tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-76432938718426660062024-03-13T14:50:12.444-04:00Making Sense with Steve LeserSteven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.comBlogger214125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-43350061726458975552023-01-13T12:21:00.003-05:002023-01-13T12:21:42.130-05:00Republicans lie and use a Questionable Statistic to Measure Effectiveness of Border Security Efforts<p>In my regular job, I am both lucky enough and unlucky enough to have thousands of metrics and statistics on the performance of my teams to sift through. When you are presented a set of data regarding something you are trying to measure, you need to think through what is being measured and what it is actually telling you because it is very easy to misuse or misinterpret statistics.</p><p>Republicans, including Texas Governor Greg Abbott, use the statistic of number of Border Apprehensions per year to determine the success or failure of an administration regarding immigration. There are a lot of problems with using this stat which I will get into in a moment, but let's assume, for now, that this is the best statistic to use.</p><p>If it is a good statistic to use, then the most successful President in recent times in terms of dealing with immigration is Barack Obama. Furthermore, Donald Trump made the issue worse after Barack Obama's successes. This is all shown on the graph below, border apprehensions were high under George W Bush, at historic lows under Obama and increased under Trump and then increased further under Biden.</p><p>Something tells me this is not the message Republicans hope we take away from all of this. </p><p>Let's start with the discussion of why this statistic doesn't say what Republicans think it is saying.</p><p>First, let's acknowledge that the number of arrests for a crime is something local police departments count as a metric of success. If a precinct is having issues with robbery, for instance, you want to see a lot of robbery arrests in that precinct. That means the police are doing what they are supposed to be doing to deal with the problem, arresting those who commit that crime. </p><p>The President is responsible for law enforcement at the Federal level, and he is responsible for border security and other types of national security. </p><p>The letter Texas Governor Greg Abbott sent to Biden accused Biden of being for open borders because of the large number of border arrests of people coming across the Southwestern border. Doesn't that mean the opposite of what Abbott is saying? Isn't that like accusing police of not caring about robbery because they have been arresting a lot of people for robbery?</p><p>If Biden was for open borders, he would direct the US Border Patrol to not arrest people coming over the border. It doesn't get any simpler to understand than that. The statistic that Republicans are using disproves the very thing they are trying to say. </p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiTE6z3S3gMQYN8f2YaLErX4VWy8lwG7hSkqkOIKwlzMLLLJ-uYDIq5tOTCo37QmxOzyfzgv40zcDl5M0MmUVBkTewAfAN8AJkad35gtJ33KHAx28ZmKQQWiQ00USs1svVMl-0t4CteE0u2VhJ8ZfFQd5ieaOFcDXh_BMJXoRemCYORaQwY_RuBBayP" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="570" data-original-width="754" height="485" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiTE6z3S3gMQYN8f2YaLErX4VWy8lwG7hSkqkOIKwlzMLLLJ-uYDIq5tOTCo37QmxOzyfzgv40zcDl5M0MmUVBkTewAfAN8AJkad35gtJ33KHAx28ZmKQQWiQ00USs1svVMl-0t4CteE0u2VhJ8ZfFQd5ieaOFcDXh_BMJXoRemCYORaQwY_RuBBayP=w640-h485" width="640" /></a></p><p>I think it is impossible for something this simple to understand to have escaped the staff of Republican elected officials. I am sure that even if Abbott couldn't figure this out himself, that his staff have explained this to him.</p><p>In short, Republicans who are elected officials and conservative pundits know they are lying when they use this statistic they way they have been using it. </p><p>Like so many issues, Republicans don't actually want to solve it, and have no shame in lying about it, they just want to use it to try to score political points against Democrats.<br /></p><p>For those who might care about what is happening, the increase in arrests is explained by two things. First, migrants who wanted to come to the US from March 2020 to the end of 2021 could not do so because of border restrictions relating to Covid. So, there was a huge pent-up demand in people trying to come to this country. </p><p>Now you might be saying, if they are coming from Mexico, the additional restrictions on the border from Mexico to the US shouldn't have presented that big of an obstacle. </p><p>Exactly! There is a second phenomenon at play here. For the first time ever, more migrants are arriving in the US via the Southwest border from countries other than Mexico or the northern triangle countries of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador (see graph below). So in order to get here, they had to pass through multiple borders, each of whom had Covid restrictions between the dates I mentioned above. It was simply too difficult to do so. Now that everyone has relaxed restrictions, people are trying to come again in huge numbers, and they are getting arrested in the US when they try.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjB7djEtRZR8MqnCH_r8Uy39-yibZAWbbnMrqtRKggOTj1DL-325LAoGgrEGIYGf061YpYWafBCoC867OASmYe13rqaSsMsmu-O6Pa2Dpqc5CvVvLUtBPjwAkwMfwQkYhsX-d95xsVcE5D15KmCwrt56DGHoPHpAfcWUzGGZucUIiO0xnAdc24KDQ6Y" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img data-original-height="479" data-original-width="922" height="332" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjB7djEtRZR8MqnCH_r8Uy39-yibZAWbbnMrqtRKggOTj1DL-325LAoGgrEGIYGf061YpYWafBCoC867OASmYe13rqaSsMsmu-O6Pa2Dpqc5CvVvLUtBPjwAkwMfwQkYhsX-d95xsVcE5D15KmCwrt56DGHoPHpAfcWUzGGZucUIiO0xnAdc24KDQ6Y=w640-h332" width="640" /></a></div><br />For those interested, the majority of people coming to the US from other than Mexico and the Northern Triangle countries are coming from Cuba, Venezuela, Colombia and Nicaragua. This complicates efforts to expel them, more can be read about that here: <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/29/us/mexico-border-encounter-data-analysis-cec/index.html">https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/29/us/mexico-border-encounter-data-analysis-cec/index.html</a><p></p><p>Dealing with this problem is a complex issue, but don't go to Republicans expecting an honest appraisal of the situation. </p>Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-69612654270241190132022-11-14T18:40:00.008-05:002022-11-14T19:03:38.874-05:00 Key moments of the degeneration of the Republican Party that got it to the batshit crazy state it is in today<p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidZL3QD1MJXil62Iv2uwpN4jEmSD3km8Ih25ZyUbx6ZbElM1YE6XBNILW1vpq2YkOZLlWMaUX-tEIQptAn4w7xj0CSqv_d0KFu1s2avjGh-u1_9ZMHoCFBbprUexFM9uJvgMIXHIO8Pz5OOCRy-5f8SVtil7D9oZAoK6sKsltGi_oSXrVURu4HR7Al/s762/Steve%20Promo%20Pic.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="762" data-original-width="762" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidZL3QD1MJXil62Iv2uwpN4jEmSD3km8Ih25ZyUbx6ZbElM1YE6XBNILW1vpq2YkOZLlWMaUX-tEIQptAn4w7xj0CSqv_d0KFu1s2avjGh-u1_9ZMHoCFBbprUexFM9uJvgMIXHIO8Pz5OOCRy-5f8SVtil7D9oZAoK6sKsltGi_oSXrVURu4HR7Al/w200-h200/Steve%20Promo%20Pic.jpg" width="200" /></a></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: medium;">Republicans are doing a bit of soul searching after their dismal efforts in Election 2022. Here are some key moments in the deterioration of that party that led it to where it is today:</span></p><p class="p2" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 24px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="s1"></span><br /></span></p><p class="p1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span class="s1" style="font-family: inherit;">1964 - Republican Presidential nominee Barry Goldwater implements the Southern strategy wherein the Republican Party stokes the tensions of whites in the south who are upset about desegregation and the civil rights movement. Racists in the south (and no, not all white southerners are racist by a long shot) who had been Democrats up until this time, became solidly Republican over the next 16 years. </span></p><p class="p2" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 24px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="s1"></span><br /></span></p><p class="p1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span class="s1" style="font-family: inherit;">1980 - In his Presidential Campaign, GOP nominee Ronald Reagan brings lunatic evangelical Christians and other extreme Christian sects into the Republican Party by adopting a firm anti-Abortion stance and paying lip service to various other Christian values. Pope John Paul II sells out and helps move many Catholics into the GOP. Christianity in the US is warped as a result, giving up its advocacy for the poor and its insistence on kindness and non-violence to support trickle down economics and a militant Republican foreign policy, and the Republican Party is warped as a result eschewing a reasonable approach toward many issues for religious extremism. </span></p><p class="p2" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 24px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="s1"></span><br /></span></p><p class="p1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span class="s1" style="font-family: inherit;">1980-1988 - Reagan abandons standard fiscal conservatism creating the first massive deficit spending in the US since the Second World War. Republicans will play lip service towards debt and deficit issues after this, particularly when Democrats are in charge, but will never act to do anything about them. (The only President that has balanced the federal budget since 1972 is a Democrat, Bill Clinton.)</span></p><p class="p2" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 24px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="s1"></span><br /></span></p><p class="p1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span class="s1" style="font-family: inherit;">1980-1988 - Reagan abandons traditional isolationist Republican foreign policy to run an aggressive interventionist and militant foreign policy. Reagan invades the island of Granada and provides massive support for Nicaraguan contra rebels in violation of a law congress enacted (The Boland Amendment) to specifically limit aid to the contras. Reagan provides support to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan so they can fight off an invasion by the Soviet Union. The Mujahideen would largely evolve into the Taliban that exists in Afghanistan today that sheltered Al Qaeda during and after the 9/11 attacks. For the first time during the Reagan administration you hear the idea in the Republican Party that the state department should be abolished and foreign policy should be run out of the Department of Defense, a view many of them still have today.</span></p><p class="p2" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 24px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="s1"></span><br /></span></p><p class="p1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span class="s1" style="font-family: inherit;">2003 - Following the advice of a group-thinked cabal of neoconservatives called the Project for the New American Century, George W Bush invades Iraq without justification in an attempt to remake the Middle East into American style Democracies. This fails miserably.</span></p><p class="p2" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 24px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="s1"></span><br /></span></p><p class="p1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span class="s1" style="font-family: inherit;">2008 - Republicans are shellacked in elections that bring Democrat Barack Obama, the first Black President into the Whitehouse and also ushers in veto proof Democratic majorities into both houses of congress. Groups of Republicans begin to think they need to go on a listening tour of America to rethink Republican policies but are vetoed by none other than Rush Limbaugh who in March of 2009 takes to the airwaves to say “We don’t need a listening tour.” Thus an effort to remake Republicanism into something they get from reaching out to grassroots voters to find out what the voters want, <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>is squelched.</span></p><p class="p2" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 24px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="s1"></span><br /></span></p><p class="p1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-size: 19px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span class="s1" style="font-family: inherit;">2016 - Republicans nominate and elect Donald Trump. No further explanation needed.</span></p>Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-10266833932476045662022-11-07T00:01:00.008-05:002022-11-07T00:11:57.122-05:00Election 2022 or as I call it: The Great Republican Gaslighting Exercise<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidZL3QD1MJXil62Iv2uwpN4jEmSD3km8Ih25ZyUbx6ZbElM1YE6XBNILW1vpq2YkOZLlWMaUX-tEIQptAn4w7xj0CSqv_d0KFu1s2avjGh-u1_9ZMHoCFBbprUexFM9uJvgMIXHIO8Pz5OOCRy-5f8SVtil7D9oZAoK6sKsltGi_oSXrVURu4HR7Al/s762/Steve%20Promo%20Pic.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="762" data-original-width="762" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidZL3QD1MJXil62Iv2uwpN4jEmSD3km8Ih25ZyUbx6ZbElM1YE6XBNILW1vpq2YkOZLlWMaUX-tEIQptAn4w7xj0CSqv_d0KFu1s2avjGh-u1_9ZMHoCFBbprUexFM9uJvgMIXHIO8Pz5OOCRy-5f8SVtil7D9oZAoK6sKsltGi_oSXrVURu4HR7Al/w200-h200/Steve%20Promo%20Pic.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><p class="MsoNormal">Prior to this year, if you were to tell me that there would
be midterm elections in the US where the Unemployment rate is down at 3.7% (basically
full employment), the gross national product has increased every quarter of the current
congressional session indicating an expanding economy and that the party out of
power, Republicans in this case, would be successful at painting the Economy as
“bad” I would have laughed at you. "There is no way that could happen" is what I would have said.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgilN77OpolZFqXfAov7pF0LRi2W1J1BYIFLPOQ8M_Sip-AKSfJE-rTCX2fEjFTIlqVDWqthGa7Up2uJCtQGe-IyO8woXahyiShqE2bIcXz4gcomqkl3FoiZhI3_qsJeJFNbcu_dEBdjopBcYPdKe58nGvRPRQxvJX_HGHMJjlS0D58i0no8hsx7dtO/s624/Fred%20Unemployment%20rate.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="314" data-original-width="624" height="322" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgilN77OpolZFqXfAov7pF0LRi2W1J1BYIFLPOQ8M_Sip-AKSfJE-rTCX2fEjFTIlqVDWqthGa7Up2uJCtQGe-IyO8woXahyiShqE2bIcXz4gcomqkl3FoiZhI3_qsJeJFNbcu_dEBdjopBcYPdKe58nGvRPRQxvJX_HGHMJjlS0D58i0no8hsx7dtO/w640-h322/Fred%20Unemployment%20rate.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgg1A0IbU7j9z649gZWrBSg0EzotmRhQ7L-xJneRDtLLPleR8N8K0RyPepgNXRm4x8_ZqpOVE_WHoP1J4vAb0PFXCTX5PqrhMdWDDjTm5e3uV1-OfqmoLw4PRtA893dw7HKK1AT3GJpLnm0oJyzSVluIRhu2SLBJBt14fXnr_LAZkn8Lwwy6xOVPgYp/s624/US%20Annual%20GDP%20Rate.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="291" data-original-width="624" height="298" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgg1A0IbU7j9z649gZWrBSg0EzotmRhQ7L-xJneRDtLLPleR8N8K0RyPepgNXRm4x8_ZqpOVE_WHoP1J4vAb0PFXCTX5PqrhMdWDDjTm5e3uV1-OfqmoLw4PRtA893dw7HKK1AT3GJpLnm0oJyzSVluIRhu2SLBJBt14fXnr_LAZkn8Lwwy6xOVPgYp/w640-h298/US%20Annual%20GDP%20Rate.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">US Annual GDP Rate</p><o:p></o:p><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yet, here we are.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Republicans reading this are, I am sure, by this point
shouting at the screen saying “Inflation!” “Inflation!!!!!!!!!!!” Yes, there is
inflation. I will get to that shortly, but that is only one datapoint of many
economic indicators. Historically in the US If the economy was expanding, i.e.
the GDP growth I talked about earlier, and unemployment was low, we would all
be calling that a good economy, which it is.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, understanding that we are talking about economy where
the top two indicators show it to be a good economy, let’s talk about
inflation, the one aspect of the economy that isn’t where we would hope it
would be. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-no-proof: yes;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguopjkh6wcvVLgBKJMTVqVR4RMlWG5I9A6dbDqqHiSOmDA2zPF6kHl-X0i9y1uAOCzHJ9TsLW6QnpFH4au6nNlA81Uq9tR0aKydcF9vemD-eXCafxZ5diGrJQSvx7LqY9jAI4S4TBIVeOOBDw5gZnDFRomb3ny4s51pqXGZsufdDpjH24wDM_mW0_6/s651/Inflation%20by%20year.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="615" data-original-width="651" height="604" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguopjkh6wcvVLgBKJMTVqVR4RMlWG5I9A6dbDqqHiSOmDA2zPF6kHl-X0i9y1uAOCzHJ9TsLW6QnpFH4au6nNlA81Uq9tR0aKydcF9vemD-eXCafxZ5diGrJQSvx7LqY9jAI4S4TBIVeOOBDw5gZnDFRomb3ny4s51pqXGZsufdDpjH24wDM_mW0_6/w640-h604/Inflation%20by%20year.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><p></p>
<br />
<p class="MsoNormal">Since the late 1960s, the Annual US Inflation rate has
ranged from less than -2% in 2011 (deflation is generally an indicator of recession)
to over 14% during the oil crisis of the late 1970s. It averages somewhere
around 3 to 4 percent. The annual inflation rate in 2021 was 7% and it is currently
at about 8.2%. Generally when we are talking about high inflation, we are
talking about double digit increases (10%) or higher. We would prefer a lower
inflation rate, but rates under 10% are not very high.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">More germane to this election is, why is inflation high and should
Democrats be held responsible. I can take your through this, but, spoiler
alert, the answer is it is high because of what Trump and Biden (and congress during
their Presidencies) did and had to do to right the economic ship after Covid,
and no the Democrats and Biden should not be held responsible. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let’s talk about my Covid assertions above. First, let’s
remember, virtually all of the governments of the world shut down their economies
for about six months due to Covid in mid 2020 and for the six to twelve months
after that, the economies ran at a fraction of their pre-Covid output. So that
is twelve to eighteen months of very low economic output, no money being earned
by companies or people, factories not having orders and not producing,
essentially very few goods and services being produced. If you had told me prior to Covid that something like this would happen, I would expect at a
minimum that we would experience an economic depression in its aftermath with
unemployment at 25% and persisting that way for some time and other severe
economic impacts. After all, people still have to pay their rent and mortgage.
Where was that money coming from? What would happen to banks if mortgages wouldn’t
be paid for 6-18 months. How would companies keep employing people? How would
people buy food? How would people pay for electricity, internet, phone, etc if
they weren’t being paid? The government had to prop all of these things up for
hundreds of millions of people.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It says something that the governments of the world were
able to take action and prevent a complete collapse of the economies given
those circumstances. And what is it that the US and other governments did to
prevent this collapse? They injected trillions of dollars into the economy. After
March of 2020 and up until the end of his Presidency, Trump injected three
trillion dollars into the economy to shore it up during and after this shut down
of the economy. In the beginning of his Presidency, Biden injected another
three trillion dollars into the economy. Now, as I indicated, the fact that the
economy could be salvaged at all in the US and elsewhere given the circumstances
is still surprising to me. But if you think you can inject that kind of money
into an economy that isn’t producing goods and services and not have some specific
expected impacts, particularly where inflation is concerned, you don’t
understand economics. In fact, most brokers on Wall street were predicting
massive inflation in Fall of 2020 regardless of who won the Presidential
election since both Biden and Trump were promising additional rounds of large
stimulus were they to be elected. It was understood by both parties and their
economic experts that this would be required to keep the economy going.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So one large component of the inflation we are experiencing
globally, not just in the US is because governments had to rescue the economy
after Covid. In fact, the US is experiencing less inflation that most of the other
large developed countries. Here is a graph of the inflation by commodity group
of the other G7 countries. They all are experiencing inflation, as expected,
but the US is generally doing better than the rest of the group.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzcAl0nYpss-FTKuMkvkT1WdBE9BUcBwF6nlmQzRbT9vqL5EKYhe8jQGJKoC92v1kEIeMVL2681lTH47WDig-TBRS1RynRNjOMeyJU2VYMhKlVuBAqpPDEVWYgQJqMv4LIFqAZ1ip4q-zZpJwTpdnjDphjstyQ_KeApssIcS2yjD25URqJgopjOI5q/s663/Inflation%20among%20g7.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="395" data-original-width="663" height="382" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzcAl0nYpss-FTKuMkvkT1WdBE9BUcBwF6nlmQzRbT9vqL5EKYhe8jQGJKoC92v1kEIeMVL2681lTH47WDig-TBRS1RynRNjOMeyJU2VYMhKlVuBAqpPDEVWYgQJqMv4LIFqAZ1ip4q-zZpJwTpdnjDphjstyQ_KeApssIcS2yjD25URqJgopjOI5q/w640-h382/Inflation%20among%20g7.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><o:p></o:p><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Also imagine, if you will, all this money that had been
injected into these economies, but there weren’t many goods and services to
spend it on. Factories took a long time to spin up again and get to full production.
Shipping companies had to get their container ships up and working again
sailing the pacific from Asia to the US and other routes. So you had all of
this money and not many goods and services, that is a recipe for inflation and governments
couldn’t do too much about that. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I would be saying this regardless of who had won the White House
in 2020. It is a miracle that the economies of the US and the other countries
of the world did not fail completely in the wake of the Covid shutdowns. Disruptions
to entire economies on the scale of what we saw with Covid are rare. In fact I
am not sure anything like that has happened since the industrial revolution ended
in the mid 1800s. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is completely bizarre, given the circumstances, that anyone
is blaming the party in power for inflation. I suppose if you know absolutely
nothing about macroeconomics, if you don’t even understand that adding tons of
money to an economy without adding goods and services will mean inflation, then
I guess it might be understandable. I find it hard to believe that people are
that ignorant of economics. For sure, Republican and Conservative pundits who
are selling this to grassroots voters know better, they just don’t care that they
are lying. That isn’t a surprise to me, that’s how those folks operate.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">If it goes like the polls are predicting, this will be the first time in American history that a party with positive GDP growth and an unemployment rate this low will be punished by losing congress. And it will happen because of ignorance.</p><br /><br /><br />Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-72116321667288859602022-10-10T13:44:00.005-04:002022-10-10T13:44:43.293-04:00The Herschel Walker saga is the latest example of how religion and politics poison each other<p><b> How Politics poisons Religion</b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Once a religious group decides it is in bed with a political
party or political leader, it must accept all the ways that party or person
differs with that religion’s values. For instance, in terms of Evangelical
Christian and the Republican Party:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Christianity talks about how one should help the
poor and that being rich makes it hard to enter heaven. Republican values empower
the rich to get richer and are not just indifferent but outright hostile toward
efforts to help the poor. Christians who support the Republican party and its candidates
are forced to overlook this.</li><li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->The death penalty is an obvious problem for
Christians. But the death penalty is part of the Republican party platform.
Christians who support the Republican party and its candidates are forced to overlook
this.</li><li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->The Republican party does not believe in funding
universal healthcare. Reagan famously pulled funding for state mental health
facilities resulting in the hordes of mentally ill homeless people we see on
the streets of major cities today. Prior to Reagan, those people would have
been off the streets and in mental health hospitals getting the treatment they
need. There is zero doubt where any of the Abrahamic based religions, Christianity,
Judaism, or Islam, stand on this. According to each of those religions we
should be helping the sick. And frankly, the atheistic/agnostic/humanist
position is in complete agreement. It is horrible for a society capable of
doing so not to help the sick. Christians who support the Republican party and
its candidates are forced to overlook this.</li><li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Abortion. This is poisoning in both directions. So,
Christians are anti-abortion. But when Republican politicians like Walker and
Trump have either had one or pressured their paramours to get one, Christians must
overlook it and support the candidate anyway. Usually you hear the pathetic
justification “Oh, they prayed for forgiveness so it’s OK” as in “Abortion is
bad! Abortion is bad! Walker and Trump pressured someone to get one? Oh, well,
I am sure they prayed and were forgiven.” Of course, that consideration would
not be given to a Democratic candidate in the same position, even if they somehow
provided proof that they prayed for forgiveness.</li></ul><!--[if !supportLists]--><o:p></o:p><p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>How in turn Religion Poisons Politics</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Since Reagan brought the evangelical Christians
into the Republican Party, you have had a host of candidates like Walker with
questionable credentials and questionable conservatism, but they call
themselves “Christians”, so they get nominations instead of someone who is
smarter and better represents conservative values. It’s no surprise that the
death of intellectual conservatism started with Reagan. You no longer have
Republicans in the party like Jack Kemp or William F Buckley. The smartest
Republican of the last 20-30 years, Jon Huntsman Jr, a Conservative with a
track record of economic and foreign policy experience and talent, got no
traction at all in the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination process. Why, because
he isn’t a religious zealot who wears his religion on his sleeves. These polls
of party identification and education and religion over time show what has happened:
<a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/06/02/in-changing-u-s-electorate-race-and-education-remain-stark-dividing-lines/">https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/06/02/in-changing-u-s-electorate-race-and-education-remain-stark-dividing-lines/</a>
the Republican party has become more religious and less educated and the
Democratic party has become less religious and more educated.</li><li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Abortion. Conservatism, particularly the
Libertarian side of it would say that Government should keep its laws off human
bodies and their decisions. You see them saying that when it comes to vaccines
and masks (along with a heavy dose of science denialism and anti-intellectualism).
But Republicans are forced to support laws against their values when it comes
to abortion to placate the Christians they accepted into the party.</li></ul><!--[if !supportLists]--><o:p></o:p><p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast">Those are just the examples that come to me off the top of
my head without a lot of research. I am sure we can come up with more. This is all an example
of how power corrupts. The saying goes that power corrupts and absolute power
corrupts absolutely. I would say that religion and politics are two sources of
power that when combined corrupt each other absolutely.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-82939070229303215702020-03-11T19:04:00.003-04:002020-03-11T23:40:15.598-04:00Coronavirus (Covid-19) is a wake-up call. Pandemics happen & we need to be prepared<div style="text-align: left;">
Among major disasters that can potentially affect large percentages of the human race, few are as regularly recurring and as able to be mitigated as pandemics. In the 92-year period from 1918 to 2010 alone there were five influenza pandemics:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div>
<a href="https://scontent.fpac2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/1017354_10151682070214361_731818678_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&_nc_sid=7aed08&_nc_ohc=q7dq11HnSOIAX_IECgi&_nc_ht=scontent.fpac2-1.fna&oh=406cb5122e5ba41ec34cf6bd3963c1d6&oe=5E8E9776" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Image may contain: 1 person" border="0" height="200" src="https://scontent.fpac2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/1017354_10151682070214361_731818678_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&_nc_sid=7aed08&_nc_ohc=q7dq11HnSOIAX_IECgi&_nc_ht=scontent.fpac2-1.fna&oh=406cb5122e5ba41ec34cf6bd3963c1d6&oe=5E8E9776" width="200" /></a>Spanish flu (1918–1920)</div>
<div>
Asian Flu (1957–1958)</div>
<div>
Hong Kong Flu (1968–1969)</div>
<div>
Russian Flu (1977–1978)</div>
<div>
H1N1/09 Flu Pandemic (2009–2010)</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So, we know they are coming and there are more pandemics than just those caused by influenza viruses as we are now discovering.</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We are currently in the midst of a Covid-19 pandemic as declared today by the World Health Organization. The World Health Organization has extensive literature and guidance on how to prepare for and respond to epidemics and pandemics. There is no reason for the countries of the world to not be prepared, but we were unprepared and that needs to change.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Covid-19 is a serious concern. It is more infectious than the flu, current estimates are that it is twice as infectious as the flu, and its mortality rate seems to be several times higher than with the flu pandemics of the last 100 years. The World Health Organization's last estimate of its mortality rate is 3.5% whereas the 1918-1920 influenza epidemic had a mortality rate of 0.9%.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
At the same time we are very lucky. Children do not seem to experience serious infection by Coronavirus. The mortality rate for a pandemic could just as easily be 10%, 30%, 70% or more. If we experienced something like that in our current state of preparedness, we could lose significant proportions of the global population and the disruption afterwards to the economy, infrastructure and global supply chain could take years or even decades from which to recover.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
That is why, once this crisis is over, it will be time for the globe to focus on exactly what to do once a pathogen seems to be on its way to becoming a pandemic. There should be several well thought out scenarios with triggers depending on infectiousness and mortality rate. Something like Covid-19 or worse should, among other measures, prompt a rapid shutdown of non-essential air travel, cruise travel and a mandatory 14-day quarantine for any people traversing international borders. Had that occurred towards the beginning of the crisis, we would likely not have had the virus spread even remotely as much as it has. There should also be stockpiles in each country of the medical supplies and equipment one might need in such a situation to include standby space to house the sick while they are receiving treatment. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
One of the concerns right now is that few if any countries have the ventilators, <a href="https://www.ucsfhealth.org/treatments/extracorporeal-membrane-oxygenation" target="_blank">ECMO</a> and intensive care equipment and facilities in necessary supply that might be required to give all those who become afflicted with the more serious forms of Covid-19 a chance to survive. There are also not enough respiratory therapists to treat those who will need these kinds of treatments nor can you train respiratory therapists quickly enough. This specialty requires a minimum of 2-4 years of training.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
All of these types of concerns should be addressed quickly after the current crisis has abated. WE must do this planning. We know these pandemics are coming. We are paying for our lack of preparedness this time around. Let's not let this happen again.</div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-11824535492749319232018-08-26T20:53:00.002-04:002018-08-26T20:53:24.967-04:00We remember John McCain as the Senator from Arizona, but he should have been the 43rd President<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Historians will have a lot to go over when they ponder the
life of Senator John McCain who passed on Saturday after a valiant struggle
with brain cancer.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He is one of the people with whom I would have loved to sit
down and have an off the record conversation. There are dozens of pieces of
history he was connected with that I would have wanted to discuss with him. One
of those that had a pivotal impact on history was the lead-up to the 2000 South
Carolina Republican Presidential primary. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
You see Senator McCain had just beaten George W. Bush in the
New Hampshire primary. He had momentum and was expected to win the South
Carolina primary. Had he won South Carolina, he would have all but wrapped up
the Republican nomination for President. We all remember what happened in the
2000 general election. George W. Bush lost the popular vote but won the
electoral college by the slimmest of margins 271-266 and then only on the
strength of the 25 electoral votes via the (ahem) disputed vote in Florida which
he only won officially by 527 votes.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
McCain, a much less polarizing figure known for reaching
across the aisle, would almost certainly have been a better general election
candidate and would have likely won the election in a much more convincing
fashion. But, let’s for a moment return to the 2000 South Carolina primary.
What was it that stopped McCain’s momentum and gave George W. Bush the victory
in that state that turned around the race for the Republican nomination?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It turns out this is one of the ugliest moments in
intraparty politics. The Bush campaign attacked McCain with three nasty and
untrue rumors. First, they spread a rumor in South Carolina that McCain had
been a traitor in Vietnam. Second, they insinuated that McCain’s wife Cindy was
a drug addict. Worst of all, the Bush campaign engaged in race baiting,
asserting that McCain’s then 9 year old daughter Bridget, who was adopted from an
orphanage in Bangladesh and fairly dark-skinned, was in fact the product of an
extra-marital liaison with a black woman. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As I stated earlier, all other things being equal, without the
dirty tricks by George W. Bush’s campaign, McCain wins the South Carolina
primary, the nomination and, I believe, the election and becomes the 43<sup>rd</sup>
President of the United States instead of George W. Bush.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then how history might have diverged becomes interesting. I
ruminate on the following on occasion:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
</div>
<ul>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">If a President McCain had been warned that bin
Laden intended to attack the United States, as Bush was warned, does he ignore the
warnings like Bush did? To refresh your memories, on August 6, 2001, President
Bush received a CIA report about al Qaeda and the possibility of airline hijackings.
This was 36 days before 9/11. By 2000, McCain had served 13 years on the Senate
Armed Services Committee, an assignment befitting his prior service to this
country. Part of his daily work concerned thinking about military and other threats
to the country and how the senate should help the President deal with those
threats. I do not believe he would have taken the August 6</span><sup style="text-indent: -0.25in;">th</sup><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">
briefing as lightly as Bush did.</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">Would a President McCain have lied us into war in
Iraq in the aftermath of 9/11? Part of the reason George W. Bush invaded and
deposed Saddam Hussein was out of a sense that his father had not finished the
job in Iraq. McCain had no such baggage. That is besides the fact that as many
issues about which I disagree with Sen. McCain, I don’t get the sense he was a
liar. He might have still gone to war in Iraq (although I don’t think so) but
if he did, I think he would have been straight with us about the reasons why he
thought we should. Some might think it doesn’t matter, but I think it matters a
great deal. In the aftermath of that war, when no WMD were found, the US became
known as a country that went to war and invaded other countries without justification.
Another term for this, the international legal term for this is, “An unprovoked
war of aggression”. This is a war crime according to international law. If McCain
was President, I believe the US does not commit this war crime.</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Torture. Does anyone believe that a John McCain,
who suffered torture for 5 ½ years at the hands of the North Vietnamese, would
authorize/instruct the intelligence agencies and armed forces of the US to
engage in torture? We don’t really have to guess, when Bush administration torture
policies came to light, McCain was the most vigorous critic of the policies on
the Republican side. McCain famously said regarding waterboarding “It is not a
complicated procedure. It is torture,” McCain spoke out against all so-called
enhanced interrogation methods. The US use of torture is a stain on the reputation of this country that should never have happened.</li>
</ul>
Obviously, as a Democrat, my preferred outcome, if I could
go back in time and change history with regards to the 2000 election, would be
to have Gore seated as President. I still believe Gore was cheated and was the
real winner of Florida if all ballots had been fairly counted. But the country
is worse off because before he got the chance to cheat Gore, George W. Bush
secured the nomination via dirty tricks against John McCain. McCain was also
denied his rightful place in history as the 43<sup>rd</sup> President of the
United States.<br /><!--[if !supportLists]--><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-48043298251636037022017-12-02T21:50:00.001-05:002017-12-02T21:50:18.059-05:00Trump, his staff, Republican Leaders and Media personalities know that Russia threw the election to him.<span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">Trump, his staff, Republican Leaders and Media personalities know that Russia threw the election to him. <a href="https://goo.gl/UtkjVV">https://goo.gl/UtkjVV</a></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5hoeBqdjDA0OecYDs8dALg6HnGlX6HUrpAcrTlE7GJoaK8RTG3_THjtCY3QYlPhPafi2oadSwzUBfGF_53EF1Ea02LFsEk2cVzgbTdTkO38xSzR2HOCpDdYh-PLqGGnYR9lhA-8rXqTE/s1600/Republicans+Know.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="535" data-original-width="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5hoeBqdjDA0OecYDs8dALg6HnGlX6HUrpAcrTlE7GJoaK8RTG3_THjtCY3QYlPhPafi2oadSwzUBfGF_53EF1Ea02LFsEk2cVzgbTdTkO38xSzR2HOCpDdYh-PLqGGnYR9lhA-8rXqTE/s1600/Republicans+Know.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-88820450880236144772017-02-24T17:04:00.000-05:002017-02-24T17:26:55.034-05:00Alan Colmes and being the Liberal on Conservative media shows<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2017/02/23/780/438/694940094001_5334104414001_Colmes-0910.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2017/02/23/780/438/694940094001_5334104414001_Colmes-0910.jpg" height="179" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I was shocked when I received a google alert that Alan Colmes
had passed. I knew he wasn’t what many of us would consider to be “old”. I wasn’t
aware of his struggles with Lymphoma. I offer my condolences to his wife and
family to include his sister in law, Monica Crowley, against whom I have faced
off several times on different shows.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The coverage in the aftermath of Alan’s passing was
predictable to me because like Alan, I am one of “those Liberals” who regularly
faces off against conservative media personalities on what is considered right
wing media. I know the controversy that causes among fellow Democrats and
Liberals. I would have easily predicted articles like the one from Slate’s
Isaac Chotiner who reductively referred to Colmes as “Buffoon and Patsy, Was
Fox News’ Original Liberal Weakling” along with various other superficial and nasty
missives.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Silly criticisms like Chotiners are the gig if you are a Liberal who goes on those shows.
Some Liberals just don’t get it. Many do, and I am thankful for those that do
but I’m really surprised that like Slate’s Chotiner, there are so many who don’t.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What’s the “it” to get? I think Lloyd Grove at the Daily
Beast summed it up best:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Ellis Henican, who has often
substituted as host on Colmes’s nightly Fox Radio Network show, especially as
the latter succumbed to illness in recent weeks, said such critiques—and they
were numerous—reflected a misunderstanding of Colmes’s role in the political
cosmos, especially from mid-1996 to January 2009, when Colmes co-starred as the
progressive voice on the eponymous prime-time cable program.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
“Being a liberal commentator on Fox
is like being the visiting team; the audience, by and large, doesn’t agree with
you, your co-host doesn’t agree with you, most of the guests don’t agree with
you, so you live with the daily challenge of needing to perform in front of an
audience that is not inclined to like you,” Henican told The Daily Beast. “You
can’t just shout. I would tell the people who felt he was not sufficiently
bombastic to go see how well they would do if their technique in front of an
audience like that is just to be a bigger asshole than the other guy.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
“You have to use other
techniques—you have to use humor, you have to use charm,” Henican said. “You
have to learn to twist a question in some unexpected way. If you don’t, you’re
gonna get run over like a freight train. That was both Alan’s talent and his
challenge.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve told people who ask me about my appearances that the
first thing you must ask yourself about appearing on Conservative media as a
Liberal is, if you decided to go on, what would you be trying to accomplish?
Everything about whether to accept and how to deal with the challenge flows
from how you answer that question. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For me, the answer to that question was and always has been,
is there a possibility for me to move the needle? Can I handle my appearance
such that someone who disagrees with the Liberal viewpoint on an issue might
have their mind changed by what I say and how I conduct myself? It doesn’t have
to be a ton of people, just a few, a handful. That’s how change happens, a few
minds changed at a time.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I think Alan had the same reason for appearing. At least it
seemed so to me when I had that internal discussion and determined how I was
going to comport myself on those shows. It really is obvious once you look at
it that way. As Daily Beast’s Grove quoted Ellis Hennican, “Being a liberal
commentator on Fox is like being the visiting team; the audience, by and large,
doesn’t agree with you, your co-host doesn’t agree with you, most of the guests
don’t agree with you, so you live with the daily challenge of needing to
perform in front of an audience that is not inclined to like you…You can’t just
shout.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That’s right and it’s hard to understand how any thinking
person wouldn’t immediately come to that conclusion. Shouting louder or being a
jerk isn’t going to convince anyone who disagrees with you. I’ve never had my
mind changed by someone acting like a jerk, why would I think that if I acted
like a jerk that I would be more convincing? On the contrary, the more
off-putting you conduct yourself, the less likely that anyone who disagreed
with you at the onset of your appearance is likely to put serious thought to
anything you had to say. When you are trying to convince someone who disagrees with you, you have to give them as few reasons to tune you out as possible. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
And let me also say that I follow discussions in the Conservative blogosphere where my appearances are discussed. While the majority of the discussions are what you might expect, i.e. variations of "I hate Leser that Liberal SOB blah blah" there are also after each appearance typically a number of of, "Well, I checked out what he said about X and that is kinda true. He's still a Liberal so and so, but he was right about X." And that is why I do what I do with all the challenges and criticisms.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If your reason for appearing on Conservative media as a
Liberal is to vent your frustration with the right wing and the hosts and you
don’t care about convincing anyone, then sure, yell, shout, scream, be rude. I’ve
known a few folks who have done that. They have the video of their lone
appearance as a keepsake (they were never invited back) and they re-watch the
video every now and then and get a chuckle, but they didn’t accomplish
anything. Two hours after their appearance, no one ever thought about them
again.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I find an interesting contrast in people who only go on
shows where the audience and host and everyone else generally agrees with them.
I’ve gone on Liberal shows and I enjoy that too, but what’s the purpose of only
appearing in front of people who agree with you all the time? What are you
changing by doing that? Why would anyone celebrate those people and instead
offer only criticism for those who share their ideology but go on “the other
guys” shows to try to change minds? Perhaps it really is as simple as people who
offer that criticism just don’t get it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
My goal is to try to change people’s minds. That, in my
opinion, is the only worthwhile reason for a Liberal to appear on Conservative
media. I believe that is what Alan was trying to do as well. Alan was much more
patient about it than I am. I listened, for instance, to a few segments of his
radio show where he would have conservative listeners call in and he would
patiently listen to them and try to convince them of his viewpoint. I never did
that with my radio show. I’m gearing up to relaunch it in the coming months,
perhaps as a tribute to Alan I may try more on air discussions with Republican
listeners. Perhaps. As I said I am not that patient.</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alan probably changed minds during his appearances, not
millions of minds at a time or even thousands or perhaps even hundreds, but I
would bet dozens at a time, sure. That is something that every Liberal should
be celebrating. <o:p></o:p></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-4674504389979147882016-12-10T00:26:00.002-05:002016-12-10T00:26:13.400-05:00Imagine the Reverse of Friday Evening's News and Hillary had won the election after Putin Intervened on Her Behalf<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghs7E5Ix8K-G3ZjxYjdbaowLdPS5cAPQgx__3cYf5GdeAZ_7jaoL0iq1PAmNJcP4gcZsEIcOEgaW2c1yyWEe2BN4ZUWDyuSmmnHKi1SJ8uguEXzmsaYHFHhn03kqASnYGcHQGzx0ON_nM/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghs7E5Ix8K-G3ZjxYjdbaowLdPS5cAPQgx__3cYf5GdeAZ_7jaoL0iq1PAmNJcP4gcZsEIcOEgaW2c1yyWEe2BN4ZUWDyuSmmnHKi1SJ8uguEXzmsaYHFHhn03kqASnYGcHQGzx0ON_nM/s320/steve.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I read today’s (12/9/2016) bombshell news in the Washington
Post <a href="https://goo.gl/HCH4Ql" target="_blank"><span style="background: white; color: #365899; font-family: "Helvetica",sans-serif; font-size: 10.5pt; line-height: 107%;">https://goo.gl/HCH4Ql</span></a> about the CIA’s assessment
that Vladimir Putin, the Russian President, intervened in the US elections to
try to help Donald Trump and after taking that in for a few minutes, I had an
amusing thought. What if the reverse had happened? What would that be like now?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It’s funny to me because as a Liberal/Democratic pundit, I
have for years faced off on camera against Republican pundits over every over-engineered
scandal they have tried to manufacture against President Obama, Hillary, and
other Democrats. Republicans are experts at making mountains out of ant hills
(or out of nothing at all) never mind mole hills. What would they do if
presented instead with an actual mountain, to continue the metaphor, as we have
now?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If Putin had sent GRU, SVR and other Intelligence Service descendants
of the KGB out to do whatever they could do to help Hillary as it seems he has
done to help Trump and after she won evidence of that came out as it has now,
the outcry from Republicans and their friends in the conservative segments of
the media would be deafening.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Republicans in the House would already be drafting articles
of impeachment, Rush Limbaugh would spend three quarters of every one of his daily
three hour shows talking about it. Every Republican elected official from
county executives to mayors all the way up to congressmen and senators would be
going in front of cameras saying Hillary is disqualified as a President and she
should say she will not take the oath of office and that the electors should vote
for the other candidate. My conservative pundit friends would be analyzing the
scandal from every possible angle during every segment of every show on
conservative networks. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This news is big stuff. A militarily strong foreign power
that has been behaving antagonistically towards the United States for the last
3-5 years has meddled in our Presidential elections to try to get their
preferred candidate elected and that candidate won. Who is to say what effect
that meddling had? A mere 80,000 votes spread out over three states, Michigan, Wisconsin,
and Pennsylvania, determined the outcome. That’s not a lot of votes at all. Did
the role the Russian’s played in WikiLeaks, hacking, and publicizing the DNC’s
emails and other efforts to make Hillary and the Democrats look bad influence things
enough to turn 80,000 votes in those states? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That is a question that everyone should be thinking about
because 80,000 votes spread out over three states can change if a candidate
trips while walking up the stairs or other similar trivial campaign occurrences.
It is a very small percentage of the vote totals. Virtually anything that
happens during a campaign can move the vote totals by that much. So, I would
argue yes, the meddling by Putin did play a factor in Trump’s victory.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It gets better. The Washington Post reported that Senate majority
leader Mitch McConnell, the highest ranking Republican elected official at the
time, threatened the Obama administration that if they released the information
about Putin’s efforts to meddle in the election before election day, he would
come out and call the Obama administrations statements “an act of partisan politics”.
McConnell, in effect, worked to deny the American public a vital piece of
knowledge they should have had in making their decision for whom to vote.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The other question that should be on everyone’s mind is, why
does Putin want Trump to win. What advantage does Putin think he gets from that
and why? I have many issues with Putin and the things he does and says. What I
would never say is that Putin is stupid. He is a very smart guy. The actions he
takes are very deliberate and he has a clear objective in mind when he takes
them and he considers all possible consequences and factors them in. Meddling
in our election is a very risky thing to do. First one must consider what might
happen if his meddling is discovered before the election. Second, what if it is
discovered and his chosen candidate loses. What kind of relationship would he
have with the new President?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whatever Putin thinks he gains from a Trump Presidency he
believes is worth all those risks. That fact should greatly concern every
American.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I will be very interested to see the response to this from
grassroots, and elected politicians and pundits from all parts of the political
spectrum. I know what the reaction would be like if the situation was reversed.<o:p></o:p></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-24504632724904806742016-11-17T22:02:00.001-05:002016-11-18T00:35:47.852-05:00Team Trump's chilling harassment and threatening of Megyn Kelly before possessing real power is a frightening preview of what is likely to come.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieioPqqDwbWwXdK3POHO8UVLaBo0WAdghJJUddpH3DZSFZG31inSp9g10BiXsHzdpT6a2bp0iM4KuMQ8CkOhDosHbZ1B5uAAhczUck2Kc3O3arjXbjvJJAQPYm13ozxa9RWdhzqNP4Nug/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieioPqqDwbWwXdK3POHO8UVLaBo0WAdghJJUddpH3DZSFZG31inSp9g10BiXsHzdpT6a2bp0iM4KuMQ8CkOhDosHbZ1B5uAAhczUck2Kc3O3arjXbjvJJAQPYm13ozxa9RWdhzqNP4Nug/s320/steve.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Threatening journalists and attacking or killing them is, or at least has been, one of the things we Americans point to regarding third world dictators and other oppressive regimes as justification of why our system of government is so great in comparison. The State Department and other Executive Branch agencies complain about those kinds of governments and their practices and try to influence them to change their ways, well at least up until now.<br />
<br />
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are important values for Americans and central to the rights afforded to us in our Constitution and Bill of Rights.<br />
<br />
Megyn Kelly is one of the most prominent political personalities in media today and she has the support of the top folks of a powerful network behind her. Trump and his team went after her and harassed and threatened her. They encouraged their supporters to harass and threaten her.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/G7QGhSDwnpU/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/G7QGhSDwnpU?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe><br />
<br />
The fact is that despite all the help and resources supporting Kelly, her last year was something that sounds to me like a nightmare. What will happen to those in the media who criticize Trump who don't have the kind of support and protection behind them that she does?<br />
<br />
The question that every member of the media is now asking themselves is, once inaugurated, when team Trump is upset with a journalists coverage, will they engage the security services of the country against them? When I write of security services, I am referring to the FBI, CIA and NSA. Is there any thinking person out there who thinks that kind of abuse of power and disregard for Constitutional freedoms is beyond team Trump? Does anyone think it is beyond Trump himself? I would answer no to both questions.<br />
<br />
This would be yet another piece of evidence supporting the idea that Trump is leading the country into oppression, hate and Fascism. If this starts to happen, Americans need to quickly mobilize to stop it.<br />
<br />
----------------------<br />
<br />
See the full interview of Megyn Kelly here where she details even more about her harassment by Trump himself and members of his campaign leadership team and his supporters:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/9i-Lkq1btP0/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9i-Lkq1btP0?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-6348842874742038422016-11-13T23:07:00.002-05:002016-11-13T23:28:14.979-05:00Trump's First Post-Election Statement on Violence against Minorities, LGBT, Jews and Muslims is Woefully Inadequate<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiA4St0KXa_EwD36qsCx-nQavjrhFENl2acY40i3OpBmLlf99IXviYhXh9pXfJT1DzcW0IEpnnhBwjo3TnSQHnd0JSVpSDs9qmQTqTAZRTcUM2ycNdxI4C6QmJVogloixYgbR3SOAe2X4/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiA4St0KXa_EwD36qsCx-nQavjrhFENl2acY40i3OpBmLlf99IXviYhXh9pXfJT1DzcW0IEpnnhBwjo3TnSQHnd0JSVpSDs9qmQTqTAZRTcUM2ycNdxI4C6QmJVogloixYgbR3SOAe2X4/s320/steve.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
While the world watched as hundreds of acts of hate and violence in the US were perpetrated against women, Jews, African Americans, Latinos and Muslims in the wake of Trump's election on November 9th, there was near complete silence from Trump and his team for three days. The only statement was from spokesperson Kellyanne Conway that Hillary and Obama needed to fix any protests or issues in the country happening right now.<br />
<br />
That statement by Conway suggests that she and Trump don't understand to what position he was just elected. There is no issue or policy in the country outside of your responsibility when you become President.<br />
<br />
As Harry Truman noted, when you get elected President, The Buck Stops Here with you.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIB1_BU-qiuwI6xKxv1TqKijOx2e1A0gg5DLPCOm4PTpvtNLj84Xsv5pQD5NVATIGI2P7MSwlODIECtvhI_66zLXZPrjElb33dNvC10b1HkiS9RSFRdqKeKM4WgfIM8EWt7FxF5XOnvgA/s1600/harry-truman-the-buck-stops-here.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="273" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIB1_BU-qiuwI6xKxv1TqKijOx2e1A0gg5DLPCOm4PTpvtNLj84Xsv5pQD5NVATIGI2P7MSwlODIECtvhI_66zLXZPrjElb33dNvC10b1HkiS9RSFRdqKeKM4WgfIM8EWt7FxF5XOnvgA/s400/harry-truman-the-buck-stops-here.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Conway and Trump need to meditate on that concept because at least right now they clearly don't get it.<br />
<br />
Finally, five days later, Trump broke his silence on the subject of bigoted members of his followers engaging in hate crimes. On 60 minutes, Trump had the following to say about it:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
Lesley Stahl: Do you want to say anything to those people (those perpetrating hate crimes)?<br />
Donald Trump: I would say don’t do it, that’s terrible, ‘cause I’m gonna bring this country together.<br />
Lesley Stahl: They’re harassing Latinos, Muslims--<br />
Donald Trump: I am so saddened to hear that. And I say, “Stop it.” If it-- if it helps. I will say this, and I will say right to the cameras: Stop it.</blockquote>
------------------<br />
<br />
"Stop it". That's Trump's tepid comment on the subject. After five days of hate crimes with nary a comment by him that is a wholly inadequate response.<br />
<br />
I wrote on my blog "The Shadow President" what any President or President-elect should say if these crimes were being committed by their supporters:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
"My fellow Americans. My transition team and I have been receiving reports about an increase in hate crimes since election day. These reports have been disturbing to me but what has been even more disturbing is that it appears some of them have been done in apparent support of me or in my name. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I categorically reject any and all acts of hate against any group whether that group is ethnic, racial, religious, gender, orientation or any other segment of American society. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
America is a place where all are created equal and where all afforded the same rights and that is what my administration is about. Anyone who commits acts of hate is a criminal whose support I do not want and who should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and I will make it a priority of my administration to do that. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Steven Leser<br />
The Shadow President<br />
http://www.theshadowpresident.com"</blockquote>
------------------<br />
<br />
That's how you handle something like that. A Willy Wonka-esque "stop, don't"<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8-MUL0rvE8k/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8-MUL0rvE8k?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
not only doesn't cut it, it will further embolden the bigots doing this to engage in more hate crimes.<br />
<br />
If those of us who are Jews or Black or Latino or Muslim or LGBT wanted to hear something that would make us feel better about whether Trump would stand up for equality, instead this statement seems to confirm our worst fears.<br />
<br />
On the LGBT front, Trump seemed to try to assuage fears he would try to rollback marriage equality with this exchange:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Lesley Stahl: Well, I guess the issue for them is marriage equality. Do you support marriage equality?<br />
Donald Trump: It-- it’s irrelevant because it was already settled. It’s law. It was settled in the Supreme Court. I mean it’s done.<br />
Lesley Stahl: So even if you appoint a judge that--<br />
Donald Trump: It’s done. It-- you have-- these cases have gone to the Supreme Court. They’ve been settled. And, I’m fine with that.</blockquote>
------------------<br />
<br />
I thought about this for a while and I realized it is not a reassurance at all. Lots of cases have gone to the Supreme Court and been decided one way and then have been reversed years or decades later. Trump is about to completely change the composition of the court. One vacancy is pending and at least one or two more will come up during his first four years. Appointing two or three conservative, anti-LGBT judges would almost certainly be enough to overturn the marriage equality ruling.<br />
<br />
Trump saying "I'm fine with that" referring to the existing ruling is no reassurance at all and here is part of why I think that. Later in the interview, Trump had this to say about Supreme Court justices:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Lesley Stahl: During the campaign, you said that you would appoint justices who were against abortion rights. Will you appoint-- are you looking to appoint a justice who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade?<br />
Donald Trump: So look, here’s what’s going to happen-- I’m going to-- I’m pro-life. The judges will be pro-life. They’ll be very—<br />
Lesley Stahl: But what about overturning this law--<br />
Donald Trump: Well, there are a couple of things. They’ll be pro-life, they’ll be-- in terms of the whole gun situation, we know the Second Amendment and everybody’s talking about the Second Amendment and they’re trying to dice it up and change it, they’re going to be very pro-Second Amendment. But having to do with abortion if it ever were overturned, it would go back to the states. So it would go back to the states and--<br />
Lesley Stahl: Yeah, but then some women won’t be able to get an abortion?<br />
Donald Trump: No, it’ll go back to the states.</blockquote>
-----------------<br />
The kind of Conservative activist judges that are looking to overturn Roe v Wade are overwhelmingly also anti-LGBT equality. Not 100% of them, sure, but it's not easy to find those that are for one but not the other.<br />
<br />
Trump was talking out of both sides of his mouth during discussions on equal rights for all minorities. There was no statement that he supports equal rights for any of these groups. We must all stay vigilant and be prepared to demonstrate and fight to support equality in the face of an incoming administration that is either hostile or indifferent to those rights.<br />
<br />
The entire 60 minutes interview transcript and video can be seen at <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-donald-trump-family-melania-ivanka-lesley-stahl/" target="_blank">http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-donald-trump-family-melania-ivanka-lesley-stahl/ </a>Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-80297071878247163872016-11-12T21:32:00.003-05:002016-11-12T21:47:22.565-05:00I told you all that hate crimes would increase with Trump’s election and it’s happening<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdHzBFOcD4-TtdElRrI8_o3ZbFeq3LpwVVY-XddlGVF1gP6VLfv4T7XCbJgHfAQx4vTotr9YAM2xbdqlzNit1nrQJSl_9Yabg82Nkdq4oh1dyA70aI2dQg-HqfEVZD8PghDNhwBFA0KCU/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdHzBFOcD4-TtdElRrI8_o3ZbFeq3LpwVVY-XddlGVF1gP6VLfv4T7XCbJgHfAQx4vTotr9YAM2xbdqlzNit1nrQJSl_9Yabg82Nkdq4oh1dyA70aI2dQg-HqfEVZD8PghDNhwBFA0KCU/s320/steve.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<h3 style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 9.0pt;">
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt; font-weight: normal;"><br /></span></h3>
<h3 style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 9.0pt;">
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt; font-weight: normal;">In my article election night at 3:21am (Technically
Wednesday November 9th), <a href="http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2016/11/hate-wins-election-america-at-risk-of.html" target="_blank">“Hate wins an election - America at Risk of Becomingthe Fourth Reich?”</a> I said:</span></h3>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
… Trump rose to the position of winning the Republican
nomination by attacking/blaming a lot of the country’s problems on Latino
immigrants and by attacking Muslims. Trump was also cited early in his real
estate career for discriminating against African Americans, refusing to rent them
apartments in his buildings… Let’s also not forget that an important part of
Trump’s base is the alt-right who are basically Neo-Nazis, KKK members and
other White Nationalists<br />
.<br />
.<br />
.<br />
Something else is coming too and much faster than
legislation-enabled bigotry. In Russia, right after Putin passed the anti-gay
laws three and a half years ago, anti-gay bigots in Russia felt empowered by
the support in the government and the frequency of attacks by bands of bigots
in Russia against the LGBT community there immediately went up by several
orders of magnitude. That’s what happens when bigots feel empowered by the
government, they act on that empowerment. Will we see that here? I have no
doubt about that whatsoever. Once Trump is installed as President, I expect
attacks on Muslims, Latinos, African Americans, Jews and LGBT to begin or
accelerate.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
It looks like that is what has happened. From the November
12 article in USA Today <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/11/12/post-election-spate-hate-crimes-worse-than-post-911-experts-say/93681294/" target="_blank">“Post-election spate of hate crimes worse thanpost-9/11, experts say”</a> :<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
What may seem like a dramatic rise in the number of hate
harassment and hate incidents happening across the country in the wake of
Tuesday's general election is not in anyone's imagination, experts say. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
There indeed has been a spike in the number of reports of
such incidents, say representatives for two organizations that track such
occurrences. A representative for one group, in fact, said the rise appears to
be even worse that what was took place immediately after the terror attacks in
2001. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Since the election, we've seen a big uptick in
incidents of vandalism, threats, intimidation spurred by the rhetoric
surrounding Mr. Trump's election," Richard Cohen, president of the
Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala., told USA TODAY. "The white
supremacists out there are celebrating his victory and many are feeling their
oats," Cohen said.<br />
.<br />
.<br />
.<br />
The SPLC, which tracks hate crimes, says it has logged more
than 200 complaints since the election, and while it could not provide a figure
for the average number of complaints it takes in each day, Cohen assured that
the number is much larger than what is typical. Anti-black and anti-immigrant
incidents are generating the highest numbers followed by anti-Muslim incidents,
Cohen said. Part of the reason it is happening is that hate group leaders are
encouraging members to intimidate people, according to Cohen.</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Also from NBC New York <a href="http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/national-international/Array-of-Hate-Crimes-Reported-Day-After-Trumps-Election-400711591.html" target="_blank">"'Rash of Hate Crimes' Reported Day After Trump's Election"</a> :<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Among the reports of events occurring in the aftermath of
the election:<br />
A San Diego State University student walking to her vehicle
had her purse, backpack and car keys taken by two men making comments about the
president-elect and the Muslim community, university police said. She walked
away to report the incident, and then returned to discover her vehicle was
missing. Police are investigating the attack as a hate crime. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A short video posted Wednesday and viewed at least 250,000
times on Facebook showed students at a school carrying a Trump sign while
someone can be heard saying "white power." Two students at York
County School of Technology in Pennsylvania walked with a sign into the lobby
and chanted "white power" twice before the director "squelched
it," said communication outreach coordinator Renie Mezzanotte, who added
that "the administration has been absorbed by" the incident for two
days, the outcry has become disruptive to instruction, and that instruction and
student and staff safety are always the school's priorities. An officer at the
York Area Regional Police Department confirmed that they investigated the
incident.<br />
<br />
Police were investigating the appearance of a swastika, the
word "Trump" with a swastika replacing the T and the words "Seig
Heil 2016," on a store front in South Philadelphia hours after the
election was called. The Anti-Defamation League said it was disgusted to learn
of the graffiti.</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you want to get close to a real-time report of a good
number of the hate crimes that have been happening, browse to Shaun King’s
twitter feed <a href="https://twitter.com/search?src=typd&q=%40Shaunking">https://twitter.com/search?src=typd&q=%40Shaunking</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I take no pleasure in being right about this. First, it wasn’t
that hard to predict. As I said in my election night article, this is what
happens when hate groups feel empowered and emboldened because of having a
person or party they perceive as being on their side in power. Bigots of all
kinds are generally base, visceral and undisciplined people who act on impulse
and are thus their actions are easy to predict.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is America with the election of Trump. It will be
interesting to see the reaction from Trump; it will tell us a lot about the
rest of what I talked about in my election night article. So far Trump and his
team have been silent and I know they have seen the same reports about an
escalation in hate crimes, so perhaps we have our answer.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here are some photos from the above articles and from people
who have reported hate crimes to Shaun King on Twitter.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOruJuFIcHShjWL_wD5eklmaKMMKpOkLIaN6ciZls22-qND5e_lQSvoabzi5XfklgF6365yfQNseWCnUlWliUnuU6FfQ85hyr8j8NJIEl1nUw3_OSSu5MvN-X4jAfGu6iF23131OuyGdY/s1600/trump-antisemitism.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="285" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOruJuFIcHShjWL_wD5eklmaKMMKpOkLIaN6ciZls22-qND5e_lQSvoabzi5XfklgF6365yfQNseWCnUlWliUnuU6FfQ85hyr8j8NJIEl1nUw3_OSSu5MvN-X4jAfGu6iF23131OuyGdY/s400/trump-antisemitism.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhliqnbzM5k68pWDJrc-D3EMyn3ukpO25NO3mIs3GOVUGkNAiOIRDKu0hdwEHlYABtYlj0cjTNv_bltMGcK1J1ZUyMGz83e1SziI1gZjdOJoGf09dFojAnnlxFLwx6dXgQtHBrQQH4u9zY/s1600/trump-mexicojpg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhliqnbzM5k68pWDJrc-D3EMyn3ukpO25NO3mIs3GOVUGkNAiOIRDKu0hdwEHlYABtYlj0cjTNv_bltMGcK1J1ZUyMGz83e1SziI1gZjdOJoGf09dFojAnnlxFLwx6dXgQtHBrQQH4u9zY/s400/trump-mexicojpg.jpg" width="225" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeIwYqJMYL_7c6wBuGowrg9EAc8FbTbYgqDIb-ISN7oyoWhsT9wc3bDHh4XjGy4fQQmluUzn_4P86ii3GP6rWr1URqDrXtMNm0ktSdHH4eLyiKQrQEEWWnDVm9VpA37iXRPBISSQPoy0Q/s1600/trump-misogyny.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="342" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeIwYqJMYL_7c6wBuGowrg9EAc8FbTbYgqDIb-ISN7oyoWhsT9wc3bDHh4XjGy4fQQmluUzn_4P86ii3GP6rWr1URqDrXtMNm0ktSdHH4eLyiKQrQEEWWnDVm9VpA37iXRPBISSQPoy0Q/s400/trump-misogyny.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJWaXWodsMAggsvtqoyy00QyEYAsNoVPUfSwCACfZCg2pemzEn92sG6kA-4rBkcgNdNnO9tgaAnV9qRhpU1Nc3AVTS-AsCcQMAzYhXxHBFE_9JaVlG4i3yTY1p_Kjerq43_x_zNCfoDuQ/s1600/trump-muslim.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="263" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJWaXWodsMAggsvtqoyy00QyEYAsNoVPUfSwCACfZCg2pemzEn92sG6kA-4rBkcgNdNnO9tgaAnV9qRhpU1Nc3AVTS-AsCcQMAzYhXxHBFE_9JaVlG4i3yTY1p_Kjerq43_x_zNCfoDuQ/s400/trump-muslim.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEheVz9mDrDJOK3b19ryrbbiP6LmAmF8HJ2tVroIKtnVpUDAae3LWxnQbRmxKPcfr0w8hx5qIxsY0Gnq7W7hH8rMRATWrGlOCPPYSnuRXZqJ5GnoG8aolPnBqwkAKGYpvUmdTaiFo_iACS8/s1600/trump-muslims.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEheVz9mDrDJOK3b19ryrbbiP6LmAmF8HJ2tVroIKtnVpUDAae3LWxnQbRmxKPcfr0w8hx5qIxsY0Gnq7W7hH8rMRATWrGlOCPPYSnuRXZqJ5GnoG8aolPnBqwkAKGYpvUmdTaiFo_iACS8/s400/trump-muslims.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKcm8LX7lvuAz9rx7ZufBYZCmu83wE9wj4EpDr3lWLAJgIDSv1qBNp-8LNzsD1GvaVf1KigTRGJoYrL-VNctu6vR_9qjN3kS6jOMssuJMTaT9SZdgpZq6pcwwuTL1SyfgumXCrMI6uwoc/s1600/Trump-Swastika-South-Philadelphia.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKcm8LX7lvuAz9rx7ZufBYZCmu83wE9wj4EpDr3lWLAJgIDSv1qBNp-8LNzsD1GvaVf1KigTRGJoYrL-VNctu6vR_9qjN3kS6jOMssuJMTaT9SZdgpZq6pcwwuTL1SyfgumXCrMI6uwoc/s400/Trump-Swastika-South-Philadelphia.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-21106516628080845662016-11-09T03:21:00.002-05:002016-11-09T03:21:12.363-05:00Hate wins an election - America at Risk of Becoming the Fourth Reich?<br /><div class="MsoNormal">
This article has been written in my mind since the moment Donald
Trump won the Republican nomination. I wanted to write it before now, but I
think it would have been discounted in the run-up to the general election as election
theater and strategy. It very much is not that. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwi0Lo_H5sd5G67QQtY7yNJrUpoiwqFNUG6-2evaBItqFmrTjoZy_fD4_ZBNCLRhOX-4S1zDAcq8bq-zinSMDF-8S0ftq5HMWkEiPykdAQfV2QSv0mLhhjo4frxtgRjllgOpOXTKM5mVk/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwi0Lo_H5sd5G67QQtY7yNJrUpoiwqFNUG6-2evaBItqFmrTjoZy_fD4_ZBNCLRhOX-4S1zDAcq8bq-zinSMDF-8S0ftq5HMWkEiPykdAQfV2QSv0mLhhjo4frxtgRjllgOpOXTKM5mVk/s320/steve.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve wondered since before I was a teen what it would be
like to have been my father growing up. My father was born in Hamburg, Germany,
July 23, 1927 and that side of my family is Jewish.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When he was five and a half years old Hitler was elected Chancellor
of Germany. The Nazis influence and antisemitism in Germany of course did not
begin with Hitler’s election. From his earliest years, my father had to contend
with growing up in a country with a political party and movement that
virulently discriminated against him and scapegoated him and people like him
for all the problems in the country going back to the loss of the first world
war fifteen years earlier. At age five and a half that party and movement came
to power and began to pass laws that enshrined in law Jews as inferior people
with ever decreasing rights. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The German state itself, under the Nazis, hated my father,
my family and other Jews. Jews were forced to leave their homes and apartments
and live near each other in depressed areas of the city that became known as
ghettos. My father was required to leave his school and go to a Jewish school.
Jews were required to wear yellow stars of David on their clothes. The state,
it’s leader and its movement and party hated Jews. There was no question about
that. That hatred would ultimately end in the deaths of over 6 million Jews.
The Nazis also hated many other groups of people. They hated LGBT, Roma, Slavs
and various other groups and they killed many of those people too. My father
and his family were sent to concentration camps in 1941 a few months after his
thirteenth birthday. His mother, father and brother were killed in the camps
along with almost all the rest of the extended family I would never get to meet.
My father was starved on 600 calories a day, tortured and worked nearly to
death 18 hours a day 7 days a week under unhuman conditions in the freezing
weather of the Baltics with inadequate clothing for the climate and this was
during ages 13-17. My father told his story in the German magazine Welt back in
2011 <a href="https://www.welt.de/regionales/hamburg/article13544356/Rueckkehr-an-den-Ort-der-Kindheit.html">https://www.welt.de/regionales/hamburg/article13544356/Rueckkehr-an-den-Ort-der-Kindheit.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
From my earliest readings about the Third Reich in my pre-teen
years I wondered what that would have been like for my father. I tried to
imagine it. How can one imagine that level of hate, persecution and torture? I concluded
as a kid that I should stop trying to imagine what it was like to be in the
camps because that kind of hell you have no chance of imagining, but the run up
to that happening, the decent of the state into raging over the top bigotry
towards you, what would that be like? I spent a lot of time thinking about that.
I felt secure and lucky that I would never have to experience such a thing. The
naivete of youth. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I thought about this with Trump because Trump rose to the
position of winning the Republican nomination by attacking blaming a lot of the
country’s problems on Latino immigrants and by attacking Muslims. Trump was also
cited early in his real estate career for discriminating against African
Americans, refusing to rent them apartments in his buildings so his racism and
bigotry goes beyond Latinos and Muslims. In terms of Latinos, just earlier this year
Trump issued verbal attacks against a Latino judge who was born here as someone
who could not be impartial because he was a Latino. The other side of my family
is Latino. Yes, among other nationalities and backgrounds I am Latino and German-Jewish.
Let’s also not forget that an important part of Trump’s base is the alt-right
who are basically Neo-Nazis, KKK members and other White Nationalists who hate
Jews, Latinos, LGBT, African Americans and various other people. Trump and his
supporters would try to counter my bringing up the alt-right in connection with
him by saying that he has repudiated some elements of that group on occasion.
Sure, but there have also been plenty of moments where it seems he and his
campaign deliberately reached out to them and that includes his adult son
tweeting out a picture which included alt-right icon Pepe the frog. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These groups will now have a President in the White House.
Trump and his surrogates can try to deny it but they are a significant part of
his base. This part of Trump’s base recently tried to reassure people by
holding a press conference in early September where they expressed their
affection for Donald Trump and expressed their hopes for a white homeland. <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/09/alt-right-leaders-we-aren-t-racist-we-just-hate-jews.html">http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/09/alt-right-leaders-we-aren-t-racist-we-just-hate-jews.html</a>
this will help you understand what they are about:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 11.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Calibri",sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">The three alt-right leaders who gathered in
D.C. this afternoon made two things very clear: They think white people are
genetically predisposed to be more moral and intelligent than black people, and
they do not want to share their envisioned utopian ethno-state with folks of
the Jewish persuasion. There’s some disagreement in the alt-right on what they
refer to as “the Jewish question.” But the big take-away was that Jews are
suspicious.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 11.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 11.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Calibri",sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Jared Taylor, who founded the white supremacist
American Renaissance site, explained the alt-right as predicated entirely on
the belief that some races are inherently superior to others—the movement, he
said, is “in unanimity” in rejecting “the idea that the races are basically
equivalent and interchangeable.” There are genetic differences in race that
make some races more ethical and intelligent than others, he said. That’s what
the alt right is all about.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 11.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 11.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Calibri",sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">“They also differ, as a matter of fact, in the
patterns of the microbes that inhabit their mouths,” he said.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 11.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 11.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Calibri",sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Thus, he continued, we shouldn’t expect black
kids to do as well in school as white kids.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 11.0pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This philosophy, nationalism plus racial superiority, added
to economic conservatism which isn’t indicated above but is part of the
alt-rights belief system, is classic Nazism.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Do I still need to wonder as a mental exercise what it would
be like to be my father existing in a country where the leader of the state and
the movement that elected that leader hates him and people like him? I don’t
think so, I think we are there. We have a President and movement that hates
Latinos, Muslim and Black people and that movement also hates Jews. The only
reassurance we have that Trump doesn’t hate Jews is that he refers to his Jewish
son in law which is perilously close to the “I can’t hate Jews/Black People/etc
because I have some as friends” cringe-worthy kind of statement. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
No, I think I’m right
where my father was in 1933 with the added bonus of being hated for two plus
parts of my heritage, not just one. Don’t forget that the Concentration camps
and Death camps that we think of when we think of the Holocaust didn’t open
until 1940-1941 (I’m discounting the earlier incarnation of Dachau that began
housing prisoners after the Nuremberg laws in 1935 as not being part of the holocaust
per se until later). That kind of discrimination was 7-8 years away in 1933.
Few Germans in 1933 foresaw that things would go so far.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Things might not get that bad, sure. A guy who spent the
entire campaign scapegoating vulnerable minorities may not turn out to be the
kind of guy who follows up that scapegoating with action. Or that action may
not be so severe. I don’t find that kind of thinking reassuring.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some of you may argue we have three branches of government
and a Constitution and that would stop things from becoming too bad here. That
sounds good, except, the next President, now Donald Trump, will get to appoint
three Supreme Court Justices. He can mold the court in his image and the court
decides what is Constitutional and what isn’t. And the congress? Do you think
the Republican congress would stand up to a President Trump? They might at some
point if Trump tries to go too far too fast but I bet in the beginning, you
will see a lot of racist legislation aimed at Muslims and Latinos that the Republican
congress will happily pass. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If Trump moves in that direction I think it will become the
boiled frog syndrome with congressional Republicans. The Republican congress
will pass what it considers to be minor and acceptable racist and bigoted legislation
against Muslims and Latino immigrants desired by Trump and it will get worse and
worse from there and expand to other ethnicities. By the time the Republicans
in congress realize what is happening they will have gone too far. The water
temperature will have been turned up slowly until the frog boiled before he
knew what was happening.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sound farfetched? Is Trump not that bad? Well, a lot of
Germans would have thought so in 1933 too. Those who lived through it and are
still alive will tell you that. My father in the above linked article briefly discusses
how his family had tickets to leave Germany and go to Shanghai but then decided
things wouldn’t get so bad and that his father mused that Hitler would be
stopped by the British before long. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of course, if you are familiar with the internet and its
culture, the use of a reference to Nazis in an article is the same as begging
someone to accuse you of violating Godwin’s law <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law</a>
. Godwin himself however noted that if you are talking about actual Nazis,
which the alt-right definitely contains (See <a href="http://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2016/09/29/neo-nazi-writer-virtually-every-alt-right-nazi-i-know-volunteering-trump-campaign/213423">http://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2016/09/29/neo-nazi-writer-virtually-every-alt-right-nazi-i-know-volunteering-trump-campaign/213423</a>
) then Godwin’s law isn’t actually violated. Godwin also acknowledged that it
can be appropriate to use Nazi references with Trump (See the above wiki
article). If you don’t understand the Godwin’s law reference just move past it
in this article, it isn’t that important.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Getting back to my point about Trump and bigoted positions
and policies. Something else is coming too and much faster than
legislation-enabled bigotry. In Russia, right after Putin passed the anti-gay
laws three and a half years ago, anti-gay bigots in Russia felt empowered by
the support in the government and the frequency of attacks by bands of bigots
in Russia against the LGBT community there immediately went up by several
orders of magnitude. That’s what happens when bigots feel empowered by the
government, they act on that empowerment. Will we see that here? I have no
doubt about that whatsoever. Once Trump is installed as President, I expect
attacks on Muslims, Latinos, African Americans, Jews and LGBT to begin or
accelerate. Trump has already said that he completely sides with the police in
the disputes with the African American community so you can use your own
imagination of how those kinds of issues will be repeated with more frequency. If
you are a person of color, don’t even look crosswise at a police officer post
January 21 because it will be open season on you and yes, more than it already
seems like it is now.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The alt-right has tried for years to gain a foothold in the
mainstream of American politics and now they and their hatred are here, thanks
to Donald Trump.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Van Jones on election night on CNN described Trump’s
election as a nightmare. That those of us who teach children not to be bullies,
not to be bigots and to do their homework now must to contend with a President
elect who is the opposite of those values and we are faced with the task of
explaining that to our kids. Jones said he has Muslim friends texting him
asking if they should leave the country and that he knows families of
immigrants that are terrified tonight. Jones said this election was a “Whitelash”,
a Whitelash against a changing country and a black President. I think he is
right about all of that and the bigotry, bullying and disdain for knowledge
about the job that it represents. Where I disagree with Jones is that Jones
said it is the responsibility of Trump to come out and reassure all the people
he insulted and offended, etc. That reassurance wouldn’t mean anything. Trumps
bigotry against Muslims, Latinos and African Americans is too central to his
candidacy and now Presidency and they are too central to who he is as a person.
They are what he is about. Any such reassurance would be a lie in my opinion. I
am upset at what Trump represents but I don’t want to be told reassuring lies
about it either.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/yeXW1FA4frY/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yeXW1FA4frY?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br /><div class="MsoNormal">
Should Muslims and undocumented Latino immigrants leave the
country as Van Jones discussed? “For their safety” is the presumed ending to
that question. How about Blacks and Jews? I can’t honestly answer that
question. In the 1930s my family in Germany wrestled with that question and
they made the wrong decision. How do you know when it is going to get that bad
and when it is too late? I’m certainly not going to try to tell anyone else. I
know that I personally will be watching very carefully how things develop, how
bad the bigotry against Muslims, African Americans and Latinos gets and whether
it expands beyond those groups. I would love to say I was going to try and do
something about it, but Republicans will have a stranglehold on all branches of
the federal government and control most of our state governments, and I
remember from the Bush administration how unresponsive Republican
administrations are toward concerns from citizens, particularly Democratic
ones.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here is part of the reason why I am so pessimistic, Trump doesn’t
have much else in the way of polices beyond his bigoted proposals. That’s what
he campaigned on and who he is. Everything else Trump talked about is silly
nationalistic rhetoric. Put it another way, to discount my concerns, you would
have to believe that 70% of what Trump talked about are things he cares nothing
about and he instead has this brilliant set of policies he wants to implement
that hid from view during the campaign even though some of the major knocks on
him were his lack of ability to do the job and the dearth of real policy
proposals.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So sure, we elected a bigot and energized the White
Supremacist/Neo-Nazi alt-right bands of bigots but things may not get that bad.
Sounds great. How many days until election 2020?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
p.s. This will be the first of several articles that
discusses the disaster that a Trump Presidency represents.<o:p></o:p></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-38292410759630241082016-09-18T21:47:00.003-04:002016-09-18T21:49:01.823-04:00I knew the Donald Trump photo with Little Miss Flint had a familiar vibe...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhe0VMylKkrMGkdTJd95M6KDwj3qpjm05mjlMJ_UGAS5l09RRTXyXgZFEuAj3-4qkGv5Qs3BXXL1B3_TwbtzKTwS7hX8rogXAvhR6g9mcTqnTQnMUdwWF13DHk0bTQhZaD5n7GzWYRY0io/s1600/Trump_Familiar_Vibe.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="249" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhe0VMylKkrMGkdTJd95M6KDwj3qpjm05mjlMJ_UGAS5l09RRTXyXgZFEuAj3-4qkGv5Qs3BXXL1B3_TwbtzKTwS7hX8rogXAvhR6g9mcTqnTQnMUdwWF13DHk0bTQhZaD5n7GzWYRY0io/s400/Trump_Familiar_Vibe.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-61713412015525711452016-09-13T18:41:00.001-04:002016-09-13T19:15:13.117-04:00Yes, far too many of Trump supporters are DEPLORABLE. Yesterday one of them punched an elderly woman sporting an oxygen tank in the face<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMZ8lOchLSQlKg5CbQD9ke2yZQ7f1JPr9b6Xj3VOyuNkKV01jyV5AZx0s93ZrrfmtlI1T_fNin_zeXGKatHQ5ln3UkfI-Y-wMERSxDTwBPKb6qyIWWlvxukLv6HI8uI31dMP6A4jjQcko/s1600/Shirley+Teeter1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="223" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMZ8lOchLSQlKg5CbQD9ke2yZQ7f1JPr9b6Xj3VOyuNkKV01jyV5AZx0s93ZrrfmtlI1T_fNin_zeXGKatHQ5ln3UkfI-Y-wMERSxDTwBPKb6qyIWWlvxukLv6HI8uI31dMP6A4jjQcko/s400/Shirley+Teeter1.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">ABC News photo of Shirley Teeter lying on the ground on top of her oxygen tank after being punched in the face by a Trump supporter at the Trump rally in Asheville NC on Monday. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: x-large;">H</span>illary Clinton should not have apologized for calling some of Trump's supporters deplorable.<br />
<br />
Shirley Teeter, a 69 year old woman who needs an oxygen tank to assist her with breathing, attended a Trump rally in Asheville NC to protest the candidate.<br />
<br />
A man standing in front of her facing away reacted to some of her comments about Trump and his candidacy by turning around and punching her in the face. The 69 year old fell to the ground on top of her oxygen tank.<br />
<br />
The aftermath was caught on camera and Teeter called ABC News affiliate WLOS to tell her story.<br />
<br />
She is a veteran of protests that go back many years and has never been hit or subjected to violence before.<br />
<br />
At the end of her contact with WLOS, she asked them a question she clearly wanted everyone out there reading this to ask themselves:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"She asks if people find a Trump supporter punching her in the face deplorable."</blockquote>
Several news media like the NY Times have been reporting on the violence at Trump rallies and how Trump incites the attendees but so far there has been no attempt by the Trump campaign to change how he behaves at rallies. The only thing Trump spokespeople have done in response is to deny that he is deliberately inciting attendees to violence.<br />
<br />
The NY Times posted this video after a year of research into what Trump rallies are like. It's clear from this video that Trump and the campaign are very aware of what happens at his rallies, they just don't care:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/R9YPYRaeTW0/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R9YPYRaeTW0?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
Now his supporters are beating up on elderly people on oxygen. To answer Shirley Teeter's question, yes, they are deplorable.<br />
<br />
-------------------<br />
<br />
More News links to the story:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/local/2016/09/13/69-year-old-woman-punched-asheville-trump-rally/90301468/" target="_blank">http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/local/2016/09/13/69-year-old-woman-punched-asheville-trump-rally/90301468/ </a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://wlos.com/news/local/69-year-old-woman-punched-in-face-outside-rally-by-trump-supporter">http://wlos.com/news/local/69-year-old-woman-punched-in-face-outside-rally-by-trump-supporter</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://wlos.com/news/local/breaking-warrant-out-for-man-who-hit-three-people-at-asheville-trump-rally">http://wlos.com/news/local/breaking-warrant-out-for-man-who-hit-three-people-at-asheville-trump-rally</a>Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-49995442903715347172016-08-17T17:32:00.000-04:002016-08-17T17:32:00.836-04:00Fun with Republicans who have selective memoryNo offense to anyone who is Greek but seriously...<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1q4dL5Gsvxarp6VaEqg_qWAdAibHN96140_aX7Uu21PS3Pe6Kwe0_1sD2DofPQARxzvsCMt8y9NQXNJL-6sCq2lWfqJm0EugGhYLfc22KxSV_7-HahHP84hf02r3vP1Ht0zlU5sCokvg/s1600/gopecnomic+vibe.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="303" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1q4dL5Gsvxarp6VaEqg_qWAdAibHN96140_aX7Uu21PS3Pe6Kwe0_1sD2DofPQARxzvsCMt8y9NQXNJL-6sCq2lWfqJm0EugGhYLfc22KxSV_7-HahHP84hf02r3vP1Ht0zlU5sCokvg/s400/gopecnomic+vibe.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-4554867795622841682016-07-27T00:06:00.001-04:002016-07-27T00:09:32.090-04:00Trump the Traitor working to put America first… under the boot of Putin. The thing that concerns me about what is happening with Trump and Putin is that so many ridiculous and scurrilous things get said during an election that many folks will not give this the attention that it deserves.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJ1hNYHsMF83qPBJEIOcKXYz9Z49V7xXDLETNBzcC7OLswwafw8M-3IO9HLHdWqVk87x0asL6LkYxx8O0ujR7tJHbNNdESPB-vWxi0gnILxBL5u1H-8uISd5IKNv3R61vDp7W-t8k_lcA/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJ1hNYHsMF83qPBJEIOcKXYz9Z49V7xXDLETNBzcC7OLswwafw8M-3IO9HLHdWqVk87x0asL6LkYxx8O0ujR7tJHbNNdESPB-vWxi0gnILxBL5u1H-8uISd5IKNv3R61vDp7W-t8k_lcA/s320/steve.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
There are too many things that now show that there is a connection between Trump and Putin and that Putin is willing to pull out all the stops to try to throw the election to Trump. As bad as that is, what is worse is that Trump is willing to hurt American national security to foster his relationship with Putin and Russia. We don’t yet know all the specifics of the relationship between Trump and Putin but here is what we do know so far:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Trump has expressed admiration for Putin on multiple occasions. This is strange behavior for a nominee for President from one of the major parties to express admiration for a foreign leader who has had an adversarial relationship with the United States for the past 12 years versus Presidents of both US parties.</li>
<br />
<li>Trump has had relationships with Billionaire oligarch friends of Putin going back a number of years. Trump’s obsequiousness toward and attempt to attract the attention of Russian leaders goes back to Soviet times. He so badly wanted to meet Gorbachev that he was tricked into meeting with a Gorbachev impersonator and this was caught on camera. See here for more information about Trump’s Russian connections throughout the years <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/07/vladimir_putin_has_a_plan_for_destroying_the_west_and_it_looks_a_lot_like.html">http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/07/vladimir_putin_has_a_plan_for_destroying_the_west_and_it_looks_a_lot_like.html</a> also here <a href="http://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trumps-russia-connections-foreign-policy-presidential-campaign/">http://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trumps-russia-connections-foreign-policy-presidential-campaign/</a> and see here <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/from-russia-with-love">https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/from-russia-with-love</a> for video of Trumps embarrassing meeting with a Gorbachev impersonator.</li>
<br />
<li>One of Trump’s top campaign personnel, Paul Manafort, has worked with Russian backed candidates in Ukraine including being on the payroll of Viktor Yanukovych, the former Ukrainian president and a Putin ally. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/opinion/donald-trump-the-siberian-candidate.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/opinion/donald-trump-the-siberian-candidate.html</a></li>
<br />
<li>It has now been confirmed that Russian intelligence services were behind the hack of the Democratic Party email system and the Russians released that information just before the Democratic National Convention when it would be sure to cause problems for the Democratic nominee’s efforts to build cohesion versus Trump. It’s impossible that this was done without approval from Putin. To put it succinctly, Russian intelligence, at the behest of Putin, is trying to help Trump win the election via nefarious means. See the below posted ABC News video.</li>
<br />
<li>The Trump campaign refused a plank in the GOP platform, pushed by all other factions of the Republican Party, that would guarantee weapons to Ukraine if Russia attacked them. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-campaign-guts-gops-anti-russia-stance-on-ukraine/2016/07/18/98adb3b0-4cf3-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html">https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-campaign-guts-gops-anti-russia-stance-on-ukraine/2016/07/18/98adb3b0-4cf3-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html</a> </li>
<br />
<li>Most concerning is that Trump has broken with over 60 years of NATO policy in suggesting that if he were President, the US might not come to the aid of a fellow NATO member if attacked by Russia. <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/07/trump-nato/492341/">http://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/07/trump-nato/492341/</a> This is a huge blow to the members of NATO, particularly in Eastern Europe, who live with an ever increasing aggressiveness from Russia and depend on their membership in NATO to stay free from Russian domination. Newsweek published an article earlier this year titled “Counting Down to a Russian invasion of the Baltics”, <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/counting-down-russian-invasion-baltics-414877">http://www.newsweek.com/counting-down-russian-invasion-baltics-414877</a> , which outlined how aggressive Putin has been in putting political, economic and business pressure on the Baltics in what can only be assumed to be a prelude to attempting to take control over those countries in one form or another. Trump’s comments must seem particularly terrifying to the people and leaders of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. It could drive countries like these or others who share borders with Russia to decide it would be easier and safer to capitulate to Putin’s demands to return to the Russian sphere of influence, and turn away from NATO and the EU. You can see the argument being made, better to do that now with some bargaining chips to be played than be overrun and have no say in how it’s done. I promise all of you reading this that those kinds of discussions are being had in countries that border Russia after Trump’s comments. I am not saying those proposing such things will win those arguments, but they are being said and are being taken seriously. </li>
</ul>
I am not exaggerating the effect of Trump’s comments on NATO. As reported by Esme Crib in Talking Points Memo, condemnation on that front was swift by a diverse group of people on both sides of the political aisle, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI). John Bolton, former ambassador to the United Nations under President George W. Bush, criticized Trump's stance as "an open invitation to Vladimir Putin" and said that he hoped that "whoever advised Mr. Trump on this rethinks it." See this video of John Bolton, who is otherwise a Trump supporter, talking about how wrong-headed Trump's comments were regarding NATO:<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/IJC4KfEDP-Q/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IJC4KfEDP-Q?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<div>
<br />
<ul>
</ul>
<br />
The Clinton campaign was also quick to respond to Trump's suggestions.<br />
<br />
“The President is supposed to be the leader of the free world,” senior policy advisor Jake Sullivan said in a statement. “Donald Trump apparently doesn’t even believe in the free world.” He went on to say that it was "fair to assume that Vladimir Putin is rooting for a Trump presidency."<br />
<br />
Trump’s response to criticism was to double down on his position regarding potentially not coming to the aid of fellow NATO countries.<br />
<br />
Why is Trump clinging so hard to a bad policy denounced from all corners that hasn’t been defended by any foreign policy expert at any position in the political spectrum? Why is hurting US National Security by weakening NATO so important to him?<br />
<br />
The only person who benefits from Trump’s proposed change in NATO policy is Putin.<br />
<br />
My contention, and I will argue this point with anyone, is that Trump’s statement on NATO has hurt American National Security more than any single act by any President in US History, and Trump managed to do that without ever being elected to any political office.<br />
<br />
The Washington Posts’ Anne Applebaum put it this way:<br />
<br />
For even if Trump never becomes president, his candidacy has already achieved two extremely important Russian foreign policy goals: to weaken the moral influence of the United States by undermining its reputation as a stable democracy, and to destroy its power by wrecking its relationships with its allies. Toward these ends, Trump has begun repeating arguments identical to those used on Russian state television. These range from doubts about the sovereignty of Ukraine — earlier this week, Trump’s campaign team helped alter the Republican party platform to remove support for Ukraine — to doubts about U.S. leadership of the democratic world. The United States has its own “mess” to worry about, Trump told the New York Times on Wednesday: It shouldn’t stand up for democracy abroad. In the same interview, he also cast doubt on the fundamental basis of transatlantic stability, NATO’s Article 5 guarantee: If Russia invades, he said, he’d have to think first before defending U.S. allies. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/how-a-trump-presidency-could-destabilize-europe/2016/07/21/9ec38a20-4f75-11e6-a422-83ab49ed5e6a_story.html">https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/how-a-trump-presidency-could-destabilize-europe/2016/07/21/9ec38a20-4f75-11e6-a422-83ab49ed5e6a_story.html</a><br />
<br />
Ms Applebaum also alluded to Trump being an actual Manchurian candidate.<br />
<br />
From the links on several of the points I noted above you can see that various major media organizations are starting to report on the kinds of things I have written about here. ABC News did an excellent piece on the hack and some of the other disturbing elements of seeming cooperation between Trump and Putin. See this video from ABC News:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/A0IZSGGZhhE/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/A0IZSGGZhhE?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
Putin is a bully who has invaded and taken over pieces of half a dozen neighboring countries. The surest way to deter a bully is by a rock-solid alliance between countries so that the bully knows in no uncertain terms that if he attacks one of the alliance members, all will come to the aid of the country attacked with devastating consequences for the attacker. We saw what happened in the run-up to the Second World War when dictators exploited the reluctance of countries to support each other by swiftly taking over large portions of Europe and Asia. Trump is working to bring those same conditions about by eroding the support of NATO alliance countries for each other.<br />
<br />
This is an enormous issue. Beyond all the other reasons why Trump would make a terrible President, this issue of Trump selling out American National Security to Russia stands above them all as a critical reason why Trump should not never be President.<br />
<br />
-----------------<br />
<br />
For reference I included NATO’s article 5 from <a href="http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm">http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm</a><br />
<br />
Article 5<br />
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.<br />
<br />
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .<br />
<br /></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-86114280872179481622016-07-24T18:12:00.001-04:002016-07-24T18:12:31.651-04:00So Many Folks Confused About What Impartiality in the Primary Means for a Democratic Party Organization or Official<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaiLfWTYrfIqc8DJIdL6K4y0HdQnxCz0K3vWWo0ZyRcN7ZQtACC5V3zUamAFoz6bEIfHMw19fEfJZNZsqeXgqGR0bs2HiilOML484g8_8rTqwiVe1kMPAXdUjzB38S_nH-Caov9JKWv0s/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaiLfWTYrfIqc8DJIdL6K4y0HdQnxCz0K3vWWo0ZyRcN7ZQtACC5V3zUamAFoz6bEIfHMw19fEfJZNZsqeXgqGR0bs2HiilOML484g8_8rTqwiVe1kMPAXdUjzB38S_nH-Caov9JKWv0s/s400/steve.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With the current brouhaha about Debbie Wasserman Schultz and
whether emails leaked by a hacker in Russia show wrongdoing, I think it’s
important that folks know exactly what the applicable rules mean in terms of
how Democratic Party officials are supposed to conduct themselves with regards
to contests for a Democratic nomination.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Many people seem to be attempting to apply these rules in a
way they were not intended.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve been subject to similar rules in the past. As a past
precinct chair, then District Leader and then County Public Relations
Chairperson for the Pinellas County Democratic Executive Committee in Florida,
we were subject to the following rule:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
PCDEC Bylaws<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
ARTICLE XIII<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Endorsement of Candidates<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<b>The endorsement of candidates in Primary elections is prohibited to the
County Committee, the Chair of the PCDEC, and all groups within its
jurisdiction, except as otherwise provided by the FDP Bylaw<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Every two years, at least while I was an officer of the
PCDEC, the county chairperson would go over with us exactly what that means and
how it affected us.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The main idea is, you cannot endorse any candidates or make
it seem to voters as if you were using your office to promote a candidate for
the Democratic nomination or that the local county apparatus endorsed someone.
You were absolutely permitted to volunteer for a campaign, work for a campaign
and to have a strong personal preference for a candidate. The key is not to make a public endorsement.
If you think about it, it doesn’t make sense to do otherwise. To prevent all
local Democratic Party officials from working on campaigns removes the most
active Democrats from helping candidates until very late in the process. That
is not the intent of the rule.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now let’s examine the DNC bylaws applicable to the situation
with DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
DNC Bylaws Article 5, Section 4<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
In the conduct and management of
the affairs and procedures of the Democratic National Committee, <b><i><u>particularly
as they apply to the preparation and conduct of the Presidential nomination
process,</u></i></b> the Chairperson shall exercise impartiality and
evenhandedness as between the Presidential candidates and campaigns. The
Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and
staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and
evenhandedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The bold, italics and underlining are mine and they are the
key point to this rule. Again, the point is not that the national chair and DNC
members can’t have a strong preference for who wins the nomination it also
doesn’t mean that the national chair and other DNS members can’t express their
preference privately. It doesn’t mean that a candidate can’t anger them or that
they can’t express that anger privately.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Understanding the rule, did Debbie Wasserman Schultz break it?
I don’t think so.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let’s also understand that we are dealing with extraordinary
circumstances here. I want everyone reading this to picture this scenario. For
25 years you have been a member of an organization that you believe in and
whose goals you believe are very important. During that time, an outside individual
has been attacking your organization and calling it insincere. He says he
upholds the principles your organization espouses better than you do and says
joining your organization would be committing treason to his beliefs. He
belittles and criticizes your organization at every turn. When it comes to making
decisions in a group he does support what members of your organization are
doing but only because it serves his interests to do so.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At the end of those 25 years, he joins your organization,
something he said he would never do, only because it is the only way he can try
to get something he wants and he contends in the highest level election against
someone who has been a loyal member of your organization for 30+ years. Your
responsibilities are as article 5 section 4 express them above.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Do you think you and/or members of your organization would
have a strong preference against this individual? Do you think you might
express that privately in emails since that does not violate the rule? When it
turns out that members of this individual’s campaign have early in the process
improperly used computer resources to gain an unfair advantage in the campaign,
do you think it would make you upset? Whose fault is it that there is antipathy
toward this individual in your organization? I think the answers to those
questions are obvious. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But hold on, it’s more than that. When Sanders’ campaign was
caught improperly accessing Hillary Clinton campaign information on DNC servers
and the DNC moved to sanction him, Sanders sued the DNC to avoid the punishment.
So you have retaliatory litigation against the DNC by Sanders on top of
everything I discussed in the previous two paragraphs. Now what kind of a relationship
and private opinion do you think DNC leadership and staffers have with/of
Sanders? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the things I keep asking myself when I think about
the relationship between Sanders and the DNC is, did Sanders ever do anything
to reach out and mend fences? You have his 25 years’ worth of attacks on the
Democratic Party. If you were in the position he was in at the start of his
campaign, wouldn’t you have seen the need to try to work to improve the
relationship because of your prior behavior/statements? Did Sanders ever do
anything at all along those lines? If so I haven’t heard of it. For someone who
purports to have the skill to be President, a job where negotiations, diplomacy
and dealing with countries and foreign leaders, not to mention domestic members
of the opposite party, whose opinions might differ for yours and where you need
to be able to craft compromises, are we to understand he was unable to reach
out and try to come to some sort of détente with the DNC?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another issue is whether any of this had any impact on the
race. Hillary’s early and insurmountable lead came from winning African
American votes in the South by huge margins and from Florida which has long
been a Clinton stronghold. Nothing that I have seen has proposed anything that
suggests that the DNC influenced that in any way. I am not sure African
Americans in the South care that much about what the DNC says nor is there much
else the DNC could do to change how they would vote. So whatever the DNC did
had little impact on the race.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of course the other upsetting point is that the leak of the
DNC emails comes from a Russian hacker who almost certainly operates with the
tacit or full-fledged permission of Putin. People in Russia who do things Putin
doesn’t like have a tendency to disappear or turn up dead see <a href="http://news.sky.com/story/the-putin-critics-who-have-been-assassinated-10369350">http://news.sky.com/story/the-putin-critics-who-have-been-assassinated-10369350</a>
and note this is an abbreviated list. Even when they escape Russia, many of
them have a tendency to end up dead before their time and some by horrific
means, like Alexander Litvinenko <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexander_Litvinenko">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexander_Litvinenko</a>
so I think it’s fair to say that this hacker operates with Putin’s permission. Putin’s
attempt to put his finger on the scale here for Trump against Hillary indicates
one of two things, either he really likes Trump and thinks Trump sees eye to
eye with him on world affairs, or it means Putin thinks Trump is a dupe who
would be easy to control or subvert. Neither possibility is a good one. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I don’t care what things were said about the candidates among
DNC members in private emails. But, if Debbie Wasserman Schultz or other
members of the DNC went beyond privately talking/emailing and expressing
personal preferences, even though it’s something that any sane person knowing
the background would probably understand, they should face repercussions for
that. To this point, I haven’t seen any evidence that they did. <o:p></o:p></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-76344585737823519002016-06-26T01:00:00.005-04:002016-06-26T01:17:33.745-04:00Hillary vs Trump regarding Wall Street and Brexit<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpQeEbx3z5RneRT6c4ZN-OaJeRCwyZ-DhxkdtajqlXC59-fOubgykUIbl3_jgL9OJ7qsTPmBMWsP56l53auYfyDzV83AG12kPrjVlbJdmrGA7W0rUQhzIVjIvbkygSdpCm71rRyOrLhF0/s1600/lesersense+-+600x600.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpQeEbx3z5RneRT6c4ZN-OaJeRCwyZ-DhxkdtajqlXC59-fOubgykUIbl3_jgL9OJ7qsTPmBMWsP56l53auYfyDzV83AG12kPrjVlbJdmrGA7W0rUQhzIVjIvbkygSdpCm71rRyOrLhF0/s320/lesersense+-+600x600.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The turmoil in the wake of Brexit particularly with the
markets has raised the question of who is better qualified to lead regarding
matters of Wall Street, Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I was asked to appear on two shows on Fox News regarding
that topic, one on Friday afternoon on the Cavuto show guest hosted by Maria
Bartiromo and one Satuday morning on the Cost of Freedom hosted by David Asman.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I want to discuss Brexit in general and what it means for
the election and what Hillary and President Obama as well as leaders of other
European countries should do but the Wall Street question is an interesting
one. Below is the video of my appearance Saturday morning on the Cost of
Freedom opposite Mark Serrano.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1_A3vXlvmG0/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1_A3vXlvmG0?feature=player_embedded" width="640"></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the first things that went through my mind during
this discussion is that Trump and his surrogates are trying to have it both
ways with Hillary. On the one hand they are trying to extend and capitalize on
criticism levied by Sanders and his supporters that Hillary is too close to
Wall Street and presumably would favor them too much. At the same time they
want to claim she would enact proposals that are bad for Wall Street. That
thought was going through my head as I exited the studio and ran into my old
friend Jonas Max Ferris who said that very thing to me right after the segment.
I hope everyone reading this gets that you can’t have it both ways. I don’t
blame Mark Serrano. I think that Trump has a massive problem in general with flip-flopping, contradictory statements and being on both sides of every issue and that sets
the tone for the campaign and its surrogates. My last article on the campaign
and Trump, “Trump’s Torrent of Flip-Flopping makes Mitt Romney look like Steady
Eddie”, <a href="http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2016/05/trumps-torrent-of-flip-flopping-makes.html">http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2016/05/trumps-torrent-of-flip-flopping-makes.html</a>
noted that several articles have now been written by reporters doing research
into Trump’s statements and the amount of contradictory statements Trump puts
out there is beyond bizarre to the point of being pathological. This article by
Politico, “Donald Trump’s Greatest Contradictions” <a href="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-contradictions-213869"><span style="background: white; color: #888888; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 107%;">http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-contradictions-213869</span></a>
is perhaps the best catalog of them. Politico’s catalog of Trumps flip flopping
and contradictions goes on for 23 pages. It still shocks me and I have read it
several times now. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But getting back to the debate I had Saturday morning, as
far as Hillary and Wall Street is concerned my position hasn’t changed since
early in the Democratic primary and that is that to really do a good job
reforming an industry you have to have a deep understanding of that industry.
Hillary has cultivated that understanding over the last 16 years, not just by
doing paid speeches but by having an ongoing dialogue with various leaders and other folks on
Wall Street and the banking industry. The fruits of that effort are many
including:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
</div>
<ul>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">.</span><span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; text-indent: -0.25in;">
</span><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">Hillary’s plan to reform Wall Street was voted
best by a large majority of Liberal and Progressive economists. In other words,
her plan will do the best job of reigning in the bad practices that led to the
mortgage crisis and various other issues we have seen in finance and banking
over the last 30-40 years.</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">.</span><span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; text-indent: -0.25in;">
</span><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">Wall Street and the Banking industry feels comfortable
that Hillary will address the problems but not prevent or hinder them from
ethically doing their business.</span></li>
</ul>
<!--[if !supportLists]--><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Number two will be dismissed by various folks as unimportant
or undesirable, but the Financial Insurance and Real Estate industry is over
20% of the US Economy. If you end up crippling or destroying that industry, you
better have a plan for recreating that contribution to the economy and the tens
of millions of jobs that come with it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is the kind of politics I prefer, engaging the people
involved and trying to gain a deep understanding of all the facts surrounding
issues so you can most successfully deal with them. Demagoguery against Wall
Street and the Banking industry and refusing to talk to leaders of companies in
both may be good politics on both sides of the aisle but it doesn’t help you
craft good policy to address the problems. Of course, with this belief system
of mine there was no question of who I would support in the Democratic primary.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On the other hand, Trump has a lot of problems where Wall
Street and the banking industry is concerned. They will never forget how he
left investors holding the bag for his four bankruptcies. All told, for
investments of billions of dollars, investors got pennies on the dollar for
such debacles as the Trump Taj Mahal bankruptcy in the early 90’s. Whenever
journalists have gone to Wall Street to assess how Wall Street and Bankers
think about Trump, they have found a very small group who like him, like Carl
Icahn for instance, and a lot of folks who refuse to do business with him.
There apparently is even a pejorative term in the industry for how bad of an
investment it is to loan Trump money. It’s called “Donald Risk” as Susan Craig
noted in a May 23<sup>rd</sup> article in the NY Times.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Adding to those kinds of problems is that Wall Street values
consistency above almost everything else. Given consistency Wall Street can
react to and successfully deal with almost anything. But as you can see from
the Politico article I linked above, Trump doesn’t do consistency. He is a wild
card and you never know what to expect from him. During the campaign he has at
times attacked Wall Street and Hedge funds, and then at times he has tried to
paint himself as a big friend of Wall Street. You can bet this hasn’t gone
unnoticed by folks on Wall Street and the finance industry.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Regarding Brexit, I think for those of us in the US and in
other European countries who support immigration and the acceptance of
refugees, Brexit was a wakeup call that we need new short and long term
approaches to these kinds of issues. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Before I get into that, I just want to point out that while
Trump was out in Scotland on Friday and Saturday cheering Brexit and saying the
citizens of the UK were right to “take their country back” (all the while
hawking his golf course), in 2013 he said something very different as the Daily
Caller noted (<a href="http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/25/before-the-brexit-donald-trump-was-a-transnationalist-who-wanted-to-leave-borders-behind">http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/25/before-the-brexit-donald-trump-was-a-transnationalist-who-wanted-to-leave-borders-behind</a>
):<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">In
January 2013, Trump wrote an op-ed in the cyber pages of CNN enthusiastically
endorsing the economic benefits of Europe-wide interdependence and calling for
nations “to leave borders behind.”<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
<br />
<span style="background: white;">“The near meltdown we experienced a few years ago
made it clear that our economic health depended on dependence on each other to
do the right thing,” Trump wrote in 2013.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background: white;">“I think we’ve all become aware of the fact that
our cultures and economics are intertwined,” Trump said. “Never before has the
phrase ‘we’re all in this together’ had more resonance or relevance.”<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background: white;">Trump also expressed his support for transnational
globalism.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">-----------------------------------</span></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Everywhere you turn you find a striking example of Trump
reversing himself. As I noted earlier, Trump’s contradictions and flip-flopping
are pathological, but I digress…<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In terms of leaders in Europe and the US who are in favor of
immigration and accepting refugees, it’s time to step back and reassess.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I think there are a lot of people in Europe and the US that
are uncomfortable with immigration and refugees at the levels they are right
now. Rather than doing things like dismissing them or calling them Xenophobes
or racists, it may be a good time to examine the impacts and come up with
concrete facts and new policies with which we can reassure folks who are
concerned. Studies should be conducted
in terms of how some of the new immigrants are settling in and assimilating. We’ve
all heard the horror stories, some of which are true and some are no doubt
exaggerated. So let’s do a study and find out how big the issue really is. Are
there parts of cities in Europe that really have defacto Sharia law being
enforced? I don’t think so, and the few attempts to investigate indicate that
this isn’t true but let’s take each of the specific accusations and debunk them
or prove them. How many incidents do we have of new immigrants abusing women or
trying to force women to cover up or obey whatever social mores that existed in
their host country but not in their adopted one? How different is the overall
crime rate of new immigrants and refugees versus the crime rate of the
communities in which they are living? What percentage of the unemployment rate
in each city and district can be attributed to new immigrants or refugees if
any?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let’s take a rigorous approach to studying the
reality of the situation so we can combat the fear mongering by Trump in the US
and by folks in Europe like UKIP’s Farage. We should also highlight the
benefits of immigration, globalization and EU membership. One of the more
stunning facts to come out of Brexit is that the cities and communities that
voted to leave the EU are more economically dependent on the EU than those that
voted to stay in it. See this graph from Press Association's John Springfield,
Philip McCann, Bart Los and Mark Thissen. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3WjqUAWTCaC4wo_gfpc5rcWFNI4tWSD3oUPeCynFhrGFTxOSaFGfUyUUS7GIykdcEClFgiFv3VDfNO4tjhH3-HY30SKzCaiFzVOISvgWUWtCd3Q4raeDta9yNNndJiexmooKCbjckJ04/s1600/leave+stay+dependency.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3WjqUAWTCaC4wo_gfpc5rcWFNI4tWSD3oUPeCynFhrGFTxOSaFGfUyUUS7GIykdcEClFgiFv3VDfNO4tjhH3-HY30SKzCaiFzVOISvgWUWtCd3Q4raeDta9yNNndJiexmooKCbjckJ04/s640/leave+stay+dependency.jpg" width="633" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I think these statistics are stunning.
They tell me that those of us in favor of things like the EU and globalization
aren’t doing the jobs we need to be doing to explain their virtues in terms of
each community. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I also mentioned new policies, and let me introduce that by
saying there are many good ideas we could come up with including I wonder
whether in the US, UK and EU we are doing an adequate job explaining to
immigrants what we expect of them as good citizens. I think we should take specific
examples of unacceptable cultural norms in other regions of the world and explain
to prospective immigrants that those things are not acceptable in their new
homes and that attempting to continue them in their new countries will result
in deportation and then follow through on that threat if necessary. I think
that’s fair. It should be explained to immigrants that things like female
circumcision, harassing or assaulting women who aren’t covered up enough in the
eyes of certain cultures, discrimination against people of other religions and
race, sexual orientation or imposing religious jurisprudence on unwilling
recipients and various other things are unacceptable behavior and will get them
deported. I’m saying this as someone who is in favor of tolerance, multiculturalism
and diversity. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
In short, let’s address the concerns of those who currently
have issues with immigration and refugees and globalism with facts and
responsible new policies. We have no choice but to try. The Brexit vote shows the consequence of ignoring those
concerns is very likely to be exploitation of them by far right demagogues. I'll leave you all with this additional graphic from Lord Ashcroft polls showing what motivated people in the UK to vote for or against Brexit.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXwJlMwqhUjDXi-wOrXLfzfYSWVGFGLmMzwRLU2mDmV_mMc89xBggFOBxP1KsFbQlNpvWcuwl1Nhmqp9guLCHRweRqprVRBiXOrveTEu1ycGdE4EVkSSFGi7xDImaLuE4OLCBZ0L1ktuI/s1600/leave+stay+issues.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="630" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXwJlMwqhUjDXi-wOrXLfzfYSWVGFGLmMzwRLU2mDmV_mMc89xBggFOBxP1KsFbQlNpvWcuwl1Nhmqp9guLCHRweRqprVRBiXOrveTEu1ycGdE4EVkSSFGi7xDImaLuE4OLCBZ0L1ktuI/s640/leave+stay+issues.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-35115038836190885762016-05-25T22:23:00.003-04:002016-05-25T22:23:37.944-04:00Trump's Torrent of Flip-Flopping makes Mitt Romney look like Steady-Eddie<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsskkUdYbsYwoEK7kg6N9wDEddnu8-oNVhJu-EOMrgXQXAIRfqT3aJnoUdteCaBqr4PfH9keAdb0j6ZI4Or6-0b2ZibyiF7OrCpHXOGQSgruxyTSvSsn5SuT-uYAttpBE9hEtcvpx6vMg/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsskkUdYbsYwoEK7kg6N9wDEddnu8-oNVhJu-EOMrgXQXAIRfqT3aJnoUdteCaBqr4PfH9keAdb0j6ZI4Or6-0b2ZibyiF7OrCpHXOGQSgruxyTSvSsn5SuT-uYAttpBE9hEtcvpx6vMg/s320/steve.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
People who have followed my writing and my radio show will recall that I have believed from the very beginning of Trump's involvement in national politics, back in 2011, that his positions weren't heartfelt and were just designed to win the Republican nomination. See <a href="http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2011/04/08/trumps-birther-strategy-makes-sense-if-you-understand-its-purpose/" target="_blank">http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2011/04/08/trumps-birther-strategy-makes-sense-if-you-understand-its-purpose/ </a> where five years ago I called it. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
This past February I explained how I thought Trumps positions on immigration, that he has held for only the last 6-12 months, were part of this "just say what you need to say to get the nomination" strategy <a href="http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2016/02/if-it-is-donald-trump-vs-hillary.html">http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2016/02/if-it-is-donald-trump-vs-hillary.html</a> .</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
It's fascinating that the far right, which has lamented not being able to nominate a "true conservative" the last two Presidential elections didn't fight harder to get a genuine conservative (Cruz) nominated when he was very much in contention for a while. Instead too many Republicans bought into Trump's spin, and make no mistake Trump has been out there trying to sell himself as some sort of straight talking Conservative.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Obviously this has worked. He is the presumptive Republican nominee. But throughout this process, he has talked himself into both sides of a multitude of issues. This is what happens when the basis for your campaign is to say whatever you think will get you nominated or elected rather than what you believe.</div>
<div class="" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYuq1xOi0vPJd4UfrJwVYtjYhCDDyAAvbknrOzIZWEosWxaMOSGrmw9YwpWaX4sxPMQ5OK_I2BZ5CsBd__6wAvj6e5kSalgFSJK1AqvOf2MUPn27eIVTgwmew27UR5RZVBtmYwtudkPAA/s1600/Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="397" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYuq1xOi0vPJd4UfrJwVYtjYhCDDyAAvbknrOzIZWEosWxaMOSGrmw9YwpWaX4sxPMQ5OK_I2BZ5CsBd__6wAvj6e5kSalgFSJK1AqvOf2MUPn27eIVTgwmew27UR5RZVBtmYwtudkPAA/s400/Trump.jpg" width="400" /></a>Sure, everyone says a contradictory thing or two now and again. I think a few can be forgiven. I remember Republicans going after John Kerry accusing him of being a flip-flopper for saying he was for $87 Billion in Iraq war appropriations before he was against it. In Kerry's case, the reason was because the earlier form of the bill reduced Bush's tax cuts to pay for it and thus was deficit neutral. The later form of the bill increased the deficit. </div>
<div class="" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Kerry didn't have close to the number of contradictions as Mitt Romney, but of course Republicans supported Romney. Now we have Trump. People who are friends of mine on Facebook will note that I have called out a number of Trump's contradictory statements over the last few weeks, but I hadn't realized how bad it has become. The admins over at Democratic Underground alerted me to a few articles on the subject through their "Real Donald Trump" picture above. Thinkprogress (click <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/05/24/3781188/donald-trump-simultaneous-positions/" target="_blank">here</a>), Salon (click <a href="http://www.salon.com/2016/05/18/trumps_korean_incoherence_the_trump_plan_for_north_korea_includes_everything_from_diplomacy_to_assassination/" target="_blank">here</a>) and in particular Politico (click <a href="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-contradictions-213869" target="_blank">here</a>) did a good job of cataloging them. There are so many it's near impossible to discuss them all. Here is a very small sample of the contradictions listed in the Politico article:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
.</div>
<br />
“Politicians are all talk and no action.” (Twitter, May 27, 2015)<br />
<br />
“I’m not a politician.” (CNN, August 11, 2015)<br />
<br />
“I’m no different than a politician running for office.” (New York Times, July 28, 2015)<br />
<br />
“If I ever ran for office, I’d do better as a Democrat than as a Republican—and that’s not because I’d be more liberal, because I’m conservative.” (Playboy, March 1990)<br />
<br />
“I’m a registered Republican. I’m a pretty conservative guy. I’m somewhat liberal on social issues, especially health care.” (CNN, October 8, 1999)<br />
<br />
“You’d be shocked if I said that in many cases I probably identify more as a Democrat.” (CNN, March 21, 2004)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://static2.politico.com/dims4/default/bc98534/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2Fb3%2F50%2F15c29a8e48d593f255a508a6e72e%2Ftrump-contradiction-edeljpg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://static2.politico.com/dims4/default/bc98534/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2Fb3%2F50%2F15c29a8e48d593f255a508a6e72e%2Ftrump-contradiction-edeljpg.jpg" height="173" width="320" /></a>“Look, I’m a Republican. I’m a very conservative guy in many respects—I guess in most respects.” (The Hugh Hewitt Show, February 25, 2015)<br />
<br />
“I’ve actually been an activist Democrat and Republican.” (CNN, October 8, 1999)<br />
<br />
“Folks, I’m a conservative, but at this point, who cares? We got to straighten out the country.” (Burlingame, California, April 29, 2016)<br />
<br />
“I’m totally pro-choice.” (Fox News, October 31, 1999)<br />
<br />
“I’m pro-life.” (CPAC, February 10, 2011)<br />
<br />
“Look, I’m very pro-choice. I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject, but you still—I just believe in choice. … I am strongly for choice, and yet I hate the concept of abortion. … I am pro-choice in every respect … but I just hate it.” (NBC News, October 24, 1999)<br />
<br />
“I am very, very proud to say that I’m pro-life.” (Cleveland, Ohio, August 6, 2015)<br />
.<br />
.<br />
.<br />
_______________________________________________________________________<br />
<br />
As I said this is a VERY small sample, the contradictions in the Politico article go on for 23 pages. Everyone should read them. It's shocking at this point. And sure, some of the contradictions are separated by 10-20 years, but many are not. This goes far beyond standard political double-speak. I think there may be something really wrong with Donald Trump, psychologically. It's hard to imagine how someone could be normal and behave this way.<br />
<br />
Whether he is normal or not, someone who does this does not belong in the White House.<br />
<br />
-----------------------<br />
<br />
Links mentioned in this article:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-contradictions-213869">http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-contradictions-213869</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/05/24/3781188/donald-trump-simultaneous-positions/">http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/05/24/3781188/donald-trump-simultaneous-positions/</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.salon.com/2016/05/18/trumps_korean_incoherence_the_trump_plan_for_north_korea_includes_everything_from_diplomacy_to_assassination/">http://www.salon.com/2016/05/18/trumps_korean_incoherence_the_trump_plan_for_north_korea_includes_everything_from_diplomacy_to_assassination/</a>Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-47760208175401500832016-03-25T19:12:00.001-04:002016-03-25T19:12:24.087-04:00Steven Leser on Newsmax Now discussing Donald Trumps issues with women a...<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="344" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4jFqcBna51c" width="459"></iframe>Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-7035944081041140352016-02-27T16:42:00.000-05:002016-02-27T16:44:29.018-05:00If it is Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton in the General Election, Latinos will play a decisive role and Trump will lose<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD2Wyvrc5KkWxuUvN2qOM69HD6rjl-cNQ1CDLe4Tgx0JDPLjGXoEoaWc5UYOmJIl_UfJCsR3cgzYhDfbhKPUPWB4RkcUHiL2ePtb0qhcsPklt3YNLg9QLwWgtwjsAXNmnEYb2CIvaUbSw/s1600/steve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD2Wyvrc5KkWxuUvN2qOM69HD6rjl-cNQ1CDLe4Tgx0JDPLjGXoEoaWc5UYOmJIl_UfJCsR3cgzYhDfbhKPUPWB4RkcUHiL2ePtb0qhcsPklt3YNLg9QLwWgtwjsAXNmnEYb2CIvaUbSw/s320/steve.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Before I get into the crux of this article, I want to provide some background that I think will make a lot of things clear about why Trump has done some of the things he has done. After his comments back in the 2004-2005 time-frame that the Iraq war was a disaster, I thought he might run for President as a Democrat. Back then, Trump was a moderate who, in my opinion, could have chosen to run for either party.<br />
<br />
The first mistake Trump made in trying to run for President was to decide to run as a Republican. I can imagine some of the reasons why and discussions had by his team as that decision was made, but that's mostly supposition on my part and immaterial. The result of deciding to run as a Republican meant that he had to try to appeal to Republican grassroots.<br />
<br />
That would have posed a serious problem for any political team trying to solve the obstacles in his way to getting the nomination. As Trump's GOP primary opponents have said, he had expressed support for many Liberal positions in the past. If he reversed positions on those things he would immediately be seen as non-genuine and a hypocrite. Those perceptions are the exact opposite of those that team Trump was trying to create. His teams goals were to develop positions that Trump could adopt that would both signal to Conservative grass roots that he was one of them and deserved their support and would also not conflict with anything he had said previously.<br />
<br />
It was clear to me with the birther position Trump took back during the run-up to the 2012 primary that this was a first attempt to reintroduce himself to Conservative grassroots as someone they should consider supporting. See my article on that here: <a href="http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2011/04/08/trumps-birther-strategy-makes-sense-if-you-understand-its-purpose/" target="_blank">TRUMP'S BIRTHER STRATEGY MAKES SENSE IF YOU UNDERSTAND ITS PURPOSE</a><br />
<br />
The second position that Trump's team had him adopt was that of being radically against undocumented immigrants having a path to citizenship, and the creation of the wall on the border with Mexico.<br />
<br />
Both the birther and anti-immigration positions fulfilled the requirements of endearing him to the Republican base and not putting him in danger of appearing to be a flip-flopper or someone willing to say anything to be elected. In fact regarding the latter, it did the exact opposite. It helped foster the impression that Trump says what he means and doesn't care about being politically correct. This impression has stuck with Trump throughout the Republican primary process and has him on the verge of becoming the presumptive Republican nominee.<br />
<br />
The problem with some of the things that Trump said regarding immigration was that they were extremely offensive to Latinos. Trump claims that the media unfairly characterized his statements but I am not sure you can say that. Huffington Post did a good job back in August of capturing, to that point, the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/9-outrageous-things-donald-trump-has-said-about-latinos_us_55e483a1e4b0c818f618904b" target="_blank">Nine Most Outrageous things Donald Trump has said about Latinos</a> and that includes such gems as:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_600_noupscale/55e0e21714000077002e4580.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_600_noupscale/55e0e21714000077002e4580.jpeg" height="297" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
and lest you think Trump's negative statements and opinion was just about Mexicans and not other Latinos:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_600_noupscale/55e0eace1700004301568ecb.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_600_noupscale/55e0eace1700004301568ecb.jpeg" height="333" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
As a Latino myself, those things Trump said are upsetting to me, but I also don't happen to think that Trump really believes those things anymore than he believed that Obama was born in Kenya. I think this was all part of the salesmanship job Trump has been doing to win over the Conservative base. I also don't think he really understood how offensive those things were that he was saying. That doesn't excuse it. Whether someone really is a really a racist and believes racist things or is just saying race-baiting things for political objectives doesn't change how it makes me feel about that person. I am very unhappy with Donald Trump for having made those statements and I am not alone. Latinos are seething over these statements both here in the US and abroad. This is very important and I am going to come back to that.<br />
<br />
Right now if you look to the general election polls describing the results of a potential Trump vs Hillary race, most have it close and some even have Trump winning. <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html">http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html</a> I wouldn't pay too much attention to general election polls at this time. As Nate Silver said, <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-year-out-ignore-general-election-polls/" target="_blank">A year out ignore general election polls</a> . Polls at this point had Clinton losing badly in 1992 and had Carter beating Reagan in 1980. General election polls don't start meaning something until the summer and even then don't start to completely shake out until early to mid September.<br />
<br />
What does give you a hint right now about how the election might turn out is to look at individual demographic groups and use the political parties and past campaigns demographic targets to tell you where someone might have an edge and where someone might have problems.<br />
<br />
Past Republican Presidential campaigns have said that their target is to get at or close to 40% of the Latino vote to win the general election. After Mitt Romney's loss in 2012, some of which was believed to be because of his poor showing with Latinos (Romney lost the Latino vote to President Obama by 71%-27%), Republican politicians and pundits for several months afterwards were saying how they needed a new approach toward Latinos and immigration and were willing to change on both counts. One of my favorite statements along these lines was Sean Hannity's:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ljvl47K-t-Q/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ljvl47K-t-Q?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
This was said by Sean one or two days after Mitt Romney's election loss in 2012.<br />
<br />
Many Republican strategists came to the same conclusion as Hannity and realized that continuing to anger the Latino community created an impossible situation for them when it came to winning national elections. That is one of the reasons for why the Republican establishment has been and is still searching for a way to stop Trump from winning the nomination. That 40% number is in their head and they are concerned about it and it turns out they have good reason.<br />
<br />
A recent Washington Post-Univision poll of Latino voters shows that in a general election match-up, Latinos would vote 72% for Hillary and 16% for Trump. See <a href="http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/washington-post-univision-news-national-survey-of-hispanic-voters/1970/" style="background-color: white; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" target="_blank">http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/washington-post-univision-news-national-survey-of-hispanic-voters/1970/</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "verdana" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"> </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "verdana" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "verdana" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Even more telling in that poll is that 81% of Latinos have a very unfavorable or somewhat unfavorable opinion of Trump and only 17% have a very favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of Trump. Conversely, 67% of Latinos have a very favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of Hillary Clinton while only 31% have a very unfavorable or somewhat unfavorable opinion of her.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; table-layout: fixed; width: 100%px;"><tbody>
<tr><td><div class="post-message" style="margin: 0px; max-width: 800px; padding: 0px;">
This demographic poll is more telling than a normal general election poll this far out because it not only gave the results of who folks would vote for it provided favorable-unfavorable ratings. Unfavorable ratings are very hard to change and Trumps unfavorable ratings among Latinos are in the stratosphere. As I said earlier, Latinos are angry at Trump and it's hard to imagine that he can change that significantly.</div>
<div class="post-message" style="margin: 0px; max-width: 800px; padding: 0px;">
<br />
It's hard to imagine Trump winning or even being mildly competitive in a general election with Hillary Clinton with those kinds of numbers. It's also very difficult to see how he would change those numbers between now and November. It would take years to repair the kind of damage Trump has done to his relationship with Latinos.</div>
<div class="post-message" style="margin: 0px; max-width: 800px; padding: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="post-message" style="margin: 0px; max-width: 800px; padding: 0px;">
In a general election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Trump will lose and Latinos will play a decisive role in that loss.</div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-60866561519646058362016-02-10T16:02:00.001-05:002016-02-10T16:02:58.049-05:00Bernie Sanders – Snake Oil Salesman Extraordinaire Threatens to Take his Act Nationwide.<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Yakov's Elixir, the best that can be had, Yakov's Elixir,
it's good for what is bad.<br /> </span><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Try this elixir, it's sure to quench your thirst, Buy this
elixir, it's best for what is worst!</span><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">-<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Song of the Snake Oil Salesman Yakov sung by Danny
Kaye in “The Inspector General” <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1yM2babqZs">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1yM2babqZs</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-add-space: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-add-space: auto;">
What
to do when a significant portion of your fellow party members have bought into the
siren song of a Snake Oil Salesman?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-add-space: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That’s what confronts those of us Democrats who do not buy
into Sanders-mania. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A snake oil salesman is someone who sells something knowing that
the product cannot do what the salesman says it will do. Before the advent of
modern medicine, snake oil salesmen were common, selling everything from
furniture polish to lemon-water, claiming the potions would cure all sorts of
ailments. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sanders presents the same picture as a candidate. Sanders is
making wild claims about being able to enact single payer healthcare, a $15
minimum wage, free college tuition and a host of other claims. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The problem, for
those of us not under his hypnotic trance, is that we know that due to
redistricting, the House of Representatives will remain Republican until
January of 2023 at the earliest and that is if everything goes as well as
possible for Democrats in the next four state and congressional elections. It’s
more likely that the House will remain Republican until January 2025 and if
things go badly, for much longer.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We’ve watched how Republicans in the House operate. They do
not pass bills submitted by Democratic Presidents and they are ensconced in
very Republican districts safe from the ire of a public who wants congress to
do something. In fact, Republican congressmen get punished if they are seen as
helping Democratic Presidents. Several dozen have received strong primary
challenges and even lost their seats to primary challenges from fellow
Republicans for the sin of seeming to be too open to working with President
Obama. That lesson has by now been received loud and clear by the rest of the
Republican House Caucus.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
All of this is a long winded explanation proving how Sanders
cannot deliver on anything he is promising, and what irks many of us Democrats
who oppose him is, he has to know this and knowing this he continues to snow
his supporters into believing he will achieve something revolutionary if elected.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even that is getting ahead of ourselves. To get to that
point, Sanders of course first needs to defeat Hillary, and then he would face
an avalanche of negative ads seeking to define him from the Republicans. The
worst part of this is, the Republicans won’t have to lie or exaggerate to do
it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In past elections, I’ve worked hard to defend the Democratic
nominee from lies and exaggerations from Republican candidates and PACs.
Sanders would present a unique problem for those trying to defend him from such
attacks because they will all (or a large majority of them will) be true.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He expressed support for the Sandinistas when they were
considered an enemy of the United States. He is a Socialist who was a member of
several college Socialist organizations, honeymooned in the former Soviet Union
and was so far left he refused to join and expressed disdain for the Democratic
Party until he had no other choice if he wanted to contend for the Presidency.
He proposes a total government takeover of healthcare and has proposed a middle
class tax increase in order to pay for it. The list goes on. The Atlantic’s Paul
Starr summed it up thusly:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-left: .5in;">
In 1980, he served as an elector
for the Socialist Workers’ Party, founded by Leon Trotsky and committed to
nationalizing major industries. In 1989 he said the Democrats and Republicans
were “in reality, one party—the party of the ruling class.” That year he wrote
an op-ed in the New York Times describing the two parties as “tweedle-dee” and
“tweedle-dum” since both subscribed to what he called an “ideology of greed and
vulgarity.”</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Someone with the above record is a Republican strategist’s
dream opponent. To make matters worse, every time he has been asked about his
Socialism, Sanders has refused to answer the question directly and instead
pointed to countries in Europe or talked about individual policies he proposes
that he thinks people will like. That isn’t defining what he believes as a
Socialist and it leaves him wide open to others defining his Socialism for him,
which Republicans will do quite happily.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve written these things about Sanders since the beginning
of his candidacy. My opinion has not changed with Hillary’s win in Iowa or
Sanders’ win in New Hampshire. Sanders candidacy presents a heavy lift to get
the nomination, can only win the general election if the Republican nominee
implodes, and if elected cannot enact any of the proposed agenda with which he
is snowing his followers. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Level headed Democrats, i.e. those who have not bought into
Sanders’ nonsense, may soon be confronted with a question. What is worse, a
Republican who gets elected President now, or a Republican who would get
elected in four years after a failed Democratic President who failed to enact
anything of an agenda that carried huge expectations with all the baggage that
would carry for the party. The perception of the Carter Presidency as a failed
Presidency, as unfair as I think that is, cast a shadow over Democratic
Presidential politics for the better part of twenty years and enabled three
consecutive Republican White House victories. Republicans used the Carter
Presidency, again, unfairly if you ask me, to great effect in claiming that
Democrats were not up to being able to run the White House.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I will leave the main part of this article with one final thought
regarding Sanders’ Snake Oil agenda. Is there anything about the last seven
years since President Obama was elected that gives anyone the impression that
the country wants to not just move further left, but farther left than any
current elected official in the Democratic Party? With the Tea Party,
Democratic losses in the mid terms in 2010 and 2014, I don’t understand how
anyone could answer yes to that question.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
p.s., for the Bernie bros who attack anyone who criticizes
Sanders, let me save you the work, I’m bad, I’m terrible, I wrote some
contradictory stuff a few years back, etc., etc. There, saved you the trouble.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/m1yM2babqZs/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/m1yM2babqZs?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-73600112105741802242016-02-04T21:09:00.000-05:002016-02-04T21:09:48.557-05:00And POP goes the Hillary Email Balloon - Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice had classified items in their personal emails too<span style="font-size: large;">My, my my. Once again I have been proven to be right, this time about the faux Hillary email scandal.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;">According to CNN:</span><br />
<br />
<div class="el__leafmedia el__leafmedia--sourced-paragraph" style="background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
Colin Powell and top staffers for Condoleezza Rice received classified information through personal email accounts, according to a new report from State Department investigators.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667;">Hillary Clinton has received severe criticism -- particularly from Republicans and computer security experts -- for using her personal email account while serving as the nation's top diplomat under President Barack Obama. Thursday's revelation about the two secretaries of state under former President George W. Bush gave her supporters an opportunity to claim the Democratic presidential candidate was being singled out over the practice.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667;">The emails were discovered during a State Department review of the email practices of the past five secretaries of state. It found that Powell received two emails that were classified and that the "immediate staff" working for Rice received 10 emails that were classified.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667;">The information was deemed either "secret" or "confidential," according to the report, which was viewed by CNN.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667;">In all the cases, however -- as well as Clinton's -- the information was not marked "classified" at the time the emails were sent, according to State Department investigators.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
.<br />.<br />.<br />more at <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/04/politics/hillary-clinton-email-classified-colin-powell-condoleezza-rice/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/04/politics/hillary-clinton-email-classified-colin-powell-condoleezza-rice/index.html</a> </blockquote>
</div>
<div class="zn-body__paragraph" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
---------------------------------------------------------------</div>
<div class="zn-body__paragraph" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
Well, I'd say that as far as the nonsense about Hillary being prosecuted for this goes, as idiots like Republican Congressman Darrell Issa and others have been insinuating, the chances of that just went to zero percent. Which is as it should be. </div>
<div class="zn-body__paragraph" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
What I tried to tell people is that this entire nonsense was predicated on Hillary being able to tell the future in two respects, knowing that someone was about to send her an email and knowing that at some point in the future, the contents of that email was going to be considered classified. Content that is later classified is pretty regularly sent to non-secure emails throughout all agencies and branches of the government. It's one of the challenges for those trying to protect sensitive information and its a tough challenge to resolve because you can't tell the future. It's as simple as that. </div>
<div class="zn-body__paragraph" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
I also tried to tell people that this has nothing to do with Hillary using a personal email account. I am sure there will be folks who read that last sentence and don't quite understand what to make of it. I will explain. You see, just like Hillary's personal email account, the State.gov email account that she would have otherwise used is not rated secure to receive classified email/information. The same rule violation in terms of safeguarding classified information would apply if the emails had gone to her State.gov email. And as I indicated in the previous paragraph, she would similarly have no way to have prevented it or known beforehand that the contents would later be declared to be classified.</div>
<div class="zn-body__paragraph" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
So the whole brouhahah that Republicans manufactured over her use of a personal email account makes no sense at all. I had a debate with a conservative former CIA agent on Sirius radio and when I said that part about the personal email vs State.gov he had to acknowledge I was correct.</div>
<div class="zn-body__paragraph" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
For classified communications, you are supposed to use the systems called SIPRnet (For classified up to Secret) and JWICS for Top Secret. SIPRnet was in the news during the Chelsea Manning affair as Manning willy-nilly released classified information from SIPRnet to make some sort of point about something completely unrelated to 99.99999% those emails, but I digress.</div>
<div class="zn-body__paragraph" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
Like the IRS scandal and various other "scandals" Republicans found something that had been going on for a long time, or a system that had flawed elements, and then they blamed the current Democratic President and Agency head for it and blew it up into a scandal.</div>
<div class="zn-body__paragraph" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: #fefefe; box-sizing: border-box; color: #262626; font-family: CNN, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.66667; margin-bottom: 15px;">
What's clear from the latest revelations from former Secretaries of State Powell and Rice is that this particular attempt at a scandal to hurt Hillary Clinton is over.</div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7643293871842666006.post-4767685537574485212016-02-01T23:41:00.003-05:002016-02-01T23:51:51.617-05:00Hawkeyes must Moonlight as Firefighters Because Tonight they Extinguished “The Bern”<div class="MsoNormal">
In a state whose demographics favored Bernie Sanders in
every way imaginable, certainly more than most other states, a state that was,
along with New Hampshire, a must win state for Sanders, Hillary Clinton has
pulled out the victory.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sanders and his campaign will no doubt try to claim they
exceeded expectations and were the underdog and all of that, but there is no
reasonable argument they can make that they can pull out a win over Clinton or
in the general election if they could not win in a state tailor made for him.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I listened to some pundits try and claim that because the result was close the race will go on. They're wrong. With Clinton beating Sanders in a state he should have won and needed to win, the race is over. </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sanders will probably win New Hampshire, and will likely win
Vermont when that state comes around, but Hillary will run the table
beyond that.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Steven Leserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02093168661406012491noreply@blogger.com0