Former Socialist, Former Republican, Former Contributor to The American Spectator, Former Resident of Canada, Back in Boston Area After Stints in New York City & Atlanta, Current Mustache Wearer & Aficionado of Baseball, Bowling in All Its Forms, Cats, Music & Healthy Living
In an op-ed in the New York Times, Ohio Republican Governor Mike DeWine expressed dismay at former President Trump and his fellow Buckeye J.D. Vance for their ceaseless attacks on Haitian immigrants living in his hometown of Springfield, Ohio:
As a supporter of former President Donald Trump and Senator JD Vance, I am saddened by how they and others continue to repeat claims that lack evidence and disparage the legal migrants living in Springfield. This rhetoric hurts the city and its people, and it hurts those who have spent their lives there.
While Governor DeWine's editorial is timely and a step in the right direction, it bears worth asking a question. Several, in fact.
Given the fact that DeWine has conceded that Trump and Vance are repeatedly stating falsehoods about the town in which he grew up and the Haitian community that resides there, how can he continue to support Trump and Vance?
Does DeWine have reason to believe that Trump and Vance will reverse course and apologize for their defamatory and inflammatory statements much less cease making them?
What happens if Trump (possibly with Vance in tow) visit Springfield in the next couple of weeks as he has promised and he persists in his lies?
What if following a Trump-Vance rally in Springfield, an angry mob take it upon themselves to physically assault and possibly kill members of the Haitian community?
But given how Trump and Vance have willfully lied about what is happening in Springfield, Ohio not only with regard to accusations of Haitians eating cats and dogs but to accusations that they are in the country illegally, Governor DeWine ought to declare that he cannot in good conscience support Trump and Vance.
His word would carry a lot of weight. I can only hope this weighs on Governor DeWine's mind.
In a speech before the Israeli American Council, ostensibly to speak out against anti-Semitism, former President Trump claimed Jews would bear some of the blame should he lose to Vice-President Harris in November.
Trump claimed, “In my opinion the Jewish people would have a lot to do with a loss.”
For starters, if Trump were to lose, the first thing he would say is that the election was rigged and that he won by a lot as he has since November 7, 2020. Trump will never concede. Thus, he does not get to say the election was rigged but it's still the fault of the Jews if Harris beats him. He cannot have it both ways.
But what can one expect of a man who claims that Jews who don't vote for him hate their religion and hate Israel? As I argued back in March:
For bad measure, Trump also complained Jewish voters hadn't treated him right. If this is Trump's idea of persuasion, it isn't going to work. Not with me and not with most American Jewish voters.
Donald Trump isn't entitled to my vote. It must be earned. The onus is not on how the voters, Jewish or otherwise, treats Trump but how Trump treats the voters. And Trump treats people like garbage.
As Trump himself put it, "I don't care about you. I just want your vote. I don't care."
Trump can howl all he wants. This Jew isn't going to give Trump his vote and there's not a damn thing he can do about it.
Oh yes, the Dodgers also clinched a playoff berth marking the first time Ohtani will play October baseball in his MLB career after spending his first six seasons with the crosstown Los Angeles Angels.
The shame of it all is that fewer than 16,000 fans were on hand to see it in Miami's Loan Depot Stadium. Well, they certainly got their money's worth even if they were rooting for the Marlins.
It remains to be seen if any of this will catch up to Ohtani himself. Whatever the case, it did not impede Ohtani's ability to play baseball. Ohtani will surely win his third MVP in four seasons and become only the second MLB player to win the MVP in both leagues joining Frank Robinson who did so with the Cincinnati Reds in 1961 and the Baltimore Orioles in 1966.
AOC certainly believes it to be so as she has demanded a "full account of the attack, including an answer from the State Department as to whether any US assistance went into the development and deployment of this technology." She also claims the "attack clearly and unequivocally violates international humanitarian law."
Pity the poor Hezbollah terrorists.
It is worth noting that AOC's view of the situation is not shared by her fellow Democratic colleagues in the House. Case in point - California Congressman Brad Sherman:
Let’s be clear—in its strategic attack on Hezbollah, Israel used innovative methods to carry out a precise military operation, maximizing the elimination of terrorists while minimizing harm to civilians by targeting military communication devices.
Iran’s ambassador must explain why he had a Hezbollah military communication device, given Iran’s long history of using its ‘diplomats’ to carry out terror. This includes a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States and target dissidents abroad, especially in Europe. In war, it’s impossible to fully prevent harm to civilians—especially when Hezbollah operates in Beirut’s densest civilian areas.
Some impacted by this operation may be civilians due to Hezbollah’s use of civilians as human shields and their use of soldiers.
Needless to say, AOC seems uninterested in Hezbollah's terrorist activities (including launching missiles into northern Israel and using human shields) much less Iran's involvement. Her only agenda is delegitimizing and demonizing Israel and willfully promoting hatred against Jews.
Lowry's NR colleague Andrew McCarthy claimed that Lowry was mashing up the word migrant (with a long i) and immigrant (with a short i) and Lowry went along it claiming he had mispronounced the word migrants.
It makes me wonder how often Lowry, McCarthy and other NR colleagues have described former President Obama or Viee-President Kamala Harris as a migrant.
Now for those of you who might be unaware, I contributed a few articles to National Review Online between 2017 and 2020. I have never met Rich Lowry, exchanged emails with him or spoke with him on the phone. But had I heard him utter the N-word, I surely would have not bothered making a submission to his magazine.
The fact that Lowry and McCarthy would make this claim demonstrates the legacy of Trumpism and what it has inflicted upon National Review and other conservative and libertarian entities. One of the key legacies of Trumpism is the virtue of lying and continuing to repeat the lie even in the face of overwhelming evidence and facts to the contrary.
To be clear, Haitian immigrants (many permitted here legally under Biden policy) didn't begin showing up in Springfield hoping to filch unsuspecting domestic short hairs. Rather, they were looking for work in a city that was seeing something of an economic revival. That's all well and good, but people are more than cogs to be plugged into warehouses or manufacturing operations.
They come with families and with needs for housing, health care and education. They have pre-existing cultural predilections different from ours (Haiti and the United States are very different places), and if they don't speak the language, that makes everything even more difficult.
Nor are resources unlimited. Health care facilities, schools and the housing stock have all been strained in Springfield.
Yet the same could be said of every immigrant community which has come to the United States - Irish, Italians, Germans, Cubans, Vietnamese boat people among many others. The same challenges were present when they came to this country and yet their presence made the American experience better. What makes the Haitians so different? Lowry's slip of the tongue certainly clarifies matters.
It is revealing that Lowry made a point of actually writing, "The Haitians also tend to be poor drivers." The death of 11-year-old Aiden Clark was horrific but it does not mean Haitians are any better or any worse drivers than anyone else. The Lowry made a point of saying so makes his verbal excretion less surprising.
In a different age, Lowry would have already stepped down as Editor-in-Chief of National Review. Today, being a racist is a badge of honor in MAGA world.
If the folks at NRO, Trump, Vance and in MAGA world want to tell us to Rich Lowry used the M-word instead of the N-word then all they are doing is telling us exactly who they are and demonstrating why they deserve our contempt.
However, unlike the first attempt last July during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania in which Trump was wounded, he was unharmed. Today's incident took place in the vicinity of Trump's golf course in West Palm Beach, Florida. Secret Service agents thwarted the assassination attempt. The suspect fled on foot but was apprehended a short time later by local authorities in nearby Martin County.
“DEMOCRACY is on the ballot and we cannot lose,” he wrote, a similar slogan commonly used by President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.
“We cannot afford to fail,” Routh continued. “The world is counting on us to show the way.”
This is similar to language that Harris continues to use on the campaign trail. On Aug. 29, she said at a rally in Savannah, Ga., “We are fighting for our democracy.”
On July 31, she said at an event in Houston that “our fundamental freedoms are on the ballot and so is our democracy” — after using identical wording at a sorority event the same day.
Tom Fitton, president of the conservative legal group Judicial Watch, told The Post: “It is no coincidence that Routh repeated Kamala’s and Joe’s extremist rhetoric against Trump. At this point it is inexcusable incitement.”
What incredible nonsense!!! No rational individual or person acting in good faith would arrive at such a conclusion. Given Routh's criminal history and erratic, violent behavior, it is reasonable to conclude that he would have attempted to assassinate Trump regardless of anything either President Biden or Vice-President Harris would have said. Whereas Fitton is simply being dishonest and is well aware of his deceit.
The same can be said for Florida Republican Congressman Mike Waltz who claimed:
This rhetoric against President Trump, this narrative that he will be the next dictator, that he is the next Hitler coming, it has got to stop. Enough is enough. And when you have this narrative coming from the left, from [the] media, from elected officials, even, that Trump has to be stopped by any means necessary, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that these people are being radicalized and taking action like this.
Congressman, name me a single Democratic elected official who has called for the assassination of former President Trump. I'll wait.
It won't be long before Trump will also cast blame upon Biden and Harris just as he did late last month after the first attempt on his life. In an interview with Dr. Phil, Trump stated:
When this happened, people would ask, whose fault is it? I think to a certain extent it’s Biden’s fault and Harris’s fault. And I’m the opponent. They were weaponizing government against me, they brought in the whole DoJ to try and get me, they weren’t too interested in my health and safety.
They were making it very difficult to have proper staffing in terms of Secret Service.
Given Trump's poor performance in his debate against Kamala Harris last week, blaming her, President Biden and other Democrats for the attempts on his life is basically the only card they have left to play, and they will play this hand again and again.
As much as contempt as I have for former President Trump and his behavior both inside and outside of the White House, I prefer that he be defeated by ballots instead of bullets. It is wrong to try to kill Trump just as it was wrong for January 6th insurrectionists to shout, "Hang Mike Pence!!!" - an assessment with which Trump concurred.
Unfortunately, things come in threes, and I would not be shocked if there was another attempt made on Trump's life between now and the election. Conversely, I would also not be surprised if a Trump supporter saw fit to make an attempt on Vice-President Harris' life in retaliation for the two attempts on Trump's life.
Chicago stands at 35-115 with a dozen games left to play. If they lose six of those games, then they will eclipse the 1962 New York Mets with 121 wins and thus become the worst MLB team in the modern era.
The White Sox travel to the West Coast to play both the Los Angeles Angels and the San Diego Padres. The team will return to Chicago on September 23rd to play a three-game home stand against the Angels before finishing the season on the road against the Detroit Tigers at Comerica Park.
While the Angels are in the last place in the AL West and could conceivably lose 100 games this season, the White Sox would have to play their best baseball of the year to avoid baseball ignobility. The odds are against them as the Padres are the top seed in the NL Wild Card race while the Tigers still have a chance at post-season play.
Nevertheless, the 2024 Chicago White Sox do have something to prove to themselves if for no other reason than pride.
Vance: The American media totally ignored this stuff until Donald Trump and I started talking about cat memes. If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do.
Bash: You just said that this is a story that you created.
Vance: It comes from firsthand accounts from my constituents. I say that we’re creating a story, meaning we’re creating the American media focusing on it. I didn’t create 20,000 illegal migrants coming into Springfield thanks to Kamala Harris’ policies. Her policies did that. But yes, we created the actual focus that allowed the American media to talk about this story and the suffering caused by Kamala Harris’ policies.
We're creating the American media focusing on it?
Nope. Vance admitted he made up the story out of whole cloth. And yet he continues to embroider that cloth:
My constituents have brought approximately a dozen separate concerns to me. Ten of them are verifiable and confirmable, and a couple of them I talk about because my constituents are telling me firsthand that they’re seeing these things. So I have two options, Dana, I can ignore them, which is what the American media has done for years to this community, or I can actually talk about what people are telling me.
Actually, there is another option. Vance or his staff could have advised these constituents who saw these things firsthand to contact local authorities to report a crime. But he didn't because these constituents either don't exist or they didn't actually see anything and heard it in the right-wing media echo chambers.
Not only is Vance is being dishonest regarding the veracity of the "eating pets" story, but he is also flat out lying when he says the Haitian immigrants are here illegally. Ohio's Republican Governor Mike DeWine contradicted Vance's "created story" in an appearance on ABC's This Weekin which he characterized the story as "garbage":
There’s a lot of garbage on the internet. You know, this is a piece of garbage that was simply not true. There’s no evidence of this at all.
This discussion about Haitians eating dogs is just not helpful. And again, these people are here legally. They’re here legally, and they want to work, and they are, in fact, working. And when you talk to the employers, what the employers tell you is, you know, we don’t know what we would do without them. They are working, and they’re working very hard.
Unfortunately, DeWine didn't mention Vance or Donald Trump by name and made it clear he still supports the Trump-Vance ticket. This means DeWine is supporting a ticket which will continue "create stories" about Ohio which aren't true. DeWine would have no such worry about the Harris-Walz ticket.
This evening, I went to the Brattle Theatre to see Key Largo starring Humphrey Bogart, Edward G. Robinson and Lauren Bacall.
Directed by John Huston and released in 1948, Key Largo is one of several films featuring Bacall being screened at the Brattle in honor of what would have been her 100th birthday on September 16th. Coincidentally, September 16th happens to be my birthday as well. Our similarities end there. (Well, O.K., we're both Jewish.)
The theatre was quite hot inside and not very comfortable. In this particular case, however, it added to the ambience as Bogie, Bacall and much of the cast including Lionel Barrymore in a sympathetic role (in stark contrast to his portrayal of Mr. Potter in It's a Wonderful Life) are being held in captivity in a hotel amid humidity and a hurricane in the Florida Keys by Edward G. Robinson and his thugs. Robinson was simultaneously comical and menacing. He was comical when slapping Bogie around but menacing when he was whispering into Bacall's ear.
Key Largo was the last of the four films Bogie and Bacall would make together (following To Have and Have Not, The Big Sleep and Dark Passages). Despite their 25-year age difference there was no age between them. Their chemistry is plain to see. Although Bacall was only 23 when Key Largo was released, she carried herself with a maturity beyond her years.
Yet one cannot mention Key Largo without acknowledging Claire Trevor who played Robinson's alcoholic lover. Desperate for a drink, Robinson demands she sing acapella only to deny her the drink when he realizes he is singing about him and not in a loving way. It is left to Bogie to give her the drink to which Robinson responds with the aforementioned comical slaps. While Bogie, Robinson and Bacall got top billing, it was Trevor would who win an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her performance, the only Oscar the film received.
It is also worth noting that Jay Silverheels, who would a decade later attain worldwide fame as Tonto in the Lone Ranger TV series, has a small uncredited role as one of a pair of brothers on the run from the law.
Yesterday evening, pro-Israel demonstrators in Newton, Massachusetts were confronted by a man shouting at them from across the street. The man then suddenly charged the protesters and tackled one of them. However, the man who was tackled had a gun and shot the man who tackled him.
Today, Scott Hayes of Framingham, Massachusetts, appeared in court pleading not guilty to charge of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. Hayes, who is not Jewish, was released on $5,000 bail and is due back in court in November. The shotgun victim, who has not been identified, is expected to survive and will eventually be charged with assault and battery for tackling Hayes.
Hayes' attorney Glen McKinlay argues that Hayes acted in self-defense. Indeed, had Hayes not been tackled there would be no need for him to use his weapon which he legally possesses. It is one thing for someone to express their contempt for pro-Israel protesters. It is quite another to violently confront them.
With that said, I have a bad feeling that the possibility of violence at pro-Israel demonstrations in this area will increase. It would not shock me the next time an anti-Israel agitator confronts pro-Israel demonstrators it will be with a gun, and that such a confrontation will result in deaths.
Then there is also the question of Hayes trial. Given the propensity of Palestinian protesters to show up everywhere, they will invariably show up at his proceeding. If Hayes is acquitted, his case is dismissed, or he is convicted but given a light sentence there is the chance that Palestinian protesters will escalate their behavior against Newton's Jewish community (which comprises nearly a third of the city's population) and non-Jews like Hayes who support Israel.
When I watched J.D. Vance's VP acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention last July, I observed him to be a phony. But I also noted his embrace of demagoguery:
However, there were moments when Vance tapped into Trump style demagoguery as when he stated, "Democrats flooded the country with illegal aliens." From there he blamed illegal aliens for housing shortages and "Biden's inflation crisis."
Now it is clear that Vance is an apprentice demagogue as evidenced by his amplification of the false story that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio are eating cats and dogs as well as other wildlife. Indeed, it his amplification that compelled Donald Trump to now infamously claim in his disastrous debate against Kamala Harris when he bellowed, "In Springfield, Ohio, they're eating the dogs, they're eating the cats, they're eating the pets of the people who live there."
In the last several weeks, my office has received many inquiries from actual residents of Springfield who've said their neighbors' pets or local wildlife were abducted by Haitian migrants. It's possible, of course, that all of these rumors will turn out to be false.
Do you know what's confirmed? That a child was murdered by a Haitian migrant who had no right to be here. That local health services have been overwhelmed. That communicable diseases - like TB and HIV - have been on the rise. That local schools have struggled to keep up with newcomers who don't know English. The rents have risen so fast that many Springfield families can't afford to put a roof over their head.
Indeed, Vance outright lies when he says a child was murdered by a Haitian migrant who shouldn't be here. Yes, an 11-year-child Aiden Clark was killed last year, but as his father Nathan stated his son, “was not murdered. He was accidentally killed by an immigrant from Haiti.” Moreover, the man responsible for Aiden Clark's death was in this country legally with an I-94. And yes, this same man has faced American justice and is serving between 9 and 13½ years for his crime.
While Nathan Clark feels sadness and sorrow for his death, that sadness and sorrow has been exacerbated by Vance, Trump and other MAGA Republicans. Clark has described Vance, Trump and other MAGATs as "morally bankrupt" adding:
They have spoken my son’s name and used his death for political gain. They can vomit all the hate they want about illegal immigrants, the border crisis and even untrue claims about fluffy pets being ravaged and eaten by community members. However, they are not allowed, nor have they ever been allowed, to mention Aiden Clark from Springfield, Ohio.
Sadly, Clark's appeals have fallen on deaf ears. Trump, Vance and MAGA Republicans aren't going to let facts and truth get in the way of the chance to spread a lie. As for Vance, the apprentice is seeking to please his master.
On this 23rd anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I think it is important to remember there are some Americans (particularly young Americans) who think Osama bin Laden was right.
It is worth remembering that much of the praise was in response to his anti-Semitic rhetoric regarding America's support of Israel.
Of course, if one is inclined to hate Jews then it is not a stretch of the imagination that one is inclined to support bin Laden. As I wrote at the time:
Most frightening of all is that within 20 to 25 years, barring a sea change in attitude, these pro-Hamas and pro-al Qaeda sentiments will become mainstream opinion in the United States or what is left of it.
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah."
Let it be clearly understood that bin Laden's objective was to kill American civilians, and that objective was carried out on September 11, 2001, which killed 2,977 Americans aboard four airliners, in the World Trade Center and in the Pentagon. Those 2,977 Americans included a great many Muslims. Thus, in bin Laden's eyes, it was the duty of every Muslim to kill other Muslims if they happened to be American.
Most of all, any American who justifies Osama bin Laden's rhetoric is also justifying their own execution.
Like millions of other Americans, I finished watching the debate between Vice-President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump.
Trump is what you would expect of him - nasty, boorish and full of shit. He also made a lot of faces and sounded like a fucking lunatic. But a lot of people like the fact that he's nasty, boorish, full of shit, makes faces and sounds like a fucking lunatic.
This brings me to Kamala Harris. She wasn't intimidated by Trump. Indeed, she took the initiative to shake his hand which I think caught him slightly off guard. But Harris has posited herself as the prosecutor and Trump as the convict. Harris stood up to Trump, but he wasn't phased in the least. She made no mistakes but I'm not sure she helped herself at all. It also didn't help that Trump ran roughshod over David Muir and Linsey Davis, but when Harris tried to interject, Davis shot her down firmly.
I would have liked Harris to challenge his claims of record inflation, that liberal scholars wanted Roe v. Wade overturned and reminded him that our unemployment rate has been below 4% most of the past 3½ years.
When the time comes, Harris will need to take command of the stage, not be intimidated nor distracted by Trump's antics while convincing and reassuring voters who might be on the fence that America will be in good hands with her in the Oval Office.
While she was neither intimidated nor distracted by Trump, she didn't take command of the stage I'm not sure how reassuring she was to people. Unfortunately, based on this debate performance, I don't think Harris did enough. In which case, we might end up with a hung jury or an acquittal. This would mean a second Trump presidency.
In Harris' closing statement she spoke of being a President who asked Americans, "Are you OK?" and caring about us rather than herself. But Trump, for all his nastiness, boorish and bullshit, pointedly asked why Harris hadn't done any of things she said she was going to do in 3½ years in the White House.
Mind you, many of us who watched the debate (me included) have already chosen our candidate. For the sliver among us who haven't decided, I don't think this debate moved the needle much as the kids like to say.
All of which means the next 8 weeks are going to be a very long slog. But we will be treated to VP debate between Tim Walz and J.D. Vance in 3 weeks from now.
A native of the Bronx, Kranepool attended James Monroe High School (as did my Dad) and would reach the big leagues with the Mets at the tail end of the 1962 season at the age of 17. When Kranepool made his debut, the Mets were concluding their expansion year in which the team lost a modern MLB record 120 games (which might soon be surpassed by the Chicago White Sox).
Kranepool was a fixture with the Mets in bad times to good times and back to bad times. He would collect 166 hits before the age of 20. Only Hall of Famers Mel Ott, Robin Yount as well as Chicago Cubs star Phil Cavaretta would have more. For all of his longevity with the Mets, Kranepool was only named to the NL All-Star Team once in 1965 and did not play.
However, Kranepool would struggle in 1970 and would be sent down the minors after hitting .118. Fortunately, Kranepool would rebound in 1971 hitting .280 with 14 HR and a career high 58 RBI. Kranepool would return to the World Series in 1973, but the Mets would fall just short against the Oakland A's. Over time, Kranepool gradually saw more time as a pinch hitter and would excel in this role despite the team's declining fortunes until retiring after the 1979 season.
In 18 seasons with the Mets, Kranepool played 1853 games which is still a team record. In a sense, Kranepool can truly be called Mr. Met. In those 1853 games Kranepool played in a Mets uniform, he collected 1,418 hits for a lifetime batting average of .261 with 118 HR and 614 RBIs.
To give you an idea of how long Kranepool played with the Mets, he was part of the team with their first 8 managers - Casey Stengel, Wes Westrum, Salty Parker, Gil Hodges, Yogi Berra, Roy McMillan, Joe Frazier and Joe Torre. Kranepool was inducted into the Mets Hall of Fame in 1990.
I leave you with Kranepool's aforementioned HR in the 1969 World Series. R.I.P.
At this time 24 hours from now, Kamala Harris will be debating Donald Trump.
When the time comes, Harris will need to take command of the stage, not be intimidated nor distracted by Trump's antics while convincing and reassuring voters who might be on the fence that America will be in good hands with her in the Oval Office.
Of course, even if she does so there is no guarantee she will be elected. Mitt Romney had a spectacular first debate against Barack Obama in 2012 and it didn't mean anything. Five weeks elapsed between Romney's moment in the sun and election day. By contrast, there will be another 8 weeks of election campaigning between what is likely to be Harris and Trump's only debate and election day. The debate might be distant memory by the time October rolls around.
Donald Trump is the devil we know, and it is up to Kamala Harris to convince us we can't make another deal with the devil.
Jones enjoyed an acting career which lasted nearly 7 decades. While Jones himself had a commanding presence, his voice was otherworldly whether it was for Darth Vader in Star Wars, Mufasa in The Lion King or uttering a simple phrase like, "This is CNN." He could have said, "I'd like a burger and a Coke," and we would have been hanging on every word.
James Earl Jones has now left this world, but his voice shall soar forever.
Perhaps the words which resonate with me the most is the monologue he delivered in Field in Dreams in which he told Ray Kinsella (as played by Kevin Costner) that people would come because baseball is a reminder of what was good and can be good again.
Today, Jones walked off in the Iowa cornfield to join the likes of Shoeless Joe Jackson. R.I.P.
The office of the former President issued a statement indicating, "President Bush retired from presidential politics years ago."
While Bush is within his right to keep his vote to himself, this is nevertheless a cop out.
Former Vice-President Cheney has been retired from public life for equally long and this has not prevented him from taking a stand. As I argued a couple of days ago:
But now that Cheney has endorsed Harris one must ask what excuse Republicans have to keep supporting Trump? One can also ask what excuse Republicans have to stay silent?
Will we hear from former President George W. Bush? Mitt Romney? Paul Ryan?
It remains to be seen, but the Cheneys have thrown down the gauntlet and Republicans won't be able to ignore the question if they too will support Kamala Harris.
Well, it would seem Bush is doing his best to do just that. But that isn't good enough.
If I were to hazard a guess, he'll probably do the same this time around. So why can't he tell us now?
If Bush cannot bring himself to vote for Harris, then he should say so and tell us why. But if he is prepared to vote for Harris then what is he so afraid of? Does he think endorsement would do more harm than good? Or is he simply unable to put country over party? Or perhaps family name over country?
Assuming Bush will write in Condi Rice or for that matter Liz Cheney, it is worth remembering that in declaring her intention to vote for Harris she pointedly stated, "I don't believe that we have the luxury of writing in candidates' names, particularly in swing states."
While one might not consider Texas a swing state, Harris has pulled within the margin of error with Trump in the Lone Star State. So, Bush's support for Harris could help make a difference. One can only hope the Cheneys work behind the scenes to urge the 43rd President to reconsider his decision.
While Walz acknowledges what occurred on October 7th "was a horrific act of violence against the people of Israel" and asserts Israel's right to defend itself, he does not mention Hamas let alone characterize it as an act of terrorism. Nor does he mention the six hostages recently executed by Hamas including Hersh Goldberg-Polin whose parents spoke at the Democratic National Convention last month.
From there, Walz says, "But we can't allow what's happened in Gaza to happen. The Palestinian people have every right to life and liberty themselves." So how does Walz propose Israel defend itself? Yes, the Palestinian people have the right to life and liberty, but what has Hamas done to promote life and liberty? And many Palestinians who aspire to life and liberty want a Palestine which runs from the river to the sea and with it the right to resistance even if that means murdering people at kibbutzs and music festivals.
Now, Walz says he is in favor of a two-state solution but says, "We need the Netanyahu government to start moving in that direction." Well, what about Hamas? Or for that matter the Palestinian Authority? Why does Walz think pressure should be applied solely to Israel? Is Walz, a former social studies teacher, unaware of the fact that the UN General Assembly created a Jewish and an Arab state in 1947 which the Jews accepted and the Arabs (re: Palestinians) rejected?
Nevertheless, Walz's comments concerning Israel and those who hate Israel are more wrong than right. I don't think Josh Shapiro would have made such an error.
During a campaign appearance in Phoenix on Thursday, Republican VP nominee J.D. Vance commented on the school shooting in Winder, Georgia (a suburb of Atlanta) which occurred the previous day claiming the lives of two students and two teachers. The 14-year-old shooter and his father are now in custody.
I don’t like that this is a fact of life. But if you are a psycho and you want to make headlines, you realize that our schools are soft targets. And we have got to bolster security at our schools. We’ve got to bolster security so if a psycho wants to walk through the front door and kill a bunch of children they’re not able.
I'm afraid Vance misses the point.
For starters, instead of stating that school shootings are a fact life, why doesn't Vance ask why school shootings are a fact of life? Look at the numbers of school shootings before 2000 and after 2000. During the 1980s, the decade in which Vance was born, there were 74 school shootings in the United States. In the 2010s, there were 265 such incidents. In this decade which is not even half over there have already been 208 such incidents and counting. Of the 10 school shootings with the highest death tolls, 8 of them have occurred within the past 25 years with only the Columbine shooting happening prior to 2000.
Let us also consider Vance's statement, "But if you are a psycho and you want to make headlines, you realize that our schools are soft targets." Such a statement suggests the perpetrators of these events have no connection to their targets. In fact, in most instances, the perpetrators are either current or former students who have an axe to grind with the institution itself.
I would also be remiss in pointing that Vance's solution is to bolster school security as if the educational institutions are at fault. As Sam Stein pointed out in The Bulwark, "Vance’s suggestion that the only possible response is to fortify our schools and get used to the dystopia was not just defeatist and cynical; it ignored the fact we’ve already taken many of those steps. The bipartisan gun safety bill that Biden signed allocated billions of dollars to prevent school violence."
Notably absent in Vance's assessment is any thought of addressing access to weapons which have the capacity to kill large numbers of people. But in Vance's world, the Second Amendment trumps being able to go to school without fear of being shot to death.
There is symbiosis in Vance calling school shootings a fact of life and Trump saying we have to get over it.
Granted, reducing the number of school shootings in this country is a daunting task and would likely be a generational undertaking even if the goodwill existed to make the effort. Nevertheless, when Vance says school shootings are a fact of life and Trump says we have to get over them, we must say, "No, that is unacceptable. We have to do better."
The younger Cheney broke the news when she was asked point blank about her father's intentions at the Texas Tribune Festival on Friday. Cheney said matter-of-factly, “Dick Cheney will be voting for Kamala Harris," to thundering applause.
In our nation’s 248-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump. He tried to steal the last election using lies and violence to keep himself in power after the voters had rejected him. He can never be trusted with power again.
As citizens, we each have a duty to put country above partisanship to defend our Constitution. That is why I will be casting my vote for Vice President Kamala Harris.
But now that Cheney has endorsed Harris one must ask what excuse Republicans have to keep supporting Trump? One can also ask what excuse Republicans have to stay silent?
Will we hear from former President George W. Bush? Mitt Romney? Paul Ryan?
It remains to be seen, but the Cheneys have thrown down the gauntlet and Republicans won't be able to ignore the question if they too will support Kamala Harris.
While I cannot say I'm shocked that Judge Juan Merchan agreed to Donald Trump's request that sentencing be delayed in the New York hush money case until after the election, I believe this delay represents a denial of justice.
Judge Merchan ruled in part, "to avoid any appearance — however unwarranted — that the proceeding has been affected by or seeks to affect the approaching Presidential election in which the Defendant is a candidate."
Nonsense.
Trump broke the law and was found guilty by a jury of peers on 34 counts. Running for President or any political office should not be used as a stay out of jail free card.
However, if Trump wins the election, I think we can forget about any sentencing hearing whatsoever.
By then Trump will be for all intents and purposes above the law.
If we choose Trump again then we have only ourselves to blame because we will have declared that criminal convictions do not matter. We will have passed sentence upon ourselves.
Thus, it is incumbent upon voters to reject his candidacy and support Kamala Harris.
Trump is hardly in any position to lecture Jews about voting for Harris or any other Democrat when his VP running mate J.D. Vance and confidante Tucker Carlson pal around with Holocaust deniers.
This would be the same Tucker Carlson who had a prominent speaking slot at the Republican National Convention and pushed for Trump to select Vance as his running mate.
Yesterday, Chicago Cubs pitchers Shota Imanaga, Nate Pearson and Porter Hodge combined for a no-hitter in a 12-0 shellacking of the Pittsburgh Pirates. Imanaga, a 31-year-old Japanese southpaw pitched 7 hitless innings with Pearson pitching the 8th and Hodge getting the final three outs in the 9th.
But until last night, all Cubs no-hitters thrown since September 1972 took place elsewhere. Actually, the Cubs had a 36-year no-hit drought until Carlos Zambrano no-hit the Houston Astros. Zambrano's no-hitter took place in Milwaukee's Miller Park because of Hurricane Ike.
For the Cubs next no-hitter, we return to Milwaukee where Alec Mills no-hit the Brewers. Neither Cubs nor Brewers fans would witness this bit of history as it took place during the COVID shortened 2020 season.
I don’t think that Vice President Harris is a worthy president of this country. I think we need to have a president who can give an interview, who can articulate a vision, who can put together an English sentence, who can articulate her and defend her policies and her record and who can engage in a debate with, and regular debates unscripted appearances, president or vice president.
As a conservative, as someone who believes in and cares about the Constitution, I have thought deeply about this, and because of the danger that Donald Trump poses, not only am I not voting for Donald Trump, but I will be voting for Kamala Harris.
Her views are so radical. It was a surprising pick to me because in order for Biden to win he has to appeal to suburban voters in a lot of swing states around the country. He's got to appeal to people who are, you know, not California liberals. He's already got the California liberal vote. I don't see that Harris helps him.
I think what he ended up having to do was basically placate the far left-wing of the party. In addition to the fact that she would be a terrible vice-president policy-wise for the country it tells us something about Joe Biden. It tells us that he's not really leading the party, not really in charge and sort of putting his mark on the party in the way most nominees do. He's much more having to keep them happy, but I think by doing so he made a pick that is going to be a mistake for him politically.
Now, I'm sure the Trump campaign is going to come across this interview if they haven't done so already and will emphasize how Cheney described Harris as "radical", "a terrible vice-president policy-wise for the country" and how she was "a mistake for him politically." After all, Democrats are doing the same where it concerns J.D. Vance's past statements about Trump.
While there's no doubt Cheney isn't going to agree with Harris on many policy matters, her objections to Harris pale in comparison to Trump and it was the Republican Party who ousted her from her House Leadership position while Republican voters in Wyoming rejected her for a MAGA mouthpiece because she would not worship at his altar.
Liz Cheney may have said that Harris was "radical" and "a terrible vice-president policy-wise for the country", but she has never charactered the Vice-President as "clearly unfit" for office much less a "danger" as she has with Trump.
Now that Cheney has endorsed Harris, I can't wait to see them together on the campaign trail.
