The UN-Debate

It was the first debate I have watched from start to finish in many years.  I felt I had to, so I did.  That was one-and-a-half hours of my life that I can never get back.  By the end, I felt shaky and nauseous, but more than anything I felt disgusted by some 40% of this nation who could actually watch that clown and still think he should be chosen to run this country.

Moderator Chris Wallace, to his credit, attempted to shut Donald Trump’s mouth more than a few times, but it proved to be impossible.  Donald Trump interrupted not only his challenger, Joe Biden, but also Chris Wallace just about every time one of them attempted to speak. So wrapped up in himself was Trump that I actually got the feeling Joe Biden and Chris Wallace could have left and Trump would have continued his blah-blah-blah-ing.  He reminded me of a battery-operated toy on steroids, only not nearly as cute as the Energizer Bunny.

If the other two debates actually happen, I think provisions should be made to enable the moderator to simply switch off Trump’s microphone when it isn’t his turn to speak.  Conversely, they could hire large men with rolls of duct tape to place across his mouth every time he opens it.  Frankly, I don’t see anything to be gained by having any additional debates, for nothing … NOTHING was accomplished with this one.  It was not a debate, but a show … a show put on by Trump for the benefit of his rabid base who, no doubt, thought he did great.

I will spare you a blow-by-blow reporting of the debate, but if you’d like a written transcript, you can find one here  .  I will, however, give you a few of the more … salient moments.

  • … 🤔
  • …… 🤔
  • …….. 🤔

Well, okay then … I guess there were no ‘salient’ moments.  There were a couple of good lines, though, the best one being at the 18:18 mark when, after yet another of Trump’s juvenile repeated interruptions, Joe Biden said, “Will you shut up, man?”  The moment immediately lit up my Twitter feed and continues to be the source of humour and kudos today.  As several have noted, he voiced what we were all saying here at home!shut-up

Toward the end of the debate, Trump did what he had been saying he planned to do, attacking Joe Biden’s son.  Personally, I think that no man with a shred of human decency would attack another man’s family for political gain.  Period.  But, we’re talking about Trump, so it was not unexpected.  But, in my view it backfired on Trump, ‘bigly’.  Here was Biden’s very heartfelt response …

“And speaking of my son, the way you talk about the military, the way you talk about them being losers and being and just being suckers. My son was in Iraq. He spent a year there. He got the Brown Star. He got the Conspicuous Service Medal. He was not a loser. He was a Patriot and the people left behind there were heroes.”

And a minute later, when Trump kept rambling …

“My son like a lot of people at home had a drug problem. He’s overtaking it. He’s fixed it. He’s worked on it. And I’m proud of him, I’m proud of my son.”

The Hunter Biden conspiracy theory, for the record, has been investigated and debunked enough times that it should have been put to bed years ago, but Trump seems not to have gotten that memo.

The best part of the entire debate was at the end when Joe Biden looked straight into the camera, looked us right in the eye and said …

“Show up and vote. You will determine the outcome of this election. Vote, vote, vote. If you’re able to vote early in your state, vote early. If you’re able to vote in person, vote in person. Vote whatever way is the best way for you, because you will… He cannot stop you from being able to determine the outcome of this election. And in terms of whether or not… When the votes are counted and they’re all counted, that will be accepted. If I win, that will be accepted. If I lose, that’ll be accepted.”

As a tool for learning more about the candidates and their platforms, the debate was worthless … a waste of time.  As a means of learning something about the candidates’ personalities … it only reinforced what we already knew:  Donald J. Trump is a rude & crude asshole and Joe Biden is a man of conscience, intellect, and compassion.  I have no doubt that if the other two debates, scheduled for October 15th and October 22nd proceed as planned, they will also be naught but a circus act for the benefit of energizing Trump’s base.  Personally, I will not waste my time watching another, though I may consider watching the vice-presidential debate between Mike Pence and Kamala Harris next week.

Deflect And Deny — The Republican Way!

I’ve recently challenged myself to make a foray into ‘enemy territory’ … conservative news venues.  I’ve only begun, so I don’t have much yet, but you will be seeing a post or two this week about my findings.  But this morning, as I was meandering about on Fox News’ site, I came across a short interview between Fox News host Chris Wallace and Trump spokeswoman, Mercedes Schlapp.

Now, we all know that if you are asked a tough question that you really don’t want to answer, your best bet is to either, a) change the subject, or b) look at your watch and say, “Oh my!  Look at the time … I’m sorry, but I’m late for an appointment with my … chiropractor!”  Essentially, Ms. Schlapp chose option ‘a’ when Chris Wallace asked her to explain why the Saturday night rally in Tulsa logged a ‘crowd’ of just under 6,200 people versus the one million who reportedly requested tickets.

Wallace: “We all saw the pictures last night. The arena was no more than two-thirds full. And the outdoor rally was canceled because there was no overflow crowd. What happened?”

Schlapp: “The key here is to understand there were factors involved, they were concerned about the protesters who were coming in.”

Wallace: “He talks about how he can fill an arena. And he didn’t fill an arena last night. You guys were so far off that you had planned an outdoor rally and there wasn’t an overflow crowd.  Protesters did not stop people from coming to that rally. The fact is, people did not show up.”

Then Schlapp went of on a tangent, talking over Chris Wallace, bringing Joe Biden up repeatedly.

Schlapp: “Joe Biden has been a failed politician that has done nothing but support failed institutions. This is in contrast with President Trump who has a strong record and is rebuilding this economy.”

This is just a snippet from the interview.  I found the video clip in several places, but when I tried to play it, I got this message:

video-unavailable

I finally found one that works … at least it works for now, and hopefully you will be able to watch it.  Note how often Schlapp deflects or goes off topic, and watch her faux smile slip every now and then …

While I don’t want to waste time focusing on how many people did or didn’t show up at Trump’s rally, the bigger point here is that, as usual, Trump and his spokespeople are deflecting and lying.  People didn’t show up at the rally for a number of reasons … protestors were not one of those reasons.  According to Tulsa police, only one protestor was arrested, though I question that, for I read of one, and blogging friend Suze tells me that her granddaughter was also arrested.  Suze’s granddaughter was doing nothing wrong, actually had a ticket for the rally, but apparently somebody took offense at her Black Lives Matter t-shirt.

I was pleased to see Chris Wallace pursue the matter … he is, after all, on the Fox payroll!  As for Mercedes Schlapp … the answer she should have given is that Trump and his campaign made a mistake in starting to hold rallies while the coronavirus is still raging throughout the nation.  That was the answer … the only right answer.

I shall continue my foray into conservative sites and report my findings later!  This project may require a jumbo bottle of ibuprofen and a case of wine!

A few quotes from Conservatives need wider coverage

Some days it is all too easy to become discouraged, listening to the endless twitterstorm, hearing the baseless accusations, wondering if this circus will every end. We look at the republicans defending Trump and wonder where they left their integrity. But, the winds are beginning to shift in the republican camp, and some are finding that there is no longer any defense for some of Trump’s words and actions. Our friend Keith has highlighted some of those, and I find a glimmer of hope in it. Thank you, Keith, for the post and permission (implied) to re-blog!

musingsofanoldfart

As an independent voter, having been a member of both parties, I seek to find the truth and facts beneath the politics. The tribal nature requires its bellringers to denounce any criticism or facts that get in the way of their winning. The US president does this frequently with his claims of fake news when he does not like what is being said.

What concerns me is we have a president who has a modus operandi of heretofore questionable and dubious behavior to further his personal cause. Yet, the claims of fake news heightened by the narrative it is Democrats that are behind this. What I have observed is an increasing number of conservative voices who are exhibiting greater courage to speak out against actions and words of this president.

Here are a few that resonate with me:

Elsa Alcala,a former Texas judge, decided to leave the Republican party…

View original post 646 more words

She … She Said WHAT???

Ms. Sarah Huckabee Sanders sold whatever soul or conscience she once may have had long ago, perhaps on May 5, 2017 when she held her first White House press briefing, standing in for then-Press Secretary Sean Spicer.  Mr. Spicer ultimately had the good sense to realize that he would not be able to sleep at nights if he continued telling the outrageous lies demanded by Trump, for he was possessed of a conscience.

Sarah-cartoon-2I largely ignore Ms. Sanders, for she is naught but a mouthpiece, says what she is told to say, and I cannot stand to look at her facial contortions nor hear her whiny voice.  However, this past weekend she was on a tear, and dear friend Ellen fed me just enough tidbits to pique my curiosity, so I had to go see for myself.  Sigh.  Where is that blood pressure medicine???

How doth she offend me?  Let me count the ways …

During an interview with Chris Wallace on Fox ‘News’ Sunday

Sarah-Sanders-Chris-Wallace“I don’t think Congress — particularly not this group of congressmen and women — are smart enough to look through the thousands of pages that I would assume that President Trump’s taxes will be.  My guess is that most of them don’t do their own taxes, and I certainly don’t trust them to look through the decades of success that the president has and determine anything.”

Grrrrrr.  Any single member of Congress is more qualified to review those taxes than Ms. Sanders, and we don’t need ‘thousands of pages’.  We’re only asking for six lousy years’ worth!  And Sarah … “success”???  The ‘man’ with more than 5,000 lawsuits in his career?  Think about that one, sweet cheeks.

“[Trump] is a person and a president of law and order. That’s his entire focus since coming in is actually restoring law and order to this country. … The president has asked them to do everything they can and everything they’re allowed to do under the law to stop the massive crisis we have at our southern border. It’s the same thing he says publicly day in and day out.”

Grrrrrrrrrr.  Law and order???  Did she really say ‘law and order’?  Trump believes himself and his minions to be above the law.  He incites violence, defends lawless organizations such as white supremacists and neo-Nazis, and she says he’s about law and order?  There was no crisis at the southern border until Trump fabricated one, then started stealing children from their parents and tossing them into cages, not even bothering to keep track of where they were!  Just last week Trump privately urged acting Secretary of Homeland Security, Kevin McAleenan, to close the border and told him that he would issue a pardon if McAleenan ran into any legal troubles for doing so.  How is this ‘law and order’???Sarah-cartoonOn This Week with George Stephanopoulos …

Regarding Trump’s ignominious, hateful tweet about Representative Ilhan Omar:

“It’s absolutely abhorrent the comments she continues to make and has made and Democrats look the other way. I find what her comments to be absolutely disgraceful and unbefitting of a member of Congress and I think that it’s a good thing that the president is calling her out for those comments, and the big question is why aren’t Democrats doing it as well.”

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.  If you could be bothered, Ms. Sanders, to read the entirety of Representative Omar’s CAIR speech, perhaps you could better understand that the single sentence your boss chose to focus on was taken completely out of context and that there was not a damn thing wrong with what she said!  She did something you never do … she told the truth!  Your boss put her life in danger, with a childish, juvenile act more befitting a 9-year-old than a 72-year-old who happens to be, for better or for worse, the leader of a nation.

Sarah-Sanders-3I’m certain that if I wished to dig deeper, I could find even more, but already I had to take a break from writing this post to de-stress by washing a sink full of dishes … don’t worry, I only broke a couple.  The job of a White House press secretary is to serve as a liaison between the president and the press.  Ms. Sanders is, rather, a puppet … a mouthpiece, who is so pre-programmed that when she is asked a question, the best she can do is condemn the reporter who asked it.  I suppose that if one lacks intelligence, the best defense is a good offense, and Ms. Sanders has that one down pat – she is very offensive.

I Never Run Out Of Snarky Snippets …

snarky-toonI don’t know why it is, but I always seem to have an overload of snark in my head these days.  It’s gotten so bad that when I cut a corner too close the other day and bumped my shoulder, I yelled that whatever idiot built this house must have been a republican!  And when one of the kitties turned over the dish of kibble and it went all over the floor, I gave her a 10-minute lecture about the importance of neatness and told her that if she didn’t mend her ways I would give her to a republican family.  So, it must be time for me to open that release valve and share my angst with you, my friends!


Plagiarism???

It was one week ago today that four tornados ripped through central Alabama, leaving devastation and lost lives in their wake.  Donald Trump, with Melania at his side, and the requisite 2 steps behind, went to Alabama to survey the damage, to bring well-wishes, and to be seen as doing that thing that presidents do.  But one thing he did has the wires buzzing …

He signed bibles.  Now, my issue with this is not religious-based, for you all know that I am not religious.  But the way I see it, authors sign books they have written … their own work.  Painters sign their own paintings.  You do not sign work that isn’t your own, and the bible damn sure isn’t written by a man who cannot even write his own name legibly or speak in complete sentences.  To me, this is a form of plagiarism, pure and simple.

Other presidents including Ronald Reagan and Franklin Roosevelt have also signed bibles, and I don’t condone that either, lest anybody think I’m just picking on Trump.  Oh, and it is said that Melania also signed a few.


Chris Wallace feels rejected …Chris-WallaceI’ve generally considered Chris a solid journalist, a cut above the usual Fox ‘News’ fare, and I’ve wondered why he was at Fox when I thought he would likely be welcomed with open arms by any of the legitimate news networks.  Perhaps Chris is also beginning to wonder what he’s doing at Fox.  As I noted in an earlier post the Democratic National Committee (DNC) decided that Fox News would not host the democratic primary debates.  There are very valid reasons for this decision, notably the almost familial relationship between Fox and Donald Trump.  Wallace, who certainly would have been one of the moderators if Fox hosted the debates, seemed disappointed …

“To be banned, or boycotted, for the 12 debates over the next year, is kind of stunning.”

Well, Chris, it’s like that old saying my grandmother used to use:  If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.  Perhaps Mr. Wallace will soon decide to go to work for a legitimate news outlet.

I’m a bit disappointed in Chris for toeing the party line, because in the past, he has shown himself to be far less a trumpeter than the rest of the clan over at Fox.  He criticed Trump for referring to the press as the “enemy of the people”, and in turn he says Trump “let me know that he doesn’t think I treat him fair”.


Shine on …bill-shineAnd speaking of Fox, one of their former executives, Bill Shines, who joined the Trump administration eight months ago as a “assistant to the president and deputy chief of staff for communications”, whatever the heck that means, has already resigned.  Why?  Not because he’s fed up with Trump and his ways, but because he wants even more … he is planning to work on Trump’s campaign for 2020.  (Why is there even a Trump campaign for 2020?  He needs to be gone long before then!)

Shine’s new title is “senior adviser to the president’s 2020 reelection campaign”.  Actually, his prior and new title both translate into “boot-licker”, so let’s call a spade a bloody shovel, shall we?  In Shine’s own words …

“Serving President Trump and this country has been the most rewarding experience of my entire life. To be a small part of all this President has done for the American people has truly been an honor. I’m looking forward to working on President Trump’s reelection campaign and spending more time with my family.”

Oh please.  Mr. Shine must have had a pathetically deprived life if this was the “most rewarding experience” in it.  If I were his wife, I’d be packing my bags right about now, for obviously he loves Trump more than her or his children.

However, there may be more to it than meets the eye, for rumour has it that there have been several disagreements between Trump and Shine in recent weeks.  Nonetheless, Trump had high praise for Shine …

“Bill Shine has done an outstanding job working for me and the Administration. We will miss him in the White House, but look forward to working together on the 2020 Presidential Campaign, where he will be totally involved. Thank you to Bill and his wonderful family!”

Stay tuned … Shine may either fade into oblivion and write another ‘tell-all’ book about his stint in the administration, or he may end up being Trump’s next campaign manager.trump-staff.png


Don’t hold your breath, Mike …

I see that Michael Cohen is suing the Trump Organization for unpaid legal fees.    What are the odds of him collecting on that?  Nada. Zero. Zilch.  Even if a judge orders restitution, it won’t happen.  Trump is notorious for cheating legitimate creditors out of their money, so why would he be likely to pay the man who has, under oath, called him a liar, a racist, and a cheat?


Another one drops out …

U.S. Senator from Ohio, Sherrod Brown, has dropped out of the running for the 2020 presidential election.  In one sense, I am sorry to hear this, for he is a good man with sound ideas for what a government should and shouldn’t be or do.  I think he would have made a fine president.  However, his odds weren’t good, for he is not well known to most living outside Ohio, and at this point, there are already too many in the running, making the long runup to the primary somewhat of a joke.  While typically I think the more the merrier … give We the People the chance to get to know a wide variety, narrow the field bit by bit, and then settle on one or two of the best.  But these are not ‘typical’ times and if Trump is still eligible to run by next year, we need to have the strongest, most ‘electable’ candidate to unseat the incumbent.  Unfortunately, that is not Sherrod Brown.

While Senator Brown is not in the running, he is still fighting the good fight, as he will hold his senate seat at least until 2025 …

“I will keep calling out Donald Trump and his phony populism.  I will keep fighting for all workers across the country… And I will do everything I can to elect a Democratic president.”


And that is just about enough snarkiness for today, don’t you think?  I’m sure there will be more soon, for I never seem to run out of something to natter about.  My family, both the humans and the furry ones, thank you for giving me a platform to vent, thus relieving them of the burden.

Ahhhhh … What A Fool

The piece I am sharing with you today does not come from The Onion, though you would be forgiven for thinking so.  It is, rather, a tongue-in-cheek look at Donald Trump as per his interview on Fox ‘News’ with Chris Wallace last Sunday by Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank.

This is what happens when a stable genius leads a stupid country

By Dana Milbank, Columnist, November 19 at 7:35 PM

Dana Milbank

President Trump is surrounded by fools.

There’s that fool William H. McRaven, Special Operations commander of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, and the other fools in the U.S. military, who should have brought down bin Laden “a lot sooner,” because “everybody in Pakistan” — all 208 million of them — knew the terrorist leader was living in “a nice mansion.” Trump alone “predicted Osama bin Laden” in 2000 when “nobody really knew who he was.”(Were they waiting for Trump to give them bin Laden’s Zip code plus four?)

There are the fools in the CIA, who have concluded based on so-called evidence that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered last month’s killing of Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi. But Trump alone understands that we’ll never know the truth, because the crown prince denied involvement “maybe five different times.”

There’s that fool Chris Wallace at Fox News, who didn’t understand why Trump skipped Arlington National Cemetery on the Monday after Veterans Day after skipping a visit to a U.S. military cemetery in France two days earlier. But Wallace, if he were wiser, would have known Trump was “extremely busy on calls for the country” as well as “doing other things.”

There are the foolish Finns who, after Trump claimed Finland avoided forest fires because “they spent a lot of time on raking,” are now mocking him by posing with garden tools in the woods. But Trump knows Finnish forest-raking is real because Finland’s president, Sauli Niinisto, told him about it just last week (even if Niinisto can’t remember this).

Worst of all are the fools in California — people who insist on calling the fire-destroyed town there “Paradise” instead of “Pleasure,” as Trump prefers to call it — who assert that the fires were caused by drought instead of their own mismanagement. As Trump well knows, “there is no drought” in California and there is “plenty of water.”

No one has suffered as many fools as Trump has. But this is to be expected when a “very stable genius” leads a “stupid country.”

Trump knows “more about courts than any human being.” He knows “more about steelworkers than anybody.” He knows “more about ISIS than the generals do,” and “more about offense and defense than they will ever understand.” He knows “more about wedges than any human being that’s ever lived.” He even knows more about medicine than his doctor, dictating a doctor’s letter predicting he would be “the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.”

How does Trump know so much about so many things? Explaining his disagreement with scientists on climate change, Trump told the Associated Press: “My uncle was a great professor at MIT for many years. Dr. John Trump. And I didn’t talk to him about this particular subject, but I have a natural instinct for science.”

Given Trump’s natural scientific instinct, you don’t need a B.S. from Trump University to know how frustrating it must be to be contradicted repeatedly by “experts” — some in his own administration!

The intelligence community unanimously believes that Russia meddled in the 2016 election, but Trump’s instinct says there’s no reason to disbelieve Russian President Vladimir Putin’s denials.

Satellite imagery shows that North Korea has enhanced its ability to launch missiles, but Trump says, “I don’t believe that.”

The scientific consensus supports the theory of climate change, but Trump says “it could very well go back” to cooling.

Trump’s instinct has led him to a number of scientific discoveries over time:

“The worst hurricanes were 50 years ago.”

Vaccines cause autism in “many” healthy children.

The flu shot is “totally ineffective.”

Exercise is unhealthy.

Coal is “indestructible.”

Windmills are a “killing field” for birds and can make people who live near turbines “go crazy after a couple of years.”

It’s okay to look directly at the sun during a solar eclipse.

California is “shoving” water out to sea “to protect a certain kind of three-inch fish.”

With such a high level of technical expertise, Trump waited 19 months into his presidency to name a White House science adviser. More than 1,000 members of the National Academy of Sciences accuse Trump of the “denigration of scientific expertise and harassment of scientists.”

But they don’t understand. Trump knows more about science than the scientists do.

And this is the problem with being surrounded by fools: Though Trump gives his presidency an “A-plus,” most Americans — about 60 percent — do not appreciate his brilliance.

He deserves better — and he should demand it. He should walk away, withdraw his excellence, maybe get a place in Pleasure — and leave us to suffer our own foolish “scientists” and “experts” and “facts.” That would really show us.

Deep breaths … lighten up … smile, for it is humour.  Any fool who rates himself an A+ when more than half the country, not to mention allies in other nations, hate him enough to wish to send him to Siberia, is a moron.

In Honour Of Admiral McRaven …

McRaven

Adm. William McRaven

Admiral William Harry McRaven is a distinguished former U.S. Naval Officer.  McRaven retired from the U.S. Navy on August 28, 2014, after more than 37 years of service, and went on to become the Chancellor of the University of Texas System.  During his naval career, he has been the commander of Joint Special Operations Command, as well as of Special Operations Command Europe.  In addition, he was designated as the first director of the NATO Special Operations Forces Coordination Centre.  His awards and decorations are far too numerous to list here but include a bronze star and a meritorious service medal.

In 2011, McRaven spent months obtaining data, then organizing and overseeing the special ops raid, Operation Neptune Spear, that ended in the killing of 9/11 mastermind Usama bin Laden.  I have not found a single black mark on his record, and from all indications he served his country admirably for 37 years.

Now, however, Admiral McRaven has become the latest target of the Fool on the Hill, Donald Trump.  Why?  Well, back in August, Admiral McRaven had the temerity to express support for former CIA Director John O. Brennan, whose security clearance had recently been revoked by the Trump Administration.  On August 16th, he penned the following Open Letter to Donald Trump that was published in The Washington Post:

Dear Mr. President:

Former CIA director John Brennan, whose security clearance you revoked on Wednesday, is one of the finest public servants I have ever known. Few Americans have done more to protect this country than John. He is a man of unparalleled integrity, whose honesty and character have never been in question, except by those who don’t know him.

Therefore, I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency.

Like most Americans, I had hoped that when you became president, you would rise to the occasion and become the leader this great nation needs.

A good leader tries to embody the best qualities of his or her organization. A good leader sets the example for others to follow. A good leader always puts the welfare of others before himself or herself.

Your leadership, however, has shown little of these qualities. Through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation.

If you think for a moment that your McCarthy-era tactics will suppress the voices of criticism, you are sadly mistaken. The criticism will continue until you become the leader we prayed you would be.

I’m not sure why Trump waited three full months before firing back … perhaps he had forgotten, or perhaps his advisors quashed prior attempts to throw mud at McRaven, but in a November 18th interview with Chris Wallace of Fox ‘News’, he was reminded.  Here’s what Trump had to say about an honourable, much decorated hero …

Chris Wallace: Bill McRaven, Retired Admiral, Navy Seal, 37 years, former head of U.S. Special Operations —

Trump: Hillary Clinton fan.

Chris Wallace: Special Operations —

Trump: Excuse me, Hillary Clinton fan.

Chris Wallace: Who led the operations, commanded the operations that took down Saddam Hussein and that killed Osama bin Laden says that your sentiment is the greatest threat to democracy in his lifetime.

Trump: OK, he’s a Hilary Clinton, uh, backer and an Obama-backer and frankly —

Chris Wallace: He was a Navy Seal 37 years —

Trump: Wouldn’t it have been nice if we got Osama Bin Laden a lot sooner than that, wouldn’t it have been nice? You know, living – think of this – living in Pakistan, beautifully in Pakistan in what I guess they considered a nice mansion, I don’t know, I’ve seen nicer. But living in Pakistan right next to the military academy, everybody in Pakistan knew he was there. And we give Pakistan $1.3 billion a year and they don’t tell him, they don’t tell him —

Chris Wallace: You’re not even going to give them credit —

Trump: For years —

Chris Wallace: for taking down Bin Laden?

Trump: They took him down but – look, look, there’s news right there, he lived in Pakistan, we’re supporting Pakistan, we’re giving them $1.3 billion a year, which we don’t give them anymore, by the way, I ended it because they don’t do anything for us, they don’t do a damn thing for us.

Trump claims to love the military, but … must we assume that he only loves those members of our military who are staunchly “pro-Trump”?  That’s how it seems.  I don’t imagine the military has much great love for Trump, either, as he is a draft-dodger and has promised much in the way of donations to veterans’ organizations that never materialized.

Most people, whether republican or democrat, veteran or not, were appalled by Trump’s remarks.

  • “This is disgusting!” tweeted Frances Townsend, who worked as a counterterrorism adviser for President George W. Bush. She said McRaven is “among the finest officers I have had the privilege to work with.”
  • Leon Panetta, who was CIA director when bin Laden was killed in the 2011 operation and later served as secretary of defense under President Barack Obama, said Trump owed an apology to McRaven “and all of the special operation forces and intelligence professionals who planned and executed one of the most important counter-terrorism missions in our nation’s history.”
  • Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Trump’s comment is “really a slam at the intelligence community” and “reflects, I think, his complete ignorance” about what was involved in hunting down bin Laden.
  • “I don’t know if Adm. William McRaven shares my political views or not,” Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio said on Twitter. “But I do know that few Americans have sacrificed or risked more than he has to protect America & the freedoms we enjoy.”

Predictably, however, the Republican National Committee backed Trump’s unconscionable remarks:

“Worth noting after recent comments: Retired Adm. William McRaven was reportedly on Hillary Clinton’s short list for Vice President in 2016. He’s been critical of President @realDonaldTrump— even dating back to the 2016 campaign. He’s hardly a non-political figure.”

Being critical of Donald Trump is hardly grounds for condemnation, given that more than half of this nation are critical of Trump on a quite consistent basis, and at least 60% would just as soon see him floating on an ice floe somewhere in the Arctic Sea.  And while McRaven’s name reportedly was on a list of 39 potential candidates for Hillary’s running mate, the Admiral did not endorse any candidate in the 2016 election.  Even if he had, it doesn’t give Trump or the GOP any right to criticize a man who has had a far more noble career, more worthy life than Trump, or likely anybody else in the GOP.

Once again, Donald Trump shows the world his lack of compassion, his ignorance, and his arrogance.

Scaramucci Strikes …

“With Scaramucci, Trump is going to war – with the media, with the truth, with America.” – Scott Reid, Canada’s Globe and Mail, 22 July 2017

Newly appointed communications director Anthony Scaramucci made the talk show rounds over the weekend.  If I thought this man was a pandering ‘operator’ before, I am now convinced.  He is a highly paid mouthpiece for the egomaniacal Donald Trump and whatever comes out of Trump’s mouth on a given day will be the party line for that day.  I shall treat Scaramucci as I do Trump … believing not one single word that he says.

One example sums it up quite well: “He’s {Trump] one of the most effective communicators that’s ever been born, and we’re going to make sure that we get that message out directly to the American people.” An effective communicator???  He cannot even string a simple sentence together, repeats himself constantly, and makes up words as he goes along.  Based on his communication skills, I would rate him at about a 5th grade level!

In case that didn’t convince you that Scaramucci is a boot-licker, let us see where else he traveled and what else he had to say over the weekend.

His first interview after being named communications director on Friday was with alt-right media outlet Breitbart.  That in itself should tell you something.  In his interview with political director Matt Boyle, Scaramucci said, “One of the things Breitbart has done is you’ve captured the spirit of what’s actually going on in the country. We have enough outlets, whether it’s Breitbart, the president’s social media feed, all of the different apparatus that we have, where people will allow us to deliver our message to the American people unfiltered. We’re having a rough time with the mainstream media, but last time I checked during the campaign we were having a rough time with the mainstream media and the people see through it.”

Then on Sunday, he made the rounds, starting with CNN’s State of the Union with Jake Tapper.  This is only a snippet, but I was proud of Tapper — he held Scaramucci’s feet to the fire and had Scaramucci stuttering more than a few times. You can read a transcript of the full interview here.

Scaramucci: “Listen, there’s obviously a communications problem, because there’s a lot of things that we have done as it relates to executive orders, bills that have been signed, economic progress.”  Progress???

Scaramucci: “You know, somebody said to me yesterday — I won’t tell you who — that if the Russians actually hacked this situation and spilled out those e-mails, you would have never seen it. You would have never had any evidence of them, meaning that they’re super confident in their deception skills and hacking.”

Tapper: “Well, you’re making a lot of assertions here. I don’t know who this anonymous person is that said, if the Russians had actually done it, we wouldn’t have been able to detect it, but it is the unanimous…”

Scaramucci: “How about it was — how about it was the president, Jake? And he basically said to me, hey, you know, this is — maybe they did it. Maybe they didn’t do it. And I’m going to maintain for you — hold on a second.”

And then, on to the really important things …

“So, Sarah Huckabee is the president secretary [sic]. If you’re asking me for my personal opinion — and maybe the president will be upset for giving my personal — we should put the cameras on. That’s no problem. I don’t think we need to have the cameras off. But if the president doesn’t want the cameras on, guess what? We’re not going to have the cameras on. It’s going to really be up to him. But I think we should put the cameras on. … The only thing I ask Sarah — Sarah, if you’re watching, I loved the hair and makeup person that we had on Friday. So, I would like to continue to use the hair and makeup person.”

Then Mr. Scaramucci moved on to Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace …

“One of the first things I want to do, as was just mentioned, we got to get the leaks stopped, Chris. … So my three simple things is I would like to reset the culture inside the comms department so that people recognize that I’m actually there to serve them, and they’re going to be working with me, not for me. That’s a very big distinction. And that all of us are there to serve the President of the United States and his agenda.

If we don’t get the leaks stopped, I am a businessperson, and so I will take dramatic action to stop those leaks. And then the third thing is I’ll be traveling with the president this week and we’re going to focus and refine the messaging from the White House. He’s one of the most effective communicators that’s ever been born, and we’re going to make sure that we get that message out directly to the American people. And I think that arbitrage* spread, the gap between how certain people think of him and how I see him, or say like someone like Ivanka sees him, that will start to narrow so.”

  • the meaning of “arbitrage pertains to the buying and selling of securities or other assets … not sure how it applies here

Full interview transcript

And last but not least, he visited CBS’ Face the Nation with John Dickerson …

Dickerson: “What happens to leakers on your watch?”

Scaramucci: “They’re going to get fired. I’m just going to make it very, very clear, okay? Tomorrow I’m going to have a staff meeting. And it’s going to be a very binary thing. I’m not going to make any prejudgments about anybody on that staff. If they want to stay on the staff, they’re going to stop leaking. If the leaks continue, we are strong as our weakest link. And I’ll say it a little differently in a pun. We’re strong as our weakest leak. So if you guys want to keep leaking, why don’t you guys all get together and make a decision as a team that you’re going to stop leaking? … But if you’re going to keep leaking, I’m going to fire everybody. It’s just very binary*.”

  • Binary relates to a numerical system using a base 2 rather than base 10. Again, I’m not sure how that applies in this context.

Full interview transcript

wavy-line

In sum, Mr. Scaramucci intends to do Trump’s bidding, right or wrong, and to hell with building a relationship with the press, to hell with the people’s right to know what is going on in their government. For the sake of our free press, the backbone of our democracy, we better all hope that those who are willing to be “leakers” have the courage, to continue to do so.  It may well be that they are the heroes of the day.

In the words of the aforementioned Scott Reid, “Mr. Scaramucci is in his new post not because he will offer superior counsel or elevated strategic skills. He is not in because he will better manage a frothing, manic press gallery. Or shape a stronger, more coherent defence of Mr. Trump’s agenda. He is in because he will fight to his last breath – without question or contest …”

A Moderator-less Debate? NOOOOO!

trumpetThe man is slimier than any snake or eel, creepier than any circus clown, more disgusting than anything my cat has ever thrown up, and yet he is being given legitimacy by some half of this nation.  The “man”, of course, is none other than he-who-blows-his-own-horn, Don Trump, aka da trumpeter.  “What now,” you ask.  Now he has decided that he does not want a moderator for the debate scheduled next Monday (9/26), and specifically, does not want Anderson Cooper as a moderator, claiming he is “unfair”.

For starters, the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) sponsors and produces debates for the United States presidential and vice presidential candidates and undertakes research and educational activities relating to the debates. The candidates do not determine the scope and sequence of the debates, nor do they set the rules.  Neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton has a vote in the matter of how the debates will be conducted.  Trump is aware of that, and thus his call for a debate with no moderator is nothing more or less than Trump setting the stage for saying the debate was “unfair” later in response to the criticism his performance next Monday is certain to garner.

debate-2Why does Trump want a moderator-less debate?  To answer that question, we need to look at the role and purpose of the moderator.  The moderator introduces the candidates, asks the questions, but most importantly, holds the candidates to the set time limits and attempts to keep them from straying off topic.  In other words, he/she keeps the debate civil and informative, at least in theory.  Given that, one can easily see why Mr. Trump would prefer a debate sans moderator.

First, he does not like questions that he cannot answer, such as questions about what his policies would be and how he plans to go about implementing them.  He only wishes to field questions that open the door for him to expound on how “wonderful, smart and successful” he is.

He also does not like to give his opponent an opportunity to speak.  In keeping with his ultra-narcissistic personality, he believes that his is the only voice, the only opinion that should be heard.  To this end, there is no doubt that he would spend the entire hour interrupting and talking over Ms. Clinton, thus ensuring that the viewers would come away without having heard a single thought from Ms. Clinton. In the 2008 vice-presidential debate, Sarah Palin’s tactic was much like Trump’s …  whenever she faced a subject that could put her on unstable ground, she did a quick pivot and went with a well-rehearsed talking point.  So picture Trump, being asked about his position on how he would go about fixing the nation’s infrastructure, responding with “We’re gonna build a big, beautiful wall!”

The moderators for Monday’s debate will be CNN’s Anderson Cooper, ABC’s Martha Raddatz, NBC News’ Lester Holt, and Fox News’ Chris Wallace, with C-SPAN’s Steve Scully serving as a backup moderator. All of these are well-respected, seasoned journalists who can be counted on to understand the issues and to treat each candidate with respect and impartiality.  None are known for being unfair or biased.  The claim that they will be “unfair” to Trump is rooted, perhaps, in Trump’s definition of the word “fair”. Trump will only consider an interviewer to have been fair to him if that interviewer, or in this case moderator, does not ask him about any controversial topic from his past, does not ask him for any details or specifics about which he has no knowledge, and allows him to dominate the entire debate.  So, by his very definition of the word ‘fair”, no moderator can ever be fair to Trump.

debate-1In recent years, I have found the presidential debates to be of little or no value to the viewing public.  I do not watch debates, but instead read the transcript the next day, which enables me to concentrate on what was said, rather than be distracted by the ranting, facial contortions, and rudeness that has become the mainstay of all political debates.  But the vast majority of people do watch them, and their “take-away” is much affected by the personalities of the candidates rather than the substance.  If, in fact, there is any substance.

I think some changes are needed to the structure of the debates. I would like to see the candidates told that as part of the rules of the debate, no interruptions will be tolerated. They will have an opportunity for a rebuttal. I would like to see them told that they are to answer the question asked, not talk about the other candidate. Then I’d like to see the people running the debate cut their microphones if they break those rules.

The purpose of the debates is for the voting public to see and hear the candidates put forth their qualifications, their ideologies, and their platforms.  The purpose is not to see and hear the candidates mock, name-call, and insult their opponents.  If I want to see a fight, I can always turn to WWW, or just watch the kids playing in my backyard.  If I spend an hour of my life watching a presidential debate, I want to come away feeling that it was an hour well-spent, an hour in which I learned something about the candidates that will help me make a responsible decision in November.  Sadly, that has not been the case for many years now.  As it stands, I believe the debates are a huge waste of both time and money, and at my age, I cannot afford to lose an hour of my life to watch da trumpeter toot his own broken horn.