Video Of The Week: Khizr Khan's Speech

The most moving and powerful speech I saw in the past two weeks, which have been full of speeches, was Khizr Khan’s speech on Thursday night.

Of course it was political and an attack on Donald Trump. But on this issue, religious and ethnic tolerance, Trump deserves the attack. And Khizr did it wonderfully.


Comments (Archived):

  1. Tom Labus

    It was great and not prepared for him by anyone.

    1. LaVonne Reimer

      That was most striking to me. He knew what he wanted to say and they let him. Interviews with him since then are entirely consistent. This guy is the real deal.

  2. Jess Bachman

    Indeed, it had authenticity that others couldn’t match. Also a polar opposite of the weirdness that was the Muslims for Trump guy at the RNC.

  3. Rob Underwood

    The two tear jerkers for me were Mr. Khan and Bernie Sanders brother, especially when his brother said “Bernard” and spoke of the the new deal.Mr. Khan was incredible. My many Trump supporting friends dismissed him and his speech. Some say Mr. Khan should “go home” even after giving his son.I increasingly despair that the nation I love – the nation of Mr. Khan and his family – is not the same one my friends who support Trump claim to love.

    1. Mike Zamansky

      Yes on the speeches and also on your implied point on his supporters.What’s scarier — the Trump candidacy and his chance to win on a platform of hate or the fact that there are enough Americans who seem to agree with him or are at least bamboozled by him.

      1. LE

        or are at least bamboozled by himYou don’t think that Hillary and the democrats are doing any bamboozeling?They shovel it with the best of the Republicans.

        1. Richard

          Exactly, I don’t recall spouses and kids speaking on behalf of the founders on demo day.

        2. Mike Zamansky

          Most certainly. I’m no fan of Hillary. In spite of her selection of Kaine, I have no faith that her education policies will be any better than the past administrations.That said, I said that the best PR campaign she could possibly have made to get me to vote for her was the RNC.The difference is I don’t see those bamboozled by the democrats being bamboozled in an aggresive hateful way.

          1. LE

            My father in law is an ex teacher. Taught in Harlem and suffered all sorts of damage as a result of the experience. Got extra pay apparently for teaching in bad neighborhoods that allowed him to retire early (in his 50’s) and also some kind of disability widget I suspect. Anyway the joke we have when talking about any teachers issue is “Randi’s got my back”. You know who I mean. The powerful head of the teacher union who from what I gather is like the Wayne LaPierre of teachers. I don’t know this for a fact but I get that all he cares about is what Randi does for him. She could stand on 5th Avenue and shoot tourists and he would probably still support her. My point is the hate thing is unfortunate but the people who support Trump are willing to look past it because they feel that he will be good for them personally.The speeches at the RNC by Donald Jr., Ivanka and most importantly Tom Barrack were excellent. Most importantly were a counter to the idea that “All Trump cares about is himself” [1][1] Which is ridiculous on hit’s face because the same is true for Bernie, Hillary or any politician as well as countless people who work for corporations trying to climb the ladder.

          2. Rob Underwood

            I could go on at length about this but would argue that the “we just need to teach kids to think” pedagogical philosophy that emerged in the 70s and 80s – ironically espoused by liberals – is a big reason, perhaps THE reason, our country is the way it is. The latter half of Gen X and much of Gen Y were “miseducated” in that they were allowed to leave middle and high school without learning the essential elements of civics, history, and the natural sciences. This has led to an electorate poorly equipped to deliberate the complex issues of the day and a workforce poorly prepared for today’s careers.I have felt this way all my life — I remember fighting in 12th grade AP English that all kids should be tested on the US state capitals and other basic US and world geography to graduate from high school. This belief also animates the work I do with you Mike and our host on Computer Science.

          3. LE

            I remember fighting in 12th grade AP English that all kids should be tested on the US state capitals and other basic US and world geography to graduate from high school.I actually think that falls under nearly useless information. Especially in this day and age but even back then (pre-internet).I was thinking about spelling recently. And realizing that there is literally no reason that I can think of to even know how to spell as precisely as you had to do in the past. You just have to get close enough for auto correct (which exists in most places that you are writing) to fix what you typed or texted. My point is that the time spent on that can be put to better use by something that is more valuable in some way. Time is not infinite. Can’t just do something because that is the way it was always done.

          4. Rob Underwood

            The US state capitals were simply representative of but one part of what I would have then – and would now – advocate as part of basic US geographic literacy that should be known by every eighth grader and definitely by senior year in high school.Do you think every US student who graduates from school should, provided they don’t have some form of learning disability, be able to name all 50 states on a unlabeled map (and yes, Colorado and Wyoming have the same shape — you must memorize that Wyoming is north). I do. I think that’s another sign of a student who has basic fluency in the geography of the country in which they live, and I view geography as a component to civics. Kids in the UK should know where London is compared with Manchester. I bet kids in Japan can locate Mt. Fuji and Kyoto – as they should.I have argued with friends about this for many decades and could keep going. I think kids need to learn facts, geography included, as well as “how to think.” The facts around civics and history are good facts for voters to know.

          5. LE

            Honestly I have to disagree with you. For example I’d rather take that time and effort and give them basic info on how to deal with people and relationships. There are only so many hours in a day. On the cutting board would actually be many things that are learned now in a history class (I didn’t say all I said ‘many’).

          6. BLSavini

            You learn these things to insure that you can function when the computers are Malfunctioning, and to aid in keeping your brain sharp.Information is NEVER USELESS, and the more you cram into your brain, the better. One never knows when that useless little snippet might wind up being useful.I went back to school in my 40’s and have seen first hand, how badly we have fallen behind.

          7. kidmercury

            Who is more hateful, Clinton or trump? Who is more interested in a hot war with Muslim countries? Who is more interested in a hot war with anyone?The primary difference is branding. Hillary is actually more aggressive than trump, just not as in your face about it. In other words, more dishonest about it.

          8. kidmercury

            Trump is still a fool though for sure, and no sane person votes for him

          9. JLM

            .Is insanity covered under Obamacare? And, what is the deductible? Cause nothing is really covered with those deductibles, is it?I ask because I intend to vote and have already voted for Trump. It may be fair to suggest that I am unable to vote for a woman who cannot figure out email or whose mouth cannot form around the truth.In that fashion, it’s HER fault.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          10. kidmercury

            lol well while i think trump is terrible, i do empathize with his *primary* voter base and the appeal he holds for them. i’m defining his primary voter base as caucasian of middle or lower class. i’m assuming you’re better off than most of those folks and so i don’t grasp at all the appeal you see in him. better taxes? or just a deeper aversion to hillary?

          11. JLM

            .I am a member of the Travis Cty Republican Party Exec Committee by virtue of my being a Precinct Chair and Election Judge. I am sort a Fifth Columnist. I have a pretty good insight into who is and why folks are supporting Trump because I am at the polling place when folks come to vote.When we ran the primary (joint w/ both parties) the line was a block long before we opened at 7:00 AM — 100% Republicans until 8:30. I could not believe it. First Democrat at 8:30.The line in that precinct was doctors, lawyers, accountants, venture capitalists, business owners, and there was an Indian chief (OK, that’s a lie but you saw it coming.) All voting on the way to work.The media meme of it being the poorly educated, the ill-informed, the blue collar, tool pushing crowd is simply not accurate.This can be proven by simply looking at the zip codes and voting precincts from which his support emanates. My precinct is the most expensive homes in the ATX.I liken Trump to chemotherapy. Medicine we have no choice but to take if we really want to get better.http://themusingsofthebigre…Elections are binary and as soon as HRC was on the ballot, I knew I was voting for the non-HRC. But, hey, that’s me and I don’t pretend to have undertaken a deep analysis. Bit of a simpleton.Be well and live better.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          12. Cam MacRae

            Given the choice between yet another right-authoritarian and whatever the hell Trump is, I understand why people are willing to thumb their noses at the establishment on the basis that he can’t possibly be any worse. A dangerous assumption, no doubt, but as @JLM:disqus says, the nation needs a round of chemo.

          13. kidmercury

            agreed. for that reason i do think trump is better than hillary, though encourage people to truly break the two party system and vote outside the box.

          14. Cam MacRae

            Ha! You’re saying men of taste will vote Johnson? He’d certainly do a vastly better job than either of the next Presidents.

          15. sigmaalgebra

            I’m a NYS registered Democrat intending to vote for Trump. I very much like my Republican Congressman retired Colonel Chris Gibson, Ph.D. I hope to vote for someone better than Chuck Schumer the first chance I get.But generally for the Republicans otherwise, no thanks: W was a grand disaster. I liked Romney, but I was fooled — now I have to regard him as a turkey, a bad joke. Paul Ryan — a disaster. The old characterization that the Republicans were selfish and out to throw grandma from the train were too close to the truth.Trump is seriously changing the Republican party by getting millions of votes, and W, !Jeb, Romney, Ryan, and more are really pissed off. Tough for them.The Democrats blew it: They have big advantages in their base and the media. Likely they could have just picked a good candidate, run him/her, and won the election. Instead they let Hillary walk and pee all over their party, and she is in line to lose. Why? Hillary’s baggage is enough to exceed the GTOW of the 747 of Air Force 1. For her violations of section (f) of the US Espionage Act, she quite literally belongs in jail. But, sure, the decision to prosecute is up to the Attorney General (AG), who serves at the pleasure of the President who no doubt doesn’t want any such prosecution. Besides, the AG and Khan are long time, old, close associates of Hillary via her main tax law firm. The fix is in, else Hillary would be on the way to court and likely jail. The Democrats blew it.I ask you, for the person with their finger on the button for nuclear war, for US national security otherwise, for US foreign policy, for US response to ISIS, for the US decision to go to war, for being US commander in chief, for US immigration, for the US economic growth, for the US Federal deficit, for US trade negotiations, for the US energy supply, for the health care of US veterans, for the US health care system otherwise, for the economic strength and management ability to take care of our needy, do you really want…

          16. BLSavini

            She has also turned a blind eye to a philandering husband. LEADERS DO NOT TOLERATE BEING CUCKOLDED. That’s a positioning issue.

          17. sigmaalgebra

            > She has also turned a blind eye to a philandering husband.Not as I understand it: Bill and Hillary have a marriage that is really just a power and money partnership. Bill likes to fornicate, enough commonly to rape women, in the White House create threats to his Presidency, etc. Hillary doesn’t care if Bill fornicates and, instead, is glad that other women do that “for him”. Hillary even thanked a woman for fornicating with Bill. And it may be that Hillary is an accessory after the fact for some of Bill’s rapes.Hillary has some really strong interests, but fornicating or love making in marriage are not among them.

          18. BLSavini

            That’s even more disgusting, and all the more reason to not vote her in.

          19. Donna Brewington White

            A vote for a third party candidate is unfortunately a vote for the leading candidate by default.(Hey Kid! Good to “hear” your voice.)

          20. kidmercury

            hey donna!the other way of looking at it is that if you are in a state that is already decided, and if you lean the other way (i.e. new york will probably go to hillary and if you want to vote for a non-hillary candidate) you might as well go third party since you have nothing to lose! :)many states are already decided……

          21. Donna Brewington White

            True.In the scheme of things it’s only one small vote. But it’s the only one we have.

          22. JLM

            .HRC is way more warlike than Trump.In Republican circles, Trump’s opposition to Iraq, his dislike of nation building, and his desire to shift more of the burden of European defense to the ………. wait for it …………… Europeans — is seen as a real problem.Interestingly enough, his desire to rebuild our tattered military is the surest way to avoid war. With the disavowal of the “two war” strategy by the Obama administration and the contraction of the military to pre-WWII force structure, we invite enemies to test us.HRC, on the other hand, is compensating for those hideous pants suits though, under current law, she can use the restroom of her then current tendency. She is not going to allow herself to be labelled as being “girly” on the military and intends to use the urinals in the mens room to prove it.That was a bit too graphic for which I abjectly apologize.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          23. LE

            I was trying to figure out the reason for the white outfit she wore for the speech. They it occurred to me that it provided “great optics” when the did the head shot with the red and blue in the background.This just shows the level of detail that her well oiled machine will go to in presenting their candidate. It’s great that all of that will be a guarantee of fixing all the ills of the nation.This is why the NYT says she wore white:

          24. LE

            A political grin fucker actually (to borrow partly from Mark Suster). She has a pre-processor for anything that comes out of her mouth. I would like actual statistics on all of the people that she told she would help vs. the ones that she actually helped. I am not saying that she hasn’t helped people or doesn’t care in some way. I just hate the shoveling of all of the crap that comes out of any politician’s mouth. Especially someone like Hillary. Every single more is thought out and choreographed in terms of maximum political benefit. No different than Trump as a businessman (or any businessman).

          25. BLSavini

            OR:Type A vs Type BExtroverts vs IntrovertsAggressive vs Passive AggressiveYin vs YangAll of which are merely definitions of essentially the same things. It boils down to style.I’m guessing that if the ECONOMY was truly better, a lot of these things would resolve themselves.

        3. LaVonne Reimer

          I’m with Mike on this but maybe the problem is the use of the term “bamboozling.” (Not that I think LE was trying to be legalistic about terms!) The real problem with Trump is that his followers are not bamboozled at all. Now LE, about your false equivalency…

        4. Alex Murphy

          Trump isn’t a Republican. He is a trumpican.This is about Americans vs Trumpicans.

      2. JMorphy88

        We are not “bamboozled” by Trump. We clearly see the direction the country is headed, we see the people behind it (many in both parties), and we want a significant course correction.

      3. sigmaalgebra

        > Trump candidacy and his chance to win on a platform of hateTrump and “hate”? I’ve been following this election fairly carefully and have not yet seen any serious evidence that Trump is connected with “hate”. I have seen a lot of such assertions without any evidence, argument, or data.If you have some serious and/or meaningful data, evidence, or argument that justifies your claim of “hate” about Trump, then by all means trot it out.Uh, that Trump wants to enforce long standing US laws on immigration is not evidence of “hate”. That Trump wants jobs in the US to go first to US citizens is not evidence of “hate”. That Trump wants good trade deals that will get the US balance of trade up from about $800 billion a year in deficit to balance and bring back jobs to the US is not evidence of “hate”. That Trump wants carefully to vet all immigrants, especially ones that are much more likely to be ISIS soldiers intending to attack the US, is not evidence of “hate” but just prudent US national security.I’d be ashamed to be supporting someone who was into “hate”. So, if you have some such evidence, then, in some words of Mark Twain, please “trot it out”.

        1. Donna Brewington White

          I must say that I didn’t pay much attention to Trump at first because I was one of those who didn’t think he had any chance of becoming the nominee. On the other hand, I feel like that I know a lot more about Hillary Clinton. In fact I knew during her husband’s presidency that she would someday be a candidate, if not even President. Somehow just knew. Her career since FLOTUS is an impressive example of a well-executed strategy leading to the White House. Maybe as a woman and the first to get this close it has taken such careful execution.Anyway, lately I have been playing catch up on Trump, listening to speeches because I want to make an educated decision in November and I do not want to be a pawn of the media. Plus I have wanted to understand why well-educated thoughtful (affluent) people in my life are supportive of him. I’ve been reading your and JLM’s comments in this thread with interest, as educational. Thank you.Admittedly, in listening to Trump’s speeches there have been times that I have cringed but I have not found him guilty of all that I am hearing in social media and traditional media about him. He does play to people’s fears but I do not hear hate coming directly from him. On the surface some of his proposals go against much of what I believe but I must admit that I understand the thinking behind his proposals. I just have to believe there are better ways to achieve national security. But I think people are downplaying how serious a problem it is. I remember holding (clutching) my infant son during the throes of 9/11 feeling a sense of helplessness and horror. Not to mention all that has happened since.No, I don’t think people supporting him are insane nor necessarily racist, especially since I know a few of them including family members (but so far only my white family members). I have also read carefully the very few accounts I have found of women and minorities who support him. You don’t hear as much about them. My favorite Trump description to date has been blue collar billionaire.

          1. sigmaalgebra

            You make especially insightful and prudent contributions to the AVC discussions. Thanks.I have little talent and less expertise at reading the largely hidden motivations and intentions of people, but I’m starting to accept Trump’s claims that he wants to help the US and, otherwise in his life, has some much better things to do. Of course, he is definitely, literally risking his life; he wears a bullet proof vest, etc.On Hillary, you might look atHillary Clinton Exposedat…It’s old, but nearly all the information remains relevant.There, e.g., can see some of how she planned her path from FLOTUS to POTUS: She was making her first run for the US Senate, sure, from NY. She wanted the Hispanic vote. There had been a radical, terrorist Hispanic group that had exploded a bomb in an historic old tavern in NYC and killed a lot of people. They were jailed. Well, Hillary had POTUS husband Bill pardon them. Hillary thought that she got some Hispanic votes from that.Nasty person.To me, Hillary sees politics as a case of stage acting where she just plays a character and, as in stage acting, the actress is not constrained by morals but is free to play an immoral character.E.g., after the Benghazi attack, she told her daughter the truth, that the attack was from terrorists, but, at the ceremony of the arrival of the dead bodies of the US citizens killed in the attack, with the flag draped caskets right there, she told the families of the dead that the cause was “that awful YouTube video”. That was a lie, and she knew it at the time. Since then she has lied again, claimed that the information was arriving slowly, and at the time she blamed the YouTube video that was the best information available — a total lie since hours or days before she had already told her daughter the truth. Recently she has also lied again, claimed that statements from a family member of one of the dead is lying about Hillary saying that the cause was “that awful YouTube video”. And in front of Congress, her remark on such lies was “What difference does it make now?”. Maybe she was hoping that a lot of people would be unable, quickly to articulate significant differences, but that is wrong. Hillary is good at coming up with cliches, excuses, and lies and appearing sincere when she does. She’s a good actress.The Democrats totally blew it: They could have picked someone at least okay, maybe someone good. Instead, the Democrats let Hillary walk all over the party. E.g., Kaine was Chair of the DNC, but apparently Hillary cut a deal with him: He would resign and, then, Hillary would select him as her VP. Then, with Kaine out of the way, Hillary appointed DWS who turned the DNC into a total pro-Hillary organization. Cheating. Maybe illegal.Watch Clinton Cash, last time I checked, with several copies on YouTube. There see that as Secretary of State, Hillary was selling favors for personal money (her foundation has about 78% overhead and, thus, is essentially her personal money — also her foundation needs to refile with the IRS for several years). IANAL, but my understanding is that for bribery proving quid pro quo is not necessary and that the coincidences of money and actions are enough for conviction.If Benghazi and bribes are not enough, FBI Directory Comey clearly said that the FBI investigation clearly showed that Clinton had on her home-brew, DIY, unsecured e-mail server US intelligence information marked higher than Top Secret. There is a news report that some of that information was US NSA GAMMA, the highest classification of the NSA. So, with GAMMA, maybe the US can get personal conversations of foreign leaders who believe that their conversations are private. Once those conversations have been leaked, the foreign leaders know that there is a leak and can go looking for it. Then the US stands to lose important intelligence sources and maybe lives. Hillary’s DIY e-mail server was a very dangerous thing.Of course, long Hillary claimed that there was no classified information on her server. A lie. Then she claimed that anything classified was not so marked at the time. Another lie.Comey said that Hillary’s handling of that classified information was “extremely careless”. As Mayor Giuliani, former US prosecutor supervising Comey, explained, in a law dictionary “extremely careless” is the first example of “gross negligence” which is the criterion of section (f) of the US Espionage Act.Of course, a decision to prosecute is up to the Attorney General Lynch. From some recent news, Lynch is a long time buddy of Hillary since Lynch worked for the law firm that has long been Hillary’s tax law firm. Yes, Khan also worked for that firm, and the firm also works for the Saudis who were very generous with money for Bill and the Clinton foundation. Maybe Lynch would/would not prosecute Hillary, but the Attorney General serves at the pleasure of the POTUS, and no doubt Obama does not want a prosecution.So, on Hillary, we have baggage, going way back, Whitewater, Travel-gate, releasing the Hispanic terrorists, …, Benghazi, bribery, and violation of the US Espionage Act, corrupting the DNC, etc.Hillary is a crook. She belongs in court and, then, jail.Hillary is just way too willing to cheat; that’s just the way she is and has been consistently for decades.To me, Trump wants to help US national security, US economic growth, US employment, the US balance of trade, the US budget deficit, VA health care, US health insurance more generally, and more.For anxiety from 9/11/2001, right. But the real situation is worse, much worse: ISIS has already made totally clear that essentially all of the US consists of infidels that ISIS wants to kill. They have definitely declared war on the US. They have clearly stated that they believe that such war is commanded by the Quran and Islam. ISIS will deploy a WMD on a major US city ASAP. If they can, the WMD will be a nuke. IIRC, after the 9/11/2001 attack, the Hart-Rudman Commission said as much.Obama and Hillary are totally or nearly totally unwilling even to mention radical Islamic terrorism. Yes, the Pope and many others want to say that Islam is just a peaceful religion and is not the same as terrorism. Well, that is not what ISIS says. Besides, ISIS or not, Islam is not nearly just a religion. And there is a lot of violence in the Islamic Quran:…My guess is that ISIS now has some hundreds, maybe thousands, of their dedicated soldiers in the US. Then, if Trump attacks ISIS, the ISIS soldiers in the US will try to blow up US shopping centers, schools, hospitals, office buildings, …, maybe with WMDs, maybe with nukes.Admitting those Muslims was DANGEROUS; Trump clearly said so, and subsequent events in the US and all around the world have proven him to be totally correct.My understanding from the news is that currently the FBI is hot on the trail of some hundreds of suspected ISIS soldiers. Likely the CIA, DIA, and NSA are super busy tracking these ISIS soldiers.So, here in the US we are at risk of radical Islamic terrorist Mohammad Ahmad Abdul ali Fatwa Abu Jihad bin Boom Boom, a.k.a., Mohammad Car Bomb, blessed be he, praise to Allah, it is written, to use his knife, gun, IDE, suicide vest, car bomb, truck, airplane, chem/bio WMD, nuke WMD, etc. to kill infidels and get his coveted magic carpet ride to Allah and 72 virgins. This would be a big joke except it is darned serious.And, with this clear and present danger, Obama is brining in more Muslims from near ISIS areas, and Hillary wants to bring in many more than Obama. I’d have a tough time thinking of any policy more harmful to the US.I trust Trump to fix the ISIS problem, quickly. I don’t trust Hillary to do well even baking cookies or supervising baking cookies; maybe she would do well stealing cookies or accepting cookies as bribes.So, for US Commander in Chief, to keep the US safe, do we really want Lying, Crooked, Bribed, “extremely careless”, Lady of Benghazi…This is darned serious stuff, historically serious stuff, our country we’re talking about.Clearly you are just excellent at reading people and their hidden motivations and intentions. So, help me and maybe the rest of us: Read Trump and Hillary for us. Explain to me what I am likely not to see yet.

          2. Donna Brewington White

            Very interesting. Thank you.I am not yet ready to share my “reading” of the candidates publicly.But I am deeply troubled by the potential outcome.

    2. Al Mazzone

      Rob, I also have Trump supporting friends. Sad to say, after some soul searching I have begun dropping those friendships. They are not something I can live with.

      1. LE

        They must not have been very good ‘friends’ or you aren’t particularly loyal if you ‘have begun dropping those friendships’.

      2. JLM

        .This speaks volumes as to the depth and quality of your friendship, no?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        1. LE

          Exactly. Exactly.

        2. Al Mazzone

          Yes, I believe it does. I have two friends from our days together in Vietnam in ’68 and ’69. And my wife and I have many friendships that have grown over the last twenty and thirty years. But it is easy to acquire social contacts that you group in a large bucket labeled “friends.” I’ve decided it’s more satisfying for me to prioritize quality over quantity.

          1. JLM

            .So, the “social contacts … group[ed] in a large bucket labeled ‘friends'” are really not friends? Do I have that correct?And the folks you knew from VN and those acquired over the last 20-30 years, none of them dig Trump and therefore are getting kicked off the island?Living in an echo chamber, are we?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          2. Al Mazzone

            Like saying why don’t you have any friends in the KKK? or some good old neo-nazis? There is a difference between having friends with diverse opinions and those that have turned out to condone racism and religious intolerance.

          3. JLM

            .’But I thought these were YOUR friends, Al, right? Did I get that wrong?How did they get to be your friends in the first place if they were in the KKK?[Not to put too fine a point on it but I doubt you have a single friend who was ever in the KKK. It’s just a knee jerk reaction when either reality or the truth is insufficient to make one’s point, no?]I, unfortunately, don’t know all of my friends interests nor do I make that a litmus test for their friendship. I’ve been known to befriend someone, during the NCAA tournament, who only says they hate Duke.I, candidly, seek out those with whom I don’t agree (except for Dukies).For each, his own.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      3. Rob Underwood

        They are mostly friends from Kennebunk and Kennebunkport Maine, where I grew up (and, yes, the same town as where the Bush family lives). They are friends I have known since I was 5. They are also my first cousins who live in Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, and Maine. They are not people I would disavow.

        1. LE

          Of course you shouldn’t disavow friends just because they have different political beliefs than you do. What’s next? We ask businesses to post their views at the front door so we can decide if we want to patronize them or not?

        2. Al Mazzone

          I totally understand. My father was a staunch Republican. But he never disavowed friends or family over it. He thoroughly enjoyed arguing politics and policy. I am not as patient and understanding.

      4. johnmccarthy

        Having Trump supporters in our extended family has certainly given us some good “teachable moments” with our kids…..

        1. LE

          And what have you told your kids?

          1. johnmccarthy

            They are family, we love them, even when they are wrong 🙂 And we should let them know why we think, and vote, as we do…..Having married a Republican (who now supports Hillary) that is from a 100% R family from Ohio, I am frequently the family outcast when it comes to politics. But I am going to do my best this year to convert them over to Hillary. Wish me luck……

          2. LE

            They are family, we love them, even when they are wrong :)Well are they wrong? Or do they simply not think like you do? This is not taking sides with either point. Just saying what is obvious. Of course they are your kids and you can tell them what you want. But the truth is while you could be right you don’t know that you are right (or even close to it).People seem to have this idea that things are cut and dry with Trump. It’s like global warming. The 90% are right, the 10% are wrong. As if it’s “murder” and surely “murder” is always wrong. But as you know there are cases where according to our legal system “murder” is justified. And even in other cultures they have different ways of looking at things. In all fairness of course.

          3. johnmccarthy

            Yes, they are wrong…..And thanks for giving me permission to tell my kids what I want…..

      5. cavepainting

        I think we are going too far when we start to pariah people just because they support Trump. He is a complex character and just because people support him does not mean they endorse every one of his positions, or that they are racist.Every time we speak to someone who supports Trump, it is an opportunity to see a different viewpoint. And some times, these perspectives are very valid and reasonable.

    3. LE

      my friends who support Trump claim to loveSo why do some of your friends support Trump? What have they told you?

      1. Rob Underwood

        They are in their 30s and 40s, under- or unemployed, and without hope regarding their economic prospects. They believe Trump will somehow (I don’t know how, nor do I suspect Mr Trump) give them jobs through protectionism

        1. LE

          Well the contrast in the conventions was how Hillary and Obama presented the country vs. Trump. Trump was debbie downer and Hillarobama thought things were peachy but ‘hey there is always room for improvement’. This makes sense because Hillary as a politician is a bit like Bush who couldn’t use a supermarket scanner.I honestly don’t think she has any clue seat of the pants about what it’s like to be a working man or the people you grew up with. Or a guy in his 50’s who was laid off.

          1. JLM

            .One cannot run for office as an agent of change when you were the status quo.I cringe at how Obama ripped HRC eight years ago and now has his tongue in her ear. Nobody is fooled.How can you be an agent for change when you offer yourself as the third term of a failed Presidency? What are you proposing to change?No, Trump — game, set, match on that sentiment.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          2. LE

            In politics it’s like in business, sports or Hollywood. [1] You want a friend get a dog. Most people have no loyalty. [2] I remember when George Stephanus became a TV commentator and totally ripped his ex boss. I thought “what loyalty”. It’s like they are all hired mercenaries. And they all understand what is going on.[1] The most frustrating thing to me is how people mis-characterize what Trump did in business. [3] As if they would expect people playing sports to not tackle their friend or do what it takes to win the game. Or do hold people to high standards. Sure just give the coach or the quarterback a 2nd and 3rd chance be a nice guy.[2] I remember when I was new in business and I hired someone who used to work at a trade (barter) exchange that I dealt with. He said to me “you are only as good as your last trade” all people care about is what you can get them now, not what you did last week.[3] And as you probably know, the loser that he put out of business by not paying the bill most likely did fuck up the work in some way. The press or politicians only have nominal transaction experience of course wouldn’t know this. (I’ve been on both sides of this by the way..)

          3. lauraglu

            Have you ever read about her background? You sound ill-informed to be stating those sorts of opinions.

        2. Rob Larson

          Exactly this. There are many, many people across mainstream America who are really struggling financially. Although median household income is $50k, median individual income is $27k (not counting the unemployed). Think about that – more than half of working Americans make less than $27k, some much less. That means that the typical American family has multiple incomes with the second income just barely enough to cover childcare, leaving them maybe $30k to live on. People feel trapped. They may have made poor education choices and poor career choices when they were younger, but now they just feel trapped and without hope. They don’t have a strong understanding of economics or politics, but now along comes this rich businessman who seems to speak to them and who says he can solve their problems.Trump is the first presidential candidate in my memory that has recognized the political opportunity this chunk of America represents, building a strategy of speaking directly to them on an emotional level. Not just them of course, but this is the group that will carry Trump to victory while most of the educated folk on either coast scratch their heads wondering what in the hell is happening. Not that I am a Trump supporter but I can see the writing on the wall – intellectual policy arguments are not going to win this election.

          1. JLM

            .Agreeing more with you than you do with yourself.The 2014 Republican landslide was all about the guy with the tool bag voting his own pocketbook and the soccer moms worrying about their husband’s job and their kids’ future.Somehow everybody has forgotten 2014 and Trump discovered it. It was just lying there being ignored.This nonsense about Trump being supported by blue collars is exactly what you say it is — it is geographical and regional. It is the coasts (liberals) v the flyover hinterlands.I have a few degrees. My wife is a lawyer (which comes in handy for me as she is able to keep me on top of recent laws like the new one where I have to make the bed on Mon/Wed/Fri).The country is angry but it is not an unfocused anger. There are specific rub points — the economy, illegal immigration, unemployment, underemployment, opportunity, national defense, terrorism, ISIS, taxes, unconstrained spending, the size of gov’t. There are more reasons which unite people today than ever.The people who don’t get it, don’t want to get it. They are happy with their sense of elite entitlement.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          2. Donna Brewington White

            This is astute.Still not sure he will win but if so this will, largely, be the reason.

    4. Russell

      Thank you for actually talking about the post – reading through this comment thread it is refreshing!

    5. Donna Brewington White

      I kept hearing about this amazing speech and I dreaded listening to it because these are the types of things that really break me up.Call me heartless, but what I heard was a political speech — especially after the first 2 minutes and 30 seconds.So I can imagine why it may have been lost on your “Trump supporting friends.”Regardless, Captain Humayun Khan is an American hero and I for one am deeply grateful for his sacrifice.

      1. cavepainting

        Yes, it was more political than it needed to be.

        1. Donna Brewington White

          Thanks, I dreaded admitting this in a public forum, especially one so close to home.

    6. sigmaalgebra

      Khan deserves the Gold Star family honor.Khan’s attack on Trump was wildly wrong and very nasty: Khan’s reading of the US Constitution is 100% totally wrong. How? Khan didn’t really say, but it appeared that he was claiming that where the US Constitution grants “freedom of religion” means that the US cannot use religion to refuse to admit Muslims. Wrong. 100% wrong. Instead, the US Constitution does not specify anything about whom the US can admit or refuse to admit as an immigrant. Under our Constitution, the US is perfectly free to admit or decline to admit anyone for any reason or no reason.Next, Khan is enough of a lawyer to have known that, to have known that he was wrong about the US Constitution. So, Khan was just passing out partisan political propaganda.I assume that Khan is a US citizen. Fine. And his son gave the ultimate sacrifice. Khan deserves the Gold Star.But Khan was wrong about the US Constitution and wrong to attack Trump.Trump was correct in responding by defending himself against the unjustified attack.But there is more: Since then a lot has come out about Khan. E.g., can see…The authors of that report later criticized CNN for not putting out such information about Khan and claimed that all that information would take a junior reporter only about an hour at Google drawing from well known public sources or some such. That is, the stuff about Khan in that report was easy to find.Net, he is anything but objective about Muslim immigration.Khan deserves his Gold Star, but Trump did nothing wrong.

    7. Carol Reid

      Mr. Khan received $25,000 from the DNC to give a speech that was written by 2 people who work for the Clinton campaign. A copy of the constitution he showed was bought just hours before by a female Clinton staffer. This is bad but there is much worse. CNN and NBC news paid Mr. Khan very well to tell his fake story. Mr. Khan has financial problems too numerous to mention.This man used his deceased son for money. How sad. Is there no decency.Mr. Khan is an immigration attorney with his own firm that is deeply in-debt.

      1. Alex Murphy

        Proof please.

  4. William Mougayar

    Also, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar cracked me up when he said:”I’m Michael Jordan and I’m here with Hillary. I said that because I know that Donald Trump couldn’t tell the difference.”Both the DNC and the RNC were big shows. We watched several parts of both of them, and it was like a weird mix of the Academy Awards / Letterman / Leno late night show. Like who’s going to be next, and oh, this one was boring, let’s hope the next one is funny or interesting. Almost everyone had practiced their speeches very well. Tele prompters worked wonders.Regardless, it is too bad where we are now. Religion used to be a footnote. Now it’s a headline.

    1. awaldstein

      I watched them back to back.Completely different reaction as I don’t have the luxury of resting comfortably on the north side of the 49th parallel.This is theatre of absurd that you need to jump in and become a participant as indeed, art otherwise will become the life we live.I”m optimistic but honestly, this is scary shit that you need to do more than watch on.I could care who wins Best Director. I damn well care who wins the election and the seats that go along with it.

      1. William Mougayar

        I thought the choreography of the conventions rivalled that of a polished Academy Awards show; and that masks the realities that electors need to know about.In startup parlance, this was the equivalent of Demo Day. All the demos look great on demo day, but that’s only the surface of reality.

        1. awaldstein

          DNC was a masterpiece of intent and performance.This scale is beyond the metaphor of any startups anywhere in my opinion. And this is not the hermetically sealed world of startups, this is the world my friend where nothing is certain and there are damn few rules.

    2. LE

      The Hollywood aspect was absurd. A necessary evil to get people to sit still for predictable political speeches. It reminded me of what I think they do at those mega churches in order to get people to actually attend church.The DNC, from the parts that I saw was a much better show. The media couldn’t contain it’s enthusiasm about how well Hillary would be able to run the country if she was able to have such a well choreographed convention. Obama couldn’t contain his glee for the most qualified person to run for office, more qualified than both himself and “Bill”. [1][1] Of course when he was running for office that didn’t matter at all.

      1. William Mougayar

        Yeah. Did you count how many committees, sub-committees, chairs and co-chairs of such committees were paraded.

        1. LE

          That’s like “couvid” at a bar mitzvah. You have 13 candles and dole them out to your best friends and relatives. It’s an honor to get a candle. Also the order of the candles matters. (Which aunt first, which grandparent first, which friend first (of the parent) and so on).Of course that was when I was growing up. Now what they have is joint candles where they call up groups of people.

  5. johnmccarthy

    This and Mike Bloomberg’s speech were the highlights of the convention for me.

    1. John Revay

      Major Mike – sure wish he was running. Very smart guy, great business person.

  6. Shaun Dakin

    Agree. Amazing.

  7. TamiMForman

    Thank you for amplifying this one, Fred. It was one of the most moving speeches I’ve ever seen. Such a powerful rebuke not just to Trump but to what too much (though certainly not all) of the Republican party has become.

    1. Rob Underwood

      Actually until folks like Paul Ryan, or moderates like Susan Collins, begin speaking up and out it is “all” — at least “all” of those active and holding elected office presently. Their silence speaks volumes — its tacit endorsement of Trump as the spokesperson now for the Republicans.As referenced in another comment, I grew up in Kennebunkport. I got to know some of the Bush family a little – one member worked as a chamber maid (which speaks volume about the family and the emphasis they put in work) at our family’s inn; another was in a Dead cover band with me at Colby. While I don’t agree with their politics, they are a good, ethical family and their staying away from Cleveland was a powerful statement about the ugliness that is the Trump campaign. I hope active Republicans find the moral courage to take a stand and follow the lead of the Bushes.

      1. sigmaalgebra

        If you have some solid information that Trump is doing something significantly wrong on something significant, then let it out! I’m still looking for the first such item.For me, I’d like to see a solid, thorough macro economic analysis of his plans for taxes, spending, paying off the national debt, bringing back profits parked overseas, economic growth, jobs, and inflation. Broadly I do believe we can and must do much better along the lines he has outlined, but on all that I’d want a lot of due diligence, measure twice, saw once, plan the trip ahead, etc. But, sure, we don’t get that from any politician.

        1. Rob Underwood

          TOTALLY agree we need to start having substantive policy discussions, not just discussions about how the candidates make us feel.I do think Mr Trump is generally less specific than Sec. Clinton on “how” and the comparison between… and https://www.hillaryclinton…. is evidence of that.

          1. sigmaalgebra

            The Clinton Web page you linked to touches on lots of topics; the Trump one, only one, how to get Mexico to pay for the wall. But the Trump Web site, in total also touches on lots of topics.For your point of being specific, I’d say that what Trump said on the quite narrow topic of how to get Mexico to paying for the wall is more specific than what I saw on the much more broad topics I just read on the Clinton page.In one of Hillary’s earlier runs for POTUS, I thought that she looked especially bright, articulate, and well informed. The Web pages you pointed to look similar. If her memory is as good as it used to be, then she can remember all that stuff and have it on hand in any speech or debate.For Hillary’s stuff, I’m very much buyer beware. E.g.,(1) She mentioned default on the national debt. There was a newsie gang up, pile on, deliberately cooked up distortion that tried to claim that Trump, at one point talking about US debt, proposed such a thing. From my reading of what Trump said, I disagree. That was just liberal media passing out propaganda for Hillary. As she quotes that stuff, she loses credibility for the rest that she has.(2) She’s back to some version of free college. My wife got free college: Sure, she was her high school Valedictorian. We both got free Ph.D. degrees, and she got some stipends — but we were admitted to one of the world’s best research universities. She was PBK, Woodrow Wilson, Summa Cum Laude. The US is just awash in education after high school from community colleges to Harvard. There is a shortage of good students, and colleges are eager for them. When I was in grad school, the department had a lot more tuition scholarships than qualified students. Hillary’s plan looks too much like subsidies for going to State U and majoring in beer and bed on the taxpayers, really buying votes for that.(3) Her stuff sticking it to Wall Street, or however she put it, conflicts with, IIRC, about $30 million she got from Wall Street. So, yes, she says she will do something about carried interest. IIRC, Trump does also but rarely mentions it explicitly if only because only a tiny fraction of his target voters would know what it is.Some of the financial regulation stuff has been part of what the heck got us into trouble. Sometimes it’s too much; sometimes too little; but in both cases too often bad because it is stupid.I don’t trust Hillary here. That Hillary can sound like a brilliant, bright all fired up college sophomore, given everything else about her, no longer impresses me. I hate to judge on trust, but I can’t make this election a second job, and with her “extremely careless”, what is in Clinton Cash, and actually a lot more, I have zero respect for her. She made a mess out of HillaryCare, and I’m terrified that she’d make a mess out of Wall Street. My best hope is that she is just lying and wouldn’t actually do much of anything and, thus, not much of anything wrong.(4) On jobs, I don’t trust her. She’s an open borders person. Her VP wants amnesty within, IIRC, the first 100 days. I don’t recall Hillary’s amnesty plan, if she has one, but I favor Trump’s deportation plan — Ike did that, and with eVerify Trump could get a lot of it done.For more on jobs, I roughly believe what Trump has said about the harm of NAFTA. Hillary said that the TPP was the “gold standard”, but the Web page qualified that. I tend to agree with Trump: We need well negotiated and well enforced trade agreements or too much of our economy will get killed off. Without careful agreements, there is no free trade; instead, it’s a trade war out there, no rules. I don’t trust Hillary on trade, especially with some of the sources of some of the money for her foundation and the speeches.In some ways Hillary’s pages look good. Net, I don’t respect or trust Hillary. My view is that Obama, before, during, and after his POTUS service deeply hates the US and that Hillary is so angry at men or something that she is not far behind. At best, I don’t believe that Hillary gives two cents for the US.To make a good case, I’d have to go into a lot more details, some that I have information on and some that I don’t, but it would be tens of thousands of characters long. I have to go get some exercise and then proof read some code.One of my views of Hillary is that she got burned trying HillaryCare and won’t try anything practical or operational again.Otherwise best I can tell, Hillary is a really good actress, looks at headlines and responds with liberal cliches, has cliches for nearly every political issue of the past 40 years, puts on the appropriate emotions, and looks really sincere. It’s all an act, a stage performance, where she is free to say anything. In the end, she is afraid to do anything the public could see, bitterly hates the US, understands next to nothing beyond just the cliches (thus has poor, really no, judgment), and is an empty pant suit. But great actress.Sorry I can’t provide more solid info. Gotta go.

          2. Rob Underwood

            Respectively, not true. Look at the Trump link again,…. There are 7 positions there. – it’s not just the wall. That aid, compare the amount (7) and depth to the dozens on Clinton’s page. I am ready for a policy discussion — but still feel like it’s difficult to get to just what Trump proposes when it comes to the “how”.Screenshots, Clinton first:

          3. sigmaalgebra

            You’re right. Sorry — I blew it. Using Firefox, I have the magnification set fairly high. So, at the Trump URL, I just saw the statement on the issue of paying for the wall and didn’t scroll down to the other issues.But now, for my exercise, mowing the grass, flopped — it rained. I’m okay with that, but the wet grass clogs up the mower. So, I will return to your points.Also today at that Trump page, I didn’t look in much detail because months ago I did.1.0 Paying for the WallJust at first glance, say, just from how to pay for the wall, what’s there now looks more polished than months ago.Looking at what Trump has now on how to pay for the wall, my impression was that he hasn’t settled on the exact way to pay for the wall but has a quite long list tariffs, fees, etc. he could use. A point from 50,000 feet up is that the wall will cost a lot less than our trade deficit with Mexico for one year so that there is a club he can use to get Mexico to pay.Trump may have gone about as far on the details as he should/could now since some circumstances may change, and he will likely need Congress. Here I cut him some slack: I accept that he wants the wall, that he can squeeze the money out of Mexico, that he can get Congress to go along, that he can handle the eminent domain issue, that he can get past the EPA hysterical Greenies, and that he can get good work done on the architecture, design, engineering, construction, for an effective wall, reasonable price, no rips, runs, or tears, good results, surprisingly quickly once construction starts.I don’t cut Trump that much slack on everything, although rarely will any politician, even Trump, give me the detail for due diligence, etc. I would want and believe that any voting citizen should want.Sorry I didn’t respond to the other several issues on that Trump Web page. But, I did read his issue statements carefully months ago, and since then from both his Web site and his rallies, which I do tend to watch, if only to see what is new and how the crowds are reacting, I have the sense that he has mostly settled on his main issues for the campaign and isn’t changing much.2.0 Health CareFor health care, I got the impression that a lot of what Trump was going to do was to kill the law that keeps the medical insurance companies from selling across state lines. Then he was hoping that the insurance companies, now in a more competitive situation, would do more personalized policies, that is, with more personalized lists of coverages and, thus, save money for the payer.For more, he wanted the medical providers to have price lists.But, his ideas were not for the poor but for people in the middle class or rich who could expect to pay for their own medical care.For old people, it seemed that he wants to continue with Medicare. For the poor, he’s said that everyone deserves medical care; it is true that for the poor there is a patchwork quilt system — maybe tweak that. All that is from my memory from months ago.2.1 ObamaCare IntentionsAlso, I will interject: To me, ObamaCare was always a disaster, was essentially deliberately a disaster. Maybe call it bait and switch, or sell it now and fix it later. Or, Pelosi just wanted it passed for whatever sweet reasons she had in mind. I can’t hope to get much understanding of Pelosi. Barney Frank wanted it to be the first step to “single payer” — I likely have a reference to that comment of his. For Obama, it seems clear to me that he wasn’t much involved, didn’t much give a sh*t: My explanation is that he knew it would pass and otherwise didn’t care. E.g., in one of his town halls, he shot his mouth off about the cost of amputations and was badly wrong, and the American College of Surgeons gave him a big slap down. I have their statement and their URL I got it from, but the Web page was pulled down a year or so ago.My take is that the work on ObamaCare so far was just to make a statement, a political statement, to put a stake in the ground, to get the US hooked, let Pelosi, Frank, and Obama claim victory, and fix it later. But they didn’t really believe they would fix it later since, IIRC, the law expires soon. So, Obama got to declare victory only for his term. But my take is that the law is not popular and will not be renewed.One accusation is that Obama, Pelosi, etc. got the insurance companies and their lobbies on board from some rules that made them a lot of money in the short term — I have seen no details.My take is that the bigger picture really is the goal of “single payer”, one size fits all, for rich, middle class, poor, young, old, mothers, babies, all run from DC (some people are rubbing their hands with glee over the prospect of all that power, and associated money, in DC), and, then, a step toward more in socialism far from health care.And, maybe such central control of health care is also intended to make it harder for the far right to outlaw abortions (which I doubt they will ever actually, in reality, really actually, in practice do or be able to do — talk, yes; do, no).Ah, I left out the biggie: ObamaCare, on the way to single payer, was to be massive cost shifting, charge much more than the real costs for the people who could pay and much less than those costs for the poor. It appears that the costs — the gifts to the insurance companies and the cost shifting — will be the leading reasons ObamaCare won’t be renewed and will be left to die.2.2 Trump on Health Care FundingBut with that, let me see what Trump says about medical care now: … Okay, I just read it again. I’m happy enough with the statement. Basically ObamaCare tries to be the main source of funding for all of medical care, does massive cost shifting, has lots of regulations, and Trump wants to junk that approach, concept. For the poor, he wants to use Medicaid. I didn’t see mention of Medicare, but I suspect he will leave that intact.2.3 Hillary on Health Care FundingOkay, let me see what Hillary says: … Okay, I just read what Hillary said on that.Naw, I can’t like that. IMHO, she’s on the way to single payer US health — e.g., she starts off with the titleUniversal, quality, affordable health care for everyone in AmericaTo me, her “universal” is everyone gets the same stuff with us on the way to paying for it with single payer. That is, she is lusting, thirsting for socialized medicine.Yup, it appears that for Hillary access to abortion is one of the biggies. So, in contrast, I suspect that with Trump a, say, Roman Catholic, woman could buy health insurance that didn’t cover abortion. With Hillary, abortion will always be covered. So, everyone will be paying for the abortions whether they will ever get one or not. That point, and similar ones elsewhere in health care, may be part of how Trump wants to get insurance premiums down for most people.Right, then, with Trump, a woman who does want abortion coverage will have to pay more for it. Similarly a woman who is sure she won’t get pregnant won’t have to pay for either abortions or maternity care.Then there is Hillary’s “affordable” and the “public option”. That’s gotta be a case of cost shifting, and/or Federal Government chips in, or a step to Frank’s single payer.2.4 Comparing Trump’s and Hillary’sTrump’s plan basically has nearly everyone paying their own way and getting some advantages from “free market” — if a nurse is rude or a physician late too often, then the patient gets to try another clinic across town. If one dentist charges $500 less for a crown job, then try them. If some one insurance company charges less for just the coverages wanted, then can use them. And so forth. Beyond those “free market” things, the biggie difference is that, except for the poor, old, vets, and maybe some special cases, say, uninsurables, Trump has everyone paying for their own medical care.Trump is ready to import drugs, if they are good, etc., from wherever, maybe India, and I get the impression Hillary is not. So, maybe the US based pharmaceutical companies would be happier with Hillary.Ah, Trump likes to import when he is involved with paying the bills! That’s a bad comment: Trump is for good trade deals, getting our trade in balance, and, then, sure, pick up bargains where can.Hillary? She is getting the Federal government involved with the payments, details of coverages, etc. Yup, Hillary wants abortions covered.More generally, Hillary wants to wash a lot of the money for US health care through DC. Ah, raise real estate prices within 100 miles of the Washington Monument!For more, Hillary wants to cover illegal immigrants, and Trump wants to deport them and, in particular, save on their subsidized medical care.For more, and more generally, and still relevant to health care, for whatever reasons Hillary is just determined to import a lot of poor people, people who will long need a lot of social welfare and social services spending, e.g., for health care and extra police protection, and people who are too likely to be ISIS soldiers.In strong contrast, and still relevant to health care, Trump wants no illegal immigration and wants appropriate vetting of everyone else with, as I suspect and as has been traditional in recent decades, high preference for highly qualified people, i.e., less in need of social welfare and services spending, e.g., for health care and extra police protection.2.5 DetailsNeither Trump nor Clinton gets to the money involved, that is, numerical values, in units of dollars.We should have the numbers, for what individuals pay, companies that provide health care coverage for their employees pay, each level of government, town to DC pays, what various NGOs will pay, and what parts of the US health care industry receive in revenue.Without these numbers, we are to a large extent walking blind, vast plans with half-vast planning. Long history shows that such tends to be darned expensive.2.6 Trees and ForestBut it’s getting too clear to me that here I’ve been looking at the trees and failing to see the forest, straining on gnats and forgetting elephants, really, failing to follow that standard advice, “Always look for the hidden agenda.”.So, to me, net, big picture, 100,000 feet up, Hillary is rushing to big bucks in the US Federal budget for a big fraction of all of health care, really a near takeover of all of US health care, and on the way to, say, Canada, England, France, Switzerland; and Trump is thinking VA medical care, block grants to the states for Medicaid, Medicare, and for health care in the Federal budget little else.Hillary has an agenda — socialism with power and money in DC. She seems to have had that bee in her bonnet all the way back to collage. I’ve seen too many such coeds — they form a significant type. A great example of the type is the two Amherst coeds totally all wound up about carbon and fracking as in…Gingrich is nice to them, tolerates them being nasty, patronizes them, then brilliantly cuts them off at their knees.Here Hillary in her determined socialism is falling behind the Chinese Communist who saidI don’t care if the cat is black or white as long as it catches mice. Not all Chinese Communists were totally stupid! Or, if a billion Chinese get too hungry, they could level Beijing and kill all the party leaders!Well, I believe that Hillary’s cat will get fat but won’t catch mice.I can’t trust or hope to respect what Hillary and her people would do with all the money and power she has in mind to have in DC for so much of health care.3.0 More IssuesAt Hillary’s Web site, gee, I saw that she is hot on global warming or is it climate change?And IIRC, the Dem platform is calling for carbon taxes.And Hillary did just dump on much of WV, PA, and OH saying that she wants to shutdown coal.To me, Hillary is going for a flim-flam, fraud, scam, shake down that would shoot the US economy in the gut and seriously damage US national security. That’s not just funny politics anymore; it’s damned serious stuff. There are some details on the issue of CO2 and global warming in…Broadly, Hillary seems to want the US to have a weaker economy with more poor people and more power and money in DC with high deficits. Trump wants to have a stronger economy with fewer poor people and less money and power in DC and high surpluses to pay off the national debt.We can talk budgetary details forever, but, if these two agendas are correct, then there’s no way Trump won’t be much better for the economy, national security, and the country than Hillary.But, yes, I still want to know how the heck the numbers will add up for what Trump wants to do on trade, jobs, taxes, revenue, budgets, deficits, surpluses, economic growth, inflation, etc.But here, too, maybe the forest is more important than the trees: We have about 95 million people out of the labor force. While I haven’t seen how unusual that is in percentage terms or what the number could/should be, I have to suspect that Trump wants to put a major fraction of those people back to work.Then those tens of millions — assuming such a number — of more people working will/would provide more products and services, that, net, will make more for everyone, more tax revenue, better balance of trade (make at home, not import), and less in social safety net expenditures. And, their employers will also be paying more in taxes.It may be that just that number alone, the number of people in the labor force, will, in the context, be the key to everything Trump has proposed. Or, maybe, just put those people back to work, and then the numbers are simple and overwhelming. Don’t put them back to work, and then numbers accurate out to the last penny still won’t add up.But, more generally, when I think about Hillary, I think about her “extremely careless”, that is, “gross negligence” as in section (f) of the US Espionage Act, handling of US classified information marked above Top Secret, her lies about that, Clinton Cash, what she did leading up to Benghazi, on the night of Benghazi, and what she has done since then about Benghazi, open borders, how she wants to shoot the US domestically produced energy supplies in the gut, how she wants to prop up ObamaCare, and dozens of smaller issues.To me, Hillary is a good actress and regards politics as stage acting.I’m no great expert in reading facial expressions and body language, but here is Hillary as she won the Dem nomination:…To me, this is one of the rare pictures of Hillary in recent years where she was sincere and not acting.Here she is really happy, likely the happiest in her life, and, since I believe she will lose the election, likely the happiest she will ever be.From that picture, it appears to me that winning that nomination was a super big thing for her. It’s like she was a normal teenage girl, her father told her that, if she could get a date for the senior prom, then she could have any dress at Neiman-Marcus, any of her mother’s $10 million jewelry collection, and a full time stretch limo, and then she just got an invitation from the captain of the football team.Net, that nomination is what she wanted. Help the country? Not really. Why the nomination? My guess: She has always believed that her father wanted a boy; Hillary has wanted to prove that she could do as well in money and power as any boy, and her nomination proved that. But that’s as far as her motivation and thinking take her.In comparing Hillary with Trump, I have to go with Trump.

          4. JLM

            .Look, let’s get real here. HRC, if elected, is not going to get anything through the Congress. Nothing.This silliness that the Congress is going to drop its own agenda — during the first 100 days — to embrace hers, pass hers, fund hers, is nonsense.I have it straight from the Easter Bunny and Santa.Please, try to stay in touch with the way things actually work. None of her shit is getting passed. Period.There may be things that I would love to see — such as free education. Hell, I’m going to finally finish law school, why not?It is not going to happen.This may come as a shock — but the lady is a liar.Trump, not a candidate for canonization BTW, is a bull shitter. A big difference and he would likely get the Congress to pass his stuff cause they would be scared shitless not to.Remember how our gov’t works, please.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          5. William Mougayar

            Even 2 years after when a new Congress takes hold?

          6. JLM

            .Barack Obama famously said, in the run up to the 2014 election, “make no mistake, my policies are on the ballot.”As it turned out, the Republicans won the Senate, added to their majority in the House, took a slew of Governor’s mansions and statehouses.The biggest repudiation since the 1920s. So gigantic in its magnitude that nobody really has been able to embrace it. Please note that nothing has gotten better since then and the Obama admin’s policies on terror and immigration have only made the country (the heartland) more angry.If HRC is running on the notion of being the 3rd Obama term, how does that change the underlying dynamic? How does she change something she was the part of? Her integrity and, by implication, her competence are not issues any candidate wants to defend.The Senate mid-terms in 2018 already line up better for the Republicans because vulnerable Democrat Senators (they’re elected for 6 years so many vulnerable Senators in 2014 and 2016 are protected by the simple mathematical logic of their term length) are up for election in states that have already flipped against them.Taking the 2014 mid-terms into account, makes it even more likely the Republicans get a veto proof majority in the Senate. It is just math.To understand the anger, take a look at Arkansas — a new Republican (Tom Cotton, Harvard undergrad, Harvard Law, combat veteran) turned out a seasoned legacy Democrat Senator (Mark Pryor, two term Senator, former state AG) with surprising ease.This is Bill Clinton’s home state and the Dem’s father was his predecessor in the Senate.Pryor won his first re-election taking 54% of the vote. It was a solid win.The man who beat him, Tom Cotton, is a rising star in the Senate and the Republican firmament but he was an unlikely winner. Green as grass but well spoken. At the end, the Dem Senator was distancing himself from Obamacare as fast as he could run. Note, Sen Pryor was running from both the President and Obamacare.Tom Cotton beat him 57% to 39%. A rookie beating a 3rd term seeking Senator.In the two weeks before the election, the big pollsters (Rasmussen, NBA, ABC, CBS) had the race at 44% to 47% favoring Cotton. The final vote was 57% Cotton, 39% Pryor. Note who moved up and who moved down.The Republicans poll notoriously under the final results. This was an old fashioned West Texas Barbed Wire Enema. But it’s a very good state to follow as the Democrat advantage was perceived as being so grand. It would be a state that HRC would be expected to carry — no chance of that.The actual results, not so much.Even more staggering is that Arkansas hasn’t had two Republican Senators since the Civil War.This is all quite mathematical and formulaic. The 2014 elections are a fair harbinger of what is about to happen. Don’t say I didn’t tell you.Six months ago, Trump had no statistical possibility of being nominated and none whatsoever of being elected. Now, he is leading in the polls (which mean nothing until after Labor Day even if they do favor Trump).To put a bit of history to it, Trump is apparently in a much better position than Reagan at the same time of his first election.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          7. cavepainting

            JLM, I am willing to bet that if Trump loses the election, the democrats will make major gains in the Senate and the House.The people who turn out to vote against Trump are likely to put several swing state republicans out of office.

          8. JLM

            .Then bet, we shall. Please set the wager, sir. I need some 9mm ammo?It will take a bit more than just being willing to bet to make it so. I study most of the races and there is absolutely no evidence to support your supposition.Take as an example, Ohio where a sitting Senator (Rob Portman) is defending serve against a former Governor (Strickland) — both solid pols.The Republicans took the Governship (Kasich) last time around and the Teamsters Union of Ohio just endorsed ……………… wait for it ………………… Portman.First time any Teamsters Union has ever endorsed a Republican in history.Why?The issue of trade agreements, specifically NAFTA and transportation implications of trade agreements.On this one, like coal, Trump is on the right side of the issue (for Ohio). Even if Trump loses Ohio, the down ballot races will be decided by the issues.There is not a single race I can think of wherein it is likely that the Democrats steal a seat if Trump were not to win. Remember there are a huge number of seats at contest in the House (100% of them) and there is only the tightest fringe case for a seat changing hands from R to D.You have to know the districts in which both parties run are fashioned for certain outcomes.As to the Senate, the Republicans hold serve and in 2018, when a lot of vulnerable D’s are up for re-election, the Republicans are poised to make substantial gains.Most of the down ballot stuff is just simple math and local issues — like trade agreements and their impact on jobs, coal. To cite a couple.There is no reason why anyone would suggest that Trump would not be competitive in the Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Nevada, Minnesota, Michigan, Colorado.Even if Hillary were to win them all — this is a hypothetical, mind you — she will not win by much and therefore she will not create any particular momentum. It is certainly possible that HRC could win the Electoral College while DJT wins the popular vote. This will have an even more substantial dampening impact on the down ballot races.Trump drew more than 60% more Republicans (crossover Dems, Independents in open primary states) to the polls in defeating the 16, mostly experienced and successful politicians he vanquished, opponents enroute to the nomination. This is an unprecedented outcome and he beat the Dems who routinely beat the Republicans.This will either be a huge win for Trump or a squeaker for HRC.So what is our wager?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          9. cavepainting

            I think the opposite. A huge win for HRC or a squeaker for Trump.If the former, there will be overwhelming turnout from Hispanics, Blacks, women and college educated whites all of whom skew democratic, and will carry the down ballot democrats over the line in places like OH,IL, FL,PA, VA and NH.If the latter, the Dems may still make very modest gains in the Senate.I would not bet on anything material. Just curious to see where it all shakes out.

          10. JLM

            .HRC will have a huge advantage in Hispanics and Black persons. That is baked into the cake already.Where there is pause in your suggestion is when considering the 2014 mid-term elections in which suburban women and soccer moms voted for their husbands’ jobs and their own pocketbooks. They all want a raise and the prospect of a HRC with massive tax increases (which will not pass obviously) — that dog won’t hunt.They are already reeling from the Obamacare premiums and deductibles. That’s why 2014 turned out the way it did.The college educated white male nonsense is a myth. It is really east and west coast liberals (who are also college educated males but not all of them) who will vote for HRC.The college educated white male in the hinterland is going to vote for his own economic status, guns (hell, they’re hunters for goodness sake), immigration, and foreign policy.The economic self-interest showed up in the 2014 mid-terms. You do recall this was the largest repudiation of a party since 1920, no?This sentiment has neither been quelled nor dampened. In fact, this anger is more virulent than ever and will propel Trump to victory. He still has to perform in the debates and on the campaign trail.How about a case of 9mm or 0.380 from WalMart? Come on.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          11. Stephen Palmer

            No, Trump is going to bleed votes in the suburbs of Charlotte, Cincinnati, Orlando, and other cities that people ignore. There are tons of college educated whites who voted for Romney in these places that don’t like Trump.Sounds like you are ignoring the countless number of polls of how bad he is doing with educated women, as well as in the state of Virginia.

          12. JLM

            .My dear Mr. Palmer, the Dems do the best in the center cities of the larger cities. Always have.The Republicans will do much better in the suburbs. Always have.Take a look at the mayors of cities (Cincinnati, Dem since 1984, last 8 mayors) as this is always a good indication as to which way a city center leans.Since 1899, there have been only 4 Republican mayors of Charlotte.The current mayor of Orlando is a Democrat.So, of the cities you mention, 100% have Democrat mayors which is an indication of center city strength.This can then be cross referenced with the Congressional districts which sit next to a city. In these areas, the Republicans are strong.This can then be cross referenced by the makeup of the state’s Senators, the governor and the statehouse. Do this research and you will get a good idea of which way the state leans.I belabor this point because there is no evidence to support your assertions.Trump has brought 62% more Republican primary voters which is a marked increase in base enthusiasm. Primary voters are a high correlation with turnout.It is a MSM meme that Trump is not doing well with educated folks. First, know that fewer than 32% of Americans have college degrees.In 2014, the numbers showed that suburban married women and soccer moms voted for their husband’s jobs, their own pocketbooks, and national security.Take a good look at the Arkansas Senatorial contest of Pryor (seeking a third term and the son of the state’s Senator) v Tom Cotton wherein Cotton won by a margin of 57% v 39%. This is an unthinkable win in a state home to the Clintons. A freshman beating a 2-term incumbent in a state like Arkansas?This has only gotten more pronounced with an economy growing at 1%.These are fact and data driven utterances which are not as much fun as just echoing whatever the blather of the MSM supports as to our own biases. Nonetheless, they are insightful.Bottom line — Trump is going to do just fine.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          13. Stephen Palmer

            No, there are quite a few polls that say he’s doing poorly with college educated people. So it is not something that the media is making up.As for their jobs, these people realize that blaming foreign trade is not the solution for what ails the economy, and many of them are doing quite well anyway.Noone is saying Arkansas is a swing state. Amazingly, Arizona may be though.

          14. JLM

            .Perhaps I was not clear. My fault. I am not contesting that there are reports of exactly what you suggest — DJT is not getting a lot of traction amongst college educated people.My point is that this is a very difficult slice of America to poll — first, there are only 32% of Americans who are college educated. I am always surprised by that number.Second, polls are phone based when college educated folks are at work. The mathematical gymnastics necessary to get a representative sample for accurate polling has become vastly more complex.People at work don’t respond to polls. So, this slice is difficult to poll.Both my wife and I have a few degrees and in the circles in which we travel there is an over representation of Trump supporters.So, I am not contesting the polls say exactly what you suggest but I am saying is they are neither determinative of the outcome nor are they accurate.I always like to consider the 2014 Arkansas Senate race between Mark Pryor (D) and Tom Cotton (R).Pryor was a sitting Senator seeking a third term. His Daddy had been the Senator from Arkansas. It was an entrenched Dem seat with a strong legacy in a state which was home to Bill Clinton once upon a time.On the eve of the election it was too close to call. Polls indicated a dead even race.When the ballots were counted, a rookie Republican, Tom Cotton, beat an entrenched incumbent, legacy Democrat.57% Tom Cotton v 39% Mark Pryor.The polls got it all wrong. That’s as bad a beating as any incumbent has ever taken. Pryor got caught having to defend his vote on Obamacare.Interestingly enough, the Cotton campaign internals got it right on the money. Two weeks out, he whispered, “I’m going to win.”This was an interesting race because it typified the depth of anger amongst the voters but also it showed how unpollable that sentiment really was.I try not to be a cheerleader when looking at the numbers but I try to understand what they are telling us.The 2014 electorate anger is far more virulent and robust than it was two years ago and DJT has tapped into it and is tacking strong with it filling his sails.If he can avoid defeating himself, he will win. No polls mean anything until after Labor Day.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          15. Stephen Palmer

            Arkansas is one of the most rural states in the country. It is not a good representation of the electorate.

          16. JLM

            .Haha, what a lame comment. Arkansas is used by political scientists EXACTLY because it is about half urban and half rural. In this manner, they can segregate the impacts more clearly.Make no mistake — the Pryor v Cotton race is a harbinger of what happened in the entire country. A powerful Democrat Senator legacy defeated by an upstart Republican challenger.The polling discrepancies were enormous.It is a perfect exemplar of the anger in both the cities and the country side.You did notice that countrywide — the entire US — the Republicans won the biggest reversal since 1920. Not just in Arkansas — which was considered a Clintonesque Dem stronghold — but nationwide.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          17. Stephen Palmer

            Actually, according to the 2010 Census, the only states that are more rural than Arkansas are Maine, Mississippi, Montana, and West Virginia.

          18. JLM

            .Your point being?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          19. Stephen Palmer

            That the state’s demographics favor the Republicans, and that’s why it’s been trending to them for 20 years. Like I said, it is not a good representation of the electorate.

          20. JLM

            .You are talking out of your ass now.In 2001, Mark Pryor took 54% of the total vote. Remember, his father had been the Senator before him. In 2008, he ran UNOPPOSED.He was favored by the polls until the last week when it looked like a dead heat.Tom Cotton won by 57% to 39%. That is an enormous win and one the pollsters got completely wrong.In the same time period, the Arkansas Senate was flipped from 20D v 15R to 14D v 21R.Again, this is why political scientists like to study Arkansas. It is western, southern, mid-western, evenly balanced rural v urban, and was under the control of Dems for decades.There have been 48D governors v 8R governors.It is a superb lab in which to study the electorate for all the reasons enumerated above. It is also small enough to be able to dissect individual precinct info.Give it up, man.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          21. Stephen Palmer

            McCain beat Obama by 20 points in Arkansas. That says a lot more than state Senate races that no one cares about.

          22. JLM

            .Of course, the McCain v Obama race was almost a decade ago which is several lifetimes in politics and the country cared about those Senate races (they were mid-terms after all) because the Republicans flipped the Senate.Sheesh!JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          23. Stephen Palmer

            Again, nothing you have said disproves that Arkansas hasn’t been trending rightward for awhile now. Just like the other SEC states that score poorly on how educated and diverse the voter-base is.

          24. JLM

            .My point had to do with the implications of the 2014 Republican barbed wire enema visited upon the Democrats. In fact, it is an accurate exemplar.I would object to the notion that Arkansas was “drifting” but would more accurately suggest it has been a rather sudden move which highlights the implications of 2014 and their relevance to this year.The reversal of the Arkansas State Senate is a pretty clear inflection point.It is difficult to imagine a more diverse voter base than in the South writ large though certain cities (NYC, SF) are clearly more diverse.Some states, e.g. South Carolina, have a black majority.You don’t like to let facts get in the way of an opinion. Bravo!JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          25. JLM

            .One last bit of factual evidence –1. Since 1877, the Class 2 Arkansas Senator has continuously been a Dem except for Tim Hutchinson until Tom Cotton (R) beat Mark Pryor (D). That’s almost 140 years.2. Since 1879, Arkansas’ Class 3 Senator has continuously been a Dem until John Boozman beat Blanche Lincoln (2-term Dem) in 2010.Hardly, a gradual shift rightward. You can’t just make this stuff up. Facts matter.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          26. JLM

            .Let me pick on Virginia as an example.Consider where we start — the Tidewater is very military (DJT), the DC suburbs are partly military and political commuters (HRC).Richmond is the black interior of the donut (CBD) v the white exterior (Henrico Cty) (tossup) and, then, you have the bottom of the Shenandoah Valley (coal country, advantage DJT).Given that layout, why would any Congressional District change hands?The only change agent is the loss of Dem seats in coal country because of HRC. There will be seats lost there.You have a Dem Governor (Terry Mcauliffe, an HRC supporter) who overplayed his had on trying to give the vote to 200,000 convicted felons.Virginia will behave well and will likely end up in the Trump column.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          27. Chevman

            Don’t disagree with your logic, but having been born and raised in Richmond, the sense I get is that HRC is closer spiritually to the heart of most Virginians.By that I mean, “Arkansas born Bill and Hillary” versus “New Yorker Trump”. Not saying that is an entirely accurate representation of history, but that is the vibe I get on the ground, talking to friends and family across the state.

          28. JLM

            .I went to VMI and maintain close ties to the state including having served on the VMI Foundation Board for years. I’ve been involved in Virginia for almost 50 years. [God, that sounds like a long time.] Classmates are in the House of Burgesses and I am in contact w/ them regularly — both sides of the aisle. I send money to my Dem classmates in Roanoke and my retired Army Col Rep classmates in the north.Note that my comments were targeted on the down ballot Congressional races, not the Presidency. Changing gears.I don’t think anyone is going to win by a landslide in Virginia. McAuliffe won the governorship on the heels of Bob McDonnell’s legal difficulties. Had Bob not done what he did, there would be a Republican governor of Virginia. [Pretty damn stupid and venal stuff like Kaine.]Kaine certainly gives HRC an advantage except for his $160K problem. On that score, he validates her grifter label. Why does Virginia do this? Kaine will be a big asset where the Dems are strong but he’s a bit strange with his social conflicts with HRC.The regions of Virginia are what they are. Your view from Richmond likely mirrors and agrees with the white flight from the city and the lily white environs in Henrico County. That has been the status quo for decades.The other parts of Virginia are as they are.I think the big variable will be the coal country in the west which has historically been Democrat, Union and solid. Not so and not for this particular candidate given her disastrous — but revealing — comments on coal.Your notion that HRC is closer “spiritually” suggests that she has a spiritual nature which, frankly, I simply do not see. I admit to not looking past her ethical problems and her wholesale inability to articulate the truth and, therefore, I may be missing something but it is not what I hear.Other than the environs near to DC, I find the state to be Southern and honorable and I think she’s got a real problem. We shall see.I left the best for last — that phony Southern accent for the girl from Cleveland?Haha.Be well.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          29. sigmaalgebra

            Tom Cotton beat him 57% to 39%. A rookie beating a 3rd term seeking Senator.That’s a BIGGIE. That’s a bigger earthquake than made Reelfoot Lake in NW TN and some more features in AR.That makes it sound like a lot of people in the flyover states are pissed off. Or as in the movie Armageddon,No. You know what, A.J.? l’m not pissed. You’ve seen me pissed. This is way, way beyond pissed, though.

          30. JLM

            .These numbers are what the media and the Dems are missing. 2014 was a West Tx barbed wire enema. This is the departure line and the Republicans may be in for a very, very, very big night.Has anything happened to quell the anger?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          31. sigmaalgebra

            There’s a lot I’m not getting. I invest too much time in the news, and still I don’t have even reasonable understanding.So, the people in AR are pissed off. I would expect that. Since I grew up in Memphis and we went fishing a lot in AR, I can’t believe that AR is not totally pissed off at Obama and Hillary. But that situation does not yet seem to be nearly as strong as I would expect in the rest of the country.I don’t understand:1. I would expect by now, if only from the Hillary dirt and the Obama record, the poll numbers would be so much in Trump’s favor that it might be 60-40 or 70-30 for him, but apparently it’s plus or minus 5 points from 50-50.2. Best I can tell, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, NYT, WaPo and more are all totally in the tank for Hillary. I don’t get it. What in the heck is motivating them?3. Paul Ryan, !Jeb, W, Kasich, Romney, Bloomberg and many more prominent Republicans are totally pissed off at Trump. I totally don’t get it: Ryan seems awfully close the Hillary, but the rest are just walking away from the leader of the Republican party and, thus, really, from politics at all. They are committing political suicide. I know; I know: The claim goes that now the divide is between the elites and the rest, and the parties don’t matter. I can’t believe that an ad hoc, unorganized divide can last.4. Hillary is beyond flawed; she has baggage enough to keep Air Force 1 from getting off the ground — exceed MTOW. Still, somehow, the Democrat party was really eager to nominate her. So, take any or all of the prominent Democrats, in the Senate, House, the states, etc. and they have to know that they are now very close to 4-8 years of zero power in politics. They seem happy enough with that. I would have assumed that they would have been in meetings, dinners, etc. raising as much hell as necessary to get a competitive candidate, but they didn’t. E.g., they let Hillary turn the party over to Debbie Downer to stack the deck for Hillary. Or, Clinton Cash is some shocking news, but Hillary has been on the take from lots of people. A person with their hand out so much can’t really hide that from everyone — the stuff in Clinton Cash has had to have been common knowledge for years in the Democrat party, Congress, all over DC, through much of politics in the US, in much of the Fortune 500, and in most of the world capitals. And, yet, still, the Democrat party put up with Hillary for years on the way to her nomination?With Hillary, the news overlooks her huge baggage; with Trump they pick on every tiny thing they can find or just invent. Why? I’m not getting it.Or, Nixon did some dirty tricks, and the WaPo ran stories enough to get the whole country outraged and drove him from office. What Nixon did was plenty bad but, still, was stealing 10 cents of rock candy compared to what Hillary has done.

          32. LE

            Team HRC writes a great yellow page ad. I learned this in my first business. Just include everything someone might be looking for. Then they will latch onto the one thing that they need that they think you have expertise in and call you. Generalities get no calls. Specifics do.There may be things that I would love to see — such as free education. Hell, I’m going to finally finish law school, why not?The world needs plumbers and ditch diggers. Hopefully all of these kids with college degrees will find jobs, eh? I don’t support free education actually at that level. Mainly because it’s an expense with no clear good outcome. Maybe some kind of trade school to teach skills that people actually can use. That would be a good idea. But no liberal arts or general business education which won’t get you anywhere.I mean seriously all of that money (forgetting where it’s going to come from) flooding to community colleges. New buildings, new staff this could be HUGE. Imagine there will be significant winners if that were ever to happen. All sorts of new money floating around.

          33. cavepainting

            I have been surprised by how many people I know are turning out to be Trump supporters. There is a certain honesty to his dishonesty ( I will bullshit and lie but I guess you know about it anyway), a refreshing aspect to his lack of political correctness, and the entertainment quotient is out of this world.But.. while I am fascinated and intrigued, voting for him is just one step too far to take. He seems to have little to no empathy for the ones who need help, has demonstrated no willingness to admit he may be wrong, and has shown no evidence of the analytical / intellectual rigor required for the office of the presidency. Nothing wrong with being pliable, but it is one thing to be conscious and aware of why you are being so vs. saying whatever comes to mind.Now, that does not mean he may not get things done. Hillary is so polarizing that the limbo in DC is likely to continue.But.. unless he starts showing a different side to his personality, he is likely to lose the election. There are simply not enough angry white males to get him over the line.

          34. JLM

            .In the crudest possible terms, the race is between a dangerous liar and a bullshitter. If you can trust HRC, then pull the lever and I will buy you a cup of coffee.In the jockey, horse, course that is life, I cannot support a jockey so devoid of integrity and such a grifter. Her venality is insurmountable but that is me.To suggest that Trump does not possess the intellectual rigor to handle the office is an indictment of your powers of observation. The guy builds 100-story buildings like other people build sand castles.Perhaps, I am a bit biased as I was a developer of high rise office buildings and know first hand how difficult it is. I graduated at the top of my class in civil engineering and have an MBA and a bit more education beyond that but I found building high rise buildings a huge intellectual and business challenge.It is a very tough business and even tougher to do well.I liken Trump to chemotherapy. It is a medicine we need to take. It will not be without some discomfort. On the other side of it, we will be well again. There is no viable alternative.This is not a new thought on my part.http://themusingsofthebigre…The triumph of his primary campaign shows what he is capable of — defeating 16 experienced, well-financed, some from political dynasties, opponents going away.I’m fine with Trump because elections are binary. We have only two choices and by process of elimination alone, I am thrown into a certain camp.The prospect of Trump with a Republican Congress means we would be able to get legislation passed in the manner in which it was intended to happen — regular order.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          35. cavepainting

            Your points on Trump having the ability to get more done is very true.Intellectual rigor is not only about knowing something in depth and getting it done – like in civil engineering. The presidency is also about dealing with situations where the data is not complete, where there are competing opinions all of which may be true or false depending on certain conditions, and where you need to extrapolate and see the big picture. All of which needs a lot of humility.It is really about seeing the whole and I wrote more about it here.

          36. JLM

            .There is ample evidence that within the Trump Organization, a big organization, that Trump may take the lion’s share of the credit but his organization is well run.The way gov’t in DC is organized, a President cannot really run anything by himself. As an example, he has to give orders to the Sec of Def and the military chain of command to make war.Do you think guys like Norman Schwartzkopf would have let a bad order stand? You grossly underestimate the military (though I do have to say the current crop of 4-star generals is very suspect given some of their behavior since leaving office).When elected, Trump will be smart enough to get the leaders of the Senate and the House over and work things out.Take, as an example, the Veterans Administration. This has been a jug fuck for the last 20 years. Trump will have that straightened out in six months.Study this:http://themusingsofthebigre…This is a signature example of what Trump got done that Mayor Koch and a dozen years could not. He may have escaped charm school a semester early but he is a doer.As to policy, there are a number of things Trump is just correct on — trade, immigration, foreign affairs, energy.The chemotherapy element of his personality is real but the medicine is also real. I’m getting excited by the possibilities.The thing I note you have not mentioned is leadership.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          37. cavepainting

            He has a real chance to win the election but his ego is getting the better of him. He can make all his points without being so obnoxious and rude. And doing some homework on the details is not such a bad thing either.His lack of self control is a big deal. Do you think a president can afford to be so loose with words and like or dislike people based on whether they suxk up to him or not ?There is such a thing called decency and grace and he needs to show glimpses of it to have any shot of winning this.

          38. JLM

            .I believe Trump is the chemotherapy our country requires to get well again.http://themusingsofthebigre…I say that with every negative aspect of chemo factored into the equation. Trump is only a viable candidate because of how flawed his opponent is and how angry the electorate is.Trump defeated 16 Republican primary opponents, all of whom had more experience. What Trump got right is the anger and the issues and the genius use of social media (earned media).In the process, he has exposed some personal traits that are not ones I would personally like to see and which are unnecessary.But the guy who was one gaffe from elimination ran the table.The country gave a clear indication of how angry it was in 2014. Take a look at the Senate race in Arkansas (Cotton v Pryor) to get a measure of how big the inflection point was.A rookie Rep candidate beat a two term sitting Senator by 57% v 39% in WJC and HRC’s home state. This is a nuclear reaction. Wow!The Republicans delivered, nationwide, a repudiation greater than any mid-term since the 1920s. That is not chopped liver. The President, foolishly, said, “Make no mistake, my policies are on the ballot.”This does not portend well for anyone who is running for the 3rd Obama term.The country is angrier still since then.There is one core theme that Trump resonates on with the angry folk — “the system is rigged and you are on the wrong side of the rigging. I know because I was one of the people who rigged it. I’m on your side and you haven’t had anyone on your side for half a century.”This is a guy who brought a 62% increase in primary Rep voters. That is huge.Most of those who are complaining about charm school temperament and style points are exactly the folks the electorate is angry at. If this were France back in the day, the guillotine would be in constant use.For a Republican to be within shouting distance of the lead after both parties have had their conventions is a stronger position than Reagan.You are perfectly right — Trump CAN win this thing.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        2. Alex Murphy

          Very simple. He would like to align with Russia. He called for Russia to hack an American citizen’s email.He is all about Trump. He is only interested in building power for himself. He believes that “only Trump can fix the system because nobody knows it like he does.” Really? Only he can fix it? First, it is not a one person job. Second, if he has been working the system as he says he has, then he “is” the problem.Trump is the worst of what it is to be in business in America. He is opaque, self serving, and rude.He is leveraging and pedaling fear. He is a charlatan. He is an ego maniac. He is a clinical psychopath. He makes outlandish statements and then tries to act like he didn’t…This is called gaslighting.…If you don’t see it, you are a victim of being manipulated.Very simply put, this election is about being American, and American values. There is one candidate that is focused on building a future, and one that is focused on creating power for himself.America is great. America is strong.Be American.

          1. JLM

            .”He called for Russia to hack an American citizen’s email.”Even if true that would be silly. What he did say was that if the Russians had the HRC (extremely careless HRC) treasure trove of deleted emails (which she, of course, says are of no national security value and are all abouj yoga, funerals, and weddings), then the American press would like to see them.I don’t think too many folks — OK, probably should qualify that “folks with an average IQ” — thought he was calling on Brother Putin to do something the Russians hadn’t stumbled on by themselves.If the Russians hacked the DNC, then they didn’t hack HRC’s server, right? Right?And, I agree completely this election will be a reassertion of American values, similar to the 2014 mid-term. As to who evokes that sentiment, there is a bit of difference in our assessment.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          2. LE

            Even if true that would be silly. What he did say was that if the Russians had the HRC (extremely careless HRC) treasure trove of deleted emails (which she, of course, says are of no national security value and are all abouj yoga, funerals, and weddings), then the American press would like to see them.Exactly. It’s shocking how many people are running with a different interpretation of reality. It’s as if people are reading the source material entirely differently. In all honesty I can see why Team HRC is making hay with and stretching the statement. But I can’t quite figure out though why the Press is literally doing the same thing (even with their bias).he was calling on Brother Putin to do something the RussiansAs if he needs the idea put in his head or some how affirmed. So retarded. <— Yeah.Did you watch Bloombergs speech? The best part afterword was liberal (I think it was Lawrence O’Donnell) absolutely fawning over not only how Bloomberg was self made (he didn’t need his Daddy’s money or something like that) but also how he was “100 times Richer than Trump” like it was some battle of the titans. Talking head on TV is an ivory tower job. (Although no tenure so maybe that’s not a good point.)And it’s great because Mike gave us the Bloomberg terminal and enhance all sorts of Wall Street gambling shenanigans you might say. Or as Trump would say “some might say”.

          3. JLM

            .At this stage of the game, there is no slur or insult that can be hurled at Trump that has not already been hurled. It is the best position to be in.It is particularly good that the media has piled on.The country gets it about the media. That doesn’t mean the Dem base doesn’t love it.The big issue from here on out is going to be the debates and if DJT takes the fight to HRC on her integrity and lying, it is going to be devastating.I don’t think there has ever been a Presidential election in which one candidate ever accused the other openly of being “corrupt.”Labor Day, the debates, and then it’s Election Day.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          4. sigmaalgebra

            That’s right: Bloomberg didn’t get a big loan from his father. Instead, he got a big golden parachute check from Solomon Brothers.He used that check, IIRC, right away to buy some Prime super-mini computers, setup his news service for traders, and let the traders get access via dumb terminals and phone lines.Okay, I doubt it, but maybe today Trump is broke. Maybe. But as of a few months ago he was quite well off because since then he has no doubt paid the fuel bills on his Boeing 757! If have to ask what it costs to fly that plane, then can’t afford it! E.g., recently, just before his trip to Scotland, he had the 757 run through scheduled maintenance and some interior touch ups. If have to ask what that cost, can’t afford it!The level of junk propaganda from the Hillary side and her media buddies is just astounding.Some darned good news is that all across the US Trump can get tens of thousands of people to come to a rally, people who no doubt have seen through the propaganda, the now literally hundreds of millions of ad dollars for anti-Trump ads. The voters are smarter than Hillary thinks.

          5. sigmaalgebra

            > He called for Russia to hack an American citizen’s email.Trump did no such thing. Just read what he actually said.First, it is clearly impossible for the Russians to hack Hillary’s e-mail because Hillary’s e-mail server is currently locked up inside the FBI, likely not connected to the Internet, likely powered off, and likely in pieces.Maybe some Russian hackers are really good, but if a server is powered off and can’t get physical access to it, then no way to hack it, not even for a Russian!Second, Trump said that if the Russians already did hack Hillary’s e-mail server when that server was running in her house and then got and still have the 33,000 e-mails Hillary deleted, then some US news people would love to have copies. Fine. Nothing wrong here.More generally, a recent effort by some newsies was to invent a story that Trump is too close to Russia. They just invented that. The only thread they had was the Trump remark I described above. These are deliberately deceptive, distorting, disgusting, destructive, dangerous newsies, biased newsies, and Trump opponents.Somehow, with this issue as a good example, you have bought into the propaganda about Trump. The propaganda about him might be a clever attack, but it is wildly wrong. You need to check the original sources, point by point.You seem to be just terrified of Trump. You might ask yourself just how and what propaganda got you so terrified.

          6. Alex Murphy

            That otherwise intelligent people buy into his line of thinking. At one point in time he was a novelty, harmless. But now, he has millions of people thinking it would be good for Trump Kingship. No thanks.

          7. sigmaalgebra

            > Trump KingshipYou have no data, evidence, or argument for that. So “intelligent people” will just set aside your post.

          8. Lori Gluck

            how about research on your own instead of puking up the same vomit over and over that the dumbocrats put out there? Show some proof, Any proof, hell any evidence that Hillary clinton has done anything to benefit this country or that she is in ANYWAY capable or qualified to run this country! To stupid to handle two email accounts, lies to the families of our military to cover the for not doing her job, Flat broke upon leaving the White House where they were supported by taxpayers (yep that’s who I want to carry the nations check book), caught stealing from the white house, defends her husband when he rapes and sexually harasses women, deleted information subpoenaed by the state department, and flip flops her position to what ever is most popular to win her votes rather then standing up for anything. Trump may not always say the politically correct thing but at least he stands on his position regardless of it’s popularity. I’ll take honest of crooked ANY DAY OF ANY WEEK. And the only one that aligned him with Russia is the ignorant media out to get the crooked killary elected at any cost

          9. Alex Murphy

            Lori, I do my own research.Let’s listen to the horse himself:…In here, you will hear DT say, “Russia, if you are listening, I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing … lets see if that happens.” This was not sarcasitic. Trump is Gaslighting when he tries to reframe what he said. Its bull shit. It is the work of a manipulative, clinically psychotic, egomaniac. And you have swallowed the hook.Regarding the witch hunt for Clinton regarding emailgate, let’s read the actual transcript from Comey:…Some important quotes/sections here:”I have so far used the singular term, “e-mail server,” in describing the referral that began our investigation. It turns out to have been more complicated than that. Secretary Clinton used several different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department, and used numerous mobile devices to view and send e-mail on that personal domain. As new servers and equipment were employed, older servers were taken out of service, stored, and decommissioned in various ways. Piecing all of that back together—to gain as full an understanding as possible of the ways in which personal e-mail was used for government work—has been a painstaking undertaking, requiring thousands of hours of effort.””I should add here that we found no evidence that any of the additional work-related e-mails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them. Our assessment is that, like many e-mail users, Secretary Clinton periodically deleted e-mails or e-mails were purged from the system when devices were changed. Because she was not using a government account—or even a commercial account like Gmail—there was no archiving at all of her e-mails, so it is not surprising that we discovered e-mails that were not on Secretary Clinton’s system in 2014, when she produced the 30,000 e-mails to the State Department.””Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.””For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received.””As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.”Comey’s statement pointed out how Clinton and her team mismanaged confidential information. This is a very public microscope of the investigation of Clinton and the conclusion is one that says she made a major series of mistakes. However, if you look at the reason for peeling the email off, there are two.While her predecessor (Rice) did not use email, Powel did. And he used it on his own server. And he has refused to provide any information to investigators. Why is this relevant? Because of why Powell did it, which was to remove the emails from the “main system” an attempt to be more discreet. That is the same reason Clinton did it.Have you not heard of the agencies being hacked?If you take an objective point of view, and ask yourself … why did these Secretaries do this, it is the only reason.Now, you can conclude that they made the wrong decision, that they should have solved the problem in a different way, but this is the only intent one can reasonably come up with.As for her accomplishments, lets try these two:- She helped the US start to recover after Bush’s administration had pulled us into an unjustified war- She drove the elevation of sanctions on Iran, which has finally led to real inspections and halting of the Iran Nuclear programBut … Clinton’s accomplishments are really not the issue. She has a long history of working within the framework of our Country. And by the way, if you don’t like that framework, then get out of our Country!!The issue at hand is that there is no Republican on the ticket. There is a life long Democrat. And a new party candidate which is a Trumpican.He is a power seeking dictator wanna be.He has dismissed the need to support Nato, he drove a change in the Republican platform to be anti Ukraine which is the current “Front Line” in the silent war with Russia, and he has been able to frame the idea that being an isolationist nation is a good idea.This is how Democracies are lost.The bottom line is that America is great! And we need to keep it great!

      2. ShanaC

        it bothers me immensely about where the pac money is coming from versus how reporters are being treated.That story, (a really not covered enough one) actually frightens me.I’ve been personally attacked a few times over it.

    2. Russell

      And thank you for actually adding to the discussion, commenting on Fred’s post as opposed to ripping off on a Hillary vs Trump tirade which entirely misses the point. Much appreciated!

      1. Donna Brewington White

        Well… in all fairness she actually did make a rather political statement and one that was blatantly critical not only of Trump but of Republicans or rather “much (though certainly not all) of the Republican party.”Of course, it set some people off on the defensive. To her credit she did it with impressively few words.Fred knows his readership. He had to know that posting this video was going to spark political commentary and debate that would have little to do with his initial post. Happens all the time.I don’t know if I am just paying more attention than in previous years, but I am aghast at how much intellectual dishonesty people are putting up with during this election, and how much pettiness is on display. Of course, this will be interpreted as being true of “the other Party” and that would be correct.And Russell, this is not a commentary on you. You just had a short enough comment that I felt I could get a word in edgewise.

  8. Imran Khan

    Fred, please correct the last name from Kahn to Khan on the subject title immediately.It is so disrespectful for the Khans to have ignored the spelling mistake. I would have understood if there is a mistake in spelling the first name , but this mistake in the last name is not acceptable. Khan is a revered dynasty for ages, a Pathan for all Muslims, has a religious Islam lineage and above all , Khans stood up for all things mattered to Islam.I am not sure if Kahns have the same respect in American history.These are some of the things you should not leave it for Autospell to correct.You were close to changing the identity of the person and therefore the caste

    1. fredwilson

      thanks for pointing this out. i fixed it in the headline and the copy but i can’t change the permalink because the comments won’t show up. i feel terribly about that mistake.

      1. Imran Khan

        Thank you, Fred. By way of your immediate response, you valued us more and so we owe a lot of respect to you. Khuda Hafiz.You are a very noble man and God will always be with you and your family. Inshallah.

        1. fredwilson

          thank you for the blessing. i appreciate it very much.

    1. William Mougayar

      I liked Thomas Barrack though.

  9. jason wright

    is the US a secular state (e.g. France)?

  10. LE

    But on this issue, religious and ethnic tolerance, Trump deserves the attack.He actually has backed off that issue and changed it to banning people from certain countries until we can figure out what is going on. It keeps getting repeated as if he is reinforcing and repeating the original statement. That’s a typical play that happens in politics. Take a snip of speech and run with it even if it has changed. Nobody can change their mind, they need to be 100% consistent.“It doesn’t matter where you’re coming from, except for fact that the terrorist nations, which is something he is adding to this policy to make it more clear, that if you are coming from a hostile nation and you can not be vetted, absolutely you should not come into this country,” Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson said on CNN. The same thing has happened with the “Trump says Russia should hack us”. That’s not what he said. He floated the idea that if Russia had hacked Hillary they should released the 30,000 missing pages of her files.

    1. sigmaalgebra

      > He actually has backed offI call BS. That’s not fair.Trump’s original statement said, IIRC, “temporarily until we figure out what’s going on.”. Well, in the meanwhile, apparently he did make a start — with my interpretation: Stop illegal immigration. Enforce long standing US immigration laws. Thoroughly vet all candidate immigrants. Be reluctant to admit immigrants from regions with a lot of terrorism. If do consider admitting such a person, then especially thoroughly vet them.Sounds to me not a case of “backed off” but just commendable, as clearly, originally proposed and intended progress on the original “figure out what is going on.”.If keep beating on Trump, then might get Hillary. Gee, might keep that in mind. Sure, need to pay careful attention to Trump, now and each day he is POTUS, but unfair attacks could give us Hillary.That Trump is not Captain America, Superman, Batman, and the best characters played by John Wayne all in one is no reason to attack Trump unfairly and get “extremely careless”, i.e., “gross negligence”, Hillary.What the heck is the origin of this dementia where we attack Trump on tiny things, often distortions or just made up lies, but let Hillary get away with massive violation of the US Espionage Act, as SoS selling favors from the US, Travelgate, and much more as in various reports. Dangerous, destructive dementia. Gee, pile on Trump for any reason or no reason and give Hillary a free pass, get out of jail free card, etc. Sounds like a way to ruin the US to me.

  11. Salt Shaker

    Mr. Khan’s words are prophetic. What struck me just as much was the anguish on his wife’s face standing next to him. Amazing family accomplishments and sacrifices. The rest of the world already thinks we’re crazy w/ respect to guns, what will they think if our country elects DJT? What’s happening to our moral compass? Trump’s playing and pandering to the lowest common denominator. He’s no savior and his appeal is almost cult like, at the expense of sanity, reality and having a firm understanding of what it is to be American.

  12. sigmaalgebra

    Since Khan’s speech was in the news, I watched the speech. Yes, it was passionate.Since Khan’s son gave the ultimate sacrifice, I honor Khan and his family.But to me, on Trump, Khan was badly misinformed. Apparently he swallowed whole and thoroughly digested and incorporated the full load of anti-Trump propaganda pejorative conjectures, unsupported negative opinions, distortions, and lies.Khan just needs to look up and follow common high school term paper writing standards about original sources and solid references.So, first, Khan needs to set aside essentially everything from the NYT, WaPo, CBS, CNN, Slate, etc. which rarely would get a grade as high as even a C on these term paper writing standards.Second, Khan just needs to pay close attention to reality, what Trump actually, in reality, really, actually said, and now, with the Internet, that’s relatively easy: Khan just needs to use Google or Bing, go to C-SPAN, YouTube, Trump’s Web site, etc.Then Khan should be very much for Trump.Trump deserves the attack No way do I see anything like that.I’m for Trump and trying to pay careful attention. So far I have seen no significant evidence that in any significant way Trump deserves what Khan said.E.g., for one really big gap with reality, Khan claimed that in some way Trump would violate the US Constitution. Khan never explained the way. I see no sense in which Trump’s proposals on Khan’s concerns, i.e., immigration, would violate anything in the US Constitution or in existing US laws.Otherwise I can’t think of anything Khan would be concerned about, and he didn’t explain.Khan does seem to have missed that at the Republican convention, the last speaker before Trump was an old Trump friend from Lebanon! That Trump friend was not concerned about Trump, and neither should be Khan (assuming Khan is in the US legally).Khan is being wildly emotional. I’m sorry he is upset. But Khan is also being irrational — he didn’t stick with actual reality, solid, original sources, and actual statements and, thus, failed to make a case.Such emotionalism over rationalism is a high speed, non-stop, one-way ticket to Hell.

    1. Stephen Palmer

      How about the multiple times he has banned and disparaged reporters, threatened companies, and now encouraged foreign adversaries to spy? Or when he racially profiled a judge? The guy cares nothing about the constitution.

      1. sigmaalgebra

        What he did with the reporters is fine with me: The reporters more than deserved it. Trump wasn’t going just to sit there and be a whipping boy for the disgusting newsies and let them kill off his campaign just for newsie stories. He pushed back. That was not just good but essential.What companies did he threaten? Ford and Carrier? Okay, they deserve it. I see nothing wrong.> encouraged foreign adversaries to spyHe did no such thing. That claim was just a totally made up, cooked up lie that has been addressed by JLM, LE, and me on this site today.> he racially profiled a judgeNonsense. Maybe you are talking about the Trump U case in CA. Trump claimed that the case should have been dismissed on summary judgment but the judge refused. And Trump claimed that otherwise the judge was unfair to him. Then Trump asked — I have the exact quote — why the judge was being so unfair to him. Then he noticed that the judge had a Mexican background and was active in some CA organizations partisan to Mexicans. So, Trump concluded that the judge had a conflict of interest since Trump wanted to stop illegal immigration from Mexico and the judge was highly in favor of such Mexicans.That nonsense was easy to debunk.Got some more?

        1. Stephen Palmer

          Sounds like you have chosen to ignore a lot of facts. I know exactly what he said about hacking, I’ve seen the tape.As for trade. If Ford doesn’t manufacture overseas while Toyota does, how the hell is Ford to compete? I am amazed how many Republicans don’t understand simple economics.

    2. Alex Murphy

      Under a Trump presidency, Kahn’s family would not have come to the US because Trump wants to ban muslims from coming to the US. Do you not understand how X leads to Y here? There is nothing wrong in Kahn’s assertions about how a Trump presidency would impact future immigration.Go to FactCheck, and read the feedback. While all politicians frame arguments in ways that distort and exaggerate the truth, Trump flat out makes things up … every day. The record is there in his Twitter stream. You clearly choose not to look at it with a critical eye and that is a shame.Your response has to be deeper with solid evidence rather than “that media news agency is biased,” or “there is a conspiracy” …

  13. JLM

    .Captain Humayun Khan was an Ordnance branch officer assigned to the 1st Infantry Division (the Big Red One). His duties included base security.A graduate of UVA’s ROTC program, he was supervising his soldiers guarding a gate when a taxi with 200 lbs of explosives failed to heed a warning to stop, instead driving through the gate and detonating. He tried to halt the vehicle but was unsuccessful. The explosion killed Captain Khan instantly.He was buried at Arlington Cemetery and was posthumously awarded the Bronze Star with V (valor) and the Purple Heart for wounds.As an Army officer myself during the Viet Nam War Era, I served as a Notification Officer and a body transport officer. I was a Captain when most of this took place. I had escaped this duty because for the first few years of my service, I was otherwise engaged overseas. These were duties assigned to certain officers because of their positions and experience. I could have gotten out of it because I was a company commander. I chose not to.I went to people’s homes, with a chaplain, and told them their sons were dead. I walked to their doors and knocked on them and stood waiting to shatter them. I remember the words I spoke exactly:”On behalf of the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense, I regret to inform you that your son, [insert name here], was killed in action [insert date, location, circumstances, if known.]”There was more but that’s the part I remember the best.You never really know sorrow until you look into a mother’s and father’s eyes and see their reaction to those words. It is the cruelest thing I have ever done in my life. The Hell of it is — I can’t remember any of their names.The Khan’s are entitled to their emotion and where they decide to focus it, is their business. They have earned that right.I should probably stop right here.The parallel to this is the manner in which our Benghazi dead were treated. At a time when the government, at all levels, knew the truth of the matter, the President, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice lied to us.In that lie — for guys like me who served — they disqualified themselves from holding high office and service to our nation. They desecrated the honor of the sacrifice of those men in a cold, calculating, and craven manner. For political gain and nothing else.In much the same way I revere and honor the Khan family’s sacrifice, I damn that of our President and the others.We are a great nation because of our collective sacrifices. We are a nation born of a bloody bayonet tip. We are a nation of laws. Freedom is not perpetual and the mortgage has to be paid from time to time.All of these things must be recognized and honored.Godspeed, good and faithful warrior. Godspeed, Captain Humayun Khan. A grateful nation mourns your loss and lesser men honor your service.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  14. jason wright

    i think Trump has a point about immigration. cherry picking talent from the education systems of other countries is a form of intellectual theft. the US should be educating its own people to supply the demand. his wall idea is just campaign spiel.

  15. BillMcNeely

    As a veteran that hit home. Definitely top 5 speeches last two weeks

  16. James Ferguson @kWIQly

    I found the speak, transparent and moving, and essentially apolitical – despite the platform.Rabble-rousing, may look utterly ridiculous until you see the effect it has, and the offense it causes.History is festooned with populist buffoons who have triggered wars.

    1. JLM

      .Apolitical? Really? The speech was given at the national convention of a political party and was targeted on the candidate of the other party and was apolitical? Really?Could you please enlighten me as to wars triggered by “populist buffoons”? As a serious student of history, I can’t come up with any. Thanks.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      1. James Ferguson @kWIQly

        Apolitical in that a) the lack of observation/knowledge of your constitution is palpable and surely that concern transcends political boundaries.b) hating people on the basis of ethnicity is not inherent to a political party (until they make it so). But Trump hates, candidly and openly. He hates the people of certain ethnicity who have lost loved ones for his right to be a buffoon. That makes him a jerk – and that is an completely apolitical observation.Other populists, Papa Doc… was the President of Haiti from 1957 to 1971.[3] He was elected president in 1957 on a populist and black nationalist platform and successfully thwarted a coup d’état in 1958. His rule, based on a purged military, a rural militia known as the Tonton Macoute, and the use of cult of personality, resulted in the murder of 30,000 to 60,000 Haitians and the exile of many more.[3]Uncle JoeStalin was one of the seven members of the first Politburo, founded in 1917 in order to manage the Bolshevik Revolution, alongside Lenin, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Trotsky, Sokolnikov and Bubnov.[3] Among the Bolshevik revolutionaries who took part in the Russian Revolution of 1917, Stalin was appointed General Secretary of the party’s Central Committee in 1922. He subsequently managed to consolidate power following the 1924 death of Vladimir Lenin by suppressing Lenin’s criticisms (in the postscript of his testament) and expanding the functions of his role, all the while eliminating any opposition.More esotericallyFriedrich Ludwig Jahn, a Lutheran Minister, a professor at the University of Berlin and the “father of gymnastics”, introduced the concept of Volkstum, a racial notion that draws on the essence of a people that was lost in the Industrial Revolution. Adam Mueller went a step further by positing the state as a bigger totality than the government institution. This paternalistic vision of aristocracy concerned with social orders had a dark side in that the opposite force of modernity was represented by the Jews, who were said to be eating away at the state.[35] Populism also played a role in mobilizing middle class support for the Nazi Party in Weimar Germany.[36] In this case, distressed middle–class populists during the pre-Nazi Weimar period mobilized their anger at government and big business.According to Fritzsche:The Nazis expressed the populist yearnings of middle–class constituents and at the same time advocated a strong and resolutely anti-Marxist mobilization…. Against “unnaturally” divisive parties and querulous organized interest groups, National Socialists cast themselves as representatives of the commonwealth, of an allegedly betrayed and neglected German public….[b]reaking social barriers of status and caste, and celebrating at least rhetorically the populist ideal of the people’s community…[30]>> As a serious student for historyPopulism 101 -…How many buffoons do you want ?

  17. James Ferguson @kWIQly

    Superb piece higlighting the dangers of populist Rabble rousing…History tells us what may happen next with Brexit & Trump

  18. JLM

    .It is evidence of a low level of comprehension, a bit of shallow intellectual curiosity, and a side order of pandering to suggest that anything going on in the world today is really a matter of religious intolerance. It is a matter of terrorism.ISIL — self-identifying themselves as the ISLAMIC State of Iraq and the Levant — is not a religious movement though they pretend to be so. They are terrorists and their greatest victims are Muslims. They may operate in the shadow of the Koran — which is a troubling bit of literature in and of itself — but they are just murderers.Trump’s utterances are related to immigration policy as it relates to the unintended import of undercover terrorists into our country, primarily by the means of a mis-guided refugee policy.The head of the FBI and the DNI have both said that ISIL is using the movement of refugees worldwide — but specifically into the US — as a means of positioning terrorists within western society.Hey, that wasn’t Donald Trump that was Comey and Klapper.In addition, both agree that there is no ability to adequately vet a refugee from a country whose infrastructure no longer exists or when the persons are fleeing in a disorderly manner. These people are undocumented displaced persons and within that flow, ISIL has already inserted and told us they intend to insert terrorists.What Trump has said is more than the knee jerk suggested herein.He has objected to the US being a repository of this refugee tsunami when neighboring countries in the region — incredibly wealthy countries with large landmasses to match their fat pocketbooks while also being religious, language, and cultural kinsmen — are not doing anything.He has objected to allowing a wave of immigration from countries who are themselves havens of terrorism UNTIL THE VETTING PROCESS IS PERFECTED.Will he win a Pulitzer for the style of his messaging? I think not.Is his logic either hateful or wrong? I, also, think not.Take this a step further and extrapolate it to his utterances in regard to the southern border. I live in Texas. We cannot get that wall built fast enough to stem the tide of low skill/low wage expectation ILLEGAL immigration, criminals (yes, he’s perfectly correct on that and I can take you to the street corners in El Paso, San Antonio, Corpus Christi, San Antonio whereat they discharge them), and others who are jumping the line of LEGAL immigration.Make no mistake, we love illegals in Texas. They do all the work — AT PREDATORY PRICES — that we want done.Consider your own biases. We all have them. Let your mind out to air some of those brain cells. Just don’t pretend this is about religious or ethnic intolerance. You’re smarter than that. It’s about terrorism, illegal immigration, and legal immigration.Trump, on these two points, is perfectly correct.I’ll tell him to work on his delivery.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

    1. Salt Shaker

      How do you vet ideology?Q. 1–Yes, I want to enter the U.S. because:A) It’s the land of opportunity. B) I want to become a solid citizen and contribute to society.C) I want to share my radical beliefs and blow things up.The notion this can be done efficiently AND effectively is utterly ridiculous (the same as deporting 11M illegals). Trump calls for a temporary ban “until we figure out what’s going on.” Can someone please tell me what those words mean in any context that’s legitimately actionable?

      1. JLM

        .Let me see if I can assist.This is about PREVENTING ISIS thugs from getting into the country, not whether they like pistachio or strawberry ice cream.Let’s start out with country of birth, country of residence, origin, education, language, religion, military service, family members, travel, public utterances, social media presence, a medical, and then we can dither about ideology.BTW, back in a past endeavor when doing something very similar to this, I would ask a candidate to disrobe and ponder where he got some of those scars which looked surprisingly similar to shrapnel and bullet wounds. Some turned out not to be the peaceful chaps they represented themselves as. It was just eyeballs.Let’s review the origin of documents — one can buy a Libyan or a Syrian passport on original stock for $50 in the local bazaar. See if the birth date, the birth location, the local cemetery provide any insights. See when the passport was issued and from whence. If it was issued last month in Raqqa, well, OK that isn’t going to work, eh?As you can see, there is a wealth of information that can be vetted well before we begin to consider ideology. This is basic research. The CIA/NSA does this stuff all the freakin’ time on foreign targets and themselves.You apply for a job at the CIA and they ask your 3rd grade teacher what kind of student you were. They interview the guy you used to sit next to on a lifeguard stand when you were 17 and whether you used to like girls. For the rest of your life, they subject you to periodic lie detector tests to see if your new girlfriend is a spy.It is not being done now and it cannot be done quickly.Then again, how about if they’d thrown some of the Boston bombers, the San Bernandino murders, the shithead in Orlando out of the country?The alternative is to let anyone and their brother into the country and “hope” it works. That is a strategy destined to flow blood ankle deep in our streets.Nobody said this shit was going to be easy. Remember what you felt like on 9-11-2001.Let me circle back — refugees should be safeguarded in the region on some of the ample landmass owned by some of the richest countries in the world where the climate is similar, the culture is the same, and they speak the language. Why are we allowing them to emigrate to the US as refugees? They have other alternatives and we should be pushing these.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        1. Salt Shaker

          “Let’s start out with country of birth, country of residence, origin, education, language, religion, military service, family members, travel, public utterances, social media presence, a medical, and then we can dither about ideology.”Beyond defining what kind of subjective criteria and weighting should apply here, I’d argue that’s likely not a good allocation of resources. How do you propose we get answers to the variables you outline? Google them? Rely on our “allies” for info? Access existing third-party databases? Polygraph? And what constitutes reasonable doubt/concern?There have been ISIS directed or inspired attacks in France, Belgium, Australia, Canada, Algeria, Lebanon, Denmark, Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, etc. Should we temporarily ban all or devolve to a discriminatory, subjective statistical probability game? Someone seeking entry from Pakistan is 3X likely to be a terrorist than someone seeking entry from Belgium.We face a much bigger threat from home grown terrorists and I believe ultimately this becomes more of a resource allocation issue than anything else.I also find it interesting that many Trump supporters welcome a temporary immigration ban to weed out potential entry by a few bad souls, yet they’re not supportive of strong gun legislation to accomplish the same. Seems a bit hypocritical.

          1. JLM

            .So, because it is difficult, you suggest we do NOTHING?Good God, man, you said there was nothing and I told you where we could start. All of which is rooted in reality. I can’t design the whole program in a single comment. All criteria must be, by its very nature, subjective.As we draw a blank on specific criteria, we then have to rely more stringently upon other criteria.This is not some pie in the sky approach, it is done routinely by intelligence agencies all the time.As to immigration from France, we are going to be focused on the same criteria but it is infinitely easier because their gov’t infrastructure is not destroyed, right?I am offended — not enough to flee to my safe place but I am offended, I know it’s hard to believe, OK, I’m not really offended, just vexed — by your idea this is a “few bad souls.” It is the beginning of an epidemic.This is a place where one uses pattern recognition and common sense. All the shithead shooters in the US fall into a fairly small and recognizable pattern, the terrorists even moreso.As to gun regulation — not control — I have long championed the idea of completing the work of the 1994 AWB (assault weapons ban) and creating a list of people who should require greater scrutiny to obtain a gun legally.This list was, of course, broadly opposed by liberals, the ACLU, and liberal states. Texas created theirs and uses it to this day. You have a domestic violence charge in Texas, you get extra scrutiny when it comes to buying a gun legally.The Second Amendment can be changed by the provisions contained in the Constitution itself. It has not because the cause of gun control — not regulation — continues to be a fringe consideration. Get the votes. Make the change. That is the way the Constitution works.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          2. Salt Shaker

            Our screening process for refugees is already fairly laborious w/ serious vetting, but that obv doesn’t take into account all foreigners seeking entry into the U.S.. Of course we need to be vigilant in all cases, but my point was more about resource allocation than anything else. Where can DHS dollars be best deployed? The 9/11 terrorists relied on the aid of others already here (including associates of the Saudi gov’t) to carry out their plans, whether it was for living expenses, housing, flight school, etc. Any foreigner looking to enter the country and commit Jihad will more than likely stand out without the support and guidance of others, given their unfamiliarity w/ language, culture, etc. With respect to prioritization, home grown terrorists and/or their potential accomplices should be #1. Our biggest line of defense from abroad frankly is the Atlantic Ocean. Our borders thankfully are far more defendable than those of our European allies. Our strategies and their strategies will be different given the geographical proximities of one European country to the next. The Muslim community here needs to be far more vigilant and cooperative to weed out radicals and clerics espousing an anti-American sentiment. They have as much as, if not more, than anyone to gain or lose.

          3. JLM

            .I don’t know where you’ve developed the notion that the “screening process for refugees is already fairly laborious w/ serious vetting”?It is, essentially non-existent.First, let’s segregate refugees from illegal immigrants, folks overstaying their tourist/work/education visas and other forms of entry into the country.A retired Marine Col I went to school with has DHS from El Paso to New Orleans. Solid as a rock, great guy. Typical Marine Colonel.He says ICE can’t round up the illegals meaning there are a huge number of folks still getting into the country without EVEN BEING TOUCHED.Refugees, by their very nature as displaced persons, are unable to provide the most basic documentation. One cannot call up the DMV in Damascus to verify information.The big question is why are we not compelling the local and regional countries — large landmasses, lots of money, speak the language, pray to the same Allah, know the culture, similar climate — to build safe harbors for their kindred spirits?The Obama administration asked for an emergency appropriation of $4B ($2B reallocated from the VA showing where their priorities lie) for staffing for vetting. Clearly, this indicates they don’t think they’re doing enough.What part of the gov’t is doing this vetting and where? It’s being done by understaffed and overworked Embassy staffs like the clowns in Pakistan who authorized the entry of Tashfeen Malik, woman shooter in San Bernandino, on a marriage visa which is not an emergency action. They missed her education and her social media postings which would have given one pause.There are active ISIS investigations in every state, sayeth the Director of the FBI who speaks in concert with the DNI (Klapper) both of whom say ISIS is sending people our way and we don’t have the ability to vet them.Our borders are a sieve. The southern border in Texas and the Southwest is wide open. Even those being caught are simply tagged and released for court dates six months in the future.Come down to Texas and we can sit on the banks of the Rio Grande and count the illegals running for their lives. None of them are ISIS?The US needs to infiltrate the mosques, no different than they sent undercover agents into the strongholds of the Mafia to make their cases.This is a solvable problem but it will take a bit of grit to make it happen. To suggest that the US is doing an adequate job of it anywhere is pure nonsense.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          4. Salt Shaker

            JLM, take a look at the attached infographic on refugee screening. More comprehensive than I had realized. I’m not suggesting we’re doing an adequate job w/ anything, including w/ illegals, but the notion we have the resources to adequately plug all gaps is unrealistic. The worst thing we can do is buckshot our resources too thinly across a wide range of initiatives rather than prioritize based on perceived risk, efficiency and effectiveness.

          5. JLM

            .Trump would finish your sentence: “…the notion we have the resources to adequately plug all gaps is unrealistic…” and until we do, we should curtail refugee — not legal, refugee — immigration to our country until such time as we can fix the system.Because after all, the shitheads only have to win once and the good guys have to win Every. Single. Time. There is no margin for error and therefore, we should hang fire until we CAN do the job.The attached infographic is a wetdream fantasy. This is why they’re asking for $4B in additional funding and why they missed the coup attempt in Turkey.There is ample evidence ISIS is amongst the refugees and there is the testimony of the FBI Director and the DNI — of course, WTF would those two know about it?There is also the evidence that in a crunch the President, the Sec of State, the UN Ambassador will lie to us about anything that is “awkward” or “inconvenient.”Where in the graphic is the flow of untouched illegal immigration through the southern border?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          6. sigmaalgebra

            Maybe you are arguing with paid Clinton propagandists.

          7. JLM

            .Further to my comment below, let us consider the following:We are asked to take comfort in the idea the FBI is taking the refugees fingerprints and comparing them to their database of known criminals or persons of interest.How would the FBI — which can only operate domestically by law — ever have acquired a 22-year old Syrian or Pakistani terrorist’s fingerprints?This is typical of the bullshit approach to refugee screening that the administration wants us to be lulled to sleep by.None of these displaced persons will have fingerprints on file w/ the FBI.This is exactly why we should be supporting the creation of safe harbors in the region in countries which have substantial land mass, lots of money, share the language, share the culture, and have similar climates.This would be the smart play.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          8. sigmaalgebra

            It’s totally beyond me (A) the high motivation of both Obama and Hillary to admit people from around the ISIS areas of the Mideast and (B) the willingness of the US public to accept this immigration without screaming bloody murder.Maybe people will start screaming when ISIS actually executes one of their main goals — deploy a WMD in a major US city. If they can get and deploy a nuke, they will ASAP. They could kill ballpark 500,000 people. Then people will wake up?

  19. jason wright

    Hillary Clinton is clearly a sock puppet. those writing her campaign checks will be setting the agenda if she becomes POTUS. i see yet another war on the horizon. probably Iran for it’s oil. i see Iran is today complaining that inward investment is too slow following the nuclear deal. i sense the hawks in Washington putting on the brakes hoping Clinton makes it to the White House.

    1. JLM

      .We had Iran right where we wanted them with our sanctions and we let them out of the noose. There is no chance we would ever go to war with Iran unless they did something provocative.The second we achieve energy independence — which could be done in a single Presidential term — Iran and the Straits of Hormuz become trivia game questions and not much more.We made Iran into IRAN with that stupid treaty. We had them under control.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      1. jason wright

        the great issue the US has had with Iran is that Iran started selling its oil denominated in a range of fiat currencies. that went down very badly with the owners of the Federal Reserve.

        1. JLM

          .You could not possibly be more wrong on that score.Iran sells its oil to obtain a currency, the US $$$, because their currency, at the time and because of the sanctions, was not attractive and tradeable for goods and services.The use of the US dollar is a bit of genius in the oil business. Otherwise, they would end up with a bunch of currencies that are not exchangeable and which are traded at a discount.The Iran treaty’s biggest benefit to Iran (well, other than being able to build a nuclear weapon in 10 years, to be called the Obama Bomb), was the re-introduction to the world markets which allow them to obtain competitive pricing for their oil.When they were banned, they had to trade at the “criminal discount” which they did with China.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          1. LE

            The Iran treaty’s biggest benefit to IranBoeing is a beneficiary with the airplane deal. [1] This is a total coincidence and had nothing to do with Obama teams poor negotiations of course. Totally unrelated to approval. [2][1]…[2] Would love to see the emails that Vladimir has on this one.

          2. JLM

            .Read up and see who Boeing’s top lobbyist was and his connection to Benghazi. You will be surprised.It all gets back to the $$$.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          3. jason wright

            Iran was bartering with India. Iran was selling its oil for rupees and then using the currency to buy manufactured goods from India. it completely circumvented the USD system of global profiteering.

          4. JLM

            .The Iran-India-China trade in oil was well known.To the extent India was “bartering” there was nothing but book entry trade between the countries, so the notion it was nominally in rupees is meaningless.China paid in dollars though they were also engaging in barter arrangements.Iran was selling oil at a steep discount because it was a “troubled” or illegal trade. When they were once again welcomed to the world stage, the discounts were ended.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

    2. JLM

      .She is an expensive sock puppet.https://www.opensecrets.org…As the loyal overseers of her plantation, who have paid her more than $20MM for spending time and chatting, know — she isn’t the least bit beholden to these interests.It is just a mistake of geography that she lives in NY and was a Senator from NY.One has to respect anyone who keeps their end of the deal, no? She can’t be bought but she can damn sure be rented.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  20. ShanaC

    Every time I watch this, I sob. I can’t even.

  21. cavepainting

    The wrong way to fight radical Islam is to fight Islam. The right way to fight it is to separate the radical from the Islam and defeat the radical without bringing Islam into the equation. The speech is an affirmation of the most basic tenets of what it means to be American.

  22. onowahoo

    I’m not a Trump supporter but it seems like Khizr Khan came to this country for freedom and rights of men and his sons. His wife didn’t say anything the entire time and was wearing protective chador.

  23. Carol Reid

    DNC paid Mr. Khan $25,000 to present the speech they prepared. Clearly a political move.Mr. Khan has financial problems with his business and the IRS.The attack was NOT DESERVED.Donald Trump had nothing to do with what happened to Mr. Khan’s son. Why the attack? 5 others turned down the offers to speak and were given $5,000 each and had to sign Non Disclosure Agreements.Mr. Khan used his son for money what a disgrace. The DNC acted disgracefully as well.

    1. Alex Murphy

      This is pretty much complete BS. Just because you read some crap report that ends with “is this report true” and then use that as the basis to continue the lie does not make it true.This misinformation tactic is used over and over. Get real.

  24. Carol Reid

    Khizer M Khan’s website notes that he works to help clients with the E-2 and EB-5 programs that let overseas investors buy into U.S. companies and also provides green cards for family members. The E-2 and E-5 are two of the most notoriously abused visa categories that essentially allow wealthy foreigners to buy their way to U.S. residency, and possibly citizenship, with a relatively modest investment. It is no secret that Hillary wants to bring more Muslims into the USA.

    1. Alex Murphy

      Your head must be ringing in the Fox echo chamber or equivalent.The E2 and EB-5 Visas are awesome.This allows a person to come into the US and to start a new business with a “substantial” investment, not a modest investment, to capitalize the business.These programs are not “notoriously abused.” There is a limited number of visas available each year. And we would be well served to see this number go up 10x. We need more businesses to start and thrive in the US rather than in other parts of the world.The Congressional Research Service did a study of the EB-5 Visa. Read it. You will find that the people using these programs are primarily coming from China. No real surprise there considering the freedom here.…Key Quote:”There are approximately 10,000 visas available annually for foreign national investors and their family members (7.1% of the worldwide employment-based visas are allotted to immigrant investors and their derivatives). In FY2015, there were 9,764 EB-5 visas used, with 93% going to investors from Asia. More specifically, 84% were granted to investors from China and 3% were granted to those from Vietnam. “

    2. Carol Reid

      To Alex Murphy, Thank you for the information. No issue there if handled properly. My main concern is why would the Hillary camp dig up this death of Khan’s son that happened in 2004 and use Khan to attack Donald Trump who had nothing to do with the War in Iraq? Khan who is a supporter of Hillary and his deceased son were used as a pawn. Both Obama, Hillary & Bush supported the war in Itsq

  25. LE

    Well the vast majority of people in this country have “sacrificed nothing”. What does that mean anyway exactly?

  26. John Revay

    well said charlie

  27. LE

    He actually has sacrificed quite a bit. But even more so considering the jokes and derision that he endures. And considering the world class hate that he has brought on himself (when he already has fame and fortune) for the things that he says I’d say that’s a pretty big sacrifice. Doesn’t even matter the reason. To me it’s actually stupid. I would guess that this is something that 99.9% of people would never do no matter how much they believed in or wanted something. Some of this also applies to Hillary or any political candidate.

  28. JLM

    .I wonder how many people on this blog today have ever sacrificed anything for their country? I do not mean that in the sole context of having served in uniform. I mean in a manner of doing something which actually provided service to the nation.There are a lot of very smart people on this blog but how many have ever served the country — big or small?I mention this because I think we have missed a huge opportunity in this country — the notion of national service. The US should require two years of a high school graduate’s time before they enter college to be invested in service of a meaningful and difficult manner.Our current mercenary army — the volunteer force v the conscript force structure of earlier times — allows the vast majority of men to allow others to serve.Luckily, the military is a honorable and noble undertaking and we have men and women who are not only willing to serve, they want to serve.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  29. Brandon Kessler

    Given they’re not calling for bans on entire religions nor one election away from the presidency, it means he is uniquely insane and dangerous.

  30. Rob Underwood

    I am indicting white affluent liberal parents, along with some liberal education advocates, for giving us as an educational system that has devalued graduating kids who know the facts of history, geography, civics, and the natural science. I.e., the “we only need to teach kids how to think” mentality that pervades neighborhoods like mine (Park Slope).I find it ironic as this approach to eduction has, in my opinion, contributed to the rise of a politician (Mr Trump). Liberals may have dug their own grave in deciding kids (who became adults) can get by “only knowing how to think” and, more recently, can get away without knowing facts about history, civics, and the natural sciences because “you can just Google everything.” I that mentality and approach to eduction is bullsh*t and nonsense.I believe insignts and ephihanies come from pattern matching of facts in the sub-conscious. Now we have a populace who has been taught, either tacitly or overtly, to develop opinions and then search Google to find facts to support.Regarding Michael Jordon, I don’t know the relevance

  31. Rob Larson

    I don’t think he considers that a sacrifice at all. The data suggests he loves the additional attention and fame. He seems more than eager to say things that he knows people will hate, to get on the front page and get even more of the national attention. Positive attention = good. Negative attention = less good, but still good.

  32. Rob Underwood

    My point remains this — I think an electorate well prepared to deliberate and vote needs to understand history (e.g., things like how World War II started), civics (what the Equal Protection clause is that Mr. Khan mentioned and why it’s important), and the natural sciences (e.g., the basics of the biology, chemistry, and physics which serve people well in numerous ways in both their personal and professional lives.)I am not advocating for a poll test. I am simply lamenting that the mentality of “kids only need to learn how to think” – a liberal view from the 70s and 80s that remains today – I believe has given us a populace that does not possess a strong command of history, civics, and the natural sciences, and this is impacting its ability to function as a both an electorate and a work force.

  33. JLM

    .Just curious, what country are you talking about?<iframe width=”520″ height=”293″ src=”…” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=””></iframe>JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  34. Rob Underwood

    I think a requirement of a well functioning democracy is a well educated populace, so one answer is any. But in this case, I’m speaking about the United States.I think your video is making my point, right? (Although videos like these, of which there are many, are sometimes though not always the product of heavy editing).

  35. JLM

    .I was afraid of that.We have dumbed down education and testing for education so dramatically that we end up with things like the above.The Founding Fathers actually envisioned a representative republic in which taxpayers were the voters. We have mistakenly and lazily allowed the word “democracy” to suggest there is no qualification to be a citizen.[The wags amongst us are tempted to say “you have to have a heartbeat” but we know better, right?]The Commonwealth of Virginia is agog at the moment with an effort by its Democrat Governor, Terry McAuliffe (big time Clinton fundraiser) and all around scumbag, to sponsor the reinstatement of the voting rights of 200,000 + convicted felons including some who are currently in jail in Virginia and other states.Why would he do that? (Careful trick question.)Cause he’s pretty sure they’re going to be voting for the Clinton Crime Family? Perhaps?Democracy can get a little messy sometimes.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  36. awaldstein

    My friend.I disagree with most everything you say about politics but I agree with this absolutely in spirit.The drive to help others comes from the way we were brought up. The reality of doing it in ways that requires your time is something few of us do.

  37. ShanaC

    working on things, always

  38. cavepainting

    Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. Having worked a lot in Israel, I see the huge difference it has made to shaping the personalities, values, attitudes and patriotism of young people.

  39. JLM

    .Arnold, you agree with EVERYTHING I say about politics and you know it. I won’t turn you out.In the disagreement, comes better ideas. In the knee jerk rejection, we lose the opportunity to educate ourselves and to learn.I want to speak to those who disagree not live in an echo chamber.When ideas wrestle and men of good nature debate, the result is always better ideas.The Colonies revolted against England in 1775 and the US Constitution was adopted in 1788. During that interim, men of good faith debated the provisions. It took a long time to arrive at an agreement which was ratified by the Colonies.The last amendment to the US Constitution (#27) was made in 1992.Reasonably passionate discourse is what drives debate. We are best when our ideas are what collide with each other regardless of how vociferously they are espoused.I was a death penalty supporter until I heard a better argument, a better idea and justification.Let the ideas clash and may the best ideas win and evolve.Because we have such little national service, we don’t collectively have enough skin in the game.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  40. LE

    So by that token someone who always wanted to be a Navy Seal, trained, applied, joined because they find it exciting hasn’t sacrificed either. Or that soldier whose parents gave the speech.Where do you draw the line? By the way I don’t think he likes the hate but he is able to put up with it. Unlike most people, (even people who comment on this blog) [1] who fear saying something that will not make them popular.He is putting up with world class abuse. That does not mean he doesn’t get a benefit from it but making enemies like that won’t exactly be good for him going forward (whether he wins or loses). Hillary does as well. But she gets way more positive than she gets negative since most thought leaders are behind her and have her back.[1] Or actually don’t comment.

  41. awaldstein

    YupMy dad–a better man than I –gave back by choosing to teach.I honestly think there is an opportunity to build a service that connects people to things to do that give back.We all say we want to do it. Maybe more would if it was a bit easier to find it.

  42. LE

    There is also less thinking simply because there are so many ways to listen or read and get lazy just following how other people think and what they do. It’s really good for all of the lemmings makes their life so much easier just going along with what others are saying.

  43. JLM

    .Agreeing with much that you say, I would only add that it does not “take a village” to educate a child; it takes engaged and disciplined parents.My kids were forced to learn at the best schools I could afford (OK, white privilege and all that) and then got their butts kicked if they failed to get good grades.Their homework was checked and they got the help they needed if I or my wife couldn’t hack it. [My son says my wife did very good at writing his papers but then she is a lawyer.]They both were required to major in things for which there were ads for employment placed into evidence.They are an investment banker and a startup eco-system graphic artist with her own profitable side business ( wife says I should write a book, “How Not To Parent” — says I should just write down what I did.In the end, parents are responsible for the kind of education their children receive.I also sent my Labs to training at Big Oak in Buda. Texas Pete would sit for an hour, if I told him to sit and wouldn’t come until I whistled him up. He was an Independent Lab liking neither the Rs or the Ds.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  44. BLSavini

    I went back to school in my mid 40’s and have seen, first hand, how far we have dropped. WE are cranking out functional illiterates.There is far too much emphasis on TEAM, with individual achievement being pushed to the back burner. In my opinion, Trump rose to power because he was willing to discuss the realities of how the Global economy hasn’t worked out so well for America. His speech patterns are simple, and HE is expressing sentiments held by the population, that continue to be side stepped by the powers that be.

  45. JLM

    .”The Holy Ghost gave us humor specifically to deal with the ugliness of life. The people with the best senses of humor navigate the shoals of life better.”Who said that?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  46. JLM

    .Francis Bacon and JLM.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  47. JLM

    .Amongst modern democracies, I count Israel as having the best system of national service. I recall being in Israel in the 1970s and listening to a young commando officer tell me, “Israel does not have the ability to lose ten miles at our borders, we don’t have the room.”This was said in a discussion during which I admitted the US loses the first battle of each war and then gets its shit in order and eventually prevails.The American Army of Kasserine Pass was not the same army as Normandy. We learned how to plan, organize, command, fight, and, thereby, how to win. We became the best logisticians ever and we are the only nation who understood and used amphibious warfare — in two theaters of war.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  48. Rob Larson

    Great question – you made me think about that for a while. This is where I come out on it: I think that to sacrifice = to give up something of yourself for the greater good. (The “greater good” = however you interpret it, but it must be something more than just yourself).Therefore if any part of the Navy Seal’s motivation is a desire to defend the country or his family or his fellow soldiers, or just a sense of duty or anything similar, even if it’s only a small part of his motivation, then putting himself in harms way absolutely = a sacrifice. (I think this is probably 100% of our Seals, or close to it). However if a young man’s motivation never rises to include anyone but himself – for example if he *only* cares about being a warrior and being able to fight/kill, which he does for his own satisfaction only, then his service is not a sacrifice. It is just serving himself. (Again, I doubt this is the case for any of our Seals/Marines/Rangers/etc)Similarly, if Trump is motivated to expose himself to hate because he thinks it is for the greater good of the country, then that = a sacrifice. But if he just loves the fame and having everyone talk about him, and he exposes himself to hate just because that is the price of getting the headlines and benefitting from today’s dose of fame, then it’s just for himself, and that is not a sacrifice.Maybe he’s motivated by serving his country. I can’t know for sure. But from the outside it seems as if he’s just in it for himself and the benefits that will flow to himself.

  49. JLM

    .We have had some excellent examples of national service — the CCC, the WPA, TeachAmerica, the Peace Corps, Americorps.The WPA was particularly useful as it built untold airfields, libraries, schools, parks, and public utilities. It was funded with almost 7% of then current GDP which was a huge amount of money. Think about that number and extrapolate it to today, wow!It had the multiple benefits of ensuring families had at least one breadwinner, absorbing massive amounts of unemployment, building enormous amounts of public infrastructure which then provided direct benefits to the nation, teaching hard work to our citizens, and preparing us to mobilize for the impending war.It ended up building almost 90% of all the airports built in that time frame which provided excellent building expertise and for WWII pilot training.We should have national service which provides the same opportunity and the military should be in the mix, not dominate it.As to wars, no war is a “good” war. Soldiers who have seen it up close, hate war. It is an obscene waste of human potential.The great contradiction is that the stronger our military, the less it is likely to be used. When we are weak, our enemies will be encouraged.The wars since Korea have all been wars we decided to conduct rather than wars which were forced upon us. I am not a fan of letting our enemies attack us but I am not a fan of our using war as an element of foreign policy.Oddly enough, Trump (a VN era bone spurred foot draft dodger) is less likely to start a war than HRC who has the burden of being as tough as the boys.It is difficult for any rational person — military view — to think the wars in Iraq and A’stan were necessary or competently undertaken.An administration should have a clear strategic vision and know what will drive them to war. Drawing fictitious and flexible red lines will not cut it.The US abandoned the “two wars at the same time” strategy during this administration and it is a very bad move.We are approaching levels that are pre-WWII in the Army, Navy, Air Force (more obsolescence than numbers) and Marines. This is happening at a time that the military is ground pretty thin and the attrition is coming from the ranks of combat experienced company grade officers and NCOs. This is a terrible position to be in.When we do go to war, we have to have identifiable military objectives and a clear definition of what constitutes success. We need to stop rebuilding other countries and spend our money in Newark, NJ.When we do go to war, we should go with a degree of violence and viciousness that overwhelms our enemies, destroys their armies (not their cities and civilians), and then turns it over to the United Nations.We need to make the American version of war so terrible as to be incomprehensible. It should scare people to even think what we are capable of.In this manner, we will fight fewer wars, lose fewer men, and have peace. It is an illogical notion until one delves into it.If a bit of evil in the world is going to result in 100 deaths and American intervention is going to result in 100,000 deaths, we need to think carefully as to whether the moral rectitude is worth the wholesale loss of life.It is a hard calculus but it is real.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  50. Kirsten Lambertsen

    Knowledge is power. France is bacon.

  51. Donna Brewington White

    Does Big Oak accept kids?