Wednesday, February 24, 2016


A new topic:
WP GOP leaders: Stop Trump!!!

WM How will Trump Unite the Party

Is Trump a problem for the GOP? for the country? Whose fault is it? What should be done?

In the WAPO alone there are a great many more recent columns on Trump. I don't think I have seen any where the writer is happy he is winning." Laurie W. 
The only way I think the GOP can stop Trump is to rally around Cruz or Rubio.  As long as Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson are splitting the 60% to 70%, Trump will keep winning.  Now the question is how do we get all but one of these power hungry narcissists to fall on the swords?

The idea of Trump having the nuclear launch codes does scare me some however I remember one wise thing that Obama said that went something like this...  'I had to learn and change a lot when I went from Candidate Obama on that side of the desk to President Obama on this side of the desk.'

Now if you want to see something hilarious...  Check this out.
Colbert's All Trump Debate

MN Jobs: Try to Cure a Symptom

MP DEED's New Opportunity Office

This effort and article seem similar to this previous one. And it has the same core problem. MP Jobs

We know there is a large academic achievement gap in the union controlled public schools, and that many poor folks are not academically ready for the work force when they become adults. Apparently Dayton's solution is to try to convince businesses to accept and train these "workers" instead of changing the education bureaucracy to fix the root cause.

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Care for the Children

Jerry and I went far afield in the Good Jobs post.  So I am going to keep it going here.

As I said...

"You are happy to encourage big government to get between this woman and her doctor to prevent an abortion. And yet after the baby is born you are against government ensuring that the baby is kept safe, healthy, fed and educated..."

Continually you blame the Public Schools and the Social System for being responsible for the achievement and wealth gaps when in my view the Religious Conservatives are equally or more responsible. Continually Religious Conservatives fight against making birth control and emergency contraception cheap and readily available to girls and women of child bearing age. (ie not to mention early term abortions)

All because of the Religious values argument. When for the good of our society these methods should be free and readily available so that as few children as possible are born into households that are not wanting or ready for them.

And then after fighting inexpensive steps that could help prevent these unwanted births, the Pure Religious folks espouse that "the babies are not their responsibility" and that the irresponsible, sinful, immature, often poor and/or stupid Parents should be responsible.  All the while somehow preaching that these irresponsible, sinful, immature, often poor and/or stupid Parents can do right by their children. 

In fact often stating that these irresponsible, sinful, immature, often poor and/or stupid Parents "know better what is right for their kids than the trained Social Workers, Early Ed professionals and K-12 teachers."

I'll never understand how Conservatives rationalize their views...  Either one values and takes responsibility for the life of a baby or they don't.  Ensuring the baby is born and then turning ones back on it has to be one of the least Christian things I can think of...

It is kind of like ensuring the baby is safely in it's car seat, before you let the very drunken Father drive off with it...  It makes no sense.  Thoughts?

Sunday, February 21, 2016

Ohio Limiting Choices for Poor Mothers

Here those "conscientious Conservatives" go again.  Next they will probably follow up by cutting welfare for Mom's that could not get access to birth control, abortions, etc...

As the Liberals say..  The GOP only cares about a child's life while it is in the womb...  After that it is someone else's problem. Thoughts?

DS Ohio Defunds Planned Parenthood
HP "Moderate" Kasich
CNN Kasich signs

Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Good Jobs in MN

Here is an interesting article that I am sure will generate a lot of discussion over there. MP Good Jobs

My first question was if the Household Income Graph included the cash value of the government benefits a low income household can receive in MN. (ie Medicare, TANF, SNAP, EITC, Child Tax Credit, etc)  It is a great graph however I think that is an important detail.


Monday, February 15, 2016

New SCOTUS Appointment?

Personally I think Obama should appointment an individual who is acceptable to the GOP.  Then maybe we would have a truly impartial Justice...  Thoughts?

MinnPost Scalia
NPR 7 Things to Know
Slate Nomination

Wednesday, February 10, 2016

Welfare Spending Increase

From Laurie:

Here is a post with a chart regarding welfare spending I thought you guys might appreciate, as it supports your point of view:

overall spending on social welfare programs has increased by 3x since 1980.

I expect Jerry will argue that spending is actually much higher.

America the Excellent

Below is an interesting exchange from here. MinnPost Rubio's Comments
"All politicians have talking points they repeat. Just think of Sanders’ “1 percent” or Clinton’s emphasizing that she is a woman.  
America is exceptional – the only country in the world that is free, powerful, and wealthy so there is nothing arrogant about pointing this out; self-congratulatory – maybe, but we all like feeling good about ourselves and if we deserve it, there is nothing wrong with this. As for unselfishness – sometimes America behaves like that (Yugoslavia, Libya) but that is exactly what it should not do. On the other hand, in most cases when it tries to defend its own interests, in this case doing the same as all other countries are doing, it does help (unless those countries screw it up) and that is what America can do, again, the only country in the world. Chile is better off now than it would have been with Allende; Iran was better off with the Shah until Carter let Khameini come home, and Iraq would have been much better off if Iraqis used a chance given to them, just like Germany and Japan did.

So when Obama tried to make America like the rest of the world, chaos ensured with more terrorism, more dead people, more violence, etc. Without a strong power for good, everyone fights for the power and nothing good comes out of that. And of course, Rubio’s going against Obama is exactly the same what Clinton is doing mentioning evil Republicans every other sentence." Ilya

"It seems many commenters here believe the USA has used it's political and military force for evil. This is something I just don't understand since we have not conquered anyone in a very long time.

It seems to me that the USA has mostly only intervened where people needed help AND where our national security/interests were at stake. It seems these folks would rather do nothing, which reminds me of 2 great quotes.

"The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing"

"With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility"  G2A
""This is something I just don't understand since we have not conquered anyone in a very long time."

Well, we did fail to conquer Iraq; but not for lack of trying. What else do you call a unilateral invasion of another country? A bunch of Saudi's fly planes into our buildings; but, the Saudi's are our petro buddies so let's find some other Arab we all can hate and we will invade their country.

The single biggest lesson lost on GWB and now on many of the GOP candidates is:

"With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility"

Making the sand glow, banning all Muslims (or just the card carrying ones?), making Paul Wolfowitz an advisor on anything begs:

"Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"" Edward

"Unilateral?  Please remember that though the ruling Dictator did not invite us in, the Kurdish and Shiite majorities did. Also, we came in when asked, we spent a lot of money trying to help them stabilize their country and left when asked. I don't think that counts as conquering by any definition.

Also, please remember the starting point. The allies were required to maintain "No Fly Zones" to protect the citizens of Iraq from their Dictator. There were only 3 choices, all bad:
- Walk away and let Saddam take vengeance.
- Maintain "No Fly Zone" indefinitely.
- Topple Saddam and give the citizens of Iraq a chance at self rule.

Too bad the Iraqi citizens didn't better advantage of the chance we gave them...

Not sure what this meant? "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"

Since everything before this moment is not able to be changed. (ie sunk costs)

What would you have the USA do regarding ISIS, Syria, Iraq, etc starting this moment based on what you have learned from the past?

Remember: Everything in the past is off limits, since it can not be changed..."G2A

Sunday, February 7, 2016

Political Blood Sport

After watching a few minutes of the GOP debate, I have to wonder if the parties do more damage than good with these debates.  I mean they spend so much time attacking each other and bashing America, I just don't get it...

I mean on the Democrat side you have Sanders complaining how terrible our country is and that only a revolution will make this country livable... And you have the GOP folks who seem to think we are living in the WORST of times. No wonder we have polarization, both sides do nothing about complain and vilify the other.

I vote that they all move to a different better country that is in better shape than America.  Thoughts?

CNN GOP Debate Takeaways
CNN GOP Debate Attacks
CNN Sanders Continues Attack
CNN Clinton Speaking Fees $153 MILLION

Thursday, February 4, 2016

Political Polarization

Eric has posted an interesting article.

This comment resonated with me:
""We" are polarized? Good points, Mr. Black. But I think you mean to say that "those who think and feel intensely about politics" are polarized. What percent of the US population is this? I suggest that it's a small minority - though it might be a majority of those who follow MinnPost." Tate
I think that Tate has a good point in that most American's are somewhat clueless about policy and politics.  Worse yet they are so busy that they live via sound bites. Which means that the far LEFT and far RIGHT media have a HUGE impact.  And Lord knows that neither side is preaching logic, negotiation, tolerance, balance, etc.

I you doubt me check out Rush, Glenn Beck, Daily KosMother Jones, etc.  If you listen to one side for too long, you will soon swear the opposing side consists of evil self centered illogical liars who are out to destroy the world as we know it...  Which of course is silly since the vast majority of American citizens love the USA and would prefer to not DESTROY it...  Thoughts?

CNN: Conservative Media's Influence

Monday, February 1, 2016

Abortion and Bodily Autonomy

Our newest commenter Anon asked that we discuss the linked article. And yes I tried to get them to select a more unique name... :-)

In summary the author is wondering if the right to life is so important, why aren't all of us citizens required to register on donor lists and required  to give our kidney if necessary to save lives? And why then do women have to sacrifice their time, money, body, possibly health, etc to save someone else's life???   Hines Abortion and Bodily Autonomy

I the author's words:
I’m not going to argue about when a group of cells transforms into a human being, whether that happens at conception or birth or some nebulous time in between.

But if the “right to life” is so important, why don’t we have mandatory organ registries in this country? Why isn’t everyone required to have their blood type and other information entered into a national database? Why don’t we require living organ donations, since most of us have some redundant organs we could give with no significant loss to our own quality of life?

Why have we so enshrined our right to control our own bodies … unless you happen to be a woman?
Of course I think it is a silly comparison. The government mandating a person care for the life that they willingly and/of their  own free will created, as compared to being mandated to sacrifice for a perfect stranger.

It is like saying that one must feed all dogs, just because you own and are required to feed your dog. Thoughts?