Tag Archives: republican

Carly Fiorina … for WHAT????? You’ve Got To Be Kidding!!!

Posted on by under Political commentary

A year and a half ago (May, 2015), before da trumpeter ever threw his hat in the ring, I wrote a post about one of the least likely to succeed candidates, Carly Fiorina.  Though she, predictably, dropped out of the presidential race early on, she is back in the news today as Trump considers her for an important post in his administration: Director of National Intelligence.  My mind is reeling with this one.  Well, my mind has been reeling ever since his first proposed appointment, and it just gets worse with each consecutive one, but Fiorina???  Give me a break!  Much of what I wrote in my original post, when she was running for president, still applies and speaks volumes as to why she is as unqualified for this post as she was for president, so rather than re-invent the wheel, I am making some edits to the original post and including it here:

This morning I found, among numerous “breaking news” updates that regularly bombard my text and email message centers, the following: “Carly Fiorina announces she’ll seek the Republican nomination for president.” Not quite awake yet, I muttered to myself, “and just who the heck is this Carly person?” Naturally, I had to do the research, and this is what I found: Carly Fiorina is a former American business executive. Fiorina was an executive at AT&T and its equipment and technology spinoff, Lucent before becoming chief executive officer of Hewlett-Packard from 1999 to 2005 when she was forced to resign (with a severance package reportedly worth $20 million!).

Fiorina was considered one of the most powerful women in business during her tenure at Lucent and Hewlett-Packard. In 2002, Fiorina pushed for a contentious merger with rival computer company Compaq, which made HP the world’s largest personal computer manufacturer but caused its stock to lose half of its value. In 2005, Fiorina was forced to resign from HP after refusing to address certain concerns brought to her attention by the Board of Directors.  Since then she has been described as one of the worst tech CEOs of all time. Fiorina ordered the layoffs of 30,000 HP employees during her tenure and is a strong supporter of outsourcing jobs overseas.

Fiorina promoted herself as Chair and CEO of Carly Fiorina Enterprises where, according to her political campaign Facebook page, she is “bringing her unique perspective and experience to bear on the challenging issues of our world, championing economic growth and empowerment for a more prosperous and secure world”. That undertaking caused more questions, when it was reported by The San Francisco Chronicle/SF Gate that as of July 2009, she “never registered her Carly Fiorina Enterprises to conduct business in California, either with the California secretary of state or the clerk of Santa Clara County, where Fiorina lives.” That created some controversy, since, at that time, it was said (as The Chronicle further explains) that “Fiorina tells the public she’s the CEO of her own business and the chairwoman of her own charitable foundation” . The Chronicle asserted that “Records also show that her Fiorina Foundation has never registered with the Internal Revenue Service or the state attorney general’s charitable trust division, which tax- exempt charities are required to do.” The criticism of Fiorina’s actions continued to imply misleading self-portrayals, as it was pointed out that “titles of CEO and chairwoman imply the existence of a corporation, [but] no incorporation papers have been filed, a check of public records shows… Carly Fiorina Enterprises has not filed a fictitious business name record. A ‘doing business as,’ or DBA, statement usually is required when a business isn’t incorporated.” This controversy contributed, in part, to her loss in a bid for senate seat in 2010 against Senator Barbara Boxer.

Fiorina served as an advisor to Republican John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. She was the Republican nominee for the United States Senate from California in 2010, losing to incumbent Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer. On May 4, 2015, Fiorina announced on Good Morning America that she is running for President of the United States in 2016.

She is quoted as saying “Hillary Clinton must not be president of the United States — but not because she’s a woman,” she told a cheering crowd in Iowa recently. “Hillary Clinton cannot be president of the United States because she is not trustworthy.” Although I am not a huge fan of Hillary Clinton, my opinion is that Ms. Fiorina is neither trustworthy nor does she have the qualifications to be President of the United States. Her knowledge of global issues and international relations is very much limited to business, which is but a small portion of what is involved in being an international leader. She has never served in Congress, nor has she ever held any public office. In fact, her only career experience is as a corporate leader, and while it is true that she was heralded more than once as one of the most powerful women in the U.S., her career is also controversial, as she is a strong believer in outsourcing jobs overseas and was, as previously noted, responsible for more than 30,000 people being laid off at Hewlett-Packard.

To further clarify Ms. Fiorina’s lack of qualifications for the job, under 50 U.S.C. § 403-3a, “under ordinary circumstances, it is desirable” that either the Director or the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence be an active-duty commissioned officer in the armed forces or have training or experience in military intelligence activities and requirements. The statute does not specify what rank the commissioned officer will hold during his or her tenure in either position, but historically a four-star general or admiral has served. On July 20, 2010, President Obama nominated retired Lt. Gen. James R. Clapper for the position. Clapper was confirmed by the Senate on August 5, 2010, and replaced acting Director David C. Gompert. The prior DNI was retired Navy four-star admiral Dennis C. Blair, whose resignation became effective May 28, 2010.

Additionally, given her support of outsourcing jobs overseas, which is diametrically opposed to the stance Trump claims to take, I am surprised that she is even under consideration.  Ms. Fiorina has exactly none of the experience that would qualify her for this position, and it is such an important position that the last thing we need is a failed executive.

 

Idiot of the Week #1 – Newt Gingrich

Posted on by under Idiot of the Week

newt-bachmanI generally do not go trolling for my “idiot of the week” … no need to, as they usually jump our and smack me in the head, or fall into my lap!  There are just so darned many to choose from.  This week, however, I nearly forgot, being tied up with multiple other issues about which to write.  But today two jumped out and caught my eye … Newt Gingrich was the first, and the other was none other than America’s #2 Bimbo, saying … Me, me, me … choose ME for Idiot of the Week!!!  There is, after all, a reason she is America’s #2 Bimbo.  However, I will start with Mr. Gingrich, primarily because there are people who actually take him seriously, whereas most everybody sees Ms. Bachman for the fool that she is.  If time and space permit, I will honour Ms. Bachman with the title in another post.

newt-2Newt was one of the final three under consideration by Trump for running mate, but as earlier noted, he lost out to Mike Pence, governor of Indiana.  But Newt is not disappointed, as “I will be sort of the leader in how we rethink and how we reformulate the entire federal government,” he claims.  NOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooo!  Say it ain’t so!  It is interesting, in light of the fact that just last month Gingrich referred to Trump as “an absurd amateur who needs to learn from his mistakes”.  Gosh, Newtie, might you be one of those mistakes?

All politicians, all people in the public eye, in fact, say stupid things that they kick themselves for later.  But some … well, it seems they just open their mouths and out flows the stupid.  Of course Trump/Palin/Bachman take the prize for that, but Gingrich has had some ‘moments’ as well (my own snarky barbs in blue):

  • “I’m not a natural leader. I’m too intellectual; I’m too abstract; I think too much.” Choke, cough, laugh, gurgle, choke …
  • “If the Soviet empire still existed, I’d be terrified. The fact is, we can afford a fairly ignorant presidency now.” Guess that is why he felt qualified to run in 2012, huh?
  • “The idea that a congressman would be tainted by accepting money from private industry or private sources is essentially a socialist argument.” Um … yeah, sure. Those guys just donate out of the goodness of their hearts, with no expectation for an … shall we say, favours … in return.
  • “The problem isn’t too little money in political campaigns, but not enough.” Huh?  Are not the terms ‘too little’ and ‘not enough’ essentially the same thing?
  • “I have enormous personal ambition. I want to shift the entire planet. And I’m doing it. I am now a famous person. I represent real power.” No display of ego here, huh?
  • “It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.” Do as I say, not as I do.  For I am the Great and Powerful OZ!

newt-1st-wife

  • “She isn’t young enough or pretty enough to be the President’s wife.” (Speaking of his first wife, Marianne, after divorcing her) Yessir, he and Trump are two peas in a pod.  At least she looks more down-to-earth than Melania Trump!

 

  • “I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they’re my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American.” Huh?  Which is it, Newt … secular atheist or radical Islamist?  The two are 180° apart!
  • “I think one of the great problems we have in the Republican party is that we don’t encourage you to be nasty. We encourage you to be neat, obedient, and loyal and faithful and all those Boy Scout words.” Well no worries now, Newt … Trump has rectified that ‘problem’ and taken nasty to previously unheard of levels! 
  • “So let me say on the record, any ad which quotes what I said on Sunday is a falsehood.” Again … huh?
  • And the very worst one yet, the one that led to my decision to name him Idiot of the Week, “We should frankly test every person here who is of a Muslim background, and if they believe in Sharia law, they should be deported.”  No snarky barb on this one … his words speak for themselves.

newt-youngIt is unclear who initiated the phrase, but I have heard it said more than once that Newt Gingrich is ‘A Stupid Man’s Idea Of What A Smart Person Sounds Like’.  That sounds about right.  Now, granted there are bigger idiots I could have chosen for Idiot of the Week, but given that Newt is apparently to have a leadership role in “reformulating the entire federal government” if Trump is elected (please no please no please no), and given that he just threw the entire 1st Amendment in the fire with his statement about Muslims, I think it is important that we get to know the man and come to understand that, like so many in the Trump camp, he is certainly deserving of the Idiot of the Week designation.  Next up … Michele Bachman … unless somebody else jumps in my face first.

A Sad Night In Indiana … And Throughout The Nation

Posted on by under Political commentary

lady liberty criesWell, the game is officially over for Rafael Edward Cruz, and I think I heard his sigh of relief all the way here, some 200 miles away.  I would like to say I am surprised by the results of tonight’s primary in Indiana, but I am not.  I do not understand the motivation behind the wave of support for Trump. I am told by a friend who is a Trump supporter, in response to my post regarding political achievement and the fact that Trump has none, “THAT is exactly what the American People want…… we are TIRED of the political machine… the people are speaking and it is LOUD and Clear!!!!!!”  As the old adage goes, “be careful what you wish for…”  I, too, am an “American People” and I shudder at the very thought of Donald Trump sitting in the Oval Office.

Of his win in Indiana, Trump says, “It is a beautiful thing to watch, and a beautiful thing to behold.”  No, I am sorry, but there is no beauty in a man winning based entirely on hatred.  It is his hatred of Muslims, his derogatory and hateful remarks about women, his racist comments directed toward African-Americans and Hispanics, that has led him to being number one in the Republican field.  A vote for Trump is a vote to take the nation back in time 100 years; back to a day when racial segregation and ‘white supremacy’ were the norm, rather than the exception.

Yes, be careful what you wish for, my Republican, Trump-loving friends.  Were it not such a serious matter with potentially catastrophic consequences, I would say it would be fun to let him win the election, let him sit in the Oval Office, and let the people see just what they have done.  I wonder which of their dreams he would shatter first.  The talk about “bringing jobs back” is smoke and mirrors.  Where is he going to bring them back from?  And how?  His promise to “make America great again”?  More dust in the wind.  For one thing, the U.S. as a nation is already pretty great.  Don’t think so?  Pick up your newspaper or go online and read about life in Aleppo, Turkey, Russia, the Ukraine, Baghdad, and then tell me we aren’t doing so good here.  But if Trump has his way, I guarantee our freedoms of speech and press will be gone within a year.  The only real saving grace is that our Constitution established three equal branches of government, each overseeing the others, so the president does not have the power that Mr. Trump apparently believes he does.  A man who is qualified to lead the nation should know these things, but Mr. Trump studied business, not government, not history, not anything that would help him to govern.

Mr. Trump has offended the vast majority of our allies with his hate and rhetoric.  We live in a global world in this, the 21st century.  It is no longer the world of our grandparents.  We live in a world made ever smaller by technological advances and a world made increasingly more dangerous by nuclear weapons in the hands of people such as Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-Un.  Mr. Trump seems to enjoy stirring people up, rousing anger wherever he goes.  He is not a diplomat and he is not a well-spoken individual.  When I try to imagine him in a conversation with either of the two above-named leaders, I feel quite ill.  Our ancestors have worked hard for more than two centuries to make this nation the land of freedom, of opportunity that it is today.  Given the chance, Mr. Trump would destroy everything for which we should be thankful today.  I still believe that there are more people who value our individual liberties than who wish to live in a government run by a man who spews vitriol wherever he goes.  I hope I am proven right in November. Tonight I cry … not because Trump is a jackass, but because so many people have apparently thrown their values, thrown what we cherish, away.  Good-night, friends.

Carson and Christie … the Comeback “Kids” in 2020?

Posted on by under Political commentary

Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon who briefly led the Republican presidential race before his campaign began an extended public implosion, told his supporters in a statement Wednesday afternoon that he does not see a “path forward” and will not attend Thursday’s debate in Detroit. “I do not see a political path forward in light of last evening’s Super Tuesday primary results,” the Wednesday statement said. “However, this grassroots movement on behalf of ‘We the People’ will continue. Along with millions of patriots who have supported my campaign for President, I remain committed to Saving America for Future Generations.” Though he is done for the 2016 election, I do not think we have seen the last of Dr. Carson on the political scene.

Though from day one I considered him highly unqualified for the job of president of the United States, there are a few things I like about Dr. Carson, not the least of which is his calm, mild-mannered demeanor. He is soft spoken, yet well spoken. He comes across as intelligent and reasonable, which is more than I can say for the “leaders of the pack” The nation does not need a personality like Trump, now or ever. That said, Dr. Carson would be well-advised to suspend his campaign and stop spending money today! He never did stand even a 1% chance of winning the GOP nomination. However, if he spends his time and money wisely over the course of the next four years, I think he could possibly become a viable candidate in 2020 or even 2024, if that is what he really wants to do.

This plan would mean a lot of hard work, but his past tells us he is not averse to hard work. He needs to spend the next four years studying, learning, and studying some more. Dr. Carson is already a renowned neurosurgeon, but his knowledge of government and history is sorely and acutely lacking. His first step needs to be to start back on the first rung of the educational ladder, this time with an eye toward Political Science, Environmental Issues, and Foreign Relations. Courses in American History, World History, Constitutional Law, Contract Law and Criminal Law are essential. Within the four years between now and 2020, he could do all of that and more. It would also be an expensive venture, but if he drops out of this lost-cause presidential race now*, he could likely meet all his educational requirements with the money he will save!

Again, I like Dr. Carson as a person. Compared to the rest of the pack of 2016 GOP candidates, he shows remarkable reserve and intelligence. I think that in addition to his educational needs, he will need to develop a stronger backbone, a shell, and a more fiery voice, but only a little. The other thing is he will need to learn to discern the truth from a lie and stop thinking that lying about his past will make him appear more of a “tough guy”. We don’t need a tough guy nor a wuss in the White House, we need a thinker, and I believe that Ben could ultimately be that thinker. 2016 may well have been a get-your-feet-wet test run for him. If so, he needs to look back, see what he is lacking, and take steps to fill in those blanks. I doubt we have seen the last of Dr. Carson, and that may be a good thing.

Carson is 64 years old, meaning that in 2020 he will be 68 and in 2024 he will be 72. A bit long in the tooth by 2024, but then Bernie Sanders is 74 and Hillary Clinton 68 in this election year. I don’t discriminate here, but he would be 80 when he left office, assuming two terms, and … I don’t know about any of you, but I really don’t want to be working that hard when I am 80!

Chris Christie is by any standards a good man. He has a conscience, he cares, he has government experience, but unfortunately he made some bad moves and “Bridgegate” became his nemesis. The most important thing that Christie needs to do now is to immediately and firmly distance himself from the Donald Trump Carnival of Horrors. Instead, he chose to endorse Trump, though from the picture that has been broadcast far and wide, it appears that he is now asking himself “WTF have I done???”

I am disappointed in Christie. Not for Bridgegate … that is politics, the media and the past. I am disappointed in him because he sold his soul to the devil. Governor Christie hates Trump as much as I do (believe me, that is a lot), but a day after the gov dropped out of the campaign, before he even had time to lick his wounds, he endorsed Trump. Why? Only one possible reason … he is seeking to be the trumpeter’s running mate. As I see it, this was the absolute worst move he could have made. The man still stands a shot in 2020 or even 2024, but not if he aligns himself with the Trump circus.

What do I like about Governor Christie? He probably won me over in the aftermath of hurricane Sandy in 2012. He was there, he was involved, he genuinely cared, and he risked the love of the republican party to stand with President Obama to get help to people as timely and efficiently as possible. Christie is, or at least was, a more moderate politician than most in today’s GOP. His views on firearms and gun control are more reasonable than most of the right-wingers: he supports a ban on assault weapons and .50 caliber weapons, especially after the mass shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012. He has shown his willingness to be a team player, to compromise when necessary in order to get things done. If he has backed down in the past year, I blame the GOP circus-atmosphere that has every republican candidate turning in circles, chasing their tails trying to figure out how to bring down the trumpeter.

Can Christie make a comeback in 2020? I think he can. What he needs to do, not only for himself, but for the survival of the GOP (if it isn’t too late already) is return to his own beliefs and stop trying to do what others expect of him. There is no better advice I can ever offer to any political candidate than to “stay true to yourself, your beliefs”.

Though I am not a republican, not by any stretch of the imagination a conservative, I do care what happens within the GOP, as it affects us all, democrat or republican, liberal, moderate or conservative. We are all in this together, and at the end of the day we all stand together or we go down together. I believe that if Christie and Carson can get their acts together, they can help bring the GOP back to a more moderate, more acceptable stance and be a driving force four years from now. It should be interesting to watch.

 

*Note:  I wrote this a few days ago.  Since that time, Dr. Carson has suspended his campaign.

I Am Confused …

Posted on by under Political commentary

I am a bit confused about the GOP candidates for president this year (2016). There are two main points on which my confusion is founded. First, they all seem to have the same “platforms” (to the extent that it can be said they have any platform at all), and second that they all seem to think they are running against Barack Obama. Certainly there are other points on which I am confused, such as why they think we are all deaf and must be screamed at, why they think we are all stupid and will fall for every lie they tell us, why they all forget that they cannot win the general election by winning only republican votes, why they think that Christian evangelicals are the only votes that count, and the list goes on. But the two main points really have me scratching my head.

The republican candidates all want the same thing, or at least they claim to. Every one has claimed that they would repeal Obamacare on their first day in office (there is actually a process required to repeal a law, and as we all know, processes take time, so this is really nothing more than tough talk, but hey … they are republicans, so what do you expect?) Each and every one is committed to de-funding Planned Parenthood (another stupid move, but again … we are talking about republicans). Every single one has a “plan” for keeping Muslim refugees out of the country (another stupid … well, you get the picture by now, right?) Every one of them believes that the solution to terrorism is to bomb ISIL, never mind the collateral damage because in their eyes there is no such thing as an innocent Middle-Easterner. Every republican candidate supports the NRA unconditionally and opposes any new form of gun control, supporting nearly unlimited access to any type of firearm, calling it their “2nd amendment right”. For the most part they deny that climate change exists and each one, even those who acknowledge climate change, claim they will not support any measures to limit the effects of climate change if said measures would negatively affect the economy (might I just say it one more time … stupid). These are only a few of the issues, and yes, if you study their rhetoric you will find slight variations between candidates, but the overall beliefs are pretty generic, which must make it difficult for republicans to figure out which is actually the lesser of all evils. I think this may explain the otherwise inexplicable popularity of the tycoon buffoon … his voice is the loudest and his facial gestures the scariest.

The Twenty-second Amendment (Amendment XXII) of the United States Constitution sets a term limit for election and overall time of service to the office of President of the United States. Congress passed the amendment on March 21, 1947. It was ratified by the requisite 36 of the then-48 states on February 27, 1951. According to the terms of this amendment, no U.S. president may serve more than two terms. President Obama served his first term from January 2009 thru January 2013, and is currently serving his second term which began in January 2013 and is set to expire in January 2017. This is the reason we will be holding a presidential election in November of this year (2016), to elect a new president to replace President Obama. Unless the Constitution were to be further amended within the next 11 months, there is no way that President Obama can serve another term. So … could somebody please explain to me why all the republican candidates … each and every single one of them … seem to feel that they are running against President Obama in this election??? A few examples from the anti-Obama hate-spewing rhetoric machine:

• “We need to remove the self-imposed constraints President Obama has placed on our intelligence community and military, and we need to put in place an aggressive strategy to defeat ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism as I have proposed.” – Jeb Bush
• “Vintage Obama: No strategy, no leadership,” Carly Fiorina tweeted. “Politics as usual.”
• “There are answers here to make our nation [is] safe, but once again the President seems incapable of finding them.” – Rand Paul
• “Live by the pen, and die by the pen,” Mr. Cruz likes to say. “Every illegal executive action that he puts in place can be undone in an instant.” (Wanna bet? Let’s see you give that one a try)

The candidates merely start with the Affordable Care Act as a target. Carly Fiorina vows to erase President Obama’s Clean Power Plan limiting carbon emissions. Senator Lindsey Graham pledges to “shut down the embassy” that President Obama recently reopened in Cuba. Senator Marco Rubio calls for repealing the Dodd-Frank law that overhauled financial regulation. Gov. Scott Walker says he would scrap the Iran nuclear deal on his first day in office. Senator Ted Cruz blasts President Obama’s order shielding some undocumented immigrants from deportation as “patently unconstitutional,” promising to roll back that and much more. “Most of the policies candidates say they’ll overturn are much more entrenched than that,” said William Galston, domestic policy adviser to President Bill Clinton. “People are sobered up fast by the reality of what it means to actually be president, as opposed to running for president.” Running against Barack Obama is not a sound strategy to overcome a candidate who has no strategy of his/her own other than to undo that which Obama has done. Wake up, republicans and ask your candidates what they will actually do, rather than what they plan to undo!

So, while I am not a republican, and do not support the far-right ideas that the GOP represents, I still think it would make for a more interesting, not to mention intelligent, election year if the current crop of candidates could come up with some original platforms and let the voters know what they realistically hope to accomplish if they should be elected, and not just parrot one another and slam President Obama. Is that too much to ask?

A Light Bulb Moment!

Posted on by under Political commentary

“When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body.”  Or, as sometimes stated, “To every action there is always an opposite and equal reaction.”  This is the third of the respected physicist Sir Isaac Newton’s Laws of Motion.  Now, I am not a scientist, in fact hard science is and has always been my nemesis, but I admit that sometimes it comes in handy even for a layperson.  So, note that whatever I say will be in laymen’s terms , and I hope those of you who are science geeks can overlook my simplicity.  To understand this third law of Newton’s, we need only consider that age-old executive desk toy, Newton’s cradle shown here:

Newton cradle

The concept is there are 5 steel balls suspended on nylon strings from a cradle-like structure.  If you pull a ball on either end back then let it go, when it swings back down, the ball on the opposite end will swing out precisely as far as you pulled the first ball.  If you pull two balls out on either end, the two balls on the opposite end will swing out the same distance once the initial two balls return to their starting point.  You have all seen them in action, but in case anybody has not, visit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton’s_cradle for some cool animated samples and a more scientific, though still user-friendly explanation.

 

Now if you have followed this blog for any length of time, you are scratching your head and asking yourself if I have gone and lost my marbles (pun intended).  Filosofa writes about politics, rants about social injustices, sometimes goes for a chuckle or two, but Filosofa does not write about scientific things, so where is she headed?  Ah yes, my loyal followers, I am headed somewhere.  Since I rarely sleep more than 2-3 hours at a time, I have lots of time to think.  So a few nights ago I was pondering how the rift between conservative and liberal thinkers has gotten wider than I can ever remember, how Democrats and Republicans are almost completely incapable of forming working coalitions these days, and I was trying to figure out the reason for this.  Thinking of myself, I realized that 10 years ago I followed a more moderate ideology, but today I must admit that I am about 95% a liberal thinker.  Why is that, I asked myself.  What changed?  And then, like a bolt of lightning illuminating the grey matter within my skull, I envisioned Newton’s Cradle.  As long as the right-most ball is only pulled out, say an inch, the left ball will also only move an inch.  But, pull that right ball out six inches, and the left ball will swing six inches to the left!  Enlightenment!!!  A “Light Bulb” moment, as it were!  The more radical either side swings, the more radical the other side will swing in the opposite direction!!!  I don’t know which came first, the chicken or the egg, and I don’t know which side started swinging wide first, those to the left or right of center.  The bottom line is that it doesn’t matter, the momentum is already set and the balls are swinging wildly out of control.  Ten years ago, knowing what I know today, I think I would have argued for gun regulation that restricted certain types of weapons and ammunition, but today I argue that the Second Amendment should be repealed and guns should be taken out of the hands of citizens.  Ten years ago, knowing what I know today, I might have argued that in light of recent terrorist activity, we ought to more carefully screen immigrants, but today, since the other side is screaming hatred and calling for a ban on any and all Muslims, I push back with opposite and equal reaction and argue that we must accept all who seek asylum in this nation.

 

Okay, all of the above is helpful (maybe) in understanding how the right and left have become so ideologically divided, how we can no longer find a middle ground on which to meet, but is it helpful in finding a solution to the problem?  I don’t have the answer to that.  Well, actually I do, but it isn’t a solution that seems likely to transpire anytime soon, as both right and left are talking too loudly to hear any but their own views.  Too busy patting themselves on the back and declaring that their viewpoints are the only righteous ones to even consider that they may be part of the problem and as such will need to be willing to seek compromise in order to be part of the solution.  There can be no compromise as long as both sides have managed to convince themselves that they are 100% right and everybody who doesn’t agree with them are wrong.  Make no mistake … if we do not ALL start moving toward a common ground, toward the middle, toward compromise, the result will be catastrophic, and probably sooner than we think.  A couple of examples:

 

  • Gun regulation – the conservative right calls for every citizen to arm themselves, while the liberal left would repeal the 2nd Amendment. Meanwhile, while we argue and fight among ourselves, crime rates, mass shootings, school shootings, suicide rates all  are on the rise in exponential rates.  Check the facts and stats, then extrapolate the date forward ten years.  See what I mean?  Some solution must be forthcoming or we will self-destruct before our very eyes.
  • Climate change – the conservative right claim that climate change is being blown out of proportion and there is no imminent threat to the planet, thus we should build the Keystone pipeline and continue burning massive amounts of fossil fuels in order that corporations can continue polluting and people can continue living their extravagant lifestyles, while the liberal left see the total destruction of the planet earth as only a few years away.

Yes, these are extremes, but that is what I am talking about.  Start with one extreme on either side, and it is inevitably met with an equal extreme on the other side.  There are hundreds more examples I could cite … social welfare, social security, nuclear proliferation, education, immigration policies all are subject to extreme partisan swings, while the truth, the solutions, lie somewhere in the grey area in the middle, an area that has been largely abandoned.  There may be no single “correct” solution to the problems facing the nation, the world, today, but there are certainly a number of absolutely “wrong” answers.  I am calling for a toning-down of vitriol in any direction, and let us all put our heads together and find ways to once again meet each other halfway.  It is the only chance this nation stands of remaining a democratic secular nation, a world leader, a decade from now.

The Doctor (Carson) is …. IN??????

Posted on by under Political commentary

Today I turn my thoughts to … drumroll, please … the GOP circus!  Come on … you know you’re shocked and that this comes totally out of left field!  Okay, okay … it is great fodder for the gristmill and it will only last another year, so I must take advantage of it while I can.  Specifically, I shall leave Trump alone this time, and perhaps forevermore, as I believe his ship is going down without any help from me.  This time, I am more focused on the new front-runner, Dr. Ben Carson.

I actually have tremendous respect and admiration for Dr. Carson.  His substantial medical credentials indicate that he did some really wonderful things as a neurosurgeon, including the separation of conjoined twins, joined at the back of the head.  His credentials are very impressive … in the medical world.  I also have tremendous respect and admiration for Maya Angelou, and I love her writing, but I would not want her to operate on my brain nor govern the nation.  I greatly respect and admire Pope Francis, but I will not let him near me with a scalpel.  So it is with Dr. Carson.  I would entrust my brain to Dr. Carson in a heartbeat if I had a brain injury or a spinal cord tumor, but I cannot entrust him with the future of our nation.  Dr. Carson is a medical doctor, he is not a lawyer, he is not a political scientist nor an economist, and his knowledge in these areas is less than Ms. Angelou’s, the Pope’s or even my own.  The fields of government and medicine are simply not interchangeable. What he seems to believe qualifies him for the highest position in the United States government is simply that he looked around and didn’t like the direction in which the country is headed, figured he could do better and thus threw his hat in the ring.  I’m sorry, but that is not enough.  Nowhere in his achievements will you see anything that qualifies him to make treaties that guarantee the peace and safety of our nation, to ward off conflicts with other nations, to form coalitions to ensure economic growth within our borders, or even to address the issues of global climate change and the environment.  I would argue that my knowledge of the Constitution exceeds that of Dr. Carson, yet not in my wildest dreams do I believe I am qualified to be President of the United States.

So why is Dr. Carson leading in the current GOP polls?  Actually, I believe it is less to do with Dr. Carson than with Trump.  I think that Dr. Carson’s soft spoken manner and his unwillingness to get into a shouting match in a public venue put him far ahead when compared to Trump.  His mild manner is refreshing … but still, in and of itself it is not a qualifier for the most responsible job in the nation.  I applaud Dr. Carson’s courage, but at the same time, I frown upon his narcissism and his willingness to speak on topics of which he has no understanding.  Although he has not been as outspoken as Trump, he has made his share of fatal faux pas, beginning with his put-down of the victims of the Oregon shooting, saying “I would not just stand there and let him shoot me.”  He has also compared the U.S. to Nazi Germany, claiming that “We now live in a society where people are afraid to say what they actually believe.”  Seriously, folks, I read a lot of news, blogs, opinions, and I do not get the sense that anybody is afraid to voice any opinion in the United States today!  And the list of his blunders goes on and on, but there is only so much one can or should say at this point.

So, Trump’s ship is sinking and I believe that Carson’s ratings will also begin to slip when there is no longer an obnoxious clown standing next to him on the debate stage.  Where does that leave the GOP?  According to the analysts, Marco Rubio is next in line to lead the race.  Time will tell, but one thing is for certain:  all of these antics are not putting the Republican Party in a position of power, but rather are making the Democratic Party look better than they otherwise might if they had a viable opponent.  The one thing I can say for certain is that the next twelve months should prove … interesting.

Who the Heck is Carly Fiorina?????

Posted on by under Political commentary

This morning I found, among numerous “breaking news” updates that regularly bombard my text and email message centers, the following: “Carly Fiorina announces she’ll seek the Republican nomination for president.” Not quite awake yet, I muttered to myself, “and just who the heck is this Carly person?” Naturally, I had to do the research, and this is what I found: Carly Fiorina is a former American business executive. Fiorina was an executive at AT&T and its equipment and technology spinoff, Lucent before becoming chief executive officer of Hewlett-Packard from 1999 to 2005 when she was forced to resign (with a severance package reportedly worth $20 million!).

Fiorina was considered one of the most powerful women in business during her tenure at Lucent and Hewlett-Packard. In 2002, Fiorina pushed for a contentious merger with rival computer company Compaq, which made HP the world’s largest personal computer manufacturer but caused its stock to lose half of its value. In 2005, Fiorina was forced to resign from HP after refusing to address certain concerns brought to her attention by the Board of Directors Since then she has been described as one of the worst tech CEOs of all time. Fiorina ordered the layoffs of 30,000 HP employees during her tenure and is a strong supporter of outsourcing jobs overseas.

Fiorina promoted herself as Chair and CEO of Carly Fiorina Enterprises where, according to her political campaign Facebook page, she is “bringing her unique perspective and experience to bear on the challenging issues of our world, championing economic growth and empowerment for a more prosperous and secure world”. That undertaking caused more questions, when it was reported by The San Francisco Chronicle/SF Gate that as of July 2009, she “never registered her Carly Fiorina Enterprises to conduct business in California, either with the California secretary of state or the clerk of Santa Clara County, where Fiorina lives.” That created some controversy, since, at that time, it was said (as The Chronicle further explains) that “Fiorina tells the public she’s the CEO of her own business and the chairwoman of her own charitable foundation” . The Chronicle asserted that “Records also show that her Fiorina Foundation has never registered with the Internal Revenue Service or the state attorney general’s charitable trust division, which tax- exempt charities are required to do.” The criticism of Fiorina’s actions continued to imply misleading self-portrayals, as it was pointed out that “titles of CEO and chairwoman imply the existence of a corporation, [but] no incorporation papers have been filed, a check of public records shows… Carly Fiorina Enterprises has not filed a fictitious business name record. A ‘doing business as,’ or DBA, statement usually is required when a business isn’t incorporated.” This controversy contributed, in part, to her loss in a bid for senate seat in 2010 against Senator Barbara Boxer.

Fiorina served as an advisor to Republican John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. She was the Republican nominee for the United States Senate from California in 2010, losing to incumbent Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer. On May 4, 2015, Fiorina announced on Good Morning America that she is running for President of the United States in 2016.
She is quoted as saying “Hillary Clinton must not be president of the United States — but not because she’s a woman,” she told a cheering crowd in Iowa recently. “Hillary Clinton cannot be president of the United States because she is not trustworthy.” Although I am not a huge fan of Hillary Clinton, my opinion is that Ms. Fiorina is neither trustworthy nor does she have the qualifications to be President of the United States. Her knowledge of global issues and international relations is very much limited to business, which is but a small portion of what is involved in being an international leader. She has never served in Congress, nor has she ever held any public office. In fact, her only career experience is as a corporate leader, and while it is true that she was heralded more than once as one of the most powerful women in the U.S., her career is also controversial, as she is a strong believer in outsourcing jobs overseas and was, as previously noted, responsible for more than 30,000 people being laid off.

I am fairly politically savvy, keeping abreast of issues and noteworthy candidates, yet I have not heard of Carly Fiorina before today. I am guessing that I am not alone in this, which indicates that Ms. Fiorina is going to have to do some serious public relations work to get her name in the forefront. She is conservative on social issues, as are most republicans, however in the current environment, she will not likely be able to get on base unless she is willing to moderate her position on gay rights/marriage. Additionally, during her senate bid in 2010, she was supported by Sarah Palin, which can only hurt her in the republican primary should Ms. Palin decide to publicly support her candidacy. Inside of an hour, I was able to learn a number of possibly contentious facts that will undoubtedly be put under the microscope by the media in the coming months. One article suggests that she doesn’t seriously expect to win the nomination but that she sees this as a means of marketing her recent autobiography. It seems there are more cost-efficient means of selling a book. That said, I think it is safe to say that Ms. Fiorina will not be a serious threat to H. Clinton or any other candidate next year. However, she may be good for a few laughs!

On Voting: A Short Primer

Posted on by under Political commentary

In a mere twenty (20) months we will be electing a new president to head up the executive branch of the government of the U.S. You scoff? Twenty months? That’s nearly TWO YEARS!!! Why worry about it just yet? And I would agree with you. Fully. Completely. Totally. Except, the potential candidates and the national parties are already circling the wagons, seeking weak spots in both the opposition and their constituency. Thus, it behooves us to start building our fortress and filling our moats! Man the battlements! Okay, okay … overkill, I suppose, though it is sometimes how I feel. Already, with nearly two years remaining in President Obama’s term of office, we are being bombarded on a daily basis by propaganda from BOTH parties and I can only imagine that by the time election day 2016 rolls around, we will all be nauseous, disenchanted, relieved, or perhaps suicidal. That said, to parody a popular, yet totally meaningless saying, “it is what it is”, and we might as well make the most of it. So, if the national parties and the candidates have twenty months to bombard and annoy us, that also means that we have twenty months to actually enlighten, educate and prepare ourselves for the final decision in November 2016.

Now, I lean toward a specific ideology, which is embraced by a certain political party, however my purpose here is not to sway anybody toward either side, but merely to assist in the decision-making process. Though I may favor one party in particular, I am more nearly a moderate and have voted, from one time to the next, for candidates representing both parties. As a popular old saying goes, I vote for the candidate, not the party. I’ve never been a “straight-ticket” voter, and I don’t recommend it for anybody, as there are good, not-so-good, and downright bad people on both sides of the aisle. It is good to keep in mind that you are voting for the person who you think is best qualified for the office and will do what is best for the nation as a whole. I have a few guidelines to share today, when thinking about the “upcoming” elections.

1. Make a list: List ten issues that matter to you. The first five should be things that matter to you personally, that will have direct impact on your life. The other five should be more global issues that you consider to be of significant importance in a more global sense, things you care about and that will have long-term impact or consequences for the nation and the world.

2. Research: Starting with the first item on your list and working your way through the list, find every scrap of reliable information available about that issue, what each potential candidate has said about the issue in the past, say, five years, ten years. Remember that what the candidate says today may vary significantly from what he or she has said in the past, and may vary from his/her voting record in the past. Be sure to study both sides of the issue, not just the one that you favor, because

a. You should be aware of the reasons each side feels as they do
b. You need to be able to clarify, in your own mind, why you feel as you do

It is likely that your research will lead to additional questions and thoughts on the topic … follow up on these with your research as well.
3. Organize: Start a spreadsheet or other type of visual tool to organize the results of your research, listing the issues and cross-referencing with each potential candidate. Make footnotes if you have found a source particularly helpful.

4. Ignore: Virtually ALL propaganda!!! I cannot stress this enough. You are about to be bombarded by trash. You will be told stories of each candidate’s indiscretions, both political and personal. Some may have an element of truth, most will be 90%-95% lies. For the most part, I recommend completely ignoring and disregarding anything you see on either Facebook, Fox News, or any of the other radical or questionable new sources. Even most mainstream news, think ABC, NBC, CBS, New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, are inept at telling a completely unbiased story. So … how, you ask, does one find the truth? Well, one looks to a broad variety of sources. I do use mainstream media, primarily print sources such as the Washington Post and New York Times, but I also rely on updates from Foreign Policy (both print and on-line editions) and Jerusalem Post for issues concerning the Middle East, Trove Today and Huffington Post for both national and international issues, and a wide variety of other sources as well. Where there are wide discrepancies, you will have to find other sources or use your instincts. The important thing is to use a broad variety, and never ever believe everything you see or hear, particularly on social media sites!!!

5. Understand: That no candidate will be perfect, no candidate will be 100% in line with your goals, beliefs and agenda, so it truly boils down to, as my father used to say, “the lesser of two evils”, or the candidate who shares the majority of your goals for the nation.
Voting is both a privilege and a responsibility that should never be taken lightly. The Preamble of the Constitution of the United States starts with a phrase, We The People. We the people are a very diverse group of human beings and each of us expect our elected officials to meet certain criteria which may vary wildly from one person to the next. We are truly blessed to live in a nation that not only tolerates, but encourages open and frank discussion among citizens. Use this wisely. Don’t let yourself be drawn into arguments that have no logical basis and exist solely for the sake of an argument. Remember that some people speak merely for the sake of hearing themselves talk. Listen … other opinions need not sway you, but sometimes you may learn from the wisdom of others. I steer clear of radicals on either side, recognizable by those who scream the loudest and are the most rigid in their thinking, convinced that their opinion is the only possible right answer. To sum up, start now doing your homework, and by the time election day rolls around in a short 20 months, you will be confident and secure that your decision is the right one for you. I am certain I shall be posting more over the course of the next twenty months, and I hope you will feel free to comment, whether you agree with me or not.