Fake News and Conspriacies

If you survive a shooting even in America these days, you still have to deal with the NRA trolls.

If you don't know what I'm referring to the Washington Post had a good story about the situation.

Trolling Survivors

Its a sad state of affairs but an inevitable one in today's day and age.

Of course its a result of our tremendous technological advances, that these people can so easily find each other and spread their hate.

They have always existed but life was much more difficult for them and their ability to reach a large audience quite limited.

Having so much information available means that much of that information is going to be erroneous and the only real solutions would be something that reduced freedom of speech, which is just unacceptable.

The good solution would be to have a public that didn't so easily buy into these false stories and conspiracies, but we have a public which has been conditioned by cable news to believe some pretty outrageous things.

You can usually spot this type of things fairly easily because they can't prove what they claim so they resort to attacking the unknowable.

For example, they will list a series of events and argue their is some connection without offering any proof and demand someone else prove their is no connection.

Even if someone could or would take the time to prove such a thing (and proving a negative is often impossible) why should they?  Facts should generally speak for themselves.

Take a fairly widespread theory that the moon landings were staged.  Could we have done it?  Maybe, but the argument simply rests upon alleging they were staged and asking for proof they weren't.  Shouldn't they have to prove they were staged?

Making unfounded allegations and demanding to be proven wrong isn't an acceptable argument.

Don't fall for it.

Economic Change

The world we live in is in many ways already a world of the future compared to how things were even 50 years ago.

We carry phones that are more powerful than any computers available at one time.

We have pretty much instant everything, from entertainment to shopping to even companionship.

We have household assistants that respond to our voice commands and can complete certain tasks for us.

Many of us are able to work remotely have a small carbon footprint and be environmentally aware.

Of course this isn't universal and we still have many people who are living without all those amenities.

Unable to get a decent job, working multiple jobs and seeing little hope for the future.

This division has in many ways defined things like our politics and attitudes in this country.

The major metropolitan areas have benefitted the most from new technology while areas where manufacturing or farming dominated local life have had their struggles.

Both of those industries have in fact gotten more efficient and are creating less jobs.

This is economically a good thing but something that isn't creating as many opportunities as in the past.

This isn't of course the first time we saw this phenomena, it happens every time there is a major change in our economics.

It will of course even out over time and we may see a bit of that already, but that is small comfort to those struggling now.

Trusting Government

One of the biggest changes during my lifetime has been how people trust big institutions and the Government.

Its possible I was naïve, but when I was young we felt that we could trust Government and most big institutions to have our best interests at heart.

After all these were the people we elected and they were elected to represent us, not lie to us.

Yes there were some people who attacked the Government but most of us had a lot of confidence it what the Government told us.

Then we had Vietnam, Watergate. the Pentagon Papers and Iran-Contra.

All of these were clear instances where people in Government lied or distorted things they told us.

In some cases it was for what they felt was the better good and in others it was simply for individual purposes, but it changed a lot of things.

In addition we had a proliferation of cable TV stations to the point where opinions could be presented as facts and reach large audiences.

The end result is a pretty common belief that the Government isn't trustworthy.

Of course if you believe the Government is at odds with the people, the only real solution is to get rid of it with a new one.

This is one of the things that helped the dotard win, the belief that he was going to "drain the swamp".

Of course he isn't doing anything of the kind and in all honesty is cementing the idea that the Government isn't to be trusted into a whole new generation's consciousness.

I doubt we will ever recapture the trust I grew up with and maybe that's a good thing.

It certainly felt better though.

Conservative Values?

If you are in favor of armed murderers using assault weapons, people going without adequate health care, increased Government spending while lowering Corporate taxes, restricting a women's control over her own body, opposing equal rights for people who have different sexual orientations, closing the borders and trying to deter people who don't agree with you from voting, I guess you call yourself a conservative.

Conservative is a term that represents someone who is generally opposed to change.  At least that's what it meant at one time.

Now it has taken on a certain radical approach where it wants to make many changes, or as they might think of it, a lot or undoing changes, to make America into something it never was, a bigoted white enclave.

Yes, the founders of this country were in most cases "white", ignoring the slaves they imported, but they weren't all the same.  You had your New Englanders, originally Pilgrims who had morphed into whalers and traders as well as farmers.  Of course New York had the remnants of its Dutch Farmers and in Pennsylvania you had your Quakers.

Delaware had its Swedish heritage and Maryland was a Catholic refuge and Virginia and the Carolina's were peopled by English émigrés who left for various reasons.  Georgia was originally a prison colony.

Much of the interior was still held by the French or Spanish and of course we had the Native Americans.

This was not an America that was terribly united but in general we tolerated our differences, at least until the Civil War.

The immigrants who came here for the first few hundred years simply had to get here, we didn't have a lot of restrictions,

This was a radical country that stood for opportunity and freedom, not narrow mindedness and hate.

We need to remember our roots and keep the American dream alive.

The real American dream, the land of opportunity that welcomes immigrants and promotes freedom

The real America has always been a diverse nation and it has made us a great one.

Let's keep it that way.

The Movement

Movements are funny things, sometimes they spring up and gain momentum and other times they simply die out.

Its still too early to tell whether the movement about the assault rifles and the power of the NRA will have the legs to make something happen.

It has to show itself not only in the current confrontations but at the place where we actually have the power to force change, the ballot box.

Americans, by and large, have been fairly tolerant of the right to own guns.  Yes it is protected in the constitution, but of course at one time, so was slavery.

A common sense solution can be had within the framework of the constitution, but if the NRA and gun lobby insists of requiring a new amendment, then so be it.

The constitution itself provides the requirements for changing it since our founding fathers didn't think they were the only ones who knew what was best.

The right to bear arms was important in the early days of the nation and the revolution actually started when the British march to seize arms in Massachusetts.

Of course, I'm not aware of anyone who wants to eliminate the right, only to make sure that we have responsible rules in place to avoid senseless tragedy.

The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is also a fundamental concept in this nation and getting gunned down in a school or at a concert is not conducive to those rights.

Lets use common sense.

Friday,

A day that doesn't include dozens of teenagers being gunned down by an assault rifle is by today's standards a good day.

It appears that the armed deputy at the school delayed engaging and has been dismissed.  I don't want to judge him without the facts and of course we will never know if the outcome would have been different, but this is part of the problem with arming people at schools.

You can't be sure how they will react.

I suspect he was assigned a well to do school in a safe district and on a regular basis was thankful for how quiet his job was.

Then one day hell breaks loose.

Why didn't he engage immediately?  Was he waiting for backup?  Was he just taken aback?

I guess we may get some of these answers as time goes by, but we know having an armed police deputy there didn't make a difference.

Maybe it could have, but I know that if the attacker didn't have an assault rifle it would have.

Even if he had an assault knife.

Arming Teachers?

I have a great amount of respect for most teachers, but I don't know many I would give a gun to.

Some of course might be suitable but are we then asking them in the event of a mass shooting to engage?

Will they be given assault rifles and as they leave the classroom to engage in warfare what about the students left behind?

There is a no reason to think that arming teachers will result in anything except perhaps more suicides or possible shooting of students after a particularly bad day.

In certain cases being armed can certainly deter certain criminal activities, say if you feel threatened in a situation and let the aggressor know you are armed.

However most acts of violence are not all that logical and in many cases the perpetrator expects to die.

Where not talking about crimes for profit when you have a mass shooting at a school or a concert, you are talking about a deranged individual heavily armed who can cause tremendous damage in a very short time, even if he is eventually killed.

Outgunned teachers and civilians is a NRA ploy which would of course increase gun sales.

Besides that it is likely to result in more gun incidents.

Let's talk about real solutions.

So is it Enough?

Senseless shooting after senseless shooting including what seems like a spate of mass shooting using assault rifles may have finally had an impact.

Not on everyone, we still have those who think more guns is the answer, that arming people who really don't want to be armed would somehow lead to less violence.

More deadly weaponry in the hands of untrained and unwilling users, sure that's the ticket.

Responsible people with responsible guns is the best solution, so first make sure the buyers are up to the responsibility of gun ownership and make sure the guns are also reasonable.

Some guns are so deadly that the requirements to buy them should be very stringent.

You have to pass a driving test to drive and while driving isn't in an amendment to the constitution, reasonable requirements should be acceptable to all.

Let's agree guns by themselves don't kill people, so the people who buy the guns need to be checked.

Its time to protect the innocent who are normally the victims here.

Haven't we had enough?

Health Care and Politics

There is a major disconnect in this country in how much people have to pay for health coverage.  It also impacts the care they receive.

As far as most countries go we are unique in our approach, if you want to call it that.

Most civilized countries recognize that health care is a fundamental right that the Government has an obligation to provide.

We don't.

Not sure if that is a question of our civilized status or simply the fact that we have let wealthy people dictate how the Government behaves.

Even in countries where there were or still are monarchies, the privileged classes long ago lost the fight to control the Government.  Yes there are still conservative parties, but only in this country do we feel that you have to be deserving to get care.

Our politicians are for sale because of the way we conduct elections. 

To run a successful campaign you need money, in some cases a lot of it, and the people who are most likely to help have a lot of it.

So you have to present your issues in a way that is acceptable to them if you hope to get a donation.

Of course even among wealthy people you have certain differences of opinion.

Still, the idea of universal health care and higher taxes to pay for it isn't on most of their lists.

In many ways we have a country where people have learned to blame each other for problems instead of the Government.

So we complain about poor people who get free health care instead of demanding we all get similar coverage. 

Its a sign of success to have a job that pays good benefits now, which is really a sad statement since aren't we all entitled to at least good health care?

President's Day

Presidents get elected based on many factors and we have had some great ones and some not so great ones.  George Washington was our first President but his primary claim to fame was as the leader of the revolutionary armies, not his actions as President.  Not that he was a bad President, just a better general.

We also, at least in much of the country consider Abraham Lincoln a great President although his whole term was spent suppressing the states that had seceded.  He did of course preside over the end of slavery and certainly had some great potential had he not been ended so tragically.

Of course measures of success are normally based on the events that happened during each President.  For example Thomas Jefferson is remembered for the Louisiana Purchase although certainly while a great expansion of the country not  the most complex executive decision.

If you consider how the country has progressed, probably none has had a greater impact on our modern country than Franklin Roosevelt who engineered the New Deal and introduced a great number of social programs we still rely on.  Of course in some quarters he is considered the President who started the welfare state and is hardly a hero.

A lot depends on how you see this country and its citizens and how you view its obligations to its citizens.

Still this is a good day to celebrate the office and consider that the country has carried on regardless of who held the office thanks to our institutions and checks and balances.

A comforting thought in light of our current situation.

FBI Behavior

The dotard doesn't seem to understand that an organization like the FBI can assign people to multiple investigations.

The people who would have followed the lead about the shooter in Florida were not working on the investigation into Russian election tampering.  most likely they were reviewing other tips and leads about terrorism.

If anything caused them to make a mistake here, and I don't know anything about the investigation for sure, it might have been the racial profiling where a tip about a Muslim shooter would probably have received a lot of attention.

This was a tip about disturbed American high school student who had committed no crime, until he did.

I see NRA trolls, like the dotard, acting as if the kids behavior should have led to some sort of action.

What would that have been?

Would we have arrested him when he had committed no crime, belonged to no terrorist group or shot anyone?

Of course not, we are not going to start incarcerating troubled teenagers, we wouldn't have the space.

What would make sense is making sure people who buy guns are in fact stable.

What would make even more sense would be to make sure assault rifles are difficult to obtain without some extensive background checks, if at all.

Hey I understand some people like to shoot these things, but responsible gun owners shouldn't object to greater background checks based on the potential lethality of the weapon.

We don't let just anyone drive a gigantic truck, you have to get qualified.

They are dangerous.

Racism on Fox

Some commentator on Fox apparently felt the need to try and suppress freedom of speech by black athletes by commenting that LeBron James should shut up and dribble.

Ignoring the fact that dribbling is probably the least important aspect of his game, why would some one presume that he isn't entitled to an opinion.

Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion and when you decide you have the right to tell someone to do x and shut up you reveal the fact that you yourself should maybe self censor a bit.

I really have no idea who this women is and I don't want to know.  Fox can decide who they want to employ and based on those decisions I long ago realized it is simply not worth watching.

This attitude they have is pervasive where they not only spread disinformation they try to accuse those who don't agree with them of being, well it varies from unpatriotic to ill-informed with many nuances in between.

Its particularly noticeable when they are disparaging minorities or other nationalities.

They cater to a certain audience and they may squeeze in a reasonable argument now and again, but watching Fox is simply not worth the effort.

Of course they have the right to air their drivel, we have the right to ignore it.

LeBron has the right to talk and dribble and shoot and pass and be a person of character as he is.

Nightmares are Dreams too.

Its a pretty simple solution for the children who were brought here by undocumented parents and grew up as Americans, let us continue to live our American lives.

In some cases they may have a sibling who is one or two years younger than they are who born here is a citizen while they are in danger of being deported to a country they don't remember and don't know.

Using them as a political football, as the dotard is trying, to get people who actually care about fairness shows a clear lack of simple human decency.

His other proposals related to building a wall, ending chain migration or the lottery are neither necessary or desirable and are preventing the dreamers from being treated fairly.

Deciding that you can use these people as hostages is simply wrong, but of course ideas of right and wrong aren't very common in the white house now a days.

Will a solution be found?

It doesn't seem likely unless it is in the courts, but ultimately I think that is a dead end.

Perhaps after the mid-terms we would have a better chance if enough people get out and vote.

Still, there is the dotard to deal with and he has three more years.

Three more years.

Another Mass Shooting

Well the NRA has struck again resulting in 17 dead.

The NRA didn't pull the trigger, a demented person did, but we make it so easy for them to get guns because of the NRA.

The suspect was an expelled student and while his motive hasn't been determined I venture to guess that he was frustrated at being disciplined and decided to act out.

The fact that what isn't that unusual in a teenager was accompanied by so much bloodshed is a function of how available assault rifles are in much of this country.

Will this event lead to any changes?

The odds are against it, especially since soon the trolls of the NRA will deny it ever happened.

In addition to the agony families face from losing a loved one, they soon will be attacked as being paid to lie and pretend a mass shooting happened.

Its of course morally reprehensible that this happens, but it follows each tragedy now a days as the pro gun people go into denial mode.

My heart goes out to the families of the victims and to all who suffered.

I would like to think that enough is enough but we will hear the same old scripts from the gun apologists and paid politicians and they will say this is no time for politics because of the tragedy.

Isn't it a time for some public safety?

The Blame Game

We have an administration led by a person who tends to say the first thing that pops into his mind.  Often this is not exactly truthful, but once he says it he tries to defend it.

When some of the statements become indefensible he needs to find someone to blame, often the person who was supposed to explain his way out of it.

Of course you also see that the people he surrounds himself with are often uniquely unqualified for the roles they occupy.

All of this adds up to a constantly changing cast of characters who realize that the positions they hold are extremely precarious.

This has led to the chaotic atmosphere there as players try to determine if they will survive, or even if they want to stay.

Of course the dotard in charge takes no responsibility for the situation, blaming almost everyone else.

This plays to some extent with some of his base but what happens is, as time passes and they think he will be proven right, he isn't.

This leads to certain elements of his base realizing they have been believing a liar and a hypocrite, who isn't really going to solve all problems "so quickly".

He isn't actually solving any, and as even his recent budget acknowledges he is making some things, like the deficit and the debt much worse.
?
Of course like it or not the show is scheduled to run for another three years, although the supporting cast can change in November.

Maybe this will make more people aware of the need for good government?

White House Budget

While the document itself is, as they say, dead on arrival, you wonder what they were trying to accomplish as they attack programs greatly supported by most Americans.

It does reveal their true colors and while most of it won't happen it coincidentally contradicts the spending bill he just signed that increases domestic programs.

Of course we know that what is going on is pretty chaotic where multiple agendas are at work.  The complete lack of coordination and involvement by the dotard is pretty well documented.

He doesn't read long documents, can't focus for long and just wants to play a lot of golf and have military parades.

What comes out of there is hardly reviewed by him except to hear the parts like it includes a wall and increases defense spending.

I wouldn't be surprised if he were to contradict some of the very things it contains in the near future.

To a large extent he has become a blustering sideshow, who spends little time doing his job between watching TV and golfing.

Maybe that is ultimately for the best.

Time will see.

America Manipulated

Many of the issues facing this country are pretty straightforward.  Further most Americans are pretty much on the same side.

Improve infrastructure, good thing.

Strong defense, good thing.

Social fairness, good thing.

Affordable health care, good thing.

Better education, good thing.

Cleaner air and water, good thing.

Now a few social issues such as abortion and LGBT rights do break down into pretty contentious sides but the question is why are those even political issues?

To the extent these views are based on religious beliefs they really should be a matter of conscience not laws.

Still on the other issues we have certain special interests (wealthy individuals) who work hard to sway public opinion.

Generally they are opposed to paying taxes and possibly believe it will lead to a social welfare state.

They have poured billions of dollars into campaigns and to a fairly large extent have executed a sound strategy of controlling State government that can adjust congressional districts.

They have also been aided by the popularity of media owned by one of their fellow travelers.

Of course as I have said often, our system of primaries allows this to happen because candidates and ultimate winners can be determined with very small participation.  Further they do everything they can to disenfranchise people who don't agree with them.

The system needs to be fixed, not just readjusted.

Human IQ

I recently read a story about a High School student in an accelerated program who tried to justify the relative absence of minorities via a science project.

Science Project

As misguided as this type of study is, I'm not ready to vilify a young person who seems, well misguided.

One interesting aspect of science today is that we can actually track people's DNA and ancestry.  I recently did this and while the results indicated a lot of what I already know about my ancestry, there were a few areas that I didn't expect.

We tend to forget that the human race has experienced any number of migrations and invasions which we know about as well as who knows how many that predate recorded history.

Its pretty clear that the world was populated as Homo Sapiens spread out of Africa to eventual replace or intermingle with prior Neanderthals who had preceded them.  We also see an expansion out of central Asia that led to the populating of the American continents.

By every definition in science, including the one concerning having viable offspring we are a single race sharing a range of characteristics no matter our external appearance.

The idea that we have subsets with significantly different basic abilities is clearly not supported by any science.  Of course, we have cultural differences and if a person from a Western culture was forced to live in a "more primitive" society, they may very well come across as an idiot because of what they don't know.

On a lesser scale it's also clear that much closer to home we can be uninformed about certain slang and behavior in different niches of our culture.

A recent episode of the TV show Blackish covered how everyone in the Black community is familiar with "The Talk".  Of course they need to explain the unique situation of being black in America to their young, its a matter of life and death, unfortunately.

Instead of studying differences it would be better to make "The Talk" unnecessary in the future.

Maybe someday.

Saturday and More Rambling

Being in Texas I get to see ads for politicians that generally strike me as a bit odd.  One of the ads features a candidate that claims to be a principled conservative who then proceeds to tell about the last administrations policies.

Makes you wonder what principled means in that context.

Of course its hard to determine what a conservative stands for anymore.

Bigger deficits?

More sexual abuse?

Less diversity?

Less health coverage?

They do want to reward they're wealthy donors, so guess that is consistent.

In some ways I would have been considered a conservative not so long ago since I believe in fiscally responsible and principled Government.

I also believe that the Government shouldn't impinge on individual liberty or anyone's pursuit of happiness.

Of course those things seem to now define me as a liberal or a progressive.

I can live with that.

Get to Work

This brinkmanship that the congress
Its a result of how everything becomes a partisan issue.

So if you get a deal done before the deadline, maybe you gave away too much.

So play a game of legislative chicken and hope the other side blinks.

Of course they won't either so we get right to the deadline, almost every time.

Of course may trying to decide what's in the best interest of the people of this country doesn't have to be so partisan?

Maybe they could decide funding the Government is something that almost everyone is in favor of?

Maybe they could decide that hardly anyone wants to deport Americans who were brought to this country as children but who grew up in our great land?

Maybe they could address the best way to make Social Security and Medicare financially secure?

Maybe ...  well that list can go on and on.

Work for America, that would be great.

Spending Roulette

The deadline for a spending extension or actual budget bill is midnight tonight and while the Senate seems to have got an agreement, the House hasn't.

Now its quite likely that it will accept the Senate deal, almost certainly if it goes to a floor vote where the fiscal conservatives can vote against it but it will still pass with the votes of the democrats.

It effectively ends sequestration in the manner sequestration intended, by passing a budget.

Sequestration was intended to be so harsh that it would force the congress to make a deal.

It failed for quite a while.

The spending increases in this deal may seem like a lot, but remember they have been postponed for a number of years now.

Of course we still need to address serious issues like immigration and dreamers, the deficit, the environment, entitlement programs, but it is at least a start.

With the mid-term elections now on everyone's mind and of course primary challenges to worry about we are probably in a period where little will actually happen.

But lets put down the spending revolver for now at least and try to get to work.

Compromise?

It actually looks like the congress may have decided to conduct business in a logical way, do what you can agree on and tackle the more contentious issues later.

Of course out contentious dotard isn't happy with that and still wants to threaten to take his ball and go home.

News reports indicate that a two year spending bill which is effectively clean has bilateral support and would leave the contentious issues for another day.

A spending bill is simply supposed to provide the funds to run day to day operations, and while some elements of how you spend the money are contentious, those should be worked out in the appropriation and authorization bills.

It allows for an orderly process and it was fairly radical when it was decided to hold it hostage to certain demands back in the Clinton presidency.

It didn't work but the republicans tried it again in 2013, once again unsuccessfully and then we saw the one real day shut down over the dreamers as the democrats gave it a shot.

Its not a good tactic since, well it hasn't worked yet.

Its hard to argue that shutting down everything is a worthwhile strategy to get a particular issue.

Also, if the issue is so contentious, its very unlikely that the other side would simply capitulate and give in.

The dotard continues to bluster and say he needs his demands met but I think he has in fact become more of a comedy routine than anything.

He has people cheering him on but not sure too many really want to be riding his coattails at this point.

He may take off the coat.

What Goes Up.....

The stock market has had a long run that actually started shortly after the financial crisis and rose from pretty bleak numbers to record after record highs.

We seem to have hit a speed bump.

The thing about stocks is that they aren't simply based on the facts, they rely upon human emotion.

People react to what they see and make decisions.

Most people react in very similar ways, so once selling starts it becomes a bit contagious.

Remember its a lot easier to sell than it is to buy, you don't have to have any money first.

Each day of losses inspires more sellers and therefore more losses and more sellers, etc. etc.

It will of course stop.

When depends once again on sentiment and we may see short term plateaus as buyers test the market.

Once it actually bottoms we should see a period of continued growth, but it may take a long time to return to its prior levels.

Its a story as old as time.

Good Game, So-So Ads

We got to see a game with end to end action and as it should be the ads were simply in the way.

Of course they cost a lot and of all of them I think the one for tide was the most clever, but when the game is as good as this one is, who cares?

Understanding of course that a lot of people who are only super bowl party fans got to see this, it may have swayed some of them to be more interested in the football.

The game set lots of offensive records and then had the surprise twist in the fourth quarter where the Eagles actually derailed the expected Brady comeback.

Congrats to the Eagles on a great performance although you have to wonder how two teams which have been know for their defense were unable to make any notable stops, except for that last one.

Also a very gutsy call to go for the TD at the end of the first half, it certainly paid off in the end but imagine the risk the coach took if it had failed.

Of course it was the same call, good or bad and for once the risky choice was rewarded.

We have determined one thing for sure.

Foles is a better receiver than Brady.

Nice to see an NFC East team beat the Patriots again, even if it was the wrong one.

Congrats Eagles!

Non Partisan Government

If you think about Government and politics you realize the two are very different.

Politics is about getting elected.

Government is about enforcing the laws.

Both have always existed in most societies but we see our current administration confusing the two.

Government in this country has been, to the extent possible non-political.

Laws were passed prohibiting Federal Workers from participating in political activities.

Of course there was a time when patronage and political party affiliation were more of a factor.

That is why the laws were passed.

Government continues on no matter who is elected although to the extent laws change the implementation changes.

You hear talk about the deep state which is simply a way to talk about the bureaucracy which exist in all Governments.  You could also call it the civil service.

It isn't partisan although of course individuals in it have political views.

We now see the dotard and his ilk deciding that if you aren't partisan for me you are partisan for them.

This ignores the tradition in this country of a Government which is neither.

Getting elected doesn't change the Government, passing laws does.

Memo Con

What would be the purpose of a committee issuing a memo about an inquiry it was engaged in, that was written by its chairman about an issue that it hasn't acted upon?

Obviously a political purpose and possibly a justification for certain actions by the dotard.

The memo argues that the basis for an investigation was a dossier prepared by someone who was opposed to the Trump campaign.

That is not proven as the only cause, but so far the dossier is still neither proven or unproven, and some of its allegations are quite serious.

The argument being made is that the FBI and the Justice Department acted on political motivations, which is unproven, even if they had a preference in the election.

We know that the investigation has actually uncovered a number of questionable activities and has led to a few indictments for obstruction.

We also know that the memo is incomplete and other details are being blocked by the chairman who released this one.

It is designed to cater to those who already feel that the investigation is politically motivated and allow the dotard to cite it in any future firings.

Its an example of a con game where two parties confirm the positions of each other based on a bunch of false or twisted circumstances.

Just a con.

Trickle Down or Crumbs, Whats the Difference?

The whole republican agenda is based on the theory of trickle down economics, encourage the entrepreneurs and everyone eventually benefits.

We know the recent tax law provided significantly more benefits to business and wealthy people, and reduced and temporary benefits to the rest of us.

It is also going to significantly increase the deficit unless fairly massive cuts are made to entitlement programs.

I would be curious with the attacks on health coverage we have already seen and the likely rise in premiums if paychecks will even go up as the tax savings meet the health insurance increases.

I'm sure it varies person to person and company to company, and some will opt for less coverage but this isn't a feast.

It is more like the crumbs referred to by the democratic minority leader.

The tax law wasn't based on being fair, and any reductions it made will have to be paid for by taxpayers either in lost benefits or increased national debt.

These are the sort of policies that eventually lead to a recession, as you see the present increase traded for future payments.

We saw this with the artificial housing boom that led to the financial crisis we haven't fully recovered from as we pursued a republican agenda of creating more homeowners.

Its the same type of faulty math they like to use all the time, not understanding how the character  of the person is more important than what they own or have.

Hey crumbs can be tasty, better than the sort of stuff that might trickle down in this administration.

Fairness

What is economic fairness?

If you subscribe to laisez-faire economics, the results are pretty much fair no matter how they come out.

It works our pretty well for the winners and not so good for the losers.

That was largely the state of affairs when the industrial revolution started and generally the outcome wasn't pretty as rich industrialists dominated and many people lived in sub-standard housing or company towns where they eked out a meagre existence.

We went through a long period of reform where certain things were added to make things a little fairer, such as universal public education, public hospitals, unions, rules about the environment and worker safety as well as programs for the unemployed and the elderly.

It is hard to imagine life without those things now, although some do.

They are envious of the days when an enterprising person could rape the environment, oppress some workers and get rich.

Of course we see a lot of people getting rich and richer as wealth is becoming shared less equally.

Is this fair?

What is the fair share a resident of this country deserves?

It is the question that divides conservatives and progressives.

It doesn't have a simple answer.