via Instagram http://ift.tt/2bBU9ec
Wednesday, August 31, 2016
Tuesday, August 30, 2016
Monday, August 29, 2016
Sunday, August 28, 2016
Saturday, August 27, 2016
Friday, August 26, 2016
Thursday, August 25, 2016
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
8 days
I made it to 199 this year, but then a broken travel trip messed me up and I stopped. Well, I didn’t stop, but I missed 2 days. Then I missed another one a week later, just busy with family and didn’t press. Then I missed the day I came back from San Antonio. Between an early morning, helping Kyle move, and Kendall get to a lesson, I just didn’t want to run at 9:30 at night.
However, I’m back on track. 8 days in a row, even though I was sleepy on the way to the gym. That was a long mile, especially with the prospect of class after.
8 days in a row, but 294 for the year.
Sunday, August 21, 2016
Saturday, August 20, 2016
Friday, August 19, 2016
Thursday, August 18, 2016
Monday, August 15, 2016
Sunday, August 14, 2016
Thursday, August 11, 2016
Sunday, August 7, 2016
Saturday, August 6, 2016
Morning class with my middle kid. We both passed, so we're halfway to being motorcycle certified
via Instagram http://ift.tt/2aJrWSS
Friday, August 5, 2016
Our Iran Discussion is Broken
I agree, this is a broken way to discuss Iran.
I thought the timing of the $400mm and the hostages was either incompetence, or perhaps a coverup, but since the $400mm was announced months ago, my suspicion is that Iran dragged their feet, using this as a face saving measure to release hostages.
I heard an interesting debate on the Iran deal that has the GOP up in arms. It was on Intelligence Squared. It featured a few experts, and no one really said we shouldn’t have any agreement, but that this was a bad agreement. I was torn. I couldn’t decide whether this was bad or good, but that we did need an agreement. I felt the “good” side did a slightly better job, but not a great job.
As a side note, the first one was on President Obama usurping the power of Congress. I agree with the votes. He hasn’t, but he has pressed things and Congress has been lax.
My big thought, as I’ve learned a little about this, is that we can’t seem to have a decent conversation about it. Far, far too many people are just fundamentally angry and upset by Iran, and it seems deep rooter. Perhaps this is because of the hostage crisis in the 70s, but it means that we cannot remotely even begin to discuss moving forward.
I’m of a mind we need diplomatic relations, but also that we need Iran to grow an economy. The more prosperous, the less likely they are to risk war, and certainly the less likely that their people risk war without being directly attacked.
Thursday, August 4, 2016
Tuesday, August 2, 2016
Why Trump?
A friend posted a note asking why would anyone think Mr. Trump is qualified to be President of the US. While I have no love for Mr. Trump, I took the challenge. Here is what I wrote:
“Well, you asked for reasons why Donald Trump should be President. Here's a few thoughts.
First, he meets the qualifications. He's over 35, a natural citizen, and lived in the US for more than 14 years. Silly, but that qualifies him, you, me, and many others. This job is about leading the US, and many of us are qualified to do that, for better or worse, by virtue of being citizens and being adults for some period of time.
He's a successful businessman. No matter how you may view his tactics or his level of success, he clearly has had some success, growing his money from millions to billions. While I might agree with Mark Cuban that he might not have $1b in liquid wealth, I suspect he has more than $1b in property and control in companies.
The skills in business sometimes translate to government, sometimes not, but we haven't seen Mr. Trump in a governance situation where he must work with others and partner, cut deals without necessarily having a large imbalance of power, or managing the military. Some other Presidents haven't had much experience in these areas, indeed, some very little. Eisenhower, for example (though he had other experience).
Trump has negotiated with other governments and world leaders. He's had success here, at least personal success, and he hasn't managed to offend these individuals in the past, so perhaps he could handle himself as a statesman of some sort.
He isn't beholden to special interests, though I wonder why he's putting out fundraisers now. I'm sure some is for the GOP, but it's a sign that perhaps he's moving closer to the establishment? Or garnering favors he'll trade in later? In any case, there is an argument to be made that he won't need to trade in favors that other politicians might want to get rich after office. To be fair, Senator Clinton is in this same place, already worth tens of millions.
Trump has aligned himself with the GOP and conservatism for the last few POTUS cycles. That means that he may approve and learn towards helping a GOP led Congress to pass laws that appeal to their interests. Since their fiscal interests are only slightly different from the Democrats, I would guess this is in the area of social change, which a large percentage of the country would agree with.
He would hopefully appoint conservative justices if he had the chance, at least I suspect some GOP people will vote for him on this alone. At worst, they'll get what Senator Clinton would do, at best, they'll get one (or more) Scalia-type justices.
As a businessman, he understands the issues of fiscal responsibility, at least to some extent. Having gone through bankruptcy, one could say he might be less inclined to spend money overseas on wars or other non-direct US interests. He flips and flops here, so I'm not sure I agree, but that's certainly a possibility, and one I would support.
He's been a bit of a blustery pussy at times, backing down when truly confronted with a losing situation. Certainly a number of lawsuits show this, as do some dealings with other businesspeople or world leaders. I do think he's likely to back down in many cases. Blustering has worked for Soviet leaders, and various other dictators or prime ministers at times. I think if generals refused to torture, or the DOJ refused some unlawful/unconstitutional order, or a world leader pressed, he'd back down.
I think one reason my son, and others, support him is that he has a chance to change the GOP, perhaps really break it up and reboot it. Many conservatives have shown they truly don't like the established Cruz/Rubio/Christie leaders, who bend and bow as much as Democrats do. Trump perhaps can, and perhaps has, forced a change here in how conservatives might view the world.
Certainly he doesn't necessarily bow to the base, or the very socially conservative.
However, given all this, I can't support him, and actually would actively vote against him. I can't take the chance he won't make a stupid decision with the overreaching power Presidents have taken. I can't take the chance he won't bow down to the very afraid and highly bigoted that see brown skin = bad, or black skin = criminal. I can't take the chance he won't actually get a strong GOP majority in both houses and also rule with a conservative bent.
Most of all I can't take the chance that he's just not very smart and will end up careening back and forth between opinions from whichever staffer most kisses his ass. Or worse, Pence. I truly think he's a person that I would not want to trust with the office, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Mr. Trump do something that would require impeachment and we'd end up with Pence.
So if it's close, I'll hold my nose and vote for Senator Clinton. I would prefer to vote Libertarian, but I think Mr. Trump is too reckless to be President.
On that piece in Medium posted above, I mostly agree. There are issues with welfare and costs, certainly I'm disappointed with President Obama and continued war, including another one todya. However that's misleading in that I think the economy is a mess everywhere, including China. I think the intelligence and military agencies are sure they can change other countries. I'm also sure that we are headed in many wrong directions, but also many right ones.”
After a comment about requirements not being qualifications (they’re not) and that my friend isn’t qualified to be a CEO, I rebutted:
“Well, I think we over value one’s qualifications but I was trying to objectively review his qualifications. I probably failed because I think he's a douche-canoe but I also have to respect and appreciate that millions of people do see him as qualified and not all of those are uneducated Americans.
You are qualified to be CEO of Apple. We could argue about the job you'd do but don't think most CEOs are smarter or more capable than many business people. They aren't, imho”
I have no support for Mr. Trump. While I think some of the things he’s been picked on lately are silly. Certainly the baby thing, or the “don’t write good” comment today. Having been on stage, and had far more of my words recorded than I’d like, I make mistakes at times that would lead someone to question whether I can speakz English.
However, the bigger point is that our President should be above many of the things that Trump reacts to and posts about. He shouldn’t engage in bickering for no gain or without reason.
While I have some reasons above, as I try to make sense of how differently we can see the world, I think overall he is a buffoon and not a good choice for President of the United States.
Monday, August 1, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
