...And The Tribune-Review Is Back To Its Old Anti-Science Tricks

I know, I know. STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS!

But while that was happening, this was being published by the Tribune-Review editorial board.

Under a headline that read:

Trib editorial: More cause for climate skepticism

The braintrust discussed this scientific paper in the journal Nature. (Remember - they're saying it's a cause for climate skepticism.). The opening:

In case you missed it — it hasn't exactly been making the mainstream media rounds — a new study published in the professionally recognized journal Nature punches a hole in the doom-and-gloom scenarios of “settled” climate change.

The study's authors determined that the Earth apparently is less sensitive to changes in CO2 levels than previously estimated. “Our study all but rules out very low and very high climate sensitivities,” said lead author Peter Cox, a professor at the University of Exeter.

You'll note the irony quotes around the word "settled." They want you to think that it isn't. And they're using this article to do it.

But when you look at the paper and the surrounding commentary by its authors, the reality (and this should not be a surprise to readers skeptical of the Trib's "climate skepticism) is really quite different.

They authors of the science paper do not doubt climate science - no where in the paper's abstract do they doubt the science. Indeed what they're doing is to refine the science. With a new methodology, they point to a narrowing of possible temperature ranges if the CO2 were to double.

If the Trib braintrust were to actually do any work researching what they opine to the public about they would have found this quotation by the paper's author:

The research team believe that by dramatically reducing the range of climate sensitivity, scientists will be able to have a much more accurate picture of long-term changes to the Earth climate.

Lead-author Professor Peter Cox from the University of Exeter said: "You can think of global warming as the stretching of a spring as we hang weights from it, and climate sensitivity as related to the strength of the spring.

"To relate the observed global warming to climate sensitivity you need to know the amount of weight being added to the spring, which climate scientists call the 'forcing', and also how quickly the spring responds to added weight. Unfortunately, we know neither of these things very well."

They're refining the science - using the scientific method to come up with better science. Where in that is "cause for climate skepticism" where the theory (that the planet is warming up due to all the greenhouse gasses we've been pouring into the atmosphere for a century) somehow isn't settled?

The Tribune-Review editorial board is misleading you, yet again, on climate science.

And by "misleading", I mean "lying."
 

My FORTY-SIXTH Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

I'd like to ask you again about Special Counsel Robert Mueller. I've written to you about him before. I have to ask you again as it's very very important to the health of our democracy.

As you know, it's been reported recently that Donald Trump ordered the firing of Robert Mueller, the man investigating Russian meddling in the election that gave Trump (and the GOP) The White House. Trump backed off when his White House counsel, Donald F McGahn - a loyal Trump appointee, refused to carry out that order.

Coincidentally, that same month you responded to one of my previous letters writing that you had, "every confidence that Robert Mueller will execute [his] responsibilities with integrity and professionalism."

I asked you last December what you would do if Trump tried to fire Mueller.

Here's my question: Now that we know that Trump has already tried to end it, do you support legislation protecting Mueller's investigation?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Round-up Volume 3
• Thirty-third letter - No response so far  
• Thirty-fourth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-fifth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-sixth letter - No response so far
• Thirty-seventh letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-eighth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-ninth letter - No response so far 
• Fortieth letter - No response so far 
• Forty-first letter - No response so far 
• Forty-second letter - No response so far
• Forty-third letter - No response so far
• Forty-forth letter - No response so far 
• Forty-fifth letter - No response so far

Fixed it for you!

(Bonus: You can use this headline for pretty much every shooting story!)

Another Statement From The Newspaper Guild Of Pittsburgh

As a follow up to this.

From the guild, last night:

Beginning at 11:59 p.m. Sunday, Jan. 28, 2018, the four-day byline strike at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette by the 150 members of the Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh will cease after successfully alerting the public of contentious contract talks that threaten the operation of the 231-year-old Pittsburgh institution.

That means the names of Guild-represented PG reporters, photographers, columnists and graphic artists will return to the paper, website and other PG platforms as on Monday. While the Guild-requested byline strike is ending, it is possible some members may decide to continue withholding their bylines, which is their contractual right.

“The byline strike was but one mobilization effort in our arsenal. We are prepared to use others. We hope we don’t have to do so,” said Michael A. Fuoco, president of the Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh and a PG enterprise reporter. “We will not–we cannot–approve another concessionary contract offered by a highly profitable parent company.”

There was 100 percent participation by Guild members–all who have bylines withheld them and those who toil behind the scenes such and copy and web editors wore stickers and buttons in the newsroom reading “I Support the Byline Strike.”

During the four day protest, a total of 226 bylines–an average of more than 56 a day–were withheld from stories, photographs, columns and graphics that appeared in the print edition. Even more were withheld on the PG website, which typically carries much more content than is published in the newspaper. It is believed the last byline strike at the PG was in the early 1980s.

Since the Guild contract expired March 31, 2017, and during the byline strike which is ending, PG journalists continued to do their jobs with the talent, passion and professionalism they bring to their jobs 365 days a year. The byline strike starkly illustrated the daily contribution their expertise provides the Post-Gazette and is an exclamation point on the Guild mantra “No PG Without Me.”

Guild members are annually cited for their journalistic excellence with national, state and regional awards and the Post-Gazette was named the 2017 Newspaper of the Year in Pennsylvania.

The byline strike’s success precipitated its end, Fuoco said.

“We always planned for it to last only as long was necessary for us to get the word out that the company’s concessionary proposal is completely unacceptable after 12 years and counting of pay, benefit and staffing cuts. In 2018, Guild members earn 10 percent less than they did in 2006. Any reasonable person can see that this cannot continue.

“With the massive national and regional publicity, we are confident that most people now know the fate of the Post-Gazette lies in the hands of parent company Block Communications Inc. of Toledo, Ohio.

“We have received overwhelming support in our quest for economic justice from all sections of the Pittsburgh community–public, political, religious, unionized, philanthropic. Along with them, we call upon the company to do the right thing: Fire its union-busting Nashville law firm, present us with a reasonable proposal and provide us with a bargaining environment of respect and dignity that our talent deserves.”

Should BCI not do so, there will be more mobilizations of increased intensity and escalation, he said.

“We fear the fate of the Post-Gazette hangs in the balance should BCI not become reasonable,” Fuoco said. “We love the Post-Gazette and want it to survive and thrive. For more than two centuries the PG has been ingrained in the fabric of daily life in the Pittsburgh community. And democracy depends upon journalism. BCI must recognize its civic responsibility and public trust by providing its talented staff with wages and benefits commensurate with what they provide.”

During the 12 years Guild members have earned 10 percent less than in 2006, pensions have been frozen, benefits have been cut; health-care coverage has decreased. Yet the cost of everything — including the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette — has increased dramatically. Still, over the last 10 months, in some of the most contentious contract talks at the paper in history, the company is demanding even more givebacks.

It is true that the Post-Gazette, like most newspapers in the country, loses money. But its highly profitable parent company BCI is able to write off those losses and regularly earns more than $100 million in profits annually. While the Guild typically keeps negotiations confidential, BCI’s refusal to move off its draconian proposal has forced us to go public.

Among the many lowlights in BCI’s proposal:

• Allowing the company the unilateral right to determine the number of hours in a Guild member’s work week, meaning it could be none (all members are currently guaranteed 40 hours a week).
• The unfettered right to use freelancers, managers and third-party vendors to perform work over which Guild members have had jurisdiction for more than 80 years.
• The ability to lay off anyone for any reason at any time and out of seniority (currently, there needs to be an economic reason; the company must meet with the Guild to try to find an alternative; and any layoffs must be by seniority in work categories).
• The ability to unilaterally change health-care benefits at any time (currently, any changes must be negotiated).

Moreover, the Guild recently filed an Unfair Labor Practice charge against the company because, through its union-busting law firm King & Ballow of Nashville, Tenn., it refused to pay a 5 percent increase in the health care premium for 2018, thereby unilaterally cutting our benefits. Companies involved in bargaining are required by federal law to maintain the same level of wages and benefits of expired contracts. It is believed to be the first ULP the Guild has ever filed against the PG but given its disregard for the rule of law, there was no choice but to do so.

“We want to report the news, not make it,” Fuoco said. “It’s up to BCI to determine where we go from here. We want a contract that’s fair and equitable to both sides. We’d like them to show they desire the same.”

I support the guild.

Questions Conor Lamb Should Ask Rick Saccone

We've written about PA State Representative Rick Saccone a few times. As I've written before, that's one of the good things about having a long-running blog: its history. What that means is that when researching some politico in South Western PA, chances are I don't have to do as much cold research - I can just dip into what's already been posted here.

Neat, huh?

Anyway, in case you missed it, Rick Saccone is running for disgraced former member House member Tim Murphy's Congressional seat. Saccone's a crazy-ass republican, Murphy's an ever so slightly less crazy-ass republican and the district (PA-18) went for the little-handed pussy grabber (and porn star boinker) by 20 points.  So the race should be easy, huh?

I should note that while the district's voters did know about the pussy grabbing, they didn't know about the porn star boinking due to a Trump-lawyer paying her for her silence with $130,000 just days before the election.

While the race should be easy for the family values Republicans, there's poll data showing that the race is tighter than Trump's 20 points.

That being said, here are a few questions that Conor Lamb should ask Rick Saccone were the two to debate:

1. Representative Saccone, in 2012 you sponsored legislation declaring that year to be "The Year Of The Bible" and in 2011 you co-sponsored an Islamophobic "Sharia Law" bill. Given that the Pennsylvania Constitution states:

   ...no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience, and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious establishments or modes of worship.

   How can you square your obvious preference for one religion over another with what's clearly spelled out in the state Constitution (and this doesn't even being to touch the US Constitution).


2. Representative Saccone, you've defended waterboarding and said that interrogation techniques should be legal:

   ...short of those that leave long-lasting or permanent physical harm.

   The UN Convention Against Torture defines torture as:

   ...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed...

   You'll note that it says nothing about "long-lasting" or "permanent" harm just "severe pain and suffering, whether physical or mental." Given all that, how can you in all good conscience advocate a war crime? Because that's what torture is - a war crime.

I'm sure there's more to discuss with Rick Saccone but that's a good start, I suppose.

A Statement From The Newspaper Guild Of Pittsburgh

A Statement from the Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh:

Until further notice, the 150 members of the Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh, newsroom journalists at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, will be participating in a byline strike in protest of 12 years — and counting — of pay cuts and other concessions demanded by family-owned Block Communications, Inc., headquartered in Toledo, Ohio.

Beginning today, all reporters, photographers, videographers, graphic artists, columnists and others are withholding their bylines from the paper, website and other PG platforms to express their displeasure with BCI. Additionally, those who toil behind the scenes such as copy editors, page designers, web editors and others, are wearing stickers reading “I Support the Byline Strike.” In all, 99.9 percent of the union is participating in the protest, an astounding sign of solidarity.

The Guild response underscores members’ frustration with significant wage, benefit and staff cuts amid increased workloads for a dozen years. And now, in negotiations for a new contract to replace one that expired March 31, 2017, the company incredibly is seeking even more concessions.

“To my knowledge, there has only been one other byline strike at the PG, in the early 1980s, so this is an extraordinary action that we don’t take lightly,” said Michael A. Fuoco, Guild president. “But these are extraordinary times in which Guild members struggle to support themselves and their families in 2018 on 2006 wages and benefits.”

Guild members’ annual wages have been cut at least 10 percent for each of the past 12 years–that means they are earning 10 percent less than they did in 2006, the last time there was a raise. Also during that time, pensions have been frozen, benefits have been cut, health-care coverage has decreased. Yet the cost of everything — including the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette — has increased dramatically.

It is true that the Post-Gazette, like most newspapers in the country, loses money. But its highly profitable parent company is able to write off those losses and regularly earns more than $100 million in profits annually. Still, over the last 10 months, in some of the most contentious contract talks at the paper in history, the company is demanding even more givebacks. While the Guild typically keeps negotiations confidential, BCI’s refusal to move off its draconian proposal has forced us to go public.

Among the many lowlights in BCI’s proposal:

• Allowing the company the unilateral right to determine the number of hours in a Guild member’s work week, meaning it could be none (all members are currently guaranteed 40 hours a week).

• The unfettered right to use freelancers, managers and third-party vendors to perform work over which Guild members have had jurisdiction for more than 80 years. • The ability to lay off anyone for any reason at any time and out of seniority (currently, there needs to be an economic reason; the company must meet with the Guild to try to find an alternative; and any layoffs must be by seniority in work categories).

• The ability to unilaterally change health-care benefits at any time (currently, any changes must be negotiated).

Moreover, the Guild recently filed an Unfair Labor Practice charge against the company because, through its union-busting law firm King & Ballow of Nashville, Tenn., it refused to pay a 5 percent increase in the health care premium for 2018, thereby unilaterally cutting our benefits. Companies involved in bargaining are required by federal law to maintain the same level of wages and benefits of expired contracts. It is believed to be the first ULP the Guild has ever filed against the PG but given its disregard for the rule of law, there was no choice but to do so.

The situation is serious and volatile. Unless the company comes to its senses and develops a sense of civic responsibility and economic justice for its loyal and talented employees, the very life of the 231-year-old PG is at risk. We fear for our beloved newspaper as BCI ignores the $100 million a year all PG unions have given back to the company since 2006. “We were hired to provide top-rate journalism talent and we’re performing our jobs in an exemplary fashion, regularly winning national, state and regional awards for journalistic excellence,” Fuoco said. “In fact, the PG was named the Pennsylvania Newspaper of the Year in 2017. But while the company markets our plaudits, it refused to treat us as award-winning journalists.

“We will not–we cannot–approve another concessionary contract offered by a highly profitable parent company,” Fuoco added. “The byline strike is but one mobilization effort in our arsenal. We are prepared to use others. We hope and pray we don’t have to do so.”

This blog has your six.

Which News DOES Senator Toomey Read?

Here he is on Hugh Hewitt, recently:

Hugh Hewitt: I am joined by United States Senator Pat Toomey from the great state of Pennsylvania who may have a rooting interest in the Super Bowl in two weeks. We will check on that. But is the President right, Senator Toomey? Good morning, welcome.

Pat Toomey: Good morning, Hugh. Thanks for having me. The President is absolutely right. The way that the business world has responded to the tax reform has been absolutely fantastic. You’ve seen the huge wave of additional compensation for workers, a wave of new investment.

I wonder if the Senator has read about:

• Kimberly-Clark to use savings from tax cuts to pay for layoffs:

  Kimberly-Clark — maker of brands such as Kleenex, Scott and Huggies — said the savings it receives from the new tax-cut law will help them pay for a restructuring program that includes layoffs.
  
  The company said the restructuring initiative, which the company was planning to undertake regardless of the tax law's passage, will involve reducing its number of employees by about 5,000 to 5,500 people, or 12 to 13 percent of its workforce. Kimberly-Clark also said it plans to close or sell about 10 manufacturing facilities.

• Comcast quietly fired hundreds in direct sales before Christmas:

  Hundreds of door-to-door salespeople for Comcast Corp. who walk neighborhoods and troll apartment complexes to pitch its telecom and TV services were called into company offices about two weeks before Christmas and fired, according to an employee and Comcast documents reviewed by the Inquirer, Daily News, and Philly.com.
  
  [And...]
  
  In late December, Comcast announced that it would hand out $1,000 bonuses to full-time employees, in response to the Trump tax cut that will slash its corporate tax rate. The fired employees will be eligible for a “$1,000 supplemental severance payment,” Comcast said.

• AT&T sheds 1,000 employees after touting GOP tax plan, giving out bonuses:

  After announcing that the majority of its United States employees would receive a $1,000 holiday bonus as a result of the new GOP tax plan, AT&T quietly laid off more than 1,000 employees.

• White House praises Walmart for raising wages because of the tax bill — despite the company laying off thousands of workers on the same day:

  Trump administration officials on Thursday praised Walmart for increasing wages and delivering bonuses to employees, even as the company laid off thousands of other workers and closed stores on the same day.

And I wonder if he has read any or all of the above, why he failed to mention this unfortunate economic collateral damage on Hugh Hewitt's radio show.

A Mulligan? Trump Gets A MULLIGAN??

For those who don't know the reference, a "mulligan" is defined this way:

2. Golf. a shot not counted against the score, permitted in unofficial play to a player whose previous shot was poor.

It's a "free pass" in a sense - something you get to "do over."

And this is how Donald Trump got one this week.  Politico reports:

Donald Trump is still the answer to many conservative evangelical leaders’ prayers. Or at least to their continuing grievances.

They embrace Trump the policymaker, despite being uneasy about Trump as a man, says Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a prominent evangelical activist group.

Perkins knows about Stormy Daniels, the porn actress who claimed, in a 2011 interview, that in 2006 she had sex with Trump four months after his wife, Melania, gave birth to their son, Barron. He knows of the reports that Daniels (real name: Stephanie Clifford) was paid off to keep the affair quiet in the waning weeks of the 2016 election. He knows about the cursing, the lewdness and the litany of questionable behavior over the past year of Trump’s life or the 70 that came before it.

“We kind of gave him—‘All right, you get a mulligan. You get a do-over here,’” Perkins told me in an interview for the latest episode of POLITICO’s Off Message podcast.

Weigh a paid-off porn star against being the first president to address the March for Life live via video feed, and a lot of evangelical leaders insist they can still walk away happy.

See? A "do-over."

So even though Trump had unprotected sex with a woman who was not his wife and then paid her to keep that information from the public (which would include all those evangelicals who somehow still support him), they can still "walk away happy" if he's on their anti-choice side.

By my count, Trump has broken these Commandments:

• Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery (this is the unprotected sex with a woman he wasn't married to)
• Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Thy Neighbor (this is the payoff to keep it a secret)
• Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Wife (Ok, so technically Stephanie Clifford wasn't married at the time, but if you read her description of Trump's reaction to her, there was a lot of coveting)

But Trump addressed the March For Life live this year so all that stuff gets a pass.

As much as I might disagree with him on anything else, former RNC chair Michael Steele has it exactly right:

"When it comes down to giving Trump a pass, some top evangelical leaders are turning a blind eye to his past discretions and came to his defense following recent reports about his alleged affair with adult film star Stormy Daniels,” host Chris Matthews explained.

“I have very simple admonition: just shut the hell up and don’t preach to me about anything ever again,” Steele suggested.

“After telling me who to love, what to believe, what to do and what not to do and now you sit back and the prostitutes don’t matter, the grabbing the you-know-what doesn’t matter, the outright behavior and lies don’t matter, just shut up!” Steele blasted.

“They have no voice of authority anymore for me,” Steele concluded.

This will have to be a question for anyone who attended the March or any religious conservative who still supports Trump:

How can you still support this man? Are the 10 Commandments negotiable?

Burden is on you, my friends, to explain your selves out of this seeming hypocrisy.

My FORTY-FIFTH Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

I was going to ask you about the government shutdown but since it's more or less resolved at this point, I'll move on (but I mean really, the GOP controls the White House AND The Senate AND The House of Representatives. How is it that you couldn't pass a budget on time? YOU OWN THE STORE.)

No, Senator. I am going to have to ask you about Stephanie Clifford (who, as you know, works in adult film industry under the name "Stormy Daniels"). The Wall Street Journal has reported that she had an affair with Donald Trump a year or so after he married Melania Trump, the current first lady, and 4 months or so after the birth of their son Barron.

They've also reported that Trumps attorney, Michael Cohen, formed a shell company to funnel $130,000 to her just before the 2016 election in order to ensure her silence.

Senator, let me ask you this week's question. Given your solid standing among the nation's social conservatives (100% rating from the Christian Coalition, for example) would you still have voted for Donald Trump in 2016 had you known that 1) he'd had unprotected sex with a woman who wasn't his wife and 2) paid her off in order for the public not to know about it, especially since that pay off might have violated FEC rules regarding an "unreported in-kind contribution" to the Trump Campaign?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Round-up Volume 3
• Thirty-third letter - No response so far  
• Thirty-fourth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-fifth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-sixth letter - No response so far
• Thirty-seventh letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-eighth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-ninth letter - No response so far 
• Fortieth letter - No response so far 
• Forty-first letter - No response so far 
• Forty-second letter - No response so far
• Forty-third letter - No response so far
• Forty-forth letter - No response so far

Meanwhile, Outside (Global Edition)

Each month around this time the climate scientists at NOAA issue a "State of the Climate" report for the previous month.

In January, however, they do an annual "State of the Climate" for the previous year.

Last year it got warmer outside.  From the report:

The monthly global land and ocean temperatures at the start of 2017 were extremely warm, with the first four months each ranking as the second warmest for their respective months, behind the record year 2016. Of particular note, the global land and ocean temperature for the month of March 2017 was 1.03°C (1.9°F) above the 20th century average—this marked the first time the monthly temperature departure from average surpasses 1.0°C (1.8°F) in the absence of an El Niño episode in the tropical Pacific Ocean. After reaching its peak monthly temperature departure from average in March, temperatures began to slowly decrease in magnitude, ranging between +0.73°C to +0.88°C (+1.31°F to +1.58°F). The remainder months ranked among the four warmest on record, giving way to 2017 becoming the third warmest year in NOAA's 138-year record. The 2017 average global temperature across land and ocean surface areas was 0.84°C (1.51°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F), behind the record year 2016 (+0.94°C / +1.69°F) and 2015 (+0.90°C / +1.62°F; second warmest year on record) both influenced by a strong El Niño episode. The year 2017 is also the warmest year without an El Niño present in the tropical Pacific Ocean. [Emphasis added.]

With the El Niño, 2017 was only the third warmest on record.

Yay.

The AP is reporting:

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the United Kingdom’s meteorological office on Thursday announced that 2017 was the third hottest year on record. At the same time, NASA and researchers from a nonprofit in Berkeley, California, called it the second.

The agencies slightly differ because of how much they count an overheating Arctic, where there are gaps in the data.

Speaking of NASA, and the climate science they do - and the damage to that science by the Trump Administration - Space.com reported:

Four NASA Earth science missions will get axed if the Trump administration's 2018 federal budget request makes its way into law.

On the chopping block are the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) satellite; the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-3 (OCO-3) experiment; the Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory (CLARREO) Pathfinder; and the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR).

Shortly after the November 2016 election, a Trump advisor said the president intends to eliminate NASA's climate-change research.

Meanwhile it's still getting warmer out there.

Today, In Pittsburgh At The Women's March

 

The Donald Trump/Stephanie Clifford/Ben Roethlisberger Story And How Far It's Gotten (so far)

Let's first look locally.

The P-G:

Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger is mentioned in a former adult film actress’s account of an alleged affair she had with Donald Trump in 2006, according to an interview transcript published Friday by “In Touch” magazine.

In recalling her affair with Mr. Trump, Stephanie Clifford — who goes by the stage name Stormy Daniels — said she remembers meeting Mr. Roethlisberger at a hotel in Lake Tahoe, Nev., the night after she first had sex with Mr. Trump. She said Mr. Roethlisberger was “hanging out with” Mr. Trump, then a real estate businessman in town for a charity golf tournament.

You should probably read the interview. Ms Clifford comes off as a steady and reliable narrator for her time with Trump.  Julian Routh of the P-G quotes this paragraph from the transcript:

We hung out for a little while and he just kept saying, “I’m gonna call you, I’m gonna call you. I have to see you again. You’re amazing. We have to get you on [The Apprentice].” I ended up leaving and the next night I saw him again at a party. It was in the downstairs of the hotel I was in and he was hanging out with Ben Roethlisberger. When I got there, he was already with him. He had Keith, his bodyguard, call me and ask me if I was coming. When I got there, I called Keith and he told me where he was sitting and he brought me over. And he was hanging out with Ben for a long time. A couple other people around, nobody famous. Mostly people trying to hang on to them. Ben had just won the Super Bowl that year. Donald excused himself. He had to leave, I don’t remember why, and he made Ben promise to take care of me. I stayed another 15-20 minutes and Ben Roethlisberger actually walked me up to my room that night because Donald told him to. Yeah, he walked me all the way to my hotel room.

And for the record, that's the extent of Ben Roethlisberger's interaction with the happy temp-couple in that interview.

And the "Keith" in Ms Clifford's narrative? That would probably be Keith Schiller, Trump's then head of security.

Now that we have the basics out of the way, who's printed this story?

• The Trib 
• PennLive
• NY Post 
• Business Insider
• CBSSports
• Esquire

And so on.  These were all posted on January 19.

Do I really need to point out that I wrote about this on January 15?

There's one bit of dissonance between my blog post of the 15th and Clifford's interview. Clifford said that the dinner was just the two of them and in Trump's hotel room. I quoted the Smoking Gun with this:

At the time Clifford met Trump, she was between marriages and living with Michael Mosny, who later became her second husband. In a series of interviews, Mosny recalled that after Clifford met Trump at the Nevada golf tournament--where she had dinner one night with the mogul and Roethlisberger--she maintained contact with the businessman.

While in the interview says that she met Roethlisberger the next night, after the sex, when he walked her home.

So which is it?

My guess is that her response is closer to the truth than Mosny's - if only because Mosny's only relating what he remembers of what Clifford told him.  There's lotsa room in there for years-old memories to get skewed.

All that aside, NONE of the above news sources caught the fact that Ben played at least one round of golf with Trump at that tournament. Was it before or after the sex? Did they partake in any "locker room talk" on the links? Has Trump at any point then or since said to Roethlisberger, "Hey, you know that blonde porn star I got you to walk home that night? Yea, I banged her. Me, 60 years old and I'm banging a porn star."

Because you can totally see him bragging that.

Can someone please put a camera in Ben Roethlisberger's face and ask him what he knows about this?

UPDATE: The headline of this blog post has been corrected. Apologies all around for getting Ms Clifford's name wrong.

Please Ask Your Trump-Loving Friends/Acquaintances About This.

This will be a follow-up to the "Donald And The Porn star" narrative.

From USAToday, we learn:

In Touch magazine has published a 7-year-old interview with a former porn star in which she goes into salacious details about an alleged extramarital affair with Donald Trump that only last week she claimed never took place.

Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, told the magazine in 2011 that the alleged sexual trysts with Trump began in July 2006 after she met him at a celebrity golf tournament in Lake Tahoe, Nev. The meeting and alleged affair came a year after the future president had married Melania Trump, his third wife.

“I actually don’t even remember why I did it but I do remember while we were having sex, I was like, ‘Please don’t try to pay me,’” Daniels said in the 2011 interview that the magazine only recently resurrected. “And then I remember thinking, ‘But I bet if he did, it would be a lot.'”

In the In Touch article, Daniels purportedly told the magazine that she and Trump had several more encounters over the next few years.

A few take-aways:

• I think we can abandon the idea that the affair didn't happen. To assume Ms Clifford's recent denials are anything other than an effect of the non-disclosure agreement would be silly.
• We've already discussed that golf tournament and the Pittsburgh connection to this story. Will someone please ask Ben Roethlisberger what he remembers about having dinner with Donald and the Porn Star?
• This was not a one time thing.

Then there's this from Slate (channeling the Wall Street Journal):

Ever since former porn star Stormy Daniels’ alleged 2006 affair with Donald Trump became public last week, we, the public, have learned a great deal about the president’s sexual proclivities. It’s too much information to know about anyone, let alone the president, let alone when the president is Donald Trump. And to think, we almost made it without ever having to know about any of this at all! We were almost blissfully unaware because Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen went to great lengths not only to pay Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet about the affair just weeks before the 2016 election, but to cover his own tracks while doing so by setting up a private company in Delaware to funnel the payment through. That comes from the Wall Street Journal, which broke the original story of Trump’s affair with Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford. 

And this is what they took from the WSJ:

[Cohen] established Essential Consultants LLC, on Oct. 17, 2016, just before the 2016 presidential election, corporate documents show. Mr. Cohen, who is based in New York, then used a bank account linked to the entity to send the payment to the client-trust account of a lawyer representing the woman, Stephanie Clifford, one of the people said.
Delaware doesn’t require companies to publicly disclose the names of their managers… [O]n its formation documents, which were reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Cohen listed himself as the “authorized person” for the company, rather than hiring a lawyer or an agent to serve in that role, which some company owners do to further obscure their identities. To further mask the identities of the people involved in the agreement, the parties used pseudonyms, with Ms. Clifford identified as “Peggy Peterson,” according to a person familiar with the matter.

Yea, tell me again about how Trump is a good man.

More Outrage Over John Block's Editorial

Here's one letter that the P-G published in the wake of Block's MLK/Racism - "So What?" editorial:

Since 1927, our family has been involved with the Post-Gazette, shaped primarily by the nearly six decades of William Block Sr.’s socially conscious leadership. Some of us knew him as “Dad,” some “Grandpa,” and some “Bill,” but we all knew him as a man whose dedication to excellence and generosity infused the newsroom culture at the paper. He was an advocate for civil rights and freedom of the press. He was both a publisher who listened to his editors and a constant — and accessible — presence. The editorial “Reason as Racism,” published on Martin Luther King Day, printed without the Post-Gazette editorial board’s consensus, and attempting to justify blatant racism, is a violation of that legacy.

We are so grateful that Bill never had to read it. It goes against everything he worked for and valued. Our family strives to continue embodying his values of social justice, respect and equality in our communities.

As shareholders and family members of the family that operates this newspaper, we are very mindful that Dr. King himself said, “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” We do not condone the sentiments expressed in the piece. We do not condone the whitewashing of racism, nor the normalization of it. We cannot remain silent and by implication approve of the use of the Post-Gazette to provide cover for racism.

The letter's signed by more than a dozen people - more than a few with the last name of Block.

And now a letter that the P-G has refused to publish:

The Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh, the union representing 150 reporters, photographers, copy editors, artists and other editorial employees at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, is collectively appalled and crestfallen by the repugnant editorial “Reason as Racism.” As a matter of course, the Guild does not weigh in on editorial positions, but this piece is so extraordinary in its mindless, sycophantic embrace of racist values and outright bigotry espoused by this country’s President that we would be morally, journalistically, and humanly remiss not to speak out against it.

This editorial is a blight on the 231 years of service the Post-Gazette has provided its readers. Over its long life, it has railed against racism and supported civil rights and justice for all. Given this history, the shameful and unconscionable editorial that ran on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, of all days, is an abomination that cannot go without condemnation from journalists committed to fairness, accuracy and decency. To be clear, no member of the Newspaper Guild had anything to do with that editorial and we stand together in solidarity against the bigotry, hatred and divisiveness it engenders.

Our hope is that, like us, readers of the Post-Gazette will decry this lapse in promoting common decency, equal opportunity and justice across our great land and the world. This editorial and its sentiments solely represent the opinions of the Block family, owners of the Post-Gazette, and not their loyal employees who use our talents to fight against what this editorial stands for.

That's signed by the executive committee of the Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh.

As the editorial was first force-fed into the otherwise unsuspecting eyes of the Toledo-based news reading public, the president of the Newspaper Guild of Toledo has also made his thoughts public:

There's a difference between disagreeing with an editorial, which will always happen, and the publisher adopting intellectually dishonest positions to advance his personal and political views in the name of employees who are mortified at them.

— Nolan_Rosenkrans (@NolanRosenkrans) January 16, 2018

Let me add my own thought, (if not already obvious): the Block editorial was reprehensible on so many levels it's difficult to keep them straight.

So Donald's porn star romp will have to wait.

There's Trouble (The "P-G" Editorial That Wasn't)

Yes, there's trouble!
Right here in (Three) River City!
Trouble with a capital "T"
And that rhymes with "B" and that stands for...

Brainless? Block? Bigotry?

A few days ago, on Martin Luther King day, the Post-Gazette published this editorial. You know when (and I'm certainly not the first person to say this) someone opens a discussion by saying, "I don't want to sound racist, but..." you know they're going to say something racist.

(By the way you can substitute "sexist" or "homophobic" with above with roughly the same result.)

Well, the editorial opens with:

Calling someone a racist is the new McCarthyism. The charge is pernicious. The accuser doesn’t need to prove it. It simply hangs over the accused like a great human stain.

This is someone hoping to be able to say unchallenged something they presume will be seen as racist but while at the same time not wanting to defend themselves from being called a racist. Because they know they're not. It's the people who point out racism and intolerance that are the real racist intolerant ones, amirite? MAGA!

Word quickly got around that the Post-Gazette's editorial board did not write that editorial published by the Post-Gazette. It was written in Toledo for the Toledo Blade (who published it a day earlier) at the behest of the two papers' owner, John Block.

This John Block:

I wonder how Block feels about his "interesting" and "memorable" friend (that's how Block referred to Trump in the caption of this tweet) paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for the silence some adult film actors.

The backlash was loud and proud.  The CityPaper snagged the story.

The Pittsburgh Foundation and the Heinz Endowments were not happy:

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has done our community and the cause of justice a grave disservice with its lead editorial, “Reason as Racism,” published of all days on Martin Luther King Day, when we as a nation commemorate the ongoing fight to end racism in our country.

Repeated verbatim from an opinion piece printed Saturday in its sister publication the Toledo Blade, the editorial is a silly mix of deflection and distortion that provides cover for racist rhetoric while masquerading as a defense of decency. It is unworthy of a proud paper and an embarrassment to Pittsburgh.

And some former P-G staffers were even unhappier:

As former Post-Gazette staff members, we are writing to express our anger at the content, tone and timing of Monday’s editorial.

The piece seeks to excuse President Trump’s disparaging remarks about nations of color, while also limiting the term “racist” to the narrowest and most violent forms of the practice, as if it no longer exists.

This is not the Post-Gazette we knew.

As a group, our personal politics and worldviews were often at odds. Newspapers are not a place for a single brand of personality or intellect. But we all shared the core values of journalism: fairness, accuracy, careful thought, and common decency.

An editorial saying, “so what” to a president referring to African countries as “shitholes,” and suggesting that the definition of racism be confined to the likes of racist mass-murderer Dylann Roof or segregationist sheriff Bull Connor, who set police dogs on civil rights demonstrators, basically surrenders the cause of civil rights.

Racism is more than overt violence. It is the systematic degradation of people through practices and institutions that are so pervasive we cease to recognize them in our own lives. It is dismissing a politician’s horrible remarks as “coarse” but meaningless, when words are the very tools of governance. It is suggesting that racist is an invalid term unless someone has met a standard so narrow that it excuses discrimination that is little more than apartheid without the violence.

Notably, racism is also saying these things in print, in a major newspaper, on Martin Luther King Day.

Ya got trouble...

My FORTY-FORTH Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey (UPDATED)

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

Seeing that you've already addressed Donald Trump's racist "shithole countries" comment (though rather tepidly and incompletely, I should add), I'd like to ask you about recent events in Hawaii.

A few days ago, Hawaii was rocked with a false ballistic missile alarm. For early 40 minutes the residents of Hawaii thought they were going to die a nuclear death. Hawaii, by the way, has a population of about 1.4 million. If only 10% were panicked, that's still 140,000 panicked US citizens.

And according to CNN, Donald Trump was on one of his many golf courses, playing golf and having lunch. There was no public comment from him for about 18 hours. In the meantime, however, he tweeted yet another complaint about "fake news."

So here's my question to you, sir: How this is acceptable behavior? That the President of the United States of America could so casually go about his day while so many of his constituents were panicked that they only had a few more minutes to live and yet say nothing about it for nearly a day?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

UPDATE: Senator Toomey has responded to this letter here.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Round-up Volume 3
• Thirty-third letter - No response so far  
• Thirty-fourth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-fifth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-sixth letter - No response so far
• Thirty-seventh letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-eighth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-ninth letter - No response so far 
• Fortieth letter - No response so far 
• Forty-first letter - No response so far 
• Forty-second letter - No response so far
• Forty-third letter - No response so far.

Donald J Trump And The Porn Star (AND THE PITTSBURGH CONNECTION)

On Weekend Update this weekend, Colin Jost said of the current Trump/pornstar story:

Let me just say what a thrill it is to be alive a time when ‘Porn star blackmails president’ is, like, the fourth biggest story of the week.

Like it or not, we live in interesting times, don't we?

Anyway, the Wall Street Journal broke the story a few days ago:

A lawyer for President Donald Trump arranged a $130,000 payment to a former adult-film star a month before the 2016 election as part of an agreement that precluded her from publicly discussing an alleged sexual encounter with Mr. Trump, according to people familiar with the matter. (subscription required)

The film star's name is Stephanie Clifford and she's known professionally as Stormy Daniels.

For the record, both Trump and Daniels deny this story.

And as the WSJ is behind a pay wall, we have to look elsewhere for details. From this article in USAToday, we learn:

According to The Journal, Clifford has privately alleged the encounter took place after the two met at a July 2006 celebrity golf tournament in Lake Tahoe. That's a year after Trump married his third wife, Melania. The Journal previously reported that Clifford had been in talks with Good Morning America in the fall of 2016 about an appearance to discuss Trump, also citing people familiar with the matter.

Donald and Melania were married in January, 2005 and  Donald and Melania Trump's son, Barron, was born in March, 2006. Just to put this into a clearer context.

But can we find a more specific date for this tournament?

Yes, we can - it's the American Century Celebrity Championship tornament and it's held in the second full week of July every year at the Edgewood Tahoe Golf Course in Nevada.

Look who else was there:

Yep, that's Ben Roethlisberger, just 5 months after his first Super Bowl win. He came in 47th, by the way, 50 strokes behind the winner, actor Jack Wagner. But that's not a big deal in itself as far as a Pittsburgh connection goes.  Looking at the results we see that both Kordell Stewart (who came in 44th) and Tommy Maddox (who came in 7th) were also there. Lotsa people were.

Donald Trump, by the way, came in 62nd.

Here's the thing: See that sign over there on the right hand side of the picture?  This blog post will explain it:

Today is the final round of the American Century Championship (televised on NBC). Ben Roethlisberger will be paired with Paul O'Neill and Donald Trump, while former Steelers QB Tommy Maddox will be playing with Marshall Faulk and Vince Coleman. As of Sunday morning, Maddox is on the leaderboard and has a legitimate chance of winning the event.

So that was the last of three rounds. Were they paired in any of the other two?

Well, there's this from The Smoking Gun:

During one round, Trump’s threesome included NFL quarterback Ben Roethlisberger and skier Bode Miller.

So that would mean that for two out of the three rounds, Trump and Roethlisberger golfed together, right? But here's the money shot, also from the Smoking Gun:

At the time Clifford met Trump, she was between marriages and living with Michael Mosny, who later became her second husband. In a series of interviews, Mosny recalled that after Clifford met Trump at the Nevada golf tournament--where she had dinner one night with the mogul and Roethlisberger--she maintained contact with the businessman. [Emphasis added.]

Ok, so where are we? All legal denials aside, this story is about a six-figure payoff in exchange for silence regarding an extra-marital affair Donald Trump had with a porn star in 2006. The payoff was made weeks before the 2016 Presidential election. Pittsburgh Steeler Ben Roethlisberger both golfed with Donald Trump (twice, it seems) and had dinner with Trump and Stephanie Clifford during the week of that golf tournament.

Given the seriousness of this story (blackmail? payoffs for silence weeks before a presidential election?),

SHOULDN'T SOMEONE ASK BEN ROETHLISBERGER WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT THIS?

Our Shithole President - And How Pennyslvania's Senators Have Reacted

Yesterday, I said I'd follow up on how Pennsylvania's politicians are either defending Trump's racism or condemning it.

We'll start with The Senate and perhaps follow-up with the House tomorrow.

Senator Bob Casey has tweeted three times on Trump's "shithole countries" remark.  First there was this:

America is better than this and our president should be too. https://t.co/RIhRpMd7If

— Senator Bob Casey (@SenBobCasey) January 11, 2018

Which, while I completely agree it, seems a bit incomplete.  The next morning, he tweeted:

The President’s remarks were wrong, hateful and divisive. Unfortunately, this kind of poisonous rhetoric is part of a pattern from President Trump that dates back decades, occurred during the campaign and continues to this day.

— Senator Bob Casey (@SenBobCasey) January 12, 2018

And continuing:

There is no place in our nation for attacks on large groups of people based on their race, religion or country of origin, especially from the President of the United States. America is better than this and President Trump should be too.

— Senator Bob Casey (@SenBobCasey) January 12, 2018

Good, as it fills out Casey's previous, and rather short, tweet. It also presents the case that this is not an outlier for Trump. He's been this vile for a long long while. Casey is unambiguous in his condemnation of Trump's racist rhetoric.

Senator Pat Toomey, on the other hand treats Trump's words a bit more, shall we say, gingerly.  His tweets:

I hope the President retracts the suggestion, attributed to him yesterday, that America should not want immigrants from countries which he was accused of describing disparagingly.

— Senator Pat Toomey (@SenToomey) January 12, 2018

And then continuing:

There are great people—many of whom would make great Americans—in every country on the face of the earth. The criterion for immigration should be the character of the individual, not the circumstances, however dire, of their native land.

— Senator Pat Toomey (@SenToomey) January 12, 2018

Attributed? Suggestion? Let's take a look, again, at what he's quoted as saying. From the Washington Post:

President Trump grew frustrated with lawmakers Thursday in the Oval Office when they discussed protecting immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and African countries as part of a bipartisan immigration deal, according to several people briefed on the meeting.

“Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Trump said, according to these people, referring to countries mentioned by the lawmakers.

Trump then suggested that the United States should instead bring more people from countries such as Norway, whose prime minister he met with Wednesday. The president, according to a White House official, also suggested he would be open to more immigrants from Asian countries because he felt that they help the United States economically.

It's sad to see Pat Toomey avoiding much of the bigotry of Trump's "suggestion" and it's also sad to see him hide behind the word "attributed" rather than the stronger "quoted" regarding the phrase "shithole countries."  It shades towards Pat accepting (or at least floating) the possibility that Trump didn't say it. It let's the shithole president off the hook just a bit.

And while it's true that Trump has denied saying it but can we really believe a guy who's made two thousand false or misleading claims in only the first year of his presidency?

Additionally Pat avoided the other side of Trump's bigotry - while he criticizes Trump's "suggestion" that the US shouldn't want people from certain countries, Pat fails to mention who Trump does want instead: Norwegians (and later, those good-for-the-economy Asians).

People from Africa, Central America and a certain all-black Caribbean nation = They're bad! Keep em out!
People from Northern Europe (who are mostly white) and those useful Asians = They're good! Let 'em in! 

Ya missed half of Trump's racism, Pat.

It's clear which side Case is on. Pat Toomey, not so much.

Executive Time

Dear America

Dear America,

Stop acting so shocked that some 70 year-old, white guy from Queens is racist.

(Especially as he's said and done a zillion racist things to date.)

Shithole Countries - Our Racist President

First, the news:

President Trump grew frustrated with lawmakers Thursday in the Oval Office when they discussed protecting immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and African countries as part of a bipartisan immigration deal, according to several people briefed on the meeting.

“Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Trump said, according to these people, referring to countries mentioned by the lawmakers.

Trump then suggested that the United States should instead bring more people from countries such as Norway, whose prime minister he met with Wednesday. The president, according to a White House official, also suggested he would be open to more immigrants from Asian countries because he felt they help the United States economically.

Some reactions.

Locally, the P-G ran with the AP story - which included this opening paragraph:

President Donald Trump questioned Thursday why the U.S. should permit more immigrants from “shithole countries” after senators discussed revamping rules affecting entrants from Africa and Haiti, according to three people briefed on the conversation.

Though they later tweeted:

Our publisher is requesting us to remove @realDonaldTrump's "vulgar language" from the lede in our @AP story about his vulgar language.

— Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (@PittsburghPG) January 12, 2018

The Philadelphia Inquirer also ran with the AP story but kept Trump's commentary in the headline:

Trump: Why allow immigrants from 'shithole countries'?

Samson X Horne at the Trib had a reaction piece posted last night. (Note: This is an update. I hadn't found Horne's article until after I posted this morning.)

We'll keep you posted as to which Pennsylvania politicians and news sources defend Trump's racism and who denounces it.

Basically, the question here is: Which side are you (and they) on?

We Report - You Decide (Trump, Treason, And Arpaio's Birth Certificate)

Donald Trump, only this morning:

Disproven and paid for by Democrats “Dossier used to spy on Trump Campaign. Did FBI use Intel tool to influence the Election?” @foxandfriends Did Dems or Clinton also pay Russians? Where are hidden and smashed DNC servers? Where are Crooked Hillary Emails? What a mess!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2018

Now read this (many thanks to the OPJ for posting this on her Facebook page).

While popping back and forth into that twitter thread, take a look at Snopes:

The research was actually initiated in 2015 by “a wealthy Republican donor who strongly opposed Mr. Trump,” according to the New York Times, but when that source of funding dried up the San Francisco law firm Perkins Coie brokered a deal to keep it going on behalf of the Democrats.

Then this from CNN:

Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson told the Senate Judiciary Committee that the author of the opposition research dossier on then-candidate Donald Trump and Russia was acting on his own volition when he went to the FBI because he was concerned that a presidential candidate was being blackmailed, according to the 312-page transcript of his testimony.

But you know...Crooked Hillary Emails and all that.

I'm surprised Trump didn't mention his pardoned-pal Arpaio:

Controversial former Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Wednesday called former President Barack Obama's birth certificate a "phony document" in an interview on CNN.

"No doubt about it, we have the evidence, I'm not going to go into all the details, yeah, it's a phony document," Arpaio said on "Cuomo Primetime."

That was yesterday.

This is the political reality for our friends in Trump-ville: Trump is great, the Democrat Party and it's espionage branch (the FBI) sought to skew the election, and Obama's birth certificate is a fake.

My FORTY-THIRD Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

Senator, I need to ask you about Fire and Fury, the book by Michael Wolff. (If you don't already have a copy, you should soon as CNN reported that Tom Steyer bought one for every member of Congress.)

Here's the thing. Prior to its publication, Donald Trump's attorneys sent a letter to both the author and the publisher of the book demanding that the publisher immediately cease and desist publishing, disseminating or releasing any portion of the book.

Only this week I received a letter from you outlining your support of the First Amendment, an amendment to our Constitution that, among other things, guarantees free speech - especially political speech.

Seeing that he's president and that this book is about the goings on inside the White House, how is it not protected by the First Amendment? Furthermore, how are any of Trump's demands that the book not be published or distributed not Unconstitutional?

All else aside, this is a chilling moment for the defense of the First Amendment, don't you think?  So I'll ask you again, which side are you on?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Round-up Volume 3
• Thirty-third letter - No response so far  
• Thirty-fourth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-fifth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-sixth letter - No response so far
• Thirty-seventh letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-eighth letter - No response so far 
• Thirty-ninth letter - No response so far 
• Fortieth letter - No response so far 
• Forty-first letter - No response so far 
• Forty-second letter - No response so far

In Case You Missed It - Oprah, Last Night

And Harper's Bazaar has a transcript:

In 1964, I was a little girl sitting on the linoleum floor of my mother's house in Milwaukee watching Anne Bancroft present the Oscar for best actor at the 36th Academy Awards. She opened the envelope and said five words that literally made history:" The winner is Sidney Poitier." Up to the stage came the most elegant man I ever remembered. His tie was white, his skin was black—and he was being celebrated. I'd never seen a black man being celebrated like that. I tried many, many times to explain what a moment like that means to a little girl, a kid watching from the cheap seats as my mom came through the door bone tired from cleaning other people's houses. But all I can do is quote and say that the explanation in Sidney's performance in Lilies of the Field: "Amen, amen, amen, amen."

In 1982, Sidney received the Cecil B. DeMille award right here at the Golden Globes and it is not lost on me that at this moment, there are some little girls watching as I become the first black woman to be given this same award. It is an honor—it is an honor and it is a privilege to share the evening with all of them and also with the incredible men and women who have inspired me, who challenged me, who sustained me and made my journey to this stage possible. Dennis Swanson who took a chance on me for A.M. Chicago. Saw me on the show and said to Steven Spielberg, she's Sophia in 'The Color Purple.' Gayle who's been a friend and Stedman who's been my rock.

I want to thank the Hollywood Foreign Press Association. We know the press is under siege these days. We also know it's the insatiable dedication to uncovering the absolute truth that keeps us from turning a blind eye to corruption and to injustice. To—to tyrants and victims, and secrets and lies. I want to say that I value the press more than ever before as we try to navigate these complicated times, which brings me to this: what I know for sure is that speaking your truth is the most powerful tool we all have. And I'm especially proud and inspired by all the women who have felt strong enough and empowered enough to speak up and share their personal stories. Each of us in this room are celebrated because of the stories that we tell, and this year we became the story.

But it's not just a story affecting the entertainment industry. It's one that transcends any culture, geography, race, religion, politics, or workplace. So I want tonight to express gratitude to all the women who have endured years of abuse and assault because they, like my mother, had children to feed and bills to pay and dreams to pursue. They're the women whose names we'll never know. They are domestic workers and farm workers. They are working in factories and they work in restaurants and they're in academia, engineering, medicine, and science. They're part of the world of tech and politics and business. They're our athletes in the Olympics and they're our soldiers in the military.

And there's someone else, Recy Taylor, a name I know and I think you should know, too. In 1944, Recy Taylor was a young wife and mother walking home from a church service she'd attended in Abbeville, Alabama, when she was abducted by six armed white men, raped, and left blindfolded by the side of the road coming home from church. They threatened to kill her if she ever told anyone, but her story was reported to the NAACP where a young worker by the name of Rosa Parks became the lead investigator on her case and together they sought justice. But justice wasn't an option in the era of Jim Crow. The men who tried to destroy her were never persecuted. Recy Taylor died ten days ago, just shy of her 98th birthday. She lived as we all have lived, too many years in a culture broken by brutally powerful men. For too long, women have not been heard or believed if they dare speak the truth to the power of those men. But their time is up. Their time is up.

Their time is up. And I just hope—I just hope that Recy Taylor died knowing that her truth, like the truth of so many other women who were tormented in those years, and even now tormented, goes marching on. It was somewhere in Rosa Parks' heart almost 11 years later, when she made the decision to stay seated on that bus in Montgomery, and it's here with every woman who chooses to say, "Me too." And every man—every man who chooses to listen.

In my career, what I've always tried my best to do, whether on television or through film, is to say something about how men and women really behave. To say how we experience shame, how we love and how we rage, how we fail, how we retreat, persevere, and how we overcome. I've interviewed and portrayed people who've withstood some of the ugliest things life can throw at you, but the one quality all of them seem to share is an ability to maintain hope for a brighter morning, even during our darkest nights. So I want all the girls watching here, now, to know that a new day is on the horizon! And when that new day finally dawns, it will be because of a lot of magnificent women, many of whom are right here in this room tonight, and some pretty phenomenal men, fighting hard to make sure that they become the leaders who take us to the time when nobody ever has to say 'Me too' again.

In case you missed it.

The Trib Braintrust, You're Still Alive, My Old Friends!

Yep, they're still around and they're still not doing their homework.

Take a look at this from today's Op-Ed page at the Tribune-Review:

PennLive reports one Mummers group in Philly's New Year's Day parade staged a skit protesting that city's soda tax, while another Mummers group's skit advocating free, universal health care targeted U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey as “Senator Toomer.” No word yet on whether Eagles fans who swore off NFL games over protesting players “taking a knee” have sworn off Mummers for politicizing the parade.

Just from reading the text, you could safely assume that the politicization of the Mummers Parade is both 1) new and 2) limited to that one group.

If you assumed that you'd be wrong.

For a hint at how wrong the braintrust is on this you'd only have to go to the very PennLive article they reference (but don't link to) above. Here are the first four sentences of that article:

The Philadelphia Mummers Parade isn't afraid to get political.

Commentary on government has been a common feature during the skits put on by the Mummers' Comics Brigades.

This year was no different.

The Vaudevillains New Years Brigade, part of the Murray Comics, criticized Senator Pat Toomey and called for universal healthcare in its skit "Party Artery."

The Braintrust seems offended that the Republican Senator from Pennsylvania is the target of some social satire (aw snowflakes, are your feelings hurt when they made fun of Senator Toomey?).

Funny how the Trib editorial board didn't seem offended when this different group politicized the parade  a few years ago:


Even when The Trib published an AP story on the event.

Then there's this photo:

According to Philly Curbed, it's from 1938. Can you see the float?  No? Here, I'll zoom in for yinz:

See what it is? It's a float protesting in 1938 the possible US involvement in an upcoming European War. Can't get any more political than that. And that was 80 years ago.

But somehow, to my good friends on the Trib Braintrust, the politicization of the Mummers Parade started this year with a protest against Senator Pat Toomey.

It didn't and the braintrust STILL needs to do its homework better.