Hillary and Bernie need to get back to civility

A mere six weeks ago, I watched a debate between the Democratic candidates for President. Compared to the Republican debate, Hillary and Bernie’s debate was a breath of fresh. They weren’t afraid to agree with each other on some issues, and they treated each other with professionalism and respect. In that same time period, the Republicans were engaging in massive immaturity, personal attacks, and general juvenile behavior. The Democrats were clearly the adults in the room.



Recently, that civility has begun to break down. Hillary is calling the Sanders campaign ‘liars’, and Bernie supporters are trying to blame Hillary for the Arizona primary shenanigans of the Republicans who run that state.


Friends, what we are headed toward is a break in the Democratic Party if we don’t tone things down a notch or two. Supporters of both Bernie and Hillary have to admit how much better the other Democrat is than Drumpf or Cruz. They must understand what kind of right wing ideologue any Republican will appoint to the Supreme Court. They have to acknowledge the deep danger our country will face with a man like Donald Trump having his finger on the button. The rich will rejoice not having Bernie or Hillary in the White House, while the working man will come to despise President Trump.


The 2016 election is simply too important to allow the Rethuglicans to win by fracturing the Democratic Party. We each need to resolve, whoever we support in the primaries, that we will back the Democratic nominee, whoever that may be. Let’s have a good fight on the ISSUES, and support whoever you prefer. But let’s not risk damaging the chances of defeating the Republicans in November by escalating the rhetoric to such a degree that we can’t come together this fall.

Trump wants to 'open up libel laws', aka destroying right of free press...

This week in Texas, Donny Trump advocated 'opening up libel laws', claiming that when the Washington Post or the New York Times write a 'hit piece' on someone, they will be able to be sued and have to pay 'lots of money'. Trump thinks newspapers are way too protected under current law, and when he is elected, we are going to change that law. See Trump calls to open up libel law.


What Trump refers to is the 'public figure rule', where to win for libel, anyone who is a public figure must prove 'actual malice' on behalf of the news story. This rule dates back to 1964, and the case of the New York Times v. Sullivan. The United States Supreme Court held that it violated the right of freedom of press for the press to be effectively shut down by numerous lawsuits claiming libel during the civil rights movement. Racists bigots were repeatedly suing the press to try to stop all the bad publicity that they got from their segregation policies. This case is heavily based on the first amendment.


Trump thinks this can be addressed by passing 'new laws'. This is indeed a scary thought. In fact, since this rule is based on a constitutional decision from the U.S. Supreme Court, any new law to the contrary would be unconstitutional. Once again we see that Trump either has no understanding of history, or of the constitution, or of the rule of law. That, or that he purposely chooses to ignore the law so that he can pander to his audience for political gain.


This is the way that a dictator behaves. Let the press know that they can be effectively put out of business if he is elected, so that they temper their criticism of him. However Trump should be careful. There are still plenty of people in the press that will take these as fighting words. And one should remember that old Mark Twain quote: 'Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel.'

Trump: "Who knows what was in my head?"

The ultimate question: Who knows what was in Trump's head? Back in 2002, Donald Trump pledged lukewarm support for the Iraq war.


This year, he has insisted that he was adamantly opposed to the Iraq war.


Today, he was confronted about his lies about his position at the time. His response (HERE) "who knows what was in my head...." 


Indeed. That is a mystery that still confounds us...

Welcome to the 2016 election!

It is a scary election year for this country.

The Republican side features front-runners like Donny Trump, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio. As I write this, Jeb Bush (Bush III), John Kasich, and Ben Carson are about to exit stage right, following Fiorini, Christie, Hucklebee, et al.

The Democratic side now features Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.


For me, this year will be a tough election to get behind someone. I was an Obama supporter four and eight years ago. I am generally satisfied with Barack's terms, but not thrilled. The Rethuglicans thwarted him at every turn the last six years, and his accomplishments lag accordingly.




But really, are people serious about Trump? What an idiot this man is. He proposes a ban on Muslims entering the U.S. Aside from the fact that blatant religious discrimination in unconstitutional, how in the hell could this even be possible? I went and looked at my passport to be sure, and there is absolutely no category for 'religion'. Even is he wanted to, there is no practical way to prevent any particular religion from entering out country. And guess what... those ISIS terrorists that he is afraid of will not admit their religion....duhhh.

Anyway, we will stay in touch with the political scene, and try to post more frequently....take it slow.

Tales of Bush approved torture

This weekend there are several stories out in the news about the publication of a secret summary of Guantanamo prsioners telling how they were tortured while in American custody at various secret detention sites run by the CIA.

From the New York Review of Books:

"We think time and elections will cleanse our fallen world but they will not. Since November, George W. Bush and his administration have seemed to be rushing away from us at accelerating speed, a dark comet hurtling toward the ends of the universe. The phrase "War on Terror"—the signal slogan of that administration, so cherished by the man who took pride in proclaiming that he was "a wartime president"—has acquired in its pronouncement a permanent pair of quotation marks, suggesting something questionable, something mildly embarrassing: something past. And yet the decisions that that president made, especially the monumental decisions taken after the attacks of September 11, 2001—decisions about rendition, surveillance, interrogation—lie strewn about us still, unclaimed and unburied, like corpses freshly dead.
How should we begin to talk about this? Perhaps with a story. Stories come to us ewborn, announcing their intent: Once upon a time... In the beginning... From such signs we learn how to listen to what will come. Consider: "I woke up, naked, strapped to a bed, in a very white room. The room measured approximately 4m x 4m [13 feet by 13 feet]. The room had three solid walls, with the fourth wall consisting of metal bars separating it from a larger room. I am not sure how long I remained in the bed....""

Also this from the New York Times:

"At the same time, perhaps unwittingly, Mr. Bush made it possible that day for those on whom the alternative set of procedures were performed eventually to speak. For he announced that he would send 14 “high-value detainees” from dark into twilight: they would be transferred from the overseas “black sites” to Guantánamo. There, while awaiting trial, the International Committee of the Red Cross would be “advised of their detention, and will have the opportunity to meet with them.”
A few weeks later, from Oct. 6 to 11 and then from Dec. 4 to 14, 2006, Red Cross officials — whose duty it is to monitor compliance with the Geneva Conventions and to supervise treatment of prisoners of war — traveled to Guantánamo and began interviewing the prisoners. Their stated goal was to produce a report that would “provide a description of the treatment and material conditions of detention of the 14 during the period they were held in the C.I.A. detention program,” periods ranging “from 16 months to almost four and a half years.”
As the Red Cross interviewers informed the detainees, their report was not intended to be released to the public but, “to the extent that each detainee agreed for it to be transmitted to the authorities,” to be given in strictest secrecy to officials of the
government agency that had been in charge of holding them — in this case the Central Intelligence Agency, to whose acting general counsel, John Rizzo, the report was sent on Feb. 14, 2007. The result is a document — labeled “confidential” and clearly intended only for the eyes of those senior American officials — that tells a story of what happened to each of the 14 detainees inside the black sites.
A short time ago, this document came into my hands and I have set out the stories it tells..."

Finally, this story is covered in audio format by NPR's All Things Considered:

"Author Sheds Light On CIA's 'Black Sites'
[5 min 14 sec] All Things Considered, March 15, 2009 · The International Red Cross interviewed 14 prisoners who were detained by the CIA at "black sites," secret locations outside of the United States. These interviews were compiled into a document intended to be seen only by high-level administration insiders. But that document was obtained by Mark Danner, author of Torture and Truth: America, Abu Ghraib and the War on Terror. It's the subject of pieces by Danner in Sunday's New York Times and in the New York Review of Books. Danner talks to host Jacki Lyden about what he found.

Barack Obama Elected President!

(The Constitution Shall Survive.)

At 9:00 pm MST tonight, CNN called the election for Barack Obama. The writing was on the wall ever since Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Virginia were called for Sen. Obama earlier tonight.

Even though it had been obvious, I heard the words, and started crying. Now mind you, I don’t cry often, but this was something I will never forget.

My feelings arise from such deep sources: 143 years after slavery was abolished, 44 years after the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and after eight years of George W. Bush and his assault on our nation’s constitution and our world image, this country, which twice elected Mr. Bush, has turned to intelligent new leadership.

After a stolen election in 2000, and after years of Republican dirty tricks dating back to the Nixon administration, the Democrats have won back the United States government. Not just the presidency, but also dramatic gains in the House and Senate. The next vacancies on the United States Supreme Court will now be filled by a constitutional scholar, not a man who ignored international law and invaded Iraq.

Tonight, I am proud to be an American. And dammit, it’s been way too long since I could say that! America has changed....Yes We Can!

Sarah Palin is a criminal. Jail or the VP's mansion?

Tonight I have been reading the newly released 'Troopergate' investigation of Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin's firing of her public safety director. The entire report can be downloaded HERE. (Interesting reading for a government report).

I am truly shocked at how this woman ran her office in regards to her zeal to fire her former brother in law. She twice approached her appointed public safety director, Walt Monegan, and Todd Palin approached hm more than that. They also thoroughly approached almost eveyone in the chain of command to try to get Trooper Wooten fired. When they were told that the investigation had been closed years ago, and that punishment had long since been given out, and that nothing could be done, Palin fired Monegan instead.

This report shows a petty, obsessive couple doing every thing possible to get their way. In my opinion, they are guilty of improperly trying to influence the Alaska Patrol for personal reasons. I sincerely hope a special prosecutor is appointed and that Palin and her husband are prosecuted. They repeatedly crossed the line, and they did so after being warned that their actions were improper.