When Someone Shows You

This election cycle is driving me a little nuts.

I don’t know what I should do. Like many in the U. S., I don’t like either of the major candidates for President. Donald Trump turns my stomach, and Hillary is, well, a Clinton, and all the scandal that’s followed them around for so long leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Here’s the thing, if I’m honest with myself, I have to admit that in both cases my opinion is quite subjective and has been manipulated quite a bit by the respective “other team” for each candidate. So, I decided to try and remedy that situation and look for objective reasons to not vote for one or the other.

Donald Trump

It turns out, I don’t have to look far in the case of Trump. All I have to do is listen to him and believe what he says. Here’s a fairly comprehensive list of the vile bile he’s been spewing for the last year or more. Truly, a reprehensible human being.

quote-when-someone-shows-you-who-they-are-believe-them-the-first-time-maya-angelou-0-84-87

Hillary Clinton

Hillary is a tougher nut to crack. Sure, as I mentioned above, the Clinton’s have been the center of a whole lot of scandal over the years. This has led to the whole “she’s untrustworthy” meme that’s been floating around for quite a while. That’s part of it, but not all of it. I’ve said myself that when I listen to her, she wreaks of insincerity. All of this is again, quite subjective. If I look objectively at all of the scandal surrounding the Clinton’s, the vast majority of it is conjecture based on flimsy (even made up) evidence. Sure, there’s the whole Monica Lewinsky thing, but that’s not Hillary, that’s Bill. As to her standing by him during all that… the cynic in me says that it was all about power and preserving her political career. But that’s just me projecting a motive on her that I don’t know for sure true. There are many, many married couples that go through issues of infidelity and remain together. Who am I to attach a purely political motive to her?

Here’s an article by a self professed liberal trying to answer the question as to why people hate Hillary Clinton objectively, covering issues such as trustworthiness, and corruption.

Where Do They Stand

The chart below comes from The Political Compass. The site covers world politics (not just the U.S.), is non partisan, and has no sponsors (it survives through individual donations).  It has a survey that you can take (and you should) which places you into a cartesian plane with one axis representing economic issues and the other social. The placement of the candidates in this plane comes from statements made in public:

… the positions on the chart are based on speeches, manifestos and, where applicable, voting records .If positions markedly change during the campaign, we will revise the chart accordingly. Already the positions of Trump and Clinton differ slightly from the primaries chart.

 

us2016

Which political quadrant does your candidate occupy?

Where do I Stand?

Take a look:

chart

I took special care  to answer each question with how I honestly think things should be. You should take the test too. Take the time to answer for yourself, not your party affiliation. That’ll give you an objective baseline for how you should consider voting at leat.

It seems that I’m getting more left wing in my old age (which is kinda backwards I know… people tend to get more conservative as they age), but about the same in terms of authoritarian vs. libertarian. That is, I’m solidly libertarian —  I believe that the guiding principle of our democracy is freedom in all things, whether social, fiscal, sexual, recreational, relational, etc.

So, if we just look at the cartesian coordinates for the two main candidates, who’s the closest to me? Two things jump out to me:

  1. Neither main stream candidate represents me
  2. Clinton is closer to me politically than Trump

When all is said and done with all of the above, I’m feeling better about choosing Hillary than I did before.

 

 

Is The Republican Party Committing Suicide?

Interesting interview with a former staffer of both Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush Bruce Bartlett about why he’s voting for Trump (hint: it’s not because he wants him to win).

Bruce Bartlett, a former official in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations and a longtime critic of the GOP’s increasingly conservative politics, sees Trump as both a product of the Republican Party’s decline and a potential catalyst for its eventual reclamation. I talked to Bartlett about why he voted for Donald Trump, what he sees in the GOP’s future, and whether something worthwhile can be salvaged from a political party that looks to be on the verge of cracking up.

Take a look. It’s definitely worth a read.

CarneyWeb Redux

Well, it’s been quite a while since I’ve posted here… nearly 5 years!!! 

The computer that I hosted the site on has finally outlived its useful life, taking more time and effort to keep working as a web server than I have the time and patience to deal with anymore (yeah, I’m definitely entering the grumpy old man zone :-)). It took a bit of effort, but I was able to get the content from the site imported into an external blog host. The only issue is that I was using a custom text filter to give me some added functionality. The net result is that some of the old content will look strange and some intra-site links won’t be formatted correctly. Oh well. If I figure out a way to fix those issues, I will, but I’m not going to lose any sleep over it.

Then there’s the question as to why I haven’t written anything here recently, and the simple answer is that I didn’t feel like it. Nothing really struck me as worth writing about, and with the host misbehaving (see above), I didn’t bother. Well, things are interesting again! The election, deflategate, artists deaths, hi-tech issues (encryption and Apple), etc. And I have opinions on all of it!

Stay tuned!

For Those That Think It’s Only the Right

In the wake of the horrifying shootings in Arizona, there are those that have said that the hateful rhetoric needs to be taken down a notch or two. In this I totally agree. What I don’t agree with is people like Bill Maher, who last night on Anderson Cooper’s show made the statement that all of that rhetoric was coming from the right and that nobody on the left was guilty of such vile speech. Well, for those of you that agree with him, take a look here. Michelle Malkin has done a tremendous job showing that stupidity and vile, hateful speech knows no political philosophy or party.

EVERYONE needs to dial it back a bit.

Let’s Make A Deal

From The Washington Post:

Charles Krauthammerr: Barack Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010 – and House Democrats don’t have a clue that he did. In the deal struck this week, the president negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than his $814 billion 2009 stimulus package. It will pump a trillion borrowed Chinese dollars into the U.S. economy over the next two years – which just happen to be the two years of the run-up to the next presidential election. This is a defeat?

Everything about this deal disgusts me and validates my belief that ALL the politicians are two-faced, hypocritical, party-first, damn-the-electorate-full-spend-ahead-whatever-it-takes-to-get-reelected jerks.

This “deal” gets us:

  • Tax cuts (well, not really cuts, but a halt to the imminent increase)
  • Spending increases

What a deal! At a time when our total debt (including unfunded mandates) is roughly $75 TRILLION (that’s right, not the paltry $15 trillion or so that you’ve heard about) we’re gonna add, rather than subtract from that total. I guess it’s that in a world of insanity, it’s the sane man that watches it all go down the tube and shrugs with atlas.

What happened to the great “victory” of the fiscal conservative tea-party republicans? It’s in the same hole as Rangel’s ethics, buried, covered with the feces of our one party government.

Not that I have any strong feelings on the matter.

 

Really Governor?

Take a look at this story from today’s Boston Globe front page:

From The Boston Globe:

Patrick vows to work to change immigration laws – The Boston Globe: [Governor Patrick] said he wants to implement all 131 recommendations contained in an administration report last year, which includes controversial measures such as in-state tuition at public colleges and driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants

That’s right, people of Massachusetts, your governor, the one that YOU elected (I didn’t vote for him) wants to give people that are here by virtue of breaking our laws the same benefits that you work and pay taxes for… which is bad enough… but he wants to do it when the state is facing a $2.5 BILLION shortfall.

Massachusetts had tried several years ago to pass a law granting in-state tuition to illegal immigrant students, saying it would bring in $2.5 million in revenue a year if 600 students enrolled. But the measure failed in the House.

Excuse me? But aren’t all the state universities and colleges already fully enrolled, and in fact over-enrolled? If these 600 people were to gain admission, 600 people from legal residents (including citizens, and legal immigrants) would not be allowed to attend.

The implications of this go well beyond driving and education (when you get a driver’s license, you can register to vote and use it for identification when voting, as an example).

Just as a reminder, the last governor to do the right thing on this issue was Romney, who worked out a deal with the federal government to allow state police arrest illegal immigrants and turn them over to federal authorities… an order rescinded immediately by Governor Patrick.

Think about it people, especially the next time you vote for governor. It really does matter.

 

Are you smart enough to teach grade school?

From Roger Ebert’s Journal :

Are you smart enough to teach grade school?: This is a certification examination for prospective teachers, prepared by the Examiners of Teachers for the Public Schools in Zanesville, Ohio, in the late 1870s:

Uh…. after looking at those questions, I know I’m not smart enough. But what’s of more interest to me is that I’m willing to bet money that most of our teachers today would fail the test too. Certainly some of the questions are archaic, but many aren’t. Here’s an example:

6. Give rule for forming plural of nouns ending in “y,” with examples. Give plurals of staff, radius, miasma, Miss White, rendezvous, talisman, loaf, grief, seraph, Mussulman, forceps, spoonful, who, beef, s, x, 6, and madam. Also give the singulars of kine, ashes, banditi, swine, animalcula.

Yikes! That’s basic stuff… knowing the plural form of various nouns that don’t follow the rules. How many teachers could get the correct answers for the whole question? Can you?

How about this one:

9. Write the past tense and past participle of these verbs:

Lay, Seek, Sit, Get, Dare,Thrive, Lie, Set, Light, Loose, Fly, Flee, Chide, Overflow, Catch, Lose, Swim, Climb, Drink, Stay, Leap, Quit, Swell, Burst, Eat.

Do you remember what a past participle is? If I asked my high school and college kids what it is, would they?

Is this part of the dumbing down of America, or is it the evolution of the language?


YEAH!!! PJ is almost set to direct The Hobbit

From TheOneRing.net:

Peter Jackson Close to Deal to Direct ‘The Hobbit’ | Hobbit Movie News and Rumors | TheOneRing.net™: Now his deal is all but complete, according to individuals close to the project. Both Jackson’s directing fee and percentage of the gross have been settled, though a number of lesser deal points remain outstanding.

This is great news! Now if we can just get past the threatened actors strike and MGM’s financial woes, this project might actually happen!

The Tenth Inning, Part 1

Last night I watched the first part of Ken Burns followup to Bsaeball, The Tenth Inning. Overall it was fantastic, just as the original documentary was. There was one part that stuck out for me though. Much of the show, as expected, was either covertly or overtly about steroids and how it affected the game. At one point, the speaker was the genius comedian Chris Rock, and he said (paraphrasing from memory), “who wouldn’t take a pill to make more money at their job? You would [motioning to Ken Burns off camera]. If you could take a pill to get paid like Steven Spielberg, you’d take it, everyone would.” Ouch! I’d never thought of it in those terms, and if I dig deep, I’d have to admit, reluctantly, that I would. This does not excuse what all the juicers did for all those years, but it makes it more understandable. Thoughts?