BloggeRhythms

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died Friday at 79 years of age. There will be much written about his thirty years of service to the nation as a member of the SCOTUS, and this isn’t the forum to discuss his effect on American society. However, a fitting, brief description of his impact was found in an article by Mark Sherman.

 

Mr. Sherman wrote: “Scalia deeply influenced a generation of conservative legal thinkers and was a lightning rod for criticism from the left almost from the moment President Ronald Reagan put him on the court in 1986. 

“A gifted writer who produced gems and barbs in equal measure, Scalia even occasionally took aim at his usual allies if they disagreed with his view of a case.” 

The Justice will be truly missed. 

On another subject: Didn’t watch the Republican debate last night. And from the recaps this morning, missed nothing except the same old sniping, name-calling and wasting of time by a stage full of wannabe POTUS’s back-biting each other.   

An exchange of comments from readers of a detailed review @bigstory.ap.org, however, defined debates and their worthlessness succinctly and accurately.   

Sam Hain opined: “All debates are done by the Establishment - even Fox. Do you have a better way to bring out the POTUS candidates ? We're all dying' to hear it.” 

Cozette replied to reader Hain, correctly describing what should be done to select the most qualified individual for the most important job in the world.   

Cozette wrote: “Yes I do. POTUS is an executive position. They are running to be CEO of the free world. I'd like each to go thru a job interview which starts with explaining what the job entails. It'd be great to have it done by the business moguls of Shark Tank. Presidents should be doers not debaters. You don't debate with world leaders. I'd even like to see them play a game of Texas Hold Em. That would tell me more than the blah blah. I can read the policy positions myself on candidates web sites."

Proving the accuracy of Cozette’s proposition for POTUS selection, a perfect example of the shallowness of debating appeared in an exchange between a blustering Trump and Jeb Bush, as follows: 

At 10:48 p.m.: “Donald Trump is bristling at Jeb Bush's suggestions that the reality TV star-turned-presidential candidate went bankrupt in his past business ventures. 

“Trump said during Saturday's Republican debate that he never personally went bankrupt, and instead, suggested that he only used bankruptcy proceedings and tax laws to protect struggling businesses.” 

In this case, while Trump may have used the law as his method to protect himself from bankruptcy while aiding his “struggling” businesses, he was at the helm of those operations when they went under. Therefore, as the responsible manager, he should be held personally accountable for how and why those entity’s failed in the first place. However, while a full answer is critical, an appropriate review of the failures can’t possibly be accomplished in a thirty-second exchange on a debate stage. 

Completely contradictory, the same Trump at 9:40 p.m. had said: ”[T]he world trade center "came down during the reign of George W. Bush," drawing boos from the crowd.” 

Which leads to the question that if Trump truly believes “W.” Bush is responsible for 9/11 in any way, and Jeb is thereby also guilty by relationship to the former president, then why isn’t Trump squarely responsible for his four bankrupt businesses? In this scenario Trump sounds like Bill Clinton’s wife, trying to have it both ways and being wrong twice. 

Moving along, a friend sent the following explanation of political differences. 

“Recently, while I was working in the flower beds in the front yard, my neighbors stopped to chat as they returned home from walking their dog. During our friendly conversation, I asked their little girl what she wanted to be when she grew up.  She said she wanted to be President someday. 

“Both of her parents, Democrat Party members, were standing there so I asked her, "If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?" She replied... "I'd give food and houses to all the homeless people." Her parents beamed with pride! "Wow...what a worthy goal!" 

“I said..."But you don't have to wait until you're President to do that!" 

"What do you mean?" she replied. 

“So I told her, "You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and trim my hedge, and I'll pay you $50. Then you can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward food and a new house.”

“She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, "Why doesn't the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?" 

“I said, "Welcome to the Republican Party. 

“Her parents aren't speaking to me anymore.”  

Along the same lines, my friend added: 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

Charlie Spiering @breitbart.com, quotes pollster Pat Caddell, a former adviser to President Jimmy Carter, who “asserted that the Hillary Clinton email scandal is “worse than Watergate.” 

Mr. Spiering explains: “Long the pinnacle of modern American political scandal, Nixon resigned after he was connected to the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in Watergate."

“This is the greatest scandal in the history of the United States,” Caddell said. “They all ought to be indicted. This is worse than Watergate.” 

“Clinton, he explained, would soon be exposed for using her connections in the State Department to enrich her family, her foundation, and her supporters. 

“They were selling out the national interests of the United States directly to adversaries and others for money,” he said. “There is just nothing that satisfies them. They are the greediest white trash I have ever seen.” 

In a fitting confirmation of Mr. Caddell’s commentary, Steven Lee Myers @nytimes.com, writes today: “The State Department released 551 more emails from the personal server of Hillary Clinton on Saturday, including 84 with some or all of the messages blocked out because they contained information that has now been deemed classified. Three of those are classified “secret.” 

“Each of the secret emails included Mrs. Clinton’s comments atop forwarded chains of messages discussing tensions on the Sinai Peninsula; a visit by John Kerry to Pakistan in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s death; and sensitive, back-channel talks between the Israelis and Palestinians. 

“The State Department has now classified as secret 21 emails from among 33,000 that were sent through the private server Mrs. Clinton used while she was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.” 

And, what seems even more damaging to Bill’s wife contention of plausible deniability is: “An additional 22 emails — mostly referring to the Central Intelligence Agency’s drone strikes, officials have said — have been deemed to be “top secret.” Those are considered too sensitive to release to the public even with portions blocked out.”

Thus, while the FBI is probably ordering lady's handcuffs and leg irons, the recurring question arises again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?     

That’s it for today folks.  

 

Adios