Teddy Roosevelt once said, “profanity is the parlance of the fool.” Democrats appear to be increasingly finding relief from both reality and sanity in profanity. Democratic members have been complaining that left-wing groups have been targeting them to be more aggressive and “fight harder” in the face of the fast-paced actions of President Donald Trump. Their response appears to be ratcheting up “rage rhetoric” with profanity and violent language. Last week, Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.) captured the new norm by yelling at a rally that “I don’t swear in public very well, but we have to f**k Trump. Please don’t tell my children that I just did that.”
The key, it appears, is for her constituents to hear it. She is not alone. (Warning: profane language)
Politicians and pundits have seemingly tried to outdo each other in proving their bona fides to the far left. MSNBC host and former Biden press secretary Jen Psaki pledged on Jon Stewart’s “The Weekly Show” podcast that she has “retired from the world of Democratic messaging” and ” speaking in a manner that was so academic and Ivory Tower.” She promised to drop “the disconnected academic Ivory Tower elite language that is too often used by Democrats, sometimes on cable television.” Instead, Psaki called on the left to “break some s–t.”
This is not a new trend. Law professors and legal pundits have long struggled to maintain a certain decorum and professionalism. However, during the Trump years, there was a similar race to the bottom as figures like Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe regularly engaging in name calling and profanity.
Just last week, a professor was restored to his teaching duties after being suspended for profane attacks on Trump. It is now considered required virtue signaling to use violent or profane language to show that you are no milquetoast moderate.
Many on the far left like former CNN anchor Don Lemon have turned the same profanity of members of the media who are not sufficiently aggressive and open in opposing Trump.
What is most striking about this race to the bottom is that it is a concession to the far left that writes off any effort to appeal to moderate and independent voters who supported Trump. The Democrats found their party captured by the most extreme elements of their base and alienated most of the country. Now, politicians and pundits are rushing to protect themselves by joining the mob.
In some cases, the effort is painfully awkward like Schumer’s effort to become a rabble-rousing populist. Even CNN has been unable to hold back:
When Democrats are not stringing together lines of profanity, they appear to be creating a new unintelligible language:
George Washington once referred to cursing and swearing as a “foolish and wicked practice” and a “vice so mean and low” that no self-respecting politician would stoop to use such language.
The rise of rage rhetoric is a measure of how politicians are now surrendering to the most extreme voices in their party. It is a matter of simple survival. These politicians believe that they cannot stay in office if they allow anyone to move to the left of their positions. To maintain their power, they are willing to join the mob before it turns on them.
We saw the same pandering with members embracing the violent group Antifa. Former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison, now the Minnesota attorney general, once said Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump.
It will not work. Today revolutionaries often become tomorrow’s reactionaries. As rage and violent rhetoric become normalized, the expectations of the far left simply shift to demand greater demonstrations of fealty. As figures like Psaki call for Democrats to “break some sh*t,” the ruin and rampage is unlikely to end with a marginal increase in ratings at MSNBC. At some point, breaking stuff becomes insatiable and uncontrollable.
That is the point, discussed in my new book, where rage rhetoric becomes state rage where free speech is often the first casualty.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Sad day Dr. Turley. I had faithfully figured you would take on the Trump administration’s move to ban and chill the Associated Press considering your apparent commitment to free speech. The question now begs. Are you a a real free speech advocate or just one when it promotes right wing talking points? Fair question sir.
You are not just predictable as a DNC troll “Jeff” with your identity theft avatar, but if the real person pictured knew you were using his photo, youd be thrown in prison.
Hey Ma, Trump won’t let me in the White House. And he won’t give me a free megaphone. Wah, wah, wah, he’s banning and chilling me in violation of the First Amendment. Waaa 😩
“… Fair question sir. …” Are you a Vanity Fair reader?
Becuase then it becomes clear why you prose such a question.
The Trump Administration said very early on that it was going to curtail the ‘main-stream media’.
So you must admit that the Media across the spectrum had ‘fair-notice’ of said action by the White House.
The Main Stream Media Orgy is over. Case in point, the recent Q&A with PM Modi of Indian was televised and it was clear that the President is going to be fair to all Press regardless of their ‘audience weight’. The idea of ‘Censorship’ at the expense of Main Stream Media Outlets is repugnant in that after years upon years of the Small News Outlets being shut out by the Media behemoths. Further more, just labeling them as ‘Alternate News’ was discriminatory (Small is not Alternate), If you wanted to be anywhere near the Truth of the past 8 years, They were the News[.]
The Counter Law Suit is a simple case of demonstrating how the Main Stream Media discriminated against the Smaller Media Outlets (for Decades).
To be ‘fair to your post, here’s the AP’s position:
White House bars AP reporter from Oval Office because of AP style policy on ‘Gulf of America’
By: David Bauder ~ February 12, 2025
https://apnews.com/article/trump-ap-journalism-first-amendment-8a83d8b506053249598e807f8e91e1ae
I’ll bite, [Dr.] Jeff.
The AP is a communist propaganda and indoctrination mechanism.
You doubt Professor Turley’s commitment to the freedom of speech. Have you looked at this blog in recent months and years? The good professor finally acquiesced to the truth of freedom of speech, which compelled him to lift even his civility rule.
There are more people with press credentials than seats in the Press room. The WH is always going to have to choose who to give seats too.
AP still has access to the president – just not the Press room. Some other outlet has gotten their seat.
Jeff, you seemed quite happy when the leftist news media censored individuals for misinformation. They were proven correct, yet you didn’t apologize for your actions.
The AP is providing misinformation about the Gulf of America and refuses to recognize the President’s order as legal. Why should he not remove the AP making room for some new blood? Your champion Biden didn’t speak to the press. Trump has been with the press, left and right, almost continuously.
Executive Authority Protection Act
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE
This Act may be cited as the Executive Authority Protection Act.
SECTION 2. LIMITATION ON JUDICIAL INJUNCTIONS AND STAYS AGAINST THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
(a) Prohibition on Stays, Injunctions, and Similar Orders by Lower Federal Courts
• No United States District Court or United States Court of Appeals shall have the authority to issue any stay, injunction, temporary restraining order, or any other order or relief that would prevent or delay the enforcement of an action taken by the Executive Branch, including but not limited to the President of the United States, executive agencies, or executive officers acting within their lawful authority.
(b) Supreme Court as Sole Authority for Injunctions Against the Executive Branch
• The Supreme Court of the United States shall be the sole judicial body authorized to issue any form of injunctive relief against the Executive Branch.
• The Supreme Court may only issue such relief after a case has been reviewed and ruled upon by the Federal Executive Review Court, as established under Section 3 of this Act.
SECTION 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FEDERAL EXECUTIVE REVIEW COURT
(a) Creation and Jurisdiction
• There is hereby established a new federal court, the Federal Executive Review Court (hereinafter “the Court”), which shall have nationwide jurisdiction over all legal challenges brought against the Executive Branch of the United States government.
• The Court shall be subordinate only to the Supreme Court of the United States and shall exercise jurisdiction over cases that would otherwise be brought against the Executive Branch in any district or appellate court.
• The Court shall not have the authority to issue any form of stay, injunction, temporary restraining order, or any other measure that prevents, delays, or suspends an action of the Executive Branch.
(b) Location
• The Court shall be physically located in Jacksonville, Florida.
(c) Judicial Structure and Appointment
• The Court shall consist of nine judges, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for lifetime terms under Article III of the Constitution.
• The President shall appoint one of the judges to serve as Chief Judge of the Court.
(d) Exclusive Jurisdiction Over Executive Branch Cases
• Any challenge to an executive action, order, rule, regulation, or enforcement decision must be filed with the Federal Executive Review Court.
• The decisions of the Court shall be final unless reviewed and overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States.
(e) Expedited Review Process
• The Court shall hear oral arguments in all cases before rendering a decision.
• No ex parte relief shall be granted, and all parties must be heard before the Court may issue a ruling.
SECTION 4. SUPREME COURT REVIEW REQUIREMENT
(a) Oral Arguments Requirement for Injunctions
• The Supreme Court shall not issue an injunction, stay, or any other form of relief against the Executive Branch unless oral arguments have first been heard by the Federal Executive Review Court and the case has been fully adjudicated by that Court.
(b) Limitations on Emergency Relief
• The Supreme Court may not issue an emergency injunction against the Executive Branch unless at least five Justices concur in the order.
SECTION 5. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING AUTHORITIES
• Any provision of federal law, rule, or judicial precedent that conflicts with this Act is hereby repealed and nullified.
SECTION 6. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY AND SEVERABILITY
(a) Congressional Authority Under Article II
• This Act is enacted pursuant to Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, which grants the President the authority to execute the laws of the United States, and Article II, Section 3, which mandates that the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”
• Congress, under its legislative authority, has the power to regulate the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary under Article III, Section 1, and to ensure that the Executive Branch is not unduly obstructed from performing its constitutional duties.
(b) Severability
• If any provision of this Act, or the application thereof, is found to be unconstitutional or invalid, the remainder of this Act shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE
• This Act shall take effect immediately upon enactment.
Congress has the authority to enact this with a simple majority. Removes 1,000 federal judges attempting each to unconstitutionally behave as if they were co-presidents. This micromanaging the executive branch by a corrupt judiciary is only really a modern tactic, absent in earlier times. Avoids the need for 67 senate votes to impeach corrupt judges.
The SCOTUS would reverse in a heartbeat. The Judiciary is the check on the Executive Branch. And Judges who ruled against King Donald are not corrupt. King Donald can’t do whatever he wants to- and the judges who have ruled against him are both Democrats and Republicans.
On precisely what basis would the Supreme Court “reverse” this?
First of all, you moron who claims to be a lawyer, the term is not “reverse”. They “reverse” rulings, not legislation.
You out yourself every time you open that fat mouth.
Congress has sole authority granted by Article 3 to establish (or disestablish) every federal court beneath the SC. Including what powers they are vested with, you turd licking numbskull.
And thus, the balance of power plays out in the courts, as it was intended. The cases will work their way through appeals and things will shake out. However, this time around, the EOs are more carefully drafted and thus harder to oppose.
That is the beauty of our system. There was never plans for the fourth branch of government to make regulations outside of the three branches. These are the target.
The law would not fix any problems.
But it is constitutional.
Article III
Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish
Naming this bill the “RECONSTITUTIINALIZING THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL ANTI-CORRUPTION ACT OF 2025” would make the Supreme Court tremble as it calls out the obvious corruption and their lack of constitutional legitimacy with politically motivated stays, summary judgments, etc.
“THE EXECUTIVE POWER, THE WHOLE EXECUTIVE POWER, AND NOTHING BUT THE EXECUTIVE POWER, SO HELP YOU GOD”
Article 2, Section 1, vests 100%, or all, of the executive power in the President and none of the executive power in the legislative or judicial branch.
No legislative body of court has any power to modify or amend the Constitution.
Legislation and adjudication shall not violate the Constitution.
Legislation and adjudication must be accomplished utterly bereft and devoid of any degree of exertion of executive power.
Legislation and adjudication that exerts executive power is unconstitutional.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Article 1, Section 1
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States,…
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Article II, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Article III, Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
The absolutely brilliant Sheryl Crow has donated money to NPR and publicized her donation on X as a way of teaching Musk a lesson. Yeah, that’ll teach him. It’ll teach him that NPR should not be coercively funded through tax dollars. What a genius that Sheryl Crow is!
Sheryl Crow finally gets American freedom, free enterprise, and free markets under severely limited and restricted government.
Sheryl Crow finally gets that any product is viable only when it engenders a voluntary and free response from free Americans in the free markets of the private sector.
Sheryl Crow finally gets that the “dictatorship of the proletariat” is illegitimate and unconstitutional in America.
Sheryl Crow finally gets that Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax for and fund only debt, defense, and general welfare, none of which include NPR, and that the very same Article and Section enumerate no power to regulate, to facilitate or impede, the press or print or broadcast media.
What you fail to get is that no one thinks you have a life
I am offended, sir.
Oh, and thanks for reading.
You’re my most loyal patron.
The Democrats can yell but for a very short time. They’ll run out of gas. It’s hard on folks to keep up such a high level of activity. They’re old and fat. They can’t put people in the streets. Their numbers are small and they’re all ‘staffers’. There is no real grass-roots traction in view.
‘Activists’ retreat to the courts when they no longer have the confidence of enough regular folks. That can be called to action.
Trump holds the final cards. Many times, many presidents have defied rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States. There are about 1000 federal judges. Their courts are designated as ‘inferior courts’. The Constitution acknowledges only the full court. As FDR almost did, President Trump can issue a proclamation refusing recognize inferior court ruling that interfere with his sworn duty to manage the affairs of state.
“You seem to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions, a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy”
Thomas Jefferson
Turley, what a hypocrite. Go to a Trump rally and you’re liable to hear women referred to as c*nts. But no, Turley thinks that’s okay.
^ Paid DNC troll. Ignore. ^
Get help. You mistook a Trump rally for a P*ssy hat rally spewing their hate.
Contrast Chuck Schumer with JD Vance. One is a sniveling old coward who cowers pathetical to the Post-Modernist Left, screaming inanities, while Vance is a polished statesman at age 40!
Vance embodies leadership. While he had the aid of a teleprompter at yesterdays Munich Security Conference, he spoke at ease with himself, confidently, declaratively and with purpose.
Bravo. Ordo amoris indeed!
However, the threat that I worry most about for Europe is not Russia. It’s not China. It’s not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within—the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values that are shared with the United States of America.
But when we see European courts canceling elections, and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we’re holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard.
And I say “ourselves” because I fundamentally believe that we are on the same team. We must do more than talk about democratic values. We must live them.
Within living memory of many of you in this room, the Cold War positioned defenders of democracy against tyrannical forces on this continent.
Consider the side in that fight that censored dissidents, closed churches, and canceled elections. Were they the good guys?
Certainly not. And thank God they lost the Cold War. They lost because they neither valued nor respected all of the extraordinary blessings of liberty—the freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, to invent, to build.
….
Unfortunately, when I look at Europe today, it’s sometimes not so clear what happened to some of the Cold War’s winners. I look to Brussels, where EU commissars warn citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest, the moment they spot what they’ve judged to be “hateful content.”
Or to this very country, where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments online, as part of “Combating Misogyny on the Internet: A Day of Action.”
I look to Sweden, where two weeks ago, the government convicted a Christian activist for participating in Quran burnings that resulted in his friend’s murder. And as the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden’s laws to supposedly protect free expression do not, in fact, grant a free pass to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief.
And perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britain in the crosshairs.
https://www.youtube.com/live/pCOsgfINdKg?si=6eGscKpcjJbBwOH3&t=164
JD Vance expressed himself quite excellently and represented the far right extremist viewpoint clearly.
Common sense and intelligence is now referred to by the lunatic Dems as “far right extremism.” I can see why all they have left in their corrupted brains is profanity.
I’m sure this crybaby loser troll didn’t listen to or read anything about the speech.
One man, one vote “democracy” IS the “dictatorship of the proletariat (hired help)” of Karl Marx.
The Founders gave Americans a severely restricted-vote republic in 1789 wherein turnout was 11.6% and voters must have been male, European, 21, with 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres.
Proud of yourselves MSM?
🤣 I bet you thought that was an insult. As your opinion is subjective, VP Vance’s speech viewed as representing a far right extremist point of view would position you somewhere in the extreme far left. So you have that going for you.
#1. Vance is lost on me. The success story of a poor hillbilly with a drug mother? Remove 25 IQ points from Vance and see what he does.
A female , 16 years old, average intelligence, mother drug addict, father in prison. She’s living in deep poverty and pregnant. Where are your orphanages? 5 years TANF? She’s 21 trying to find a job ?
The poorest state is California btw and then there’s the bullet train…
Vance is in Europe giving lectures? Embarrassing…
Remove 25 IQ points from Vance and see what he does.
How about 100, then he might not be lost to you.
#1. Ah yes, how about Vance as is but black? How about Vance as is but wearing a turban?
Personally I don’t care if he is a hillbilly. Why do I even know that? Being a hillbilly makes him a better VP? Check a box? 😂 oh, how about a hillbilly transgender?
Identity politics…
No, Vance is the Vice President of the United States of America.
You lost and you’re the one who IS lost.
They believe they are in the same class as the French Resistance. And they are like the guy who stood in front of the tanks in Tiananmen Square. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are cowards.
The art of rational debate has long been replaced by ideological propaganda on the left and in their schools. It is a coarsening of the intellect. History has shown this to give rise to dictatorships such as The French Terror, Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Mao’s China. The threat to Democracy, indeed…
Spot-on.
For parasites, debate is the most fearful enemy of all because they are wrong and they know they cannot win a courteous debate. “I want to rob and rule you” will never win debates, yet that is their position.
“If they don’t stand for something, they will fall for anything.”
– Gordon A. Eadie, 1945
___________________________
Communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) have disregarded and exceeded all modes of decorum, all ethics, all morals, and all social parameters in order to illicitly obtain unmerited benefits and entitlements, redistributed wealth, and faux status.
And conservatives and republicans haven’t?
When your only goal is stealing, you must work very hard if you also want to convince everyone that your stealing is virtuous.
Profanity (?), a crutch for an inarticulate MF’er!
Heavily-tattooed Secretary of Defense—-Hegseth—on defending Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in Faux News—“They just want their sh!t back.” Gee how cool!
Ukraine says it never was and never will be Putin’s sh!t. Stupid Hegseth, who is even being criticized by Republicans, announced that Putin was going to be allowed to keep the parts of Ukraine he already stole. Who makes concessions even before negotiations begin?
Turls has to dig deep for things to attack Democrats for given the string of court losses, missteps and growing opposition King Donald. So now—it’s profanity?
Are you really that blind to how negotiations work? And what does it matter if Hegseth has tattoos? Are you really that superficial? In response to Hegseth’s comments on how America will not be the EU sucker, Zelensky made a smart suggestion that the EU needs its own armed force. Wow. The EU actually not relying on American to fight its wars to take responsibility and field it’s own army. How terrible is that? As for the Ukraine Russia war, had Biden the butcher not squashed the tentative peace deal the Ukraine and Russia had in Istanbul in the spring of 2020, just a few months after the war started, the Ukraine would of been in a better position of keeping their own territory. But, Biden gave Russia that.
Ukraine claiming territory while telling the people who live there that they must give up their language and religion is a very strange, surrealistic idea of property. That territory does not belong to Ukraine. It belongs to the people who live there, as does all territory.
Tell me how any “tattoo artist” can improve on God’s work. I do make an exception for women who’ve had radical mastectomies and have a faux areola and nipples tattooed when they had the entire breast removed. Ask S. Meyer what the Hebrew Bible has to say about tattoos. Tattoos are nothing but a fad and people who get them don’t respect their own bodies by marking them up with purple ink and trashy designs— trying to prove their uniqueness. It proves the opposite.
“Ask S. Meyer what the Hebrew Bible has to say about tattoos. ”
Not every Jew follows every Torah portion, but that doesn’t negate their significance. In the case of the tattoo, it is not part of the Ten Commandments. Judaism emphasizes forgiveness and kindness to the stranger, which Hegseth is.
Hegseth is a hero who demands our respect. Ask Estovir what he believes, for he understands religion and its purpose. If Hegseth converted to Judaism, he could be buried in a Jewish Cemetery with his tattoos. The important thing is not that Hegseth has a tattoo, whether he is Jewish or Christian, but whether he believes in God and the morality in the Torah.
Hegseth is an arrogant, woman abusing alcoholic loser— who ran 2 Veterans organizations into the ground and created an hostile workplace for women. Even his own mother admits he is abusive. He got booed by military families at a base in Germany. He is in way over his head and is already messing up royally—something even Republicans admit. He has this position because he’s even dumber than King Donald and will do whatever he is told to do.
You asked a serious question and I provided a serious answer. Immediately instead of pursuing the intellectual side you went on another of your ignorant and insulting rants. Find a spouse to torture or a dog. Maybe then the authorities will see that you need to be locked up.
She needs help. I wish someone in her family would admit her to an institution before she hurts herself.
Oh Gg, most of the negotiation has to happen begore a meeting can be held. That lets the attendees declare success without the risk of failure
GIGI has a TATTOO on her REAR END!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you mad he isn’t wearing a stolen dress??
Bravo Professor Turley!
https://x.com/JonathanTurley/status/1890785941788262623
https://x.com/JonathanTurley/status/1890786333364199451
YES !
On the Hill’s “Rising” guys wondering where the protests are, the explanation that makes the most sense to me is that Trump has starved the potential protests of their funding. Protests take organization, organization takes highly-paid organizers, and highly-paid organizers won’t do their thing if the taypayer-funded grift has been turned off. Conservatives have long known the protests were purchased, but blamed billionaires, and now we are learning that it was likely back-door funding from rogue agencies all along. Could Trump’s team have already known this, and adjusted their agency-targeting aim accordingly?
Or maybe, just maybe, the majority of Americans, which polls say oppose Trump, have had enough already. Trump “won” by the slimmest margin in 55 election cycles and the lie about groceries got him the power he is abusing. The majority of Americans oppose Musk.
Wrong. The majority of Americans voted for Trump. He won the popular vote, the swing states, the electoral college. Polls show 86% of Americans support or approve of Musk and DOGE reductions of governments fraud, waste and abuse. You are losing and will continue to lose. You are the leftists that all the sane and normal, traditional Democrats want off their side and out of their party.
How marvelous!
He received less than half of the popular vote and a very slim plurality. Americans are quickly souring on him and Musk— but most of all the uncertainty. He enacts tariffs and then delays implementation. He freezes all government contracts and then unfreezes some. The stock market doesn’t like uncertainty. And Americans don’t like unqualified people pawing through their Social Security files. Dipstick Musk’s little genius squad claimed that Social Security benefits are being paid to people who are 150 years old—- not true. They don’t understand the old COBOL program that had to have a “placeholder” figure for data— if they didn’t have verification of a birth date, they would put in “1875”, which coders knew meant that the date of birth information needed vetting.
sailor-mouth giggi is like the pig with lipstick, lying in the mud in the bottom of a barrel, screaming up at the top at all those looking down on her. As soon as you call her out for her bad mouth and lies, she acts real nice for a few posts, but she juste cannot survive without mud on her snout.
We did have enough already which is why YOU lost and will continue to lose as more and more corruption is uncovered.
This feels pretty one sided Professor, I mean come on Trump and his press secretary both have used profanity on camera and Trump used it in the oval office on camera so …yea. Seems like we’re all working to widen the divide, and none of that “healing” stuff either side promises when they win ever seems to come to fruition.
And by the way, ground beef just went up nearly a dollar a pound…when’s he going to bring the food prices down like he promised?
I’m glad he won. I’m thrilled about RFK. But, ….all I’ve seen him do is strut, sign orders designed to appease the far right and immigrant haters and fuel their “hatred” of the left but I see none of that healing he promised and I see none of that “lowering food prices” so working class mugs like myself, can afford to eat.
This article is encased in partisan blinders.
Chris,
The beef herds in American have been on the decline for a few years now. Droughts, the cost of feed, even of hay went up. Ranchers had to scale back their herds to stay afloat. No one can control mother nature. It is going to take a few years for them to rebuild their herds if everything went right.
USF
You know agricultural production costs follows the price of diesel; feed, fertilizer etc costs are ALL tied to that cost. You then have weather patterns and pest infestations that can wreak havoc on crop yields.The Inca knew, watch the stars…El Nino, beans in the teens. Like everything else, we pay twice as much to import it rather than produce it. More quick money for the land whores selling subdivisions than there is running cows or growing taters.
Traveler,
You are not wrong. But part of the problem is they are trying to apply Wall Street like paradigm to nature and farming. They want quarterly and yearly profits when the best practices are more like two years to bring cattle to market at a reasonable cost and profit by NOT using feed but hay or pasture raised only beef. Same goes for goats, sheep, chickens and hogs. When I raise hogs, some people find it off putting as I pasture raise them and they have a much more intense “porky” flavor. Others would call it “gamey.” That is they have been eating industrial, feed raised hogs that IMHO, tastes like cardboard. I do everything I can to reduce my costs. I do crop rotation to include bringing in livestock to “fertilize” my own fields. When I do grow corn, rather then own the combine, I hire someone to do it for me. Reduces my costs of ownership and up keep.
Upstate Farmer-
Well said. Most people never worked on a farm or have any idea what happens there. My Uncles all had farms in South Georgia and raised Corn, Soybeans , tobacco (a few decades ago), with smaller herds of cattle 40-50, hogs about 60-70, and thousands of chickens . Nothing like walking behind a mule drawn sled in South Georgia in August priming tobacco (really, really hot) Convinced me that I was not made for farming. But living in the Midwest, Farmers were usually my best patients and had a truly stubborn passion for the land. Great respect for them all
Nonsense, the price of ground beef prepandemic was 2.88 lb here, now its nearly 7. Its nonsense. These are artificially created price hikes and they were supposed to be temp but the corporations didn’t want to go back to prepandemic so they just sorta became permanent and are now climbing more under Trump.
I am 65 this year and can’t afford to eat. I live on 1 meal a day and half of my groceries I buy on credit. He said he’d address it but he did not. He’s doing all the things his “base” loves but ignoring the things that helped him win with the independents and unaffiliated who turned out for him in record numbers like myself, because he said he’d address the problem of OUR SURVIVAL.
I’m not talking politics here, I’m talking survival. This isn’t some opinion, and I wont’ even answer to the trolls tossing out insults and making nonsense claims about me or calling me stupid. This is about real life, and Trump promised to address this and hasn’t.
I am waiting….
He’s doing all the things his “base” loves but ignoring the things that helped him win with the independents and unaffiliated who turned out for him in record numbers like myself, because he said he’d address the problem of OUR SURVIVAL.
Chris, as desperate as your situation is, I assure you that you do not want the President to start implementing price controls. The cost of everything you need for your survival today is the result of policies that were years in the making. Trump was not wrong to campaign on micro-issues like the cost of eggs, or meat or gasoline, etc. The micro connects his vision for the future with the individual voter. Every candidate does that. But the President must govern in the macro, setting policies to enact the change promised for those micro issues.
Btw if I misread your comment about partisan blinders and you were “not” accusing me of wearing them, apologies. As for the “micro-macro” nonsense, that’s just spintalk for making bs promises you don’t intend to honor. Trump most certainly can do things to lower food prices other than cost controls, ranging from agricultural tax and other incentives to impacting transportation costs, market economy, etc.
First he has to go back to talking about the problem, instead of making bs spin talk like you just made to excuse away making campaign promises one never intends to keep.
all I’ve seen him do is strut, sign orders designed to appease the far right and immigrant haters and fuel their “hatred” of the left…
No apology is necessary, you apparently are wearing them. Increase taxes and offering incentives impacting whatever…? How about some magic pixie dust while your at it. Damn!
You’re an idiot. What “sides” blinders am I wearing, troll?
Huh? What sides?
He said he’d address this and he hasn’t even spoken on it other than blaming it on Biden.
You’re a troll making excuses and nothing more. JUST LIKE THE DAMN DEMOCRATS.
Talk a big game, then win take power and then the promises turn into inane excuses like you’re spewing and its back to the status quo.
Excuses are for losers. Not winners.
Excuses are for losers. Not winners.
Should I list all the excuses you’ve made for why you are eating one meal a day? Not one has fingered your personal responsibility for your desperate situation. The fact you’re totally dependent on what your government can put on your table does not strike me as a “winning” position.
#1. All food is being imported. Price fixing by importers is happening.
If the price is fixed at the lowest cost for the poor then all people benefit. That isn’t happening. Same for shelter. The idea is greatest utilization.
3 weeks in office-quit crying. DEMS delayed to confirm his appointments. What did Biden do in 4 years? 21% inflation!!
Chris, Trump has not even been in office for one month yet. Like you, I am facing tough times, and they are going to get worse when my unemployment check ends in a few weeks. Luckily, I have a monthly social security check, and no vehicle expenses. But I do not blame Trump. He has started doing the things that he needs to do to reduce the inflation rate. Cutting the deficit will help, as well as ending the Democrat’s war on energy. There are so many built-in extra costs in our daily living, that it is almost unimaginable.
Trump is trying to end taxes on Social Security and on tips, too. At least with Trump, we have somebody who gives a hoot about us. I agree with you that there is a greed component to the higher prices. If a person is in business, and there is inflation, then why not raise prices even when you don’t necessarily have to? I know how business people think.
all I’ve seen him do…
This article is encased in partisan blinders.
I believe you’ve identified the root cause of your distress. Hint: {bolded}
and no olly, your trolling aside I don’t have “partisan blinders” you moron, I’m independent and always have been. The cause of my distress moron, is called hunger. I’m dealing with real life issues while you clowns sit on your fat arses trolling, …enough. I’m not playing the game.
Chris, the only thing I see you are independent of is a connection with how the economy works and the role of POTUS. You might try eating the letters S T E A K off of your keyboard. That would make as much sense as expecting the price of beef to magically drop 26 days after inauguration.
The only thing I see you’re capable of is making bullsh%t excuses like a paid spindoctor.
Dang Chris
Sorry for your predicament, it’s going to take a little pain and time to get the money value back under control. I firmly believe if Trump had lost there would come a reckoning like no other, only time will tell.
Don’t be stupid. You’re not glad he won. Did he promise to lower the price of groceries in three weeks? No.
It is going to take a lot longer than a day or three weeks to fix all of Biden’s failed economic policies. As I have stated before, we will be feeling the effects of Bidenflation for years to come.
#1. Bring food prices down? As soon as the people stop short packaging and doubling prices themselves? Just a guess…
“designed to appease the far right and immigrant haters “
Most on both sides of the aisle realize our fertility rate is below replacement. They want immigration. They hate illegal immigration and how Biden unnecessarily brought in criminals and terrorists.
S. Meyer,
What we want is legal immigration. We want the best and brightest. Just like most of other countries, like Canada. Not the illegal criminals who assault, rape and kill women who Democrats want to defend or even let those criminals go.
I think we have reached the tough live stage.We need to halt all legal immigration, H1-B and renewals until the illegals are out of here. Maybe then everyone would pitch in and get it done
Look at the comments on Turleys blog. This place is a shite-hole if ever there was one.
A bunch of children who get easily angry, taunt, and throw temper tantrums if they get criticized.
Seems to me you people are emotionally, if not mentally, and intellectually challenged.
Who is angry and throwing temper tantrums?
He’s mostly referring to himself.
Ahem, well actually you are – outbursts are for children or senile geriatrics. Like you, I assume.
Whatta you, you people?
So, listen clown man. You think hanging around this blog 12 hours a day makes you an elite? Time take a very long break. Old man.
…yourself DEMS
I’m your Huckleberry.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Where do you think Democrats got if from?
Watching Black Entertainment channel?
Probably from all of those terrible white, middle-class looters.
You do know BET is owned by CBS, right? I have heard Republicans, especially the current President using vile language for years and seen Republicans cheer. Many if not all past Presidents curse in private, this one curses as a cheer line at his rallies. Turley may be accurate to point out the increased cursing by a few Democrats, but to do so without mention of Republicans who do it more often and behind the seal of the President is exactly what Fox News would appreciate.
Hollywood. Predominately Democrat leaning.
African tribal chiefs?
the use of scatological language by the left is a clear indication that they lack the linguistic ability to carry on a civil discussion or are unable to express their main thoughts intelligently.
If one is going to use such language then at least pick up a copy of Shakespeare’s Insults https://www.amazon.com/Shakespeares-Insults-Educating-Your-Wit/dp/0517885395/ref=sr_1_4
I might be mistaken, but I think profanity and vulgarity are different. Profane has a religious aspect, while vulgarity is derived from bodily functions.
Yes, you are correct: “profane” language–“profanities”–are ones where God’s Name has been used in-vain (e.g., “God,” “Allah,” “Buddha,” etc., put with the word “damn,” and various forms of Jesus’s name used profanely, rather than prayerfully). Regular cursing includes other curse words, including those which are really vulgar, regarding those bodily functions you allude to. They’re not good either, but the profane language is FAR worse, since it breaks–hello!!–one of the Ten Commandments! I quit going to movies a long time ago, because even PG-13 movies use profane language now. The NBC television network has succumbed as well, with profane language appearing in PRIME TIME shows! (When did the FCC start allowing that on broadcast TV?) I was a regular, watching the Dick Wolf set of shows, for several decades, but each of them now has gone off this cliff, so I’ve quit ALL of them. Hearing politicians of either party go down this disgraceful path is appalling. I realize that Prof. Turley has encouraged us to think about what freedom-of-speech actually means, so on one level, using God’s Name in-vain is protected speech; however, I fear God more than I fear man, and I wish others in public would consider the implications of using such language as well.
# 1. Profane language is immoral meaning it calls upon demons to do their bidding. Demons like vulgarity. It’s part of philosophy. The spirit of the language is immoral, unethical and the object in nature is the body. It’s a curse to yourself and others. Demons don’t care. They can be perfectly moral if you’d like that instead.
The mistake is in thinking all people are moral or even want to be. The problem is in living with Demons and immoral people. Must you censor? No, you’ll know them by what they do.
These are union people trying to keep jobs and politicians trying to keep the money laundery. It’s coming in at 65% but most likely much higher. Trump wants something back for the 65%.
Are Demons real? As real as your thoughts.
Bread and circus… the communist democrats would burn America to the ground to reign over the ashes.
A prime strategy of Obama:
Compel the destruction of “capitalism,” which is actually freedom and free enterprise, and impose communism (i.e. the dominion of the parasites).