national news, political news

Scorned women on the march

How does that saying go? “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”?

A lot of women around the United States of America are feeling scorned today, the first full day of Donald J. Trump’s presidency.

They’re marching on Washington, D.C. They’re marching all across the country. Why, even in Amarillo, Texas — where the president earned about 80 percent of the total vote — women were to march at Ellwood Park.

Their protest? They dislike (a) the election of a man who actually admitted to mistreating women and (b) the defeat of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who most pundits and prognosticators said would make history by becoming the first woman elected president of the United States.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/meet-the-women-of-the-womens-march-on-washington/ar-AAm5aKo?li=BBnb7Kz

I’m trying to process this collective march throughout the land.

On the one hand, I understand women’s anger, disappointment and pain. Trump campaigned for the presidency while hurling insults at many demographic groups — and that included women, who took personally his attacks on people such as former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly and actor/comedian Rosie O’Donnell.

But … get this: Exit polling showed that Trump garnered more than 50 percent of the female vote nationwide. Statistically, that might have spelled the difference between winning and losing for the Republican presidential nominee. By capturing a majority of the female vote, does the women’s march overstate the concern that marchers are expressing? I don’t know the answer to that question.

It does appear that the national divide now is split not just along urban and rural residents, among racial groups and among socio-economic groups. It now appears split along gender.

A lot of women are angry today as the realization of Trump’s inauguration as the 45th president is soaking into their consciousness. Not all of them, mind you. Indeed, I know several women here in the Texas Panhandle who voted for Trump — many of them with great trepidation; however, others did so with great enthusiasm.

My advice today to the president? Pay careful attention to what these women on the march are saying. He should not want to be on the receiving end of women’s rage if he scorns them yet again by ignoring their protests.

national news, political news

It’s done; now it’s time to get used to a new era

The deed is done.

Barack Obama handed over the reins of power to Donald J. Trump. The former president and his family jetted off to California. The new president took up some business in the Oval Office before dancing the night away with his wife.

I’ll make yet another confession: I’m not yet ready to embrace fully the notion that Trump is actually, really and truly, certifiably the commander in chief of the world’s greatest military machine.

Yes, I know he is president. I know he won an election that seemingly everyone on the planet thought he’d lose bigly.

I’ve mentioned already that I’ve voted in 12 presidential elections. Five times my candidate has won; seven times he has lost. I know what it’s like to be on the short end of the vote count. Heck, the first election I voted in — that would be 1972 — my guy lost 49 states.

However, in every case I’ve been able to accept fully the outcome and move on … until now.

This one feels strangely different. It has something to do with what I still believe about the president’s unfitness for the office he now occupies. I get that not everyone agrees with me. Many of my friends here in the Texas Panhandle voted for Trump. They’re still my friends.

Still, I ask you to hang with me. I’m likely to come around.

Eventually.

International news, national news, political news

Trump fills two key national security posts … next?

Donald J. Trump took the oath of office today and the U.S. Senate managed to do its job by confirming two critical appointments to the new president’s national security team.

Senators confirmed James Mattis as secretary of defense and John Kelly as secretary of homeland security.

Two elements intrigue me about both of these men.

One, they are retired general-grade officers, both Marines, both of them with four stars each on their epaulets. You’ll recall that the president said he knows “more than the generals about ISIS, believe me.”

But … does he? I don’t think so. I am convinced as well that the president didn’t think so either when he blustered that statement while campaigning for the office. It was an applause/laugh line.

The second element that is most interesting to me is that Gens. Mattis and Kelly both contradict some talking points that Trump declared, also while campaigning for the presidency.

Mattis in particular has declared Russia to be a primary threat to our national security, something that Trump has dismissed virtually out of hand as the controversy over Russian hacking has escalated. Kelly, too, has shown to be his own man while discussing ways to protect the nation.

Kelly takes the point now as Trump’s guy in the fight to control illegal immigration. Mattis now gets to assess additional international threats to the nation — and he is seriously concerned about Russia. Perhaps he can persuade the commander in chief that he, too, needs to worry about Vladimir Putin’s intent.

I’m also fascinated that the notion of a retired Marine general with the nickname of “Mad Dog” is seen as the reasonable alternative to the man who nominated him in the first place.

These two men will assume critical roles in the new administration. One word of warning, though, is in order: Donald Trump now needs to concentrate aggressively on filling many of the staff-level national security jobs that are vacant.

He did vow at his inaugural that he would eliminate radical Islamic terrorists from the face of the planet. You must get busy, Mr. President.

national news

POTUS goes to war with those around him

Get ready for this: I am about to give the new president of the United States a backhanded compliment for showing some serious brass while delivering his inaugural speech.

Donald J. Trump, standing on a podium surrounded by many men and women with whom he’ll work — the folks who serve in Congress — threw down the gauntlet. He said the era of doing nothing in Congress has ended; he said Washington prospered while the rest of the nation suffered; he accused lawmakers essentially of enriching themselves while the Ordinary Joe was sucking wind.

Did the folks on the podium feel the burn?

More’n likely.

However, if this was his effort to bridge the divide that has split the country, I fear it might have widened it — particularly among the individuals who serve in Congress. Indeed, the divide between Capitol Hill and the White House might be the most gaping of all.

Republicans made it clear when Barack Obama became president that they had no intention of cooperating with him. Now it’s Democrats’ turn to exact revenge on a Republican president.

And the president today perhaps gave them more ammo to lock ‘n load as they prepare to do battle with the guy who’s just dissed them so grandly … and in front of so many people.

Given that most of out here in the proverbial peanut gallery don’t really know about Trump’s ideology, we are left to wonder if his declaration of war against Congress is going to perpetuate the gridlock that gripped the federal government for much of the past eight years.

Here’s my fear: If Democrats succeed in blocking whatever Trump wants to do, there could be collateral damage inflicted by Republicans who launch their own counterattack.

Or … lawmakers on both sides of the aisle could get angry enough at Trump’s fighting words to stop government dead in its tracks.

Then what?

national news

‘American carnage’ becomes Trump’s signature line

It turns out Donald J. Trump found a phrase after all that likely might stick in the minds — and perhaps the craw — of millions of Americans.

“The American carnage is going to stop right now,” the president said in his inaugural speech on the steps of the U.S. Capitol.

American carnage.

Wow, man!

I guess the president has chosen to ignore the crime trend in this country, which is that violent crime is at a 40-year low. Sure, some communities have been victimized by evil-intended criminals. Chicago has been torn by waves of violence, as have other large American cities.

Does this portend a nationwide “carnage” that has gripped the nation, a place where all Americans are living in fear of being shot? I’m having difficulty understanding why the brand new president would send this kind of message out across the vast landscape of the nation he leads and around the world that continues to rivet its attention on what occurs in this country.

The president has painted a stark, forbidding and frightening picture of the United States. So help me, I believe he has severely misstated the condition of our great nation and has delivered the same message that fired up the Republican base to nominate him in the first place — and helped carry him to victory in the general election.

The campaign has ended, Mr. President. It is now time to unite the nation. Rhetoric that tells of a fictitious “American carnage” only does more harm.

national news

This isn’t ‘peaceable’ assemblage, folks

Protestors have every right to protest.

They have no right to damage or destroy personal property, which has been occurring today during the inauguration of Donald J. Trump as president of the United States.

I am going to submit that this is the most profoundly disappointing element of today’s events. No, it’s worse than that. It’s disgraceful.

Indeed, I get that many Americans are unhappy with what is transpiring today. I am one of them. Some members of my family are, too, along with some of my best friends.

I don’t believe any of them have burned motor vehicles or broken storefront windows or tossed things in the direction of others to voice their disagreement with public policy.

Those who are angriest are more than welcome to spare me the “this is free speech” malarkey. It’s nothing of the kind. It’s criminal mischief.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right “… of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Not a single word can be found in there that condones vandalism or violence.

Shame on those who have sullied a time-honored tradition.

national news

So much for unity at this inaugural

I have a message to the new president of the United States, if only he receives it.

The campaign is over, Donald John Trump. You won. You’re the president. You promised to unify the country. You could have started when you delivered the inaugural speech. Sadly — in my mind — you didn’t.

What the country heard from the president was a recitation of the themes that won over enough voters to elect him president.

He painted yet again a dark, forbidding portrait of the greatest nation the world has ever known. He talked about job losses, a dispirited military establishment, fear of radical Islamic terrorists, a general feeling that the nation has gone to hell in a hurry.

This wasn’t your typical inaugural speech. It contained little of the high-minded hope that presidents bring to their high office.

Here is the speech in its entirety. Take a look and judge for yourself:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/full-speech-president-donald-trump-inaugural-address/ar-AAm3VY0

Believe it or not, I was hoping there would be at least a glimmer of recognition of the progress that President Barack Obama made during his eight years in office: dramatic reduction in the jobless rate; revival of the auto industry; huge reduction in the annual federal budget deficit; success in the war against terrorists — including the killing of Osama bin Laden.

None of that came forward.

Interestingly as well was the lack of mention of the dreaded Affordable Care Act, which Trump has vowed to “repeal and replace.” Nor was there a mention of the Iranian nuclear deal that Obama negotiated to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

He talked instead of restoring jobs, bringing back manufacturing jobs. Here’s a news flash, Mr. President: Those jobs fell victim to automation, not poorly negotiated trade deals; good luck if you think manufacturers are going to forgo robots for human beings.

I’m going to wish the president well — believe it or not. If he succeeds in all that he wants, more power to him, and to the country he now leads.

Failure, as the saying goes, is not an option.

If only he could have lifted our spirits just a little bit.

national news

Hoping for a beautiful sunrise tomorrow

A lot of aspects of American life likely could change sometime this afternoon.

At 11 a.m. (CST), Donald John Trump will become the 45th president of the United States. Barack Hussein Obama will exit the world stage and jet off to Palm Springs, Calif., for some well-deserved R&R with his family.

The new president will attend a parade, shake some hands, then venture into the Oval Office.

Then — he says — he will sign some executive orders, which he is entitled to do.

Will these orders undo some of the many positive aspects of Barack Obama’s presidency? Trump, after all, has called the current president a “disaster.” He’s said his policies are “stupid.”

Trump, who calls himself a “smart person” with a “good mind,” and someone who will surround himself with the “best minds” and a team that has highest collective IQ of any in the history in the history of the republic, will get to work to make his mark on the presidency.

What that entails, at this moment — on Inauguration Morning — remains virtually anyone’s guess.

I am going to hold out hope for one thing to occur. It will be that the sun will set tonight and we’ll all be able to awake Saturday to yet another beautiful sunrise.

I am going to pray that the new president is successful in whatever plans he has laid out for the next four years. The consequences of failure are too grim to ponder.

business news, national news, political news

Will the new president violate the Constitution right away?

An argument making the rounds for the past several months goes something like this: Donald J. Trump is going to be in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution at the moment he takes the oath of office as president of the United States of America.

The source of the violation? His myriad business interests.

This isn’t just a Democratic Party point of view. Republicans also are buying into a notion that Trump’s refusal to separate himself completely from his business dealings is creating a monstrous potential for conflict of interest.

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/19/510574687/ethics-lawyers-call-trumps-business-conflicts-nakedly-unconstitutional

According to National Public Radio: “A president is not permitted to receive cash and other benefits from foreign governments,” Norm Eisen tells Fresh Air‘s Terry Gross. “And yet, Donald Trump is getting a steady flow of them around the world and right here in the United States.”

The “emoluments clause” is front and center in this debate. It’s written into the U.S. Constitution. It should be called the “anti-bribery clause.” Trump has refused to divest his myriad business interests; he has refused to put them into a blind trust.

NPR, quoting Richard Painter, former ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, reports: “The president needs to focus on protecting the United States and American interests in a very dangerous world,” Painter says. “I really hope that President Trump takes the steps he needs to, to be free of conflict of interest in that endeavor.”

There are questions about whether Trump’s business dealings abroad could interfere with U.S. policy. Trump refuses to release his tax returns. He declines to provide detailed financial reports. He keeps saying this discussion is a media creation.

Holy cow, dude! You’ve got some serious experts on this stuff suggesting you’re going to violate the Constitution you will swear to “defend and protect.”

Does a direct violation of that sacred oath create a reason for, um, impeachment?

Let’s all wait for this to play out.

national news, political news

Whether to boycott inaugural

I want to open this topic up for discussion after declaring my own view that might ruffle a feather or three.

I’ve been stewing over this notion about boycotting Donald Trump’s inauguration on Friday. Several dozen Democratic lawmakers say they aren’t going to attend the inaugural out of protest over Trump’s election to the presidency.

I’m not comfortable with that notion.

I’m going to launch my own mini-boycott Friday. I’ll watch the new president’s inaugural speech, but I’m going to forgo the rest of it: the parade, the pageantry, the balls, the “first dance.” I am just a schmuck out here in Flyover Country who is not elected to a public office that is part of a federal government that sets laws for everyone to follow.

A Democratic boycott of a Republican president’s inaugural seems, to my way of thinking, to miss the point about what these inaugurals are all about. They aren’t about the individual who is elected president; they are about the office. We salute the office and the principles on which it was founded.

The inaugural is meant to honor democratic tradition, not Democratic politics.

Do I wish someone else had been elected president? Sure I do. But here’s another point: That other person I supported — Hillary Rodham Clinton — is going to attend the inaugural with her husband, the former president. She’ll be on the podium. She’ll stand and applaud when the new president takes the oath. If anyone had reason to boycott, I think it would be her.

Those who detest the president don’t have to applaud. They can keep their hands warm by sticking them in their pockets.

This event Friday isn’t about Donald Trump; it certainly isn’t about those who are boycotting the event. It’s about the presidency, which is going to keep on functioning the moment the chief justice tells Donald J. Trump, “Congratulations, Mr. President.”

***

Let me know what you think. Those of you who see this on Facebook likely will comment on that social medium. Feel free to comment on High Plains Blogger as well.

I don’t think anyone will change my mind. Nor do I think I’ll change anyone else’s mind, either.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience