Posted in Fiction, Politics

The Snollygoster Politician

img_0258

“Oh, he is a snollygoster, all right. That Donald, he is a right snollygoster,” the old man said as he stood on the street corner talking to a group of folks that had gathered round him.

“What’s a snollygoster, mister?” Asked a young fellow who was part of the group.

The old man replied, “We don’t want to vote for a snollygoster, young man. A snollygoster is a right unprincipled fellow. He can be anyone, but is usually one of those unscrupulous politicians. Ha! In the old times, they smoked big cigars, carried carpetbags, wore flowered waistcoats, and were very shrewd and loud and proud in getting their point across to the public.”

The old man continued, “I think they are a bit more in disguise now. They are still loud and proud, but if they are politicians, they wear expensive suits, give speeches that promise the world, but they are really out for themselves and not for the people they are trying to represent. They are shrewd, however. You have to be more shrewd to spot one. You can usually spot their egos before you can see them.”

The young man nodded his head and started talking softly to the other people standing around the old man who was obviously holding court on that street corner. There were rumblings in that crowd. It was hard to tell if they were with the old man or against him. The crowd was growing.

The place was a street corner in New York City in the U.S. The time was October, 2016, only a month before the U.S. Presidential election. The candidates for President of the United States were probably two of the most disliked candidates ever running for President and it was clear that the old man was talking about one of them, Donald Trump, the businessman turned politician. There were rumors about both candidates, but new information had just popped up about Mr. Trump. Disturbing information. This information had apparently sparked the discussion on the street corner that day.

A middle-aged woman in the crowd spoke out. “Donald Trump is a snollygoster. We should all be able to see it. He says he is supportive of women’s issues, but look at the new information we just learned. Trump has even admitted that it’s true.”

Someone else in the crowd asked, “What information? Tell us.”

The middle-aged woman said, “Donald Trump made extremely lewd and sexually aggressive comments about women, citing that he could do anything he wanted to women because of his “star” status before a television show in 2005. His words were captured on tape because he said them on a hot mic pinned to his lapel. He had been married to his current wife, Melania Trump, only a few months at the time. Mr. Trump admitted the remarks were made but was not apologetic.”

There was a louder rumbling in the crowd after that explanation.

The middle-aged woman continued, “How can we, as a society who professes to give equal opportunity to everyone, vote for a candidate for President who has such disregard for such a large segment of our population?”

A cheer went up from the crowd surrounding the old man. Obviously, the crowd was an anti-Trump crowd or at least a crowd eager to hear the information the wise old man was imparting to them.

The old man said, “There have been many other revelations about this Donald that make us wonder how he can deal with foreign leaders who are women, governors and senators and representatives who are women, staff who are women, and women’s issues that come across his desk. He obviously has a blatant disregard for women and only values them in the bedroom.”

A loud male voice said, “But what can we do? He is very close to the other candidate in the polls. He may win!”

“We have to stop this carpetbagger, this snollygoster,” the old man said. “Do what Americans do best. Revolt! Go to his rallies and demonstrate against him. Make him drop that snollygoster cigar out of his mouth and lose his cool. Don’t vote for him and tell everyone you know!”

The old man said, “Remember the stories of the Old West where a covered wagon would pull up into towns and everyone would gather round because they knew there was a salesman on it selling products that might help their ailments? A salesman would appear in a flamboyant costume and have all kinds of products — elixirs to help their rheumatism, potions to cure whatever ailed them? Those elixirs and potions all turned out to be nothing more than snake oil. Nothing at all that would help and the people paid good money for them because they were desperate.”

“Yes,” the crowd, that had tripled in size, cried.

“That Donald is offering us snake oil if he becomes President. What he offers sounds good to some of us who are desperate but it will turn out to be nothing that will help us and will probably hurt us instead. He is the snollygoster in the flamboyant costume and the loud voice,” said the old man.

At that point, the crowd was whipped into a frenzy. Someone had gone into a local store and had gotten material to make signs and posters. Everyone was down on the ground making anti-Donald posters to carry. The crowd numbered at least 500 people.

The old man slipped quietly away. He had done his work on that particular street corner. He was off to another street corner in another part of New York City. You see, the old man was not as old as he seemed. He was a Viet Nam veteran who loved his country. He was also ill and did not have long to live. But, he and some of us buddies from that war were not about to see their beloved country taken over by a carpetbagger. They were spread out all over the U.S., doing exactly what the old man was doing. They were on street corners all over America, holding court, telling the truth about the snollygoster determined to highjack their beloved country. They were not going to let that happen.

The old man trudged on.

#blogpropellant #amwriting #amblogging #writing #realDonaldTrump #politics

TBP’s On-Line Writer’s Guild #33

Random Number 3

 

 

Posted in Politics, The Economy, Travel

2016 US Presidential Election: Pneumonia or the Economy and Foreign Policy?

 

imageI am discouraged by American journalism. I am also discouraged that the American people don’t demand more from their journalists and their Presidential candidates. I will certainly be interested to watch the upcoming Presidential debates although we cannot forget that early voting will have already started in some states. It seems this Presidential race is a slog,  toward, at best, mediocrity.

Let’s look at what’s important. Hillary Clinton’s very temporary, very common bout with pneumonia is not important regarding this election. This is an illness any one of us could contract and recover from very quickly. THe press and her opponent have made a much bigger deal out of it than it is, probably to deflect attention from the other issues that they should be discussing. However, since these two candidates are the oldest ever running for the White House, it is appropriate that they release their health records.

Our biggest economic problem is jobs. We hear wholesale promises of jobs from Mr. Trump but he has no plan to magically manufacture them except he talks about bringing industry home. Home to what? Dilapidated plants that are light years behind technologically? In some cases, no plants or factories are left at all. Clinton has a jobs creation plan that will add about 10 million jobs during her first term. However, she also talks about the revitalization of the manufacturing sector and this writer thinks that is dreaming. She does plan to put people to work on the infrastructure which is desperately needed – if she can get funds from Congress.

It is a little more difficult to figure out Donald Trumps’s plan for jobs. He says he wants to bring back jobs from China, Japan, Vietnam, and other countries but he is not clear what he wants to bring them back to. WIthout a manufacturing and technology sector, Trump’s plan to bring back jobs seems to fall flat. He is also not in favor of raising the minimum wage.

WIth regard to foreign policy, Mr. Trump has very little experience. He is a nationalist. He is not in favor of many trade agreements with other countries or is for very strict terms. He wants to appease and support Russia while doing the opposite with China, seeing China as our enemy.  He does not support the Iran deal and does support strong men ruling the Middle East.

Mts. Clinton has been a diplomat for many years. Her foreign policy is based on diplomacy. She is very well-schooled on the issues facing the US from other countries in the world and would be one of the most knowledgeable leaders in modern times in foreign policy due to her background and her experience gained as Secretary of State.

One of the problems with this election is that the candidates nor the media are focusing on these or any other issues. Instead they are talking about Clinton’s illness or Trump’s medical history or tax returns. The American people should want to know these candidates’ stands on issues, not their personal extraneous issues. OTherwise, we cannot make informed voting positions.

If you understand the issues, get out and vote but educate yourself first so you can make an informed voting decision. #dailyprompt #2016presidentialelection #realDonaldTrump #HillaryClinton #amwriting #amblogging #writing #economy #foreignpolicy

 

Posted in Politics

Do U.S. Politicians Think “Let Them Eat Cake?”

 

image

I don’t talk much about politics on this blog because it is such a travesty here before the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. When I saw the word cake this morning, I was both amused and horrified. Marie Antoinette, Queen of France before the French Revolution, and wife of King Louis XVI, supposedly said “let them eat cake” when told that the French peasants had no bread to eat. Clearly, that was a slam against her own people because if they could not afford bread, how could they afford cake?

I think of both our Presidential candidates when I hear the “let them eat cake” quote. Donald Trump rails against the fact that the manufacturing sector has failed in America and jobs have been sent overseas. All the while, most of the products made by the companies he owns are made somewhere else……China, Vietnam, Bangledesh, and more. HIllary Clinton rails against the same thing but until recently, she has been for every trade agreement that came along, including the TPP and NAFTA. Both philosophies kill our own manufacturing sector, slide the U.S. Economy into a service economy status, and take away jobs from skilled workers.

Let them eat cake?

These skilled workers who used to work in steel, coal mining, engineering, technology, even teaching, are now restaurant workers, retail employees, who work without many benefits, have to work odd shift work, and have no retirement plan and often no health insurance.

Let them eat cake?

Neither Trump nor Clinton can relate in any way to middle class America. Trump is a rich man, though not as rich as he would like us to believe. He has been only a moderately successful real estate developer. He really is not a good business man and has lost so many of his ventures in casinos, restaurants, and other venues such as Trump University, and many more. Clinton is probably more down to earth than Trump but she is going to owe debts to so many lobbyists by the time she is elected, if she is, these lobbyists are going to want to be paid in some way. She is going to be held accountable to her campaign donors far more than to the American people.

Let them eat cake?

Trump nor Clinton really have no understanding the problems of the middle class. They just let us work at a menial job, or read, or play on Facebook, hoping it will dull our enthusiasm for the political process and we will vote for whoever has brainwashed us most effectively. Of course, they don’t want us to really understand the issues.

Let them eat cake?

Who are YOU going to vote for? #amwriting #writing #blogging #realDonaldTrump #HillaryClinton #2016PresidentiaCampaign

 

 

Posted in Creative Nonfiction Essays, Politics

On Being Decisive And Donald Trump’s Use of “Maybe”

image

Are you a decisive person? Do you make up your mind about something and stick to it? Or is your favorite word “maybe?” I can tell you that this blogger has a definite dislike, perhaps hatred, for the word “maybe.”

Based on the 2016 Random House Dictionary, the word maybe means possibility or perhaps if used as an adverb; a possibility or uncertainty if used as a noun. Nothing decisive about any of that, is there?

How do you like it, dear readers, if you ask someone a question and their response is “maybe,” or “possibly,: or “it’s a possibiity.” Do you know any more than you did when you asked the question in the first place? No, you don’t. This blogger considers herself a fairly decisive person. I think I usually can evaluate a situation and make a decision fairly quickly. It’s not always the right decision, but it’s a decision nevertheless. I don’t think I leave people hanging with a “maybe” very often. Sometimes, I have to look at my calendar and I have to put someone off and give them a decision after I look at my calendar, but I try to carry my calendar with me so that won’t happen.

Donald Trump’s speeches are an example of the power of the negative power of the word “maybe.” Slate.com runs a column called Lexicon Valley on the power of language. The author, Andrew Kahn, analyzes Trump’s speeches and his powerful use of the word “maybe.” He categories Trump’s use of the word “maybe” by Levels. For example Trump’s Level I “maybe” happened when he was discussing President Obama’s birth certificate and he says something “Maybe It Says He’s a Muslim.” Of course, Trump doesn’t know that, but the word “maybe” plants just enough doubt in the minds of his supporters.

Kahn’s Level 2 “maybe,” is not premeditated like a Level 1. In referencing the Orlando shootings, Trump suggested that maybe President Obama was soft on terrorism. There are other examples. The Level 2 maybe shows uncertainly about what this candidate thinks and believes but fires up his supporters. That is his point.

Then there is the Level 3 maybe which Trump uses when he wants to portray modesty and humility. He says that his campaign and support is a phenomenon that has “maybe” never happened in history.

The word “maybe” can be powerful in a negative way as candidate Trump proves. He has used it masterfully. #realDonaldTrump #amwriting #writing #blogging #dailyprompt

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2016/06/22/donald_trump_uses_the_word_maybe_as_a_crutch_and_a_bludgeon.html

 

Posted in Creative Nonfiction Essays, Politics, Uncategorized

#alllivesmatter

image

Yesterday, I wrote a blog post entitled A Darkness Over Our Country. I had no way of knowing that the darkness would grow deeper during the coming night with the horrific shooting of police officers and the wounding of others in Dallas, TX in the United States.

I haven’t slept all night. Sleepless in the U.S. I have a feeling I’m not alone. I’m afraid. Not just for myself and my family and friends but for my country. We have a political environment, as I discussed in the previously mentioned blog post, that is dividing our country. We have a racially divided country of the type I haven’t witnessed since the 1960’s race riots.

I don’t pretend to know what is going on in our country regarding racial tension. Police officers seem to fear for their lives when they stop cars with young black men in them or when they confront black men on the street. I don’t know if their fear is justified or not. Should they fear black men more than white men? If so, why? I don’t know the answer to that question. I am making no judgements. What I do know is that there is violence in the streets that seems to be racially driven.

Ferguson, Missouri. Baton Rouge, Louisiana and Alton Sterling. A young black man in a car with his girlfriend and baby in Minnesota. Michael Brown. I could go on and on. Were these shootings by police justified? How will we ever determine the answer to that question?

Then we have last night. A peaceful protest in Dallas, Texas that was spurred by the Alton Sterling shooting and by the shooting of the young man in Minnesota. At the end of the protest, shots rang out and the crowd started to run. The shots came from snipers in “an elevated position” according to observers. All the facts are not yet clear, but when it was over, five Dallas police officers were dead and six people were injured. Some civilians were injured. Clearly, the snipers were aiming at the police officers.

Did this violence help the situation on the street between the police and the young black men? No. Violence begets violence. Hate begets violence. This was a terrorist attack motivated by hate. All it will do is increase the level of fear felt by police officers and young black men. It will increase the likelihood of more violence between those two groups of people. The level of hate will skyrocket and the American people are already angry and afraid.

Soon, we have both the Republican and Democrat National Conventions coming up. Both could be contested conventions. Both could generate more hate and possibly violence. Is this what we want for America?

Do we have the leadership in the White House to find a way out of the current situation in America? With the two presumptive candidates for President, do we have one that can find a way to lead us out of the hatred and violence? One of the two candidates preaches hate and violence. The other candidate preaches peace but the American people don’t find her trustworthy. How do we solve the vicious circle we are in of hate and violence?

Black Lives Matter. White Lives Matter. Blue LIves Matter. #alllivesmatter

Posted in Creative Nonfiction Essays, Politics, Uncategorized

A Darkness Over Our Country

A darkness has descended over our country. No, I’m not talking about ISIS. I’m not even talking about terrorism in general. I’m talking about how the political environment in the United States is affecting our society and the relationships between people in our country.

There was a time, a long period of time, in the U.S. that politics and religion were two topics that were not discussed between friends in what was then called “polite society.” I’m not suggesting that we go back to that time. I am suggesting that we take some lessons from that time.

The political environment in U.S. has gotten so toxic that people of different political persuasions literally cannot have a discussion about the issues affecting the U.S. today without becoming angry and spewing vitriol to their acquaintances and even to their family and friends. I have never been in such an environment in the U.S. in my lifetime. For most of the years of my life, I have not known the political affiliations of my friends and acquaintances. Politics was something we did not discuss. Because of my profession, we always discussed issues that affected our country and other countries. We had spirited discussions. But, they never devolved to the point where people became angry and friendships were affected. We always laughed, shook hands at the end of our discussions, and agreed to disagree. That doesn’t seem to happen anymore.

When friends and family discuss the issues affecting the U.S. now, during the 2016 Presidential campaign, someone, or several someone’s, are going to walk away angry. I don’t understand this. We all have opinions. Some of us think that we need a fence between our country and Mexico. Some of us think there are other solutions. Some of us think we need a “change” from the policies of the current political administration. Some of us think the current administration has done a good job. I recall that, in 2008, some thought we needed a change then as well. Some of us have strong opinions that a change is needed in our foreign policy in a number of areas. Some of us think a change is needed in other areas. Some of us strongly believe in the Medicare and Social Security systems as they are. Some of us don’t.

What I am doing is illustrating that there is a plethora of issues facing our country. It isn’t possible, or even desirable, for all of us to have the same opinion. Differing opinions is what our two-party system is based on. If everyone had the same opinion, there would be no need for a two-party system. That is when the country starts to lean toward Fascism.

I avoid political discussions now. I am one of those people who has lost a friend, partly because we engaged in political discussions. I am sure some of you reading this blog post may be able to say the same. Somehow, our society in the U.S. has to get past thinking that politics is more important than relationships. No matter who is in the White House, no matter who is in the Congress, we need our friends and family. It is unfathomable to me that we have allowed this type of darkness to descend over our society. It is a sign of radicalism taking hold of us and leading us down a path where we should not want to go. #amwriting #writing #blogging #politics

Posted in Democracy, Politics

The Brexit Vote: Does it Foretell the American Election

image

Great Britain’s Brexit vote refers to the decision by the populace of Great Britain this week to leave the European Union (EU). A decision with wide-reaching implications not only for Great Britain but for the rest of the 28-nation EU, the United States and perhaps the rest of the world. One of the most important issues of the Brexit referendum was immigration into Great Britain. The U.S., of course, has the same issue that is a hot button for the 2016 Presidential election.

At the risk of over-simplification, the EU stressed freedom of movement among its member states. When Tony Blair was Prime Minister, he embraced the British integration into the EU. When eastern European countries joined the EU, many other European countries put immigration limits in place. Great Britain did not. Since then, three-fourths of the immigrants into Great Britain have not been European at all but of other nationalities. The immigration wave has been massive with the new arrivals stressing Britain’s welfare system, environment, and almost every other resource available to the British people. It should not be lost, however, that not an inconsiderable amount of the hatred of new immigrants had more than a little to do with racism and bigotry.

This begs the question of why wasn’t, under Prime Minister David Cameron, some sort of immigration reform put into place? Was taking the step of withdrawing from the EU actually necessary? It seems like a case of closing the barn door after the horses got out.

Of course, many draw the parallel between the immigration problem in Great Britain and that in the United States. I see a real difference. The United States has immigration laws already on the books. Enforcing them would go a long way toward solving the problem of illegal immigrants in the U.S. just like enacting immigration reform would have done much to help Great Britain.

Along with immigration, Brexit was also a response to globalization. It can be argued that it is a step toward de-globalization or nationalism. Globalization has been a movement in countries like Great Britain and the U.S. since World War II. Globalization involves free trade of goods and services across borders. In the case of Great Britain, that means that trade is tariff-free within the EU. Will the EU still allow tariff-free trade when Great Britain withdraws? We will see. Perhaps not.

Many countries have literally stopped producing many items needed by their people due to globalization. They rely on trade agreements with other nations to provide what their population needs. The United States has such trade agreements with a number of nations. For example, the U.S. no longer has a manufacturing economy. If there is a nationalist President, like Donald Trump, elected that tears down the trade agreements in the U.S., one has to wonder where the manufacturing plants and skilled labor will suddenly come from to produce what the U.S. citizenry need. The same questions can be asked about Great Britain. Will they suddenly be importing everything they need and paying tariffs? One can sense economic disaster.

So what happens now due to Brexit? In the short-run, the world financial markets reacted drastically negative. Manufacturers and financial institutions are threatening to pull out of Great Britain. Scotland will probably have a referendum on freedom from Great Britain and succeed. Other short-term effects are bound to be felt. The world as Europe knows it will change. We have no way to know what the long-term effects will be yet. The same may happen in the United States if Donald Trump, the GOP presumptive nominee, wins the 2016 Presidential election. #Brexit #realDonaldTrump #writing #amwriting #blogging

Posted in Appalachia, Eastern Kentucky, Politics, Uncategorized

Does America Really Vote Against our Own Self-Interests?

 

image

In the 2015 Kentucky Governor’s election, some of the results of the voting seemed astounding. For one thing, Kentucky elected a Republican Governor for only the second time in four decades. Most were shocked when Governor Matt Bevin was elected, having fully expected his Democrat foe to prevail as Democrats usually do in the race for the Governorship in this usually red state. The results were even more shocking when officials looked at the county-by-county breakdown of the voting.

Matt Bevin had made his platform clear. He was going to repeal Obamacare in the state. Kentucky has one of the most successful Obamacare programs in the U.S., called Kynect, which has been particularly helpful to some in the poorer Eastern Kentucky counties located in Appalachia. Bevin also planned to considerably roll back Medicaid, the welfare program that so many in this poor state relied on. Yet, in Owsley County, Kentucky, the ninth poorest county in the state, voting results showed that 70.5% of the voters cast their vote for now-Governor Matt Bevin, despite his position on these policies. In Magoffin County, Kentucky, also in the Appalachian region of the state and the eighth poorest county, 54% voted for Bevin.

Did the voters in these two counties vote against their own self-interests when they voted for Matt Bevin for Governor? In Owsley County, 66% of the population is enrolled in Medicaid and 47% in Magoffin County. Yet, they voted for the candidate that stated he was going to dismantle the health insurance part of the program and considerably roll back the welfare benefits. Why?

There are many opinions and varying answers to these questions. On the surface, some say that the average education level of the voters in Eastern Kentucky is low and these low information voters cast a ballot without full knowledge of the candidates’ positions. I personally know that is true in many cases.

There is a second issue which quite possibly trumps the issue of the low-information voter. This issue is not one you hear the talking heads spout on Fox News or any of the news programs. Some people actually vote principle over pocketbook

Eastern Kentucky is in the region we call the Bible Belt. Many people rely on their religious values to determine their actions. The conservative movement has hijacked religion and made it a part of secular politics. They have somehow painted the Democratic party as the Anti-God party though this is blatantly not true. The Democratic party has simply respected the separation of church and state. Many voters have cast votes for candidates who espouse their own religious views even if the very things they promise to do are against their own self-interests.

There are many examples of voting principle over pocketbook. Gun control is another. Until the mid-1970’s, the National Rifle Association (NRA) was a moderate organization supporting moderate gun control laws. Then, it adopted a strict original interpretation of the Second Amendment and bought and paid for many members of Congress. In 1991, in an interview, Chief Justice Warren Burger, who was appointed to the Court by Richard Nixon and was a conservative, accused the NRA of fraud on the American people and said it had far too much influence on the members of Congress. He ended the interview by saying, “and I am a gun man.” Imagine what Burger would think today!

The NRA supports the Republican party and has convinced gun owners that Democrats want to take away their guns, which is foolishness. My family, Democrats as far back as our genealogy can be traced, have been gun owners, though we have felt no need to carry them in holsters on the street. Voters cast votes for candidates who are supported by the NRA because they fear anyone else will somehow take away their guns.

These are only two examples of many. Other issues that fall in the “principle over pocketbook” category are abortion, drugs, affirmative action, racism, and taxes. But those are topics for other blog posts. The Tea Party branch of the Republican party has been particularly effective at encouraging low-information voters to vote principle over pocketbook with Fox News being their media tool.

In our 2016 Presidential election, it will be interesting to watch this phenomenon. Unfortunately, in this writer’s opinion, the presumptive Republican candidate, Donald Trump, has not yet taken definitive positions that allow anyone to make decisions based on their pocketbooks or their principles. #amwriting #writers #blogging #BlogHer

 

 

Posted in Politics, The Economy

Will the Economy Affect the Presidential Election?

I’m tired of the word “circus” when describing the 2016 Presidential election. It’s much worse than a circus as the connotation of that word is an event that includes fun and games. Even though the whole thing has seemed funny at times, the future of our country is at stake. When we finish laughing, suddenly it seems very serious. Will the current state of our economy affect the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election? In a perfect world, the voters would be looking at issues like the jobs report, inflation, interest rates, and a myriad of foreign policy issues. Have we heard much or anything about those issues this year? Not so much.

Oh, you can argue that we hear about foreign policy but all we hear is about terrorism and a little about immigration. Both are crucial issues but do we hear any real plans for either? Nothing sustainable. We already have immigration laws on the books that are not being enforced. We hear about a wall that may be built if a certain candidate is elected. The only thing we seem to know to do about terrorism outside of our borders seems to involve way too many innocent people.

Regarding domestic policy, there is very little discussion of policy positions except those that are either ultra-liberal or ultra-conservative which may not represent the majority of the American people.

I have heard little about the fact that, instead of rising, the Gross Domestic Product of the U.S. fell by 0.5% in the first quarter of 2016. In 2015, the pundits were predicting a roaring 2016 economy. Not happening. The job market. Last fall, we reached a 40 year low of the number of Americans participating in the job market at 62.4%. That has gone up slightly to 62.9%. Even though we added over 200,000 jobs during March 2016, the jobs are simply replacing jobs long since lost. Inflation. Core inflation increased 2.2% on an annual basis in March 2016 and 2.3% annually in February. Not much talk about these key issues that affect each of us.

Instead we get slogans and platitudes. Mudslinging and name calling.

Is the state of our economy really affecting the election? People certainly seem angry. Is what they are angry about……wages that don’t cover expenses, high cost of health insurance, terrorism….just to name a few….really something any of the candidates can do much about? Or has it all gone too far? Food for thought. #Hillary #Trump #presidentialelection #economy