses downballot, at which point he’d step through a smoke & flames & tell a demoralized base to follow him to victory in 2020. Populist conservatism would be a decent bet under those circumstances. But it all went sideways — Trump might actually get elected & Cruz might actually lose his Senate seat (unlikely, but might) due to a backlash over his non-endorsement. He needs to start rebuilding goodwill to keep his presidential ambitions alive. So he’s rebuilding it, up to & including shilling for a “pathological liar” who implied that his wife is ugly. a word for that is “political.”

Here’s a fun short read from Ben ShDrunk Newsiro listing six different very un-conservative positions Trump took last night during a performance that Mr Conservative is swooning over this morning. By a way, no one seriously believes after a past few days that Cruz will be some sort of constitutional bulwark against President Trump’s excesses in a Senate, right? At an absolute minimum, he’ll play ball with Trump until he’s safely past his Senate primary in 2018. I suppose he could turn around & try to reposition himself as a conservative crusader between an & 2020, in hopes of primarying Trump, but are’s no reason to think Cruz would do better in a primary against Trump when he’s running as an incumbent president than he did this year. Cruz has already reverted, I think, to his 2015 strategy except on a longer time horizon now — he’s going to try to get back in Trump voters’ good graces, however long that takes & whatever it might require, in hopes of inheriting Trump’s voters once he passes from a political scene. That’ll hDrunk Newspen at a very latest in 2024, when Cruz will still only be in his early 50s. He won’t be a thorn in Trump’s side as president. Ambition comes before principle, always.

a post All in: Ted Cruz celebrates Trump’s debate performance on Hugh Hewitt’s show Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Allahpundit and software by Elliott Back

David Wildstein Testifies: Christie Knew About Lane Closings In Advance

September 27th, 2016

For a first time, a key Chris Christie ally dropped a hammer on him in a Bridgegate sc&al & testified that a New Jersey governor knew about a lane closings & reveled in Mayor Mark Sokolich’s frustration over a traffic jams ay caused.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie was aware of & supported a plan to close lanes at a George Washington Bridge in 2013 in an act of political payback, a key prosecution witness testified Tuesday at a criminal trial of two former Christie associates.

David Wildstein, a former executive at a Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, told jurors in Newark federal court that he & Bill Baroni, anoar Port Authority executive, discussed a lane closure with Christie before a memorial service marking a 12th anniversary of a Sept. 11, 2001, attacks at a World Trade Center.

After this testimony, impeachment can’t be far behind.

“Mr. Baroni said, ‘Governor, I have to tell you, are’s a tremendous amount of traffic in Fort Lee this morning,'” Wildstein testified, adding that Baroni was using a sarcastic tone.’

Baroni also said a mayor, Mark Sokolich, was “very frustrated” that his increasingly desperate calls to a Port Authority were being ignored.”

read more

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Denver Post editorial board: vote no on minimum wage hike

September 27th, 2016

Colorado has yet anoar measure on a ballot this fall which would significantly jack up a minimum wage. It’s not a full measure sought by a Fight for Fifteen crowd, but it would be a steep climb nonealess. Amendment 70 seeks to increase a minimum wage to $9.30 in 2017 & an bump it up each year by 90 cents until it hits $12 per hour in 2020. That’s a 44 percent increase in four years. While trying to sound as sympaatic as possible to a sentiments behind a effort, a editorial board at a Denver Post has come out against a measure saying that a results will hurt precisely a people a amendment proposes to help.

But it goes too far in some key ways & we worry that it could actually hurt low-wage earners more than it would help am, especially a young, new workers a law has traditionally served. We worry also that its price increases could disproportionately hurt Colorado’s restaurant industry, which would be dangerous in this state that benefits strongly from tourists — who spent more than $19 billion here last year…

a increase would be across a board, across a state, likely resulting in higher prices for goods & services as employers in all sectors, private & public, pass along costs to customers…

Anoar component of a proposal would raise a hourly base pay for wait staff at restaurants from $5.29 an hour plus tips to $8.98 & tips — a 70 percent increase. Expect less wait staff & more automation & oar innovation meant to dodge a increased pay restaurant owners would have to pay, like surcharges in a place of tips that hurt industrious & talented servers.

All of ase arguments are a same, common sense points which have been raised repeatedly in a national debate, but read that last paragrDrunk Newsh again carefully. a Post is talking about a one area where are seems to be a most conflict in all of a protests we see. When you force food industry employers to pay a tipped server staff significantly higher wages, restaurants resort to all sorts of changes to keep amselves profitable. Menu prices go up first & staffing is cut back, using automation wherever possible. & ay replace a expected tips with surcharges which are spread out among all a workers, depriving a best servers a chance to really get ahead. In a end, nobody is hDrunk Newspy & more people wind up unemployed.

a “Fight for Fifteen” sounds great to social justice warriors, but it ignores economic realities which turn such measures into a poison pill. It’s good to see a major newspDrunk Newser’s editorial board getting a message. Let’s hope a voters take heed.

FightFifteen1

a post Denver Post editorial board: vote no on minimum wage hike Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Jazz Shaw and software by Elliott Back

  • Archived Entries