...See MoreMy first thought was about the level of cruelty America tolerates, but that was quickly followed by the level of stupidity found in America.
I am referring to the article at "The Intercept" titled, "Malnourished Prisoner’s Death Reveals Horrific Conditions in a Texas Prison." The article says:
Quote)
Alton Rodgers was 31 years old and suffering from bilateral bronchopneumonia, bed sores, and severe malnutrition when he died of head trauma on January 19, 2016, in the custody of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
(Snip)
Rodgers stood 6 feet 7 inches tall and weighed 148 pounds when he died. His body mass index was 16.7, dangerously lower than the bottom of the normal range, which physicians set at 18.5. According to Northwest Texas Hospital records, Rodgers was admitted with hypoglycemia, a urinary tract infection, dehydration, bilateral bronchopneumonia, bed sores indicating prolonged immobility, and other conditions.
(End quote)
And now for the stupid part!
(Quote)
Complaints about health care and record-keeping at Clements are not hard to come by, and many of them center on the prison’s alleged refusal to test inmates for tuberculosis.
(Snip)
These inmates surmise that the prison has put itself at risk of tuberculosis infection for budgetary reasons. The 2017 Texas state budget calls for a four percent decrease in funding for the state’s prison system, which amounts to a $250 million in slashed funds for a system that is already under pressure.
“The medical, security, mailroom and grievance [departments] are all severely under-staffed. This is what draws their negligence,” Walker suggested. Johnson, who is active in organizing against “slave labor” in prison, concluded by saying that the prison system wants “to make money off us, not spend it on us.”
(End quote)
Unbelievably stupid! If you let tuberculosis fester in your prisons, it will get out and your society will pay dearly. This disease is caused by a micro that is very adaptive. In fact, it quickly developed resistance to the first three drugs discovered to fight it. The disease was only subdued by using a three drug cocktail.
- Gay marriage is still legal. - Mass deportations and raids of schools are not happening, keeping families intact (despite the unwillingness of some members of those families to follow federal law ... thanks Mr. Kaine for reminding us how important following federal laws is.). - Muslims are still allowed to exercise their first amendment rights. - Women still have the right to vote! - And here is a list of all of the rights that our President has taken away from women:
I'm hoping that the sun will come up tomorrow. If I believe the Dems, that may not happen. Then again, many of their predictions are proving to be simply the spouting of alternative facts.
While not devastating, eliminating the planned reduction of MIP on FHA mortgages is not in any way helping to reverse declines in home ownership rates. Home ownership is at it's lowest levels in 50 years. NAR estimated that some 30,000 to 40,000 people who would have been able to afford a home purchase with the anticipated lower fee will now be shut out of homeownership, while 700,000 to 800,000 will pay more for mortgage insurances than they otherwise would have. Others may have to adjust their home purchase plans.
And, cutting funding to international women's health organizations via implementing the gag rule, cutting funds to these organizations can have tremendous ramifications for women, children, and men in the remote regions in which they operate. No federal funds to Planned Parenthood Global or Doctors Without Borders.
This is not unique to Trump. The rate on MIP fluctuates with the market. Fha has the funds to handle the reduction, and interest rates are set for an increase, but anyone who doesn't own their home can rent a home from a wall street investor. Mom and Pop small investors are being squeezed out.
And the gag rule goes into effect any time we have a Republican president.
Yet, the hope and change candidate served those destroying this nation's democracy as assiduously as the man he replaced. He bailed out Wall Street rather than Main Street, expanded foreign wars with a disastrous foreign policy, made Bush's tax cuts permanent, dissolved posse comitatis, squelched dissent by aggressively prosecuting whistle-blowers, and set an extraordinary legal precedent by authorizing the assassination by drone of and American citizen and his 16 year old son with no charge, no evidence, and no due process.
Frankly, once the rhetoric is set aside, Pres. Trump represents maybe less hope, but more change than Pres. Obama ever did.
But in answer to your question, here is a comment that I think sums it up:
"I tend to think that's a bad question. It is politics-as- novel, rather than politics-as-system. We are a large, fractious nation full of clashing interest groups and wildly differing opinions, as well as differing levels of engagement with politics. That system will often spit out results that most of us don't like very much. Trying to ascribe those results to a person, or even a small group, is like blaming the weatherman because it's raining, or an economist for a recession. You have selected the most visible target, not the most likely one. And, in the case of Democrats who fault Republicans for Trump, a very convenient target as well." Chicago Tribune commentary
On 1/22/17, Mark Joseph Stern wrote: > > Mr. Stern is a writer for Slate. This article was > published in "Business Insider" and seems to show that > Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is the person really running our > country. "How the most powerful Republican in America > paved the way for Donald Trump." > > What are your opinions? and why does ONE person in the > Senate have this much power?
1. Trump is ______ (i...See MoreOne phenomenon that should concern us all is the lack of critical thinking and reading. There is such a flood irrational, ignorant, and hysterical anti-Trump sentiment that rational, legitimate criticism of Trump gets lost in the deluge.
Here are three silly examples from The Washington Post and social media:
1. Trump is ______ (insert your choice of evil intent here) because he changed the drapes in the Oval Office to gold drapes. The implication is that they are made of gold, LOL.
2. Trump is _______ because he got rid of the Spanish option of the White House website and omitted climate change, etc. The implication is that Obama's White House wewbsite was the only correct one.
3. Melania Trump is selling her jewelry and modeling services via the White House website. (WA Post)
As old folks know, every new tenant of the White House redecorates or decorates according to his and her preferences.
The Trump staff most likely created their own WH website prior to the inauguration. It's not that they "scrubbed" Obama's site as the news source claimed. Trump did promise to downsize the government, anyway. Climate change denial, yes, is a serious issue and that is kind of my point: if we don't limit some of the trivial complaints about Trump, the serious ones don't get the attention they need.
Finally, no, there are no links to Melania's jewelry or modeling services on the WH website. In fact, if you click on some of the links of the WAPO article, it takes you to a quote by one of Melania's vendors who says that they do not sell her jewelry anymore. So the header is an absolute lie.
Keep crying wolf and soon no one will believe anything in the media at all.
...See MoreBob asks if some of us "don't find 'SOME stories in the newspapers' substantive enough?" The answer is, some of us don't! We are waiting for Pres. Trump to offer policies and laws. Cha Cha is correct to say "if we don't limit some of the trivial complaints about Trump, the serious ones don't get the attention they need."
A different poster wrote of "the ethical implications of the family’s business entanglements." What on earth did you expect! Yet, it is amazing! Those complaining think they have a point. The Trump supporters see this as trivial, and become a more entrenched Trump supporter. So much so, that the division created by the trivial complaints will not serve the nation well when we face the much more serious issues.
Cha Cha also wrote, "Every special interest group is trying to push the other out of the way to be Trump's primary 'victim'." That is an interesting take!
However, my view is the oligarchs that run this country view Pres. Trump as a loose cannon, and want to cripple him in favor of congress, because they own congress - both Republicans and DNC Democrats. In particular, the Neocons and the military industrial complex are in panic mode over Pres. Trump's suggestion that we should talk to Russia and other enemies.
No, we will never be Russia's best buddy. However, we need to talk to everyone, and when we can work together for the good of everyone, we should! And, by the way, if you listened to Pres. Trump carefully, you find his attitude is what you expect from a deal maker - very transactional! IMHO, Mr. Trump is too arrogant to be "best buds" without there being something in it for him!
Returning to domestic issues, Pres. Trump's policies look to be a freaking disaster. As wonderful as the Women's March was, going by the news coverage, it seem to lack a specific agenda. If we wish to be successful in battling Pres. Trump's horrible ideas, we need to have our ideas ready and in the minds of those opposing the Trump issues. The current trivial assault is preparing us to lose those battles.
The founding fathers understood what is called the "tyranny of pure democracy" or "tyranny by the majority." Years ago, I noticed this in environmental studies of third world countries that acquired democracy. The city people wanted cheap food, and had the vast majority of the votes. This meant their governments often did awful things to their farmers. They would even destroy their agriculture industry with cheap imports - which is short sighted. Yet, no politician was interested in improving the lot of the farmers.
Additionally, some scholars think the founding fathers were influenced by the recent French revolution and its fairly rapid degeneration into dictatorship. This had given the populists some pause to reflect on the wisdom of too direct a democracy.
Thus, the founding fathers knew; in a healthy democracy, minorities need some kind of veto power, and that is the function of our electoral college (and the Senate). This country has been pursuing an economic strategy that was devastating the "rust belt" and these people wanted to tell us how upset they were.
Now mind you, they have been telling us for sometime. However, in this election, several of the states - enough of the states - got together and simultaneously used their veto power in an otherwise close election. What they were vetoing was Hillary's promise to keep doing what this country has been doing since Ronald Reagan - that is, destroying jobs, unions, the middle class, and more all for the sake of making the rich richer. It was economic!!!!
My point, I think the Electoral College system worked exactly the way the founding fathers planned. And yes, when states get together to exercise their veto on what is happening, you should expect the Electoral College result to be different from the popular vote. That is not a flaw! That is the system working correctly!
PS: This post is not to be construed as support for Pres. Trump! Honestly, had the rest of us demanded an end to the devastation in the rust belt, this Trump thing would not have happened. But we didn't, so it did!
PPS: James Madison wrote in the Federalist Paper pg. 51:
(Quote)
It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure.
(Snip)
In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.
This does not change the reason for the Electoral College which is to make sure the minority at some point can stop the majority.
Now mind you Bob also says, "We shouldn't be ruled by the majority, we should be ruled by an arbitrary minority" is a nonsensical argument."
I find this no argument at all. Of course, in a democracy, the people are most often ruled by the majority. Beyond that, I get the sense that Bob wants to deny the existence of "tyranny by the majority." Yet, I restate, the founding fathers understood the problem well, and were interested in preventing this tyranny.
It should be clear that this means from time to time the majority will not rule. Of course, the founding fathers, nor anyone else, can guarantee that any mechanism to prevent tyranny by the majority will always work the way people want, but the mechanism, in this case the Electoral College, must be there.
Beyond what Bob has written and taking from the media, I am disturbed at some of the reactions to Pres. Trump. Frankly, IMHO, there is a small group that would like to short circuit our laws and rid themselves of Pres. Trump. I saw this in the push to get the Electoral College to go against the law and not make Mr. Trump president. There are other such examples! However, I support the law and, in particular, the peaceful transition of power.
I want that peaceful transition in place, because after the likely disaster that will be Pres. Trump, I want another peaceful transition of power.
PS: At this point, everyone knows Pres. Trump's personal traits and habits are reprehensible to some. It is time to focus on the issues. We all know the president is an unprincipled narcissist. Yet, so was Hillary! She just hid it better.