a clown car full of millionaires: the 2016 presidential primary thread

this isn't great http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/06/pope-francis-climate-change-encylical-leaked-version/395915/ but it does highlight something which is probably obvious but important nonetheless:

But, in fact, the topic of this encyclical is squarely in the pope’s wheelhouse. Francis links his call for environmental stewardship to the book of Genesis, and he repeatedly couches environmental degradation in theological language. “That human beings destroy the biological diversity in God's creation; that human beings compromise the integrity of the earth and contribute to climate change, stripping the earth of its natural forests or destroying its wetlands; that human beings pollute the water, soil, air; all these are sins,” he writes.

for those that believe in sinning and punishment and life after death, maybe this makes a difference? i'd guess that most people who identify as religious, even those who regularly attend church, don't really spend that much time caring about sin, but for those that are pursuing infinite bliss and haven't been convinced before, maybe clearly categorizing it as a sin changes behavior.

#karl thanks so much for this. the extracts are denser than how i'd imagined this kind of tract but pop philosophy- pap' philosophy - is right, i think. i don't know. it's really hard to imagine reading this as a confrontational text - feeling resistant to accepting this as a problem & its force persuading you - but the idea that any change will be the result of it being pressed fervently by people who care seems right.

Also there is a point where economic ideas against environmentalism are presented with a moral aspect at the cutting edge - this will kill jobs and jobs are good is the message, but the implication is that jobs are a the moral good, that all good things flow from giving people more jobs. So having a moral retort (and a lot of people, even if they are not in a moral hierarchy, find "a man who thinks about moral issues says so") is at least a good way of starting a conversation.

lol

The head of the Republican National Committee, responding to demands from increasingly worried party leaders, spent nearly an hour Wednesday on the phone with Donald Trump, urging the presidential candidate to tone down his inflammatory comments about immigration that have infuriated a key election constituency.

The call from Chairman Reince Priebus, described by donors and consultants briefed on the conversation and confirmed by the RNC, underscores the extent to which Trump has gone from an embarrassment to a cause for serious alarm among top Republicans in Washington and nationwide.

But there is little they can do about the mogul and reality-television star, who draws sustenance from controversy and attention.

Woo! http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article26849269.html

Rather gross though:

Grayson has drawn negative attention for his messy divorce from Lolita, his wife of 24 years. A trial to determine whether she committed bigamy was delayed earlier this year when her breast implants leaked. The couple seemed close to an agreement until negotiations recently fell part. In an amended petition June 4, Lolita asked the court to prohibit Grayson from selling or transferring his assets.

“Gold diggers gotta dig. That's all I gotta say,” Grayson told the Tampa Bay Times in May. “We had an agreement. She's trying to renege.”

Grayson has faced criticism about his offshore investments in the Cayman Islands. He has fought with reporters who asked him questions about his hedge funds — and his investments raise questions about why a politician who has been critical about tax breaks for the rich would use a known tax haven for himself. This week The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust asked for a congressional investigation to determine if Grayson is violating a House rule by using his name on the hedge funds, while a Fort Pierce Democratic activist filed a similar request. Grayson has said he has done nothing wrong with respect to the funds.

the implication is that jobs are a the moral good, that all good things flow from giving people more jobs

The implication (for at least a thousand years now) has been that the natural resources claimed by the wealthy are rightfully theirs. It's morally wrong to hunt for food in the Lord's forest. Unfortunately there are few moral rights left for the non-wealthy.

Oligarchs and speculators have been fighting environmental concerns for a long time. Drilling for oil/coal now where a thousand years ago they were mining for iron ore. And back then public water supplies were polluted to the point uselessness by those with the funds/resources to use and abuse more than everyone else.

It is interesting the Pope is getting into it now, seemingly for the first time in history(?).

he's definitely addressing it more directly and giving it way more prominence than any other pope, but he's not the first. the encyclical starts off with a summary of what previous popes have said on the environment, actually. benedict seemed to have little to say about it, but that's probably because he was the antichrist, right? (there's more talk on all of this in the global warming thread btw)

in other news, a key piece of jeb's plan to boost the economy is to have us all work longer hours.

In an interview with the Manchester Union-Leader, the first-in-the-nation primary state's most-read paper, former Florida Gov Jeb Bush insisted “people should work longer hours", as a key part of his plan to drive higher economic growth.

The comment is already being treated as a gaffe. But it is actually an accurate if perhaps over-candid explanation of his economic plan, which seeks to combat stagnant or declining wages by getting people to work more hours.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bush-under-my-plan-people-should-work-longer-hours

In response to criticism from Democrats, Bush's spokesperson replied: "Only Washington Democrats could be out-of-touch enough to criticize giving more Americans the ability to work, earn a paycheck, and make ends meet."

man, that is some all-time spinning, there. must be tough working in that office, never know when the boss is going to say something just heinously unpopular and stupid-sounding.

one thing that gets me excited about the future is the prospect of spending even more time sitting at this fucking desk

work them at what

i guess bush is now trying to spin it like he was just talking about the underemployed:

Bush later sought to clarify what his remarks -- which he made in an interview with the New Hampshire Union-Leader -- during a town hall event in Hudson, New Hampshire, later on Wednesday, explaining that he was referring to Americans who aren't working full-time.

"You can take it out of context all you want, but high sustained growth means people work 40 hours rather than 30 hours and that by our success they have disposable income for their families to decide how they want to spend it rather than standing in line and being dependent upon government," Bush said.

but that would make his comments just pointlessly circular: my plan to solve underemployment is to raise the level of employment. he wasn't saying that though. depressing as it is to watch the video and hear the hint of the ol' W lilt around the edges of his voice, it's pretty clear.

Hey I'm all for companies hiring full-time rather than part-time so they don't have to provide benefits but it seems like that's on companies rather than the workers.

Most Americans working multiple part time jobs would instantly give that up for a steady full time job w benefits.

i.e. becoming a presidential candidate

one of which benefits is six-figure Fox News contract

W is clearly the political genius of the clan.

hard to argue that

http://i.imgur.com/2L9eJjx.jpg

It's hard work promoting yourself.

Check it out, this painting has four presidents in it.

http://i.imgur.com/vWCcnAi.jpg

"You can take it out of context all you want, but high sustained growth means people work 40 hours rather than 30 hours and that by our success they have disposable income for their families to decide how they want to spend it rather than standing in line and being dependent upon government,"

One or two mentions of freedom and the military, and this could almost achieve Palin levels of linguistic gloriosity.

Good to know our choices are 40 hr workweek or standing in line dependent "upon" government.

get ready to hear "sanctuary cities" about 1.68 million times between now and 11/16

The picture above (depicting various Bushes standing in line for government, arf arf), is from a fascinating article from 2012 on why Jeb won't run:

http://nymag.com/news/politics/elections-2012/jeb-bush-2012-10/index4.html

right there in the headline:

Jeb Bush: ‘You can love your Mexican-American wife and also believe that you need to control the border’

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/08/jeb-bush-you-can-love-your-mexican-american-wife-and-also-believe-that-you-need-to-control-the-border/

"You can love your Mexican-American wife and also believe in controlling her."

what the post doesn't mention is that he sung it to the tune of "take a letter, maria"

"You can love the Mexican culture, you can love your Mexican-American wife and also believe that we need to control the border," Bush told the crowd. "This is a bizarre kind of idea that somehow you can have an affection for people in a different country and not think the rule of law should apply. This is ludicrous."

He added that he would push to deploy "forward-leaning border control agents" closer to the actual border; use new technologies, including drones, to monitor border traffic; and fix the E-Verify system and stop providing law enforcement funding to "sanctuary cities" that refuse to work with federal agencies to deport illegal immigrants.

As for the nation's illegal immigrants, Bush said "I honestly think we need to provide a path to legalize status, not citizenship."

"The idea that we’re going to round up 11 million people and send them back -- it’s not real. It’s not grounded in reality."

"forward-eaning" jfc these people and their corpodrivel.

inleaning

"forward-leaning border control agents" closer to the actual border

"I can't see what's going on over there and my binoculours are broken. If only there was another way!"

http://media.giphy.com/media/lGkUyj3IrEcvu/giphy.gif

lol

Note how they aren't actually moving anywhere, just giving the appearance of movement.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-vows-long-campaign-wont-commit-to-backing-gop-nominee/2015/07/09/8f75a5b8-264e-11e5-b72c-2b7d516e1e0e_story.html

Trump said the call from Priebus “was meant, in my opinion, to be a congratulatory call . . . It wasn’t a lecturing-type call. He’s going to lecture me? Give me a break.”

Hypothetical GOP nominee breathes sigh of relief.

looking forward to his financial disclosures

god, this guy. just a quote machine.

“I have a huge staff — I have a big staff in Iowa, New Hampshire, all over,” Trump said. “I absolutely stay in. If for some reason I think it’s not going to happen, I’m not a masochist. You understand that, right? . . . I’m like a smart person. I went to the Wharton School of finance. I built a great company.”

he's like a smart person

“My life has not been losing, you understand that,” Trump said. “They used to say, ‘clown.’ I’m not a person that loses. I don’t lose.”

"There goes Donald Trump, that winning clown", that's what they used to say.

He's sounding a bit like Fredo in Godfather II there.

"I can handle things, I'm smart--not like everyone says--not dumb, smart, and I want respect. I went to the Wharton School of finance..."

feel like hill v. trump could be a 1984 style landslide

http://fusion.net/story/162656/we-made-a-chrome-extension-to-add-real-ridiculous-donald-trump-quotes-to-every-mention-of-his-name/

There is no head of the GOP. There is no GOP.

only Zul

otm

Like Gandalf, I have a huge staff

feel like hill v. trump could be a 1984 style landslide

yeah so wd Hil vs Jose Canseco, what is your point?

you guys really define 'easily amused'

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/07/trump-leads-gop-field-in-north-carolina.html

I won't consider myself amused until someone hits Trump in the groin w a football