All mothers have this quality. Some more than others, but some.
Your computer may not show the video and just provide the dialog.
An Independent view of law, politics and social issues confronting Angelinos, Californians, and Americans
All mothers have this quality. Some more than others, but some.
Your computer may not show the video and just provide the dialog.
Now, at long last, the big guns are being brought to bear. Now, at long last, some major Republicans like Mitt Romney are speaking up to lay waste to Donald Trump.
For months Trump’s rivals and other Republicans have either retreated in silence or tentatively and ineptly criticized him for exactly those traits that voters like about him: for being a slapdash, politically incorrect money-hungry bully.
But now finally — at long last — major Republicans are raising their heads and highlighting Trump’s actual vulnerability: his inability to think for an extended time about anybody but himself.
He seduces people with his confidence and his promises. People invest time, love and money in him. But in the end he cares only about himself. He betrays those who trust him and leaves them high and dry.
It’s unpleasant to have to play politics on this personal level. But this is a message that can sway potential Trump supporters, many of whom have only the barest information on what Trump’s life and career have actually been like.
This is a message that can work in a sour and cynical time among voters who already feel betrayed. This is a message that can work because it’s a personality type everyone understands. This is a time when it is not in fact too late, when it may still be possible to prevent his nomination.
The campaign against Trump has to be specific and relentless: a series of clear examples, rolled out day upon day with the same message. Donald Trump betrays.
It can start with Trump University, where Trump betrayed schoolteachers and others who dreamed of building a better life for themselves.
Trump billed his university as a place people could go to learn everything necessary about real estate investing. According to a 2013 lawsuit filed by New York’s attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, more than 5,000 people paid $40 million, a quarter of which went to Trump himself.
Internal Trump University documents suggest that the university wasn’t really oriented around teaching, but rather around luring customers into buying more and more courses.
According to the New York lawsuit, instructors filled out course evaluations themselves or had students fill out the non-anonymous forms in front of them, pressuring them into giving positive reviews. During breaks students were told to call their credit card companies to increase their credit limits. They were given a script encouraging them to exaggerate their incomes. The Better Business Bureau gave the school a D- rating in 2010.
“They lure you in with false promises,” one student, Patricia Murphy, told The Times in 2011. Murphy said she had spent about $12,000 on Trump University classes, much of it racked up on her credit cards. “I was scammed,” she said.
The barrage can continue with Trump Mortgage. On the campaign trail, Trump tells people he saw the mortgage crisis coming. “I told a lot of people,” he has said, “and I was right. You know, I’m pretty good at that stuff.”
Trump’s biggest lies are the ones he tells himself. The reality is that Trump opened his mortgage company in 2006. Others smelled a bubble, but not Trump. “I think it’s a great time to start a mortgage company,” he told CNBC. “The real estate market is going to be very strong for a long time to come.”
Part of the operation was a boiler room where people cold-called clients, sometimes pushing subprime loans and offering easy approval.
Jennifer McGovern had trusted Trump and went to work for him. But she got stiffed in the end. In 2008 a New York State Supreme Court judge ordered Trump Mortgage to pay her the $298,274 she was owed. The bill wasn’t paid. “The company was set up in a way that we could never recover what we were owed,” she told The Washington Post.
The stories can go on and on. The betrayal of investors when his casino businesses went bankrupt. The betrayal of his first wife with his flagrant public affair with Marla Maples. The betrayal of American workers when he decided to hire illegals. The people left in the wake of other debacles: Trump Air, Trump Vodka, Trump Financial, etc.
These weren’t just risks that went bad. They were shams, built like his campaign around empty promises and on Trump’s fragile and overweening pride.
The burden of responsibility now falls on Republican officials, elected and nonelected, at all levels. For years they have built relationships in their communities, earned the right to be heard. If they now feel that Donald Trump would be a reckless and dangerous president, then they have a responsibility to their country to tell those people the truth, to rally all their energies against this man.
Since the start of his campaign Trump has had more energy and more courage than his opponents. Maybe that’s now changing.
Is Donald Trump the new Hitler or a reincarnation of William Jennings Bryan? In a piece on U.S, News and World Report web site Daniel Klinghard, on March 4, 2016, thinks Trump is reminiscent of Bryan. Following is a slightly abridged version of the article.
Pundits and academics toyed for a while with branding Donald Trump with the scarlet H – warning of his rise as a replay of the fall of Weimar Germany and the emergence of Adolf Hitler. Trump’s suggestions that the government surveil mosques, deport undocumented Mexicans and prevent Muslims from entering the U.S. was originally hailed as more Nazi than American, until we reflected on the pervasiveness of NSA surveillance, the treatment of Japanese-Americans during World War II and the mass deportations of Operation Wetback in 1954. Indeed, there are enough examples of such Trumpisms in the American tradition for comparisons of demagoguery without having to conjure up Hitler.
Consider William Jennings Bryan, who captured the Democratic presidential nomination 120 years ago in 1896. He made a name for himself as a journalist (both before and after serving as a member of the House of Representatives) and importantly as an orator who toured the country to speak to populist groups and agitate for the abandonment of the gold standard and the adoption of a silver-based currency. In his appeal to lowbrow tastes, his ability to turn politics into popular entertainment and his willingness to play to prejudice against judgment, Bryan was closer to a modern-day reality TV star than Trump is to Hitler.
To secure the nomination, Bryan applied the same rhetorical style that he had honed in prairie schoolhouses and southern convention halls – a popular forum that had been all but ignored by party elites, but through which he generated a “silent majority” that struck the establishment by surprise in 1896.
Among the most popular tools of the Bryan campaign were a series of ill-informed and wildly popular pamphlets featuring a young boy who lectured bankers on the intricacies of global finance. Witty, anti-Semitic and grossly simplistic, they reassured voters that there were solutions to America’s economic woes – solutions so clear that a child could see them. Like Trump, Bryan appealed to what he deemed to be common sense and warned his listeners that anyone preaching moderation only intended to keep the common man in the dark.
Fifteen Democratic candidates received votes for the nomination at the 1896 convention, including six governors, five senators and the sitting vice president of the United States. They never overcame their interpersonal opposition to present a united front against Bryan, a former two-term representative and newspaper editor. Indeed, they hardly considered Bryan a serious contender until the convention met and he delivered his famous “Cross of Gold” speech decrying the gold standard and calling Democrats to an apocalyptic battle against the “Eastern Elites” who dominated both parties.
The elevation of Bryan had long-term implications for his party. His predecessor as Democratic nominee, President Grover Cleveland, had made his career following a formula of running on reform principles and governing pragmatically. After 1896, Cleveland was a man without a party. He refused to support Bryan and retired in despair when Republican nominee William McKinley trounced Bryan and set up the GOP for a thirty-year period of dominance.
Bryan remained the master of what was left of the Democratic Party, despite the clear flaws in his candidacy and his isolation from the party’s establishment – particularly from its traditional major donors, nearly all of whom abandoned the party after 1896.
It is easy to imagine the emergence of an analogous situation under a Republican collapse today, even if it is one with different policy objectives. In fact, if you look at a map of the 1896 electoral college results demonstrating Bryan’s loss, you’re looking at the basic parameters of a Trump loss (with some give and take around the edges, particularly Washington, Virginia and Florida).
If the Republicans of 2016 go the direction Democrats went with Bryan in 1896, it could mean years of wandering in the wilderness. We might look toward such a proposition with hope that the polarized politics of the past fifteen years would at last be broken. But we should also be warned of a democratic deficit, in which the incentives to mobilize in support of Democratic politics would wither along with the possibility of real party competition.
The trees and other spring blooming plants at my home are confused. Everything is blooming. American Robins were in the front yard splashing in the water from the sprinklers. It was supposed to be one of the wettest Februaries on record. Instead, by one measure at least, it became the hottest on record. We turned on the air conditioning for about 30 minutes this afternoon as the temperature approached 90°F. Underground Weather reports the temperature reached 94°F. The forecast is for a rainy period with temperatures in the 60s starting Sunday.
All photos taken with Panasonic FZ200 camera
The downside of this summer weather in February is my concern that next summer’s temperatures will be beyond healthy extremely hot. That might be a good excuse to head to the mountains or the beach for cooler weather. It’s foggy in Newport Beach, California today. Is this part of El Niño/La Niña? The weather bureau seems to be unable to provide reliable information.
Model Cheryl Tiegs calls plus-size SI swimsuit cover ‘unhealthy’
I had no plans to post this year’s Sports Illustrated swimsuit cover model as she is overweight. Now former top model Cheryl Tiegs has made her comments. Tiegs thinks the selection sends a bad message. I couldn’t agree more. She may be young and is modestly attractive but Ashley Graham is hardly a dream beauty in a swim suit. Emphasis on slender should be the appropriate message. 36-34-47 are not measurements that anyone should be striving to achieve. Miss Graham should be in touch with Weight Watchers, Jenny Craig, or Nutrisystems.
Look at the cover photo.
Now look at another photo of Ashley Graham. Nice looking but no beauty.
February 28, 2016
Trump won’t disavow support from KKK, David Duke. His own words on CNN’s State of the Union program.
By Danielle Allen February 21, 2016
Danielle Allen is a political theorist at Harvard University and a contributing columnist for The Washington Post.
Like any number of us raised in the late 20th century, I have spent my life perplexed about exactly how Hitler could have come to power in Germany. Watching Donald Trump’s rise, I now understand. Leave aside whether a direct comparison of Trump to Hitler is accurate. That is not my point. My point rather is about how a demagogic opportunist can exploit a divided country.
To understand the rise of Hitler and the spread of Nazism, I have generally relied on the German-Jewish émigré philosopher Hannah Arendt and her arguments about the banality of evil. Somehow people can understand themselves as “just doing their job,” yet act as cogs in the wheel of a murderous machine. Arendt also offered a second answer in a small but powerful book called “Men in Dark Times.” In this book, she described all those who thought that Hitler’s rise was a terrible thing but chose “internal exile,” or staying invisible and out of the way as their strategy for coping with the situation. They knew evil was evil, but they too facilitated it, by departing from the battlefield out of a sense of hopelessness.
One can see both of these phenomena unfolding now. The first shows itself, for instance, when journalists cover every crude and cruel thing that comes out of Trump’s mouth and thereby help acculturate all of us to what we are hearing. Are they not just doing their jobs, they will ask, in covering the Republican front-runner? Have we not already been acculturated by 30 years of popular culture to offensive and inciting comments? Yes, both of these things are true. But that doesn’t mean journalists ought to be Trump’s megaphone. Perhaps we should just shut the lights out on offensiveness; turn off the mic when someone tries to shout down others; reestablish standards for what counts as a worthwhile contribution to the public debate. That will seem counter to journalistic norms, yes, but why not let Trump pay for his own ads when he wants to broadcast foul and incendiary ideas? He’ll still have plenty of access to freedom of expression. It is time to draw a bright line.
One spots the second experience in any number of water-cooler conversations or dinner-party dialogues. “Yes, yes, it is terrible. Can you believe it? Have you seen anything like it? Has America come to this?” “Agreed, agreed.” But when someone asks what is to be done, silence falls. Very many of us, too many of us, are starting to contemplate accepting internal exile. Or we joke about moving to Canada more seriously than usually.
But over the course of the past few months, I’ve learned something else that goes beyond Arendt’s ideas about the banality of evil and feelings of impotence in the face of danger.
Trump is rising by taking advantage of a divided country. The truth is that the vast majority of voting Americans think that Trump is unacceptable as a presidential candidate, but we are split by strong partisan ideologies and cannot coordinate a solution to stop him. Similarly, a significant part of voting Republicans think that Trump is unacceptable, but they too, thus far, have been unable to coordinate a solution. Trump is exploiting the fact that we cannot unite across our ideological divides.
The only way to stop him, then, is to achieve just that kind of coordination across party lines and across divisions within parties. We have reached that moment of truth.
Republicans, you cannot count on the Democrats to stop Trump. I believe that Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination, and I intend to vote for her, but it is also the case that she is a candidate with significant weaknesses, as your party knows quite well. The result of a head-to-head contest between Clinton and Trump would be unpredictable. Trump has to be blocked in your primary.
Jeb Bush has done the right thing by dropping out, just as he did the right thing by being the first, alongside Rand Paul, to challenge Trump. The time has come, John Kasich and Ben Carson, to leave the race as well. You both express a powerful commitment to the good of your country and to its founding ideals. If you care about the future of this republic, it is time to endorse Marco Rubio. Kasich, there’s a little wind in your sails, but it’s not enough. Your country is calling you. Do the right thing.
Ted Cruz is, I believe, pulling votes away from Trump, and for that reason is useful in the race. But, Mr. Cruz, you are drawing too close to Trump’s politics. You too should change course.
Democrats, your leading candidate is too weak to count on as a firewall. She might be able to pull off a general election victory against Trump, but then again she might not. Too much is uncertain this year. You, too, need to help the Republicans beat Trump; this is no moment for standing by passively. If your deadline for changing your party affiliation has not yet come, re-register and vote for Rubio, even if, like me, you cannot stomach his opposition to marriage equality. I too would prefer Kasich as the Republican nominee, but pursuing that goal will only make it more likely that Trump takes the nomination. The republic cannot afford that.
Finally, to all of you Republicans who have already dropped out, one more, great act of public service awaits you. As candidates, you pledged to support whomever the Republican party nominated. It’s time to revoke your pledge. Be bold, stand up and shout that you will not support Trump if he is your party’s nominee. Do it together. Hold one big mother of a news conference. Endorse Rubio, together. It is time to draw a bright line, and you are the ones on whom this burden falls. No one else can do it.
Marco Rubio, this is also your moment to draw a bright line. You too ought to rescind your pledge to support the party’s nominee if it is Trump.
Donald Trump has no respect for the basic rights that are the foundation of constitutional democracy, nor for the requirements of decency necessary to sustain democratic citizenship. Nor can any democracy survive without an expectation that the people require reasonable arguments that bring the truth to light, and Trump has nothing but contempt for our intelligence.
We, the people, need to find somewhere, buried in the recesses of our fading memories, the capacity to make common cause against this formidable threat to our equally shared liberties. The time is now.
Jeb Bush finally dropped out of the race for the presidency. It was no loss for the Republicans or the nation. I always thought he looked awkward at the rallies he held. He offered no new ideas that anyone cared about. He was the establishment candidate that was backed by what was reported to be a $100 million super-pac. The very thing that most Americans despise – a group of wealthy contributors who would expect something in return if he was elected.
Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have one thing in common. They abhor super-pacs. Both of them a drawing the largest crowds at their campaign events. Both of them are scary alternatives to the establishment candidates. Still the pubic seems to love them for their extreme views.
Still I do not believe the GOP race is not over. Marco Rubio is likely to be the new establishment candidate and when John Kasich and Ben Carson drop out his position might easily bring him to at least 50% in the polls.
Sadly if Rubio wins the nomination I will have to support the Democratic candidate. Rubio clearly stated in one of the debates that under no circumstance would he support an abortion even if the mother’s life was at stake. That horrible situation might leave a family with no mother and the loss of someone’s dearly loved wife.
I view Hillary Clinton as someone in the same category as Jeb Bush. A super-pac backed traditionalist who does not care about anyone but herself. She happens to favor abortions to preserve the life of the mother. Donald Trump’s abortion views are unknown to me and apparently everyone else as he has avoided offering his view on debate stages, town hall forums and other venues.
Events effecting local communities rarely receive national attention. Hurricane Sandy and Hurricane Katrina are two that really received massive media coverage. The BP oil spill on the Gulf coast was another attention getter.
The greater concern ought to be government attention when the impacted communities are those of the wealthy versus those of the poor.
In Los Angeles the Southern California Gas Company had a huge natural gas leak, reported to be the largest such leak in American history, near the Porter Ranch neighborhood may cause vomiting, nosebleeds and other short-term symptoms, they say, but they have assured residents that it does not pose long-term health risks. The leak was first reported Oct. 23, 2015. The leak was stopped last week and permanently capped yesterday.
Porter Ranch has a $121,428 median household income (2008 dollars), high for the city of Los Angeles and high for the county according to the Los Angeles Times. Since the leak thousands of residence have been relocated by the gas company at their expense. The area has been blanketed with law firms offering to process suits against the gas company. The real Erin Brokovich visited the area representing a law firm.
Meanwhile the Exide battery factory in Vernon, an industrial community 15 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles has been operating since 1922. That factory has been spilling lead, arsenic, cadmium and other toxic metals on the ground and contaminating homes and yards in surrounding communities as well a ground water in the surrounding area these past 90 years. The people living in the nearby residential communities are all low income residents estimated to total 110,000 people.
Now the Exide company has agreed to close the facility. But where has the government been since 1922? Where was Erin Brokovich all these past years?
Will anyone in Michigan see jail time for the Flint, Michigan contaminated water system? Not only will there be no jail time it is unlikely anyone will lose their job.
Unless there is money to be made no one cares.
Remembering one of America’s worst presidents!
It appears that the folks in South Carolina have forgotten some major events that occurred when George W. Bush was president. Not all were his direct fault but he and his administration, in my opinion, did not take sufficient precautions. I did not have to refer to any publication or website for these occurrences. They are all clearly in my mind. They should be in yours too.
Perhaps the above listing of George W. Bush’s major administration failures would be a reason to suspect another Bush would not be welcomed to the White House.