Presidential Predictions: Part Two

     The scenery in Washington, D.C. is changing rapidly.  As predicted in this blog on January 1, movement already has begun to dismantle Obamacare and Donald Trump’s pre-inaugural parade is set to the marshal sounds of saber rattling from North Korea.  Though Trump has not caused European leaders too much heartburn yet, Scottish Sunday Herald writer Damien Love hilariously satirized the upcoming BBC broadcast of the inauguration as the debut of a new “Twilight Zone” series.

     Other administrations would organize a cogent response to these events; but there will be none.  So far the next administration is saying WikiLeaks was never used as a propaganda machine, the CIA disseminates unflattering leaks, Putin doesn’t order hacks, and the sky is falling.  Here’s a look at what we may expect from a few of the players on Trump’s national security and communications teams.

National Insecurity

     Even prior to the January 6 release of the Intelligence Community’s declassified “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections” report, Trump was assaulting directors with disparaging remarks about their competence.  Days later when BuzzFeed.com published a 35-page opposition research dossier containing unverified allegations linking him to Russia, Trump pointedly blamed the U.S. Intelligence Community and likened the event to smear campaigns in “Nazi Germany.”  FBI director James Comey, CIA director John Brennan, NSA director Michael Rogers, and National Intelligence director James Clapper denounced Trump’s statements and cautioned him to use restraint.

     Brennan stated: “There is no interest in undermining the president elect. Our responsibility is to understand dangers on the world stage…”  He also said, “I don't think he has a full appreciation of Russian capabilities, Russia's intentions.”

     Soon, the duty of informing Trump on these dangers will be the task of others.  Trump’s pick for the next CIA director is Kansas representative Michael Pompeo.  To his credit, Pompeo is a bright, driven man who passed at the top of his class at West Point in 1986 and served as editor of the Harvard Law Review while earning his law degree at the University.  Pompeo founded Thayer Aerospace and Private Security, and later became president of oilfield equipment company Sentry International.

     Pompeo is active in the conservative Tea Party movement, is a climate denier, denounced Obamacare, and was highly critical of the Obama administration's decision to close the CIA's secret prisons (“black sites”), and its adherence to anti-torture laws.  Pompeo also is highly offended by whistle-blower Edward Snowden and the reforms that followed his disclosures.

     In January 2016, the Wall Street Journal quoted Pompeo as saying: “Congress should pass a law re-establishing collection of all metadata, and combining it with publicly available financial and lifestyle information into a comprehensive, searchable database. Legal and bureaucratic impediments to surveillance should be removed. That includes Presidential Policy Directive-28, which bestows privacy rights on foreigners and imposes burdensome requirements to justify data collection.”

     Wait…  What?! Let’s look at that quote again. “Legal and bureaucratic impediments to surveillance should be removed…” including the presidential policy directive “which bestows privacy rights on foreigners and imposes burdensome requirements to justify data collection.”

     Yes, he said that out loud.

     The incoming administration may not “fully appreciate” the threat Russia presents, but Trump’s security selections seem to have a common interest in extracting information from citizens and combatants by using the most invasive means available.  According to John Sifton, deputy Washington director of Human Rights Watch, Trump’s selection for National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, also “has exhibited basic contempt for international law, including the Geneva Conventions and laws prohibiting torture.”

     Flynn was tapped to serve as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) for the Obama administration in 2012.  The administration sited hard-line views on Islam and a contentious leadership style as reasons for his dismissal from that post in 2014.  Flynn, famously tweeted “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL…” (Feb 26, 2016, @GenFlynn).  He has increasingly maintained that all American allies should be marshaled to fight a “world war” against ISIS.  In 2016 Flynn reportedly accepted payment from the Russian state-run media machine RT to dine at an extravagant gala with Vladimir Putin.  Photos of Flynn at that dinner were used by the Kremlin as part of their own propaganda campaign.

     Senators should take a serious look at this guy before rubber-stamping approval.  This is THE PERSON who will provide the last (paranoid) whisper in the president-elect’s ear regarding national security issues and his decisions.

Spicer’s Not Nicer

    The president-elect chose Republican National Committee communications director and chief strategist Sean Spicer to serve as White House press secretary.  Spicer leads the team which now includes Hope Hicks (director of strategic communications), Dan Scavino (director of social media), and Jason Miller (communications director).  Spicer, who has a flair for combative and contentious relationships with the press, already is leaning toward breaking tradition and parting ways with daily press briefings.

     In December, Spicer told Fox’s Megyn Kelly: “…I don’t know that it needs to be daily. I don’t know that they need to be on camera. And I think that’s a view shared by a lot of former White House press secretaries, a view by some in the media, in fact, that the White House press briefings have become somewhat of a spectacle.”

     Under ideal circumstances, being a press secretary to any elected official is a stressful job.  Stuff happens.  You can write a speech and the boss can toss it aside and shoot from the lip, leaving you feeling like the person who follows the horses in the parade.  Given Trump’s penchant for midnight Tweets and (ahem) creativity, I would not want to face the White House press corps every day either.  However, daily briefings provide information and a sense of transparency for the press and the public.

     Media outlets like CNN already are accusing Trump with “gas lighting” the public by meeting the facts of his audio- and video-taped statements with claims these events never happened.  Clearly, if the press secretary doesn’t show up for a media briefing, Trump’s reality will be akin to a shimmering oasis in a waterless fact desert.

     Due to the demands of this job, White House press secretaries seldom survive a full, four-year term no matter who is President.  But, people will go the extra mile if they believe in the product they need to sell to the media.  I would be willing to bet hard money that every member of this crew already has a letter of resignation prepared.  The press office should install a revolving door now.

I Predict

     This will be the most paranoid and least transparent administration America has ever known.  If Trump fails to arrest his Twitter habit, he will be solely responsible for international incidents with countries that can back up their upset with nuclear readiness.

     What’s more, when we hear about it, the press will be quoting (maybe accurate, may paranoid) unnamed sources who contacted them without authorization from the Trump White House because they are freaked out and they love their country (and they might be drunk dialing).

Presidential Predictions: Part One

Like many Americans, at the dawn of a new year I am feeling anxious about our future and how our new leader’s decisions may impact the rest of the world.  One does not need a degree in political science to predict the obstructionist practices of Congress witnessed throughout the Obama administration will continue.  In 2017, I guarantee the color of the road blocks will be blue rather than red.

A great deal of attention will be focused on the Senate in coming weeks as they debate the confirmations of Trump’s cabinet selections.  The words “nepotism,” “campaign donor,” and “no experience” will be prominent in these discussions.  While giving loyalists jobs is nothing new in Washington, serious consideration regarding the résumés of Trump’s picks is imperative.

Here are some of my thoughts and predictions.

Law and Disorder

One of the first things Trump likely will do upon inauguration is reverse President Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals executive order. Under that order, approximately 740,000 undocumented immigrants brought to America as children were granted work permits allowing them to remain in the U.S. while they sought citizenship.  If Trump takes the tough line, hundreds of thousands of young adults will be thrown out of work and many will lose educational funding.  Mexican and Canadian officials have been bracing for an influx of returning ex-patriots and immigrants who have sought political and religious asylum in America.

Trump’s claims that DACA is “illegal” will be heard in federal court and he believes Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions can navigate the murky waters of civil rights laws as U.S. Attorney General.  Many in the Senate reportedly disagree with the suitability of this nominee.  Historically, Sessions has been a proponent of reduced funding for tough-on-crime programs and strict immigration enforcement.  However, it is Sessions’ historical racial insensitivity that blocked his nomination as a federal judge in 1986.  During those hearings a parade of legal professionals offered testimony that Sessions was a bigot.  One African-American prosecutor, Thomas H. Figures, stated Sessions called him “boy” and reportedly “admonished me to ‘be careful what you say to white folks’.”  While Sessions may have evolved over the past 40 years, this record will be reopened in the Senate approval process.

No doubt, some decisions regarding civil rights will be brought before the Supreme Court for Constitutional and procedural interpretation.  And who will fill the seat left vacant by the demise of Judge Antonin Scalia?   Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, has been awaiting Senate confirmation for 11 months.  It is likely that if Democrats remain calm, Garland will win approval.  There is no indication that Trump has actually decided to offer his own appointee for the open position at this time although, in May, Trump compiled a list of 11 conservative, white, predominantly male candidates for public consideration.

One would hope Trump is too busy with other matters to intrude in the Supreme Court confirmation process; but, he has demonstrated his ego does not rest.  I predict widespread public protest beginning on January 20 and continuing for some time.

Healthcare

Throughout his campaign, Trump repeatedly said he would repeal the Affordable Care Act.  His pick for Health and Human Services Secretary is an indication he was serious.  Six-term Congressman Tom Price (R-GA) is an orthopedic surgeon who led opposition to the Affordable Care Act, saying (aud nauseum) that the law interferes with the ability of patients and medical providers to make medical decisions.  Granted, this is an imperfect law; however, rescinding the law in its entirety is not only unlikely but also would be hugely unpopular to people with pre-existing conditions who rely upon its protection.  ACA requires that healthy younger adults who probably would not otherwise purchase health care coverage do so.  This mandate is designed to keep costs lower for the most vulnerable members of society.

International Relations

This writer is very uneasy about the impact Trump and his cabinet selections will have on international relations.

Trump’s choice for Commerce Secretary is Wilbur Ross, a billionaire investor in steel, coal, textiles and automotive operations.  Ross is a strong proponent of privatization and has repeatedly ignored labor concerns and the kinds of serious safety issues that resulted in the Sago mine disaster which killed 12 people.  Ross wants to impose high tariffs on Chinese imports and break the “bondage” of “bad trade deals.”

Expect delays in the potential confirmation of Secretary of State nominee and current Exxon president and CEO Rex Tillerson.  Much has been said in the press about Tillerson’s associations with the leaders of oil rich nations such as Russia who have not always been American allies.  While previous secretaries were nominated because they possessed the diplomatic skills to diffuse aggravation, Tillerson reportedly has used angry outbursts, and projectiles to gain his business objectives in places like Yemen.

As we await Senate confirmations, ponder this:  Trump’s tweets and telephone calls have already angered leaders in China and Israel.  Trump needs a diplomatic corps with the skill to round off his sharp edges and this is not the team with the right stuff.  I expect China will offer retaliatory decisions, the deterioration of Isreali and Palestinian peace, European allies with hurt feelings, heightened mistrust from the Middle East, amplified saber rattling from North Korea and a lot of very uneasy silence in Japan and South Korea.  Delaying Tillerson’s confirmation will not help the situation, but the possibility that Trump will have to identify another selection for Secretary of State may have a preferential result.

Environmental Insecurity

Americans who are concerned by the confluence of industrial imperatives and environmental policies will not be comforted by Trump’s nominations for the secretaries for Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency or the Department of Energy.

Ryan Zinke, Trump’s Department of Interior Secretary nominee, is a former Navy SEAL commander and Montana’s freshman representative.  The department is responsible for managing and conserving federal land and natural resources, the U.S. Forest Service, and administration of programs relating to indigenous people.  Given what transpired recently at the Standing Rock Reservation in the Dakotas, placing a former Navy SEAL chief with seemingly no experience in environmental issues in command of protecting land and people like the Sioux and their embattled treaties is a cognitive disconnection.  Why not nominate a wolf to protect the farm foul, too?

Speaking of cognitive disconnections, Oklahoma attorney general, Scott Pruitt has been given Trump’s endorsement to run the EPA.  Pruitt’s well documented alliance with corporate fossil fuel interests and his failure to defend the environment is anathema to the notion and definition of environmental protection.  Pruitt is a darling of energy industry lobbyists and no friend of the environment.

Let us not forget, that former Texas governor Rick Perry is Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Energy.  While many people confuse the department’s directive with the extraction of fossil fuels, the Energy Department is primarily responsible for protecting America’s nuclear energy and arsenals.  Historically, scientists and (Noble Prize winning) physicists have been placed in this very sensitive position.  Perry, who suggested on several occasions that the agency should be abolished, earned a bachelor’s degree in animal science from Texas A & M.  Perry’s nomination is not only perplexing but really freaking dangerous.

Conclusion

Trump’s selections of cabinet members seem to be unilaterally made to stand in complete opposition of the duties and responsibilities of the departments they would lead.  The nominations are downright baffling.  The hour is late, and there is a great deal of ground to cover.  Stay tuned as up-coming blogs delve deeper into topics such as national security, economics and domestic policy.

For now, I wish all a happy and healthy New Year and peace.

Election Afterthoughts and the Walmart Correlation

     Since the election of Donald Trump as the 45^th President of the United States, citizens have surged into our streets to protest the “unfairness” of our Electoral College system.  Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the election because the rules applicable to electoral delegations decided for the nation.  This has happened before.

     Frequent readers of this blog know this writer is not celebrating Trump’s election.  However, I am not among the protesters in Los Angeles because vocal (or violent) protest is seldom useful.  In my opinion, protesters are reinforcing the differences which became starkly evident during this election cycle at a time when we need to embrace our similarities.  For America to remain safe and strong we must pull ourselves together and not tear our nation asunder.

     On November 9, political pundits were stunned as they realized they had failed to accurately predict this election.  For months they focused on public sentiment, historical trends, and parsing the population; but, they failed to look at the impact of state economies.  Macro- and micro-economic models demonstrated long before the election that people who live in poverty have spread into new regions.  To many voters, a Clinton presidency looked too much like the previous administration and another four years of financial insecurity looked like a death sentence.  Through these eyes, poor people with children voted with their stomachs and their hearts.

     There is a distinct relationship between avoidance of economic facts and the pollster’s failure to anticipate Trump’s popularity.  This very unscientific link is what I call “The Walmart Correlation.”

According to a Wall St 24/7 report in March of this year, Walmart is the biggest single private sector employer in 19 states (AL, AZ, AR, FL GA, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, MT, OH, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA, WV, WY).  This is a distressing fact because Walmart is synonymous with low wages and has historically destroyed family-owned small businesses in areas where it opened its stores.  Not surprisingly, in 17 of the 19 states where Walmart is the largest employer, voters gave Trump a victory.  According to the US CensusBureau, 16 of those states were home to more people in poverty than the national average.

     According to a CNNMoney report, in February Walmart increased its minimum wage from $9 per hour to $10, a change that reportedly affected “virtually all of its hourly workers, including some supervisors, which make up the majority of the company's 1.4 million U.S. workers.  The wage hike will boost a full-time worker's average hourly wage by 3% to $13.38. Part-timers will get an average hourly wage of $10.58, up 6%.”  To put it another way, a full-time Walmart worker earns $2,140 per month and part-timer working 30 hours per week earns $1,354 per month.

    This is a small improvement for workers who labor under the miserly fist of a company that was called a “welfare queen” by Bloomberg View reporter Barry Ritholtz in 2013.  Collectively, Walmart employees reportedly are the biggest consumer of public assistance programs such as Medicaid and WIC. According to Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL), Walmart employees are the biggest group of food stamp recipients nationwide and receive $1,000 on average in public assistance.  Although Walmart is acting within the law, they apparently are not compelled to shoulder responsibility for their employees and shift the burden for living wages and healthcare to taxpayers.

     Many Americans are misinformed about the populations which use public assistance programs.  The average food stamp recipient is white (47%).  Women are twice as likely as men to seek food aid.  While Trump did nothing to disabuse voters of the notion that “illegals” are “syphoning money” from food stamp programs, SNAP applications state: "Documented immigrants can only receive SNAP benefits if they have resided within the United States for at least five years..."

     To qualify for food stamps, a three-person family must earn no more than $2,069 per month or $24,800 per year before taxes. Therefore, the full-time Walmart worker earns too much for food stamps while the part-time worker lives well below the poverty line.

     Daily Beast writer Daniel Gross stated Walmart’s allegiance to low wages has had a deleterious effect on local and regional economies including their own.  He said: “Walmart’s same-store sales are falling as the surrounding retail market surges. What’s the problem? By screwing its workers with low wages, the nation’s largest private-sector employer is preventing a huge chunk of the American workforce from shopping at its stores.”

     Trump spoke loudly and clearly to the fears of his supporters by promising to reduce competition for available jobs by removing immigrant workers from the employment pool.  He offered the possibility of employment with an infrastructure project that would build a wall at the borders of states with high levels of poverty.  He tacitly told voters he would secure public aid resources by removing immigrants who allegedly reduced these resources for Americans in need.  Yet, his promise to cut taxes and eliminate Obamacare would erase access to healthcare through Medicaid and resources for public aid for people on the financial edge. Alas, not all change is good.

     For those who are still upset about a Trump presidency, please put the bullhorn down and start listening. The “bigots” who voted for Trump are just like you in their fear and distress.  The truth about many of Trump’s supporters is this: They are disenfranchised Americans who spoke with their ballots because they had no other way to speak.  Look at these facts and do something constructive for Americans who, like you, were voiceless.

     Stop yelling about them and help them.

Think. Vote.

     It is the eve of the 2016 U.S. National Election.  At this point, most of us are sick of television ads, robo-calls and junk mail endorsing both sides of state and local propositions.  I stopped watching television newscasts two months ago because I could no longer stomach gleeful reports of presidential political fisticuffs and slap shots.  While this election cycle has lasted longer than a hockey season, this election is not a game.

     No United States presidential election is a game because the outcome affects the entire planet.

     Cable news and its histrionic, muckraker mentality has allowed Americans to become completely distracted by circus-like entertainment when we should have been concentrating on the fundamentals of national policies that will impact our lives.  While we were cheering the larger-than-life flamboyance of a ringmaster and the zany antics of clowns, we failed to analyze the costs associated with not only buying the ticket, but cleaning up the mess when the show left town.

     Countless voices have warned that American ignorance is dangerous.  World leaders such as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and Mexico’s Foreign Minister Claudia Ruiz Massieu are bracing for the possibility that Americans will flood across their borders based on the outcome of this election.  Syrian President Bashar Assad, Former South Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Sung-han, French President François Hollande, and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier all addressed the need for stable and rational American leadership to protect world security through formal and informal alliances.

     On October 27 Russia’s Vladmir Putin correctly placed responsibility for America’s future on Americans by stating: “Hysteria has been whipped up in the United States about the influence of Russia over the U.S. presidential election ... It's much simpler to distract people with so-called Russian hackers, spies, and agents of influence. Does anyone really think that Russia could influence the American people's choice in any way?”

     Meanwhile, in March, Australian minister Christopher Pyne said “democracy should be robust, but it certainly shouldn't be violent” and described the behavior of Americans at presidential political rallies as “terrifying.”

     It is clear from this writer’s perspective that the mainstream media has fanned the fires of discontent by focusing on the entertainment value of politics rather than on political fundamentals.  We can surely thank the media and “ratings week” for making Donald Trump a presidential contender while ignoring the hard-won experience and credentials of Hillary Clinton.  Yet, on the eve of the election, here we are.

     I invite readers to leave the circus tent and the din of the crowd to ponder the enormous responsibility of casting a ballot for President of the United States of America.  Consider deeply whether the choice you make will be based on emotion or logic.  Base your decision only on fundamentals such as economic stability, national security, adherence to Constitutional law, and the safety of our streets from threats both foreign and domestic. Do not make a decision based on personalities, rhetoric, costumes worn by of the actors, second-hand information or what will satisfy your momentary happiness.  Think about your community, your city, your state, your region, your country, our neighbors, and the rest of the world.  Take these moments in the silence of this night to think.

     Please, please, think.

     Search yourself for patience, tolerance, peace, and love for family, friends, and country.  Sleep on these important matters one last time.

     And, please, cast your ballot for whatever truth and right and hope is within you.

Never, Trump

     On October 9 I was shocked when I opened the Los Angeles Times to page A-10 and read the f-word.  The expletive was part of a transcript of the 2005 conversation between Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and former “Access Hollywood” host Billy Bush.  While Trump rightly assumed “Access” would cut most of the video footage down to a few sound bites, he could not ignore the fact that tape was rolling as he crowed about his conquests.

     “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful – I just start kissing them.  It’s like a magnet. I just kiss.  I don’t even wait.  And when you’re a star, they let you do it.  You can do anything,” said Trump. “Grab them by the….”

     Just read it.  I can’t type what he said.

     The fact that the Times tossed aside 99 years of decorum to publish these words demonstrates depth of commitment.  It is the duty of the Fourth Estate to accurately report current events for posterity.  Another duty of the Fourth Estate is to act independently of government and politicians to discern and articulate the truth.  The content of the 2005 Trump/Bush transcript surely made editors wince, but they quoted him precisely and without embellishment.

     Yet, in the second presidential debate, Trump tried to minimize the damage by calling his banter “locker room talk.”  Debate moderator Anderson Cooper asked Trump: “For the record, are you saying, what you said on the bus 11 years ago, that you did not kiss women without consent or grope women without consent?”  Cooper asked three times before Trump stopped tap dancing around his “respect” for women and replied, “No, I have not.”

     In her response, Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton could have excoriated Trump.  Instead, she said:

     “You know, with prior Republican nominees, for president, I disagreed with them. Politics, policies, principles. But I never questioned their fitness to serve. Donald Trump is different. I said starting back in June, that he was not fit to be president and commander in chief. And many Republicans and independents have said the same thing. What we all saw and heard on Friday was Donald talking about women. What he thinks about women. What he does to women. And he has said that the video doesn't represent who he is. But I think it's clear to anyone who heard it that it represents exactly what he is.”

    A debate is not a court room or a blog.  As moderator here I shall permit Trump’s debate request to “get on to much more important things” such as three legal actions that came as a result of actions Trump denied.

     In the 1991 divorce proceedings of Donald and first wife Ivana Trump, Ivana alleged a 1989 “rape” in a sworn deposition.  After attorneys claimed spousal rape was not a crime, her language was softened.  Regardless, the original deposition was included by author Harry Hurt III in his 1993 book Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump.

     In 1997, Florida businesswoman Jill Harth filed a sexual harassment law suit against Trump after he pushed her against a wall at his estate, attempted to kiss her forcefully and fondled her.  Trump reportedly settled for over $100,000.

     As was previously discussed here, in June of this year, Katie Johnson filed a civil suit in New York federal court naming Trump as a co-defendant who allegedly held her as a sex slave and raped her at the New York home of level three sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in 1994 when she was 13 years old.  Trump denied the charges.

     Please follow the links above and don’t take my word for this record.  These stories are not mere musings of bitter ex’s, business partners or pretty girls who let Trump steal a kiss and a squeeze because he was “a star.”  These women were sexually abused and brought complaints to courts of law risking the costly tit-for-tat civil suits for which Trump is famous.  The incidents demonstrate Trump’s pattern of violence and predatory behavior.  As Secretary Clinton said, this is “exactly what he is.”

     He may apologize for words he said when he was bragging; but essentially, Trump was bragging because he was proud of what he did and what he was able to get away with.  In his own words, he exposed himself as a sociopath.  He exposed himself as a person who either does not know the difference between right and wrong or a person who just doesn’t care.  The general public might call him “crazy;” but, in a court of law, a person who cannot tell the difference between right and wrong can also be identified as “criminally insane.”

     Let that sink in.

     The Republican presidential nominee demonstrates the qualities of Antisocial Personality Disorder and may be insane.

     After making the decision to print the true, vulgar words of Donald Trump, the Los Angeles Times also ran an editorial entitled “The last Trump straw,”  which said:

     “For those of us who have long argued that Donald Trump is unfit for the White House. The ugly disclosures of the last couple of days are further proof of what already seemed obvious.  But if it takes this last straw to break the back of Republican denial, so be it.  Now those who profess to be shocked by this latest detail must act on their outrage and say the words: “Never Trump.”

     Never.  Never.  Never.  Not ever, Mr. Trump.

Sitting to Stand

     San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick is sitting through the playing of the national anthem before his games to claim his solidarity with people who are treated unequally and unjustly in America.  Kaepernick said:

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”

     It’s a gutsy, passive protest.  By beginning his protests during the preseason when the team could have cut him, he risked his career.  The NFL could have fined him for conduct that was deemed financially or critically damaging to the league.  He risked harm to his personal reputation and his personal safety.  But, Kaepernick embraced his Constitutional right to free speech and sat.

     The 49ers coach, Chip Kelly, stood by Kaepernick, telling reporters his quarterback’s action is “his right as a citizen” and “it's not my right to tell him not to do something.”  San Francisco 49ers teammate Eric Reid and the Seattle Seahawks’ Jeremy Lane supported Kaepernick and subsequently declined to stand for the national anthem as well.

     Readers might ask why I am bringing this up in a political blog.  I am highlighting this issue because it demonstrates one of the fundamental perceptual rifts in our society.

     On the one hand, people who never experienced systematic discrimination often react angrily to Black Lives Matter protesters.  They may blame the victims of police shootings and believe media excuses that victims had alleged gang affiliations, criminal backgrounds, or “reached for a gun” rather than a wallet.  They fail to note later media reports correcting initial false information, seldom ponder injustice, and simply go on with their grumpy day.

     On the other hand, there are people who have experienced injustice.  Women who know they are receiving a lower wage than their male coworkers know injustice.  People of color who were pulled over by police because they were driving at night know injustice.  Sick, working poor people who were denied Medicaid because they “earn too much” know injustice.  People in inner cities who live at the dead end of low-wage jobs due to inadequate elementary educations know injustice.  These people may live in resentful silence knowing discrimination is alive and well in America.

     These fast-moving, diametrically opposed perceptual undercurrents fuel voter decisions.  The choices people make about whether they will vote and for whom they will vote cannot be quantified by pollsters who want to predict how voters will express their emotional realities on Election Day.  We could predict a sports figure would take a public position on current events.  We could predict people would oppose and disagree with the sports’ figure’s position.  But, we still cannot imagine the impact.

     In closing, I will do something I have never done in this blog.  In my non-blogging time, I write poetry.  (http://chairthelyonkramer.tumblr.com/).  Here’s to you, Colin.  Fight the good fight.

Sitting to Stand

A half black man sits down on a bench

And stands for all people police have shot down

In fear and unbefitting no crime.

A man with grace and athletic elegance.

A man with a college degree and a fat paycheck.

A man who became what he is today,

He is a man with a right to sit and stay.

What is more American than this protest?

Risking health and reputation and career

He stands for his countrymen by sitting down.

You so-called fans have no right to stop him.

You, armchair critics who send a football player

This latter day gladiator

Out to the grids on a Sunday

To lay down his body for your entertainment.

You want him to stand because you say so

Like all of the American Negros in our nation?

“Stand up! Roll over! Play dead!”

You make his point with your condemnation.

Mr. Man, sit where you can

Sit down, sir, please, and make your stand.

A Word About the 24-Hour News Cycle

     As a long-time political junkie, I have, at times, rolled out of bed at five and started my day by flipping news channels.  CNN, MSNBC, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS. Click, click, click.  Invariably, the national news lead stories were always the same with a slightly different spin.  If you've seen three in eight minutes, you've seen them all.

     For the past several weeks, I did a little experiment.  I tuned in to some of those cable news programs where a panel is assembled to discuss the political news of the day.  Honestly, I couldn't handle it. As readers can imagine from my blogger silence, the exercise rendered me speechless,

     For hours every evening, grown professional men and women barely control themselves, take sides like children in a divorce, and talk over one another to say... What, exactly?  More often than not, it seemed the "news" panel was reporting on itself.  I'm still not sure that I caught anything resembling reasoned journalistic commentary.

     Call me old school.  News is supposed to be informative.  We are supposed to receive the who, what where, when and how about local, national, and international events.  It is our responsibility to tease out the impact of these events on our lives and our communities. Having a bunch of panelists screeching simultaneously across the space of two desks is neither informative nor entertaining to this writer.  This kind of programming feels like very irresponsible journalism.

     Therefore, I am returning to the comparative solitude of reading my news.  If I wish to know what a candidate said in a speech I will use the power of the Internet to obtain a transcript.  I will read stories from a plethora of information sources with various interpretations of the same events and then decide for myself what impact (if any) a single event will have without the interruption of eight people screaming in the background.  I have returned to a state of political junkie bliss.

     I hope you all know how much I appreciate folks who read.  Thank you for taking the time to read me.

     Now, there is a big, fat, contentious presidential election at hand and it's high time that I got back to writing about the significance of local social and economic factors' impacts on who and how we select leaders.