Kirstjen Nielsen has joined the White House exit list

Kirstjen Nielsen was ‘no doubt’ forced out as Homeland Security secretary  Reported by Nikki Schwab in the New York Post

Maine Writer- reality fear is that the incompetent Donald Trump will be appointing another ghoul to his "acting" administration. Scary. 

https://nypost.com/2019/04/07/dhs-secretary-kirstjen-nielsen-expected-to-resign-during-meeting-with-trump/

WASHINGTON – Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen resigned Sunday.

Bill Kristol @BillKristol posted on Twitter - "Two words you won't find in Kirstjen Nielsen's resignation letter: Donald Trump. Nielsen writes, 'It has been my great honor to lead the men and women of the Department as its sixth Secretary'. She does not say it was an honor to have served President Trump"
WASHINGTON – Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen was forced out of the position, according to multiple news reports.

Bloomberg reported that the president met with Nielsen early Sunday evening and asked her to resign.

One former White House official told The Post that she was “no doubt” pushed out of the job, which she’s held since December 2017.

The president has become increasingly angry over the number of migrants from central American countries coming over the US’s southern border, with many of them trying to apply for asylum in the United States.

Trump’s frustrations were placed on Nielsen’s head, the Washington Post reported.

Trump had already indicated that he was looking for “tougher” individuals to handle immigration. Last week, the president abruptly yanked the nomination of Ronald Vitiello, who was to lead Immigration and Custom Enforcement. “We want to go in a tougher direction,” Trump said.

#Scary

Nielsen hadn’t been told of the president’s decision, nor did she agree with it.

Knowing she was on thin ice Sunday, Nielsen went into the White House meeting thinking she might be fired, the Associated Press reported.

On Sunday night, after tweeting that Nielsen “will be leaving her position” Trump again went on (another evil!) Twitter rant over the migrant flows.

“Mexico must apprehend all illegals and not let them make the long march up to the United States, or we will have no other choice than to Close the Border and/or institute Tariffs,” Trump wrote. “Our Country is FULL!”

Confessions of a Republican ~ echo essay by Leonard Pitts

Vote Blue! Be a proud Democrat!

An editorial essay published in The Hutchinson News, a Kansas newspaper; written by Leonard Pitts.

The other day, a woman confessed to me (MaineWriter~ Ahh? Like she was in a confessional?) that she’s a Republican. (!)

Republicans may bristle at the verb, but it’s used advisedly. In fact, the lady admitted her party affiliation the way you would some personal failing. “I don’t tell a lot of people,” she said, “but . . .”

To be fair, the reticence might have been in part because we met in a blue state. But she also made clear her disenchantment with the GOP on its own merits -- or lack thereof. 

And who can blame her? 

In genuflecting before a rabid rabble of vulgarians, hyper-nationalists and flat-out bigots -- the “base” -- her party has embraced stealing Supreme Court seats, “alternative” facts, alienating allies, kissing up to enemies, “good people on both sides,” tax breaks for billionaires -- and Donald Trump. 

Republicans are a moral train wreck.

She’s hardly the only Republican who feels estranged. Another woman told me, “The Republican Party has clearly lost its way. Actions speak louder than words in politics. You cannot campaign and say you’re a fiscal conservative when you allow the debt to increase to the degree that it has or to provide the types of giveaways in the tax bill that the Republicans have given away.”

This person was not simply a Republican voter, but a former elected official, Claudine Schneider, a Rhode Island congresswoman who left office in 1991. 

“I am astounded with the lack of backbone,” she told me by telephone. “My assessment is, the Republicans keep hearing how popular Donald Trump is and I think the House and Senate members are just inclined to go along to get along. . . . It’s all about holding on to power. It’s essentially, ‘I’ll do whatever it takes to get re-elected.’ ”

So Schneider has assembled a group of like-minded former GOP officials, Republicans for Integrity, to hold the party to account. “Though we are lifelong Republicans,” she wrote in a Miami Herald op-ed, “we are urging you to vote only for candidates who will restore the kind of integrity and constitutional accountability that our nation’s forefathers intended.”

“I’m not going to be one that’s going to argue that we should defeat all Republicans,” RFI member and former Arizona Rep. Jim Kolbe told me. ”. . . .But I do believe Republicans need to stand up for principles and for integrity and they need to stand up to a president when he’s not following those principles.”

And doesn’t the group’s name speak volumes? Like “Jews for Jesus” or “Blacks for Trump,” it’s an implicit acknowledgment that what it describes is a departure from the norm. In “Republicans for Integrity,” then, we have a group of Republicans conceding that integrity has become rather rare in the GOP.

That’s something the party has yet to face. One recalls Sen. Lindsey Graham, in the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation hearing, yelling at his Democratic enemies -- another word used advisedly -- about their supposed willingness to do anything to achieve their goals. “Boy, y’all want power,” he sneered. “I hope you never get it!”

It was a moment of sheer moral disconnect that brought to mind a verse from Matthew: “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own?”

Republicans should heed that injunction. Especially given that it comes not just from “leftists,” “libtards” and “Demwits,” but from inside their own tent. Party stalwarts such as George Will, Jeff Flake and Bill Kristol have all complained about the stench of rotting elephant. Now “Republicans for Integrity” is a thing.

“I don’t tell a lot of people . . .” the woman said. And it was sobering.

“I’m a Republican” should not be something you confess (Perhaps, only in a Confessional?).

Leonard Pitts is a columnist for The Miami Herald, 

Horror of the unspeakable - big nuclear buttons

Donald Trump says his ‘Nuclear Button’ is bigger than Kim Jong Un’s

This isn't funny ~ but the Bill Kristol Twitter survey question gets to the core of Donald Trump as being unfit for leadership.

In a Tweet on Tuesday, Donald Trump warned North Korean leader Kim Jong Un that his nuclear button "is a much bigger & more powerful."

Conservative pundit Bill Kristol created the surreal response to this very real news:

@BillKristol

In light of Donald Trump's Nuclear Button tweet, should we conclude we're living (survey):

13%in a Mel Brooks movie?

13%in a Monty Python skit?

74%only a short while longer

To which one Twitterzin responded:

@EdSkipper

Seriously Bill - this is beyond any joke. Do you have ANY influence to help the GOP come to its senses and remove this existential threat? (Better to be in the political wilderness - and a decent person - for a decade than be party to the end of our world and this insanity.)

And, in another Twitter thread, @DavidFrum wrote:

"Not in a mood for Twitter jokes. This is dark & dangerous. I shudder for every parent of a son or daughter in uniform - and for us all"

Trump warned North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Twitter on Tuesday that he’s always prepared for the nuclear option.

“North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the ‘Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times,’” he wrote on Twitter.

“Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!”

Dear God, Donald Trump is crazy. Republicans must remove him from office.

Every day, Americans wake up asking the same question: "Is Donald Trump still the president?" 

 We'll be spared asking ourselves that question if this crazy Trump incompetent leadership sets off a nuclear war. In fact, the rhetorical question "is he or isn't he?", will be irrelevant.

Conversations- open to being completely "wrong": an economist view

I'm a nurse, not an economist. Therefore, my opinion about Bill Kristol's video discussion about economics was written from my consumer's point of view. Indeed, I learned something.
Okay, I took the advice of respected conservative pundit Bill Kristol. In fact, I listened to the 90 minute video conversation with his expert economics friend Irwin Stelzer, who spoke eloquently about how economic theories impact on modern issues of the day. As a registered nurse, I appreciated their discussion about health care, although it was only a small segment of the conversation. Moreover, I learned about how one academic economist processes information. Here are my take aways from this interesting conversation:

Dr. Irwin Stelzer, an economist, in conversation with conservative pundit Bill Kristol

I was impressed by the concept of "being wrong".  Dr. Stelzer spoke about how the polarizing political arguments - particularly those embroiled with climate change - have the philosophical potential of being completely wrong.  He was not advocating in support of climate change theories or against those who deny the concepts.  In fact, he abhors the use of the word "climate change denial" because it conjures up the horrible images of Holocaust denial, a disgusting relationship albeit unintentional. 

Nevertheless, the presentation about the possibility that climate change denial might be "totally wrong", was an interesting discussion. In his economics argument, he said it's possible that those who fervently believe in climate change as absolutely true, could also be wrong.  In other words, if one side or the other are totally wrong, and in the philosophy of "all things are possible", this is highly probable, then how do these opposing factions reconcile their errors?  If I understood Stelzer, his concept about being totally wrong regarding climate change means that those who deny the theory must accept the fact that they might be wrong. In so doing, they must evaluate to what degree they are willing to accept any possibility that climate change is real? As I understand this argument, Stelzer might advocate for the denial group to at least acknowledge that ice caps are melting at an accelerated rate and this could be the result of human interference in the environment.  This doesn't mean they accept the advocates for climate change theories because, frankly the proponents of climate change don't have very much data to demonstrate their position is totally right, either. What is most probable in this economic conundrum (my word, not his) is that there are risks and opportunities in the acceptance of "climate change theory". For example, people in Canada might embrace the possibility of warmer temperatures while coastal communities must accept the risk of losing their generational ways of living, as sea levels rise.  (Although this seems too simplistic, especially coming from a learned economist, the acceptance of inevitable change and human capacity to adapt  are "evidenced based outcomes", a health care concept.) Stelzer recommended a carbon tax to accommodate the proponents of climate change and thereby relieve the responsibility for deniers about their opposition, in the event the advocates are totally right. (Hmmmm....An interesting theory....) In effect, the carbon tax would be a way to build an economic incentive to buffer the potentiality of climate change being real.

Dr. Stelzer spoke eloquently when he discussed economic inequality. He is worried about how compensation for working is losing it's correlation to the quality or integrity of the job.  He used the example of a T-shirt salesman who works hard, does all the right things, sells T shirts at a competitive price but then his competitor goes to China to buy the same design much cheaper and, thereby, takes all the business. Sadly, the hard working T-shirt salesman is not compensated for doing what was right and fairly competitive, while the person who undersold the costs used unfair trade policies to take his T-shirt rivals livelihood.

Yes, the conversation between Kristol and Stelzer was laced with not too subtle references about their mutual opinion regarding Donald Trump's leadership.

Although this conversation with Bill Kristol and Dr. Stelzer was educational, my summary of the discussion was this:  America will survive climate change theory and, by extension, endure the leadership of Donald Trump.  It's just a shame we must all suffer the philosophical agony of this era, before reaching this conclusion.

Some quotes from this discussion:

Stelzer: "...think about...healthcare...We are going to get it wrong. When you are trying to guess how many millions of people are going to respond to what kind of policy, we’re going to get it wrong. So the question is, which is the least costly error we can make?"

Kristol asks:  "you are a very strong advocate for a carbon tax, which is a favorite of a lot of the environmentalists. People sort of say, 'Well how could he be both? I thought he – he seems like a climate skeptic and then he is for this carbon tax'."

Stelzer responds:  "(If we)..don’t agree with them 100 percent, you are a 'denier'. And I hate that term, because it comes out of the Holocaust. It’s a terrible term. And I have told them that and they keep using it. So, you say, okay, I don’t like these people. But nevertheless, I've got to look at what they say."

"And it doesn’t look to me like what they are saying is plausible – that the world is going to come to an end – especially since that’s an invitation for more government. So the people who are doing it have an incentive. You have always got to look at what the incentive is of the person who is making the position. And so his incentive is to expand government, and naturally...regulation."

"So then you say to yourself, well, but I could be wrong. Now let me see, if I’m wrong and the globe heats up, that’s not a reversible error. That is an error. You can’t buy a fan and cool the globe down – you’re done. So, maybe I am wrong. They think they’re right, they know they’re right. I think I am right, but I am not sure I am right."

So then the question is, what policy is appropriate that will do the least damage if I am wrong? Well, we should do something as costless as we can to reduce emissions, in case they are being generated by human behavior. Well, what is the most efficient way to do that? Now, there, an economist can be helpful..."  

Check out this entire transcript at the link here.

Republican reality check- Charles Krauthammer calls out Trump

Conservative journalists have gone where cowardly Republican politicians have not dared to tread. In fact, pundits like Bill Kristol and now Charles Krauthammer are holding Donald Trump accountable for his words. Kristol has been saying all along that Donald Trump is not a conservative. Now, Charles Krauthammer is strongly criticizing Donald Trump for promoting dictator character traits akin to what is executed in Banana Republics.


Bill Kristol


Charles Krauthammer
Krauthammer: Trump Threat to Prosecute Hillary Sounds Like a 'Banana Republic'- FoxNews

Krauthammer: Trump Threat To Prosecute Hillary Clinton, That's "Banana Republic"- Real Clear Politics

Isn't it ironic how the clarion call words of Vice Presidential candidate Lloyd Benson ring clear from Conservative pundits in the 2016 presidential campaign.  

"Dear Mr. Trump, both Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer are political conservatives. Mr. Trump, you are no conservative!" 

As a matter of fact, Maine Writer might even indulge and go so far as to say Hillary Clinton is, likely, more of a conservative than Donald Trump; because, at least, Americans know where she stands on her issues, plus she's been transparent enough to share her tax returns.

Americans must vote for leadership we know and reject the man behind the curtain who blows smoke without any substance.

Donald Trump is not a conservative- "No, seriously!"

Political pundit Bill Kristol has been saying this all along: 

"Trump’s Republican critics say that these announcements (his policies) prove what they have been saying all along: that he is no conservative.

" (No, seriously!)

Conservative pundit Bill Kristol has been trying to turn up the volume about this issue!

It's become political cliche for a reason. This paraphrase always finds a way to fit and this time it's on Donald Trump: I've known a lot of conservatives in my life, but Mr. Trump, "You are not a conservative!"



Republican zealots who follow Donald Trump in lock step like storm troopers are these politically brain washed people. Nevertheless, even in their mesmerized mania, most "Trumpsees" have probably never read anything about their preferred candidate's policies. If they really understood what he has proposed, they might be startled....."no, seriously!". 

Unfortunately, Trump can't be trusted so what he says about anything will have a neutralizing effect on his proposals. Even the purists positions would be subject to  justified skepicism.

Ramesh Ponnnuru writes in BloombergView.com describes how traditonal Republicanism has been Trumped by unhinged Donald Trump.  2016 ELECTIONS
Trump Throws Out the Republican Litmus TestsBy  Ramesh Ponnuru

Republican lawmakers often privately complain that their party is being held back by conservative "purists", wrote Ramesh Ponnuru. On isues like taxes and elfare, the GOP's elected officials have had to meet "a series of litmus tests" to avoid being branded traitors by the doctrinaire conservative base. But Donald Trump has blowntraditional GOP dogma to smitherenes. The Republican presidential nominee has proposed new child care subsidies for working mothers, the removal of millions of pooer poeple from the income ax rolls, and a tax increase for some six figure earners.  Indeed, he has "put in a good word for Medicaid," suggesting that he may favor expanding the program instead of cuting it. He has even indicated that milliosn of illegal immigrants may one day apply for legal status- that is "amnesty". 

Other Republicans seeking office would never dare voice such "heterodox thoughts"- yet, they don't seem to have hurt Trump at all. Granted, he's a celebrity candidate and has "maintained the party line" by voicing his opposition to abortion, same sex marriage and Obamacre. "But he has excersied more freedom than Republican politicians dreamed they had." 

Whether or not he wins, "the stranglehold" of consevative drogma, "now appears to be broken".

Seriously?  Maybe Republicans have lost their brand. If so, they've brought it on themselves and their "purism" has now gone down a Trumponian dug ditch.

Romney Wrong on Emergency Medical Services and Health Care- Bill Kristol Acknowledges President Obama Inherited Financial Disaster

Two take-aways from the weekend presidential campaign news cycle- (a) Conservative Bill Kristol says President Obama really did inherit a financial disaster and (b) Governor Romney told Scott Pelley how emergency medical services is the safety net for acute medical care.  

Dear Governor Romney, Emergency Medical Services is expensive!  Don't expect EMS to be the safety net for acute care when you intend to revise Medicare and Medicaid- because EMS, as we know it, won't be there at the end of your reforms.

Governor Romney wrongly spoke on 60Minutes with Scott Pelley about how reforming Medicare can save it.  Why fix something that's not broken?  

Medicare is a health insurance policy, many experts are available to recommend actuarial adjustments to the system.  Moreover, don't expect emergency medical services to pick up the pieces when the health care system won't be able to handle the capacity of an aging population if capped health care reimbursement becomes a barrier to health care.

Reforming Medicare does not mean that Emergency Medical Services will be availabe to transport people who need access to acute care.  Among the many mis-statements Romney made on 60 Minutes, he should be held accountable for leaping to the assumption that emergency medical services will be the safety net between sick senior citizens, poor people and death.

Not only is EMS not the right medical care for critical care but the Governor wants to reform Medicare and Medicaid- a source of reimbursement for EMS!  In fact, there won't be any EMS available if senior citizens and poor people must pay for transport with vouchers. EMS is not bundled into any payment system that I know of, so any reform of Medicare or Medicaid will likely exclude emergency care, unless it's trauma related.  I sincerely hope EMS providers get involved in educating their communities about how wrong minded it is for the safety net to acute care services to be supported by emergency medical services- it's expensive, it's not preventive, it's not what emergency medical services providers are trained to do. Assuming EMS will be there as the point of access to acute care, this will require insurance companies to guarantee payment- including Medicare and Medicaid.  It's important for media to point out how wrong Romney was on answering this question.

  

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/23/mitt-romney-60-minutes-health-care_n_1908129.html

WASHINGTON -- Downplaying the need for the government to ensure that every person has health insurance, Mitt Romney on Sunday suggested that emergency room care suffices as a substitute for the uninsured. "Well, we do provide care for people who don't have insurance," he said in an interview with Scott Pelley of CBS's "60 Minutes" that aired Sunday night. "If someone has a heart attack, they don't sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care."

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/09/23/894341/bill-kristol-obama-has-turned-around-the-financial-meltdown-pretty-well/

On the political front, the weekend news shows were loaded with skeptics with advice for Governor Romney- including conservative pundit Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard.

Republican Bill Kristol admits President Obama turned around the financial meltdown of former President Bush "pretty well".

Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol says that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is going to have a tough time winning if the election is a referendum on President Barack Obama’s first term. “If this election is just about the last four years, that’s a muddy verdict." The conservative columnist told Fox News host Chris Wallace on Sunday "Bush was president during the financial meltdown, the Obama team has turned that around pretty well,” he explained.

Romney was aggressive on the 60-Minutes interview, but his responses were loaded with huge assumptions that sounded like schemes he concocted to win the presidential election.  

Perhaps the most telling remark Romney gave on the Pelley interview was when he admitted it was his decision to speak about 47 percent of Americans as being "victims".  

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57518495/campaign-2012-obama-vs-romney/?pageNum=6&tag=contentMain;contentBody

Romney: That's not...that's not the campaign. That was me, right? I-- that's not a campaign.  Pelley: You are the campaign--
Romney: I've got a very effective campaign. It's doing a very good job. But not everything I say is elegant. And I want to make it very clear, I want to help 100 percent of the American people.

So, the bottom line is that Romney knows he is the campaign and his response to Pelley about his leadership is the only true comment the Governor can stand behind.  Yes, he is the campaign and it's not going well.  There's no reason to believe his leadership as a President would be any different.