Tag Archives: government

207. We Don’t Need a King Trump

25 Mar

0KingTrumpTrump has actually expressed his admiration for dictators, such as those controlling Russia, N. Korea, and Turkey. In an exchange with Joe Scarborough, when told that Putin “kills journalists that don’t agree with him”, he replied that “our country does plenty of killing, too.”

I am seriously concerned that Trump supporters really do not understand why he is a great danger to the US and must not continue as President. Here is a partial list of his worst abuses.

In January of 2020 he disregarded intelligence agencies and highly regarded epidemiologists and ignored the clear dangers of Covid19. This delayed our understanding and actions regarding the disease and probably caused thousands of unnecessary deaths. Testing for the virus was definitely delayed by Trump and his administration. He downplayed the virus so that it would not affect his precious stock market, which helps with his future election. He could have begun working on associated supplies, like protective masks and gloves and equipment like ventilators. He terminated a special White-House group dealing with epidemics. He blamed Obama for having ineffective procedures, when he had three years to correct them.

He left the Paris Climate Accord and ignored the dangers of climate change. He should have worked on our own climate efforts and on supporting valuable research programs. Ultimately, millions of people will die from the resulting hurricanes, fires, floods, droughts, and possible wars.

He withdrew from the Iran Nuclear Deal, which included several major nations, and was preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The deal was working, according those most familiar with it. Now we have no deal, worse relations with Iran, and more potential dangers.

He failed in his dealing with North Korea. He boosted world respect for them and they continue to develop dangerous nuclear missiles. Expressing his “love” for Kim made him look foolish.

He has lost world respect for the US Presidency because of his childish and rude behavior. By breaking several existing international deals, other nations do not trust him. There is also less trust because what he says is often different from staff statements.

Knowledgeable people throughout the world cannot believe what he says because he makes obvious mistakes and lies. Fact-checkers have counted over 16000 “false or misleading claims” during his three years in office. To show that this count is plausible, one can simply read his speeches and note how the “truth” varies from time to time. For example, he made up a story about why he fired FBI Comey, and then three days later gave an entirely different reason. Another lie is the “do-nothing” Democrat congressmen, that, in fact, created hundreds of bills, which were not acted on by the real “do-nothing” Republicans.

He supported Russia in several ways. In one situation he believed what Putin said, instead of what his intelligence agencies stated. He significantly delayed the imposition of Russian sanctions approved by US Congress. His impeachment was based on an action that favored Russia.

He undermined the FBI, intelligence agencies, and other governmental offices, like the Attorney General. He promoted actions that benefited him instead of our country. His A.G. Barr, a yes-man lied in his description of the Mueller Report.

He appointed many Federal Judges that are radically conservative and in many cases, without appropriate qualifications.

He supported tax changes that primarily support already rich people and corporations, while ordinary people got very little and nothing permanent. His financial policies have greatly increased our national debt.

He made a deal with Turkey, which resulted in the deaths and loss of homes for thousands of Kurds. Kurdish soldiers helped the US fight and destroy the Islamic State. This action has led to further distrust of the US in international matters.

Trump was impeached because he pressured Ukraine to help him with his 2020 election. This was harmful to our ally Ukraine in their fight against Russia, and the delay of needed military support was a major setback for them. This increased global distrust of the US.

He hollowed out many US government agencies, such as the State Department. We lost many valuable experts that helped with vital decision making. Trump said he could make the best decisions on his own (with Tweets, of course). Most of his staff and cabinet were chosen on the basis of loyalty and subservience, rather than competence and experience. Many had to resign and many were fired for calling him “moron” or simply disagreeing.

Many immigrants at our Southern US border suffered because of poorly thought-out policies. Disorganization caused children to be separated from parents in a way making reuniting them very difficult, and still is incomplete. In many cases, Trump has rushed to implement policies without considering the negative effects.

Some of his trade policies were OK, but trade deals with China were a disaster for many farmers and others in the US. Some of our farmers were paid by our government for their losses. The total is more than $20-billion per year. Many losses to others are not compensated at all. In January of 2020 he signed an initial trade agreement with China, that includes many uncertainties. As usual, many people have to suffer to satisfy Trumps ego.

Trump has damaged ObamaCare and tried to abolish it without the promised Republican replacement plan. US citizens were saved by one vote, that of Republican John McCain. Trump has falsely claimed that he was preserving the “pre-existing conditions” feature. It seems that McCain is the last Repub with the guts and patriotism to stand up to Trump.

A vote for Trump is support for a government in which all of the above will continue and likely get worse. The tyranny of Trump must be terminated.

205. How Candidates Really Get Elected

28 Feb

Commentators and reporters often make demands of candidates that only serve purposes such as dramatizing and attracting attention. At the same time, I am generally pleased by the way our traditional press and reporters operate. Some self interest is always present, so it is mostly up to the candidates themselves, to stay out of trouble. There are two types of potentially troublesome demands: urging attacks on fellow candidates, and the other is to provide detailed plans. 

Attacks and competition can lower the likely success of all candidates in a party. Providing a lot of details, sometimes is OK, but every detail can cause rejection by a certain segment of the population. For example, I would suggest that those in favor of Medicare-for-all should say something like this: “our general goals are to provide complete low cost and even zero cost, to all citizens. I (the candidate) will work hard towards this goal. And any such legislation brought to me that has the support of Congress and the people, I will sign into law. Healthcare is so complicated and with so many opposing interests, no one person can make final decisions. I will encourage the appropriate Congressional and citizen committees. And of course,  every plan developed will require OMB estimates of cost. A good immediate plan could simply be improvements to ObamaCare, while more comprehensive new plans are gradually implemented.

Traits for a successful candidate. 

The candidate must be likable. Sounds superficial, but very important for votes. This trait answers my title question: “How candidates really get elected.” This factor probably is most important, but some other traits below could be significant.

The candidate must emphasize key issues for voters, like wages, health care, and jobs.

The candidate must have a substantial history of worthy causes and patriotism.

The candidate should be free of scandals and dishonesty. Sometimes this does not matter much. If folks really like you, then these are less important.

The candidate must look and act “presidential.” This means reasonably good looks, and a mostly serious demeanor with only a few humorous exceptions. Sad to say,  superficial features are very important, particularly to less well educated people.

The candidate must answer questions well and have a pleasant voice.

The candidate must demonstrate that he/she has good judgement. This can be demonstrated by how he/she organizes and runs his/her campaign. All his interactions with people should be appropriate.

            A Good Candidate is Not Necessarily a Good President

The characteristics of a good “candidate” are not necessarily the same as a good president. A really good president would have very good analytic abilities. He would be able to understand and deal with very complicated issues. He should have working experience with this type of thinking.  A candidate could do well, even without this ability.

My assessment of the candidates.

When I study the current list of Democrat candidates for president, it appears to me that every major candidate has a significant flaw. First, I want to say that most are very decent people and all would be a great improvement over Trump. Here are the details.

Age is significant. Three contenders if elected, will reach age 80 in their first term in office. Bernie Sanders is the oldest and also the most radical. He has to lose some votes for these two reasons. In his first primary, I voted for him and I respect him a lot, but he is not as sharp as he was previously. Like POTUS, he has a very dedicated following. Billionaire Mike Bloomberg has some serious political problems, but could be a good president. He should be welcomed and respected because he promises a lot of financial support to whoever emerges. He has a lot of relevant experience and can deal with tough problems. Joe Biden (former vice-president) has a lot of support from black people and unequaled amounts of experience. He is likable in many ways and would make a good president. But he has always made “gaffs” and he tends to be even more inconsistent at his current age. I have personal experience with old age and realize the memory, mental capacity, and strength limitations. Ten years ago, all three could have done well in debating Trump.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is very capable and was my favorite for many years. But I and others were disappointed by her nasty attacks of other Democrat candidates. These attacks could be overlooked, but lately she has not pleased the voters enough. She also developed a health care plan that was very expensive — definitely a victim of too much detail in her plans. Also, she is losing some votes to Sanders.

Mayor Pete Buttigieg is highly intelligent, strong, speaks well, and is very young. I think he has the ability to be a great president and could defeat Trump in debates. In my eyes, he has no flaws, but he will lose the redneck votes because of his love preferences. This is a shame because he is a great person.

The other candidates are good people, but so far, at least, have not gotten enough votes. Senator Amy Klobuchar is really outstanding and has the ability to be a great president. Also, she has a good record of electability. Billionaire Tom Steyer has a good recent record of the right values, but so far, not enough votes. I don’t know of any “flaws,” but for one thing, there is a lack of name recognition. There is a small possibility that he could emerge because others have serious flaws. Governor Jay Inslee dropped out, but I viewed him very favorably.

For me, the best choice is not so clear. One problem is that a candidate could do well with Democrat voters, but not so well with the general population (an example is Bernie Sanders). For people like me, it is best to wait and see who is most supported by the voters, before my actual decision.

 

 

202. Deaths and Traffic Lights.

2 Feb

There is an old saying going back decades: A corner only gets a traffic light, when there is a traffic death there. When I think about what is currently happening in our world, this saying comes to mind. In order for certain good things to happen, we need the impetus of a disaster. Many do not address issues, unless they perceive some sort of major risk.  We could say that the enemy of good government is complacency. 

.                        Complacency Leads to Dictatorships

The first application that comes to mind is the 2016 election of Donald Trump. Under past presidents, Republican or Democrat, people were not really alarmed. Of course, there were criticisms and complaints, but generally, most of us went about our business not particularly concerned. After a long period of questionable actions, concern really mounted. In the 2018 elections, Democrats finally became alarmed and massive numbers voted.  In fact the surge also led to an impeachment. Now, we clearly see the need for a “traffic light on the corner.” And, after a little hesitation, I will state that the President’s behavior has been so egregious for years, that even if you think the articles of impeachment are a little weak, they are still justified. I am sure that if the founding fathers were presented with our current facts, they would agree with his removal from office.

For many people, there is a complacency about climate-change. They might even believe the science, but in their narrow world they don’t feel the danger. It’s another variation of the traffic-light dilemma. No traffic light because my life is OK.

The traffic-light principle could also be applied to the errant evolution of the Republican party. It appears that after Trump was nominated, the Party was able to eliminate more responsible and intelligent members, and attract more transactional and financially desperate folks. The Repubs and Dems ignored the dangers and the errant drift was not prevented because there was no dramatic “death,” just a slow almost invisible decline. After the firing of Comey, the problems were more visible and a Special Councel, Mueller, was appointed.

I want to point out that the “traffic-light” effect is very common.  In one of the subdivisions I lived in, a minority faction was elected because the majority of residents, really did not care much. They were only concerned after the minority group did some inappropriate and expensive things for themselves.

I think if you look around the world, you can see how this traffic-light principle has had its effects. In many nations, there is an acceptance of government for a long time, and change (often bloody) only occurs at some breaking point. I think many of the “Arab Spring” nations went through such a transition.  In Russia, the initial effects of Putin’s leadership were beneficial. And so the population just did not get very alarmed about Putin’s gradual transition to autocracy. Hopefully, some day they will be able to put in the “traffic light.”

 

 

 

199. Trumps international Assassination Policy

4 Jan

00Soleimani-General-Iran

Major General Q. Soleimani of Iran was assassinated by order of our President Trump on January 3, 2020. This General was commander of the Quds Force, a division responsible for various operations include clandestine. Our Secretary of State claimed that the General  was plotting  actions “that would have put dozens, if not hundreds of American lives at risk.” Critics state that the consequences, retaliations, of this assassination will be more harmful than the benefits.

The benefits of this action are claimed to be American lives that will be saved. Trump pointed out that General Soleimani “has killed or wounded thousands of Americans over an extended period of time, and was plotting to kill many more.” He ordered the death “to stop a war and not to start one.” Our military blamed Soleimani for recent attacks on our bases in Iraq, which resulted in the death of a US contractor and some Iraqi personnel. Also, he was blamed for the attacks by protestors on the US Embassy in Baghdad. The Trump administration provided no details on potential attacks by Iran on our people.

The most important criticism for this assassination is that killing this popular General will elevate the US – Iran conflict, moving us closer to war. Severe retaliations have been threatened. Here are other considerations.

Killing one official does not change a governments goals or policies. There always are others that can take over. An “imminent” Iranian attack would already be planned and could be executed by other military officers.

Trump acted alone, ignoring Congressional leaders, which would usually participate in major decisions. Also, as a general rule, any serious attack would be more acceptable if our allies were consulted in advance. Our role in international conflicts, is always more justified if we work with other nations. Our previous Presidents always worked with others.

The assassination of a government official in a major nation is a serious and unusual act. History tells us that this is only done when an actual established “war” is in effect, or the terrorist is not in government. It is a real break of international tradition, to assassinate foreign leaders; and it makes no sense if you want to do valid negotiations.

I suspect that Trump ordered this radical action, more for his personal benefit than for our country.  So far, the effect is more troops in foreign countries and the disruption of many lives, mostly due to evacuations. More of our soldiers will be exposed to dangers.

 

 

 

 

 

198. The Democratic Presidential Candidates

1 Jan

CandidatesDebatePic3Here are my thoughts about the Democrat candidates for President. I have included all those doing well in the polls and a few others that I think are notable.   The ages shown are as of Election day 2020.  Source for the ages and titles is: Jim Geraghty, National Rev, Feb 1, 2019.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, 79, I have always liked Bernie, he is a proven patriot and established progressive. Would make a good president, but is really too old for the stresses. For most of his first term, he would be in his 80′s.  After 80 there can be serious losses of memory and other mental capacity.

Former NY Mayor Mike Bloomberg, 78, a decent and experienced man, but not likely to get enough votes.

Former Vice Pres. Joe Biden, 77. I have always respected Biden, but never thought he had the speaking ability to be a great president. He would not be my first choice, for one thing, he is too old to be optimal. However, if nominated or the best choice for beating Trump, I would certainly support him. He could gather a set of top experts that would help him to do well in office.

Mass. Senator Elizabeth Warren, 71. I have followed her career for a long time and know her to be patriotic and a supporter of the people. She really could drain the swamp, which is much worse than most know. I like “Medicare for all,” but she may have pushed this too hard. If elected, she might be able to do more for the middle class, and for our country, than any of the others.

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, 69 I was disappointed when he dropped out early. He pushed climate-change programs long before it was so popular. He appears to be a very competent governor and so far, has no negatives. My studies of his record as governor would suggest a good choice.

Democrat Activist Tom Steyer, 63, has $1.6 billion. Around 2011 he started an interest in politics and liberal causes. He launched a group “NextGen America.”  He is a Democrat, and supports progressive positions: climate, immigration, healthcare, and education. Mostly, he was an investor, but for the last eight years, has worked hard for the people. I know of no negatives and he could be a good choice.

Minn. Senator Amy Klobuchar, 60. This lady has a great record of winning elections and speaks exceptionally well. I am impressed by her intelligence and ability to answer difficult questions.  She could be the best President if elected, but may not be the best candidate. I think that some people would say that she does not have a presidential charisma, on-the-other-hand, she wins elections. I would be happy with her election.

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, 59, is not likely to be nominated, as of today.

California Senator Kamala Harris, 56, is younger and strong. I think she lost some support because sometimes she did not express herself well. Could be very good in 2024.

Colorado Senator Michael Bennet, 55. Not well known, but could emerge.

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, 51. He is strong and has good ideas, but does not seem likely to get enough votes.

Entrepreneur   Andrew Yang, 45has proposed a number of unusual far left plans, such as a “Universal Basic Income” of $1000 per month. He is intelligent and answers questions well, but probably too radical for many voters.

Cal. Congressman Eric Swalwell, 40, dropped out early. He is comparatively young, but has considerable strength, speaking ability and charisma. Could be a choice for Veep, or may be great for the 2024 election. He could develop into a top leader.

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, 38, makes a great impression because of his high intelligence and great speaking ability. He seems to have a good understanding of the main governmental issues. Could be a great president if elected. For some, however, may not have enough presidential charisma. An asset is his good record in the military. If nominated, I suspect he could do well in debating Trump.

So, who do I think is the best candidate? For a while, it was Eliz Warren. Now what I see is that each of the top contenders has certain compelling elements, and for me it is hard to pick out one. I think I will have to go with whoever gets the most votes in the primaries. Most important, as many others think, is beating Trump.

 

194. Increasing Dangers Force Speedy Impeachment

8 Dec

As I am writing this, I heard on the TV that someone who appears unqualified has been confirmed (for life) as a Federal Judge. She is Allison Rushing, a young 37, and a lawyer with almost no trial experience. Trump has already appointed 158 judges to the Federal bench. He and Mitch McConnell are a dangerous team that is gradually moving our country towards ruin, in several ways.  The appointment of extreme conservative federal judges and/or unqualified judges will continue as long as Trump is in office. Below I list many other dangers for our country that worsen almost every day.

1. A foreign policy that rejects our relations with traditional democratic allies in favor of traditional enemies such as Russia. The USA has enjoyed beneficial relationships for decades with: the UK, France, Germany, the E.U., Spain, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, etc. Trump has warm relationships with Russia, N. Korea, and Turkey and says he admires their ability to control the citizens. He thinks like an autocrat and enjoys that type of company, while rejecting those most supportive of democracy.

2. Russia continues to develop methods of influencing our elections. Trump has received help from Russia, and has done very little in protecting our election process. We need a President that will address this issue.

3. Under Trump we are quickly moving towards even more serious climate problems, which he ignores. Under Pres. Obama, the US provided valuable international leadership in this area and support for relevant scientific research. The sooner Trump leaves office, the sooner we can work on these problems. In general, Trump has discouraged competent scientists so that other countries will exceed us in valuable tech and science projects.

4. Trumps new tariff policy has basically been neutral in terms of money brought in and money paid out to farmers that have lost business. However, when US importers must pay for the new tariffs, they must pass the cost to retailers, so in some areas, our citizens will be paying higher prices. Also, some manufacturers have lost business because of retaliatory tariffs by China and elsewhere. So the bottom line is that Trump tariffs have been mostly negative, producing higher prices, causing some businesses to suffer, and harming our allies. Trump failed in coercing China because he did not work with allies. For more info, see, for example, (search) NPR’s “Trump’s Tariff Bounty” article.

5. Foreign nations no longer respect the USA under Trump leadership. Many of our usual supportive nations are starting to look to China or Russia for leadership. Trumps own words are often inconsistent and may differ from statements by his staff.

6. Trump favors torture. Ronald Reagan and most other Presidents were against it. Trump supports cruel immigration programs for our Southern border and has terminated the humanitarian DACA program. He has ruined the careers of many associates because they spoke the truth about his policies.

7. Trump has undermined important federal agencies such as the FBI and CIA. In one situation, he favored Putin’s word over that of our intelligence agencies.

8. Trump has gutted major government departments, such as State and Education. He makes important decisions without expert help and often finds it necessary to cancel his orders. Generally, foreign nations no longer trust him.

9. Trump is destroying government safeguards considered vital by the founding fathers. He ignores oversight procedures by Congress and claims total power under Article 2 of the Constitution. His attacks on the “press” also suppress a most important democracy safeguard.

There are many other dangers, and of course, several books have been written about this. Fortunately, Nancy Pelosi, has recently stepped up and forcefully supported the impeachment process. If you look at all of the people and institutions that “hate” him you have to ask: is he really doing the right thing? Is everyone in the US so shallow, that they can only think in terms of who they “like” or “dislike” — instead of what is patriotic, or lawful, or well thought-out?

192. Impeachment: List All Clear Violations

16 Nov

In the articles of impeachment currently being developed, it is important to list everything convincing and with clear evidence! Anything not listed will be assumed by Republicans and others to be OK. It is not just one thing that makes impeachment urgent, it is widespread criminality. Listed below are my suggestions.

Bribery: Trump delayed release of $391 million in vital support to Ukraine, in exchange for Pres. Zelensky making a public announcement of a Biden investigation.  This is a clear deal (quid pro quo) with a foreign country. The Zelensky public announcement  was actually scheduled, but cancelled when the military aid was released as a result of investigations. Delay of this aid is likely responsible for military deaths.

Obstruction of Justice. In the articles, I would include the clearest obstructions of justice listed in the Mueller Report.

Obstructions of Congress.  List all orders by Trump to ignore subpoenas and requests for documents. Include requests for information sent to Trump.

Also consider witness tampering, failure to divest his businesses, possible treason in his support of national enemies and ignoring election violations, undermining agencies like the FBI and the DOJ, and violations of the US Constitution. I repeat, only include clear and convincing items with evidence.

The bottom line is: the major reason for impeachment is not just any one incident, but it is widespread Trump-administration criminality, including many criminal staff.  Also consider that if one item is rejected by the Senate, there are others that may be accepted. The more articles presented, the greater the chance of something being approved.  Impeachment, even without conviction, is so important, because it tells the world that this president does not represent the majority of our country.