I noticed this page two-type story this morning. The Trump 2020 election national press secretary....Kayleigh McEnany....spoke up on Alyssa Milano (actress)....saying that women (probably men as well) simply "tune out the Trump critic and that Hollywood's opinions on political issues are irrelevant."
Maybe a decade ago, the opinions of Hollywood types might have been worth something. In the past decade, the public has generally tired of the juvenile behavior often seen with politics.
If you are trying to hype your opinion based on your Hollywood status now.....you probably are burning a bridge or two to your career....where a quarter to half of the general public have zero interest in products you produce.
Saturday, 29 June 2019
Friday, 28 June 2019
One Odd Feature of the Two Debates
Maybe it's just me....but after you look at the twenty folks up there...did you kinda notice that that there are only three candidates from the south....and all three are from Texas?
Beto, Williamson, and Castro. Oh, and there is a virtual unknown mayor from Miramar.
Southern voters? Well, here's the thing, there's not a lot to attract you over to Joe Biden, Bernie, or Warren.
So would you look at Beto as a possibility? Maybe.
Hurting the southern vote situation? I think the VP is absolutely destined to be the loser candidate from Georgia....to help balance black and female voters.
Beto, Williamson, and Castro. Oh, and there is a virtual unknown mayor from Miramar.
Southern voters? Well, here's the thing, there's not a lot to attract you over to Joe Biden, Bernie, or Warren.
So would you look at Beto as a possibility? Maybe.
Hurting the southern vote situation? I think the VP is absolutely destined to be the loser candidate from Georgia....to help balance black and female voters.
Its Broke and We Want To Fix It
After viewing roughly 75 minutes of the first debate, and maybe 60 minutes of the second debate, there is this one trend that continues on with the candidates....the system is broke and we want to fix it. I see five essential problems with this theme:
1. Most of what they are picking....has been broke not just for the Trump era (since 2016)....but broke for years and even decades. Yes, they are talking about things that were broke in the Obama era, the Bush era, the Clinton era, the Reagan era, and even back into the Carter/Ford era. Throughout these periods, the House and Senate shifted back and forth. Each had a chance to fix problems, and some even came to resolve the issue with a 'fix'.....then came later to realize that the 'fix' actually made the problem into something bigger and worse.
2. The use of the term 'real' change? This was used a couple of times in the debates. Are we talking real change versus fake change? Is real change even a measurable accomplishment?
3. Why didn't a lot of broke things get fixed in the 2008-to-2016 era under President Obama?
4. If you add up the fixing 'cost'.....it gets up into the tens of trillions of dollars. Where exactly will that money be found? If you are saying new taxes, and it'll be taken from the companies.....will their product costs shift upwards, and be simply delivered to the customers?
5. If you go down among Americans and ask them about non-government 'things' which are broke.....they will list out hundreds of things. The NCAA bowl game process is broke. The way that cable TV bundling is done, and you are forced to have CNN in the basic package....is probably broke. Parking fees are broke. The security process at airports is broke. The list goes on and on. An average American will tell you about a hundred things which bother them.....which are broke, and there's just not much going to happen to resolve that.
Sorry, but we've kinda earned the title of a broke nation.....and apparently are fairly happy with broke things.
1. Most of what they are picking....has been broke not just for the Trump era (since 2016)....but broke for years and even decades. Yes, they are talking about things that were broke in the Obama era, the Bush era, the Clinton era, the Reagan era, and even back into the Carter/Ford era. Throughout these periods, the House and Senate shifted back and forth. Each had a chance to fix problems, and some even came to resolve the issue with a 'fix'.....then came later to realize that the 'fix' actually made the problem into something bigger and worse.
2. The use of the term 'real' change? This was used a couple of times in the debates. Are we talking real change versus fake change? Is real change even a measurable accomplishment?
3. Why didn't a lot of broke things get fixed in the 2008-to-2016 era under President Obama?
4. If you add up the fixing 'cost'.....it gets up into the tens of trillions of dollars. Where exactly will that money be found? If you are saying new taxes, and it'll be taken from the companies.....will their product costs shift upwards, and be simply delivered to the customers?
5. If you go down among Americans and ask them about non-government 'things' which are broke.....they will list out hundreds of things. The NCAA bowl game process is broke. The way that cable TV bundling is done, and you are forced to have CNN in the basic package....is probably broke. Parking fees are broke. The security process at airports is broke. The list goes on and on. An average American will tell you about a hundred things which bother them.....which are broke, and there's just not much going to happen to resolve that.
Sorry, but we've kinda earned the title of a broke nation.....and apparently are fairly happy with broke things.
That Two Minutes of Beto-Spanish
During the first debate....for a few minutes, Beto switched over from English to Spanish....to demonstrate that he could talk their language. I questioned the nature of this.
You can imagine some guys sitting at home, and suddenly thinking....what the heck....did 'Junior' flip the channel over to some Latino network, or did the cable company hit the wrong switch.
But this brings me around to the big question....do we need an 'Amigo-President' or 'Gringo-President'? And if we need one....shouldn't he be actually Spanish or Latino, and NOT some fake Irish-American guy who does a Latino act?
If Beto wins? Some big push would occur where every school in America would start a Spanish class, and guys would be sitting around the water-cooler at work.....talking about their 'Novia' (girlfriend), or their puta (slut).
Would President Beto show up for appearances with a cowboy hat, and boots?
Would Blacks be able to adapt to a Latino-nation?
For entertainment reasons, I kinda like the idea of bringing the Amigo-President to DC.
You can imagine some guys sitting at home, and suddenly thinking....what the heck....did 'Junior' flip the channel over to some Latino network, or did the cable company hit the wrong switch.
But this brings me around to the big question....do we need an 'Amigo-President' or 'Gringo-President'? And if we need one....shouldn't he be actually Spanish or Latino, and NOT some fake Irish-American guy who does a Latino act?
If Beto wins? Some big push would occur where every school in America would start a Spanish class, and guys would be sitting around the water-cooler at work.....talking about their 'Novia' (girlfriend), or their puta (slut).
Would President Beto show up for appearances with a cowboy hat, and boots?
Would Blacks be able to adapt to a Latino-nation?
For entertainment reasons, I kinda like the idea of bringing the Amigo-President to DC.
My View of the 2nd Democratic Debate
I'll offer these nine observations:
1. The more entertaining moment was after Mayor Pete did his explanation over the police-shooting in South Bend....defending his actions....then Swalwell jumped right in to suggest he'd up and fire the police chief right away. Mayor Pete had a pretty nasty look on his face....as if to say 'Buddy, don't get me deeper into trouble'.
2. Winner of the night? Andrew Yang. Limited exposure, but he gave five-star answers and impressed me.
3. Weirdest commentary of the evening....some two-minute chat by Mayor Pete on the Republicans and religious groups.
4. Harris and the 'caged kids'? They were caged in the Obama era....what'd she do about that?
5. This talk at some point about moving from regular healthcare to Medicare-for-all? I don't think it really sold well, and some folks who are happy....won't be happy with this new gimmick.
6. Winners of the evening? Yang, Biden, and Hickenlooper. Bernie and Harris were OK, but didn't seem to have any 'pep'.
7. It just seemed to be a series of sound-bytes, and I felt drained out with the format, and ten candidates....by the 50 minute point.
8. You can probably whittle the group of 21 candidates down to around seven folks at this point.
9. The only one on the stage that really looked like a statesman.....was Joe Biden. It was painfully obvious.
So here in the end, the question for me....can I stand another double round of debates at the end of July? I have my doubts.
1. The more entertaining moment was after Mayor Pete did his explanation over the police-shooting in South Bend....defending his actions....then Swalwell jumped right in to suggest he'd up and fire the police chief right away. Mayor Pete had a pretty nasty look on his face....as if to say 'Buddy, don't get me deeper into trouble'.
2. Winner of the night? Andrew Yang. Limited exposure, but he gave five-star answers and impressed me.
3. Weirdest commentary of the evening....some two-minute chat by Mayor Pete on the Republicans and religious groups.
4. Harris and the 'caged kids'? They were caged in the Obama era....what'd she do about that?
5. This talk at some point about moving from regular healthcare to Medicare-for-all? I don't think it really sold well, and some folks who are happy....won't be happy with this new gimmick.
6. Winners of the evening? Yang, Biden, and Hickenlooper. Bernie and Harris were OK, but didn't seem to have any 'pep'.
7. It just seemed to be a series of sound-bytes, and I felt drained out with the format, and ten candidates....by the 50 minute point.
8. You can probably whittle the group of 21 candidates down to around seven folks at this point.
9. The only one on the stage that really looked like a statesman.....was Joe Biden. It was painfully obvious.
So here in the end, the question for me....can I stand another double round of debates at the end of July? I have my doubts.
Thursday, 27 June 2019
My View of the First Democratic Debate
I sat and watched about 75 minutes of the two-hour debate. I'll make these nine comments:
1. At some point early on (maybe 8 minutes into it), Beto responds at first in English, then flips over to Spanish. I have no idea what he said.....but he was appealing to Latino voters. I thought it was stupid, but obviously he felt otherwise.
2 Moderator-wise? Too many. But having ten folks up there....was way too many as well.
3. Boring. Along about minute 45....I started to lose interest.
4. Lot of free stuff. Tax increase to pay for this? Into the trillions.
5. The weakest of the evening? Klobuchar, Castro, and de Blasio. They should stand down and quit at this point.
6. Surprise of the evening? This John Delaney guy. His comment on Medicare-For-All? Absolutely correct.
7. Did ten folks up on the stage screw up the debate? YES. I would limit it to four max.
8. From this group, the only three that I see advancing with potential are Warren, Beto, and Delaney. None of the remainder were even decent VP candidates.
9. The chief topic of the evening.....over and over....is that the system is 'broke'. After hearing this for the 20th time in the first hour....I sat and thought over the chatter. If it's broke....it's been broke longer than 2.5 years, and maybe longer than 20 years. This triggered me to wonder.....who broke it and how did they break it?
It pains me now....to consider that in 24 hours.....I have to watch a minimum of another hour of a marginal debate. At least I'll get a chance to see Mayor Pete once more.
1. At some point early on (maybe 8 minutes into it), Beto responds at first in English, then flips over to Spanish. I have no idea what he said.....but he was appealing to Latino voters. I thought it was stupid, but obviously he felt otherwise.
2 Moderator-wise? Too many. But having ten folks up there....was way too many as well.
3. Boring. Along about minute 45....I started to lose interest.
4. Lot of free stuff. Tax increase to pay for this? Into the trillions.
5. The weakest of the evening? Klobuchar, Castro, and de Blasio. They should stand down and quit at this point.
6. Surprise of the evening? This John Delaney guy. His comment on Medicare-For-All? Absolutely correct.
7. Did ten folks up on the stage screw up the debate? YES. I would limit it to four max.
8. From this group, the only three that I see advancing with potential are Warren, Beto, and Delaney. None of the remainder were even decent VP candidates.
9. The chief topic of the evening.....over and over....is that the system is 'broke'. After hearing this for the 20th time in the first hour....I sat and thought over the chatter. If it's broke....it's been broke longer than 2.5 years, and maybe longer than 20 years. This triggered me to wonder.....who broke it and how did they break it?
It pains me now....to consider that in 24 hours.....I have to watch a minimum of another hour of a marginal debate. At least I'll get a chance to see Mayor Pete once more.
Tuesday, 25 June 2019
The Problem With Wealth Inequity
I noticed a couple of dimwit billionaires had some conference meeting today, and they hyped up that something out of the Presidential race (on top of reparations, relief for student debt, save-the-planet-carbon taxes, etc)....should be done to hand more money out because of wealth inequality.
There are three essential things that bother me when this discussion comes up: (1) the government is always seen as the 'middle-man' to get the wealth and redistribute the wealth, (2) there are tremendous odds that when you hand twenty-odd billion dollars out.....that it'll be immediately spent to drive folks with serious wealth inequality further into debt and cause increased inequality, and (3) the likely tool to take wealth is a tax.....which virtually every company and billion (and special interest group) has zero interest in a simple 10-percent minimum tax situation.
If you add up everything that the Democratic contenders have chatted about in the past couple of months....it goes up into the two or three trillion dollar range. The increased taxation? Once you bring this up with most middle-class Americans, they freak out.
It bothers me to some degree that you'd go to George....who mostly just lives with his girlfriend who earns a real paycheck for nursing forty hours a week), admitting that George hasn't worked a steady job in five years, and then via some wealth inequality situation.....you'd hand George a check for $1,200 each month. What'd George do to earn that $1,200? Nothing....except being an adult and suffering from wealth inequality. What will George spend the $1,200 on? Mostly booze, drugs, and video-gaming.....or perhaps hand some 2nd girlfriend $300 a month for special 'favors'.
I'd look at this game and basically quit working at age 35....just let the government hand me my wealth inequality check and hope this pyramid-scheme lasts for at least fifty years.
There are three essential things that bother me when this discussion comes up: (1) the government is always seen as the 'middle-man' to get the wealth and redistribute the wealth, (2) there are tremendous odds that when you hand twenty-odd billion dollars out.....that it'll be immediately spent to drive folks with serious wealth inequality further into debt and cause increased inequality, and (3) the likely tool to take wealth is a tax.....which virtually every company and billion (and special interest group) has zero interest in a simple 10-percent minimum tax situation.
If you add up everything that the Democratic contenders have chatted about in the past couple of months....it goes up into the two or three trillion dollar range. The increased taxation? Once you bring this up with most middle-class Americans, they freak out.
It bothers me to some degree that you'd go to George....who mostly just lives with his girlfriend who earns a real paycheck for nursing forty hours a week), admitting that George hasn't worked a steady job in five years, and then via some wealth inequality situation.....you'd hand George a check for $1,200 each month. What'd George do to earn that $1,200? Nothing....except being an adult and suffering from wealth inequality. What will George spend the $1,200 on? Mostly booze, drugs, and video-gaming.....or perhaps hand some 2nd girlfriend $300 a month for special 'favors'.
I'd look at this game and basically quit working at age 35....just let the government hand me my wealth inequality check and hope this pyramid-scheme lasts for at least fifty years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)