So Many Creative Minds
Saturday, February 27, 2016
Wednesday, February 17, 2016
Bernie or Hillary
Either Bernie or Hillary is fine with me. The stakes are huge and those who say they wouldn't vote for one or the other if they get the nomination are not Democrats in my mind.
I will probably vote for Bernie in my Massachusetts primary, but in reality Hillary is the one raising money for down ticket Democrats. While she has raised (27) millions to elect other Democrats, Bernie has not been able to extend any financial help to Democrats running to defeat Republicans.
Whoever the president ends up being, he/she will need the support of other Democrats to get anything done at all for the people.
We all know that big money must be taken out of politics, but it will never happen if we can't elect Democrats and change the court. Bernie's ideas have permeated the Democrat electorate so even if Hillary wins she will be running a Bernie influenced agenda.
I will probably vote for Bernie in my Massachusetts primary, but in reality Hillary is the one raising money for down ticket Democrats. While she has raised (27) millions to elect other Democrats, Bernie has not been able to extend any financial help to Democrats running to defeat Republicans.
Whoever the president ends up being, he/she will need the support of other Democrats to get anything done at all for the people.
We all know that big money must be taken out of politics, but it will never happen if we can't elect Democrats and change the court. Bernie's ideas have permeated the Democrat electorate so even if Hillary wins she will be running a Bernie influenced agenda.
Friday, February 12, 2016
Blame those who vote for and legitimize this carpetbagger.
From FP artical by David Rothkopf
"Plenty of blame lies with Trump,
who has consistently chosen to take the low road on the campaign trail
unless an even lower one was available to him. By attacking Mexicans and
Muslims and cherished American values, he has stirred up hatred and
fear whenever he thought it would play to his advantage. He has promised
to violate our Constitution and once again ridiculed our values with
his assertion
that he would do something “much worse” than waterboarding terrorists.
He is repulsive. But he has also demonstrated enough smarts that we can
know this kind of vileness is a choice. He believes it is working for
him…because it is.
And it’s for this reason, that
far worse than Trump are those who are choosing to vote for him. They
argue that he is an alternative to the status quo and that alone is
sufficient justification for giving such a man a better chance at
becoming president with each of their votes. They buy into his proposed
false choice between the corruption and dysfunction of Washington and
“anything else.” They ignore his utter lack of qualifications. They
sidestep his twisted and repugnant character or lack thereof. They are
more to blame than the candidate. Any idiot can declare he wants to be
president of the United States; it takes a real special kind of
disregard for facts, national interests, our children’s future, and
America’s standing in the world to actually vote for such an idiot."
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Friday, January 22, 2016
Never thought I'd quote the 'National Review
“Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of
generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless
and crude as the Donald himself,” the magazine declared.
National Review also collected essays from 22 conservative leaders who offered their own reasons for opposing Trump’s candidacy. The names ranged from former Fox News star Glenn Beck to former U.S. Attorneys Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey to prominent Southern Baptist leader Russell Moore to online provocateur Erick Erickson, the founder of the conservative blog RedState.
The magazine’s dramatic move comes as Trump has regained the lead in polling in Iowa, which carries enormous influence as the first state to vote in the primary process.
National Review’s complaints against Trump ranged from his liberal positions in the past on abortion, gun control, health care and taxes to what they deemed to be his lack of knowledge of the details of his own immigration plan.
“In one Republican debate he clearly had no idea what’s in that plan and advocated increased legal immigration, which is completely at odds with it,” the magazine’s editors wrote.
National Review is very hawkish on the immigration issue itself, generally favoring reducing legal immigration in addition to illegal immigration. They stated in their editorial that Mitt Romney’s support for “self-deportation” as the Republican nominee in 2012 was “entirely reasonable,” and note that at the time, Trump criticized Romney over it.
A theme throughout the editorial and many of the essays is that Trump presents himself as a “strong man” to fix the nation’s problems, whereas conservatives believe that power should be as decentralized as possible. “No one can be fully trusted with public power, and self-government in a free society demands that we reject the siren song of politics-as-management,” wrote Yuval Levin, editor of the conservative journal National Affairs."
From an atricle by
National Review also collected essays from 22 conservative leaders who offered their own reasons for opposing Trump’s candidacy. The names ranged from former Fox News star Glenn Beck to former U.S. Attorneys Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey to prominent Southern Baptist leader Russell Moore to online provocateur Erick Erickson, the founder of the conservative blog RedState.
The magazine’s dramatic move comes as Trump has regained the lead in polling in Iowa, which carries enormous influence as the first state to vote in the primary process.
National Review’s complaints against Trump ranged from his liberal positions in the past on abortion, gun control, health care and taxes to what they deemed to be his lack of knowledge of the details of his own immigration plan.
“In one Republican debate he clearly had no idea what’s in that plan and advocated increased legal immigration, which is completely at odds with it,” the magazine’s editors wrote.
National Review is very hawkish on the immigration issue itself, generally favoring reducing legal immigration in addition to illegal immigration. They stated in their editorial that Mitt Romney’s support for “self-deportation” as the Republican nominee in 2012 was “entirely reasonable,” and note that at the time, Trump criticized Romney over it.
A theme throughout the editorial and many of the essays is that Trump presents himself as a “strong man” to fix the nation’s problems, whereas conservatives believe that power should be as decentralized as possible. “No one can be fully trusted with public power, and self-government in a free society demands that we reject the siren song of politics-as-management,” wrote Yuval Levin, editor of the conservative journal National Affairs."
From an atricle by
January 21, 2016
Yahoo Political News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)