scott pruitt, rick perry , trump & disregard for the environment

Today, I want to look at two cabinet nominees that are crucial to our planets environment.  For the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); scott pruitt and for the Department of Energy; rick perry.  These are two agencies that play the most important roles in working to keep the earth a viable environment for most life forms on the planet, not least of all human life.  The issue is not the ability to live on the planet now or in the near future, it is to keep the environment in a position to sustain life well into the future.

The stated goals of the EPA are as follows:

Goal 1: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality Goal 2: Protecting America’s Waters
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Goal 5: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring Compliance

https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan

The sated mission of the Energy Department is as follows:

The mission of the Energy Department is to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.

http://www.energy.gov/mission

So, let's see how the nominees for these two cabinet level positions match up with 'their' agencies' goals.

Scott Pruitt, as Attorney general (AG) of Oklahoma, has been at odds with the EPA for much of his time as the AG. He states on his Linked In page, that he is “a leading advocate against the EPA’s activist agenda”.  he has a law suit currently pending against the EPA.  Not looking too good, eh?  pruitt is documented as being closely aligned with the fossil fuel industry.  he is on record as questioning the validity of research findings that carbon emissions are causing climate change.  To be truthful, what this author would like to do, in my fantasies, is to chain pruitt inside a smoke belching stack of a coal fired plant, or secure his mouth over the tail pipe of a car and see how well  he fairs.  Not that I'm suggesting that we forget the greenhouse effect that carbon emissions cause, thus raising the temperature around the globe, but let's just talk about air quality.  Which does this shmock think will make for good air quality, solar arrays & wind mills, or smoke belching power plants.

Also, the trump transition staff announced pruitt is “an expert in Constitutional law”. pruitt is on record as saying ,“Obama’s gone too far. If Congress is not acting, he thinks he can act in their place…Unconstitutional.” Now I'm not a lawyer, but I believe I have a good grip on the Constitution. The way our government was set up was for the Supreme Court to be the arbiter between the legislative and administrative branches. If the legislative branch believes that the President has exercised powers that are not hers or his to use, the proscribed recourse is through the Supreme Court. A President is not doing anything Unconstitutional just because an individual says so. The Supreme Court is the only entity in this country that can make that determination.  This guy has a long way to go to prove to me that he understands the Constitution.  

Truth be told, what he was doing with that statement was throwing food to the sheep.  The sheep love hearing words like 'Constitutional' or 'Unconstitutional' in relation to what they want.  The sheep believe, in their heart, that if someone says one of those words from a position of authority, then it's true.

The quotes, referenced above are from a Washington Post aricle:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/07/trump-names-scott-pruitt-oklahoma-attorney-general-suing-epa-on-climate-change-to-head-the-epa/?utm_term=.5591cd6e83c5

rick perry, former Governor of Texas; he's much easier to explain.  When running for the Republican nomination for President in 2012, perry said, during a debate, that The Department of Energy was one of three departments he wanted to "dismantle".  Whoaaa doggy (a little Texas talk).  It is not difficult to imagine that this guy will do all that he can to at the least 'hamstring' the very agency he has been nominated to lead.  Amongst the many types of energy that the Department of Energy regulates is nuclear power, nuclear waste and an aging nuclear weapons arsenal.  Hey ....... let's just get rid of this department. That would "ensure America's security".

These are the two people that would, if trump has his way, lead these two critical agencies that work to ensure Americas security and well being.  In essence these two departments perform a basic Constitutional function, "promote the general Welfare".  Are these good choices, I don't think so!

Being a Responsible American Citizen

Late week, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) presented a report to law makers that Russia manipulated the release of hacked emails with the primary intention of helping trump become President.  The CIA noted that emails from both campaigns had been hacked, but only emails regarding Hillary Clinton were leaked by Russia.  This, of course, raises concerns for any responsible and reasonable (r & r) citizen of our country, and that concern is, if this is so, what can we, as a nation, do to prevent this in future elections.  So let's see who's responsible and reasonable!

Members of the Senate; are they r & r?  

Mitch McConnell seems to be.  I have no love for Mitch McConnel, but when someone does the right thing, I'll recognize it as the right thing.  Yesterday, McConnell admonished some Republican law makers who "are reluctant to either review Russian tactics or [willing to] ignore them."  He went on to say  "The Russians are not our friends".  I am all for all humans on earth living in peace with each other, but as long as we are divided into separate countries, I have an issue with another country attempting to manipulate the free elections of another country.  In this case, I agree w/McConnell,  "The Russians are not our friends".

Senators Lindsey Grahm and John McCain, both republicans have joined Senators Jack Reed and Charles Schumer, both Democrats, in calling for a bipartisan probe into the allegations that Russia interfered in the U.S. election process.  McCain is the current chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Reed is the ranking Democrat on that same committee and Schumer is the incoming Senate Minority Leader.  All highly respected legislators.


Members of the Electoral College, are they r & r?

Ten Electors (nine Democrats and one Republican) have requested an intelligence briefing on the subject in an open letter to National Intelligence Director James Clapper.  This link will take you to the letter which is extensive and clearly sites Constitutional reasons for the request as well as reference to the always highly regarded Federalist Papers.  The letter is too long to place in this posting, but I strongly endorse reading it.


donald trump, is he r & r?

It should come as absolutely no surprise that trump is not reasonable and therefore not responsible.  his focus is on himself and not the integrity of future elections in our country.  In a FOX television network interview on Sunday, 12/11, trump made the following comments: “I think it’s ridiculous. I think it’s just another excuse. I don’t believe it,” and that he won by a "massive landslide". 

trump continues to reveal his self as not fit to lead our country.  If the President of the United States (which trump is not as of this writing) is not concerned about the integrity of our electoral process; cannot see the writing on the wall; cannot even bring his or her self to keep an open mind, then in this writer's humble opinion, that person is not qualified to hold the office of President of our country.  trump fits this description of a person who is not fit to lead us.


















- trump = nonsense / "massive landslide" = “I think it’s ridiculous. I think it’s just another excuse. I don’t believe it,” Mr. Trump said on Sunday in an interview on Fox News. 

Equal Rights Amendment

One of the brilliant features of the U.S. Constitution is that it is an amendable document.  Apparently, the framer's of the constitution knew that time marches on and with it the necessity for a living document that had the ability to change as the world changed.  Fortunately our world has changed in a progressive way.  Change is inevitable, but it could be regressive (as we may very well, soon, learn).  When the Constitution was written, there were many people that had no rights; slaves,women, native Americans.  If some of the framers were to have it their way, only those that owned land would have had the full protection of the law and full rights under the law.  Slaves and women had no voice, no right to own property and no access to the court system to redress wrongs. 

Our culture and our Constitution have progressed, but as is often the case, law lags behind reality.  Case in point is the Equal Rights Amendment.  Reality is, women do every thing men do.  Women serve in the military.  Women have the 'right' to serve on the battle field.  Women cannot be discriminated against (supposedly) in the job market or the work place.  BUT, one major area where equality has not been reached is that in many cases, women do not earn the same salary as men while performing the same exact jobs.  

The analogy I put forward is that of highway speed limits.  The posted speed limit on most of the interstate highways (at least in the Boston to Washington corridor) is 65 miles per hour [mph].  Now anyone that drives on these interstates knows that the defacto speed is between 75 and 80 miles per hour.  Because the law is 65 mph, police officers can still issue tickets to all or anyone they choose, who is driving the defacto speed.   I propose that what we have with reference to equality in our country is similar.  For the most part we treat women and other minorities equally, again for the most part, but we have not set this in 'stone'.  There is no overarching constitutional guarantee that women and in fact all human beings that are citizens of our country will receive the full protection of the law.  The constitution needs to guarantee the same treatment of ALL people, whether filthy rich or desperately poor, female or male, black or white (or whatever a person's skin tone is), handicapped or fully able, native American or ancestors of those that came to this continent and usurped this land for themselves. 

To guarantee equal treatment under the law would be the morally correct thing to do.  Esther Peterson, a Kennedy appointee, proposed that "specific bills for specific ills" should have been the legislative path to take.  I disagree and I also propose that a re-submission of the amendment be made with additions that reflect further progress in our culture since the original draft in 1923 and the subsequent re-write in 1943 to the wording that was not ratified by the requisite number of states to became law:

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

I believe an up to date re-work would keep sections 2 & 3 as shown above.  It is section 1 that I feel could be reworded to read:

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State to any citizen of the United States of America including, but not limited to gender, race, religious practice, sexual orientation, and physical or mental disabilities.

This is the Equal Rights Amendment and needs to address equal rights for ALL of America's citizens.  Equal Rights are Human Rights.  Women's Rights are Human Rights.  In the current political climate, an amendment with this wording or with the original wording would most likely garner less support than it dd during the ratification process in the 1970s.  I feel like I'm on solid ground when I say that I doubt that either wording would even be adopted by the current Congress.. As the moral compass of our nation, we will need to work diligently to shift who is in Congress and who is in the White House.  Beyond this, on the national level, we will need to work to shift representation at the state level, the grass roots level, to have an Equal Rights Amendment passed and ratified.  This will be a slow process and may take a new generation to accomplish.  I am sad that I most likely will not be here to see this grand accomplishment take place, but I have faith that it will.  Our country is the greatest country on this planet and provides our world with a true moral compass.  Equal Rights for all human beings will start in the U.S. and spread from our country to all other counties, but it will be a slow process.

Never Forget

November 9th, 2016 was a somber day.  In fact, what I experienced at my work place and even in my republican dominated small town (very republican) was an eerie silence.  My son, reported the same experience from D.C. where he goes to school at George Washington University, four blocks from the White House.  I had experienced that type of silence one other time in my adulthood and once in my childhood.  The experience in my childhood was November of 1963, when I was not quite eight years old and I was in third grade.  It was the day after President Kennedy's assassination.  It is a vague memory, but while writing about it now, the feeling and the memory of that day as well as President Kennedy's funeral procession in D.C. are coming back to me strongly.

My experience in adulthood was on September 11th, 2001 ( I really do not like referring to this day as 911, I feel it diminishes the gravity of what occurred on that date).  The rest of that day and for the next few days after had, again, an eerie silence.  A large amount of the daily background noise had stopped due to all aircraft being grounded, but it was more than that.  I felt like we Americans were experiencing a collective shock.  I do not believe I can describe the feel of those days after the horror of the attack on the World Trade Center buildings and on the Pentagon.  I believe we all had a heightened sense of empathy for all of the people that died that day; jumping out of windows, burning to death, crashing into the buildings and into the farm land outside of Pittsburgh; the chaos on the planes, especially the flight where the passengers obviously fought back against the hijackers, that crashed in western Pennsylvania.

From the shock of September 11th, rose the collective cry; "never forget".

Now we come to the date, November 8th, 2016.  First, I want to note that my heart was set on Hillary Clinton to be elected as the next President of our country.  Not only because I believed in the policies that she had clearly spelled out during the campaign, but also because I could not imagine the horrors that would most likely occur in a trump administration law in our country.  trump has a long history of obvious, documented, disregard of laws when it pertains to whatever he wants to do.  Laws simply don't apply to trump.  I make it a point to recognize reality and to this point in time that has been reality as far as trump's behavior is concerned.

trump is surrounding himself with 'yes' people.  Whatever he wants to hear, he will hear it from these people.  steve bannon (chief whitehouse strategist); bigotry and hate.  jeff sessions (attorney general); bigotry and hate.  scott pruit (environmental PROTECTION agency); a person who currently has a suite filed against the agency he has been nominated to run.  michael flynn (national security advisor); panders in fake news to feed the sheep.

My biggest concern is steve bannon.  As I have pointed out in a previous posting, this guy is vocally supported by the kkk & the american nazi party.  These groups would not support & endorse bannon if his philosophies did not align with theirs'.  bannon is a self described Leninist and is on record as saying "I’m a Leninist. Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal, too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment”.  I don't know about you, but this scares the hell out of me.  I do not believe I am over reaching when I say that between trump, bannon and jeff sessions, this country could easily experience what Germany did under hitler.

In order to limit trump's & bannon's ability to degrade our country's moral high ground, which will cause real human suffering for millions of people, we must constantly protest in visible ways so that the media will have no choice but to report on the protests, which in turn will place pressure on Congress .  We must also lean heavily on our legislators to obstruct the trump/bannon agenda.  I believe that for the most part the member's of Congress are decent men & women who have differing views on how to run our country.  I do not believe that these decent people have the evil goals that trump, bannon, sessions, the kkk and the american nazi party have.  Although many of us do not agree with many members of Congress, we are depending on all decent members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, to be a firewall against trump and his obviously evil agenda.

So.......just as with September 11th, 2001, November 8th, 2016 is a date that we must make sure to "never forget"! Never forget to protest.  Never forget to write to your legislators.  Never forget to keep the pressure on trump and OUR Congress.  NEVER FORGET !

tongue in cheek (lol)

Breaking news!  Close observations by concerned citizens, report what appears to be nefarious activity at the Stage Star Deli on West 55th street, a few blocks from trump tower, in Manhattan.  steve bannon has been frequenting the deli for the past four to five months, since becoming officially associated with the trump campaign and since the election, as the nominee for the position of chief white house strategist.  he has been observed on many occasions, chatting with different young adolescent males who came into the deli accompanied by the same unknown male each time.  After talking with these boys, the boy, on each occasion has gone down the stairs to the basement, where the rest rooms are located.  bannon always has gone down the same stairs shortly after.  Both did not return back up the stairs for time periods ranging from fifteen to thirty minutes, bannon always returning first, followed by the boy about five minutes later.  bannon always returned looking very disheveled and out of breath.  The boy, each time, returned looking scared and left the deli immediately.  The conclusion reached by the persons making the observations, was that bannon seems to have a sexual interest in boys between the ages of ten and thirteen years of age, and has arranged for the unknown male to traffic boys to the deli for bannon to have sex with.

I leave it to you the reader to decide what you will.

Now, this is obviously my tongue firmly implanted in my cheek.  I know that you, the reader is not fooled by this crap.  So if this is obviously fake news, and you immediately knew that it was, why does the nominee for national security adviser not know horseshit when he sees it.  lieutenant general michael flynn has pandered in this type of fake news, along with his son, "throughout the presidential campaign" per a New York Times report. But wait, I don't want you to blindly believe a well respected newspaper that, as a standard operating procedure, makes sure that what they publish is firmly grounded in fact. I will gladly print an example of a tweet from flynn (please note that I attempted to copy the image of the tweet, so there would be no doubt, but was unable to):

"@ GenFlynn Nov 2
U decide - NYPD Blows Whistle on NEW Hillary EMAILS: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes w Children, etc ... MUST READ!
truepundit.com/breaking-bombs..."

Go ahead, click on the link.  It takes a little bit of time to come up, but there it is the fake crap that flynn is chewing on.

flynn's son became the fall guy and was 'fired' ("you're fired" ala trump) from the transition staff.  So, what we have here is an idiot who involves himself with fake news as our country's National Security Adviser.  This guy is either stupid or a true and complete ass.  Either way, that's not ok for a person holding this highly important and sensitive position.

Million Women March

The Million Women March, planned to take place on January 21, 2017, the day after inauguration day, will still take place.  It is unfortunate (to say the least) that the march cannot convene at the Lincoln Memorial.  All through modern history, this has been an important gathering point for protests and the exercise of our first amendment rights.

The latest information that I am able to find is from The Guardian.  The Guardian is a well respected news source, with a long established history (since 1821), based in the U.K.  It has an online presence for U.S. news.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/08/womens-march-on-washington-lincoln-memorial

On 12/8/16, in an article titled "Women's March on Washington won't have access to Lincoln Memorial", it is noted that "the National Park Service, on behalf of the Presidential Inauguration Committee, filed documents securing large swaths of the national mall and Pennsylvania Avenue, the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial for the inauguration festivities (which as you will note further on in tis post is a flat out contradiction to what a spokes person for the NPS is quoted as saying). None of these spots will be open for protesters."  The article goes on to point out the following key points:

    - Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, a constitutional rights litigator and the executive director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund has in the past led court battles for protest access on inauguration day itself. Ms. Verheyden-Hilliard is quoted as saying at a recent press conference held by the ANSWER [Act Now to Stop War and End Racism] Coalition "banning access to public land for protesters days after the inauguration is “extremely unique”".   She went on to note that "“It hasn’t come up in any way previously, where you’ve had a groundswell of people trying to have access on the Saturday, January 21, and thousands of people want to come, and the government is saying we won’t give you a permit.  What they’ve done is take all of these spaces out of action, historic spaces for dissent.”"  I will note here that Ms. Verheyden-Hilliard and ANSWER are participating in the march, but are not the planners who are working closely with the NPS [National Park Service].

    - Mike Litterst of the NPS noted that it is "partly a practical issue. Inauguration bleachers and viewing stands started being erected on 1 November and it will take until 1 March to completely clear the major public spaces from all of the inauguration works.  They’re construction zones, effectively”".  Another writer's note here; I will be in D.C. to protest on inauguration day and to take part in the Million Women March on 1/21. I certainly hope I don't see anyone on the National Mall near these "construction zones".

- Per Cassady Fendlay, spokeswoman for the women’s march on Washington, "“The Lincoln Memorial is not possible.” She said march organizers were not associated with the Answer Coalition, and have “had no issues with the permitting process at all”. “We are in conversation with the police. We have secured another location”", but at present is declining to name where the march would now take place, but has said it would be nearby.

So, there you have it.  Whether this is a believable story from the NPS or not becomes irrelevant.  The march will occur, just not at what is the most visible venue in our country and perhaps the world.  I have no doubts, though, that the march will command nationwide and worldwide attention!

An Electors choice

Yesterday, my niece forwarded me a link to a New York Times Op-Ed article that was published on
Monday, 12/5. The title of the piece is "Why I Will Not Cast My Electoral Vote for [d]onald [t]rump".  It was written by a Republican Elector from Texas by the name of Christopher Suprun.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?mwrsm=Email&_r=0

At the end of the opening paragraph, Mr. Suprun notes that ".....I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office."  Mr. Suprun goes on to note that Alexander Hamilton, in "Federalist 68 [The Federalist Papers] argued that an Electoral College should determine if candidates are qualified, not engaged in demagogy, and independent from foreign influence."  It should be noted that the Federalist Papers have, throughout the course of U.S. history, played an important role in conjunction with The Constitution in U.S. Supreme Court decisions on many occasions. (From 1790 to 1984 The Federalist Papers were cited in 206 Supreme Court decisions and 122 opinions).  Then Christopher Suprun addresses each of the determiners noted by Hamilton.

Is the candidate being considered by the Electoral College "qualified"?  This is obviously a very subjective point.  Suprun points out that "[d]uring the campaign more than 50 Republican former national security officials and foreign policy experts co-signed a letter opposing him. In their words, “he would be a dangerous president.” During the campaign Mr. Trump even said Russia should hack Hillary Clinton’s emails. This encouragement of an illegal act has troubled many members of Congress and troubles me."  I can think of many, many other known facts about trump that disqualify him on the criteria of being "qualified", but Suprun makes the case very well.

Is the candidate being considered by the Electoral College "not engaged in demagogy"?  Suprun recalls trump's behavior during the primary season and up to today with the exact same incidents that came to my mind.  "[m]r. [t]rump urged violence against protesters at his rallies during the campaign. He speaks of retribution against his critics. He has surrounded himself with advisers such as [s]tephen [k]. [b]annon, who claims to be a Leninist.....".  With reference to bannon, trump cannot claim the same ignorance that he did when claiming he did not know david duke or what the kkk, as an organization, stands for.  steve bannon is vocally and strongly supported by and endorsed by the kkk and the amarican nazi party.  These entities would not support bannon if his philosophies did not align with theirs  trump obviously knows all of this and if not (get real), then he lives under a rock, which of course does not make for an effective President.  trump offered to pay the legal fees for, what I have referred to for the past year as, the "brown shirt" thugs that attacked protesters at trump campaign rallies.  

Is the candidate being considered by the Electoral College "independent of foreign influences"?  Let's give trump the benefit of the doubt.  Let's believe him when he claims he sold all of his stocks in June of 2016 (which I do not believe at all, he may have sold some, but for many reasons that will be put forward in an upcoming post, I doubt very highly that he sold them all or even close to them all).  Also note that as recently as this morning (while watching NBC's The Today Show at an office to get blood work) I heard that trump does not plan to give up his interest in the trump organization.  The trump organization has holdings world wide, period.  Although he will be giving control of the trump organization to his sons, he will still have a financial interest and will be discussing business with his sons from the perspective of the highest level of security briefings which he will receive daily.  Doesn't meet this criteria!

So......per Federalist 68, trump is clearly not qualified to perform the duties of the President of the United States of America!  My hope is that Christopher Suprun will voice all of these thoughts and concerns to his fellow Electors.  

In order for The Electoral College to continue to be a viable institution, the Electors need to prove that they are not simply a rubber stamp.  They are bound by no law, to vote for any given candidate.  We live in a time where communication technology can support the ideal of "one person, one vote", and if The Electoral College cannot bring critical thinking to bear in this election, then it is obviously time for a Constitutional Amendment to be drafted and put before the American people for ratification, to dismantle The Electoral College.