President's Day - 2017

We are less than 40 days into 45's presidency.  I have this mental picture of a reporter, from one of those very conservative media outlets who were invited into last Friday's closed-door press briefing with Sean Spicer as the New York Times, CNN, L.A. Times and the Huffington Post were excluded; asking Mr. Trump a question.

"Mister President, today is President's Day.  As we sit in the Oval Office, in your opinion, who is our nation's greatest president ever?"

"Me.  I'm the greatest president in the history of not just the USA, but of the entire planet.  The bigly things I've done in just a few weeks are much more bigly than those of the presidents who came before me.  In fact I've done such a great job I'm working on replacing those four guys on that mountain in South Dakota with just me."

A bit of a stretch?  Probably.  But not all that big of one when you consider a tweet that the narcissistic resident of the White House sent out last week.

"The media has not reported that the National Debt in my first month went down by $12 billion vs a $200 billion increase in Obama first mo."

Of all the stupid things that he has tweeted out thus far, this is the stupidest.  The reason that the media isn't reporting this in the way Herman Cain phrased it on Fox and Friends, is that it is an idiotic notion.  45 hasn't signed a single piece of financial legislation.  Nothing he's done since being inaugurated has had anything to do with the level of the national debt.

The lunacy goes deeper.  In an era where 45 is talking constantly about how the media puts out fake news, it is he and his myopic minions who are engaging in the biggest lies ever.  Comparing the first month of his tenure in the Oval Office with that of President Obama is one of the most egregious of false equivalencies ever.

January 2009.  The U.S. is reeling from a financial meltdown.  The Dow Jones Industrial average, which hit a high of 14,000 in October of 2007 was below 8,000 the day that President Obama was sworn in.  It would fall below 7,000 by March of 2009. 

January 2017.  The U.S. is enjoying a recovery.  Unemployment is at a historic low.  The market continues to climb.

I cannot say with any degree of certainty that when history renders its judgment about where Donald Trump ranks in terms of other presidents, for better or worse, but I predict he'll be near the bottom with Andrew Johnson and Franklin Pierce.

* * *

Speaking of comparisons between 45 and President Obama, let's make a few

President Obama went to Chicago in February of 2009 and went back in June of 2009.  Those were his only visits to his hometown during his first six months in office.

45 has visited his Mar-a-Lago home three straight weekends during February of 2017.  He has spent three of his first six weekends in office

President Obama played his first round of golf after being inaugurated on April 26, 2009.

45 has gone to his golf courses six times during his first six weeks in office.  CNN reports that while 45's staff is taking great pains to conceal the number of rounds of golf he has played,  it appears that he played a round of golf on "most of those visits."

At this rate 45 will play a lot more golf than President Obama did during their respective times in office, and let us not forget that 45 constantly criticized President Obama for playing golf too often.

* * *

Some numbers:

Austria - 54,064
France - 400,000
Germany - 400,000
Italy - 671,000
Japan - 67,065
Russia - 4,000,000
Spain - 390,000
United Kingdom - 863,000
United States - 11,300,000

These are estimates of the illegal immigrant population in these nations made between 2008 and 2010.  A comparison of 13 nations (those above without Japan but adding The Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, The Netherlands, Slovakia and Turkey) to the U.S. showed that the total population of illegal immigrants in the U.S. at the time was 3.8%; while the average of the other 13 nations was only 1.3%

No other nation on this planet has been as tolerant of illegal immigration as the U.S. was prior to the election of 45.

But no new laws have been passed.  What 45 is instructing the Department of Homeland Security to do regarding the deportation of those who are in this country illegally is not illegal.  It is a drastic change in policy.

I've said all along that our nation is in need of a comprehensive reform of those laws governing immigration.  We also have a problem with those here illegally whose home country will not take them back.  What do we do with them?

Do we have any recourse against this change in policy?  None that I can see through the judicial system.  None that would ever get enough votes in the Congress.

Take the cast of Juan Carlos Hernandez Pacheco of West Frankfort, IL.  This town voted overwhelmingly for 45 in November.  Now they are uniting behind the man they know as "Carlos."  He is the manager of a local restaurant and a "pillar of the community" according to many who reside there.

He was taken into custody by federal immigration agents on February 9th.  He remains in custody.  While DHS doesn't have anything to say about why he was arrested, or why on that particular day; but they did mention he has two DUI convictions.

Wait a minute, you're thinking.  DUI isn't a serious crime that merits deportation.  It isn't murder or rape.  Tell that to the families of the 9,967 people who were killed in DUI incidents in 2014 according to the Center for Disease Control.  19% of children who died in auto accidents in that year died because of someone who was DUI.

One DUI is forgivable.  We all make mistakes, errors in judgment.  Multiple offenses are not so easily forgiven.  Andrew Thomas Gallo who killed three people including Angels pitcher Nick Adenhart in a 2009 crash was previously convicted of DUI and was driving on a suspended license at the time.  Like it or not, it was only good fortune that Mr. Pacheco didn't injure or kill anyone in either of his DUI incidents.

Now I am NOT saying he should be deported solely on the basis of those two convictions.  I am saying that we cannot dismiss those convictions out of hand because of what he has done since.  The point is that if 45 wants to deport those here illegally because of things like DUI convictions, he has the power to do so.

How do we fix this?  There is only one way.  Change the composition of the Congress so that we can institute the comprehensive immigration reform that is needed.  A subject I'll be addressing in another blog.

Oscar Predictions and Analysis - 2016 movies

The following are the Academy Award nominees for this coming Sunday's Oscars.  The links are to my reviews of these films at www.tailslate.net

Best picture:

“Arrival”
“Fences”
“Hacksaw Ridge”
“Hell or High Water”
“Hidden Figures”
“La La Land”
“Manchester by the Sea”
“Lion”
“Moonlight”

I've seen eight of the nine and liked all of them.  I think Moonlight and Manchester by the Sea are the two best but the margin isn't huge.  I don't think Manchester by the Sea will win because of the "issues" involving its lead actor Casey Affleck and the sexual harassment allegations against him.  It will probably come down to Moonlight and La La Land, with Hidden Figures as the potential underdog possibility.

Lead actor:

Casey Affleck, “Manchester by the Sea”
Andrew Garfield, “Hacksaw Ridge”
Ryan Gosling, “La La Land”
Viggo Mortensen, “Captain Fantastic”
Denzel Washington, “Fences”

I haven't seen Captain Fantastic.  I predict a win for Denzel Washington although it is possible a La La Land sentiment among the Academy membership might propel Ryan Gosling to Oscar gold.

Lead actress:


Isabelle Huppert, “Elle”
Ruth Negga, “Loving”
Natalie Portman, “Jackie”
Emma Stone, “La La Land”
Meryl Streep, “Florence Foster Jenkins”

I've not seen either Elle or Loving but based on what I have heard about those performances, I'm predicting an Oscar win for Emma Stone.  While the love affair between the Oscars and Meryl Streep is long and strong; and she will get some support just for her willingness to battle the man in the Oval Office in social media, I don't see her winning for this performance.  Natalie Portman was outstanding but the film itself wasn't great and she is already an Academy Award winner.  Although the Golden Globe win for Isabelle Huppert represents the votes of less than 100 people, it might have caused more members of the Academy to take a closer look at her performance.

Supporting actor:


Mahershala Ali, “Moonlight”
Jeff Bridges, “Hell or High Water”
Lucas Hedges, “Manchester by the Sea”
Dev Patel, “Lion”
Michael Shannon, “Nocturnal Animals”

If it were up to me, I'd just hand the Oscar to Mahershala Ali and not bother with all of the drama.  But it isn't.  Dev Patel is very popular.  Michael Shannon's turn in Nocturnal Animals is also a potential winning one.

Supporting actress:


Viola Davis, “Fences”
Naomie Harris, “Moonlight”
Nicole Kidman, “Lion”
Octavia Spencer, “Hidden Figures”
Michelle Williams, “Manchester by the Sea”

If you are a gambler, call your bookie in whatever country you can bet on the Academy Awards and bet big on Viola Davis bringing this one home.  She will almost certainly win.

Best director:


Denis Villeneuve, “Arrival”
Mel Gibson, “Hacksaw Ridge”
Damien Chazelle, “La La Land”
Kenneth Lonergan, “Manchester by the Sea”
Barry Jenkins, “Moonlight”

You could give this one to any of the five and they'd be deserving.  I think it comes down to a race between Damien Chazelle and Kenneth Lonergan. 

Adapted screenplay:

“Arrival”
“Fences”
“Hidden Figures”
“Lion”
“Moonlight”

This one is tough.  Fences is the best screenplay of the bunch but that's probably due to the fact so little of the brilliant writing of the late August Wilson was changed in adapting his stage play to the screen.  I predict a win for Moonlight.

Original screenplay:


“Hell or High Water”
“La La Land”
“The Lobster”
“Manchester by the Sea”
“20th Century Women”

I'd pick The Lobster over any of the others but I think La La Land will win.

Cinematography:

“Arrival”
“La La Land”
“Lion”
“Moonlight”
“Silence”

I think La La Land will win but I'd give this one to either Arrival or Silence.

Best documentary feature:


“Fire at Sea”
“I Am Not Your Negro”
“Life Animated”
“OJ: Made in America”
“13th”

I suspect 13th will eke out a very narrow win over I Am Not Your Negro.

Enjoy the Oscars!

Examing the exclusion of CNN and the New York Times by the White House

This is the headline of a piece posted by the Huffington Post:

"Trump White House Bars News Organizations From Press Briefing"

The story is about how CNN, the New York Times and the Huffington Post were excluded from a closed-door press briefing conducted by Sean Spicer today (Friday, 2/24/2017).  While excluding those organizations, it should be noted that Mr. Spicer invited Breitbart, One America News and the Washington Times, all of whom have a very conservative bias.

Here is a quote from New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet:

"Nothing like this has ever happened at the White House in our long history of covering multiple administrations of different parties,” Times executive editor Dean Baquet said in a statement. “We strongly protest the exclusion of The New York Times and the other news organizations. Free media access to a transparent government is obviously of crucial national interest."

He is right.  It has not happened to the New York Times.  But it did happen to Fox News during the Obama Administration.  Here is a quote from Anita Dunn, then White House Director of Communications in 2009 when she appeared on CNN:

"What I think is fair to say about Fox — and certainly it's the way we view it — is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party. They take their talking points, put them on the air; take their opposition research, put them on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news network the way CNN is."

So it turns out that 45 is not the first to call a cable news network a purveyor of fake news, although not in those direct terms.  But the implication is clear.  If you want to parse this then perhaps you should check out the White House blog attack on Fox News on September 30, 2009 where it reads:

"For even more Fox lies, check out the latest "Truth-O-Meter" feature from Politifact that debunks a false claim about a White House staffer that continues to be repeated by Glenn Beck and others on the network."

How did the other media outlets respond at the time when the Obama Administration banned Fox News program "Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace" from a round-robin presidential interview earlier in September of 2009?  They protested.  They said it was wrong.

They were right.  It was wrong then and it is just as wrong now.  The burning question is, will the conservative news media show the same courage and step up to defend the freedom of the press and the need for news outlets who are critical of 45's administration to have the same access as those who are his cheerleaders?

I predict they will fail to step up.

Stay tuned.

Random Ponderings - 02/22/2017

If he had lived, George Washington would be celebrating his 285th birthday.  Instead he is rolling over in his grave watching the actions of the Confederacy of Dunces occupying the White House.

* * *

28 year old Michael Rae Papayans pleaded no contest to assault charges as the result of his having savagely beaten a Mets fan in the Dodger stadium parking lot after the Dodgers lost to the Mets in a 2015 playoff game.  The beating victim was knocked unconscious and lost a piece of his skull.  Mr. Papayans will spend 14 days in jail and make over $100,000 in restitution.

Bet if he lived in a less affluent neighborhood than Palos Verdes Estates he might be facing a stiffer punishment.  Meanwhile, misdemeanor charges are still pending against his mother who is accused of kicking the unconscious victim while he lay helpless on the ground. 

* * *

Today will be the eighth straight day I've worked.  The only thing propelling me forward at 4:19 a.m. as I write this is the fact I have tomorrow and Monday off from work.  But when I first thought about today being the eighth of eight, I was reminded of one of the best jokes ever regarding ESPN.

If its almost a sport, it's on the Ocho.

* * *

Are people making too much of a flinch?  Judge for yourselves.

I tend to think that any woman might be a bit concerned about being touched by a man who brags about being able to grab them by the p***y.

* * *

From last night's Late Show with Stephen Colbert, after he described 'rogue' Twitter accounts like AltStateDept, Alt_DOJ and the like:  "The idea that a high-ranking government official would be on Twitter is laughable."

* * *

Add "From Not to Hot" to the list of reality shows involving fame-whores that I won't be checking out.  Okay, maybe for just a moment to see what is described as the dramatic results of weight loss surgery performed on Honey Boo Boo's mom.

The problem is that hotness on the outside with nothing of substance on the inside is simply quick visual stimulation.  I find intelligence much more important.

* * *

At its corporate headquarters in Zurich, the top executives at ABB, a company that is involved in robotics and power & automation technology are probably scratching their heads to try and figure out how one of their employees in South Korea managed to steal $100 million.

Actually he is suspected of having help from people outside the firm and the authorities believe the employee has fled to Hong Kong.

* * *

Katherine Heigl is starring in a new legal drama on CBS titled Doubt.  I've watched the first two episodes and I'm enjoying it thoroughly.  I went to IMDB to see what people were saying about it on the message board and found a big surprise.  Three days ago, the site disabled its message boards.  I haven't posted on them in ages and haven't had occasion to want to read any of them until just now.

Wow.  A major shock.  When I was first out of the hospital back in mid 2011 and mostly housebound, I spent hours reading and writing on those boards.  Now I wonder why the site made this choice.  I must have missed something.  So I checked.  Their stated reason according to multiple media sources is that they feel the boards "no longer provided a positive, useful experience.

* * *

An anthem for the resistance

I loved the above song by Credence Clearwater Revival when it was first released in the fall of 1969.  Then it fell off of my radar until 1991.  That was when the late Lewis B. Puller Jr.'s Pulitzer Prize winning autobiography, Fortunate Son was released.  I bought it the moment I could and read it from cover to cover in one sitting.

I even wrote about Puller last year at the point in time when we were discussing the despicable comment by 45 about how he had made sacrifices.  You remember, after the appearance of Khizr Khan, father of a fallen U.S. soldier at the Democratic National Convention stated that 45 had never sacrificed a thing.  45 responded by claiming that his work in employing people was a huge sacrifice.

Well, I heard this song again yesterday and it hit me that it would make the ideal anthem for those of us who are resisting the incredible incompetency of 45 and his minions in the White House.  Look at the lyrics.

Some folks are born made to wave the flag
Ooh, they're red, white and blue
And when the band plays "Hail to the chief"
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no senator's son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no
Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, oh
But when the taxman comes to the door
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yes
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no millionaire's son, no
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no
Yeah, yeah
Some folks inherit star spangled eyes
Ooh, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask them, "How much should we give?"
Ooh, they only answer More! more! more! y'all
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no military son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, one
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no no no
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate son, no no no

The spoon born in Donald J. Trump's hand wasn't just silver, it was gold or maybe even platinum.  He plays at being a patriot but if there were ever a "Chickenhawk" in the Oval Office, it would be he.  He makes ridiculous claims that his time in a military high school gave him more military knowledge than those who actually served.  He's happy to send people like William "Ryan" Owens in harm's way and to claim the mission was a success even though his administration initially tried to blame the Navy SEALs death on the Obama Administration.

The lyrics regarding how Trump responds when the taxman comes make this an even more appropriate anthem to describe so much of what is wrong with 45.  What kind of person would inflate the value of an asset like a golf course on his financial disclosure form as evidence of his business acumen.  Meanwhile he goes to court to get the county where that golf course is to lower the assessed value of that golf course well below what he listed in his financial disclosure form, in order to reduce his property tax bill.  Hypocrisy of the highest order.

Meanwhile his tax plans will ask the middle class to pay "More! more! more! y'all."

Of course maybe someone has a better song for a resister's anthem.  Suggestions?

In the future...

October 14, 2294
UCLA
A History Department classroom

"Good morning ladies and gentleman and thank you for attending today's lecture in our series "Failed Presidencies.  My name is Morgan Stewart and today we will be looking at the 45th president of the United States, and one of the most controversial presidencies in our nation's history.

No examination of the colorful tenure of Donald J. Trump in the Oval Office would be complete without first reviewing the events of the election where he managed to win the electoral vote while losing the popular vote.  In point of fact, his defeat in the popular vote was by the largest margin of any president in history where the winner of the electoral vote lost the popular vote.

Why did he win the election?  Some say it was the fact that the now non-existent Democratic Party nominated a woman who was simply unelectable.  Hillary Clinton had been the First Lady, a United States Senator from New York and later on the Secretary of State during the administration of Barrack Obama. 

There had been so many unfounded allegations made against Secretary Clinton during her husband's presidency and her own political career after he left office, resulting in a very negative perception of her among a large segment of the population.  Her truly horrible choice to use a private email server for her work emails during her time at Foggy Bottom along with the attempt by the Republican controlled House to make the events at Benghazi, Libya did not help her cause.  Nor did the disclosure that the leadership of the Democratic National Committee conspired to deny Senator Bernie Sanders, founder of today's Progressive Party any chance at the nomination.  These negatives, along with several key planning blunders by the Clinton campaign put a man with absolutely no political experience and no real qualifications into the White House.

The wheels began to fall off of the Trump train almost immediately after his inauguration.  Rather than get to work, he continued his pattern of attempting to shift focus from the real issues to nonsensical ones, he engaged in a specious claim that the audience at his inauguration was larger than that of President Obama.  Photographic and video evidence proved this to be a complete falsehood and rather than admit the error, 45 sent his White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer to tell even more lies about inauguration attendance.  This led to the coining of the phrase "alternative facts" as a euphemism for falsehoods.

Then came the very brief tenure of National Security Advisor, retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn.  His 24 day time in the position remains the record for the shortest time in that job.  And it was Flynn's involvement with Russia that would ultimately lead to the demise of 45's presidency. 

There was the executive order signed by 45 that was quickly ruled unconstitutional by the federal courts.  An order to exclude people from seven nations with mostly Muslim populations seemed to make sense to 45 and his favorite advisor, Steve Bannon.  However, given that no resident of any of those nations had previously participated in any terrorist actions on U.S. soil, one has to wonder what was the impetus behind choosing those nations. Was it the fact that 45 had no business interests in those countries, while he had significant business interests in other nations that had been home to people who had actually undertaken terrorist actions on our soil?  I leave that to you to decide.

45's hypocrisy heightened when after severely criticizing President Obama for his frequent golf outings prior to his own election; followed by 45 spending nine consecutive weekends at his Mar-a-Lago home/golf resort.  His aides went to great lengths to conceal the fact that 45 played at least one round of golf each weekend, and often two.

But eventually, the combination of the General Services Administration determining that 45 was in breach of his lease for his Washington, D.C. hotel; the imminent release of the report from the independent counsel who had investigated his alleged violations of the Constitution's emoluments clause; the reports that there was evidence that members of his campaign had colluded with Russian intelligence in the hacking of the DNC email system and TMZ.com obtaining a copy of what was described as proof of 45 engaging in "water sports" with Russian prostitutes finally convinced 45 that it was time to resign.  And so he did.

In a ranking of U.S. presidents put out by 100 leading historians on the 500th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, Donald Trump was rated the worst president in history by every single member of the panel.

Thanks for coming to today's lecture and I hope to see some of you here next month when we review the Andrew Johnson presidency.

Clueless

When most people hear the word "clueless" this is the first thing that pops into their minds:

Or possibly this, the TV version of the above film:

While I am well aware of those references to the work clueless, when I hear that word I think of this:

What makes him the best photo definition of this term?  Let's begin with the fact that he held a campaign rally in Florida this weekend.  He's been in office all of 29 days and he is running for reelection?  That is ridiculous.  Presidents seek reelection based on their accomplishments in office.  What has 45 accomplished in those 29 days?  Let's review.

Established a record for having the National Security Advisor with the shortest ever tenure in the job.  Michael Flynn left that post after only 24 days.  The previous record holder for shortest tenure in the job was William H. Jackson at 129 days.  That was in late 1956/early 1957 when the position of National Security Advisor was still relatively new.  It had been created in March of 1953.

Then there is the fact that back in 2015 45 said "I would rarely leave the White House because there's so much work to be done.  I would not be a president who takes vacations.  I would not be a president who takes time off...you don't have time to take time off."  Consider that statement in light of the fact that this is the third straight weekend 45 is spending at his Mar-a-Lago club.  Shouldn't he be in the Oval Office getting things done rather than glad-handing people who pay big bucks to get close to the president?

Did we not hear 45 talk over and over about how he is going to bring jobs back to the U.S. and fill them with U.S. workers?  So why is Trump Winery (owned by his son Eric) asking for visas to bring in foreign workers?  According to the International Business Times, Trump-related companies have brought 286 foreign workers into the U.S. and employed them since he announced his candidacy in 2015.  Some of them work at Mar-a-Lago. Care to speculate on how many weekends he will wind up spending there this year, possibly served by those foreign workers?

His definition of "fake news" is any news that doesn't jibe with her twisted perception of reality.  He uses that label to try and discredit any news story that paints him or his administration in any unfavorable way.

He is truly clueless.  Congrats.

What's in that memo...

In a story from the Associated Press, they claim the administration of 45 is considering using National Guard troops to "round up unauthorized immigrants."  You can read the text of the memo here. 

The White House is denying that this is their intention and calling the memo "a very early draft."  That could be true. This could have simply been General Kelly's idea and the memo was his 'trial balloon.'  I doubt it, but that is a real possibility.

General Kelly is probably very familiar with the Posse Comitatus Act and that's why the memo was carefully crafted so that the National Guard troops would not be federalized.  While under state control, using Guard troops would not be in violation of this law.  The purpose of the law is to prevent the military from enforcing law in the civilian jurisdiction except in time of martial law.

The draft order makes reference to the 287(g) program.  This is where it gets sneaky.  General Kelly (or perhaps 45, if he directed this memo be drafted) is trying to stick the states with the bill for doing the federal government's job.  We hear that immigration is the province of the federal government and the states have no business getting involved in immigration.  Fine.  A reading of one paragraph of 287 (g) is enlightening (the bolding is mine)

"Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, the Attorney General may enter into a written agreement with a State, or any political subdivision of a State, pursuant to which an officer or employee of the State or subdivision, who is determined by the Attorney General to be qualified to perform a function of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States (including the transportation of such aliens across State lines to detention centers), may carry out such function at the expense of the State or political subdivision and to the extent consistent with State and local law."

This is a way to avoid the biggest obstacle to engaging in a mass of deportations.  The expense.  During the campaign, 45 dismissed concerns about how the federal government would pay for the cost of rounding up and deporting illegal immigrants.  Now we see how they intend to pay for it, by sticking states with the tab.

The White House denials that this is on their agenda ring hollow.

Raising the Stakes

Donald Trump held another joint press conference with a world leader. This time it was the Prime Minister of Israel.  When they took questions, 45 gave out two.  One to David Brody of Christian Broadcasting Network and Katie Pavlich of Town Hall dot com.  Two questions given to reporters for two media outlets with a strong conservative bias.

CNN shouted questions about the resignation of National Security Advisor Michael Flynn but they were ignored.  45 is not the first president to ignore shouted questions that he did not want to answer.  President Obama and every single one of his predecessors did the very same thing.  I'm also pretty sure that 45 isn't the first president to go through difficult stretches of time where he would prefer to give questions to those who might be more supportive.

But this continued refusal to allow the three major broadcast network news outlets and CNN to ask questions at press conferences is troubling.  It is a sign that 45 doesn't have the ability or the guts to allow himself to be asked the tougher questions. 

45 is also not the first president to obfuscate attempts to dig into the goings on at the White House.  With the possible exception of the Nixon administration, no previous administration went to this extreme of opacity.  Without 45's administration we would have probably lived our lives without ever hearing someone talk about "alternative facts."

Speaking of Kellyanne Con Job, MSNBC's Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski announced that Ms Con Job has been banned from that news program.  They will no longer book her for their show.  A Washington Post article contained this from Ms Brzezinski: 

"We know for a fact she tries to book herself on this show,” Brzezinski said. “I won't do it, 'cuz I don't believe in fake news or information that is not true. And that is — every time I've ever seen her on television, something’s askew, off or incorrect."

If I were the managing editor of CNN or one of the three broadcast network news operations (I say three because while Fox is a broadcast network, its news operation is cable, not broadcast), I would take the position of Morning Joe one step further.  I'd raise the stakes and tell the White House that if they will no longer take our questions, we will no longer give them a platform to present the views of 45's administration.

We would still do in-depth coverage of 45 and his administration.  We would simply no longer allow them to use or attempt to "manage" us.  No more Kellyanne Con Job and her alternative facts or Bowling Green Massacres.  Stephen Miller would have to go on the Christian Broadcasting Network and make his specious claims that the judiciary doesn't have the authority to rein in 45.  Or he could do a live-stream from Town Hall dot com.

It is the obligation of the president to allow the press to cover his (or someday her) activities.  45 is attempting to prevent that and it is wrong.

Birthday Party Excess??

Senator Bernie Sanders posted the following on his "senatorial" Facebook page:

"Congratulations, Mr. Schwarzman, on your 70th birthday and your ability to spend $20 million on your party. I hope you had a good time. You will certainly make a fitting member of the Trump administration, which includes the wealthiest cabinet in the history of the country.

While billionaires like Schwarzman get richer, the middle class continues to shrink and 43 million people live in poverty. And to add insult to injury, the Trump administration will be working hard to make life more difficult for the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor by cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and killing the Affordable Care Act.

Once again, Mr. Schwarzman, I hope you enjoyed your $20 million birthday party."

He was referring to the birthday party thrown by billionaire Stephen A. Schwarzman.  Senator Sanders linked to an article in the New York Times about that party.  If you read the article, its author takes pains to point out that the actual cost of Mr. Schwarzman's party was nowhere near the $20 million figure that Senator Sanders (or whichever staffer wrote this diatribe) quoted twice.  I am not "defending" the expense or calling the allegation that it was excessive wrong.  I'm just trying to offer perspective.

Reading about Mr. Schwarzman's party reminded me of what some considered an excessive birthday party thrown not quite 30 years ago.  My late father's birthday is June 4 and in 1987 it was his 50th birthday.  While he wasn't a billionaire, at the time he was wealthy.  His birthday party that year was a four day celebration that he informed me cost in excess of $300,000.  Adjusted for inflation, that same party would cost over $600,000 today. 

I remember that party very well.  I was still serving in the Air Force and had to fly in from my duty station at Nellis Air Force Base just north of Las Vegas.  There wasn't room for me in the house so Dad put me up at a nice hotel.  He paid the airfare. 

It was quite a bash, with "name" entertainment on two of the three nights of the celebration.  Great food and drink were everywhere.  The 8,000+ square foot house in one of the ritziest areas of North Dallas was wall to wall people.  Servers abounded.  Valet parking.

So where did that $300,000 go?  It went to the musicians, the servers, the valet parkers, the cooks, the people who set up and cleaned up and more.  It isn't as if we had a bonfire and burned 3,000 $100 bills. 

Was it excessive?  That is a subjective judgment.  Feel free to make it. 

Mr. Schwarzman is worth a reported $11.2 billion.  10% of that would be $1.12 billion.  1% would be $112 million.  Let's cut the Senator Sanders estimate of the party cost in half and call it $10 million.  So a man spent less than one-tenth of 1% of his net worth on his 70th birthday party.  Is that really all that excessive?.

Consider a 30 year old couple with no kids.  Their net worth is $25,000 after we add up their assets and liabilities.  To do the equivalent of what Mr. Schwarzman did, they would go out and spend $25 on the party for whichever one of them was turning 30.

I'm not saying fireworks, camels, trapeze artists and a performance by Gwen Stefani might not be a bit over the top.  It is.  But there is as Paul Harvey used to say, "the rest of the story."

Mr. Schwarzman gave $100 million to the New York Public Library.  He gave $150 million to Yale University.  He created a program similar to the Rhodes Scholar program for students in China and funded it with a personal donation of $100 million.  All items mentioned in the New York Times article.  So while he isn't as generous as Warren Buffet or Bill & Melinda Gates, he isn't miserly either.

The problem with what Senator Sanders is saying is that he's trying to use conspicuous consumption to criticize 45's cabinet and political agenda.   The fact that the cabinet is extremely wealthy isn't the problem.  The problem is their utter lack of qualifications to serve in the positions they've been given, and how their wealth and ties to nations and businesses cause conflicts of interest.

Highlighting the inflated cost of a birthday party has nothing to do with cutting social safety nets.  Criticize the agenda.  Focus on the problem with the unqualified and conflicted cabinet.

Then there is the real issue that makes such an extravagant birthday party seem so wrong.  I've written frequently on the biggest economic issue we face moving forward.  The ever-widening gap of income inequality.  Take that on, Senator Sanders.  Please.

Freedom of the Press or Fear of the Press

45 has held joint press conferences with Britain's PM Theresa May, Japan's PM Shinzo Abe and now Canada's PM Justin Trudeau.  During those press conferences, Trump ignored the three major broadcast networks and CNN.  Here is who Trump allowed to ask questions at these pressers.

With Justin Trudeau:

Sinclair Broadcast Group
Fox News

With Shinzo Abe:

New York Post
Fox News

With Theresa May:

Reuters
Fox News


Notice a pattern?  Fox News gets a question every time.  Sinclair's conservative bias is well known.  The Post is owned by News Corp, founded by Fox News creator Rupert Murdoch.

Why won't 45 call on any reporter who isn't from a media outlet with a conservative media bias?  Fear?  Common sense?  Or simply the fact he doesn't dare open himself up to a tough question he can't handle?

* * *

As I was working on this, the story of National Security Advisor Michael Flynn's resignation broke.  Aside from the fact that this is yet another demonstration of dystopian level dysfunction, Flynn's conversations with the Russian ambassador after former President Obama imposed sanctions on Russia are disturbing.

So is the fact that Flynn attempted to disguise his dishonesty by saying the following:

"Unfortunately, because of the fast pace of events, I inadvertently briefed the vice president-elect and others with incomplete information regarding my phone calls with the Russian ambassador"

In plainer language, he lied.  I continue to be amazed by how many different ways people can say they lied without using that word.  It may have been a lie of omission if he failed to tell Mike Pence everything that happened, but it is still a lie.

We've never had a presidential administration that has been as blatantly dishonest with the American people since 45 was sworn in; and considering what went on during Nixon's second term, that is saying a lot.

Why Fandango.com sucks

Saturday is supposed to be a day off of work.  To help out one of my two office managers, I agreed to work a few hours to serve a client who usually sees a tax professional who is out on medical leave at the moment.  But I still had time to see a movie in the morning before work.

The film A United Kingdom opened in limited release on Friday and I wanted very much to see it.  There are only two theaters in L.A. and two in NYC showing the film.  One of the local theaters did not have a showing early enough, but the Arclight in Hollywood had one, according to Moviefone.  So I went to buy the ticket right then and there, which means using the Fandango ticket service.

Your Movie Adventure Awaits CONFIRMATION NUMBER: WQRK8TQ

Get excited! You're going to the movies. Here are your order details.

A United Kingdom 1h 51m Saturday, February 11, 2017 9:45am ArcLight Hollywood View Map 6360 Sunset Blvd Hollywood, CA 90028 323-464-1465 1 Adult

That is from the email confirmation I received.  So I got to the theater at 9:35 and went to the kiosk and printed out my ticket.  The problem was, the ticket was for a showing that began at 9:15.  I asked the ticket agent about it and when he asked where I purchased the ticket, he nodded.  Then he said "they are a third-party ticket broker and they do make mistakes.  Next time use our own website."

Believe me I will.  I will never again use Fandango.  I paid them a "convenience fee" of $1.50 for the convenience of not getting to see the movie I wanted to see.  Not very convenient.

First three weeks

The close of business on Thursday, February 9, 2017 marks the end of the first three weeks of the presidency of Donald J. Trump.  It's been an interesting few weeks.  We have a new term, alternative facts, created by a woman who has told so many falsehoods many now refer to Kellyanne Conway as Kelly Con-Job.  We've had a crisis over conflicting claims about how many people were in attendance at the inauguration of our current president.

But those pale in comparison to other issues that have arisen.  The extremely poorly execution and implementation of what appears to be an unconstitutional executive order, barring people from seven mostly Muslim-populated nations.  Nations whose residents have yet to commit a terrorist act in the U.S.

People who support and oppose the current president argue on social media, without any apparent interest in truly hearing the opposing viewpoint.  They merely seek confirmation of their own assumptions, no matter how inaccurate they might be.  Those rantings are not productive. 

Petitions seeking to effect change have yet to have any significant impact.  One petition, calling on Congress to investigate Donald Trump with an eye to impeaching him has more than 650,000 signatures.  It is almost certainly a waste of time, as the Republican-controlled House isn't going to pass a resolution of impeachment. 

In 1972, before the Watergate break-in, an impeachment resolution was introduced into the House.  It went nowhere.  Two more pre-Watergate break-in resolutions also went nowhere.  Then in July of 1973 another was introduced, calling for Nixon's impeachment for the allegedly illegal bombing of Cambodia.  Tip O'Neill wrote in his autobiography what a disaster it would have been had that resolution come up for a vote; as it would have gone down to an overwhelming defeat.  The House, having once failed to pass such a resolution would not have done well with another.

Remember that at that time, Democrats were in control of both the House and Senate.  If the opposition party is cautious about impeaching the president, just imagine what it would take for his or her own party to begin that process.

Petitions calling for Donald Trump to release his tax returns are also probably doomed to fail.  But there is a different path worthy of exploration to achieve that end.  Professor George K. Yin of the University of Virginia penned an op-ed piece for the Washington Post.  In it he pointed out how a Congressional committee could receive the Trump tax returns and if they feel it appropriate, release them to the full membership.

One last thought.  Donald Trump sent out a tweet criticizing Nordstrom's for dropping Ivanka's line of clothes, shoes and other stuff.  Now this is a man who thinks he is the world's best businessman and yet he can't wrap his head around a business making a business decision.  Whether because of weak sales or boycott threats, Nordstrom's made a business decision to drop Ivanka's product line.  It isn't about whether or not she is a "great person."  It's about the Nordstrom's bottom line.  If Donald Trump can't see that, then he isn't the business genius he keeps telling us he is.