Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Author: Fuzzy Slippers

Profile photo

Fuzzy Slippers

I am a constitutional conservative, a writer, and an editor.

Follow me on Twitter @fuzislippers

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on October 24, 2016 22 Comments
Earlier this month, Mary covered the WikiLeaks emails that showed then-CNN contributor, now DNC Chair, Donna Brazile forwarded Team Hillary a question ahead of the second presidential debate.  Not only did the DNC not learn anything from the ouster of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, but now, a tech blogger finds proof that the WikiLeaks emails concerning Brazile are not "doctored" as she claimed. Fox News reports:
After Democratic Party boss Donna Brazile claimed emails showing her apparently tipping off Hillary Clinton to questions at a March town hall were “doctored,” tech sleuths got to work -- and now say they've found proof the emails are authentic.

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on October 23, 2016 61 Comments
It's been a while since I've written about the Senate, but as the prof did an analysis of the GOP keeping the House, I am revisiting the question of whether or not the GOP can keep the Senate.  As a recap:  The Democrats need to win five Senate seats to win back the majority, only four if Hillary is elected and Kaine, as VP, holds the tie-breaking vote.   Republicans, by contrast, are defending 24 Senate seats to the Democrats' 10. As the professor noted, "In the case of the Senate, it will pave the way for Hillary to push through disastrous judicial nominations. And yes, expect Majority Leader Schumer to raise the nuclear option to the Supreme Court level if Democrats control the Senate by even a single (tie-breaking) vote." This holds true even if Trump wins the White House and the GOP loses the Senate.  Without the Senate, Trump won't be able to get the type of justice/s confirmed that he promised.  They simply won't make it through a Democrat-controlled Senate.

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on October 22, 2016 49 Comments
I thought Trump did a good job in the third and final presidential debate, but as the prof noted, Trump just can't seem to help himself from saying that one thing that will dominate headlines for the next however long and effectively obscuring the important, valid, and meaningful things he has to say. A quick internet search of Trump's first 100 days speech pulls articles entitled "Trump threatens to sue accusers while laying out plan for first 100 days" from NBC News and from CNN, "Trump makes 'closing argument,' again attacks accusers. I'll spare you the scathing headlines from those outside the "unbiased, straight news" outlets  reported by purported "journalists" at NBC and CNN.  Yes, Trump did attack his accusers and threaten to sue them during his first 100 days in office, so it's not all that remarkable that it's making headlines . . . and driving the narrative against Trump.  Yet another completely avoidable self-inflicted wound. But let's move on.

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on October 22, 2016 5 Comments
On Friday, New York's Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law NY State Senate bill S6340, making it illegal in the state of New York to advertise "for the use of dwelling units in a class A multiple dwelling."  This law is aimed at Airbnb, a San Francisco-based homestay network that coordinates the rental of private properties by the homeowners. Not unlike Uber, a transportation network, Airbnb eliminates the often union-driven marketplace for a given service; with Uber it's taxis and with Airbnb, it's hotels.  And as with Uber, unions are not happy with the explosion of Airbnb and lobbied in New York state for the passage of this law that establishes a minimum of at least 30 days for peer-to-peer rental of private property and provides for fines up to $7,500 for those in violation. The Hill reports:

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo banned short-term rentals on Airbnb after he signed a bill on Friday making it illegal to list unoccupied apartments on the service for stays under 30 stays.

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on October 18, 2016 17 Comments
In the midst of the furor over the Podesta email leaks, Politico finds itself in the middle of the media bias scandal many of the emails have revealed. In 2015 , Glenn Thrush, Politico’s chief White House correspondent, sent an article he was writing at the time to Podesta so that he could approve it. At least Thrush knew he was acting improperly for a supposed "journalist" and recognized himself as a "hack" while begging Podesta not to "share or tell anyone" he "did this." Fox News reports:
A Politico reporter called himself a “hack” when he asked Hillary Clinton’s top campaign aide John Podesta to look over sections of his unpublished report on the Democratic presidential candidate before publication, a recent email revealed by WikiLeaks shows. The May 2015 story, written by Glenn Thrush, Politico’s chief White House correspondent, was titled, “Hillary’s big-money dilemma.” The article focused on early difficulties Clinton's campaign would face to raise money during the 2016 White House run.

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on October 17, 2016 20 Comments
Instead of election officials rejecting mail in ballots because the signature does not match the one on file, U.S. District Judge Mark Walker ordered that Florida extend the same courtesy it extends to those who don't sign their ballot at all: a chance to correct the problem. The Miami Herald reports:
Calling existing rules “obscene” disenfranchisement, a federal judge in Tallahassee declared late Sunday that Florida must provide a method for voters to fix signature problems that might arise when they vote by mail in the presidential election. U.S. District Judge Mark Walker’s ruling was a victory for the Florida Democratic Party and the Democratic National Committee, which sued the state Oct. 3 arguing Florida canvassing boards shouldn’t immediately reject a ballot if a voter’s signature doesn’t match the one on file. The state gives voters who forget to sign their mail ballots a chance to fix the problem before Election Day — but doesn’t offer voters with mismatched signatures the same opportunity. Walker ruled the “bizarre” double-standard was unconstitutional.

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on October 16, 2016 24 Comments
In 2012, the families of the Sandy Hook victims sued Remington Arms for selling a perfectly legal weapon in a perfectly legal way.  The lawsuit argued that the sale of the a weapon that has "no reasonable civilian purpose" made Remington responsible for wrongful death.  On Friday, a Connecticut judge dismissed the Sandy Hook families' suit against Remington Arms. Reuters reports:
A Connecticut judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit filed by the families of some of the 26 young children and adults killed at the Sandy Hook Elementary school in 2012, saying the maker of the rifle used in the attack had "broad immunity" under federal law. The lawsuit, filed in December 2014 and seeking unspecified financial damages, said the AR-15 military-syle assault weapon used in the attack in Newtown, Connecticut, should never have been sold to the gunman's mother, Nancy Lanza, because it had no reasonable civilian purpose.
Accessibility by WAH