Hysterical Headlines (Funny or Absurd) for November 20th:
Bottom Line: These are your daily doses of nonsense from the generally godless, soulless and slanderous (GSS) media...
Dems Must Nominate Another Woman for President Jeet Heer, The New Republic
Excerpt: As sexual misconduct scandals hit Capitol Hill, it makes even more sense for the party to run a female candidate against the sexist president.
Ahh yes, more slander from the GSS media (but that's not a surprise). 17% of President Trump's cabinet is female, two senior advisers are women. His communications director is a woman and his spokesperson is a woman. But why get muddled down with facts right? Anyway, the real issue here is simply the notion that "we need to run a woman". Not the best possible candidate to lead this country but a woman. It's possible they're one in the same but this mindset is everything that's wrong with leftist mindset. Rather than the best possible people in the most important places - there's a mindset of identity politics behind nearly every decision that's made. That's not healthy and ironically, it's inherently discriminatory.
How Trump's Tweets Are Hurting Him Jim Messina, Politico
Show of hands. How many people think Politico is in the business of aiding President Trump and his agenda? Therefore, if they're perpetuating a narrative once again about his tweets what would that suggest? Using the 180-degree theory works wonders sometimes. This is more confirmation that the President's tweets are probably more effective than not.
Excerpt: This bill was written for Donald Trump’s wealthy friends on Wall Street, not for American families. We’ve seen this before: Republicans vote for massive giveaways to the richest corporations and individuals at the expense of the middle class while pretending their bill will create jobs for working families.
Tom Perez opened up Microsoft word, starting typing and he lied (just trying to channel a little lyin' Ted for this story). Anyway, I've demonstrated empirically that every person who pays federal income taxes benefits from both GOP versions of the tax proposal meaningfully with the Senate plan specifically being of disproportionate benefit for those who earn around $60,000 or less. There's an undercurrent of sentiment like this that's perpetuated near non-stop, not "fact checked" by the fact checkers and is willfully communicated by the MSM. It's simply not true. If you currently pay federal income taxes now, you'll substantially benefit next year period. Secondly, I'd still like to know how much you earn before the left decides that you're no longer a working family? That's another insult for those who work their butts off to achieve the American Dream.