Trump's Latino Pressure Cooker

I am writing this entry because I am seeing something I have never before seen in 78 years, and I think it important.  My vantage point is Oakland, California, and that makes all the difference in what I am about to explain.

First, you need to know more about the setting.  California's ethnic composition recently shifted. Whites are no longer the largest ethnic group of citizens.  There are now 14.99 million Latinos in California, and 14.92 million whites.

Trump's comments about Mexicans didn't sit well with the Hispanic community.  Furthermore, I have never before seen such ardent opposition to a President-Elerct as what I am seeing now among whites.

The State Legislature of California is working on a bill that should be passed very shortly and which rules that except in cases of serious crime such as murder or assault or robbery, etc., State officials are forbidden to cooperate with any federal agents over any immigrant or immigration issues.  It should pass within a few days.  San Francisco is reaffirming its position as a "sanctuary city," and so is Oakland.  I know personally that in Oakland, the schools do not pass around any immigration information about students.  At least 15% of them, by a recent estimate, are "illegals."  And if you want to hire a day laborer in this city, there are several places where you can go, meet potential workers, strike up a bargain with them, and bring them home to do work on one's premises.

Understand the sort of issu that we are dealing with here.  We are not dealing with whether or not the President should add another 500 square miles to a marine sanctury, or wether street repairs should be given a higher financial priority than new parking meters, or whether ten new building inspectors should be hired to make certain buildings meet the City code.  From the immigrant point of view, we are dealing with a situation that threatens their families and their very existence.

If some of your family members arrived here without documentation and their children were born here as legal American citizens, would you be willing to accept a situation in which your very family's cohesion was threatened ?  What would you do if your family were threatened ?  What would millions of people in the same class do if they were in the same situation ?  What would set up a mass revolt ?  How many millions of people would it take to be effective ?

Call in the National Guard?  How many millions of them were and are law-abiding citizens who do not want to see their communities torn apart ?  Would they (and should they) all follow orders ?

Let us consider the case of the young man who heard the false news about Hillary being involved in some kind of porn business out of a pizza parlor, and who brought a gun to the scene to "fix" the situation.  Are there any unbalanced Hispanics out there who might do something similar to try to remedy Trump's inhumane and insane immigration policy ?  It only takes one out of a group of people feeling their families and communities are in danger, or out of 15 million or more whites who feel a keen sense of injustice, to attempt something insane and terrible.

We are sitting oin a pressure cooker, and Trump is turning up the heat.

A Fascinating, New Political Book

I want to pass on a recommendation of a relatively new book. It is called “Dark Money.” The author, Jane Mayer, describes the extensive activities of the Koch Brothers in propagandizing right-wing points of view that benefited them financially.

The book started out as an article or two that appeared in The New Yorker Magazine. In case you are unfamiliar with the policies of The New Yorker Magazine, they are known for perhaps the most careful and strict fact checking in the publishing business. It is also a sure thing that the publisher of this book, Doubleday, did their own fact checking and consulted carefully with lawyers before issuing this work.

Mayer discovered after her New Yorker article that she was being investigated by a private detective to see if he could find anything detrimental about her (he couldn't), and was also accused of plagiarizing from the works of a number of authors. A check with the authors revealed that not a one of them felt she had plagiarized from them.

The book is strictly factual, without hysterical emotion. It simply states that this happened, that happened, so and so paid for such and such a thing, and so on. I saw her interviewed by two different people, and in each interview she was strictly factual, not at all emotional.

If you want to learn how many people in this country have had their political views pushed to the right, read this book.  

It Has Been a Bad Week for Conservatives

It's been a bad week for conservatives, hasn't it ? 

First we have the Pope recognizing that climate change is real and is a serious threat – and telling this to 1.2 BILLION people, many of whom, though undecided in the past, will now accept his point of view. 

Then we have that pesky Supreme Court. First they rejected the attempt to eviscerate ObamaCare – a loss they should celebrate because if they had won they would definitely have lost the 2016 election. And then this terrible, terrible decision making it legal for people to marry anyone they want to marry, no matter what their sex. Conservatives have long claimed that legalizing marriage between same sex couples threatens normal heterosexual marriage, though no conservative yet has come up with a convincing argument explaining why this is so. It's just the natural conservative impulse to want to run people's lives under the banner of “freedom.”

The long-term trend in history is one of liberal ideology becoming stronger and stronger. The very establishment of this nation is one example. The advance of women's rights, the legalization of unions, the advance of civil rights, the establishment of social security, the establishment of Medicare and ObamaCare demonstrate this. Eventually, liberalism wins.

Yes, there are occasional bumps in the road. The Supreme Court decision to award the Presidency to George W. Bush was one. But we survived it. We didn't have a revolution, though most liberals thought the Court's decision was politically motivated. The fabric of our government held. 

Liberal progress will continue. And because of this we'll have a better world .

Romney was trying to sell a lot of snake oil in his debate with the President.  Here's a great example:

He absolutely insists that he has no plan to raise taxes.  However, one of his aims that he has repeatedly stated over the last few months is that he is going to close loopholes and deductions.  One of the loopholes he has said he wants to eliminate is the mortgage interest deduction, in which someone buying a house can deduct the cost of his mortgage interest from the calculation of his income.  He wants to end this practice.

Let's do some calculations.

If you are paying $1,000/month in mortgage interest -- and I bet this is a low amount for most Americans -- you don't get to deduct 12 (months) x $1,000 from your reported income.  If you still manage to stay within the 15% tax bracket, your paper income increases by $12,000 and you are taxed an additional 12 x $1,000 x 15% = $1,800.  It doesn't matter if Romney keeps your tax rate the same.  He is now forcing you to be taxed on a greater amount.  Who cares whether it is called a tax or what ?  A greater amount still has to come out of your pocket.

"I don't care," you say.  "I rent my house,"  So your landlord has to pay more, and he will simply increase your rent to cover that cost increase.

Romney snake oil.

Solving California's Fiscal Crisis

I don't pretend to know how to completely solve California's fiscal crisis, but we know one step that could be taken to help the process. Examine every lifer in tyhe California prison system for possible parole, and give the deserving ones their freedom. A lot of them deserve it.

This isn't an idle, uninformed comment. I spent full-time for six months reading parole hearing transcripts and other official documents relating to the Board's activities and what I found made me think of Alice in Wonderland. In the end, I wropte a 12-page friend of the court brief proving beyond any doubt that the members of the Board were not doing their legislatively-mandated task, actually considering whether or not inmates deserved parole. It became clear that the Board had been instructed by Governor Gray not to grant parole except in certain cases -- when the applicant was a friend of a well-connected Republican, or was an ex-lawman.

At the time, the victims of crime were a strong lobby with the Prison Guard's Union.  The San Francisco Chronicle once called the union "The Invisible Government."  Their greed has costs the taxpayers of the State of California billions of dollars, and if their wings could be trimmed, this would help bring the California budget under control.

Has you read the article in the latest issue of Harper's Magazine called, "Why Vote ?"  It is subtitled. "When Your Vote Counts for Nothing"  and is by Kevin Baker.  I quote the opening paragraph here:

"The heroic narrative of modern society has always been that democracy would prevail in the end.  We believe that democracy somehow has an infinite resilience, that it is a bottomless reserve capable of being tapped whenever necessary, that in times of crisis not only will great men be recognized, called forth, and elected to office but that we,the people will rise to the occasion when required to do so. We have long counted on democracy to be the safety brake on our worst impulses, to be the countervailing force against fanatical ideologies, to serve as a check on the routine excesses of capitalism.  But we can no longer count on democracy as some sort of natural force or secret weapon, for today it has been turned against us, its very institutions now reinforcing the triumph of money and fueling the growth of nihilistic and antidemocratic movements."

I urge you to read it.    Whether you support Obama or (God forbid) Romney, you will agree with much that Baker has written.     See Harper's Magazine, October 2012

Sarah has been around long enough to have established record of behavior.

My take on Palin comes from what I have seen and also from facts that I believe are true.

First, she is a shrewd person. I think she has considerable intelligence, particularly in how to manipulate and maneuver. If the saying is correct that what a man believes can be determined not by what he says but by what he does, we can determine certain of her values. Note that after she emerged from obscurity thanks to McCain, halfway through her term as governor she quit, and then went on the lecture circuit where she cleaned up in speaker's and appearance fees. This is a woman who knows how the financial cookie crumbles, and who values her own personal financial gain over commitment and public service. Her behavior shows that.

That she can be quixotic in her behavior can be seen by her educational record, where she shifted around from college to college for a number of petty reasons (she said she left the University of Hawaii because she didn't like the weather). This kind of erratic behavior reveals something important about her.

I was in Ivory Coast, West Africa, leading up to and including the night of Obama's election. For weeks up to McCain's loss, she always appeared holding her retarded baby, trying to demonstrate what a devoted mother she is. However, the kid practically disappeared after McCain's loss when his appearance could no longer garner her sympathy votes. Have you seen him lately ? I haven't. The devotion was evidently short-lived, lasting less than the span of an election

Sarah's defining moment, however, and one we should all remember despite her cagey and manipulative winks, came when Katie C was interviewing her as they walked along. Katie asked her what she read, thinking this would give us a better grasp of her interests. Remember the minute of stunned silence in which she could not give an answer ? This told me everything I needed to know about whether she was qualified to be vice president or president.

Regrettably I am reminded by her actions and by her family of a term I think accurately describes the bunch of them: "White trash."

Here is a list of five lies that Paul Ryan told when he gave his speech at the Republican National Convention last night. Every single news outlet should report on these lies.

1. Lie: President Obama is the "greatest threat" to Medicare.

Truth: Obama didn't make any cuts to Medicare benefits; he made cuts to provider reimbursements, to improve cost efficiency and extend the fiscal security of Medicare by eight years. According to the Medicare actuary, "[Obama's] Affordable Care Act makes important changes to the Medicare program and substantially improves its financial outlook."¹

But Ryan actually does want to cut benefits. He proposed dismantling Medicare and replacing it with a voucher system, leaving millions of seniors to come up with more money to pay for care out of pocket.^2,3

2. Lie: President Obama didn't save a General Motors plant in Wisconsin.

Truth: First, Obama wasn't even in office when the GM plant closed. Second, Obama never made a promise to save it.⁴

3. Lie: President Obama ignored recommendations of a bipartisan debt commission.

Truth: Paul Ryan actually sat on that commission. And he led Republicans in voting down the commission's own recommendation. So the commission never gave a report to Obama, because Ryan himself voted to kill the report before it could.⁵

4. Lie: President Obama is responsible for the downgrading of the U.S. Credit Rating

Truth: House Republicans, including Paul Ryan, held the full faith and credit of the United States hostage to try to ransom it for trillions of dollars in cuts to social programs without increasing taxes on the wealthy one dime. Standard & Poors said specifically, "We have changed our assumption on [revenue] because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues." That's why our nation's credit rating was downgraded.^6,7

5. Lie: Ryan wants to protect the "weak."

Truth: Ryan's biggest feat in his political career was proposing a budget with dramatic cuts to programs benefiting the poor. He'd cut Medicaid by one third, take away health care insurance from 30 million Americans, and cut Pell Grants for 1 million students. All so that he could give more tax breaks to the rich.⁸

About Republicans

One afternoon a Republican was riding in his limousine when he saw two men along the roadside eating grass.

Disturbed, he ordered his driver to stop and he got out to investigate. He asked one man, 'Why are you eating grass?'

'We don't have any money for food,' the poor man replied. 'We have to eat grass.'
'Well, then, you can come with me to my house and I'll feed you,' the Republican said.

'But sir, I have a wife and two children with me. They are over there, under that tree.'

'Bring them along,' the Republican replied.
Turning to the other poor man he stated, 'You come with us, also..'

The second man, in a pitiful voice, then said, 'But sir, I also have a wife and SIX children with me!'

'Bring them all, as well,' the Republican answered
They all entered the car, which was no easy task, even for a car as large as the limousine was.

Once underway, one of the poor fellows turned to the Republican and said, 'Sir, you are too kind. Thank you for taking all of us with you.'

The Republican replied, 'Glad to do it. You'll really love my place. The grass is almost a foot high.'

Stating Facts, Not Lies

We need to state over and over again an economic fact that Republicans are trying to cover up. Whren President Clinton left office, this country had a budget surplus. When George W. Bush left office, we were so deeply in the hole financially that we could not accurately estimate how bad the situation really was. The Republican party tries to portray itself as being fiscally responsible. They are not. Their performance has proven the opposite. Don't forget this when election time arrives.

Inhofe, C Street, Ivory Coast, and Washington Intrigue

A little research may have revealed James Inhofe's reason for disapproving of President Obama's reception of President Outtara, the recently and fairly elected President of Cote d'Ivoire. At first we thought maybe there was some kind of financial payoff, direct or indirect, involved. We haven't ruled that out. However, we think we have discovered another possible reason for Inhofe's approval of the ex-president of Ivory Coast and for his disapproval of Cote d'Ivoire's President Outtara.

Inhofe was and may still be a resident of the notorious C Street residence, home of a Christian fundamentalist sect with numerous residents including U. S. senators. The C Street residents represent a powerful lobbying organization not registered as one, and thus escaping laws relating to lobbyists. You can read about C Street and its residents at http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/07/21/c_street Inhofe's C Street connection is old news.

But because Outtara, the duly-elected President of Ivory Coast, is a Muslim, this probably explaions some if not all of Inhofe's antipathy towards him.


Ex-President Gabagbo is a Christian. (Never mind that his refusal to step down has cost more than 3,000 Ivoirians their lives.) Outtara is a Muslim.

Senator Inhofe, Outtara, Gabagbo, and the Ivory Coast

On the website NewsOK.com, I came across an article about Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma who criticises President Obama for receiving the new President of the Ivory Coast, President Outtara.

Now wait a minute. What is a patriotic, flag-waving Senator like Inhofe (which is the way he customarily presents himself) doing criticizing this visit ? It isn't as though Ivory Coast is a strategic ally, unless you eat chocolate. (Ivory Coast produces up to 50% of the world's chocolate supply.)

The November elections in Ivory Coast (Cote d'Ivoire) were honestly won by Outtara. The margin wasn't narrow. The elections were observed by a number of respected international organizations and were pronounced by them to have been honest and fair. Problems arose when the election's loser, Gabagbo, refused to step down. He was buddies with the head of the army and the head of the police, who at least for a while remained loyal to him. Outtara was forced to hole up in a hotel guarded by United Nation troops in case Gabagbo's forces tried to assassinate him. In the nation's ensuing unrest and disarray, Gabagbo's refusal to step down resulted in the deaths of at least 3,000 Ivoirians.

Yet despite all credible evidence, Inhofe feels President Obama should not receive Outtara and should presumably still be supporting Gabagbo.

When the evidence is so strong that Outtara's election was legitimate, we have to wonder why Senator Inhofe still supports Gabagbo. Was there some kind of arrangement, relationship, or payoff between Gabagbo and Inhofe. If there were, this wouldn't be the first time American Senators have tried to meddle in the affairs of Africa. We have to ask the question: Was Gabagbo paying off Inhofe in order to have a supporter inside the United States Senate ? If not, what benefits does Inhofe hope to receive (or has received) through his support of Gabagbo ?

Reporters, this is worth investigating. We are firing off a letter to Senator Inhofe to ask for an explanation.

On Pundits, Experts, and Observers

I don't claim to be a pundit, an expert on the news with sources other people don't have, or some kind of Washington insider. I am just a citizen. What justifies my writing this blog is a curious characteristic I have. I notice things. Back in college, I remember reading the text of a play by Shakespeare and noticing that something in a line of verse didn't belong and really wasn't part of the verse, but rather a stage direction. My function here as I see it is to bring certain matters my readers might otherwise not notice to their attention. In the post that follows this in time, I shall give a good example.

What Conservatives Really Believe

There is a saying that what a man believes can be determined by what he does rather than by what what he says he believes. Consider this bit of human behavior.

Conservatives, including most Republicans, want to reduce the size of government and end most government programs. They have tried for years to get rid of social security. Despite their unsuccessful attempt to privatize social security a few years back, they still talk about wanting to do this. (Can you imagine the effect this would have had on this country's elderly poor if social security had been privatized before a huge financial crash a few years ago ?)

But have you ever seen a conservative or any Republican who upon receiving his or her social security check sent it back to the government instead of cashing it ?

What Republicans Don't Understand

The debt crisis shows that the Republican party members in Washington just don't understand the normal existence of normal Americans. When we are having tough times because we don't have enough money, what do we do ? For one thing, we cut our expenses. We eat hamburger instead of steak, or pasta instead of hamburger. We stop going to restaurants. We make sure the lights in our homes are off when we don't need them. We skip going on a vacation. We cut, cut, cut our expenses.

But it doesn't stop there.

We also try to increase our income. For millions of Americans these days, this means taking a part-time job. In the debt crisis situation, this is the equivalent of closing tax loopholes and ending tax breaks for oil companies and the very rich.

We should not lose sight of the ultimate goal of the ideologically-driven Republicans. It is nothing less than eliminating most of what government does by eliminating most of the government.

________________________________________________________________

This just in: An e-mail from our Jamaican correspondent tells us that if there were an election in Jamaica right now for our elected representatives, 98% of them would vote Democratic. Everyone is watching because this debt crisis affects the entire world.

The only thing you as a citizen of the United States can do is to let Speaker Boehner and Senator McConnell know how you feel by calling them. It will only take a minute and it will increase the pressure on them. Call now ! Boehner: 202-225-6205 Mcconnell: 202-224-2541.

The End of the American Empire

To me it is clear that the end of the American Empire as the strongest power on earth is coming to an end. This is no profound observation. The reasons are clear.

The top two reasons are, in my opinion, these two facts:

1) Congress is broken. It no longer seems capable of doing the people's business. Strife between the Democrats and the Republicans has made much meaningful legislation impossible. For this, I blame the Republicans more thsan the Democrats, though there is blame on each side. Witness what has happened to healthcare. Can Obama move on to the reconciliation process and get something done ? He seems so afraid to do this, despite the fact that it has been done several dozen times. Reconciliation doesn't seem likely.

2) The media is incapab;le of covering the news and sees itself either as entertainment or as a vehicle reporting largely inconsequential fluff, with little in-depth analysis. The media tries very hard to manufacture consequences to relatively unimportant matters. On MSNBC just a few minutes one of the commentators stated, "Just because we don't know anythying seriously wrong to have developed doesn't mean that it hasn't." (My quote is not entirely accurate, but the gist of the meaning is.) The media work hard to make unimportant matters seem important. They spend most of their time feeding on other people's unhappiness ("Ms. Jones, how did you feel when you saw your brother gunned down ?"). A great example of a crisis manufactured by the media is the recnt recall of vehicles by Toyota. Other car companies (Ford, for instance) have recalled larger numbers of vehicles. This blown-up crisis is probably the result of ignorane and a desire for ratings rather than Japan-bashing or s serious examination of facts.

With neither Congress nor the media are working as they should, the American Empire is falling.

Today's Whopper

I believe that the two-party system is a good one. I believe that the party in power needs others to debate policies. In other words, I believe in the necessity of a "loyal opposition."

However, today on "Meet the Press" the Senate's leader of the Republicans, Mitch McConnel, simply lied. He knew that he was lying, too. He stated that the United States "has the best health care system in the world." The moderator fortunately called him on this one, commenting that the only category in which the United States' health care system is # 1 is in cost. Not in life expectancy, infant mortality or a host of other indicators is the United States anywhere near # 1.

We deserve better than this if the Republicans are to fancy themselves as "the loyal opposition." That Senator Mitch McConnel openly lied on Meet the Press needs to be widely known.

Bush, Rove and the Bush Presidency

Among the magazines I read is The Atlantic Monthly. It's a great magazine that covers many consequential subjects. Sometimes many months worth stack up, but I try to get to each issue sooner or later. In the September 2007 issue, much of which is centered around the theme of "Lessons of a Failed Presidency," is an interesting article by Josua Green called "The Rove Presidency." If there is any one reason that stands above the rest, Green contends, it is that Karl Rove operated his time in the White House the way he worked actual elections -- he steamrollered his way to success. When he shifted from trying to get Bush elected to trying to effect policy, he continued with this steamroller attitude, and it didn't work with Congress. He alienated most of the House and the Senate. Green also states in the concluding paragraph:

"The Bush administration made a virtual religion of the belief that if you act boldly, others will follow in your wake. That certainly proved to be the case with Karl Rove, for a time. But for all the fascination with what Rove was doing and thinking, little attention was given to whether or not it was working and why. This neglect encompasses many people, though one person with far greater consequences than all the others. In the end, the verdict on George W, Bush may be as simple as this: He never questioned the big, booming voice of Oz, so he never saw the little man behind the curtain."