tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-304458502024-03-07T19:05:24.219-05:00Winter's Soldier StoryInformed Commentary on Politics, International Events and the Military.Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.comBlogger634125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-86663572194365555042017-03-04T15:35:00.000-05:002017-03-04T15:56:39.530-05:00Looking for Russians? OB and HC Know Just Where They Are<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
To fully understand propaganda you first need a working
knowledge of the mindset of an elementary school cutup, preferably in the Grade
4 to Grade 6 range, but often it starts earlier and can last a lifetime.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I'm talking here of the kid who throws a paper wad at the
back of the teacher's head, then loudly blames the studious kid in the front
row when the teacher demands an explanation. In other words, exactly what Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton have been doing for years and are engaged in now.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuyJ4rQ9jPh3kNUzPmWnnYw3L7IQOJH5V-6oa9QpD5i0TKXu5memISDmx1tR-YfQZ9hol-tgtTuruQWF_2BM_Av90CeFnQVY3VoMvU_hdzWq8zzt88fQVXWC_GmHdu2_tAWo6BxQ/s1600/Obama+Disrespects+America.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="131" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuyJ4rQ9jPh3kNUzPmWnnYw3L7IQOJH5V-6oa9QpD5i0TKXu5memISDmx1tR-YfQZ9hol-tgtTuruQWF_2BM_Av90CeFnQVY3VoMvU_hdzWq8zzt88fQVXWC_GmHdu2_tAWo6BxQ/s200/Obama+Disrespects+America.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We are seeing a version of that behavior all over
Washington, D.C., these days and have been for decades, although presently it
is loud, persistent and a new variation on the theme erupts daily. The issue du
jour is always, however, centered on the false claim that
President Donald J. Trump has had nefarious contact with Russian government
officials especially during and since his declaration of candidacy for US
President.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrQKML81Sg6hhvC682kF0qhAtfXbZ29PskQOqn0fe3YA_n13xbmX1RL2BhOA1UkgH4v9B1KuHSNA9Z-EeSpfJx3EuDGkLH_o5WkZNn1pEdZrm_OPv_tgxSUgQHeR-fRY9_BILW5w/s1600/Hillary%252C+Joyful+Hillary.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrQKML81Sg6hhvC682kF0qhAtfXbZ29PskQOqn0fe3YA_n13xbmX1RL2BhOA1UkgH4v9B1KuHSNA9Z-EeSpfJx3EuDGkLH_o5WkZNn1pEdZrm_OPv_tgxSUgQHeR-fRY9_BILW5w/s200/Hillary%252C+Joyful+Hillary.jpg" width="151" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
An occasional ringer shows up in the news when an
administration official who did have contact with a Russian official, in a
perfectly legal and appropriate setting, is pilloried by the US media, which universally
is working as the propaganda arm of that segment of the Russian government that
wants a return to communist control. The media has 'found evidence,' relating to two members of
the Trump Administration, incidental in one instance, and appropriate, legal
and necessary in the others, that has been turned into the appearance of an
international scandal with Democrats en masse calling for firings and even
Trump's impeachment.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Currently the media is wetting its collective pants over the
claim that Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions lied during his confirmation hearings when
he said that, as a Donald Trump supporter who was often referred to as a
campaign "surrogate," he knew nothing of campaign contacts with the
Russian government.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now, decidedly, Sessions could have told his interrogator,
Minnesota Sen. Al Franken, that he did have a meeting with the Russian ambassador
in his Senate office, as a Senator, not a campaign surrogate, to discuss
matters that had nothing to do with the campaign. But Franken couched his
question specifically to the confines of the campaign and Sessions answered
within that narrow framework.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As I said above, Franken was interrogating Sessions, not
asking reasonable questions of a senate colleague and everything I ever learned
in the code of conduct says you do not cooperate with enemy interrogators, John
McCain notwithstanding. Franken and his ilk most definitely are enemies of the
American people and yet he gave Sessions a loophole that Sessions danced
through with aplomb. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To put it bluntly, if Al Franken wants better answers he
should ask better questions, especially when he already knows the answer, yet
keeps quiet until an opportune moment arises to initiate a smear campaign. You
have to hand it to Franken; he may have stunk as a comedian but he has launched
a promising second career as Class Clown of the Senate.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, the media has universally reported only half the
story – saying Sessions denied contact with the Russians – but omitting the
fact that he was responding to a question about the campaign not about his
appropriate conduct as a US Senator. But there is no reason to be surprised by
any of this.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The American media has been steadily infiltrated by
communists since at least the 1930s, possibly earlier, and since the 1960s has
dominated the political reporting in a non-stop effort to undermine the United
States and fulfill Nikita Khrushchev's promise at the United Nations to
"bury" us, not with warfare but by infiltration and steady erosion of
our basic rights and freedoms. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And who has been espousing Communist philosophy in this
country for decades? Hillary Clinton – ever since her riotous days as a Yale
graduate co-ed – and Barrack Hussein Obama, who was raised by communists and
has been a fifth-columnist ever since he erupted on the political scene with no paper trail attesting to his past. What they are doing as we speak
is engaging in classic elementary school bad child behavior, with the media acting
as a willing accomplice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But late this past week it was revealed that the Obama
administration had bugged Trump Towers, president Trump's business headquarters
and home, both while he was a candidate and after he won the election, which if
proved accurate could lead to criminal charges against the ex-president. Obama
also deliberately downgraded some forms of raw intelligence to allow access for
myriad people who had no clearance to see it. This tactic, which certainly
approaches the demarcation line of sedition, if not stepping over it,
enormously expanded the ability of his left behind fifth columnists to leak it,
and to make it much harder, although not impossible, to track down the leakers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nonetheless, Trump has steadily been chipping away at the
layers of insulation built by his predecessors and staff, and suddenly Obama
and Clinton are back on their heals. It stands to reason that Trump should
launch a wide-ranging investigation into their actions, if he hasn't already. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If he finds what many suspect he will, he should spare no
effort to bring all involved to justice whether a former president, former
secretary of state, or low-level staffer who typed the memos and filed the correspondence.
The oath of office says to uphold and defend the Constitution against <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">ALL</i></b>
enemies foreign and domestic.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are no exceptions, and there shouldn't be.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-46482947162341692942017-02-22T13:18:00.000-05:002017-02-22T13:18:10.191-05:00We Have Met the Enemy, and it is the Media's Fifth Column<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
President Donald J. Trump held a campaign style rally last weekend
in a huge airplane hangar in Melbourne, Florida, and despite a wildly
enthusiastic capacity audience that overflowed to the outside, his words had
barely ceased resonating inside before the media caterwauling began.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"He wasn't 'specific' about terrorism in Sweden; he called
us the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">enemy</i>; his wife said the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Lord's
Prayer</i></b> and had to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">read </i>it!
Trump is not 'qualified,' his White House is a study in 'chaos,' he isn't
getting <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">anything </i>done!"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The left-wing media and its associated fifth-columnist
saboteurs are literally in a frenzy of character assault, spewing non-stop misinformation
yet clueless as to why their fellow-traveling saboteur methodology is not
working this time. The primary focus of the most recent round of hand-wringing
and self-absorption that has sent the left into spasms of angst is Trump's
defining the media as the enemy of the American public. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiU22spquMucrCErVpGqXqtXw2UNyIn-RLQ8xAuv6FfOslwRFCei0_INWmm9zoU0wUV0_D4lQjcwmoqQ_SucpkzCrBiBzBF27WfYlm735iiD0uW6pHg2NCwrUdnvP1IFsPkfNRm5w/s1600/Fifth+Column.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiU22spquMucrCErVpGqXqtXw2UNyIn-RLQ8xAuv6FfOslwRFCei0_INWmm9zoU0wUV0_D4lQjcwmoqQ_SucpkzCrBiBzBF27WfYlm735iiD0uW6pHg2NCwrUdnvP1IFsPkfNRm5w/s320/Fifth+Column.jpg" width="227" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But Trump isn't necessarily wrong here. The media as it is
known – particularly that sector describe as "Main Stream" – can not
be compared to true journalists, whether print or electronic, and that has been
the case for decades. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"The media" is in fact a conglomeration of propagandists
that has its origins back at least as far as the 1930s when a
"famine" in Ukraine imposed by Russian communists' killed up to 10
million people by starvation, torture and execution in one year, but was
horribly under-reported in the west. The modern-day offspring of those first
propagandists work for the power brokers behind the Democratic Party, which no
longer represents people who believe in democratic principles. They are
self-anointed "elites," people who want the US to fail because it is
a symbol of successful nationalism.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Those earliest propagandists posing as journalists were followed
by an all-out assault on the truth during the Vietnam War that ultimately was
successful in convincing the US Congress to withdraw all aid to South Vietnam.
That in turn led to communists rampaging throughout Southeast Asia for years,
slaughtering an estimated 3 million civilians, displacing millions more and
enslaving the remainder.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Kudos by the way to conservative talk radio host Tammy Bruce
who pointed out earlier this week that the Vietnam era faux journalists were
led by Walter Cronkite, the disgraced CBS anchorman who was discovered to be a
communist sympathizer – meaning he was a communist – after the war ended. Bruce
was responding to a question concerning Cronkite's protégé and replacement at
CBS, Dan Rather, himself a disgraced "journalist" who went so far as
to falsify documents in an attempt to prevent the election of George W. Bush,
but has emerged from exile to exhort his fellows to stand fast in their
deceptions.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Regarding Trump's actual performance during his first month
in office, there are two issues that display the ignorance and incompetence of
the "media," and go a long way toward explaining the ongoing climate
of hostility toward him. First, as any business or military person knows, you
must make a plan to achieve your goals and objectives, and then you must have a
backup plan in case the first one goes awry, which it will.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The so-called media generally aren't aware of real-life
obstacles, and can't handle, physically, mentally or emotionally, any deviation
from their self-anointed destiny. In their world, Donald Trump was not supposed
to win the presidency, it was supposed to go to Hillary Clinton by default and
since it didn't they will yell, scream, throw tantrums, stamp their feet and
hold their breath until they turn blue – all of which we see on a daily
basis.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Second, many media representatives are simply reflecting
their instant gratification generation upbringing. They don't understand
concepts that don't align with fast-food burgers, over-the-counter coffee, and their
addiction to instant and public communication even if it others are put in
danger during its application, such as texting while driving. They have no
concept of percolated coffee, long simmering meals, or hand-written letters
that require thought and the ability to correctly spell our native language.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
They can't get over not receiving a participation trophy for
doing everything they could, fair and foul, mostly foul, to get Clinton
nominated, including sabotaging Bernie Sanders, and then elected by similarly
sabotaging Trump. They keep waiting for someone perceived as an adult to show
up, pat their heads, tell them everything will be okay, and put them on the
path to driving Trump from office. And if Trump doesn't finish four years worth of work in the first 100 days it is failure and he owns it, or so they believe.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Yet, Trump is prevailing, day by day, issue by issue. If one
initiative is temporarily delayed, he adapts his initial plans to reflect the
new realities while simultaneously pressing onward with others. This happens in
business and the military every day. It is not unusual or a symbol of failure,
it is reality and most of us deal with it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even though Democrats in the US Senate are hell-bent on
disrupting what should be fairly routine approval of Trump's cabinet he still
is moving forward. Even though repealing and replacing Obamacare, the poster
child for bureaucratic overreach, ineptitude and conceit, is akin to playing
Pickup Stix with an octopus, requiring elimination one suction cup at a time
without disturbing other areas, it is getting done.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite a plethora of fifth-columnists left behind by
departing president Obama
to sabotage Trump's agenda, it still is moving forward. Look at what he managed
to do with immigration.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
His initial executive order to temporarily halt immigration
and unvetted refugees from countries that have been identified as state
supporters of terrorism was sabotaged first by then-acting, and since fired,
Atty. General Sally Yates, and then by leftover Obama appointees in the Justice
Department who couldn't win a court challenge if they were tasked with proving
the sun comes up in the east.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
They were successful in delaying Trump's policy initiatives
but he has retrenched and has issued a new immigration directive, as well as
ordering the hiring of 15,000 immigration agents and border control officers.
When those people are in place, if each of them is responsible for the
deportation of just one illegal per day, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">more than 5,000,000 illegals will be gone in
one year</i></b>, which should go a long way toward reducing crime and welfare
abuse in that sector.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump was right about the media, especially those he named
and several others as well. They no longer represent an unbiased search for the
truth, and the stories they broadcast and print often aren’t news at all. But we
should not be disheartened; there still are occasional glimmers of real
journalism left in America.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Conservative talk radio has many outlets, independent blogs
that cover real news in-depth, completely and accurately are many and diverse,
and news outlets such as One American News and CRTV are shining lights in the
new journalism. But as far as the so-called mainstream media, they are indeed
an enemy to the American public, perhaps the worst and most dangerous we have
ever faced.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-35738172603378103612016-11-09T18:36:00.001-05:002016-11-15T19:00:28.999-05:00Pollsters, Pundits Had Anti-Trump Agenda<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
All across the American media pollsters and pundits are
gazing at their navels and wailing about why Donald Trump was elected president
of the United States when everything they did for more than a year was geared to
preventing exactly that outcome.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What did we do wrong? What did we miss? Why did the voting
public not believe our polls and commentaries in sufficient numbers to make
Hillary Clinton president? Woe is us; we are going to have to convene panels
and study groups and committees to examine our polling methods to make sure
this never happens again.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is merely a continuation of the rubbish these people
were spewing ever since 2015 when they ignited a firestorm of opposition to Trump
by claiming that any other GOP candidate would do better against Clinton than
he would. But what so many either ignored, or didn't understand, was that Trump
also ignited a firestorm of anti-establishment fervor that was sufficient to
overcome all the odds and send him to the White House.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Yet today, even some allegedly conservative national outlets are
decrying the leftist bias of the "main stream media" as if it is
anyone else but them. While the more astute of the pollsters were issuing mea
culpas and promising to do better the next time, and others were simply
ignoring their failures or trying to look the other way, the simple fact of the
matter is that they can prevent a similar failure the next time by just doing
their jobs. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What was missing from this presidential election was the
application of professional standards, as poll after poll succumbed either to
their own biases or pressure from the leftist media to make sure that their
numbers consistently put Clinton above, beyond and out of Trump's reach.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I became suspicious of the 'polls' when they also began to
show that President Obama's favorability ratings were climbing above fifty
percent. This despite domestic discord, a continually weak economy, jobs
numbers that were never good and often relied on part-time and seasonal swings
to appear even anemically improved, repeated terrorist attacks on our own soil,
and an all-out war against the police.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So I started looking into the methodology of the polls and
what I found was that they were nearly universally slanted to the Democrats. In
poll after poll by either national or local media outlets, often coupled with
colleges or universities, the pollsters surveyed a preponderance of Democrats,
well in excess of their actual percentage in the electorate, while sampling
smaller numbers of Republicans and virtually ignoring independents. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But except for occasional outliers, independent voters
dominate the electoral landscape, so their absence in appropriate percentages
from the bulk of the polls rendered the results virtually meaningless. The
'polls' were in fact surveys, because they contacted people by random, with no
means of ascertaining whether those being interviewed were who they said they
were, either by personal identity or political preferences.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I wrote about this several times prior to the election and
concluded that Trump would win. I am not taking a victory lap here because I
wasn't involved in the election, but I am pointing out that it is possible to
delve into the methodology of this propaganda and ascertain whether it is
accurate or a blatant attempt to sway public opinion.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In one of the most laughable of the polls, released just
before Election Day, FOX News gave Hillary Clinton a lead of 4 percent over
Trump, and identified respondents' political persuasion by asking them not how
they were registered, but did they think of themselves as Republicans or
Democrats. WHAT?? Both major parties were over-sampled in this poll while independents
barely broke double digits.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a straightforward, far more accurate way to do a
real POLL of political beliefs and I learned it at class given by a veteran
political strategist nearly two decades ago. Start with the fact that every
state has lists of registered voters by name, address and party registration,
or lack of it in the case of independents.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The parties have further breakdowns on how many times each respondent
has voted. If you want 'likely voters' you contact people who have voted in
four out the last four elections of the same type – presidential elections,
gubernatorial elections, congressional elections or local municipal elections.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then you contact sufficient numbers of each party or
independents to reflect their actual percentages in the area you are polling. For
a more accurate result you should get a total of at least 1,000 respondents.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the media didn't do that. Their polls were abominations
and clearly intended to drive more people to the Democrat candidate while
making the Republican appear to be struggling with a minimal base. Fortunately
for Trump the public doesn't trust the media.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nonetheless, these 'polls' were reported as fact when in reality
they were fantasy. The upshot of what we now see as an all-out effort to usurp
the electoral process is that dozens if not hundreds of reporters, editors,
producers, columnists and pundits for America's major news organizations have
squandered their reputations, their rapport with the public, and most important
the trust of their viewers and readers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Restoring that trust may be extraordinarily difficult if not
impossible. It's only two years until the next national election. Better get
started.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-73772526219450288032016-11-07T11:11:00.000-05:002016-11-07T11:11:29.302-05:00Frenetic Media Pulls Out All Stops to Stop Trump<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The American media, across the spectrum, in all forms, has
never been so unreliable, so biased, so propagandized and untruthful as in the
past 18 months of presidential campaign coverage.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Regardless of whether we are reading establishment
newspapers and magazines, viewing television news outlets, cable and network,
or listening to talk radio, we have been inundated with lie after lie, all of
which were intended to maintain the establishment grip on Washington, D.C., and
the political bureaucracy. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The basis for this not-so-astounding claim on my part is the
overwhelming use of surveys loosely defined as "polls" which drove
every single news cycle regardless of the nature of true news that far too
often was relegated to secondary status. Even when a major event did occur,
such as the terrorist attack on a gay club in Orlando, Florida, the media
ultimately got around to what it would mean in the polls.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you want to know when the media is lying to you – aside
from newscasters moving their lips - you simply have to look for any segment
that starts with the words "according to recent polls." If you like
you can substitute "just released" or "brand new" or words
of that nature for 'recent.'</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Before a single candidate announced for the presidency, the
media and the major political parties had already decided that Democrat Hillary
Clinton would face Jeb Bush, who would vanquish his Republican primary opponents
with aplomb. After a hard-fought campaign Bush would be ever-so-closely edged
out by the woman who would be the first female president of the US.</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTCqNC382X9z4imdx0Q6qMV7gOxQux3tbmorv1FhJgZpuNP3-8eHBcYexvXylTYHRZMjNXcXrAHE-UnT3siDkuv75LHOmVXb259-ez2Rclaj05e0A_kkq22mPHzSkcKDtS-9eAvA/s1600/Hillary%252C+Joyful+Hillary.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTCqNC382X9z4imdx0Q6qMV7gOxQux3tbmorv1FhJgZpuNP3-8eHBcYexvXylTYHRZMjNXcXrAHE-UnT3siDkuv75LHOmVXb259-ez2Rclaj05e0A_kkq22mPHzSkcKDtS-9eAvA/s320/Hillary%252C+Joyful+Hillary.jpg" width="243" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hillary Clinton</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And the media already had the polls to prove it! But far too
often, those "polls" did not include a representative sampling of
Republican, Democrat and Independent voters in the percentages by which they
were registered in the area where the sample was taken, much less those who
could be relied upon to vote. In fact, many of the early polls didn't even
ascertain whether the respondents were registered voters, and often included a
random sampling of several hundred "adults."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In other words, they were meaningless. Yet the polls drove
the news and the intent was that the news then would drive the polls.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Two things stepped in the way; the campaigns of Vermont
Independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who ran as a Democrat alternative to
Clinton, and Republican Donald Trump who ran as an alternative to the
establishment. After a well-run campaign in which the media undermined him at
every opportunity, in coordination with the Democrat National Committee, and
hurt him as much by the issues it didn't cover as those it did, Sanders went
down to pre-ordained defeat, with Clinton the anointed successor to Barack
Obama.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then to the horror of his one-time supporters Sanders found
the sudden wealth to purchase a third home, a $600,000 mansion, and instantly
became a Clinton supporter. In fact, as the campaign progressed, Sanders had
his nose so far up Clinton's rectum that he morphed into a political caricature
of Pinocchio, pausing only to beg of Clinton, "Tell me another lie, tell
me another lie!"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But Trump, who was under fire from the first question he
fielded in the first primary debate, turned the tables on virtually everyone,
including the media and the political establishment which for the purposes of
this article means that unholy conglomerate of D.C.-centrist insiders and
self-anointed "elitists" from both major parties. He bested 16 other
primary opponents, many of whom had so little support that they weren't even
allowed on the same stage with him.</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDQIOK-XnbLxw6Y6BBDmsEV5sbOQU8apYy2ypRCM0Bw4MdfoEB_C6QGSstxy6mOttyWs0Kfyruk-VQk3d6yuiTfrQX6yPt4LxsIeupcv9_0mrZBODv3QNNQIp5FdS3Pb_zGrbQ7Q/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDQIOK-XnbLxw6Y6BBDmsEV5sbOQU8apYy2ypRCM0Bw4MdfoEB_C6QGSstxy6mOttyWs0Kfyruk-VQk3d6yuiTfrQX6yPt4LxsIeupcv9_0mrZBODv3QNNQIp5FdS3Pb_zGrbQ7Q/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Donald J. Trump</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump had enough money to fund his own campaign without
having his legs cut out from under him by biased news reports that are intended
to stop the flow of donor cash that for other candidates funds the campaign ads
that are the life blood of the media. And Trump, unlike any of his predecessors
going back to Dwight Eisenhower, showed that not only did he not need the ads,
he also had the personal toughness to withstand the unrelenting, usually false
assaults on him by the media and its stooges, props and sycophants.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So here we are on the cusp of the 2016 presidential election
with the media universally proclaiming the race is a "dead heat" with
Hillary Clinton just a few points ahead of Trump, but within the "margin
of error." Bull. I have reviewed the methodology of virtually every poll
done in every "battleground" state where the decision supposedly will
really be made – because according to the media mantra, every voter in every
non-battleground state is so predictable that they really don’t need to pay
attention to them on Nov. 8. These polls say she will eke out a narrow victory,
just as planned at the outset.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Really? I've got news for you. Many so-called predictable
"blue" states are in the media's list of Clinton guaranteed electoral
votes only because they are using the same bogus polling methodology in the
final days that they were using months ago. And these polls still are
over-sampling Democrats while under-sampling Republicans and Independents,
usually by double digits.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Yet even with the deck stacked in that manner Trump is
close, tied, or within the "margin of error," which tells me that the
media is trying, right up to the last minute, to keep the election within a
razor-thin margin that would preempt large-scale calls for recounts and
investigations of voter fraud. "Oh, so close. Sorry guys. But you did give
it a good try." And an anti-establishment candidate will never be heard
from again in our lifetimes.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More to the point, people writing about or broadcasting
these lies know exactly what they are doing but keep telling us with a straight
face that a majority of American voters still prefer a candidate who some are
saying committed treason, to a capable businessman who sometimes makes
thin-skinned people feel uncomfortable. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Before every news organization and college looking for extra
income started doing "polls" there were two major polling
organizations in the US; the Gallup Poll and the Harris Poll. Interestingly,
neither of these organizations does polling on presidential races, although
they will poll issues surrounding those races.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One reason why is the incredible unpredictability of the
electorate, and to do an accurate poll of political preferences you have to get
the names and contact information for people who actually are registered to
vote, and usually do, an expensive and time-consuming endeavor. You have to
have their party affiliation or lack of it, and the frequency with which they
go to the polls in similar elections going back at least 4 cycles to have any
chance at accuracy.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And even then you can be blindsided because, as is the case
this year, millions of people registered to vote in the Republican primaries
and you can see from the turnout at his events that they are there for Trump.
But they aren't on the lists of people who have voted in similar elections so
they don't get polled; although that really wouldn't matter since the media
model is to get sufficient responses to verify its pre-selected outcome, not to
find out what people are really thinking.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So they 'poll' a few or several hundred people, get the
response they wanted, then claim to know exactly where the race stands, within
a supposedly acceptable margin of error. Want to know what the The Harris Poll
thinks of margins of error? Check this out.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span>The Harris Poll <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>avoids the words “margin of error” as they are misleading.</u></b>
All that can be calculated are different possible sampling errors with
different probabilities for pure, unweighted, random samples with 100% response
rates<u>.<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> These are only theoretical
because no published polls come close to this ideal.</b></u></i><br />
<br />
Also, Gallup samples generally are at least 1,000 respondents and sometimes
much larger. Only rarely do they go into the 500-1000 range, but many media
polls routinely sample less than 500 alleged voters, and then claim to know the
mood of the country.<br />
<br />
So I don't look for a Hillary Clinton victory on Tuesday because even though
she has plenty of supporters who are willing to look past her personal history,
her husband's history, her foundation's activities, her support for so many
anti-American positions on myriad issues, and her abject failures as a public
official, there are far more Americans who have had it with her and the
political establishment.<br />
<br />
Thus, barring a massive outbreak of voter fraud, which is possible, I admit,
I believe the real polls put Trump over the top. And if that prediction comes
true I hope one of his first acts is to put the so-called media, those pusillanimous
purveyors of lies, divisiveness and hatred on notice that they will be the last
people in town to get a heads up on anything, whether it be breaking
international news or a brief on the D.C. Zoning Commission's upcoming decision
on an application to build a dog house. <br />
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-82765581132200967122016-11-02T11:40:00.002-04:002016-11-02T12:01:09.868-04:00We Wanted A Street Fighter; We Got Our Wish!<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Several times over the past decade I have derided the
gentlemanly manner in which Republican candidates have approached campaigning,
whether it is on a local, state or national level.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I see politics as a blood sport, not a gentlemanly – or ladylike
– contest, whether the candidates are running for president or alternate for a municipal
commission. I understand human nature and at some level in all of our psyches
we want to win, regardless of how "nice" we try to be in public.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the Republican Party for some time now has been
enforcing a "nice guy" mantra where GOP candidates are to refrain
from taking off the gloves and smacking the daylights out of their opponents,
regardless of how vicious that opponent may be. Somewhere along the line the
general public was supposed to attach itself to the anti-bullying point of view
that has made total wimps out of generations of school kids who are blindsided
by reality when they get out in the working world and don't know how to defend
themselves.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The nice guy approach didn't work and I am not the only person who feels this
way. In fact I was reminded of some of my earlier columns recently when
conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh brought the subject up on his show.
Limbaugh made the point that out here in the real world some of us had been
calling for street fighters and brawlers and now we have it. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For instance, when John McCain was getting slapped around by
Barack Obama in 2008 I decried his Marquis de Queensbury approach writing about
it <a href="http://ronaldwinter.blogspot.com/2008/10/street-fighter-obama-vs-gentleman-john.htm">here.</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Four years later, I wrote about it <a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#editor/target=post;postID=1001025113754533284;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=54;src=postname">here</a>
when Mitt Romney was facing off against Obama in 2012. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Unfortunately my predictions came true in both races and
when all was said and done the GOP "nice guys" were down on the
pavement, crying about their opponent being "unfair," while Obama and
his cronies were dancing over them singing "I won, I won, I
won," and taking the country right down the proverbial drain.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In both cases the GOP candidates put up a clean and
"gentlemanly" fight, and in both cases they got their asses kicked.
In Romney's case, he lost because Republicans didn't come out to vote for him,
even though Obama amassed about 4 million fewer votes in 2012 than he had in
his 2008 victory over McCain.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZXjhyphenhyphen-l8YMsu3W4Cc0ruuf9VnuHT5ePo-nB-0ZkzdPUuowgxDOByEEUJ3Ux2w1khf1nvIVcUimRXD0l6iD2NpIP4KU8hTQpgkvYoNEPU6Qi9ygiBtPMTghjMxPnuriK11zHO2Jw/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZXjhyphenhyphen-l8YMsu3W4Cc0ruuf9VnuHT5ePo-nB-0ZkzdPUuowgxDOByEEUJ3Ux2w1khf1nvIVcUimRXD0l6iD2NpIP4KU8hTQpgkvYoNEPU6Qi9ygiBtPMTghjMxPnuriK11zHO2Jw/s200/Donald+Trump.jpg" width="160" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Donald J. Trump</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then came Donald J. Trump. He let the world and the
political establishment know from the very start that he wasn't playing games
and he would not fight clean or even fair. He started out his first debate
telling Rand Paul that he didn't even belong on the same stage and that was one
of gentlest things he said in the primary season.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He spent the next several months kicking his opponents,
numbering 16 at the beginning, off the stage, one by one. In the end, he stood
alone, victorious, ready to take on Democrat Hillary Clinton and her behind-the-scene
partners, establishment Republicans who are outraged that the rank-and-file
haven't toed the party line and selected their fair-haired candidate, as well
as the entirety of the US media establishment.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Throughout the primaries there was not one television
network or major print news outlet that covered his campaign fairly or
accurately. Even before he vanquished his last Republican primary opponent, the
media was trumpeting alleged "polls" that showed he would be far
behind Hillary Clinton if she was successful in stealing the Democrat
nomination.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
From the beginning the media – through use of their fake
polls – attempted to direct the primary voters to their preferred candidates –
Clinton and Jeb Bush – and from the beginning Republican and Independent voters
told the media and the establishment to pound sand and voted overwhelmingly for
Trump. It has since been proven that those "polls" were as bogus as
the current crop of garbage that form the core for any print article or
electronic segment.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump, for his part, led his supporters from the front, telling
the unified media and GOP establishment lackeys that he wasn't taking their
crap, wasn't knuckling under to their threats and
attacks and was going to do his own campaign, his way. And here we are, a week
from the election with even the bogus pollsters cracking and reporting that the
race is "tightening," and that in many states Trump is even ahead.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What a pant load, Trump has been ahead all along.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump got to this point by sticking steadfastly to the
street fighters' credo, that of continuing the fight and never backing down,
even when you get hit hard, even when you get bloodied, even when you get
knocked down. Whatever the other side throws at you, you take it, shake it off
and keep fighting.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Because to a true street fighter, the only real loss comes
from backing down, wimping out, begging for mercy when you still had fight left
in you. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump has of course been bloodied, what with the combined
forces of the media, the Democrats, and the so-called "elitist" Republican
establishment aligned against him and launching coordinated assaults against
his candidacy. But each time he came back swinging, and therein lies the
'secret' to his overwhelming popularity.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He didn't wimp out, he took the shots and even on the rare
occasions when he was rocked, he came right back. Joe Biden can talk all he
wants about being a bad ass but he can only dream of possessing a fraction of
Trump's true toughness.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In less than a week most Americans will go to the polls and
it will surprise no one if Trump comes out the victor. The Clinton machine is
still trying to find something, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">anything</i></b>, that will halt the Trump
juggernaut, but time is preciously short and they have shot all their ammo. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The elitists called for Trump to step down in early October
when a putrid little media ass kisser who secretly taped Trump making some
unflattering comments more than a decade ago, released the tape to the Clinton
campaign. He did it in the summer, but Clinton held on to it and used it for
her "October surprise." </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, the real surprise came when Trump stood up,
apologized for his past indiscretion and kept right on swinging. And his
popularity grew.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The total lack of understanding of the real nature of the
beast was never more apparent than the drivel emanating from GOP establishment
types who believed Trump would meekly step down. That is what <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">they</i></b>
would have done, but that's also why wimps of that nature never actually run
for anything because their precious little feelings would get hurt in the first
moments of the engagement, and they'd run home crying, jump into bed and pull the
covers over their head until the monsters went away.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But Trump? He hung tough and sure enough, the media was
finally forced to confront the fact that their attacks only made Trump
stronger.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now, Hillary Clinton is backed into a corner, taking massive
shot after massive shot. Her legs are buckling, her supporters are trying to
help her by attacking Trump from outside the ring, and yet, every day she sags
a bit closer to the deck. I seriously doubt that she has the wherewithal to
find some kind of inner strength to mount one last successful counterattack.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Should Trump win it all next Tuesday, and I believe he will,
there is one thing his enemies should remember. Street fighters will fight all
alone if necessary, because that is what street fighters do.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But they also remember who backed them up and who stood
against them when the fight was on. Trump will make good on his promises to reunite America in an atmosphere of greatness. But at the same time, he won't forget the candy asses who
stabbed him in the back from the day he declared his candidacy to this very
moment.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Frankly, I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-55195665455166707052016-10-20T16:53:00.000-04:002016-10-20T16:53:04.636-04:00Hillary Clinton, Joe McCarthy Reincarnated – The Red Scare is Back!<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
There were a number of stupid things said at the third and
thank God final presidential debate of the 2016 election year, but the hands
down stupidest was Hillary Clinton's claim that Donald Trump is a puppet of
Russian honcho Vladimir Putin.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For starters, there is no solid evidence that anything of
the kind is happening, except the release through Wikileaks of thousands of embarrassing
and possible actionable emails from Clinton and her cronies running from
insults to criminal conspiracies. The Clinton campaign and the wider Democratic
Party are both screaming loudly of Russian interference, which is what people
do when they know that the ginned up polls showing her ahead of Donald Trump
aren't accurate and she actually is losing.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Second, although she claims that 17 US intelligence
officials say Putin is interfering with our election, and that he really,
really, really likes Trump more than her – something that any sixth grader
would understand as a threat to their class standing – the truth is that
starting with the FBI and going outward, the Obama Administration simply isn't
trusted and anything they say is highly suspect to most intelligent Americans.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But to hear her go on and on about the Russians Are Coming,
The Russians Are Coming was like reverting back to the Cold War days when the
Russians really were coming and they really liked the Democrats far better than
any Republican. This time around Clinton seems to have taken on the
characteristics of infamous Red baiter Joe McCarthy, the late senator from Wisconsin
who turned commie hunting into a national pastime.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But McCarthy was a Republican and although he was
eviscerated by the 1950s media, which had far fewer communists in key positions
than today's media, he also was right. In a famous incident from that time
McCarthy, in a speech before Congress held up a list of dozens of suspected
communists who he said were working inside the US government.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He was roundly criticized for his comments, but as was later
revealed in several books on the Venona Cables, he was right and virtually
everyone on his list, nearly 5 dozen I believe, was in fact a communist agent.
The Venona Cables were messages transmitted between the Soviet Union and its spies
in the US, which the communists thought
were immune from decoding.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But through a series of events in WWII, the code was broken
and US intelligence agencies began deciphering them, a task that continued until
the Jimmy Carter presidency when he ended it. The upshot of the work on the
Venona Project was that the identities of many Soviet spies working in the US government
including the State Department, the Treasury, the OSS which was the forerunner
of the CIA, and even the White House were discovered.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
McCarthy didn't live anywhere near long enough to do a victory
round on his claims of widespread communist infiltration but it would appear
that Hillary Clinton did that for him Wednesday night. She literally looked
like a 50's era red baiter, warning of a newly emerging Red Scare, and claiming
that Trump is a mere puppet for Putin.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That claim might have had some traction if not for the fact
that Trump wants to beef up the US military, the Justice Department and other
agencies that would pose a major threat to any Russian attempts at infiltration
or manipulation. Putin has pretty much had his way with the
Obama Administration, including making Clinton herself look like a world class
chump on the international relations, so why would he want to give up on a good
thing?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Backing Trump would be a lose-lose situation for Putin
because he would be facing an unknown factor who just might get his jollies
facing up to the old Russian bear. Clinton on the other hand, well, why not
back Clinton? At least she can be manipulated, and quite often wouldn't even
know it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nonetheless, as asinine as it appeared Clinton's ravings did
take me back in time to a much simpler and joyful era, when we knew that the
Russians were our enemies seven days a week and nothing was going to change
that. It sort of made me feel – young again.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Does anyone remember I Led Three Lives? Now <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>that</u></i></b>
was a TV show!</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-84506918973251129822016-10-20T12:55:00.002-04:002016-10-20T12:55:51.840-04:00Trump Won't Blithely Accept Election Results! Nixon Did and We All Lost!<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhs2iCQA9tQ-m3_l9QytiSChh8IWvmXuyg2UZZR_f3AJmm8mlc7yXT7T6izqRpf1xdfydbrPNhAwRv5J1rwr4leUKOmw0hMj2LWTec2ca6JWPXRxA5sGJKxM7cBUu6cAB8AbvlURw/s1600/Hillary%2527s+Best.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhs2iCQA9tQ-m3_l9QytiSChh8IWvmXuyg2UZZR_f3AJmm8mlc7yXT7T6izqRpf1xdfydbrPNhAwRv5J1rwr4leUKOmw0hMj2LWTec2ca6JWPXRxA5sGJKxM7cBUu6cAB8AbvlURw/s200/Hillary%2527s+Best.jpg" width="130" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hillary Clinton</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The mainstream media is trying to hide Hillary Clinton's
deplorable performance at the presidential debate Wednesday night by focusing
on Donald Trump's comment that he will wait until election night before
deciding whether to accept the outcome.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of those streaming voter opinion polls that was on TV
during the debate showed massive, overwhelming support for that position from
Republican and Independent voters, while the Democrats didn't like it much,
which means the media didn't like it much. So what? Too bad.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Why would any sane office seeker concede their position on
anything weeks before a vote when one of the mainstays of their campaign is
that the process is rigged and voter fraud is widespread? The media was
reporting across the spectrum in the days leading up to the debate that Trump
had no proof of his accusations, which in itself is an outright lie.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There already have been reports of illegal aliens and
long-dead people voting in early voting states so how much more
"proof" does he need? Hopefully, by drawing early attention to the
issue it can be curtailed.</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSiGyfM869xDS3n5u3Y1bfutzrZwEySYK4JaQLVHa2TsATce5OraBPYdMpgD2q6FDqrAB2WK11fn7qvsgEG6T1vsJk7agGC7OdYS5JoLw85NyKU6XPXs9CF6TcwIOaIpdgTkCSzA/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSiGyfM869xDS3n5u3Y1bfutzrZwEySYK4JaQLVHa2TsATce5OraBPYdMpgD2q6FDqrAB2WK11fn7qvsgEG6T1vsJk7agGC7OdYS5JoLw85NyKU6XPXs9CF6TcwIOaIpdgTkCSzA/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Donald Trump</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But there is a bigger matter to discuss here; what happens
when candidates should withhold their concession and instead meekly accept an
outcome that not only is fraudulent but by its nature disenfranchises millions
of voters?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Case in point is not the extended claims by Democrat Al Gore
in 2000, who simply could not believe that the country didn't think he was as
cool as he thought he was, but rather the unfortunate decision by Richard Nixon
in 1960 not to contest the election night results and to concede to John F.
Kennedy. Nixon had been presented with credible information of massive voter
fraud and manipulation in Illinois, West Virginia and Texas, home of the soon
to be vice president Lyndon B. Johnson.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nixon determined that contesting the election would be bad
for the country and allowed the results to stand. The results ultimately
included the Bay of Pigs fiasco, the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy's
assassination, Johnson's escalation of the Vietnam War and decades of unrest.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nixon was elected in 1968 on a promise to end the Vietnam
War, which finally occurred not by the military victory that was within his
grasp as early as 1969, but after he left office in disgrace in 1974. The fall
of South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia to murderous rampaging communists resulted
from two cowardly acts of Congress, the Case-Church Amendment of 1973 and the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1974 that pulled all support from South Vietnam.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As a result some 3 million people were butchered by the
communists, 2 million South Vietnamese fled and were dubbed Boat People by the
media, who basically ignored the 300,000 deaths reported by the UN Commission
on the Status of Refugees and Displaced Persons. The media also ignored the
160,000 deaths in communist concentration camps that the media called
"reeducation camps," and hid the savage genocide in Cambodia's
killing fields, where millions died, until it was too widely known to ignore.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It was in the Kennedy/Johnson years that the seeds of the
drug epidemic that still afflicts millions of Americans sprouted, along with a
near universal breakdown of morals that led to the spread of venereal diseases
on an epidemic scale and ultimately brought about incurable sexually
transmitted diseases including herpes and AIDS. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Would all of this have happened under Nixon? Not likely. It
is entirely possible that other issues would have arisen in those Cold War
years, but Lyndon Johnson never would have been president and that in itself
would have been far better for the country than the hell that he brought about.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, should Donald J. Trump willingly discard an opportunity
to challenge a fraudulent election vote? No. Never. He is not the first
presidential candidate to keep his options open, and he won't be the last.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But he is today's candidate, challenging the establishment,
vowing to Drain the Swamp that is today's government, and he is certain to face
myriad attempts legal and illegal, fair and foul, to keep him from becoming
president and making good on his campaign pledges. He should hold firm until
the last legal vote is counted, and every illegal vote is discarded.</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-13539273456486568602016-10-16T14:24:00.001-04:002016-10-17T12:10:24.696-04:00NY Times, er Pravda, Irate Flight Attendants and Bogus Polls<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the end it's all about voter suppression. People who do
real polls, not the media generated propaganda that exists only to convince
candidates to buy ad space, know that Donald Trump has been way ahead from the
beginning.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So if you are backing Hillary Clinton and willing to throw
the entire Constitution of the United States of America out the window to get
her elected, how do you offset the albatross that she has had hanging around
her neck for two decades? Not her own incompetence, vile and profane behavior,
history of selling herself and her country to the lowest bidder or total
disdain for the citizens she aims to rule.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
No, none of that. Rather, the albatross that is her husband
and his reputation as a serial sexual molester who left the White House in
disgrace, impeached, disbarred, taking thousands of dollars worth of government
property that he was forced to return, and leaving behind only his DNA on a
blue dress proving forever that if he is breathing and his lips are moving he
is lying.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite the media and the Democrat party perpetually
proclaiming Bill Clinton to be a much-loved latter day Pied Piper who in
reality takes private plane trips to secret places with known pedophiles,
and yet supposedly attracts throngs of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>truly ignorant donors, the voters know him to be who and what he really
is. And we know that voting him and Hillary back into the White House would be
suicide for the American Dream, the Constitution and all that was possible for
more than two centuries.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So how do you offset this gaping negativity, this dark cloud
that follows her everywhere she goes? How do you combat it, especially in the
midst of the total failure of your most effective weapon, the fawning
propagandists portraying themselves as journalists who scramble to move their
cameras ever closer to the podium so as not to reveal what every one already
knows, that where Trump attracts tens of thousands each day, she rarely
attracts even tens of hundreds?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Easy. You create a work of fiction out of a decade old
secret audio recording of Trump saying the kind of things about women that far
too many men say in private to each other. You turn that one mistake into a lifetime of fabricated behavior, get your media tools to repeat it every hour of every day, and make it the lead headline of every news story every hour until the Big Lie becomes the only thing the public remembers and Trump is forced to respond, adding to the piling on.<br />
<br />
And there you have it; a totally fabricated diversion to draw attention away from your albatross and in fact, make it his albatross. Not only does the public begin to question his qualifications for office, but your own inabilities across the spectrum of public service - your positions on the real issues facing the country - get lost in the shuffle. <br />
<br />
No, he never said he forced his way
on women and groped or kissed them against their will.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In fact he said the exact opposite; that women let him kiss
them and grope them because he is a star and when you are a star you get to do
that kind of thing. Have you ever seen or read interviews with the bouncers from
Studio 54, that Manhattan nightclub famous for its patrons snorting enough
cocaine to keep the country of Columbia solvent for decades? Have you read the
accounts of what women were willing to do just to get in the door? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Have you ever looked into the demands made of rock band
groupies whose highest aspiration is being included in the
background of a rock video; and have you seen how many people thought nothing
of destroying their own self-esteem just for a chance to be "seen?"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So I don't doubt that Donald Trump existed in a world that
is foreign to most of us, but I do doubt the stories of his conveniently
discovered accusers because frankly, he didn't have to force himself on anyone. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
From the initial allegations of Jessica Leeds whose description
of a first-class unsavory encounter in her airplane seat next to Trump in the
1980s doesn't match the actual interior of the plane she claimed they were
in, to the outrage of flight attendants everywhere who say they never would
have allowed such behavior, to the copy cats who sprouted lies like fungi in
beds of manure in the days afterward, there has been an appalling absence of
basic journalism across the American media spectrum.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
From the standpoint of a 30-year veteran of the media,
public relations, and media relations fields, with considerable work in crisis
management behind me, I can point to one particular aspect of this sordid media
generated and perpetrated mess that leads me to believe Trump, not his
accusers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump fessed up to his reprehensible commentary, told the
country he was truly sorry and embarrassed for his long-ago behavior. He looked
us in the eye, admitted what he did was not his best moment, was regrettable
and apologized for long-ago trash talk.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the neither the Times, a showpiece of yellow journalism
with a long-time reputation for making errors that it refuses to correct, nor
the rest of the American mainstream media, including FOX News, was content to
let that rest, considering that he said it during a debate with Clinton in
which he mopped the floor with her steel-like coiffure and showed the world the
true difference between them. NO, the media went on a tear, bringing forth
discredited accuser after discredited accuser, including copy cats, apers and
bandwagon jumpers, not one of whom could prove even a smidgen of her claims
against him.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But when the NY Times and other media outlets launched their
tidal wave of attacks on Trump he stood up to them, looked them in the eye and
said No Way Did This Happen. A client in trouble who doesn't obfuscate and
avoid the issue, but instead tackles it head-on by flat-out denying it and
demanding that his accusers show their proof is a PR man's dream.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Want to run your mouth and make vicious unsubstantiated
claims? Then show up, stand up and let's see your proof! Oh, you don't have
any? Well, like Louis XV once said, "Apres moi, le deluge." Here
comes the rain baby.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Decades ago, while there still were real investigative
reporters in this country, as opposed to media faces who report on
investigations, there was a requirement that at least two credible sources back
up any story of this nature; three was better.<br />
<br />
Now it merely takes the word of anyone who is
willing to prostitute themselves to the media for a few minutes of infamy, and
a lifetime of dishonor and discredit. Not people who tell the accuser "You lie
and I'll back you up," but people who witnessed the alleged incident were required for valid investigative pieces to make it to the public.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Unfortunately for Hillary and her media lackeys, there
aren’t any. In fact, Trump has witnesses who say these incidents didn't happen, and they
<b><i>were</i></b> there!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So what does the media do to hide its complicity and
duplicity? It leads every story every hour with bogus "polls" showing
that their exemplary "reporting" has awakened the public who now are
deserting Trump and jumping on the Clinton bandwagon. This of course begs the
question "Why?"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
People who aren't voting for Clinton know exactly why they
aren't and wouldn't vote for her regardless. If they were going to vote for
someone other than Trump due to the media created controversies, it certainly
wouldn't be her.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But there is one thing that all of these media polls have in
common. Look in the print stories about the poll results and there will be a
link taking you to the actual poll. And you will find that invariably they
over-sample Democrats by as much as 10 percentage points, and grossly
under-sample Independent voters.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So why wouldn't these "polls" show Clinton
leading? Also, pollsters, who conduct these polls by "randomly" calling
people on the phone and asking if they are registered and voting, can skew them
simply by targeting certain area codes and local prefixes. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Both major political parties have extensive data on
registered voters in every locality and they know where their strengths and
weaknesses lie. So if you want an outcome that is favorable to Democrats, just
target phone numbers in places where Democrats have the highest registrations,
then call away until you have an acceptable number responding the way you want and
voila!<br />
<br />
You have created a false narrative, spoon fed it to a supposedly gullible public, spread it far and wide and have shown that it has indeed changed the minds of millions of likely voters. Except you haven't; you have made it appear to be so, but it isn't so. But now the candidates are scrambling to either make the most of it, or fight back against it, and one way they do that is to use the media to spread their own message; and that means dollars. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I actually heard a FOX News contributor say the other day
that the best thing Trump can do to offset these results is "buy TV
ads!" Seriously.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So how can voters offset this unprecedented surge of yellow
journalism? Vote. Get out and vote. Make sure your family members vote, your
neighbors vote; in short if we want America back, we have to take it back here
and now in massive numbers that will overwhelm the bogus polls and election
fraud that is sure to come next. You have your marching orders.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-43522343355960789182016-10-04T15:05:00.001-04:002016-10-04T15:05:43.975-04:00Why I'm Not Watching the Vice-Presidential Debate<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let's get it over with up front. I'm not watching tonight's
debate.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I know who I'm voting for in November, there isn't even a minuscule chance that someone will say something tonight that will change my mind
and I am absolutely certain I can find something better to watch if my evening
is to be spent in front of a television.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I can also make some predictions that probably will come
true. Tonight's moderator is CBS News’ Elaine Quijano, who the media refers to
as a Filipino-American and an Asian-American even though she was born and
raised in the United States. I didn't know until just now that people born in
the Philippines are considered Asian, which I thought meant people of Oriental
races. Sorry, I guess I'm not very informed.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The media says that she will clash with GOP vice
presidential nominee Mike Pence, because as the media also says, Donald Trump,
the GOP presidential nominee is anti-immigrant. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEintOTb0pxfIyI1djLBpeyEu1Doqd6xWX1z_RApDBhHauulKfJup8g9uZYkjGecBI5dPhJtuwN-JKSnFBZ86vc9FQlGR2vGdoXW5h1I8Kyg_e8ZRPPDVmgsKCnEcw7TbIetzR1ofg/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEintOTb0pxfIyI1djLBpeyEu1Doqd6xWX1z_RApDBhHauulKfJup8g9uZYkjGecBI5dPhJtuwN-JKSnFBZ86vc9FQlGR2vGdoXW5h1I8Kyg_e8ZRPPDVmgsKCnEcw7TbIetzR1ofg/s200/Donald+Trump.jpg" width="160" /></a></div>
That of course is an outright
lie and the mantra chanted by the Democrats, including the media, ever since
Trump entered the race and promised to get illegal immigration under control. <br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The media refers to Quijano as a second-generation American,
just like me, although no one has ever called me a Scottish-American and my
relatives in Scotland don't think of me as Scottish either. Apparently that
means we're supposed to hate Donald Trump and vote for Hillary Clinton which
has about as much chance of happening in my house as a wax cat surviving a
California wildfire.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nonetheless, that appears to be the cover for Quijano to
pull a Lester Holt on Pence and ask him a bunch of 'gotcha' questions and
interrupt him while he tries to formulate a response. Of course he'll deserve
anything he gets from the media since he doesn't want a bunch of unvetted
Syrian refugees, some of whom are highly likely to be terrorists, dumped
helter-skelter into Indiana where he is governor.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Regardless of how well Pence does tonight, the media
tomorrow will say he lost. If he has no blunders and his Democrat opponent
screws up from the opening question to the last, the media will still say Pence
lost.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxaEBor-6-3AMZPDuQFR1MoatvSRQ8wOcB8qCWi-CA-f5Bd2sWgWVp3rzRQ3ipCCDDe8hxCinZCGNrGVOsLE_3MXmGJAS_4LrbEU0VtMdzF7MmhGs_T8IhMB-k0BlsADRtqjzz8A/s1600/Hillary+Picks+A+Winner.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxaEBor-6-3AMZPDuQFR1MoatvSRQ8wOcB8qCWi-CA-f5Bd2sWgWVp3rzRQ3ipCCDDe8hxCinZCGNrGVOsLE_3MXmGJAS_4LrbEU0VtMdzF7MmhGs_T8IhMB-k0BlsADRtqjzz8A/s200/Hillary+Picks+A+Winner.jpg" width="146" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If his opponent can't say two words without tripping over
his tongue, the media will say Pence lost. I, however, believe Pence will win
because tomorrow I still will not vote for Hillary Clinton and I won't buy any
products from the advertisers who back this blather. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Did I tell you that I discovered an entire unwatched season of The Blacklist on Netflix last week? Go Reddington!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-72713982727498260662016-10-03T13:31:00.000-04:002016-10-04T08:05:46.137-04:00NY Slimes Commits 'Journalistic' Suicide with Trump Hit Piece<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The New York Times and its assorted media sycophants spent
most of Sunday slapping themselves on the back over a sloppy and questionable
package of attack articles alleging that Republican presidential candidate Donald
Trump took an entirely legal and justifiable loss on his 1995 tax returns partially
due to a downturn in the Atlantic City gaming industry.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Times, admitting that it possesses only three out of
potentially scores of documents that would have been involved in such a complicated
corporate/personal tax return, even ran a sidebar crowing about how it returned
to 'old fashioned journalism' in producing the articles – an incredible
overreach when you see how little actual legwork went into the effort. Old- fashioned
journalism in this case apparently means a return to the days of Yellow
Journalism, when rumor and innuendo were used with abandon to savage political
enemies and anyone else the writer didn't like.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The biggest problem with the article is that although the
Times and its associated propaganda partners claim that it reveals something,
it actually relies heavily on supposition to arrive at meaningless conclusions,
and the most active verbiage includes words such as "could have." The
primary foundation for the claims fomented by the Times lies in the paper's
confession that it all came from three cover pages purporting to be from a tax
return apparently filed more than two decades ago, including altered entrees,
and backed by conjecture. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Times claims the three pages were anonymously mailed to
its newsroom from Trump Towers, while many analysts say they believe the
package came from Trump's long-ago ex-wife Marla Maples who is the only person
other than Trump who could have legally released the documents without his
approval. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By claiming the documents arrived anonymously the courageous
reporters and editors at the Times – including an editor who has so voraciously
salivated over Trump's tax returns that he says he will go to jail to get<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>his hands on them – obviously are hoping to
immunize themselves from potential legal consequences should Trump's attorneys
file an action against the paper.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The story behind the hit piece centers on the decline in
revenues from Trump's Atlantic City casinos in the mid-1990s which the Times,
itself on the brink of financial collapse, says was due to Trump's
mismanagement. If the Times is going to make that claim against Trump it has to
expand it to include gaming giants such as Caesars, Bally's and financial colossus
Morgan Stanley which incurred a loss of equal proportions to Trump's, more than
a decade after Trump pulled the plug on his Atlantic City businesses to stem to
losses.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In reality, the rise of the Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun Casinos
in Eastern Connecticut was the beginning of the end of expansion and high times
for Atlantic City casinos. The Connecticut casinos siphoned off billions of
dollars of gaming revenues from throughout the northeast and elsewhere, not
just from Trump's businesses but from many others as well.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the early 1990s Atlantic City had a dozen major casinos
as well as several smaller ones, and was being eyed by major league investors
for even more expansion. But the rise of the Connecticut casinos abetted by
legalization of gambling in Philadelphia, Delaware, Maryland and New York State
and online gambling in New Jersey steadily drove a stake
into Atlantic City's expansion and hastened its decline.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Analysts say that when things finally even out Atlantic City
will be able to support only four casinos at best. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This backdrop was ignored by the Times when it used the
three cover pages – one for New York, one for New Jersey and one for
Connecticut, purporting to be from Donald Trump and Maples' tax returns in 1995
but only one of which – the New Jersey cover sheet – bore their signatures. The
New York document shows – using altered entries – that Trump took a $916
million loss two decades ago. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Maybe that's true, maybe it's not because the line entries
that document the loss are done in two different fonts that don't even line up
with each other. So the intrepid reporters at the Times called the accounting
firm that prepared the document, (their name is printed on the bottom so its
hard to miss) and found out that the accountant who prepared the return 21
years ago is now 80 years old and living in retirement in Florida.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Not to be denied, the Times sent a reporter to the Sunshine
State where it interviewed the reluctant accountant in a bagel shop. Shades of
Deep Throat or what?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He told the Times that his computer software back in 1995
couldn't print out a 9-digit number so he put the original into his typewriter
– the article didn't disclose whether it was a manual Royal or an IBM Selectric
and it probably doesn't matter, other than being able to verify the fonts,
since either way we are talking ancient technology here – and typed in the
extra numbers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Unfortunately he didn't initial the changes, nor did Trump
which is a commonly accepted accountability principle when altering
official documents. But even if everything the Times says about the documents
is true, so what?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Basically, two paragraphs of 1990s gaming commission
documents that accompany the article say that Trump could take advantage of
what amounts to averaging over a total of 18 years, starting in 1992 and going
forward to 2010. Big deal. That is the price of doing business; sometimes the
best laid plans go completely awry and you have to scramble to keep from going
under, which apparently, Trump did.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So he is a survivor and did nothing illegal. Moreover, there is not one word about the millions of dollars Trump and his businesses pay in state taxes, local taxes, payroll taxes, fees, permits, sales taxes and the millions of dollars in income taxes paid by his employees who have jobs thanks to his businesses. <br />
<br />
Yet the Times
runs a package that is rife with innuendo and misinformation, one example of which
is the claim in the sidebar regarding the three pages from his 1995 return; <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">"<b>They</b> were signed by Mr. Trump’s wife
at the time, Marla Maples, and by Mr. Trump, whose recognizable handwriting
renders his signature in jagged, oversize letters."</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Actually, only one page was signed, so using
<u><b><i>"they"</i></b></u> to imply multiple signatures is flat out inaccurate. "A
page was signed …" would have been accurate, but also would have deflated
the impact of the information.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Considering that the Times has used the same income
averaging in its recent tax returns to improve its financial standing, it is at
the very least hypocritical to be bashing Trump for making use of the tax laws,
which he legally is required to do or face lawsuits from his investors.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The vast majority of the Times main article smacks of jealousy,
seemingly because Trump did survive and didn't go under. Since his wasn't the
only business that took a major hit in Atlantic City in the 1990s, it was
duplicitous of the Times to focus only on his losses and not the ongoing losses
of Atlantic City and those who invested in it four decades ago.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Old Gray Lady as the Times is known, obviously has declined
from her position as paper of record to that of a miserable old crone who can't
keep her facts straight or do her job correctly or well.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">Perhaps the Times masthead should be changed to say <b><i><u>"All the News That's Fit to Print - and a Lot That Ain't."</u></i></b></span><br />
<br />
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Frankly, she seems to have decomposed to the
status of checkout counter tabloid rather than a respected journal, much like
an aging call girl trying to claim that somehow she is better than and socially
above her street-walking cousins, when in fact the only differences are their
outer appearances and the price - which can't be written off ones income taxes.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-14709519964196735632016-09-26T15:13:00.000-04:002016-09-27T12:18:30.850-04:00The 3 Percent "Polls" and the "Who Cares" Debate<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
If I didn't know better I'd think that the only news worth
reporting this weekend was tonight's scheduled presidential debate between
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Did you know that there was another terrorist shooting in a
shopping mall in the Pacific Northwest over the weekend in which five people
were murdered? Oh, and down in Texas yet another mass shooting.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
No, instead we get non-stop pre-debate hype, interspersed
with claptrap about the "peaceful" protests in Charlotte, NC, where
an armed black man was shot by a black cop and bunches of white people were
assaulted as a result. And property was burned, cops were attacked, the streets
were full of gunfire, windows were smashed, cop cars were damaged, all in the
name of "peaceful protest." Oh, and five white men were killed by
police last week in the same time span as the shooting in Charlotte, but few
Americans have heard of that.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Has it occurred to anyone else that the media is so
self-insulated and removed from the rest of society that they don't know that
we know they are full of crap and we can see for ourselves that what is really
happening doesn’t mesh with what they are saying?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Instead, the media has to hype the debate, even though sometimes it is
on only one network, because they hope there will be more debates on the other
networks and if they make these debates appear important enough or entertaining
enough, then they can sell ads at out-of-control rates and justify the bloated
news readers' and "contributors" salaries.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Taken together this mish-mash of real news and media-generated
propaganda has an ulterior motive, the end result of which is to get Hillary
Clinton elected. The media has long been the propaganda arm of the Democrat
Party and nothing has changed this year except that FOX News is so anti-Trump –
with a couple of notable exceptions – that it now is lumped in with all the
other media in terms of being seen as Clinton supporters.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Also, after NBC news personality Matt Lauer was vilified by
his media colleagues for actually asking tough questions of Clinton in a
Commander-in-Chief Forum last month it is highly unlikely that tonight's
moderator, Lester Holt, will even consider anything remotely resembling
fairness in his approach. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As far as the alleged polls that have Clinton ahead
nationally, many outlets use the Real Clear Politics average, unless another
poll comes along that more convincingly makes a point they favor. But the
problem with the RCP average is that most of the polls they use to arrive at
the average are done by … The Media! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the case of the most recent RCP average going into the
debate, Trump is a couple of points behind in the average. But that is only
because one of the few non-media polls sampled, the McClatchy-Marist poll, had
Clinton ahead by 7 points – as did the NBC poll – and which happened to skew
the results heavily in Clinton's favor! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As usual, there was no true verification of the poll
respondents who simply were contacted by "random" phone calls on
their house phone or cell phone, asked who they were and what party they
belonged to, which is hardly scientific to say the least. All the media relies
on these polls, but a simple search of the methodology used shows that the NBC
poll queried 45 percent of respondents who said they ranged from strong to
leaning Democrat, and only 35 percent who said they were strong to leaning
Republican, while a mere 13 percent identified themselves as independent.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oddly enough the McClatchy poll methodology claims that 35
percent of voters nationally are Democrats, 30 percent are Republicans and 33
percent are Independents. When they query only "likely voters" they
say that 37 percent are Democrats, 32 percent Republicans and 30 percent
Independents. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Not only does the McClatchy poll raise serious questions
about the NBC News poll, it also contradicts itself in that of its respondents
47 percent ranged from strong to leaning Democrat, while 42 percent said they
were strong to leaning Republican and only 9 percent self-identified as
independent. Meaning these polls are garbage and irrelevant.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So why are they used? Why do they drive every single news
cycle? Well, one theory says that if you are going to tamper with the outcome
of an election it is best to keep your tampering within the margin error of
expected results. So if on Election Day the polls have Trump ahead by 3 points
and the margin of error is 3.6 points and Clinton wins by 2.7 points – which is
way outside the margin for an automatic recount – well, the media can say the
polls had it wrong but only by the slimmest of margins.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is important because professional analysts know their
numbers and if results are out of skew they will jump on it hard and fast.
Remember in 2004 when the media reported in late afternoon on Election Day that
exit polls were showing John Kerry ahead of George Bush in some key districts? But
analysts looked at the districts where those false exit poll numbers originated
and knew right off the bat something was amiss.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So how do voters overcome this attempted manipulation of the
public will? Do the same thing the English did in the Brexit vote last summer.
Turn out in numbers that overwhelm the margin of error and vote in the person
who should be voted in by such a large margin that any attempt at voter fraud
will stand out like a neon sign. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oh, and when all is said and done, the polls likely won't
move a single point due to the debates. Check out George Bush in his
presidential campaigns. Same amount of hype, all kinds of endless arguing about
who won this one or that one and in the end, there was no change in the
pre-debate status. Much ado, etc. Food for thought.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-21858093403780531302016-02-02T13:48:00.001-05:002016-02-02T13:48:05.408-05:00Cruz Wins Iowa; FOX Has Egg (Ethanol) on its Face<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite the concerted and nearly overwhelming efforts of a
mansion full of strange bedfellows who opposed him, Republican Ted Cruz won the
Iowa caucuses Monday night, to the chagrin of Donald Trump and the mainstream
media, especially FOX News.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
FOX and other outlets, cable and network included, worked
frantically, and hand-in-hand with Trump, in the weeks leading up to the vote
to drive Cruz out of the race. Cruz is considered the one real maverick in the GOP
field and campaigns on his independence from the GOP establishment.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The media and Trump failed abysmally but even though Cruz
won hands down, you wouldn’t have known it from the media reports on the night.
In fact, if you hadn’t paid attention to the race or the votes until sometime
after 10 p.m. Monday night, you would have thought from the coverage that the
real winner was Florida Senator Marco Rubio, the establishment favorite if they
can’t have Jeb Bush. And they can't.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
FOX had cast the race as a sure-win for Trump, and based on
flawed – and horribly under-represented – polls, it was to be the death knell
for the Cruz campaign. With Jeb Bush barely rating a shrug on the public
interest scale, the establishment media fawned over Rubio and anointed him the
newest, bestest favorite.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In its attempt to derail Cruz, FOX brought Iowa Gov. Terry
Branstad onto hits shows twice to pass on false claims about ethanol and Cruz's
opposition to government subsidies for the dirty, costly, alcohol-based fuel
additive that doesn’t work. They also went spastic over a last-minute Des
Moines Register poll that not only had Trump winning, but said that the bigger
the turnout the bigger the win for Trump – based again on polls of a few
hundred voters with somewhat vague identities.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But that isn't what happened. The turnout was huge, historic
for Republicans, yet the more people who voted, the more who voted for Cruz. I
guess the commercials run by Trump and Rubio touting their newfound
Christianity – Trump even started carrying a Bible for God's sake, pun intended,
in a blatant show of crass pandering – didn't fool very many true Christian
Evangelists.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Every show, every major FOX personality – with the exception
Andrea Tantaros and a couple of pundits on The Five who still have the courage
to speak their minds – had it in for Cruz, far more so than Trump even. Now the
media has another problem on its hands, that being what to do about Trump after
they spent the summer bashing<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>him, and
then warmed up to him over the holidays when it appeared he was going to
prevail.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Warmed up to him may not be the right phrase. Sucked up to
him, or circled the wagons around him in a blatant show of New York City
liberal elitism may be a better way to describe it. Can we say Hypocrites?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But Trump faltered and Rubio still came in third, which
means neither won. (See Trump's pre-Iowa comments on coming in second to see
what last night really means.) So what does the media do know that its best
laid plans have come unraveled?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Probably just ignore it all, make believe it never happened,
make sure it goes away by never mentioning it again and head into New Hampshire
with an altered sense of mission.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But before the rest of us sit back and smugly predict what
will happen next, we should remind ourselves that there is a long, long road to
the GOP nomination. Anything can happen, and anything probably will. Basically
the way I see it, if either Cruz or Rubio comes out on top, we all win.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If anyone below them on the returns yardstick comes in first
we may well have a problem. The trouble with Trump is that I don’t know which
alter ego will show up if he wins it all – and he still might.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But is he a liberal in disguise, or a true convert to
conservatism who will really do right for this country?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Either way, there is one thing I know for sure at this
point. Ethanol is still a dirty, polluting, stinking expensive and inefficient
biofuel that has become a source of Farmer in the Dell welfare for far too many
people in the Midwest, and if Cruz gets elected, this is one source of welfare
that will no longer be championed by Big Government.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oh, and Trump should get serious about telling us who he is
and what he stands for and stop bashing everyone opposed to him. Even base
animals know you don’t poop where you eat and eventually you will need these
people to back you, not back away from you.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And FOX News? You folks have to take a close look at your
business plan boys and girls. It's crumbling. You have to start <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>reporting</u></i></b>
the news and stop trying to <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>manipulate </u></i></b>the news; or
making it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And that's the truth!</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-36455525738994041812016-01-31T14:02:00.001-05:002016-01-31T14:02:28.873-05:00Establishment Media Backs Trump; Are Iowa's Evangelists Gullible? Hello One America News Network!<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Texas Senator Ted Cruz was heading for front-runner status
in the race for the Republican nomination for president back in December, until
he referred to Donald Trump's "New York values" in one of the
interminable presidential debates, this one hosted by FOX.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Cruz made the point that New Yorkers, which most thinking
people understand means residents of New York City, not necessarily the rest of
the state, are liberal in their thoughts and actions. Trump parried Cruz's
comment not with a defense of his liberal positions on a variety of matters,
but by bringing up the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 when the twin towers of the
World Trade Center were hit by aircraft that had been hijacked by Muslim
extremists and more than 2,000 people died.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Since then it has been rough going for Cruz, not out in the
rest of the country, that also lost people and buildings on that day, but with
the New York/Washington media cartel, which has spared no effort in painting
Cruz as highly disagreeable and inappropriate to be President of the United
States. This is remarkable in the sense that until Cruz uttered that phrase –
which Cruz has plenty of statements from Trump himself to back him up – the
very media that now is savage in its attacks on him, led by the FOX News
Channel, had been equally vicious in its attacks on Trump.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now, however, Trump, who boycotted the last FOX debate for
GOP candidates ostensibly because he doesn’t like Megyn Kelly, one of the
'moderators,' (but more likely because he didn't want to lose support that
close to caucus voting due to attacks from his rivals,) is solidly a New
York/D.C media favorite. Even, or perhaps especially, FOX goes out of its way
to paint Cruz in the worst possible light while giving Trump a pass on
virtually everything.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We expect this of the Washington Post, New York Times – or
any New York newspaper for that matter – and the television networks, not to
mention MSNBC and CNN. But FOX claims to be Fair, Balanced and Unafraid.
Unfair, definitely Unbalanced, and Job Scared should be its logo. (I should
note that the Times endorsed Ohio Governor John Kasich, but frankly, I believe
that was just for cover. They can't be serious.)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Take for instance Special Report on Friday night, when
anchor Bret Baier did an interview with Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, in which
Cruz's objection to government subsidies for ethanol arose. Although Baier
briefly hit on the fact that Branstad's son is a highly paid lobbyist for
ethanol, he allowed the governor to outright lie when he used the term
"refineries" when referring to jobs involving the production of
ethanol. Then the governor claimed that ethanol is cheaper than gasoline, and
that objections to ethanol come from "Big Oil."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I say lie because Branstad knows that ethanol is not a fuel
that is refined. It is moonshine corn liquor that is distilled, the same as any
other spirits like bourbon, whiskey, sour mash or vodka, and only becomes
ethanol when gasoline is mixed with it. And since the US Congress has mandated
that "Big Oil" use no less than 32 <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">billion</i> gallons of ethanol domestically by 2020 – meaning a
ready-made before-market outlet just in mixing gas with the moonshine – I don’t
see how they can possibly have a problem with a government induced and
government mandated and supported market. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In fact, the law requires that the moonshine (corn liquor) have
gasoline added to it so the people who distill it won't be able to drink it
between the distillery and the pump; not that there is any worry of that
happening in a state where the Evangelical Christian vote is all powerful and
FOX claims that more than half of the evangelicals are voting for Trump.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then on FOX News Sunday, host Chris Wallace did an
abominable interview with Cruz, repeatedly interrupting him when he was trying
to answer Wallace's questions, and baiting him with false employment and job
"statistics." Fortunately for journalism, Wallace came out on the
short end of that stick.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That was followed by an incredibly fawning interview with
Trump in which he was allowed to make several baseless and unchallenged attacks
on Cruz. Wallace even let Trump get away with saying he didn't know where his
money was going when he donated $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation, even though
he has only donated $57,000 to veterans' causes prior to his run for president.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I thought Trump was the ultimate businessman. Yet he gives
away a quarter-million dollars without knowing where it is going and for what
purpose? Sounds like a classic Washington/Manhattan insider to me. Trump even brought
up Cruz's citizenship again without mentioning that he is considering a lawsuit
against Cruz! Without a peep from Wallace.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Wallace's one-two interview frankly was one of the most
unprofessional I have ever seen despite working four decades in the media and
related industries. It reminded me of disgraced CBS News anchor Dan Rather's
self-promoting attacks on President Richard Nixon back in the 1970's – before
Nixon resigned.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But worse, Wallace's 'panel of experts' which supposedly is
comprised of media professionals with superior insight into the issues of the
day, included none other than Branstad! And again he was allowed to bash Cruz
unchecked – although he has lots of nice things to say about Trump – and again
portrayed the ethanol industry as a boon to his state while falsely claiming
Cruz is against renewable energy – with no challenge from Wallace or the panel.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Wallace, who also "moderated" the most recent
debate in which his lack of professionalism was at its height – "This is a
debate sir, and we'll set the rules" – knew that Cruz had answered that
criticism by noting that he favors all forms of renewable energy but not
government subsidies for any of them. Yet Wallace remained silent on Sunday then
and again when Branstad referred to ethanol distilleries as "plants"
instead of distilleries.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Which brings me to the question, are Iowa's evangelical
Christians, as well as other voters, all that gullible? Are they so uninformed
on ethanol that they don't know that half of their state's corn crop goes to
making moonshine that then is mixed with gasoline to make a dirty, expensive
and ineffective "biofuel" that American drivers are forced to buy to
support their "industry?"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Do they not know that Donald Trump and Marco Rubio have been
mostly silent on their new-found Christianity until they started running last-minute
campaign ads hoping to influence the evangelical vote? Do they not know that
many of Trump's positions are diametrically opposite of their professed
beliefs?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I guess we'll find out Monday night after the caucus vote
comes in.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oh, and I have been a loyal viewer of FOX News and FOX News
Sunday in particular since the late Tony Snow was the host. But after seeing
the gross lack of professionalism on view this week in Iowa, building on plenty
of previous instances, I will now be getting my news elsewhere. And, while one
viewer may not matter, you can bet that if a loyal person like me has had it
with FOX, plenty of others have too.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Say goodnight FOX; One America News Network seems like a
good place to relocate.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-44469925564101819052016-01-27T18:30:00.001-05:002016-01-27T18:30:48.276-05:00The Truth About Ethanol, Snow Storms and Ted Cruz<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Prior to last week's blizzard I was more than confident that
I could dig out without too much trouble, since my relatively new snowblower is
in the words of one reviewer "a beast" that makes short work of even
really heavy snowfalls.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Not to mention that right after the first heavy frost last
fall put an end to lawn mowing, I moved the snowblower from the back of the garage
to the front, changed the oil, cleaned the spark plug and started it to make
sure it would run when I needed it. But that was in October and we didn't have
a real snow storm until Saturday, January 23.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nonetheless, on Friday afternoon I brought the 'beast'
outside to start it just to make sure. But it didn't start. It didn't start
when I primed it and pulled the starting cord a bunch of times, it didn’t start
no matter how I adjusted the choke, it didn’t start when I used the electric
start, and it didn’t start even after I cleaned the spark plug again.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By the time I was finished ruling out all the other factors
it was dark and I knew that the issue was the fuel. Why?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Because small engine fuel across the US is the same fuel we
put into our cars and it is laced with <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">ETHANOL</i></b> a corn/carbon based bio-fuel
additive that the government requires because it is supposed to give us a
cleaner alternative to refined gasoline at no reduction in performance. Which
is <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">BULL</i></b>!
Ethanol is dirty, creates pollution while being processed, does nothing for
performance, and gums up our engines.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn1;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[1]</span></span></span></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ethanol, which actually is distilled corn, which actually is
moonshine, or 'corn likker' depending on where you live, is not the cure-all
that the government and Iowa corn growers and distillers claim. Worse, if left
unused too long it requires another additive to "stabilize" the
gasoline/ethanol mixture so seasonal appliances such as lawn mowers or
snowblowers will start even if they have not been used for several months.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Except, as I found out last weekend, the stabilizer additive
breaks down over time too, especially if it is exposed to the heat of summer!
This happens to most snowblowers because they aren’t used in most summers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So Saturday morning I ended up outside on the frozen lawn, taking
my snowblower apart as the snow was beginning to really come down on my head, ultimately
draining a half-gallon of what had been perfectly good gasoline, and replacing
it with gas I purchased that morning. All because since 1978, during the jimmy
carter administration, the US government has been paying farmers and distillers
– not refiners, distillers – through subsidies and tax breaks, to produce more
and more of this crap, to gum up our engines and fuel lines, causing us to
spend more to buy additives, all the while we are being taxed for each gallon
of modified moonshine. (Distillers are required to mix the end product with
gasoline before shipping to discourage people from drinking it.)<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn2;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[2]</span></span></span></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The outright subsidies to this colossal rip-off ended in 2011,
but Congress was sly enough to eliminate one tax and replace it with a sneakier
means of getting our money. In 2005 Congress passed the Energy Policy Act,
which requires the use of renewable motor fuel under a new mandate, the
Renewable Fuel Standard.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The next year Congress passed the Energy Independence and
Security Act which requires that by 2022, 36 billion gallons of renewable oil,
which basically means ethanol, be added to US gasoline supplies each year. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even though federal subsidies for ethanol were eliminated in
2011, the Renewable Fuel Standard remains in place, ensuring that each year the
amount of ethanol produced increases, meaning that farmers who raise corn for
ethanol and distillers who produce the moonshine that becomes ethanol will have
a steady market, through government intervention, regardless of the viability of
the product. Oh, and foreign ethanol is hit by a tariff the second it reaches
US soil, so there is no foreign competition.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn3;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[3]</span></span></span></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Thus, when Ted Cruz says he is not in favor of ethanol
subsidies, he is doing all American taxpayers a big favor. That is especially true
if he is elected president and follows through by eliminating government
support for this unnecessary product, which literally creates another welfare
class, this time of corn farmers and ethanol distillers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In my mind there is only one degree of separation between
farmers who put their acreage into corn for ethanol, rather than using it to
produce food, and an inner city hoodlum who collects food stamps to trade for
drugs and alcohol. And while there may be jobs at the hundreds of distilleries
that have sprung up in America's Corn Belt since 1978, those jobs wouldn’t be
there if there was a real market for ethanol.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a ton of information on the Internet regarding
ethanol, including how it creates more pollution to make it than it saves as a
gasoline additive. Did you know that a by-product of ethanol production is
carbon dioxide, which producers then sell? If there is a market for carbon
dioxide why don't they just recover some of what is already in the atmosphere
instead of creating more?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In fact, since Donald Trump bashed Cruz for not supporting
ethanol subsidies, and since Iowa also is a state where the Christian
Evangelical vote is huge, and Trump obviously believes he can squash Cruz both
on trade and religion, I guess we have a question to ask the Evangelicals. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Do you believe that creating job revenue by supporting
government subsidized production of the Devil's Brew, especially since it in
turn is being used to support massive taxes on individual drivers through a
false claim that it is beneficial to the environment, is a true testament to
your faith?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you do, then you are a hypocrite and God help you. If
not, then you should rise up against those who spout false prophecies and flush
that unused ethanol down the drain – if it can be done without polluting the earth.
Up with hydrogen!</div>
<div style="mso-element: footnote-list;">
<br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn1;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[1]</span></span></span></span></a> <a href="http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/ethanol-facts1.htm">http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/ethanol-facts1.htm</a>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn2;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[2]</span></span></span></span></a> <a href="http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/ib_32.pdf">http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/ib_32.pdf</a>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ftn3" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn3;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[3]</span></span></span></span></a> <a href="http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/ib_32.pdf">http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/ib_32.pdf</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-85116885690360153902016-01-05T10:44:00.000-05:002016-01-05T15:27:11.699-05:00The Genius of Trump's Generalizations<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Virtually since he announced his candidacy for President of
the United States, Donald Trump has been subjected to a stream of demands that
he issue specific plans on subjects ranging from national defense to immigration
to tax reform.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With the exception of his economic plan, a field in which he
has more than a passing acquaintance, Trump generally has avoided getting into
"the weeds" as pundits and political operatives refer to the fine
print, preferring to work in generalizations. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The media obsession with specifics was obvious on a recent
broadcast of the O'Reilly Factor, hosted by FOX News political commentator Bill
O'Reilly. Trump was being quizzed on his approach to the quickly unraveling
situation in the Middle East where Saudi Arabia, ostensibly our ally, and Iran,
definitely not an ally, are becoming increasingly belligerent toward each
other.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
O'Reilly wanted to know whether Trump would send troops to
Saudi Arabia to help in case of war, and Trump would not give O'Reilly a
definite yes or no, despite the host's insistence. "The American people
want some unpredictability," Trump said several times, to O'Reilly's
obvious displeasure.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump is taking the smart road in his response to the media
and other candidates' incessant demands for specifics which, if he obliged
them, would then be torn apart and ridiculed even if they are the best plans
ever seen on the political stage. It is obvious that American leaders should
not be announcing their plans for military action, as has been the case since
the Johnson Administration gave our enemies in Vietnam a near daily security
briefing on what we would and would not be doing.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpDrkwjyVbhvXKlPHceefpPuki9qrTX5WcvHSQRG-chP2MYdyO1gLsYtx1s28-5GN2UkG4x5UFJUCuQUrFmcqhCUn4TOKybJSCi_uV6MMOCoG4RVCB0u5IfdznJeMQlmNOk6ryCQ/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpDrkwjyVbhvXKlPHceefpPuki9qrTX5WcvHSQRG-chP2MYdyO1gLsYtx1s28-5GN2UkG4x5UFJUCuQUrFmcqhCUn4TOKybJSCi_uV6MMOCoG4RVCB0u5IfdznJeMQlmNOk6ryCQ/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Donald Trump</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In fact, being specific on what you will or won't do in
certain situations when you don't have access to all the background
information, is pretty stupid. Trying to look like the class genius by having
all the answers when you can't possibly have all the intelligence needed to
make an informed decision actually makes you look like the class clown, or the
class know-it-all. And candidates who do get specific on all manner of issues
when they don't have the facts, not only look stupid, but they are playing
right into the media's hands, as well as that of Democratic candidate Hillary
Clinton.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is no secret that the media, including most commentators
on FOX, don't like Trump and would love to see him knocked out of the box.
Failing to get Jeb Bush to the top of the heap, the media, through use of phony
polls, has attempted to help one or another of the other GOP hopefuls upset
Trump, only to see them all fall. The most recent media darling on the GOP side
– a grudging replacement for Bush – is Marco Rubio, a 2<sup>nd</sup> tier
selection of the GOP establishment, who is faring no better than those who
preceded him.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But so far Trump, and to a lesser degree Ted Cruz, are
avoiding the trip wires and pitfalls. By not getting into specifics on what
course of action he would take in the Middle East, Trump is leaving all options
on the table and leaving our enemy, in this case Iran, which barely missed hitting one of our aircraft carriers in the Strait of Hormuz with a missile last week, unsure of what we will do if they keep
jerking our chains under a Trump presidency.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
President Obama by contrast, tells our enemies not only what
we will or won't do in current situations, but broadcasts his intentions for
weeks, months and years into the future; which is why America has become a
laughingstock among the nations of the world.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nonetheless, pundits regularly mock Trump, using his refusal
to get specific as proof that he doesn't know what he is talking about. But it
is the pundits who are lacking, not Trump. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He is well aware, through a lifetime of successful business dealings
that you don't telegraph your punches and you don't show your cards. You don't
do it in military situations, you don't do it in diplomatic situations and you
don't do it when you are the president of what used to be the most successful
country in the world. Period.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The aforementioned polls also are used as evidence that once
past the primaries, voters will flock to Hillary Clinton if Trump is the GOP
nominee. Aside from the fact that there still are a dozen GOP contenders for
the nomination and no poll is immune from loyalties to other candidates swaying
the opinions of respondents, the polls themselves are ridiculous in that many
of them involve fewer people than the number of sycophants who turn out for a
Clinton campaign appearance.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Mike Huckabee made that point on FOX recently, asking why he
should care about the results of a poll that has only a couple of hundred
respondents, or the opinions of myriad pundits who have been dead wrong about
Trump every single time.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump is on the right track by keeping to generalities. He
will rebuild the military, he will attack illegal immigration, he will rebuild
the economy, he will restore greatness to America, and all he needs to convince
most voters than he can do it, is a lifetime of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>doing</u></i></b>, not <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>talking</u></i></b>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And frankly, based on the rabid attacks on Trump from the
full spectrum of the mainstream media, including FOX, and the massive turnouts
at his campaign events, contrasted to the meager showings at Clinton's, I
believe that if he is the GOP nominee he will trounce Clinton in the manner of
Reagan vs. Mondale. And I believe that most in the media know that too, and are
scared to death that it will happen.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-41436334160477844862015-11-21T15:34:00.000-05:002015-11-21T15:37:58.106-05:00French Citizens Need to Play Cowboys and Terrorists<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
A week after the terrorist slaughter of 130 mostly French civilians
and the wounding of another 350 in Paris, the French are still reeling and
making pilgrimages to the sites of the shootings and bombings.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It would be uncivilized to deny the French their time of
mourning or to pass judgment on what may or may not constitute responsibility
for the murderous rampage that hasn't been seen in that magnitude since World
War II. But at some point there has to be an analysis of the killings, how they
occurred and why they occurred. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And I don't mean from the standpoint of the liberal whine
"What did we do to them? Why don't they like us?"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the most shocking revelations concerning the orgy of
slaughter in Paris was that it was carried out by only 8 Islamic terrorists,
and most of the killing was done by psychopaths carrying AK-47 semi-automatic
rifles. Also, according to eyewitness accounts from survivors of the horror
inside the Bataclan concert venue, each of the gunmen had to stop shooting on
occasion to reload.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Survivors and news reports are thus far silent on whether any
of the approximately 1,500 patrons inside the Bataclan made an effort to rush
the terrorists, who were calmly and precisely shooting their targets. Only when
police forces finally charged the hall, where hundreds were still being held as
hostages or playing dead while bleeding from their wounds, did the attackers
die, one by blowing himself to bits.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Francophiles, those who devote their lives to all things
French and have a reputation for disdaining anyone who does not believe that
the US lags far behind Europe in cultural matters, have long bashed Americans
for our "cowboy" mentality. But I can't conceive of an attack on a
concert hall anywhere in the United States, packed with people rocking to the
sounds of a heavy metal band of all genres, where the patrons would simply
stampede for the exits or hide until the police arrived. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even without weapons there would be a rush to tackle the
shooters, similar to what occurred on Flight 93 on September 11, 2001, or on a
high-speed train from Amsterdam to Paris last August when three <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">American</i></b>
passengers took out a terrorist armed with a Kalashnikov, a pistol and a box
cutter. Many, if not most, Americans have an ingrained sense of responsibility
to do something in the face of certain death, even if that something means to
die with honor while thwarting their attackers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I realize that there are soft targets in the US where a
terrorist attack would be more likely to succeed; cities such as New Orleans,
Washington, D.C., New York or Chicago for instance. Those cities have
extraordinarily tough gun control laws which have effectively disarmed the
citizenry leading to out-of-control murder rates. They are sitting ducks for
terrorist attacks.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But even in those cities it would not likely end well for terrorists
to attack a concert by an emerging rap star for instance, if hordes of Chicago
gang-bangers had decided their night out would include a few hours of live
music.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Without question there are many people in France who love
the United States and strongly believe in our centuries old alliance. But many also
believe that most of us are of the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Ugly American</i></b> variety, and don't
know the difference between a brasserie and a brassiere<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The point here is not to be snarky or to gloat, but simply
to note that there are many philosophies in the world and sometimes it takes a
blend to get things right. Take for instance the news report late last week
where a French father was talking to his young son in front of a makeshift
memorial piled high with floral arrangements.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The boy said, "The bad men have guns." </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"But we have flowers," the dad responded. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Beautiful sentiment. Just the kind of peace-at-all-costs
sentiment that will get both of them murdered by unrepentant Islamic extremists
who see killing "infidels" as a holy calling. Unless the next group
of victims is trained to defend itself.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are ways to blend our national philosophies to the good
of all. Perhaps if the Francophiles get down off their high horses, so to
speak, and look at the good in America for a change, they can see how it can be
applied to the betterment of the average Frenchman. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Perhaps the French educational system can add some foreign
flavor to its philosophy curriculum in the future. Let the boys study
philosophers such as Jean-Paul Sartre to understand existentialism, but throw
in a little Wyatt Earp, Wild Bill Hickok and Billy the Kid for realism.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And if the typical French family includes a jeune fille who
is enthralled with the lifestyle of Simone de Beauvoir, even the stories of her
occasional ménage a trois, why not throw in a little Belle Starr and Annie
Oakley for balance. At least they could shoot, n'est-ce pas?</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-31218747781446532972015-11-01T10:27:00.001-05:002015-11-02T08:08:47.070-05:00Biased Media Knows No Boundaries<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Voters who tuned in to the Republican presidential debate on
CNBC last week were treated to an unabashed display of media bias as
interrogator after interrogator asked questions that were condescending,
inaccurate, belittling and rude.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Until, that is, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz used his allotted time
for one in a series of really stupid questions to go on the offensive rather
than meekly submit to the attacks. Following the example set by Cruz the
candidates rose up and called out the CNBC hacks for what they were. The
backlash against the network ranged from the audience booing the questioners to
the Republican National Committee severing its ties for further
"debates."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But you don't have to wait for another national political event
to see examples of media bias; it is all around us and in myriad formats.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Take for instance the race for First Selectman in
Stonington, Connecticut where former Congressman Rob Simmons is the Republican
candidate, facing incumbent Democrat George Crouse. Simmons, who has decided to
continue his lifetime commitment to public service by serving his hometown, was
endorsed by The Day newspaper as a man who can get things done locally and in
the state Capitol.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But after receiving the endorsement from the largest
newspaper in the area, Simmons was subjected to a scathing commentary from a
reader in the newspaper's digital edition, which lead off by accusing Simmons
of war crimes when he served in Vietnam a half century ago. Aside from the obvious
veteran bashing, the accusation is a rehashed attack that was launched at
Simmons by then incumbent Congressman <span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Sam
Gejdenson back in 2000, when Simmons successfully challenged Gejdenson for
Connecticut's 2<sup>nd</sup> Congressional District seat.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">At that time
Gejdenson initially claimed his campaign had no connection to the attack on
Simmons' credibility, but ultimately had to publicly apologize. Simmons served
two tours in Vietnam, and then returned as an operative
for the Central Intelligence Agency for an additional two years. He ultimately retired from the US Army Reserves as a Colonel in Military Intelligence.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Simmons has amassed
a distinguished military and political career, and has been a lecturer at Yale
University and the University of Connecticut as well. He was never accused of
war crimes in any forum outside of gutter politics, yet the libel that was aimed
at him remains in the commentary section of The Days digital edition.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Although most
reputable news outlets require that readers identify themselves and refrain
from launching unsubstantiated attacks on candidates in the last campaign days
leading up to the election, The Day appears to have made no effort to remove the
libelous commentary.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Apparently, racist,
sexist, profane or otherwise unsavory commentaries are scrubbed from the
website, but scurrilous libelous attacks on distinguished veterans are allowed
to stand. The commentary was signed by the pseudonym R. O. Thornhill, who the
Simmons campaign believes is actually a close adviser to the Crouse campaign.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Meanwhile, the town
of East Hampton, Connecticut, home of the late Gov. Bill O'Neill saw its own
version of media bias erupt this past week. The weekly newspaper Rivereast ran a
front-page article on the local school board chairman, a Democrat, deciding to
prohibit any town official from doing business with the school system.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">This after the
chairman "discovered" that nearly 18 months ago, Republican Mark Philhower, a
member of the local Town Council who owns a Heating, Ventilating and Air
Conditioning firm called Tech Unlimited, had done some work for the schools.
The sudden announcement came in the form of a motion that was not part of the
regular agenda for last week's school board meeting, just a week before the
election. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">The reason for the hasty action is, according
to the chairman, because he had only just discovered this egregious violation
of … something, although we're not sure exactly what … and had to act
immediately lest it be repeated.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">The problem with the
coverage hits many buttons. First the chairman's point of view dominated much of the article, before Philhower's response is noted in the final graphs,
half of which were on the jump page. More important, after contacting
Philhower, I learned that two essential matters he had told the paper's editor were
left out.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">First, he isn't the
only office holder who has done work for the town, especially for a department
over which he has no control. For instance, the owner of a school bus
company which has held millions of dollars worth of contracts with the town, also
served on the local zoning board. Philhower could not recall the local
democrats raising any issue about the propriety of this arrangement, especially
in the days just before an election.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Second, the work
Philhower did for the schools was of an urgent nature, amounted to about $6,000
and took place in February, March and May of 2014, mostly in the coldest part
of the winter. Both of these items should have been noted, and Philhower's
response should have been much higher in the story, rather than the supportive
but not especially detailed comments from school board Republicans. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Obviously, on-line
commentaries, libelous though they may be, and cheap political shots by small
town politicians don't rise to the level of national news personalities
attempting to sway a presidential election. But the principle is the same. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Our system of
government springs from local politics and the people who take the time to
serve on local boards and commissions deserve just as much consideration as
should be given to national level office seekers. The local media has
just as much responsibility to act ethically as the national and international
media should … regardless of the less than stellar example set by what is
called the Mainstream Media.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Otherwise, as
Philhower noted, the cheap attack on his credibility and his business, exemplifies
"why good people don't want to run for office."</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Or, as Sen. Cruz said during CNBC's political debacle, "</span>"The questions asked
in this debate illustrate why the American people don't trust the media."</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-17035251616730795272015-10-25T19:08:00.001-04:002015-10-26T08:50:47.843-04:00The Myth of the "Trump Slide" in Iowa; Carson Under Siege?<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you believe some polls and the news media, Donald Trump's
campaign is on a downslide in Iowa, the first state to hold a Republican caucus
where a convoluted process begins to select a grand total of up to 30
delegates, just over one percent of the total.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The impact of the Iowa caucus is negligible for a number of
reasons, but, because it is the first such vote in the nation, the media
believes it should set the agenda for all the rest of the states. That obviously
is not the case, yet, two polls, neither of which can actually claim to know
for sure exactly who they allegedly interviewed, have concluded that Dr. Ben
Carson, whom I respect, has leaped ahead of Trump. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The genesis of this astounding turnaround in the current
race for the GOP presidential nomination is in a poll from Quinnipiac
University and another from the "highly respected" Des Moines
Register newspaper. Actually, the polling method is so shallow in each instance
that the number quoted by the media, that is salivating to drive a stake
through Trump's heart, could actually be the reverse of what is reported. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span class="printinfobox">In the Register's own words, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">"The Iowa Poll, conducted
October 16-19 … is based on telephone interviews with 401 registered Iowa
voters who say they definitely or probably will attend the 2016 Republican
caucuses … .</i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span class="printinfobox"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">"Questions based on the subsamples of 401 likely Republican caucus
attendees each have a maximum margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage
points. This means that if this survey were repeated using the same questions
and the same methodology, 19 times out of 20, the findings would not vary from
the percentages shown here by more than plus or minus 4.9 percentage points." </i></b></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn1;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[1]</span></span></span></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<span class="printinfobox">In other words, besides the fact that the sampling is
pitifully small, these polls were conducted over the phone with people who may
or may not have been who they say they are. </span>Similarly, the poll from
Quinnipiac University poll has some questionable conclusions.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Quinnipiac says that Carson leads Trump 28 - 20 percent
among Iowa likely Republican Caucus participants. A news release on the poll
also says, "This compares to the results of a September 11 survey showing
Trump at 27 percent with Carson at 21 percent." </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But again, check out the methodology. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">"This RDD telephone survey
was conducted from October 14 - 20, 2015 throughout the state of Iowa.
Responses are reported for 574 likely Iowa Republican Caucus participants …. This
subset of likely Republican caucus -goers has a margin of sampling error of +/
- 4.1 percentage points."</i></b><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn2;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[2]</span></span></span></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But here is the part I like best. The poll is done on phones and when someone answers a landline, "Interviewers ask to
speak with the adult member of the household having the next birthday."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Well that is a foolproof method of determining voter identifications
if I ever saw one. Suppose that an interviewer calls my house and asks to speak
to the adult who has the next birthday. That would be my wife, but hell will
freeze over before she ever answers a poll, so I would just say, "Oh,
that's me. Fire away." See how that works?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Meanwhile, Dr. Carson did some Sunday media work, basking in
the glow of "front-runner" status, and on Fox News Sunday had an
extraordinarily difficult time explaining his proposed changes to Obamacare and
Medicare. Carson has said he will repeal Obamacare, as have most Republicans,
but adds that he will give wage earners a choice of having their own health
insurance account as opposed to letting government bureaucrats determine their
future health care.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
FOX moderator Chris Wallace seemed unable to get his head
around that concept and repeatedly asked Carson to explain how this proposal
would work and how it is different from earlier incarnations of Carson's health
plans. Carson tried very patiently to explain his plan but Wallace simply was
having none of it. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I don't know whether Carson has suddenly lost his
communication skills or if Wallace was just have a rough Sunday morning, but
the interview went badly for Carson who seemed to be struggling through most of
it. Remember when I wrote in my last column, that Carson is next to feel the
full weight of negative media? Looks like it started Sunday.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oddly, the Iowa caucuses are virtually irrelevant. The
results of the caucus are reported to the media which then deserts Iowa usually
without explaining that there then will be county, district and state
conventions that actually select the Iowa delegates, and they aren't bound in
the least to the results of the original caucuses! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Last time around Rick Santorum won the Iowa caucus, for
instance, but the media declared Mitt Romney to be the winner, regardless of
what the votes showed, and by the time the record was corrected, any momentum
Santorum may have garnered dissipated.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As noted previously, the Register poll notes that if the
same questions were asked of the same people 20 times, the answers would change
by plus or minus 4.9 percent in 19 of those times. The 20<sup>th</sup> round
of questioning apparently is a wild card.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, does that mean that one time out of 20, people who may
or may not plan on attending an Iowa GOP caucus, and may or may not be eligible
to vote in said caucus, and may or may not actually vote, could declare by a
wide margin, say 85 percent, that they are forever bound to Alfred E. Neuman?
Plus or minus 4.9 percent of course. But their votes aren't binding.</div>
<div style="mso-element: footnote-list;">
<br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn1;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[1]</span></span></span></span></a> <a href="http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/caucus/2015/10/23/ben-carson-charges-9-points-ahead-of-donald-trump-iowa-poll-gop/74278414/">http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/caucus/2015/10/23/ben-carson-charges-9-points-ahead-of-donald-trump-iowa-poll-gop/74278414/</a><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn2;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[2]</span></span></span></span></a> <a href="http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/ia/ia10222015_demos_igv72sh.pdf">http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/ia/ia10222015_demos_igv72sh.pdf</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-2787314837846309612015-10-21T09:17:00.000-04:002015-10-21T09:22:11.422-04:00Sayonara Fiorina; Carson Next?<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is no secret that the establishment media
wants Jeb Bush to be the Republican nominee for president, preferably matched
against Hillary Clinton so the establishment wins, no matter who gets elected.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Standing in the way of that goal is Donald Trump who thus
far has managed to deflect virtually every attack on his candidacy and still
sits atop all the so-called 'polls' – including those published after contacting
fewer people than the average attendance at a Clinton campaign event.</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitqKzcQ8ndSGmomHWUM-9QNKIkjK5-cDLC3ETBHkBRBI1w4DN9xwlIIrz3LFyo2qyJWMEbkxqI4y7QD3ibm_C94TwRJShlDPYBp1xltt4URf5W1Z5KLVHu-5F0jmRnfiuBfIH3bg/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitqKzcQ8ndSGmomHWUM-9QNKIkjK5-cDLC3ETBHkBRBI1w4DN9xwlIIrz3LFyo2qyJWMEbkxqI4y7QD3ibm_C94TwRJShlDPYBp1xltt4URf5W1Z5KLVHu-5F0jmRnfiuBfIH3bg/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Donald Trump</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The media was agog last month after Carly Fiorina proved
herself to be a competent debater, especially after she is handed softball
questions that a third-grader could have anticipated. Yet, despite a quick bump
in the 'polls' she began a slow, steady decline into campaign trivia oblivion,
right alongside Bush. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This should come as no surprise as it appears to be an
intended result. Fiorina makes a good personal impression and has sufficient
wit and intelligence to prevail for an hour or two. But the expected result of
pushing one candidate to the top, or near it, is that people will start looking
closely at this week's version of "The Chosen One."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When voters started taking a closer look at Fiorina they
didn't like what they saw. Fiorina got an early boost because Trump made fun of
her looks, a faux pas that she rode right into the GOP debate. That proved to
be just enough to move the people who actually are contacted for the 'polls,'
roughly 400 or so of those nebulous "leaning Republican" type people,
to say Fiorina when asked for their first choice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fiorina also was touted as a business expert who had broken
the glass ceiling and worked miracles that rivaled Trump's status as a giant of
business acumen. Then voters discovered that Fiorina not only was a walking
disaster in the business world, but that she also had mocked California Senator
Barbara Boxer in Fiorina's wildly unsuccessful campaign to be US Senator, in a
manner akin to Trump's mocking of Fiorina.</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB9yK29FTZH5ghK6aRoBw3UNL5sYIcFT4jBcqpaDFlD_LSshfZGVaUL2q03Sswd9yxlZdPRwwhyHRTCh5hAuF1U8QW0UFKd-sDW0S1Broamzzg6DiVe6l7784QxcNKSg2FRiwyjQ/s1600/Carly+Fiorina+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB9yK29FTZH5ghK6aRoBw3UNL5sYIcFT4jBcqpaDFlD_LSshfZGVaUL2q03Sswd9yxlZdPRwwhyHRTCh5hAuF1U8QW0UFKd-sDW0S1Broamzzg6DiVe6l7784QxcNKSg2FRiwyjQ/s320/Carly+Fiorina+2.jpg" width="234" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Carly Fiorina</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The more people looked, the less they liked and down went
Fiorina. Which was exactly what the media wanted. Why? Because her demise is
just one step toward the eventual elevation of Bush, and is tied to the yet-to-be released campaign strategy of showing Bush as a fighter who is in for the
long haul.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But Trump, against all establishment expectations, is still
atop the 'polls,' even brushing back a vigorous surge by neurosurgeon Ben
Carson, and the steady presence of Sen. Ted Cruz, who would be
this season's anti-establishment<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>favorite
were it not for Trump. Carson was supposed to be knocked out of the race, right
along with Fiorina after he made some supposedly politically fatal comments,
including one that devout Muslims shouldn't be president unless they are
willing to denounce Sharia law and really mean it when they swear an oath to
uphold the US Constitution.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But instead of driving Carson down, his honesty and
forthrightness rocketed him out of the pack to a place virtually on Trump's
heels, if you believe the 'polls.' Remember, these supposedly scientific
surveys have a margin of error of about 5 percent, which renders them
meaningless. If, for instance, the poll says Trump has 25 percent and Carson
has 24 percent, it really could mean that Trump has 30 percent and Carson has 19.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Or that Trump has 20 and Carson has 29, or any combination
of numbers in between. Bush, who garners 6 or 7 percentage points, could
actually be the favorite of as few as 1 or 2 percent of the "leaning
Republican" respondents. In other words these 'polls' are irrelevant with
the exception that Trump, Carson and Cruz consistently are at the top despite
the flaws in the methodology. But that should soon change.</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-ZCPuecIa-IFaOEJ6S9vU2TbtjPsilHj3dvQ5Xqkc3DotZp3LoUkt9Chb2fnVFhEUuwpEbxN9BATTPVPfrz0XPn67SBKknw6BGcnoLAiMj0vRBpcdZkBc_2SVcnqhJMknaZGn2Q/s1600/Ben+Carson.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-ZCPuecIa-IFaOEJ6S9vU2TbtjPsilHj3dvQ5Xqkc3DotZp3LoUkt9Chb2fnVFhEUuwpEbxN9BATTPVPfrz0XPn67SBKknw6BGcnoLAiMj0vRBpcdZkBc_2SVcnqhJMknaZGn2Q/s1600/Ben+Carson.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ben Carson</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bush's campaign is starting to get really, really nervous. First you
have Bush claiming that he has enough money to last out the primaries right
through Super Tuesday – the date when enough states hold
primaries to allow a clear front runner, or runners, to emerge – March 1 this
year. That statement is intended to quell the big donors' butterflies. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then you have the Bush campaign mocking Trump – the
latest oh, so clever, bon mot, came from a Bush campaign official who referred
to Trump as a Zombie. What wit, what a display of elitist intelligence over the
crude, blue-collar worker dressed in a Sunday-go-to-meeting suit. Just the kind
of comment to drive more voters to Trump.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the Bush world, upstarts like Trump, Carson, Cruz and
whomever may still be hanging around, should be knocked out of contention on March
1. (Cruz's stubborn refusal to fade away already has been noticed, with Jeb's
brother, ex-President George, publicly opining that he doesn't like Cruz. More
on that issue in another column.) Bush will then emerge as the knight in
shining armor who shall sally forth and slay the Clinton dragon. Just like Mitt
Romney did to Barack Obama. Or not.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But Trump keeps hanging in there and even though the media
reported that he had slipped in their 'polls,' they now are reporting
that he is again on the rise. The explanation is that Trump is rising because
after looking over his competition the voters still like Trump better. Better
than Carson, or even Cruz.</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi85UAhfDSMVxxi9qGunmLQZ9Cw62RHJZKHiao46oE0ysMeUJ4uAyt0Jby8TkGm_Am_DK8LHP8L26gMyt5oAx-OWqX28d6tygkN5rxZpsK9YpcWhT-tYBO7yrb8GsR61BxLDPNKQg/s1600/Ted+Cruz.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi85UAhfDSMVxxi9qGunmLQZ9Cw62RHJZKHiao46oE0ysMeUJ4uAyt0Jby8TkGm_Am_DK8LHP8L26gMyt5oAx-OWqX28d6tygkN5rxZpsK9YpcWhT-tYBO7yrb8GsR61BxLDPNKQg/s1600/Ted+Cruz.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ted Cruz</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Meaning, Carson, who enjoys the 2<sup>nd</sup> place
standing in the 'polls' is next to feel the full weight of negative media on
top of his campaign. I mean, after all, we can't have a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">surgeon </i></b>as President of
the United States can we? He hasn't even held elective office!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So look for a series of "revelations" about
Carson, or 'gotcha' questions in the next debate, that are intended to drive
out yet another strong contender. Cruz is already on the hot seat, and once he and Carson are eliminated, Bush will then unleash $100 million in negative ads against Trump. The ultimate goal is to render Trump, Carson,
and Cruz totally ineffective by March 2. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, there is one flaw in this strategy. It is called
the voters. They seem to be a bit restless this season, eh what! Oh, and Trump has more money than Bush. And he is a better street fighter, by a long shot. Just anticipating the political battles to come should keep us upbeat and engaged long after the Super Bowl this winter. Oh yeah!</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-1043298334327633832015-09-17T14:16:00.000-04:002015-09-17T14:16:26.395-04:00CNN Does Hatchet Job on GOP "Debate" – Again!<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Following up on the 2012 CNN "gotcha" debate when
Candy Crowley took Barack Obama's side – inaccurately – against Mitt Romney, a
CNN team presided over a spectacle Wednesday night that had only a shadow of
resemblance to "<span class="ssens">a contention by words or
arguments."</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">The three-hour ordeal appeared to have but
one goal, the disparagement of the entire 11-member GOP slate in the Ronald
Reagan Presidential Library. The only way a true winner could have emerged was
if they all turned in unison and walked off the stage.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">It was a setup from the start, with CNN moderator
Jake Tapper asking Carly Fiorina to comment on someone else's statement that
Donald Trump shouldn't have his finger on the nuclear button – a throwback to
the dark days of the Cold War when contending politicians used the threat of
nuclear holocaust to question opponents' mental stability.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">Fiorina waded right into the fray, saying </span>“I
think Mr. Trump is a wonderful entertainer,” <span class="ssens">and then ducking
the rest of the question, thankfully. </span><span class="ssens">Trump actually missed a terrific
opportunity to parry Fiorina considering they were standing in front of an Air
Force One aircraft that had flown President Reagan to his official duties, and
that Reagan was an entertainer before becoming arguably the most beloved
president of the modern era.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Oddly enough, Trump responded by attacking Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, whom he
said “shouldn’t be on this stage” because of his low poll numbers. Paul shot
back that there was “a sophomoric quality” to Trump, noting that Trump has attacked
people for how they look.<br />
<br />
Trump retorted that he had never attacked Paul's looks, adding, however, “There’s
plenty of subject matter right there.”<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">That basically set the tone for the
evening, and believe it or not, it actually went <b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">downhill</i></b> from there, as question after question pitted one
candidate against another on a personal rather than policy level, usually
spinning off something that someone had said in an interview at some other
time.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">Otherwise, substantive discussions were at
a minimum and usually grew out of frustration from the many candidates who
seemed to be all but ignored by the CNN team as the big names on stage engaged
in drawn-out thrusts and parries that had virtually nothing to do with the state
of the country. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">Some of the more enlightening moments came
from former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee who didn't get to speak much, but when
he did it was insightful and direct, hitting for instance on the Iranian deal
(treaty), and Planned Parenthood harvesting body parts from living aborted
fetuses. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker also got in some good points along the way, but like most other participants, they were few and far between.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">Right alongside Huckabee, literally and
figuratively, was Texas Senator Ted Cruz who also didn't get that much time but
nonetheless was right on the money when he did speak. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span>Florida Senator Marco Rubio and New Jersey
Gov. Chris Christie also tried to bring the discussion back to real issues and
away from personality disputes with only partial success.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">One of the more ridiculous moments of the
evening came when former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush chastised Trump for singling out
illegal aliens from Mexico in his immigration discussions, and told him to go out in the audience and apologize
to Bush's wife, who was born in Mexico. Trump refused and tried to make the
point over Bush's insistent interruptions that he was talking about criminal
illegals, not law-abiding Mexicans.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">Actually, Trump should have taken Bush up
on his challenge. He should have called Mrs. Bush up to the stage, told her he
had heard she is a wonderful person and note that his criticisms were of the
Mexican government sending criminals of all sorts over the southern US
border. Trump could have made his point, looked accommodating to Mrs. Bush, and
probably gotten Jeb in trouble with his wife for putting her in the spotlight.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">There were times during the three hours
when virtually everyone got to make a salient point or two, although they
usually had to fight for the time. Trump and Bush got more than double the
exposure of some of the other candidates, so those on the short end of the
stick had to be somewhat aggressive.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">The most aggressive of all was Ohio Gov.
John Kasich who at one point looked so angry that I thought his eyes were
bloodshot, although that could just have been my TV. Dr. Ben Carson, who many
pundits were saying needed a "breakout" night, didn't get it and
often found himself on the defensive, such as when he was asked about his
opposition to going to war in Afghanistan after the 9-11 terrorist attacks.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">Carly Fiorina had several good moments
including her statement on the Planned Parenthood debacle and certainly showed
that she should be on stage. However, she still displayed far too many moments
when her infamous "demeanor" was dark and foreboding. She later told
a reporter that there are too many serious things at hand to smile about, which
may be true, but she could at least look pleasant during the interludes.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="ssens">All in all the night was an abomination
and it did absolutely no good for the Republican Party. GOP National Chairman </span><span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Reince Priebus might consider holding a
meeting with all the candidates prior to the next debate and drum one simple
point into their heads.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">When you are asked if
another candidate's finger should be on the nuclear button, the only response
is "Anyone on this stage would be preferable to Hillary Clinton, or any
other Democrat candidate." Then get back to the issues and how the GOP
will keep the Congress and win the White House in 2016.</span></div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-71644912333410833692015-09-13T12:33:00.001-04:002015-09-13T12:33:33.164-04:00Smile Carly, Smile, Trump Has a Point<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Carly Fiorina was but one of the Republican presidential candidates
who last week attempted to boost their standing in the over-crowded,
pre-nomination field by engaging in a verbal spat with front-runner Donald
Trump.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump was asked a question about Fiorina's meteoric rise in
the polls, all the way from 1 percent to 3 percent in a matter of just a few
months. Trump, as expected, did not deflect the question but answered it in his
usual blunt manner, pointing to Fiorina's often sour demeanor and asking “Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that?"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The media, predictably, reported, virtually across the
board, that Trump was bashing Fiorina's looks, those she was born with not
those she controls by using the muscles in her face. Fiorina quipped that she
must be "getting under his skin" because of the aforementioned
upwards movement in the media generated and controlled polls.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fiorina and the media all forgot to mention that she was criticized in her 2010 Senatorial bid for bashing her opponent, Barbara Boxer's hairstyle. Fiorina later said that taking (and giving) shots about appearances "goes with the territory." That, however, was in 2010. This is 2015. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nonetheless, Trump was forced to clarify that he was talking about
Fiorina's demeanor, not her actual looks, which some media outlets trumpeted as a victory for freedom
of the press and a harbinger of the soon-to-deflate Trump campaign.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump's poll numbers responded by going up even further.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The fact is, Fiorina often forgets that she is always in
focus on someone's camera when she is out in public, and there are far too
many moments when she does in fact look dour, sourpussed even. Several of these
moments were during the first Republican "B" Squad debate, the one
for the not-quite-there, soon-to-be-gone, never-really-had-it candidates.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fiorina did well in that debate but often, when another
candidate was answering a question and the camera momentarily focused on
Fiorina, she looked like she had just bitten into something sour. I should note
here that I like Fiorina and am happy that she got sufficient poll numbers to
force CNN to restructure its eligibility criteria for the upcoming debate to
ensure that she gets on stage.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHrA5fC7OjfId7Ur5EtUhfUZJ24tQviMkkR7JDNoLnaEAZTPMWLpKT_ge4KrUMT2s4N6d5E6opFmIxTbyAm0EVa_33IU7UnZM4yr_en3sAZPFF_mfih9j_0LVJMVsJuRgUMdxkQA/s1600/Carly+Fiorina+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHrA5fC7OjfId7Ur5EtUhfUZJ24tQviMkkR7JDNoLnaEAZTPMWLpKT_ge4KrUMT2s4N6d5E6opFmIxTbyAm0EVa_33IU7UnZM4yr_en3sAZPFF_mfih9j_0LVJMVsJuRgUMdxkQA/s320/Carly+Fiorina+2.jpg" width="234" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But I said way back during the B Squad debate that she
should get some media relations training that should include teaching her that
she is always on camera, and she always should look pleasant, even smiling if
appropriate. Looking intense just doesn't work for Carly.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, now some pundits are saying Trump should really
look out for her in this debate because she is going to put him in his place.
Or not. This could easily be one of those scenarios where she is so built up by
the media that anything less than a grand-slam knockout will be regarded as
abject failure.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Remember, the media wants Jeb Bush to face Hillary Clinton
in 2016, so no one in DC or Manhattan will lose their cushy jobs as 7-figure
anchors, or sought after pundits, or Chief Correspondents of something or
other. A lot of media money is at stake here and regardless of which side of
the political fence they are perceived to be on, the media is in the tank for
the status quo and that means JEB! and Hillary.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump, since he is so rich and is funding his own campaign
is a fly in the media ointment and from the media standpoint he has to go, the
sooner the better. Thus the coverage of anyone who makes the mistake of
abandoning their campaign issues to spend time bashing Trump. It won't work for
them, it probably won't hurt Trump, but it does adhere to the media agenda.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So if Fiorina, or Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal who I also
like very much and who also jumped on Trump's candidacy this week as a means of
getting some media coverage, can bring Trump down, then Jeb will have free
reign to spend his $100-million plus of lobbyist money on buying media ads and
paying media salaries.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Candidate Ben Carson got on the anti-Trump bandwagon last
week as well, questioning Trump's religious faith, an issue which Trump said he
keeps private, although he did open up and inform the world that he is a Presbyterian
and he believes in the Bible. Carson, who previously tripped up by questioning
Trump's immigration stance, ended up apologizing for calling Trump's faith into
question. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Carson's status quo immigration position probably hurt him a
lot more than any perceived damage he did by questioning trump's intent to
deport alien criminals, gang members and others. The public
likes that position and Carson's campaign could very well have plateaued by
getting into the Trump bashing game plan just to please the media.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Frankly, the more the media and its anointed candidates du
jour appear to be using Trump as a whipping boy for their agendas, the more the
public reacts negatively to the attackers and positively for Trump. Hey, maybe
it wasn't the most subtle or sensitive of comments to say what he did about
Fiorina's looks, but it was accurate and it should be more of a wake up call
for Fiorina than a slam at Trump.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even Chris Wallace said on Fox News Sunday this week, when
he wasn't trying to get John Kasich (who has developed an affectation for purple
in<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>his personal wardrobe) to jump on the
bash Trump bandwagon, that Jindal would have received zero press coverage if he
gave a speech on a major policy initiative. But Jindal did get coverage and
lots of it, for bashing Trump.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Yet Trump is the one going up in the polls, JEB! is
plummeting, even in those fake 300 or 400 respondent coffee klatches with
margins of error in the 5 percent range, masquerading as polls. Nonetheless, pundits
are spouting their wishful thinking that if enough other
candidates say enough bad things about Trump, somehow, miraculously, the public
will decide they no longer like him and flock to JEB!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whistling past the graveyard is what they're doing.
Whistling past the graveyard.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-85043191234583229542015-09-05T12:03:00.000-04:002015-09-05T12:05:24.484-04:00Trump Defies GOP "History" and the Media With 3rd Party Pledge<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Republican Presidential front-runner Donald Trump signed a
pledge on September 2, saying he will not run as a third-party candidate if he
fails to gain the party nomination.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some in the media immediately hopped on his pledge as a
capitulation to the GOP hierarchy, and others who really, really
want the fast-fading Jeb Bush to be the nominee sharpened their hatchets and
ramped up efforts to knock Trump out of the lead for good. But they all are
missing a salient point.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiquiTA3eXMhwmGdCpfGHK5EUUUMjAKBx27xCHBm183fcaQR3tD9ek_jX_5Xngo1xcM38QaIcFvnX5Cw_ZKP5r8dyDE6PQ3a9jclE1lsFaWUvx6Grnnzz9rlK1NtpC9OJqn-3oOEg/s1600/Pledge+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiquiTA3eXMhwmGdCpfGHK5EUUUMjAKBx27xCHBm183fcaQR3tD9ek_jX_5Xngo1xcM38QaIcFvnX5Cw_ZKP5r8dyDE6PQ3a9jclE1lsFaWUvx6Grnnzz9rlK1NtpC9OJqn-3oOEg/s320/Pledge+1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
First, Trump took the pledge because South Carolina made it a requirement to get on the ballot for the GOP primary there, and other
states are saying they will do the same thing. Trump still needs to win primary
and caucus votes and even he can't afford to miss being on the ballot,
anywhere.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More to the point, it is generally accepted for both the
Republican and Democrat parties, that the public is totally disgusted with
politics as usual, and the self-anointed "ruling class" that picks and
chooses the "political class" in every major election. But the
"media class" is slowly coming to the belief that Hillary Clinton
probably won't survive criminal investigations into her (alleged) chicanery
while Secretary of State and is scrambling to decide which Democrat replacement
will bend to its will.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The same media very much wants to believe that Trump will
eventually begin to fade, just as other front-runners did in the recent past, so
Jeb Bush can reemerge as the anointed leader. Various members of the
"pundit class" have pointed to the front-runner status of Rudy <span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Giuliani</span>, Michelle Bachmann and Herman
Cain in previous elections as evidence that early front-runners
will drop like a rock further down the road.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However. In virtually every case mentioned by the pundits,
there was one common factor that negatively affected each candidate, that will
have no impact on Trump whatsoever. That factor, simply put, is money.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Once the media decided that Bachmann, Cain or other
candidates were close to knocking its anointed candidate out of the race, an
immediate and relentless series of "gotcha" attacks was launched
ridiculing them as not being of the right quality, or right knowledge level to
hold the highest office in the land. In each case, the media ridicule resulted in a
drop off in contributions, which prevented the candidates from buying ads or
doing other communications work to offset the constant negativity. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That the attacks on Trump have already begun is evident in a dust-up that occurred on Friday, Sept. 4, when conservative radio announcer Hugh
Hewitt tried to trip Trump up on his knowledge of world terrorist
organizations, and their leaders of the moment. As if anyone outside the media
cares at this point.</div>
<br />
Hewitt asked Trump about the anti-American Quds, a secretive terrorist force
within the Iranian Revolutionary Guard that reports directly to the Iranian
Supreme Leader. But Trump thought Hewitt said Kurds, an ethnic group in Northern
Iraq that is both predominately Christian and pro-American.<br />
<br />
Trump was well aware that the Kurds have been begging the US for arms to
help them fight ISIS, or ISIL if you are an Obama apologist, but he was cut off by
Hewitt who said he said "Quds" not "Kurds." I heard a tape
of the interview and frankly, even if you are a foreign affairs expert it would
have been difficult to determine what Hewitt said.<br />
<br />
That exchange immediately turned into an anti-Trump media frenzy about him not
knowing ISIS from ISIL, Quds from Kurds, Hezbollah from Hamas, Houthis from
Hutus and Tutsis, or Al Qaeda from the Haqqani Network or Boko Haram.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump, in his inimitable fashion, charged that Hewitt was
asking loaded "gotcha" questions and is a "third-rate"
journalist. He has points on both cases, especially since Hewitt interviewed
GOP candidate Carly Fiorina later and asked her the same questions, which she
answered, claiming meanwhile that she had not heard Trump's interview. That's
her story and she's stuck with it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump told Hewitt later in his interview that the terrorists
and their leaders will change by the time the 2016 presidential election rolls
around and he has a point. It also is assumed, however, that unlike the current
occupant of the White House, the next occupant will and should have a more
detailed understanding of terrorist organizations that need to be annihilated.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But all this amounts to a tempest in a teacup when you
consider the media and the "elitist class" game plan. The point is to
drive Trump down in the artificial polls the media is using to eliminate some
candidates from debates and regular coverage, and thus eliminate his ability to
buy ads etc. Should Trump drop even slightly in these phony "polls" the media will go crazy proclaiming that his support is ebbing and he no longer is a viable candidate.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But Trump has his own money. Lots of it. He merely has to
use it effectively. His supporters don't care that some self-styled media
elitists are playing games with his knowledge of today's players on the
terrorist stage. They despise the media already and are going to respond by supporting Trump even more
ardently, if that is even possible.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump should go to the ad departments of the news outlets
and buy tons of ads – print, radio and TV. Then he should starting running them
all the time, especially around the shows of people who are obviously biased
against him. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By doing this he will get the ad departments, which really
run the show, on his side, he will make the point that he is paying the
salaries of his detractors, and for purely political reasons, he will be
offsetting their commentaries every time they open their mouths. Money may not be
able to buy happiness but it sure can buy ad time.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-75727495952703218982015-08-27T11:27:00.001-04:002015-08-30T15:27:36.412-04:00KT McFarland – Donald Trump's Biggest Cheerleader<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you've watched any of Donald Trump's recent campaign
speeches – and who hasn't – you may have noticed that he has some very positive
things to say about veterans, and negative things to say about the way we have
been treated over the past half century or so.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Trump is right, and on Bret Baier's Special Report show on
FOX News last night, alleged national security "expert" KT McFarland
showed exactly why Trump puts veterans high on his "to do" list. In
fact, McFarland's comments do more to convince veterans to back Trump than
nearly anything Trump can say himself.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
During a segment on whether the White House or the Pentagon
is blowing more smoke up the public's skirts on the effectiveness of the ISIS
terrorist army, McFarland claimed that the Pentagon is lying about ISIS just
the way it did "in Vietnam." Back then, she claimed, the military
claimed the war in Vietnam was going well, when exactly the opposite was true.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Really? What an insufferably stupid, uninformed, asinine
thing to say. I will repeat what I and many others have said and written over
the past four decades; the US military never lost a single major battle in the
entirety of the Vietnam War, twice pushed the communists to the brink of
surrender, and twice US politicians bailed them out. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The communists were beaten at every juncture by US forces
during the American involvement. Also, the South Vietnamese were overwhelmingly
victorious when the north launched an all-out invasion in the spring of 1972,
and were repelled by a combination of South Vietnam's ground forces and US air
power.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Out of the 250,000 communist troops who invaded the south in
1972, an estimated 150,000 were killed in action while half of all the northern
artillery and armor were destroyed. It was an impressive victory for the South
Vietnamese, even if, as usual, it was not reported that way in the US.<br />
<br />
Former Marine, senator and current presidential candidate James Webb stated recently that the former North Vietnam has finally admitted what many knew to be true long ago - that it lost an estimated 1.4 million troops in the Vietnam War. Troops, just troops. Or an average of nearly 100,000 communist troops killed in action for every year of the US involvement. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Yet within three years of scoring the biggest victory of the war, the south fell after McFarland's then
boss, Henry Kissinger, convinced President Richard Nixon to force the South
Vietnamese to accept the Paris Peace Accords, which supposedly guaranteed that
the US would intervene on behalf of the south if the north invaded again. But
right on the heels of the peace accords acceptance the US Congress passed the
Case-Church Amendment in 1973, and the Foreign Assistance Act in 1974, which
cut off all aid to the south, leaving them alone and defenseless against the
communist invasion of 1975.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Obviously, McFarland who is supposed to be brilliant and has
degrees from some of the finest colleges and universities in the nation to
prove it, doesn't know a lot about history, or doesn't want to know.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ms. McFarland started out her career doing part-time typing
in the West Wing around 1970, as a college freshman, when the US
presence in South Vietnam was being steadily reduced. Only a few years later she
was "a key member of Henry Kissinger's National Security Council
Staff" according to Wikipedia. Which says a lot about how so much got
screwed up on the international stage back in the 1970s, and is so screwed up
to this day.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
She comes across as one of those pseudo-elitist bureaucrat-type
people who make grandiose statements about world affairs, and help enact
sweeping and far-reaching agreements on matters such as the despised Rules of
Engagement that dictate how American troops must behave in battle. But
dilettantes like McFarland are never subjected to the consequences of their
actions, or find themselves fighting through a jungle, or a desert or a
freezing mountain top, all the while constrained by "rules" that our
enemies find laughable.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is the servicemen and women who are defending this
country who have to make split second choices that come down to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">"live on your feet (and possibly be
sentenced to prison for surviving) or die looking through a rule book to see
what you are supposed to do in this situation"</i> that suffer from
uninformed elitist pronouncements from people like McFarland.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So if Donald Trump is interested in a nickel's worth of free
advice, I would suggest that he contact McFarland, convince her to go on
television a couple of times a week, and each time spout her uninformed, agenda-driven claptrap about the military and veterans. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then he can slingshot off the outrage that is sure to follow
and make his point all the more forcefully that the D.C. cabal is totally out
of touch with reality, and he is just the guy to replace people like her with hard-nosed pragmatists who also possess plenty of
common sense. Or he can just eliminate their positions and make them go out and
get real jobs for a change.</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-72327548022249500962015-07-07T10:08:00.001-04:002015-07-08T08:42:23.583-04:00The Bitter Disappointment of the Obama "Legacy"<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Remember back in 2008 when a majority of voting Americans
were all agog over promises of "Hope and Change," and how wonderful
it was that the soon-to-be first black American president would right all the
wrongs of humanity that (allegedly) are common in the United States?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It just goes to show you what happens when you stereotype
people and use superficial reasoning to make major decisions. As history has
shown, while there are plenty of black people who would be terrific presidents,
Barack Hussein Obama is not one of them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdsiX3Hk7PHL3Z8clIj6_plOu95jrvzA4mt2vSR4XKni0BBdBIPj8J4yZvBJ6w5oK9RRf3rLmEpvRrL4wieeOQGPhZJNm5sy9MyMdwijNZnq7cdBWDIZeOquN_lnAYxbb0hve7dQ/s1600/Obama+looking+like+a+pres.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdsiX3Hk7PHL3Z8clIj6_plOu95jrvzA4mt2vSR4XKni0BBdBIPj8J4yZvBJ6w5oK9RRf3rLmEpvRrL4wieeOQGPhZJNm5sy9MyMdwijNZnq7cdBWDIZeOquN_lnAYxbb0hve7dQ/s320/Obama+looking+like+a+pres.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Looking presidential</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Fast forward to the present and what we have instead are
propagandists and apologists spewing rewritten history and contorted
explanations of current events hoping that the general public can't see the
truth. Unfortunately, the American media, which long ago morphed into a
propaganda machine that would make Josef Stalin blush, has an endless supply of
sycophants who go along with the daily story line without question.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But there is another side of the story to the Obama legacy,
and it is neither glowing nor in fact even remotely positive. It is the story
that like it or not will be the one told by historians of the future. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Take for instance the last week in June, 2015 when the US
Supreme Court's approval of gay marriage and national health care were touted
as shining examples of Obama's successes as chief executive. It was his best
week in seven years, his minions crowed, ignoring the fact that in the case of
gay marriage, Obama had little to do with the struggle that produced the court
verdict.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In fact, Obama, who even while he was campaigning for
president said he supported traditional marriage, was just one of many
obstacles to gay equality as the issue wended its way to the highest court.
There were far more active gay people – Ellen DeGeneres comes immediately to
mind – paving the way and taking the risks. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Obama gloated about the Supreme Court decision and even had
multi-colored lights shine on the White House in a larger-than-life version of
the rainbow gay pride emblem. But in truth, he was a late-comer, jumping on the
bandwagon just in time to take credit for the work of others.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Regarding national health care, dubbed Obamacare, it is interesting
that prior to its 2010 passage by Democrat majorities in the US House of
Representatives and Senate, proponents were claiming that there were 18 million
Americans lacking health insurance – not counting illegal aliens who get free
health care. With the law in effect for several years, the administration
is bragging that 90 percent of all Americans now have health coverage. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But if you do some simple math, you'll realize that with a
population of 320 million, 90 percent coverage means that 32 million now are
lacking coverage, which includes millions whose policies are no longer legal
according to the contorted dictates of the law. So, aside from its cost, and
the objections of a majority of Americans, what kind of success is the
administration claiming by passing a health care law that nearly doubles the
number of people who don't have health care insurance?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On immigration Obama claims to be concerned about the plight
of illegal aliens and their children who enter the US surreptitiously and now
want to stay. He also claims to be putting monumental efforts into border
security and deporting masses of criminal illegals – I know, that is redundant.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But hardly a week goes by without hearing of another breach
of our de facto open southern border, and our social services being swamped by
yet another influx of unemployed, uneducated, unskilled and/or ill
"undocumented" arrivals. When an illegal alien randomly murdered an
American citizen who was visiting a tourist attraction
in San Francisco over the July 4<sup>th</sup> weekend, we are told that the
killer has been deported five times, and has 7 felony convictions, yet was
right back in the US firing an illegally obtained firearm. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Further, it was reported that the killer was arrested
recently on a drug charge, but since he is in San Francisco, a "sanctuary
city" meaning they just ignore federal immigration laws, he was released
to prey on the innocent yet again. Question: If cities like San Francisco and
New Haven, CT, can declare themselves sanctuaries and ignore immigration laws,
what is to stop other cities from declaring themselves sanctuaries for
heterosexual rights and ignoring the gay marriage dictates from the Supreme
Court?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But those failures on the administration's part are just the
tip of the iceberg. The unquestionable Mother of All Failures is Obama's dismal
record on energy. Worldwide efforts to end the burning of fossil fuels are
viable, not because of Global Warming or Climate Change scare tactics, but
because fossil fuels are poisoning our earth, water and air, and should be
stopped.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nonetheless, instead of researching energy sources and investing
in technologies that could produce energy without polluting, Obama paid off
political cronies and supporters with half-hearted efforts at solar power, wind
power and horror of horrors, biofuels.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Solar power needs and should have support for far more
research, as does wind power, but how biofuels, including ethanol, can possibly
be conceived as a replacement for fossil fuels escapes me. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Both biofuels and fossil fuels undergo a conversion process
call fixation. And the very definition of biofuels calls into question their
viability as a replacement for fossil fuels. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><u>The biggest difference between a biofuel and a fossil fuel is the
time period over which the fixation occurs. In a biofuel, fixation occurs in
months or years. In a fossil fuel, fixation occurs over thousands or millions
of years. Additionally, fossil fuels are made entirely of hydrogen and carbon
atoms while biofuels contain carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn1;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[1]</span></u></b></span></span></span></a></u></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So there is more oxygen in a biofuel than a fossil fuel, but
so what? The base element of both is carbon, and burning either still is going
to release carbon to the atmosphere. I thought we were trying to decrease our
"carbon footprint."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The element that is being ignored in all this is hydrogen,
which is the most abundant element in the universe. One of the most common
sources of hydrogen on earth is water – and if you believe the global warming
alarmists, the seas are rising so tapping into them for hydrogen shouldn't pose
a problem. Also, the byproduct of hydrogen combustion is water vapor, meaning
if you burn hydrogen, you get water! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Considering that President Obama has racked up trillions of
dollars in debt, what prevented him from diverting a billon or so to create a methodology
that could efficiently extract hydrogen from water? The technology already
exists in nuclear submarines that ingest seawater, separating the hydrogen and
oxygen atoms, retaining the oxygen for breathing and venting the hydrogen back
into the ocean.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In autos, the standard gas tank could be replaced with a
water tank, with the water passing through a converter similar to (but much
smaller than) the ones used on submarines that would separate the hydrogen from
the oxygen, but retain the hydrogen to burn and vent the oxygen back to the
atmosphere. Essentially, a major component to answering to the earth's energy
needs was at hand, and the Obama administration instead pushed biofuels and built
windmills that slaughter wild birds. Way to go guys.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Obama also talked about infrastructure rebuilding and again
did little to nothing. Here again, a major opportunity for improving the
country, while providing a model for the world to follow, was squandered.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For instance, two major weather calamities occurred this
spring; both could have been mitigated to some degree with creativity and
planning. Southern California is experiencing a drought – which occurs regularly
in a desert – and Texas, Oklahoma and other states in the middle of the country
were hit with major flooding in June.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The drought in Southern California, which produces a huge
portion of America's fresh produce, could have been mitigated to some point by
releasing to crop irrigation, the trillion gallons of water the government is pumping
out to sea to save a minnow. But the minnow got the water and the crops got
cooked. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While Texas is flooding and California is baking, the Obama
Administration is focused on preventing the construction of the Keystone XL
Pipeline to block Canadian oil from coming to the US. Meanwhile, trains pulling
oil cars are derailing and exploding with a conveniently frightening regularity,
and oil pipelines are mysteriously bursting, further defiling the earth and
water.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What would have prevented Obama from initiating a massive infrastructure
project to construct reservoirs, retention ponds, and similar holding
facilities to absorb excess water in times of floods, in conjunction with a
network of pipelines to divert that water to places where it is needed?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
President Dwight D. Eisenhower took a jumbled road system in
the mid-1950s and turned it into the Interstate Highway system we now enjoy.
Obama could have done for water distribution what Eisenhower did for
transportation. And he could have initiated a parallel water supply project by
constructing desalination plants along the California coast, pumping billions
of gallons of water to starved croplands each day. But he didn't.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the Global War on Terror, Obama violated a most basic
rule of geo-politics – it is better to deal with the devil you know than the
devil you don't – by ordering the execution of master terrorist Osama Bin Laden.
Thus, American special ops troops killed the acknowledged international leader
of all terrorists, even though we knew where he was, presumably were monitoring
his communications so we knew what he was doing, and long ago had worked up a
psychological profile so we could predict future actions with reasonable
accuracy.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now we have a thousand unknown devils springing up in myriad
places, with little in the way of good intelligence on who they are, what they
are doing, or what they may do in the future. Another sterling performance.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Obama's administration is also embarked on a transparently
ridiculous effort to give Iran, the chief exporter of terrorism in the world, a
nuclear bomb under the guise of a legacy-making international agreement. Should
he succeed he is aiding and abetting a country that executes its citizens for being gay, and is determined to wreak financial and military chaos around the
world, even while Europe, much of Asia and the US itself are teetering on
financial meltdown and anarchy. Don't get me started on his refusal to assist Ukraine fend off attacks by Russia, or jump-starting the depleted coffers of Cuba, one of the most vicious left-over remnants of the Cold War communist empire.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Domestically, we have the worst race relations in this
country since the 1960s, and millions of people are out of work while the media
spews meaningless, falsely rosy unemployment statistics that only reveal how
many people are no longer drawing unemployment benefits, not how many have
found jobs. Our military is needlessly being downsized, our defenses are weak
and morale is dismal. Overall, the Obama administration is a propagandist's
dream. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Political legacies may be written by paid staffers and
propagandists, but true history takes a much more objective view. When the true
history of this administration is written, it will be a tale of many
opportunities and few results.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And while Obama personally may be insulated sufficiently to
be unconcerned, he has children, and generations of his offspring will be left
to explain the damage he did, and the good he failed to do long after he, and
we, are gone.</div>
<div style="mso-element: footnote-list;">
<br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=30445850#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn1;" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[1]</span></span></span></span></a> <a href="http://biofuel.org.uk/biofuel-facts.html">http://biofuel.org.uk/biofuel-facts.html</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30445850.post-78998048588721236582015-06-17T14:43:00.000-04:002015-06-17T14:43:33.590-04:00The Sheer Fun of a Trump Presidential Candidacy<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
It started as soon as the words were out of Donald Trump's
mouth; that he now is an official candidate for the Republican nomination to
run for President of the United States.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The man whom I define as the epitome of New York City Brash,
who is held in high esteem by many American voters and a much lower post on the
status ladder by many others, particularly in the media, was the instant target
of vile media punditry. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is no secret that Trump has support and admiration among
rank and file Americans, and is openly disdained by many media elitists and
Inside-the-Beltway maintainers of the status quo. Yet, even as the Internet
exploded with commentaries supporting him – many along the lines of "he
sure can't do worse than the one we have now" or equally popular, "if
it comes down to him or Hillary, Trump has my vote," – pundits and
newscasters were immediately deploring and denigrating Trump with abandon.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The negative reaction was to be expected from the mainstream
media I suppose. There are very few people who are deplored by the left more
than a successful American entrepreneur who is unapologetic, some would say
gleeful, about it. And Trump did say after all, "I am very rich,"
although he was noting that he would not rely on lobbyists or donors or anyone
else to fund his campaign.</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjs2yHfJXalwaAU1Cct3XIm3Nsn4DDGIjuGtKNIvXXWSLi03aYHfSQtd90LukMBt2MwY6HomfJFCcnuDJUWeyiEwSj9unKPht9McWpb8tcEb85rSpYe-82CPzqxD2fXfAQ-8GzviQ/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjs2yHfJXalwaAU1Cct3XIm3Nsn4DDGIjuGtKNIvXXWSLi03aYHfSQtd90LukMBt2MwY6HomfJFCcnuDJUWeyiEwSj9unKPht9McWpb8tcEb85rSpYe-82CPzqxD2fXfAQ-8GzviQ/s1600/Donald+Trump.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Donald Trump</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But this time the media bad-mouthing was universal, even exploding
on FOX News for instance. My first encounter with the widespread reaction was at
5 p.m., when I took my usual seat at the TV to watch The Five on FOX. I anticipated
that Democrat supporter Juan Williams would have little good to say about Trump,
but I got quite a shock when the person whom I believe has the most consistent
control of her emotions, former White House Press Secretary – under George W.
Bush – Dana Perino, went absolutely apoplectic.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Perino launched a verbal assault on fellow Five host Eric
Bolling, who like Greg Gutfeld and Kimberly Guilfoyle had some good things to
say about Trump being in the race; mostly that he would change the tone of the
debate and put a lot of other candidates' feet to the fire. But when Bolling repeated
Trump's statement that he would build a fence on the US southern border between
the US and Mexico, and that Mexico would pay for it, Perino went off.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"How would you do that?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>How would you make Mexico pay for it?" she demanded of Bolling
repeatedly. Bolling appeared to be a bit taken back by Perino's assault, and
tried to get an explanation out, but to no avail. Frankly, Perino's question
should have been aimed at Trump, and she could have communicated that by simply
saying, "I don't believe him and I'd like to hear an explanation."</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2GTkd4LV3cXA6GrYatfxUGQkVrOgCagneFz304l7kZ_mRoSAycJx0Hs0yLK0rAjzfeH4Iz9bQtWsSz07qr7gTJPwxTFJAwqFVGyNuuSs6Y5QOSVXurHbA4VaaRpWR6Li-qugiYg/s1600/Dana+Perino.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2GTkd4LV3cXA6GrYatfxUGQkVrOgCagneFz304l7kZ_mRoSAycJx0Hs0yLK0rAjzfeH4Iz9bQtWsSz07qr7gTJPwxTFJAwqFVGyNuuSs6Y5QOSVXurHbA4VaaRpWR6Li-qugiYg/s1600/Dana+Perino.png" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Dana Perino</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But NOOOO. She hammered Bolling right into a corner before
stopping for breath, and then heading into a break. Let me point out here that
I like Perino and believe she should think about running for president. But she
was off base in this case, and, like so many others, protested too much.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some of the others included FOX commentators George Will and
Charles Krauthammer, both of whom were less than kind to the new candidate.
Krauthammer said for instance, "I think his single most important
statement was 'I am very rich.' "</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Will opined that Trump will destroy the GOP brand among
voters, which is laughable to people in Connecticut whose once-imprisoned GOP
governor is now facing another term behind bars, as is a former GOP State
Chairman. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It also should be noted that both Will and Krauthammer were
recent objects of a Trump Twitter War in which he said unkind things about both
of them. Perhaps that should have been taken into account before selecting the
guest list for the Special Report panel discussion last night, to avoid charges
of conflicts of interest at the very least.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Similarly, FOX News host Gretchen Carlson had Meghan McCain
on as a guest Wednesday afternoon, with McCain referring to Trump and his
announcement speech as "crass." Then again, she is the daughter of
Sen. John McCain, R-AZ, whose temper tantrums and facetious presidential campaign
against Barack Obama didn't do much for the party image either.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Personally I think the media hates Trump because he can't be
controlled. The media likes to help some candidates get to the top of the pack
because they raise millions of dollars in campaign funds, much of which is
spent buying ad time and space from the media that gives them so much time and
space.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What they don't want to tell you is that a ton of the money
raised before the national conventions – of both parties – goes to buy delegates
to the primaries. Not outright of course, that would be illegal, but in a
roundabout way, as in promises of more money from the public trough once they
win the election.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So Trump may not buy as many ads, but he may have already
bought – so to speak – the votes of delegates who may just believe he can turn
this country around.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Frankly, I'm glad Trump is in the race, and while I don't
have much faith in him winning the nomination, I do believe the debate is about
to get far more real and personal. He <i>will</i> hold other candidate's feet to the
fire and they will have to answer some real questions for a change.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We should go buy some popcorn. This is going to be a fun
show and I for one intend to watch it all the way to the convention; and
beyond. </div>
Ron Winterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08183872232524118092noreply@blogger.com0