Has anyone else been asked at least five times this week who they are going to be voting for? Has anyone else been asked repeatedly if Ted Cruz is eligible to run for president? How about whether Bernie Sanders has any real chance of winning the presidency? If so, we have something in common. If not, why not? I mean, isn't it time to play "Presidential Election Sweepstakes?"
In order of the questions I have been repeatedly asked - 1. I have no idea who I will be voting for president in November. 2. Yes, I believe Ted Cruz is eligible to be elected for president, 3. No, I do not think under the current climate of hyper-partisanship that Bernie Sanders can be elected to the White House (apologies to all of those insistent Bernie can win). Why?
Until a clear candidate articulates what they will actually be able to do as President, I will keep "my powder dry" and wait (like most Americans) on my decision until we are much closer to election day (and after the respective parties decide their actual nominee - to do otherwise is pure speculation and a waste of brainpower). Remember folks, I an an independent living in a Closed Primary State. As a result, I am unable to vote in the party primaries. Second, I believe Ted Cruz is eligible to serve as President because under the most commonly acceptable interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution - having at least one parent with American citizenship makes his citizenship certain. I maintained the same stance on Obama's eligibility (can't say the same for Cruz supporters though). But Cruz is now confronting evidence that he filed false campaign finance reports from his Senate campaign. He said the first case (Goldman Sachs) was just an oversight but now it has been shown he failed to disclose an additional loan (Citibank). (See:http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/report-cruz-failed-disclose-2nd-loan-2012-senate-36327179). And why the hell can't Bernie win? Because the self-admitted
"Democratic-Socialist" seems content to take the mantle of what most Americans (with the help of cynical media and the now entrenched narratives created under Reagan) cannot fathom. I mean, socialists are communists right (not really, but do Americans care to know the difference)? America will never be a socialist country (but see Social Security, public roads, law enforcement, fire protection, etc.) because we embrace capitalism. Except ask any GOP ideologue and they will claim corporate welfare is good, but welfare to those that actually need it - Anti-American! Is this my belief? Of course not, but it IS what most Americans have been made to believe and therefore, I do not think Bernie in this era can be elected as a result. Hell, Theodore Roosevelt himself couldn't get elected in this era!
So who should we vote for? Hillary is a liar damn it! What makes Cruz lying about his political origins and the sources of his financial support acceptable? What about Rubio who repeatedly lied about his parents "refugee" status escaping Castro's Cuba (they left Cuba years before Castro came to power), his documented misuse of Florida GOP credit cards, and his failure to show up at work in the United States Senate for close to two years? Are these okay? Why is it okay for Rubio to spend most of his time fundraising for the presidency instead of representing the citizens of Florida in the Senate where he was elected to serve? I'll lay off the other GOP candidates because they currently are not relevant to the discussion (sorry GOP supporters, but you have to admit, being on the debate "undercard" has to be somewhat embarrassing (but what a book deal they shall secure)! What about Trump? How can anyone take a man serious that claims he will do for America what the Constitution clearly says he cannot? Oh that's right, if elected, Trump will figure that out "on the job." What really disturbs me are the calls by many GOP candidates to amend the Constitution while also claiming Obama has "trampled" the document. Ironic isn't it that claims of Constitutional abuse can be cured by the GOP by simply ignoring the Framers' stated intentions behind separation of powers, checks and balances and Federalism itself by calling for the destruction of the very same document all-together! (See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/12/30/rubio-endorses-a-new-constitutional-convention-winning-praise-from-the-right/ and http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/27/politics/ted-cruz-supreme-court-gay-marriage-obamacare/). Are they pandering or what?
Yes, over 210 years of Constitutional Authority under Judicial Review and Stare Decisis is to be cast aside because some alleged "patriots" simply can't stomach the system America has enjoyed since the days of Washington, Hamilton, Madison and Adams. On top of this effort, they claim they also want to force the Federal Government to be required to balance the Federal Budget! I have a better solution. Ignore amending the Constitution and instead, have Congress tell every state that all federal revenue sharing to the them will be suspended for ten years in order to balance the budget and severely reduce the deficit! They can do that if they truly wanted to balance the budget, yet to do so would surely lead to bankrupting the states that rely upon federal financial support. More importantly, Congress already holds all of the power to balance the budget, not the President (Article I, Section 7, US Constitution). So while the GOP controls both the House and the Senate, why won't they exercise the power and authority they already have to fix the budget deficit? Why not? Because to do so would take away their traditional (and cynical) political arguments that the President is always at fault for financial issues (unless their "man" is in the Oval Office). Partisanship always overrides reality. Unfortunately, the public does not understand that the Media and political parties have lied to them - and continue to do so.
Hey Rubin, all you do is bitch about the GOP - where is your angst for the Democrats? Like I said, when the nominees are determined, I will focus more on the actual candidates (and I am unaware of any Democrat calling for an overhaul of the Constitution). But what about Executive Actions, aren't they illegal? Actually no, they are not (unless and until the Supreme Court says so - not partisan pundits and media). Until then, the GOP candidates are the ones making outrageous claims with equally outrageous solutions. "America Sucks" seems to be their mantra. What happened to being a proud American? Tell the ignorant enough that things are awful, and they will begin to believe it. Just look at the nut jobs occupying the Federal Wildlife Refuge in Oregon - occupying with the force of weapons! Do Americans actually understand what Sedition is? If approached to leave the Refuge, would the occupiers choose to raise their weapons and "fight it out?" Does anyone else see the irony? Occupy Wall Street is still vilified as a radical communist and Anti-American plot, yet armed occupiers of Federal installations willing to use violent resistance is somehow "patriotic?" Where are the politicians to condemn this action? Too afraid to speak up? If they are (and they obviously seem to be) then how does anyone truly expect them to be a leader in the White House?
So as the election games continue to unfold, can we as Americans please expect more from our wannabe presidents? Can we expect and demand they actually discuss what they can do from the Oval Office under Article II and Custom and Usage instead of complaints that include fictitious arguments that America is weak and being destroyed? Those claiming America is in ruins are the ones pushing an agenda to alter the Constitution and the American way of life. Oh yes, the Democrats want to amend the Constitution as well - except they want to do so to limit the ability to use unlimited "dark money" from influencing elections and public policy in Congress (and many moderate Republicans (yes, they do still exist) want to do so as well (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_money). Why can't we expect presidential aspirants to outline the specific programs they wish to establish instead of implementing scare tactics that always includes dividing Americans by political ideology?
As Founding Father and Framer Alexander Hamilton once wrote; "The inquiry constantly is what will please, not what will benefit the people. In such a government there can be nothing but temporary expedient, fickleness and folly." When will Americans wake up and realize that hyper-partisan based elections promise what will please some, but not serve the better interests of our great nation? Until that happens, we will all fall victim to "fickleness and folly." Have a great week!
In order of the questions I have been repeatedly asked - 1. I have no idea who I will be voting for president in November. 2. Yes, I believe Ted Cruz is eligible to be elected for president, 3. No, I do not think under the current climate of hyper-partisanship that Bernie Sanders can be elected to the White House (apologies to all of those insistent Bernie can win). Why?
Until a clear candidate articulates what they will actually be able to do as President, I will keep "my powder dry" and wait (like most Americans) on my decision until we are much closer to election day (and after the respective parties decide their actual nominee - to do otherwise is pure speculation and a waste of brainpower). Remember folks, I an an independent living in a Closed Primary State. As a result, I am unable to vote in the party primaries. Second, I believe Ted Cruz is eligible to serve as President because under the most commonly acceptable interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution - having at least one parent with American citizenship makes his citizenship certain. I maintained the same stance on Obama's eligibility (can't say the same for Cruz supporters though). But Cruz is now confronting evidence that he filed false campaign finance reports from his Senate campaign. He said the first case (Goldman Sachs) was just an oversight but now it has been shown he failed to disclose an additional loan (Citibank). (See:http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/report-cruz-failed-disclose-2nd-loan-2012-senate-36327179). And why the hell can't Bernie win? Because the self-admitted
"Democratic-Socialist" seems content to take the mantle of what most Americans (with the help of cynical media and the now entrenched narratives created under Reagan) cannot fathom. I mean, socialists are communists right (not really, but do Americans care to know the difference)? America will never be a socialist country (but see Social Security, public roads, law enforcement, fire protection, etc.) because we embrace capitalism. Except ask any GOP ideologue and they will claim corporate welfare is good, but welfare to those that actually need it - Anti-American! Is this my belief? Of course not, but it IS what most Americans have been made to believe and therefore, I do not think Bernie in this era can be elected as a result. Hell, Theodore Roosevelt himself couldn't get elected in this era!
So who should we vote for? Hillary is a liar damn it! What makes Cruz lying about his political origins and the sources of his financial support acceptable? What about Rubio who repeatedly lied about his parents "refugee" status escaping Castro's Cuba (they left Cuba years before Castro came to power), his documented misuse of Florida GOP credit cards, and his failure to show up at work in the United States Senate for close to two years? Are these okay? Why is it okay for Rubio to spend most of his time fundraising for the presidency instead of representing the citizens of Florida in the Senate where he was elected to serve? I'll lay off the other GOP candidates because they currently are not relevant to the discussion (sorry GOP supporters, but you have to admit, being on the debate "undercard" has to be somewhat embarrassing (but what a book deal they shall secure)! What about Trump? How can anyone take a man serious that claims he will do for America what the Constitution clearly says he cannot? Oh that's right, if elected, Trump will figure that out "on the job." What really disturbs me are the calls by many GOP candidates to amend the Constitution while also claiming Obama has "trampled" the document. Ironic isn't it that claims of Constitutional abuse can be cured by the GOP by simply ignoring the Framers' stated intentions behind separation of powers, checks and balances and Federalism itself by calling for the destruction of the very same document all-together! (See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/12/30/rubio-endorses-a-new-constitutional-convention-winning-praise-from-the-right/ and http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/27/politics/ted-cruz-supreme-court-gay-marriage-obamacare/). Are they pandering or what?
Yes, over 210 years of Constitutional Authority under Judicial Review and Stare Decisis is to be cast aside because some alleged "patriots" simply can't stomach the system America has enjoyed since the days of Washington, Hamilton, Madison and Adams. On top of this effort, they claim they also want to force the Federal Government to be required to balance the Federal Budget! I have a better solution. Ignore amending the Constitution and instead, have Congress tell every state that all federal revenue sharing to the them will be suspended for ten years in order to balance the budget and severely reduce the deficit! They can do that if they truly wanted to balance the budget, yet to do so would surely lead to bankrupting the states that rely upon federal financial support. More importantly, Congress already holds all of the power to balance the budget, not the President (Article I, Section 7, US Constitution). So while the GOP controls both the House and the Senate, why won't they exercise the power and authority they already have to fix the budget deficit? Why not? Because to do so would take away their traditional (and cynical) political arguments that the President is always at fault for financial issues (unless their "man" is in the Oval Office). Partisanship always overrides reality. Unfortunately, the public does not understand that the Media and political parties have lied to them - and continue to do so.
Hey Rubin, all you do is bitch about the GOP - where is your angst for the Democrats? Like I said, when the nominees are determined, I will focus more on the actual candidates (and I am unaware of any Democrat calling for an overhaul of the Constitution). But what about Executive Actions, aren't they illegal? Actually no, they are not (unless and until the Supreme Court says so - not partisan pundits and media). Until then, the GOP candidates are the ones making outrageous claims with equally outrageous solutions. "America Sucks" seems to be their mantra. What happened to being a proud American? Tell the ignorant enough that things are awful, and they will begin to believe it. Just look at the nut jobs occupying the Federal Wildlife Refuge in Oregon - occupying with the force of weapons! Do Americans actually understand what Sedition is? If approached to leave the Refuge, would the occupiers choose to raise their weapons and "fight it out?" Does anyone else see the irony? Occupy Wall Street is still vilified as a radical communist and Anti-American plot, yet armed occupiers of Federal installations willing to use violent resistance is somehow "patriotic?" Where are the politicians to condemn this action? Too afraid to speak up? If they are (and they obviously seem to be) then how does anyone truly expect them to be a leader in the White House?
So as the election games continue to unfold, can we as Americans please expect more from our wannabe presidents? Can we expect and demand they actually discuss what they can do from the Oval Office under Article II and Custom and Usage instead of complaints that include fictitious arguments that America is weak and being destroyed? Those claiming America is in ruins are the ones pushing an agenda to alter the Constitution and the American way of life. Oh yes, the Democrats want to amend the Constitution as well - except they want to do so to limit the ability to use unlimited "dark money" from influencing elections and public policy in Congress (and many moderate Republicans (yes, they do still exist) want to do so as well (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_money). Why can't we expect presidential aspirants to outline the specific programs they wish to establish instead of implementing scare tactics that always includes dividing Americans by political ideology?
As Founding Father and Framer Alexander Hamilton once wrote; "The inquiry constantly is what will please, not what will benefit the people. In such a government there can be nothing but temporary expedient, fickleness and folly." When will Americans wake up and realize that hyper-partisan based elections promise what will please some, but not serve the better interests of our great nation? Until that happens, we will all fall victim to "fickleness and folly." Have a great week!
RSS Feed
