Wednesday, March 17, 2021

Don't blame Cardi B or the media...We've always been depraved...

 

At what point in my 60 years should I have thought the United States wasn't depraved? 


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. 

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. 

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. 

In the 1990s, genocides in both Rwanda and Bosnia outraged some but for the most part, the American people said, "not my problem."

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. 

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...

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. 

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. 

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. 

Some folks think Cardi B and "the left-wing media" are perverted and pushing depravity. 

We've ALWAYS been depraved. 

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. 

Now, fast forward to January 6th of this year. 

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. 

That was depraved. That was obscene. That was perverted. 

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?

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. 

There's no vaccine for that coming anytime soon. A mask for this condition is useless. 

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."

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. 

We were supposed to leave our kids a slightly "more perfect union." 

Are we?

We have much bigger things to worry about than Cardi B's WAP...


Sunday, February 14, 2021

IMPEACHMENT IS DONE WITH - Q & A time...


 With the acquittal of former President Donald Trump yesterday, there's a lot to chew on. Here's what I'm thinking about today. 

In question and answer form, a few thoughts...

Q) DOES THE ACQUITTAL HELP TRUMP'S 2024 CHANCES TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT AGAIN?

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. 

Q) WHY DID THE DEMS NOT CALL ON MORE WITNESSES TO TESTIFY? 

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 no interest 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. 

Q) ARE THE REPUBLICANS AFRAID TRUMP - WOULDN'T THEY BE BETTER OFF WITHOUT HIM? 

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:


No, he's not afraid of Trump. 

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."
Whichever conservative candidate winds up in favor with Trump's base, will have an advantage heading into the 2024 Republican primaries. 

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...) 

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?" 

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. 

Q) IS TRUMP IN THE CLEAR?

A) No, he's not. Four, possibly five potentially significant legal landmines await Donald Trump.

    1. The Attorney General of State of New York - Letitia James (Taxes)

    2. Manhattan District Attorney - Cyrus Vance (Taxes)

    3. US Attorney for the Southern District of New York - Audrey Strauss (Taxes) 

    4. Fulton County District Attorney, (Georgia ) - Fani Willis (Election interference)

    5. Unites States Attorney General - Merrick Garland* (Tax Fraud)

*Garland still needs to be confirmed by the Senate. 

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. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*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. 

*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?

                                                     








Saturday, January 30, 2021

The Jobs! It's always about the jobs...

 

 


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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 




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. 

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."

Let's talk about jobs.

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. 

For 24 months...

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. 

What about after the completion of the project, how many jobs would remain? 

35

Thirty-five full time, probably very good jobs, and a couple dozen contractor part-time gigs as well. 

We shouldn't stop there, though. What about the jobs that are LOST due to the construction of the pipeline?

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. 

What about those jobs? Those are often good-paying, union jobs with benefits. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

Will it destroy TransCanada? 

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. 


Cause, Lord knows it can't wait to create those thirty-five full-time jobs...





Tuesday, January 8, 2019

Tonight's Presidential Address...Yes, there's a crisis, but not the one Trump will say there is...

Tonight on all the major television networks, President Trump will speak to the nation about the crisis on the border.

It promises to be a divisive speech.

Supporters of the POTUS will mostly think he's "truth-telling" and bemoan the fact that Democrats in Congress are playing hardball.

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.

Here's my take on tonight's speech...

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.

Its not thousands of terrorists - it's six...

Most of the people here illegally are overstaying their visas, not scrambling across the border.

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.

They need more agents, lawyers, judges, staff to manage the incoming people.

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

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.

Trump is stuck on the "wall" thing because he promised his base a bigass wall, the best ever wall during the campaign.

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.

It's beyond time for the "Best dealmaker ever" to make a deal.

Sunday, December 9, 2018

Pre-Campaign Thoughts on Strategy for Democratic Party...

  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.

  Specifically, what electorate strategy should the Democratic Party embrace for 2020?

 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?

Here's my premise: Trump won because he energized the turnout among white voters without college degrees. 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.

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.

His base LOVED it.

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.

That's how Trump won...

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.

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 longer from start to finish.)

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.

I can't think of a Republican candidate who those liberal locations would support over the eventual - regardless of who it is - democratic candidate.

The Dems likely already have the college graduate vote...

The Dems likely already have the women's vote...

The Dems likely already have the LGBT vote...

The Dems likely already have the youth vote...

The Dems likely already have the Asian vote...

The Dems likely already have the _________ (fill in the blank) vote...

Get the idea?

Trump has the male, non college graduate vote...

Trump has the evangelical vote...

Trump does well with the over 50 vote...

This sounds overly simplistic, but to me it's clear.

The Democratic Party should employ a 50 state strategy with an emphasis in the rust belt states, (PA, OH, MI, IN, WI, etc...)

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.

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.

It is, in my opinion, not the time for an inexperienced younger person to rocket to the White House.

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.

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.

A Biden / Brown ticket would have plenty of progressive positions and goals to satisfy most special interest groups across the country.

Will this ticket become a reality? The website predictit.org lists Kamala Harris as the best "bet" to win the 2020 Democratic nomination, followed closely by Bernie Sanders, Beto O'Rourke and Joe Biden.

I'll discuss the pros/cons of the above list at a later date...





Monday, November 19, 2018

Welcome to the Dark Ages - Here we go again...

"The Sleep of Reason Brings Forth Monsters"
(Fransisco Goya - est. 1798)
  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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?

  The hypocrisy is too much. It's been taken to a new height and a new low all at the same time.

  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.

  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.

  But it doesn't...

  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.

 When the moment suits you...

  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...)

  A free pass...

  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.

  This POTUS lies to you on a daily basis and like a dog, you lap it up. Every. Single. Time.

  It's pathetic. You've confused love of country with love of party or skin color or a particular faith, etc...

  You. Are. Confused.

  Welcome to the Dark Ages, friends. Hang onto your ass...

Tuesday, November 13, 2018

Fact Check: Did President Obama Throw A Reporter Out Of A Press Conference?

  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.

  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.



Let's clear up a few things...

1) This was not a press conference. The President was there delivering remarks about LGBT Pride Month back in June of 2015...

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,”

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.

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.

5) Here are three different media outlets, the Associated News, the Washington Post, and Snopes:

AP NEWS coverage...

Washington Post coverage...

Snopes coverage...

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.

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.

I'm as guilty as anyone, but every day, I try to fact check stories and claims I see on my social media platforms.

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.




Sunday, November 11, 2018

Donald Trump's Accomplishments: Fact, Fiction or Otherwise?


President Trump was elected President of the United States Two Novembers ago, and what a ride it's been since then.

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.

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.

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.

A week or so ago, a Facebook friend posted the following picture, that he captioned with the following.  "Just facts, not rhetoric."



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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) GDP Growth at 4.2%: It's true the GDP Rate in the United States was, in fact, 4.2% 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 bold claims during his campaign, 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. Misleading at best.

2) Unemployment Rate at 3.7%: It's true that the Country's unemployment rate is 3.7%, 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%. 



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...

3) Record low Black unemployment: It's true that Black unemployment reached an all-time low back in June when it dipped below 7%. That's a good thing, of course. However, similar to overall unemployment, it's important to see the bigger picture. 


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. 

4) Record low Hispanic unemployment: Once more, we see a record low for unemployment related to a particular group. The 4.7% rate of Hispanic unemployment reported in October 2018 is the lowest on record. 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:



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. Fact, but highly rhetorical in nature to the point of being misleading.

5) ISIS decimated: 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. Per Vox, "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." 

Vox continues, however, "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."

“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."

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.

According to the Defense Department's report, upwards of thirty thousand ISIS back fighters were still active in Iraq and Syria. The United Nations report from June 2018, reports the same findings in terms of ISIS manpower in the two countries.

Bottom line: 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." Not a fact...

6) North Korea denuclearizing: 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  - this can't be viewed as a fact. Intentions do not equal results. In time, we'll know more...

7) Improved trade deals: Using the "right-of-center" Forbes Magazine, they break down President Trumps trade deals into three sections. South Korea, China, and the European Union.  

South Korea - A weak arrangement that, in the end, may not even be approved by the South Korean government...

China - 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."

European Union - "Little more than an agreement to talk about talking."

Bottom line: How they are "improved" isn't known yet... so, hardly a fact...

8) American Hostages released: It is a factual statement that "hostages have been released during the Trump presidency." Some higher profile than others, almost 20 Americans were either kidnapped outright or being detained for various reasons and then were released since Trump took office. In the last month, American US Pastor Andrew Brunson was released by Turkey after negotiations with American officials...Yes, a Fact...

9) Improved immigration security: 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. 

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 "We've started building the wall" (April 3rd, 2018, remarks with Baltic leaders), construction on the "wall" has not begun. 

What has happened is the repair and construction of older pieces of the already existing wall and obstructive impediments in Calexico, that were planned as far back as 2009, well before Mr. Trump took office. Congress has appropriated $1.57 million dollars for border security, but that is expressly forbidden to be used for the building of a "new wall." 

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 this one from March of this year, see the violent crime rate from illegal immigrants as "less than" the level Mr. Trump insinuates it is. 

Bottom line: 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 False that Trump has improved immigration security...

10) Cutting aid to hostile nations: 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 to a handful of countries with a mixed reception around the world. 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, it is a fact Trump has cut aid to some nations...

11) Fewer people on food stamps: 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.” It is Fact that a lot of people have left the food stamp program 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. 


Bottom line: Fact, but highly rhetorical in nature to the point of being misleading.

12) Jobs being created: 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. Trump's job growth is running behind 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. Bottom line: Fact, but highly rhetorical in nature to the point of being misleading.

13) Manufacturing resurgence: There seems to be little dispute that U.S. Manufacturing has prospered under the Trump Administration. This chart sums it up very nicely:



There is ample evidence of robust performance indicators within the manufacturing sector. From Zachs .com, "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." 

Bottom Line: Fact

14) Reduced regulation: 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. Bottom line: Fact


Summary: The poster was presented as "Just facts, not rhetoric." 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.

The post itself is certainly not "just facts." I hope readers, as well as the orginal poster, 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.

The more informed we are, the better. Period!


Sources:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/188185/percent-chance-from-preceding-period-in-real-gdp-in-the-us/





















I'm back! Time to get busy!!!


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.

So, a break I took!

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.

There will be so much going on that it will be like trying to drink from a fire hose.

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.

Dear god, how do I sit this one out?

I can't.

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.

(New post on you know who will be out shortly!)

Thanks-

Bill


Tuesday, November 28, 2017

Men sure are having a hard time lately, aren't they?

Harvey Weinstein, famous Hollywood producer...

Mark Halperin, News producer, author and political commentator...

Kevin Spacey, actor in screen and stage productions...

Roy Moore, former Alabama Supreme Court Judge and politician...

Louis C. K., comedian, actor, writer, director, producer...

Al Franken, current Senator from Minnesota, former writer and actor on Saturday Night Live

Glen Thrush, political reporter for the New York Times...

Charlie Rose, television journalist and talk show host...

John Conyers, Congressman from Michigan

Donald J. Trump, Real Estate, businessman, reality TV show host and 45th President of the United States.

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.

If you Google this subject, there's no shortage of things that will come up.

It's a strange 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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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...

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.

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.

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?

Seriously?

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.

While not enough, most guys have been informed of basic rules of a workplace. It's not rocket science. Here are the basics:

Don't touch anybody except to shake hands.
Don't talk about anyone's physical appearance with others.
Meet with clients, associates, etc. in a mostly public place.
Keep the conversation and your language as professional as possible.
Find companionship, sex, etc. somewhere else than work.

It's not that hard...



Thursday, November 9, 2017

A Year Has Passed Since Trump Became President. Some Thoughts...


 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.

 As comedian Lewis Black so often says, "You've got to be shitting me."

 No, this was of course as real as it gets.

Donald Trump won because of a few different reasons.

1) Trump resonated with the blue-collar, lower-income voters that felt left behind by the Democratic Party. 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.

2) Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate. 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.

3) Not enough of us vote. Roughly six in ten of eligible voters bothered to vote, which adds up to a LOT of people not voting. Apathy is not a good strategy to advance the Country in any direction.

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.

None of this is new information and your mileage may vary as to what you think explains best the 2016 election.

I can't pin this all on the Trump effect and neither should you.

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 "The New New Deal" which chronicles the early days of the Obama first term.

As Obama said, “We've always known that lasting change wouldn't come quickly or easily. It never does.” 

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.

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 Politifact's 2013 Lie of the Year.

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.

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.

So, come to the 2016 General Election and who do we see on the right?

Jeb Bush, 
Chris Christie, 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?

They're all career politicians...

Who did we see on the left?

Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Malley were likewise, career politicians in one form or another.

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.

Then there was Trump. NOT a politician.

Hmmmm...

People didn't care he was an asshole.

People didn't care he stiffed any number of contractors and small business along the way.

People didn't care he boasted about his conquests with women.

People didn't care about his divorces.

People didn't care about his very un-presidential tone and demeanor on the campaign trail.

People didn't care about when he claimed John McCain wasn't a true war hero because he had been captured.

People didn't care when he criticized the Gold Star Mother.

People didn't care about his "some very fine people on both sides" comments after Charlottesville...

People didn't care after Trump resurrected the NFL players taking a knee matter, despite a Veteran suggesting to Colin Kaepernick he do so instead of sitting in protest.

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 Politico in a sobering article earlier this week, "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.”

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.

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.

Ted Nugent, Roy Moore and Joe Arpaio are now "in" while thoughtful, creative public servants and dedicated policy wonks are out.

Welcome to the Dark Ages v.2.0...

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.

His reckless and incessant Tweeting of petty, foolish and self-indulgent messages at all hours of the day and night.

His dangerous handling of North Korea.

His inept handling of China.

And of course, his inexplicable relationship with Vladamir Putin and Russia.

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.

This is what happens when, despite all the information we could want at our fingertips, we collectively decide its too hard 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."

This is going to get worse before it gets better.

We deserve Donald J. Trump as our President.

We must do better.

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.

Kasich is a Republican. I used to be a Republican. That doesn't mean he could never advocate for policies I might find acceptable.

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.

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.

As we start Trump's second year in office, I can only imagine where our politics will be a year from now.




Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Why Healthcare is a Right, and is Consistent with our Founding Principles...

Donald J. Trump 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.

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.

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!"

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.

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.

Delivering healthcare is a complicated endeavor under the best of circumstances, and we're not remotely delivering healthcare to anyone in the United States under the "best of circumstances." More on that point later on.

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.

Is health care in the United States of America a right or a privilege?

IN 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.

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.

I think the place to look is in the Declaration of Independence.

Here's the phrase:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. 


You won't find the phrase "healthcare" here either...

However...

"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.

"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.

Life: We have a right to live. I know we still execute people across the United States for various crimes and we're told those people lost 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...)

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.

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.

It doesn't say except for 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."

If we want to say we should apply the Constitution literally, then it has to be a 2 way street.

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. 

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.

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..."

Yes and no...

If a person is in an "emergent condition" the hospital must 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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 


Maybe they were kidding about life being unalienable?


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.

This also makes financial sense...

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....

A look at thirty four other industrialized countries healthcare spending as a percent of their GDP:





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...

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.

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.

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.

Consider...

*The United States has fewer physicians per 1000 (2.6) than the median OECD Country in 2013 (3.2)...

*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.

*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.

*In terms of outcomes...

US life expectancy - 78.8 years
OECD Median  - 81.2 years

US Infant Mortality - 6.1 deaths among 1000 live births (highest among 11 countries studied)
OECD Median IM - 3.5 deaths

Chronic disease prevelance in the US (2 or more chronic conditions) = 68% of adults >65 yrs. old
Other countries in study, figures range from 33% in the UK to 56% in Canada

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.

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...

See the entire study from the Commonwealth Group here...

So...

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."

Bottom line:

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.

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, while 19 have rejected it. 

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.

The above reasons are the foundation of my position as to why healthcare is a right and not a privilege.