President Elect Trump, starting off on the right foot

You have GOT to love this!

As Trump Leaves Press Behind for Steak Dinner, Incoming Admin Already Showing Lack of Transparency

LOL!

In a highly unusual move, President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday night left his Manhattan residence without notifying the reporters covering him or giving any indication of where he was going.

The maneuver seemed to deliberately limit access to the media.

So, the media that treated him first like a side-show and then when it looked like he actually had a chance, like a pariah, is distraught that he is not kissing their asses? Really? LOL!

With his Tuesday night actions, the Trump Administration is shaping up to be the least accessible to the public and the press in modern history.

It only feels that way to the press because they have been wearing blinders for the past 7 years. They have not cared what the Obama Administration has been doing. They have been too blinded by the halo they put on his head. They are singularly incurious when Democrats are involved.

A week after the election, Trump hasn't yet held a press conference, the longest any recent president has waited to speak to the press. That continues a weeks-long drought that's been going on since mid-summer, when Trump last answered questions from the press.

Funny, I don't recall this same level of angst when Hillary was not holding press conferences for dozens of weeks.

Trump has also refused to travel with the press corps since the election, a continuation of his campaign practice of flying in a separate plane from the media that covered him.

Again, good for him. He is not a Democrat President Elect. He won't get the fawning, fan-boy treatment so why should he subject himself to that? No sane person would.

The media covering the president-elect have also not yet been offered briefings on his transition efforts, which was a typical practice for past presidents that allowed the public to keep apprised of the details of the new government.

Again, why should he? So that the press can start attacking his every decision and highlight every mis-step (or just make them up when they can't find them)? The press has shown that he will not be treated fairly. Why should he go out of his way to help them?

The press have and are going out of their way to call this the "most divisive" election and a "contentious" election. The left is rioting in the streets. The left is beating up people. The left is burning down buildings and blocking traffic. THAT is what is making this divisive and contentious. Funny how when Obama won (twice!) despite how racist this country was reported to be, there were no riots, no burned down buildings, no blocked highways. You don't think that conservatives "felt bad" that the other guys won? The only difference then versus now is that then the media's (and left) guy won and now the media's (and left) gal lost. Trump is not the problem, Racism is not the problem. The left and the media are the problem.

What an amazing group of IDIOTS!

What an immense amount of ignorance and naivety! These people have no idea what is in the Iranian agreement because much of it is secret! The latest public facts make it clear that inspectors will have no ability to inspect. If the inspectors can't inspect, how is Iran prevented from developing an atomic bomb? Hint, they aren't!

Typical lefty crap from Hollywood lefties!

If you want to see how big the idiocy in Hollywood has become (well actually always was), watch as much of this as you can stand:

I don't know which would be worst; if everyone involved in this video actually believes it or if they actually don't but would prefer Iran with a bomb than America doing what it takes to prevent it. Neither answer is good.

P.S. Oh and that crap at the end about "love their children too". It was crap when Sting did it about Russia and it is crap now about Iran. It is actually worst about Iran. The Russian people did and do love their children but the folks in charge of Russia at that time thought that they had a real chance to best America and as long as they and their own children survived, all is good. In the case of Iran, they actually believe that dying in the service of killing infidels (us) is a "very good thing" and it would actually make them martyrs so using that line in connection with Iran is extra, double stupid and shows how little of the world these clowns actually know.

Obamacare realities!

Obamacare realities strike home! Another fan discovers the hard reality that there "an't no such thing as a free lunch". Welcome to the results of getting what you want. I hope that this is a learning experience for you but I won't hold my breath as there was sufficient information available before Obamacare "got jammed through congress with just a Democrat party line vote and other procedural tricks" but you were still all for it and cheered when it was signed into law. Well now you get to live with the results unless the Republicans can undo this mess - at which time you are likely to blame them for something anyway.

California now giving driver’s licenses to illegal alians

California has begun accepting driver’s license applications from immigrants who are in the country illegally.

The DMV expects 1.4 million people will seek a license in the first three years of a program aimed at boosting road safety and making illegal (ed. there fixed it for you) immigrants’ lives easier.

So, how does one know that the "illegal" is who they are claiming to be? How does one know that an "illegal" does not go to the DMV 3, 4, or more times to get a "valid driver's license" under any number of names? How long will it be until failure to accept one of these legal "illegal" licenses becomes a crime? By definition, an illegal immigrant is here against the law and is ALREADY breaking the law by being here. What part of "illegal immigrant" do these folks not understand?

Obamacare and related thoughts

The Indiana school districts claim that they'll have to reduce working hours or lay off workers in order to shoulder the increased costs - or financial penalties - the employer mandate would impose upon them.

Sorry but it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people. Teachers overwhelmingly voted for Obama and they overwhelmingly supported Obamacare (ACA). They wanted this, they own this!

In a related article, this part is spot on:

The idea that an insurer like Regence can, or will, spin on a dime and revive our ol’ $587 Woody within the next six weeks is absurd.

True, Obama's "dictate" that insurance companies can continue to offer their older, non-qualifying plans for another year was (as is most things Obama) pure BS. He knows that there is NO way the insurance companies can re-tool their plans and get state commissioner approval to offer the older plans in time. Not to mention that those already cancelled are still cancelled. Done is done.

All I can say is, you voted for it, you own it and you sure are starting to get it! With his closing paragraph, this rube guarantees that he will not only get it, but he will get it hard and continue to get it repeatedly as this particular old dog refuses to learn a new trick.

We’re willing to suck it up and pay our fair share for health insurance. We want the exchanges to work.

What is so funny about this piece is that he still thinks himself so smart, enlightened and righteous but he is none of those things. This was a designed disaster. It may be running ahead of schedule but it is and has been on the projected path. He is a rube of the highest order as even after being shown the truth, he continues to willingly and gladly drink the Kool-Aid.

In a related note, is it just me or do you also want to just scream at everyone that dares utter the meaningless phrase "fair share". What the HELL is your "fair share"? It is liberal fairy dust. It is unicorns. It is whatever the person uttering it thinks it means at that time and place. The is the apex of empty gestures. It is a sliding scale of demand for more. It comes from the same suitcase as "living wage", "give back" and "social justice". These are the things that liberals utter when they can't bring themselves to tell you what they really think either because they aren't thinking or they know what they are thinking will get them laughed out of the conversation so they dress it up with these "oh so PC" catch phrases hoping to slide past logic.

But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.

That is right, Queen Nancy said that "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it". She is referring to the current health care legislation.

That would be like me telling you that you have to buy this car in order to test drive it, oh and by the way, too bad if you don't like it as you now own it!

Most members of congress (if not all of them) don't even know what is in this steaming pile as none of them have read it and they want us to take it on faith that "its all good".

It is an embarrassment that she is in congress and a down right crime that she is speaker of the house!

Can you say "projection"?

The biggest problem with the media’s understanding of the Tea Party movement is that some on the left assume (1) that the Tea Parties are Astroturfed at least as much as some of the left’s own demonstrations and (2) that the educated right hates Obama at least as much as the educated left hates Bush and Cheney. So far, I haven’t seen much evidence of either.

Neither have I and I don't know anyone that "hates" Obama. I know a number of people that think he is wrong for this country and is taking us in the wrong direction but "hate"? Just don't see it. Most on the right did not "hate" Clinton either. Thought he was a disgrace to the office and that he and the misses were basically acting like grifters but no hate, heck Bill seems like a real likable fellow, someone you would enjoy having a few beers with. I do admit that there are some harsh feelings toward the misses. She just can not help but rub some people the wrong way.

I did watch this exchange as part of an earlier post related to the guns at town hall events controversy. This bit did escape my notice as I was focused on the other topic.

Typical Times

Where is the 'Science' in this science article? I followed the link from Instapundit because the wording got my attention. Once I started to read the article I knew something was amiss. Then I saw that it was from the Times. That explains a lot, like why the following passages are in a Science article:

In the United States and much of the Western world, when a couple divorces, the average income of the woman and her dependent children often plunges by 20 percent or more, while that of her now unfettered ex, who had been the family’s primary breadwinner but who rarely ends up paying in child support what he had contributed to the household till, climbs accordingly.

What world is the author living in? Of course he doesn't contribute the same in exact dollars after a divorce than he did before. First he does not live there any more, second he has to pay for his own place to live, and third he has to pay child support (even when he has joint custody and the kids spend part/half of the time with him). His available income goes go UP by 20%? Are you kidding me? If he has any extra disposable income it is because he was kicked out of the 2400 sqr ft house he was living in and now resides in a 600 sqr ft apartment. Real fair exchange that.

the man who skips from one nubile spouse to another over time is, like the sultan who hoards the local maidenry in a single convenient location, simply seeking to “maximize his reproductive fitness,” to sire as many children as possible with as many wives as possible.

So it is also now the man's fault that his wife left him and he would like to be a couple again. She got "tired" of being married, takes him for child support and short term alimony and he is a harem builder because he is dumb enough to give another woman the opportunity to financially screw him.

“We’re so wedded to the model that men will benefit from multiple marriages and women won’t, that women are victims of the game,” Dr. Borgerhoff Mulder said.

Well liberal groups are but not anyone that bothers to actually look at the statistics behind marriage, divorce and child support in America.

but the capacity of women across cultures to dissolve relationships that aren’t working has been much underestimated.

Especially in America by liberals where the no-fault divorce allows either partner to basically walk away from a marriage without cause or concern and more and more women are doing just that while men are getting crushed under child support payments.

A few child support facts:

According to the U.S. Census Bureau report, non-custodial fathers pay some or all of their support obligations 77% of the time, and non-custodial mothers make full or partial payment 75% of the time.

Of all fathers who have custody of their children, more than 92% of them work, either full or part-time, while 78% of custodial mothers are employed.

So men are just a likely (or more so) to pay some or all of their child support verses women and when men do have custody of their children they are 14% more likely to have a job than women.

Also Sanford Braver, Ph.D researched the statement that a mothers standard of living goes down after a divorce while a fathers goes up and finds it false.

Among the myths under attack: the "disappearing dad'' who initiates the divorce and then deserts his children; and the widely cited 73 percent drop in standard of living that divorced mothers and children suffer (an alleged error in arithmetic by Harvard researcher Lenore Weitzman). Braver's calculations indicate that post-divorce mothers and fathers share about the same standard of living, at least in the beginning.
In case you are interested, more info here.

An't it a beatch when facts get in the way of a good "story" be it in the science section or the opinion page?