Hiring Amy

I was looking for a contractor to dig a new foundation the other day and I came across Amy Coney Barrett. Contractor extraordinaire. Referred by Don the Con Construction Advisory Panel. So I had her come in and do an estimate.

Me: Hello Amy, I am happy to see you. So, what is your experience as a contractor?

Amy: I am certified as a contractor by Home Advisor and the Federalist Society.

Me: OK. So, need you to provide some references.

Amy: Certainly, just look at my website. It is all about me .

Me: I did that already. Yes, well your website says you are a contractor and that you are an honest contractor. No examples of your work. But, do you have any references from places you have done work for in the past?

Amy: That is a good question. I am well aware that references exist and that references are something that all contractors should have. However, divulging references at this point may prematurely influence your decision to hire me. However, at some time in the future I may or may not divulge references.

Me: I see. Well how many foundations have you dug and what kinds of materials do you use?

Amy: Excellent, thoughtful question. As you may or may not know, there are many types of foundations. It is important to find the type of foundation that best fits every individual’s needs. Some foundations are better than others. There are a variety of styles of foundations. As well as sizes.

Me: Ok. So what kind of foundations have you constructed in the past.

Amy: I would like to answer that question as fully as possible. I am certified to build foundations of many types and styles. At this time I cannot really commit to any one foundation, although I can assure you that I will faithfully build a foundation. Foundations are the foundation upon which buildings are built. Before I can discuss a foundation I will need you to sign my contract. Here is my contract.

Me: (Reading the contract). Hmm. Ok, it says here that I am hiring you for life. That is a pretty big commitment.

Amy: Yes. Before I can start to explain what a foundation is and what I may or may not build, I need a lifetime commitment from you that I will be the sole contractor you ever hire. And I will be paid regularly, of course, for the rest of my life. Whether or not I actually build any foundation is not the issue. It is the lifetime guarantee of employment that is important.

Me: I see. Well, so, can you tell me what you plan to build the foundation out of, before I sign the contract. And are there any guarantees on my end?

Amy: That is a good question. I would like to explain to you exactly what I do and how I will do it. However, to do so may influence how I make my foundation building decisions in the future. Certainly that would be unfair to any future construction. Premature. Just sign.

Me: Well, what about guarantees? What if the foundation collapses or leaks?

Amy: Interesting point. In the past there have been some contractors who would guarantee their work. In that case there is a guarantee. In other cases there is no guarantee. I feel it is premature to discuss any guarantee until you have signed and returned the contract to me. At that time I may, or may not, discuss guarantees.

Me: What about foundations you have dug in the past? Can you give me some addresses so I can look at them.

Amy: A very astute question. Which I think I already answered. Delving into the past is not needed. Whatever I may or may not have built in the past is not important. What is important is the future. I keep an open mind on each foundation I dig. If I dig foundations. Which I do. Or maybe I don’t .Can’t discuss it until the contract is signed.

Me: So, you want me to give you a job for life even though I have no idea how you are going to build a foundation or if you will guarantee your work. Or even if you will show up at all?

Amy: Well, to be clear. As I said in the past and I will say in the future. A contract is a contract and a guarantee is a guarantee. That said, I cannot commit at this time to the actual building of the foundation until the contract is signed. At that point I will open to discussions of all contractual arrangements.

Me: What if the foundation collapses and harms or kills my wife or kids.

Amy: That is a good question and I would like to discuss it now. However, any discussion of possible damages or injuries may be premature. There is nothing in the original Constitution that requires me to build a foundation that will not collapse. I refer you the the original document.

Me: Ok. Sounds like a good deal to me. I will give you a lifetime contract. You will not answer any questions about your past foundations or plans for building my foundation. You accept no responsibility for faulty work. I guess I could sign.

Amy: Good. Sign here and here and here. Ok. I will be back sometime in the future to perhaps perform a function for which you will pay me for the rest of my life. As for now, I have another appointment. Don’t call me, I’ll call you.

Me: Thanks Amy. Sure is good to know I am in the hands of an honest professional.

The Ten New Things

As the three people who read my blog know, I am pretty good at predicting things. I predicted that Jeb Bush would win the presidency in 2016, that Medicare for all would be enacted and that all Republican gun owners would turn in their weapons as a show of support for children murdered every day in America. OK, so maybe no so good. HOWEVER, here is part of my end of the year prediction from December , 2017, when the GOP controlled both houses…

“Finally. Congress votes itself a 50% pay raise for a “job well done”. The legislative branch passed a total of three bills. They were: 1. “The Amazing Trump is the Best President Ever” bill awarding the Trump Medal of MAGA to the best person in America. This year’s recipient? Donald Trump. 2. “The FBI Traitor” law. Which labels all members of the FBI, former and current, official “enemies of the people” and subject to immediate permanent detention and prosecution for doing “bad stuff”. Mueller is the first to be perp walked. 3. “Congressional Vacation Act” which allows Congress to take a vacation for a period including January 2 through December 30, with pay and expenses for fact finding travel.  Mr Trump signed all three bills and praised Congress for their services… which will no longer be necessary.”

I was watching the pundits on Morning Joe this morning talking about the demise of the Democratic Party because of the APP problems in counting the Iowa Democratic caucus votes. Their main theme was the incompetency of the Democratic Party. And by extension any Democratic administration. Okey Dokey.

This was similar to another Democratic government run debacle with the roll out of the Affordable Care Act. We all remember how Obama and the Dems screwed that up. Big government at its worse. Except.

Except both the ACA roll out and the Iowa caucus problems were not caused by “big government” at all. Both were major technical  problems made by private contractors, not the government. In a nation where the prevailing narrative remains that business is more efficient than government, we see the opposite. It is the private contractors that screw things up. Regularly.

Now, let’s look at really BIG government, the Social Security administration and Veterans administration. These are the government folks who send out your Social Security and Veterans benefit checks. And have been doing so for decades. Ever miss a payment? Ever have a check bounce. Ever have a failure to deliver? I rest my case.

But, back to the pundits who are already predicting the end of the Democratic Party. It is February 4, 2020. Between now and Election day there will be at least 10 new things that will once again give the pundits something new to predict. And they will be just as certain of themselves and just as wrong as they always are. As a self-made pundit, here are my 10 new things.

1. One of the Democratic candidates will be physically assaulted, by weapon or by fist. And she will punch back.

2. A major US corporation will file for bankruptcy. And be given tax dollars as compensation.

3. Kim Jung Un will announce that he has a nuclear weapon and the ability to reach the US with it. Also announces a contract for new Trump Tower in Pyongyang.

4. Donald Trump, Jr will announce the best trade deal ever with China, and the details will be forthcoming. The details never come forth.

5. A number of global warming catastrophes around the globe will prompt the UN to hold a global warming summit, which the US will refuse to support.

6. The GNP will continue to hover around 2.3% but no one knows what that means. Although 76% of the population is certain it has something to do with the Super Bowl.

7. Photos will emerge of Mike Pence leaving a room with a woman. She looks scared. So does he.

8. Israel will announce that they accept the Kushner peace plan which allows Palestinians to look at their former homes on the West Bank during Ramadan. For 2 minutes.

9. Mike Bloomberg will buy North Dakota, Mississippi and Arkansas, giving him enough votes to win the election. He complains that he has used up all his pocket change for the week.

10. Vlad Putin will make a surprise appearance at the Republican convention and will graciously accept the nomination for president by acclimation of the party. Why not eliminate the middle man? Vlad  will then appoint Ivanka Trump as his running mate.

So, those are my predictions. And after each event the pundits will all-knowingly tell us what it means. Again.

I know what you are thinking. Most of these are WAY OUT THERE and probably not going to happen. But  number 10 is just obvious.

https://josephurban.wordpress.com/2017/12/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/techonomy/2013/11/10/the-unhealthy-truth-about-obamacares-contractors/#1a8f06bf644f

 

 

L’Etat C’est Moi

 

Watching Alan Dershowitz make his arguments for presidential power was certainly mind numbing. Now, I can understand why Trump would have Dershowitz on his team. He has a long history of effectively  defending people who might have otherwise been convicted based solely on evidence. OJ Simpson, Jeffrey Epstein, Claus von Bulow and others. Also, his connections with Fox “news” and his connections with the same sex ring that Trump and Clinton seemed to be part of  what made him a good choice.

Nevertheless, despite his person flaws and general lack of integrity aside, let’s look at his arguments. Remember, no other Constitutional scholar was willing to sit on the president’s team. Not even Jonathon Turley who the Republicans brought in to testify to the House inquiry. So, Alan stands alone as the expert on the Constitution for Trump.

His basic argument has been this.

If the president did something illegal, but he did it for good reasons, then that is not impeachable.

Furthermore, if the president THINKS that his own re-election is in the public interest, anything he does to secure his own re-election is  not impeachable. As long as the president believes his re-election is what is best for the country he may take any actions to assure that re-election and , according to Dershowitz, that would not be an abuse of power.

Stunning.

Here are his own words: “Every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest and, mostly, you’re right — your election is in the public interest,” Dershowitz said. “If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.“

https://www.businessinsider.com/alan-dershowitz-trump-re-election-public-interest-2020-1

I taught European history for many years when it was part of the old New York State curriculum. Since then European history has been subsumed into a more comprehensive Global Studies curriculum.

Back in the day we spent a bit of time on the French Revolution and the historical basis for that event. The long term developments leading to the Revolution are rooted in the old monarchical system.  In the 17th century there was a power struggle in France.

On one hand we had the monarch and on the other the nobles. The majority (98%) of the people could just pound sand. They really did not count.

In order to centralize his power Louis XIV decided that he needed to move against the nobles . Now, the power of the nobles was in the great city of Paris (Washington, DC). To eliminate that power center Louis decided to build a new power center, near the small village outside of Paris. A day’s ride from Paris. So he built Versailles (Mar -a – Lago). There he could control the nobles.

I have been to Versailles. It is mind boggling in both size and luxury. Especially when you consider it was built in the 17th century. A short train ride from Paris today, but in Louis’s time it was isolated from Paris. If a noble wanted to be part of the power structure he had to travel to Versailles. He had to genuflect to Louis. And so Louis was able to slowly bring the nobles under his control.

Most famously a quote attributed to Louis (whether he said it or not, he certainly acted as though he did) was : L’etat C’est Moi. I am the state.

What does that mean? There is no distinction between the interests of the state and the interest of the king. There is no division between what is good for the king and what is good for the state. I am the state. What is good for Mr Trump is, by definition good for the United States.

Now, if we accept this argument, then the following logically follows.

In November of 2020 Mr Trump believes that the election of his opponent is not in the best interests of the nation. However, he honestly believes that his own election is in the best interests of the nation. That being the case, on election night, the results are in.

Mr Trump’s opponent has won. But wait. The election of his opponent is not in the best interests of the nation. So, Mr Trump simply invalidates the election.

He asks Attorney General Barr offer his legal opinion and Mr Barr concurs. It is within the power of the president to annul the election because there is nothing in the Constitution that specifically states a president CANNOT nullify an election.

But wait, Congress can step and overturn the decision. No. According to the legal opinion of the Justice Department the president has unlimited power, as long as he is acting in what he (and he alone) considers is best for the country.  The Congress cannot review any decision made by the president. He is above the law. The imperial presidency.

And so ends democracy.

I am the state.

 

 

The “Obvious” Defense

The impeachment trial of Donald Trump started last week. The House managers presented a very thorough case. Now it is the time for the defenders of the president to speak. Fair enough.

So, what should they say? Well, let’s look at what the House has presented  and see how they can respond.

The House case focuses first on the withholding of aid to Ukraine and the withholding of a meeting in the Oval Office with the president of the Ukraine. Both are important to the Ukraine for what should be obvious reasons. Ukraine is partially occupied and is at war with Putin’s Russia. Not to belabor the point but again. Ukraine is partially occupied and at war with Putin’s Russia.

So, the Ukraine desperately needs military help. Which the Congress and the president have given them.They also just as desperately need Putin to understand that the US stands with Ukraine against his illegal occupation and aggression. So, both the military and political aid are essential.

It is a fact that the Department of Defense was ready to start to distribute the military aid to  Ukraine on June 18, 2019. From the DOD website:

“The Department of Defense announced today plans to provide $250 million to Ukraine in security cooperation funds for additional training, equipment, and advisory efforts to build the capacity of Ukraine’s armed forces.” ……https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/1879340/dod-announces-250m-to-ukraine/

The DOD does not release any military aid unless a thorough review has been done to make sure the country is meeting the requirements for fighting corruption, insuring human rights, etc.

So, for the president’s Defense Team. The first point they need to address is why the military aid was withheld. What information came to light between June 18 and the hold on the aid? There may be legitimate reasons for withholding aid, if so, what were they? And why was the very process for withholding aid taken out of the usual channels and handed over to a political appointee, rather than a career official?

Along the same lines, the defense may argue that the president can unilaterally withhold aid for any reason. In fact, the aid was held up 9 different times, with no explanation. However, the Government Accounting Office relayed a decision that what Trump did was break the  law. A law that requires him to notify Congress with reasons for any hold up in aid:

“In the summer of 2019, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) withheld from
obligation funds appropriated to the Department of Defense (DOD) for security
assistance to Ukraine. In order to withhold the funds, OMB issued a series of nine
apportionment schedules with footnotes that made all unobligated balances
unavailable for obligation.
Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own
policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law. OMB withheld funds
for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA).
The withholding was not a programmatic delay. Therefore, we conclude that OMB
violated the ICA….”

Click to access 703909.pdf

So, the president or his staff broke the law. Period. His defense team needs to explain that and justify the hold on military aid. Why did the president think it was essential to break the law? Perhaps he had good reason.Legal reasons. What were they? And why was Congress never notified?

Furthermore, since aid was eventually released they need to answer another question. What happened to make the president change his mind and lift the hold? What new evidence emerged? Did he discover it was illegal or was there a change in Ukraine? What specific reason was there for all of a sudden releasing most of the aid?

The second charge on impeachment brought by the House managers was the obstruction of Congress. Now, it is pretty obvious that Congress was obstructed since the president refused to provide and documents or witnesses to help in the investigation. The question is, was that obstruction legal?

On Saturday the president’s team argued that the entire impeachment proceeding was illegal. So, since the proceeding was illegal they had no requirement to cooperate. Of course, this argument does have a major hole.

The position presupposes that the executive branch alone can decide for the House of Representatives what it can and cannot investigate. In other words, although the Constitution gives the sole power of impeachment to the House, the executive branch can overrule that power. The position falls flat on two levels. First, it disregards the specific language of the Constitution.

Article 1, Section 2: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Of course it makes no sense legally or logically for the object of an impeachment or investigation to have the power to end an impeachment or investigation.

Along the same lines the president’s defense claimed that the House violated their own rules, so therefore the very impeachment itself is illegal. Yet, here we are. The Senate, controlled by Mitch McConnell, recognized the legality of impeachment. The Supreme Court, along with Chief Justice Roberts, recognizes the legality of the impeachment. We are having a trial precisely because the House acted legally. So, once again we have the president, alone, making claims that no other branch of government agrees with.

Now, it is legal for the president to, in certain circumstances, invoke “executive privilege”. However, invoking that privilege means the president has to make a case, before a court, that the documents or testimony being withheld is being done for legitimate national security concerns. So far, Mr Trump has made no such claim.

His lawyers, however, have taken the position that he can claim executive privilege without making a formal claim of executive privilege. In their words, he can hide anything he wants for any reason he wants. In other words, the chief executive is supreme and cannot be investigated or impeached.  Trump has taken this position publicly:

“…Trump was giving a speech at a Turning Point USA conference, where he predictably veered off into a tirade about special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and how, as president, Trump could’ve stopped it.

“I have an Article 2 where I have the right to do whatever I want as president,” Trump said. “But I don’t even talk about that because they did a report and there was no obstruction.”…” 

AND…

“…During a pre-taped one-on-one interview with ABC News reporter George Stephanopoulos, Trump argued that “a lot of great lawyers” agree that Article 2 of the Constitution means that the President can’t obstruct justice.

“So a president can’t obstruct justice?” Stephanopoulos asked.

“A president can run the country,” Trump responded. “And that’s what happened, George. I run the country and I run it well.”

“When the President does it, it’s not illegal?” Stephanopoulos asked….”

“I’m just saying a president under Article 2–it’s very strong, read it,” Trump said. “Do you have Article 2? Read it.”

(To be clear, executive privilege is not mentioned in the Constitution)

Trump Claims Article 2 Gives Him ‘The Right To Do Whatever I Want As President’

Trump When Asked If POTUS Can Obstruct Justice: POTUS Can ‘Run The Country’

So, the president’s defense team will have to find a justification that he has refused to cooperate with Congress. While they may rightly point to very specific instances where other president’s have attempted (successfully or unsuccessfully) to invoke “executive privilege”, they will have to justify an unbridled power of the president to hide all his actions and documents.

Now, will the defense team address these issues raised by the House managers? Will they respond to the facts and evidence in the charges? Will they talk about how the Democrats have hated Trump from day one? Will they talk about Adam Schiff?  Will they talk about the Mueller Report being a hoax? Will they claim the entire procedure is a  “witch hunt”? Or will they talk about how corrupt the Biden’s are? Benghazi Redux?

In other words, will they address the points the Hose manager have  made, or will they deflect ? Isn’t the answer obvious?

No Quid Pro Quo

No quid pro quo. So goes the latest talking point in the pretzel logic of the GOP. Let’s start at the beginning.

First, Trump did nothing wrong. Some crazy whistleblower without any first hand knowledge of the phone call to Zelensky reported it.

Hearsay. The whistleblower never heard the call, so he or she could not know what was on the call. So, nothing to see here.

Then we learned that the Inspector General looked at the case. He did some investigating, as he is supposed to. And he found that there was some substance to the whistleblower complaint.

But Mr Trump did nothing wrong, so he released the perfect transcript of the call. Well, not exactly the transcript, but a partial transcript with some parts missing. But it was perfect. See. Just another plot by the Dems to get Trump.

Then we read the partial transcript and OOPS. In it Mr Trump is clearly asking for a “favor” from Zelensky. The “favor”, it turns out , is to investigate “corruption” And he specifically mentions the Bidens.

No problem, says the Trump supporters. He never specifically tied any conditions to this request. Just asking and not getting what you want is not a crime. Trump never did anything to coerce the Ukraine.

Next, we learn that there was a months long attempt by Giuliani to get Zelensky to investigate the Bidens. And Sondland was involved. And Pence was involved. And Pompeo was involved. And Perry. And Volker.  And Lev. And Igor. An entire parallel universe trying their hardest to get the Ukrainians to make up stuff about the Bidens. IF they wanted the military aid they deserved.

But then… it is learned that the military aid to the Ukraine was put on hold. Ukraine, in the middle of a border war with Putin. Ukraine, which badly needs military help and Congress voted to help. And the Pentagon is ready to deliver. Then a hold is placed on the aid. By the White House. No one knows why. But, no problem. As Kelly Anne Conway says: Just a coincidence!

So, no quid pro quo.

Now quid pro quo usually means that I will give you something and then you give me something. These “somethings” have value. And they are “somethings” I would not normally get. “Somethings” I may not even deserve.

So, does Ukraine get “something” they did not deserve? Nope. Eventually, after the whistleblower complaint became public, Mr Trump released the military aid. But this was aid they DESERVED. It was not a “quid pro quo” because it already supposed to go to the Ukraine.

Trump did not offer the Ukraine anything new of value. They already had a right, under the law, to the military aid.  Did I mention they were fighting Putin? So any weapons Trump sent to the Ukraine might be used to kill Russian soldiers or  lackeys. Putin was not happy.

So, there was no quid pro quo. The GOP is correct.

What we are seeing is a perfect phone call and a perfect set up. For extortion. Trump tried to EXTORT the government of Ukraine by withholding much needed military aid. Aid they had a right to . To force them to publicly state they were investigating the Bidens. Now, Ukraine did not need to investigate the Bidens, which would be a waste of time. No. Just announce, on TV, that you are investigating the Bidens.

Just give Mr Trump a political TV ad so he can call the Bidens crooks. Don’t worry about finding anything, the announcement is enough.Then Fox “news” can spend every day talking about the criminal Bidens. Every hour. Every minute.

Do it OR ELSE. OR ELSE you don’t get your military aid. You don’t get the photo op with the US president. Do it OR ELSE you will lose even more countrymen to the Putin invasion. 13,000 casualties already.

That is not a quid pro quo. It is extortion.

Extortion: the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.

So we now have the entire Republican party standing behind a man who has used extortion on an ally who is trying to survive the attacks by Putin. The GOP saying it seems ok to them. Extort an ally? Is that wrong? Is that an impeachable offense? Undermining the 2020 election? Is that wrong?

The stench of the GOP grows daily. Extortion is not a problem. What next? Perhaps an open murder on 5th Avenue?

 

What Were You Thinking?

In his testimony about the Mueller Report, Attorney General William Barr explained his reasons for thinking it is not possible to charge Mr Trump with a crime. The key reason being that the prosecutor would not be able to demonstrate “intent”. According to Mr Barr the only way to charge an individual with a crime is if you can prove an “intent” to commit a crime. Even if the person’s own words suggest intent, unless he is explicit that he wants to commit a crime, there can be no trial. Therefore, no indictment is even possible.

This news reached the prisons and defense lawyers around the nation and they responded with glee. Parties were held. Fireworks were set off on Riker’s Island. The fix was in.  No intent, no crime.

So, let’s imagine for a moment that Attorney General Barr, once he is ousted from his current role, becomes a trial judge. Defense attorneys are lining up to have their cases heard before the learned justice.

Case # 1. Johnny Dillinger

Prosecutor: Your honor, the state will show that Mr Dillinger planned and implemented a number of bank robberies. He used the “Lamm technique” of casing a bank, planning a getaway route and then robbing said bank. He was successful and was found with the money. Other members of his gang have admitted to helping him rob banks. The evidence is overwhelming.

Counsel for the Defense: Your honor, the defense admits that Mr Dillinger did plan and execute said robberies. However, it is up to the state to prove “intent”. There is no proof that Mr Dillinger even knew that taking money from a bank was a crime. I mean, he’s not a lawyer familiar with the intricacies of the law. Furthermore, the “intent” of his actions was not to commit a crime, only to obtain money. Money all of us need to live. He saw the bank and thought that the money in the bank would assist him in providing for his family. If robbing banks was not against the law, no crime would have been committed. My client never, in his wildest imagination , “intended” to commit a crime. He only wanted money. Just like everyone else. I move for immediate dismissal of all charges for lack of evidence of “intent”.

Judge Barr: Well argued . The court agrees that while Mr Dillinger may have committed these “crimes”, there is no way to determine whether he “intended” to commit crimes or just wanted money for his family. Case dismissed.

Case #2: Ted Bundy

Prosecutor: Your honor, the state will prove that Mr Ted Bundy committed at least 30 homicides between 1974 and 1978. Included are charges of multiple rapes, kidnapping and necrophilia. He is a serial killer who is the most brutal sociopath and should never again be released to society. . We have the forensic evidence . We will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty.

Counsel for the Defense: Your honor, the defense admits that Mr Bundy did, in fact, take some of the actions noted by the state. We ask you to consider, however, the “intent” of Mr Bundy. Did he kidnap? Yes. Did he rape? Yes. Did he murder? Yes. But what is the real question? In our mind the ONLY question is this: Did Mr Bundy “intend” to break the law?

When Mr Bundy was kidnapping and raping and murdering was he “intending” to break the law? Or was he just intending to rape ? And kidnap? And murder? If rape and murder were not against the law would Mr Bundy even be subjected to this trial? Nowhere in the state’s case does it prove that Mr Bundy “intended ” to break any laws. Just the opposite. He wanted to follow the law, but his sociopathic desires would not allow him to. In his mind, he “intended ” to do whatever was legal. So, your honor, we are requesting an immediate dismissal of the charges based on the fact that no criminal “intent” was proved by the state.

Judge Barr: Excellent legal analysis. While it is clear that Mr Bundy murdered and raped over 30 individuals, the state did not provide any evidence that Mr Bundy intended to break the law. With this lack of intent I am disturbed that the prosecution has even brought the case against this honorable man. Complete exoneration. Case dismissed .

Case #3: LeRoy Jones

Prosecutor: You honor, Mr Jones was found with 2 bottles of baby formula in his possession , not paid for in the grocery store. This is a misdemeanor and we suggest 2 weeks in jail and a $100 fine.

Counsel for the Defense: We concur with the prosecution and plead guilty.

Judge Barr: Outrageous conduct. Stealing is a major crime. Not only did he take baby formula, he obviously intended to break the law. The days of coddling criminals are over. I sentence the criminal to 1 year in prison and a $1000 fine.  Let that be a lesson to all who would “intend” to break the law.

 

 

Lies Liberals Tell, Part 7

Lie#7: It Can’t Happen Here

Copyright 2017,2018,2019 Joseph Urban

I am not much for conspiracy theories. Most have no basis in evidence. So as a liberal I have always told myself that fascism cannot happen here. We have a long history of the rule of law and democratic traditions. There is no way the US could fall into a dictatorship. I firmly believed that.

Until now.

Students of history tell us that democracies have fallen in the past. Taken over by “strong men”. Men who demanded allegiance to themselves above allegiance to the law. Who demand loyalty oaths. Who tell the “Big Lie”. Rome , in ancient times, lost the Republic to a dictatorship.  It was not that long ago that the democracies of Germany and Italy fell to demagogues. Under Gorbachev, Russia was on its way to becoming a democracy, then Putin and the oligarchs took over. We are not immune.

What has been the great strength of the US has been the separation of powers. Checks and balances. The executive, legislative and judicial branches each checking the power of the others. The delicate balance of power.

So, when Richard Nixon violated the law the Supreme Court and Congress stepped in and said “No”. You cannot do that. You will not do that. We are loyal to the Constitution and the nation, not to you personally. We do not confuse the Presidency with the person currently holding that role. So Nixon was forced to resign or be impeached.

We have fewer checks and balances today. The Republican Party has , over the last 40 years, slowly morphed into a cult. It is now lead by Mr Trump. It is a personality cult whose loyalty is to him personally, not to the rule of law.  The Republican Congress sits by while Mr Trump obstructs an investigation into his financial dealings and connections with Russia.

Mr Trump acts like a mobster. Mr Trump attacks citizens who are Muslims. Mr Trump attacks the FBI. Mr Trump attacks the Department of Justice. Mr Trump makes wild and unsubstantiated claims on a daily basis. He attacks the free press. He attacks individual members of Congress . And the Republicans in Congress acquiesce. Worse than that, the leadership of the GOP colludes and enables this man.

There is only a check and balance system if the legislative branch decides to honor and follow the law. This Republican Congress refused to do so. They had become lapdogs content in the lap of the “Great leader”. Now that the Democrats control the House we are finally seeing some accountability. But only some.

The Republican Senate has decided that supporting this person who is undermining the basic institutions of democracy is the thing to do. The man is above the law.

Mr Trump knows he will not face any consequences from this Senate. He can fire the special prosecutor and this Senate will do nothing. Or worse. They will follow and encourage him. He has signed their tax bill for the wealthy. He has given them 2 Supreme Court members who will, in the future, support corporate interests over individual rights. They will now return the favor.

The president wanted a wall between the US and Mexico. When the Congress refused to fund that wall, he simply said he would ignore Congress and do it anyway. The Republican majority leader in the Senate has supported the president. He has said, in effect, that the president does not have any check on him from Congress.

Any student of history that understands the rise of Mussolini, Hitler or Putin can see what happens when power gets concentrated in the hands of the executive branch. With no checks . Germany was a democracy in 1932. By 1936 it was a dictatorship. One man did not “take over”. He had plenty of help when he attacked the press (lugenpresse) and the elected assembly.

So, it can happen here. Don’t doubt it.

Conclusion

Liberals need to stop lying to themselves about the far right that has taken over the Republican Party.  They do not hold to the same core beliefs as the founding fathers.

Liberals have been far too passive in dealing with the right wing in this country. We have been victims of our own belief in the American values and basic honesty and decency. Liberals understand that the conservatives, especially since 1980, simply do not believe in the US Constitution. They do not believe in the Bill of Rights. They do not believe in democracy.  Liberals must understand that and act accordingly.

The Republican party has ceased being the party of small business and fiscal responsibility. It has become a tool of corporations and a radical right wing. Worse, it has morphed into a personality cult devoted to the “fearless leader”.  Dangerous. Only the utter destruction of that party will open the door for real change.

The Blue Wave?

In 2018 the American people had a choice. Stick with President Trump and the GOP or return the Dems to power. The results are in. Almost.

In some districts in NY and California they are still counting ballots. Many were submitted by mail and have yet to be tallied. It is taking  a while. And the Republic still stands.

Which is an aside. Why not just have all paper ballots? It takes a little longer to count, but so what. We have an election in early November and the new Congress takes office in early January. That is almost 60 days. Plenty of time .

Paper ballots are not subject to computer fraud or machine error. They cannot be hacked by the Russians or the Chinese. Large numbers of votes can’t be “accidentally” or intentionally switched. The safest, most reliable form of voting. But I digress.

The results of the 2018 elections:

Governors: 20 Republicans won; 16 Dems won. The GOP holds 27 states, mostly in the south and plains. The Dems hold 23, mostly in the far west, the upper Midwest and the east. More significant is that Alaska switched from the Independent to the GOP, while Nevada, New Mexico, Kansas, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan and Maine switched from the GOP to Dems. 45 million voted for Dem governors while 42 million voted for GOP governors.

Senate: Dems won 21 seats plus 2 (Vermont and Maine) that caucus with the Dems. GOP won 11 seats. A final total of 23-11. On the Senate elections 55.6 million Americans voted Democratic, while 34.4 million voted GOP. Pretty decisive.

The House of Representatives: Dems won 234 seats, the GOP won 198 with three seats yet to be decided. The GOP leads in 2 (NY 27 and NC-9) while the Dems lead in 1 (CA-21). Total votes for GOP candidates was 49.6 million and for Dems was 56.1 million). Pretty decisive.

Two things are obvious. It was a major Democratic wave election  and the country is still rigidly divided as far as political party voting is concerned.

The people voted fairly decisively for Democratic candidates and Democratic  policies. Again. Mr Trump went around to a few states and did a good job of rallying his base (except in Montana). But the Democrats, without a true national leader, did a better job of speaking to the issues and getting out the vote. A lesson for future elections.

High School Calendar

Two events coincided this weekend for me. One was the accusations and explanations regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh and his possible sexual predatory behavior when he was a young man. The other was my 50th high school reunion.

First, Mr Kavanaugh. He has been accused of attempted rape when he was drunk and in high school. The accuser will be heard next week in the Senate committee hearing. He has denied any untoward behavior. In his defense a former Republican Congressional candidate named Gina Sosa came to his defense. I guess.

“I mean, we’re talking about a 15-year-old girl, which I respect. You know, I’m a woman. I respect,” Sosa told CNN. “But we’re talking about a 17-year-old boy in high school with testosterone running high. Tell me, what boy hasn’t done this in high school? Please, I would like to know.”   

http://time.com/5404108/brett-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-high-school-gina-sosa/

That got me thinking about my old high school buddies. As I said, the 50 year reunion just took place and I had not seen most of these guys in, well, 50 years. Like Brett Kavanaugh, I went to an all male Catholic High School. My class size was about 100, so we got to know each other fairly well. Now, my memory is not the greatest but I do not recall attempting to rape anyone.

As I looked around the hall at my 50th reunion I saw men who had traversed a wide variety of life paths. Ph.Ds. Scientists. Entrepreneurs. Teachers. Musicians. A whole lot of successful, fulfilled lives. Of course, I remember us all as teenagers. Goofy. Smart. Athletic. Funny. Serious. Mentally undeveloped. Full of potential.

As I looked around the room I could not imagine any of us at the age of 17. Or 27. Or 57. Any of us at any age attempting to rape a girl. Jim? Ed? Jack? Tim? Tom? Dan? Dave? Nope. Not a rapist in the group. Were we the “oddballs” of America? Unsuited to the title of “typical teenage boy”?  Should we be embarrassed by our lack of real manhood? According to Gina Sosa we were far out of the norm. I hope not. I think not.

Which leads me to another point. In the attempt to “prove” that Brett Kavanaugh did not attempt to rape this girl, he has produced a calendar. A calendar he kept as a 17 year old boy. This piece of evidence demonstrates beyond a doubt that this young man never attempted to rape anyone.  While I personally think keeping a calendar of your activities at 17 is a bit odd. So be it. What is even odder is keeping that calendar for 30 years. So be it. But, to his credit, Brett nowhere mentions that he raped anyone. A careful check of all entries and no “Attempted rape tonight” showed up anywhere. Case closed.

This line of thought lead me to investigate myself. Sure enough, in the barn in an old cardboard box covered with bat guano I found my own old high school calendar. After all, what boy would be without such a record. Just as Mr Kavanaugh is able to prove his innocence by his words, I have included some of my own entries below. Like the good judge, I am allowed to pick and choose what the people will see.

October 12. Went to party. Stood around for 3 hours. Ate cake. Went home. Read Playboy. Going to confession tomorrow.

November 7. Worked on homecoming float. Gina S . wore a tight skirt. She almost talked to me. Stayed up half the night. Going to confession tomorrow.

December 3.  Asked Gina S. for a date. She said yes. Going to see a movie tomorrow. Can’t wait. Stayed up half the night.

December 4. Got to first base with Gina S. Well, almost. Was in the batter’s box and got “hit by pitch”. Still. She said she would go out with me again. Yippeee. Going to confession tomorrow.

December 13. Out on a date with Gina S. Got to first base!!!! Then, big mistake. Tried to get to 2nd base and was picked off the bag. Thrown out of the game early. Told me she would call me if she wanted to see me again.

April 1. Gina S called!!!! I got excited. Then she said “April Fool”. Still, just having her call made me think of her. Going to confession tomorrow.

May 20. Got together with 8 of my buddies and gang raped a 12 year old virgin. Now we are real men!!! Gina S. called and said she now considers me “normal”. Wants to go steady!!

All I can say is: Boys will be boys. And the boys I went to school with became men. Perhaps Gina Sosa needs to hang out with a better quality of “boy”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pocahontas or not?

Elizabeth Warren is gearing up for her run for the presidency against Donald in 2020. She will be a strong candidate because she can explain economic reality in a way that the common person can understand. And she is not afraid of Trump the bully. She has handled bullies before.

If you recall, Ms. Warren was nominated to be the head of the new Consumer Protection Agency. But the Republicans hated her. Why? Because she was and is an advocate for consumers. You know. Everyone who ever buys anything.

So, the GOP blocked her nomination and she didn’t get the job.

So, what did she do? Give up? Hardly. She responded by running for the US Senate where she now has a seat. And a bully pulpit. And is a daily reminder to those same  Republicans that they have failed to shut her up.

Which brings me to “Pocahontas”.

Mr Trump regularly derides Senator Warren, calling her “Pocahontas”. He does this because she has related a family story that she is descended partially from Native Americans. And evidently “Pocahontas” is the only Native American Trump has ever heard of, outside of “Tonto”. A family story. Is it true? Trump says “No”. And if you can’t believe the guy who still says Obama was born in Africa, who can you believe?

True or not, Mr Trump will bring this up at every rally. He will try to make this a campaign issue. And the press, unable to figure out what is real news and what is propaganda, will undoubtedly play along. Fox will have orgasms of delight covering this “issue”every day. Trump knows he can’t win on his record or the issues, so slander is his best and only weapon.

So, what should Warren do? Take a DNA test. Find out once and for all if she has any Native American heritage.

If she does have Native American ancestors, she can shut Donald’s mouth with a simple test. Make it public. Donald has lost his weapon.

If she does not have Native American heritage she should openly admit it. The family story is wrong. Just like so many family stories in America. Every family understands that. Get it over with. Trump loses his weapon.

While the issue is trivial, Trump and his network have a history of making the trivial seem important. Of clouding the issues with attacks on persons. Benghazi. Benghazi. Benghazi.

So, Senator Warren. Take the test. Disclose the results. Don’t let the trivial get in the way of the important.

Who knows? Maybe we can get Trump to take that DNA test proving his mother was not an orang-utan. So far, he has refused.

New Year Predictions 2018

This is the time of year when we think about the new year and what it will bring.  My new year predictions for 2018. While a couple might be a little off, I remain confident that my overall predictions will hold true.

The Cleveland Browns football team will be allowed to leave the NFL and play against selected college teams. While they do not fair well against Southeastern Virginia Disability Institute and the Outer Waco Texas Girls Ballet School the season is not a total loss. They will end up with a 1-11 record, having eked out a 3-0 victory over the Northern Idaho School for the Blind.

Robert Mueller’s third cousin on his mother’s side, 12 year old Cynthia Woggles,  will be investigated by a Congressional Committee headed by Trent Gowdy. The investigation, which will cost $ 7,000,000 and the calling of 98 witnesses, all of whom are commentators on Fox and Friends, will discover that Woggles  voted for Hillary Clinton in her 6th grade mock election in 2016.  (Not to be confused with the national mock election held the same year) Mr Trump will use this evidence of bias to fire the Republican Mueller. In  his place Mr Trump will appoint Roy Moore to take over the investigation. Moore immediatley calls Woggles for a play date.

Major League baseball will announce that after a study of fan injuries at 6 ballparks they have discovers 14 fans who had died during the game. At first the cause of the deaths was a mystery, since none of these fans were hit by foul balls or bats. Medical examiners confirm that these deaths can be attributed to a cerebral shutdown of the inner brain, caused by intense boredom.

The US will recognize the following new capitals. Scotland. Former capital: Edinburgh. New capital: Trump International Golf Links.  China. Former capital: Beijing, Forbidden City. New capital: Shanghai, Ivanka Shoe Factory.  Iran. Former capital: Tehran. New capital: Jersusalem.  USA. Former capital: Washington, DC. New capital: Mar-A-Lago, Florida. Congress passes a law concuring.

FEMA will announce, sometime in June, that they have devised a plan to bring power back to Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico has not had full electric power resumed since Hurricane Maria in September, 2017. Despite the fact that the FEMA response was the “best response ever” to a catastrophe (a close second being the FEMA response to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans) . The new plan calls for running an extension cord from Merida, Mexico to the island to bring power back on line to the millions of foreigners living in Puerto Rico.  As long as Mexico agrees to pay for the cord.

The 1st Annual Scott Pruitt “Global Warming is a Hoax” seminar takes place in a yacht named “The Golden Dollar” off the coast of Charleston, South Carolina in July. Guest speakers include climate experts Sean Hannity, Clint Eastwood’s empty chair and the entire Duck Dynasty family. The conference is cut short when a family of polar bears swims past searching for ice.

In the Vatican, Pope Francis is caught on mike saying that he thinks “this god stuff is a bunch of BS”. Nevertheless,  he speaks out against war, violence, disease, global warming and hatred. He calls on all government leaders of the world to join in peace and harmony. No one calls back.When asked what common people should do to solve these problems he answers: “I tell you, I’m all outta ideas. Reality sucks so you might as well pray to a fantasy. Gets ME through the day.”

The New England Patriots win the Super Bowl, 17-14, on February 4 in a thriller over the Philadelphia Eagles. The Eagles have 7 TDs called back by the replay officials in NY, who are nowhere near the actual location of the game in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Days later it is discovered that the league officials in NY had mistakenly been watching the replays of the Bournemouth vs. Stoke City English Premier League soccer match of February 3, in which no one scored. As usual.

Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke announces the closing of all National Parks, except for Mount Rushmore. All parks will be sold to the Koch Brothers at a deep discount and the proceeds, which are tax deductible, will be spent renovating Mount Rushmore. The faces of Teddy Roosevelt, George Washington , Thomas Jefferson and Abe Lincoln will be sandblasted away to make room for giant head of Donald Trump, surrounded by his three wives. The monument will be renamed: Best Monument Ever. Congress concurs.

On a strict liberal vs. conservative vote the Supreme Court approves Executive Order 5,678 on the topic of voting rights. Since the court had previously ruled , under Citizens United, that money equals speech, they extend that ruling to include voting. Under the new ruling “money equals voting”, as well. Based on the principle of “one dollar equals one vote” the 2018 election will be determined by a new voting method. Every citizen must bring in their tax returns to show their gross income from wages and investments. Each dollar will count as one vote.

North Korean leader, professional golfer and all around bozo Kim Jung Un  announces a new building plan. He has signed an agreement with Trump University to open up a “Kim-Donald School For Learning Stuff” in Pyongyang. The school will focus on business related seminars including: How to Get Stuff  For Free; 12 Ways to Evict “Those People”; Tax Evasion 101: Avoiding Those Nasty Import Fees; and, Bankruptcy, The Real Estate Developers Best Friend. Eric Trump attends the ribbon cutting ceremony which is a disaster as none of the Korean made scissors are sharp enough to cut the paper ribbon. Eric calls the “Kim-Donald “school  the “best university ever” and announces at the same time that the US will begin selling nuclear technology to Kim as a gesture of good will.

Finally. Congress votes itself a 50% pay raise for a “job well done”. The legislative branch passed a total of three bills. They were: 1. “The Amazing Trump is the Best President Ever” bill awarding the Trump Medal of MAGA to the best person in America. This year’s recipient? Donald Trump. 2. “The FBI Traitor” law. Which labels all members of the FBI, former and current, official “enemies of the people” and subject to immediate permanent detention and prosecution for doing “bad stuff”. Mueller is the first to be perp walked. 3. “Congressional Vacation Act” which allows Congress to take a vacation for a period including January 2 through December 30, with pay and expenses for fact finding travel.  Mr Trump signed all three bills and praised Congress for their services… which will no longer be necessary.

 

 

Mr Reed on the Backs of our Children

My Congressman is Tom Reed of NY-23. A staunch Trump supporter and one of the key members of the Ways and Means Committee responsible for the GOP tax bill. I called his office at 10:30 this morning and spoke with one of his staff members for 15 minutes. Here are the questions I asked and the answers I received.

Q. How many expert Congressional hearings has Mr Reed attended?

A. Don’t know exactly. There have been a few. Also he is on Ways and Means which had some hearings.

Q. Has Mr Reed read the entire bill, all 1000 pages ?

A. Yes. He has read the entire bill.

Q. Does Mr Reed gain financially from this bill, in the sense of the “Corker Kickback”? Any specific provisions which help him?

A. Do not know. Thinks not, however.

Q. According to some analyses, over the next 10 years 83% of the tax benefits go to the top 5% of people and corporations. Why does Mr Reed think the top earners need a break more than the bottom 95%?

A. Not familair with that analysis so can’t speak to it. The idea is to be pro-growth which will create jobs.

My follow up: Isn’t that what George Bush tried and it did not create jobs, called supply side?

A. Would not characterize it. Not familiar enough with the Bush plan to respond.

Q. The tax law keeps in place giving tax credits for taxes paid abroad. Doesn’t this discourage companies from creating jobs in the US if they can continue to take an overseas tax credit?

A. Is not familar with this provision. Can’t answer.

My follow up: If you want job creation at home wouldn’t it be better to tie any tax breaks to spending on jobs in the USA? Make job creation in the US a requirement for getting the tax break?

A. Will pass on my idea to the Congressman.

Q. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculated that 10,000,000 lower income  families would get an increase in the child tax care credit of $75 a year. That amounts to an increase of 50 cents a day. Is this a good increase for poor people raising children?

A. The child credit remains and has been increased so poor families get a $2,000 tax credit, which in an increase. And they can get $1,400 in taxes returned.  

Q. On April 15, 2011 when Mr Obama was president, Mr Reed released this statement: “We are borrowing $58,000 per second on the backs of our children and grandchildren… Reducing spending and getting the national debt under control in the single most important issue…. Trillions of private dollars sit on the sidelines waiting to see if we are serious about reducing the deficit and paying down our debt….” Has Mr Reed changed his mind abut the deficit?

A. We are concerned about the deficit and debt. We are pro-growth and Mr Reed is concerned about spending.

Follow up: What specific spending does he want to cut?

A. Can’t answer.

The staff member, who was very polite and patient with me said he would try to contact others who could answer my questions.

Mr Reed used to be concerned about expanding deficits. Evidently he has concluded that our children have strong backs. They are going to need them.

Senator Gillibrand and The Death of Due Process

Roy Moore may or may not be elected to the US Senate tomorrow. He has been accused by multiple women of icky behavior. Of cruising malls looking for girls. Of dating teens. Whether or not this enough reason for the good people of Alabama  to reject him remains to be seen.

Moore’s defenders have, rightly, pointed out that he has never been convicted of violating any woman or girl. I saw an interview (which I personally found disturbing) of Moore supporters in Alabama. A number of them saw nothing wrong with him trying to date a 14 year old girl. One guy pointed out that his grandmother was 13 when she got married and had 2 kids by the time she was 15. Others pointed out that things were different in the past  (they were, but this is the present) and many Alabama moms would have been happy to have their 14 or 16 year old daughter dating an assistant DA. Others were certain that the accusers had been paid by George Soros.  Moore denies all claims and says they are all liars. So be it.

Al Franken posed for a prank picture of him groping a sleeping Leeann Tweeden. When on a USO tour with this sports commentator and former top Hooters girl. The fact that she was a playboy model does not diminish any sexual assault, nor does the fact that she works for FOX. Just sayin’ . Other women have also come out and claimed that Franken touched them inappropriately. His supporters point out that he has not been charged with anything and while he denies many of the complaints he has apologized for others. He has asked for an Ethics Committee hearing. But that was not enough, so Franken, under pressure from Democratic congresswomen  and congressmen, has resigned.

A Republican from Arizona wanted to pay millions to one of his female staff members to be a “surrogate” mother since he and his wife cannot have kids. Doesn’t sound so bad until you learn that his “religion” forbids artificial insemination.  Had to do it the regular way. I see. He resigns.

Old John Conyers, Democrat of Michigan, accused by staffers of inappropriate touching, resigns. Like it matters. The guy was old, even for Congress. If he did touch someone he couldn’t remember five minutes later. But that is another topic. He’s gone.

https://josephurban.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/80-is-the-new-36/

Another Congressman owes me $84,000 as far as I am concerned. Farenthold  (Texas Republican) had the Congressional Sex Slush Fund pay $ 84,000 in hush money to a woman he assaulted. I want my money back. Oh, wait, he promises to pay it back. We shall see.  My question: Why is there a Congressional Sex Slush Fund to begin with?

http://time.com/5048265/blake-farenthold-sexual-harassment-settlement/

Which brings me around to one of my New York senators, Gillibrand . Kirsten Gillibrand was appointed to the Senate seat vacated by Hillary Clinton by then-Governor Patterson, who had  admitted to numerous extramarital affairs. This did not bother Kirsten at the time. Nor did the money and support funneled to her by the Clintons bother her. Nor does it bother me. She won an election on her own, well, maybe with a little Clinton help. Gillibrand started out as a “Blue Dog” Democrat (conservative) but has “evolved” over the years to become a leading liberal in the Senate. Evolution is a wonderful thing. I confess I voted for her in the last election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsten_Gillibrand

Recently Senator Gillibrand was at the forefront of the movement by Democratic congresswomen to oust Al Franken. She called for his resignation and got it. She has also condemned former president Clinton for his dalliances and said he should have resigned from office. For having an affair. (Did I mention she took money and support from the Clintons to help her get elected?)

Now, since Gillibrand is my senator I was concerned with her motives. So, I just called her  Washington DC office and asked a couple questions.

First, I asked why she has not called for President Trump to resign. After all, compared to the allegations against Mr Trump , Al Franken is an altar boy. If Franken’s unproven behavior merited a resignation, why not Trump’s much worse unproven behavior?

The response from her representative  was that Gillibrand has spoken out about Mr Trump. No reason given as to why she has not called for his resignation.

My second question was based on the 2014 claims by Gillibrand that she was sexually harrassed while in the Congress by other Congressmen. She talks about 3 or 4 specific cases, yet refuses to name her harrassers. The answer given to me was that Gillibrand HAS named her harrassers but I can find no evidence of that on any website.  At the time Gillibrand was challenged to name her harrassers but she refused, using this logic:

“So why didn’t she call out the men who wronged her by name? “Because then our conversation would be about the idiocy of any one individual male,” Gillibrand said. “And I don’t want to talk about that. I want to talk about the broader problems that are far more relevant.” For a woman who’s trying to carve out her position as a leader for women, it’s not a bad conversation to own.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/09/kirsten-gillibrand-explains-why-she-didnt-name-her-harassers/439767/

So, now Kristen has decided that the “idiocy of any one individual male”, namely Al Franken, is good enough for her. So, the “broader problem” is more important than “due process”? The end justifies the means? We keep silent about sex harrassers for the greater good?

Gillibrand is a lawyer by trade. She is a very smart person. She understands the Constitution. She understands “due process” and what that should mean. She has been in the forefront to deny that “due process” to one man, Al Franken, while protecting the identity of other sexual harrassers. Even though she claims personal knowledge of sexual harrassment in Congress by other Congressmen she refuses to “name names”, thereby aiding and abetting those who would prey on women not as psychologically strong or powerful as she. Silence is what sexual predators thrive on. And Gillibrand has been silent allowing predators to go unpunished.

Why has she been silent about some and why so aggressive at this time towards Franken? My only conclusion is that Gillibrand has seen a bandwagon and has decided to jump onto the driver’s seat. The bandwagon is a dangerous one. It says anyone accused is guilty. Case closed. No hearings. No trial. It also says that we must always believe any woman who makes a claim. Sorry, I just will not accept that.

Kirsten is not done. She wants to climb higher. She has her eyes on the Democratic nomination for president and is using the current scandals, quite selectively I might add, to propel herself into the national spotlight. How is she any different than any Fox-sponsored politician who tries to use selective evidence for political advantage? To throw red meat to a specific audience? She has shown herself to be a typical member of the elite ruling class…. say anything for political gain. I think there is a term for that: opportunistic.

To think I helped put her in office. Sad. Very sad.

https://www.playboy.com/leeann-tweeden

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/does-gillibrand-have-a-responsibility-to-name-her-harassers

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/16/full-text-al-franken-apologizes-for-allegedly-groping-woman-244978

 

 

 

 

Sex Harrassment Training

“The Senate unanimously approved legislation late Thursday that institutes mandatory sexual harassment training for senators and aides — a potentially meaningful shift amid calls for overhauling Capitol Hill’s system for handling harassment complaints.”

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/09/congress-sexual-harassment-training-senators-aides-244762

I was able to acquire an actual audiotape of the first meeting of the sexual harrassment training for Congress. I have changed the names to protect my congressman.

From the audiotape:

Anonymous Congressman: Hey, babe, is this the place for the sex training?

9 year old girl: Hi Mister, yes, this is the place for your training.

AC: So, who is running this show?

9YO: I am . I was asked by my mommy to talk to you all today.

AC: Aren’t you a little young to teach us how to harrass women?

9YO: No, Mister. I am here to help you learn how to be good.

AC: Oh, oops. I misunderstood. The email  said “sexual harrassment training”. I thought someone would teach me how to  harrass my female  employees and not get caught.

9YO: No, Mister. I am supposed to help you understand that sex stuff is wrong.

AC: Ouch. Boy am I embarrassed. So, what do I need to know?

9YO: Well, you should be nice to people.

AC: But what if I really want to touch a woman. You know, I really want to. I can hardly control myself. And I am the boss.

9YO: You should not touch anyone who doesn’t want to be touched. It’s not nice.

AC: OK. I never knew that ! Wow! So, if I am the boss I should not just like kiss her or grab her by her..uh.. private parts. You know, like President Trump.

9YO: No, that is wrong. That is being a bad man. You should never touch anyone who does not want to be touched.

AC: So, it would be wrong to just grab a woman? Really? I never knew that. What if I say sexy stuff to her? Like Clarence Thomas.

9YO: No. That is bad. You should not say sexy words to someone  in the workplace. You should never say things to make them afraid or sad. That is bad.

AC: Wow. I never knew that. So I should not make commensts to women about having sex with me or force a women to have sex on my desk. Like Matt Lauer.

9YO: NO! That is called rape. That is a bad thing. Do not do that. That is very naughty. Don’t you understand?

AC: What if I “accidently” grab a female on her butt? I mean, what if it is an accident? Like Al Franken?

9YO: NO! You are making me mad ! No. No. No. That is wrong. Don’t touch.

AC: Well, I am trying. But I never knew that was wrong. I am learning so much today that I never knew! Let me see if I understand. I should not touch women or girls  if they don’t want to be touched. I should not say sexy things to women in the workplace. I should not rape women, even if they are working for me?

9YO: Yes. Now you understand. That is called sex harrassment. That is wrong. I learned in Kindergarten that you should not touch others. Didn’t you ever go to Kindergarten? My teacher said to never touch others who do not want to be touched.

AC: OK. I get it. Thank you for this training. I never knew that it was wrong to touch or kiss or rape a woman. This training has really opened my mind.

(The 9 year old leaves the room but the tape is still running.)

AC: (talking to an aide). That girl was really HOT, wasn’t she? I was going to invite her to have dinner with me tonight at Hooters. Think that would be wrong?

End of tape.

Personal aside: The people who we elect to make our laws need to be TRAINED not to sexually harrass other human beings. Please read the previous sentence again. Then try not to cry.

 

Fitness for High Office

One of the most laughable statements  by politicians in modern times was made by Mitch McConnell recently. He was talking about Roy Moore, the GOP candidate for the Senate.

“He’s obviously not fit to be in the United States Senate,” Mr. McConnell told reporters on Tuesday.        https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/14/us/politics/sex-scandals-mitch-mcconnell.html?src=twr&_r=0

Let me say this about Roy Moore. He is, in my opinion, a pedophile. He is a slug. He sees himself as an Old Testament patriarch whose gender and age allows him to do anything he wants to anyone he wants. At the same time, the people of Alabama have the right to send to the Senate anyone they want.

If the people of Alabama want an accused pedophile and a moron to represent them, so be it.  If he committed a crime in Alabama that is for Alabama to determine. Look at the man who he is trying to replace. Jeff Sessions. A man who actively prosecuted black citizens for registering other black citizens to vote. The “high standards” of the Senate dd not see a problem with that. The Senateand House have been seating bigots and racists for over a century and it seems not to violate any ethical standards.

How many of these giants of the Senate have voted over and over to take away heath care for the working poor? How many times have they voted to end the ACA? How many times have these morally superior men noto voted t raise the minimum wage for those “working Americans” they love to talk about. How many of these fine gentlemen have voted to give massive breaks to the wealthy and screw the poor? How many of these fine representatives have supported voter suppression laws?

I would suggest that there is NO ONE who is morally repugnant enough to be excluded from the Senate or the House . And the record supports me.

I could care less if a senator wants to bang a dog. In some states that may be a requirement. Who knows?

That said, let’s look at a number of these sexual accusations and how they played out over the years.

Dwight Eisenhower and John F Kennedy both had affairs . The press never reported them although they were gossiped about  and well-known. But affairs are consensual sexual relations. Which are in a different category than sex crimes. (Although when JFK and Ike were alive adultery was a crime in most states, and is still a crime in 21 states. Should they have been impeached?)  http://www.freep.com/story/life/family/2014/04/17/in-which-states-is-cheating-on-your-spouse-illegal/28936155/

Did Moore commit sex crimes? Seems so. He was in his thirties and went after very young girls. Pedophilia?  His supporters seem to use the Bible as some justification for his proclivities. I think the guy is just sick and needs treatment. He seems to have  along history of this kind of behavior.

Al Franken has just been “outed” as an abuser as well. He forced himself on a woman and kissed her against her will. He took a fraternity-style photo of himself pretending to grope her while she slept. Is this sexual assault? Was this a one time thing ? A jackass trying to be funny? Franken apologized and said he was ashamed. Will other women come forward? If the people of Minnesota want a former comedian who has apologized for his actions to represent them, so be it.

Bill Clinton had consensual sex with Monica Lewinsky in the White House. She was 22 years old. Is a 22-year-old woman an adult who can make those decisions about who to have sex with or not? Is it crass and icky for an old man to use his position of power and have sex with someone who technically works for him (although in a non paid position). Is it illegal or just smelly? Does it make him unworthy to hold the office of president?

Then we come to the Abuser-in-Chief himself. A man who has bragged repeatedly about sexually abusing women. He has said he forced himself on women. Kissed them when he wanted. Grabbed them by the pussy. He has been found guilty of discrimination in housing  against black renters. He has been found guilty of ripping off young people at his phony Trump University and forced to pay $ 25,000,000 in damages. And he has been accused by multiple women and girls of sexual misconduct, including forcible kissing and groping.

How can Mitch McConnell or anyone member of the government DARE claim that Judge Moore or Al Franken or Bojo the One-Eyed Pedophile is not fit for government “service”.The American people have spoken. Well, at least 60,000,000 have spoken.

They spoke in November of 2016 and said unequivocally that ANY PERSON, no matter how low their moral compass is suited to participate at the highest levels of government. No matter what kind of sluggish behavior a human being can engage in, it was evidently not sluggish enough to prevent 60,000,000 from voting for him.

The Congress is not the synod of bishops or the college of cardinals of the Catholic Church. It is not a moral or religious organization. It is a bunch of men and some women who want to tell the rest of us what to do. They want to make laws. They are fallible human beings who should not be held to any standard other than how they vote on issues.

I do not support sex abuse in any form, but let’s be real. The  “standards” of government behavior hardly eleimnate anyone from serving in Congress.

(Please excuse editing errors. For some reason I cannot control my editor today!)

Condolences to Ray and Elfreda

The election for GOP candidate for the next senator representing the good people of Alabama is this Tuesday. Mr Trump was in Bama campaigning, kind of, for Luther Strange. His opponent is Judge Roy Moore. Whomever wins this primary election is pretty much assured of beating anyone the Dems put up in the special election to fill Jess Sessions seat. I mean the last time Alabama elected a Democrat as senator (Richard Shelby) he immediately switched parties and became a Republican.

So this election is, in effect, the election for the Senate seat.

A little research shows us that Luther Strange is, well, strange. He supports Donald Trump all the way.  He wants to kill trade deals, cut off funding for family planning at Planned Parenthood and of course, “Drain the Swamp” (but that is a different essay).

Luther, as Alabama attorney general, fought to allow Hobby Lobby to keep women from accessing basic medical care, like family planning services. He also supported Exxon’s refusal to reveal the climate change research it had done. As the replacement Senator for Jeff Sessions he has voted to take away health care for 40,000,000 Americans and to gut Medicaid  (which is the primary health insurance for over 1,000,000 Alabamians, mostly children). And Luther is the SANE candidate!

Judge Roy Moore, former Australian cowboy and kickboxing champion, has his own set of abominations. He was the judge who insisted, contrary to the US Constitution, that the 10 Commandments be placed outside his courtroom. (On a side note, the good judge has a personal set of 10 Commandments he carved himself… maybe he thinks he carved the originals as well). When he lost the court case and was told to remove the 2 ton granite boulders , he refused. He put himself above the law and was removed from the bench. Then Alabamians immediately elected him to the state Supreme Court.

He wants to give public money to Christian schools. ( I guess the Alabama public school systems are glutted with cash). He has condemned homosexuals from the bench. He condemns the idea of universal health care. He condemns trade. He condemns immigration, especially from our “northern border”.  (We don’t need no Canucks!) He condemns…well… just fill in the blank with any concept designed to give folks equal rights or make their lives better. You get the picture.

So, what does this have to do with Ray and Elfreda? I went to college with Ray and Elfreda (not their real names) back in the early 1970s.  (OK, Ray and Elfreda ARE their real names. I mean, who could make up a name like Elfreda?). They both live in Alabama.

Now, you could take any rusted pickup truck with a tail light out, stars and bars decals and gun rack (in other words, ANY vehicle in Alabama) and run over 2,000,000 Alabamians. And you would not hit anyone nicer than Ray or Elfreda. I mean, these folks left the relative sanity of the north and gave their professional lives to educating the kids of the Yellowhammer State. They migrated south of the Mason-Dixon Line to help kids in a state whose leaders couldn’t choose between 2 official fish,  so named them both: the tarpon and large mouth bass.

So I send Ray and Elfreda my condolences. Luther Strange or Judge Roy Moore is going to be “representing ” them for the next 6 years. A choice between an idiot and a bigger idiot. Heads I lose, tails I lose.  Perhaps there will be a tie and BOTH candidates can go to Washington.

“Introducing the distinguished senators fro the great state of Alabama: Moore Strange.”

Ray and Elfreda, I feel your pain.

(Actually I DO feel your pain. My “representative in Congress is an avid Trump supporter and all around con artist named Tom Reed, NY -29.)

 

http://www.lutherstrange.com/on_the_issues

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther_Strange

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Moore

https://www.roymoore.org/Positions/

Lugenpresse…Testing the Waters

At a Trump campaign rally in Ohio two of the Trump supporters called out to the journalist filming that rally that he was “lugenpresse”.  A term used by the Nazis to condemn any newspaper or journalist that did not toe the party line . Especially newspapers owned by Jews. The epithet aimed at any newspaper that criticized the Nazi Party. Or failed to bow down to the Fuhrer. “Lying press”.

On Sunday Kellyanne Conway did her weekly news “alternative fact” show, this time in an interview with Chris Wallace.  While not using the term, she echoed the sentiments of the “lugenpresse” when she wondered aloud why many members of the press had not been fired.  Why? For their coverage of Donald Trump.

She wondered why these members of the press were not dismissed by their bosses. Why they continued to appear on talk shows and give their opinions. Why are they not being silenced?

One of the first things the Nazis did when they gained control of Germany was to intimidate and suppress the free press. I say “gained control” because the Nazis never won the popular vote in a free election. They were always a minority party. Hitler was able to get only 32% of the vote for president in the last free election in Germany, with massive support from the rural  areas.

Once the Nazis did gain power they were quick to use it to suppress any opposition. Key to that was the free press. Communist newspapers. Jewish-owned newspapers. Independent newspapers were quickly brought under the control of the new regime. By intimidation.

The “lugenpresse” were any newspapers or journalists who dared contradict the Nazi facts. The Nazi “alternative facts”. Control of the media was seen as crucial to ultimate control of the nation.The opposition, no  matter how slight, must be silenced. Real news must not be reported. Facts must not be reported. An “alternative ” reality must be established with Goebbels deciding what is acceptable. The idea that the press must be the mouthpiece of the government  was the goal. And , for the most part, it was.

Kellyanne Conway and Steve Bannon are testing the waters. Attacking the press. Calling for the removal of those who dare criticize. Calling for a ban on people of the Muslim faith based on an idea that Muslims are all terrorists and all alike. Mr Trump calling into question the actual photographic evidence of the crowd size at his inauguration.  An attempt to bully the leader of Mexico into paying for a wall that Trump wants to build.  The first “press conference” with Sean Spicer, Mr Trump’s spokesman, was an attack on the press. And the attack ended with Spicer walking off refusing to answer questions. The message was clear. We will control the press. We cannot allow any contradictions or criticisms.

An all out attack on the facts, evidence and common sense. An “alternative” reality compete with “alternative  facts”

They are testing the waters to see how far they can go. Can they bully the press into silence? Can they bully our neighbor into compliance? Can they bully the American people into subservience? Can they bully the GOP controlled Congress into silence?

I think not. (Well, maybe they CAN bully Congress). The USA in 2017 is not Germany in 1933. The US citizens in 2017 are not going to sit back while Muslims are treated harshly and Mexicans are stereotyped and the free press is under attack. And the press is not going to roll over to an alternative reality.

The Trump folks are testing the waters to see how far they can go. Those waters will get hot very quickly.

(Note: The most thorough set of books on the Nazi rise to power is the trilogy by Richard J Evans. The Coming of the Third Reich, The Third Reich in Power and The Third Reich at War)

“Doing The Mitch”

The GOP Senate, lead (?) by Mitch McConnell, has announced that they are refusing to consider any Supreme Court nominee put forth by President Obama. Even though the Constitution does require the Senate to “advise and consent” on judicial  appointments, they have decided that they will refuse to abide by this Constitutional requirement. They won’t even listen to Mr. Obama on the matter.

Why? Because President Obama has only one year left in his four year term of office. And in their minds that means that he should relinquish his Constitutional power. NOW! And relax .

At first I thought this was odd. But since the McConnell announcement I have had many experiences which have convinced me that his philosophy may be the norm. In fact, across America millions have now embraced  McConnell . It even has a name. “Doing the Mitch”.

Some examples:

I called 911 because a burglar was breaking into my house. The operator informed me that she was retiring in 7 months. She said she was not going to put my call though because she was “Doing the Mitch”. Why bother? With only a few months left to work?

So, I called back and finally got a 911 operator who took my call. (By now a truck had backed up to my door and a gang of burglars were loading up my furniture).

Finally a police car arrived and Officer Blarney got out. I was relieved. I pointed out the burglars ripping me off. He had a faraway look in his eyes. And rolled them. I begged for help.

“Sorry, sir”,  he said. “I am due to retire in 10 months. In the old days I might have done something,  but no longer.  I am taking my cue from the US Constitution. I am “Doing the Mitch”.  You’ll have to call the department and ask for some rookie to come out.”

Since the truck with all my worldly belongings was starting to pull away I took matters into my own hands. I dragged one of the burglars from the truck, but was then pummeled into a stupor by the other two. As I lie on the cold hard ground I managed to find my phone and speed dialed the local hospital (don’t ask why the local hospital is on speed dial). Thank god a young voice answered.

The ambulance arrived in record time, about 30 minutes later. To my horror the EMT had graying hair and a lot of wrinkles.As he looked at me lying on the ground I could feel his irritation.

“Look”, he explained. “I would like to help you, but the fact is that I am retiring in 9 months. I really don’t see the point in working any longer. The end of my term is almost up. It doesn’t seem fair to me to force me to do my job. I am “Doing the Mitch”.

Well, I finally crawled into the hospital and was given medical assistance. Sort of . Unfortunately for me I needed a couple bones reset. The good news was that the MD who saw me was new on the job. Great. The bad news was that the anesthesiologist was near retirement. “Doing the Mitch”. Ouch. That hurt.

So, there we have it. A nation of Constitutional scholars dedicated to “Doing the Mitch”. As I was recuperating in the hospital bed a nice old lady came in with a cake that someone had sent to me as a gift. At first I was a bit worried. So I asked her, “Are you near retirement?”.

“No”, she responded sweetly. “I have a year and three months left delivering cakes for the Kim Davis Kentucky Bakery”.

“Great, I’ll take the that cake” I blurted.

“Not so fast, dearie”, she glared. “Are you gay?”

 

 

The New Old GOP

Just for fun I decided to check out the NY Times archives to see what was happening on the day I was born . The archives, called the “Times Machine” is supposed to have every newspaper ever published by the Times. Since I have a digital subscription to the NYT , I get it for free. Not sure if it is available to all.

I found the paper from my date of birth in 1950 and perused the stories. The USA had just recognized the Bao Dai government of Viet Nam while the Soviet Union was recognizing Ho Chi Minh. I guess we know how that played out.

J. Edgar Hoover, that good old cross dressing head of the FBI was asking Congress more more money for more agents to fight the 54,000 “card carrying” communists and millions of “fellow travelers”. He was received with open arms. We know how that played out.

Labor disputes in the coal industry. A strike on hold in the telephone industry.  (Remember when you simply had a black phone and didn’t need a law or economics degree to figure out the contracts?). The courts ruled that the NY City transit authority would  have to give back pay to workers, upon which the transit authority said they would have to raise fares.

Stuck deep in the paper, on page 18, above the half page Ballantine beer ad and next to the new Magnavox 16″ TV offer (a whopping $299.50 , a heck of a lot of money in those days when the average family income was $3,300) was an article titled:

RETREAT ON RIGHTS CHARGED TO GOP, Democratic Congress Leaders Assail 1950 Statement of Party Principles.

To summarize, the article told how the Dems had forced a civil rights agenda into their platform over the opposition of the Dixiecrats. (In a few years it would be the Southern Dems who would walk out of the Democratic party and form their own Dixiecrat Party and then subsequently join the GOP years later). This article related how the GOP, along with the southern Dems, were blocking a vote on  the Fair Employment Practices Commission (FEPC). This commission had been created by Executive Order 8802 by FDR and and supported by Truman.It simply stated that there can be no  discrimination in hiring in the defense industry or government based on race, color, creed or national origin. This order was expanded by Truman to include the military by Executive Order 9981.

In combination with the southern Dems the GOP in the Senate was allowing a filibuster so the law could never come up for a vote. They refused to support the north Dems in invoking cloture and shutting down the southern filibuster. Some suggested the GOP represented “liberty against socialism” although a number of northern GOPers supported civil rights  and were not happy about the position of the leadership. After all, the GOP platform SUPPORTED civil rights.

What stuck me the most, however , about this article on the day I was born were the words of Minnesota Senator Hubert H. Humphrey. He stated that the Republican position was a retreat from their own party platform which supported civil  rights.

The article further states:

“The Senator declared that the Republican statement used “the kind of language that the Dixiecrats would have accepted for the 1948 Democratic plank”

“This may be the FIRST STEP in the LEGAL LOVE-MAKING between Senate Republicans and southern Democrats on the civil rights issue”, he added. “They have engaged in illicit love, as indicated in voting, for  about a year-and-a quarter”. (Capitals mine)

So, the attempt to make fair labor practices the  permanent law of the land failed in 1950 due to the combined efforts of Dixiecrats and the GOP leadership.

Perhaps the “new” GOP of is not so “new” after all. Was this the “first step” in moving the GOP and southern Dems closer together? The basis for the “Southern Strategy” of Nixon? The beginning of the conscious attempt by the GOP to attract racists to the party rather than join in the fight against racism? Was Humphrey correct in his analysis?

To review. Two Democratic presidents use executive orders to expand rights for certain categories of Americans. The GOP fights them every step of the way and refuses to even consider legislation granting rights. Some GOPers claim it is a battle between “Liberty versus socialism”.

Sound familiar?

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_8802

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9981

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Employment_Practice_Committee

http://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1950/02/08/issue.html

Contestant #2: Dr. Rand Paul’s Prescription: Take A Vague and See Me in the Morning

(This is the second in a series of biased reports about the potential candidates for the presidency. As these giants among men proclaim their desires to be the most powerful human being on the planet I will attempt to file a short report on each).

Rand Paul, son of former Texas congressman Ron Paul, announced today that he was willing to serve as president of the US. A major surprise to all Buddhist monks still alive in Tibet. To anyone else, not so much.

As with all candidates the best thing to do is to start with their own websites. On his website Dr. Paul stresses the fact that he is a doctor. A doctor of ophthalmology and that he does good works. That is very noble. And humbling. But for some reason in his bio he fails to mention his board certification. Dr Paul was certified once to practice his “doctoring” by the ABO (American Board of Ophthalmology). But something happened. And he let that certification lapse. So, he was then certified by the NBO (National Board of Ophthalmology), a group NOT recognized by the (ABMS) American Board of Medical Specialties, the national group that certifies the legitimacy of boards. Why not? It was just a board made up by some doctors. UH. Actually, Rand Paul was the president of the group that certified Rand Paul, with Kelly Ashby Paul (Rand’s wife) as vice-president of the group and Rand Paul’s father-in-law as secretary. But, he WAS certified to practice, at least by his kinfolk. (For some reason that NBO was dissolved in 2011).

So, what would a Rand Paul Presidency look like?

Rand Paul’s’ website (www.randpaul.com) has about 16 issues. I will focus on only 4. You can read the rest. Good luck.

Sanctity of Life. Rand believes in the sanctity of life. Well. That is good news! He defines “life” as existing at conception. He says that American women have murdered over 50,000,000 CHILDREN since Roe v Wade. (Did I forget to mention that he is doctor, yet he thinks an embryo is a child?). He opposes all abortions. Period. He thinks states should be able to make any laws they want in this regard . So, I guess you might say that Rand is not a real fan of the US Constitution. A Dr. Rand Paul presidency would not enforce Roe v Wade. I think. He is vague on that point.

Health Care. Dr. Paul wants to repeal Obamcare. And replace it with…. what we had before Obamacare…only better. A market driven system. He knows that a market driven system works because…uh…it left 40,000,000 Americans (real people this time, not embryos) without health insurance. He is rather vague on details. But a Dr. Rand Paul presidency would put the patient first, by eliminating the ACA.

Taxes. President Dr Paul hates taxes. He will institute a 17% tax rate for all businesses and people. His plan is called the EZ Plan. It is EZ to understand because he has no other details. It is EZ Vague. Would current tax breaks for corporations remain? Would breaks for agribusiness remain? Personal deductions? Long on vague, short on details. But, the plan does call for the elimination of Social Security taxes for the middle and lower classes (Not sure where the income levels fall on middle class. That part is…uh…vague). So, no more payments would be going into Social Security from younger workers. So, depending on his exemption plan, a Dr Rand Paul presidency would see a significant decrease in taxes for the super rich. Not so much for the poor.

Which leads us to….
Social Security.
Dr President Leader Rand Paul has a plan for Social Security.

He wants to fix Social Security by increasing the retirement age and means testing. OK. I’ll bite the means testing. I agree that millionaires like John McCain should not be dipping into the pot. Postponing retirement? Doesn’t that just prevent younger workers from getting started? This would apply only to younger workers, so us old fogeys would still get our benefits. …But…wait…In Dr President Excellency Paul’s TAXES plan (see above) he called for eliminating billions of dollars in payments to Social Security. How does that work? Billions less coming in but more going out? Does Mr Dr His Holiness Paul know how Social Security even works? Does he know that payments made today go to today’s retirees? By what magic will SS take in billions less and pay out more? THIS is how he “fixes” Social Security? With magic?

Dr Paul’s lack of real solutions comes through loud and clear. He attacks the “Washington Insiders”, of which he is a part, but offers no real alternatives. Lots of “plans” and ideas and slogans.

All in all, Dr Mr Rand seems to have the same “prescription” for America as other GOPers. Not all that different. Gives homage to the religious right. Wants freedom from paying taxes but not freedom for women to control their own bodies. Has magical thinking when it comes to Social Security financing. A man who will keep it vague in hopes of not exposing the shallowness of his thought processes. Or, who has a real agenda he refuses to share.

Once, in order to be “certified” to practice medicine Rand Paul simply created his own certification board. I suspect the only way the doctor will ever be POTUS is if he “creates” his own country. Then his wife could be vice president again.

Gaydar Sale… Finally A way to Know For Sure

Hi. This is Ron Popeil for Ronco. The makers of the Ronco Potato Peeler and Car Sponge. Here to help you once again with a household problem. Now that Indiana has become the 21st state to make Gay hate legal there is a real need for discovering who really is gay. Can you tell by the way they walk? Sometimes. Can you tell by the way they talk ? Maybe. But in today’s world so many gays look and talk and act like normal people…how can you REALLY know.

If your restaurant does not want to serve gays, how can you be sure that burly muscle man is not a secret gay?? He may not be lisping, but is he eyeing your manhood from behind those bifocals? And how can you know if that “birthday cake” you are baking for that 5 year old might be going to house where her lesbian aunt might show up and have a slice ? Well, you don’t know. And you didn’t bake that cake for gay taste buds to enjoy !
Gone are the days in Germany where gays were forced too wear pink triangles. And Jews had to wear the Star of David. Life was simpler then. The good old days.
But Ronco solves your gay problems. With the new Ronco Gaydar. The Gaydar exposes gays, even those not out of the closet. For only $ 19.95 (plus a small shipping and handling fee) Gaydar takes the worry out of bigotry. Never again have a doubt about that customer. Or strange “Uncle John”. Gaydar takes the worry out of homo identification. Be sure too bring it to “Meet the Teacher Night” at school.

How does Gaydar work? Sorry, I can’t reveal the impressive technology. But here’s all you need to do. Point your Gaydar pistol (Yes, it is shaped like a German Lugar so no one will even know it is a Gaydar) at any person and pull the trigger. Gaydar shoots out a specially developed “gay-detecting formula” that registers on your Gay detector. Just check the Rainbow Detector. The farther to the left, the gayer the guy…or gal. Easy to use. Even a child cn use it. Let the little ones start early!

But does Gaydar really work? Some very famous people seem to think so.

Michelle Bachmann says “WOW, what a surprise. Just for fun I pointed the Gaydar at my hubby. WHOA. I sure never would have guessed.”
Adolf Eichmann the third (grandson of Adolf Eichmann) says “” Grandpa would have loved this . It would have made is life’s work so much easier. He would have killed for a machine like this”
Ted Cruz says” I took it to the Senate. Just as I figured on the liberal side of the aisle. A perfect score. Tested everyone but Lindsey Graham. He disappeared.”
Ben Carson: “As a highly educated doctor I can tell you that this device really works. I went inside the State Penitentiary during visiting hours and WHAMMO. This baby went off like fireworks on the 4th of July. Even some of the guards were “infected.”

Don’t wait. Don’t let “those people” into your public accommodation. Only $19.95 (plus shipping and handling) and you and your family can be gay-proofed forever.

But there’s MORE. Act now and Ronco will throw in JEWDAR absolutely free. Works just like Gaydar but for Jews. Instead of a Rainbow dial the Jewdar has a Star of David that lights up like a Hanukkah candle any time a Jew is detected. Tested at the Wailing Wall. It WORKS! I know. You are thinking. JEWS. Aren’t they all lawyers? Won’t they sue me? NO. Remember, the religious freedom laws do not demand that you justify your bigotry by belonging to any organized religion. You can just be a stand up, stand alone bigot and the law protects you. The law says you don’t even have to practice any religion at all !

That’s right. Gaydar and Jewdar BOTH for only $ 19.95. But wait. There’s more ! Order now and you will get Gaydar, Junior. Just for kids. This handy little Gaydar miniature gun will allow your child to tell which of his classmates has gay tendencies. A lot of power in a tiny package. Start your loved one early in detecting deviants. Feel secure that none of “those kinds” of kids are accidentally invited to junior’s birthday party.

That’s Gaydar, Jewdar and Gaydar,Junior. All for only $ 19.95. But wait, there’s MORE. Yes, the first 100 callers will also get ObamaDar.

Is that guy REALLY white or is he “passing”? Is that a good tan she worked on or was her grandmother’s mother a darky ? Not sure whether or not your child’s classmate is a “mix” of races, part Negro? ObamaDar will give you the answer. Comes with an easy to read Black or White dial. No shades of gray on this dial ! Act now. Call 1800-BIGOTRY.

Only available by phone or at a Bigots-R-US near you. Gaydar. Don’t take a shower in a public place without it!

Contestant #1: President Ted Cruz and Liberty

(This is the first in a series of articles about the contestants for the presidency in 2016. As they throw their hats (or toupees) in the ring I will be attempting to figure out what kind of president each would be. Keep in mind, of course, that many of these candidates are actually auditioning for jobs on Fox News and are not really serious about the presidency).

Ted Cruz announced that he is, by the grace of god, going to become president of the USA. And the key word in Cruz’s philosophy has been LIBERTY.

He wants liberty for himself. Liberty for those who follow his fundamentalist religious beliefs. It is all about freedom and god.

For starters, he made his announcement at Liberty University in Virginia. What could be more appropriate than to announce a Liberty campaign at a Liberty University? And the entire 10,000 member student body showed up to hear him. Well, actually they were forced to see him. You see, at Liberty University students are not free not to attend campaign speeches. Any student who failed to show up was going to be fined $10 and given official reprimands (demerits?) on their record. I guess you might say that where Liberty University is concerned “Freedom Isn’t Free” !

Cruz’s web site (www.tedcruz.org) has four major areas. First, he supports the US Constitution. That is certainly commendable. Second, he supports a strong America. So far he has my vote. He believes that life and families are good things. And finally he wants people to have jobs. With those ideas he should win by a landslide!

The devil, always, is in the details. So, based on his actions and the details of his website these are the kinds of things President Cruz would be in favor of.

1. Eliminate the ACA. And replace it with nothing at the federal level. While he opposes the ACA his only response to the chaos that would cause is to make all health care insurance the responsibility of the individual states. The bill he sponsors (you can find it on his Senate website) provides no guarantees for consumers. None. It is, in fact, nothing more than a repeal the ACA along with some vague idea of maybe giving people some vouchers. Under a Cruz presidency we go back to having massive numbers of uninsured. With no consumer protection.
2. Stop gay marriage rights. Cruz, the defender of liberty, would take away the freedom of a significant number of Americans to marry. Because it offends some people. He is very clear that only states have the right to decide who can marry. Based on his view of liberty a state could institute laws preventing blacks and whites from marrying. Or Jews from marrying non-Jews. It all depends on what the current state government decides. Liberty to take away liberty.
3. End the constitutional right to an abortion. A woman would no longer have the right, (guaranteed under the Constitution) to have a medical procedure if the state was opposed to it. Again, the king of liberty would take way the liberty of others. This man devoted to the Constitution would allow individual states to void decisions of the Supreme Court. President Cruz, not the SCOTUS, would decide what the Constitution says. Liberty.
4. Allow anyone to defy any law if that person had a “religious” objection to the law. Once again, while Cruz talks the talk of supporting the Constitution, he walks the walk of destroying the Constitution. Liberty.If I don’t like Jews I don’t have to serve them in my restaurant. If I don’t think homosexuals deserve to eat I can refuse to sell them food in my grocery store. Of course, the SCOTUS long ago established the Constitutional principle that if you are a commercial enterprise you must be open to all citizens. Not Ted. Not Mr Constitution.
5. Finally. What if President Cruz does not get his way? TANTRUM TIME! As a Senator he has abused his power to try to shut down the government because the rest of the Senate would not go along with is ideas. What would a President Cruz do? Would he simply abolish Congress? After all, he does have a pipeline (pun intended) to god.

A president Cruz, the defender of “liberty” would take away liberty from all except a fundamentalist few. He would throw folks off of health care, tell state governments that they can decide who can marry (marriage is not a federal right), tell pregnant women that big government will control their health care decisions, and allow people to use their personal beliefs to avoid following the law in any area they deemed “religious”.

Orwell would be smiling.

Or, as an American hero once said, “Give me liberty or give me Cruz.”

Hillary’s Hidden Emails

Much has been made of Hillary Clinton’s emails. I, myself , cannot think of a single reason why the Secretary of State would keep these private. It’s not like she ever communicates on any sensitive matters with foreign governments. Or might have personal thoughts.
Using my expertise in computer hacking I was able to locate and save a handful of Secretary Clinton’s deleted emails. I don’t know what the GOP expected to find, but WOW, these are radioactive! Remember, you read them here first, before they made it to the Drudge Report or Fox News!

Fr: HilClin to: Bubba
Bill. I am going to be late for dinner again. Please don’t order another take out from Gary’s Greaseburger. You know it makes you fart all night. On second thought, just pull out the sleep sofa. I almost forgot, some girl named Monica called again.

Fr: HilClin to: Barack1
Mr Prez. I ordered your good friend , the ambassador , to be killed by the Muslim Brotherhood in Benghazi as you requested. I still don’t see your end game in all this. Anyway, I am sure the dopes in the GOP will never figure out that I am a secret Muslim myself. ALLAH AKBAR

fr: HilClin to: ChelseaGirl
Be honest. Did that dress make me look fat? Too much cleavage? Not enough? Because Michelle1 was looking at me like “What’s that all about”. Sometimes I hate that b…. b….. Also, no, I cannot babysit next week. I am going to be busy deleting emails. LOL

Fr: HilClin to: StarrLoser
Hiya Ken. Just another email to RUB IT IN. You never could pin that Vince Foster caper on me, could you? And you KNOW I procured whores for Bubba all the time but you couldn’t prove that either. And Whitewater? LOSER ! NYA NYA

Fr: HilClin to: ISIS
Keep up the good work, fellas. I hate America just like you do. Off with their heads. ( I’d love to send you Bonehead Boehner LOL just kidding… he is the best thing I have going for me)

Fr: HilClin to: Sideshow Sarah
You go girlfriend. Keep saying those stupid things to make people think the entire GOP is a bunch of morons. So glad JohnMcOLD picked you. See you on the next moose hunt. Go girl! BFF

Fr: HilClin to: Wall Street
Open those wallets boys, I’m a coming soon. You KNOW no one can beat me. So you better join me. Get in on the ground floor !

Fr: HilClin to: ElizaWarren
Don’t even think about it. Really. Don’t think about it. I leave you with two words: Vince Foster. Don’t even think about it.

Fr: HilClin to: Email Server
When I delete these emails I should back up FIRST, right?

The cat is out of the bag. The jig is up. The GOP finally has the evidence they need to get Hillary.
Next step: Representative Gowdy is planning to subpoena Malia’s Iphone. Hey, you never know!

The Job Creators Strike Again

The 114th Congress, controlled by the GOP , has now voted to approve the XL Pipeline. The Senate will probably follow suit. It is not clear if this vote actually means anything, since the State Department has not yet completed it’s required study of the pipeline. And the POTUS cannot act to approve it until the State Department makes it’s recommendations. And it is quite possible that President Obama would approve the pipeline anyway, if the State Department so recommends.

But facts and the law will not stand in the way of the Job Creators. The GOP Job Creators. Their dedication to creating jobs has no bounds. The policies of Reagan’s Supply-Side Economics (called “VooDoo Economic”s by former POTUS GHW Bush) have created millions of jobs since the 1980s. That is the good news.

The bad news is that those jobs were created overseas. China. Vietnam. Mexico. Or in states well below poverty level wages. Alabama. Georgia. Tennessee. Good for CEOs and the upper 1 %. Not such a great deal for the middle class or workers. Not such a great deal for taxpayers since so many full-time employees are also on Food Stamps. We may pause at this point to recall that these Job Creators fought very hard to prevent the US from helping the auto industry keep the jobs already created. Tens of thousands of jobs. Good paying jobs with no one on Food Stamps. Saved by the bail outs and TARP. Job Creators hated them. Predicted the end of freedom in America if we saved these jobs. (That catastrophe was somehow averted.)

So the XL Pipeline is not a new triumph for the Job Creators. They have created short term low wage jobs before. For the honor of piping the filthiest oil on the planet across the water tables of the plains states the US will be rewarded with thousands of jobs. Over 1,000 miles of 36 inch pipe. Carrying unprocessed, unrefined thick crude oil . Across water resources. Across farmland and grazing land. What could go wrong?

The pipeline will create 3,000 to 5,000 jobs. Good jobs. Unless they are given to non-unionized, low wage immigrant labor. And these jobs will last a long time. Well. Two years. Then they end. Then the housing built for the temporary workers lies vacant. The boom in the small towns goes bust. But there are more jobs. Permanent ones. Jobs that are here to stay.

The best estimate of the long term permanent jobs servicing the pipeline is 35. And 15 more part time jobs, as well. 50 jobs. The economic impact of these 50 jobs is hard to gauge. The GOP Job Creators have been beating their chests and thumping their …well…their whatevers, for 50 permanent jobs. For 6 years they have battled to get these 50 jobs.

While infrastructure rots and schools crumble, the Job Creators are narrowly focused on 50 jobs for their oil company donors. Not thousands of police officers to make cities safer. Not thousands of teachers to help our students. Not firefighters. Not computer technicians or scientists. Not increased training for new doctors and nurses. Nope.

The Job Creators have spent 6 years whining about 50 jobs. That’s about 9 jobs per year. Fewer than one per month.

A great start. At this rate the Job Creators will have the US economy booming along with full employment by the time the sun burns the Earth to a crisp in 1.1 billion years. But, hey. You gotta start somewhere.

80 is the New 36

I have nothing against old people. Someday I may be old, after all I will be turning 65 soon. So don’t let this essay keep you awake at night. Or during the day.  Depends .(Double entendre intended).

I was cruising the demographic data on the US and discovered that the median age of our citizenry is about 36 years. So approximately half the population is older than 36 and half is younger than 36. So, most of the population will be living well into the 2nd half of the 21st century. Many will be living into the 22nd century. The decisions we make today will have  along term impact on their quality of life. Hold that thought.

The new Congress has just appointed chairmen and chairwomen for the next session. The Senate committee chairs will determine the course of politics over the next two years. Why ? Because,  unlike the rest of America, the Senate is not a democracy. The committee chairs decide which topics to investigate,  which bills get discussed and which ideas go onward for a vote. In other words, they decide what the laws will be. They will decide what the laws will be and what the future looks like for those millions of Americans who will be living in the end of the 21st and start of the 22nd centuries. Hold that thought,  too.

Let’s take a look at these new committee chairs. The men and women,( oops, woman) with a vision of the future. Men and woman like you and I, who have been molded by their life experiences. Brought up in a specific time and place. Influenced by the technology they used and the ideas they were exposed to during their formative years. People who have grown up in a different world than we see today…and a vastly different world than we will see in the future. Here they are.

The list of committees followed by the chairman and his  or her age in 2 years time, when their chairmanship may or may not expire.

Commerce, Science and Transportation, John Thune, 55

Energy and Natural Resources, Lisa Murkowski,  59

Homeland Security, Ron Johnson, 61

Foreign Relations, Bob Corker, 64

Budget, Mike Enzi, 72

Veteran’s Affairs, John Isakson, 72

Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, Lamar Alexander, 76

Appropriations, Thad Cochran, 79

Armed Services, John McCain, 80

Agriculture, Pat Roberts, 80

Environment and Public Works,  James Inhofe, 81

Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Richard Shelby, 82

Finance, Orrin Hatch, 82

Judiciary, Charles Grassley, 83

Remember those thoughts I told you to hold? Some of these guys were born during the Great Depression. (No, not the Bush Great Depression, the Hoover Great Depression). Most were being rocked in their cradles before a guy named Hitler rocked Poland with the blitzkrieg. More than half were born during or before the US entrance into WW2. 6 of these 13 chair people will be 80 or older in two years. They should not even be driving a car, much less leading a lawmaking body. At least 2 knew the founding fathers personally .(OK, maybe that last one stretches the facts a little).

As I said, I have nothing against old age. And nothing against these particular fogeys. In fact, if I could get these guys into a pickup basketball game I would kick some Senate butt, no doubt. But whether Dem or GOP, isn’t it a bit disturbing to think that these octogenarians and septuagenarians hold such power over the future? Does anyone really think they are capable of devising strategies to develop sensible, realistic programs that meet the needs of the future?

The median age of the US population is 36. The leadership of the Senate is now in the hands of 80-somethings. On the negative side, they are completely out of touch with modern society and the future. On the bright side, they may never be able to find the committee rooms