Gary Johnson /Libertarian – From the Cheap Seats

 

libertarians3bigGaryJohnson

Gary Johnson, a Libertarian is running for President in 2016. Although he would never be my choice, as an option to Donald Trump he seems like a stellar choice for Conservatives and I am surprised that more Republicans have not jumped on board. Except for the fact that he thinks we should legalize drugs, especially marijuana, to end the War on Drugs and that we should treat drugs use as an illness, not a criminal act, his platform seems as if it is right out of the Republican playbook

Gary Johnson spent two terms as the Governor of New Mexico and he managed to leave New Mexico with a million dollar surplus although he had to slash and burn to do it. He is a small government guy. He wants to close the Department of Education and HUD immediately if he wins the election. He is in favor of letting the states deal with most social programs on their own and he favors vouchers for schooling and privatizing prisons.

He believes in low taxes which is good because by the time he has finished cutting budget items he doesn’t need all that revenue. He used the veto 200 times in his first six months in office (Wiki) and has been called “Veto Johnson” and “Governor Veto” (Wiki). He was considered a good governor in New Mexico although some of his more controversial ideas did not fly. “Johnson’s accomplishments in office were described as follows: “no tax increases in six years, a major road building program, shifting Medicaid to managed care, constructing two new private prisons, canning 1,200 state employees, and vetoing a record number of bills. He really became popular for his handling of the disastrous Cerro Grande Fire.

LIbertariansbig

You can find a list of his statements on important Presidential issues at

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

To summarize, here are just a few of the stands he has taken, stated in his own words:

On abortion his most recent stand was “don’t require insurers to provide birth control, May 2012”;

On economics he states “National debt approaching $20 trillion is bankrupting us, Jan. 2016” and “No bank bailout; no farm subsidies; no stimulus, May, 2012”, “Cut federal budget by 43% to bring it into balance, Feb. 2012, “End the Fed; they’ve devalued the dollar by printing money, May, 2011”

Where have I heard these cold-hearted judgments based on an economic point of view that is not shared by all economists? Republicans say these things incessantly – they say them as if they become truer with repetition. Yes, Mr. Johnson left New Mexico with a 1 million dollar surplus, but why? How does having money sitting in a government account help the people? How did almost shutting down the New Mexico state government to attempt to extort acceptance of school vouchers help the people?

Johnson is against the Affordable Care Plan, says that “government managed healthcare is insanity”, says “ObamaCare is unconstitutional; so is Bush’s Medicare Rx plan” and these are obviously statements that warm the cockles of many a heart on the right. He does however, want to “let the Patriot Act expire” and he says, “the Founding Fathers would be disgusted about spying on Citizens”, which might not go over quite as well with Conservatives.

Some quotes on War and Peace:

  • We are no safer after years of failed nation-building abroad. (Jan 2016)
  • Afghan nation-building will fail; withdraw immediately. (Aug 2012)
  • Cut all support and aid to Israel. (May 2012)
  • No military threat from Iraq, Afghanistan, nor Libya. (Aug 2011)
  • Iran is not currently a military threat. (Aug 2011)
  • Let Israel deal with Iranian nukes; not US role to tell them. (Aug 2011)
  • Absolutely would not have gone into Libya; get out now. (Jul 2011)
  • We wiped out al Qaeda 10 years ago; leave Afghanistan. (Jun 2011)
  • No threat from Libya; so no authority to topple dictator. (Jun 2011)
  • Afghan War initially warranted, but not for 10 years. (May 2011)
  • Military surveillance should discover WMD before invasion. (May 2011)
  • I opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. (May 2011)
  • No Afghan timetable; start tomorrow & finish in a few months. (May 2011)
  • Eliminate ineffective interventions in Iraq & Afghanistan. (May 2011)

These stands are more purely Libertarian and might be tough to swallow for some Republicans.

Libertarians2big

All in all Gary Johnson has much more in common with Republicans and the right than he does with any Democrats and his economic policies would be real deal breakers for voters seeking an alternative to Hillary Clinton, but not so much to voters looking to ditch Donald Trump. Although I don’t even like to think about having a Libertarian in the White House, given the nonsense that Grover Norquist, another Libertarian, has caused with his well-enforced pledge against raising taxes, I favor having more than two parties involved in America elections and I favor it even more in times like these when there is such an enormous partisan divide.

Kill Hillary?..the Fight for Women’s Rights

Hillary Clinton c

Donald Trump3

 

The battles women have fought for their rights have been many and fierce. There is a museum exhibit that has a table set with 39 plates for women who got a seat at the table through stubborn will and tenacious intelligence. There are 999 names on the white tile floor below the table of women who contributed much but did not quite win a coveted seat.

There is a Women’s Rights National Historical Park in Seneca Falls, NY to commemorate the first Women’s Rights Convention held there in July, 1848 and to honor the women who courted cultural disdain and ostracism to fight the surprisingly long battle to get men to accept women as equals.

There is no part of our original Constitution or our Bill of Rights that acknowledged females as people and there is no language that denies that women are people. It was not unprecedented in Europe to have Queens, but it was usually treated as sort of an aberration and Queens were almost forced to marry, except in the famous case of Elizabeth II in England. Men in early America did not even consider giving women the right to vote and women did not think to petition for it. Culturally men ruled the roost when the Constitution was written.

Women Suffragettes won the vote in a sort of a mash up with the Prohibition ladies in 1919 and the Constitution was amended to include the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote in 1920. Now it is the 21st century and we have still never elected a woman to our highest office and women are sadly underrepresented in Congress. Wouldn’t it be fine to have a woman President when this amendment celebrated its one hundredth anniversary?

womens rights, seneca falls big

As I watch the media pile hypothetical sin after hypothetical sin onto Hillary Clinton who is running to be our President in 2016 I can’t help but think that this is the last gasp of men grasping to hang on to power, which men are not even losing, only sharing.

MSNBC has some of the worst Hillary bashers, although these men could not actually want Trump to be President. Joe Scarborough, Mark Halperin who has even joined Scarborough on Morning Joe lately, Chuck Todd, and their many male guests go on and on about Hillary’s “unfavorable” like members of a gossipy 50’s coffee klatch full of mean girls.

Even when Donald Trump (who knows very well that Hillary has no plans to change the 2nd Amendment in any way) dog whistles (loudly) to the NRA and the 2nd Amendment people – people whose first thought in a fight is perhaps to vote with a gun – and uses a deliberately veiled reference that could be construed as an invitation to assassination, the equivocation begins almost immediately. Never mind that these could be the same militia people who were prepared to start a war on behalf of a rancher who was cheating by grazing his cows on government land without paying the rather reasonable fees. Donald Trump knows that there are mentally ill people out there who would delight in killing Hillary, or, in fact, anyone Trump fingered; so do the news people who have now turned on Hillary Clinton (to escape the wrath of the Donald?).

Hillary has been smeared with so much mud by all these men that we may never know if any of it is real. These men spent the entire day after Donald Trump threw out his off the cuff threat arguing that he did not know what he was saying and that he was trying to be funny. Well I have a hypothetical for all Trump’s defenders. He did not phrase his remarks the way he did by accident; they were in fact carefully crafted to walk the legal line and be deniable in future conversations. They were designed to make his followers swoon once again at Donald’s audacity and to elicit the twisted admiration that he loves to bask in.

Yesterday the top story shifted so quickly to the unproven scandal of the supposed pay for play activities of the Clinton Foundation and Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State that I got whiplash. Today we are deep into Hillary bashing and repeating Donald’s excuses which somehow always allows him to repeat the jabs he has recently been most proud of pulling off. No matter what Hillary has or hasn’t done it can’t be as poisonous as what these folks are doing. Mayor Giuliani, shame on you.

So men are obviously not ready for a female President and women are back in this place where we have another fight on our hands and we have been fighting this particular battle for the past eight years in one way or another. The war on women in which Republicans tried to fight against women’s freedom to control their own bodies and their own reproductive rights was often a fight about the beliefs of some men that the world was a better place when women were submissive and when they stayed at home. Women’s pursuit of satisfying careers ruined the nuclear family, or so these men believe, and all manner of cultural evils have ensued, so if we put women back in the kitchen these disruptive cultural trends will go away and there will be peace in the land forever and ever. There are men who fervently believe this stuff and they do not want Hillary Clinton, or indeed, any woman to be the President of the United States.

While women would like to win something without a pitched battle and tons of mental and social angst that is not what is going to happen in the 2016 election. It is as fraught a moment as any instance of cultural change and rather than dancing and toasting with champagne we will obviously be slogging through mud right to the bitter end.

 

Jill Stein, Too Far Out for America

peace

Jill Stein is sort of groovy in some ways. I agree with her that fracking should be banned. There is a real connection between environmental factors and human health. I remember Love Canal. Stein is a medical doctor with degrees from Harvard. She was an internist for 25 years and she taught future doctors at Harvard Medical School. She fought the industries in her state that ran by burning coal because the pollution was so harmful to living things. She stands up for the things she believes and she has earned some praise for her passion.

However, Jill Stein is sort of far out in other ways, literally way out there in terms of her backing for some discredited causes. In fact I have heard that some call her the Ben Carson of the left. She has given some support to the anti-vax movement by refusing to give her unequivocal acceptance of scientific studies that show no connection between vaccines and autism. Some people who are against vaccinating their children are now arguing that the scheduling of these vaccines is the variable that has contributed to the rise in autism in America. Jill Stein does not say anything to rule this out. It is dangerous when there are 7 billion+ people on the planet. What we definitely do not need is an outbreak of smallpox.

Stein is also against GMO’s (genetically modified organisms) and many others in the forefront of the stay-healthy-eat-pure-hike-kayak-and-bike-and –you-can-live-forever crowd are with her on this. There is nothing really wrong with being anti-GMO although so far no truly harmful effects have been found. Many on the “hippie” fringes of the left believe that messing with Mother Nature always comes back to bite us in the butt. Partnering with this passion is Stein’s support for the argument that nicotine based fertilizers are killing our honey bees. In an article in Slate magazine correspondent Jordan Weissmann, says that most evidence suggests that our bees are doing just fine. However you feel about these matters, these issues are still a bit “out there” as part of a Presidential agenda.

Mrs. Stein has tacked a few new concerns on to her environmental agenda which are a better fit to a broader Presidential agenda but which could also qualify as pandering. She has promised to have the government pay off all student debt using the same mysterious economic trick that was given the title of “quantitative easing” when it was used to buy up bad mortgages and bail out the banks. She is really steamed about what she sees as a con which used a mathematical sounding term to cover up what amounted to a theft of taxpayer money. She shows us how clever and witty she is by creating the term “misleaders” to talk about our government officials and the Fed (which she would reform within an inch of its life). She often also backs reparations for Americans of African Descent, a very controversial piece of pandering which may or may not ever happen.

Jill Stein (picture her with a headband or a chain of flowers in her hair) wants to cut the military budget by 50% and close 700 military bases (picture her chaining herself to a fence near the Pentagon surrounded by angry Republicans and bewildered Democrats). That would certainly buy us a lot of student debt, although my nieces who just finished paying off their loans might be a bit ticked off. It also appeals to my hope for a future that has far more peace than war in it. But it flies in the face of the evidence we can find throughout human history that we are a contentious species and not quite ready to begin the thousand years of peaceful coexistence we would like to see stretching ahead of us.

John Lennon probably would have been a fan of Jill Stein and I am a huge fan of John Lennon, although I can’t imagine having him as our President and I cannot see us electing someone as “airy fairy” as Jill Stein either, although I hope she continues to shake her tambourine and fight the good fight at the intersection of the environment and the health of our planet. Even the anti-war stuff is beneficial, but certainly not Presidential. I cannot see the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein, getting much more than the 3% of the vote that she is currently getting.

Here are two of the sources I used to learn more about Jill Stein:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/07/27/jill_stein_is_not_the_savior_the_left_is_looking_for.html

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

 

Examining Republican Myths

Republican economic myth 3 big

The Economy

Why are we still hearing the whine of Republicans like gnats buzzing our brains by way of our ears, saying things like they do not dare let Democrats get their hands on the economy and that they might be able to cast an extremely reluctant vote for Hillary if she moderates her agenda for the economy? I seem to recall that the Republicans were in office when this country went into the Great American Recession in 2008. I keep thinking (don’t you) that it was lack of regulation on banks and investment firms that created a housing bubble which was destined to burst and do real damage to millions of Americans. I have, with many other middle class Americans, waited for some of that “trickle down” to get into my bank account but that hasn’t happened. We have examined these Republicans myths many times.

So, my question is, why do Republicans still think that they should be put in charge of the American economy? Why do they think that the same policies that tanked the American economy are what we need to set it right? These are the same Republicans who obstructed the Obama administration so much that he was never really allowed to stimulate the economy as much as he would have liked and who then want to use the slow recovery meme against the Democrats in the 2016 election. I guess they think we have very short memories, or that they are so popular (or that their media brainwashing has been so effective) that the truth does not matter.

Thomas Friedman, who leans right, wrote about this in yesterday’s New York Times. He cites Hillary Clinton’s progressive agenda as being anti-business and he suggests that her policies will discourage, rather than encourage investment and innovation. Although Hillary may not have been addressing business interests lately, she knows that this country’s engine of growth is business, employment and a spirit of invention that keeps us striving to break new ground. He makes it sound as if she will replace industry with infrastructure, private with public, but she is not advocating any such dichotomy. She is saying that improvements in infrastructure will boost employment, but will also push economic growth and make it easier and less expensive to do business in America.

Republican myth 3 big

Foreign Affairs

I also keep hearing a chorus, sort of like the chorus in a Greek tragedy, softly chanting a refrain that tells us the heroic tale of the mighty Republicans who are much better at foreign affairs and winning battles than those dumb Democrats who seem to think that we can rely on diplomacy, alliances, and hit and run soldiering. In this version of the Republican myths they blame the Democrats, especially Hillary, for the chaos in Libya and they tell us that Obama and Hillary are to blame for the upheavals in the entire Middle East as if we have already forgotten who took the lid off the pot in Iraq (43). As if the internet played no part in the events of the turn of this century.

They are caught in a narrative that suggests that complex world events have simple causes. According to Republicans people can’t cause climate change, but one person, acting on his/her own can topple empires and create global political chaos with well-intentioned but clumsy advice. Yes Obama backed off from the “red line” in Syria, but where would we be right now if he didn’t? I suppose in GOP-world we would be shut of Assad, the Syrian people would not be flooding Europe (so that their children can have some quality to their lives), and there would be no ISIS. But this is all hypothetical and we might just be stuck sending our sons and daughters into a situation that is still in flux and cannot be solved with powerful rifles and dead soldiers.

They insist that ISIS would not exist if Obama had never brought the troops home from Iraq and the rest of us insist that ISIS would not exist if Bush had never sent our troops to Iraq. By artificially speeding up an awakening that probably was inevitable but perhaps not quite so imminent chaos was loosed on the world in the sense of the conflicting sects of a religion that we once saw as monolithic but which was not, in the sense of how the Islamic religion, which has been left in a peaceful-seeming equilibrium will eventually either temper its fundamentalism with modern secularism or will wall itself off in an ecstasy of purity and either turn its back on the rest of us or force our foreheads to the floor. I think Bush would have done better by all of us if he had gone directly to Afghanistan and left Iraq alone, although the taunting of Saddam Hussein was hard to ignore. Once the Middle East awakened to the 21st century, some Muslims with disgust, some with interest, the changes we are experiencing there were probably inevitable.

The GOP shows no more prescience or military brilliance when faced with our current dilemmas than the Democrats and, in fact, because they do not like to approach the problems we face with any delicacy, their desire to stomp around using the dusty boots of America’s children, and their bombast would actually be harmful. Many people believe that Hillary Clinton is too hawkish to conduct our foreign affairs in these combustible times, but I like to think that Hillary is unlikely to turn Obama’s foreign policy approach aside and become an avenging Amazon. She has too much compassion for women and children to leave the effects of her decisions on them out of the equation.

The GOP, if you really consider the past seven or eight years and the mistakes of G. W., has nothing to offer us on either the American economy or our foreign policy, but Hillary will still take their stand on these issues into account because she wants to unify, rather than divide, America. The Republicans cannot be trusted to do the same if they are in control.

August Book List 2016

stack of books on the dark wood background. toning. selective focus on the middle book
From a Google Image Search

My August Book List 2016 is compiled from four sources: Amazon, Publisher’s Weekly, the Independent Booksellers, and the New York Times Book Review

 

Amazon

 

Wolf Road: A Novel by Beth Lewis

Dark Matter: A Novel by Blake Crouch

The Heavenly Table: A Novel by Donald Ray Pollock

Chaos Monkeys: Obscene Fortune and Random Failure in Silicon Valley by Antonio Garcia Martinez  (NF)

Underground Airlines by Ben H. Winters

A Hundred Thousand Worlds by Bob Proehl

Here Comes the Sun by Nicole Dennis-Benn

As Good as Gone: A Novel by Larry Watson

Pierced by the Sun by Laura Esquivel

Pond by Claire-Louise Bennett

Invincible Summer by Alice Adams

Night of the Animals by Bill Broun

 

Mysteries and Thrillers

 

The Black Widow by Daniel Silva

Wolf Lake: A Novel by Ruth Ware

The Heavenly Table: A Novel by Donald Ray Pollock

The Castle of Kings by Oliver Potzsch

I Am No One: A Novel by Patrick Flanery

All is Not Forgotten: A Novel by Wendy Walter

How to Set a Fire and Why: A Novel by Jesse Ball

The Last One: A Novel by Alexandra Oliva

Dark Matter: A Novel by Blake Crouch

 

Nonfiction

 

The Voyeur’s Motel by Gay Talese

 

Science Fiction and Fantasy

 

Just One Damned Thing After Another: The Chronicles of St. Mary’s, Book One by Jodi Taylor

Time Siege by Wesley Chu

The Dark Side by Anthony O’Neill

 

Publisher’s Weekly

 

Wintering: A Novel by Peter Geye (Sequel to The Lighthouse Road)

The Heavenly Table by Donald Ray Pollock

Problems by Jade Sharma

Before the Fall by Noah Hawley

Magnate: The Knickerbocker Club by Joanna Shupe

The Girls: A Novel by Emma Cline

One Hundred Twenty-One Days by Michele Audin (trans. by Christiana Hills)

 

July 25th

 

You Will Know Me by Megan Abbott

Dark Matter by Blake Crouch

In Loving Memory by Winona Kent (sequel to Persistence of Memory)

The Unseen World by Liz Moore

 

Fall Books

 

The Underground Railroad by Colson Whitehead

Commonwealth by Ann Patchett

Swing Time by Zadie Smith

Here I Am by Jonathan Safran Foer

The Mothers by Brit Bennett

 

Mystery, Thriller, Crime

 

The Lost Boy by Camilla Lackberg

IQ by Joe Ide

The One Man by Andrew Gross

 

Independent Booksellers

 

The Rocks by Peter Nichols

Before the Fall by Noah Hawley

Sweetbitter by Stephanie Danler

First Come Love by Emily Griffin

The Woman in Cabin 10 by Ruth Ware

Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi

Underground Airlines by Ben H. Winters

Barkskins by Annie Proulx

Belgravia by Julian Fellowes

Milk and Honey by Rupi Kaur

The Cartel by Don Winslow

Last Words by Michael Koryta

A Banquet of Consequences by Elizabeth George

Pond by Clair-Louise Bennett

A Hero of France by Alan Furst

The Singles Game by Lauren Weisberger

The Trouble with Goats and Sheep by Joanna Cannon

Siracusa by Delia Ephron

LaRose by Louise Eldrich

The Vegetarian by Han Kang

Eligible by Curtis Sittenfeld

Lily and the Octopus by Steve Rowley

The Light of Paris by Eleanor Brown

The Mandibles: A Family, 2029 – 2047 by Lionel Shriver

Lilac Girls by Martha Hall Kelly

The Course of Love by Alain de Botton

Zero K by Dan DeLillo

The Trap by Melanie Raabe

The Summer Before the War by Helen Simonson

The Noise of Time by Julian Barnes

They May Not Mean to, But They Do by Cathleen Schine

NYT Book Review

 

July 10

 

Vinegar Girl by Anne Tyler

Invincible Summer by Alice Adams

She Poured Her Heart Out by Jean Thompson

 

Crime Fiction

 

The Innocents by Ace Atkins (Bk. 6)

Another One Goes Tonight by Peter Lovesey

Fatal Pursuit by Martin Walker

Brighton by Michael Harvey

 

Editor’s Choice

 

The Sun in Your Eyes by Deborah Shapiro

The Drowned Detective by Neil Jordan

Born on a Tuesday by Elnathan Neil Jordan

Grief is the Thing with Feathers by Max Porter

 

July 17

 

The Mandibles A Family 2029-2047 by Lionel Shriver

The Sunlight Pilgrims by Jenni Fagan

Belgravia by Julian Fellowes

 

Editor’s Choice

 

Lucky Strikes by Louis Bayard

 

July 24

 

Heroes of the Frontier by Dave Eggers

Chronicle of Last Summer by Yasmine El Rashidi

Miss Jane by Brad Watson

The Heavenly Table by Donald Ray Pollock

Pond by Clair-Louise Bennett

The Veins of the Ocean by Patricia Engel

 

Crime Fiction

 

Let the Devil Out by Sarah Crichton

Guilty Minds by Joseph Finder

Fall From Grace by Tim Weaver

The Lost Girls by Heather Young

The Black Widow by Daniel Silva

 

July 31, 2016

 

The Devils of Cardona by Matthew Carr

Good as Gone by Amy Gentry

All the Missing Girls by Megan Miranda

The Death of Rex Nhongo by C B George

You Will Know Me by Megan Abbott

Breaking Cover by Stella Remington

The Wolf of Sarajevo by Matthew Palmer

I Am No One by Patrick Flanery

City of Secrets by Stewart O’Nan

Missing, Presumed by Susan Steiner

Dark Matter by Blake Crouch

Paradime by Alan Glynn

Under the Harrow by Flynn Berry

Dancing with the Tiger by Lili Wright

Exposure by Helen Dunmore

The Kingdom by Fuminori Nakumura

The Crow Girl by Eric Axl Sund

Among the Dead and Dreaming by Samuel Ligon

Fever by Tim Baker

Judenstaat by Simon Zelitch

Underground Airlines by Ben H. Winters

 

 

The Last Great Conspiracy Theory?

 

conspiracytheorybig

Have we reached the last great conspiracy theory? We have been watching a conspiracy theory tennis tournament play out between the Democrats and the Republicans at least since 2012. The Benghazi tennis ball has been smashed back and forth for ages because the damning revelations were supposed to be timed to interfere with the 2016 election. Finally the anticlimactic report of the last Benghazi investigation (we hope it is the last because it’s costing the American people big bucks) concludes that all evidence suggests that Hillary Clinton was not guilty of any wrongdoing in this devastating attack in Libya. There was no assistance that could have arrived in time to save our people in Benghazi and Hillary Clinton was not, as many stated, asleep at the most crucial moments.

The fact that Hillary Clinton used a private server while at the State Department was the one juicy piece of info that came out of the Benghazi investigations. The Republicans put the Benghazi investigation to rest because they gleefully imagined that Hillary would be indicted by the FBI for something, treason, I guess. This seems a rather hyperbolic outcome to wish for given that it would suggest that Hillary is a seer who knew that the attacks in Benghazi would happen when she became Secretary of State and planned in advance to cover her tracks. But it sort of fits the Lucifer label that Republicans tried to attach to her at the RNC last week. (Republicans have a thing about Lucifer – they are so paranoid about the UN that they speak of something called the Luciferian Church of the UN, which does not exist.) I suspect they are saying that if Hillary is Lucifer on earth she could have known about the Benghazi attacks in advance. If you have to use this kind of bizarre reasoning to get where you want to go wouldn’t it seem that it is time to backtrack and start over, or just be quiet?

So now the GOP is left with just one more tennis ball to bat around and they must try to make the volley last until Hillary is tarred and feathered just before people go to the polls because Republicans cannot win this election without sliming their opponent, considering the caliber of their own candidate. This final round of our conspiracy tournament involves the Clinton Foundation and the arms deals made by the State Department while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. It is possible that these are two separate spheres that simply look like they overlap (a simple conflict of interest), or it is also possible that there was collusion between Bill and Hillary and that her arms deals while in the State Department were actually tied to the donations made to the Clinton Foundation. I have spoken before about the difficulty with seeing simple cause-effect relationships in complex matters. You must carefully connect the dots to prove that the money given to the Clinton Foundation was indeed used to influence arms deals in the State Department. The optics are bad, but is there actually any connection?

I don’t recall a time when we have had a husband and wife team where each partner had aspirations for the Presidency of the United States of America. Had the times been different for women would Eleanor Roosevelt have made a great Presidential candidate? Possibly. But that moment did not happen. But we are fifty plus years past those days. We now have a past President, Bill Clinton, doing his post Presidential best to help save the people on the planet from poverty and exploitation. And we have Hillary Clinton who believes she can do a good job as our first female President. I assume Bill Clinton’s goals are altruistic. Others assume he is using the Clinton Foundation to increase his personal wealth and bankroll his wife’s election campaign. People who hypothesize about this know that such activities are illegal and yet they believe that Bill and Hillary Clinton are so powerfully connected and privileged that they will not only steal from a charitable foundation with the family name right on it but also that their guilt will be covered up by powerful people. That all sounds pretty diabolical. But is it true?

Furthermore the argument goes on to say that Hillary drummed up contributions for the family charity while she made her rounds as Secretary of State and that she traded State Department arms deals for those contributions. There are the charts hanging out on the internet that look pretty damning.   http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

clinton foundation chart 1 big

 

 

clinton foundation chart 2 big

 

Yikes! I can see why people get all exercised over this. But just because events are contiguous does not prove a cause-effect relationship. If there is a true cause and effect connection between these two sets of data then perhaps Bill and Hillary Clinton should be in jail. But, even though Hillary’s judgment was called into question on the email server decision, it would take some pretty stunningly unrealistic rationalizations for the Clintons to sell arms through the State Department in exchange for campaign contributions from foreign governments and make those funds look like charitable donations. Why would anyone expect to get away with something so blatantly illegal when contemplating a run for the highest office in our nation? I still do not accept that the Clintons are corrupt enough to plan and execute a scheme like this. I believe that the Clinton Foundation is Bill’s project and does have charitable goals. I also believe that Hillary did not go around the globe trading ostensibly charitable contributions from foreign governments for arms offered to foreign nations by the State Department. Connect the dots if you can. If you can’t retire the ball and get off the court and end this third round of the great conspiracy tennis tournament.

 

 

Donald Trump is Deranged: The Details

narcissist 4 sm

Once again I argue that Donald Trump is deranged. His derangement takes several forms. He is, first of all, a certifiable megalomaniac (see narcissistic personality disorder). People with this disorder are sometimes leaders because their ego drives them to destroy all obstacles in their path, but they are usually too selfish to share power with anyone. While Julius Caesar began his governance of Rome by heading a republican form of government, he soon became disillusioned with the Roman senators and he felt that he towered over them in every way. He became “dictator in perpetuity” and the Fall of Rome began. (By the way, he was also assassinated,) Donald Trump is just such a man. He does not have equals, only underlings.

He is not the right person to head a Democracy. He does not even believe in free speech unless it praises him. This should be frightening to all who love America and what we stand for. If he gets elected I will be scared to speak against him. Is he just a verbal bully or is he a true thug who will use power like a weapon? We don’t know, do we? I was only ever nervous about speaking out against two other Presidents – Nixon and G W Bush (because of his henchmen) – both Republicans.

The Republican Party seems to think that in order to keep order in America we must flirt with fascism. (Donald Trump acts like a fascist.) They don’t like people who speak softly even if they do carry a big stick. They want to be sure the world knows that any leader they back will talk tough and use that big stick, with malice, at the slightest offense. The problem with this is that our biggest stick is actually a nuke, which Donald Trump refuses to say he will only use under the most dire circumstances.

Donald Trump is a deal maker, which in his case, means that he will do almost any sleazy old thing as long as it is marginally legal. So he tells Americans, who think our government is taking care of so many undeserving people that it can no longer take care of them, that he will build a wall – that he will kick out all the freeloaders. And he will bring back all the jobs. But if he can’t do these deals, he will not mind disappointing his followers and he will do different deals which they may or may not like. That is the true “Art of the Deal.”

Trump seems to have the emotional maturity of a child. Name-calling, cheap taunts, foolish nicknames, these things may look like they send opponents scurrying but his targets only disengage because if they fight back they have to lose any gravitas they might ever have in the future. Donald is a junk yard dog who will keep throwing dirtier dirt until his temper tantrum gets him what he wants. He may seem to win but he really just sets his “phaser” to stun and those he vanquishes decide to walk away and live to fight another day.

I understand that the things he promises look appealing to some. He seems like he can bring back simpler times when Americans were predominantly Christians of European origin who spoke English. His followers seem to yearn for this and believe that he will basically give them back the America of their childhoods. The world has moved on however, and it will most likely prove impossible for Donald Trump to produce an American future that corresponds to his fantastical promises. The 21st century is what it is and that is what we must learn to participate in and we must prove that we know how to thrive even as our world changes. As for Donald, if he is President I hope he gets good meds. If he is not elected he can be as eccentric as he pleases. He is wealthy enough to get away with it.