2018 started out well for our family. Our son was the last of his siblings to get an advanced degree, but the first with a Ph.D. Shortly thereafter he proposed to his girlfriend, and became engaged. Both of them grew up in Southern California, but they had to move across country in order to meet. The religious will tell you that it was no coincidence that they never knew each other when they lived only a few miles apart from one another, and only met when both were living across the country. Rather, it is G-d's way of remaining anonymous. They then moved back to Southern California, and our family was all together again. It looked to be a promising year. We made plans for a trip back east in early October to visit "the boys" in Jersey. One of the boys always puts us up - it saves on hotel expenses, and we have a great time together. Then there's the added benefit of being able to rant about politics one on one with our hosts. I am sure they love it. :\
At the beginning of the year, our miniature Schnauzer became ill. Neither the vet nor the specialists were able to get a handle on it. But his "Mommy" cooked special meals for him, and nursed him as best as anyone could. I believe, and the vet agreed, that he would not have survived his last six months but for my wife's efforts. In July, Trooper died at only 10 years old. It was a painful loss for our family. This pup worked his way into everyone's heart with the love and affection shown to us all.
As we all know, our plans do not always work out. There is said to be a Yiddish proverb: "Man plans, G-d laughs." Come September, my family was not laughing. (Many of you know this next part, but with my email issues I am not sure how many got the story. Also, I have added some details.) What started on September 1 seemed to be a cold; although a few days later it felt like a flu. Then I was unable to keep anything down - for days. Two trips to an emergency room resulted in no improvement in my condition. On September 7 my family had to call an ambulance - I had a 104.5 degree fever and was unresponsive. My daughters were so concerned that each of them called for an ambulance, not knowing the other had. I have no recollection of the ambulance coming nor of much of my week in the hospital. Our planned October vacation had to be canceled.
With a diagnosis of meningitis, the doctors needed to determine if it was viral or bacterial. The test would be a spinal tap, but that failed as they were unable to penetrate through the spinal fusion I had at age 17. So the doctor ordered that a picc line be put in and that I get 10 days of antibiotics through the picc line, just in case it was bacterial meningitis. Although their suspicions were that it was viral. The picc line was actually a blessing as my arms were starting to look like a battlefield with all the IVs and constant drawing of blood. Everything could go through the picc line, and blood could be drawn through it as well. So, the IVs came out and the poking for blood stopped.
During my hospital stay my fever came down from the extremely high 104.5 degrees to mostly normal. My blood pressure, however, remained exceedingly high, with my systolic readings regularly being in the 180s. I do not recall what additional medications they were giving me beyond my usual ones. I had lost so much weight, about 15 pounds in 10 days, and was so weak, that I was unable to walk unassisted. While the doctor said I was ready to be discharged from the hospital after a week, he did not want me discharged to home. Rather, he thought that I should go to a rehab facility. I admit it - I panicked. I simply was not comprehending what that would entail or how long I would be kept there. Fortunately for me, our son's friend's wife works in that hospital and came to speak with me. I just wanted to go home, but she explained why that was not a good idea. My irrational fear that I might not be released for a month or more was eased when she explained it would be two weeks maximum, but likely one week.
One week it was, as I made good progress with the help of my therapists. I continued physical therapy through the end of the year. My left leg still feels weaker than the right, so I do use my cane for walking longer distances. Some of you know that I had about a 90% hearing loss in the hospital, but thank G-d the hearing has returned. The blood pressure came back to normal, or at least my normal of slightly elevated. My severe fatigue lasted for over two months, but then my energy returned. However, my endurance for lasting all day, including working after dinner, is not yet the same. Of course, I am not exactly a young guy, either.
The comfort that my family felt in my coming home was then tempered by the death of my wife's Aunt, the only sibling of my mother-in-law. It seemed as if we were destined to continue with bad news.
During my combined two weeks in the hospital and the rehab hospital, my wife put in her own extraordinary efforts. Once I was out of danger, she was again working daily in my office, while visiting me nightly, regardless of her level of exhaustion. She also spent weekends with me, and I cannot thank her enough. We discussed getting another dog, knowing all along we would eventually do so. While there were mixed feelings about the timing, on October 13 my wife visited an animal shelter with her sister, and brought home a little 13 pound cutie. Our vet estimates that she is two years old. We think that she is a Schnauzer/Shih Tzu mix. The shelter said she was a stray, but it was immediately clear that she had lived with people before. She knew to sit, shake and do her "business" outside. Her first day with us she was very nervous, even shaking. I do not think she spoke (barked) for a full week. A couple of times I bent forward to pet her and she backed away. Our suspicion is that some person of the male persuasion was mean to her and maybe hit her. But she knows she is loved here.
My wife has always done the baby naming in our family. I give my input, but if she disagrees... With this little addition to the family, it took her about ten days to settle on a name - Ruby. But with all the nicknames already I wonder if she knows her name. Rubis. Rubic. Rubala. And "Little One." I loved this pup from day one. In mid-October I was still going to bed between 8:00 and 8:30 pm as a result of the fatigue. Ruby just knew something was amiss, as she would jump up onto the bed (she is quite the jumper) and stay with me. Now, she waits to go bed until her Mom does. But she did that for me for weeks.
Only a few weeks after Ruby came home to us we were evacuated because of the Woolsey fire. The smell of smoke permeated our entire house. The sheriff drove down our street using their bullhorn/loudspeaker to tell everyone to get out. It was the only way I was able to convince my wife we had to go. We packed, put Ruby in the car with us, and headed off for our youngest daughter who lives in a one bedroom apartment. She is very sweet and let us sleep in her bed (for four nights) while she slept on the couch. She loves Ruby and Ruby loves her so Ruby had a good time on her big adventure. But we were heartbroken by the number of people who lost their homes, while being sad, yet grateful, that the number of deaths was kept to three. It could have been far worse in such a fast moving fire. We love our firefighters!
While the only long term side effects for me are the left leg weakness and lack of staying power, I continue to worry about and pray for a number of friends. One of the boys in Jersey, the one we stay with and my dearest friend, is on dialysis and needs a kidney. One of my college buddies had his own serious infection resulting in multiple complications, from which he is still recovering. And another friend has just completed his 12 sessions of chemotherapy following a third bout with cancer, but with good test results. Yet another had a major heart attack. I know, we are not getting any younger. But I thank G-d that all of us are alive. And I continue to thank G-d for each day - for myself and for these friends.
Tuesday, January 1, 2019
Monday, December 24, 2018
Year End Reflections, Part II
Syria. The USA has only 2000 troops in Syria. However, claiming that ISIS in Syria has been defeated, and vowing to keep another campaign promise, President Trump ordered the removal of those troops. Respectfully, President Trump, that is a bonehead decision. I agree that the troops should not remain for the purpose of "nation building," and 2000 troops is insufficient for that purpose in any event. Trump: "Why are we fighting for our enemy, Syria, by staying and killing ISIS for them, Russia, Iran and other locals?"
In tendering his resignation, Defense Secretary Mattis thanked Trump for being able to serve, and praised what they were able to accomplish - such as an increased defense budget, and improved readiness of our troops. Then Mattis opined: "...I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model - gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions - to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense."
Iran will now benefit by having a clear path from Iran to the Mediterranean - through Iraq to Syria and Lebanon/Hezbollah. Our Sunni Arab allies and Israel cannot be happy over this decision, as Iran is a threat to all of them. Russia has sought influence and control over events in the Middle East ever since they were part of the Soviet Union. Neither Trump nor Obama nor Bush (W) understood the threat of Russia. Romney did, but Obama mocked him about it and the mainstream media joined in. Russia already has a base in Syria. Does anyone doubt Russia's desire to stir up trouble everywhere? Think Crimea and Ukraine. Meanwhile, it is a total abandonment of the Kurds, who have been regular allies of the US. Those troops in Syria acted as a deterrent to Turkey, whose Islamist leader would like to declare war on the Kurdish people.
So what will the outcome be? Will Turkey, a NATO member, attack our allies, the Kurds? Will war break out between Iran and their Hezbollah proxies against Israel? Hezbollah is said to have more missiles (all aimed at Israel) than most countries in the world. Will Russia use its increasing presence and influence in the Middle East to "gain veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions," as suggested by Mattis? Will ISIS regroup? That small number of US troops sent a clear message that the US had an interest in keeping stability in the Middle East, and preventing bad actors such as Iran and Russia from dominating a large swath of the world. America first should not mean America isolated.
Pittsburgh. Following the horrific massacre at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, Jewish journalist Julia Ioffe said this: "A word to my fellow American Jews: This president makes this possible. Here. Where you live. I hope the embassy move over there, where you don't live was worth it." Wow! Let's deconstruct that. The massacre in Pittsburgh was a result of American Jews helping to elect Trump, and supporting the move of the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, Israel's capital city. I mistakenly thought the massacre was carried out by an evil, Jew-hating, may he rot in hell, individual. Why can't American Jews just be proud of Israel, be proud that like every other country in the world, Israel is finally allowed to have recognition of the city that the Israelis have deemed their capital. Jerusalem. Would Ms. Ioffe deny any other country in the world the right to name their capital city?
Chuck Schumer. Okay, most of us would agree that politicians often speak out of both sides of their mouth. When in power, they say one thing. When out of power, they often say the opposite. But it is funny when a politician speaks out of both sides of his mouth in the same sentence. Recall that President Trump accused the Courts of making politically motivated decisions. That, in turn, prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a statement defending the independence of the judiciary. Which, in turn, prompted the Senate Minority Leader to defend Roberts' comments, while declaring: "I don't agree very often with Chief Justice Roberts, especially his partisan decisions which seem highly political, (such as) Citizens United, Janus and Shelby..." Partisan decisions? Which seem highly political? Hmmm.
Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays? An NPR/PBS/Marist poll found that 56% of adults think people should wish others a "Merry Christmas," with 31% preferring "Happy Holidays," and 11% not caring one way or the other. But only 38% of the 18-29 age group preferred "Merry Christmas." The biggest difference was between Democrats, preferring "Happy Holidays" by 47% with only 42% preferring "Merry Christmas," and an overwhelming number of Republicans, 80%, preferring "Merry Christmas," with only 13% preferring "Happy Holidays." So, Merry Christmas!
In tendering his resignation, Defense Secretary Mattis thanked Trump for being able to serve, and praised what they were able to accomplish - such as an increased defense budget, and improved readiness of our troops. Then Mattis opined: "...I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model - gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions - to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense."
Iran will now benefit by having a clear path from Iran to the Mediterranean - through Iraq to Syria and Lebanon/Hezbollah. Our Sunni Arab allies and Israel cannot be happy over this decision, as Iran is a threat to all of them. Russia has sought influence and control over events in the Middle East ever since they were part of the Soviet Union. Neither Trump nor Obama nor Bush (W) understood the threat of Russia. Romney did, but Obama mocked him about it and the mainstream media joined in. Russia already has a base in Syria. Does anyone doubt Russia's desire to stir up trouble everywhere? Think Crimea and Ukraine. Meanwhile, it is a total abandonment of the Kurds, who have been regular allies of the US. Those troops in Syria acted as a deterrent to Turkey, whose Islamist leader would like to declare war on the Kurdish people.
So what will the outcome be? Will Turkey, a NATO member, attack our allies, the Kurds? Will war break out between Iran and their Hezbollah proxies against Israel? Hezbollah is said to have more missiles (all aimed at Israel) than most countries in the world. Will Russia use its increasing presence and influence in the Middle East to "gain veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions," as suggested by Mattis? Will ISIS regroup? That small number of US troops sent a clear message that the US had an interest in keeping stability in the Middle East, and preventing bad actors such as Iran and Russia from dominating a large swath of the world. America first should not mean America isolated.
Pittsburgh. Following the horrific massacre at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, Jewish journalist Julia Ioffe said this: "A word to my fellow American Jews: This president makes this possible. Here. Where you live. I hope the embassy move over there, where you don't live was worth it." Wow! Let's deconstruct that. The massacre in Pittsburgh was a result of American Jews helping to elect Trump, and supporting the move of the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, Israel's capital city. I mistakenly thought the massacre was carried out by an evil, Jew-hating, may he rot in hell, individual. Why can't American Jews just be proud of Israel, be proud that like every other country in the world, Israel is finally allowed to have recognition of the city that the Israelis have deemed their capital. Jerusalem. Would Ms. Ioffe deny any other country in the world the right to name their capital city?
Chuck Schumer. Okay, most of us would agree that politicians often speak out of both sides of their mouth. When in power, they say one thing. When out of power, they often say the opposite. But it is funny when a politician speaks out of both sides of his mouth in the same sentence. Recall that President Trump accused the Courts of making politically motivated decisions. That, in turn, prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a statement defending the independence of the judiciary. Which, in turn, prompted the Senate Minority Leader to defend Roberts' comments, while declaring: "I don't agree very often with Chief Justice Roberts, especially his partisan decisions which seem highly political, (such as) Citizens United, Janus and Shelby..." Partisan decisions? Which seem highly political? Hmmm.
Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays? An NPR/PBS/Marist poll found that 56% of adults think people should wish others a "Merry Christmas," with 31% preferring "Happy Holidays," and 11% not caring one way or the other. But only 38% of the 18-29 age group preferred "Merry Christmas." The biggest difference was between Democrats, preferring "Happy Holidays" by 47% with only 42% preferring "Merry Christmas," and an overwhelming number of Republicans, 80%, preferring "Merry Christmas," with only 13% preferring "Happy Holidays." So, Merry Christmas!
Thursday, December 20, 2018
Year End Reflections, Part I
Identity Politics. A Katrina Trinko had a piece in the 12/19/18 USA Today. Citing Yale and Princeton researchers, she wrote "researchers found that it's conservatives, not liberals, who treat everyone the same." Then, quoting Yale Insights, this: "Liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner." I could have told the author that. Liberals tend to believe minorities cannot achieve on their own without government assistance.
Moving? If so, you may be interested in knowing what states people are moving to. According to the 12/19/18 USA Today, Texas gained the most people in 2017 - 379,128. Florida was next with 322,128. Rounding out the top five are California with 157,696 people, Arizona with 122,720, and North Carolina with 112,820. Three more Western states were in the next five: number 6 Washington with 110,159 people, number 8 Colorado with 79,662, and number 10 Nevada with 61,987. Texas and Florida, two states that remain conservative, have by large margins gained the most people.
Civil Forfeiture. The 11/30/18 Wall Street Journal editorial discussed a recently heard case at the Supreme Court, Timbs vs. Indiana. While the facts in the case are not very favorable to Timbs, the issue of when the government may seize someone's property is extremely important. The issue is when do takings under civil forfeiture constitute excessive fines and therefore violate the 8th Amendment to the Constitution. The problem is that state and local governments have increasingly turned to civil forfeiture as a means of raising revenue. During oral argument, The Journal tells us that "Justice Stephen Breyer asked Indiana's solicitor general whether someone caught driving five miles an hour above the speed limit could be forced to forfeit his Bugatti, Mercedes or Ferrari."
Socialism. Oh, you wanted to know what the solicitor general of Indiana answered Justice Breyer. Did you have any doubt? Yes, he said, the government could take your very expensive car because you slightly exceeded the speed limit. Government, big government, has an unending appetite for revenue - aka your money. California is thinking of taxing text messages. Back to socialism. A letter to the editor in the 12/4/18 Ventura County Star was written by a young voter. "We want a living wage, health care, clean air and water, and an education without being punished for doing so. If you do not support these things, then us young people will not vote for you." We want? I never thought that way, as I was not taught that way. I'm guessing many young people never heard of "rugged individualism."
The President's tax returns. In a letter to the editor in the 12/14/18 USA Today, we are told that "Congress should enact a law requiring presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns before they can run for office...we deserve full and complete transparency before we decide on a candidate." I am curious as to what a candidate's tax returns tells me about their likely policies. Furthermore, Article 2, Section 1 of the US Constitution sets forth who is eligible to hold the office of president. It would likely require a Constitutional amendment to add the further requirement of disclosing tax returns. After all, an Amendment (the 22nd) was needed to limit a President to terms.
George H. W. Bush. The former President (41) died on 11/30/18 at the age of 94. The 12/2/18 LA Times had this headline: "A patriot and servant." The 12/2/18 New York Times headline was "A Genial Force in American Politics." In a special section that day, The New York Times led with "A Genial President Who Guided the Nation to the End of the Cold War." The 12/6/18 USA Today had this headline: "A Great, Noble Man." I recall similarly flattering things being said upon the death of John McCain. I get that it is considered declasse to speak poorly of the dead. However, I just get the feeling that the only Republicans the mainstream media respects are dead ones.
Moving? If so, you may be interested in knowing what states people are moving to. According to the 12/19/18 USA Today, Texas gained the most people in 2017 - 379,128. Florida was next with 322,128. Rounding out the top five are California with 157,696 people, Arizona with 122,720, and North Carolina with 112,820. Three more Western states were in the next five: number 6 Washington with 110,159 people, number 8 Colorado with 79,662, and number 10 Nevada with 61,987. Texas and Florida, two states that remain conservative, have by large margins gained the most people.
Civil Forfeiture. The 11/30/18 Wall Street Journal editorial discussed a recently heard case at the Supreme Court, Timbs vs. Indiana. While the facts in the case are not very favorable to Timbs, the issue of when the government may seize someone's property is extremely important. The issue is when do takings under civil forfeiture constitute excessive fines and therefore violate the 8th Amendment to the Constitution. The problem is that state and local governments have increasingly turned to civil forfeiture as a means of raising revenue. During oral argument, The Journal tells us that "Justice Stephen Breyer asked Indiana's solicitor general whether someone caught driving five miles an hour above the speed limit could be forced to forfeit his Bugatti, Mercedes or Ferrari."
Socialism. Oh, you wanted to know what the solicitor general of Indiana answered Justice Breyer. Did you have any doubt? Yes, he said, the government could take your very expensive car because you slightly exceeded the speed limit. Government, big government, has an unending appetite for revenue - aka your money. California is thinking of taxing text messages. Back to socialism. A letter to the editor in the 12/4/18 Ventura County Star was written by a young voter. "We want a living wage, health care, clean air and water, and an education without being punished for doing so. If you do not support these things, then us young people will not vote for you." We want? I never thought that way, as I was not taught that way. I'm guessing many young people never heard of "rugged individualism."
The President's tax returns. In a letter to the editor in the 12/14/18 USA Today, we are told that "Congress should enact a law requiring presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns before they can run for office...we deserve full and complete transparency before we decide on a candidate." I am curious as to what a candidate's tax returns tells me about their likely policies. Furthermore, Article 2, Section 1 of the US Constitution sets forth who is eligible to hold the office of president. It would likely require a Constitutional amendment to add the further requirement of disclosing tax returns. After all, an Amendment (the 22nd) was needed to limit a President to terms.
George H. W. Bush. The former President (41) died on 11/30/18 at the age of 94. The 12/2/18 LA Times had this headline: "A patriot and servant." The 12/2/18 New York Times headline was "A Genial Force in American Politics." In a special section that day, The New York Times led with "A Genial President Who Guided the Nation to the End of the Cold War." The 12/6/18 USA Today had this headline: "A Great, Noble Man." I recall similarly flattering things being said upon the death of John McCain. I get that it is considered declasse to speak poorly of the dead. However, I just get the feeling that the only Republicans the mainstream media respects are dead ones.
Monday, December 17, 2018
Mueller vs. Flynn
Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was President Trump's incoming National Security Adviser. As such, it would not be improper for him to be speaking to foreign officials. On January 24, 2017, former FBI Director James Comey sent two agents into the White House of the four day old Trump Administration to interview General Flynn. Comey told the MSNBC audience how proud of himself he was, because sending in agents to the White House is "something I probably wouldn't have done or wouldn't have gotten away with in a more organized administration." You see, the agents knew Flynn had spoken with the Russian ambassador. Whether the FBI or NSA picked up Flynn's conversations, the name of a US citizen should not be "unmasked" without some good national security concern. The Obama Administration was not concerned with that.
A few comments on the above. Four days into the Trump Administration Comey was already after Trump. His own comments reflect that he knew he was "getting away" with something. Even if not illegal, he knew it was clearly improper. But Comey has demonstrated his propensity for improper behavior previously. After all, instead of reporting the FBI's findings on the Hillary Clinton investigation to Attorney General Lynch, who had the responsibility of deciding whether or not to prosecute, Comey, not the prosecutor, took it upon himself to close down the investigation and decide there would be no prosecution. Then there was Comey's leak of his written memos of conversations with Trump to friend and Columbia Law School professor Daniel Richman, in order to get the information leaked to the press and get a special counsel appointed. It was hardly a surprise that Comey's colleague and good friend, Robert Mueller, was appointed the special counsel.
The memos in question had to do with Trump asking if Comey could "let this go" with regards to Flynn. When Flynn met with those FBI agents he either forgot (questionable) or lied about speaking with the Russian ambassador. Which means, if he lied, he lied about something that was not illegal. When Comey testified before the Senate he was asked why he didn't just tell Trump that it was improper to ask the FBI Director to let it go. Comey: "If I were stronger, I would have. I was so stunned by the conversation that I just took it in...maybe other people would be stronger in that circumstance." Trump was neither a lawyer nor a politician. Just how difficult would it have been to explain the impropriety to a new President? (Then again, Comey's boss A.G. Lynch, was not strong enough to tell Bill Clinton it was improper for him to be speaking with her in private on the tarmac in Phoenix, while she was investigating his wife.) Or, maybe Comey has repeatedly demonstrated his desire to "get" the President, rather than help a non-politician new President understand the process.
Flynn talking to the Russian Ambassador was not illegal. Lying to the FBI is illegal. The issue with Flynn's conversation with the Russian Ambassador is that Flynn was not yet the National Security Adviser. The conversation occurred during the transition period when Obama was still in office. The Logan Act of 1799 (date not a typo) makes it criminal to have unauthorized negotiations with foreign governments. A total of two (2) people have been indicted for a violation of the Act - in 1802 and 1852. Neither was convicted. More recently, John Kerry as a former Secretary of State, took it upon himself to speak with foreign leaders in order to try to save the Iran nuclear deal. There was Kerry, then a private citizen, undermining the official policy of the United States of America. He could have/should have been prosecuted. But he was not. No, that was reserved for Flynn, a Trump associate. Hillary Clinton could have/should have been prosecuted. But she was not. Nor has Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe or James Comey.
As for Flynn, the Wall Street Journal reported that "Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty to avoid bankruptcy and spare his son from becoming a legal target." Frankly, I am sickened by the entire Mueller investigation. But let me be clear. I opposed the Bill Clinton impeachment proceedings. He had two years left in his term. He was elected to that office. I objected to Trump saying "lock her up" with regards to Hilary Clinton. Impeachment should be rarely used. Prosecution of high government officials should also be rare. So, what are you saying, Mike? That government officials are more important than the rest of us? That they are above the law? No. I am saying that I do not want to see this great country degenerate into a third world style government - where people on the outs are either imprisoned, exiled or worse. The political divide between the two parties is as bad as any of us can recall. The Democrats and the Left have wanted Trump out of office since Trump was inaugurated. So, the next time a Democrat gets elected to the office of president with a Republican Congress, that person gets impeached? Or indicted?
I'm kind of old fashioned. I prefer that people who win presidential elections (absent death or resignation) be able to serve out their full term. Or, maybe we can go with coup d'etats - if not violent ones, then through special counsel. Because that is exactly what is happening now.
A few comments on the above. Four days into the Trump Administration Comey was already after Trump. His own comments reflect that he knew he was "getting away" with something. Even if not illegal, he knew it was clearly improper. But Comey has demonstrated his propensity for improper behavior previously. After all, instead of reporting the FBI's findings on the Hillary Clinton investigation to Attorney General Lynch, who had the responsibility of deciding whether or not to prosecute, Comey, not the prosecutor, took it upon himself to close down the investigation and decide there would be no prosecution. Then there was Comey's leak of his written memos of conversations with Trump to friend and Columbia Law School professor Daniel Richman, in order to get the information leaked to the press and get a special counsel appointed. It was hardly a surprise that Comey's colleague and good friend, Robert Mueller, was appointed the special counsel.
The memos in question had to do with Trump asking if Comey could "let this go" with regards to Flynn. When Flynn met with those FBI agents he either forgot (questionable) or lied about speaking with the Russian ambassador. Which means, if he lied, he lied about something that was not illegal. When Comey testified before the Senate he was asked why he didn't just tell Trump that it was improper to ask the FBI Director to let it go. Comey: "If I were stronger, I would have. I was so stunned by the conversation that I just took it in...maybe other people would be stronger in that circumstance." Trump was neither a lawyer nor a politician. Just how difficult would it have been to explain the impropriety to a new President? (Then again, Comey's boss A.G. Lynch, was not strong enough to tell Bill Clinton it was improper for him to be speaking with her in private on the tarmac in Phoenix, while she was investigating his wife.) Or, maybe Comey has repeatedly demonstrated his desire to "get" the President, rather than help a non-politician new President understand the process.
Flynn talking to the Russian Ambassador was not illegal. Lying to the FBI is illegal. The issue with Flynn's conversation with the Russian Ambassador is that Flynn was not yet the National Security Adviser. The conversation occurred during the transition period when Obama was still in office. The Logan Act of 1799 (date not a typo) makes it criminal to have unauthorized negotiations with foreign governments. A total of two (2) people have been indicted for a violation of the Act - in 1802 and 1852. Neither was convicted. More recently, John Kerry as a former Secretary of State, took it upon himself to speak with foreign leaders in order to try to save the Iran nuclear deal. There was Kerry, then a private citizen, undermining the official policy of the United States of America. He could have/should have been prosecuted. But he was not. No, that was reserved for Flynn, a Trump associate. Hillary Clinton could have/should have been prosecuted. But she was not. Nor has Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe or James Comey.
As for Flynn, the Wall Street Journal reported that "Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty to avoid bankruptcy and spare his son from becoming a legal target." Frankly, I am sickened by the entire Mueller investigation. But let me be clear. I opposed the Bill Clinton impeachment proceedings. He had two years left in his term. He was elected to that office. I objected to Trump saying "lock her up" with regards to Hilary Clinton. Impeachment should be rarely used. Prosecution of high government officials should also be rare. So, what are you saying, Mike? That government officials are more important than the rest of us? That they are above the law? No. I am saying that I do not want to see this great country degenerate into a third world style government - where people on the outs are either imprisoned, exiled or worse. The political divide between the two parties is as bad as any of us can recall. The Democrats and the Left have wanted Trump out of office since Trump was inaugurated. So, the next time a Democrat gets elected to the office of president with a Republican Congress, that person gets impeached? Or indicted?
I'm kind of old fashioned. I prefer that people who win presidential elections (absent death or resignation) be able to serve out their full term. Or, maybe we can go with coup d'etats - if not violent ones, then through special counsel. Because that is exactly what is happening now.
Monday, December 10, 2018
The Immoral Hypocrisy of the Left
The December 8, 2018 Los Angeles Times reported that the faculty of Pitzer College voted to suspend a study abroad program at the University of Haifa in Israel. Pitzer is a small liberal arts college in Southern California, and is highly regarded academically. The motion to suspend the study abroad in Israel program was brought by Professor Daniel Segal, who is Jewish. Segal claims he brought the motion to counter Israel's restriction on academic exchanges, with the Times citing a 2017 law which the paper says "bar(s) entry (to Israel) to those who support boycotts, divestment or sanctions against the Jewish state." Segal was also disturbed by restrictions to Israel based on "ancestry..." Jews do have a right of return, with some exceptions. Why just Jews? From a religious viewpoint, the land of Israel was promised to the Jews by G-d. From a historical viewpoint, no other people have been as persecuted throughout history as much as the Jews. From a legal viewpoint, the UN, having been granted control of the British Mandate in Palestine, voted to partition the land into a Jewish state (which became Israel) and an Arab state, which the Arabs declined.
Earlier this year, on 3/25/18, Pitzer issued a press release announcing "Pitzer College Professor Daniel A. Segal has been accepted to participate in the Palestinian American Research Center (PARC) US Faculty Development Seminar on Palestine this summer." The press release tells us that there will be "visits to Palestinian universities, research institutes and cultural institution(s) as well as roundtable discussions, tours of historic cities and meetings with Palestinian colleagues."
We further learn from the press release that seminar participants will "deepen their knowledge of their fields of interest in Palestine and build relationships with Palestinian colleagues and institutions." The good news is, from a historic point of view, the Palestinians have nothing in their past or present that would disqualify them from interaction with American academics - or that would deter Professor Segal.
June 5, 1968. Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan assassinates US Senator and Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy. Sirhan specifically chose the date of June 5, 1968 as it was the one year anniversary of the start of the Six Day War, in which Israel miraculously defeated the Arab armies massed at their borders. Sirhan: "My only connection with Robert Kennedy was his sole support of Israel..."
September 5, 1972. At the Munich Olympic Games, Black September, a front for the Palestinian Fatah group, took 11 Israeli athletes hostage. In the ensuing rescue operation, 9 athletes were killed, including American-Israeli David Berger.
May, 1974. Palestinians took 115 people, mostly teenagers, hostage in the town of Ma'alot. Utimately, 25 people were killed; 22 were teenagers. 68 were injured. Prior to what became known as the "Ma'alot Massacre," the terrorists murdered a young couple and their 4 year old boy in their home. The 5 year old daughter was injured.
October 7, 1985. The Palestine Liberation Front hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro. During the hijacking, the Palestinians brutally murdered American Leon Klinghoffer. Disabled and in a wheelchair, Klinghoffer's body was then thrown overboard.
2000-2005. The Second Intifada. These numerous terrorist attacks on civilians began after Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat walked out on President Bill Clinton, Clinton having brokered a deal in a meeting in DC with Arafat and then Israeli leader Ehud Barak. Arafat chose to return to Ramallah and begin the Second Intifada rather than make peace. Palestinian terrorists blew up innocent Jews of all ages on buses, in cafes, shopping malls, and, of course, at what came to be known as the Passover Massacre. During the 3/27/02 attack on Jews at a Passover Seder, 30 people were killed and 140 were injured.
More recently, of course, were all the stabbings of Jews; and the multiple attacks from Gaza, with Palestinians firing their rockets and missiles at civilian targets. At least 54 Americans have been murdered by Palestinian terrorists. Needless to say, the above list constitutes a small portion of all the terrorist attacks carried out by Palestinians against innocent Israeli Jews. The good news is that there is nothing the Palestinians have done that disturbs Professor Segal enough to consider a boycott of Palestinian universities. PA leader Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly said that not a single Jew may live in a future Palestinian state. Apparently, that also is not a problem for Professor Segal. The problem for Professor Segal? His fellow Jews and the State of Israel. Then again, Israel denying entry to a few people who want to stir up anti-Israel sentiment and even anti-Israel activity within the country is worse than the countless murders carried out by Palestinian terrorists. Right?
Earlier this year, on 3/25/18, Pitzer issued a press release announcing "Pitzer College Professor Daniel A. Segal has been accepted to participate in the Palestinian American Research Center (PARC) US Faculty Development Seminar on Palestine this summer." The press release tells us that there will be "visits to Palestinian universities, research institutes and cultural institution(s) as well as roundtable discussions, tours of historic cities and meetings with Palestinian colleagues."
We further learn from the press release that seminar participants will "deepen their knowledge of their fields of interest in Palestine and build relationships with Palestinian colleagues and institutions." The good news is, from a historic point of view, the Palestinians have nothing in their past or present that would disqualify them from interaction with American academics - or that would deter Professor Segal.
June 5, 1968. Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan assassinates US Senator and Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy. Sirhan specifically chose the date of June 5, 1968 as it was the one year anniversary of the start of the Six Day War, in which Israel miraculously defeated the Arab armies massed at their borders. Sirhan: "My only connection with Robert Kennedy was his sole support of Israel..."
September 5, 1972. At the Munich Olympic Games, Black September, a front for the Palestinian Fatah group, took 11 Israeli athletes hostage. In the ensuing rescue operation, 9 athletes were killed, including American-Israeli David Berger.
May, 1974. Palestinians took 115 people, mostly teenagers, hostage in the town of Ma'alot. Utimately, 25 people were killed; 22 were teenagers. 68 were injured. Prior to what became known as the "Ma'alot Massacre," the terrorists murdered a young couple and their 4 year old boy in their home. The 5 year old daughter was injured.
October 7, 1985. The Palestine Liberation Front hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro. During the hijacking, the Palestinians brutally murdered American Leon Klinghoffer. Disabled and in a wheelchair, Klinghoffer's body was then thrown overboard.
2000-2005. The Second Intifada. These numerous terrorist attacks on civilians began after Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat walked out on President Bill Clinton, Clinton having brokered a deal in a meeting in DC with Arafat and then Israeli leader Ehud Barak. Arafat chose to return to Ramallah and begin the Second Intifada rather than make peace. Palestinian terrorists blew up innocent Jews of all ages on buses, in cafes, shopping malls, and, of course, at what came to be known as the Passover Massacre. During the 3/27/02 attack on Jews at a Passover Seder, 30 people were killed and 140 were injured.
More recently, of course, were all the stabbings of Jews; and the multiple attacks from Gaza, with Palestinians firing their rockets and missiles at civilian targets. At least 54 Americans have been murdered by Palestinian terrorists. Needless to say, the above list constitutes a small portion of all the terrorist attacks carried out by Palestinians against innocent Israeli Jews. The good news is that there is nothing the Palestinians have done that disturbs Professor Segal enough to consider a boycott of Palestinian universities. PA leader Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly said that not a single Jew may live in a future Palestinian state. Apparently, that also is not a problem for Professor Segal. The problem for Professor Segal? His fellow Jews and the State of Israel. Then again, Israel denying entry to a few people who want to stir up anti-Israel sentiment and even anti-Israel activity within the country is worse than the countless murders carried out by Palestinian terrorists. Right?
Tuesday, December 4, 2018
Immigration, the Caravan and the Media
We conservatives know very well that the mainstream media cannot be trusted to tell the truth, but can be trusted to slant the news and headlines to fit their left-wing agenda. On the first page of the 11/27/18 Ventura County Star was this headline: "Trump calls immigrants 'criminals.'" Of course, not everyone reads the articles - as the media knows - but for those who did, they were told that Trump called SOME immigrants criminals. Quite a difference.
For those of us who saw the scenes on TV of some of these nice immigrants rushing the border and throwing rocks and other items at the border police, that sure looked like criminal activity. Said the 11/26/18 front page story in the LA Times: "Trump's administration and those who support his hard-line stance on illegal immigration immediately seized on the dramatic images from the scene." Wait, Trump has a "hard-line" stance on ILLEGAL immigration? Trump did say he wants people to come here legally. What is the Times' stance on illegal immigration? Oh, that's right, the left does not believe any "immigration" is illegal.
In contrast to the Trump supporters, the Times tells us "...the images of the U.S. government using tear gas on a group of migrants that included children disturbed others..." What disturbed me was mothers and fathers who, having declined the asylum offered by Mexico, were willing to put their children at risk by rushing the US border. Then, the Times quotes Cristobal J. Alex, president of the Latino Victory Fund: "What we saw at the San Ysidro border crossing should horrify the whole country; it was simply inhumane." I am sure Mr. Alex was quoted by the Times during the Obama Administration, which used tear gas at the border 1.3 times per month during the years 2012 through 2016.
The 11/13/18 editorial in the New York Times was titled "Mr. Trump's Imaginary Immigrant Crisis." Imaginary? The violent scenes at the border looked quite real to me. The Times: "The United States has clear laws governing the the asylum process and well-funded agencies to enforce those laws." To quote the Church Lady: "Well, isn't that special?" If there is no immigrant crisis, and we have laws and agencies to take care of it, then why do we have millions and millions of people here illegally?
Clearly, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 did not solve the immigration problem. Given that relations between the Democrats and Republicans are worse today than they were in the 1980's, it is difficult to imagine any real solution coming anytime soon. Which, perhaps helps account for the popularity of Trump's border wall. In the meantime, no one should count on the mainstream media to fairly report on the immigration issue.
For those of us who saw the scenes on TV of some of these nice immigrants rushing the border and throwing rocks and other items at the border police, that sure looked like criminal activity. Said the 11/26/18 front page story in the LA Times: "Trump's administration and those who support his hard-line stance on illegal immigration immediately seized on the dramatic images from the scene." Wait, Trump has a "hard-line" stance on ILLEGAL immigration? Trump did say he wants people to come here legally. What is the Times' stance on illegal immigration? Oh, that's right, the left does not believe any "immigration" is illegal.
In contrast to the Trump supporters, the Times tells us "...the images of the U.S. government using tear gas on a group of migrants that included children disturbed others..." What disturbed me was mothers and fathers who, having declined the asylum offered by Mexico, were willing to put their children at risk by rushing the US border. Then, the Times quotes Cristobal J. Alex, president of the Latino Victory Fund: "What we saw at the San Ysidro border crossing should horrify the whole country; it was simply inhumane." I am sure Mr. Alex was quoted by the Times during the Obama Administration, which used tear gas at the border 1.3 times per month during the years 2012 through 2016.
The 11/13/18 editorial in the New York Times was titled "Mr. Trump's Imaginary Immigrant Crisis." Imaginary? The violent scenes at the border looked quite real to me. The Times: "The United States has clear laws governing the the asylum process and well-funded agencies to enforce those laws." To quote the Church Lady: "Well, isn't that special?" If there is no immigrant crisis, and we have laws and agencies to take care of it, then why do we have millions and millions of people here illegally?
Clearly, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 did not solve the immigration problem. Given that relations between the Democrats and Republicans are worse today than they were in the 1980's, it is difficult to imagine any real solution coming anytime soon. Which, perhaps helps account for the popularity of Trump's border wall. In the meantime, no one should count on the mainstream media to fairly report on the immigration issue.
Israel and the Jews - Then and Now
Just a few days ago, 11/29, was the 71st anniversary of the UN General Assembly vote to partition the British Mandate in Palestine into two states - a Jewish one and an Arab one. The Jews formed a state which they called Israel. The Arabs chose not to create their own state, rather, they chose war in an effort to destroy the newly created Jewish state. It was in 1897 that Theodore Herzl called for the First Zionist Congress, which was held in Basel, Switzerland. Herzl is generally regarded as the founder of the modern Zionist movement.
Fast forward 71 years from that UN resolution and on 11/30/18, the UN General Assembly voted 156 to 8 (with 12 abstentions) for a resolution which, among other things, referred to the Temple Mount (Judaism's holiest site) by its Muslim name al-Haram al-Sharif. There was no connection made to Judaism or the Jewish people. The US, Canada and Australia voted against the resolution. However, the EU supported it. In a less than stern admonition, the EU advised that it "could stop doing so (supporting such resolutions) unless more inclusive language was used to reference holy sites in Jerusalem." So, the wimpy EU MIGHT not support such resolutions in the future unless they use nicer, more inclusive language.
Seventy-three years ago the Second World War ended, bringing an end to the Holocaust carried out by Germany against the Jewish people. Now, seventy-three years later, the Jerusalem Post has reported that Germany's Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has been pressuring the Central and Eastern European countries to not follow the US's lead and move their embassies in Israel to Jerusalem. Supposedly, Germany is concerned that the moving of embassies will interfere with the Iran nuclear deal, which they strongly support. Then again, it might be an indirect slap in the face to President Trump.
Or, maybe Germany was just continuing its anti-Israel policies. In 2015 it failed to "block the marking of Israeli goods from disputed territories." In other words, Germany supported the BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanction) movement against Israel.
This week Jewish people around the world are celebrating the holiday of Chanukah. Antiochus IV was a Greek-Syrian King of the Seleucid Empire. Antiochus sought to prevent the Jewish people from practicing their religion. There was a group of "Hellenized Jews" who were assimilated and really did not practice Judaism. However, the observant Jews would not comply with the ban on the practice of Judaism. In 167 B.C.E. Antiochus sent his forces in to enforce the ban, and thousands of Jews were killed. The observant Jews who fought back were known as the Maccabees, and were led by Mattathias and his five sons, and ultimately succeeded in routing the forces of Antiochus.
Under the control of the Syrians, the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem had been desecrated. When the Jews again took control of the Temple they determined that it would take eight days to restore the oil used in Jewish rituals. However, they only found enough uncontaminated oil to last for one day. Miraculously, the oil lasted eight days. Jews light candles in the menorah during Chanukah, one on the first night, two on the second and so on up to eight on the last and eighth night of the holiday. Eight candles to mark the eight days that the oil in the Temple in Jerusalem lasted.
But that was then. Today, we have a revisionist theory of Chanukah. This was expressed by author Michael David Lukas in the Op-Ed pages of the 12/2/18 Sunday edition of the New York Times. This theory of Chanukah says that there was a civil war between the Maccabees and the Hellenized Jews, with Antiochus, incredibly, getting no mention in the Lukas article. Rather, Lukas tells us the religious fundamentalist Maccabees defeated the "city-dwelling assimilationists who ate pork, didn't circumcise their male children and made the occasional sacrificial offering to pagan gods." In other words, the Hellenized Jews did not practice Judaism. After all, the primary prayer for Jews, recited morning and evening, is the Shema: "Hear O Israel, G-d is our Lord, G-d is one." The belief in a monotheistic G-d was brought to the world by the Jews. It is hardly consistent with making sacrificial offerings to pagan gods.
For revisionists such as Lukas, it makes perfect sense. He is a self-described Bernie supporter who says he is an assimilated Jew and a product of intermarriage. Lukas continues that he eats pork, and that he and his wife agonized over the decision to circumcise their son. He grew up in Berkeley, now lives in Oakland, and said he practices Reconstructionist Judaism. Lukas asks: "Why should I light candles and sing songs to celebrate a group of violent fundamentalists (the Maccabees)?"
Shame on Germany. Shame on the EU. Shame on the UN. As for the revisionist Jews, who do not seem to be able to see the good in Israel or Judaism, well...you decide.
Fast forward 71 years from that UN resolution and on 11/30/18, the UN General Assembly voted 156 to 8 (with 12 abstentions) for a resolution which, among other things, referred to the Temple Mount (Judaism's holiest site) by its Muslim name al-Haram al-Sharif. There was no connection made to Judaism or the Jewish people. The US, Canada and Australia voted against the resolution. However, the EU supported it. In a less than stern admonition, the EU advised that it "could stop doing so (supporting such resolutions) unless more inclusive language was used to reference holy sites in Jerusalem." So, the wimpy EU MIGHT not support such resolutions in the future unless they use nicer, more inclusive language.
Seventy-three years ago the Second World War ended, bringing an end to the Holocaust carried out by Germany against the Jewish people. Now, seventy-three years later, the Jerusalem Post has reported that Germany's Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has been pressuring the Central and Eastern European countries to not follow the US's lead and move their embassies in Israel to Jerusalem. Supposedly, Germany is concerned that the moving of embassies will interfere with the Iran nuclear deal, which they strongly support. Then again, it might be an indirect slap in the face to President Trump.
Or, maybe Germany was just continuing its anti-Israel policies. In 2015 it failed to "block the marking of Israeli goods from disputed territories." In other words, Germany supported the BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanction) movement against Israel.
This week Jewish people around the world are celebrating the holiday of Chanukah. Antiochus IV was a Greek-Syrian King of the Seleucid Empire. Antiochus sought to prevent the Jewish people from practicing their religion. There was a group of "Hellenized Jews" who were assimilated and really did not practice Judaism. However, the observant Jews would not comply with the ban on the practice of Judaism. In 167 B.C.E. Antiochus sent his forces in to enforce the ban, and thousands of Jews were killed. The observant Jews who fought back were known as the Maccabees, and were led by Mattathias and his five sons, and ultimately succeeded in routing the forces of Antiochus.
Under the control of the Syrians, the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem had been desecrated. When the Jews again took control of the Temple they determined that it would take eight days to restore the oil used in Jewish rituals. However, they only found enough uncontaminated oil to last for one day. Miraculously, the oil lasted eight days. Jews light candles in the menorah during Chanukah, one on the first night, two on the second and so on up to eight on the last and eighth night of the holiday. Eight candles to mark the eight days that the oil in the Temple in Jerusalem lasted.
But that was then. Today, we have a revisionist theory of Chanukah. This was expressed by author Michael David Lukas in the Op-Ed pages of the 12/2/18 Sunday edition of the New York Times. This theory of Chanukah says that there was a civil war between the Maccabees and the Hellenized Jews, with Antiochus, incredibly, getting no mention in the Lukas article. Rather, Lukas tells us the religious fundamentalist Maccabees defeated the "city-dwelling assimilationists who ate pork, didn't circumcise their male children and made the occasional sacrificial offering to pagan gods." In other words, the Hellenized Jews did not practice Judaism. After all, the primary prayer for Jews, recited morning and evening, is the Shema: "Hear O Israel, G-d is our Lord, G-d is one." The belief in a monotheistic G-d was brought to the world by the Jews. It is hardly consistent with making sacrificial offerings to pagan gods.
For revisionists such as Lukas, it makes perfect sense. He is a self-described Bernie supporter who says he is an assimilated Jew and a product of intermarriage. Lukas continues that he eats pork, and that he and his wife agonized over the decision to circumcise their son. He grew up in Berkeley, now lives in Oakland, and said he practices Reconstructionist Judaism. Lukas asks: "Why should I light candles and sing songs to celebrate a group of violent fundamentalists (the Maccabees)?"
Shame on Germany. Shame on the EU. Shame on the UN. As for the revisionist Jews, who do not seem to be able to see the good in Israel or Judaism, well...you decide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)