None of the Above

The elite of the GOP wants anyone but Donald Trump.  They are afraid that he is both unelectable, and that his presence at the top of the ticket will affect the downstream races. But what will happen if Ted Cruz is at the top of the ticket?

Right now, the GOP is not a party which believes in anything that benefits the common person.  They want to destroy a healthcare system designed by a conservative think tank, taking away health care from people who'd never have access to it if the ACA had never passed.  They want to take away a social safety net from people who need it, saying the "sins" of a small minority of abusers excuse the punishment of all. They are are party who supports radicalism over conservatism, looking to restore a status quo that never existed.

When Joe Scarborough (a noted conservative) from the "Morning Joe" show openly states that neither party has bothered to address the needs of people earning under $50,000, something is very wrong.  To me, it is the very greed for power which causes most presidential candidates to such on the tit of Wall Street in order to get elected.  Once they accept any Wall Street money, they are owned by the big banks - and banks have no heart. Everything and everyone is just a number to them, and the poor are simply liabilities to be scrubbed from the balance sheet.

Sadly, it looks like Hillary Clinton will be the likely opponent of whoever the GOP selects. Trump offends me, but Cruz horrifies me even more.  Neither are fit to serve in this country's highest office.  Hillary is owned by Wall Street, and she can't be trusted to do much more than line her own coffers.

So....

Unless Bernie Sanders is nominated (and he has big flaws as well), I want none of the above.  Neither party deserves votes when they are trying to game the election to prevent the peoples' choices from being on the ticket.  One could argue that Bernie is not the choice of the Democrats.  But with the way the game was rigged to coronate Hillary, who knows what would have happened if the Democratic party had not shown such bias?  

I still have hopes for a Sanders vs. Trump election.  But the way it's going, we will never know which direction the people really want this country steered - and we will never have a chance to check and balance the power of Wall Street....

Thank god that she's now in the kiddie table debates

I have no problems with "Honest Conservatives".  People like William Buckley more than had my respect.  Their views were well thought out, and yet, were flexible enough to reflect the realities of the current day.  But most important, people like Buckley had a certain form of integrity - unlike today's crop of wingnut politicians.

Early in this campaign, I felt like Carly Fiorina had a good chance of being in the top tier of GOP politicians running for president. She was not the kind of person I'd have wanted in charge of our country, because if she were to run this country like the business she once ran, we'd have thrown her out of office in the middle of her term.

Recently, I had the misfortune of hearing about Fiorina's latest gaffe.  Children who were touring an Iowa Botanical Garden as part of a class tour made it into the background of Fiorina's anti-abortion event. Although the first amendment to the US Constitution protects speech, who protects the children from being used as political pawns?  Their parents did not authorize the use of their children's images in Fiorina's political event.  Who was looking out for the children?

If I felt that Fiorina had some qualifications to be president before, I have none now.  She has no respect for anyone but herself.  She does not make sure that she has the right to use others for her own purposes - and when she uses children without permission, she crosses over an ethical line as well of one of taste.... 

Thankfully, at the time I wrote this, Trump is in the GOP lead and not Fiorina....

Is she fit to serve?

I have never been a fan of Hillary Clinton.  She is and always will be a Machiavel, but this is not a bad characteristic for someone running for the office of president.  Instead, it is a potential risk if she wins the election, because one can't be sure of what will guide her when in office - save for self interest.

Strong leaders tend to be Machiavels to some degree or another. One has to be enough of a psychopath (no moral judgement here) to sacrifice one group of supporters for a "greater good" - and Hillary has proven herself capable of doing that. But she has a habit of snatching defeat out of the claws of victory, by underrating the power of her opposition. When her husband was president, she couldn't get healthcare reform done.  Like her husband, she was a lightning rod for the opposition's political lightning strikes.  And in the 2008 election cycle, she underrated Barack Obama - to her regret.

She is a very intelligent lady, and is very pragmatic.  Yet, she put her foot in her mouth by agitating for a "no fly zone" in Syria.  ISIS has no air force.  So who does this affect? Russia! Can we afford to antagonize the Russians when we have a common enemy?  Why shouldn't we let the Russians look like the bad guys - even if it means that we sacrifice our rebel friends to keep the Syrian government nominally in power?

Much noise has been made by the GOP about her use of private email servers. But government officials from the GOP have done the same thing.  Given the data security breaches in Federal Government computer systems, it is likely that her private server may have been more secure than the government servers she was expected to use. (It is also possible that her private servers may have been "Honey Pots" designed to feed false information to people spying on her.)  Bernie Sanders is likely right - this is a non issue.

There is something not generally reported in the press - she has a soft, human side that people don't often see on the political trail.  She likely hides it because of the double standard imposed on women - if she is soft, she is weak.  And if she is hard, she still can't be as imposing as a male.  In short, she is not allowed to be herself - no matter how qualified she is for office.

So the big question is:  Is Hillary Clinton qualified to be president?  She hasn't done anything important enough to disqualify herself.  But has she developed enough skills to steer this country?  Or, is she the only logical choice left, given the non-logic coming from the opposition?  Only time will tell....

Iran and the remaining folk in the Clown Car.

Most of the people in the GOP "Clown Car" are saying that the deal with Iran is a bad one, and that they will overturn it when in office.  Do any of them understand that pandering to the base only makes them look more idiotic for the general campaign?

- - - - - -

The deal with Iran was not only a deal with America, but a deal with Germany, France, Russia, China, and Great Britain.  Although the Israelis could not be a direct part of the deal and had to condemn the deal for existential reasons, I have no doubt that they have had to have some input into the deal due to their relationship with America.

It is very pleasant to read this statement from Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, that the Republican presidential candidates were so “laughable” that “the people of Iran look at them as a form of entertainment.”  Why, you might ask?  Well, he is wise enough to know that even if the USA were to back out of this deal, that it would still be in force with the other G5+1 members.  This deal needs no treaty with the USA, nor does it need America's cooperation to be implemented.  It helped that the USA was on-board when the deal was crafted, as it allowed America and Iran an ability to openly work with each other - something that has not been possible since before 1980.

The Iranian President went on to say the following:

“Can a government become a signatory to an international agreement and then the subsequent government tear it to shreds? This is something that only the likes of Saddam Hussein would do. So, any government that replaces the current government must keep itself committed to the commitments given by the previous administration. Otherwise, that government, that entire country will lose trust internationally,”
To me, this is the most salient point of the conversation noted in a late September post in Raw Story.  Iran's president knows that America's foreign policy can not make rapid flip flops based on which party is in charge of the executive branch.  It took over 50 years for America to start having civil relations with Cuba.  And he expects that it will take more time for America and Iran to learn to work with each other again - this deal being one of many steps geared to fixing the problems of the past.

- - - - - -

Can we trust the Iranians?  If we were to look at it from a different point of view, one could ask - can they trust us?  Right now, the Iranian President is wise enough to know that the "Clown Car" is spewing out noxious fumes, and will likely get its tuneup in the prelude to the general election.....

Democrats finally debating

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton - Opponents who know who their real political enemies are. One comment from Bernie in regard to Hillary's emails said all that needed to be said about the difference in tone between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party in this country. 

Contrast the difference between Sanders' campaign and Trump's campaign.  It'd be almost impossible to find an instance where Sanders said anything mean about an individual.  Yet, you'd find a very strenuous voice against social injustice in our society.  Contrast this with Donald Trump, where a lot of meanness exudes from the man - but he doesn't have much of a message worth delivering.  Sanders states how he'd fix the problems in our society, while Trump only makes grandiose statements on how he'd make America great again, without filling in any of the details needed to believe him.

Both Sanders and Trump are voices against "business as usual" from the party elites. But again, look at the differences.  Sanders can work with the Democratic elite, even though he is an Independent from Vermont. Trump threatens the Republican party elite, and he comes from the same circles who could buy and sell presidential candidates.  Who do you think will get more done if elected to POTUS?

Many still consider Sanders' and Trump's campaigns as sideshows to the "eventual" main event - Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton. But Jeb has no traction right now.  The top 3 GOP candidates are all people from outside the Washington elites.  There is a good reason for this - the public is sick and tired of an elite that no  longer looks out for the welfare of the common person.  The dislike of elites shared by rural and inner city people is now spreading to suburbia - crippling Bush's chance of being nominated as the GOP's candidate. However the same dislike is not hurting Clinton that much.  

Why is Clinton not suffering as much as Jeb Bush?  This is an important question to ponder. The way I see it, her wealth is "new money" - something people respect, even though they question her ethics. Bush's wealth is "old money", and no longer has the respect of the common person. This is not conscious. I only thought of it when I think of how rich the Clintons became in 15 years.  

This leads to yet another question - Why has Trump's wealth not been held against him? To me, I think it is how Trump has promoted himself.  He has had many more business failures than successes, yet has figured out a way to offload the risks of his business ventures onto others.  For a project manager - this is a great thing to do.  But for the rest of us, it smacks of something less than ethical behavior.

Over the next 3 months, we'll see a lot of change. And we'll see if Sanders' and Trump's campaigns are going to implode when real elections are held.  If I am right, Hillary will collapse again, and the people in back of the GOP Clown Car will drop out of the race. I also think that Sanders will ask Hillary to be his VP - and she'll accept the position. It'll be a fine way for her to end her political career - and she could still get the job she's coveted for several electoral cycles.....

Ben Carson - Would you be comfortable with a Muslim as president?

Recently, I was watching TV when Ben Carson said that he felt Islam was incompatible with the constitution, and that he was uncomfortable with a Muslim being president. Politically Incorrect?  Sure!  But he said what a lot of the people in mainstream America feel, and are voicing in both rural and urban settings.  So why are the pundits giving him a hard time?

In an age where the Middle East is center most in the political debate, often ahead of jobs, education, and health care, the religion of a candidate for POTUS often gives us an idea about his/her thinking about an issue. Would you have wanted Joe Lieberman, an Orthodox Jew, having to deal with a possible rapprochement with Iran?  I certainly wouldn't.  But I wouldn't want either a Sunni or Shiite Muslim directly involved with the negotiations either - they may have too much emotional "skin" in the game to make a decision which meets the best interest of ALL Americans. 

Carson did say that he was comfortable with a Muslim in the Legislative branch - as long as he/she subscribed to the basic secular values of the United States. And in many ways, most Americans support people who are not religious extremists being part of government at all levels.  

The US Constitution says that no religious litmus test (my words) shall be used to qualify a person for running for any office in the United States.  This is a good thing.  But it doesn't prevent the individual from using a person's religion as a guide to how he/she would deal with certain issues.  For example, POTUS is a 24x7 job.  Would we want someone who "religiously" observes Shabbos to be president?  I'm not sure.  But we've already had a Christian (in the 1800's) who would not work on Sunday be elected president, and as a result, we actually had a day in our history where there was no sworn in President of the United States. Could we afford this today?

Years ago, people worried about JFK being Roman Catholic - Would he obey the Pope before fulfilling his duties to America?  History tells us that he put America first ...after sating his sexual appetite.  This is why we need to know as much as possible about a presidential candidate before supporting him or her.  Sometimes, a person's religion can be simply posturing (as in the case of JFK) - or one of real belief (such as with Jimmy Carter). Either way, religion is an important factor in who we choose for president....

In the end, I think this will quickly become a non issue, but not for the reasons I'd want it to happen.  Instead, the Democrats and the remaining GOP Candidates will be out gunning to take down Donald Trump, and not having a serious conversation about the role of religion in politics and government.

The clown car, and an unwanted driver

Donald Trump - a man so filled with ego, he has no doubts about himself, even when he's totally wrong about things. He's a man who knows, that if you say a lie often enough, many people will consider it to be the truth - especially when they want to hear that lie become truth.

- - - - - -

As I write this, American businesses are slowly disconnecting themselves from their business relationships with Trump. NBC/Universal has decided not to show the Miss Universe pageant on its networks, Macy's has decided to stop selling Trump branded goods, as well as other businesses keeping their distance from this, the loudest clown in the GOP Clown Car (The GOP's 2016 POTUS Candidates).

Sadly, he's saying what many in the GOP base really wants to hear - illegal immigrants from Mexico are taking American Jobs and are part of the criminal class. Although he walked back his words, the not so hidden meaning was - most Mexicans are criminals who need to be pushed back over the border, something which is furthest from the truth....  And this has gotten the GOP mainstream worried, as Trump recently reached #2 in the polls.  The last thing the GOP wants is to lose the Latino vote for the long term - and Trump's pandering to the base is hurting long term GOP prospects with the Latino population..

Most of the GOP Clown Car is afraid to deal with racism in the party's base. Recently, they ducked the issue of whether the Rebel flag should be flown in South Carolina, claiming that is was a local issue and that the flag reflected "Southern Heritage". Yet, a majority of South Carolinians (including GOP members) supported taking down the flag. Why such a disconnect between the population of South Carolina and the people who want to be our national leaders?  To make things worse, when the issue was brought up in the US Congress, regarding the flying of the Rebel flag in Federal parks, the GOP leadership tried to duck the issue - so that they wouldn't anger the racists in their base who continue to vote them into office. This is a bloody shame! 

- - - - - -

But back to Trump....  

Many Americans want a president who can run this country like a business. But if Trump were to run it, we'd have a legacy of failure. His casino ventures didn't do well, his air-shuttle flopped, his vodka is forgettable, Macy's has dropped his clothing line, NBC/Universal has terminated their relationship with his Miss Unvierse pageant, and the only thing he has going for him is the magic of his name tacked onto a real estate deal.  Trump has licensed out his name on a large number of real estate deals, and to me, his quality control seems to be lacking.  Can you imagine how he'd screw up this country?

- - - - - -

Sadly, the clown car keeps moving along, and there is not anyone who I'd really feel comfortable voting for in this race.  Too bad that Kinky Friedman and Jesse Ventura aren't running - either would get my vote.....

"Southern Heritage" = Racism

Does anyone really believe this?

- - - - - -

The Rebel battle flag means many things to many people. Most of all, it is a symbol of rebellion against a country which was moving towards abolishing slavery,  There were many good men caught up in this battle, brother fighting brother, and a way of life destroyed. But can anyone say with a straight face, that flying this flag is not a slap in the face to any Black person who sees it?

In Germany, the non-museum display of the Nazi flag is highly regulated. In most cases, it is banned. But even the Germans know when the Hackenkreutz can be displayed - when the Swastika's extremely bad taste is used for humor, as in "The Producers" when it played in Germany.

Outside the theater, the Pretzel banner flew - a little bit of humor, spoofing the former symbol of the Reich.  Inside the theater, the Nazi banner flew - where there was no way that it could be taken to honor the values of the Reich.

This was an elegant way to deal with a sensitive issue in Germany - they know that the seeds of hatred are easily sown, and they know that symbols as powerful as the Nazi flag can be easily abused.  Sadly, our 1st amendment in the Bill of Rights gets in the way of dealing with the most important symbol of American treason, racism, and hatred - the CSA battle flag.

If many in the South wanted to celebrate "Southern Heritage", they could just as easily flown one of the other flags of the Confederacy - such as the one below:

Why isn't this one flown?  Because behind all the politically correct and sanitized talk lies a background of racial hatred.   

In two books I've read that included trips across the American South ("The American Home Front: 1941-1942" by Alistair Cooke, and "Travels with Charley - In search of America" by John Steinbeck) the authors both got disgusted with the attitudes of most Southerners they encountered, and couldn't wait to be out of this land. Although things have changed a lot since the 1960's when Steinbeck wrote his book, we still have far to go.

When I was last down South in 2001, I visited a couple of friends from the AOL chat group for Widows and Widowers. While there, I ended up chatting with the woman of the house. She complained that "them N----rs" are getting everything from the state, leaving us poor. (Of course, the 2 of them could have saved a lot of money by kicking their 3 pack a day cigarette habits - but that wasn't going to happen.) This lady loved to blame Black people for the problems that she and her White friends were having. Although this was 14 years ago, it left a very foul taste in my mouth when it comes to the values of our South.

Recently, 9 people were killed by a lone wolf terrorist inside a church.  One of those people was an elected representative in South Carolina's legislature. And it was amazing how quickly many people in the government realized that they needed to remove the Rebel Battle Flag from the Capitol. Yet, when members of the GOP POTUS candidate "Clown Car" were asked about whether the flag should be taken down, most of them hemmed and hawed - not wanting to alienate the racist lunatic fringe that makes up a goodly number of loyal GOP voters in the South.

In a recent article in Der Spiegel (International), they wonder why it is only now that America is addressing its long history of racism.  Der Spiegel notes that we have a prominent museum dedicated to the memory of the Holocaust in Washington, DC (which I've visited, and discussed in another blog entry), but none to remember the evils of slavery.  They go on to note that Thomas Jefferson has a big monument in our nation's capital, but only when you go to Mount Vernon, his homestead, do you find out about the abuse of slaves that went on in his era. 

I am glad to say that former POTUS candidate Mitt Romney said in unquestionable terms that the flag MUST be taken down - something most of the "Clown Car" won't do.  And I am even more glad to see that Strom Thurmond's son, Paul, has taken an honorable stand and will vote to remove the Confederate flag from South Carolina's Capitol.  Knowing his father's pro-racist stance for most of his political career, it's good to see that the son will do right by history - and help to get the flag removed before the Black legislator killed by the terrorist lies in state in the Capitol building. And this gives me hope for the future....

I never thought that Pataki would try again....

This is a picture of the former governor of New York state, George Pataki. Officially (at the time I wrote this entry), he's now the second "major" candidate from New York to be running for the presidency. And in certain ways, he is the most qualified candidate (at this time) of those who have formally announced that they are running for POTUS, having served as governor of New York for 3 terms.  Executive branch experience (in either state or federal government) counts for a lot when one is the president, and this man (in any other era) would be a shoo-in for the nomination. Sadly, we live in a very strange era - where one party has too many candidates running for POTUS, and the other has too few candidates running for POTUS.

- - - - - -

I am familiar with Pataki since his days in Peekskill.  His family had a farm just off of the Bear Mountain Parkway, as it loops around the city proper. The property was worth much more developed into housing than it ever would have been worth as a small farm in Westchester county - and I only wonder how conservationists let that property slip through their grasps.  (Please note: Westchester county already had a working farm (Muscoot Farm) which it used to preserve part of its heritage - one could argue that we didn't need another within a half hour's drive.) 

When serving in public capacity, Pataki had a local office in the heart of Peekskill - and it had one of the better storefronts on the block. I wonder how much he was responsible for the gradual long term revival of Peekskill as a small city. At least I haven't yet heard a lot of negative scuttlebutt from my friends in Peekskill regarding this man.  If he is able to avoid drinking too much of the GOP Kool Aid, he may just be the candidate they need to defeat Hillary.

- - - - - -

We will find  out a lot about Pataki over the next few months. For example, his position on abortion and guns did not reflect that of the GOP base.  Will he flip positions to gain votes? I'm not sure. But he is front loading a lot of effort into the early primary states to get momentum as early as possible.  One problem - Chris Christie is doing the same thing. If I were Pataki, I'd remember one thing - Christie will cross that bridge when he comes to it!

Political Inequality - Even some conservatives see this as a risk

A while back, Andrew Sullivan commented in his blog about the political threat of soaring inequality. That problem is still with us, and is getting worse.

- - - - - -

One of the things noted in the chart below is Elite Fratricide preceding Political Disorder.

This is a very dangerous time for any nation, as the lunatics come out and are at risk of gaining power.  Recently, the Governor of Texas put the state guard on alert, claiming to protect Texas from an invasion from the United States. Even Forbes Magazine (where this link originated) senses that people who would believe this are Right Wing Nut Jobs!  And yet, the polity in many of the Red States keeps electing people who in other times, would only be fit for a clown car.

In the past, I posed the question:

How many clowns can be fit into a typical Clown Car?

And I realized that I already had the answer:

No one knows - it is still spewing out clowns.

In the case of the GOP's field for 2016, we now have so many candidates, that it will be impossible to have all of them on the debate floor at the same time.

The "Tea Party" said that giving financial aid to Hurricane Sandy victims would be a big mistake because of all the fraud that would be involved. (And they were right.  Does anyone remember the "Stronger than the Storm" campaign, which had Governor Chris Christie prominent in every ad?") And now that Texas has been hit by a natural disaster, they have changed their tune....

- - - - - - 

What we're seeing here is a political party that is out of control, a party which favors the political elite over the common good of society, and one that wants to continue adding to the economic inequality which is now disrupting the body politic.

An example of the disconnect between the GOP and reality is the candidacy of Carly Fiorina for the presidency. She is running, using her experience as CEO of Hewlett Packard as her way of showing she is qualified to hold high office.  One problem - HP kicked her out of the "C-Suite", as the firm under performed during her tenure. Can we risk having a poorly performing business person running the country, if we want America run as if it were a business?

- - - - - -

Right now, there is a case working its way through the court system which is geared to disrupt the idea that congressional districts are to contain equal numbers of people, by posing that the districts should contain equal numbers of voters.  Is this fair? Probably not. But, like Jim Crow, we've seen unfair systems established before in this country to keep a ruling elite in power. And I keep wondering - how long will it be before the disenfranchised say: "We're not going to take it anymore?"