Suddenly drooping in the polls (read it all) and flagging in his desire to be the president because it's not actually a monarchy or a dictatorship, Donald Drumpf may be the only person that can defeat Donald Trump for the Republican nomination.
Drumpf may be taking the lead.
When it comes to a classic narcissist like Donald Trump, it’s hard to say when (or if) he’ll begin to find the process of running for president so humiliating that he’s tempted to just drop out. He clearly doesn’t care that “respectable” people are routinely calling him a racist and comparing him to some of the most notorious fascist dictators of the 20th-Century. He doesn’t seem to care that the intelligentsia and the media elite are condemning his character and his intelligence. But he’s also obsessed with his image and he’s financially dependent on his brand. His campaign has already cost him business relationships and partnerships, yet that hasn’t tamed or dissuaded him so far.
[...]
Trump’s already getting a little squirrelly. He’s under pressure after his campaign manager was indicted yesterday for battering a Breitbart reporter, and now he’s reneging on his pledge to support the eventual nominee because he feels the RNC has treated him shabbily and he can sense that the party elite are plotting to deny him the nomination at the convention. There’s increasing talk that he could cost the Republicans control of the House of Representatives as well as the Senate.
Due to sore loser laws in many states that will prevent Trump from running as an independent after failing to secure the Republican nomination, he cannot run a successful third party candidacy. But he could get on the ballot in some red states, split the vote, and hand Electoral College delegates to Clinton or Sanders. I can see him doing that out of spite.
Ted Cruz never stood a chance of winning the presidency anyway, Drumpf or No Trump.
He’s very unpredictable. He seems to be getting enough validation at the moment to make all the hits he’s taking seem worthwhile, but this doesn’t seem to make much sense from a business or branding perspective, and he surely knows that history is written by the same intellectuals who increasingly despise him with the heat of a thousand suns.
[...]
... what terrifies him more? The humiliation of losing? Or the responsibility of winning?
Relative to sinking popularity (Clinton 54, Sanders 42 in the latest NY poll) as familiarity becomes more contemptible, it was understood that was supposed to be Hillary's problem exclusively. I am sensing the rising paranoia of those Republicans who claimed long ago he was a stalking horse for Clinton. Down or out... you go, Donnie.
In going to the town hall format for the remaining three GOP presidential contenders, let's at least give a little credit to CNN and Anderson Cooper for their attempt to bring some civility to the discourse. The two front-runners just aren't up to the task of elevating it. Too heavy a lift.
It came well into the second hour of a Republican town hall event Tuesday night, in which CNN anchor Anderson Cooper and a cast of carefully curated ordinary Americans got a chance to ask each of the three remaining GOP presidential candidates questions, one by one, and those candidates each got the chance to completely ignore those questions and spray clouds of rhetoric like startled, flailing squids. It was a rerun, in other words, of the same episode that's played out over and over again during this interminable primary campaign.
First went Cruz...
The night in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, began with Cooper asking Texas Senator Ted Cruz about his suggestion that US law enforcement should patrol "Muslim neighborhoods" as a way to combat terrorism; a plan that has been roundly condemned by New York City law enforcement officials who tried monitoring local Muslims and realized it didn't help anything. Cruz shrugged off the criticism, calling New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio a "left-wing radical," and raising the specter of Europe's Muslim-dominated "no-go zones" where the police fear to tread, a fairly common myth floating around the far-right wing.
The exchange set a pattern: Someone would ask Cruz a question and he would either avoid answering, or find a way to bend it to his purpose. A job interview-style query about Cruz's biggest weakness prompted a monologue about how dang much he loves the Constitution. A father asked Cruz if he would support a bill aimed at stopping the Department of Veterans Affairs from overprescribing drugs—a measure named after his son, who died of an overdose while in VA care—and the Senator just repeated vague platitudes about VA reform and the War on Drugs.
A woman asked what Cruz would do specifically for women and he rambled about how great his mom and wife are (in other words, he isn't going to do anything in particular for women). When Cooper brought up the ugly campaign fight over a National Enquirer story accusing Cruz of infidelity—a story that Cruz has accused Trump's campaign of planting—and asked whether the Texan would support Trump as the party's nominee, Cruz hemmed and hawed for long minutes, then basically refused to answer the question.
Trump used up most of his fourth-grader-on-the-playground vocabulary early in his segment.
When it came to foreign policy, not day-to-day Twitter spats, however, Trump seemed less prepared. The most substantial exchange came when Cooper challenged the candidate to clarify some of his statements about nuclear proliferation, since Trump has said he's worried about more countries acquiring nuclear weapons, but also OK with Japan, South Korea, and maybe Saudi Arabia getting nukes. Trump's response was, basically, Whatever, if it means the US does less to police the world, fine. Later, he pulled the same light-on-details act when he said the US government should provide healthcare and education, and then said no, the states should, or the private sector should get involved, or something.
We've seen this all before—the avoidance of questions, the pandering, the almost pathological focus on talking points. The latter was most grossly displayed Tuesday when a police officer who'd been shot 15 times while fighting a white supremacist who was attacking a Sikh temple asked the Republican frontrunner what could be done to combat prejudice. Trump had a chance to soften his tone, to look presidential while interacting with a man universally regarded as a hero. Instead, he trotted out some stuff about Muslim terrorism, and once again, completely ignored the question.
That Kasich had to go last meant most everyone tuning out before he came on, another sad reality of the state of play for the GOP this cycle.
(Kasich), it must be said, actually did answer questions, including those about unpopular stances he's taken in the past. As the campaign's third wheel, he doesn't have the luxury of ignoring the queries of interested voters. He won't be president no matter how well he performs at events like these.
Kasich's hopelessness, like Trump's bluster and Cruz's smarm, was nothing new. When Wisconsin primary voters cast ballots next week, they'll be choosing from the same menu they faced before the town hall; the same spread of squabbling and half-truths will be laid out, growing increasingly stale for the next few months, until the Republican Party finally lands itself a nominee. In that sense, Trump's complaint about being tired of debates was the truest moment in a night that was short on them—he's as eager to see the end of this as voters are.
Kasich's last luxury is that, as the winner of one primary -- his home state of Ohio -- and the possessor of 143 delegates, at least nobody (except Ted Cruz) is calling for him to drop out. Contrast that with the hourly exit calls to Bernie Sanders, who owns 15 state wins to Clinton's 20 and trails her by only 200 delegates ... the human, mortal, democratically-chosen ones, not those of the super variety. All numbers here.
Republicans thought that they would be safer holding town halls than presidential debates, and they were wrong. The top two Republican candidates made a great argument for supporting the Democratic nominee. The town hall was a total disaster. Neither of the top two Republican candidates is electable, and there is no sense in discussing John Kasich because he will never be the nominee.
I sourced PoliticsUSA -- a questionable opinion site, poorly edited being my main objection -- for the above excerpt because some people think it's apropaganda outlet equal to Blue Nation Review. That's what is known as a false equivalency. Click over and look at their stories and tell me if you agree or disagree.
Yes, we need to see some grown-ups do this debate thing, but we won't get that. Because somebody is a little miffed about someone else's tone.
The last public poll conducted two weeks ago showed her with a very comfortable 71-23% spread. (You may recall that her win here in Texas at the beginning of this month was by a 66-33 margin.) So what does she have to gain by debating? Nothing, and she stands to lose some if she does.
The ever-cautious and calculating leader much prefers to sit on her lead, run out the clock.
FiveThirtyEight.com projects an almost even split of the NY delegation, which strikes me as ass-covering on their part after their earlier embarrassments. Fresh polling, somewhere in the pipeline, will likely show the lead shrinking; that's what the polls have done throughout this cycle, tighten up as election day draws closer. So in the three weeks between now and April 19 -- when New Yorkers vote -- her campaign has probably calculated that can withstand some Twitter flak and even the grievous attacks of her nasty handlers and their enabling, sycophantic third-rate media (Blue Nation Review, need I say more?) and still come away with both a convincing victory and the talking heads on teevee spinning as loudly as we have yet heard for Sanders to exit the contest.
California's primary in early June, where she holds just a 7-point lead, looks long in the distance.
I still see a Democratic convention where Bernie gets a prime time speech in one of the first couple of nights, concedes gracefully, and politely herds his supporters onto the Clinton bandwagon. There will be some larger-than-usual quantity of bitter-enders, but the safe bet is that like the PUMAs in 2008, most of the #NeverHillary-ites fall in line.
On a side note, has anybody been called a Sandbagger (scroll down to the comments) yet?
In presenting this week's blog post roundup, the Texas Progressive Alliance is sad that Rick Perry won't come out of retirement to run as a third-party alternative to Donald Trump. (Sad for all the missed comedy opportunities, of course.)
Hillary Clinton is eager to get her war on, and PDiddie at Brains and Eggs really doesn't want to go down this road again: war protests, war criminals, torture, disabled vets who can't get their VA benefits handled properly, etc. and so on.
Egberto Willies talked to an insider about why we no longer get the truth from our media: news is packaged and sold for ratings and clicks.
TXsharon at Bluedaze was at the seminar in Denton where experts from across the country said that a 100% renewable community was possible, ending the need for additional gas plants.
Dos Centavos posts some of the races and candidates he's watching in the Harris County Democratic Party's runoff election, to be held May 24.
And the Lewisville Texan Journal had a concert review of Texas legend Jimmie Dale Gilmore and his son Colin who put on a music show locally.
=======================
And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.
In an Easter ritual where the most evil thing is cleansed, Trail Blazers reported that Mexicans burned effigies of Trump (as 'Judas') in the streets of that country.
Grits for Breakfast revealed the business model for the company that manufactures Tasers: they also supply police bodycams and intend to be the dominant vendor in that market.
Prairie Weather points out the Democrats' forty-four-year-old paranoia, and its name is George McGovern.
Texas Election Law Blog reports that the Firth Circuit Court of Appeals in its entirety (en banc) will review the Texas voter ID lawsuit, and the plaintiffs have asked the Supreme Court to block the law from implementation in the 2016 election.
Zachery Taylor is on board the "Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein, but never Hillary Clinton" bandwagon.
Carl Davidson at The Rag Blog premises that there are actually six political parties in the United States (and that's within the two that wear the "major" label), and has some suggestions for working within them for progress.
The TSTA Blog highlights a rural school district that is trying to hang on.
Better Texas Blog celebrates the 6th anniversary of the Affordable Care Act.
(God love Charles Kuffner for doing the blogging I cannot bring myself to do: Ken Paxton, Sid Miller, the statewide and Harris County runoffs. There's just no resolve in me to commiserate about causes lost two years ago, and barely any for the Houston political scene. Maybe next month I can manage a post or two about our awful state officials and our stultifying local elections. I'm hoping. For the moment it's just too dreary.)
Last week when Miz Lindsey picked poison over a bullet to the temple, I didn't bother with anything but a single Tweet to note the moment. A blog post? Why? I just figured ... well, Lindsey Graham. Once a dumbass douchebag, always, ya know?
"Ted is a consistent, principled conservative who has demonstrated the ability to appeal to voters and win primary contests," Bush said in a statement provided to CNN.
"Washington is broken, and the only way Republicans can hope to win back the White House and put our nation on a better path is to support a nominee who can articulate how conservative policies will help people rise up and reach their full potential."
It's no surprise this ringing endorsement was posted to Facebook instead of holding a presser. Had Bush done so in more conventional fashion, he wouldn't have been able to suppress his gag reflex, and the media wouldn't have been able to suppress their guffaws.
But to be certain, this is the ongoing "lesser of two evils" balsamic reduction for the GOP.
Like Graham, Bush seems to have made his decision based on whom he hated least. The former governor had refrained from endorsing Rubio while he was still in the race, a Republican source told Politico, because he believed his fellow Floridian and one-time protégé “was not up to the job of being president.” In endorsing Cruz, a Tea Party-aligned extremist, Bush follows in the footsteps of Chris Christie, who was driven to endorsing Trump by his obvious disdain for Rubio, and Ben Carson, who threw his support behind Trump in part out of animosity toward Cruz, whose dirty tricks in Iowa the retired neurosurgeon never forgave.
-- The Apache State sets this week's record for futility, incompetence, and/or fraud at the polling place. Be sure you understand the difference between unicorns (Greg Abbott's voter "fraud") and actual election fraud.
1. Lines were so long people literally spent an entire work day waiting in line
The queues were lengthy because the election administrators failed to properly allocate resources.
Consider: 2012 primary had 300,000 voters and 200 polling places. 2016 primary has estimated 800,000 voters at 60 polling places. #12News
Maricopa County (Greater Phoenix, nation's sixth largest city, 1.5 million people as of 2010) Recorder (the chief elections official) Helen Purcell blamed the voters for the delays.
Purcell may have been responsible for a new Maricopa County record: The last ballot in her county wasn’t cast until after midnight local time, or 3 AM Eastern time. The elections are such a mess in Arizona that the Secretary of State and the Office of the Maricopa County Recorder are admitting they can’t handle running an election. Both Purcell and Secretary of State Michele Reagan support legislation that will turn the administration of elections over to state party organizations.
2. Clear voter suppression in Latino neighborhoods
Just click over and read about it, and then ask yourself if you're surprised that a place that elects Joe Arpaio sheriff conducts its elections this way.
It gets worse.
3. Democrats mistakenly registered as independents, given provisional ballots
As Arizona voters were still waiting to cast their ballots, US Uncut reported on allegations that voters who had previously registered as Democrat were instead listed in the voter database as “independent” or “no party listed.” In Arizona’s closed primary system, independent voters are denied their voice by having to vote with a provisional ballot. But what voters classified as “independent” who cast provisional ballots don’t realize is that their ballots are never counted.
Emphasis mine. A reminder: NEVER ACCEPT a provisional ballot if offered. It's nothing but a pacifier. Its sole purpose is to fade heat; to shut you up, making you think you participated in an election when you actually did not.
42-year-old Kelly Thornton, who worked as an Election Day Technician in Yavapai County voting center 5 on Tuesday, told US Uncut that roughly two thirds of voters who came to her precinct had been mistakenly identified as independent by the election software. All of those voters were subsequently forced to cast a provisional ballot.
“One man was a lifelong Democrat who was listed as independent. He left the precinct, went to his house, and came back with a card showing that he was registered as a Democrat,” Thornton told US Uncut. “But when I called the election center (administered by the county recorder’s office), they told me to just give him a provisional ballot anyway.”
[...]
Thornton was also given a script by the Yavapai County recorder’s office to read to voters, verbatim, when they asked if their provisional ballots would be counted. The script outright tells the voter that if they cast a provisional ballot when the system lists them as independent, their vote will not be counted...
This is where it gets ugly for Democrats.
“I called the Arizona Democratic Party office around 1 PM, and I said, ‘Something is not right here.’ They said someone would call me back, and nobody called me back,” Thornton said. “This is the exact same thing that voters have been experiencing in Pima and Maricopa County all day.”
Given that one of Bernie Sanders’ largest bases of voter support comes from independents, it isn’t hard to see why the Vermont senator lost Arizona handily: his core supporters’ ballots weren’t counted.
So when you hear calls from Democrats for Bernie Sanders to drop out -- on the heels of the calls that Sanders isn't/wasn't a Democrat anyway, that he should play by the Democrats' rules, i.e. superdelegates -- be clear on the understanding that these are the rules they are talking about.
Democrats predictably might just blame Purcell, the Republican elections official, who is certainly the right and proper scapegoat. She's of course blaming all the dysfunction on Democrats for registering wrong.
Helen Purcell might be worse at her job than Harris County's own Stan Stanart, which makes this episode a similar Catch-22 we have in Texas' largest county: not enough Democrats voted in the election when Republicans like Purcell and Stanart were on the ballot themselves, due in no small part to the Republicans in charge practicing voter disenfranchisement of Democrats as hard as they can ... and round and round it goes. Like the water in the toilet when you flush it.
There's more at the link about how this set things up nicely for Hillary Clinton's comfortable win in the Grand Canyon State last night (or this morning), and it's certainly not one of the two reasons I anticipated when I predicted nearly a year ago that Sanders would be ultimately be denied the Democratic nomination. The bottom line, unvarnished ...
Still, for Sanders to emerge as the nominee, he has to win a majority of the remaining states and win by some very big margins. On Saturday, Alaska, Hawaii and Washington hold Democratic caucuses.
-- As a result of yesterday's (or today's) returns, calls grow louder for Bernie to take a seat on the bench. Markos Moulisas has no standing -- whatever he believes about the power of his influence -- to bring the contested primary to an end, or even to censor posters to his blog who disagree with his choice of presidential candidates. Yesterday, in the richest of ironies, he sent me a blegging e-mail, touting Daily Kos traffic stats and asking me to chip in $5 'to continue their work'.
So over and done with that guy and his shitty blog.
But more to the point: when Bernie finally does leave the race, he's taking a lot of Democrat votes with him somewhere. Whether they are going to the Greens' Jill Stein, a futile Sanders write-in campaign, or back to sleep on the couch is to be determined.
More and more people are coming to the same realization I did last summer, and there's significantly more anecdotal evidence on my social media feeds -- and, I'm guessing, yours -- that indicates D voters in droves are getting off the bus. Probably doesn't mean anything for Hillary's electoral prospects countrywide, but could have severe ramifications for Democrats downballot in places like Harris County. This is more evidence that Clinton's value at the top of the ticket in Texas is unlikely to change the electoral color of the Lone Star State.
No need to get your hopes up, Chuck; any early poll will probably be done by the Texas Tribune/UT/YouGov conglomerate, which has consistently demonstrated its extraordinarily lame predictive value on its best day, and its absolute worthlessness this far out.
-- As the results in the two states with heavy Mormon populations that voted yesterday suggest, Trump is a hard sell in the LDS caucus. Ted Cruz took advantage with an ad showing a little too much of Melania Trump's assets, and that started the weekly catfight we have come to expect now from the GOP 'presidentials'.
Palestinian and human rights advocates were aghast over remarks made by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton at the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) convention on Monday, saying that her speech represented "everything that is bad" with U.S. imperialism and policy in the Middle East.
During the address, Clinton vowed to take the U.S.-Israel relationship to "the next level"—a level which seemingly includes more war and imperialism, few, if any, rights for Palestinians, and definitely no economic boycotts of Israel.
She even used hawk talk against the BDS initiative, exhorting the young draft-eligible warriors in the crowd to arm themselves and run to the front.
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton spoke at an annual conference held by AIPAC and praised students at colleges and universities who are on “the front lines of the battle to oppose the alarming boycott, divestment and sanctions movement known as BDS.”
The part of the speech on BDS was specifically directed at young people attending the pro-Israel lobby group’s conference, and it received roaring applause.
During her speech, Clinton declared, “Particularly at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise across the world, especially in Europe, we must repudiate all efforts to malign, isolate, and undermine Israel and the Jewish people.”
Just your standard neoconservative talking points. Credit her for swinging the terrible, swift sword of 'anti-Semitism' as swiftly and strongly as she uses 'sexism' and 'misogyny' (and her supporters use "Berniebros"). The best defense is a good offense, after all.
Politicians like Clinton and groups like AIPAC use a State Department definition of anti-Semitism. Palestine Legal argues this definition “erroneously includes criticism of Israel as a nation state in the definition.” This departs from the “conventional understanding of anti-Semitism as hate and ethno-religious bias against Jewish people.” It redefines anti-Semitism to include “demonizing Israel,” “applying a double standard to Israel,” and “delegitimizing Israel.”
Words matter, you see. Did you ever think that Hillary Clinton could get to the right of Donald Trump on foreign policyAmerican hegemony continuous war in the Middle East?
Last month, Trump suggested he was “neutral” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict so that he could negotiate with both parties.
“I think making a deal would be in Israel’s interests,” the brash billionaire said on ABC’s This Week With George Stephanopoulos on Sunday. “I don’t know one Jewish person that doesn’t want to have a deal, a good deal, a proper deal, but a really good deal. But I would say it’s probably one of the toughest deals. Me being a dealmaker, it’s probably one of the toughest deals in the world to make, because there’s just so many — there’s just so many decades of hatred between the two sides.”
Clinton seized on Trump’s reluctance to take a stand.
“America can’t ever be neutral when it comes to Israel’s security or survival,” she said. “We can’t be neutral when rockets rain down on residential neighborhoods, when civilians are stabbed in the street, when suicide bombers target the innocent. Some things aren’t negotiable. And anyone who doesn’t understand that has no business being our president."
More "Let's Make a Deal" from Donald. Sounds kind of pussified to me. At least we know, between the two front-runners, who's got the bigger fingers.
Maybe the Nobel Committee could award her a pre-emptive Peace Prize, like they did for Obama. That worked out pretty well. Not so much for American soldiers or Afghani wedding parties or Syrian children, but Lockheed Martin, et.al. sure turned a tidy profit. There will always be Republicans who believe Clinton is not more pro-Israel than Trump, however, and Sheldon Adelson is helping with that (hat tip for this link to No More Mister).
In the meantime, tough-talking theocrats like Ted Cruz are sufficiently blocked from their own pandering to the Jewish lobby. No matter how much he'd actually like to carpet-bomb some country or turn the desert into glass, Cruz and his devout Christian-soldier ilk are only in the fight to see if the prophecies in their favorite book can come true: their Savior floating down from the sky with a thousand angels on white horseback in tow, and them floating up to meet Him.
This Easter season, it's not rebirth being celebrated. It's death.
The pastoral Grey Forest community in Bexar County will host the state's Green Party delegates, candidates, and conventioneers in early spring.
The GPTX state nominating convention will take place April 9. Voting delegates were elected at the county nominating conventions on March 19, where the party also voted to grant the Green Party nomination to candidates who will appear on the general election ballot in November. This process is similar to the major parties' primary elections, except it is done 'caucus-style'.
Delegates will also consider any resolutions brought up from the counties.
The GPTX state meeting occurs the following day -- Sunday, April 10th -- when delegates elect party officers and conduct other party business. There will be three At-Large SEC positions filled in addition to Co-Chair, Treasurer, & Secretary. If you are interested in running for one of the party officer positions, please inform the state co-chairs at the contact below so that you can be listed in the agenda packet. Nominations will be accepted at the meeting. Party-building and candidate support workshops will also be held.
Delegates from the counties to the GPTX state convention and meeting are kindly requested to RSVP for planning purposes as breakfast and lunch will be provided. There is no charge to attend the state convention, but donations to offset the costs are requested.
WHEN: April 9, beginning at 8 a.m. and April 10, 2016
Natalie Upchurch, Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector
A full list of Green Party statewide filings can be found here. (George Reiter, the US House candidate for District 9, and Deb Shafto, the Texas Senate District 6 nominee, withdrew from their respective races without a candidate selected to replace them. In doing so, they cited conflicts with their positions on Houston Pacifica affiliate KPFT's local station board. If they were to run for public office, that board's by-laws would require that they resign their posts.)
The Texas Progressive Alliance wishes we could be in Cuba with President Obama right now -- instead of looking over these busted NCAA brackets -- in bringing you this week's roundup.
When Libby Shaw at Daily Kos learned some of the drinking water supplies in the state exceeded the federal standard for arsenic, she asked how will small government -- government-loathing lawmakers -- react? What will they do? Nothing, of course. Pretend the problem does not exist. No Worries Texas. We Can Shoot the Arsenic Out of the Water.
Hillary Clinton admitted to Chris Matthews that she sold her vote to invade Iraq for $20 billion, to George W. Bush. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs is glad that's finally cleared up.
Guest columnist Judge Brian Holman writes a guest column in the Lewisville Texan Journal about that city court system's improving indigent defense.
Bluedaze posted details of the "100% renewable" Denton town hall this week, and Texas Vox announced the upcoming public hearing calling for better city management in Austin.
Dos Centavos advanced H-Town's Cesar Chavez parade.
===================
Juanita Jean contemplates the sheer awesomeness of a Trump/Carson ticket, Election Law Blog has Ted Cruz's "Voter Fraud Joke of the Day", and Trail Blazers helps shoot down the rumor that Rick Perry will be drafted for president at a brokered GOP convention this summer.
Prairie Weather commented on the media narrative about the presumptive winners in our nation's presidential nomination process, but doesn't specify the actual losers.
Grits for Breakfast wants to know why the Texas Rangers seem incapable of rooting out local corruption when they are called upon to investigate it.
Ty Clevenger complains about the State Bar of Texas' refusal to take action against Ken Paxton, and The Houston Press realized that state Sen. Donna Campbell of San Antonio apparently doesn't understand the (almost worthless) medical cannabis bill she voted for in the last legislative session.
Lone Star Ma focuses on the 9th of the United Nations' new sustainable development goals: "Build resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialization and foster innovation." And Houston Strategies took note of the recent Atlantic piece that pointed out the inconvenient truth about income inequality and affordable housing in "liberal" cities.
Dan Solomon talks to Wendy Davis about Dawn Porter’s abortion law documentary Trapped, among other things.
The Makeshift Academic reminds us that Merrick Garland has a lot of company in the confirmation process.
Pages of Victory paraphrases one of Charles Dickens' most famous sentences in compiling a list of his own.
Kate Braun of The Rag Blog observed the convergence of pagan and non-pagan spring rituals: the vernal equinox and Palm Sunday.
And congratulations go to Somervell County Salon on her blog's eleventh anniversary.
