Kathy Griffin Controversy, aka "Trump Head"

How Far Does Too Far Go?

How does the Kathy Griffin controversy stack up with other previous 1st Amendment issues concerning the President of the United States? During the Obama presidency, there were countless images of Obama in the Joker makeup, and other images of him with a bone through his nose, similar to the horrible stereotypical images of African tribespeople that racists used to show to the masses. Although I do not recall them, I think there might have been images of 'President Obama in cross-hairs, which is equally uncalled for.  Is the recent image of Kathy Griffin and the severed Donald Trump head the worst case of comics trying to get a reaction out of a shocked society?

I think Griffin's was the worst stunt that I can remember.   I know the 1st Amendment is a sacred law and right that Americans use, but I think in a divided society, with a polarizing President Trump, that image that Kathy Griffin released was both ill-advised and dumb.  It encourages similar behavior from others and will lead down a path that is unforgivable.  I know some comedians suggest that is what they do, to provoke, agitate and whip people into a frenzy.  That is fine and all, but in this day and age, it is not the kind of discussion the American people need to engage in.  

I think it started with the election/Supreme Court affirmation of the presidency of George W. Bush that started the trend of the unhinged behavior of the American electorate to publicly demean and insult the occupant of the White House through words and images that are shocking to many (I know presidents since the creation of the country and constitution have been subject to cartoon images and added ridicule, but lately it has gotten to be alarming).  Democrats and liberals started to goad each other into creating the perception of how stupid President Bush was, which led to the Will Ferrel role of a dim-witted chief executive who was in over his head and had Vice President Cheney the one who ran the country.

Then, when Barack Obama was elected to the White House, it was conservatives turn to raise the shock value of their lack of respect for the president and his family.  The media did not try to show how this type of behavior was not acceptable, rather the media showed these images to rile up the respective sides of the political divide.  It led to abhorrent behavior from some members of the Republican party, including consultants and party leaders, especially on the state and local level in conservative states.  The GOP should have taken the steps to clamp down and show of force that this derogatory behavior will never be tolerated.

For future generations, I hope that the American people will realize that one does not have to like or can even hate the President of the United States. They can make fun of him or her in a clever way, but that promoting behavior that pokes fun at, or at its worst encourages violence of any sort directed at a member of Congress or a President, is unacceptable and should never rear its ugly head again.

Scary Times: The unsettling Trump Administration and the State of our Union

The Sorry State of Our Union 

April 11, 2017

I have been reading various media outlets and online websites regarding the last few days of the ever-volatile Trump Administration. Granted, during the campaign, I thought Donald Trump was able to use his P.T. Barnum carnival barker style of campaigning to win the White House effectively.  It was a campaign that no one had ever run before and became a blitzkrieg of sound bites, bluster and a rope-a-dope methodology which defeated an astounding 17 other candidates in the Republican primaries. Additionally, Trump took on and was able to defeat the vaunted Clinton Machine (with some help from the Russians, FBI Director Comey and Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, allegedly). So, I was expecting his administration to be unconventional, to say the least.  He would govern a little differently, but with help from experienced political hands, or so I had hoped.

However, over the past few weeks, I am starting to believe that the "new era" of Trumpism and politics his supporters along with those who had an open mind (like myself) had expected is nothing more than a charade.  Mr. Trump's baffling Cabinet choices and their testimonies during confirmation hearings were nothing I have ever witnessed before. Attorney General-designate Jeff Sessions answers to Senator Franken were downright head-scratching, especially his volunteering that he didn't speak with anyone from the Russian government, even though Senator Franken never asked him that specifically.  His recent recusal from any administration or congressional investigations into Russian tampering of American democracy is embarrassing to the country, and the country's allies.  Along with President Trump's nutty accusation that former President Obama had instructed the FBI to "wiretap" phone lines at Trump Tower in New York is a ridiculous assertion, even on its face to partisan observers.  Our transition of power does not allow for outgoing presidential administrations to listen in on phone calls from aides for the incoming administration since that would require the help of government agencies, who are going to be of service to the new administration.  

I personally feel that Mr. Trump is not the person who is running things in the White House. That is a shared responsibility between Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus, with the former GOP Chairman Priebus in the "Robin" role to Bannon's "Batman." Trump appears to be coasting through his job.  I don't get the impression he is a studious person, and the job requires a lot of reading (intel briefings, etc), and I feel he wants people to do the majority of heavy lifting the job comes with.  President Trump loves to sit at his desk and show the items he has just signed.  A bit juvenile, if you ask me.  Like show and tell, but an adult version.  Trump does not seem to be heavily involved in running the country.  There is no deep preparation, outside of knowing his talking points that his aides tell him to say.  His interviews consist of simple, but effective extemporaneous exchanges with the main network media. Nothing deep is said from President Trump.  The country now has to deal with a non-interested President of the United States for the next four years.  I hope those years do not suck.

While there is an apathetic president in the White House, there are dueling echo chambers in form of conservative and liberal traditional media, website and online opinion forums, and a general fraying of common decency. The latter is a result the echo chambers. Trump supporters are his supporters for a reason, and nothing the traditional media puts forth will change their opinion of him.  His support borders on worship and that can trend to a worrisome possibility.   Liberal supporters tend to have a visceral hatred of President Trump, even more than their loathsome feelings for former President Bush.

Take for instance the recent allegations, which are being investigated by the FBI, of the Trump campaign's alleged ties to Russia, and the transfer of that information from the intelligence services and the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes (R-California). The Democrats are trying to paint Mr. Nunes as a compromised member of the committee and a political stooge for the Trump Administration.  The Republicans are supporting Congressman Nunes because their angle is that Democrats are just trying to create drama where there is none.  The liberal and conservative echo chambers are taking sides and disregarding the other side's arguments.  It is a scary proposition where two groups within Congress to not accept or give the benefit of the doubt to the opinions or concerns of the other side.  This can set a dangerous precedent, which could lead to a cataclysmic and fatal division of the country for the foreseeable future.  The lead-up to the American Civil War was begun when the pro-slave states of the south and the pro-union states of the north ignored the issues and concerns of the other side and felt their own views were more important, valid and the right way to look at the business of the country.  I feel that America is still fighting those same pertinent issues.  It has been accelerated due to the explosion of cable news shows with various experts, "strategists," and politicians preaching to their constituents, rather than seeking common ground.


Recently, President Trump was on the receiving end of his first legislative defeat, with his attempt to repeal and "replace" the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"), was soundly destroyed by an indifferent White House, stubborn Freedom Caucus and poor leadership from Speaker Ryan.  The Republicans spent 7 years trying to defeat, overturn and repeal the health care bill that President Obama wanted for his legacy.   What an utter waste of time.  The GOP had no credible alternative but simply threw a 7-year temper tantrum.  If behooves the GOP, that if they want to repeal a bill they don't like for a multitude of reasons, the party needed to show a good-faith replacement that would make the goal of access and secure insurance for the poor and afflicted in this country, the replacement needed to show visible improvement above and beyond the older bill. Their alternative, the American Health Care Act, was an utter disgrace and a shallow attempt to cover their loathing of a legacy project for America's first black president.


(Updated):

With this Trump Administration, there is never a shortage of news and outrageous crap that eliminates from this White House.  Recently, television images from around the world showing Syrian women and children being killed by the deadly Sarin gas.   Some in the alt-net community suggested it was a false flag operation where it was made to look like the Assad government had committed this travesty, while others said it was the Russians, and others claim that it was the opposition rebels who are creating this illusion.  Nonetheless, President Trump authorized the launching of 59 American-made Tomahawk cruise missiles to attack the airfield where the Sarin gas bombing was initiated. The Trump Administration did warn the Russians of the military operation, thereby avoiding an escalation in the situation. This attack did not create much damage, based on drone footage afterward, but the administration did specify that 20% of the aircraft that took part in the bombing had been destroyed.  Not sure I buy that.  I think it was a waste of time because it did not deter any of the parties involved in the Syrian Civil War from creating a cease-fire or cessation of combat.  I think the primary goal was for Trump to show he had "balls" and could be trusted to represent American and Western interests.  Personally, I don't think he scared Russia's Putin or the Iranian government of future engagement with the American military.

In other White House news, Sean Spicer said that Assad was worse than Hitler because he used chemical agents to attack civilians, while the Nazi leader did not do that.  Mr. Spicer conveniently left out the "chemicals" Hitler used to kill millions of Jews, including in the gas chambers.  What an idiot!  Each and every day this administration, along with the nut jobs who advise the president and speak to the media, embarrass this country to no end.  Combine that with the horrible legislation crafted by our Congress, and I feel that the American century (20th) will lead the decline of American civilization.  Maybe that is a stretch to think about, but based on the short, but tumultuous days of the Trump Administration, the behavior of North Korea, China in the Pacific and Putin's grand ambitions for Europe and the resurrection of the Russian Empire, I feel this country is off-course in its destiny to protect Western values.

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa Will Run for CA Governor in 2018

Why is this man running for Governor of California?

I just heard recently that the former (and infamous) mayor of Los Angeles, His Holiness Antonio Villaraigosa, is running for governor of California.  I have to just sigh.

I am baffled that the same notorious people keep running for the political offices throughout the country. Former California senate and presidential candidate Carly Fiorina is contemplating a senate run from Virginia (she lives there now, and ran her crapticious presidential campaign from that state), Rudy Guiliani ran for President twice, along with Mike Huckabee and Senator Rand Paul. Granted, many of them knew they would not win, but ran to increase exposure and to demand higher speaking fees for their red meat crowds (both liberal and conservative). Still, I am saddened that very few people outside of the old retreads (figuratively speaking) in our political class run for multiple positions. There is nothing new with those politicians or their platforms.

Mr. Villaraigosa had grand ambitions as Los Angeles mayor, where many projects fell short of their goals. Part of that I suspect is that the donor class within city limits (like the Vatican's Curia) controls much of what goes on behind the scenes, and may have pushed back when his ambition got the best of him. Still, if you have an ambitious agenda, and you talk a big game, you have to be able to deliver to your constituents. 

He had a mixed record as administrator of the nation's 2nd largest city. Antonio was a supporter of public transit in Los Angeles, and that is why Metro was able to receive sales tax increases (Measure R) due to his whipping the vote counts for passage. On the other hand, his role in trying to fix potholes, and repair the city's infrastructure was a moderate success. He wanted to break up the LAUSD, which is a great idea, into 5 or more divisions, to increase accountability. However, he was not able to get people to support him for those proposals (he also ran into school administrators, teacher's unions, and segments of concerned parents). Mr. Villaraigosa did work out a beneficial partnership that did bring in some small levels of accountability, but it was not what he wanted, and the educational goals he had hoped for did not pan out.

The city at the time did not have a large police force to deal with the problems of a young 21st Century metropolis. Mayor Villaraigosa did grow the LAPD to a force numbering over 8,500 officers, although his goal was to increase the police force by 1,500 officers to over 10,000, but that did not happen. In fact, he padded some of those numbers with the city agency that provides protection for the city's buildings and other notable locations. Crime reduction was another positive in his favor, and those gains in terms of increased public safety have remained relatively constant.

Additionally, he did have an impact as an environmentalist, including exceeding the Kyoto Protocol levels of water consumption, conservation and carbon emission reduction in certain areas of the city. Mr. Villaraigosa mentioned once that he wanted to plant 1 million trees in the city, and that goal was not achieved either (he "only" managed to put around 350,000 trees, which is still pretty impressive, though).

Additionally, he wanted to eradicate the city's growing budget deficit, which had reached $530 million around the time he wanted to run for Governor the first time, in 2010. That embarrassment was a dent in his political ambitions, and he has now waited patiently for another chance once Jerry Brown rides off into the sunset (and his Moonbeams). At this current time the budget shortfall is hovering around $150 million, so he did make some progress in lowering it, but part of that credit does go to the current mayor, Eric Garcetti as well. Another problem is that Villaraigosa worked out an agreement to raise city employee salaries by 5% per year, and this was before the economy collapsed in 2009. A 25% increase is too much for most cities to effectively deal with and balance future budgets with this type of expenditure. It will lead to more deficit spending, something Los Angeles does not need in this time period.

His first state of the city address, back in 2006, was given by a more ambitious and telegenic mayor that the old, grizzled vet 8 years later in 2013. While he does get credit for some things, he did not accomplish many other items on his agenda. A Los Angeles Times poll showed that roughly 20% of city residents felt he was a good mayor, and delivered on his proposals. The article's author felt that reflected more on his lack of more accomplishments, than his general failures.

I think he would be a similar type of first term governor. He will make grandiose pledges and promises, deliver on some of them, pad his numbers for others, and make the shallow case that Mr. Villaraigosa does deserve a second term. Personally, I think California needs someone more dynamic, in touch with younger voters (who will make up the workforce) and can deliver on doable, but major campaign promises. The state will have a large increase in expenditures due to absorbing health costs for new immigrants, and the loss of some tax revenue with people leaving the state for greener pastures in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico. In order to revive the state's economic fortunes (I know California has the world's 6th largest economy, but the economy benefits corporations and wealthy residents more) for most residents who are middle and lower income. The state needs a politician who will change the way California runs itself, and Antonio Villaraigosa is a politician cut from a previous generation's cloth. The state needs a new type of 21st-century politician, one that will usher the state into the new century as well, and make California "Great Again!"

Sorry, Antonio, you are just not that person our state needs.

Sources: Los Angeles Daily News (February 4, 2009)

               http://www.dailynews.com/article/ZZ/20090224/NEWS/902249875

               Los Angeles Times (April 15, 2013)

             http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/15/opinion/la-oe-newton-column-villaraigosa-20130415

The first two weeks of the Trump Administration have been what people thought it would be.

February 8, 2017

E Pluribus LOCO!

"MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!...OR NOT"

The bats**t crazy modus operandi of the Trump Administration has lived up to its billing, and people's fears.

As soon as President Trump was sworn in, he made a furious attempt to sign as many Executive Orders as possible.  Trump signed an order to halt the acceptance of foreign travelers from countries designated "dangerous" by the State Department and the foreign policy establishment.  President Trump created a firestorm of protests from the Democrats and those in the Republican establishment, due to a perception of poor handling of the powers of the president.  The rumors of confontational conversations with some of the United States's longest and greatest allies (Mexico, in terms of trade, Australia, whom we fought in the Pacific theater with in World War II). Trump had an awkward meeting with the British Prime Minister, Theresa May.  Who could forget the creepy hand-holding between Trump and May? It made the "special relationship" seem a bit forced and phony.  Hopefully that relationship with Britain wont be ruined by President Trump's boorish behavior and arrogance. Not to mention his rampant insecurity.

The "Muslim Travel ban" does not speak well of President Trump's understanding of the nuance of foreign policy and the impression it creates around the world.  The repuation of the United States hangs in the balance.  If America continues to treat its allies poorly, then some other ambitous nation (China, Russia or India) will attemp to provide millitary and diplomatic security that America has taken a back seat to.  Trump does not posses the subtlety of the power of the bully pulpit.  The president has the "bully" part down cold, but he needs to understand the power of the presidency has around the world, and must use it carefully and when needed.  The ban is primarily for seven specific countries in the Middle East, but it does not include countries that have serious jihadi fundamentalist and terrorism epicenters (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc).  I believe this Executive Order was planned and excecuted poorly.  It does appear that Trump's Svengali, Steve Bannon, is running the show.  It shows that someone with no experience in federal government service, specifcially for the Executive Branch, can ruin the power of the office itself through poorly thought out policies, in my opinion. Not to mention, that any negative perception in the Muslim world of President Trump's intentions toward Muslims, will inflame anti-American sentiment, and increase the recruitment of Islamic terrorists who will plot to attach the United States.  Trump must be careful, or he will open a Pandora's Box of worldwide conflict, one in which no one wins.  He must be cautious, and remove any sense of bellicose behavior.

Speaking of dangerous and aggressive behavior, President Trump must not give in to the neocons within the Republican party who want to see America fight another dumb war in the Middle East, in this case against the Islamic Republic of Iran. He will be goaded and supported by the Israeli government of Benjamin Netenyahu, who would prefer the world's pre-eminent superpower do their dirty work in fighting Israel's most hated enemy.  I sincerely believe that the Netenyahu's government wants the United States to fight all of Israel's traditional enemies, in order to allow Israel to wield enormous influence within the Middle East and around the world, to some small extent.  It is shameful, in my opinion, that America is so easily bamboozled into war by numerous countries.  While I share a strong desire to see Israel strong, prosperous and able to provid its citizens a peaceful co-existence with the world community, the current right-wing government in Te Aviv is not going to ensure that for a long time. Its policies regarding settlements in the long run will backfire and not bring the desired result its people want, which is peace with its neighbors.

In fact, there are discussions that one of the main reasons for an aggresive American policy towards Syria is that the country is a focal point for a conflict based not on Assad, but a natural gas pipeline. Currently, Russia supplies a vast amount of natural gas to the European Union, and Putin does not want any alternate options for Europe.  Many of the gulf states, UAE, want to have a rival pipeline that goes through the Arabian Peninsula and provides an alternate power source for the European states.  Assad does not want that alternate pipleline to run throug Syria, partly due to Syria being a client of the Russian Federation.  The Gulf States want the United States to fight the Syrian government (and Russia too), and offer to pay for this stupid endeavor.  

I sincerely hope that Trump has the right support within his inner circle to avoid another aggresive war in the most volatile part of the world.  It angers me that the Gulf States simply are offering to pay for this idiotic idea, and that America would have to sacrifice its soldiers, sailor, airmen and Marines for another most likely protracted war that will yield no real benefits.   Most of the American people are tired of conflict in the Middle East, so I hope Trump and his staff are careful to avoid war.  Even though I think President Trump is nuts on many levels, during the 2016 campaign, he seemed inclined to avoid expensive and financially draining conflicts with no certain, and swift outcomes.

After the first two weeks, I am under the belief that the next four years of President Trump is never going to be boring.  I hope he has the strength to avoid using any sort of nuclear weapons (tactical nukes) even thoug he is goaded to do so.  While I do have some hope that Trump is not a fool, I am not certain that his insecurity and thin skin will force him to do something stupid that will have no tangible benefit for the reputation of the United States, or its citizens.

Every week is a roller coaster.  I hope for America's sake, none of its citizens are forced to vomit, like I am scared of doing.

" Our Father, Who Art in Heaven...."

Donald Trump Inaugurated! Now what?

President Donald J. Trump Inauguration: Sign of the impending Apocalypse? Or Much Ado About Nothing?

For those of us who watched a rather celebrity-less Presidential Inauguration, and the WTF aftermath (Sean Spicer press conference, anyone?), it remains to be seen if this administration can reach a level of competence that will assuage the anxiety and fear of certain segments of the American population. First, there was hardly anybody of entertainment value that was willing to perform.  Even though that does not portend whether an administration will be scandal-free, or if they can accomplish anything, perception does matter.  It was partially due to immense public pressure (bullying, in my opinion), which caused some artists and entertainers to "pull out due to other conflicts" from performing for the new administration.  IF artists and entertainers were forced to not play for presidents who committed adultery, or said things they regret, inaugurations would have no celebrities present.  I think in order to protect and honor the dignified and peaceful transfer of power between administrations, artists should play even if they loathe or dislike the new President.  Be above partisan fighting.

Too many artists and entertainers give in to the bullying committed by the online community.  In addition, the level of political correctness that is prevalent in our society, along with the threat of boycotts has forced people to make decisions based on fear and calcuation of loss of income, which is sad.  It is not a sign of a great society where small but influential group of bloggers, online trolls, etc. can force people to make a choice between income and being decent people.

President Trump's Inuagural speech was not too uplifting or aspirational.  Instead, he painted a bleak picture of a dystopian America, one in which he alone can make better, and atone for past Presidents' mistakes.  I believe that America is doing very well, but for  the 1% of Americans primarily, who are high earners and who do not struggle to make ends meet, or worry if they will have the money to feed their kids.  When he states "Make America Great Again," I feel he is targeting those Americans who are not part of the success that benefits others, i.e. the 1%.  He has the right message for those who feel they are being left behind by a globalized economic model, but I am not sure he has the right solutions for those individuals.  Tax cuts for the wealthy, decreased government spending, except for the Department of Defense, is not the way I would go.  Personally, if I were President, I would raise taxes on the wealthy, provide tax cuts for the middle class and lower income earners, place a moratoriam on government spending, and ease certain regulations for businesses so that they can improve local economies.    

However, Congress is controlled by the supply-side Republican party.  They are not interested in increased government spending, but essentially use a "one-size fits all" legislative model of tax cuts for the wealthy, decreased entitlement (social security, etc) and massive defense spending.  That usually is a recipe for large increments to our national debt, but that has not stopped Republicans before.  They seem to care about deficit spending and the troubling debt when Democrats control the White House, and or one branch of Congress.  I do not see President Trump making the lives of people better.  I think he is essentially a puppet of the GOP donor class, and does whatever Chief of Staff Reince Priebus tells him to do. The rumors of Trump spending most of his time watching tv to retaliate against those who make fun of him, or are critical of him, is disconcerting to say the least.

The area of the new Trump Administration that worries me the most is foreign policy.  He seems to be way too cozy with Russian Presient Vladimir Putin, and add the fact that he has not released his tax returns is very troubling.  Those Americans who feel that not releasing his returns means he is hiding something from the country is a serious issue.  Is he compromised?  Are most of the loans he receives from foreign investors primarily Russian in origin?  Media reports have said that many banks are reluctant or outright against loaning money to the Trump organization, mainly due to the fact that Mr. Trump is very litigious.  He makes Scientology, which has a reputation of intimidation through massive and frequent litigation, seem benign in nature.

I sincerely hope that President Trump does not given in the the Neocons in his administration who are angling for war with Iran.  I believe the American people are exhausted from the last two wars that endured for over 15 years.  The electorate will not stand for another stupid invasion of a Middle Eastern country. Since Russia is a protector of Syria and Iran, and Trump is friendly with Putin, perhaps one of the benefits of this shady friendship will be an aversion to armed conflict in the most volatile region of the country.  One can hope anyway.

Inauguations are symbolic of something new.    Will President Trump usher in a new era for prosperity for all?  Will he avoid the shameful foreign policy of President Bush?  Will he be an faithful steward of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?

No one knows how the next four years are going to turn out.  The world prays that it will not be a disaster.  Terrorism can only be defeated by being smart, and building trust and cooperation between those Western nations and the Islamic community around the world. President Trump is now the Leader of the Free World.  

Now what?  

What the Hell Just Happened? Yikes!

Donald Trump wins Presidency!   WORLD opinion of America in state of shock!

January 13, 2017

At the time of my last blog post, the United States was gearing up for a Presidential election vote on November 8th.  Even though Hillary Clinton was not my favorite choice, I felt that she would win comfortably.  Little did I know that she was far more unpopular, in addition to Donald Trump's savvy reading of the electorate, which made his victory such a shock. Truth be told, I was in total shock when the networks called the race for Trump.  There was a sense of WTF did our country just do?  Will I see a mushroom cloud in downtown Los Angeles?  I am not gonna lie, I was a little afraid, despite the bluster of past blog posts.

Reviewing the media of both the left and the right, you get a sense of different opinions of how his presidency will turn out.  Liberal and progressive websites profess an outcome where the Trump Presidency will fail and damage America's global reputation.  Conservative websites believe that although Trump is an unknown entity, he will do the bidding of the GOP and its pro-business goals.  This includes unnecessary tax cuts for the wealthy. 

Democrats continue to push the narrative that Putin and Russia's intelligence services worked to defeat Hillary Clinton, in that a Trump White House will be less confrontational to Putin's global ambitions.  This is to also damage the legitimacy of Donald Trump.  The recent intelligence reports that imply that Russia interfered with the November 2016 elections is ambiguous at best.  I believe that Russia did try to influence the election, but that they did not "hack" voting machines to alter votes.  Most countries use covert methods to influence our elections.  I am not shocked by this, and I think it has been going on for decades.  What do you think AIPAC, the powerful pro-Israel lobbbying group, does all the time?

If Donald Trump can avoid a war with Iran, I think he will have provided some sense of pragmatism in international affairs.  I personally get the sense that Trump is not a war monger, and that the neoconservatives who are angling for another stupid war in the Middle East will not have the influence they had in the Bush White House.  The jury is still out in terms of what kind of jobs he will bring back to the United States.  Carrier and Ford got good publicity through Trump's "negotiations" to keep or bring back some jobs to American workers.  However, the finite details as to the real outcomes need to be made transparent.  If Donald Trump gives away the store to companies who treaten to move jobs overseas unless they get concessions, the benefits he espouses may not add up to that much.

I share many American's fears of a Trump administration.  Hopefully, he is not the ignoramous that liberals promote to the country.  His presidency has many unknowns, but if he can manage the country in a pragmatic and careful manner, maybe his time in the White House will not be so bad?  Eh, I really cannot say, but pray that it will work out.

I am now returning to my bunker.  Pray for Peace!

I am a Foodie...and it is Glorious!

October 16, 2016

The culinary industry has been transformed as chefs become renowned for their craft

____________________________________________________________________

I have been an avid diner over the course of my life.  In my younger years, restaurants were just a place for my family and I to enjoy each other's company and to enjoy our favorite eateries. 

However, over the last 15 years, I have noticed an explosion in interest in the craft of the culinary arts.  The Food Network has turned chefs into celebrities (the term "Celebrity Chef" I find insulting, but I digress).  

This has formed millions of fans who turned the restaurant business, and the craft of cooking, into a multi-billion industry, and these patrons who created fandoms of legendary restaurants, such as Per Se (NYC) and The French Laundry ( Yountville, CA) and their chefs (Thomas Keller) into global legends.

I have the utmost appreciation of the efforts and dedication that many of these gifted chefs spend to make meals some of the greatest memories for people who patronize these restaurants.  These talented artisans turn meals into lifetime memories and experiences that become part of the human life story.  I am enthralled when I see these chefs make their masterpieces into meals for personal enjoyment.  

Some of my best memories with my family (and sometimes myself) have been to eat at many of the finest restaurans in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., New York, Montreal and Vancouver to name a few.  Many of the restaurants are on my foodie bucket list, such as Alinea in Chicago, which has won Michellin stars, Boloud and Le Barnardin (NYC), Noma in Denmark, the Fat Duck (England) and El Bulli (Spain, which has since closed).

I hope to try many of these great locations before my time on earth has passed.  They will most certainly be worth it.

Dessert at Alinea (Chicago-Chef Grant Achatz)


Apple Taffy made with helium (Alinea, Chicago)

       

Debate II Results: I am now resigned to believe Hillary will win November 8th

October 10, 2016

Why I feel Hillary will win the Presidency of the United States on November 8th

__________________________________________________________________

I watched intently the second Presidential debate on Sunday, October 9th.  It was interesting to see Donald Trump change from the clumsy debater to someone who appeared calm and didn't invade Hillary Clinton's personal space, like senate candidate Rick Lazio (R) did in a debate in 2000 for Hillary's first campaign for senate in New York.

As I have stated in my previous blog posts, I tend to go back and forth on this election. Not because I feel Trump would be a good President, in fact, I think he would be a poor President.  However, he seems to be the grenade that would blow up the current political system, one that favors the large dollar donor class, Wall Street and the fields of finance and tech.  Most Americans are angry that their lives have not improved, and wages have either remained stagnant or decreased, while the 1% have seen their fortunes rise.   That is what Trump would represent, and that is why I feel he has the support he does.  Most of the media feel that his support his mainly white and male, but I believe he could not have won the Republican primaries if his support consisted of that small demographic.  I think liberals will be in for a shock on election day, and find out how much of the country supports him.  Not enough to win, but make it very close.

However, after the second Presidential Debate, while Trump did tend to make some improvement in terms of his posture, composure and what he said, I feel that most voters who saw the debate didn't really move in his direction.  He needed to show that Hillary will be more of the same type of leader in the White House, with little change in terms of what will be accomplished. Specifically, towards economic policies that would help the large segments of American society that are struggling in this global economy.

Hillary did just enough to convince her supporters that she has enough horses to win on November 8th, but not enough for a large mandate.  She is a corporate Democrat, and the changes she will push won't make the economy grow to the levels it needs to do, I feel.  Asher Adelman, the real-life character that Wall Street's Gordon Gecko was modeled on, felt that Bernie Sanders had the right idea of growing the economy. Mr. Adelman believed that in order to grow the type of economy that America needs, the low and middle classes need higher wages in order to spend money.  Those types of consumers are what determines if the overall economy of the country is good, because when they spend money, it forces banks to lend, which is how banks improve their financial holdings.

So, based on the debate this evening (Sunday), Hillary Clinton performed well enough to convince America she is the best candidate, but for the usual elite crowd of people, who as before, will benefit the most.

Nothing will seriously change, unless a similar populist to Mr. Sanders comes around and makes a better push for the White House, and succeeds in getting there.

The Negatives for Trump and Hillary just keep getting worse

October 7th

What is going on with these two candidates? Enough already!
__________________________________________________

With the shocking new "revelations" recently about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, it seems this election is about to get a whole lot worse.

It is not a shock that unearthed "hot mike" recordings of Donald Trump and Access Hollywood's Billy Bush were heard on their way to a taped event,  which were released to the general public today.  In it, Bush and Trump can be heard talking in lewd terms about several women that Trump and had met, and attempted to sleep with, and generally debased their reputations with "guy" talk aboard a bus on their way to watch Trump take part in a soap opera acting session, or something to that effect.  While I am not surprised that it was somehow found and released just before the 2nd Presidential Debate, and the the timing reeks of politics, it does not help the embattled Trump's image with many female voters, one in which his mysogonist opinions and poor outlook towards women in general are well known and discussed.  It presents a serious calamity with women voters, and seriously harms Trump's general election prospects, which were an uphill climb to begin with.  Now, there is talk that he should drop out, but he is the type of person who will not, and that will force the GOP to determine if they chalk up this election as a loss, and work to obstruct President Clinton for the next four years.

The Republican party cannot support him publicly anymore, and many senior party officials must work overtime to protect their candidates who have winnable races despite the Trump albatross around their necks.  Trump supporters will vote for their guy anyway, and this problem will be a left-leaning media story until November 8th.  The GOP is in a world of hurt, and their problem candidate is about to explode party unity. The Republicans are trapped on a runaway train, going at high speed, with no crew in the engine, and there is no sign that train will stop until it is derailed.  There are going to be many sleepless nights at GOP headquarters.

Hillary has new problems of her own, which will be covered by Fox News extensively, and by conservative websites and blogs.  Wikileaks has released transcripts and emails from Hillary's speeches and emails from John Podesta, a Hillary campaign advisor.  In her speeches, Wikileaks shows that what Hillary says in public about issues that progressives support (No TPP, no Keystone pipeline, etc), she supports those items, which will damn her to Bernie supporters as well.  Allegedly, Hillary also supports reforms for Wall Street, but insists that Wall Street insiders must lead the charge, which will anger Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. I bet he does regret endorsing her now too.  Also, Hillary is an advocate of an open, global economy, one that is contingent on an "open borders" policy.  With immigration policy at the heart of this presidential campaign, this is going to hurt her. However, no liberal media network (CNN, MSNBC) will cover it. Those networks will spend most of their time on Trump's anti-woman narrative.

It is a shame, because the immigration issue could be a winner for the candidate that provides cogent, honorable and pragmatic immigration law and policies.  A good friend of mine, Kevin Lynn, has written something related to this as a writer on a progressive blog:

http://progressivesforimmigrationreform.org/someone-left-truth-rain/

This election could be about issues that need addressing, and the American voter is anxious to hear solid policy positions, but the campaign now will be about two horribly unpopular candidates, and their increasing negartive narratives. This is a sad time for this country.

Shame on us.

I go back and forth about Trump

October 1, 2016

Uugghhhh...I go back and forth about Trump the person, and presidential candidate

___________________________________________________________________

After watching the presidential debate, I felt Hillary had made enough points where the general perception would agree that she won the debate.

However, I am still not a fan of her, nor her policies.  I don't think she would make the right decisions on the global stage relating to the use of our militiary.  Her supporters tend to praise her actions as our country's chief diplomat.  I didn't think her time as Secretary of State accomplished much. Hillary will not change Obama's interactions with foreign leaders, nor will she lower the military's foreign engagements.  I feel that she will make Syria worse (unless President Obama can work with Putin to agree to a meaningful cease-fire before he leaves office). It could explode a wider war in the Middle East, including a much anticipated civil war between Sunni and Shia Musims.

Her economic policies don't inspire much confidence in me, but I will give her the benefit of the doubt.  It will be a wait and see approach.  Economic policies tend to take a few years before they warrant a verdict by economists and business interests.

I feel that Hillary will ensure Wall Street will continue to have strong influence on her business policies, and that will cause major tension with liberal and moderate citizens who believe banks and large corporations have too much influence in Washington, D.C. Additionally, those corporate interests write laws that benefit and protect them at the expense of the American voter.

I desperately wanted Donald Trump to be a real change agent, but he has proven to be an amatuer (quite literally) in the general election campaign, making stupid statements, wasting time with beauty pageant controversies, etc.  He needed to show that he has the temperance to handle the world's most difficult job.  His actions do not inspire moderate voters to cast their lot with him.

This election has turned out to be a choice between two bad options, two flaming piles of elephant turd, if you will.  Neither is that appealing, and for some, one is downright scary.  The campaign of 2016 will do down in American history as the race with no good options (including the Green and Libertarian parties).

Pray for Us.

Why I think Hillary will win the presidential campaign

September 30, 2016

Why I think Hillary will win the presidential campaign

____________________________________________

Much as been made of the recent presidential debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton on September 26th.

What should have been an interesting contrast between a (faux) populist, Republican modern-day P.T. Barnum and a corporate Democrat, turned into a farce of comical proportions.  Trump should have focused his attention on what he would do for the American people, and what his business skills (allegedly) would do to improve the economic outlook of millions of American citizens who live anxiously day-to-day and wonder about their futures. Because Trump is a political neophyte, and is not used to debates, he fell into traps that Hillary laid for him.  She is a skilled debater, who uses her legal acumen to force Trump into defensive postures on his life and personal faults.  This debate was for him to win, since the country had low expectations regarding his ability to hold his own with with a formidable legal mind.

Donald Trump needed to just focus the narrative of the debate on the future of the country, and provide simple analogies to show that Hillary Clinton is not a change agent. Rather, Trump need to provide she is a continuation of the Washington, D.C. Establishment providing for their elite members, at the expense of the American people and their quality of life.

He fell into traps Hillary provided due to his massive ego and insecurity, and as a result he had to defend her assertions at the expense of her fatal flaws as a candidate and her political history.

Since he did not do any of the things mentioned above, he will now have to react to her challenges to his competency, temperment, and leadership, rather than her lack of new ideas.  I believe that the remaining  story will fall under Hillary lobbying false narratives, provided by her campaign and the Democratic party, instead of showing the country that Mrs. Clinton is not going to be the transformative candidate she claims to be, outside of her gender, which is still signifiant nonetheless.

Mr. Trump had the opportunity to lay out a foundation of his goals to change the direction of the country.  However, he will be forced to parry and counter Hillary Clinton's strategy of making the race about him, rather than the tiresome scandals of the Clinton brand.

-AK