monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

But beyond those seriously huge blind spots in modern right wing thinking, there is the other aspect where attacks on "identity politics" carry another prime notion - that there is something wrong or illegitimate in the liberal urge to protect and elevate the disadvantaged whether through gender or race or religion or wealth, etc. For example, working towards increasing the proportion of women in positions of leadership - that's merely "identity politics". Seeking to ensure that less well off blacks are facilitated in casting a vote, again, merely "identity politics".

A reasonably well-organized primer on neoconservative history and behavior.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.globalresearch.ca/neocon-101-what-do-neoconservatives-believe/6483/amp

The preamble of the article:

“Neocons” believe that the United States should not be ashamed to use its unrivaled power – forcefully if necessary – to promote its values around the world. Some even speak of the need to cultivate a US empire. Neoconservatives believe modern threats facing the US can no longer be reliably contained and therefore must be prevented, sometimes through preemptive military action.

Most neocons believe that the US has allowed dangers to gather by not spending enough on defense and not confronting threats aggressively enough. One such threat, they contend, was Saddam Hussein and his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Since the 1991 Gulf War, neocons relentlessly advocated Mr. Hussein’s ouster.
----------------------------------------

Pre-emptive, sometimes Byzantine or Machiavellian military action goes hand in hand with upholding American hegemony.

Waiting for my president to come up with an Elton John song title to zing him with.

I've been thinking of approaching city council here in my small BC community to insist on a local bylaw that would mandate at least one Muslim Santa in every mall during the Consumer Fest period.

WASHINGTON — Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, has asked the White House for documents about some of President Trump’s most scrutinized actions since taking office, including the firing of his national security adviser and F.B.I. director, according to White House officials.

Mr. Mueller is also interested in an Oval Office meeting Mr. Trump had with Russian officials in which he said the dismissal of the F.B.I. director had relieved “great pressure” on him.

It is also important to keep in mind that these statues were erected after the end of reconstruction, in the Jim Crow era, and their explicit purpose was to show blacks "their place" in that society. Contemporary conservatives, and Finny is a wonderful example of this, assiduously ignore that.

yet only slightly more than a decade later, the constitutional convention decided that a black slave was only 3/5 of a person.

As my list proves, some mayors and City Councils made those decisions, bowing to threats of violence or at least unilaterally- without input from the people.

You think that's ok.

I do not.

Using the Confederate statues clouds the issue, I think. Imagine something you value is whisked away. Imagine public sentiment is not on your side. I don't think you can, but I think it's incredibly important to try. I'm thinking of the Neimoller poem.

Unilateralism and mob opinion shouldn't be our methods.

If the repubs can't help Trump pretend that he's moving his legislative agenda forward (because they can't agree among themselves), then Pilosi and Schumer are very happy to help Trump... Why, that allows them to ridicule the house and senate republicans, but it looks shortsighted to me. The right thing to do long term is to isolate Trump, not work with him.

I think Trump believes he is using a strong-arm tactic against the GOP, effectively showing them if they can't get their **** together, he'll go across the aisle.

I think the Dems believe they just bent Trump and the GOP across an Oval Office couch.

If the Senate had not held up Obama's nomination for justice Garland, then it would have been ruled constitutional, but since they didn't and Trump won and Gorsuch is the newest Justice, it would have most likely been ruled unconstitutional if by some kind of weird happenstance it would have gone to the Supreme Court. It is basically political on the question of it's constitutionality.