California Rebuilding Democratic Bench
The Democratic Party is currently struggling with the question of who should be leading it, heading into the future. Should they stick with known leaders, or is it time for fresh blood? Most notable in this power struggle are the questions of who should lead the Democrats in the House, and who should lead the Democratic National Committee. The Senate had largely decided their own leadership question before the election, since Harry Reid had already announced his retirement. The Senate leadership handoff that just happened had already been worked out months ago, and Senator Chuck Schumer will (starting in January) be known as Minority Leader Schumer for the next two years. Over on the House side, a fierce debate is taking place as to whether Nancy Pelosi should continue as the Democratic leader or whether someone younger might be a better option. The D.N.C. leadership may be the biggest fight of all, though, as multiple candidates have already thrown their hats in the ring.
In all these questions of leadership, some have noticed that the Democratic "bench" is pretty downright thin these days. Partly, this is Beltway-insider "conventional wisdom," since there are plenty of Democrats in the House and Senate who are young, committed, and eager to lead -- but, alas, their names are not on the insiders' lips when they gather at their cocktail parties. At the same time, it is indisputable that the House Democratic leadership is rather advanced in age, especially when compared to the young guns currently in charge of the Republicans. Even the lefty wing of the Democratic Party is best represented by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, neither one of whom is exactly a spring chicken.
The ultimate prize in this Beltway parlor game is, of course: "Who will be strongest to run for president in four (or eight, or twelve) years?" When taking this longer view (not only at the presidential level, but more generally, as: "Who will lead the Democrats in the future?"), California may be best positioned to serve as the Democratic bench. I say this not just because I happen to live there, but because of the momentous turnover churn that is currently taking place.
California's two current members of the United States Senate are Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein. California's current governor is Jerry Brown. Barbara Boxer has served in the Senate since 1993, and will retire at the end of this year. Dianne Feinstein has served since 1992, but it is very likely that she will soon decide that her current term will be her last and announce she'll be stepping down in time for the 2018 midterm election. Brown will go down in history as "California's F.D.R.," since he will be the only governor to ever have served four terms. Future governors are limited to only two terms (Brown's earlier two terms in the 1970s and 1980s didn't count under the grandfather clause of the term-limit law), and Brown will finish his fourth term in two years. This means that within a two-year period three of the most powerful political offices in California will probably change hands. For the first time in a quarter-century, California will have two brand-new senators, as well as a new governor. All will be Democrats, unless a giant earthquake suddenly swallows San Francisco and Los Angeles.
One of these handoffs has already happened, since Boxer didn't run for re-election. And her replacement, Kamala Harris, is already being highly spoken of when Beltway denizens gather to speculate about the future of the Democratic Party. Since others are already having such fun speculating about her, though, I doubt I need to add anything to that conversation.
But don't sell the rest of the California bench short, either. Harris will have a two-year jump on the other two offices, it is true, but whomever wins them will also be worth consideration for higher office (or leadership position) as well. Since Dianne Feinstein has not actually announced her retirement yet, it's impossible to say who will jump in the race to replace her. Begin with the Democrats who didn't beat Harris, and speculate freely about others who might salivate at the prospect.
The most interesting prospect, for me at least, is the man who is quite likely to take the reins from Jerry Brown. Gavin Newsom is already Brown's lieutenant governor, and he is the clear favorite to win Brown's office in two years (unless Kamala Harris decides to challenge him). If he wins, it will give him executive experience running the sixth-largest economy in the world (measured against other nations, not states). The only real problem Newsom faces is the political calendar. After all, mounting a serious run for the presidency in 2020 would mean starting in early 2019 -- which would be Newsom's first year in office, should he win the gubernatorial race. California voters might not look too kindly on a new governor who immediately begins running for a higher office, in other words.
Newsom is an interesting character, who rose to prominence as mayor of San Francisco. He wasn't as ultra-liberal as some in the city by the Bay would have liked, and some of his political ideas were not very well received. He comes from a business background, but one that was initially financed by a member of the Getty family. He does have impressive political connections within the Democratic Party, though (his aunt was married to Nancy Pelosi's brother-in-law, for instance), and some of the ideas he championed have proven to be downright prophetic, especially when measured by the yardstick of bold leadership.
You may be wondering: "Where have I heard Newsom's name before?" The answer to that question is that he was the person responsible for San Francisco marrying gay couples for a 29-day period -- back in 2004. Newsom reportedly listened to George W. Bush's State of the Union speech that January and was incensed that Bush finished the speech praising the Defense of Marriage Act (which limited all marriage to heterosexual couples). Newsom acted immediately, blowing off a post-speech party hosted by Nancy Pelosi to phone his chief of staff and county clerk to ask what would be needed to marry gay people.
On February 12, two days short of Valentine's Day, the first gay couple was legally married in San Francisco's City Hall. The two women were 83 and 79 years old, and had been together 51 years. Five days later, 2,200 couples had been wed. By the time a court issued an injunction on March 11, over 4,000 legally-married gay couples existed in California.
Some may not remember it now, but this was an extremely radical step for Mayor Newsom to take. His own advisors warned he was committing political suicide. National Democrats were aghast, and some still credit Newsom's action with helping to re-elect George W. Bush. It was too much, too soon, most Democratic Party officials mournfully lamented. When Proposition 8 was put on the ballot (to deny gay marriage in California), Newsom's words were prominently featured in the "Yes on 8" advertising: "As California goes, so goes the rest of the nation. It's inevitable. This door's wide open now. It's going to happen, whether you like it or not." Many point to these ads as one big reason Proposition 8 won, in fact.
Newsom never backed down, and he was ultimately proven right. While throngs of more-timid Democrats clutched their handkerchiefs with worry, Newsom did what he thought was right, and never apologized for it. It took many, many years (too many, in fact) for all the rest of the Democratic Party to come around to Newsom's initial position. Even in the 2008 presidential election, neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton had yet "evolved" to support marriage equality.
I must admit for full disclosure that while I wasn't blogging back then, I was also one of those cautioning that it was too much, too soon. I was wrong, and Newsom was right. If he hadn't pushed the issue when he did, it is likely it would have taken a lot longer to become reality on the national stage. His leadership quite likely shortened the timeline.
Marriage equality isn't the only issue Newsom has been out in front of, though. In 2013, Lieutenant Governor Newsom convened a "Blue Ribbon Commission on Marijuana Policy" with the state's A.C..L.U., and after it issued its report in 2015, Newsom became one of the leaders of the movement to pass Proposition 64, which just legalized recreational marijuana in California. He not only lent his name to the effort, he actively campaigned for the measure as well.
This was the second time California has voted on recreational legalization (the first one failed). And nothing highlights the changing of the Democratic guard in the state quite so much as the fact that the person who led the "No" effort, both this year and back in 2010, was none other than Senator Dianne Feinstein. There's the past and the future in a nutshell, really.
Most Democrats are acting just as nervous and prone to swooning over legalizing marijuana as they were over legalizing gay marriage a few years ago. They are, to be blunt (no pun intended), afraid of the political risk in supporting the issue. They timidly wait for the voters to signal their acceptance before even getting involved. Which is not actual leadership, it bears mentioning. Recreational legalization was notably absent from the vast and detailed agenda Hillary Clinton just ran on, to cite the most prominent example.
Gavin Newsom is one of a handful of Democrats (there are others, who have been making notable progress reaching across the aisle in Congress, it should be noted) who have gotten out in front of this issue, and shown real leadership. Newsom, quite obviously, is not the type of politician who waits for the people to lead, and then meekly follows. He has shown he's willing to lay his own political career on the line to stand up for what he believes is right, on two of the biggest social and political fights of our times. So even though the political calendar may preclude a Newsom presidential run next time around, my guess is that eventually he is going to take a crack at the top job. And he'll have an impressive record of true leadership to run on.
Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris aren't the only two California Democrats who are about to deepen the Democratic Party's bench, either. Once Dianne Feinstein announces her retirement (whether this election cycle or the next), there will be another prominent national slot for an up-and-coming Democrat to fill.
So my advice to all of those Democrats crying in their beer over the thinness of their bench (during their oh-so-trendy Georgetown cocktail parties) is to look to California. We're about to shuffle off three of our old-guard politicians and replace them with some very impressive younger voices. You may not have heard their names very often yet, but you soon will -- that's my guess, at any rate.
-- Chris Weigant
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Should they stick with known leaders, or is it time for fresh blood?
If it's one or the other, I think fresh blood:
Tulsi Gabbard
Cory Booker -- Future president, IMO
Julian Castro
Joe Kennedy
Kamala Harris
Gavin Newsom
Kick -
Yeah, with Cory Booker, there's that whole "ran into a burning building" hero thing, but I just don't trust him to stand up to Wall St., personally...
Maybe it's just me...
The Castro twins, now, they're pretty impressive...
:-)
-CW
[61] from yesterday's "One Big Idea" column
Michale -
The Left Wingery was claiming a new Dark Ages with stocks falling to ZERO and hell on earth if Trump won...
Howz THAT going??
In fact, all the economic experts at Daily Kos and in the media are ALL predicting an economic boom because Dodd-Frank will be fully repealed, all industrial and corporate regulations will be eliminated when the EPA is shut down, and the minimum wage will be abolished.
In a boom economy, the party in power wins. Therefore I'm predicting massive wins for republics in the 2018 midterms regardless of anything else they do. People will only see the economic boom.
When the republics own 70 senate seats, 400+ House seats and three quarters of the states in the 116th congress, they will be able to hold a constitutional convention to repeal and add amendments as they wish. I fully expect them to pass the following: all senate and house seats will henceforth be elected by state legislatures and the president elected by congress.
What others do you think they might add or repeal?
It's good to see that today's blog at least focuses mostly on elected Dem leaders because one of the many problems in the Democratic Party is that “leader” is a title randomly given out to anybody.
There’s nothing anyone has to do to earn it; they don’t even need to be elected. It’s just handed out to anyone as a way of virtual bolding whatever position it is they hold, a mere means of underlining emphasis to give a sense of gravitas to whatever they're saying this week.
This inevitably dilutes the meaning of “leader” to a shorthand form of “one whose positions/statements I agree with”.
But it devalues and sidelines those who were elected into leadership roles over bits of the party and this necessarily impacts on the optics of the whole party.
The Dems now appear to have a plethora of leaders — rather like too many cooks in the adage about spoiling the broth — but no actual party leader so it is wandering directionless in the wilderness, the scene of an internecine civil war with a hundred small battles and not a single general in sight.
Since the election, both Elizabeth Warren and Independent Bernie Sanders have had the mantle of Dem “leader” conferred on them. I think they may well end up in the forefront of the party because nobody else wants to be there. However, neither will be elected leaders. They will just become de facto leaders, the voices of the party by default. (Given how desperately the party needs a leader, this is better than nothing, a whole lot better perhaps).
I find it incongruous that any party, major or minor, has no clear, elected leadership. The minority leaders in the chambers of congress are leaders only of their caucuses, not the whole party.
The party as a national organization doesn't have a leadership structure. Not even the DNC chair is considered worthy of more than a part-time person, using the job as a top-up salary - and the position is not held in high esteem anyway. Their chairperson is more like a casual shop steward who meets with members twice a year. The position has no gravitas attached to it.
It's a big problem for Dems but it will never be fixed until they recognize that it is one of their problems and the reason they can so easily be beaten in midterms - no national coordination, no sense of unity.
For the first time in a quarter-century, California will have two brand-new senators, as well as a new governor. All will be Democrats, unless a giant earthquake suddenly swallows San Francisco and Los Angeles.
I was going to make a joke, but recent seismic activity indicates that this could happen sooner rather than later...
Need to get in touch with my real estate agent out west, Lex Luthor, and see what might be available..
OK, OK.. Couldn't resist a LITTLE joke.. :D
Mopshell,
Sorry.. I ran your answers in with Kick's yesterday.. Apologies..
In fact, all the economic experts at Daily Kos and in the media are ALL predicting an economic boom because Dodd-Frank will be fully repealed,
Yes, they are... *NOW*... Prior to Trump's ascension they were predicting economic collapse and a new Dark Ages... :D
What others do you think they might add or repeal?
I think that, on the first day, President Trump should sign an executive order that repeals anything and everything that Obama has put into place that CAN be repealed by Executive Order..
Then we can go back over them and single out the ones, the very few that actually are good for this country and re-implement...
When the republics own 70 senate seats, 400+ House seats and three quarters of the states in the 116th congress, they will be able to hold a constitutional convention to repeal and add amendments as they wish. I fully expect them to pass the following: all senate and house seats will henceforth be elected by state legislatures and the president elected by congress.
I read somewhere that, government wise and taking into account state governments, The Republican Party is stronger than it has ever been since 1900....
While that's not quite the Republican Juggarnaut you are envisioning, the Democratic Party has a tough slough ahead...
I even corrected the spelling errors :D
But let me see if I understand.. You are predicting that the economy will do GREAT under President Trump and that the GOP will avoid the Mid-Term Curse (MDC patent pending) :D in 2018???
Not even the DNC chair is considered worthy of more than a part-time person, using the job as a top-up salary - and the position is not held in high esteem anyway.
Considering the last two people to hold it??
Is it any wonder??
It's a big problem for Dems but it will never be fixed until they recognize that it is one of their problems and the reason they can so easily be beaten in midterms - no national coordination, no sense of unity.
Spot on....
Having California lead the way for leadership sounds like a good idea, CW...
But consider this...
Given all the Trump gloom and doom and fear-mongering that came from the Left in the run-up to the election, it's a safe bet that, as long as Trump doesn't start WWIII, his 1st term is going to be treated as a smashing success...
It's the Mandate Theorem all over again...
MY advice would be for California, nay any state looking to advance to a leadership role, to keep their powder dry for a year or so...
"Never make a decision until it's absolutely necessary to do so"
-Captain James T Kirk
See how a Trump administration shakes out.. No sense in putting your best guy or girl out their early, only to see them get creme'ed by an actually decent Trump Administration...
Just my thoughts...
Let it not be said that I don't throw ya'all a bone now and again...
http://theworleys.net/temp/trumpets.jpg
:D
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/after-winning-7-more-seats-gop-dominance-state-legislatures-all
And for the Democratic Party, the hits just keep on coming...
It's passed time for the Democratic Party to face reality...
The old way of doing things is simply NOT going to work... The American people have passed by the Democratic Party...
It's time to be AMERICANS first and Democrats second....
I can't make it any simpler than that...
There may be a 'churning' happening over on the GOP side too, don't forget. Much of the list of potential administration posts are folks who are currently serving, such as Nikki Haley, Rick Scott, and Jeff Sessions. There will be more, many more currently elected officials looking for a way to fatten their resumes and future paychecks with any job with a "US" in its title.
Of course folks like Haley and Sessions are from safely red states, and Scott's Lieutenant Governor can fill the rest of his term, but eventually Trump's team will have to look at folks whose seats aren't quite as safe - they have over 4,000 appointments to make - and we might have some interesting special elections in our future.
Oddly, the fact that Trump had so few donors (compared to a Bush or Cruz, for instance) to his campaign could actually work against him, as some particular plums - Ambassadorships for instance (though I deplore the practice) - are usually reserved for them.
Not that I'm worried. So far, Trump's ad-hoc idiocracy is struggling though what should be the easy picks. Rough starts for new administrations are not uncommon, but this one feels quantitatively different: more like a reality show, less like an episode of the A-Team.
Rough starts for new administrations are not uncommon, but this one feels quantitatively different:
Of course it does..
This is the first time in our lifetimes that we have a President Elect that doesn't owe anyone (relatively speaking) but the American people...
Like I commented frequently, take away Trump's '-R' and he is a Democrat's wet dream of a candidate that the Left CLAIMED they wanted... :D
And the wisdom of Trump starts to shine thru.. :D
Apple could make iPhones in US in future: sources
TAIPEI -- iPhones might one day soon carry "Made in America" labels.
Key Apple assembler Hon Hai Precision Industry, also known as Foxconn Technology Group, has been studying the possibility of moving iPhone production to the U.S., sources told the Nikkei Asian Review.
http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/AC/Apple-could-make-iPhones-in-US-in-future-sources
So, let's change that "THOSE JOBS AIN'T COMING BACK" meme to "THOSE JOBS JUST MIGHT COME BACK" meme....
:D
The Two Americas of 2016
By TIM WALLACE NOV. 16, 2016
For many Americans, it feels as if the 2016 election split the country in two.
To visualize this, we took the election results and created two new imaginary nations by slicing the country along the sharp divide between Republican and Democratic Americas.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/16/us/politics/the-two-americas-of-2016.html
WOW..
Now THAT is interesting.....
[74] John From Censorati (yesterday) et al...
I updated my tamperMonkey script for the name change.
I also fixed the "Preview Comment" functionality so that it properly formats paragraphs/line breaks with "<p></p>" and "<br/>" tags, resp., to make it useful as a preview function.
Now, if I could only let one edit one's comments after they are posted... but some things are beyond the power of a user script :)
To update, just go to:
http://chasbrown.com/cwWeedBlocker/CWTrollBlocker.user.js
and tamperMonkey should walk you through the process.
Still too depressed to comment on the main topics of the day, though...
CW is correct that Newsom could be a formidable candidate and not only because he has shown political courage ahead of his peers. He is smart as a whip, articulate and knows every issue in detail. And let's name the obvious, he is a damn good-looking fellow, female friends have even described him as "dreamy". Couldn't hurt, superficial times being what they are. Of course I've also heard the theory that the Dems should quit jacking around and talk Oprah into running. If voter's familiarity with a face on a TV screen gives an edge it could be a no-brainer.
I also fixed the "Preview Comment" functionality so that it properly formats paragraphs/line breaks with "" and "" tags, resp., to make it useful as a preview function.
Now THIS is something useful...
THIS is something that is worthwhile... :D
Kewl move, CB... :D
However, don't think I didn't notice how easy it is to evade the racist filter you have created...
I don't plan on making use of the vulnerability.... Unless forced to.. :D
Still too depressed to comment on the main topics of the day, though...
See what happens when you use crutches and racist filters to avoid reality???
Depression sets in....
Steedo,
Of course I've also heard the theory that the Dems should quit jacking around and talk Oprah into running.
So, let me get this straight..
Many of you (still workin' at it, Liz!! :D) decried and castigated Trump as nothing but a "reality TV" star....
And THE solution is to run ANOTHER TV star in response???
And no one can see the hypocrisy?????
To update, just go to:
http://chasbrown.com/cwWeedBlocker/CWTrollBlocker.user.js
and tamperMonkey should walk you through the process.
Interesting....
When I click on your link, CHROME gives me a warning..
EXTENTSIONS, APPS AND THEMES CAN HARM YOUR COMPUTER. ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO CONTINUE?
Now, of course, I am not pointing fingers, but.......
[17] Michale
By all means, do install it! In 'Expanded' mode (which you can default to), you can still see the site exactly as you do now; just with a little innocuous '-' sign marking your posts. And the preview really is better... helps with those occasional 'oops, forgot the closing tag...' moments. :)
CW - I'd be happy to share the tiny bit of extra code with you to fix the 'showPreview' function in your template if you're interested - it's just a one liner, really.
[19] Michale -
As far as the Chrome warning - that is a good thing, and one should always be cautious! You'll need to (a) install TamperMonkey (google it) in order to activate the script; and (b) either trust me, or examine the code to see what it does...
You can play with it at this dummy test site (a static version of an earlier Friday post I grabbed for testing; you can't actually submit a comment there, but if you jump to the bottom of the page you can check out the preview action):
http://chasbrown.com/cwWeedBlocker/cwExample.html
Michale- Note I said "heard the theory" and it might qualify as irony. She would no doubt be a formidable candidate but not my first choice. Many cheers, glad you are back on the health track.
[20] chaszzzbrown
By all means, do install it! In 'Expanded' mode (which you can default to), you can still see the site exactly as you do now; just with a little innocuous '-' sign marking your posts. And the preview really is better... helps with those occasional 'oops, forgot the closing tag...' moments. :)
He's right. Just install it. It's excellent even if you use it for nothing except the preview.
Thank you Charlie Brown!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLsCBEk6aL4
chaszzzbrown,
Now, if I could only let one edit one's comments after they are posted... but some things are beyond the power of a user script :)
Many moons ago, when I commented at HuffPost, there was an edit function that allowed you to edit your comment as many times as you desired but you had a time limit which was, if I recall correctly, about 15 to 30 minutes ... a very useful function.
Hey CW
No.
In San Francisco, supporting gay marriage in 2004 was NOT bold leadership.
Likewise, supporting legalizing recreational marijuana in CA in 2016 is not bold either.
Newsome's "business background", his "ideas that were not well received"", and his cozy connections to the establishment (corrupt) Dems in CA should be expanded upon for a balanced view.
Gavin Newsome is a Big Money neoliberal to the core.
California can do much better.
He may well become governor, but your praise is undeserved.
Feinstein or even Dick Cheney could come out in support of gay marriage and recreational marijuana, but it wouldn't make them liberal or progressive.
Pretending that those issues are emblematic of sane or wise or bold or progressive policies overall is foolish.
Follow the money, and report on it.
A
[82] Kick
But, I wasn't even running! :)
By all means, do install it! In 'Expanded' mode (which you can default to), you can still see the site exactly as you do now; just with a little innocuous '-' sign marking your posts. And the preview really is better... helps with those occasional 'oops, forgot the closing tag...' moments. :)
Yea, the regular preview helps with that too. But often times, I just don't bother. I doubt your thingy helps with lazy :D heh
But I figured "what the hell" The preview point alone is a good sell for me...
But when I try to run the JAVA .js CW.COM gives me a APPS, EXTENSIONS AND CANNOT BE ADDED FROM THIS WEBSITE message..
Finally, if I may ask a favor.. Your moniker for this scriptkiddy thing is a tad racist.. If I am not mistaken "Troll" is a race.... Everytime i see it, it's like I am seeing CWBlackPeopleBlocker.js...
It's a minor perception thing, but it really drags the enthusiasm down...
Just my 2 cents worth...
Steedo,
Michale- Note I said "heard the theory" and it might qualify as irony.
Irony, hypocrisy.. Tomaytoe Potaytoe :D
But, my apologies.. I thought you were advocating the idea.. My mistake.. My apologies.
Many cheers, glad you are back on the health track.
Thanx... My right arm was my surgery arm. My right arm is also my trackball/typing arm... Dunno if posting on CW.COM constitutes Physical Therapy, but am hopeful.. :D
CB,
But let me get this straight..
You have my name HARD-CODED into the script??? So, if I were to change my posting name to 'A', you would have to release a NEW script??? And, then if I changed my posting name to 'B', you would have to re-release a whole new script!??? :D
Do you believe giving me so much power is a good idea??? :D Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.. I mean, if I am the evil troll that some of ya (wink, Liz) think I am, what's to stop me from simply adopting different posting names??? Or even just using a random character generator to generate a different random name. I mean, if I am THAT awful that you few have to actually censor my words!!!??? Who knows what I am capable of!!!??? :D
I mean, don't get me wrong. I am flattered that my ideas, opinions and observations are so...so... DANGEROUS to the status quo and to the snowflakes that special software (easily evaded, apparently, but special nonetheless) must be created to prevent my words from getting out????
I also question the wisdom of how your efforts reflect on chrisweigant.com
According to CW's tagline, chrisweigant.com is a "reality based forum"...
Your script changes that to "this is a reality based forum where new words, differing opinions and upsetting ideas are eliminated from view so you don't have to be upset by them.."
Not nearly as catchy, in my not so humble opinion...
Anyways, these are just random thoughts.. Your script has some good points, there is no doubt.
But like any other tool (say, a gun) it can ALSO be used for evil... And aren't you part of the group that says gun manufacturers are responsible for what people do with their guns??
Well, there ya go....
[26] Michale
I doubt your thingy helps with lazy :D heh
If only! If so, I'd also have have it up my charisma +5, and so on.. :)
But when I try to run the JAVA .js CW.COM gives me a APPS, EXTENSIONS AND CANNOT BE ADDED FROM THIS WEBSITE message..
The way the tamperMonkey stuff runs is: first you install the TamperMonkey extension for Chrome:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tampermonkey/dhdgffkkebhmkfjojejmpbldmpobfkfo?hl=en
It's an extension, kind of like Adblock, which after a page loads, does some other stuff to the page. Adblock removes any ads it finds; TamperMonkey instead adds javascript to the page, which runs after the page has loaded.
(And if you don't already have the Adblock Extension, you really, really need to install it; because it will change your internet world).
After TamperMonkey is installed, instead of getting that message, you should get something a bit more comprehensible when you go to that link I gave. If not, reply here (I'll check back).
Of course, if CW is amenable, he could add the code to his template and then the whole thing would be moot; but running a website is work...
Finally, if I may ask a favor.. Your moniker for this scriptkiddy thing is a tad racist.. If I am not mistaken "Troll" is a race...
Heh. Maybe in Middle Earth; but they don't have internet.
[28] Michale
Of course you could go on like that; and that is pretty much the definition of a being a troll. But what would be the point? If I don't want to read your comments, I won't; and there's little you can do about that at the end of the day.
I didn't develop the script to make it hard to read YOUR posts. I developed it to make it EASIER to read OTHER PEOPLE'S posts.
In other news..
There seems to be a lot of media discussion about a lame duck Presidential Pardon for all illegal immigrants...
Is such a thing even possible???
Of course you could go on like that; and that is pretty much the definition of a being a troll.
Aha....
So, if I *DON'T* do that, then that proves I am NOT a troll..
Correct??? :D
Heh. Maybe in Middle Earth; but they don't have internet.
Actually, it's in the real world as well, but OK...
On the other hand, since you and I have already established that I am NOT a troll, how about a name change anyways??
How about CWMichaleBlocker.js??
Or.. CW-I-Cant-Handle-New-Ideas-And-Differing-Opinions-Blocker.js
Couple o good suggestions there.... :D
On the other hand, since you and I have already established that I am NOT a troll...
When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Say something once; why say it again?
chaszzzbrown,
Thanks for the update. Everything is more difficult for me now and I appreciate the assistance.
I'll tell everybody about my experiences with our healthcare system (and my anxiety about the Orange One's terrific ideas for the future) when it's the subject du jour. I'm quite knowledgeable about health insurance having been a senior underwriter for both Anthem and Humana.
[34] JFC
Is Censornati near Hackron? :)
When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Say something once; why say it again?
Exactly.. Thank you... :D
Say something once; why say it again?
So, when Trump repudiated David Duke 12 times, it's absolutely ridiculous to criticize Trump for not repudiating Duke a 13th time...
Right? :D
I'm quite knowledgeable about health insurance having been a senior underwriter for both Anthem and Humana.
Haven't they both completely bailed on TrainWreckCare???
chaszzzbrown,
John From Cincinnati was a series on HBO. In my case, I changed it to Censornati as a HuffPost handle and it was a reference to their censorship efforts. I was a commenter there early on and probably posted a total of 30,000+ times even though I mostly avoided those main thread flame wars. I've never lived in Ohio or anywhere near Cincinnati.
John From Cincinnati was a series on HBO. In my case, I changed it to Censornati as a HuffPost handle and it was a reference to their censorship efforts.
Interesting...
You appear to be against censorship over at HuffPoop, but embrace it whole-heartedly here in Weigantia...
I believe there is a word for that... :D
LizM [23],
I don't remember that function at HP, but you do get to edit at Slate for about a minute.
[25] chaszzzbrown wrote:
But, I wasn't even running! :)
But you helped Linus get elected, and it turned out what the Peanuts were trying to accomplish -- Sally getting her locker open -- wasn't going to happen because President Linus got overruled by the real guy in charge... and all Sally really needed to do was kick the locker.
Moral of the story is: Sometimes you just need to kick something... ;)