No RSVP Needed

I have always thought of voter registration as an RSVP to our country's invitation to participate in the political system and perhaps join a party. From the passage of the Voter Rights act of 1965 until just recently I thought people who did not register to vote were people who did not pay enough attention to make informed decisions anyhow. I suppose my opinion was akin to the fear some of our founding fathers expressed in regard to the passions and prejudices of the great unwashed. The appeal of Donald Trump and the results of the last two mid term elections seem to justify my snobbery and the low opinion some of our founding fathers had of the masses. But not so fast!

The polls show that only around 25% of likely Republican voters favor Donald Trump, and that the voter turn out was incredibly low in the last two mid-term elections. In other words, it was not the passions of the majority (or the masses) that decided those elections; rather those elections were decided by the passion of a minority that is all too vulnerable to the fear mongering and demagoguery of someone like Trump. It is little wonder that the Republicans are passing voter suppression laws. When the turn out is high, as it was in the last two presidential elections, the Republicans lose. But that is beside the point. This is a matter of fairness and irrefutable logic. By definition, you cannot have a democracy and voter suppression at the same time. In other words, the Republicans have now changed the choice from Republicans v. Democrats to Republicans v. Democracy.

It is the gutting of the voter rights act and the voter suppression laws that now make me favor the universal and automatic registration of all U.S. Citizens as qualified voters. No RSVP necessary. All citizens should be invited and all should be encouraged to participate.  No political party should be allowed to pervert the system!

Feeding The Beastly Media

On Alex Witt's show today John Nichols of The Nation said: The presidential race begins earlier all the time. Once the race begins the news media focuses in on it and starts grasping for things to report about it.  Mr. Nichols said that one of the big differences between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton is that Trump, the ultimate huckster, understands the need to draw an audience both for the media and for himself. And he (Trump) responds to that need by feeding the media daily. In other words, Trump draws the marks to the pitchmen or pitch-women who pay for the audience. Hillary, as Nichols says, is too cautious and distrusting to do this.

Let me throw in my own two cents here. Hillary Clinton knows that getting elected is only part of what a politician must do; the other part is doing the job you were elected to perform. Furthermore, she is smart enough to know that the news media is loyal to the purveyors of soap and beer rather than the purveyors of reason and sound policies. Reason and sound policies do not draw large audiences!  Sensation is what is needed to draw the large audiences the sponsors demand!  Trump can provide the sensation because he is not worried about it biting him in the ass later; whereas Hillary thinks such a bite would make her new office chair too uncomfortable. Unfortunately for Hillary, lurid accusations about her e-mails are sensational, whereas rational explanations refuting the absurd accusations are not. Thus we have the media salivating over Republicans who are demonstrating all the cerebral synapses of an amoeba by insisting that more of Hillary's lies about the content of her e-mails are coming out every day. When asked what evidence the Republicans have to support that statement they point to disputed classifications, or classifications that were made long after the e-mails were sent or received, or they say Hillary deleted the evidence! When it was pointed out that Colin Powell used his private e-mail account one Republican liar on Alex Witt's show actually insulted the intelligence of Alex's audience by saying, “Yes, but his e-mails did not include any classified material.” Someone should have asked this moron how he knew that, and how he was going to prove it since Mr. Powell also wiped his e-mail server clean!

News Flash For The Lame Stream Media: just because unconscionably vicious Republicans and right wing character assassins say something is a scandal does not mean there are any grounds for calling it a scandal! Try doing your job as journalists and do a little questioning and digging.

The difference between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party today is the difference between intellect and emotion. The Republicans are so devoid of any positive policies that all they have to sell is fear and loathing! As Mr. Nichols said, the pundits should be cautious about comparing the appeal of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. They should be aware that although both men are drawing followers who feel disaffected, Bernie's followers actually care about the issues. They, Bernie's followers, want to repair the system in much the same way as the New Dealers did. Trump's followers are not that bright or knowledgeable; they actually believe government is the problem! Smash it, they say. It is all about anger; Trump's followers want someone who will smash it!

Reform To Crush Us

The initiative process in California was supposed to be a reform; instead it was and is a piece of progressive legislation gone wrong. It is a rare California ballet that does not contain at least one outrageous initiative put forward by greedy plutocrats who are trying to demagogue their way to even greater wealth and power at your expense (see “Who Runs The State,” posted here on 5/11/2010). Hold your nose ladies and gentlemen because the latest example of this is a crap cake the Greedy Old Plutocrats are cooking up in every state. Although most states do not provide the greedy plutocrats with an oven that is as convenient as the California initiative, the Union Busting recipe is the same everywhere, and the finished product is always toxic to working men and women!

Everyone should read “Are Unions An Us Or A Them” by Dave Johnson, 8/14/ 2015, Campaign for America's Future.  And I mean everyone, whether you are a Californian or not! 

Mr. Johnson's warning about what happens to wages and the middle class when unions are destroyed is accurate.  His description of the divide and conquer tactics used against the working people of this country is also correct. As he wrote:

“If they [the billionaires and giant corporations] can get people to believe that unions are about some separate, distant 'them' instead of 'we' and 'us,' they can turn some working people against other working people, and keep them from realizing this is why everyone’s wages and living standards are under such stress. ...Don’t let yourself be divided by 'us vs. them' arguments. The reality is that when unions are strong, everyone benefits — union member or not.” 

Mr. Johnson includes charts that illustrate the difference unions make in everyone’s pay.  As usual, what the Greedy Old Plutocrats are trying to peddle as reform will crush us!

On the subject of divide and conquer see also Wage Laborer

Note To Senator Schumer

Please engage your mind and disengage your lips from Prime Minister Netanyahu's butt! Even a very large number of Israelis will tell you there is no viable alternative to the workable agreement Secretary of State Kerry negotiated with Iran. Netanyahu wrongly interferes with our domestic politics, and he wrongly opposes the pending agreement with Iran. You do not have to support Netanyahu in order to support Israel. In fact you will be doing Israel and the rest of the world a favor if you support the agreement with Iran and reject Mr. Netanyahu's opposition.

You well know that the rest of the world will not keep the sanctions against Iran in place if we back away from this deal. The only way to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon at that point will be war. Only jingoistic simpletons (mainly Republicans and very hard line Israelis) favor Mr. Netanyahu's war! Rational people realize that the cost of such a war will be high, and that it cannot be called a defensive war if we reject reasonable alternatives.

Do not cower in fear over what you think the Israeli lobby will do!  Have the courage to stand up for what is right and avoid what could be a disastrous war.  Opposing Netanyahu's war is in Israel's best interest, and it is not the same as interfering with Israel's domestic politics.  A good ally will tell you when you are wrong.  Let your constituents know you will continue to support Israel, but that we Americans must and will use our best judgment (for our own sake and Israel's) when it comes to our domestic politics and when it comes to dealing with Iran.

Still Republicans

Donald Trump is not the only one who has declared bankruptcy four times. The Republican Party has been declaring moral and intellectual bankruptcy every two years for at least the last twenty years or so. Needless to say that the title of this post is not a complement. The latest dog and pony shows, mistakenly called debates, have not done anything to improve the unfavorable image of the Republican Party either.

I purposely avoided the food fight I expected at the kiddie table. Apparently I am not the only one. All the pundits commented on the empty room in which this so called debate took place. The pundits also reminded me of how easy it is to impress them. Many of them were actually touting the performance of Carly Fiorina! Apparently this former business women, who was forced to resign her position as CEO of Hewlett Packard, opened up her ALEC talking points book, then beat the Benghazi and Hillary e-mail drums while dumping on Planned Parenthood. Judging by the highlights shown and the interview she gave afterwards, her performance was a one person band act that made me proud of my fellow Californians for rejecting Ms. Fiorina in favor of Senator Boxer in 2010. If her act was the most impressive thing taking place at the kiddie table I am glad I did not subject myself to the entire ordeal.

I ate an early dinner rather than watching that first debate. Then I set a glass of water and some anti-nausea medication on the end table next to me, just in case the bullshit factor triggered my gag reflex, and I tuned in to what was supposed to be the adult debate. Although I was not naive enough think that the Greedy Old Plutocrats would treat us to the lowlife drollery of 2011, I did expect the less than august cast of characters to provide at least a few entertaining lowlights. I have to admit that I was a bit disappointed in that regard. Part of what made the Republican debates of 2011-2012 so revealing and so embarrassing was the reaction of audiences who represented the Republican base or, as I would say, the base Republicans. This time the Republicans and Fox made an effort to prevent reprehensible spectacles such as the audience cheering when the number of people executed by Texas was announced or booing a decorated soldier because he talked about being gay.

Surprisingly, at least to me, Fox News actually handled the debates with a degree of competence I did not know they possessed. As Jeremy Peters wrote in New York Times,  “This was an opportunity [for Chris Wallace, Megyn Kelly, and Bret Baier] to demonstrate that their network is not, as its critics have charged, a blindly loyal propaganda division of the Republican Party, that Fox journalists can be as unsparing toward conservatives as they are with liberals, and that they can eviscerate with equal opportunity if they choose."  Not that this diminished to any great extent the role Fox still plays as the right wing, Republican, propaganda tool.

I do not think I have to tell you the Republican establishment really wants to get rid of that loose Trump cannon, and Donald Trump was asked some questions he certainly considered harsh:

Hand up; Fire at will! The Donald raised his hand when Bret Baier asked for a show of hands from anyone here “..who is unwilling tonight to pledge your support to the eventual nominee of the Republican Party and pledge to not run an independent campaign against that person?” Showing his hand brought some boos and criticisms framed as follow up questions. Megan Kelly added to Trump's discomfort by asking him when he become a Republican, and she followed up by generally questioning his bona fides in regard to the issues important to the Republican base. In fact, I think Megyn Kelly's questions were the most damaging to Trump. I particularly liked it when she asked him about calling women he did not like “fat, pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals.” I think her questions regarding his derogatory comments about women were particularly devastating at a time when Republicans are being rightly accused of conducting a war on women. The next most damaging were Chris Wallace's questions and exchanges with Trump over Trump's bankruptcies. Mr. Trump defended the bankruptcies as good business decisions that merely took advantage of the bankruptcy laws. But Mr. Wallace described “how lenders to Mr. Trump’s company had lost more than $1 billion and 1,100 people had been laid off “ during Trumps latest Bankruptcy. I cannot tell you how Republicans react to such things, but I can tell you independents and Democrats take a dim view of you screwing your employees and your creditors. Can you say out of touch?

Much to the credit of the moderators, Trump was not the only one who was asked difficult questions. Chris Christie was asked about New Jersey's downgraded credit rating, and Scott Walker was asked about his extreme position on abortions. Most of the candidates were also asked questions about immigration. What bothered me is that none of the candidates had the moral courage to confront Trump about his absurd accusation that the Mexican Government is sending its criminals across the border. This lack of moral courage also extends to John Kasich and Jeb Bush, even though both of those gentlemen tried to make nice with Hispanic voters.

Now I have to comment on the pundits again. In spite of the drama the pundits want to stir up to draw an audience, I do not think there are winners to such debates. Most people will say the winner was the candidate they favored going into the debate. So there are only losers who tripped all over them selves or candidates who did well enough to please their supporters. The Democratic pundits thought Kasich and Rubio did well. But here is the problem: none of the candidates had to answer questions about racial issues, voter suppression, or economic policies. If Marco Rubio had to answer economic policy questions he would have to reveal once more that he wants to take us into the future with the failed policies of the past, and Kasich is not much better. I might add here that none of the Republican candidates can widen the Republican base and still win the primary elections.  Stay tuned in there is more to follow!