Here is an instant classic, cleverly titled "Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight." I expect a re-mix will include a musical soundtrack. Maybe the Music Man?
Kathleen Parker of the WaPo describes it. The thirteen minutes passes quickly. Folks with fond memories of Hillary's "Pretty in Pink" cattle futures exposition will be disappointed, and I am sure we all have our favorite Hillary whoppers which have been overlooked here.
Do let me add - people are quick to point at pictures from the 2008 campaign and note that eight years in the White House have aged Obama but my goodness: eight years out of the White House have been hell on Hillary.
First
Posted by: geezer | May 18, 2016 at 11:30 AM
Well, she's been out of the WH for 15 years.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 18, 2016 at 11:47 AM
She doesn't live a healthy life style. Her choice for VEEP is crucial, as he could be our president in a couple of years and her choices are even more radical than Obama.
Posted by: _peter | May 18, 2016 at 11:49 AM
Can you imagine Vice President Franken being sworn in after Hillary chokes on a lime in a Corona bottle? Or Castro?
Posted by: _peter | May 18, 2016 at 11:57 AM
President Cory Booker today choked back tears at the funeral of the first Woman PResident, but said that the nation needs to continue to fight for Mrs. Clinton's values....
Posted by: _peter | May 18, 2016 at 12:01 PM
peter,
Do you mean Hillary chokes on Castro or he is sworn in?
Cuz, while I could see her choking on Fidel (viva la revolucion!) I couldn't see her lying back and thinking of mother Marx for just plain ol Julian.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | May 18, 2016 at 12:03 PM
after Hillary chokes on a lime in a Corona bottle?
Hahhaaaa!!! Too funny, peter!
Posted by: Janet S. | May 18, 2016 at 12:36 PM
the dog barks, the caravan moves on ...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-18/saudi-arabia-said-to-consider-paying-contractors-with-ious
this can't be good.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/angry-streets-not-recall-may-venezuela-leaders-biggest-151904037--sector.html
the workers paradise.
Posted by: rich@gmu | May 18, 2016 at 12:42 PM
therein lies the problem, one of the lesser known ingredients in the rise of aq, was the collapse of
oil and it's impact on the kingdom's safety net, that and the balkan and caucasus insurgencies that provided the recruiting material,
Posted by: narciso | May 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM
[Reposted from the end of several threads ago:]
I have been busy and often, like now, play catch-up.
Besides that:
-- I have a remembry that is aging and general. -- I can retain select detail at one end of the spectrum, and
-- I can retain some philosophical concepts at the other.
What that means is that much of the noise here that causes commenters to seethe and foment goes by the board for me. That is a blessing.
I admire and appreciate many JOM long-timers, lurkers, and those who come back to revisit from time to time.
I admit to under-appreciate gross repetition, goalpost movers, and put-words-into-my-mouth twisters.
JOM is, for all its ups-and-downs and occasional warts, The Gold Standard Of Observation And Commentary.
I toast its owner, its visitors, and its ongoing success!
Posted by: sbw | May 18, 2016 at 01:09 PM
thank you sbw, our host permits this socratic exercise, somewhat like kingsfield,
https://twitter.com/EylonALevy/status/732865974458830848
Posted by: narciso | May 18, 2016 at 01:11 PM
Another link to the overtime rule from Comrades Barry and Joe.
Two questions arise;
1. Is anyone truly stupid enough to not know this will simply result in adjustments by employers which will not benefit employees?
2. Under color of what law do the Feds make this imperial decree? Interstate commerce? All small businesses are engaged in IC?
OK that's four questions.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | May 18, 2016 at 01:11 PM
Good Morning!
Local rag has a story with some pictures on the Turnagain Hiking Trail that starts about a mile from our house and is one of our favorites. If anyone is interested, Turnagain Arm Trail
In other local news, big stink ongoing about some Native Villagers that killed an Endangered Humpback Whale. Western Alaska hunters may be in trouble after landing off-limits whale
The Humpback came into shallow water chasing herring, so the villagers went out in their skiffs with "high powered rifles" and took "hundreds of shots" to kill it.
Pitka’s son, with the same name, posted a video of the hunt on Facebook that showed rifles being fired and the water turning bloody red. The video was later removed.
Sad news of course to the Enviro's who want prosecution, but the Natives are thankful, and the paper helpfully includes a recipe: (How to eat a whale: A Barrow family describes how to prepare bowhead the Inupiaq way)
Posted by: daddy | May 18, 2016 at 01:19 PM
jimmyk:
jimmyk, I might have believed that except that:
1) They are ALL not true,
2) They are crafted to appear true,
3) They are designed to mislead.
No one who examines the list should have any reason to trust Democrats whose words demean them so.
Posted by: sbw | May 18, 2016 at 01:24 PM
Here's some help, Ig:
Posted by: lyle | May 18, 2016 at 01:25 PM
--They’re either going to get more money...--
Yes, because employers do not determine how much ones salary might be.
Of course I guess the next step is the Feds decide that also.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | May 18, 2016 at 01:29 PM
it's just another full employment bouffet for the bar, like the lilly ledbetter act,
Posted by: narciso | May 18, 2016 at 01:33 PM
Fascinating, little known story;
Stand aside Winchester and Colt for the gun that truly won the west; the BB gun.
Well, sort of.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | May 18, 2016 at 01:34 PM
I have run into cross-dressers in public places occasionally, and my inclination is not to harass them but to GET AWAY. In a restroom, most women would do the same thing. If I had thought Sally was a man, I wouldn't have yelled at him. I would have assumed he was there for creepy purposes and beat feet out the door.
The whole thing is bogus
Exactly, Miss Marple.
More phoniness, just like this: Another 'Racial Attack' Ruled a Hoax in College Town
Posted by: daddy | May 18, 2016 at 01:42 PM
so they have overmedicating kids to ward off some ephemeral condition, and now they admit, oops sorry about that,
Posted by: narciso | May 18, 2016 at 01:48 PM
Nice article by Chaco on Hillary's email issues.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | May 18, 2016 at 01:55 PM
Was just advised by a company that I am familiar with that a US Commercial jet was refused entry into Iranian Airspace by the Iranians, even though the US Commercial jet had pre-approval and was on the proper route and had the proper frequencies, radar contact, transponder codes, within the proper time coordinates, etc.
Looks like the Iranian "Moderates" Ben Rhodes just helped us make a Deal with aren't so moderate.
Posted by: daddy | May 18, 2016 at 02:14 PM
I wonder how many people have already died at the hands of weapons bought and terrorists trained using the money Obama and Kerry and Rhodea gave to Iran as part of the nuclear deal?
Posted by: James D | May 18, 2016 at 02:16 PM
Rush is saying that lots of Dem's are now coming to believe that Hillary may actually not have what it takes to beat Trump, and that's causing big worries, because 6 months ago they all figured she would be doing a cake walk thru the Dem Primaries right now. The dawning reality that she's a terrible candidate, generating zero enthusiasm and performing miserably against the 70 year old Socialist has even her True Believers scared to death.
I think Rush is right.
Posted by: daddy | May 18, 2016 at 02:23 PM
I posted that 13 minutes of lies video about 10 days back and read nary a word here. Good to see that TM found it and posted it. Very powerful if used properly.
From one of my USNA buddies:
Best to enlarge it but a good rant.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 18, 2016 at 02:25 PM
daddy --
Polls tend to show the same thing. Today there is a poll out of New Hampshire, a blue to purple state that Obama won twice.
It shows in a Trump vs. Sanders matchup, Sanders wins by SIXTEEN points. In a Trump vs. Rodham matchup, Rodham wins by only TWO points, within the margin of error.
The polls in state after state show the same thing -- the voters are not swarming to Trump, but they do not like Hillary.
It almost seems like BOTH parties this year seem destined to nominate the one candidate from their party who cannot win (or at least would have a very difficult time against any normal opponent).
Posted by: Theo | May 18, 2016 at 02:29 PM
I think Rush is right.
Rush has been on target this whole campaign. I was ready to send him to the glue factory before this, thinking the Internet made him obsolete. But he's had his finger on the pulse every day that I've heard him for a while.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 18, 2016 at 02:30 PM
Good job JIB
Posted by: maryrose | May 18, 2016 at 02:30 PM
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GOP_2016_TRUMP_SUPREME_COURT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-05-18-14-08-40 Any JOM legal scholars care to let us know good/bad/indifferent?
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 18, 2016 at 02:35 PM
Dave --
A decent list. The Willet selection made me smile.
Trump is clearly trying to reassure conservatives with this list.
Posted by: Theo | May 18, 2016 at 02:51 PM
Forget Christie. He's dead in the water in Joisy.
Rumor has it that he is the John Doe who is trying to quash the release of names of the unidicted co-conspirators in BridegeGate. IOW's, he knew.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 18, 2016 at 02:56 PM
I figured there'd be some Rotisserie League Fantasy Judiciary players here.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 18, 2016 at 03:01 PM
From the last thread:
The shorter blank was CFPB, the longer referred to the "unscrupulous" banking industry. But you could replace them with pretty much any government regulatory agency and the corresponding industry and it would fit just fine.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 18, 2016 at 03:01 PM
3rd new thread of the day
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 18, 2016 at 03:03 PM
1) They are ALL not true,
2) They are crafted to appear true,
3) They are designed to mislead.
sbw, I think our only point of disagreement is that I'm not sure the proponents of the statements know them not to be true, but I am sure they find them useful.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 18, 2016 at 03:05 PM
meanwhile back at the ranch,
http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/05/civilian-rescues-chibok-girl-from-boko-haram/
Posted by: narciso | May 18, 2016 at 03:08 PM
jimmyk, fair enough, but I think you give them too much benefit of the doubt.
It’s like believing a guilty Democrat who never admits guilt is innocent.
Posted by: sbw | May 18, 2016 at 03:09 PM
SBW,
I still get a kick out of O'Reilly last night, angry that the NYTimes used reporters to go after Trump that personally don't like Trump, and demanding that the Times Editors only use New York Times reporters to cover Trump who don't dislike him.
There is no such creature.
Posted by: daddy squinting at iPad | May 18, 2016 at 03:17 PM
yes douthat finds him least distasteful, like appleseeds rather than cyanide,
Posted by: narciso | May 18, 2016 at 03:52 PM
A decent list. The Willet selection made me smile.
Me, too. He's a friend of Iowahawk; in fact they appear to have had lunch together from what I see on Twitter.
But Iowahawk, who is decidedly anti-Trump, hasn't said anything about the SCOTUS list yet. Wonder if it will change his mind at all. Much as I like him, he seems like the kind of guy who would never publicly admit he was wrong, especially on something like this where he's really dug in.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 18, 2016 at 03:54 PM
Right on cue, Iowahawk tweets:
David Burge
@iowahawkblog
.@Socardini Justice Willett is also on my SCOTUS short list. #Iowahawk2016
No credit to Trump for a good choice, of course.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 18, 2016 at 04:02 PM
No credit to Trump for a good choice, of course.
Porch I asked this question on another new thread and will repeat it here: do we know that this list is Trump's personal choice or is one chosen for him?
Posted by: centralcal | May 18, 2016 at 04:10 PM
Hi centralcal, I just replied on the other thread - it's being reported as the list his campaign developed...
Posted by: Porchlight | May 18, 2016 at 04:14 PM
Good afternoon! I've been out all day. My blood pressure was good at the doctor's appointment this morning,after catching up on the threads,I'm not sure it is so great now.
I was scared to death to post on JOM the first time. I was in awe of all of all of you,so smart and funny and with wonderful stories. My silly updates from Maine pale by comparison.
Politics really sucks. Remember,my daughter works in D.C.,so I have a pretty good idea of what goes on.
Many of us are of a certain age and we know in our hearts that the country has changed and it is very frustrating.
I do hope that everyone will take a deep breath and continue to post on JOM.
Posted by: Marlene | May 18, 2016 at 05:25 PM
I was scared to death to post on JOM the first time. I was in awe of all of all of you,so smart and funny and with wonderful stories.
Marlene - I felt exactly the same way! I had lurked here forever and didn't feel like I could say anything of comparable value but then, one day, I screwed up my courage posted.
I think it's such an amazing kaleidoscope of opinions, life experiences, and funny banter. I enjoy the rabbit trails that appear out of nowhere about all kinds of things.
I hope the election differences will not cause permanent damage.
Posted by: Momto2 | May 18, 2016 at 06:55 PM
Ha! Marlene. My first post to JOM came after TM criticized me for misspelling his name in my own, now dormant blog.
Posted by: sbw | May 19, 2016 at 08:51 AM