3515 – Tuesday, September 17, 2019 — Can a Woman Be President of the USA?

16 Sep 2019 4 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

515mRahlm4L._SX371_BO1,204,203,200_

In 1996, I predicted that the United States of America would have its first woman president no later than the year 2004.  There were a number of notable women in congress at the time and the USA was long overdue for its first woman president.  It is now 2019, and we still have not had a woman president in the USA.  We are beginning the 2020 elections and we have a number of strong intelligent women on the campaign trail for the Democratic Party Presidential candidate.   

Perhaps not surprisingly, the political pundits are saying that this election year a woman cannot beat Donald Trump for the office.  The suggestion is that a woman might be selected for the Vice Presidency but not for the Presidency.  A man can beat Trump, but you know how woman are, they just can’t take the heat. 

“I now announce myself as a candidate for the Presidency. I anticipate criticism; but however unfavorable I trust that my sincerity will not be called into question.” — Victoria Woodhull, 1872

In 1872, Victoria Woodhull became the first female presidential candidate while the former slave Frederick Douglass was her running mate.  The record shows that no one even bothered to count their votes.  It is a safe bet that women did not vote for anyone since they did not get the right to vote until June 4, 1919.  It is also a safe bet that in 1872, the KKK was doing all it could to keep African American men from voting.  Despite their efforts, the percentage of voters who were Black in 1872 was at a high-water mark that was not surpassed for many years.  In fact, after 1872, the number of Black voters declined as the Federal Government abandoned African Americans in the South and let the notorious Jim Crow laws be enacted. 

“America is false to the past, false to the present, and solemnly binds herself to be false to the future.” — Frederick Douglass

ixkittvjvticgygo9pwvld3bcsfqavmifxaz9q12z6zssikpmhagjtxqykhy2dcg

In 2008, Hillary Clinton was the first woman to be nominated by a major political party as their presidential candidate.  During the election year, those opposed to her called her a bitch, dyke, castrator, liar, crook, hypocrite, racist, traitor, Nazi and narcissist.

“I’ve seen both candidates attacked based upon physical characteristics, both attacked based upon personality traits, both attacked based on past decisions.  The one element that separates the two is that Clinton is also attacked for being a woman, and Trump is not attacked for being a man.” — Jennifer Mercieca, a historian of American political rhetoric.

My first-born child was a girl.  She was born in 1968 and we named her Christina.  People always asked me if I was disappointed that I did not have a son.  The thought of disappointment never crossed my mind.  I was proud to have a daughter and both my wife Julia, and I were determined to give her every opportunity that we would have given a son.  When she was a young child, she received as many “boy” toys like trucks and erector sets as she did dolls and playhouses.  She was inundated with books and just as many were about science as about other subjects that might have been considered traditionally female subjects.

When she was old enough for sports, I spent time ice skating, bicycling, swimming, skiing and canoeing with her.  We once took second place in a father daughter canoe race.  When she was in high school and wanted to be a cheerleader, we also encouraged her to play some sports and not just stand on the sidelines and cheer for some boys.  I did not want to let society stereotype her, and I wanted her to believe that she could be anything she set her mind to.  Doctor or nurse.  Pilot or flight attendant.  President or President’s wife. 

female-presidents

The United States of America prides itself on being the land of liberty and justice.  The home of the brave and the land of the free.  The home of democracy.  While we brag about American Exceptionalism, 101 countries have had a woman elected either as president or prime minister.  Excluding female monarchs, over 150 women since 1918 have been elected or appointed head of state.  Meanwhile in the United States of America, we have not even had an elected woman vice president. 

And of course, this year is not the right time for a woman.  We need to select a guy because only another guy can beat Trump.  It is not a woman’s role to be president, at least not in the Land of the Free.  The Democrats with several woman candidates seem to think that the best we can do is select a woman as a running mate for the male presidential candidate.  It is said to be imperative that we select a man if we really want to beat Trump.

“Of all the indignities Donald Trump has imposed on Democrats since he decided to run for president, the fact that he has convinced many of them they dare not nominate a woman to oppose him is among the worst.” —  Ed Kilgore, Intelligencer, Sept 20, 2018

women-president-candidates-696x464.png

I have watched some of all three Democratic debates to date.  It is clearly my opinion that Warren is the most intelligent, coherent and poised of all the candidates.  My wife also shares that opinion with me as does a large percentage of the American electorate.  I have qualms with every one of the Democratic candidates.  Not one of them is without some problems in terms of policy or procedures.  But I will not vote for anyone just because they can beat Trump.  Neither will I vote for a candidate on the basis of race, religion, age or gender.  

Dear Daughter,

I am sorry I lied to you when you were growing up.  In America, the dream that you can be anything you want to be is for men only.  This country is terribly divided but is less divided on the issue of whether or not a woman is qualified to be president.  Most people seem sure that she is not.  I should never have set you up for failure by telling you that a woman could be President of the United States of America.  Our country is not ready for a woman president.  Maybe in another 100 years or so, we will have the intelligence and open mindedness to see that women are the equal of men in politics and many other areas of life.  Until then, please do not lie to your daughters and set them up for heartache and disappointment.  It would not be easy for them to be called a bitch, liar, hypocrite, feminazi, dyke, crook and other insults like the ones that Hillary had to endure.

Love, your father.

“When a man gives his opinion, he’s a man.  When a woman gives her opinion, she’s a bitch.” — Bette Davis

“We teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller. We say to girls, you can have ambition, but not too much. You should aim to be successful, but not too successful. Otherwise, you would threaten the man. Because I am female, I am expected to aspire to marriage. I am expected to make my life choices always keeping in mind that marriage is the most important. Now marriage can be a source of joy and love and mutual support but why do we teach girls to aspire to marriage and we don’t teach boys the same? We raise girls to see each other as competitors not for jobs or accomplishments, which I think can be a good thing, but for the attention of men. We teach girls that they cannot be sexual beings in the way that boys are.”  — Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, We Should All Be Feminists

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rally Round the Flag Boys and Girls. Time to Attack IRAN!

15 Jun 2019 1 Comment

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

I am re-posting this information which is from Wikipedia.  I have not written one word of this blog, but I think it is important enough to post.  The President of the USA may now be using this tactic with IRAN.  It has been used before and Americans will fall prey to it again unless people are aware of the tactic and stand up to it.

Estoy re-publicando esta información que es de Wikipedia. No he escrito una palabra de este blog, pero creo que es lo suficientemente importante como para publicar. El presidente de los EE. UU. Ahora puede estar usando esta táctica con IRAN. Se ha usado antes y los estadounidenses volverán a ser presa de él a menos que la gente esté consciente de la táctica y la haga frente.

我正在重新發布來自維基百科的這些信息。 我沒有寫過這個博客的一個詞，但我認為發布這個詞非常重要。 美國總統現在可能正在與伊朗使用這種策略。 它已經被使用過了，除非人們意識到這種策略並且能夠堅持下去，否則美國人將再次成為它的犧牲品。

Ich poste diese Informationen, die aus Wikipedia stammen, erneut. Ich habe kein Wort dieses Blogs geschrieben, aber ich denke, es ist wichtig genug, um etwas zu posten. Der Präsident der USA könnte diese Taktik jetzt mit dem IRAN anwenden. Es wurde schon früher benutzt und die Amerikaner werden wieder Opfer davon werden, es sei denn, die Leute sind sich der Taktik bewusst und halten sich dagegen.

Rally ’round the flag effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

President Bush approval rating from 2001 to 2006. Spikes in approval coincide with the September 11 attacks, the invasion of Iraq, and the capture of Saddam Hussein.

The rally ’round the flag effect (or syndrome) is a concept used in political science and international relations to explain increased short-run popular support of the President of the United States during periods of international crisis or war.[1]Because rally ’round The Flag effect can reduce criticism of governmental policies, it can be seen as a factor of diversionary foreign policy.[1]

Mueller’s definition[edit]

Political scientist John Mueller suggested the effect in 1970, in a landmark paper called “Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson”. He defined it as coming from an event with three qualities:[2]

  1. “Is international”
  2. “Involves the United States and particularly the President directly”
  3. “Specific, dramatic, and sharply focused”

Causes and durations[edit]

Since Mueller’s original theories, two schools of thought have emerged to explain the causes of the effect. The first, “The Patriotism School of Thought” holds that in times of crisis, the American public sees the President as the embodiment of national unity. The second, “The Opinion Leadership School” believes that the rally emerges from a lack of criticism from members of the opposition party, most often in the United States Congress. If opposition party members appear to support the president, the media has no conflict to report, thus it appears to the public that all is well with the performance of the president.[4]

The two theories have both been criticized, but it is generally accepted that the Patriotism School of thought is better to explain causes of rallies, while the Opinion Leadership School of thought is better to explain duration of rallies.[3] It is also believed that the lower the presidential approval rating before the crisis, the larger the increase will be in terms of percentage points because it leaves the president more room for improvement. For example, Franklin Roosevelt only had a 12% increase in approval from 72% to 84% following the Attack on Pearl Harbor, whereas George W. Bush had a 39% increase from 51% to 90% following the September 11 attacks.[5]

Another theory about the cause of the effect is believed to be embedded in the US Constitution. Unlike in other countries, the constitution makes the President both head of government and head of state. Because of this, the president receives a temporary boost in popularity because his Head of State role gives him symbolic importance to the American people. However, as time goes on his duties as Head of Government require partisan decisions that polarize opposition parties and diminish popularity. This theory falls in line more with the Opinion Leadership School.

Due to the highly statistical nature of presidential polls, University of Alabama political scientist John O’Neal has approached the study of rally ’round the flag using mathematics. O’Neal has postulated that the Opinion Leadership School is the more accurate of the two using mathematical equations. These equations are based on quantified factors such as the number of headlines from the New York Times about the crisis, the presence of bipartisan support or hostility, and prior popularity of the president.[6]

Political Scientist from The University of California Los Angeles, Matthew A. Baum found that the source of a rally ’round the flag effect is from independents and members of the opposition party shifting their support behind the President after the rallying effect. Baum also found that when the country is more divided or in a worse economic state then the rally effect is larger. This is because more people who are against the president before the rallying event switch to support him afterwards. When the country is divided before the rallying event there is a higher potential increase in support for the President after the rallying event.[7]

In a study by Political Scientist Terrence L. Chapman and Dan Reiter, rallies in Presidential approval ratings were found to be bigger when there was U.N. Security Council supported Militarized interstate disputes (MIDs). Having U.N. Security Council support was found to increase the rally effect in presidential approval by 8 to 9 points compared to when there wasn’t U.N. Security Council support.[5]

According to a 2019 study of ten countries in the period 1990-2014, there is evidence of a rally-around-the-flag effect early on in an intervention with casualties (in at least the first year) but voters begin to punish the governing parties after 4.5 years.[8]

Historical examples[edit]

The effect has been examined within the context of nearly every major foreign policy crisis since World War II. Some notable examples:

  • Cuban Missile Crisis: According to Gallup polls, President John F. Kennedy‘s approval rating in early October 1962 was at 61%. By November, after the crisis had passed, Kennedy’s approval rose to 74%. The spike in approval peaked in December 1962 at 76%. Kennedy’s approval rating slowly decreased again until it reached the pre-crisis level of 61% in June 1963.[3][9]
  • Iran hostage crisis: According to Gallup polls, President Jimmy Carter quickly gained 26 percentage points, jumping from 32 to 58% approval following the initial seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran in November 1979. However, Carter’s handling of the crisis caused popular support to decrease, and by November 1980 Carter had returned to his pre-crisis approval rating.[10]
  • Operation Desert Storm (Persian Gulf War): According to Gallup polls, President George H. W. Bush was rated at 59% approval in January 1991, but following the success of Operation Desert Storm, Bush enjoyed a peak 89% approval rating in February 1991. From there, Bush’s approval rating slowly decreased, reaching the pre-crisis level of 61% in October 1991.[3][11]
  • Following the September 11 attacks in 2001, President George W. Bush received an unprecedented increase in his approval rating. On September 10, Bush had a Gallup Poll rating of 51%. By September 15, his approval rate had increased by 34 percentage points to 85%. Just a week later, Bush was at 90%, the highest presidential approval rating ever. Over a year after the attacks occurred, Bush still received higher approval than he did before 9/11 (68% in November 2002). Both the size and duration of Bush’s popularity after 9/11 are believed to be the largest of any post-crisis boost. Many people believe that this popularity gave Bush a mandate and eventually the political leverage to begin the War in Iraq.[3][12]
  • Death of Osama bin Laden: According to Gallup polls, President Barack Obama received a 6% jump in his Presidential approving ratings, jumping from 46% in the three days before the mission (April 29 – May 1) to a 52% in the 3 days after the mission (May 2–4).[13] The rally effect didn’t last long, as Obama’s approval ratings were back down to 46% by June 30.

Controversy and Fears of Misuse[edit]

There are fears that the president will misuse the rally ’round the flag effect. These fears come from the “diversionary theory of war” in which the President creates an international crisis in order to distract from domestic affairs and to increase their approval ratings through a rally ’round the flag effect. The fear associated with this theory is that a President can create international crisis to avoid dealing with serious domestic issues or to increase their approval rating when it begins to drop.[14]

“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.  Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.  That is easy.  All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”  — Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials 

 

3627– Monday, May 27, 2019 – Jesus Christ versus Donald Trump

27 May 2019 5 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , ,

Why do I get these crazy writing ideas when I am running?  I get some of what I consider my best ideas while I am out jogging.  Sometimes, my brain solves problems when I am running, sometimes it comes up with thoughts on things to do and other times I get ideas to write about. I was out running yesterday when the following thought flashed into my mind:  What if Jesus entered the presidential race on the Democratic side?  What would people say about this?  I assume that it would get attention from a wide range of commentators.  Just for fun, I decided to “put words into their mouths.”  The result is the following “Fake News.”  If you want to add your comments on what or how you would think about such an event, please do.  I always welcome comments.  So here we go!

News Flash!  Breaking news on CNN and Fox News.  Jesus of Nazareth, AKA, Son of God, Man from Galilee, Jesus Christ and King of the Jews has recently thrown his hat or crown into the ring to run for president against Donald Trump in 2020.  A quick Pew Poll shows him trailing Joe Biden and Sanders in popularity but leading the other 22 Democratic candidates.

jesuspresident

“We are bringing you some recent comments concerning this new event.  First, from the Republican side:”

Donald Trump: “Fake, Fake, Fake. I don’t believe it is the real Jesus.  But even if it was, I will kick his butt back to Crown Heights or wherever else he is from.”

Mitch McConnell: “This is another desperate gamble on the part of the Democratic Party.  I don’t care if he is the real Jesus or not.  There is no way that we are giving any of our hard-earned tax money to the poor people in this country.”

Lindsey Graham: “Well, you all know that I am a man of honor and integrity.  However, I do not think it is right that Jesus should try to stick his nose into something that should not matter to him.  We in the Republican Party have been doing a good job of running this country and I think Jesus would be better off working with the Pope to improve things in the Vatican.  Let us politicians run this country.”

Sarah Huckabee Sanders: “I know Jesus has quite a reputation, but I think he is a sell-out for joining the Democrats.  I am a Christian, but I will still vote for Donald.  He is the man.”

Devin Nunes: “I think there is some kind of a conspiracy afoot here.  I don’t know this Jesus guy very well, but I suspect that if he is a Democrat, he is also a closet commie and closet homosexual.  You can’t trust any Democrat.  I plan to head a committee to see if this Jesus has a bonafide birth certificate and is really an American.”

Bill Hannity: “Fox News says he is a fake and a charlatan.  Who ever heard of anyone in their right mind wanting to take money from the rich to help the poor, the lame and the sick?  Maybe he is Jesus, but this is the 21st Century and he is long past his prime.  He might have been able to sell that message in 20 BC, but this is 2020 and that dog doesn’t point any more.  If I were Jesus, I would go back to selling alms or something to help the poor and stay out of politics.”

“Now for some comments from the Democratic side.” 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: “I have great respect for Jesus, but I don’t think he has a chance. First of all, he is a White guy.  Second, he is old.  I mean he is really old.  You put it all together and he is an “Old White Guy.”  Not enough Democrats will identify with him.  He is a nice guy, but you know what they say about nice guys.”

Nancy Pelosi: “I am not going to play any favorites here.  As long as he doesn’t push for impeachment and as long as he remembers that I run the Democratic party, I won’t have a problem with him.”

Ilhan Omar: “I want to know where he stands on Israel.  Is he for a two state or a one state solution?  These Jewish politicians are all the same.  Everything for Israel and nothing for Palestine.  If he wants my support, he is going to have to show his support for the Palestinians.”

Chuck Schumer: “I agree with Nancy.” 

Joe Biden: “I think Jesus could have a lot going for him, but he lacks my experience.  He might make a good Vice President, but he will need to pay his dues. I have been in the Democratic party for over thirty years and I have the track record that this country needs.  I will get behind Jesus if he is the party’s choice as I have got behind every other Democrat that my party chose.

Bernie Sanders: “I have said it once and I will say it again.  Election days come and go.  But the struggle of the people to create a government which represents all of us and not just the one percent – a government based on the principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice – that struggle continues.  I have been on the forefront of this struggle for many years.  I have nothing against Jesus, but you did not see him on the Civil Rights marches when I marched along with Dr. Martin Luther King and you did not see him on the Vietnam War protest marches when I marched facing police batons and tear gas.  We need someone who will stand up to this corrupt government and I have demonstrated that I am willing to do that.”

“That’s all for now.  We will bring you updates on the Democratic nomination process as events happen.  Rumors are that Buddha and Moses are considering entering the race.”

“You’ll have a good, secure life when being alive means more to you than security, love more than money, your freedom more than public or partisan opinion, when the mood of Beethoven’s or Bach’s music becomes the mood of your whole life … when your thinking is in harmony, and no longer in conflict, with your feelings … when you let yourself be guided by the thoughts of great sages and no longer by the crimes of great warriors … when you pay the men and women who teach your children better than the politicians; when truths inspire you and empty formulas repel you; when you communicate with your fellow workers in foreign countries directly, and no longer through diplomats…”  ― Wilhelm Reich, Listen, Little Man!

 

 

 

 

Bully in Chief and Liar in Chief!

13 Dec 2017 2 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , ,

‘He is a bully’: Gillibrand hits back at Trump over demeaning tweet

Senator Gillibrand

Trump is not only THE Bully in Chief, he also is THE Liar in Chief. I am still waiting for one journalist to be honest and call this guy a Liar.  At least Senator Gillibrand has the guts to label this lowlife for what he really is. We have a President with NO integrity and a Senate full of politicians with not much more integrity. Do you think this poor excuse for a human being would still be president if even 1/4 of the Senate had the guts to speak out and call him for what he really is?  He no more deserves to be president than Benedict Arnold.  Time for more calls to impeach him.  Time for more Americans to speak out.  Let the waves of indignation and moral outrage roll down and sweep him out of office.

No bigger mistake has been made in the history of this country than the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the United States of America.

Time for Questions:

When will we impeach this lowlife?  What about the people who helped to put him into office?  Have they any regrets?  Are you speaking out?  If not, when will you add your voice to the chorus of people who have the courage and integrity to speak their piece?

f61cf2a6b0a0dfac39792e1d5998c996

Life is just beginning.

Trump is not the end but the beginning.  We are going to see more rights for people in the world, more justice, more compassion, more of what will make American’s proud just as soon as we dump trump.

 

 

 

The Man or the Office?  Which Do We Respect?

06 Feb 2017 8 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , ,

trump

Hardly a day goes by that I don’t wonder whether I should call him Chump, Asshole or Mr. President.  There are many decrying the use of my pejorative adjectives to describe our new president.  They say “Even if you do not respect the man, you must respect the office.”  This rule (I know not where it began) seems to have taken the form of “common knowledge” as though there was some ancient prescription that admonished us to always respect an elected or appointed official.

Ironically, the man in office now gave no respect to his predecessor.  Beginning with the birther conspiracy before Obama even took office and continuing right up until his election, the man now in office took every opportunity to denigrate and insult President Barack Obama.  Nevertheless, I am not using this as an argument to insult our new President.  It fails the test of morality in that we all know “two wrongs do not make a right.”

My dilemma stems from my difficulty with understanding whether we should assign respect to an office regardless of the character of the individual that might be in it.  Perhaps history could shed some light on this issue for us.  What does history tell us about this question?  Is it really a universal law that we must respect the office even if we do not respect the man?  Have people in the past always respected the office even when they disliked the office holder?  Should we respect the office or the office holder?

Let us go back to the time of Israel under the Roman occupation when Herod was king.  What did they say about Herod?

“On an appointed day, Herod put on his royal robes, took his seat upon the throne, and delivered an oration to them.  And the people were shouting, “The voice of a god, and not of a man!”  Immediately an angel of the Lord struck him down, because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and breathed his last. …” — Acts 12:19-24 

king-georgeMarching forward in time to the period of the Revolutionary war when George the III was ruler of the American Colonies, what did they think of King George?  Here is what is written in the Declaration of Independence:

“A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

Our second President John Adams was called a “hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.” By James Callender, a supporter of Thomas Jefferson.

The insults were returned by Adams supporters who called Jefferson a “a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father.”

President Abraham Lincoln who is today revered by many as either the greatest or second greatest president in American history received even more scorn than Jefferson or Adams from his contemporaries:

funny_lincoln_400

“George Templeton Strong, a prominent New York lawyer and diarist, wrote that Lincoln was “a barbarian, Scythian, yahoo, or gorilla.”  Henry Ward Beecher, the Connecticut-born preacher and abolitionist, often ridiculed Lincoln in his newspaper, The Independent (New York), rebuking him for his lack of refinement and calling him “an unshapely man.”  Other Northern newspapers openly called for his assassination long before John Wilkes Booth pulled the trigger. He was called a coward, “an idiot,” and “the original gorilla” by none other than the commanding general of his armies, George McClellan.” —- Knowledge Nuts

I could cite pages of examples such as the above.  History is full of examples of insults levied against Presidents, Kings and many other office holders.  I listed only a few to show that insults against an office are nothing new.  However, does this make it right or are these insults simply a lack of character?  What are our obligations to an “office?”   This question might be posed in one of two ways:

  1. We should respect an office even if the office holder is not worthy of our respect.

Yes!  We should respect an office because it represents an agreed upon authority.  If offices had no authority, institutions would break down and there would be no rule of order.   Democracy is based on the acceptance of authority emanating from the will of the masses.  No one person is above the masses in a democracy.

No!  An office has no intrinsic entitlement to respect.  The respect for an office comes from the office holder and not the other way around.  To simply respect a title because it is a title is both illogical and dangerous.  One can think of the harm that was caused by the respect that the Fuhrer had in Germany because he was the leader even when many disagreed with his policies and his behavior.

quote-the-president-of-the-united-states-whoever-it-is-deserves-a-certain-level-of-reverence-chris-matthews-117-93-79

  1. We should only respect an office when the office holder is worthy of respect.

Yes!  People can only remain free and independent absent of an authority that comes solely from titles, ranks and names.  If we obey or show respect for an office that is in violation of ethics or morality, we give away our free will.  Massacres, murders and other atrocities often arise from a group mentality or an unwarranted willingness to acquiesce to authority.  An office is not entitled to respect unless the office holder imbues the office with respect.

No!  People must show respect to the institution or office regardless of who the office holder is.  We must recognize that in the case of Trump, millions of Americans chose him over Hillary.  To disrespect Trump is to disrespect the millions of citizens in this country who following the laws of the land duly elected him to the office of POTUS.

do-not-respec

Well, there you have it.  I think I have laid out the “two sides of the coin.”   Now it is time for you to weigh in with your opinions.  Do not sit this one out.  Put your opinions in the comments section and let me hear from you.

Time for Questions:

What do you think? How would you answer these questions?

Life is just beginning.

“In a few days, I will lay down my official responsibilities in this office, to take up once more the only title in our democracy superior to that of President: the title of Citizen.” — Farewell Address, President Jimmy Carter.

For another opinion on this issue, see the article by Jonathan Chait.

Must We Respect the Office of the Presidency?

 

 

 

 

 

A Vote for Donald Trump is a Vote for Hatred, Bigotry and Fear.

31 Oct 2016 Leave a comment

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

blog-punch1Donald Trump is a greedy rich racist sexist bigoted homophobic coward and boor. However, Donald Trump is not America.  Donald Trump is a reflection of the worst elements of humanity rolled into one human being.  I know many people who have elements of Donald Trump in their personalities.  I know racists. I know sexists. I know greedy rich and greedy poor people.  I know bigots and I know people who are homophobic.  I know many cowards who will not bother to stand up for their ideas or the rights of other people.  Donald Trump is unique in that he manages to roll all of the negative characteristics of humanity into one persona.

“The great secret of true success, of true happiness, is this: the man or woman who asks for no return, the perfectly unselfish person, is the most successful.” — Swami Vivekananda

crooked-hillaryDonald Trump is not America.  Donald Trump is a creation of a media empire that is out of control.  A media that trends sensationalism, exploitation, fear and paranoia to feed a 24/7 system of so called news reports.  A system of glitz, glamour, ads, sound bites, commercials, sex appeal and worthless trivia that has little or no educational or informational value.  It is a system that neither informs nor educates.  It is a system that thrives on the likes of Donald Trump.  It is a system that thrives on the exotic, the unusual, the strange, the bizarre, the kinky, the outlandish and the far out.  Donald Trump is all of these things but he is not America.

“If people in the media cannot decide whether they are in the business of reporting news or manufacturing propaganda, it is all the more important that the public understand that difference, and choose their news sources accordingly.” — Thomas Sowell

sex-imagesDonald Trump is not even a real Republican.  The party he claims as his own is one he and his small band (less than 9 percent of the total registered voters in the USA)* has managed to co-opt.  The Republicans that I have called friends over the years want nothing to do with him.  They are as appalled as the Democrats are at Donald Trumps rise to popularity in the media polls.  Americans however should not be surprised at this.  It is not the first time that a fraud, demagogue and charlatan has captured the media stage.  Looking back through US history, we can find similarities between Donald Trump and the likes of Aaron Burr, The Know Nothing Party, Huey Long, The Silver Shirts, and of course Joseph Mc McCarthy.   None of my Republican friends would avow affiliation with any of these characters.   They are not America and neither is Donald Trump.

“Find out for yourself what is truth, what is real. Discover that there are virtuous things and there are non-virtuous things. Once you have discovered for yourself give up the bad and embrace the good.”   — The Buddha

trump-and-putinEvery country in the world has its right and left-wing extremists.  It has been this way for hundreds of years.  Fortunately, in the USA, our political system usually kicks out the extremists and the middle ground or centrists have always trumped the left and right-wing fanatics.  Due to our political system, we have escaped such maniacs as General Franco, Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler.  There are many drawbacks to our political system and chaos often seems to be a major characteristic of it.  There are many people who would discard such a system in favor of stability and security.  These people would buy such a political system at the cost of freedom and liberty.  In many nations throughout the world, citizens select benevolent dictators rather than trying to deal with the vagaries and uncertainties that are often characteristic of a US style democracy.

Donald Trump would have Americans believe that he will bring us stability and prosperity, but at what cost?  Donald Trump would build a huge wall to keep out immigrants.  Donald Trump would build Internment Camps for American Muslims.  Donald Trump would outlaw Gay marriage.  Donald Trump would create a police state to keep in check unruly minorities.  Donald Trump would insure that a woman’s place was back in the kitchen.

“In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.” — Acts 20:23

Donald Trump promises to make all Americans rich.  That is how he is buying the support of a small minority of foolish Americans.   Donald Trump says “I am rich.  I know how to run things. I can make you rich too.  Look at how much money I have.”  And people believe him:  “Donald Trump will Make America Great Again means Donald Trump will make us all rich like he is.”  Well, he will promise to make every American rich.  That is the benefit he is promising for anyone is willing to vote for him.  All it will cost America is the cost of one giant prison system.

trump-wallDonald Trump says that he will create the largest wall that the world has ever seen, but it won’t keep out immigrants.  It will only keep out ideas and innovation.  Donald Trump supporters include the misguided and fearful who believe that if we only had less poor people, less immigrants, less refugees, less minorities, less disabled people and less women in power that “America Would Be Great Again.”  This is a delusion held by those who dream of a bygone era when “Father knew best, Blacks knew their place and women stayed in the kitchen.”  The myth of “The Good Old Days” is almost impossible to kill in a population fed on media mediocrity and where real history is either not taught or understood.  Donald Trump will not bring back the “good old days” because the good old days where not really that good.  Donald Trump will not “Make America White Again.”

A man asked Muhammad what was the mark whereby he might know the reality of his faith. Muhammad said, “If thou derive pleasure from the good which thou hast performed and thou be grieved for the evil which thou hast committed, thou art a true believer.” The man said. “In what doth a fault really consist?” Muhammad said, “When action pricketh thy conscience, forsake it.” — Sayings of the Prophet

hate-speechWhat all of Trump’s bombastic speeches fail to note is that America is still great.  Unfortunately, the things that make America great are hidden behind the media pronouncements of Donald Trump and his ill-advised followers. The ceaseless stream of bad news, crime, bizarre and weird news that titillates so many also deprives us of being a well-informed populace.   In addition, our outlandish media system simply serves to hide the many great values that the USA stands for.

Most Americans and by this term I will include North America, Central America and South America, i.e., US Citizens, Mexican Citizens, Canadian Citizens and Citizens from Central and South America are decent law abiding compassionate and loving people.  The majority of the people I know or have met in Canada, the USA, Mexico, Central and South America will help their fellow human beings.  They are good Samaritans who will give some of what they have to provide for others in need.  They are not greedy or bigots or racists or sexists.  They are people like you and me who care for their neighbors, their country and their environment.  They are not Donald Trump supporters.

“Before someone will get the guts to monitor your life, he must get the keyboard of humility. To be a humble person, is a priority in leadership!” — Israelmore Ayivor

The media and its fascinations with the likes of Donald Trump obscure the good that abounds in our nations.  The media obscures the daily good deeds and charities that are done in the name of love and compassion for others.  People like Donald Trump are raised on soap boxes and the ceaseless barrage of hateful comments from him and his followers hides the voice of the majority.  Donald Trump and his followers are the minority.

“It’s easy to stand in the crowd but it takes courage to stand alone” — Mahatma Gandhi

trump-bankrupt-americaThe message of hatred and intolerance that spews daily from Trump is something that one could pity Trump for if it were not so dangerous and belligerent.  It is hard to feel sorry for the bully that is kicking other people when they are down.  Somewhere though, we know that such bullies are really cowards. Their intolerance and lack of compassion towards others is driven by fear and insecurity.  No matter how big and bad the bully seems, they are the biggest cowards in the playground.  It is time to put Donald Trump and his followers in their places.  There is no room in America for bigots, sexists and racists who are intolerant of and lack compassion for others. We need to keep America great by letting the world see the true values that guide our nations and not the distorted hate filled messages that the media loves to display.

“We shall listen, not lecture; learn, not threaten. We will enhance our safety by earning the respect of others and showing respect for them. In short, our foreign policy will rest on the traditional American values of restraint and empathy, not on military might.”   — Theodore C. Sorensen

We are a few weeks short of Election Day.  The Trump bandwagon has already exploded.  Hillary has been asked what she will do to unite the country.  Unfortunately, stupidity and greed and hate cannot be united with honesty, integrity and compassion.  We will be left with an underbelly of nearly 30 percent of American voters who have supported Trump.  For whatever reason, (it really does not matter) we have millions of Americans who will vote for a man who has no qualifications to be a humane being never mind President of the United States of America.  We will have to take the problem of his supporters very seriously or risk a rerun of this past election.  I think I am on firm ground when I say that four things must happen to change in America:

  1. We need to insure a pathway to success for all Americans by creating a system of lifelong learning and job training.
  2. We need to change our political system and start by establishing term limits. I would support a system of a single term of six years for all representatives, senators and the President.
  3. We need to break up the monopoly that a few media giants have on the news. We need more integrity in journalism and not a system that is built on sensationalism and exploitation.  The news should inform people and help people make better decisions.
  4. We need a better system for establishing the credentials of candidates for office. The system of debates that we watched the past year did little or nothing to help people decide who was the most qualified candidate and what their concrete policies were.

Time for Questions:

Will you help get out the word?  Will you promise to speak out against Trump and his lack of morality and values?  Will you be sure to register to vote this election?  Will you educate yourself on the candidates and vote on the basis of values and not fear?  Will you help the world to see that Donald Trump Is Not America?

Life is just beginning.

“Americans need to educate themselves, from elementary school onward, about what their country has done abroad.  And they need to play a more active role in ensuring that what the United States does abroad is not merely in keeping with a foreign policy elite’s sense of realpolitik but also with the American public’s own sense of American values.”  — Mohsin Hamid

10- 22-2016.  Breaking News!!!  Trump unveils his 100 day plan in final policy speech.

His 100 day plan: Put women back into the kitchen by repealing Roe Versus Wade. Eliminate income inequality by giving more money and tax breaks to the rich hoping some of it will “trickle” down. Build up a military that is already as large as the next ten largest militaries in the world COMBINED. Put more people in prison who are trying to get into this country for a better life. We already have the largest prison population in the world. Sue his accusers for having the temerity to call him on his sexual predation and assaults. Build a big big wall to employ millions of laid off American workers. Finally, REPEAL Obama Care and replace it with something Great. Any more NEW FUCKING IDEAS MORON?

Facts, Data, Evidence and the Search for Truth. How do we know what to believe anymore? – Part 1

10 Oct 2016 4 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

truth-2I watched several shows the other day in which Trump supporters were interviewed.  People are as curious about his supporters as they are about Trump.  Given the unquestionable fact that Trump is a greedy sexist racist hate monger, why would anyone support him?  The assumed knowledge is that his supporters are a bunch of ignorant losers:  people who are uneducated or at best semi-literate.  However, the data and demographics do not entirely support this conclusion.  Many Trump supporters are intelligent educated and literate people.  These are also people who believe in the United States of America and care about their country.  What then persuades or convinces them that Trump is the right person for the job of POTUS?  His qualifications pose a questionable proposition that would seem to fly in the face of all known facts in the entire universe.  This dilemma strikes at the heart of the matter.  We do not know what to believe any more.  What is a fact?  What is evidence?  What is objective data?  Where can we find facts that are truthful (not really a redundancy)?

I think about my graduate students at the college where I have taught for many years.  These are students who are working on an MBA and are highly literate, highly educated and highly intelligent individuals.   Many of them already hold very well paying jobs and responsible positions in successful companies.   Nevertheless, the challenge that I continually face is to teach them the difference between facts, data, evidence and truth.  Despite their literacy, few of these students understand the difference.  This is a scary situation.  If these highly educated students do not understand the difference between these concepts, how can we expect the many uneducated members of the general public to understand and comprehend the essential elements of truth finding?  I say essential because facts, data and evidence are the three pillars of truth.  If you do not have these, you cannot find the truth.

liesSeveral problems make the issue even more complex.  In academia, we are dealing with a subset of life in which there is much less confusion over the truth since no one is deliberately trying to distort, lie or sell us anything.  There may be stupidity, lack of knowledge and even ignorance by many scientists and professors but the greed motive is much less tangible.  I am not saying it does not exist, but for most of my teaching career, I cannot think of anything I have ever tried to sell to my students and make a profit on.  I can say with some confidence that this is also true of all the instructors whom I have ever known or worked with.  The same situation does not exist outside of academia.  The marketplace is a vicious jungle when it comes to searching for the truth while academia is a tame zoo in comparison.

When we enter the marketplace and even more so in the political arena, the motive to convince us of something relies much less on elucidating the truth than it does on obfuscating the truth in order to sell us something.  Wells Fargo Bank wants you to open a credit account.  They don’t care whether you need it or not.  Volkswagen wants to sell you a car even if they have to hide the truth about pollution levels.  Every politician in America wants you to vote them into office.  They don’t want you to know the real truth about their competition or that they do not have all the answers to the problems facing our country.

Companies and politicians have a vested interest in hiding the truth from you.  Stories like Miracle on 31st Street where Macy’s sent people to Gimbels are few and far between and exist mostly in fantasy.  Similarly, stories about politicians with ethics such as “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” have become legendary because they depict a reality that seldom exists.  Most politicians will promise you the moon to get your vote and most companies will not tell you the truth about cigarettes, drugs, food or anything else unless forced to do so by some form of government regulation or mandate.  It does not matter whether it will kill you or not as long as you buy it or elect them.

trump-versus-hillaryFinally, we come to perhaps the biggest ruse of all.  If anyone is searching for the truth, they will eventually enter into the Fourth Estate.  This hallowed ground is defined as:  “A societal or political force or institution whose influence is not consistently or officially recognized.  Fourth Estate most commonly refers to the news media, especially print journalism or The Press.” (Wiki).   Thomas Jefferson believed that the two pillars of a democratic society were an educated citizenry and a free press.  Mark Twain was somewhat more skeptical about the power of the press and information to inform people when he noted that:  “If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you’re mis-informed.”  The truth seeker has been taught since early childhood that in the domain of the Fourth Estate is to be found the truth.  Little do they know the quagmire they have entered into or that the role of truth finding in the Fourth Estate no longer exists.

Today, the major purpose of the news (whether print or digital or video or audio) is to sell.  Sell, sell, sell, sell and sell some more.  Sell junk, sell drugs, sell expensive credit cards, sell stuff and more stuff.  Stuff you don’t need, won’t need and will probably never need.  The job of the media is to convince you that you do need stuff, that you desire stuff and that you cala_verite_par_jules_joseph_lefebvren not possibly live without stuff.

I once thought that journalists were a group to be respected.   This was based on the knowledge that they had often risked their lives and their reputations to bring us the truth.  Today, journalists are little more than pimps for advertisers.  They have sold their souls to the devil, descended into hell and may never come out again.  The measure of a journalist is not how much information they provide to the public but how many advertisements they can sell.  The changing role of journalists has made it even more difficult for people to find the truth.  Nothing in the news is remotely objective or unbiased any more.  Every paper, every station has their spin on things.  The spin is determined by who owns and controls the media.
Take polls for example.  As we go into the final days of the 2016 US presidential election, you can find polls that favor one candidate or the other candidate.  If there are seventy polls, half may favor one candidate and half may favor the other candidate.  There is no truth even in these so called unbiased statistical polls.  Many of my friends have suggested that the news media want the race to be close because this keeps people tuned in.  Much like a sports match, we would rather watch an event that had a pair of evenly matched contestants.  My friends have suggested that the news seems to do its best to insure that first one candidate gets major media attention thus elevating them in the polls and then it switches to the other candidate providing them attention that elevates their poll numbers.  I am not a big conspiracy theorist but this theory does seem to have some merit to it.

78-trump-debate-lies-758x426Regardless of whether the media intentionally want to keep the race close or not, there is no denying that the candidate who is the most obnoxious, the most outrageous and the most sensational will garner the most press.  Trump has been well aware of this and has continually manipulated the media into providing him billions of dollars in free advertising.   The fickle public seems to swing from one candidate to the other depending on who they see in the news.  Trump has undoubtedly benefitted from his ability to keep the press absorbed with his every utterance regardless of how inane they are.  He can tweet at 2AM in the morning and be assured that Fox News will carry his tweet on the 7 AM morning news.

stupid-trump-supportersHow then can we blame the general public, educated or not, of being uninformed or misinformed when most of our society is conspiring against them finding the truth?  It is a trap that I have fallen into when I have railed against the stupid, illiterate and uninformed Trump supporters.  Sadly, they are not to blame for their reliance on Trump to give them the truth.  The have certainly not found it in academia or the Fourth Estate.  I have some solutions to this issue but I do not have the entire answer to it.  I do have part of the answer.  It is quite clear to me that one must understand the difference between facts, data, evidence and the role of these three elements in helping to shape the truth.   In Part 2 of this blog, I will go into the subject of Facts in more depth.  In the following parts, I will cover Data, Evidence and Truth.

Time for Questions:

How do you know what to believe?  Who do you trust to give you unbiased information?  How much do you trust the news?  Are you satisfied with the quality of the information you get from journalists and the news?  What do you think we need to do to improve the quality of information the American public receives?

Life is just beginning.

“There’s a danger in the internet and social media.  The notion that information is enough, that more and more information is enough, that you don’t have to think, you just have to get more information – gets very dangerous.” — Edward de Bono

%d bloggers like this: