Never pass up a chance to sit down or relieve yourself. -old Apache saying

Wednesday, June 26, 2024

Hillary Clinton

Hillary wrote a piece for the New York Times (below) about the upcoming "debate" between President Biden and convicted felon Donald Trump. Trump "stealing" the 2016 election was a real travesty for this country. It highlights once again the archaic nature of our Electoral College, whose time has come and gone. Same thing happened to Al Gore in 2000, when the then-Supreme Court halted the recount in Florida which would have put Gore over the top and into the White House. What did we get instead? George W Bush, the goofy ex-governor in Texas, who neglected terrorist warnings and started a dumb war in Afghanistan, then Iraq, not to mention the economic crisis in 2008, exacerbated by Bush and his awe shucks personality. But, unlike Trump, Gore accepted the SCOTUS' decision and did not call for an insurrection.

But regardless, the 2000 and 2016 elections are now in the past and there is no "fixing" them. The GOP does not want to abolish or even attempt to update the Electoral College, because it produced two GOP wins in 2000 and 2016, both of which ended in disaster for the country, despite Bush and Trump losing the popular vote. That has to change. 

So, instead of Hillary Clinton becoming president in 2016, we got the egomaniacal con man Donald Trump, who has shown himself to be in it only for himself and his rich friends, and full of vitriol and hatred. We have to do just about whatever it takes, short of cheating, to keep Trump out of the Oval Office again.

Hillary Clinton: I've Debated Trump and Biden. Here's What I'm Watching For.

June 25, 2024 

Last week I had the time of my life at the Tony Awards introducing a song from “Suffs,” the Broadway musical I co-produced about the suffragists who won women the right to vote. I was thrilled when the show took home the awards for best original score and best book.

From “Suffs” to “Hamilton,” I love theater about politics. But not the other way around. Too often we approach pivotal moments like this week’s debate between President Biden and Donald Trump like drama critics. We’re picking a president, not the best actor.

I am the only person to have debated both men (Mr. Trump in 2016 and, in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary race, Mr. Biden). I know the excruciating pressure of walking onto that stage and that it is nearly impossible to focus on substance when Mr. Trump is involved. In our three debates in 2016, he unleashed a blizzard of interruptions, insults and lies that overwhelmed the moderators and did a disservice to the voters who tuned in to learn about our visions for the country — including a record 84 million viewers for our first debate.

It is a waste of time to try to refute Mr. Trump’s arguments like in a normal debate. It’s nearly impossible to identify what his arguments even are. He starts with nonsense and then digresses into blather. This has gotten only worse in the years since we debated. I was not surprised that after a recent meeting, several chief executives said that Mr. Trump, as one journalist described it, “could not keep a straight thought” and was “all over the map.” Yet expectations for him are so low that if he doesn’t literally light himself on fire on Thursday evening, some will say he was downright presidential.


Mr. Trump may rant and rave in part because he wants to avoid giving straight answers about his unpopular positions, like restrictions on abortion, giving tax breaks to billionaires and selling out our planet to big oil companies in return for campaign donations. He interrupts and bullies — he even stalked me around the stage at one point — because he wants to appear dominant and throw his opponent off balance.

These ploys will fall flat if Mr. Biden is as direct and forceful as he was when engaging Republican hecklers at the State of the Union address in March. The president also has facts and truth on his side. He led America’s comeback from a historic health and economic crisis, with more than 15 million jobs created so far, incomes for working families rising, inflation slowing and investments in clean energy and advanced manufacturing soaring. He’ll win if that story comes through.

In 2016, I prepared intensely for the debates because I knew I had to find a way to cut through Mr. Trump’s antics and help the American people understand what was really at stake. In 90-minute mock debates on an identical stage, I practiced keeping my cool in the face of hard questions and outright lies about my record and character. A longtime adviser played Mr. Trump and did everything he could to provoke, rattle and enrage me. It worked.

Unfortunately, Mr. Biden starts from a disadvantage because there’s no way he can spend as much time preparing as I did eight years ago. Being president isn’t just a day job; it’s an everything-everywhere-all-at-once job. Historically, that has led to weaker first debate performances for the incumbent.

First, pay attention to how the candidates talk about people, not just policies. In my third debate with Mr. Trump, he promised to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. I responded that this would have real consequences for real women. Mr. Trump had already said women should be punished for getting abortions. “You should meet with some of the women I’ve met with,” I told him. “I’ve been to countries where governments either forced women to have abortions, like they used to do in China, or forced women to bear children like they used to do in Romania. And I can tell you, the government has no business in the decisions that women make with their families in accordance with their faith, with medical advice.”

On Thursday, Mr. Trump will most likely say he wants to leave abortion to the states. He hopes that sounds moderate. But it really means he’s endorsing the most extreme abortion bans already imposed by many states and all the extreme restrictions to come. Mr. Trump should have to answer for the 12-year-old girl in Mississippi who was raped and then forced to carry a child to term. She started the seventh grade with a newborn because of her state’s draconian abortion ban. It’s because of Mr. Trump that in Louisiana a young girl unable to get an abortion went into labor clutching a teddy bear. Studies find that women living under abortion bans are up to three times more likely to die during pregnancy, childbirth or soon after giving birth. Because of Mr. Trump, one in three women of reproductive age now lives under such restrictions.

Mr. Biden is one of the most empathetic leaders we’ve ever had. Listen to how sincerely he talks about women’s rights, the struggles of working families, opportunities for people of color and the courage of Ukrainian men and women risking their lives for democracy. Mr. Trump can’t do that because he cares only about himself.

Second, try to see through the bluster and focus on the fundamentals at stake. In 2016, Mr. Trump refused to say whether he would accept the results of the election. “I’ll keep you in suspense,” he said. “That is not the way our democracy works,” I responded. “Let’s be clear about what he’s saying and what that means.” You can draw a straight line from that exchange to the deadly insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

This time, expect Mr. Trump to blame Mr. Biden for inflation but avoid answering questions about his own economic plans. He has to deflect or lie because his proposals — tax cuts for the superrich, gutting the Affordable Care Act, deporting millions of workers and slapping across-the-board tariffs on everyday goods — would exacerbate inflation, raise costs for American households and cause a recession. That’s not my prediction; it’s from Wall Street’s Moody’s Analytics. Experts at the nonpartisan Peterson Institute for International Economics estimated that Mr. Trump’s tariffs alone would mean, in effect, a $1,700 tax increase each year for the average American family — or more.


For his part, Mr. Biden is clearly eager to talk about his plans to lower costs. He has stood up to powerful pharmaceutical companies by capping the cost of insulin and signing a law to allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices for the first time. On Thursday listen for plans to take on corporate price gouging and make gas, groceries and housing more affordable. The president has already helped one in 10 Americans with federal student loans get much-needed relief. He most likely will be ready to offer more ideas for how to help young people get a strong start and afford a middle-class life.

Third, when you see these two men side by side, think about the real choice in this election. It’s between chaos and competence.

Mr. Trump has been convicted of 34 felonies and found liable for sexual assault and financial fraud. He’s spent a lifetime putting himself first. If he gets back to the White House, we’ll have more inflation and less freedom. It won’t just be a rerun of his first term. Since losing in 2020, Mr. Trump has become angrier and more unhinged. His former secretary of defense says he is “a threat to democracy.” His former chief of staff says he “has nothing but contempt for our democratic institutions, our Constitution and the rule of law.” Remember that on Thursday when you hear Mr. Trump recite his grievances and vow retribution.

By contrast, Mr. Biden is a wise and decent man who is fighting hard for working families. Yes, he’s 81. That’s just three years older than Mr. Trump. And his lifetime of service and experience helps him get things done that make our country stronger and all of our lives better, from bringing Democrats and Republicans together to fix crumbling roads and bridges to standing up to Russian aggression.

This election is between a convicted criminal out for revenge and a president who delivers results for the American people. No matter what happens in the debate, that’s an easy choice.

Original (Gifted)


Saturday, June 22, 2024

wake up America

Hope springs eternal that enough Trump fans will become disenchanted with the guy that the Dems can retake the House, expand their majority in the Senate, and keep the White House. 

I heard a segment on CNBC yesterday that was quoting a couple of billionaires and they were saying that they are more concerned about Joe Biden "destroying" capitalism than they were about Trump "destroying" democracy. All I can surmise from this ridiculous statement is that they are either 1) not that well educated, or 2) they are dyed-in-the-wool Republicans who are casting about for an excuse to keep voting for Trump.

I also noticed that more wealthy people are dumping large amounts of money into Trump's campaign. I suppose it is akin to a wager. You put up $20 million for Trump, and if he wins, the GOP lowers taxes on the rich, and the return on money could be quite large. And they don't give a fuck if the country unravels or not. How they figure they would survive Trump's flippant temper is beyond me.

Meanwhile, I wish the cult members would open their eyes.



Friday, June 21, 2024

tariffs?

Recently, Donald Trump (I hate having to focus on this buffoon) said he would abolish the income tax and generate revenue solely by tariffs if he gets back into the Oval Office. The fact that tariffs would have to increase by probably 50-100% on everything we buy to make up the shortfall would curtail consumer spending, raise tariffs worldwide, and leave the government wayyyy short of cash.  But how short?

I often turn to Paul Krugman, an economist who publishes columns in the New York Times and elsewhere, for simple answers to economic issues. Paul takes a stab at Trump's ludicrous idea, and he almost gets there, but still, his explanation seems incomplete. Frankly, trying to convince the simplest-minded voters (e.g. Trump voters) that this is a bad idea seems too big a mountain to climb. 

Which reminds me of all the wasted time and effort this nation has expended "thanks" to Trump. A literal time-suck, a boil on the ass and heart of this nation, a plague upon the mind of the nation, a degenerate wannabe dictator that has screwed everyone he has ever met is my impression of this despicable person. Trying to explain anything to a brainwashed Trump-cult member seems a total waste of time, so about all we can do is vote blue in November.

The Paranoid Style in Tariff Policy

But what’s worse is Republicans’ toadying support that defends it with a laughable conspiracy theory.

  • Thursday, June 20, 2024
  • By Paul Krugman / The New York Times

A few days ago Donald Trump floated a truly terrible, indeed unworkable economic proposal. I’m aware that many readers will say, “So what else is new?” But in so doing, you’re letting Trump benefit from the soft bigotry of rock-bottom expectations, not holding him to the standards that should apply to any presidential candidate. A politician shouldn’t be given a pass on nonsense because he talks nonsense all the time.

But in a way the most interesting thing about Trump’s latest awful policy idea is the way his party responded, with the kind of obsequiousness and paranoia you normally expect in places like North Korea.

What Trump reportedly proposed was an “all tariff policy” in which taxes on imports replace income taxes. Why is that a bad idea?

First, the math doesn’t work. Annual income tax receipts are around $2.4 trillion; imports are around $3.9 trillion. On the face of it, this might seem to suggest that Trump’s idea would require an average tariff rate of around 60%. But high tariffs would reduce imports, so tariff rates would have to go even higher to realize the same amount of revenue, which would reduce imports even more and so on. How high would tariffs have to go in the end? I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation using highly Trump-favorable assumptions and came up with a tariff rate of 133%; in reality, there’s probably no tariff rate high enough to replace the income tax.

And to the extent that we did replace income taxes with tariffs, we’d in effect sharply raise taxes on working-class Americans while giving the rich a big tax cut; because the income tax is fairly progressive, falling most heavily on affluent taxpayers, while tariffs are de facto a kind of sales tax that falls most heavily on the working class.

So this is a really bad idea that would be highly unpopular if voters knew about it.

But here’s the kicker: How did the Republican National Committee respond when asked about it? By having its representative declare, “The notion that tariffs are a tax on U.S. consumers is a lie pushed by outsourcers and the Chinese Communist Party.”

Now, economists have been saying that tariffs are a tax on domestic consumers for the past two centuries or so; I guess they’ve been working for China all along. Yes, there are exceptions and qualifications, but if you imagine that Trump is thinking about optimal tariff theory, I have a degree from Trump University you might want to buy.

Anyway, look at how the RNC responded to a substantive policy question: by insisting not just that Dear Leader’s nonsense is true but that anyone who disagrees is part of a sinister conspiracy.

Don’t brush this off. It’s one more piece of evidence that MAGA has become a dangerous cult.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times



Wednesday, June 19, 2024

Alberto



Tropical Storm Alberto, that is. We here in deep south Texas have escaped hurricanes for several years now. In fact, the last strong storm to hit this area was 2008 with Tropical Storm Dolly, which dumped lots of rain and shredded some buildings at the time. The house we are now living in on South Padre Island was hit hard by Dolly. It ripped off the roof and dumped tons of rain into the house, which had to be stripped down to the studs and rebuilt. We bought it back in 2017 and have had no storms since. 

Alberto became the 1st Tropical Storm of the season this morning. After years of avoiding them, I guess it is our turn. Forecasts indicate a second tropical storm will be forming in the same area in about a weeks time. Forecasts that far out are often bullshit, but when it comes to these storms, we should pay attention.

We have been in a horrendous drought for years down here. Everything is parched, many plants simply dried up and died. We are in a Stage 2 Water Rationing situation down here, which is supposed to mean no watering of plants, but neighbors all over the area simply disregard the restriction trying to keep their plants alive. No one has been fined or penalized for violating Stage 2. Maybe, maybe, Alberto will add enough water to the region to allow Stage 2 to be lifted.

The Rio Grande Valley gets its water supply from 3 sources, which are all linked together: the Rio Grande river, Falcon Lake and Lake Amistad. Both lakes are along the Rio Grande river. Falcon Lake is down to 10% full, or 90% empty, and Amistad is around 25% full, or 75% empty. The Rio Grande itself slows to a mere trickle in several places all the way up to its headwaters in the state of Colorado. Irrigation is the main culprit. 

This area produces prodigious amounts of corn, sorghum, cotton, sugar cane, citrus and other crops, sucking water from the Rio Grande and declining groundwater. Many huge fields of citrus have been converted to neighborhoods. Now, we get as much food from Mexico as we get locally. But the Mexican cartels keep threatening foodstuffs coming north across the border from Mexico. If the cartels cut off the foods coming north and we continue with the persistent drought, well, I shudder to think.


remember

remember

deja vu

deja vu

indeed

indeed

Delete Fox "News"

Delete Fox "News"

Probably

Probably