Blogging Bayport Alameda

March 14, 2018

National Horror Story: rearranging deck chairs

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:04 am

Surely we must all be MAGAing as of now.

I mean, all stable and genius administrations lose top leadership positions before a full two years have lapsed…oh wait…


  1. President Obama:

    Two Secretaries of State
    Two Treasury Secretaries
    Four Secretaries of Defense
    Two Attorney Generals
    Two Ambassadors to the United Nations
    Three Secretaries of Commerce
    Four Chiefs of Staff
    Four Directors of the Office of Management and Budget
    Four Chairs of the Council of Economic Advisors

    (And two of every other cabinet position)

    Conclusion? it’s hard to work in Washington? President Obama had a hard time with finances, clashed with the military on policy, and struggled with running the White House, constantly prosecuting leakers? or President Trump has a dysfunctional administration? Let the spin begin but at least use the facts…

    Comment by Nowyouknow — March 14, 2018 @ 6:38 am

    • 8 years vs 1.25 years

      Comment by dave — March 14, 2018 @ 6:40 am

    • Any of President Obama’s cabinet get fired over Twitter?

      Comment by Lauren Do — March 14, 2018 @ 6:55 am

    • Obama also didn’t have a Congress that was controlled by his own party. How low can you set that bar for Trump?

      Comment by Lauren Do — March 14, 2018 @ 7:04 am

      • Did Obama have any personal scandals over corruption, self dealing, adultery, nepotism and/or collusion with foreign enemies? He was no Lincoln or FDR, not by a longshot, but you make a fool of yourself by playing what-about-ism vs. Trump.

        Comment by dave — March 14, 2018 @ 7:13 am

        • Ooops, that was a reply to nowyouknow

          Comment by dave — March 14, 2018 @ 7:14 am

        • Not Obama, but the Clintons had all you mentioned, dave–in spades. nowyouknow should have picked Bill Clinton. Right party, wrong president.

          Comment by vigi — March 14, 2018 @ 10:43 am

    • Great people on both sides, right?

      Comment by Rod — March 14, 2018 @ 9:34 am

  2. I never had much respect for anyone who voted for Il Duce in ’16, but I can understand some number of them.

    If you live in a coal district, I get it. It was a terrible idea but at least hoping the mine would reopen was a better reason than hating that black SOB so you wouldn’t vote for his successor cuz she killed Vince Foster, among other irrational reasons.

    If your single issue is abortion, well, the guy who was pro-choice for decades and brags about his prowess with the ladies DID say he was against abortion, so OK, I get that.

    If you live in a formerly prosperous factory town, I get it. You were foolish to believe the Cheeto would bring back 90 grand + benefits factory jobs, but I do understand a vote to bring things back the way they usta be, dammit.

    But now, after seeing the train wreck (instead of on time trains) and the plainly, openly moronic narcissist for whom the Presidency is just a new toy, how in the world can they still support this dolt? Is there ANY reason other than they are stupid, racist, or some such other very negative ist?

    After 15 months, is there a remotely rational reason to still be a Trumpist?

    Serious question. Rational responses welcome.

    Comment by dave — March 14, 2018 @ 6:44 am

    • Conversely, are there any non-Trumpists, non-GOPers even, who dabbled in spreading the Hillary conspiracy slanders on facebook or twitter, or who supported Jill Stein, and still think those were good, rational ideas?

      Comment by MP — March 14, 2018 @ 8:13 am

    • let me guess who will respond, and it won’t be rational that I guarantee.

      Comment by JohnP.TrumpisnotmyPresident. — March 14, 2018 @ 8:43 am

      • Well one of them is getting into the usual whataboutism with the Clintons and some irrelevant wonky link about stock prices because of course she is.

        Comment by Rod — March 14, 2018 @ 11:01 am

      • In violation of my rule against posting to lunatics, note that the two presidents with the best S&P 500 performances during their terms are #1 Clinton and #2 Obama.

        Comment by dave — March 14, 2018 @ 11:16 am

        • Posting to the lunatics is fun!

          Comment by Rod — March 14, 2018 @ 11:23 am

      • You requested a rational response. I gave you two. Go ahead, Call names. We lunatics are laughing all the way to the bank.

        Comment by vigi — March 14, 2018 @ 11:29 am

        • Comment by Rod — March 14, 2018 @ 11:34 am

        • so vigi , I guess you are a self identified lunatic.

          Comment by JohnP.TrumpisnotmyPresident. — March 14, 2018 @ 1:31 pm


        “One of the great enduring stupidities of the American presidential cult is the belief, rooted in invincible ignorance, that the state of the U.S. economy at any given moment is a reflection of the intelligence and wisdom of the chief executive of the federal government and a result of the excellence or insufficiency of his administration.”

        Comment by Doug K — March 14, 2018 @ 7:35 pm

        • Yeah, but it’s a hell of a coincidence.Who cares? The stock market has never been higher. Smart money takes profits while coincidence reigns.

          Comment by vigi — March 17, 2018 @ 2:07 pm

        • “Invincible ignorance”

          Comment by Doug K — March 17, 2018 @ 2:46 pm

        • Sorry to hear you’re losing money, Doug.

          Comment by vigi — March 18, 2018 @ 3:25 pm

        • Oh, I’m doing quite well, thank you. See, I don’t buy and sell securities based on who the president is, because that would be dumb.

          Comment by dougkeen — March 19, 2018 @ 7:09 am

        • Neither do I, Doug. I agree; that would be dumb. I am just riding the wave on equities I’ve already owned for decades. Whee!

          Comment by vigi — March 19, 2018 @ 10:02 am

    • I have also been really trying to understand, in the most authentic way as possible, what motivated/s folks to support the guy who occupies the WH. Every day, I find it impossible to fathom what his supporters find so appealing about him, such as those women I saw on TV yesterday who were so overcome with joy when they saw his motorcade go by that they cried.

      I will never agree with the “cultural” differences (ie. Capitalism is supreme, or that poverty is deserved, or that there is something wrong with LGBT folks, or…..), and I will never agree with certain conservative outlooks on issues such as abortion, gun rights, or Nationalism or environmental degradation and climate change. And I find him so deeply obnoxious, moronic and offensive. But with regard to economic issues…..I do believe I share notable common ground with some of his 2016 supporters. The Democratic party has ignored and/or forgotten about so many people who have been suffering from under / unemployment due to dying industries in our nation’s Rust Belt.

      From HuffPo today re: Conor Lamb, the Congressional candidate from PA : “But Lamb also had a laser-like focus on kitchen-table economics, particularly with his promises to protect Social Security and Medicare”. He also embraced union workers and aggressively courted their support.

      So I’ve been intrigued by Universal Basic Income proposals as a way to bridge the macroeconomic transition to not only globalization but automation. I’m curious what others think.

      Comment by dya — March 14, 2018 @ 12:10 pm

      • Some of them support him because they share his deplorable views. Some of them support him because they’re just ignorant. Some, because he validates their racist, xenophobic authoritarian desires. But I think many of them support him because he trolls the people who they’ve been told for decades by the right wing propaganda machine are literally the devil incarnate.

        Comment by Rod — March 14, 2018 @ 12:49 pm

  3. He should have brought Gary Busey in for a rating jump.

    Comment by Doug Biggs — March 14, 2018 @ 9:19 am

  4. Rand Paul (R-Ky) on cheese-flavored, puffed cornmeal snack’s twitter appointment to run the CIA and his determination to keep Haspel from confirmation:
    “It’s galling to read of her glee during the waterboarding,” Paul said. “It’s absolutely appalling.”

    Comment by MP — March 14, 2018 @ 1:26 pm

  5. “Obama also didn’t have a Congress that was controlled by his own party. How low can you set that bar for Trump?” Obama’s 111th Congress consisted of 56 Democratic Senators, 2 Independents (who Voted as Dems) and 41 Republicans. with 1 Vacancy in the Senate. The House consisted of 256 Democrats and 178 Republicans.

    Trump’s 115th Congress is 47 Democrats. 2 Independents and 51 Republicans in the Senate. Trump started out with 193 Democrats, 238 Republicans and 4 Vacancies in the House. This is not intended to be a Political Statement but just a Posting to show actual numbers. The way things are proceeding Trump may be stuck with similar numbers as Obama after mid-terms.

    Comment by frank — March 14, 2018 @ 8:47 pm

  6. Hot damn I wish the Hill Clint had won. With all her achievements in foreign policy, now there’s a gal that knows how to deal the new Stalin. Funny the electorate (except for Ca) was too stupid to understand that the best way to deal (and win a Nobel Prize) with foreign leaders is for a US President is to call your Marines “corpses” and learn how to apologize whilst bowing.

    Comment by Jack — March 15, 2018 @ 10:10 am

  7. I can’t wait for someone to resign by Twitter. That would be the best!

    Comment by JohnB — March 16, 2018 @ 5:51 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Say what you want

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at