Loose Lips Sink Ships

Loose lips sink ships is an American English idiom meaning “beware of unguarded talk”.

Quite arguably one of the most famous and effective propaganda posters, “Loose Lips Might Sink Ships” links sharing war secrets with the loss of American life and attacks on the Navy. This slogan, created by the War Advertising Council, quite literally meant that citizens should avoid talking about ship movements, destinations and deployments because that information could easily be intercepted by the enemy at a grave cost. This propaganda poster is a prime example of how a simple, clear and memorable slogan can convey the severity of an issue and influence public behavior.

In an interview Donald Trump did with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt on Thursday morning, in which Hewitt attempted multiple times to get Trump to say he was being metaphorical or hyperbolic, Trump repeatedly refused — and insisted he really meant Obama was a founder of ISIS.

Hewitt prodded Trump, suggesting the GOP nominee meant that Obama “created the vacuum, he lost the peace,” and was not to be taken literally. But Trump objected.

“No, I meant he’s the founder of ISIS. I do. He was the most valuable player. I give him the most valuable player award. I give her, too, by the way, Hillary Clinton,” Trump said.

Hewitt tried again, saying: “But he’s not sympathetic to them. He hates them. He’s trying to kill them.”

“I don’t care,” Trump replied. “He was the founder. His, the way he got out of Iraq was that that was the founding of ISIS, okay?”

Today, Friday, Trump attempted to walk back tweeting “”Ratings challenged @CNN reports so seriously that I call President Obama (and Clinton) “the founder” of ISIS, & MVP. THEY DON’T GET SARCASM?”

Did Hewitt take Trump’s words as sarcasm? I don’t think so. Hewitt is a very serious guy. He made every effort to obtain a clarification from Trump.

As president would he be threatening sanctions, tariff imposition, or war and then say “Oh, I was joking” or “That was sarcasm. I really didn’t mean what I said.”

You want this man as commander-in-chief of the United States?

The GOP Debate of December 15, 2015

While the debate was not a major change event I predict the further decline of Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina in the polls. The discussion on foreign affairs was beyond their understanding as reflected in their answers.

There were at least two answers at last night’s GOP debate that should disqualify these candidates as contenders for the presidency. Their supporters will overlook the remarks as if they had no consequence.

1. Chris Christy said he would enforce a no fly zone over Syria and would shoot down Russian aircraft that would challenge that enforcement even if it meant World War 3. In other words he would take the United States into war over Syria that could bring on worldwide devastation.

2. Donald Trump was asked “What’s your priority among our nuclear triad?” by Hugh Hewitt. Trump clearly did not understand the question because he launched into a diatribe into about he would have handled Syria and the Middle East.

Hewitt: “Of the three legs of the triad, though, do you have a priority? I want to go to Sen. Rubio after that and ask him.” Trump: “I think – I think, for me, nuclear is just the power, the devastation is very important to me.”

Senator Rubio new exactly what the question was about and informed everyone on the stage and in the audience.

I know that Rand Paul was out of step with the rest of the candidates but his answers were the best thought out.

The debate was primarily about hate and fear and who could best address those issues. The candidates offered nothing positive.

Ben Carson Continues to Prove He is not Ready for the Presidency

Given that Doctor Ben Carson is a retired neurosurgeon it is difficult to understand how lacking he is in basic knowledge about how the Federal government operates and how little he knows about American treaties.

Number 1:

When asked about what Eastern European nations should do about the fear of Russia he said they should join NATO.

Hugh Hewitt, talk radio host, asked if NATO should be willing to go to war if Russian leader Vladimir Putin attempts to do in the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania) what he’s already done in Ukraine.

“I think they would be willing to go to war if they knew that they were backed up by us,” Carson said. “We need to convince them to get involved in NATO and strengthen NATO.”

“Well, the Baltics, they are in NATO,” Hewitt responded. [In fact, they’ve been member states since 2004.]

After a commercial break, Carson explained that he was confused. “Well, when you were saying Baltic state, I thought you were continuing our conversation about the former components of the Soviet Union,” he said.

Carson’s views on the current Middle East turmoil are similarly confused. Read the entire Hewitt interview here:

Number 2:

In an awkward back-and-forth on NPR’s “Marketplace,” the top-tier GOP presidential candidate baffled host Kai Ryssdal by apparently conflating the debt limit with broader budgetary issues.

Ryssdal asked Carson if the US should raise the debt limit, a hot-button issue that has repeatedly generated congressional brinkmanship in recent years.

Here is the transcript:

Ryssdal: All right, so let’s talk about debt then and the budget. As you know, Treasury Secretary Lew has come out in the last couple of days and said, “We’re going to run out of money, we’re going to run out of borrowing authority, on the fifth of November.” Should the Congress then and the president not raise the debt limit? Should we default on our debt?

Carson: Let me put it this way: If I were the president, I would not sign an increased budget. Absolutely would not do it. They would have to find a place to cut.

Ryssdal: To be clear, it’s increasing the debt limit, not the budget, but I want to make sure I understand you. You’d let the United States default rather than raise the debt limit?

Carson: No, I would provide the kind of leadership that says, “Get on the stick guys, and stop messing around, and cut where you need to cut, because we’re not raising any spending limits, period.”

Ryssdal: I’m going try one more time, sir. This is debt that’s already obligated. Would you not favor increasing the debt limit to pay the debts already incurred?

Carson: What I’m saying is what we have to do is restructure the way that we create debt. I mean if we continue along this, where does it stop? It never stops. You’re always going ask the same question every year. And we’re just gonna keep going down that pathway. That’s one of the things I think that the people are tired of.

Ryssdal: I’m really trying not to be circular here, Dr. Carson, but if you’re not going to raise the debt limit and you’re not going to give specifics on what you’re gonna cut, then how are we going to know what you are going to do as president of the United States?

Number 3:

Ben Carson told Meet the Press that no Muslim should ever be president. “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation.” The constitution specifically says that there is no religious qualification to be president. Carson doubles down by telling Wolf Blitzer on CNN he is not sure that President Obama is a Christian – and that really doesn’t matter but being a Christian seems to matter to Ben Carson.

Presidential Debates where the Candidates Tell Us Nothing About Real Issues

A bizarre three hours.

After listening to the second GOP debate you would think that the choice for president is all about who would have his/her finger on the nuclear button and who has been the smartest CEO. Trump says the leaders of other countries are destroying American jobs but offers no solutions (at least he has identified the loss of jobs as an issue).

Or is the real threat to America the Muslim world.

Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson said he would not support a Muslim as President of the United States. Responding to a question on “Meet the Press” today, the retired neurosurgeon said, “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that.” He also said that Islam, as a religion, is incompatible with the Constitution.

On that Meet the Press program commentator guest Hugh Hewitt, who is also a constitutional scholar, pointed out that the sixth article of the Constitution specifically says that religion shall not be a criteria to hold any office. The end of the last sentence in that article reads, “but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

The problem is that the voting public can decide they do not want anyone to hold office that is not a Christian. This is not a new issue.

We have a spotty history of bias against those who hold beliefs that are not held us (that personal us). Laws aside, the first Catholic to run for President was campaigned against because of his religion. Al Smith was the first Roman Catholic presidential nominee, and lost the 1928 election in a landslide to Republican Herbert Hoover. Influential Lutherans and Southern Baptist ministers believed the Catholic Church and the Pope would dictate Smith’s policies.

Source: Boundless. “Al Smith and the Election of 1928.” Boundless U.S. History. Boundless, 21 Jul. 2015. Retrieved 20 Sep. 2015 from https://www.boundless.com/u-s-history/textbooks/boundless-u-s-history-textbook/from-the-new-era-to-the-great-depression-1920-1933-24/resistance-to-change-188/al-smith-and-the-election-of-1928-1045-2231/

Much of those very same arguments against Al Smith were again used when John F. Kennedy ran for president. Americans were not dissuaded by the anti-Catholic arguments and Kennedy won. The 1960 presidential race was one of the closest elections in U.S. history. The popular vote was 49.72% for Kennedy against 49.55% for Richard Nixon. 303 electoral votes for Kennedy of the 537 total electors.

Anjem Choudary, a famous Muslim cleric in the U.K., in 2013 said, “Inevitably, I’m convinced, I’m 100% certain that the sharia will be implemented in America and in Britain one day. If we have enough authority and power, we are obliged as Muslims to take the power away from the people who have it, and implement sharia law.”

Chris Christy accurately pointed out in that last debate that the public wants to hear specifics about what candidates would do to help Americans obtain decent middle class jobs. Did any of the other candidates hear his message? I doubt it.

In my opinion no candidate in either party are worth voting for. None have proposed any specific actions they would take on any issue.