Racial bias...

Commentators, puzzling about Donald Trump’s continued popularity, have begun to speculate that it is his candor that is winning converts – yes, he often says dumb, incorrect, even outrageous things, but what you see is (apparently) what you get – a real Donald, warts and all.  Compared to weasel-wording, spin-doctored , TV-groomed, PAC-purchased politicians, he is a refreshing change for many.

Along the same lines as telling it like it is, politically incorrect or not, let me point out an obvious fact that no one seems to want to address for fear of being racist – there is rampant black racism as well as white racism. Let the police shoot a black man these days  – even an armed one – and there will be riots and protests and stern words from the President, and all the usual black civil rights leaders will show up to berate the white community.

But let a black man shoot a white TV reporter and white cameraman n Virginia, on air, and you hear hardly a peep from the black community.  Let a black man in Houston approach a white sheriff’s deputy filling his gas tank at a gas station and shoot him, execution style from behind, and repeatedly, and not a single one of the prominent (and loud) civil rights leaders has a word to say about it.

Looks like pretty obvious racial bias here………

Is the Iran agreement reasonable?

The worry many people (including myself) have had about the Iranian nuclear deal is that the American administration was too eager to get a deal, and gave away the farm in order to get an agreement. The revelation tonight by the Associated Press that, via a secret agreement (not the only one either, apparently, because it is labeled  "Separate Agreement II" -- what is "Separate Agreement I", one wonders?) between Iran and the IAEA, Iran will be allowed to inspect the Parchin nuclear site (suspected of having been used for nuclear weapons work)  WITH ITS OWN IRANIAN INSPECTORS!!!!!!  In other words, no foreign inspectors will be allowed to see the site.  Is that real verification? I think not.

Apparently this nuclear agreement, or at least key parts of it, actually depends on Iran doing its own verification! And if the president trusts that, then I have a bridge to sell him as well.......

What other quiet "side agreements" are there in this deal?

Until now I was more or less convinced that this deal was, if not great, at least acceptable.  But  apparently we haven't really seen all of the deal, and what is hidden may well be unacceptable. 

It will be interesting to see how the administration and its spin doctors try to handle this revelation.

Donald Trump's appeal

Watching clips from last night's Republican debate (I didn't waste my time watching the whole thing live) I guess I can begin to see why Donald Trump has some appeal. He is a loudmouthed blowhard, but at least he is an AUTHENTIC loudmouthed blowhard. He says what he thinks, straight out, dumb or not, politically incorrect or not. It's a little refreshing.

 In comparison, everyone else looks like they are reading from scripts prepared ever so carefully by committees of spin doctors and focus groups to be sure to appeal to a base and not offend campaign sponsors. Everyone else seemed to be simply pasting together well-worn campaign slogans that we are all tired of hearing (especially since we know they really don't mean them).

It is, perhaps, a measure of how weak the Republican field really is that a substance-free blowhard like Donald Trump could dominate the stage in this debate.  Of course, there is rampant speculation that he entered the race deliberately to split the Republican party and give Hillary a clear run at the Presidency.  The fact that he is close person friends with the Clintons, and that Bill Clinton called him a few weeks before he announced and encouraged him to run, feeds this speculation.

I certainly wouldn't vote for the Donald, but his presence in this campaign may finally move a few of the others to abandon their carefully-scripted speeches and tell us what they really think. No, I don't expect Hillary to do that, but with luck one of two of the Republican contenders might pick up on the clue.

What a miserable field!

So far the upcoming presidential election is shaping up to be a really miserable choice.

On the Democratic side we have Hillary Clinton as the “inevitable” contender, despite a succession of illegal or barely legal activities that stretch back to her husband’s administration.  Does anyone still remember the Rose Law Firm records of her billings that conveniently “disappeared” from the law firm files , only to eventually be found in the White House family quarters (and revealing that she double-billed many of her clients)? And then most recently we find that as Secretary of  State she kept her emails on a private server in her home (despite the security issues) , and conveniently “erased” all  the “personal” (ie- incriminating) emails before she released the rest to the Congressional Committee investigating this issue (shades of Nixon’s 18-minute gap?).  In between is a whole string of questionable actions which the press is conveniently ignoring for the moment.  This is hardly the person I would pick to lead this nation.

Then there is Joe Biden possibly entering the race.  Despite his tendency to repeatedly say the wrong thing at the wrong time, which made him a joke through most of Obama’s terms, compared to Hillary he actually looks better, which is pathetic.

And finally we have Bernie Sanders, a died-in-the-wool old fashion Socialist, eager to turn the US into a European-style centrally-planned, centrally-managed cradle-to-grave nannystate, despite the fact that Europe recently has been showing us just how economically unsustainable such a state is.

On the Republican side we have (currently) 17 contenders, of whom only one (Senator Lindsey Graham, who is no more than a blip in the polls at the moment) accepts the overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is real, and largely caused by human activities. So the other 16 are either (a) scientific ignoramuses, (b) dumb as dirt, or (c) simple opportunists who know perfectly well that the evidence is overwhelming, but hold their position simply as matter of getting votes from the far-right base and/or mollifying the energy companies that contribute to their campaigns.  None of these options recommends them as potential presidents of this nation.

Then there is the undeniable fact that Republicans these days seem to have forgotten that this nation was founded on the principle of separation of church and state, and individual freedom, and want to inflict on everyone their own, often quite parochial and  narrow-minded, religious and moral constraints.

And it boggles the mind that Donald Trump, a wildly-narcissistic, ego-driven, publicity-seeking clown if there ever was one, is well ahead in recent polls of Republican voters. It suggests that a lot of Republican voters are also dumb as dirt, or at least that the rest of the field is so thoroughly unappealing that “the Donald” looks reasonable by comparison, which is also pathetic.

Perhaps things will change over the next few months and someone, either among this crowd or a new face entering late, will look more appealing.  But the choice thus far is pretty disappointing. I am no fan of President Obama’s administration, but most of these clowns, Democratic and Republican alike, based on what I have seen thus far, would likely make his administration look good by comparison.