Where have I heard this before?

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump threatened Sunday to push the government into a shutdown ahead of the coming spending deadline in September if Congress does not fund his border wall and change the nation's immigration laws.  CNN   7/29/2018

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that a government shutdown “could happen” and blamed Democrats for the looming threat, claiming “they want to have illegal immigrants pouring into the country, bringing with them crime."
NBC 12/6/2017

PHOENIX — President Trump on Tuesday threatened to shut down the government over border wall funding, said the North American Free Trade Agreement is likely to be terminated and signaled that he was prepared to pardon former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, who is anathema to the Latino community. Washington Post 8/23/2017

Looming above Washington as Congress and the White House attempt to avert a funding shutdown in only five days’ time, Donald Trump’s central campaign promise to build a wall on the Mexican border threatens to bring the US government to a halt this week in a national display of dysfunction.  The Guardian 4/23/2017

Okay - why did he not shut it down when he controlled both houses of Congress?  Why did he wait until the Democrats controlled the House?  Nah - could not be politics...

How quickly they forget

Representative Mark Meadows is upset that the Democrats cannot even come up with 5 billion dollars for President Trump's "wall".

He says this is just a small number.  Maybe he forgets the 1.5 TRILLION that the Republicans gave to the wealthy in the form of tax breaks.

Do you think if they had not squandered that money they may have been able to find the money for the wall?

Mis-Simplification

People who deny climate change often look to headlines for their ammunition:

THE PLANET NOW HAS MORE TREES THAN IT DID 35 YEARS AGO

The world is getting greener. Why does no one want to know?

Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds

Conservative web site used this information to claim that we have nothing to fear from "climate change" and that getting warmer is good for our planet.

I call this mis-simplification of the information.  They take a bit of information, out of context, present it with no backing data and draw a conclusion from it.

For example - the planet has more trees than it did 35 years ago.  Okay - some questions:
1. Was there a reason why 35 years ago we had a dearth of trees?
2. Are the trees today equal to trees prior to 35 years ago.
3. What about 100 years ago?
4. If there are more trees - are they the same trees?
5. What does more trees mean exactly?

Even in the case of the second headline, the author of the article (A) admits that the author of the study (B) he cites,  has told A to stop misquoting B!

So how do you identify mis-simplification?

1. The information comes from headlines, not a careful reading of the article
2. There information is too specific ("35 years")
3. The information is too logical - so obvious that it is hard to contradict.

Mis-simplification might is a major part of "fake news" and is being used to distract people from real issues and critical thinking.

How we convince people to recognize this?  We have to them to question their own biases.  That is a much more difficult problem.

Supreme Agony

In watching the circus which is the hearings for Supreme Court Nominee Kavanaugh, the following thought struck me.  For all those defending Judge Kavanaugh, with 100% certainty and how unfairly he is being treated, what about Bill Cosby?  What about all the priests and bishops of the Catholic Church who were accused and convicted of abuse.  What about the Hollywood producers and stars who ended up being guilty? 

We are going through a period in time where past sins are being dug up and used against people.  We have not yet drawn the line between what is fair and sensible and what is over the top.  Certainly what was done as a teenager is different than something done as an adult.  Certainly people can change and correct their faults.  As a Catholic, redemption is the key part of our beliefs.  However, redemption has a price. Honest admission of failings, expressing contrition, and leading a better life after.  I get the feeling Judge Kavanaugh has done the last one, not sure about the first two.

How come come nobody thought of this?

There is much talk about who is the "anonymous" writer in the NYT op ed.

What about is this is a compilation of many people?

The "author" does say "we" so might that also mean that several people contributed to it?

That way all could say they did not write (the entire) it, and not implicate any one other person.

Hmmm.

UPDATE - 3 days after this someone else had the same thought - Steve Bannon -not sure I want to be in that company....

Mark Twain and the new truth

It is alleged that Mark Twain said "A lie goes around the world before the truth even gets its pants on".

Whether he did or did not, he was credited with saying it.

Well I have come up with my own saying and hope to be a famous as he is.

"TRUTH FINDS ITS SEAT AT THE 50 YARD LINE."

The damage is done

Update 2/17/2018 - From what I have found out, Carter Page's surveillance started in October 2016.  It was renewed 3 times for 3 months each so unless it was renewed unknown to us, the surveillance ended in October 2017.  So if he was not currently under surveillance when the memo came out, they would claim that no unmasking took place.  I still wonder if finding out anyone was under surveillance so close to the ending of the surveillance was damaging, but technically, it is not unmasking.

One thing that has not been addressed with the release of the "Carter Page" memo, is that in unmasking Carter Page as the person who was being surveilled, this ended any information that was forthcoming from the surveillance.  Now, it might be that the information was already winding down, or that his identification was out there to the point that the information being gathered was not longer trustworthy; in fact could have been already been purposely misleading.  The fact is, now that Carter Page has been "unmasked", no more information will be coming from this investigation.

One year down

Okay,

Here is my quick review of the President Trump's first year in office.

1. Supreme Court Nominee - Here the President really owes a debt of gratitude to Mitch McConnell.  If McConnell did not take the risk of delaying the nomination of President Obama's nominee (remember Garland?), then there would be no nomination to make.
2. Economy - like it our not, 2017 was still President Obama's.  The Dow came from almost nothing (6400 in 2009), to end up at 19,887 in 2017.  It is just crossed 25000 as I write this, but my opinion is that it is overvalued and due for a correction.  Will companies buy back stock keep it high?  Tune in during 2018.
3. Jobs - for 2017, we see the same problem as the last 8 years - jobs that are created are either highly skilled or minimum wage and not enough workers to fill the first scenario.  With the college bubble about to bust (a correction in tuition), I think companies should spend some of their saved tax money, not to invest in machinery, but to invest in training centers for the workers they need.
4. I do not see any problem with controlling immigration and protecting our borders.  The "my way or the highway" attitude hurts more than helps.  The Republicans know they need to turn many non-citizens into good taxpaying citizens, but after demonizing them for so long,  how do they get to that point?  DACA will be the first turning point.
5. Foreign Policy.  The President has some good people who are being compromised by the 3am Tweets and other outbursts.  Then you wonder how many good people are being forced to say things they don't want to.  An example is Nikki Haley's "we are taking names" comments at the UN.  If the administration does not have the courage of their convictions to take some criticism, you wonder if they are right.  The "It is my ball and if you don't play by my rules I am going home" is a childish attitude.

And that is all I will comment on.  Happy New Year

ChrisZ

All over but he shouting

After living through this play twice before, I seem to know how it ends.

At first there are a lot of happy people who have maybe $20.00 more dollars in their pockets each week, but then after a few years they realize that the creep in fees, local taxes,  increases in cable bills and cell phone plans, end up costing much more. 

Then the retirement plans get cut, the roads get worse and it costs even more to get an education.  Eventually, people realize it was a stupid idea, and make steps to fix it.

Just when it is starting to work, people get greedy again and are sold anotehr bill of goods. 

Then the cycle starts again....

All we have to fear is fear itself

What drives people?  I am proposing that people are all driven by two opposite emotions: Pride and Fear.

Pride, or Ego, does not allow us to be wrong - it does not allow us to be objective.  It makes us deny evidence.  It gives us privilege, defined by us.

Fear is the opposite, but with the same effect - it shapes our beliefs and does not allow us to accept things that force us to change - we are afraid of change because it means we have to have put an effort into meeting this change - at our core, we do not like change.

The true response is humility, the desire to search for truth, even it it does not fit with our preconceived notions.  This means changing your beliefs when presented with evidence to the contrary.

We will never be able to completely take emotion out of our actions, nor be able to understand everything put before us. We are capable of making informed decisions, and the more people who make informed decisions, the more possible the the group decision will be correct.

What a 180 - Makes my head spin....

Today President Beamed on how he was right and the election was rigged.

Except - he was not referring to the Democratic Primary - he was referring to the General Election:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/21/donald-trump-fact-check-rigged-election-voter

‘Rigged election’

“The election is absolutely being rigged by the dishonest and distorted media pushing Crooked Hillary – but also at many polling places – SAD.” – 16 October, Twitter

“Of course there is large scale voter fraud happening on and before election day. Why do Republican leaders deny what is going on? So naïve!” – 17 October, Twitter

“So many cities are corrupt and voter fraud is very, very common.” – 17 October, Green Bay, Wisconsin

Do people have such short memories that they are this easily fooled?

The most $%$#@ I have heard - today

Steve Forbes was on a panel show on Fox.  the panel was of 4 men and 2 women - all but one of the panel (a man) was solidly in the Trump camp.

A the end of the segment, and at a point where no one could respond - Steve Forbes let out with this winner "I should not have to buy an insurance policy that covers pregnancy."  I am surprised that the women on the panel did not jump out of their seats and attack him.  What a %^%$# statement.  Does he not understand how insurance works?  Did he not have children himself?  Does he not have a mother? Should the women not have to pay into a policy that covers prostate exams? Should middle age people not have to pay into a policy that covers Alzheimers? 

The ACA tried to level the playing field but stating the minimum coverage that treats us all like individual human beings.  We band together as a society to provide health care for everyone.  The ambulance driver does not ask for your insurance card in an accident.  The emergency room doctor does not ask if his services are covered by your plan.  Do you want to get to the point where the police do not come to your house because you opted out of burglar protection on your taxes?

When we think about what these people are saying, we realize that we are being sold down the river by people who just wish to line their pockets.

Chris

Tom Price resigns from post - mirrors requested

I don't need to write - just to report:

Under pressure from Trump, Price resigns as health secretary over private plane uproar.

"I certainly don't like the optics," Trump told reporters as he headed for the presidential helicopter Marine One, en route to a weekend stay at his golf club in New Jersey. "I'm not happy, I can tell you that. I'm not happy."

Can someone please buy the President a mirror?

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=20322092#editor/target=post;postID=738009036454706782

The Next Great Bubble

Saturday, February 21, 2009
Chris's Words of Wisdom (WOW)
“This country will collapse economically, when the government cannot pay for the seemingly reasonable demands of the people .”

ChrisZ


I wrote this over 8 years ago - the next bubble will be the government bubble - what we are seeing this year in CT, IL and many other states.

My claim is that the state budgets are not allowed to expand and CONTRACT, like they do in normal business.  This is why government jobs always have to lag behind jobs in private industry.  For example:

Geno Auriemma is a great coach, but he should not be making 2 million dollars a year at UCONN.  His salary should have been capped at around $500,000. "Then he would have left UCONN!"  Right, and someone would have taken his place.  "But we would have not won all those championships!" Maybe, maybe not; but winning championships just led to more spending and increased taxes.

Teachers salaries and pensions should be phased out and moved to IRA's.  Current teachers with pensions should have them adjusted to current economic conditions.  No one group should be guaranteed isolation from the ups and downs of the economy and still be paid more than the average worker with the same skills.

Companies who lay off people because it is cheaper to deploy robots and pay unemployment, should be taxed extra for replacing people in the first place.  Technology is driving the economy and making a small group of people wealthier, with out any concern for the collateral damage in their wake.  You cannot claim protection against third world competitors while making record profits....

I give these as examples - not to pick on any person or group - every person is looking out for their own good.  Nothing wrong with that unless they look at the world as a unlimited salad bar.  The world is closer to a zero sum game, than an win/win or infinite sum game.

ChrisZ



 

Ego or not Ego

To be a president you have to have an ego.  What motivates it is another story.  Here are the presidents I remember in my lifetime:

Kennedy: Altruistic - driven by family pressure to be great
Johnson: Driven by fate - did not like Kennedy but felt he had to continue his work
Nixon: Driven by losses and a bit narcissistic - will hang on til last second
Ford: Not enough ego - fate put him there
Carter: A nice guy who really  thought niceness could win
Reagan: Another altruistic guy who I believe really thought he knew best
Bush 1: His turn - not egotistical enough
Clinton: A wheeler dealer - narcissistic but practical (knew when to fold them)
Bush 2: a bit of a puppet of Cheney and the GOP - toward the end was finding his swagger.
Obama: the chosen one - altruistic - the professor

Before we come to Trump

H Clinton: My turn -I worked and slaved my but off- put up with crap and should be rewarded.  Being first woman she would want to leave a legacy though.

Donald Trump - I am the best - but unlike Mohammed Ali -more talk than results - golden boy with opportunistic tendencies - everything revolves around me - willing to throw anyone under the bus if it makes him look good.   Not sure he really cares about America - just that he is best for America no matter what. a Realty TV show in the White House.

That is why I did not vote for him - not that Hillary was much better - but being the first woman would have forced her to be a better president.

Trump does not care - except about himself.

Scoutworthy

President Trump

A Scout is:

Trustworthy,         20%
Loyal,                   20%
Helpful,                40%
Friendly,               30%
Courteous,            20%
Kind,                    20%
Obedient,             10%
Cheerful,              20%
Thrifty,                 15%
Brave,                   10%
Clean,                   10%
and Reverent.       20%

Not much of a Scout

Predictions and Hindsight

There is a lot of speculation on if the Russians "stole" the election for Trump.  I will jump in and give you my thinking and let's see if it turns out to be true.

First we start with the fact that then businessman Donald Trump is an astute student of humanity.  His entire life has been that of exaggeration, boasting, confronting and intimidating.  He knew going into the primary that he could not best the other candidates on political knowledge and world affairs so he did not even try.  He played right to people's fears, anxiety and selfishness.  His Twitter account and use of right-wing media such as Fox (even when it seemed to be against him he was still using it for his advantage.  No conspiracy theory was off the table, no claim too outlandish, no correction unchallenged by turning back on the accuser.

Once he became the Republican candidate, people thought he would become more mature, even headed, and maybe even calm.  That did not work - enter Kellyanne Conway.  As per his previous persona, he doubled down with items like Hillary Clinton should be locked up, President Obama started ISIS, and that the election was already rigged against him.

Then a curious thing happened.  Social media became the method by which many people got their information.  Why read a newspaper when the news comes right to your phone.  Why search Google when your friends are all sending you news on Facebook.  Twitter allowed people to send rumors around the world before Politifact or any other fact-checking organization could respond.

People tend to believe what they want to hear and when they are bombarded by the same thing over and over and it becomes the truth - even if there is no shred of evidence.

Now enter the Russians.  I do not know their reason,  Maybe President Putin was mad at Hillary, maybe he wanted to help Trump, maybe he just wanted to mess with our minds.  Hacking the Democrats provided no information that would last more than a 24 hour news cycle.  Hacking the election machines was too daunting as it would only affect a small percentage of the votes.  So they hopped on the Trump bandwagon and started flooding social media with fake stories and unsubstantiated claims.  The fact that 100% of these were anti-Hillary just fueled the fire.

Now we have a perfect storm of two entities trying the same tactics and feeding off each other, and perhaps there was no direct collusion, just the enemy of my enemy is my friend.  Hillary Clinton was too slow or incapable of taking the fight back as she would always be firing from behind.  Even the statement that the Russians were interfering, normally a statement that would infuriate any American, was not looked as just another feeble attempt to change the focus from Clinton's "crimes".

So we had the perfect storm. One that fooled the pundits and the polls.  One that gave now President Trump the thought he had a mandate that he did not have.  Now that he is in office, he is finding that the real world in Washington does not work like the campaign trail.

The silver lining in this debacle?  If, and I believe it will be, it is shown that the Russians did play a part in upsetting our election process, people will come to the realization that they cannot blindly believe anything they hear.  They will be come the ultimate cynics.  This will be the beginning of a new era where people actually think and research what they hear.

Well I can hope.

Is it the method or the results?

When you were in school, you not only got credit for the right answer, but for "showing your work" which was to make sure that you did not just guess or cheat.

Both were important but in the end, if you showed you knew how to get the right answer, but did not get the right answer, you really did not know how to get it - did you?  Either that or you made a stupid mistake.  (My hand is up for that - a painful lesson.)

Now to today.  Let's start by establishing a truth.  A "leak" must be true by definition.  You cannot leak something that is not true - it is just something that is made up.  I cannot leak that President Trump is really 5 foot 5 inches tall, no matter how seriously or how widely published it is.

So to Representative Trey Gowdy.  Here is what he said in response to Senator Charles Schumer's comment that House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, be removed from that position. Note, the details of the events are not essential to the point I am going to make.

"I wish Senator Schumer and some of the other Democrats would be interested in the authenticity and reliability of the underlying data [rather than] the means by which it was acquired," Gowdy said.

Now, Let us go back a few weeks to when Rep Gowdy was asking FBI Director James Comey about if the leak on former national security adviser Michael Flynn was being investigated.

Gowdy asked Comey to also assure the American people that the FBI is investigating the leak which led to the resignation of Trump's national security adviser Michael Flynn over communications with the Russian ambassador.

"I can't," Comey responded. "But I hope people watching know how seriously we take leaks of classified information. But I don't want to confirm it by saying we're investigating it. I'm sorry I have to draw that line, I just think that's the right way to be."

Gowdy shook his head in response. He said he wouldn't argue, but that he and Comey agree the release of classified information is "most definitely" a crime.

He then asked Comey to "seek authority from whomever you need to seek authority from" to assure the American people that the leak is being investigated.

Okay - which one is it - in the first case the that fact but not the method is important, in the second, the method and not the fact is more important????

Hmmmmm.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/03/27/trey-gowdy-chuck-schumer-devin-nunes-intelligence-wiretap-info-white-house

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/03/20/gowdy-presses-comey-whether-flynn-leak-will-be-investigated

The Technique of Diminishing Exaggerations

This was Charles Krauthammer on Fox News Network 3/22/2017

“There appears to have been, for sure, um, illegal, if not illegal improper, unmasking of Americans,” the conservative pundit added. “We know that’s so because of the Flynn the unmasking.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/23/krauthammer-hesitates-to-say-nunes-revelations-vindicate-trump-we-are-in-the-dark-video/#ixzz4cAHBApqd

I have corrected the quote in the bold section, to better represent what Charles said and to give some inflection to this.  

In my mind, this is the Rush Limbaugh technique of Diminishing Exaggeration.

This usually goes like this:

1. Everybody is doing it
2. Most people are doing it
3. Many people are doing it
4. I heard about a guy who did it.

Look at his statements

1. There appears to have been,
2. for sure
3. illegal
4. if not illegal, improper

So he starts out by saying that there is an appearance.
Then he says it is for sure (definite)
Then he says it is illegal,
then he says it may not be illegal but improper.

A fair statement should have been:

There appears to be improper unmasking of American citizens

We do not have enough information to go beyond that.

But the words that will be picked up by people who have a bias are:

“There appears to have been, for sure, um, illegal, if not illegal improper, unmasking of Americans,” the conservative pundit added. “We know that’s so because of the Flynn the unmasking.”

Hmmmmm....

"All lies and jests, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
Paul Simon from his song "The Boxer"

Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/p/paulsimon390928.html

Wikileaks and morality

It is interesting about the discussion regarding the in and out of Wikileaks as it pertains to the current administration.

Here is the bottom line - Wikileaks is neither evil or good, in the traditional sense.

Wikileaks is amoral,  it does not care what it releases, it feels that EVERYTHING musty be exposed, no matter who it hurts.

That does not make it evil, but it makes it wrong.

The right of free speech is not absolute, it is always constrained by humanity.

The First Amendment says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Just because Congress can make no law respecting an establishment of religion, does not make every religion right. 

Just because Congress can make no law abridging the freedom ............of the press, does not make the press always right.

And just because Congress can make no law abridging the freedom of speech, goes not make all speech right.

With any freedom comes responsibility - if you do not accept the responsibility, then you cannot claim the right.