The Donald might want to be more careful in choosing insults. Recently, in response to the possibility of a new candidate for the Democratic Party's Presidential nomination, Trump referred to Michael Bloomberg as little Michael.
It's long been speculated that Mr. Trump wants no release of his tax returns, because those documents would demonstrate he's nowhere near as wealthy as he claims. Such speculation continues to gain credibility. Yesterday, Bloomberg's net worth was estimated at about $52 billion, while Trump's came in at only about $3 billion.
Not also that Mr. Bloomberg's government experience is vastly more extensive than Mr. Trump's ...
Saturday, November 9, 2019
Friday, November 8, 2019
Kurds and Ukrainians
It appears that Donald Trump cares as little for Ukrainians as he's shown he does for other groups. By caving to Putin and Erdogan, Mr. Trump may have caused the death of thousands of Kurds. By withholding arms and other assistance from Ukraine, even in the short term, he may cause the same or worse in that nation.
In the period from April 2014 to December 2018, the United Nations estimates that 12,000 - 13,000 Ukrainians were killed as a result of the conflict between their country and Russia. Of these, more than 3,300 were civilians.
In the period from April 2014 to December 2018, the United Nations estimates that 12,000 - 13,000 Ukrainians were killed as a result of the conflict between their country and Russia. Of these, more than 3,300 were civilians.
Wednesday, November 6, 2019
Reading Political Tea Leaves
Reading Political Tea Leaves
Three elections last night might foreshadow major weeping, wailing, and tooth-gnashing by Republicans in general, and by Donald Trump in particular. Let's start with a scorecard of sorts.
|
| That last point has particular relevance to the upcoming 2020 Federal elections. Monday night, Mr. Trump campaigned for Matt Bevin, the Republican candidate and incumbent governor. In 2015, Bevin won the Governor's mansion by 15 points; in 2016, Trump won Kentucky by 30 points. But yesterday, all that went down the tubes. That's because, in particular in Kentucky and in a manner reminiscent of the 2018 midterm elections, two voting blocks turned from red to blue. Foremost among them: | ||
Mr. Trump, at his "get Bevin over the finish line" rally Monday night, framed the Kentucky gubernatorial race as validation for himself and his Presidency. Be careful what you wish for, Donald ... |
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
Putting Cart Before Horse
Or in this case, assignment before content.
Constitution 101, as I've come to call this variety of posts, arose from my sense of awe over the Bill of Rights - the first 10 amendments to our Constitution. But there are many other Amendments that have played as critical a role in shaping our society as has the Bill.
That being the case, I'm going to give you an assignment, based on the 13th and 14th Amendments. Each of those has a relationship to the end of slavery in this country. Which of the two abolished that nightmarish institution, and which ensured those who survived it were granted full citizenship?
Email me at:
Bodhi Mickie
The first correct answer wins a slot as guest blogger ...
Constitution 101, as I've come to call this variety of posts, arose from my sense of awe over the Bill of Rights - the first 10 amendments to our Constitution. But there are many other Amendments that have played as critical a role in shaping our society as has the Bill.
That being the case, I'm going to give you an assignment, based on the 13th and 14th Amendments. Each of those has a relationship to the end of slavery in this country. Which of the two abolished that nightmarish institution, and which ensured those who survived it were granted full citizenship?
Email me at:
Bodhi Mickie
The first correct answer wins a slot as guest blogger ...
Get a Grip, Gohmert
Louis Gohmert represents the 1st Congressional District in Texas. He's done so since 2005.
As an early adherent to Tea Party and even tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories, Gohmert has a history of outrageous comments. But this past Thursday, he outdid himself. As has become so much the practice on the far right, Gohmert threw really red meat to the Republican (Trumpian?) base, claiming that the impeachment inquiry would force the United States into a civil war.
How long will it take for these whackamoles to understand that their florid rhetoric is taken seriously by some? How many Charlottesvilles or Tree of Life?
As an early adherent to Tea Party and even tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories, Gohmert has a history of outrageous comments. But this past Thursday, he outdid himself. As has become so much the practice on the far right, Gohmert threw really red meat to the Republican (Trumpian?) base, claiming that the impeachment inquiry would force the United States into a civil war.
How long will it take for these whackamoles to understand that their florid rhetoric is taken seriously by some? How many Charlottesvilles or Tree of Life?
Monday, November 4, 2019
Second Amendmnent Remedies
In 2010, Sharron Angle, the Tea Party candidate who won the Republican primary that year in Nevada, broached the idea, during a radio interview, that
the public had the right to bring down an out-of-control Congress with Second
Amendment remedies.
Statements like that have contributed to the ever-more-frequent and ever-more horrific mass murders we've lived through since 2010. Too many people misunderstand the Second Amendment. They read it as Go out and get the biggest, most bad-ass gun you can find, and feel free to use it to blow away anyone whom you can't convince to agree with you. That's not what the Framers had in mind.
As a student of language, I pay attention even to small details like punctuation. In many cases, like The Second Amendment, punctuation can be considered the analog in rhetoric to rhythm or cadence in music. And the Second Amendment is replete with commas.
Its author James Madison, in Federalist 46, explained those marks: During the ratification debate, many Americans feared that the federal government would become too powerful and too similar to the monarchy in Great Britain. Madison calculated while writing Federalist 46 that the standing military, controlled by the federal government, should be kept under a maximum of 30,000 troop. Then, the people themselves, working through state governments, could extend efforts to to protect themselves from the the threat that might be posed by a standing arm. Federalist 46 suggests an aggregate total militia of 500,000.
Here's how Madison described it.
Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.
Bold and italics mine. Madison's concern was the ability of the public to contribute to its own defense and freedom. He went so far as to say that if European monarchies / tyrannies had to operate under the conditions prescribed in and for the Second Amendment, they would be speedily overturned.
Sorry, Sharon (and those who agree with her). The Second Amendment protects the ability of governments. local, state, and federal, to protect the public. Nothing more.
Statements like that have contributed to the ever-more-frequent and ever-more horrific mass murders we've lived through since 2010. Too many people misunderstand the Second Amendment. They read it as Go out and get the biggest, most bad-ass gun you can find, and feel free to use it to blow away anyone whom you can't convince to agree with you. That's not what the Framers had in mind.
As a student of language, I pay attention even to small details like punctuation. In many cases, like The Second Amendment, punctuation can be considered the analog in rhetoric to rhythm or cadence in music. And the Second Amendment is replete with commas.
Its author James Madison, in Federalist 46, explained those marks: During the ratification debate, many Americans feared that the federal government would become too powerful and too similar to the monarchy in Great Britain. Madison calculated while writing Federalist 46 that the standing military, controlled by the federal government, should be kept under a maximum of 30,000 troop. Then, the people themselves, working through state governments, could extend efforts to to protect themselves from the the threat that might be posed by a standing arm. Federalist 46 suggests an aggregate total militia of 500,000.
Here's how Madison described it.
Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.
Bold and italics mine. Madison's concern was the ability of the public to contribute to its own defense and freedom. He went so far as to say that if European monarchies / tyrannies had to operate under the conditions prescribed in and for the Second Amendment, they would be speedily overturned.
Sorry, Sharon (and those who agree with her). The Second Amendment protects the ability of governments. local, state, and federal, to protect the public. Nothing more.
Sunday, November 3, 2019
The Nats Are Champs in More Than One Way
Yesterday, it was confirmed that Sean Doolittle, a relief pitcher for the World Champion Washington Nationals, would decline an invitation to the White House.
Doolittle chose not to attend the ceremony slated for Monday. He's the first Nat to do so publicly. Meanwhile, there have been reports that a handful of his teammates are considering taking the same step.
In an interview with The Washington Post Friday night, Doolittle explained his reasoning, which includes not compromising his beliefs, as well as an aversion to Donald Trump’s actions and policies.
Like I said - a champ in more than one way ...
Doolittle chose not to attend the ceremony slated for Monday. He's the first Nat to do so publicly. Meanwhile, there have been reports that a handful of his teammates are considering taking the same step.
In an interview with The Washington Post Friday night, Doolittle explained his reasoning, which includes not compromising his beliefs, as well as an aversion to Donald Trump’s actions and policies.
Like I said - a champ in more than one way ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)