tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-200245952024-03-14T01:32:37.025-07:00Right View from the Left CoastRighty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.comBlogger2320125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-18827849402314233622016-06-13T11:54:00.000-07:002016-06-13T11:55:04.735-07:00Thoughts On OrlandoThere are almost no words to describe and or explain <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article83307497.html" target="_blank">the terror that must have taken place this past Sunday morning at the Pulse nightclub </a>in Orlando, Florida.<br />
One thing is for certain and that this was an act of Islamofacsist terror, period. Omar Mateen called 911 during the carnage to pledge his allegiance to the Islamic State and cited leaders of the bloodthirsty group that controls part of Iraq and Syria. And the investigation is taking some real twists and turns including a report that Mr. Mateen made to <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/13/orlando-gunmans-descent-into-islamic-terror-comes-into-focus.html?intcmp=hpbt1" target="_blank">trips to Saudi Arabia</a> and that <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/13/us/orlando-nightclub-shooting/index.html" target="_blank">he tried to purchase body armor</a>.<br />
What is truly fascinating about this is the reaction and what should be the focus moving forward.<br />
Shamefully it is falling along the political lines that have divided the United States for a long time now.<br />
On the left, led by the Dear Leader, President Obama, there is a lack of willingness to call this act what it is. An act of Islamofacsist terror. There is no willingness to utter the words <i>radical Islam</i>. There is a push for gun control as there always is after a mass shooting. There is a lot of standing united with Orlando. There is the Pray for Orlando. And because the Pulse nightclub was a gay club there is the attempt to link it just to homophobia and or a hate crime.<br />
On the right, the recognition that this is an act of Islamofacsist terror. That it will take a serious effort to fight against not just the Islamic State but those who act in the name of the Islamic State and or any other group that seeks to instill radical Islam in the West and the rest of the world. That while prayers are necessary it will take more than that to fight such a long-term war.<br />
And let me make clear that there is a difference to have an opinion on the role of gays and lesbians in society in a nation like ours. But it is more political than organized carnage that this act of terror was. The fact is that these are fellow Americans that died at the hands of the evil Mateen and I sure as hell don't care that they were mostly gay and or lesbian. They are Americans, period. To radical Islamic forces, this is an acceptable way to deal with those that are gay and or lesbian. Just note that in the Islamic State held lands, it is perfectly acceptable for the so-called authorities to throw suspected homosexuals off the top of the tallest building in any given town. And if there is not a tall enough building, stoning those people is perfectly acceptable. Before one uses an obscure Christian pastor who thinks this is a good thing, note that is in the minority and so far they have not carried out acts such as these.<br />
The problem is that we need to put aside the politics and recognize that we are fighting a real enemy. An enemy that hates modernity (except for guns and pick-up trucks). They hate gays and lesbians. They hate Jews. They hate Americans. They hate anything that is non-Islamic. And they even hate those that they perceive to be not pure enough Islamic/Muslim. They carry out their hate in acts such as what took place in Orlando. In San Bernardino. In Paris, France. In London, England. Any and everywhere they see an enemy.<br />
I will be the first to admit that there are people that agree on the basic need to take on these terror merchants but disagree on how to do so. But there are those that want to bury their heads in the sand and suggest that any true discussion on radical Islam is really just Islamophobia. It is sort of like when former President Jimmah Carter and his statement that we in the West, and particularly the United States, had an inordinate fear of communism.<br />
What I fear is that what will happen is if we do not come to some kind of consensus policy on dealing with radical Islam, the more attacks that happen the stronger the possibility that there will be a bad backlash against good, patriotic Americans that practise Islam. I want to avoid such a backlash. We can do that if we try.<br />
We need to do something good and unifying for those that died and were injured in Orlando. While I an sympathetic to those that are putting the Love Wins all over Facebook, I think it is time to stop trying to score political points and take on radical Islam as the United States of America.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-50225028308348011662016-06-11T20:34:00.000-07:002016-06-11T20:34:14.021-07:00I Have Given Up On Fox NewsFor the most part, it is true.<br />
I, your humble blogger have given up on watching Fox News.<br />
Before I explain why, there are two shows worth your time to watch.<br />
That would be Special Report with Brett Baier and The Greg Gutfeld show on Saturday nights.<br />
After that, you are better off looking at the Fox News website or even any other news source.<br />
The question is, what gives? Why would I, a conservative that believes much of what we call the Mainstream Media or MSM, is left-biased give up on the only conservative if not equal time to the left-wing media bias?<br />
Because of the Fox News cheer leading for one Donald J. Trump and his chaotic quest for the Republican nomination for president.<br />
And folks, now that Mr. Trump in the presumptive GOP nominee, it is only going to get worse before it gets better.<br />
Until this election cycle, I found Fox News to be fair to all the GOP candidates in each consequential election cycle. The 2004 one does not count for then President George W. Bush had no Republican opposition. There was no cheer leading for one candidate over the other. Once the nominee became clear, yes there was no question that the opinion hosts were going to be for the GOP over the Democrat no matter who or she was.<br />
But this cycle it became very clear from the moment that Mr. Trump made his bizarre announcement of candidacy to now that the opinion hosts were almost falling in line and more like fawning in line to Mr. Trump. It has, dare I say it, seeped into the news coverage as well. maybe not in the same way of say Sean Hannity, but there is no question that Fox News Channel can now be called the Trump News Channel.<br />
Take the prime time lineup.<br />
Starting at 4:00 p. m. (All times are Pacific as after all, this is Right View From The Left Coast!) with Greta Van Sustren. The question I have is what member of the Trump family does she NOT have on?! Yes it is clear that she is a solid Trumpette.<br />
Then there is as radio talker Mark Levin calls Bill O'Reilly, the Eight O'clocker (Five O'clocker here on the left coast). He will claim that he is down the middle whenever he interviews Mr. Trump. Which seems like every day to me. But in the same breath he will say that he is trying to help Mr. Trump whenever he is in trouble. Hey, Eight O'clocker! You're job is not to help Mr.Trump in any way but to ask really tough questions and get answers. Especially during the heat of the primaries. No, you are not down the middle with Mr. Trump, Eight O'clocker. You are and have been an enabler.<br />
But not Meghan Kelly and the Kelly File at 6:00 p. m. She has been tough as nails and Mr. Trump has not liked it. There is a truce of sorts between Mrs. Kelly and Mr. Trump, but overall it is clear that Mr. Trump knows he will be challenged and he does not like that in the least.<br />
But I can't even watch Mrs. Kelly the way that I used to<br />
Which leaves the aforementioned Mr. Hannity.<br />
I have to say that I liked when it was Hannity and Colmes. I guess that Alan Colmes just got tired of being Sean's punching bag night after night. I do not know. But since it has just become Hannity, it is just unwatchable. And Mr. Hannity fawning and drooling over Mr. Trump is rather revolting. For years on radio and television, Mr. Hannity has railed against those that he believes are not real conservatives. He has held himself up as the real deal. Yet once Mr. Trump announced, he jumped on that Trump Train head first.<br />
Now there are those on the weekends, led by Jeannine Pirro, who are also on the Trump Train in nauseating fashion.<br />
Look, they have the right to be open as to who they favor as they are opinion people, not the news people. But what I expect, especially when voters are making up their minds in the primaries and caucuses is not cheer leading for one candidate. I expect when other candidates are getting face time that they are not given an inquisition and the candidate of favor being fawned upon.<br />
As a conservative this all reminds me of what we righteously accused the MSM of doing with one Barack Hussein Obama. Of fawning. Of not asking tough questions. Of making excuses when a certain candidate makes numerous faux pas. Of elevating someone that we did not think was all that qualified to be president.<br />
I feel that I am living in an alternate universe when it comes to Fox News and Donald J. Trump.<br />
But to be fair, the MSM does not get a pass. They have at a level given Mr. Trump a free ride. But the Trump News Channel, er <i>Fox</i> News Channel has taken it to another level.<br />
My biggest concern is that Fox News has long been seen as a right-wing outlet. I would argue that it has simply been equal time to the left-dominated MSM. But this Trump-love, no Trumpaganda is too much for this conservative.<br />
BTW, why to I recommend Special Report and Greg Gutfeld to still watch?<br />
Special Report is Washington based and has been truly down the middle. And any show that features Charles Krauthammer is a must-watch.<br />
Mr. Gutfeld is the only consistent opponent of Mr. Trump and has had the testicles to call his fellow hosts out on their fawning of Mr. Trump. Mr. Gutfeld needs to be given support.<br />
This conservative has given up, for the most part, on Fox News for selling out to the Trump Train.<br />
I hope that Fox News comes back after the election but until then, one is no worse watching or getting news from an MSM source.<br />
<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-7271650542584055142016-05-31T17:06:00.000-07:002016-05-31T17:06:26.032-07:00The Killing of Harambe And Why It Had To Be DoneNo story within the last 24 hours has split public opinion like that of t<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3618549/PICTURED-four-year-old-boy-fell-zoo-s-gorilla-enclosure-prompting-keepers-shoot-Harambe-creating-revulsion-world.html" target="_blank">he four-year boy that fell into a gorilla enclosure at the Cincinnati Zoo and drew the curiosity of a 17 year-old gorilla named Harambe.</a><br />
Harambe no doubt was curious of what fell into his lair.<br />
But that curiosity cost Harambe his life as zoo officials shot Harmabe dead to save the boy, identified as Isiah Dickerson.<br />
Some want to blame the parents of the boy for not paying better attention.<br />
Some are elevating Harambe to such human status that they would like the mom to face charges.<br />
There is even those that are using the tragic event to question the existence of public zoos.<br />
Let's start right there.<br />
Zoos used to be the purview of the rich and famous. One of the most wealthiest men in the United States, William Randolph Hearst, in fact, had a zoo at the famous San Simeon ranch. Now the masses can view exotic animals close up. Sorry but the vast majority of people will not be able to see many of the animals in zoos in their natural habitat. Knowledge of animals and how the live and interact should not be only for those that can afford it. Zoos also serve a purpose in doing research about all kinds of animals. No, not harmful research but trying to learn about what makes animals tick. Our modern zeal to be more humane with animals has taken away the reality that we know little if anything about those that we share this planet with. <a href="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/why-was-harambe-the-gorilla-in-a-zoo-in-the-first-place/" target="_blank">While this is an interesting article</a>, the writer is clearly against the concept of breeding animals that will only know the life of being in a zoo. It is a clear quandary, but I support zoos and the good that they do.<br />
There is no question that apes and or gorillas are very smart animals. They are the closest to humans in the animal kingdom. But at the end of the day, Harambe was an animal and when the chips are down, the brass tacks if you will, a human being must be protected and that is why the zoo officials made the gruesome decision to kill Harambe. Is it possible that a tranquilizer dart could have done the job? Well, I take the word of <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/nation-now/2016/05/31/jack-hanna-zookeeper-knoxville-cincinnati-zoo-gorilla-killed/85181272/" target="_blank">the former head zookeeper of the Cincinnati Zoo, Dr. Jack Hanna.</a> According to Dr. Hanna, a tranquilizer dart would have taken about five to 10 minutes to work. Keep in mind that we are dealing with a four-year-old child, not an adult who might have had the ability to figure out what to do once Harambe was hit with a tranquilizer dart. According to the first linked article in The Daily Mail, it does appear that Harambe may have been in fact trying to protect young Isiah. <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1295429/Extended-video-Harambe-shows-gorilla-holding-boy-s-hand.html" target="_blank">Here is video</a>. To us humans, it appears that at some point, Harambe is dragging Isiah like a rag doll. But then there is a curious moment when Harambe clearly is showing what can only be described as affection for Isiah. I think that it is clear that both are scared for different reasons. After all, Isiah invaded Harambe's space. Being so domesticated, he had no idea who or what this was. Was Isiah a threat? This is what we do not know about gorillas. It was not the time to take a chance. The zoo did the right thing.<br />
Now the craziness of the Internet had some people trying to equate the fact that the gorilla was taken out and a white child was protected. That somehow, this whole episode is a sign of the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll "White privilege".<br />
The fact is that Isiah Dickerson is black. As are his parents.<br />
And here is where the weirdness of the internet rears it's ugly head.<br />
The fact is that there is no doubt the mother, Michelle Gregg, and the father, Deonne Dickerson, have to bear some responsibility for not paying better attention to Isiah in the first place. Not that it matters per se, but Mr Dickerson is not exactly a model citizen as this article points out. Some people are somehow trying to tie that point into a larger point that the parents do bear some responsibility. They do. No matter what, I think that <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/science/2016/05/31/cincinnati-zoo-gorilla-death-conservationist-jeff-corwin-says-zoos-arent-your-babysitter.html" target="_blank">conservationist Jeff Corwin is spot on here</a>. That zoos are not baby sitters. They are serious places and yes, they have wild animals. People may think that Mr. Corwin is wrong in saying what he said but there are numerous reports that the parents were distracted by the other children and not paying close attention to Isiah. In fact there are reports that Isiah said that he wanted to swim with the gorillas. Again, let me remind the reader that zoos contain wild animals. No matter how domesticated they are, one can not take lightly the fact that Harambe was all of 400 pounds. Isiah may have been at the most what, 50 pounds?! It does appear that there will be an investigation into all of the events and that is clearly warranted.<br />
Sadly, the Cincinnati Zoo is in a no-win situation but did the right thing in killing the gorilla Harambe to save the life of Isiah Dickerson.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-7415063266692381122016-05-31T13:55:00.000-07:002016-05-31T13:55:28.186-07:00Why This Conservative Has Taken A Blogging BreakYeah, it has been a while since I last posted anything.<br />
The reality is that this conservative was driven away from the keyboard because of the prospect of seeing the 2016 election a race with Republican presumptive nominee, Donald J. Trump, and the more than likely Democrat nominee, Hillary Clinton.<br />
I am one of those 60% plus Americans that is not happy with my party, the Republican party, choice for president. I certainly will not vote for Mrs. Clinton.<br />
So I have been mulling where does my vote go this election.<br />
It will not go to Mr. Trump no matter how conservative he tries to sound.<br />
As noted, it will not go to Mrs. Clinton unless she somehow totally changes in almost every way and essentially becomes a Republican.<br />
In the aftermath of Mr. Trump becoming the presumptive GOP nominee, my first thought is that I will write in a past candidate in November. But unless he or she were to make a case for such a candidacy, it will be a wasted vote.<br />
My current position is that if I cast a vote for president at all it will be the newly-minted Libertarian candidate, former New Mexico Republican governor, Gary Johnson.<br />
But I am still mulling over whether or not I will even participate in the presidential aspect of voting. I mean, I will still vote for the GOP for congress, local contests and the like. After all, the local elections are in many ways more important that the presidency. At least in a federal republic that is the United States, that is how it should be.<br />
One thing is that I live in the now deep-Blue state of California. We have a race for senate this year as Sen. Barbara Ma'am Boxer is finally leaving the senate stage.<br />
But California has found a way to possibly have the race to replace Sen. Ma'am Boxer be between Democrats only in both the primary and general election.<br />
You see, the once Golden State now has a system of voting that, other than the presidency, in the primary it is the top two that go on to the general election. No matter what political party. Thus the race seems to be between the current Democrat attorney general, Kamala Harris, and Democrat congressman, Loretta Sanchez. Yes, there are Republicans running. But the fact is the only commercials I see are for Miss Harris and Mrs. Sanchez. I will vote for Republican Tom Del Beccarro in the primary hoping that he makes the general election. If not, and no Republican makes the general, I will be a disenfranchised voter and probably skip the senate race as well as the presidential race.<br />
This is the dilemma for conservatives particularly in a state like California.<br />
We may be skipping both the presidential and senate race in November. Because many of us believe that Mr. Trump is not particularly conservative. And why would we vote for a Democrat in a senate race?<br />
Thus it made me think what is the point about writing about politics?<br />Then I realized that this blog is not just about politics but what passes for culture and many other current events.<br />
And while I may rarely write about the presidential race, there is so much that is worth writing about.<br />
That is what you will get from here on out.<br />
This conservative is back.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-80327753662613962782016-02-23T19:00:00.000-08:002016-02-23T19:00:12.546-08:00Nevada Caucus-It's On!Right now the Republican voters of Nevada are going to caucus for either Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Marco Rubio or Donald J. Trump.<br />
It will be a late night back East for the caucus does not close until 9pm Pacific Standard Time. Turnout is supposed to be about 10% and the unreliable polling does show the Donald far ahead. But Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio are putting in a serious effort here. It is the last test for all the candidates before the 13-state Super Tuesday primary a week from today.<br />
Since I am a partisan in this, I urge all Nevada Republicans to show up and caucus for Sen. Rubio.<br />
There will be a separate post about results as they come in. I<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/primary-caucus/nevada" target="_blank">f you can't wait, here is a page for up to the minute results. </a><br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-20379149882450006462016-02-23T11:07:00.002-08:002016-02-23T11:07:58.871-08:00Good News For TrumpAs an opponent of Donald J. Trump, <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/" target="_blank">these polls</a> on the surface are rather disappointing as they almost all show him in the lead and at 50% in Massachusetts.<br />
But there are caveats that are a glimmer of hope if you, like me, oppose the Donald.<br />
For one, John Kasich has some splainin' to do since he is not leading in his home state. The Donald has a five-point lead with 31% to 26% for Gov. Kasich. The rationale for the Kasich candidacy seems to be falling apart if he can not lead in his home state.<br />
That is not a problem for Sen. Ted Cruz as he has a comfortable eight-point lead in his home state of Texas. Sen. Cruz has a solid 37% to the Donald's 29%. Sen. Cruz is also leading in New Mexico but only by one point and it is a bunch at the top three.<br />
Even Sen. Marco Rubio has some good news as he is leading in Utah by two percent. The interesting thing here is that the Donald is in third place with 18% of the vote.<br />
Now there are eight states that have polling regarding next Tuesday's Super Tuesday primary.<br />
So play along to note something.<br />
If you add the percentages of the eight polls here, the Donald averages a solid 31%. If one combines Sen. Cruz averaging 21% and Sen. Rubio averaging 18%, the two leading anti-Trump candidacy with 37% of the vote. And if Gov. Kasich and Dr. Ben Carson were to drop out of the race and their support was distributed evenly, the anti-Trump forces still lead 42% to 37%.<br />
So is it possible that someone may see the handwriting on the wall and drop out before next week? It is unlikely but possible depending on tonight's caucus in Nevada. It appears that Sen. Rubio is now getting a huge boost of elected members of congress supporting him. The Donald just has to hold steady and hope the bleeding on the right continues.<br />
My guess is that by next Wednesday both Gov. Kasich and Dr. Carson will suspend their campaigns. For Gov. Kasich, he needs to be running a national campaign and he is not. For Dr. Carson, He is not gaining but losing support and even his most ardent supporters will ask him to leave with a modicum of dignity.<br />
We shall see a lot more polling and who will come out with a chance to be the anti-Trump. My guess is that will be Sen. Rubio. Then it will be Mano a Mano.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-19905649002735889212016-02-22T14:03:00.000-08:002016-02-22T14:03:01.885-08:00What Do The Trump Voters Want?I'm totally honest here in the question above.<br />
What exactly do the people who have been or are supporting one Donald J. Trump really want from their political savior?<br />
Some interesting polling coming from the Donald's recent win in South Carolina over the weekend seems to contradict the issue that the Donald is really running on. <br />
That is illegal immigration.<br />
<a href="http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/21/this-is-what-the-south-carolina-exit-polls-reveal-about-gop-voters/" target="_blank">It appears that the majority, yes the majority, of those that participated in the Republican primary favor a pathway to citizenship and or legal status for illegal aliens.</a><br />
Huh?!<br />
So while the Donald is averaging about 30% of the vote in the three primaries that have been held, it is a minority within a minority. The majority of Republicans in a state like South Carolina favor some kind of legal status for those here illegally but have, basically, been working and earning a paycheck.<br />
What is clear is that the vocal minority is angry. And voting for the Donald is what unifies the angry. The angry that want to close the border. The angry that want to bar Muslims from entering the United States. At least for a while. After that, well it gets pretty murky.<br />
See in the beginning of the Donald's campaign, the Donald was trying to win over conservatives by having seemingly a Come-to-Jesus conversion to a solid conservative position on a variety of issues <a href="http://www.bookwormroom.com/2016/02/16/dear-trump-supporters-with-new-info-available-its-okay-to-change-your-minds/" target="_blank">as noted in this post from Bookworm Room. </a><br />
Many people just liked that the Donald was taking on the sclerosis of the Washington Beltway GOP. Yeah! Telling it like it is! And to a point I agree. The Beltway GOP oversold what they could and or could not do in regards to the Dear Leader, President Obama. They have never admitted such and deserve scorn and ridicule. Even the writer of the link admits that was a attractive aspect of the Donald and why he got him.<br />
But then the post compares and contrasts what the Donald has done and or said in the past, it is damning to a thinking person.<br />
There is a meme going around Facebook as an example trying to prove that the Donald has been a registered Republican since 1980. There is even something that looks official. The only problem is that what the record is that the Donald has been a registered voter and could participate in scheduled elections. The Donald, by his own admission, has been like crap on his party registration. All over the place.<br />
Let's not forget that the Donald has also, again by his own admission, given money to both parties. And more to the Democrats than the Republicans. The Donald gave money to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi that they used to retake control of congress in 2006.<br />
When it comes to socialized medicine, the Donald is pretty much all in. He makes a lying claim that people are literally dying in the streets and that will not happen under a Trump presidency. That is right out of, well Bernie Sanders playbook.<br />
The writer of the linked post does an excellent job on explaining the difference between eminent domain for the public good vs. a crony capitalist goal (of which the Donald is a YUGE crony capitalist).<br />
There is much more, but for people that call themselves conservative, how in the name of all is holy can you support Donald J. Trump?<br />
Is it really just about illegal immigration? Is that really all you care about? You really think that the Donald is going to do what he says? How? With congress? Good luck with that one. If not, are you down with a President Donald simply going the executive order route? Or is it that your anger is that of a form of political road rage? Not thinking but maybe going off half-cocked and spewing out because it will make you temporarily feel better?<br />
Before you scream that I am for the Gang of Eight type of legislation, nope, not in the least. We do have to deport those here illegally and committing illegal activity. Period. But there is no way we can, or should, do anything sweeping. It all has to happen piece by piece. There is no magic bullet. Really, there is not. Unless you are willing to give everything one believes in up, then I get the support of the Donald.<br />
Please do not try to claim that the Donald is a conservative. He is not. Your issue is one and it is a minority view within a minority of voters.<br />
What the Trump voters want is the same thing that propels people like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jesse Ventura to power. A magic fix to big problems that cannot just be waved away.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-22939346534916026142016-02-10T15:13:00.001-08:002016-02-10T15:13:54.015-08:00Christie, Fiorina Drop OutAs expected, GOP presidential candidates <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/10/christie-fiorina-suspend-2016-campaigns.html?intcmp=hpbt3" target="_blank">Gov. Chris Crispy, er Chirstie, and former Hewlett-Packard CEO, Carly Fiorina, have "suspended"</a>, re: ended, their quests for the presidency.<br />
Both candidates finished near the bottom in Iowa and New Hampshire.<br />
Gov. Christie went out literally kneecapping Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) during last Saturday's presidential debate. He ran a poor campaign that never caught fire with much of anyone. By kneecapping Sen. Rubio he raised some serious doubts about the junior senator's ability to think on his feet. Gov. Christie thought that would help him gain some traction. What it did do was a double whammy by clearly affecting voting for Sen. Rubio but also to Gov. Christie. The man spent 70 days in New Hampshire trying to mix it up with voters. for all his effort he got a whole seven percent of the vote.<br />
On the other hand, Mrs. Fiorina had a proven business record and did run in 2010 in California against Sen. Barbara Mamm Boxer. She did lose that race in a good Democrat year in California. Hell, they are all good Democrat years here in the once Golden State. But Mrs. Fiorina brought a very broad depth to the issues facing the nation. She should have been in the last presidential debate but the reality is that it would not have helped her out all that much.<br />
What will be interesting is to see who, if anyone, they will support.<br />
My guess is that Gov. Christie would throw his support to the former Florida governor, Jeb! Bush. Gov. Christie is pretty establishment, whatever that means, and I would not expect him to go out of the way to change that. I think that Mrs. Fiorina could throw her support to Sen. Rubio. Foreign policy is important to her as to Sen. Rubio and while some think that she is also an establishment type, I think that she straddles the fence enough that she could be a big catch for Sen. Rubio.<br />
Now if only Dr. Ben Carson would read the writing on the wall . . .<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-36481865534014621582016-02-10T10:10:00.000-08:002016-02-10T10:10:44.575-08:00Thoughts On New HampshireLast night was an earthquake for both the Democrat and Republican parties as two outsiders swept to victory in the persons of <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/primary-caucus-results/new-hampshire" target="_blank">Sen. Bernie Sanders and Donald J. Trump </a>in the New Hampshire presidential primaries.<br />
I will just comment for the Democrats, there is no question that one Hillary Clinton is in trouble. She should win the nomination because of her dominance of the superdelegates. But make no mistake, Sen. Sanders and his brand of democratic socialism is finding an audience. There is no doubt that Sen. Sanders can and will win some more states. He will move Mrs. Clinton further to the left and the Democrat party as a whole that way. There is a civil war in the Democrat party and that can not be glossed over.<br />
But this is Right View From The Left Coast and I will make extended thoughts on the Republican race.<br />
And I will do so regarding each of the eight candidates that seriously competed in New Hampshire starting with the winner of the New Hampshire GOP primary.<br />
<br />
<u>Donald J. Trump</u>.<br />
No question he won and won big. But make no mistake about it. in this case he got a lot of his 35% support from the undeclared or independent voters. Having said that, there is no question that Mr. Trump is the Pat Buchanan with money of this election cycle. He is saying that everything needs to be blown up in Washington and he is the one that can do it. Never mind that he offers little difference between himself and either of the two Democrats running for president. he is against the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll GOP establishment. And that is enough for about 30 to 35% of the GOP vote. Mr. Trump now has 17 delegates as the result of second place in Iowa and first in New Hampshire. Remember that 84% of the delegates are distributed by a form of proportional representation depending on the state. Only 16% will be from winner-take-all states. It will be important come convention time.<br />
<br />
<u>John Kasich</u>.<br />
Basically Gov. Kasich finished a distant second and that will do nothing to help him get more money and or endorsements. Gov Kasich will not win in South Carolina. I don't see anywhere he has any opening. He will try to hang on, but without a miracle in South Carolina and Nevada, where does he win on Super Tuesday? But he can keep going on until Super Tuesday and hope to accumulate more than the three delegates he got on Tuesday.<br />
<br />
<u>Ted Cruz</u>.<br />
Sen. Cruz ended up having a good night. No, really. He spent little time and money in New Hampshire and still managed a third place finish and two delegates. Adding to the eight that he won in Iowa and he is in second place with a total of 10 delegates. Sen. Cruz is probably going to finish in the top three in South Carolina and could win or come in second in Nevada. He is going to be battling Mr. Trump for the conservative and or anti-establishment GOP vote.<br />
<br />
<u>Jeb! Bush</u>.<br />
Mr. Bush should really stop already and get out of the race. But, alas, he will not and continue the delusion that he will somehow wrest the nomination. Even if this race ends up in a brokered convention, I do not think the establishment will force another and weakest of the Bush's down the throats of a GOP electorate that will keep people home. But last night, he and the Right To Rise super PAC spent $35,000,000 for a forth place finish and two delegates. Mr. Bush has the money to go through to Super Tuesday but he does not have the support of the GOP voters. This election cycle it is simple. The GOP voters are repeating a mantra. No More Bushes. And even without Donald Trump in this race, Mr. Bush would barely expand his extremely limited support.<br />
<br />
<u>Marco Rubio</u>.<br />
Clearly the disappointment of the night. No doubt that Chris Crispy's, er <i>Christie's</i>, interrogation of him proved effective in this past Saturday's debate. No doubt that some voters were turned off by Sen. Rubio falling into Gov. Christies trap. Some may think that he is part of the establishment when he has spent his career against the establishment. Yes, save for the Gang of Eight so-called comprehensive immigration "reform". I still support Sen. Rubio as the best hope against either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders. He is a conservative. And rather than run away from a bad performance, he owned it. Very big props for that. But he got no delegates and makes his path to Super Tuesday harder, it is not impossible. Look for Mr. Bush and Sen. Rubio to be duking it out in the next debate.<br />
<br />
<u>Chris Christie</u>.<br />
A loser and also one that staked his whole campaign on New Hampshire and finished in sixth place, no delegates. <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/breaking-news-chris-christie-expected-to-suspend-presidential-campaign-219074" target="_blank">It appears that Gov. Christie is about to exit the race as reported by Politico</a>. If that is the case, his only contribution would be to have thrown Marco Rubio off of his game. Maybe that is a good thing but as noted, timing is everything. We shall see if that is a long-lasting blow Gov. Christie delievered.<br />
<br />
<u>Carly Fiorina</u>.<br />
She got screwed, plain and simple. She was not given a slot in this past Saturday's presidential debate and should have. Lack of exposure on such a stage probably relegated her to this poor finish. Could she have done better if she was allowed to debate? Probably. While Mrs. Fiorina is still in the race, it is on life support and may change any day now.<br />
<br />
<u>Dr. Ben Carson</u>.<br />
I do not know if he is running a real campaign or trying to get some kind of book deal. The good doctor should not have run for president but a lot of people convinced him to do so and he has. But he finished a dismal two percent and really should think about exiting the race.<br />
<br />
A broader thought that I had is that conservatives were the big loser in all of this. Mr. Trump is not running as a limited government constitutionalist but as a populist strongman. Gov. Kasich keeps prating on about taking care of the poor and not exactly opposed to Obamacare. It is clear that Gov. Kasich is running for the compassionate conservative vote and that will not fly with many GOP voters this time around. One can put Mr. Bush in that category as well. of the remaining contenders, only Sens. Cruz and Rubio seem to have a clue about limited government. As I write this, <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431094/new-hampshire-primary-results-donald-trump-conservatives" target="_blank">National Review just released this editorial</a> lamenting the same thing.<br />
One thing is for sure.<br />
This battle has not ended in New Hampshire and it does look like a serious one for the immediate future. And this is why delegates matter this time around.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-81640462941766155102016-02-09T12:43:00.000-08:002016-02-09T12:43:20.644-08:002016 New Hampshire GOP Primary - It's On!The first in the nation primary in the 2016 GOP presidential <strike>Death March</strike> campaign is on in the state of New Hampshire and we already have some votes.<br />
<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/09/politics/dixville-notch-new-hampshire-primary-midnight-vote/index.html" target="_blank">The voters of Dixville Notch voted 3 - 2 for the Ohio governor, John Kasich over businessman Donald J. Trump. </a><br />
It does not amount to much of anything but it gives a sense of some of the voting that will take part in the rest of the state.<br />
In your humble blogger's estimation, the polls are all over the place and will probably turn out to be wrong.<br />
Right now, as he has throughout the campaign season, Donald J. Trump is in the lead., <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_presidential_primary-3350.html" target="_blank">In fact if you look at the polling averages over at Real Clear Politics</a>, the Donald has a solid lead over Florida senator, Marco Rubio, leading by about 17 points. I think that the candidate to watch for in terms of potential victory or a very strong second is the aforementioned Gov. Kasich. Gov. Kasich is literally staking it all on a strong showing in New Hampshire to keep his campaign going. As he will tell you, repeatedly, Gov. Kasich has done 106 town hall meetings. It is one of the reasons that Gov. Kasich did so badly in Iowa. What that means to me is that Gov. Kasich does not have the ability to mount a nationwide campaign unless it gets something going out of New Hampshire. Any less than a second place finish and I think that Gov. Kasich is all but done. Same for former Florida governor, Jeb Bush and New Jersey governor, Chris Crispy, er Chirstie.<br />
By all accounts, ground game matters and many believe that Gov. Kasich has one of the best.<br />
Well, how will they finish?<br />
Here is my order of finish, no percentages:<br />
<br />
John Kasich<br />
Donald J. Trump<br />
Marco Rubio<br />
Jeb! Bush<br />
Ted Cruz<br />
Chris Christie<br />
Carly Fiorina<br />
Ben Carson<br />
<br />
Yep, I think that Gov. Kasich can beat the Donald. But the reason that I do not put any percentages is because I think it will be a close log jam for the top four spots. I don't think whether Gov. Kasich or the Donald would win by much.<br />
Again, like Iowa, this is a state in which the delegates will be awarded proportionally. So as many as five candidates will have some delegates going into the next race of consequence, South Carolina. The GOP primary will be on February 20.<br />
If you are bored and want to read all about the race from the local level, go to the <a href="http://www.unionleader.com/" target="_blank">New Hampshire Union Leader</a>. For results later, there is the <a href="http://sos.nh.gov/" target="_blank">New Hampshire secretary of state website</a>.<br />
One thing for sure is that New Hampshire will not settle anything in the GOP presidential field. Maybe one or two candidates will drop out. No one really knows for sure.<br />
But one thing is certain.<br />
It makes South Carolina even more important than many thought at the beginning of the campaign season.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-34417198793424252972016-02-08T14:04:00.001-08:002016-02-08T14:04:44.267-08:00Pro-Abortion Group Slams Doritos Super Bowl AdIf one does not think that the so-called pro-choice crowd is really pro-abortion, <a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-08/doritos-super-bowl-commercial-gets-slammed-by-abortion-rights-group" target="_blank">the histrionics</a> of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NARAL_Pro-Choice_America" target="_blank">NARAL Pro-Choice America </a>during yesterday's Super Bowl should put it to rest.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ko7GuDOv4BM/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ko7GuDOv4BM?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
Doritos chips put out what I thought was a funny commercial as seen above.<br />
As I was watching the game in a large group, it was more of a visual look as I did not pick up everything that was being said.<br />
But according to NARAL, this was a horrible commercial.<br />
Why? <br />Well, here is the tweet down below:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">#NotBuyingIt - that @Doritos ad using #antichoice tactic of humanizing fetuses & sexist tropes of dads as clueless & moms as uptight #SB50.</span><br />
<br />
<b>WELL! </b><br />How dare Doritos <i>humanize</i> a baby in the womb! How dare they! And showing a future dad as clueless! And showing an uptight mom to be!<br />
Gee, you know, its just a commercial. Something to illicit laughs and get people to purchase a particular product; in this case Doritos chips.<br />
But no, no, no. There was a social and political agenda there according to the NARAL folks.<br />
If you actually watch the commercial, it is obvious that the baby, and yes I will call it a baby at this point, is nearly full-term. The doctor even says that it is due any day now. It is what a baby looks like nearly full-term in the womb.<br />
Ahh, but if what NARAL would call a fetus is humanized in any way, even to and out of the womb, then they would have to admit that it is killing a human life. Thus it was terrible that an apparently full-term baby would be referred to as such.<br />
Science, not feelings, is confirming that which most pro-lifers believe. That there is a point a baby is such and that many can survive out of the womb not at just nine months but in as little as seven months. There is a point that a woman and a man are making a conscious choice to kill a human being.<br />
That is why NARAL was so offended. Oh sure, they thought that they would throw in supposed stereotypes because, if you go to the first link, they were watching <i>every</i> commercial for perceived slights against the gals in particular.<br />
This is what is wrong with the Social Justice Warrior crowd.<br />
They do not have any life and are not happy people.<br />No really, they are not happy. Happy people, or people who don't care, would not freak out over a commercial in which it was clear it was stereotyping. That is a lot of humor. In this case, it was lighthearted at best and in reality really making the male look stupid. That is something that the entertainment industry has been doing since, well at least the advent of mass television in the 1950s. Happy people, or people who don't care, would not use good time to waste looking for real and or perceived slights on any particular group. Happy people, or people that don't care, usually look at a glass as half-full. Unhappy and or SJWs look at a glass as half-empty and want the whole glass.<br />
There is a correlation between why conservative leaning people tend to be happy and content. It is not that we do not see that there are real problems. It is that we do not look at everything as a problem. We know that the world is not a perfect place. We seek different, time-proven solutions.<br />On the other hand, liberal leaning people see nothing but problems. Everything requires some kind of government solution. Even if it makes a problem worse. And most important is that they see conservatives not merely as maybe wrong but evil. Our minds have to be changed on any given topic. If not, friendships are often at risk. Sometimes families get divided over "issues".<br />
One problem is when conservatives think that they will be just as bad as liberals and see things as a problem or an issue as a form of one-upmanship. Thus we could, and some are, just as bad scolds as the other side.<br />
I just wanted to watch some of the Super Bowl and enjoy a few commercials. Is that so much to ask? Do I have to think about when life begins? According to NARAL, I do. We all do.<br />
We are so doomed.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-47443471513819512592016-02-02T14:58:00.000-08:002016-02-02T14:58:27.802-08:00Thoughts On IowaLast night the voters spoke in Iowa and delivered victories to Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Ted Cruz.<br />
In terms of delegates, both winners simply received the majority of, not all. Thus Sen. Cruz ended up with eight delegates. Second place finisher, Donald J. Trump, and third place finisher, Sen. Marco Rubio ended up with seven delegates each. On the Democrat side, Mrs. Clinton gets 23 delegates and her opponent, Sen. Bernie Sanders will get 21 delegates.<br />
A lot of criticism is thrown Iowa's way (as well as New Hampshire) being the first in the nation to vote in the respected party primaries. I think that they are good states to see how a candidate can deal with organization. Clearly Sen. Cruz out hustled all the other Republican candidates. His team singled out the state's conservative, evangelical Christian voters and Sen. Cruz scored their votes. Like it or not, the Donald did not take the old fashioned retail politicking and organization seriously and it showed. Also, sorry but skipping the last debate before the caucus did not help. No matter what excuse the Donald uses to not participate in the debate, many caucus participants said that eventually determined their vote. And who would have thought Marco Rubio would have had such a strong third-place finish looking at the polls?<br /><a href="http://rightviewfromtheleftcoast.blogspot.com/2016/02/cruz-wins-iowa.html" target="_blank">As I noted last night</a>, clearly there was something called Marcomentum that catapulted Sen. Rubio to nearly a huge upset and forcing the Donald to a potential third place finish. That is breathing life into a campaign that really needs it.<br />
Ted Cruz went one way too long in his victory speech. And while his religious references did not bother me, I thought about the rest of the nation and places that would be totally turned off by such overt Christianity. Sen. Cruz will have to find a way to be less evangelical Christian preacher and more able to really expand the base of his support to those people he, and I, believe he needs to win a general election campaign. We will see if Sen. Cruz can pivot in much more secular New Hampshire.<br />
Donald J. Trump has to begin to take this campaign seriously if he is really in it to win it. The Donald will have to spend real money for organization and broadcast advertising. And he will have to participate in debates no matter what.<br />
Marco Rubio needs to continue to build on the Marcomentum and get to second place in New Hampshire, simple as that.<br />
For the Democrats, Mrs. Clinton has to be humiliated that she could not put Bernie Sanders, a self-avowed "democratic" socialist, away in Iowa. I will say it now. The Democrats are that far to the left that I will not be surprised if Sen. Sanders ends up the Democrat nominee. What we are seeing is the left-wing crack up and the end of the Obama coalition. And the only saving grace for Mrs. Clinton is the whole Super-delegates that are there to guarantee an "establishment" candidate wins the nomination. We shall see but there is no doubt Mrs. Clinton is going to lose badly to the senator from next-door Vermont next Tuesday.<br />
The funny thing about all of this is that it has not made the race any easier for either political party. It is all still up in the air. And maybe for a while.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-90073090872611496372016-02-01T20:35:00.001-08:002016-02-01T20:35:59.671-08:00CRUZ WINS IOWA<a href="http://www.decisiondeskhq.com//" target="_blank">Texas senator Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton are the projected winners according to the Ace of Spades Decision Desk. </a><br />
The big loser is . . .the Donald. Oh yeah, and probably Hilary Clinton as well.<br />
What?! Mrs. Clinton?!<br />
Well, as of this writing Mrs. Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders are essentially tied at 50%. Some guy named Martin O'Malley who had not even polled a full percent may keep Sen. Sanders from victory. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/omalley-to-suspend-his-campaign-according-to-campaign-adviser/2016/02/01/4e1a4572-c77c-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html" target="_blank">Oh yeah, and he dropped out of the race. </a><br />
Stay tuned for that one.<br />
On the GOP side, Sen. Cruz vanquished the gasbag from New York City, Donald J. Trump and with relative ease as well.<br />
As of this writing, here is the total<br />
<br />
Ted Cruz: 47,510 28%<br />
Donald J. Trump: 41,812 24%<br />
Marco Rubio: 39,599 23%<br />
<br />
I am not even bothering with the rest of the field as they are irrelevant.<br />
Here is one for you.<br />
Only 2,213 votes separate Mr. Trump from the Florida senator, Marco Rubio. While 99% of the votes are in and it is doubtful, it is a slight possibility that Sen. Rubio can overtake Mr. Trump for second place and more delegates. All three will have some delegates on the road to New Hampshire in one week.<br />
There really is some Marcomentum as the last Real Clear Politics average had Sen. Rubio at 17% and he should finish with 23, maybe 24% of the vote. I hope that carries on to New Hampshire.<br />
And what about the Donald?!<br />Maybe when all is said and done, two things will stand out.<br />
One is that Mr. Trump should not have skipped that last debate this past Thursday night. And maybe, just maybe the whole Trump thing is overblown and we are settling into a race between Sen. Cruz and Sen. Rubio that still may go all the way to Cleveland.<br />
<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/01/huckabee-omalley-suspend-presidential-bids-following-iowa-caucuses.html?intcmp=hpbt2#" target="_blank">Oh, and already the Cruz win has claimed a casualty as the former Arkansas governor, Mike Huckabee, is calling it quits. </a>Look for the Rev. Mike to endorse the Donald sometime this week.<br />
The voters have spoken in Iowa and now, on to New Hampshire next week.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-85615241272639009562016-02-01T17:32:00.000-08:002016-02-01T17:32:01.998-08:00The 2016 Iowa GOP Caucus: It's On! It all comes down to this as Iowa <b><i>FINALLY</i></b> goes to caucus and roughly about 150,000 Republicans will begin to clear the field as some voting begins.<br />
<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/primary-caucus-results/iowa#" target="_blank">Here is a good place to get up to the minute results for both the Democrats and the Republicans.</a> For the Democrats, 44 convention delegates are up for grabs. The Republicans have 30 delegates at stake. For the GOP, it is not a winner-take-all and expect the top three finishers, whoever they may be, to walk away with delegates.<br />
I will update later when results come in and we get a picture of who wins, places and shows for the GOP.<br />
It's on!<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-40443211616308989012016-02-01T15:52:00.002-08:002016-02-01T15:52:56.039-08:00The Iowa Caucus Is Really Almost HereNo really, in less than two hours of this post, the good Democrats and Republicans will finally caucus and the first votes of any kind in the 2016 presidential <strike>Death March</strike> campaign happen.<br />
<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430615/donald-trump-2016-supporters-revolution-temper-tantrum" target="_blank">For Republicans and or conservatives, National Review's David French has an important article about what this voting cycle may mean for the parties and movement.</a><br />
I tend to believe that what is happening is exactly a celebrity moment with Donald J. Trump. But it is a lot of Pat Buchanan as well. Somehow, a billionaire is leading the pitchfork rebellion against the establishment.<br />
Nowadays, I guess I am part of that establishment because for one, I support Marco Rubio for president. And I don't think that there is anyway the United States will deport 11,00,000 illegal aliens or whatever the number is. Neither does Mr. Trump really believe that, but that is not the point of the piece by Mr. French.<br />
There is about a quarter of the GOP that is tired, rightfully so, of being sold out by those they send back to Washington. The real indictment should be how much importance we have even been told that the nation's capital has become in our lives. That is not an issue to these folks and yet it should be. But at a level, conservative and or right-wing populism does not really make the size of government the real issue. Note that the Donald never talks about actually cutting the size and scope of the federal government. He will need that big government to round up the illegals and implement the tariffs he is proposing against Red China and all those that are "unfair" in international trade.<br />
That is also a part of what is at stake in this election.<br />
If you are in Iowa, read the link before you caucus and think long and hard if you want to send a message or back a candidate that will be able to implement real change.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-86499656483591194672016-01-30T19:39:00.000-08:002016-01-31T13:26:32.954-08:00The Des Moines Register Poll Has Good News For The Top 3<a href="http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/01/30/donald-trump-reclaims-lead-latest-iowa-poll/79562322/" target="_blank">This really is it folks as the last The Des Moines Register poll before Monday's caucus just came out a while ago. </a><br />
And while it does show Donald J. Trump in the lead with 28%, Sen. Ted Cruz is not far behind at 23% and trailing in third place is Sen. Marco Rubio with 15%. Which means that all should get some of the 30 delegates up for grabs in this state.<br />
Each of the top three candidates can point to some good news for their team.<br />
For the Donald, his support is the most solid at 71%. And 50% think that the Donald will actually be feared by foreign leaders the most. But the downside is that many feel the Donald is not the most knowledgeable or will be respected by friends of the United States.<br />
In regard to Sen. Cruz, he has a higher enthusiasm rating to be the GOP nominee compared to the Donald. Sen. Cruz is in positive territory at 56% while the Donald is at 44%. Sen. Rubio leads that field at 58%. Se. Cruz also is sky-high in favorability ratings at 65% compared to the Donald's 50%. Sen. Cruz is also strong as a second choice at 17% while the Donald only manages a seven percent second choice in a caucus where people can and do change their minds at the last minute.<br />
The good news for Sen. Rubio is that people would be very inclined to be with him if he ends up winning the GOP nod with 58% of those voters. And Sen. Rubio has strong favorability rating at 70%. The problem for Sen. Rubio is that it has not translated to potential votes in the caucus.<br />
This is usually the most reliable of the polls and does not change my prediction that Sen. Ted Cruz will win the caucus, Donald J. Trump will come in second and Sen. Marco Rubio third.<br />
In less than 48 hours we will finally see the voting begin and the hand wringing fire up on all sides.<br />
<br />
<b><u>NOTE:</u></b><br />
I typed in the wrong numbers of the poll results. I have corrected that error.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-55068079233687580992016-01-30T13:17:00.000-08:002016-01-30T13:17:11.890-08:00Iowa 2016 Republican EditionMonday is the big day as the Iowa voters finally will caucus and get the GOP presidential nomination show on the road.<br />
<a href="http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar/2016-iowa-caucuses/" target="_blank">This is a helpful guide as to how the caucus actually works.</a> It is not a primary and is somewhat byzantine in how delegates are eventually chosen. One thing that it is not is a winner-take-all caucus. Delegates are chosen based on the percentage of votes any given candidate receives. Thus More than likely the top three finishers will walk away with delegates and possibly power at a possibly brokered GOP convention in Cleveland later this year.<br />
One bit of digression that is important to note is that most states in the past were winner-take-all primaries and or caucuses. Not this time. A full 84% of the delegates will be chosen by a form of proportional representation. Only 16% will be from winner-take-all primaries and or caucuses. Thus it is possible that fewer candidates will simply drop out as in the past. It is possible that it could be a three-way race all the way to Cleveland and no one candidate will have the 1,237 delegates needed for a first-ballot victory. It is possible no one will be close enough in the end.<br />
So back to Iowa.<br />
<a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html" target="_blank">According to the Real Clear Politics polling average</a>, yes Donald J. Trump still leads all candidates with 31% of the vote. Texas senator Ted Cruz is a strong second with 25% and Florida senator Marco Rubio is a surging third place with about 14%. The rest of those still standing are in the single digits.<br />
But history shows, and this year is no exception, that as much as 40% of the people who will actually caucus can change their minds right up to caucus night.<br />
What does that mean?<br />Well, it possibly hurts the Donald more than anyone. Since he decided to skip the last debate this past Thursday and host a hastily-staged support for veteran-themed event, the potential caucus goers do not like that disrespect. It was something that Ronald Reagan regretted when he skipped the last Iowa debate in 1980. Mr. Reagan lost and it lead to the eventual sacking of his campaign manager, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Sears_(political_strategist)" target="_blank">John Sears</a>. That is something when people point that out to defend the Donald and his decision to bail because he could not take Fox News channel's <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megyn_Kelly" target="_blank">Megan Kelly</a> and her possible pointed questions that he might actually have to answer.<br />
Not having the Donald on the debate stage helped all of the candidates. But probably helped Sen. Marco Rubio and former Florida governor Jeb! Bush more than the others.<br />
There is a school of thought that a serious caucus attender will have heard all of the candidates at least once in person during this Death March of a campaign season. They make up their mind and then get to the caucus site and hear all those from the different campaigns and some just change their mind right there on the spot. While 40% seems to be a high number, it is the way that a caucus works. Yeah, it is a little messy but truly democracy in action.<br />
What do I think will happen on Monday night?<br />It will be a nail-biter but I think that Sen. Cruz will finish first. Then it is the battle for the scraps and that will be between the Donald and Sen. Rubio. My guess is that Sen. Rubio could easily surge to second place based on the past. But more than likely the Donald will finish second and Sen. Rubio a very strong third. The rest? Well, it won't matter except for Jeb! and his millions that he can stay in hoping that there will be a dreaded brokered convention.<br />
Then it is on to New Hampshire only a week later.<br />
The 2016 presidential Death March campaign is finally going to the caucus goers and the voters and not a moment too soon.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-47945364814245038052016-01-30T12:37:00.000-08:002016-01-30T12:37:15.414-08:00RuminationsI looked at the last time that I posted and realized, wow it has been a while.<br />
A lot has happened since December 22, 2015. Too much not to use this post as a spray at all fields, so to speak.<br />
The 2016 presidential campaign is in full swing and finally, Iowa voters will caucus on Monday. We are at a point of the campaign in which we will see in the Donald J. Trump campaign is going to steamroll it's way to the GOP nomination. On the Democrat side, we will see if voters Feel the Bern and whether once again, as in 2008, they go far left and nominate an open socialist.<br />
The Super Bowl is set and next Sunday the Carolina Panthers and the Denver Broncos will play for all the NFL marbles. I'm pulling for a Bronco win for probably the first time because I do like Peyton Manning. And He has not ruined any chance for my beloved Cleveland Browns making the Super Bowl the same way one horse-faced looking guy, John Elway, did twice to my Browns in the 1980s. The reason that Mr. Manning has not done damage is because, to be blunt, my Browns have sucked. Pure, plain and simple.<br />
On February 28 will be the Academy Awards, truly a waste of time and space. Yet millions will watch and salivate over people that could not get a serious job. Oh, and there is a manufactured controversy about the fact no Black was nominated for best actor and or actress. And the movie Straight Outta Compton was not nominated for best picture. Why there is the hash tag, #OscarsSoWhite. And I say so what?! There have been plenty of years in which Blacks have been nominated and won. Last I checked, and correct me if I am wrong, but the movie <i>12 Years A Slave</i> won the Academy Award for best picture in 2013. It's all arbitrary anyhow and some years are just better than others for Blacks and well, everyone else. Some Black actors and actresses are boycotting the Academy Awards this year. And I say welcome to my party. I too am a boycotter but that is every year, not just over some made-up controversy. I just loathe the whole awards show concept.<br />
California is still in the toilet and moving to the left at a rapid pace. There is still corruption at all levels of government and always the wonder of why. Maybe essential one-party rule is part of it. Just sayin. . .<br />
There is so much to write and so little time. But one vow is that I will make an effort to get something in at least once a day from here on in.<br />
Ruminations are not all that easy to do.<br />
<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-3361135352121647232015-12-22T17:29:00.000-08:002015-12-22T17:29:15.536-08:00Conservatives Have Conservatives To Blame For GOP State Of AffairsGuess what fellow conservatives?<div>
There is a huge problem in our ranks and we have ourselves to blame.</div>
<div>
Before ye call me a sellout, RINO, etc., etc., read on.</div>
<div>
A case in point and what I will concentrate on is the Republican leadership in congress. </div>
<div>
Recently former Speaker of the House, John Boehner, all but handed conservatives a gift by giving up and leaving congress. Mind you, Mr. Boehner was not some hippy, left-winger. He was reliably conservative while moving up the leadership ladder. Something happened when Mr. Boehner attained the pinnacle of house leadership, the speaker's office. Mr. Boehner came in as House minority leader and acted as such when he became the speaker. It appeared that Mr. Boehner was more interested in cutting the deals no matter what rather than taking stands against the overreach of the executive branch. Sure, we are in divided government and at some level, deals will be cut. Conservatives simply wanted floor votes on a myriad of proposals that did not have a chance of even getting out of the then Democrat senate. But Mr. Boehner did nothing when the Republicans took control of the senate this year. </div>
<div>
<a href="http://rightviewfromtheleftcoast.blogspot.com/2015/12/the-trump-train-rolls-along-to-cliff.html" target="_blank">As I noted yesterday</a>, the GOP could simply have taken a page from the Democrat playbook of 1974-76 and sent the whole left-wing agenda to an impotent President Ford. He vetoed 66 pieces of legislation and was only overridden on 12. That's an over .800 winning percentage. Maybe it will end up the same but what the Republican base wants to see is less deal making and some back-bone. Count me in that group. </div>
<div>
But when Mr. Boehner quit, where was the great conservative to win over the disparate forces of the House of Representatives GOP caucus? </div>
<div>
NO ONE, but NO ONE wanted the job. The current Speaker, Rep. Paul Ryan, literally had to be dragged into the job. Where was <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Webster_(Florida_politician)" target="_blank">Daniel Webster</a>? Where was anyone in the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Caucus" target="_blank">Freedom Caucus</a>? Huh? </div>
<div>
I'll tell you where they were. </div>
<div>
Hiding. </div>
<div>
Hoping that they would not have to try for a job that saw a pretty conservative fellow, Mr. Boehner, run out on the rail.</div>
<div>
I fear that some firebrand conservatives realize that because deals have to be done, some disgusting, some just unpalatable, they do not want their fingerprints on it. Really, that is what we have to conclude.</div>
<div>
You know who cut some lousy deals with a worse political landscape but turned out to be a damn good president?<br />Ronald Wilson Reagan.</div>
<div>
So the dude literally dragged into the speaker's chair, Mr Ryan, cut a lousy budget deal that as he said the cake was already baked.<br />He is right. </div>
<div>
What was he supposed to do? Rip it up and start over? Maybe. Give conservatives more of a place at the table? Well, duh! </div>
<div>
By getting this out of the way, next year is going to be different. Conservatives will have a place and Mr. Ryan will make much more of a conservative effort to govern with the most left-wing president in our lifetimes. </div>
<div>
We conservatives expect a lot and were promised a lot over the past couple of election cycles. at a real level, we have been hosed. But we also are so damn tribal, we can't get a good, unifying governing majority. </div>
<div>
I hope my fellow conservatives think about all of this and don't think blowing up the place will make for a winning coalition. </div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-92097515320000735852015-12-21T21:21:00.000-08:002015-12-21T21:21:00.757-08:00The Trump Train Rolls Along To The CliffI still do not get it, the Trump Train that is.<br />
It seems that the Donald's support only grows and it is whenever he opens his illogical mouth and shoots off some absurdity.<br />
Is it the fault of the GOP establishment? The Democrats? The Dear Leader, President Obama, himself?<br />
It's all of the above I'm afraid.<br />
The GOP establishment seems more interested in cutting deals, such as the latest budget deal in congress, than ever confronting the Democrats and their titular leader, the president of the United States. Votes should have been had on repealing Obamacare as an example. Yes, the Democrats would fight in the senate and try the filibuster. So what? The GOP leader, Ol' Mitch McConnell, could drop a nuke on the filibuster and make the Dear Leader, President Obama, veto it.<br />
The Dems did this to Gerald Ford after he became president in 1974 and they swept to super-majorities in both houses in the midterm elections that year. The impotent successor to Richard M. Nixon in less than two years as president vetoed a total of 66 bills. Only 12 vetoes were overridden by congress and thus became law. And I will note that a Democrat, one Jimmah Carter, was elected president in 1976.<br />
My point?<br />It can be done and not hurt in the long run. It inspires a base that is needed to turn out the vote in 2016 no matter who the candidate is. It shows a party that believes in what it runs on.<br />
I get all of that.<br />
I would like to remind my friends who are on that Trump Train thinking that the Donald walks on water and says nothing wrong, there is nothing wrong with having a little political experience when running for office.<br />
Despite the comparisons to one Ronald Wilson Reagan, by the time he made his serious campaign for the presidency in 1976, he had served two successful terms as governor of California, and was able to enact welfare reform before it was cool. He had a record. And he had a lot of serious people supporting the failed '76 effort. Many of those would be influential in his two successful terms as president.<br />
I'll say it.<br />
Donald J. Trump can not and could not shine Ronald Reagan's shoes on a good day.<br />
Yeah, go ahead and show a picture of Mr. Reagan shaking the Donald's hand once as proof I am wrong.<br />
Policies and ideas matter.<br />
I have written before and will again that the Trump Train is more like the eventual Schwarzenegger Train Wreck.<br />There is no there there. What proof does <b><i><span style="color: #660000;">ANYONE</span></i></b> have that the Donald can do anything that he says he wants to do.Yesterday in an interview, the senate majority leader, Sen. McConnell, said there will never be passage of any Trump plan to ban Muslims entering the United States. Sen. McConnell and congressional leadership is a whole other post. There is no record because while the Donald has never been in any political office. Like Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger, there is the feeling of somehow we should just trust him.<br />
I don't.<br />
The Donald has no serious policy advisers. His national spokeswoman, Katrina Pierson, seems to be as unserious as he is.<br />
In the end I do believe that the Donald could score some early victories. Or maybe not. The Donald does not have much organization in Iowa, a caucus state. He leads substantively in New Hampshire, but it is essentially an open primary. Think some Democrats won't try to skew the vote there? The Donald could win in South Carolina, but many pols there are making their support clear now that Sen. Goober Graham has left the presidential race.<br />
If your a conservative and Republican, the only way we win is with the most electable <b><i><span style="color: #660000;">CONSERVATIVE</span></i></b> in any given race.<br />
And that is not Donald J. Trump and his merry train wreck in the making.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-47129837296981863192015-12-08T15:13:00.001-08:002015-12-08T15:13:43.054-08:00Trump's Muslim Plan A Non-Starter<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/07/donald-trump-calls-for-banning-muslims-from-entering-u-s/" target="_blank">I get the point that Donald J. Trump is making regarding Muslims coming to the United States</a> and our extremely permissive immigration policy, especially under the Dear Leader, President Obama.<br />
But it is a non-starter for a variety of reasons.<br />
For one, the way that Trump says we can stop Muslims coming to the United States is to simply ask them at the point of customs.<br />
Really?! Does the Donald really think that a Muslim being asked that question is going to answer honestly? Why would they?<br />
And many are not coming to stay but to travel and do business. Are we going to ban people who practice Islam, or at least say they are Muslim, from doing business in the United States? And travel, are we really going to turn away people simply coming to see relatives and or travel and go home? Many do that. Not all stay over their visas.<br />
The insanity of the Donald is that he compares what he proposes to what the paragon of liberalism, one Franklin Delano Roosevelt did in the opening days of the United States entering World War II.<br />
Interning Japanese-American <b><i><span style="color: #660000;">CITIZENS</span></i></b> and to a lesser extent German-Americans and Italian-American <b><i><span style="color: #660000;">CITIZENS</span></i></b> in concentration camps and taking away their property.<br />
Why many Trump supporters are also pointing out that the former worst president of the United States, Jimmah Carter, banned Iranians from travelling to the United States during the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979-80. Even that is kind of wrong <a href="http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/us-sanctions" target="_blank">as this points out </a>that the ban was against travelling <b><i><span style="color: #660000;">TO</span></i></b> Iran.<br />
What is the pattern in all of that?<br />
The United States took these actions against nationalities, not religions. And even that became questionable especially concerning the Japanese-Americans during World War II. The fact was that it was a total overreaction and did not prove to be effective. We threw the baby out with the bath water.<br />
You know what nations use what Trump is talking about against a nation?<br />Arab and Islamic nations against Israel. If one has an Israeli passport, don't bother trying to go to a nation outside of Egypt or Jordan, the two Arab-Islamic nations Israel's have relations with.<br />
Is that what we want?<br />
I don't.<br />
There is a way to make the point by simply not accepting refugees on face value. To some that is harsh and xenophobic, but rather than try to cherry pick between Syrian Christians and Muslims, we have to be willing to say no to any at this time.<br />
What should be done is to visit this aspect of immigration without the whole so-called "comprehensive" immigration reform refrain and set very concrete policies for allowing or not allowing refugees into the United States. It is the role of congress and the executive branch. But I suspect that both have very different ideas on how to handle this situation.<br />
But outright banning Muslims coming to and fro is not the same as banning people from nations that are clearly our enemies and or frenimies. My United States passport does not have a place for religion and it should not. Is it the price of living in the type of society we do, a free one? Possibly. But again, if congress and the executive could work out some kind of legislation that could do a better vetting process, it would help.<br />
This brings me to a new conclusion about the Donald.<br />
I thought I answered the question that the Donald is not a fascist in the traditional sense of the word and he is not.<br />
But he is a strongman type. The Donald is used to getting his way in business and it is totally different from politics in which, like it or not, coalitions are built. He acts and reacts like a businessman that has a set way and expectation.<br />
What is troubling is that man conservatives, myself included, see the current occupant of the White House as a sort of strongman. Yet many Trumpettes do not seem to get that the Donald is the same thing only with an R after the name.<br />
My point is that I do not want to replace one strongman for another. I want to see a constitutionalist in the White House. One that does not want more power but willing to let go of power, especially as in regards to usurping state rights and or obligations via Washington, D. C.<br />
The Trump Muslim plan is a non starter and the reaction of a strongman, not a leader.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-68903149778900422282015-12-03T21:15:00.001-08:002015-12-03T21:15:52.945-08:00Barbara Ma'am Boxer Continues To Be The WORST SenatorSeriously, I just hope that if California is stuck with either Kamala Harris or Loretta "Woo! Woo! Woo!" Sanchez as U. S. senator after next year for anything is a improvement over current Sen. Barbara Ma'am Boxer.<br />
She is without a doubt the WORST person in the senate and that is saying a lot.<br />
Look, both political parties have some hack people elected in safe seats and are none too bright. To be fair, a Republican senator I can think of that fits is Louisiana's David Vitter, who just lost his bid to become Louisiana governor.<br />
But Sen. Vitter can't hold a candle to Sen. Ma'am Boxer.<br />
Unbelievably after one of the worst terrorist attacks on American soil since 9/11, in a push for federal gun control laws, the ignorant tool said this:<br />
<br />
<b><i><span style="color: #660000;">Sensible gun laws work. We've proven it in California. And were not going to give up.</span></i></b><br />
<br />
Has the tool been under a rock for the past what, 24 plus hours?! Did she not see the carnage that was committed in a state with some of the toughest gun laws in the land? How in the hell could this tool say what she said?<br />Yes, two people had a helluva lot of firepower. Most were high-powered at that. And all indications are that the two terrorists that carried out the attack yesterday in San Bernardino, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, obtained the weapons legally. And because of the California laws regarding magazines and the like, they are different than in other parts of the United States. They take longer to reload. And don't forget the bomb factory that was in the home of the two terrorists. And since they were killed in a shootout with law enforcement, we will not know what the California gun charges would have been.<br />
But because today was a vote to try to increase background checks and allegedly close a "loophole" about gun show sales, our national embarrassment spoke in her usual manner.<br />
Dumb.<br />
People still get guns. Law abiding citizens follow the law to get guns. Some criminals do as well. Most who are criminals, however, do not. Even an outright gun ban, which is what is had essentially in France, can't stop people, especially committed terrorists, from obtaining weapons. Whether they be guns and or IED's or God forbid even worse.<br />
What matters is how illegal use of guns are prosecuted. Not whether the person had the gun in the first place.<br />
Sen. Ma'am Boxer's replacement has to be better than her for she is not a national treasure but a national buffoon.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-47544455950096587202015-12-03T13:34:00.000-08:002015-12-03T13:34:44.707-08:00Media Coverage Of Islamic Terrorism Pretty Much What You'd ExpectYesterday, December 2, 2015, a husband and wife <a href="http://www.sbsun.com/general-news/20151202/14-dead-21-injured-in-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-2-suspects-killed?source=most_viewed" target="_blank">committed an act of terrorism that killed 14 and wounded 21 in San Bernardino, California.</a><br />
As it turns out, it is safe to say this was an act of terrorism, not "workplace" violence. The two suspects, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik were not exactly, oh I don't know, Scandinavian. By the looks of the names, definitely Middle Eastern and or South Asian. And as more information is disbursed, it appears that they were . . .wait for it . . .practicing Muslims.<br />
Put the two together and you get, <b><i><span style="color: #660000;">RADICAL</span></i></b> Islamic terrorism.<br />
No, it was not some anti-abortion fanatics. It was not a case of workplace violence. It was a well planned assault on a group of innocent people, having a Christmas party.<br />
But the media coverage is actually worse than expected.<br />
Sometimes I wonder about the whole cable news thing. All the networks, CNN, Fox News and MSNBC. All engage in speculation and not trying to get the facts. Some of it is the sheer laziness of reporters. It is much easier to tweet and engage in speculation than actually using resources to obtain the facts and disburse that. Thus we end up with newspaper front pages like this doozy:<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6gMmQlp6e1btQxElK2OSCrRkgTKlTC3RoTdjCif8RmaDGkgIar0qTaM59-RagRQHsFs9WuKXpzGInt6XfirNyb3N9dguRjvCRFEQ_XCn3h-OrOrX2wdbBVOdyMK-0lXnEOIu-FA/s1600/NY_DN.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6gMmQlp6e1btQxElK2OSCrRkgTKlTC3RoTdjCif8RmaDGkgIar0qTaM59-RagRQHsFs9WuKXpzGInt6XfirNyb3N9dguRjvCRFEQ_XCn3h-OrOrX2wdbBVOdyMK-0lXnEOIu-FA/s320/NY_DN.jpg" width="256" /></a></div>
Why of course, it's all about gun control! And beating up people of faith, mostly Christians.<br />
Too bad the terrorists had bombs that just did not go off.<br />
Why do I mention the anti-abortion angle? Well, <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2015/12/02/breaking-report-of-up-to-20-people-shot-in-san-bernardino/" target="_blank">as reported by Allahpundit over at Hotair</a>, Bloomberg Business made sure to note that the shooting was taking place near the local Planned Parenthood clinic. And again, knowing little if any facts, political "leaders" used the occasion to push for gun control. Again, not knowing any of the facts.<br />
<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3345021/Twelve-pipe-bombs-4-500-bullets-tools-making-explosives-police-home-San-Bernardino-suspects-design-bomb-used-Boston-bombers.html" target="_blank">One fact is that the home of the terrorist, Farook, was described as an IED (improvised explosive device) factory</a>. That as many as twelve pipe bombs were found is better reported in the foreign press than our own press.<br />
Our press is interested in narrative and facts be damned.<br />
The most important thing that media should do is remember the five W's and one H.<br />
Who.<br />
What.<br />
Where.<br />
When.<br />
Why.<br />
How.<br />
There is nothing taught in a reputable journalism school that adds an S-speculation-to the story formula.<br />
The fact is that the line no longer exists between a reporter and a pundit. Every reporter seems interested in producing spin than fact gathering. Pundits think that their opinion is fact.<br />
We must absolutely demand better reporting and less punditry in these events. It takes time and serious investigation to ascertain facts. It's not neat and tight as an episode of CSI. Once the facts are indeed in, report it accurately and then, then lets comment and pundit away.<br />
When people that are supposed to deliver facts engage in speculation and feed a particular narrative, they are failing in their basic duty.<br />
As the American media continues to decay further into irrelevancy, we the consumers of information end up being uninformed and unable to make up our minds as to what would be the best way to understand and deal with any given situation.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-8160632530237029442015-12-01T15:13:00.000-08:002015-12-01T15:13:48.398-08:00If I Am Against Donald Trump, Who Am I For?I don't think that it is a secret that I support Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) for the GOP nomination for president in 2016.<br />
But I also strongly oppose the campaign that one Donald J. Trump has been and continues to run for the same GOP nomination.<br />
A thought came to me when I was on a Republican site on Facebook.<br />
A gentleman was making the case that many of us that oppose the Donald seem to beat up on the guy and do not boost the candidate that we support.<br />
The gentleman was and is right.<br />
Thus I took his challenge and explained why I support Sen. Rubio over any other candidate. As it turns out, the gentleman is a Rubio supporter as well.<br />
But his point was spot on.<br />
One of the aspects of Trump supporters is the fact that they are always on defense because of the many wild things the Donald says. In their zeal, they are mocking and demeaning those that oppose their candidate. And we who oppose the Donald end up feeding this and forget we support some other candidate.<br />
If someone that criticises the Donald does not support another candidate at this point in time, then it is nothing but dumping on Trump and I don't support that.<br />
A candidate like the Donald comes around once a generation. Yes, he is tapping into a certain group of people. Not all are a bunch of racists and or bigots. Not all think the United States is in such a state that we need to Make America Great Again. What does animate many is the fact that the promises that the GOP leadership has made over the last five years have fallen far short. That the leadership has ridden the Tea Party and their agenda only to not support it when it counts. Sure, we're not able to win every battle but at least we put the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the Democrats on the record on any given issue. At least most could say that the leadership tried. Maybe there will even be a stronger negotiating point as well. What the Donald does is sound like a Tea Party candidate because he says the GOP establishment sucks. Yet on many an issue, he is not a Tea Party candidate in the least.<br />
That is why I oppose the Doanld's candidacy.<br />
But why I support Sen. Rubio is because of the fact he actually took on the GOP establishment and won. Many seem to forget that. All that some can remember is that Sen. Rubio tried to cut a deal on illegal immigration. Something that I oppose and think that the junior senator from Florida realizes was a huge mistake. I remember that Sen. Rubio took on now Democrat Charlie Crist and defeated him handily in a GOP primary. Had Mr. Crist won that race and the subsequent election in 2010, that would have been a sure vote for so-called comprehensive immigration "reform". As it turned out Crist was such a loyal Republican, he became an Obama Democrat and a loser in running for his old job in 2014.<br />
Sen. Rubio has a solid conservative record in the senate (<a href="http://acuratings.conservative.org/acu-federal-legislative-ratings/?year1=2014&chamber=13&state1=22&sortable=7" target="_blank">American Conservative Union lifetime rating 96%</a> as of 2014. <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/scorecard" target="_blank">A Conservative review lifetime rating of 80%.</a> Both well north of 50%.). And before people scream that he has missed senate votes, his record on that is quite a lot less than that of the last two senators to run for the presidency, Secretary of State John F. Kerry and the Dear Leader, President Obama.<br />
When righteously criticizing the Donald, we must make the case for our candidate as well and that needs to be at all times. Just writing the latest wild comment and dumping on it shows us to be tearing down and being not much better than what we say about the supporters of the Donald.<br />
It's not just about what we are against but what are we for.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20024595.post-54967699746965712232015-11-28T19:52:00.000-08:002015-11-28T19:52:32.621-08:00Is Donald Trump A Fascist? What Does Trump Believe?The short answer is no, the Donald is NOT a fascist the way one would understand it.<br />
The long answer is that the Donald really has no clue as to what he believes and says and promotes whatever comes to his mind with little if any thought.<br />
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism" target="_blank">If one looks at this link at Wikipedia</a>, the one thing that the Donald seems firm on is nationalism. Otherwise, I do not see a candidate fitting the fascist label.<br />
The Donald is more like that relative that says what he or she thinks and doesn't really care how or what comes out.<br />
If one really does back to his speech announcing his quest for the GOP nomination, it was all off the cuff. No notes. Hence his comments about Mexico sending all their criminals here to the United States. And it has gone downhill from there.<br />
Here is what really gets my goat.<br />
Many of the Trumpettes love to compare the Donald to the Great Man himself, Ronald Reagan.<br />
There is absolutely no comparison, period.<br />
OK, take it back.<br />
The only comparison is that both did take it to the GOP establishment.<br />
But here is the difference.<br />
Ronald Reagan was an actual thinker, despite what the left says about him. It is known that Mr. Reagan read extensively, talked to many people and came to the conservative idea over a period of time. Mr. Reagan got into elective politics almost by accident. Everyone today knows that Mr. Reagan gave a last-ditch awesome speech for the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, Sen. Barry M. Goldwater (R-Ariz). It is known simply as <a href="http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/reference/timechoosing.html" target="_blank">The Speech.</a> Two years later, a group of conservative businessmen talked the retired actor into running for governor of California. And the rest is history.<br />
But there is an in between history that a lot of people do not know about.<br />
After losing the 1976 GOP presidential nomination to the incumbent president, Gerald R. Ford, Mr. Reagan became a radio commentator and as archives now public show, Mr. Reagan did his own research and wrote out the five-minute commentaries that kept him in the public eye.<br />
My question is what does the Donald actually believe? Whatever seems to be attractive to his core supporters.<br />
And the supporters are not bad people, despite my usage of the phrase Trumpette. Most are people that are frustrated with politics in general and the GOP establishment in particular. Many feel that GOP congressional leadership has acted impotently regarding the Dear Leader, President Obama. I agree with that. But I listen very carefully to the Donald and do not see how he would have any relationship with congress be it a Democrat or Republican one.<br />
The bottom line to me about Donald Trump is that whatever he believes, and it is not fascism, it is certainly not conservative. And that disqualifies him to me.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><!-- Start Bravenet.com Service Code -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="http://pub49.bravenet.com/counter/code.php?id=401890&usernum=4206170601&cpv=2">
</script>
<!-- END DO NOT MODIFY --><script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-4162134-1";
urchinTracker();
</script></div>Righty64http://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.com0