tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-48763031792296087552024-03-14T04:11:30.151-04:00Reasonable ConversationA blog dedicated to the reasonable, rational and tolerant discussion of today's issues...With a focus on Politics, let's discuss it, shall we?Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.comBlogger927125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-37362934508338299332021-03-17T21:44:00.008-04:002021-03-18T17:40:29.880-04:00Don't blame Cardi B or the media...We've always been depraved... <p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3wgrZNBcsfo/YFKsf_TMtQI/AAAAAAAAVek/svBERdM9_kkrsB341r-bx4i29Qjp6CC6wCLcBGAsYHQ/s300/bucket%2Band%2Bmop.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="168" data-original-width="300" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3wgrZNBcsfo/YFKsf_TMtQI/AAAAAAAAVek/svBERdM9_kkrsB341r-bx4i29Qjp6CC6wCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/bucket%2Band%2Bmop.gif"></a></div><p></p><p>At what point in my 60 years should I have thought the United States wasn't depraved? </p><p><br></p><p>We live in a country that when we were under the age of ten, over 58,000 soldiers lost their lives in a "conflict" that never made sense from its origins back in the mid-1950's. </p><p>In our teens, we watched the highest level of our government betray us with the Watergate scandal and we got to read about National Guard troops and State Police shooting, in 11 days, college students - six of them fatally. </p><p>In the 1980s, we saw the Greatest Country in the World turn a blind eye to the AIDS epidemic, while another leader of our Government at first "couldn't remember" but then admitted that yes, he'd authorized an illegal arms for hostages scheme. </p><p>In the 1990s, genocides in both Rwanda and Bosnia outraged some but for the most part, the American people said, "not my problem."</p><p>In the 2000s, we had 9/11 which then led to a mind-bending over-reach of our Federal Government into our private lives, all in the name of protecting us, plus we invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, blew the shit out of it, and last I looked we're still tangled up there. Also, we failed to take care of the first responder's medical expenses and it took prolonged pressure from a comedian (Jon Stewart) before we gave the benefits they deserved. </p><p>In the 2010's - we've seen the 30+ year percolation of far right-wing disinformation, that exposed our general lack of critical thinking skills, give us a heightened sense of political division in our country that then gave us Trump and the current woefully inept group of elected officials...</p><p>Looking back before some of us born, in the late 1930s, the United States of America refused a passenger ship with Jewish refugees from Eastern Europe to allow them to disembark and take refuge in the greatest country on Earth. </p><p>In the 1940s, for better or worse, that same country would become the only country to date to ever detonate an atomic weapon in the course of war. We did it twice, killing almost 250,00 people in the process. </p><p>The Tulsa Massacre, our horrific racial injustices in our prison systems, generations of prejudice, crime, cruelty, and greed, our meddling in other countries affairs, the lack of a coherent health care system, etc, etc, etc. </p><p>Some folks think Cardi B and "the left-wing media" are perverted and pushing depravity. </p><p>We've ALWAYS been depraved. </p><p>Remember how offended some of you were when a black quarterback dared to kneel - quietly - during the national anthem to silently protest police violence against blacks in this country? I do. People lost their minds, especially on the right. It was unacceptable you said. You had no problem when the NFL canceled Kaepernick. Same thing with the Dixie Chicks a decade earlier when they went against President Bush. Remember Sinead O'Conner and her SNL performance where she tore a picture of the Pope in half? Same thing...back then, canceling was just a patriotic duty. </p><p>Now, fast forward to January 6th of this year. </p><p>Too many STILL support Trump and are awfully quiet about the abuse that members of our law enforcement had to endure that day. For being vocal about supporting law enforcement, the events of 1/6 really put you in an uncomfortable place. </p><p>That was depraved. That was obscene. That was perverted. </p><p>Make no mistake, our country is knee-deep in all of it right now. When facts no longer matter, when lies that support your personal narratives replace truths and any impulses to critically think your way through the contradictions, what else can you call it?</p><p>Collectively, we are sick in the US. Not just from the Covid-19 pandemic. That will, in time, no longer remain the threat it has been and which has taken almost 550,000 of our Mothers, Fathers, siblings, friends, and children. That's also depraved and obscene in its own way but the bigger pandemic in our country is the virus of ignorance laced with a virulent component of pride. </p><p>There's no vaccine for that coming anytime soon. A mask for this condition is useless. </p><p>That's depraved and obscene, of course. Right now, elected officials are trying to diminish voting rights in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan to name a few locations. Now, if you're white, you probably don't have to worry too much. If you're black and you've enjoyed the "Souls to the Polls" on that Sunday before election day every four years, well, conservative legislatures would basically tell you, "too bad."</p><p>I'm 60. While the country surely has seen amazing technological advances since my birth, the progress of how we treat each other, how our tolerance for those different than we are, etc. doesn't seem that much better in some places than it was in the year of my birth. </p><p>We were supposed to leave our kids a slightly "more perfect union." </p><p>Are we?</p><p>We have much bigger things to worry about than Cardi B's WAP...</p><p><br></p>Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-75821841030191152322021-02-14T18:26:00.002-05:002021-02-15T09:15:22.472-05:00IMPEACHMENT IS DONE WITH - Q & A time...<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-arNwfs8i5HQ/VQWlXigKmaI/AAAAAAAAECE/6Tn1GuJM_E4AcGnZXjInr3OJ2ukAGwMNgCPcBGAYYCw/s225/Politicsimages1.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="225" data-original-width="225" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-arNwfs8i5HQ/VQWlXigKmaI/AAAAAAAAECE/6Tn1GuJM_E4AcGnZXjInr3OJ2ukAGwMNgCPcBGAYYCw/s0/Politicsimages1.jpg" /></a></div><br /> With the acquittal of former President Donald Trump yesterday, there's a lot to chew on. Here's what I'm thinking about today. <div><br />In question and answer form, a few thoughts...<br /><br /><b>Q) DOES THE ACQUITTAL HELP TRUMP'S 2024 CHANCES TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT AGAIN?</b><br /><br />A) Yes and no. Yes, because it's a long-acting injection straight into the vein of the Trump base. Trump's been playing the "victim" for a long, long time. He's good at it, too. If he decides to run himself in 2024, "THEY TRIED TO IMPEACH ME - AGAIN - AND LOST - AGAIN!!!" will be part of every campaign speech he makes. He'll paint a picture that the Democrats hate him And all of the good Americans who supported him in 2020, too. On the other hand, it won't help him because, by the largest margins in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, members of his own party have turned on him by the casting of votes, not to Trump's liking. <br /><br />Q) <b>WHY DID THE DEMS NOT CALL ON MORE WITNESSES TO TESTIFY? </b><br /><br />A) From the reporting I've read, it comes to two main reasons. First, the witnesses from the Trump-world like Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and others from former Vice President Mike Pence's world showed <b>no interest</b> in cooperating with the House Managers. To compel them to testify would've meant subpoenas, which would've been challenged in Court. Then the appeals that were sure to come, etc, etc, etc. It could've dragged on months. Additionally, the GOP leaders in the Senate apparently made it clear that had witnesses been insisted upon, the Dems and President Joe Biden could kiss goodbye their desire to get the rest of Biden's Cabinet confirmed and any legislation passed. Realizing that no amount of testimony, regardless of how damning it was toward Trump, would change enough Republican votes to result in a guilty verdict the Democratic Managers decided a faster acquittal was preferable to a drawn-out acquittal. <br /><br />Q) <b>ARE THE REPUBLICANS AFRAID TRUMP - WOULDN'T THEY BE BETTER OFF WITHOUT HIM?</b> <p></p><p>A) They're not afraid of Trump. The consensus seems to believe that had the vote to determine guilt on Saturday been a "secret ballot" instead of a public one, the former President may have lost handily. Did Minority Leader Mitch McConnell sound afraid to you when he said this after the vote was counted:<br /><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HrvtEBh-j-A" width="320" youtube-src-id="HrvtEBh-j-A"></iframe></div><br /><p>No, he's not afraid of Trump. <br /><br />Everybody else with an (R) after their name is, however. Not exactly afraid of Trump, but his base. Trump's base is loyal, rapid and reflexively dismisses any negative news about their "Dear Leader."<br />Whichever conservative candidate winds up in favor with Trump's base, will have an advantage heading into the 2024 Republican primaries. </p><p>The GOP isn't a monolith in any sense of the word at all. The hardliners (Hawley, Johnson, MT Greene, Ernst, Blackburn, etc.) are one group. The old hands (Cruz, Rubio, Paul, Lee, Thune, Scott, etc) are another. Then, you have the Republicans who voted to find Trump guilty (Cheney, Romney, Toomey, Collins, Murkowski, Cassidy, Kinzinger, etc...) <br /><br />How these three groups decide to work together or not over the next 18 months will be telling. Can they afford to be against the "hardliners?" Can they afford to be with the "hardliners?" <br /><br />Again, should one hardliner be designated by the Kingmaker (Trump) in the run-up to the GOP primaries for 2024, they'll have a helluva base of support and donors to work with. All the other challengers may cancel each other out, leaving a relatively easy stroll to the nomination. </p><p><b>Q) IS TRUMP IN THE CLEAR?</b></p><p>A) No, he's not. Four, possibly five potentially significant legal landmines await Donald Trump. <br /><br /><span> 1. </span>The Attorney General of State of New York - Letitia James (Taxes)</p><p><span> 2. Manhattan District Attorney - Cyrus Vance (Taxes)</span><br /></p><p><span><span> 3. US Attorney for the Southern District of New York - Audrey Strauss (Taxes) </span><br /></span></p><p><span><span><span> 4. Fulton County District Attorney, (Georgia ) - Fani Willis (Election interference)<br /></span><br /><span> 5. Unites States Attorney General - Merrick Garland* (Tax Fraud)<br /></span><br />*Garland still needs to be confirmed by the Senate. <br /><br />Any one of these could pose big trouble for Trump, if a few of these jurisdictions take things all the way, there's no telling what punishment may await the former POTUS. <br /><br /></span></span>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p>*One guy who really, really impressed me during the impeachment process was Congressman Jaime Raskin (D) for Maryland's 8th Congressional District. His poise, his prose, and his professionalism were very appealing. <br /><br />*One (well, three) people who didn't impress me at all during the impeachment process were Trump's three attorneys. Ill-prepared, unprofessional, I mean what lawyer, defending the former President of the United States brings up this guy?<br /><br /> <a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nW1H0PRS_l8/YCmlPtkzqaI/AAAAAAAAVbk/wmLHXAjni00TQWbPlFas-6VYaJX3LC_VgCLcBGAsYHQ/s262/JiminyCricket.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="262" data-original-width="192" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nW1H0PRS_l8/YCmlPtkzqaI/AAAAAAAAVbk/wmLHXAjni00TQWbPlFas-6VYaJX3LC_VgCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/JiminyCricket.jpeg" /></a></p><p><br /></p><p><br /><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /><br /><br /></p></div>Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-75990916143508939932021-01-30T15:54:00.000-05:002021-01-30T15:54:01.885-05:00The Jobs! It's always about the jobs...<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oQYcX-lzAlw/YBW7eATmVHI/AAAAAAAAVYo/88Mcx_v6OMgk5ma0cIhm8o3-E6FmO6LwACLcBGAsYHQ/s317/images.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="159" data-original-width="317" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oQYcX-lzAlw/YBW7eATmVHI/AAAAAAAAVYo/88Mcx_v6OMgk5ma0cIhm8o3-E6FmO6LwACLcBGAsYHQ/s0/images.jpeg" /></a> </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div>LOTS of coverage on the Biden Administration's announcement to halt any further construction of the Keystone XL pipeline this week. It's been a contentious political issue for several years now. The Obama administration blocked its construction in November of 2015 and outside delays with regard to property rights slowed its progress, as well. <br /><br />The Trump administration supported the pipeline project in January of 2017 but progress was again stymied by the Nebraska Public Service Commission (who rejected TransCanada's proposed routing) in November of that same year. <br /><br />One year later, in November of 2018, District Court Judge Brian M. Morris blocked the permit granted by the Trump administration citing that a supplemental environmental review needed to be completed before construction could continue. </div><div><br /></div><div>In the days since the Biden inaugural on January 20th, I've seen many articles and social media memes passionately defending the project and taking Biden to task for the loss of thousands of jobs related to the construction of the pipeline. A secondary argument focuses on the premise that without this oil from Canada, the United States will become dependent on oil from the Middle East and the environmental concerns about those allegedly "unregulated oil tankers" dumping their waste into the ocean on the journey. <br /><br />The United States produces about 40% of its own domestic oil needs. We import the rest mostly from Latin America (20%), Canada (15%), Nigeria (5%), and "other" countries (3%). We do import the rest from several Middle Eastern countries. </div><div><br /></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PqKirwnJSOk/YBXAFvuWriI/AAAAAAAAVY0/KaWu3qMIvC8vOZlvktAIITE1nP7-LoerQCLcBGAsYHQ/s300/gr-oilprod-300.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="239" data-original-width="300" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PqKirwnJSOk/YBXAFvuWriI/AAAAAAAAVY0/KaWu3qMIvC8vOZlvktAIITE1nP7-LoerQCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/gr-oilprod-300.gif" /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><br />The funny thing is, the Keystone Pipeline isn't even fully built, so the project's suspension doesn't affect where we buy our oil from. </div><div><br /></div><div>There are other pipelines running between the US and Canada it seems that can increase their capacity without the Keystone project. And no, Canada won't be delivering that crude oil to us via "gas-guzzling tankers...dumping waste into the ocean."</div><div><br /></div><div>Let's talk about jobs.</div><div><br /></div><div>The project would absolutely create jobs. A couple thousand jobs for up to 24 months or so. Those are great paying direct jobs and certainly indirect labor and retail would also benefit significantly. </div><div><br /></div><div>For 24 months...</div><div><br /></div><div>Unless the construction company was able to get it done in a year, in which case, well, it's a 12 month boon to the local economy and then not so much. </div><div><br /></div><div>What about after the completion of the project, how many jobs would remain? </div><div><br /></div><div>35</div><div><br /></div><div>Thirty-five full time, probably very good jobs, and a couple dozen contractor part-time gigs as well. </div><div><br /></div><div>We shouldn't stop there, though. What about the jobs that are LOST due to the construction of the pipeline?</div><div><br /></div><div>The oil is already getting shipped via truckers and railroad workers. As well as the truck stop workers/mechanics, gas station/convenience store employees, hotel/motel workers, restaurant staff, trucking logistic experts, etc. </div><div><br /></div><div>What about those jobs? Those are often good-paying, union jobs with benefits. </div><div><br /></div><div>Environmentally, the pipeline crosses one of the biggest aquifers in the country. If the pipeline breaks, drinking water may become scarce and shoot up in price. </div><div><br /></div><div>There are also concerns from local indigenous tribes about the routing of the pipeline. To be fair, there are some tribal communities that receive revenue from pipelines for their communities, so that has to be factored in as well. </div><div><br /></div><div>In the end, Canadian oil companies save money by creating a more efficient system to transport their crude oil to and through the United States. </div><div><br /></div><div>Imo, it's about profits. Mostly because I don't buy that the Canadian oil company is in any way, shape or form concerned THAT MUCH about employment in the various small towns along the way. And, I suppose, nor should they be. TransCanada's profit model doesn't include acts of goodwill as the main thrust of their construction projects. <br /><br />Will it destroy TransCanada? <br /><br />I don't know, that's above my paygrade. But, the stock seems mostly stable and they'll find a way to carry on. Maybe it's a waiting game for the next Republican President who may give it the green light and the project can be revived. </div><div><br /></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qQXpyLBtfAU/YBXHJxSMKhI/AAAAAAAAVZA/p6o8fM_oEH0Z5ZwqsNXtTmRNQy_9SnwTACLcBGAsYHQ/s2048/TransCanada%2Bstock.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1882" data-original-width="2048" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qQXpyLBtfAU/YBXHJxSMKhI/AAAAAAAAVZA/p6o8fM_oEH0Z5ZwqsNXtTmRNQy_9SnwTACLcBGAsYHQ/s320/TransCanada%2Bstock.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Cause, Lord knows it can't wait to create those thirty-five full-time jobs...<br /><br /><br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /></div><p></p>Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-30652207975781709492019-01-08T17:33:00.000-05:002019-01-08T17:33:18.763-05:00Tonight's Presidential Address...Yes, there's a crisis, but not the one Trump will say there is...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7xDrZ30k9ug/XDUgUtsZw5I/AAAAAAAAP1g/1lfQabSiWY0ShLEbva3cKK7hO-lbhaUXQCLcBGAs/s1600/trump1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="183" data-original-width="275" height="212" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7xDrZ30k9ug/XDUgUtsZw5I/AAAAAAAAP1g/1lfQabSiWY0ShLEbva3cKK7hO-lbhaUXQCLcBGAs/s320/trump1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Tonight on all the major television networks, President Trump will speak to the nation about the crisis on the border.<br />
<br />
It promises to be a divisive speech.<br /><br />Supporters of the POTUS will mostly think he's "truth-telling" and bemoan the fact that Democrats in Congress are playing hardball.<br /><br />Foes of Mr. Trump will be uber focused on the truthfulness of his remarks, which may be less than 100% truthful. Also, they'll be looking forward to the Democratic response afterwards by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.<br />
<br />
Here's my take on tonight's speech...<br />
<br />
Trump is correct in saying there's a crisis at the border. Problem is, its not the one he claims it is. The claims he's made - and that been supported by Press Secretary Sarah Sanders and Vice President Mike Pence - that thousands of terrorists are pouting across the border with Mexico are false. The government's own stats don't support his claims.<br /><br />Its not thousands of terrorists - it's six...<br /><br />Most of the people here illegally are overstaying their visas, not scrambling across the border.<br /><br />The real crisis is for the United States Border Patrol, who are understaffed and underfunded. They don't have the tools to do the job that's being asked of them. Too many illegals are coming across every week and the USBP is overwhelmed.<br /><br />They need more agents, lawyers, judges, staff to manage the incoming people.<br /><br />They need more facilities to properly house the people while they wait for the individual cases to be adjudicated. More money to properly provide healthcare and food<br />
<br />
They do need more fencing and obstacles to keep people out. That may be a "wall" in some places. In other places, its the barrier with steel slits you've seen. In other cases, its drones or other structures/tactics to effectively stop the illegal entry issue.<br />
<br />
Trump is stuck on the "wall" thing because he promised his base a bigass wall, the best ever wall during the campaign.<br /><br />If Trump tones down his rhetoric this evening and puts forth a reasonable list of requests, and seems less interested in demonizing the Democrats - who do want border security too - then the Dems should work with him and make something happen to get the Federal Government open again and make meaningful improvements to the border situation.<br /><br />It's beyond time for the "Best dealmaker ever" to make a deal.<br /><br />Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-824055774373983642018-12-09T18:23:00.002-05:002018-12-09T18:24:30.204-05:00Pre-Campaign Thoughts on Strategy for Democratic Party...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ifOnITznz7E/W_Ij8TZopoI/AAAAAAAAPuk/BNbHsrlb3Bk-D4pawb9m3rpQkBfojzvcgCLcBGAs/s1600/opinionimage.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="222" data-original-width="227" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ifOnITznz7E/W_Ij8TZopoI/AAAAAAAAPuk/BNbHsrlb3Bk-D4pawb9m3rpQkBfojzvcgCLcBGAs/s1600/opinionimage.jpg" /></a></div>
With the mid-term elections behind us, it's just a matter of time before multiple democratic candidates declare their intentions on running for the nomination. It won't shock me if someone decides to contest President Trump's re-election bid from the right, but for this post, I want to just focus on the Democrats.<br />
<br />
Specifically, what electorate strategy should the Democratic Party embrace for 2020?<br />
<br />
Should they invest their time and money heavily into identity politics or focus on a far wider swath of voters, at the cost of those who fall into the first group?<br />
<br />
Here's my premise: Trump won<a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clintons-ground-game-didnt-cost-her-the-election/"> because he energized the turnout among white voters without college degrees.</a> He was able to connect with a constituency that wouldn't / couldn't connect with Hillary Clinton and she damn sure didn't connect with them.<br />
<br />
Trump wooed them and they swooned. This was a candidate they could relate to. It wasn't the stuffed shirt-ness of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. It was a guy who said shit other candidates wouldn't dream about saying. He insulted the other Republican candidates and swore sometimes for good measure.<br />
<br />
His base LOVED it.<br />
<br />
Keep in mind, for years - since the 1980's - the American voter has been told that you can't trust government. All they want to do is tax you back to the stone age, run your lives, stick their nose into your business and tell you what to do. From Fox News to Right wing talk show hosts to Trump's yelps about the so-called "deep state," the message is simple to understand. You can't trust a politician - and I'm NOT a politician. I'm a businessman.<br />
<br />
That's how Trump won...<br />
<br />
If past is prologue, and in politics it often is, Trump's intention to run for re-election shouldn't be hard to figure out. He plans on it. Nor is the loyalty of his base hard to predict. They will be loyal, I suspect.<br />
<br />
How loyal? Their boy has been under attack since he was sworn in. This Mueller this? Pfft., they're just out to get him. LOOK HOW LONG THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN GOING ON!!! (Keep in mind, the Muller investigation has been going on for 566 days, whereas the Watergate investigation - which was far more straightforward than the current Russian hacking/collusion business has been, took <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/complete-watergate-timeline-took-longer-realize">longer from start to finish</a>.)<br />
<br />
The Democrats will be punished if they give short shrift to the middle of the country. If they focus on well established geographical liberal strongholds, they will hand the opposition a large hammer to use against them.<br />
<br />
I can't think of a Republican candidate who those liberal locations would support over the eventual - regardless of who it is - democratic candidate.<br />
<br />
The Dems likely already have the college graduate vote...<br />
<br />
The Dems likely already have the women's vote...<br />
<br />
The Dems likely already have the LGBT vote...<br />
<br />
The Dems likely already have the youth vote...<br />
<br />
The Dems likely already have the Asian vote...<br />
<br />
The Dems likely already have the _________ (fill in the blank) vote...<br />
<br />
Get the idea?<br />
<br />
Trump has the male, non college graduate vote...<br />
<br />
Trump has the evangelical vote...<br />
<br />
Trump does well with the over 50 vote...<br />
<br />
This sounds overly simplistic, but to me it's clear.<br />
<br />
The Democratic Party should employ a 50 state strategy with an emphasis in the rust belt states, (PA, OH, MI, IN, WI, etc...)<br />
<br />
Ticket wise, I've been saying for over a year that Joe Biden/Sherrod Brown would one that deserves serious consideration, PROVIDED both men want to run and would agree to such an arrangement.<br />
<br />
Joe Biden brings over 45 years of political experience to the party. He was a long-term Senator from Delaware who served on a broad range of Committee assignment, including the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. His 8 years as President Barack Obama's Vice President allowed him to see the Federal Government operate at the highest levels. He is well respected uniquely qualified to be the next POTUS after Mr. Trump. Bridges - domestically and internationally - are in bad need of repair. In today's complex world, where trust hasn't been a strength of our current President, we need an experienced, knowledgeable hand steadying the ship. Biden has enough gravitas in Congress to reach across aisles and get away with it.<br />
<br />
It is, in my opinion, not the time for an inexperienced younger person to rocket to the White House.<br />
<br />
An effective partner to run with Biden would be Ohio's, Sherrod Brown. One of the most liberal Senators in the Country, Brown is known for his pro-labor, pro-working man support. A 45 year veteran of Ohio politics on both a State and Federal level, Brown has worked as Ohio State Representative from 1975 - 1982, the Ohio Secretary of State from 1983 - 1991, a member of the US House of Representative from 1993 - 2007, one of two Senators from Ohio from 2007 through today and recently won another 6 year team in the 2018 Mid-terms.<br />
<br />
Two highly experienced, competent and electable veterans of the political scene could go a long way toward repairing the damage currently being inflicted by President Trump. The Democratic Party should strive to make it easy for independents and yes, white males without a college degree to consider voting for them in 2020. Aim right at the middle of the "Blue Wall" by courting voters in all 50 states but especially PA, IL, MI, WI, and MN. Likewise, great attention should be paid to swing states like OH, AZ, FL, NC and CO, to name a few.<br />
<br />
A Biden / Brown ticket would have plenty of progressive positions and goals to satisfy most special interest groups across the country.<br />
<br />
Will this ticket become a reality? The website <a href="http://predictit.org/">predictit.org</a> lists Kamala Harris as the best "bet" to win the 2020 Democratic nomination, followed closely by Bernie Sanders, Beto O'Rourke and Joe Biden.<br />
<br />
I'll discuss the pros/cons of the above list at a later date...<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-44637202220747107982018-11-19T18:44:00.000-05:002018-12-09T18:25:36.715-05:00Welcome to the Dark Ages - Here we go again...<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ttC5m4oegpA/W_NJt6azW4I/AAAAAAAAPu4/wpufK7af0TwY9ojh9nW0wtaJpCCd-4rjACLcBGAs/s1600/Francisco_Jos%25C3%25A9_de_Goya_y_Lucientes_-_The_sleep_of_reason_produces_monsters_%2528No._43%2529%252C_from_Los_Caprichos_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="522" data-original-width="345" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ttC5m4oegpA/W_NJt6azW4I/AAAAAAAAPu4/wpufK7af0TwY9ojh9nW0wtaJpCCd-4rjACLcBGAs/s320/Francisco_Jos%25C3%25A9_de_Goya_y_Lucientes_-_The_sleep_of_reason_produces_monsters_%2528No._43%2529%252C_from_Los_Caprichos_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg" width="211" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"The Sleep of Reason Brings Forth Monsters"<br />
(Fransisco Goya - est. 1798)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I have tried hard over the last few weeks to reach out to a handful of Trump supporters - some of whom reached out to me, first - and use reason, demonstrable facts, the clearest writing I can muster, etc.. and basically all its achieved is well, not too damn much.<br />
<br />
I wish not to live in the Dark Ages v2.0. I will resist this with everything I can think of. It's maddening and these people are willfully or woefully ignorant.<br />
<br />
The believers are strong, their faith in both God and Trump is robust and its a waste of time to bring a weapon of reason to a discussion about, when it comes down to it, faith in some other-worldly power.<br />
<br />
It's time to say goodbye to some bigots and religious imposters. You don't get to use your faith as a shield to hide your small-mindedness, your ignorance, your cruelty, and your bigotry.<br />
<br />
I'm NOT sorry that America doesn't look like it did when you were a child. Lily white, no dissenting opinions, everybody speaking the King's English, etc. Everyone in their proper place.<br />
<br />
Time passes. And the organism that is the United States of America is a living and breathing organism. There is room for everybody. Stop acting like the US is some sort of private club to which only you and yours have the password to.<br />
<br />
It wasn't all that long ago when there were a racism and hatred toward almost every ethnic group that's ever come here. What is this? Payback?<br />
<br />
The hypocrisy is too much. It's been taken to a new height and a new low all at the same time.<br />
<br />
The constant droning of Love for Christ on too many timelines which seems to alternate with messages about hatred toward people who don't look like you, don't worship like you do and don't come from around here is offensive to me.<br />
<br />
If you truly think the caravan is coming to murder you, rape the women and kidnap the kids, congrats - you've been duped. It doesn't phase any of you that as soon as election day passed, the President stopped talking about it.<br />
<br />
But it doesn't...<br />
<br />
To watch the current POTUS attack a set of Gold Star parents last general election or speak offensively toward a former POW, didn't generate so much as a peep out of your kind, which is rich, given how much you feign this fake patriotism when the moment suits you.<br />
<br />
When the moment suits you...<br />
<br />
To watch this POTUS do any number of things and get a free pass on compared to the incredibly rough ride you gave the black guy before Trump. (Rounds of golf, remarks about "grabbing her by the pussy," outright lies, etc...)<br />
<br />
A free pass...<br />
<br />
I saw not a single word from any of you taking Trump to task over his idiotic comments toward a 37 year Seal, Retired Admiral William McRaven in the interview with Fox's Chris Wallace.<br />
<br />
This POTUS lies to you on a daily basis and like a dog, you lap it up. Every. Single. Time.<br />
<br />
It's pathetic. You've confused love of country with love of party or skin color or a particular faith, etc...<br />
<br />
You. Are. Confused.<br />
<br />
Welcome to the Dark Ages, friends. Hang onto your ass...Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-11039541170886548852018-11-13T19:10:00.001-05:002018-11-13T19:10:31.041-05:00Fact Check: Did President Obama Throw A Reporter Out Of A Press Conference?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tw9m81Ompjw/W-tgNPKCzjI/AAAAAAAAPs8/XiYChOSwKiIJpusiI0BWy5QzgMnFPhvoACLcBGAs/s1600/Obnama1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="194" data-original-width="259" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tw9m81Ompjw/W-tgNPKCzjI/AAAAAAAAPs8/XiYChOSwKiIJpusiI0BWy5QzgMnFPhvoACLcBGAs/s1600/Obnama1.jpg" /></a></div>
After the recent dust-up at President Trump's press conference a few days ago, where CNN's Jim Acosta wound up seeing his White House press credentials revoked, a video from a June 2015 made a comeback.<br />
<br />
In a wrong-headed case of "whataboutism", this video, from an LGBT Pride event held at the White House, and that featured President Obama being interrupted by an anti-Gay rights protester. After repeated requests by the President to stop interrupting the event, he instructed Secret Service to remove the person.<br />
<br />
<br />
<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/bb7uluvfOXI/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bb7uluvfOXI?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
<br />
Let's clear up a few things...<br />
<br />
1) This was not a press conference. The President was there delivering remarks about LGBT Pride Month back in June of 2015...<br />
<br />
2) The person he had removed was not a credentialed member of the media, by rather someone who had somehow worked their way into the event and then decided to interrupt the POTUS by screaming and yelling. The person was heard yelling, "Shame on you, you shouldn’t be doing this,”<br />
<br />
3) President Obama gave him the option of being quiet or being removed. He refused, so the President had Secret Service remove them from the room.<br />
<br />
4) Given the hostility from the media at large toward Trump's handling of Jim Acosta and the striping of his "hard pass", it would be hard to find any media outlets that would defend Obama had he done the same thing. Which clearly, he did not.<br />
<br />
5) Here are three different media outlets, the Associated News, the Washington Post, and Snopes:<br /><br /><a href="https://apnews.com/afs:Content:2519450088">AP NEWS coverage...</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../c05a21da-e45b-11e8...">Washington Post coverage...</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.snopes.com/.../obama-reporter-press-conference/">Snopes coverage...</a><br />
<br />
Once again people with an urge to support the current President seem willing to twist, misrepresent, deceive others into either believing claims the White House or Trump Administration distributes or finding some other nonrelated story and insisting that it is something that it wasn't.<br />
<br />
It's a pretty intense time right now in the United States and on social media. We're very polarized and too often talk past each other. That's not going to do anyone any good at all.<br /><br />I'm as guilty as anyone, but every day, I try to fact check stories and claims I see on my social media platforms.<br /><br />With the startup of the 2020 Presidential Election not too far away, it would help things if we just remember to slow down a tad, regardless of what side you're on (or even no side) and do a few minutes of research to find out what really happened.<br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-5923509190142823882018-11-11T09:47:00.000-05:002018-11-11T09:47:22.547-05:00Donald Trump's Accomplishments: Fact, Fiction or Otherwise?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pFv-ltfrCu4/W-bxbpQJSPI/AAAAAAAAPqs/vzkqEtb5coIeEh-NikBSWlw_vKBEA6eAwCLcBGAs/s1600/Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="185" data-original-width="272" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pFv-ltfrCu4/W-bxbpQJSPI/AAAAAAAAPqs/vzkqEtb5coIeEh-NikBSWlw_vKBEA6eAwCLcBGAs/s1600/Trump.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
President Trump was elected President of the United States Two Novembers ago, and what a ride it's been since then.<br />
<br />
Love him or hate him, most people have strong feelings about our 45th President. Some think he's the guy we've been waiting for to turn Washington upside down, not be beholden to either party and "empty the swamp" as he does things that are common sense solutions for problems that others haven't been able to solve.<br />
<br />
Others think he's the Devil in disguise. A fast-talking bullshit artist who knew just what tone to take and how to talk to the voters (well, a certain slice of the voters) to build a big enough constituency to win the presidency over one of the most dreadful presidential candidates this county has seen in a long while, Hillary Clinton.<br />
<br />
The two-year mark is a good time to take stock and apply fair measurement to the man who has utterly changed how Presidents behave while in office.<br />
<br />
A week or so ago, a Facebook friend posted the following picture, that he captioned with the following. "Just facts, not rhetoric."<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ppMS9uvyrXk/W-bz69FxdfI/AAAAAAAAPq4/JmzfB_NeZaU56DfXPNlCBvvvYonCPKqGgCLcBGAs/s1600/Trump%2Baccomplishments%2Bposter.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="960" data-original-width="764" height="320" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ppMS9uvyrXk/W-bz69FxdfI/AAAAAAAAPq4/JmzfB_NeZaU56DfXPNlCBvvvYonCPKqGgCLcBGAs/s320/Trump%2Baccomplishments%2Bposter.jpg" width="254" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Thirteen claims of examples of accomplishments Mr. Trump has achieved in his first two years in office. Let's look at each objectively and see if the claim is Fact or Fiction or something in between the two.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
1) <b>GDP Growth at 4.2%</b>: It's true the <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/188185/percent-chance-from-preceding-period-in-real-gdp-in-the-us/">GDP Rate in the United States was, in fact, 4.2%</a> in the 2nd quarter. Just 2.2% the quarter prior, GDP almost doubled. Since then, it has fallen back to 3.5%. As a comparison, the GDP rate was 4.2% or higher three times during the Obama Administration. Mr. Trump made some <a href="https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1414/grow-economy-4-percent-year/">bold claims during his campaign,</a> including "a GDP annual growth rate of 4%. That did not happen in 2017. With a growth rate YTD for 2018 of 2.75, it'll require a tremendous, "never seen in recent times" performance in our 4th quarter to do it in 2018. There is no basis on which to build a case that Trump deserves as much or let alone more credit than his predecessor does. <b>Misleading at best.</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
2) <b>Unemployment Rate at 3.7%</b>: <a href="https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate">It's true that the Country's unemployment rate is 3.7%,</a> which is very, very good. However, perspective is important. We can go back and look at the slope of the unemployment rate in 2013 and see a very strong, downward sloping month to month trend of falling unemployment data. The "eyeball test" suggests that Mr. Trump is continuing the rate of improvement that Mr. Obama had before him. It's important to also remember that When Obama took office in early 2009, the unemployment rate was already bad and climbing to above 10%. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PtwdhmOy8BE/W-b3TXdp5LI/AAAAAAAAPrE/Jrq0oet4HDAKfl1fvT9ArNSS2Knm4gSlwCLcBGAs/s1600/united-states-unemployment-rate.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="340" data-original-width="730" height="149" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PtwdhmOy8BE/W-b3TXdp5LI/AAAAAAAAPrE/Jrq0oet4HDAKfl1fvT9ArNSS2Knm4gSlwCLcBGAs/s320/united-states-unemployment-rate.png" 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;">
The data clearly shows that Mr. Obama had eight years of improvement compared to Mr. Trump's almost two years of continued improvement while in office. It's dishonest to suggest that Mr. Trump was the one who fixed the unemployment issue in the Country. He has successfully continued the long trend of improvement that Mr. Obama began eight years ago...</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
3)<b> Record low Black unemployment: </b>It's true that Black unemployment reached an all-time low back in June when <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/1/17417762/black-unemployment-rate-record-low-may-jobs-report">it dipped below 7%</a>. That's a good thing, of course. However, similar to overall unemployment, it's important to see the bigger picture. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zQXBFeUS78E/W-cJR6nq2uI/AAAAAAAAPrQ/nZibfgVCu0sgNYkXKPDEyOlQxSQtDpS-ACLcBGAs/s1600/blackunemployment.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zQXBFeUS78E/W-cJR6nq2uI/AAAAAAAAPrQ/nZibfgVCu0sgNYkXKPDEyOlQxSQtDpS-ACLcBGAs/s320/blackunemployment.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Looking closely at the image, you can first, the overall measurements of black unemployment dating back to the George W. Bush administration. In the middle of the image, you can see where the Obama presidency began as well as when the Trump presidency began. Like overall unemployment, Mr. Trump has continued the improvement began earlier - again much earlier - by Mr. Obama. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
4) <b>Record low Hispanic unemployment:</b> Once more, we see a record low for unemployment related to a particular group. <a href="https://money.cnn.com/2017/12/08/news/economy/ivanka-trump-hispanic-unemployment-rate/index.html">The 4.7% rate of Hispanic unemployment reported in October 2018 is the lowest on record.</a> Yes, like the two previous kinds of unemployment we've reviewed, this too happened on President Trump's watch. That's a fact. And, also like the two previous areas we've looked at, Hispanic unemployment has been dropping for quite a while, traceable back to the tail-end of the GW Bush presidency. The success in October began back in 2010...the data shows steady growth over multiple years:</div>
<br />
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Y8BIclnecOw/W-cWSIBUiiI/AAAAAAAAPrc/smNhOgdUJwMNCcc_FoN5rtf6CkEPXUe7QCLcBGAs/s1600/Hispanic%2BEmployment%2Brate.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="275" data-original-width="490" height="223" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Y8BIclnecOw/W-cWSIBUiiI/AAAAAAAAPrc/smNhOgdUJwMNCcc_FoN5rtf6CkEPXUe7QCLcBGAs/s400/Hispanic%2BEmployment%2Brate.png" width="400" /></a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Trump deserves approval for the continuance of the previous job growth policies across overall, Black and Hispanic unemployment sectors. I find it a stretch and highly misleading to suggest that Trump is responsible for the current healthy unemployment rates we enjoy today in the United States. While the Facebook post doesn't allege that, it's a common meme that Mr. Trump fixed something Mr. Obama hadn't. <b>Fact, but highly rhetorical in nature to the point of being misleading.</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
5) <b>ISIS decimated:</b> On April 12, 2018, President Trump tweeted the following, "...the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS. Where is our “Thank you America?” It is fact that during the Trump presidency, the United States, with the aid of other countries, inflicted significant losses upon ISIS. <a href="https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/30/16945312/state-of-the-union-2018-isis">Per Vox,</a> "<i>There’s real truth here. The amount of territory controlled by ISIS declined by 60 percent between January and October 2017, according to a count by IHS Markit, a strategic intelligence firm. The group lost control over both Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, and Raqqa, which served as the de facto capital of ISIS’s so-called caliphate; it now no longer controls a major populated city in either country." </i></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Vox continues, however, "<i>Yet Trump’s comment implies that nearly all of the ISIS-held territory was liberated in the past year. This isn’t true. In fact, it’s not clear that Trump deserves much credit for these developments — if any. His counter-ISIS strategy has, for the most part, been a continuation of the one the Obama administration began back in 2014, which had already been steadily chipping away at the group’s territory."</i></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<i>“Whatever successes the Trump administration is claiming against ISIS are actually a product of the Obama administration’s approach,” says Jennifer Cafarella, the senior intelligence planner at the Institute for the Study of War.</i>"</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Decimated is a powerful sounding word which means destroyed. In two columns from August of 2018, citing two reports - one from the United Nations and the other from Mr. Trump's own Defense Department - the facts indicate that ISIS is far from decimated and is and will remain a highly dangerous threat not only in the Middle East but around the world.</div>
<br />
According to the <a href="https://media.defense.gov/2018/Aug/07/2001951441/-1/-1/1/FY2018_LIG_OCO_OIR3_JUN2018_508.PDF">Defense Department's repor</a>t, upwards of thirty thousand ISIS back fighters were still active in Iraq and Syria. The <a href="http://undocs.org/S/2018/705">United Nations report from June 2018</a>, reports the same findings in terms of ISIS manpower in the two countries.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<b>Bottom line</b>: ISIS has lost most of the ground it had gained but still possesses a highly dangerous and capable military force of approximately 30,000 troops. With numbers that high, given the volatility of the are they are trying to remain a force in, they do not appear to be "decimated." <b>Not a fact...</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
6) <b>North Korea denuclearizing</b>: I can find no source that alleges that North Korea has begun to denuclearize its weapon program. North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Un is on record as saying he'wants to be rid of his nuclear weapons program by the end of President Trump's first term, but nothing concrete has apparently happened as of this date. With no evidence yet - <b>this can't be viewed as a fact.</b> Intentions do not equal results. In time, we'll know more...</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
7)<b> Improved trade deals:</b> Using the "right-of-center" <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/phillevy/2018/08/08/midterm-report-card-on-trump-trade-deals/#5b0455763508">Forbes Magazine</a>, they break down President Trumps trade deals into three sections. South Korea, China, and the European Union. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<u>South Korea</u> - A weak arrangement that, in the end, may not even be approved by the South Korean government...</div>
<br />
<u>China</u> - Lots of talk and back-slapping, but "There are not even any talks currently underway." Whatever the future may hold, the deal-making to date seems to have been a failure, despite initial self-congratulation."<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<u>European Union</u> - "Little more than an agreement to talk about talking."</div>
<br />
Bottom line: How they are "improved" isn't known yet... so, <b>hardly a fact.</b>..<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
8)<b> American Hostages released:</b> It is <b>a factual statement</b> that "hostages have been released during the Trump presidency." Some higher profile than others, almost <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/27/president-trump-freed-17-prisoners/">20 Americans</a> were either kidnapped outright or being detained for various reasons and then were released since Trump took office. In the last month, <a href="https://www.vox.com/world/2018/10/12/17965126/turkey-pastor-brunson-trump-release">American US Pastor Andrew Brunson</a> was released by Turkey after negotiations with American officials...<b>Yes, a Fact...</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
9) <b>Improved immigration security</b>: Let's look at the two main components of Trump's immigration policy. The building of a wall and any policy changes he's implemented since taking office. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
One of the major pieces of Trump's Presidential campaign, "Build that wall!" became and remains a rallying cry at his rallies across the country. Despite claims by Mr. Trump that "<i>We've started building the wall</i>" (April 3rd, 2018, remarks with Baltic leaders), construction on the "wall" has not begun. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
What has happened is the repair and construction of older pieces of the already existing wall and obstructive impediments in Calexico, that <a href="https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2018/02/28/calexico-border-patrol-starts-constructing-border-wall-no-not-border-wall/373465002/">were planned as far back as 2009</a>, well before Mr. Trump took office. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/04/05/president-trump-says-his-beautiful-wall-is-being-built-nope/?utm_term=.e44f6dea1e23">Congress has appropriated $1.57 million dollars for border security</a>, but that is expressly forbidden to be used for the building of a "new wall." </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Looking at policy changes, the President has been more productive. From the controversial "Travel ban" that been rejected by at least one court, resulting in revised and softer language in the second attempt, to an increase in border arrests, which then led to the separating of children from their illegal immigrant parents at the border - which then led to horrific stories of children being detained in less than desirable conditions, etc. All the while numerous studies, including <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1745-9125.12175">this one from March </a>of this year, see the violent crime rate from illegal immigrants as "less than" the level Mr. Trump insinuates it is. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<b>Bottom line:</b> Trump is being deceptive at best when it comes to the issue of the wall and policy-wise, while he's implemented some changes that seem less than directly related to any improvements in this area. It's <b>False</b> that Trump has improved immigration security...</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
10) <b>Cutting aid to hostile nations</b>: Trump has adopted an "America First" approach and put the word out on the international stage that if your country is not acting as a "friend" would toward the United States, any foreign aid you've been getting, may be in jeopardy of getting cut off. Trump has reduced aid <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/03/world/europe/trump-foreign-aid.html">to a handful of countries with a mixed reception around the world.</a> The perception seems to be that America is no longer spreading its wealth around with the same virtuous motivations it used to, which over time, will have consequences... That said, <b>it is a fact Trump has cut aid </b>to some nations...</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="" style="clear: both;">
11) <b>Fewer people on food stamps:</b> On August 2nd, 2018, at a campaign rally in Wilkes-Barre, PA, Mr. Trump said, "More than 3.5 million Americans have been lifted off food stamps—something that you haven’t seen in decades.” <a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/oh-snap-misleading-claims-on-benefit-enrollment/">It is Fact that a lot of people have left the food stamp program</a> since Trump came in office. However, like the unemployment claims, he's continued a trend that goes back to the Obama Administration. As this chart shows, the decline in the number of people on food stamps or SNAP Benefits began early in 2013. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xsb8mMqzO0I/W-gk21v5rzI/AAAAAAAAPro/2RzRpJYSNvkCMEmzh6u63QWzCf_El1qHgCLcBGAs/s1600/InkedFood-Stamps-Monthly_LI.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="590" data-original-width="1016" height="231" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xsb8mMqzO0I/W-gk21v5rzI/AAAAAAAAPro/2RzRpJYSNvkCMEmzh6u63QWzCf_El1qHgCLcBGAs/s400/InkedFood-Stamps-Monthly_LI.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<b>Bottom line: Fact, but highly rhetorical in nature to the point of being misleading.</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
12) <b>Jobs being created</b>: Are "jobs being created?" Absolutely, they are. However, like unemployment rates and food stamps, it's a bit misleading to give too much credit. Trump's numbers, by any measure - to be fair - have been very solid. But they are consistent with the trajectory that began back in the Obama Administration. <a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2018/07/trumps-numbers-second-quarterly-update/">Trump's job growth is running behind</a> Obama's so far and his campaign pledge "the best jobs President God ever created" seems unrealistic. If he continues his current pace, he'll surpass both Obama and President Reagan, but fall well short of the job growth Bill Clinton achieved in his time in office. <b>Bottom line: Fact, but highly rhetorical in nature to the point of being misleading.</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
13) <b>Manufacturing resurgence:</b> There <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2018/10/16/the-trump-manufacturing-jobs-boom-10-times-obamas-over-21-months/#658f85515850">seems to be little dispute</a> that U.S. Manufacturing has prospered under the Trump Administration. This chart sums it up very nicely:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6Q69CmyNeuU/W-gyGmi_ynI/AAAAAAAAPr0/bI9gyDHA0NUxsOe-202EYP292ZzVMlrcACLcBGAs/s1600/manufacturing%2Bgrowth%2Btrump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="540" data-original-width="960" height="225" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6Q69CmyNeuU/W-gyGmi_ynI/AAAAAAAAPr0/bI9gyDHA0NUxsOe-202EYP292ZzVMlrcACLcBGAs/s400/manufacturing%2Bgrowth%2Btrump.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
There is <a href="https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/328133/us-manufacturing-sector-firing-on-all-cylinders-5-picks">ample evidence of robust performance</a> indicators within the manufacturing sector. From Zachs .com, <i>"U.S. manufacturing sector has been witnessing resurgence under the Trump administration since last year, shrugging off its lengthy spell of weak productivity and sluggish growth. Under Trump’s presidency, the manufacturing sector is flying high as manufacturers have increased capital spending and hiring driven by massive tax overhaul, deregulatory measures, strong domestic economy, and robust business sentiment."</i> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<b>Bottom Line: Fact</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
14) <b>Reduced regulation:</b> Another popular component of Trump's campaign was a pledge to gut regulations. While its one thing to unwind an Executive Order from a prior President, writing new ones isn't exactly popular these days. Writing and passing new ones into law, even with a full control of both houses of Congress - is also hard and time-consuming. An area where progress has been made, of a sort, is in the internal enforcement of the standing regulations. The biggest targets have been Energy and Environmental regulations, but almost no department hasn't been affected by the movement. There is great concern about the long-term effects of these policy decisions and look for several policy and tone reversals to be a popular talking point of any Democratic campaign for those seeking Mr. Trump's job in 2020. <b>Bottom line: Fact</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b>Summary: </b>The poster was presented as "<b><i>Just facts, not rhetoric.</i></b>" Given fair consideration, I've tried to fairly assess each of these 14 claims on the facts. Utilizing upwards of 16 different sources, I've avoided over-representing a single media viewpoint. Where I've been able to call a claim a fact, I have. If a claim has been technically true but it's either misleading or deceptive in how the claim is being viewed, I've attached a caveat to it. In the cases where I could find no evidence to support it, I've judged it to be False. Over time, some of these claims may move into a different judgment.</div>
<br />
The post itself is certainly not "just facts." I hope readers, <i>as well as the orginal poster,</i> will understand why it's not a 100% factual poster and that it's important to apply critical thinking skills to any poster like this that we find on social media. Take the time to fact check content like this. There's no downside to taking a few minutes to verify something. Worst case might be you understand the issue a little more deeply, that's all. Best case, you may discover that a source you previously trusted has posted misleading content and be wary of anything like that you see in the future. Alternately, you may discover that something you thought to be false was, in fact, true.<br />
<br />
The more informed we are, the better. Period!<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b>Sources:</b></div>
<br />
<a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/188185/percent-chance-from-preceding-period-in-real-gdp-in-the-us/">https://www.statista.com/statistics/188185/percent-chance-from-preceding-period-in-real-gdp-in-the-us/</a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1414/grow-economy-4-percent-year/">https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1414/grow-economy-4-percent-year/</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate">https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/1/17417762/black-unemployment-rate-record-low-may-jobs-report">https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/1/17417762/black-unemployment-rate-record-low-may-jobs-report</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/01/16/no-trumps-approval-among-black-americans-hasnt-doubled/?utm_term=.793cc13dd655">https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/01/16/no-trumps-approval-among-black-americans-hasnt-doubled/?utm_term=.793cc13dd655</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://money.cnn.com/2017/12/08/news/economy/ivanka-trump-hispanic-unemployment-rate/index.html">https://money.cnn.com/2017/12/08/news/economy/ivanka-trump-hispanic-unemployment-rate/index.html</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/30/16945312/state-of-the-union-2018-isis">https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/30/16945312/state-of-the-union-2018-isis</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://media.defense.gov/2018/Aug/07/2001951441/-1/-1/1/FY2018_LIG_OCO_OIR3_JUN2018_508.PDF">https://media.defense.gov/2018/Aug/07/2001951441/-1/-1/1/FY2018_LIG_OCO_OIR3_JUN2018_508.PDF</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="http://undocs.org/S/2018/705">http://undocs.org/S/2018/705</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/phillevy/2018/08/08/midterm-report-card-on-trump-trade-deals/#5b0455763508">https://www.forbes.com/sites/phillevy/2018/08/08/midterm-report-card-on-trump-trade-deals/#5b0455763508</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/27/president-trump-freed-17-prisoners/">https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/27/president-trump-freed-17-prisoners/</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b><a href="https://www.vox.com/world/2018/10/12/17965126/turkey-pastor-brunson-trump-release">https://www.vox.com/world/2018/10/12/17965126/turkey-pastor-brunson-trump-release</a></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2018/02/28/calexico-border-patrol-starts-constructing-border-wall-no-not-border-wall/373465002/">https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2018/02/28/calexico-border-patrol-starts-constructing-border-wall-no-not-border-wall/373465002/</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/04/05/president-trump-says-his-beautiful-wall-is-being-built-nope/?utm_term=.e44f6dea1e23">https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/04/05/president-trump-says-his-beautiful-wall-is-being-built-nope/?utm_term=.e44f6dea1e23</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1745-9125.12175">https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1745-9125.12175</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/03/world/europe/trump-foreign-aid.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/03/world/europe/trump-foreign-aid.html</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/oh-snap-misleading-claims-on-benefit-enrollment/">https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/oh-snap-misleading-claims-on-benefit-enrollment/</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2018/07/trumps-numbers-second-quarterly-update/">https://www.factcheck.org/2018/07/trumps-numbers-second-quarterly-update/</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2018/10/16/the-trump-manufacturing-jobs-boom-10-times-obamas-over-21-months/#658f85515850">https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2018/10/16/the-trump-manufacturing-jobs-boom-10-times-obamas-over-21-months/#658f85515850</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/328133/us-manufacturing-sector-firing-on-all-cylinders-5-picks">https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/328133/us-manufacturing-sector-firing-on-all-cylinders-5-picks</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/has-trump-killed-more-regulations-than-any-other-president/">https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/has-trump-killed-more-regulations-than-any-other-president/</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-90355639456010146922018-11-11T09:32:00.001-05:002018-11-11T09:57:59.079-05:00I'm back! Time to get busy!!!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cI05yd0fbZE/W-g6XZq4III/AAAAAAAAPsI/1YaQepH5neU_pQpJplWbMBXRqjXSECg4wCLcBGAs/s1600/Bill%2Bsunglassesresized.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="505" data-original-width="494" height="200" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cI05yd0fbZE/W-g6XZq4III/AAAAAAAAPsI/1YaQepH5neU_pQpJplWbMBXRqjXSECg4wCLcBGAs/s200/Bill%2Bsunglassesresized.jpg" width="195" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
It's been a while since I was blogging regularly. Several reasons for that including performing well over 400 times a year, while fulfilling the duties of husband, father, grandfather, brother, friend, etc. puts a guy in a jam timewise sometimes. Another reason is that there has been SO MUCH coverage of President Trump that frankly, I needed a break.<br />
<br />
So, a break I took!<br />
<br />
It's a good time to return to writing. Trump is a likely subject on a daily basis, the Mueller probe seems to be heading into its last few chapters, a new and divided Congress will gavel in next January and before we know it, people will begin to declare their candidacy for President of the United States, the election for which is less than two years away from today.<br />
<br />
There will be so much going on that it will be like trying to drink from a fire hose.<br />
<br />
In the end, though, Trump is Trump and he's the story of a lifetime. I'm not a fan but as a friend recently reminded me for the umpteenth time, I was an early voice that said: "Don't laugh, gang - he could do it..." While I hoped fervently he didn't win, he did (I think) and he apparently wants to run again.<br />
<br />
Dear god, how do I sit this one out?<br />
<br />
I can't.<br />
<br />
So...LIFE has been reorganized a bit, and I hope to post something worthwhile a few times a week. Some posts will be short, some will be long. Enjoy them however you wish. Let me know what you think, regardless if you agree or disagree.<br />
<br />
(New post on you know who will be out shortly!)<br />
<br />
Thanks-<br />
<br />
Bill<br />
<br />
<br />Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-57105564930265969732017-11-28T12:56:00.000-05:002017-11-28T13:00:13.337-05:00Men sure are having a hard time lately, aren't they?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-frligksrxn0/VGkY3PgkxGI/AAAAAAAAD9U/RjPc04pQ0ksVBP7GMEjJ57j8SaXfDA9JgCPcBGAYYCw/s1600/opinionimage.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="222" data-original-width="227" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-frligksrxn0/VGkY3PgkxGI/AAAAAAAAD9U/RjPc04pQ0ksVBP7GMEjJ57j8SaXfDA9JgCPcBGAYYCw/s1600/opinionimage.jpg" /></a></div>
Harvey Weinstein, famous Hollywood producer...<br />
<br />
Mark Halperin, News producer, author and political commentator...<br />
<br />
Kevin Spacey, actor in screen and stage productions...<br />
<br />
Roy Moore, former Alabama Supreme Court Judge and politician...<br />
<br />
Louis C. K., comedian, actor, writer, director, producer...<br />
<br />
Al Franken, current Senator from Minnesota, former writer and actor on Saturday Night Live<br />
<br />
Glen Thrush, political reporter for the New York Times...<br />
<br />
Charlie Rose, television journalist and talk show host...<br />
<br />
John Conyers, Congressman from Michigan<br />
<br />
Donald J. Trump, Real Estate, businessman, reality TV show host and 45th President of the United States.<br />
<br />
These are just a few of the well known names of men who have been accused of improper and sexually oriented conduct toward others that have hit the headlines in the last few weeks. You'll note the list doesn't include others who have been previously accused of similar inappropriate behavior like Bill Cosby, Roger Ailes or Bill O'Reilly.<br />
<br />
If you Google this subject, there's no shortage of things that will come up.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">It's a strange</span> thing, this "sexual misconduct" thing. When you have grown men like Louis CK, for example, guys who can make or break a career, they certainly hold the power over younger female wannabees. By now we've all heard the "MO's" of guys like him.<br />
<br />
<i>Aspiring actress somehow meets famous/powerful male in some setting. It may be a professional one or it may be a social one or it may fall somewhere in both camps. One way or the other, the young lady is invited to come up to his room, or his house, office, etc. to discuss the business further. Once in that environment, it doesn't seem to take long before someone is making advances, speaking lewdly, pleasuring one's self or worse. The woman is in a helluva situation, with no easy way out sometimes and a genuine fear of "...shit, what will this mean for my career? I don't want to be a waitress all my life.</i><br />
<br />
It's easy for any of us who haven't been in that situation to cast judgement. Or, if we have found ourselves in a similar circumstance, to ask why didn't she just "do what I did?" Which may mean anything from comply fully with the creeps advances and hope that somehow down the road it'll be somehow "worth it," to find a way to walk/run away as fast as you can. We're all wired differently and I suspect that while most women would choose to just get out of there intact, there are those who will - in an almost transactional way - go along.<br />
<br />
It's a unthinkable choice to have to make, on the spot and one that 99% of men have no concept of whatsoever. I'm in no position to judge the choice any woman decides is the right one if she finds herself in such a terrible situation. (And neither are you.)<br />
<br />
I'm 57, I've worked for over 40 years and I've never - not once - ever been pressured or harassed while working or at school by an employer or professor. I don't think I'm the exception to the rule.<br />
<br />
Men have had an asinine outlook toward women for centuries. Religion hasn't exactly been an advocate for women right's either. The odds have been stacked against women for, well, for ever...<br />
<br />
Obtaining a college degree, succeeding at a job or ascending through the ranks is already difficult enough for legitimate reasons. The work is usually difficult to some degree, there's competition for a particular position or promotion. Real life, family, kids, health issues, relationships, etc. also can present necessary distractions that make everything harder and stressful.<br />
<br />
It's probably safe to safe to say that if you take a man and a woman, send them through the same college and career experience and they both attain the same basic position of leadership, that the female has had to put up with more bullshit along the way than the male did.<br />
<br />
Everything from her figure to her clothes, her hair, her makeup, her perfume, etc... Men don't typically have to deal with that nonsense. And then on top of that, some fat, sweaty "fill in the blank with guy's name" wants to fool around a bit or he'll impede her career?<br />
<br />
Seriously?<br />
<br />
Men are pigs and we always will be, I suspect. Some of us behave better than others. I'd even say most of us know how to act around a woman and be professional. The ones who don't deserve everything that comes their way.<br />
<br />
While not enough, most guys have been informed of basic rules of a workplace. It's not rocket science. Here are the basics:<br />
<br />
Don't touch anybody except to shake hands.<br />
Don't talk about anyone's physical appearance with others.<br />
Meet with clients, associates, etc. in a mostly public place.<br />
Keep the conversation and your language as professional as possible.<br />
Find companionship, sex, etc. somewhere else than work.<br />
<br />
It's not that hard...<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-36235826482514054502017-11-09T14:30:00.000-05:002017-11-09T18:22:38.050-05:00A Year Has Passed Since Trump Became President. Some Thoughts...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eVpduhuiFus/WgRWY5FxVUI/AAAAAAAANIY/V1yLwFMdM_QfSIeOqCL3n8q4f30Os68CgCLcBGAs/s1600/Trump%252BPresident.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="455" data-original-width="810" height="223" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eVpduhuiFus/WgRWY5FxVUI/AAAAAAAANIY/V1yLwFMdM_QfSIeOqCL3n8q4f30Os68CgCLcBGAs/s400/Trump%252BPresident.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
A year ago I sat in this seat, at this desk, in this office watching the 2016 General Election returns that announced that Donald J. Trump would be our next President.<br />
<br />
As comedian Lewis Black so often says, "You've got to be shitting me."<br />
<br />
No, this was of course as real as it gets.<br />
<br />
Donald Trump won because of a few different reasons.<br />
<br />
1) <b>Trump resonated with the blue-collar, lower-income voters that felt left behind by the Democratic Party.</b> Trump sang the songs those folks wanted to hear, he wasn't a fancy talker like President Obama was nor was he, uh, well, black. A white guy who had some level of perceived success in business and had the TV star name recognition that blew everyone else away. No matter his ideas were fragments of thoughts, not well-thought out actual polices mind you, but his pitch sounded good enough to the voters in all the rural and non-urban environs. The Dems never found a voice, although I suppose Bernie Sanders came the closest. Close wasn't remotely good enough.<br />
<br />
2) <b>Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate.</b> While likely a far better administrator, she isn't that likable, and when you factor in her self-inflicted gaff of all gaffs with the personal server and her lame handling of it, well - that was that. Some curious campaign strategy to skip various states as the campaign drew near its close and voila! Despite getting more votes, she got the "wrong votes" and you know who got the White House.<br />
<br />
3) <b>Not enough of us vote</b>. <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-voter-turnout-wasnt-way-down-from-2012/">Roughly six in ten of eligible voters bothered to vote,</a> which adds up to a LOT of people not voting. Apathy is not a good strategy to advance the Country in any direction.<br />
<br />
Other factors worth considering is the lack of outreach President Obama made in terms of developing the next generation of democratic politicians. The Democratic party's utter incompetence in terms of well, almost everything. Some will point to the 2016 general election campaign as a case-study on how to screw up an almost sure thing through a lack of vision, hubris and poor judgment.<br />
<br />
None of this is new information and your mileage may vary as to what you think explains best the 2016 election.<br />
<br />
I can't pin this all on the Trump effect and neither should you.<br />
<br />
I am still unable to fully express my disappointment in how things have gone since President Obama took office, where my optimism was dashed within the first few months. For a good understanding of how quickly the Obama Administration became utterly fucked with no clue or willingness to counter punch the GOP, pick up a copy of Michael Grunwald's "<a href="https://www.amazon.com/New-Deal-Hidden-Story-Change/dp/1451642334">The New New Deal</a>" which chronicles the early days of the Obama first term.<br />
<br />
As Obama <span style="font-family: inherit;">said, <span style="background-color: white;">“</span><span style="background-color: white;">We</span><span style="background-color: white;">'</span><span style="background-color: white;">ve always known that lasting change</span><span style="background-color: white;"><b> </b>wouldn't come quickly or easily. It never does.” </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span> <span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">The ugly business of getting the needed votes and the appalling horse-trading required for same quickly fouled the fresh air of what I hoped would be a new age in our politics and our Country. I didn't expect the loyal opposition to hand Obama everything he asked for, but my God, the obstructionism came so fast, so fiercely that even I was surprised.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span> <span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">So the eight years of the Obama Presidency was underwhelming and too much time was spent explaining, defending and explaining some more why his policies were generally good ones. The old saying goes "if you're explaining - you're losing" proved true and while he won re-election, he never came close to being the "change-agent" I'd hoped he would be. Obama made many mistakes and is guilty of his own elevated levels of hubris to be sure. It was foolish of him to declare - over and over again - that " if you like your health plan - you can keep your health plan". Otherwise known as <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/dec/13/looking-back-lie-year/">Politifact's 2013 Lie of the Year</a>.<br /><br />Our politics grew more coarse, the media beat its drum dronishly and the message went out to all the land. Politicians - no matter their party or promises - all sucked and sucked hard. Trust none of them.<br /><br />Right-wing talk radio, Fox News evening lineup hosts and a handful of right-leaning websites fed into this narrative that all politicians were evil, untrustworthy and basically out to fuck us all.<br /><br />So, come to the 2016 General Election and who do we see on the right?<br /><br />Jeb Bush, </span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">Chris Christie, </span>Lindsey Graham, Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and John Kasich among others. What do they have in common?<br />
<br />
They're all career politicians...<br />
<br />
Who did we see on the left?<br />
<br />
Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Malley were likewise, career politicians in one form or another.<br />
<br />
Bernie was a breath of fresh air to some but unelectable in my mind from the start in that election cycle. The United States of America wasn't and probably isn't ready to elect even a soft Socialist into the White House.<br />
<br />
Then there was Trump. NOT a politician.<br />
<br />
Hmmmm...<br />
<br />
People didn't care <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/trump-asshole-hes-our-asshole-says-gop-congressman-656240">he was an asshole</a>.<br />
<br />
People didn't care <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/news/312846-dc-area-contractors-claim-trump-owes-them-more-than-3-million">he stiffed any number of contractors </a>and small business along the way.<br />
<br />
People didn't care he boasted about <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o21fXqguD7U">his conquests with women</a>.<br />
<br />
People didn't care about <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trumps-family-life-654724">his divorces.</a><br />
<br />
People didn't care about his very<a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/19/trump-says-i-do-regret-some-caustic-campaign-state/"> un-presidential tone and demeanor </a>on the campaign trail.<br />
<br />
People didn't care about when he claimed John McCain <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/trump-attacks-mccain-i-like-people-who-werent-captured-120317">wasn't a true war hero</a> because he had been captured.<br />
<br />
People didn't care when he criticized the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/07/31/trumps-temper-tantrum-freaks-out-u-s-allies/?utm_term=.ddda878eff00">Gold Star Mother</a>.<br />
<br />
People didn't care about his "<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/trump-defends-white-nationalist-protesters-some-very-fine-people-on-both-sides/537012/">some very fine people on both sides" comments after Charlottesville...</a><br />
<br />
People didn't care after Trump r<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/sep/22/donald-trump-nfl-national-anthem-protests">esurrected the NFL players taking a knee </a>matter, despite a <a href="https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/heres-how-nate-boyer-got-colin-kaepernick-to-go-from-sitting-to-kneeling/">Veteran suggesting to Colin Kaepernick</a> he do so instead of sitting in protest.<br />
<br />
They didn't care about anything...Trump's broken promises or failed plans don't matter to the group that adoringly voted him into office. As a resident of the slowly decaying Johnstown, PA area told <a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/08/donald-trump-johnstown-pennsylvania-supporters-215800">Politico in a sobering article</a> earlier this week, "<i>Johnstown and the surrounding region are struggling in the same ways and for the same reasons. The drug problem is just as bad. “There’s nothing good in the area,” Schilling said the other day in her living room. “I don’t have anything good to say about anything in this area. It’s sad.” Even so, her backing for Trump is utterly undiminished: “I’m a supporter of him, 100 percent.</i>”<br />
<br />
It was all fake news, made up either by radical Democrats who hate the Country or by long-serving RINO's who should've been kicked out a long time ago.<br />
<br />
The cake was baked. From President Reagan saying "government is the problem" back in the 1980's all the way up to election day, we've been on this path where we ridicule honorable Government servants, educated policy people who are trying to improve the lives of the people in the country to college professors and anybody else who ain't singing America, Red, White and Blue is #1 songs.<br />
<br />
Ted Nugent, Roy Moore and Joe Arpaio are now "in" while thoughtful, creative public servants and dedicated policy wonks are out.<br />
<br />
Welcome to the Dark Ages v.2.0...<br />
<br />
Nepotism run amuck, inexplicable staffing choices, choosing to not staff key foreign policy and State Department positions. The bullshit claims that we'd have the BEST healthcare in the world. The excuses for why the infrastructure improvements haven't begun in earnest yet. The influx of Wall Street and other billionaires into his Administration.<br />
<br />
His reckless and incessant Tweeting of petty, foolish and self-indulgent messages at all hours of the day and night.<br />
<br />
His dangerous handling of North Korea.<br />
<br />
His inept handling of China.<br />
<br />
And of course, his inexplicable relationship with Vladamir Putin and Russia.<br />
<br />
We get the government we deserve. This is what happens when enough people take the lazy way out and listen more to know-nothings like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Alex Jones than they do to serious, educated and qualified people of knowledge and science and facts.<br />
<br />
This is what happens when, despite all the information we could want at our fingertips, we collectively decide its <i>too hard</i> to read about health policy or what tax cuts mean for our deficit or what the 14th Amendment actually was trying to say when it actually said "...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."<br />
<br />
This is going to get worse before it gets better.<br />
<br />
We deserve Donald J. Trump as our President.<br />
<br />
We must do better.<br />
<br />
This is NOT to say in any way, shape or form that the Country is in this fix because "my guy/girl" didn't win. If a reasonably thoughtful person like John Kasich, for example, had been elected, I highly doubt I would feel the visceral level of distress I and others do on a daily basis.<br />
<br />
Kasich is a Republican. I used to be a Republican. That doesn't mean he could never advocate for policies I might find acceptable.<br />
<br />
We'll do better as soon as we begin to shun the extremes in our politics and find a new, meaningful appreciation of those thoughtful voices in the Center. Nobody will get all they want, but likewise, nobody should wind up with nothing they hoped for.<br />
<br />
There's no acceptable honest explanation for why the individual mandate, supported by minds at the Heritage Foundation to derail Hillary Clinton's attempt at health care reform was somehow tyranny and un-American when President Obama weaved it into the Affordable Care Act. How it went from perfectly reasonable to dangerous and tyrannical overreach is intellectually dishonest.<br />
<br />
As we start Trump's second year in office, I can only imagine where our politics will be a year from now.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-63324897257851043322017-02-14T22:27:00.001-05:002017-02-14T22:27:25.059-05:00Why Healthcare is a Right, and is Consistent with our Founding Principles...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7AzxIBcKQKc/WGBzqVf1JLI/AAAAAAAAHK0/ZZCXsNtwkZIolhNQEy4y13kIKJp86-o4wCLcB/s1600/Constitution.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7AzxIBcKQKc/WGBzqVf1JLI/AAAAAAAAHK0/ZZCXsNtwkZIolhNQEy4y13kIKJp86-o4wCLcB/s1600/Constitution.jpeg" /></a></div>
<span style="font-size: large;">Donald J. Trump </span>has been our President since he was sworn in on January 20th . One of the biggest issues he'll have to deal with is the nation's approach to health care. He has been quite clear that he believes the Affordable Care Act to be a disaster and had promised to repeal it in first week or so in office.<br />
<br />
Today, February 14, 2017 marks the twenty-sixth day of his Presidency. He is two days into his fourth full week. The Affordable Care Act has not yet been repealed.<br />
<br />
There is no consensus what will happen to the 30 million or so people who have signed up for health insurance via the ACA. Some think a repeal and delay approach would be best where the ACA would carry on for a year or two while its replacement was negotiated, but still give the Trump White House and Congress the ability to look America mostly in the eye and say, "We repealed the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare is no more!"<br />
<br />
A smaller number of Conservative voices feel there should be no repeal of the ACA until the "replacement" plan is ready to be transitioned to. Still others have suggested all those currently covered via the ACA could keep their coverage and eventually the "greatness" of the new polices available after "Trumpcare" is introduced will be so appealing, so superior that over time, people will eventually abandon the polices and/or coverage via the ACA marketplace exchanges or the medicaid expansion.<br />
<br />
Talk of terminating the main funding streams for the ACA may sound good, but if those streams are ended, while those services are permitted to be still provided is rife with problems. Such an approach will grow the deficit and debt, which combined with Mr. Trump's other campaign promise of a massive infrastructure program that will cost a lot would start the next Administration off on an odd way given all the rhetoric we heard about shrinking government and reducing spending.<br />
<br />
Delivering healthcare is a complicated endeavor under the best of circumstances, and we're not remotely delivering healthcare to<i> anyone</i> in the United States under the "best of circumstances." More on that point later on.<br />
<br />
A question that often comes up in the debate about what role, if any, should the government play in the delivery of health care to Americans - maybe the fundamental question behind the acrimonious discussion on the matter - is this.<br />
<br />
Is health care in the United States of America a right or a privilege?<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">IN</span> the typical debate about this question, one thing that those who think its a privilege bring up is that the words "healthcare" appear nowhere in our Constitution. The "its a right" crowd usually counter by saying its covered by the general welfare clause. Not really. "General Welfare" really meant that the Government would be able to keep itself healthy and in tact and able to function.<br />
<br />
Keep in mind, the Supreme Court ruled the ACA and its "individual mandate" that required most Americans to obtain health insurance to pay a fine, to be essentially a tax, which gave it a different status than many thought it should have.<br />
<br />
I think the place to look is in the Declaration of Independence.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Here's the phrase:<br /><br /><i><span style="background-color: white;">We hold these truths to be self-evident, that </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_men_are_created_equal" style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration: none;" title="All men are created equal">all men are created equal</a><span style="background-color: white;">, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. </span></i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-color: white; color: #252525;"><br /></span></i></span>
You won't find the phrase "healthcare" here either...<br />
<br />
However...<br />
<br />
"Men are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights." This basically means God has given us certain rights (not privileges,) that no one can take away.<br />
<br />
"Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." So... God gives us the right to be alive, to have Liberty from birth and to be able to pursue happiness. Let's look at the first of these unalienable rights from God.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Life:</b></span> We have a <i><u>right</u></i> to live. I know we still execute people across the United States for various crimes and we're told those people <i>lost</i> their rights because they broke the law. Those words don't appear in the Constitution either, so it appears there's some negotiable wiggle room. If death can be an exception, can't life? Further, if life is a God given right, and its unalienable - then it can't be taken away. (Yet it is...)<br />
<br />
We know African Americans, for example, weren't considered people and were abused terribly. The text of the Constitution doesn't include Blacks or Negroes or anything else.<br />
<br />
We know women were denied the right to vote until the 19th Amendment was added in 1920. The Constitution doesn't mention women in its text.<br />
<br />
It doesn't say <i>except for </i>crooks or Blacks... it says "men." Not some men or certain men or special men or white men or men who can afford it. It just says "men."<br />
<br />
If we want to say we should apply the Constitution literally, then it has to be a 2 way street.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">If we're entitled to live, its also implied we're entitled to have access to the basic things one needs to be able to live. Not live like a King, but not expire due to lack of food, heat, water, and yes...health care. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="color: #252525;"><span style="background-color: white;">We decided over fifty years ago that Americans should be able to get help buying food if they met certain financial criteria. Generally speaking, these were the poor people of our society, and while we hear about abuses (which OF COURSE should be addressed) we know that a LOT of people get public assistance. There's also assistance available to qualified people for heat, water, etc.<br /><br />Next in the usual course of a discussion is the following, "Everyone CAN get healthcare.. all they have to do is go to the emergency room and they can get treated..."<br /><br />Yes and no...<br /><br />If a person is in an "emergent condition" the hospital<i> must</i> treat them to the extent that they are stabilized. That may take minutes, hours, days or potentially weeks depending on the circumstances. Emergency room care here in the US is very good, but also very expensive. We lead the world in medical bankruptcies, and this is one of the reasons why. People with no insurance have to pay cash for their medical services and for many - its a catastrophic amount of debt that buries them forever.<br /><br />The law that compels the hospitals to treat such acutely ill or injured people doesn't afford much protections to those not yet in a emergent condition. You can't walk into an ER and ask for nutritional advice. You can't ask them to review your medications. You can't stroll in to an ER and ask for a treadmill test because you think you need one. You can't pop in and ask for a cup of dialysis. You can't ask for anything really.<br /><br />Folks in that situation were typically turned away, and they were welcome to return when they were in a bad way. Then and only then would the Emergency Room staff be happy to help them. Hopefully, things wouldn't be too hard to repair or fix and there would be a happy ending. Too often, it wasn't a happy ending.<br /><br />Emergency room care isn't health care. Its emergency medicine. Its not the sort of preventative health care one would receive from their primary care doctor. It's not screenings. It's not education. It's not routine checkups, blood work, urine tests, etc. It's not contraception. It's not nutritional guidance. It's not learning how to walk again or write again or speak again after something took those skills away. It's not an discussion on the options for end of life care that's occurring while a patient is in the middle of a crisis that may end their life.<br /><br />In other words, its not the kind of health care that could help a person stay healthy or address a small issue on their own under the guidance of a primary care physician before it becomes an emergent condition which may be life threatening. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525;"><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">Maybe they were kidding about life being unalienable?</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So, allowing people to not have access to affordable health care creates a perverted dynamic. We, the people of this fine country won't help you to access the cheaper but vital healthcare that might in fact, keep you out of the very, very, very expensive emergency room where the care is great but where people still die in every hour of every day.<br /><br />This also makes financial sense...<br /><br />To which the General Welfare clause makes a a return visit to this discussion. The Congress is compelled to secure the general well-being of our government's fiscal health. GDP issues due to health care costs pose a major threat....<br /><br />A look at thirty four other industrialized countries healthcare spending as a percent of their GDP:</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-U0vTfC-dBJw/WH6mipUU7-I/AAAAAAAAHl8/0GQIxrpIJMI3ipmlo2QJSRFiOwptiOZvgCLcB/s1600/PercentGDPbyCountry19602013Arrow.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="238" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-U0vTfC-dBJw/WH6mipUU7-I/AAAAAAAAHl8/0GQIxrpIJMI3ipmlo2QJSRFiOwptiOZvgCLcB/s320/PercentGDPbyCountry19602013Arrow.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
From the managed care of the 1980's to the Affordable Care Act of 2010, the United States pays a higher percent of our GDP than any other country on earth. That's bad...</div>
<br />
Another thing to note. Those other countries on the chart have universal coverage. They are able to provide health insurance to all of its citizens, while spending less as a percent of their GDP.<br />
<br />
Pick your poison in terms whether you prefer Conservative or Liberal, Republican or Democratic style plans and approaches to address health care delivery in the US. Its inefficient and consuming more of our dollars than any other country in the world.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The so-called "greatest healthcare system in the world" also has major issues with its delivery and outcomes when compared to other industrialized countries around the world who offer universal coverage.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Consider...</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
*The United States has fewer physicians per 1000 (2.6) than the median OECD Country in 2013 (3.2)...</div>
<br />
*Data from this decade shows Americans see their doctor on average fewer times (4/yr. ) than the median OECD country (6.5 visits per year.) Canadians saw their doctor on average 7.7 times a year. In Japan, the average number of visits is 12.9 per year.<br />
<br />
*The US also has fewer hospital beds per thousand people (2.5) compared to the average median OECD (2.9), Germany has twice the number of beds as we do and Japan has over three times the number of beds we do.<br />
<br />
*In terms of outcomes...<br /><br />US life expectancy - 78.8 years<br />OECD Median - 81.2 years<br /><br />US Infant Mortality - 6.1 deaths among 1000 live births (highest among 11 countries studied)<br />OECD Median IM - 3.5 deaths<br />
<br />
Chronic disease prevelance in the US (2 or more chronic conditions) = 68% of adults >65 yrs. old<br />Other countries in study, figures range from 33% in the UK to 56% in Canada<br /><br />Obesity in the US is the worst in OECD countries... 35.3% of the US population is considered obese. Higher than any other country in the study.<br /><br />While we do well with treating cancers, we don't compare well to other countries in treating diabetes, amputations due to diabetes, ischemic heart disease...<br /><br />See the entire study from the <a href="http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/oct/us-health-care-from-a-global-perspective">Commonwealth Group here...</a><br />
<br />
So...<br /><br />We cover fewer people, in many cases our outcomes are less than steller to say the least and we pay significantly more for this level of "...effectiveness."<br /><br />Bottom line:<br /><br />Our approach to health care delivery in the United States since the 1980's through today is expensive, inefficient, unavailable to many and consuming far more of our GDP than any other industrialized country in the world.<br /><br />If you have money or a job that provides you the access to health insurance you still have to deal with the terribly flawed, segmented and inefficient US health care system. If you're poor or don't have a job that provides health insurance benefits, depeneding on where you live - you may be with out access to even Medicaid, the public safety net program for poor people. Medicaid is administered by the States, and many have refused to participate in the Medicaid Expansion within the ACA. Currently, 32 States and DC have adopted the expansion, <a href="http://kff.org/health-reform/state-indicator/state-activity-around-expanding-medicaid-under-the-affordable-care-act/?currentTimeframe=0">while 19 have rejected it. </a><br />
<br />
Without access to affordable health care and health insurance, people have a impediment to life, liberty and a pursuit of happiness afforded them by our Declaration of Independence. This issue hurts both individuals as well as the welfare of the United States.<br /><br />The above reasons are the foundation of my position as to why healthcare is a right and not a privilege.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-65172382043053855482016-10-12T10:14:00.002-04:002016-10-13T21:17:55.997-04:00Opinion: Conservatism has no one to blame but itself...<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jX1PF9GtYxg/V_5BKLuY_UI/AAAAAAAAF4s/4M_g5XOKR9w_fArSKo5gJPI50XzuJ20-ACLcB/s1600/opinionimage.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jX1PF9GtYxg/V_5BKLuY_UI/AAAAAAAAF4s/4M_g5XOKR9w_fArSKo5gJPI50XzuJ20-ACLcB/s1600/opinionimage.jpg" /></a><br />
The Republican candidate for President is at a war of sorts against the Republican Speaker of the House.<br />
<br />
Think about that.<br />
<br />
The Republican party is in crisis mode with their whirlwind and morally repugnant candidate, Donald Trump driving the GOP train off the rails. Escape routes are nowhere to be found for the party members. Stay loyal to Trump - pay a price. Reject Trump - pay a price. Try to quietly take no stand - pay a price.<br />
<br />
Most people wouldn't feel sorry for politicans, political parties, and those that glom onto them for self promotion, and neither do I. Politicans are typically their own worst enemy, so usually they deserve what they get. No tears from me, sorry.<br />
<br />
Way back when Trump first made rumblings about seriously running for POTUS this cycle, people laughed it off as just another public relations stunt. As it became evident he was serious this time, they still laughed and called it a joke that shouldn't and needn't be taken seriously. When the Donald would tangle with serious, professional politicians he would quickly be cut down to size. Nothing to worry about, let's all enjoy the good laughs Trump is sure to provide.<br />
<br />
No one's laughing now, are they?<br />
<br />
I've felt from very, very early on that a candidate like Trump would be well-positioned to take advantage of our current political polarization.<br />
<br />
Since the days of Reagan, there's been a steady drip, drip, drip of anti-government, anti-progressive rhetoric in the US. The merging of the conservative movement and the religious right, cable news outlets like Fox News, media outlets like Brietbart and right wing talk radio, etc... all stoked the divisions we have now.<br />
<br />
The hard right, which preached the message of we're losing our freedoms, liberty, our country, etc.. staked out a very loud but very tiny sliver of the american electorate as they grew in influence over the last few decades.<br />
<br />
As more and more people bought into the notion that all government is bad, the appeal of a true outsider grew and grew. Most weren't viable and faded away during general election campaigns.<br />
<br />
This cycle, the far right voices demonized almost everyone, except for their chosen few like Ted Cruz. Enter Donald Trump who isn't a politician, but IS a celebrity and has great name recognition.<br />
<br />
He jumped on the bandwagon the far right was preaching and scaring people with. He hijacked their movement and one by one, kicked another conservative, then another and another to the curb until only he and Cruz were left.<br />
<br />
Ted Cruz, despite his education and his speaking skills is not well liked, by most people. He comes across like a dick to most people, so he didn't get the support he needed to survive.<br />
<br />
By attrition, Trump prevailed as a true outsider who heard people's pain and had no fucks to give about running roughshod over the other GOP candidates.<br />
<br />
Basically, IMO, the conservative movement and the religious right, cable news outlets like Fox News, media outlets like Brietbart and right wing talk radio, etc. created the conditions for a wildcard outsider with an appearence of ability to stroll in to american politics and win the nomination. When you lay down with the likes of Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Rudy Guliani, Breitbart, Rush, etc. did you really think you could walk away from that unholy union undiseased?<br />
<br />
Put more crassly, if you willfully lie down with pigs in a pigpen, you will surely walk away smelling much like the shit you just embraced. What did you think was going to happen?<br />
<br />
The GOP has no one to blame but themelves for the epic ass kicking Mr. Trump is about to receive.<br />
<br />
They swore they were going to re-inivent themselves after the '12 relection of President Obama. They did a nice internal study, them tossed it in a drawer and kept going they way they had been.<br />
<br />
If there's not a significant, meaningful self-examination of their party, their values and policy positions in the next few months, they deserve their demise.<br />
<br />
America will be MORE diverse in the coming decades, not less and the Republican Party's myopic allegience to older Christian white males will come with a high price.<br />
<br />
We need a vibrant, contempoary Republican party in the United States. The Democratic party has its own issues and a history of incompetance. A viable 3rd party option would be healthy as well. The dye is cast, and barring something utterly unforseen, Hillary Clinton will be our next President of the United States.<br />
<br />
If the Republican leaders and party movers and shakers don't embrace new ideals and shun, <i>publicly shun</i> their rabble-rousers and fear-mongerers, they will move closer to, not further away from national irrelevance.<br />
<br />
And it will be well-deserved...Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-57303518939053197142016-07-10T11:11:00.001-04:002016-07-10T11:11:04.265-04:00Guns: We're Arguing Over the Wrong Things...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GUEQ3YzijJQ/V4JcSXy9bzI/AAAAAAAAErY/KZQaJ318kT0LAYD0dHZNM7ZJoxXKcONsQCLcB/s1600/glock_19.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="220" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GUEQ3YzijJQ/V4JcSXy9bzI/AAAAAAAAErY/KZQaJ318kT0LAYD0dHZNM7ZJoxXKcONsQCLcB/s320/glock_19.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><b>June 12, 2016</b></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">: 49 dead, 50 wounded, Orlando, FL.</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><b>December 2, 2015</b></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">: 14 dead, 22 wounded, San Bernardino, CA.</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><b>November 29th, 2015:</b></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> 3 dead, 9 injured, Colorado Springs, CO.</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><b>October 1, 2015</b></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">: 9 dead, 9 injured, Roseburg, OR.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><b>July 16, 2015</b></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">: 5 dead, 3 wounded, Chattanooga, TN.</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><b>June 18th, 2015</b></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">: 9 dead, Charleston, SC.</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">You get the idea...</span></div>
<b id="docs-internal-guid-c03f9b9c-d539-0b08-cba9-fa40ecfe030c" style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Gun debates are ubiquitous. We don’t seem to be getting anywhere however.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Some thoughts...</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">1) If you’re truly fearful that President Obama or Hillary Clinton are going to confiscate all the guns in this country, you can relax. Obama hasn’t taken anyone’s guns away, and Hillary is less liberal than he is on this issue. No matter what you hear from the NRA or talk show hosts like Shawn Hannity or Rush Limbaugh, it’s fear-mongering. You’re being played. Talk shows can be informative and entertaining as hell, but they should never be anyone’s primary source of information about anything. Gun sales are robust, especially after a big event like the shootings in Dallas this past week. (<a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-07-08/gun-stocks-reach-record-highs-after-dallas-police-shooting">Gun stocks rose over 5% the next day.</a>..)</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">2) Mass shootings are horrific and terribly sad but they make up a very small percentage of gun deaths. According to Center for Disease Control, over 33,000 people died from gun violence in 2013. Of those 33,000 victims, “mass shootings” accounted for just 1.5% of all gun deaths. The vast majority of gun deaths are suicides. Homicides have stayed pretty consistent in the 11,000/yr. range. Suicides using a gun are rising in the US. In 1999, we had roughly 16,500 firearm suicides in the US. In 2013, that number grew to a staggering 21,175 firearm suicides. In Ohio alone, more than 3 Ohioans die by suicide every day. Roughly, 1,100 of our fellow Buckeyes commit suicide and guns are the most common way to end your life for men and the second most common for women. </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">3) In 1996, Congressmen Jay Dickey from Arkansas who, along with like minded fellow Representatives, didn’t like what the CDC was coming up with in their research in gun violence and its effect on public health. In 1996, Dickey added an amendment onto a House Bill that prohibited the CDC from using any public funds to “...advocate or promote gun control.” The language was vague and researchers didn’t want to risk their careers or other funding to find out how far they could go. Therefore, gun violence research basically ground to a halt. </span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">They weren’t done. The House then voted to strip $2.6M from the CDC’s budget, precisely the amount spent on firearm injury research the year before. Congress also applied the same restrictions on other Federal Agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institute for Health. </span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">To quote physician and epidemiologist Arthur Kellerman, “</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Health researchers are ethically bound to conduct, analyze, and report studies as objectively as possible and communicate the findings in a transparent manner...criticizing research is fair game; suppressing research by targeting its sources of funding is not.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">”</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Jay Dickey reversed himself in 2012 after the Aurora, CO theater shootings where 12 people were killed and another 73 were injured. Dickey said “...scientific research should be conducted into preventing firearm injuries and that ways to prevent firearm deaths can be found without encroaching on the rights of legitimate gun owners. The same evidence-based approach that is saving millions of lives from motor-vehicle crashes, as well as from smoking, cancer and HIV/AIDS, can help reduce the toll of deaths and injuries from gun violence.“</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
4) The NRA in all of its infinite purity <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082">contributes heavily</a> to those conservative congressional entities and candidates who can aid them in their policy interests. Those conservatives then toe the line when it comes to blocking or voting down any legislation the NRA finds objectionable. The NRA continues to wail that Obama/Hillary are COMING FOR YOUR GUNS, the 2nd Amendment is UNDER ATTACK, etc... Gun sales/gun stocks are healthy... Congressmen get re-elected, nothing ever changes, life is good for the whores on the Hill and in the executive suites of the NRA.<br /><br />We should be demanding the removal of the impediments preventing us from studying the gun issue on a Federal level.<br />
<br />
What is the NRA afraid of?<br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span></div>
Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-25821960644437080432016-04-22T08:21:00.001-04:002016-04-26T05:25:22.473-04:00Let's Take A Breath on the Wright-Patt Air Force Base Bible Removal…<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Mjigjy3Fd-o/VxoW27_eVUI/AAAAAAAAEPY/MNlOlmks_GEFluWD1JHwQJ7Dad5KnzsxgCLcB/s1600/wpafbbible.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="150" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Mjigjy3Fd-o/VxoW27_eVUI/AAAAAAAAEPY/MNlOlmks_GEFluWD1JHwQJ7Dad5KnzsxgCLcB/s320/wpafbbible.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<i>(This column was published in the Dayton Daily News on April 26th, 2016...)</i><br />
<br />
From the Dayton Daily News earlier this month…<br />
<br />
"<i>Wright-Patterson Medical Center has removed a Bible from a POW/MIA display after the Military Religious Freedom Foundation lodged a complaint, according to a base spokesperson."</i><br />
<br />
The social media discussions on this issue I’ve seen are pretty heavily in favor of those who feel the Bible should not have been removed. Many stated their positions on the premise that the United States is a Christian Country and the actions taken by WPAFB were just the latest in a long string of widespread, anti-Christian actions, aimed at spreading the “War on Christians.”<br />
<br />
That’s right, the “War on Christians.”<br />
<br />
Sigh…<br />
<br />
A quick Google search tells me there’s roughly 575 churches in the Dayton area. Nationally, according to the 2010 “Religious Congregation Membership Study” there are roughly 350,000 churches in the United States. That’s seven thousand for each State. That’s 116.4 churches for every county in the country.<br />
<br />
That’s a lot of churches.<br />
<br />
The vast, vast majority of these churches also receive tax exempt status on their income. Instead of closing down churches and/or arresting those trying to conduct or attend services, the United States government grants them building permits and tax breaks. A rather odd “war strategy.” I don’t believe for a second anyone who plans on attending a church service this weekend in the Dayton area has any real reason to worry about being arrested, forced to confront protesters or face personal injury. You shouldn’t either.<br />
<br />
There are Christians actually under attack in the world. Not here in the US, but in places like Iraq, Syria and elsewhere. People trying to practice their faith are being targeted, apprehended and usually sentenced to long prison terms or death. Likewise, missionaries who bravely chose to enter such lands knowing the price tag should they be caught is harsh and severe. Those people can legitimately comment on the war on their faith.<br />
<br />
Every time I read someone’s online screed about how they and their like minded “Believers“ are the victims of this imaginary “War on Christians,” I think about those other Christians actually in danger. It’s not some hyperbole written between sips of a Pumpkin Spice Latte by someone who sits with their feet up in a comfortable booth at Starbucks while they listen to their favorite Pandora mix on their earbuds. “That guy” isn’t under attack.<br />
<br />
This thing at Wright-Patt AFB isn’t an attack on religion.<br />
<br />
Given that it’s Government property, any inclusion of any one religious text like the Bible, Torah, Koran, etc. in a display like the one at the WPAFB medical clinic is best left out of it. Despite what some folks apparently think, the United States doesn’t have an army of Christian warriors. It is comprised of Americans. Christians, Jews and Muslims. Agnostics and Atheists. White and Black. Yellow and Brown. Rich and Poor. Educated and uneducated. City kids and country kids. Men and women. Conservatives and Progressives.<br />
<br />
Americans, all of them.<br />
<br />
I hope, out of respect for those truly facing danger for practicing their faith, the next time someone thinks they’re a victim of religious persecution, they slow down for a second and think about those other people.<br />
<br />
“War on Christians?”<br />
<br />
It ain’t happening here.<br />
<br />
Let’s take a breath.Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-43200817835067770022016-04-06T07:44:00.004-04:002016-04-26T05:25:47.612-04:00Local nursing homes need your time, help...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Fxmw1jHRWhw/VwT2VWTLSSI/AAAAAAAAEO4/FKoyPJxmxF0VJwqeezQQHqln8ZJNktnQg/s1600/NH.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Fxmw1jHRWhw/VwT2VWTLSSI/AAAAAAAAEO4/FKoyPJxmxF0VJwqeezQQHqln8ZJNktnQg/s1600/NH.jpeg" /></a></div>
<div class="cmArticle cmOembedContainer" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #444444; display: inline; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12.0012px; line-height: 14.4014px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;">
<div style="border: 0px; display: inline; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
<i style="color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; line-height: normal;">(This column was published in the Dayton Daily News on April 2nd, 2016...)</i><br />
<br />
In the greater Miami Valley, located in Southwest Ohio, there are approximately 250 nursing homes and assisted-living facilities within an hour or so drive from downtown Dayton. Almost every community you can name has at least one. Dayton and Springfield have a lot, but smaller towns like Eaton, New Carlisle, Urbana and Sidney each have at least one of these places for seniors, as well.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
For 20 years, I’ve traveled around thie region performing for the folks that call these places home. I often see volunteers helping out the activity professionals who coordinate activities for the residents. These volunteers help out in many different ways. Some bring residents to and from music programs, call bingo, deliver mail, paint nails, read aloud today’s newspaper or serve refreshments.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
Some read verses from the Bible, while some sing hymns. A volunteer may visit a person who is lonely, perhaps depressed and craves the comfort of a hand to hold, a face to smile at or arms to be held by. Someone to talk to. Despite the very best efforts of the special people who work as activities professionals (and they are highly dedicated and caring people), the hours can go by awfully slowly for some residents.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
After talking with several of my clients, one thing is clear: We need more volunteers in our Dayton-area nursing homes. Carolyn Hoff, Activity Director at Brookhaven Nursing and Rehab in Brookville, OH, says, “The volunteer programs have been on the decline due to the overall aging of our population and also increased longevity. The baby boomers are now caretaking of their parents, children and grandchildren — and at times, their spouse — often on top of maintaining their careers thus they no longer have time to volunteer.”</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
Families also play an important part with those confined in these facilities, but as Hoff adds, “Often when family visit, the resident speaks to them about personal issues such as wanting to go home, finances and family issues. Whereas when a volunteer stops in, it’s relaxing light topics, comfort, social.”</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
Volunteers play a unique and valuable role in residents’ lives. The benefit isn’t limited to the recipients. Those who volunteer often find the work to be quite fulfilling and worthwhile.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
We are transitioning in the need for care from the Silent Generation, (those 71 years of age or older) to the Baby Boomers, (those between 52 and 70). As boomers (in greater numbers) replace the previous generation, need for these facilities will grow, as will demand for additional health care professionals and other staff to provide care for the residents. Volunteers can play a vital role in this challenge.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
April 10-16 is National Volunteer Week in the United States. The need for volunteers, especially in nursing homes and assisted-living facilities, has never been greater. The people who reside in these facilities are our mothers and fathers, our grandparents, our aunts and uncles and our brothers and sisters. They are our teachers, our coaches, our bosses and our co-workers.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
They are our friends. Someday, they may very well be us.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
Please give some thought to volunteering.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 1.167em; line-height: 1.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0.25em;">
To learn more about volunteer opportunities contact a nursing home or assisted living facility near you for more information or call your local Area Agency on Aging.</div>
</div>
Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-68468068818742266582016-03-07T10:17:00.003-05:002016-03-07T10:17:54.354-05:00Why Voting For Trump Makes Sense...(For Now, At Least...)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IEsrchFkhUU/Vt2bPgTxk0I/AAAAAAAAENw/XljY8gzd4cs/s1600/trump4potus.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IEsrchFkhUU/Vt2bPgTxk0I/AAAAAAAAENw/XljY8gzd4cs/s1600/trump4potus.jpeg" /></a></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Come Tuesday, March 15, yours truly will be voting for Donald J. Trump. </span></div>
<b id="docs-internal-guid-f5f69053-51a4-40fc-088d-387b285201f9" style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Not because I agree with him on his policies. (I don’t.) </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Not because I see leadership qualities in him. (I don’t.) </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Not because I think he can spark the economy, improve our broken healthcare delivery system or fix the Veteran’s Administration’s problems, etc. (I don’t.) </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Certainly not because he shares the same values that I do. (He doesn’t.) </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Why will I be voting for him, then? </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I’ll vote for Trump because I think his winning the Republican Nomination produces the best chance to force the current Republican Party to seriously reinvent itself. Which would be good for the Country, regardless of a person’s individual political tastes. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">When President Obama won reelection in 2012, the Republican National Committee conducted a “GOP Autopsy.” A large project, the RNC’s report came up with many recommendations, including reaching out to minorities, addressing the notion the party doesn’t care about people and attacking corporate welfare. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">As a former Republican, I wish I could point to some concrete improvements along these lines, but I can’t. If anything, the far right wing of the GOP has won the argument on what sort of candidates to run. There are no real moderates. Our Governor, John Kasich a clear-cut conservative, is the most reasonable of those remaining, but his path to the nomination is hard to see. </span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The GOP’s base mocks and attacks our current President, a decent and thoughtful man, while cheering for a con-man because of his bluster. The Republican establishment is doing their best to move voters away from Trump to either Rubio or Cruz. It’s unclear to me how successful they will be. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.666666666666666px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Trump embraces much of the nonsense the GOP has been selling over the last two decades. Symbolically, he is the Republican Party’s Frankenstein, who has sprung to life and seems intent on destroying the voices and thinking that gave him life. His simple message, and it is simple, is that America isn’t great anymore, but if we elect him, She can be once more. He never really says exactly how this would happen, but the millions who have voted for him so far don’t care. They’re not overly interested in policy. They’ve heard it all before. They don’t want to hear promises, because they’ve been lied to before as well. They want something different this time. </span></div>
<br /><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">If Trump faces Hillary Clinton in the General, it’s my belief and hope the Democrats will win the Presidency by a large margin and regain seats in the US Senate. In spite of Clinton being a rather dreary candidate herself. </span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The Republicans have no one to blame but themselves. Catering to the extreme voices comes at a cost, and the bill needs to be paid. It won’t be easy. Congressmen who compromise are targeted by special interests with deep pockets. They’re afraid to take any stands that would result in them being “primaried” by a more pure conservative challenger-with unlimited cash to spend. </span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Maybe at that point, the adults in the GOP will rise up, tell the hard core tea party and right wing talk radio voices to take a back seat and remold the Republican Party in a modern, expansive and intelligent fashion. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span>Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-28499772380893146492016-02-18T20:34:00.000-05:002016-04-26T05:26:56.347-04:00GOP should be careful what they wish for with regard to Supreme Court Nominee<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-34muZseGFwU/VsZwp3otIkI/AAAAAAAAELQ/MSAmA1jolFc/s1600/Supreme%2BCourt%2BBldg.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-34muZseGFwU/VsZwp3otIkI/AAAAAAAAELQ/MSAmA1jolFc/s1600/Supreme%2BCourt%2BBldg.jpeg" /></a></div>
<div dir="ltr">
<span style="font-size: large;"><i style="font-size: medium;">(This column was published in the Dayton Daily News on February 26th, 2016...)</i></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;"> </span>Within hours of the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia last Saturday,</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Republican leadership and the remaining Republican candidates for President voiced<br />
the opinion that President Barack Obama should not pick the successor to Scalia.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br />
Majority Leader McConnell quickly released a statement that said, “the American<br />
people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice.<br />
Therefore this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.” Senate<br />
Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley offered, “It’s been standard practice over the last<br />
eighty years to not confirm Supreme Court nominees during presidential election<br />
years.” GOP frontrunner Donald Trump advised a “delay-delay-delay” approach<br />
while fellow candidate Ted Cruz said “we owe it to Scalia and the Nation to ensure<br />
that the next President names his replacement.” Marco Rubio said, “The next<br />
President must nominate a justice who will continue Justice Scalia’s unwavering<br />
belief in the founding principles.”</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br />
Replacing a staunch conservative with a progressive on the Court flips the balance<br />
of power from leaning conservative to leaning liberal. On issues from Citizens<br />
United, to labor rights, to abortion, gun control, voter’s rights, etc., there’s no<br />
shortage of impactful cases headed the Court’s way. Considering the age of the<br />
three oldest Justices, multiple vacancies during the next Presidential term would<br />
surprise no one. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 82, Anthony Kennedy is 79 and<br />
Stephen Breyer is 77.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Instead of waiting for a nomination from President Obama, the Republicans<br />
couldn't wait to get on record on how they would refuse to allow this sitting<br />
president to select Justice Scalia's replacement. By merely dragging their feet a bit<br />
and ultimately rejecting the nomination, which is well within their rights and<br />
would’ve been a vastly smarter thing to do, this problem would’ve handled much<br />
more deftly. Having chosen a different path to address this, they look like<br />
hypocritical, spoiled brats at the moment.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
Senate Republicans should choose their next steps very carefully. Looking forward,<br />
if the Democrats hold the White House and either President Clinton or President<br />
Sanders is putting forth the nomination, do we think they will be inclined to submit<br />
a less progressive name then President Obama did? I don’t.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
If President Trump or Cruz is doing the nominating then the GOP fears become
<br />
moot. However, there is nothing currently suggesting either would win in a
<br />
comfortable fashion come November. That’s a big risk for the GOP should they
<br />
refuse Obama his nominee. What if they lose?
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
If the GOP’s goal is to block Obama, they can do that. If their goal is to effect the
<br />
ideological makeup of the Court as little as possible, they should reconsider their
<br />
approach. Obama, a major disappointment to progressives, is unlikely to nominate
<br />
a radical. His previous two nominees (Sotomayor and Kagan) are not considered
<br />
extreme. If they block him and then lose in November, the new President will
<br />
submit their own nominee. By their actions, the GOP may facilitate adding a far
<br />
more progressive voice to the Court than Mr. Obama would.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr">
<br /></div>
Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-65260716408766796062016-02-14T21:03:00.002-05:002016-02-14T21:11:19.761-05:00In the wake of Antonin Scalia's unexpected passing, now what? <table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--3UXDKLvtR0/VsEbzjo7yiI/AAAAAAAAEK8/OKxf5aXAVL4/s1600/Scalia.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--3UXDKLvtR0/VsEbzjo7yiI/AAAAAAAAEK8/OKxf5aXAVL4/s400/Scalia.jpeg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #252525; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.4px;">Antonin Scalia, Supreme Court Justice<br />(March 11, 1936 – February 13, 2016)</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>With the unexpected and sudden passing of Justice Scalia,</b></span> many questions abound on what happens to his seat during this time of fragmented government and a highly contentious presidential campaign. Arguably, the strongest conservative voice on the court, President Obama will surely nominate someone well to Scalia's left ideologically. Leaders of the Republican party have forcefully expressed their intent to handle things in such a way that the <b><i>next </i></b>President will nominate a successor to the fallen Justice. The President and his fellow Democrats feel strongly that the Senate should hold confirmation hearings and consider whoever Obama puts forth.<br />
<br />
The politics are intense in this matter, and not without complexity.<br />
<br />
With a mostly evenly devided Court, each nomination potentially sways the institution one way or another. Reflecting the Country, a divided court is probably best as opposed to a heavily lopsided one. Swing vote Justices, like Anthony Kennedy of perhaps Chief Justice John Roberts, carry a tremendous amount of power in determining the Court's path. Nominations really matter in times like this, and with 2-3 other Justices getting up in age, there may be more replacements needed over the next few years. Just one of the reasons this Presidential cycle is so important for both parties. The next POTUS may appoint several justices, potentially altering the "split" nature of the Court, the effect of which, would touch many aspects of American life for decades to come.<br />
<br />
Everyone can point to their pet campaign issue of the debt, foreign affairs, the economy, entitlements, etc., but one issue that potentially / eventually effects everyone is how the Supreme Court rules on its cases. Citizens United, a challenge to Roe V Wade, the pending Unions case, perhaps a new challenge to the Affordable Care act, etc. Each effects thousands of Americans in unique ways.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">What do conservatives want?</span></b><br />
<br />
Conservatives want two things. First, they want to delay any actions taken that would result in a new Justice being confirmed. They understand that Obama will replace Scalia with a progressive mind, probably moderate, and that the effects of that eventuality would be devestating to the Conservative cause. Secondly, they want to win back the White House next November. Give the current state of disarray in the Republican field, they have to feel their best chance lies in delaying Scalia's replacement at almost any price. President Obama is clearly acting within the Constitutional scope of his powers to nominate a candidate for the Court. Likewise, via the somewhat elusively defind "advise and consent" clause of Article two, Section two of the Constitution, the Senate can delay the process indefinately. (Not without a cost, of course...)<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">What do progressives want?</span></b><br />
<br />
Progressives also want two things. First, they want to move forward deliberately with the nomination process and see Senate Confirmation hearings happen within the next few months, resulting in a confirmed nominee to fill Scalia's seat. Secondly, they too want to win the Presidential Election come November and be positioned to fill another 2-3 seats on the Court. The Democrats fear an uncooperative Senate and then worst of all, losing the election in the Fall. That would be a disaster for both short and long term considerations. President Obama would like nothing more than to see an unexpected Supreme Court appointmentbe the cherry on his last term.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">The politics of it all...</span></b><br />
<br />
So many moving pieces to consider.<br />
<br />
If the Senate Conservatives get their way, there won't be any vote, regardless of whom President Obama nominates. It's a kind of shitty way to impede the Court's restroration to full status, but this isn't flag-football, people. The more moderate Republicans still around may warn of the potentially high price their party may pay for such a stunt, but for the most part, no one else in that party is paying attention anymore.<br />
<br />
If the nomination process is blocked by the Senate leadership, look for the White House and both Democratic candidates Clinton and Sanders to use this a club to beat the GOP field with regularly. They will tell the country that the Senate is merely holding things up so as to avoid Obama filling another SCOTUS seat. The Conservative base couldn't care less, but what will moderate conservatives and independents think of such a plan? Does it become a campaign issue with traction for indy voters? Dangerous ground here to tread for the GOP.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Finally..</b></span>.<br />
<br />
You've heard the phrase, "...better the devil you know than the one you don't." While refusing to grant advise and consent to the sitting President and his nominee, what happens if they succeed in blocking Obama short term. Let's assume Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency. Would she put forth candidates more or less progressive than Obama would? I think that after delaying the entire process and beating the mantra "the next POTUS should pick the next Supreme Court Justice" to death, they'd be in a weak position to then obstruct a Clinton nominee.<br />
<br />
Speaking of Clinton, while thought to be more of a hawk on military matters than President Obama, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders - Clinton's only competition in the race for the Democratic nomination this cycle - has forced HRC to move to her left. If Clinton wins in November, does she submit a moderate progressive to faciliate bi-partisanship or does she put forth a staunch progressive, to take advantage of her political capital from winning the election? What if Sanders wins? Wouldn't he certainly push for progressives on the bench? Of course he would.<br />
<br />
Given that, isn't there an argument to be made that the Senate Republicans shouldn't break any speed records, but given the potential for a worse otucome that what Obama might give them, agree to work with President Obama and give him one more appointment.<br />
<br />
It may be the Republican's best chance at a more moderate voice replacing the voice of Justice Scalia...<br />
<br />
<b>Additional: </b><br />
<br />
Here are two very enjoyable reads on this issue from the SCOTUSBLOG, a terrific web source for all things Supreme Court.<br />
<br />
The first is an <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/ninth-circuit-judge-paul-watford-is-the-most-likely-nominee-to-replace-antonin-scalia/#more-238286">article by Tom Goldstein, </a>Publisher of the SCOTUSBLOG, on who Goldstein thinks is the favorite to be nominated by President Obama.<br />
<br />
The second is one by the legendary Lyle Denniston, who has covered the Supreme Court since 1958. Denniston <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/judiciary-panel-chair-wait-on-court-until-after-election/">gives us an inside look at the current machinations within the Supreme Court </a>and how Scalia's passing will likely effect the Court's short term future.<br />
<br />
<br />
Sources:<br />
<br />
http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/ninth-circuit-judge-paul-watford-is-the-most-likely-nominee-to-replace-antonin-scalia/#more-238286<br />
<br />
http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/judiciary-panel-chair-wait-on-court-until-after-election/Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-87515211955400341262016-02-12T00:43:00.001-05:002016-04-26T05:30:36.007-04:00I got to ask the Democratic candidates a question (No, they didn't answer it...)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-VN3aRkWJT9E/Vr1uHDoLGqI/AAAAAAAAEKs/8wR8dCZVgtg/s1600/berniehillary.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="195" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-VN3aRkWJT9E/Vr1uHDoLGqI/AAAAAAAAEKs/8wR8dCZVgtg/s320/berniehillary.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><i style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';">(This column was published in the Dayton Daily News on February 12th, 2016...)</i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">A few weeks ago I was invited to participate in a private group discussion of undecided voters sponsored by the PBS Newshour on Facebook. A few dozen of us were encouraged to discuss campaign related issues and submit follow-up questions for the Democratic debate in Milwaukee, WI last night.<br /><br />Early on I submitted a follow-up question for Bernie Sanders that reads as follows:</span><br />
<br />
<br />
(<i>From the transcript)</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i>(BREAK)</i></div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i>WOODRUFF: Welcome back to the Democratic presidential debate. Before we return to our questions, we have a follow-up question from our Facebook group. And it is to Senator Sanders.</i></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<genius-referent data-genius-annotator-id="2225623" data-genius-api-path="/referents/8664062" data-genius-featured-referent="true" data-genius-hover="" data-genius-referent-id="8664062" data-genius-style-id="referent" data-genius-wrapped-path="/8664062/www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/11/transcript-the-democratic-debate-in-milwaukee-annotated" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: transparent !important; box-sizing: border-box; color: black; cursor: pointer;"><i style="background-color: white;">Senator, it comes from Bill Corfield. He is a 55-year-old musician from Troy, Ohio. And he asks: "Are there any areas of government you would like to reduce?"</i></genius-referent></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<genius-referent data-genius-annotator-id="2225623" data-genius-api-path="/referents/8664066" data-genius-featured-referent="true" data-genius-hover="" data-genius-referent-id="8664066" data-genius-style-id="referent" data-genius-wrapped-path="/8664066/www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/11/transcript-the-democratic-debate-in-milwaukee-annotated" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: transparent !important; box-sizing: border-box; color: black; cursor: pointer; transition: background-color 0.2s;"><i style="background-color: white;">SANDERS: Hey, I'm in the United States Senate, and anyone who doesn't think that there is an enormous amount of waste and inefficiency and bureaucracy throughout government would be very, very mistaken.</i></genius-referent></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<genius-referent data-genius-annotator-id="2225623" data-genius-api-path="/referents/8664066" data-genius-featured-referent="true" data-genius-hover="" data-genius-referent-id="8664066" data-genius-style-id="referent" data-genius-wrapped-path="/8664066/www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/11/transcript-the-democratic-debate-in-milwaukee-annotated" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: transparent !important; box-sizing: border-box; color: black; cursor: pointer;"><i style="background-color: white;">I believe in government, but I believe in efficient government, not wasteful government.</i></genius-referent></div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i>IFILL: How about you, Senator Clinton -- Secretary Clinton?</i></div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i>CLINTON: Absolutely. And, you know, there are a number of programs that I think are duplicative and redundant and not producing the results that people deserve. There are a lot of training programs and education programs that I think can be streamlined and put into a much better format so that if we do continue them they can be more useful, in public schools, community colleges, and colleges and universities.</i></div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i>I would like to take a hard look at every part of the federal government and really do the kind of analysis that would rebuild some confidence in people that we're taking a hard look about what we have, you know, and what we don't need anymore. And that's what I intend to do.</i></div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i>SANDERS: If I could just answer that, <genius-referent data-genius-annotator-id="2870196" data-genius-api-path="/referents/8664075" data-genius-referent-id="8664075" data-genius-style-id="referent" data-genius-wrapped-path="/8664075/www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/11/transcript-the-democratic-debate-in-milwaukee-annotated" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.2s;">we have also got to take a look at the waste and inefficiencies in the Department of Defense</genius-referent>, which is the one major agency of government that has not been able to be audited. And I have the feeling you're going to find a lot of cost overruns there and a lot of waste and duplicative activities.</i></div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i>(APPLAUSE)</i></div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman"; line-height: normal;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent;">My thoughts:</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">Overall, I'm disappointed. The answers were boilerplate and not very
informative. Certainly not inspiring. Sanders responded first and frankly
didn't answer the question. </span><st1:city style="background-color: transparent;" w:st="on">Clinton</st1:city><span style="background-color: transparent;">
in turn went straight to "...streamlining wasteful programs involving
training and education areas", which sounds good on the surface, but had
no real specifics. She then wandered into word-salad land when she said,
"...programs can be streamlined and put into a much better format so that
if we do continue them they can be more useful, in public schools, community
colleges and colleges and universities." What on earth does that mean? </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br />
Sanders, realizing that <st1:city w:st="on">Clinton</st1:city>
had rambled longer than he had, then said something rather amazing. "If I
could just answer that..." Wait a second. "If I could just answer
that?" Full stop, Bernie. They
asked you first. Remember? Whew... <br />
<br />
Sanders then brought up waste and inefficiencies in the Defense Department, which
is what he should've said in the first place. He didn't stop there as he (not
to be outdone by Hillary) proved he too could say the word
"duplicative" in regard to his desire to seeing an audit performed on
the Department of Defense. <br />
<br />
Duplicative is an odd word. It's not the kind of word regular people use very
often, but here are the two leading Democratic candidates for President, and
they both say it within 15 seconds of each other. <br />
<br />
Somewhere, Marco Rubio was laughing...<br />
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">This was, in my opinion, a softball question, asked in front
of a friendly audience and mostly sympathetic viewers. No harm done. If this
question gets the same sort of silly non-answers during one of the Presidential
Debates, that will be a different story. They will pay a price for not having
something more polished to offer up. </span>
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br />
<!--[endif]--></div>
Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-74202395920279053642016-02-10T05:41:00.001-05:002016-02-10T06:19:00.217-05:00New Hampshire Primary Winners and Losers...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6d5r77bqOrU/VrsAy6trRPI/AAAAAAAAEKc/1sAIeEt2FZo/s1600/nhprimary.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6d5r77bqOrU/VrsAy6trRPI/AAAAAAAAEKc/1sAIeEt2FZo/s320/nhprimary.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">There wasn't much drama as to who would win the Republican or Democratic primaries last night. Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders had both been polling comfortably in first place for a long time and nothing would change that come yesterday. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">With a record setting turn-out, the people of the Granite State helped professional pollsters feel good about themselves once more after a rocky showing in the Iowa Caucuses last week. The final results conformed to the conventional wisdom that Trump and Sanders would win by a wide margin, that Hillary Clinton only had a small likelihood to come within ten percent of Sanders (she finished 22% behind Bernie). Pollsters also predicted a respectable showing from Ohio Governor John Kasich who finished a solid second, four percentage points in front of Iowa GOP winner Ted Cruz and five points ahead of Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The winners and losers of the 2016 New Hampshire Primaries...</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;" /><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;">WINNERS: </b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;">Donald Trump - </b><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"> After a bit of a clumsy 2nd place finish in Iowa, the Trump campaign responded with a renewed focus on the importance of a ground game in New Hampshire. While the outcome was never really in doubt, the time between Iowa and the Granite State allowed the campaign to recalibrate its approach slightly, and should serve it well going forward. With a 16 point lead in the South Carolina Primary Real Clear Politics poll, Trump is sitting pretty as the primary season moves South. With the affirmation that the New Hampshire victory provides him, look for even more swagger and bombast going forward. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><b>John Kasich</b> - Ohio Governor John Kasich, at least for a night, broke out of the cluster of himself, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. New Hampshire was everything to the Kasich campaign, who mostly took a pass on Iowa in favor of touring the state and spreading his message via over one hundred town halls. His efforts were rewarded, as was his unique message and positioning with regard to the other Republicans in the race. Heavy on experience, policy and (for lack of a better word) his belief in "American togetherness." Kasich is well funded, he has a very good organisation to help him as the primaries head south. Of concern is how well does he play in South Carolina (where he doesn't currently place in the top five of the RCP poll) and beyond. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><b>Bernie Sanders</b> - Sanders seems to me to be a genuine, sincere and passionate man. He crushed HRC last night with 60% of the votes cast on the Democratic side of the primary. How badly did he defeat her by? CBS News reported that Sanders had captured a stunning 82% of the female vote. That is terrible news for Hillary Clinton. A Sanders win surprised no one and what the future holds for him only time will tell. It's great to win the opening game of the primary season, especially when its in your back yard, no doubt. But we'll quickly see the sheer magnitude of the Clinton campaign with all of its finances and infrastructure as we head to South Carolina and Nevada. Will Sanders be able to get his populist message to resonate enough to make a difference going forward?<br /><br /><b>Vermin Supreme</b> - When you show up at other people's campaign events with a boot on your head, you're going to get noticed. This novelty candidate wound up with 243 votes, which is more votes than Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Jim Gilmore (who is still officially an active candidate), George Pataki, Lindsay Graham and Bobby Jindal. Despite these hijinks, Supreme got far fewer votes this year than he did in the 2012 NH Primary when he got 833 votes. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;">LOSERS: </b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;">Hillary Clinton - </b><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"> While no one really expected her to win in New Hampshire, this combined with a weak victory last week in Iowa, hardly puts forth a picture of a large, efficient campaign machine that will crush everything in its path. While I fully expect to see that behemoth spring to life over the next few weeks, right now the Clinton campaign doesn't seem to be firing on all cylinders. Her message doesn't have the passion of the Sanders campaign and she never been that good on the campaign trail. She's not a Barack Obama and no where close to her husband, former President Bill Clinton when it comes to hard core campaign skills. The Sanders campaign may have reached its zenith last night, but if the Clinton campaign doesn't step it up a notch and find a way to connect with their voters (the discrepancy in the female vote was shocking) quickly, Bernie Sanders will surely benefit. The sooner HRC dispatches Sanders and can focus on the general campaign, the better for her.<br /><br /><b>Chris Christie</b> - New Jersey Governor Chris Christie made no bones about how important a solid showing in New Hampshire was. And as the polls leading up to yesterday's Republican primary consistently suggested, the primary voters left little doubt as to their feelings. A sixth place finish in the single digits does not bode well for the campaign's future. One wonders if his time would've been better spent taking a different approach in the last debate. While the attacks on Marco Rubio were entertaining, they weren't especially substantive. Christie has headed back to New jersey to "re-assess" his campaign. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><b>Marco Rubio</b> - After an uplifting 3rd place showing that was basically a tie for 2nd in last week's Iowa Republican caucuses, the thinking was that Rubio was in a good position to carve out a space just behind the front-runner in New Hampshire. To finish in fifth place last night is not what the Florida Senator had in mind. Rubio quickly took the blame for his poor showing, claiming that his poor performance in last week's debate, "I did not do well on Saturday night. That will never happen again." Rubio sits in third place in South Carolina polls and has to be hoping for a better outcome there.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><b>Carly Fiorina/Ben Carson</b> - If we combine their vote total percents, they finish behind Governor Christie, who has the sense to re-assess whether or not his campaign is viable going forward. The token candidates have done their job, attracted some people who might not otherwise have identified with the GOP, but now its time to swear their allegiance to someone else, and step aside. From what I've seen and heard, Fiorina isn't going anywhere for a while. Ben Carson's future plans are less certain. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></span></span>Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-45044386493396065222016-02-02T06:46:00.002-05:002016-02-02T16:56:11.457-05:00Iowa Caucus Recap...Winners and Losers....<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-aZwUJpSTpiY/VrCDwBrkIWI/AAAAAAAAEJ8/j4fk4Cqby6k/s1600/Iowacaucus.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-aZwUJpSTpiY/VrCDwBrkIWI/AAAAAAAAEJ8/j4fk4Cqby6k/s1600/Iowacaucus.png" /></a></div>
The winners and losers of the 2016 Iowa Caucus...<br />
<br />
<b>WINNERS: </b><br />
<br />
<b>Ted Cruz</b> - Cruz jumped out to an early lead and never looked back Tuesday evening. His superior ground game, attention to detail and resilience in the face of a "Trump attack," proved formidable. The impact of this victory remains to be seen going forward, but we know where it's not. (i.e. delegates...) Mr. Cruz walks away with eight delegates toward the GOP nomination, while Messrs. Trump & Rubio each walk away with seven. The real benefit is momentum as New Hampshire comes next on the primary schedule. Cruz won't win New Hampshire as its considered "home field" for Trump, but a top three showing will position him as a serious and stable candidate built for a long, long run as the primary path then heads south to South Carolina, Nevada and the SEC states. Underestimate him at your own peril.<br />
<br />
<b>Donald Trump</b> - While he didn't win, this political novice came in second place and likely learned some lessons along the way that will serve him well. Reports that campaign events were understaffed and a disorganised ground game have been surfaced in various media outlets. Trump's chances of winning in Iowa was never great and his ham-handed attempt to connect with evangelicals fell short. Trump also gave the best speech of any I heard last night. Humble, down to earth, less bombast was just the right tone to leave Iowa and head "home" to the Northeast and the New Hampshire primary, where the billionaire will almost certainly celebrate his first primary victory.<br />
<br />
<b>Marco Rubio</b> - Rubio sort of snuck up on everyone and finished just behind Trump. While he deserves credit for his performance, his victory speech was a little over-amped for my liking. Someone should have reminded him he came in a strong third in the Iowa Caucus, and that he didn't just win the Presidency. New Hampshire won't be as kind to Rubio and what happens after that is hard to see at this time.<br />
<br />
<b>Bernie Sanders</b> - Just a few months ago, Sanders was 30+ points down to the Hillary Clinton "mega-machine" in Iowa. To virtually tie HRC in Iowa is a fantastic start to the Sanders primary performance. He now heads to New Hampshire, where he will almost surely win and win by a large margin. Sanders will have big-time momentum heading into Nevada and South Carolina. Conventional wisdom (for what it's worth) says Sanders then runs into a brick wall as Clinton finds more friendly states coming up on the primary schedule. Not sure how long the "Burn" will last, but it will certainly be interesting to watch.<br />
<br />
<b>LOSERS: </b><br />
<br />
<b>Hillary Clinton</b> - The presumptive Democratic nominee, for all her name recognition, her cash, her endorsements and her massive organization, couldn't shake off the upstart Bernie Sanders campaign. Yes, she is the technical winner but walks away with one... ONE... more delegate than Sanders does. Long term, she still profiles as the heavy favorite to be the Democratic Nominee, but questions abound in Clinton world. She'll lose in New Hampshire and despite how bright the road after that looks going forward, what effect will the predictable Sanders adoration have in the coming days? Stay tuned.<br />
<br />
<b>Ben Carson</b> - It wasn't that long ago when neurosurgeon Ben Carson was the front runner in Iowa. With that positon however comes scrutiny and the good doctor simply hasn't held up well with the attention. The more we've got to know Carson, the less and less he appears to be a remotely serious candidate. Massive staff defections, replacements and bewilderingly snoozy debate performances, here's hoping Ben Carson, while heading to Florida to "change his clothes" reconsiders this hopeless pathetic effort and suspends his campaign and doesn't set foot in New Hampshire. It's time to write another book, Mr. Carson.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-671475969315302412016-01-31T07:48:00.001-05:002016-01-31T11:51:20.864-05:00Iowa Caucus - Prediction on the Democratic Caucus...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oAEJtI4DpIo/Vq36Av5i4wI/AAAAAAAAEJs/vDFdV232a9U/s1600/Iowacaucus.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oAEJtI4DpIo/Vq36Av5i4wI/AAAAAAAAEJs/vDFdV232a9U/s1600/Iowacaucus.png" /></a></div>
Compared to the Republican race, there is much less to consider for the Democrats. Essentially a two horse race, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are the only serious candidates running for the Democratic nomination.<br />
<br />
Hillary Clinton, is the former Secretary of State and Senator from New York and First Lady, is the unquestioned front-runner. On paper, she has it all. Experience. Financing. Congressional endorsements. Name recognition. She also carries with her a stench of varying proportions from the Benghazi affair and most recently, some rather serious questions being asked by serious people (not to mention Federal Agencies) about her inexplicable handling of her emails.<br />
<br />
She's been around a long time and everyone seems to know who she is. Some people love her, some loath her but regardless of all the strengths and/or concerns I listed above, she is the presumed Democratic Nominee for President this year. If the FBI comes back with an indictment and the Justice Department elects to press charges, it will quite possibly end her campaign which means three things.<br />
<br />
1) She'll have no one to blame but herself for not being pro-active and using a safer, less controversial method to handle her State Department emails.<br />
<br />
2) Bernie Sanders supporters will do a happy dance.<br />
<br />
3) Vice President Joe Biden's phone will ring and the begging on the other end of the line will commence.<br />
<br />
If I were a betting man, I'd say this email thing doesn't produce an indictment and in spite of the stupidity o<span style="font-family: inherit;">f the whole thing, will s</span>lide well to the rear of campaign issues. The GOP will continue to beat it to death, but the Clinton comeback, "The Federal Bureau of Investigation has decided there was nothing illegal about what happened..." will serve her well.<br />
<br />
I am not a fan of Hillary Clinton. I will support whoever is running against the GOP nominee this November because I'm generally pleased with the last eight years of the Obama Administration and Clinton seems best suited and most inclined to maintain the path we're on. Washington Post columnist <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-would-be-insane-to-nominate-bernie-sanders/2016/01/26/0590e624-c472-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html">Dana Milbank</a> put it nicely this week when he contrasted her with the "other" candidate, Bernie Sanders:<br />
<br />
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i><b>Hillary Clinton, by contrast, is a dreary candidate. She has, again, failed to connect with voters. Her policy positions are cautious and uninspiring. Her reflexive secrecy causes a whiff of scandal to follow her everywhere. She seems calculating and phony.</b></i></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<i><b>And yet if Democrats hope to hold the presidency in November, they’ll need to hold their noses and nominate Clinton.</b></i></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black; line-height: normal;">Bernie Sanders is an interesting guy. A surly career politician in his 70's, Sanders is a self-professed Democratic Socialist who has some very interesting and some very expensive ideas for how to serve his Country should he be elected our next President. Sanders is connecting with younger voters in a way that reminds me of the days of Ron Paul. </span></span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<span style="color: black; line-height: normal;">I like his goals for addressing income inequality, raising the minimum wage and implementing universal health care. I like his disinclination of getting the United States involved in another decade long waste of blood and treasure in the Middle East. </span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black; line-height: normal;">I also think he's the real deal. He's been talking about these issues for 30+ years. He doesn't often "poll test" his answers or interests which I find refreshing. Of all the candidates of either party running for President, I would most like to meet Mr. Sanders someday. He will not be our next President. He will have moved the conversation along a few steps and someday when his visions are reality (which I believe), he will deserve some credit for elevating the conversation. </span></span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black; line-height: normal;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">What happens in Iowa Monday night?</b></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;" /></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">Looking a three different sources, </span><a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/?state=nwa" style="background-color: white; color: #888888; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px; text-decoration: none;">Real Clear Politics</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">, </span><a href="http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/iowa-republican/" style="background-color: white; color: #888888; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px; text-decoration: none;">Nate Silver's 538.com</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;"> website and the </span><a href="http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/01/30/closer-look-gop-iowa-poll-results/79566664/" style="background-color: white; color: #888888; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px; text-decoration: none;">Des Moines Register's</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;"> polling data, I come up with these predictions for the Democratc Caucus Monday night:</span></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;" /></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">1st - Hillary Clinton</span></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;" /></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">2nd - Bernie Sanders</span></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;" /></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">3rd - Martin O'Malley</span></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;" /></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">Sources:</span></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-would-be-insane-t</span></span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">o-nominate-bernie-sanders/2016/01/26/0590e624-c472-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html</span><br />
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<br /></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">http://www.realclearpolitics.com/?state=nwa</span></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;" /></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/iowa-republican/</span></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;" /></div>
<div style="color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 18.48px;">http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/01/30/closer-look-gop-iowa-poll-results/79566664/</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black; line-height: normal;"><br /></span></span></div>
</div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #111111; line-height: 1.8em; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-4951636193060606472016-01-31T07:07:00.000-05:002016-01-31T07:48:46.164-05:00Iowa Caucus - Prediction on the Republican Caucus...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IvTsOFnUPJ8/Vq3iprlommI/AAAAAAAAEJU/jijYKxvdP1M/s1600/Iowacaucus.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IvTsOFnUPJ8/Vq3iprlommI/AAAAAAAAEJU/jijYKxvdP1M/s1600/Iowacaucus.png" /></a></div>
Monday night, thousands of Iowans will participate in their caucus process and when they're finished, two candidates will walk away as victors. A few other candidates will walk away with top three finishes which will establish them as (at least in their minds) as serious contenders. Several others will finish outside the top three and have to face serious questions about the viability of their campaigns. Finally, a few will finish with such a poor showing and utter lack of support/disinterest from the good people of Iowa that serious consideration will be given with regard to ending their respective campaigns.<br />
<br />
The 2016 campaign cycle has been an unconventional one to say the least. Virtually no one expected to see <b>Donald Trump</b> heading into the Iowa caucus as the front-runner. (Other than Trump himself, perhaps.) The billionaire from New York City has thumbed his nose, given the finger crapped on, etc. conventional campaigning to the astonishment, disbelief and dismay of his fellow GOP Presidential wannabees. With no political experience and no Super PACS bankrolling his campaign, Trump has been strutting since he announced his candidacy on June 16.<br />
<br />
A steady dose of insults, implications and accusations, some fair some probably not, have added a flair to the process. His supporters love it and call it a fresh approach from a candidate who is beholden to no one and who has a track record of "getting things done." Two attributes which play well across the heartland to the average Joe and Jane voters who are fed up with politicians of all stripes. Sick of the promises that never amount to anything and the limitless pandering from most politicians, Trump is for better or worse, something different.<br />
<br />
For decades, Americans have been told that "government is the problem" as President Reagan said thirty five years ago during his first inaugural address on January 20th, 1981.<br />
<br />
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."<br />
<br />
Trump has called our leaders dumb and stupid,which resonates with a large swath of Americans. People who work hard and see their wages being outpaced by their bills and the cost of living in today's United States. Congress typically has lower job approval ratings than anyone, which pisses people off. Each party complains about the other in their own self righteous way, while getting very little done while taking home comfortable salaries which most Americans can only dream about earning.<br />
<br />
Instead of more of the "same old same old" promises and pledges, Trump has sung his own song, with out question. Brash, plain talk is refreshing regardless of its intellectual honesty. Some of what Trump has promised is crazy talk, woefully short on details and impossible to imagine as ever becoming the way of our world. His supporters don't seem to care. All they know is that life is pretty hard for them, the other candidates look and sound much like the last batch of nincompoops from the previous campaigns. For better or worse (and could he really do worse, they wonder?) Trump is the thing clearly NOT like the others and for now at least will reap the benefits of his uniquness.<br />
<br />
<b>Ted Cruz</b>, Senator from Texas, has been on a chartered course for POTUS since he came to the Senate just three years ago. (It would have been unheard of for a freshman Senator from anywhere to consider a run for President until recently.) Cruz is an ultra-conservative who will never win any popularity contests amongst his peers. The take on Cruz seems to be yes, he's very smart and yes, he's a self-serving, ego maniacal, jerk. In terms of Iowa's Republican / conservative vote, Cruz appears to be Trump's only serious competiton.<br />
<br />
Cruz bills himself as a "true conservative" who says we should not evaluate those "pretending" to be conservatives by their words but by their actions. Fair enough. In terms of formal education, Cruz is quite accomplished with degrees from Princeton and Harvard, not exactly two bastions of conservative thought. (Sure, he could've gone to Liberty University or Hillsdale College for a REAL conservative experience, but he didn't for reasons we can only wonder about.)<br />
<br />
Make no mistake, Cruz may be in fact, smarter than the rest of the field this cycle. Unfortunately for him, this isn't a IQ contest, this is an election, which requires a different skill set. What played well in Texas, doesn't neccessarily play well in the rest of the Country. Without Donald Trump in the last debate, Cruz was center stage and took more hits than he gave. One could've anticipated the other Republicans on stage last Thursday night (Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, John Kasich, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush and Ben Carson) would go after Cruz, and as the debate played out, Cruz looked weaker and weaker. His responses on his immigration stance (stilted and double-talk) and his healthcare (borderline incoherent) did not play well.<br />
<br />
Cruz has plenty of money and has staked out the "true conservative" positon all to himself and his RW talk radio pals. He'll be around for a longtime and if Trump implodes, Cruz will be in the top tier of candidates. (Assuming nothing comes of this Canadian anchor baby thing...)<br />
<br />
<b>What happens in Iowa Monday night?</b><br />
<br />
Looking a three different sources, <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/?state=nwa">Real Clear Politics</a>, <a href="http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/iowa-republican/">Nate Silver's 538.com</a> website and the <a href="http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/01/30/closer-look-gop-iowa-poll-results/79566664/">Des Moines Register's</a> polling data, I come up with these predictions for the Republican Caucus Monday night:<br />
<br />
1st - Donald Trump<br />
<br />
2nd - Ted Cruz<br />
<br />
3rd - Marco Rubio<br />
<br />
4th - Ben Carson<br />
<br />
5th - Rand Paul/Jeb Bush<br />
<br />
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Sources:<br />
<br />
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/?state=nwa<br />
<br />
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/iowa-republican/<br />
<br />
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/01/30/closer-look-gop-iowa-poll-results/79566664/<br />
<br />
<br />Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4876303179229608755.post-32863723093500238312015-10-14T13:41:00.001-04:002015-10-14T13:41:05.782-04:00The Democratic Debate - A few Thoughts...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wGt9g4rkaus/Vh5nlHoOvqI/AAAAAAAAEH8/DjMiat6I5pw/s1600/Demdebate31.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wGt9g4rkaus/Vh5nlHoOvqI/AAAAAAAAEH8/DjMiat6I5pw/s1600/Demdebate31.jpeg" /></a></div>
The Democratic candidates for President finally had their first debate last night in Las Vegas, Nevada. Frontrunner Hillary Clinton, Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders, Jim Webb, Martin O'Malley and Lincoln Chafee rounded out the debate field.<br />
<br />
Generally speaking, it was quite different than what we've seen from the Republicans this cycle. No insults, no put-downs or other nonsense. For just short of two and one-half hours, there was civil discourse about a variety of issues. Adults speaking like adults. Few instances of one candidate interrupting another. No one was chastised.<br />
<br />
It was a yawner...<br />
<br />
Full disclosure, I'll likely wind up voting for one of these people from last evening to be our next President. Unless and until the GOP puts forth a candidate that isn't some genuflecting, pandering, intellectually dishonest caricature of the politician he/she<i> thinks</i> they really are, I won't...I can't vote Republican anytime soon. For most of my early voting life, I voted Republican. Like others have said I didn't leave the Republican Party, they left me somewhere during the George W. Bush Administration. The Dwight Eisenhower's, the Richard Nixon's and yes the Ronald Reagan's of yesteryear would find no home in today's raucous and ridiculous Republican Party. And, neither can I.<br />
<br />
Back to last night's debate...<br />
<br />
A few thoughts on each of the participants...<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Hillary Clinton</b></span> - The media seems to be convinced that HRC had a fantastic evening putting forth a Presidential air while demonstrating a clear superiority in the debate environment. I agree, she was the smoothest and best prepared voice on the stage last night. Bernie Sanders shunned any serious debate prep, while O'Malley, Webb and Chafee tried to make their cases but mostly failed. Clinton's best moment when she took the GOP to task for their hypocritical stance on "big government."<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">"<i>When people say that, it's always the Republicans or their sympathizers who say you can't have paid leave, you can't provide health care," she said. "They don't mind having big government to interfere with a woman's right to choose and to try to take down Planned Parenthood. They're fine with big government when it comes to that. I'm sick of it! You know, we can do these things.</i>" </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span> I thought her worst moment was her response to CNN Host Anderson Cooper's question "which enemy you've made during your political career are you most proud of?" Clinton responded, "<span style="background-color: white; color: #111111; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 22.4px;"><i>Well, in addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians; <b>probably the Republicans.</b>"</i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">Tuck that away in your memory banks friends, I think we will see that in an ad during the general...</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 24px;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Bernie Sanders</b></span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"> - A great number of people likely saw and listened to Bernie Sanders for the first time last night. They heard vintage Sanders railing against big banks, corporations, climate change, etc. In some ways Sanders is the opposite of HRC. While the first question to Clinton regarded her "flip-flops" on various positions "Will you say anything to get elected?" no one seems to question Bernie's sincerity or authenticness. Truth is, he's been beating the drum on most of these issues for decades and for that he deserves respect. True to his word, he had nothing harsh to say toward anyone, even after Clinton said he wasn't tough enough on guns. In the end, both she and Sanders want basically the same things out of gun reform. Better/faster background checks, close the gun show loophole, fund mental health, etc...<br /><br />For better or worse, his biggest moment of the night was when he interjected a question about HRC's emails with this...</span><br />
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Guardian Text Egyptian Web', Georgia, serif; line-height: 24px; margin-bottom: 1rem; padding: 0px;">
<i>“I think the secretary of state is right, the American people are sick and tired about hearing about your damn emails,” Sanders said to hoots and cheers from the audience, after CNN moderator Anderson Cooper pushed Clinton on the ongoing scandal.</i></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Guardian Text Egyptian Web', Georgia, serif; line-height: 24px; margin-bottom: 1rem; padding: 0px;">
<i>He concluded by saying: “Enough of the emails – let’s talk about the real issues facing the American people.”</i></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">If we can consider that last night was bernie Sanders making a first impression on the American people, he did pretty well. While his genuiness came across effectively last night, I think the typical general election voter isn't actually prepared to pull the lever for a Socialist. Sanders is a Democratic Socialist, but I think most people only read/hear "socialist." For that and many other reasons (finances, ground game, etc...) he is limited to being a charming diversion during this campaign. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 24px;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Jim Webb</b></span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"> - Webb was the candidate I was most interested in watching last night. A decorated Vietnam vet, former Secretary of the Navy and former Senator from Virgina. He is also a well-regarded author. Webb had several smart things to say about guns, cyber security, etc. but seemed less impressive when it came to criminal justice (Black Lives Matter), and the Iran Nuclear deal (it's upsetting the region's balance of power.) He's certainly entitled to his opinions, but he seemed to me to be more of a professorial moderate conservative than a Democrat. He's clearly an interesting guy but his complaining about not getting enough time combined with the above responses place him somewhere other than a serious position for the Democratic nomination. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 24px;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Martin O'Malley</b></span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"> - Two things stood out for me as I watched the former Governor of Maryland. The first was his response to Coopers "enemies" question when he simply said "The National Rifle Association" and then his closing statement where he drew a distinction between the Democratic debate and the prior Republican ones. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span> <em style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 27px;"><span style="color: #333333;">"On this stage</span><b> <a href="http://www.refinery29.com/2015/10/95727/martin-o-malley-democratic-debate-closing-statement-quotes" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">you didn't hear anyone denigrate women, you didn't hear anyone make racist comments about new immigrants, you didn't hear anyone speak ill of anyone because of their religious belief</a>,</b><span style="color: #333333;">" O'Malley said. "What you heard was an honest debate of what will move us forward, to lead to a clean electric grid by 2050, and employ more of our people, rebuild our cities and towns, educate our children at higher and better levels, and include more people in the economic and social life in our country."</span></em><br />
<em style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 27px;"><span style="color: #333333;"><br /></span></em> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">The problem in all of that is that ALL the Democrats on stage last evening are no fans of the NRA. He put it succinctly, but for that to be a high moment reveals how the rest of his night went. His closing statement was good, but not nearly enough. Had the rest of his night gone well, it would've been a terrific close, but in the end-he needed to demonstrate how he differs from Clinton and Sanders NOT how all of them differ from the GOP clown car. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: large; line-height: 24px;"><b>Lincoln Chafee</b></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"> - Mr. Chafee's night can be summed up in two short videos...</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">This one on his vote on Glass Steagall:</span><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gkcAeEhtCbU" width="560"></iframe> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, Century, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">And this one about Clinton's email scandal/US reputation around the world:<br /></span><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/f06slMOBfMg" width="560"></iframe><br />
<br />
The perpetual grin on his face made him appear clownish and I doubt anyone feels that his performance last evening improved his very, very small chances in the race for the Democratic nomination. He should suspend his campaign yesterday.<br />
<br />
The next Democratic debate will take place in Des Moines, Iowa on Saturday, November 14th, 2015.Bill Corfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18260108431220011138noreply@blogger.com0