Blog Archives

The inaugural Oy! Awards

8/30/2016

Today, I award my first official “Oys!.” As with the fact checker in the Washington Post who awards Pinocchio’s for misleading or false statements made by public officials, I’m offering “Oys!” (An expression of exasperation or dismay) for folks who are, well, Oy!-inspiring.

First up, we have ex-Congressman, ex-mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner back in the news for sexting with yet another woman (with his young child in the bed with him) and soon the ex-respected Weiner likely will have an ex-wife.

And, we have Donald Trump’s gastroenterologist saying he wrote his note excusing Donald from giving more information on his medical records in a rushed manner because Trump’s limo was waiting for the letter, apparently with the engine running. Thus, this doctor wrote that Trump’s “test results were astonishingly excellent” and, if elected, Trump will be “the healthiest individual ever to be elected to the presidency.”

No use going into all the history of the Weiner topic because it’s well documented and who really cares, other than his wife, Hillary Clinton top aide Huma Abedin, who showed him great support over the years only to have to give up on him, finally.

What piqued my interest more was her quite understandable statement explaining what was going on and asking that folks show respect for her family’s privacy.

In the story reporting all this in the Washington Post, several of her friends were anonymously quoted. Now, maybe she gave her approval for them to talk to the press, we’ll never know. But let’s assume she meant what she said about wanting privacy and didn’t approve friends babbling about her private issues.

The Post included this attribution for the story: “Both that friend and other Clinton loyalists who spoke about Abedin on the condition of anonymity out of respect for her privacy.” Boldface added by me.

Read it again. These friends of Ms. Abedin talked anonymously out of respect for her privacy. Really? If my friends ever did that, they wouldn’t be friends anymore. If I asked for privacy to deal with such a personal and hurtful situation, I mean I want PRIVACY. Lord.

Over to the Trump doctor.

Apparently Trump uses a gastroenterologist as his general practitioner. That’s his business, just seems odd to me. I looked up gastroenterologist because I wanted to be sure I was correct that such a doctor is one who deals specifically with the gastrointestinal tract and liver. I was correct. I guess he’s saying Trump’s stomach and liver are in great shape, which is terrific. I wish him a healthy stomach and liver especially since he doesn’t drink alcohol which can lead to liver problems.

Further research shows that most experts (experts being folks who have been specialists or general practitioners (GP) for a while) say that a specialist isn’t typically used as a GP because a GP is exposed to more general conditions that may present in patients, thus have more experience at spotting more issues. Specialists are specialists for a reason - they focus their practice on a specialty.

So, two issues: First, why is a gastroenterologist giving Trump a clean bill of overall health? And, second, what kind of doctor writes a note in five minutes, because the limo is using up gas, to vouch for a major party’s presidential candidate’s good health?

So, on a scale of zero to five Oys!:

Amedin’s friends her earn four Oys! (“Oy! Oy! Oy! Oy!) for forgetting they were talked to because they are FRIENDS of hers.

Trump’s gastroenterologist earns four Oys! (“Oy! Oy! Oy! Oy!”) for writing a medical opinion in five minutes while the limo waited.

3 Comments

When there's no transparency, we see what we want to see

8/24/2016

0 Comments

Transparency. A big word going around that doesn’t fit either presidential candidate.

Transparency means the quality that makes something obvious or easy to understand. Now you can see why it doesn’t fit either.

I’ve been over-obsessed with Donald Trump in this space for the last year – with good reason. But that doesn’t mean Hillary Clinton is without her significant faults. And transparency is maybe the biggest one.

She is viewed as dishonest by a majority of the voters and the only reason she doesn’t look as bad as she should is because Trump weighs in even lower on the honesty scale with voters. As I’ve said before, Trump is the only candidate Clinton can beat and Clinton is the only one he can beat.

With Mrs. Clinton there is, for starters, the Clinton Foundation which by its nature is going to be looked at with a close eye because where there’s big money and a politician (in this case two) one looks for games to be played. Clearly, as the Clintons claim, the Foundation does a lot of good around the world.

And, just as clearly, it raises questions about the big-dollar donations from individuals, governments and corporations and what access, if any, that meant with then-secretary of state Clinton and what it could mean if there is another President Clinton.

Emails from the State Department while she was secretary showed that big donors often sought meetings and other things from her department. Those emails also show that many of the meetings requested were granted. They also disclose that many of the requests for things – visas, for example – were not granted.

The Foundation has said it will change its ways if she becomes president which is terrific but there are those who say it should have changed its ways before and definitely should change now as she runs for the highest office. Have there been illegal conflicts of interest? That’s for law enforcement to allege and a court of law to determine. Have there been appearances of conflicts of interest? Oh, yes. And that’s for the court of public opinion to say. And it shows in her trust deficit.

When I was on the staff of a cabinet member we’d get calls from friends or party for meetings. If it made sense to do the meetings, we did. Not because of the money but because of the topic and if there were schedule openings. Would it look like that to an outsider? Probably not. And, for sure, no one got anything just because they were a donor or friend. Would it look that way to the public? Probably not. Especially in the eyes of someone looking for a conspiracy.

That’s why the measurement in public office is really the “appearance of a conflict of interest.” That’s a higher bar in many ways and a necessarily high bar if the public is to trust its elected and appointed officials.

Another area of lack of transparency for Mrs. Clinton is that she has not held a press conference in nearly 10 months. I get why. She’d be inundated with email questions, especially now that there is a new trove of emails and we don’t know what’s in them. Not to mention the Foundation questions. That press conference could last for hours if she let it.

My guess is she can handle the questions but does not want a live broadcast of a news conference with hundreds of reporters pounding her with questions, legitimate and not legitimate. Still, we expect our politicians to make themselves available for press conferences, especially those running for President of the United States. If she can’t defend it, she probably shouldn’t have done it.

Sure, as her campaign manager says she’s answered questions but that’s mostly to regional press or answering on the fly or maybe one on one on TV. All good. But not like a press conference. She did undergo hours of questioning before a congressional committee on Benghzi and withstood the pressure and questions well. We know she can do it. There’s no question she’s one tough woman. But she’s also one very careful woman, with good reason, and she brings a lot of that on herself.

So, do it, Mrs. Clinton. Just as Donald Trump needs to release his taxes and start showing the transparency we expect from a presidential candidate, you should hold a press conference and be held accountable for the foundation and the emails. I know you’ve answered many of those questions already. Answer them again. Put the transparency argument to bed.

When there is no transparency, we get to see what we want to see -- not necessarily what the truth is.

Plus, no matter which of the two wins the election – we’ll want even more transparency when they are sitting in the White House. May as well get used to it now.

0 Comments

The pivot begins...or does it?

8/22/2016

1 Comment

From the beginning of his campaign for president, Donald Trump promised no pivoting, no apologizing, no regretting and no teleprompt-ing. Last week after, for the second time, he fired his campaign manager – and after saying he doesn't fire loyal people unlike politicians -- the pivoting, apologizing, regretting and teleprompt-ing began at warp speed.

No one should be surprised because the one constant in his campaign has been lying. In fact during his “I regret any comments I made that may have hurt anyone” speech he promised he would “never lie to you.” And he spent this week lying, again…still.
The semi-pivot seems to have begun.

Interestingly this “pivot” seems to have started AFTER Paul Manafort – who reportedly pushed for a pivot for months – resigned and after a junk-yard-dog-conspiratorcy-weaving Steve Bannon took over.

So Trump gave a few teleprompter speeches last week and we’ve seen him not apologize but show “regret” (another speech he read off a teleprompter for fear he would go off-script and not “regret” anything) for some of things he may have said in the heat of the moment where he lost control of his senses apparently because he really didn’t mean to be mean. If you believe that, I have a presidential candidacy to sell you.

Trump harped early on during the primaries about those “phony” politicians made all the more phony because of their dependence on teleprompters to stay on message rather than “be themselves.” So, now, with no explanation we see Trump speaking from a teleprompter, going off now and then it to repeat a phrase he just read or to add a “believe me” in case we didn’t believe him the first time. (On that point, he is correct.)

We also know he’s lying not only because his lips are moving but because he emphasizes some statements by lifting one of his hands (that really come across stubby on TV) and putting his index finger together with his thumb to show us he really, really means it, believe me.

Linguists have been quoted all over the media parsing every word of his regret to show that he really said nothing – similar to that Olympic swimmer who showed such immaturity in Brazil when he lied about his vandalism, his drunkenness and his juvenile behavior the other night.

Interestingly, appearing a Sunday show, GOP Chairman Reince Priebus hailed the new Trump. Called him “maturing.” Take a step back, Reince, Trump is a 70-year-old self-proclaimed billionaire – and you think he’s finally “maturing?” If so, I’d say I have a presidential candidacy to sell you but you’ve already bought it. Instead, Reince, meet the Olympic swimmer, he may make a good Senate candidate for you to back, he seems to have the qualities your seek.

And last week, with an extra helping of chutzpah, Trump began making a special appeal to African American voters – with whom he registers not 1 percent of their vote in polls – by saying to them, “what have you got to lose?” by voting for him since your lives have not improved under Democratic policies? What a salesman! Buy me, because, hell, what have you got to lose? I guess that is him taking his best points and selling them.

Does that even deserve a response? Okay, it does. My second response is, so what policies are you offering to improve things for African Americans who you think are all living in poverty and poorly educated? My first response is, “WTF, are you nuts?” After all you’ve said, intimated and rumored about minorities in this country, after not disassociating yourself from bigots and racists and segregationists like David Duke, about your plan (which I haven’t heard mentioned lately) to build a ‘great wall’ on our southern border to keep out those rapin’, robbin’ and thievin’ Mexicans.” And let me use sarcasm -- something you said you were using when you spewed your insults day after day but apparently never looked up the meaning of the word – to say, what happened to your “extreme vetting” when it came to your last two campaign managers? Clearly, that didn’t work out so well.

And, by the way, he showed Saturday that he may now be ready to endorse a path to citizenship for those 11 million Hispanics here illegally who he’s been saying for a year he will round up and deport. May as well use that teleprompter since, like all those politicians you say you are unlike, you’re talking out of both sides of your…mouth.

Oh, and then he campaigned with his vice presidential running mate down in Louisiana to pass out needed supplies to those affected by floods. Okay, I guess that’s better than promising a charitable donation that will never come. At least he helped empty a truck rather than empty cash from a bankruptcy, leaving small business owners with nothing on the dollar.

Clearly, I don’t buy his pivot. I do, though, see his cynical, craven campaign for what it is – just another reality show script (Oh, did I say reality shows have a script? Isn’t that an oxymoron?) – a continuation of his craven, cynical campaign that assumes American voters are dumb and can be manipulated by a guy who has yet to display a serious policy bone in his body. He still merely hands out generalities, insults and regrets written by a staff person.

Here’s when I might begin to believe Trump has pivoted to being a real presidential candidate:

He releases his taxes
He stops blaming the “dishonest” media for every bad story he reads or sees
He stops saying the election is going to be rigged against him
He stops using juvenile names for his opponents
He stops his blatant lies

In other words, I’ll never believe it.

1 Comment

And you thought the campaign already was ugly?

8/18/2016

2 Comments

If you thought the presidential campaign was ugly. Just wait.

By all accounts, Donald Trump’s new “CEO” of his campaign, Stephen Bannon, head of Breitbart News, is a nationalistic street fighter who hates all things establishment and supported Brexit. He is a proponent of “let Trump be Trump” and that Trump – the only Trump – is cut from Bannon’s cloth anyway, so Bannon just exaggerates that. Mix in the understanding that this Trump is also the real Trump and that newly deposed Fox News Chief Roger Ailes, another old Republican street fighter, is either officially or unofficially helping Trump prep for a debate with Hillary Clinton and Katie, bar that door.

For those of us who thought appointing Paul Manafort as his campaign leader was a sign of nasty politics to come, we may just look back on that appointment and say, “if only Manafort stayed in control.” As if anyone is ever in control of Trump.

What does it all mean? Who has known what anything has meant this year? But here's my guess:

Trump becomes even nastier than we thought he was before. The “pivot,” a phrase I hate, is not coming – if it ever was – and Trump definitely is “doubling down.” another phrase that drives me nuts, on his strategy of being an isolationist who overlooks bigotry and racism in favor of what he thinks are the right things to do for a country founded on “we the people” and freedom and justice for all (not “all, except”). We’ll never see his tax returns. He’ll never learn anything about foreign policy in the real world. His tax plan will always favor the rich. He will lie a thousand times more. He will never apologize. He will return to taking on every significant Republican elected official in America. My guess is he loses the election, big, but not before we go through the roughest, ugliest, most hurtful political moment in our country’s history. Bar none.

And, when it's over, we may face some violent protests over what Trump is calling a "rigged election" in a country where voter fraud is almost non-existent based on all the evidence.

And, if he ever appoints yet another campaign leader, it will be Vladimir Putin. OK, I’m kidding about that, I think.

2 Comments

Yesterday's Olympic-size events -- on the track and the campaign

8/17/2016

1 Comment

In the Olympics yesterday, Abbey D’Agostino of the United States and Nikki Hamblin of New Zealand collided with each other, falling to the track. In the flash of a second, the moment they’d trained years for crumbled to the ground. But rather than swear at each other angry that years of hard work had gone for naught, they served as each other's crutch and crossed the finish line together in the 5,000 meter race, in the spirit of sportsmanship.

In other Olympic-size news, Donald Trump’s presidential campaign has fallen and can’t seem to get up and a top executive from the conservative “news” web site Breitbart has come in to prop up the Republican, the second major staff shake-up in about a month.

Interesting juxtaposition -- but one was done in the spirit of two strangers helping each other out after a calamity in the once-every-four-year Olympics and the other in the once-every-four-year thing we call a presidential election.

The Breitbart fellow, Stephen Bannon, is now Trump’s campaign chief executive. Bannon, the stories say, has no presidential campaign experience which should help offset the Trump campaign’s other leader – campaign chair Paul Manafort – who has plenty of experience and has watched Trump’s poll numbers do nothing but fall since he took over.

Oh what a tangled web…well, not sure that fits but then again nothing fits in this election year.

On the other hand, news reports say that naming Bannon is a doubling down on Trump’s view that Trump needs to be Trump – sticking to his strategy of no-holds-barred campaigning, a nationalist bent and saying whatever comes into his mind no matter who it insults or how nutty it may sound or what lies he tells. Hey, it worked in the primary, their logic goes, so who’s to believe the polls showing a pending shellacking. Let’s stick to what worked!

Meantime, let me get this straight: Manafort, who those of us who go back to the 1970s in GOP politics know as one of the meanest street fighters around and whose picture you’ll see if you look up “dirty tricks” in the dictionary, is being pushed aside for someone, uh, meaner. OK, got it.

In related news, more than 100 former elected officials, campaign and administration staff going back to the 1970s sent a letter to the Republican National Committee (RNC) asking that it stop funding Trump’s campaign now and move the money to more winnable House and Senate races. I was one of those signers. To those of us who signed it was not a “heroic” action, as some are saying, but a common sense one to try to save some worthwhile Republican candidates while tossing an unworthy presidential candidate who can’t win over the side.

The RNC will comply – but on its own timetable. The RNC says it won’t throw its standard bearer overboard. But it likely will in October when it has tossed past standard bearers (goodbye, Bob Dole) over so they can say they gave it the old college try.

Timing is everything, as they say, and the RNC says it needs Trump for now to raise money. My guess is if they stopped funding Trump, many big donors who are not supporting Trump would again give money to the RNC. But, that’s my political calculation, for what it’s worth.

Many don’t think it’s worth much. One person called those of us who signed the letter “has-beens.” True to a large degree, but a group of “has-beens” with a collective hundred and probably thousands of years’ experience working on behalf of the Republican Party, its candidates and its elected officials or serving in office.

Another person who contacted me, anonymously, called me far worse names that are not suitable even for this web site which has few standards for name-calling. Let’s just say I never did do any of the things he said I did with male sexual partners – not that there’d be anything wrong with it if I did.

One other just called me a RINO (Republican in Name Only), a title I can tolerate since I’ve been called a lot worse things in my political life (see above). For the record, I thought the party was a “big tent” which could tolerate various views but agreed on a set group of ideals, a set of ideals Trump does not seem to agree with. But, I guess I took Ronald Reagan more seriously than some members of the GOP.

On the other hand that writer said the biggest offense of those who signed the letter was that we went public with it rather than stood by silently. She wanted, I guess, us to put party over country. I guess she figures we can vote for someone else, and let the party sink lower in the public’s mind, but we should keep our mouths shut as the party disintegrates.

The only conclusion I can draw is that we have yet to see the bottom of this year’s politics.

1 Comment

'The truth and nothing but the truth' so help you Donald

8/11/2016

0 Comments

The closest we’ve seen to documentation that Donald Trump is a lifelong liar was published today by The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/trump-lies/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumplies-11a-top%3Ahomepage%2Fstory).

The story reports on a deposition Trump gave nearly 10 years ago in which a couple of smart lawyers representing an author Trump was suing pulled out statements made by Trump in the past which he had to admit, under oath, were lies or, at worst, were extreme exaggerations which pass for truth in Trump's mind.

Maybe more importantly the deposition shows the patterns with which Trump uses his “truth” – a series of flat out lies or statements that he regards as truth but literally no one else can. Or maybe they are sarcasm. Or jokes. Sound familiar? He’s been using the same tactics is his campaign from Day One. Read the story yourself and see if you agree – even those of you who are supporting Trump.

One example which, to me, says it all: Trump said he was paid $1 million for a speech. In truth, he was paid $400,000. In Trump’s Truth, though, he said he was paid the $1 million because while $400,000 was the amount of cash he was paid, he viewed The Learning Annex (which hired him to give the speech) as heavily advertising it, to the tune of what he estimated at $600,000 as more money he was “paid” because it accrued to the benefit of the Trump “brand.” The new math, I guess.

If I were a trained professional I might call this pathological lying. I can’t because I’m not a doctor. But I’ve heard “some say” – that attribution Trump successfully uses to justify his whack-a-doodle statements - that he is pathological.

There’s far more in the story which is the best story done so far because, well, it’s, based on a deposition by Trump who was under oath when he responded to questions - which means, it isn’t 100 percent the truth, but it’s as close as Donald Trump will ever come to it.

0 Comments

We can't stop talking about Trump until he's defeated

8/10/2016

1 Comment

It’s hard to find any stronger words than already have been used to condemn Donald Trump’s latest result of the ‘dishonest media,’ joke, sarcasm, turn of phrase, call-out for voter turnout – or whatever the hell he’s calling it today.

Whether he meant it or not, his words yesterday called for owners of guns to beware, that when Hillary Clinton is elected president (not before) they should literally take aim and shoot.

Do I really think Donald Trump intends to call for the assassination of the next president? No, I do not. But, that’s what he did. Words matter. And if he doesn’t know that by now – with all his misunderstooded-ness – then he never will.

And that, my friends, is what we mean by the temperament one needs to be the president of the United States – knowing that even if you “mis-speak,” your words are taken seriously whether it’s by those who support you, those with whom you do battle in an election or, if you were ever elected, those who lead other not-so-friendly countries. And you can't blame someone else, you have to take responsibility for what comes out of your mouth.

We in the U.S. have always been a bit isolated/arrogant about our place in the world. We don’t always think (or care) about how other countries perceive us. But if Donald Trump were to become president and made a similar comment about, say, Kim Jon-un, who has access to and intention to use nuclear weapons, well, blaming the “dishonest media” isn’t going to matter after a nuke hits.

And that last sentence is not sarcasm. And I do not exaggerate. For the gazillioneth time, this is not reality TV, this is reality.

As I think has been clear in previous posts about Trump (which have dominated this space the last year or so), I think he is unprepared, not of the right temperament, not serious enough, hasn't met an issue he understands, is surrounded by the wrong people, can’t stay on message for his own good, and, if he weren’t one of the only two people right now who stand a chance of being elected, I would consider a complete and utter joke of a candidate.

But, he is one of those two people. And, yesterday is another, but I’m sure not that last, example of why he shouldn’t be elected. If I had said what he said, the Secret Service and FBI would be at my door asking what the hell I meant.

Trump has been too cavalier, too uncaring, too selfish, too-wanting-to-please those who support him “even if he shoots someone on Fifth Avenue” to be even considered as a potential president of the United States. But, as I may have mentioned before, he is one of just two people who will be our next leader.

If I read this space, I’d get tired of reading about Donald Trump and the idiocy that is his campaign.

But until he is defeated, none of us should get tired of doing something about.

1 Comment

Trump: A clear and present danger

8/5/2016

3 Comments

Clearly, it’s been a bad week for Donald Trump’s campaign. And all the problems were self-inflicted. Hillary Clinton seems to be adopting the strategy of: if your opponent is hurting himself, get out of the way.

Attacks on a Gold Star mother, apparently an attack on a mother in his audience, refusal to endorse Congressional leaders who endorsed him. But his worst comment may be alleging that the November election is rigged.

First, it isn’t. Study after study has shown that the allegations of voter fraud in a federal election are tiny over the years. No one anywhere is voting 10 times, as Trump alleged. No one is trying to steal the election from or for anyone. He offers no evidence of the system being rigged. My guess is since he's falling in the polls, he thinks the system has to be rigged. First, the polls aren't rigged. In any event, the polls are not the votes that will be cast in November. The polls mean nothing and depend on the methodology used for each one and the timing.

But if Trump continues that claim, when he does lose in November, we could have protests and worse from his truest supporters who for some reason believe this man and his lies. Protests are okay. Our system allows for that, and I'm glad it does. But Trump and his people seem to be calling for violence if he loses the election.

Of all the things he’s said, that may be the most dangerous – claiming a presidential election is rigged. This man truly knows no decency.

I won’t repeat what others have written – for example that even Al Gore, who won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College bowed out more than gracefully – because why repeat all that?

I will say, there is no choice between Trump and Clinton. My friends who know I’m going to vote for Clinton harangue me with arguments like “what about the Supreme Court,” “what about her liberal policies,” “how can you trust what she says?” And more.

Trump is basically inciting violence if he loses the election. The most important responsibility a president has is to keep America and its citizens safe. Inciting riots is not keeping us safe.

Add to that Trump’s ignorance of the importance of international alliances, his ignorance of the dangerous ramifications of using a nuclear weapon, his compliments of dictators like Kim Jong-un or his praise of Putin’s leadership – all these are disqualifications for the office of president. All of these endanger our safety.

If anyone trusts Trump more than Clinton to wisely exercise the presidency’s responsibilities for keeping America safe, well, I’d make a joke here but the topic is far too serious to joke about. We will survive her policies. We always survive bad policies. But we may not survive the danger Trump poses to our country's safety.

Most recent polls are showing a distinct turn toward Clinton. Don’t believe them. Polls will change. In fact, don’t believe any predictions until the night of November 8 when, I hope, Clinton is elected – legitimately.

3 Comments

Leftover thoughts from the conventions

8/1/2016

1 Comment

If Donald Trump believes, as he has said, that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any votes, why doesn’t he release his taxes? If wounding or killing someone doesn’t merit losing a vote, I imagine he also believes that being caught lying about his finances wouldn’t lose him any either.
I read many people say that if Donald Trump were elected president we’d be protected because he’d have good advisors around him. Why do they think it would be different from his campaign where even those few good advisors aren’t listened to? Typical day: Trump says something outrageous. The Senate Majority Leader and Speaker of the House criticize him and even his running mate often tries to walk it back. An hour later, Trump is saying the same thing in an even more outrageous way. And taking the oath of office would change that how?
Does Jeffrey Lord, the former Reagan White House aide and current Trump supporter, go home every night and take six showers to cleanse himself of his defenses of every Trump stupid statement?
In a sign of the changing times, Katie Perry sang and, rather than the candles or Bic lighters folks swayed in rhythm when I was a kid, the audience was swaying their iPhone flashlight.
“Woman President.” Drives me crazy when I see the phrase. Not because I have any problem with a FEMALE president but because “woman” is noun and not an adjective. The correct way to say it is first “female president.”
Hillary Clinton certainly has a very strong resume to be president but the constant drumbeat that she is the “most experienced ever…man or woman” overlooks George H.W. Bush’s resume when he ran for president. She was First Lady, senator, secretary of state. He was CIA Director, RNC chairman, China envoy, Congressman, ambassador to the United Nations, vice president.
Democrat celebrities: Katy Perry, Meryl Streep, Eva Longoria, dozens in the music video of “Fight Song,” Paul Simon, Carol King and 40 Broadway stars like Audra MacDonald, Indina Menzel and Brian Stokes Mitchell, just to name a few. Republican celebrities: Scott Baio, Antonio Sabato Jr. and that guy from Duck Dynasty.
Ronald Reagan was known for, among other things, his tremendous optimism. So much so that his “Morning in America” slogan from 1984 was mocked by some. Donald Trump did his version but “Midnight in America” doesn’t exactly motivate the same kind of feelings.
Since when are the children of presidential candidates among the leading star speakers at conventions? I mean, really? At the GOP convention a Trump kid spoke every night, spinning tales about their father that he contradicted when it came his turn to speak.
Democrats clearly won the Battle of the Conventions. Trump's promise of an entertaining convention turned out to be broken.
Watched a lot of CNN – more than in years. Their bulletin of Breaking News included promoting the new CNN app and under the banner of Breaking News we were told Hillary/Trump would speak “momentarily.” Never happened. We seemed to always wait at least an hour and a half before they started. And, by the way, since when (other than Bill Clinton) do candidates keep voters waiting so long after the scheduled hour?
The day after the Democratic convention Trump went on a riff about the Clinton and DNC emails, saying only idiots would put anything important in an email and longed for the old days of couriers. He said Patton would never have relied on emails, implying he would wait days at the front for a courier to deliver a message to him rather than have an immediate warning of the latest intelligence.
Trump criticizes Clinton for not doing a presser in months and calls it “disgusting” and not transparent. Kind of like him not releasing his tax returns.
In a riff criticizing what he says is the bias of CNN -- the Clinton News Network as he called it – he said, “wait, the red light just went off CNN’s camera.” Crooked CNN he said was cutting him off the air! Huge applause for his calling them out. I was watching it live – on CNN.
Trump said Bernie Sanders sold his soul by endorsing Clinton who Bernie had criticized for months; same as Chris Christie who is now running Trump's transition operation.
Trump said the US is like a third-world country. I have no wise crack for that.
Trump said Bernie looked miserable and depressed at the DNC. Apparently he never watched Bernie who campaigned as an angry old man.
Just a hunch, I think the soon-to-open Trump Hotel in D.C. will go bankrupt.

1 Comment

The inaugural Oy! Awards

When there's no transparency, we see what we want to see

The pivot begins...or does it?

And you thought the campaign already was ugly?

Yesterday's Olympic-size events -- on the track and the campaign

'The truth and nothing but the truth' so help you Donald

We can't stop talking about Trump until he's defeated

Trump: A clear and present danger

Leftover thoughts from the conventions

Archives

B. Jay Cooper

powered by bjaycooper.com