First Blog

In our youth-obsessed culture, a paradox is all around us.   Namely, b oth political parties seem embedded with aging and tired players who refuse to give up their places on the center stage of American politics.  They seem not recognize the world is changing - has changed - around them. They hearken back to younger days when they learned their craft, often causing more damage than good. These include Clinton, Pelosi, McCain, Mitchell, Sanders, and others. All have big influence in that whatever they say is widely carried by news outlets. This, in turn, fuels the pundits with days of moronic commentary.  You pick the channel. Technically, we call this a feedback loop. On this note: Have you ever noted the background persons in NOKO Kim Jong Un’s public appearances?  All, almost without exception, seem to be aging generals and admirals. I guess Kim likes people around him that could or likely would not be competitors. This is not prejudice against the aging, given I am

Bill de Blasio . It used to be that college students would imitate adults.  Wearing suits and elegant attire, they would act as mature as they could. Nowadays, it is the reverse.  Adults are imitating college students, supporting all manner of youthful positions, mostly extreme uncompromising views – the typical fair of sophomores.  Case-in-point.  With NY City in grief over the loss of a police officer to assassination, the mayor jets off to Europe to hang with a bunch of protesters with seeming goal simply to protest. The man seems to be singularly immature, usually a recoverable illness, but not in his case. --------------------- Presidents . Clinton was bogged down a lot by personal issues. Bush was bogged down by wars in the Middle East. Obama was bogged down by trying to remake the US and the world into a globally unified enterprise.   The question is: Who’s taking care of our country?  This includes the bridges and roadways, the waterways and schools, the power plan

Timeline for James Comey.  There are two emotional threads.  Love and hate and then hate and love. July 5, 2016 .  Comey condemns Clinton for mishandling classified information.  But then say we will not indict.   Dems love it.  Reps hate it. October 28, 2016 .   Comey’s wait a minute moment.  We reopen the investigation, found new emails with classified info on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. Oops.  Reps love it. Dems hate it. Interim.  Both sides generally disdain Comey basically because he seems beyond the control of anyone.  Reps hate Comey; Dems hate Comey.  Especially, Hillary hates Comey, blaming his “re-opening letter” as a primary cause for her loss. May 9, 2017.  Trump fires Comey.  Reps claim it was appropriate; Dems also, probably.  However, because Trump did the deed, Dems hate it; Reps love it. Even the Nixonian metaphor has been issued – within an hour of the termination letter!  But it’s OK since it was made by an aging Senator.  “Never let a crisis go to

I’m reminded of the great baseball pitcher Bob Gibson, who was reported to be so competitive he wouldn’t even let his daughter win at “Old Maid.”   I’m sure this story is exaggerated, but his legendary competitiveness is well known. (See: https://lownaway.wordpress.com/2013/02/06/bob-gibson-a-lesson-in-competitiveness/ )   The point here is that champions are competitive to the extreme.   Our case-in-point here is just that: competitiveness.   Almost all of our presidents have been competitive.   This is a good thing! Some, like Lincoln, concealed it very well. Others, like Roosevelt (Teddy-type) were brash about it.   But, this quality compels them to hold a vaunted office, an office not for the thin-skinned or the gentle soul.   They all have it, no matter how benign you think they are.   This includes among the recent presidents, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Bush x 2, Clinton, Obama, and most certainly PE-elect Trump.   Thus, we come to the nasty part of this report

The Clinton-Trump debate has come and gone.   It seemed Trump was baited mercilessly.   He fell for it completely. What a mistake.   She prepared; he did not.   She did seem scripted; he ad-libbed mostly stuff from his stump speeches, and poorly.   But on the security issues, both were dismal.    Both demonstrated a total lack of knowledge, detailed or general on national security of all kinds.   Here, we can excuse Trump as simply being ignorant.   But Clinton, also ignorant, should understand from experience the gravitas of computer security and hacking.   But her delivery was rehearsed and delivered with no apparent personal understanding. Both said security was big and important, but neither have a clue on what to do.   "We will get top people to fix it," was the extent of their answers.   Hint. Already, the top people the government has ARE working on it and failing.   Corporations usually give short shrift to the costs of better security.   Us everyday folks d