Thursday, June 9, 2022

Dems’ New Message (Will it work again?)

Re: The January 6th, 2021 televised Congressional hearing of 6/9/2022

The new/old message is/was: “We’re not Trump.” It worked for President Biden. Candidate Biden hid in his basement, let surrogates tell us he would be a moderate and “put a lid” on his work day by 2:30. Americans were so fed up with angry tweets and less than classy discourse from the White House that “I am not Trump” did the trick for candidate Biden.

Since candidate Biden became President Biden, America has been embarrassed in Afghanistan. Russia and China have measured America to be week; resulting in Russia starting a world war that China is ready to join with an invasion of Taiwan. We can no longer produce enough of our own energy. Families can no longer afford gas or food. Crime is at an all time high due to police “defunding.”  2.5 million people are projected to enter our country illegally this year alone. (At least our government is providing our soon to be new neighbors with free airfare to the city of their choice, a new cell phone, a free phone plan, plus some funds to help them start their new lives. A criminal background check should be thrown in as well.) Babies have been hospitalized because we cannot make enough formula. And then, there was the American Rescue Plan that was followed up by that infrastructure thing that together caused that inflation thing. If only the Dems could spend more money - they would fix inflation!

Candidate Biden’s campaign was not limited to “I am not Trump.” He also said he would be the great uniter. Okay, let’s move on.

Nobody wants Trump again, but nobody is falling for the “We’re not Trump” message again. Trump was/is classless but he had a team of competent people with good economic and national security policies. (Not his entire team.) Americans want that competence and good policies without a side of Trump. We want adults to be back in charge. We want the Republicans.

P.S.: I cannot believe that the Dems are still so afraid of Trump, but I am happy they are - it is making them more delusional. I bet even Trump is enjoying their fear.

Wednesday, March 16, 2022

What Constitutes a World War?

 

What constitutes the designation of a “World War”? Is it the number of countries involved? How many? Three, four, five? Maybe it has to involve more than one continent. Why do we think in geographical terms when applying the World War designation to a military conflict? Our current thinking is that it has to be physical combat between more than two countries to be declared a World War. This is wrong thinking and dangerous.

Russia is conducting a mortal attack on all freedom loving people of the world. Who does not love freedom? We, lucky enough to have freedom, take it for granted. And when we see it being attacked by means of war in some far away continent, we view it as a regional war. We trick our minds to believe that it is not our war. It is not our freedom at risk. It is not our people dying.

We (the United States of America) are bending over backwards to avoid starting World War III. Prime Minister Chamberlain tried doing that with Adolf Hitler. It did not work. He could not stop the initiation of a World War that had already begun any more than America can today. Mr. Chamberlain just provided Hitler with more time to better plan his attack, better build his might, better collaborate with fellow evil regimes. We may very well be providing Putin with more time to better collaborate with China and other evil regimes on how to divide the conquest. Does anyone know that for sue – no. Does anyone know for sure that this is not the case – no. Could Iran, North Korea or another rogue actor be involved. Maybe, we do not know. But we do know that sooner rather than later is always the best way to eradicate poisonous weeds. Russia’s success will bring in other evil nations. Russia’s defeat will have the opposite effect.

 It is not the scale of the geography involved that constitutes a World War. It is both the attack on the freedom of people for no other reason than conquest and domination and the alignment of allies and axis that makes it a World War. Ukraine’s allies are clear to be seen. The democracies of the world, led by NATO are stepping up to show support and to supply arms. Even if they are not courageous enough to do all they can, they have delineated themselves on the freedom allies’ side of the war. Those not clearly seen to be Ukraine’s allies are teetering on being among the new evil axis. When the world is so divided and armed combat has begun, we are in a World War. It just does not yet fit our conceived concept of the term.

Will Russia stop at Ukraine? Will they stop at Poland? Will they stop at Germany, England? Will they stop at Canada? Will they ever stop? Will China take advantage of the fog of Russia’s war to invade Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and/or New Zealand? What will Iran and North Korea do?

We do not know the answers to these questions. But we do know that at least one evil, maniacal man has started armed conflict against one country that holds the freedom values of the majority of nations on the globe. And through their failure to protest Russia’s actions, we see the alignment of a new evil axis. We should not wait for the aggressor to answer the question of how far this war will go. Rather we should dictate the answer - forcefully.

If Russia conquers Ukraine and does stop (temporarily with the façade of peace in our time), will we have been successful? Is it a success to prevent World War III in military geographical terms through the sacrifice of the Ukrainian people’s sovereignty and lives? Would it be another success if such a horror happened in Finland three years later?

Russia’s War on Ukraine is World War III. It is an attack on all freedom loving people of the world. Those standing with Ukraine include the United Kingdom, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Finland, Switzerland, America and many, many more. The majority of the world’s community of nations support Ukraine and a very few are standing quietly on the sidelines waiting to see how they can benefit from Russia’s provocations and conquests. The allies and the axis of the wartime world order are already clear to see. To be honest, they have been clear to see for several years.

We can see the wartime allies and axis. One member of the allies is under mortal attack. This constitutes a World War. Being afraid to fight it will not make it go away. Only courage will prevent it from every being bestowed the official World War title.

Americans are embarrassed that our President is cowering at every threat Putin utters. This is good. The President makes every decision based on the latest polling. This poll for strength will only go up. The President will then find courage. Let us hope it is before too much more horror. The freedom allies of Ukraine have united. The evil axis is awaiting to assess the strength of the allies’ response. World War III has started. The formidable Ukrainian army, the resilience of its people and the leadership of President Zelensky has shown that Ukraine, along with the allies’ support and participation can defeat the decaying empire of Russia’s inept military.

Tuesday, March 15, 2022

American Citizens Are the Cause of World Disorder

 

I have been thinking a lot lately that President Biden is the worst American president in history. He is a good man, but not a good President. He is the majority of the world's current problems. The world is begging for the leader of the free world to lead, and he is off courting the dictators of Iran and Venezuela. Worse, he sent our unprepared VP to represent our country at a time when the whole world is watching intently. She did not help. I am sure the Ukranians, the Poles, and Romanians were not impressed.

Afghanistan, the border, crime, covid, energy, inflation, Ukraine, the new Green Deal, Iran, Venezuela, leadership, wokeness, racial strife, defund the police, and oh yes, we may be at the start of WW III. We have a lot of problems.

These problems would not be as severe if President Trump was still president. Great policies, great message, lousy messenger.

With that said, we have another problem. We can blame the lack of leadership, the horrible journalism that pervades our society at this point in time. We can blame the internet. But, at some point, we have to take responsibility for our own actions.

The root cause of our problems is us. We have devolved to a level of classlessness. Each of us needs to conduct ourselves with class. Then we will debate issues, not shoot personal insults. We will force politicians to evolve to our level. We will lead the world again. 

Wednesday, September 30, 2020

First Debate 2020: Trump Won with the Transition of Power Reframing

President Trump lost on demeaner, although Vice President Biden's name calling (racist, clown, liar) did make it a close call. Vice President Biden won on the showing up scale only because nobody thought he could actually pull it off. All in all, it was a painful episode that we all wish we did not wait for with such high hopes and anticipation.

Vice President Biden won on style because he is a lifelong politician that knows it is always a good idea to look straight into the camera and talk to the American people.

But, on substance, President Trump forced Vice President Biden to shun the AOC and Bernie Sanders wing of the Democrat Party by disavowing public healthcare for all and the Green New Deal. He also made the Vice President look awkward with his inability to utter the term "law and order."

All in all, not many minds were changed tonight. However, President Trump's response to the (paraphrased) "will you respect the vote and follow through with a peaceful transition of power" question was brilliant. The President stated that the peaceful transition of power (that the Democrats' constantly imply he is too undemocratic to abide by) was not afforded to him. He won the election only to be met with the Russian collusion hoax, the Ukrainian phone call impeachment trial and endless investigations that handcuffed his ability to get his agenda accomplished. That is a new perspective on the trials and tribulations that President Trump has faced. It is a perspective that will take a few days to resonate. After thoughtful consideration of this perspective, many people will see that it is a valid point and that the Democrats are being very hypocritical of the President (and with their high-horse, hypocritical admonishment of the President not holding up the American tradition of a peaceful transition of power).

The lack of a peaceful transition of power from the Democrats also neatly wraps up the President's first remark of the debate; that he was elected for 4 years and the voters put a Republican majority in the Senate just two years ago. Therefore, he and the Republicans have the duty, the authority, and the mandate to nominate and confirm a Supreme Court Justice. As the President said, elections have consequences.

If one were to tie the loose ends together, the Democrat opposition to the President's nominee is just more obstruction to the peaceful transition of power from the Democrats to the President.

Recap: Style to the Vice President, Demeaner (by a hair) to the Vice President, Substance to the President. First impression: the Vice President won because he was, unexpectantly, mostly cogent for ninety minutes. However, in one week, after some thoughtful analysis, the President will be the true winner of tonight’s debate. The President won by exposing the Democrats as peaceful transition of power hypocrites.

Bottom line: the President wins by introducing a new perspective that exposes not only the Democrats hypocrisy, but the (all-too-eager to diminish the President’s character) press.

Sunday, May 10, 2020

Leaders Make Decisions About Death All the Time – Right Now It is Badly Needed


Politicians and the media are saying that reopening our economy would be a crime against all humanity. "We cannot put one person's life at risk!" The truth is that decisions regarding death are made much more frequently than people realize. People that have spent a life in politics seem to not understand this fact.

When I was a freshman of engineering at Drexel University, I took a mandatory course on Engineering Ethics. The professor opened the first lecture with this statement and question: “When construction of the Walt Whitman Bridge was considered, it was estimated that it would cost $200 million dollars (I don’t remember that cost estimate so I fudged it) and it would also cost the lives of 6 workers during the construction. How did a cost benefit analysis ever justify the construction of that bridge considering that lives would be lost?”

I answered the professor’s question. with another question: “How many lives would the bridge save once it is in use?” The professor was pleased with my quick response and asked me how the bridge would save lives? I replied that people would be able to get to hospitals faster, and that more direct travel routes would reduce travel distances and traffic congestion which would reduce automobile accidents. The professor told me that my answer was exactly the cost benefit analysis that justified the bridge’s construction.

My answer to justify known loss of life seemed to be common sense to me. But now I view the nightly news and wonder how people can be so foolish with the corona virus and the need to reopen our economy. Have we lost our common sense?

Think of other endeavors that people knew would cost lives: NASA and the quest to reach the moon. How much more risk can a human being take than strapping themselves to a rocket that will take them out of earth’s gravitation and into an uninhabitable environment for the sake of adventure. But it was not for adventure. It was for protection. We raced to space because we feared that the Soviet Union would get there first and put us in a vulnerable position militarily. We took the risk of a few lives to protect all Americans’ lives. We lost lives, but we were all safer for it.

Think about drug trials in human beings. There are risks, but if a drug proves effective, it may save many lives. Think of military exercises. It is awful when we hear the news that a few of our military personnel have lost their lives during exercises. But it is those exercises that keep us safe from our enemies that could cause much more harm.

Courageous leaders take the decisions to conduct space exploration, to test drugs on humans, to conduct military exercises and to build bridges, skyscrapers, airports, railways, and highways. They take every reasonable measure to prevent the loss of life and/or injury, but they know zero-loss-of-life is not possible. The result of these difficult decisions is progress.

Hell, every time we get in a car, we are making a decision involving potential death. However, we believe that the chance of the deadly accident occurring to us is so infinitesimal, that we drive ourselves to where we want to go. Some people do not complete their trip. Today, 38,000 Americans are killed in car accidents every year, but politicians do not ban driving. In 1970 the number killed was 52,000 with fewer people on the road. We keep learning more and better ways of making cars and driving safer. However, we do not stop driving to wait for the safety improvements we know will come next year.

In our current corona virus environment, it may have been wise to pause the economy to learn about the virus and ways to combat it. The primary concern was not having enough healthcare resources to handle the virus. We now know we can handle the healthcare workload. It is now time to make the difficult decision to risk lives and put America back to work. Another pause, if our healthcare resources become overwhelmed, is still possible (but should be regional). But let us cross that bridge if we get there.

The government has thrown about 3 trillion dollars of bailout money to keep the economy on life support. On top of that the Federal Reserve has said it can throw another 3 trillion dollars into buying bonds to keep the credit markets working. And, most importantly, we have learned that the corona virus is not as deadly as originally feared. It is awful to be sure, but it will not obliterate mankind.

What justifies returning to work when we know lives will continue to be lost? Saving even more lives by allowing people to work.

Work puts purpose into many lives. There is all too common a view that work is a chore, but people know it is how they provide for themselves and for their families. These simple facts mean that work puts purpose into people's lives. Putting purpose back into people’s lives will steer them away from drug and alcohol abuse and reduce the mental health and suicide problems that are increasing in this period of isolation. And it will prevent hunger. Yes, people are dying from corona virus, but people die from the flu as well (up to 125,000 Americans per year). Yet, we do not shut down the economy every flu season.

Then there is the final justification - we need to pay for all the government bailouts by working and paying taxes. Keep the economy shut down for much longer and printing money will no longer work. The people that are currently able to make donations to food banks will no longer be able to make those donations. Think about not having the money to pay for our social safety net (government and private). This is not a pretty picture. Worldwide, due to a lack of American charity, estimates of up to 60 million children will die from hunger this year.

Continuing to add barriers such as on-demand testing for every American whenever they want a test, or to track and source-trace every new case of the virus is preposterous (we have never done this for the flu or any other novel disease). These are excuses that stop leaders from taking the decision that involve known death. I am sorry to say, it is cowardness. A lack of courageous leaders taking the difficult decisions will lead to even more death. It is time for courageous leaders.

Maybe next year we will have on-demand testing and 100% source-tracing. Maybe next year a self-driving car will eliminate all car accidents. Until then, we still have to pay the bills.


FYI: My college professor ended the discussion of the Walt Whitman Bridge construction by informing the class that not a single life was lost during construction. By the time construction started, a new technology of safety nets had been put into practice. Quite a different story from the 13 lives lost on the Ben Franklin Bridge that was built almost a century earlier about 2 miles north across the same Delaware River. However, there was still loss. After engineering school, I married a fellow Philadelphian. Her uncle was an iron worker on the bridge. He fell only 8 feet but was paralyzed from his waist down for the rest of his life. (Maybe next year we will have a corona vaccine.)

Monday, March 9, 2020

VP Biden Will Not Be the Democrat Nominee


Vice President and Senator Sanders will share the debate stage on Sunday night. If VP Biden will either frequently end his incoherent statements with the sentence, "I see that my time is up," or he will make more incoherent statements. After two debates, Senator Sanders will easily take the lead in the polls. The Democrats will begin to panic and allow Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard to join the debates to reduce VP Biden’s talk time (and therefore gaffs).

After two debates, Congresswoman will begin to garnish some support in the polls. It will not be enough for her to win the nomination, but it will be enough to assure that neither Senator Sanders nor VP Biden do win enough for a first ballet win at the Democrat’s convention.

So, we will arrive at the Democrat’s convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on July 13th, 2020 without a clear nominee. This scenario is either already known or is currently being plotted by the Democrat National Committee. Who do you think the party elite will come up with as the last-minute nominee? Oprah Winfrey? Michelle Obama? Hilary Clinton? John Kerry? Amy Klobuchar?

Amy Klobuchar would be the best prepared and positioned to beat President Trump and she is playing the Democrat establishment politics. You heard it here first.


Wednesday, March 4, 2020

Democrats Note to Self: "I see that my time is up."

Vice President Biden has repeated "I see that my time is up" many times during the Democrat Presidential Debates. Each time the sentence was uttered, it was preceded by an incoherent statement that even the Vice President realized was going nowhere. He used that phrase to end his (and our agony). Every other candidate talked as long as they could to get themselves and their positions in front of the voters.

To this point the Vice President spoke as little as possible in every debate. Whoever schooled him to stay quiet was smart. When asked what misconception the voters have of him, the Vice President responded, "They think I have more hair than I think I do." I'm sure the Men's Club for Hair found that illuminating, but the remaining three-hundred-million Americans wondered why and how that should impact their voting choices.

Unfortunately, the silent debater gig is up. The Vice President will now be one of three and possibly only one of two on the stage for the next debate. That means he will be given forty to sixty minutes of talk time to express his stance on a variety of topics. If he uses the "I see my time is up" excuse as frequently as in the past maybe he will get twenty to thirty minutes of talk time. But that will be a lot of "I see that my time is up" bumbling.

The alternative to the "I see that my time is up" bumble is more talk time. How many gaffs do you think the Vice President can execute with a full hour of talk time? (60 minutes divided by x gaffs per minute = y gaffs).

Did the Democrats not think of this before they decided to raise the Vice President as their party's chosen candidate?

Note to Democrats: I can see that your time is up. But, I assume you already knew this because the Vice President told you numerous times.

Bottom line, Senator Sanders will clean the Vice President's clock in future debates, the Democrats will either be represented by a socialist or at a contested convention, pull the plug on the populist Senator Sanders at their own peril. Either way, the Democrats will burn down their own house.