Powered by TypePad

« This Is Why We Have A Federal System | Main | Easter Weekend »

March 25, 2016



Nobody is listening. :-(


First things first---you're crazy!


The Democrats talk about UFOs. The Republicans insult each other's wives. The President just got through dancing the tango, and Europe is going boom.

This is David Lynch's world. The rest of us our welcome to find a spot on the ledge and watch.


Going back to Clarice’s offer to unredact the redacted for Lent comments . . .

In history, Jewish bankers got their start for two reasons:

1) They had an international diaspora necessary for international banking, and

2) The Christian Church believed that since Jews were going to Hell anyway, they could lend money to Christians who dared not risk going to Hell by lending money.

Needless to say, Church views changed as entrepreneurship grew.

Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki

--2) The Christian Church believed that since Jews were going to Hell anyway, they could lend money to Christians who dared not risk going to Hell by lending money.--

Citation? Jesus said we shouldn't turn away from those who seek to borrow and even told us to lend to our enemies.

Tom Bowler

I think it was the usury issue. For religious reasons Christians weren't suppose to charge interest on a loan. The Jews had no such prohibition.

Absurd though she be.

Was it about National Security that all that was kept secret? Maybe they, and she, thinks it's all just a nice little hobby.


from the last thread.


during maverick's campaign, one of his advisers davis, was on the payroll of the ukrainian oligarch's party,

Something to that.

Heh, the good ol' time value of money. Who invented that? There to fix the blame.

We've all heard Shakespeare's 'Never a blah blah blah', but I sort of prefer the take of, I believe, Rabelais, who much preferred to be a borrower for then the lender wished you all prosperity and luck, but were you a lender, the borrower would prefer you died and forgot the loan.

Of Mice and Mischief Makers.

It came from hoarding, er, stockpiling food, to weather the 'climate change' and 'weather weirding', er times the Gods are angered. And thence, of course, the cats.


roswell was a prime military testing site, majestic turns out to have mostly bogus,


the organized wiki file shows red queen was aware of who ordered the hit,

Adulthood's End.

Heh, Hillary may call the spirits of the vasty Area, but will they answer when she do call?

Dave (in MA)

Norm Macdonald ✔ ‎@normmacdonald
My favorite Garry joke: "I'm dating Miss Georgia. All right, it's the former Miss Georgia. OK, it's George Foreman." #RIPGarryShandling


Dan Burton had a falling out with Aliev's circle, who also contracted the Podesta group


Hillary's new campaign slogan: "To Infinity and Beyond!"

It has got to be the water on the coasts that is making these people so delirious. The silly season used to be well defined as the dog days of August when all of the grownups were at the beach. Now it's 24/7 year round.

Obama told a bunch of Argentine teens that there's no real difference between capitalism and communism except for the 100 - 150 million bodies, of course.

And another thing. I expect the aliens they ind in Area 51 will be the kindly, helpful sort who will solve global warming as they suck our precious bodily fluids.

We're going to have a showing of "Idiocracy" this weekend and you're all invited. It's been re-classified as a documentary.


I got that earlier bit from this link,


Cecil Turner

At first I thought this was implying she didn't know about the Groom Lake test facility in Nevada. Which would've meant she was a moron and entirely unsuitable to be running for Prez. But listening to the video, it's apparent she's talking about the Air Force's UFO files, which is a completely different subject.

So as much as I'd like to accuse her of the former . . . at least based on this . . . I really can't.


the one in question,



camacho speaks,



well when we get out of 1947:


pagar a bacon,  country ham and sausage supporter

Here we go again:


"“We will demand that Congress listen to the People and take immediate action to save our democracy."

Has anyone ever heard of a leftist making any effort to save democracy? I would believe them trying to save Communisum.


yes, sbw, there was a cspan interview with gerald posner about his book about vatican finance, and how it was a relatively new thing,


Why aren't they protesting at the White House? Isn't that where the Messiah lives, the One who is almost like a God? Shouldn't he have "saved democracy" by now? What's he been waiting on?


these are van jones type astroturf,



red queen did not get the memo,


it inspired the x files and dark skies, which featured jeri ryan, who figures in other conspiracies

Free James D!

Anyone see anything on the news about protests in Charlotte yesterday/today over a law designed to keep men out of women's bathrooms?

They mentioned it on the local news this morning, and there looked to be a huge crowd there.

Who knew transgender bathrooms is the issue that the left is ready to go to the barricades for?


I thought it was over the religious freedom bill.

Beasts of England

Looks like Ol' Teddy was ministering to his flock. Although it appears that it was more than just hands he was laying upon them. Maybe he'll get some mitigation points for 'celebrating diversity'.


it doesn't pass the smell test,


this does by contrast.


Hey there, Beasts.

Miss Marple 2

Hi, Beasts!


it's gotten very silly, and martinet graham chapman has got to put a stop to it,


hey beasts,


the truth is not out there,


Thomas Collins

Free James D!, the only thing I saw was the NBA was reevaluating whether it could hold its All-Star Game in Charlotte given North Carolina's outrageous law that might prevent a dong waver who identified as a female from using the Ladies Room. The inhumanity!


I have no idea whether the Cruz loose zipper stories are true or not. But let's assume for the moment that they are.

How on earth could a candidate running as a conservative Christian not keep his zipper up, at least during the campaign? These sorts of stories always seem to bubble to the surface. What, this time it's different?



and Marvel has gone all Hydra on the matter,

Thomas Collins

My main focus on the Cruz story is the dumbing down of words. I've heard the ladies who might be the subject of Cruz's supposed flings and one time stands referred to as mistresses. When men were men, a mistress was a woman well kept by the man in the context of an ongoing private relationship A man should not be credited with having five mistresses simply because he has johnson control issues.


Right, DrJ.

And what kind of person would do that to his party?

Dems can get away with it, sometimes (not Edwards, whose affair was also broken by the Enquirer). Repubs never can. Especially a preachy guy like Cruz who is always quoting Scripture and is basically central casting for a conservative Christian pastor with zipper problems.

No wonder he couldn't get any Senate endorsements. Poor Jeb. Who wants to be the last guy to endorse a serial adulterer?


#TheThing reminds me of that Ron Rosenbaum story in 2007 where he claimed to have knowledge that other outlets were sitting on a major scandal but didn't know whether he should break it or not. Of course he claimed it wasn't "the Edwards rumor," but nobody believed him.

Texas Liberty Gal

re: Cruz If anyone thinks that an ambitious man like Cruz would have flings with 5 ladies and then run for President with that in his background you are nuts! I'm quite frankly shocked that some of you are even entertaining the thought that this might be true.


wasn't that mickey kaus, it's not impossible, eg: john ensign but highly unlikely,

Cecil Turner

If these stories don't pan out, it's going to hurt Trump.


On July 8, 1947, witnesses claim that a spaceship with five aliens aboard crashed on a sheep-and-clattle ranch outside Roswell, NM, in incident they say has been covered up by the government. On March 31, 1948, exactly nine months after that day, Al Gore was born. That clears up a lot of things.


Until the National Enq has pictures like they did with John Edwards, there is no reason to take the story seriously. I mean, the NE runs stories on Obama and Hillary and their alleged antics all the time. I see no mileage out of them even in these precincts.

Besides, does anyone really think, based on past record, that Trump is remotely faithful to his current spouse? Seriously?

I am reminded of a disgusting book -- Hollywood Babylon -- written by a rather disgusting man. There's no reason to believe much of the garbage dished in that book, but since the writer was repulsive, and presumably had insight into being repulsive, his stuff was believed all over the place. (And a lot of the legends originated by that book continue to pollute film history).

Support Trump if you must, but be careful about embracing the scandals that suddenly surround those who attack him. Trump isn't above dishing lies early and often.

Thomas Collins

Texas Liberty Gal, although I hope it's not true, I think National Enquirer is pretty careful when they run these stories on prominent pols. I'll bet they have credible sources (although even supposedly credible sources can lie and exaggerate, to be sure).


M. Continetti at FreeBeacon has a very good essay on Barry already acting like the UN Sec Gen and a lot less like our prez. Powerline links it. Worth a quick read.

Hey, Beasts!

common man

You might slow your roll long enough to consider the source. The Enquirer is at minimal spotty on stories, and that is before before you consider the Enquirer has formally endorsed Trump several weeks ago. The story seems to quote only one guy, and that is guy in Trump's campaign. Everything else is heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who says some private investigators are investigating. Anyone one think Trump is above a false rumor attack through friendly sources? If yes, come buy this shiny new bridge I own free and clear...

Thomas Collins

This is different from a story on a known escapader such as Bill Clinton. National Enquirer is trying to take down a current prominent POTUS candidate who doesn't have a reputation as a philanderer. Plus, this would have more focused vetting than a story in which National Enquirer gets some prof to speculate on UFOs from Neptune morphing into nanoparticles and attacking the water system.



How is it that you think this Cruz story is scurrilous unfounded trash that should be shunned but it's okay for you to assert that "based on past record" Trump is definitely cheating on his current wife?

Thomas Collins

The fact that Trump is classified as a National Enquirer fave, common man, is going to make the National Enquirer even more careful if the purpose is to take Cruz down. As CT points out at 3:45 PM, this could backfire on Trump. National Enquirer is unlikely to have gone off half cocked on this story.



It's based on past behavior, and conduct he's boasted about on the Howard Stern show over the years. He might have changed, but there is no compelling reason to believe he has.

Porch, honest to gosh, you guys have pinned your hopes on someone who, to every appearance, is a genuinely bad man. Since LBJ probably fit that category too, it might work out OK. But there's no reason to believe it will.

JM Hanes


"If these stories don't pan out, it's going to hurt Trump."

Unfortunately, they hurt Cruz too even if they are not true at all, both because of the kind of assumptions we're seeing right here and because of the time wasted addressing them instead of campaign issues.

Repeating a caution I voiced on the last thread, I wouldn't necessarily assume that the Enquirer must have something. For every John Edwards or Tiger Woods story, they've also published mountains of salacious, unsubstantiated, innuendos, and well-known politicians have less recourse than almost any other targets.


The Enquirer first broke the Edwards story with innuendo and anonymous sources. Then it was drip, drip drip until finally photos and the rest.


Maybe I need a transcranial magnetic stimulation emotional perception cure but IMO the latest is just a pantomime cage match. Cruz and Trump are simply letting voters know how they intend to deal with Hillary.
Consider ...


  • Spouses are not off limits, everything involving Hubby Bubba BJ is fair game;
  • No quarter given because Hillary is a woman. More than just policies everything is on the table, from her looks to Goldman Sachs;
  • He will openly attack her personally.


  • Spouses are not off limits, everything involving Hubby Bubba BJ is fair game;
  • He will attack her using a female proxy, eg Carly, instead of directly;
  • He's drawing in the democrat female demographic. For any of them that want their chance to have sex with the next president of the US, Ted's their guy.

Thomas Collins

JMH, I acknowledge that as a public figure, Cruz is in a more vulnerable position for these stories. However, I don't think National Enquirer would rely solely on NYT v. Sullivan in a case in which the subject is a current legitimate POTUS contender. Once again, I'm not saying the Cruz multiple liaisons story is true, but I believe National Enquirer has sourced this more carefully than most of its other scandal stories.


What I find ominous is that, while now even the MSM is reporting on this story, the one place where there has been nary a peep is Drudge. The guy who gave us the blue dress. And who is now a blatant Trump supporter.

And we live in age where you don't just sneak off to a motel room together on the QT. You've got to sext naked selfies to each other.

And I wish I could believe that Cruz wouldn't be so stupid, but he's a guy, so . . .

I'm holding out hope that it isn't true, but I am worried.


Appalled, if it turns out to be true, what's going to hurt Cruz the most is not that he had the affairs, but that he campaigned on evangelical Christian values and even had Glen Beck out there alluding that he is the equivalent of the Second Coming (the one thing that has always bothered me about Cruz, even if I did vote for him.)

Trump has never cloaked himself in holy righteousness. Heck, the Ivana affair was all over the not just the tabloids but the MSM for months. People are way more willing to forgive the sin, than they are the the hypocrisy.

Cecil Turner

National Enquirer is unlikely to have gone off half cocked on this story.

There are several past high visibility lawsuits that suggest otherwise. And from the few quotes I've seen (something about private investigators "digging into" affairs he "supposedly" had), there is a lot of built-in deniability to the story.

The Enquirer running it could backfire on the Donald by itself, but if his supporters run with it and then it proves false, it's going to leave a mark.

Thomas Collins

Rope a dope is certainly a possibility, Porchlight. No doubt helps circulation. Amanda Carpenter, by the way, has issued a strong denial that she is or was one of Cruz's flings.

common man

Believe what you will. See any sources quoted not tied at the hip to DJT in that article? Any names of women. Any names of PIs who want to go on the record with something they have found out?


Appalled, Trump is an open book. He's had affairs and has been open about them. His wives all say nice things about him.

LBJ - horrible guy, and stuff about him was known and circulated, but he wasn't personally open about any of that stuff, except being just a general vulgar dude.

You're basically saying that Trump is definitely having an affair *right now* because he's had them in the past. Is that how you pick stocks?

Yes, I've pinned my hopes on Trump. It seems clear to me that he's all we got.

Free James D!

Porch, honest to gosh, you guys have pinned your hopes on someone who, to every appearance, is a genuinely bad man.

I don't think that's what anyone here is doing. I think everyone here who defends Trump or pushes back against his critics would rather have someone else (Cruz, Walker, Fiorino, whomever).

It's more a matter of acknowledging the reality that:

(1) he's the frontrunner, and will at worst go into the convention with more delegates than anyone else (and more likely go into it with enough delegates to either win on the first ballot or come within a hair of that).

(2) dislodging him from that position, either now or during the convention, will basically blow up the party and guarantee a Hillary victory in November.

(3) he is raising issues that resonate with a lot of people out there, and which have gone unaddressed by the GOP leadership basically forever, and those people are clearly tired of being ignored, lied to or told to just go off and die already.

Given that, I think the people here who are, while not necessarily Trump supporters, accepting of him as the likely nominee in November, are just trying to make the best of the situation we find ourselves in.

Thomas Collins

CT, I think it's going to backfire on Trump even if National Enquirer has incriminating pics of Cruz. If GOP pooh-bahs think National Enquirer took down Cruz for Trump, they will decide that bringing down Trump in Cleveland is worth whatever risk that entails.

Meanwhile, John Kasich lurks.

Texas Liberty Gal

Thomas Collins - You mean like the story Obama has 12 mistresses?

Cecil Turner

You're basically saying that Trump is definitely having an affair *right now* because he's had them in the past. Is that how you pick stocks?

I don't know about stocks, but in my experience that's exactly how you'd bet on a serial philanderer.

Texas Liberty Gal

I think the other thing everybody can agree on is Cruz is super smart. To think he would run having this in his background is laughable.


well there was the scoop about the cia nurse,that killed scalia, that's plausible right


but he's a guy, so . . .

I find this deeply offensive. I personally, and I suspect many others here, keep their promises. And that includes zippers.

Texas Liberty Gal

Also of note-Drudge has no mention of the story on his site


seriously there's a whole season of ncis, in schweitzer's revelations alone, yet crickets,

common man

Using National Enquirer and carefully vetted in the same sentence is a major violation of writing etiquette, and common sense...


--Meanwhile, John Kasich lurks.--

See this is why I've got that sick, worried, sinking feeling.

It's one of those times when you think to yourself, "No good can come of this."

I guess there is an upside, in that he might be able to beat Hillary. The downside is that he's probably insane.

Thomas Collins

I hadn't read about that one, Texas Liberty Gal. Was it a story claiming real mistresses or, as in the Cruz case, flings? I could easily believe that Obama has had at least 12 flings of various sorts. For that matter, 12 flings for any man or woman of at least middle age is hardly a stunning number. Five even less so, especially for those with the opportunity.


I apologize, Dr. J.--it was a bad joke. And women can be just as guilty of that sort of thing.


well delusional like jesse eisenberg in the affleck vehicle,


James D.,

I was a Walker fan. Sent him money the day he announced. He fizzled.

I voted for Cruz for Senator and was happy to do so. I also defended him here during the shutdown when a lot of folks were coming down on him. Over the course of the campaign, I liked him less and less, and lost my confidence that he could win.

If it's going to be Clash of the Titans, I want the guy who can fell Medusa.

Cecil Turner

If GOP pooh-bahs think National Enquirer took down Cruz for Trump, they will decide that bringing down Trump in Cleveland is worth whatever risk that entails.

If Trump goes into the convention with more than 50% of the delegates, he'll win (the primary . . . he's still running double digits behind Hillary for the general). If he goes in with less than that, they're going to take him down (and should, because he's running double digits behind Hillary). I don't think this story changes anything in that dynamic in a meaningful way . . . except in the likelihood that he'll fail to reach the goal.

Jack is Back!ll

Inquirer Cruz story is bogus. Guy who owns the rag is long time friend of The Donald. In fact, I read some place weeks ago to expect the Inquirer to be let loose on Cruz once things tightened up.

But both campaigns are shaming themselves. When do we hear how to make America great again with competent leadership and inspiring ideas?


OK, if this Cruz stuff is true, let's just say "Who cares?" and "MYOB".
It's between Heidi and Ted, not us. Just like all the Ds.
And I'm OK with it--if the guy has enough testosterone to run around, maybe he has enough to stand up to Ds and get himself elected.

My spouse knows well he'd wake up with his balls stuffed in his mouth some morning if this ever happened here---
Not really. But he thinks it would, so that's all that matters. I do NOT want to ever get a sexually transmitted disease like cervical cancer.

Free James D!

I think the other thing everybody can agree on is Cruz is super smart. To think he would run having this in his background is laughable.

I'm not commenting one way or the other about whether the story is true or not, but the fact that he's super smart doesn't mean a thing.

History is chock-full of incredibly smart, politically savvy men who thought they could never be touched. Until the day they learned that wasn't true and they watched their whole career go down the toilet due to an affair (or some other personal failing).


Won't there be a lot of questions when they find Vince Foster in Area 51 ?

Miss Marple 2

I can think of one other guy, Yale law school grad, Rhodes Scholar, who ran for president with a past history of affairs of various sorts.

Does the name Gennifer Flowers ring a bell? Paula Jones?


Yep, Donald is friends with the Enquirer guy. I don't know why that makes a difference. This was rumored for weeks and it was the Rubio people who wanted it to break before Super Tuesday to help Rubio overtake Cruz.

Once Rubio dropped out, those people, many of whom were NeverTrumpers, didn't want it to come out because it would obviously help the Donald.

Thus the Enquirer picked it up.


OK, if this Cruz stuff is true, let's just say "Who cares?" and "MYOB".

Slight problem. If true, Cruz would have been willing to run for his party's nomination and then the general knowing that this stuff was very likely to come out at any time, thus ruining his chances and his party's chances and potentially destroying his marriage and family.

Not only that, he chose to run as the smarmy preacher, so that if it did break, it would do maximum damage.

Who would do that?

It's not just one affair that maybe he told his wife about and begged for forgiveness. If true (your premise again), it's at least five women.

Sorry, there's no moving on in that scenario.

Miss Marple 2

Zerohedge's take on this, with quotes and such:


Art in Newport

If this story is true, Cruz has made a fool of Mitt Romney, and the entire state of Utah.

Miss Marple 2

Art, not to mention the Weekly Standard, the National Review, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh and his brother David, and assorted people who endorsed him.

Perhaps this is why Ben Carson didn't endorse him.

Jack is Back!ll


Gimme a break:) I can't even imagine Cruz taking his suit off to go to bed.

Jack is Back!ll

Trump's response.


Okay. It's over. lets move on to other things. The truth has set us all free. He truly is the jerk my friend warned me about back in July.

Miss Marple 2


This story was shopped around by the Rubio camp back in the summer, including Rick Wilson.

A Washington Times reporter said he knows of 2 of the women.

Several media sites have been sitting on it.

Surely, after the stunt with Melania's picture, you don't expect Trump to be all cordial?

Thomas Collins

Tell that to Edwards and Woods, common man.

I'm really surprised that so many of my friends here are summarily dismissing this story as bogus. Sure, it could be National Enquirer simply publishing speculation by those who are out to get Cruz. But to dismiss it summarily? I have to disagree respectfully with that view.

CT, I think GOP is more likely to take the nomination away from a 50% plus one Trump if Cruz's campaign is destroyed by this, even if National Enquirer has the goods. GOP will decide it has had enough of Trump, whether or not it has proof Trump was behind this.

But to bring some perspective on this: Viewed against some of the 19th century POTUS elections, this is kid stuff. Rumor, innuendo, reckless behavior and downright score settling is always a part of politics. Sometimes it bubbles and sometimes it bubbles over. We may be seeing the bubbling over in this case. And we don't even have the final report on The Hill yet.

As far as this being inconsistent with Cruz's persona, there is one person in American public life, dead or alive, about whom I would be 100% stunned to have something like this proven: George Catlett Marshall. Everyone else? I might be very surprised or skeptical, but not 100% stunned.

Thomas Collins

It's the nerdy ones one must watch out for, JiB. :-)


I think the other thing everybody can agree on is Cruz is super smart. To think he would run having this in his background is laughable.

TK will pipe up any minute reminding us that he wasn't smart enough to check citizenship requirements;)

JM Hanes

Have any of the pictured women outright claimed she did have a "fling" with Ted? These days the National Enquirer doesn't have to prove a damn thing, does it? And because it's Cruz, it's double damning, because, of course, a shameless philanderer is morally superior to a hypocrite. Is there anything Trump supporters won't excuse?


I know, JiB, it's hard to imagine. :)


I hate to say it, but after reading that Trump tweet, I think there's proof, I think Trump knows that there's proof, and I wouldn't be surprised if Drudge has got it.

I say that because it reads like bait, and not even subtle bait at that.


===Is there anything Trump supporters won't excuse?===

Nope. Or believe.

JM Hanes

It's my impression that the days of original reporting at Drudge are long gone.


I'm not trying to hide. I can't type. Sur is Sue.

Miss Marple 2

What am I excusing that Trump did?

He didn't shop the story around; the Rubio people did. There is evidence of that.

He objected to the picture of his wife being posted in an ad. Perfectly justifable, in my opinion.

He did not threaten anything about Heidi, except he would spill the beans on her, which he did today, and it was all her ties to Goldman Sachs, the Bush Administration, the FEC, NAFTA, and the COuncil of Foreign Relations.

As far as I can see, the only thing he did that was questionable was poking Cruz by mentioning the Enquirer had gotten some stories right.

The comments to this entry are closed.