Monday, April 18, 2016

Monday's Observations


Just another manic Monday, ooh, oh oh...

Weather has finally warmed up to the expected seasonal temperature.  Even so, the lovely weather can't distract me from things, that make me go hmmm...


Tomorrow of course is the New York primary.


Just want to point out a few things, that I just can't keep mum about.


     Bernie Sanders thankfully returned safely home, after the quick jaunt to Rome.  Still, I find it to be a curious endeavor.  
     When the trip was first announced, there was speculation as to whether it was at the Vatican's invitation, or a Sanders' campaign maneuver.  Given the timing, and this Crux article, I bet on the latter.  It was announced on April 8, which I also found interesting given the week's earlier happenings.  Let's see, you had the Daily Newsinterview on 4/1; then the transcripts came out on 4/4.  Then Sanders's campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, made a lovely statement about Hillary's ambitions on 4/5;  to which Hillary laughed at on 4/6.  On 4/7 Bernie announced that Hillary was unqualified, and when asked for reason, pretty much stated a phrase as a mother of 2 girls I hear often enough; "She started it!" which she didn't.  Some termed the week, "Bernie's Bad Week."  Then out from nowhere, Bernie's been invited to speak at the Vatican.  
     Interesting for a number of reasons, other than timing, if one has time to ponder, and you know I do. 
     Prior to the announcement, I remembered seeing an article on Senator Sanders last summer, when he stated that he was proud of his Jewish heritage, but was not particularly religious.  That has kinda changed over the campaign.  No matter.  He got religion, okeedoe.  But then we heard that the Pope would likely not be there.  But then Bernie got lucky, and he and his wife got to see the pontiff after all.  Which I'm happy for him- when in Rome... 
     Though seems to me that "the meeting" was more like me getting to shake the hand of someone I admire, introduce them to my husband or daughters, and perhaps inform the object of my admiration on why I admired them.  Last fall I went with my daughters to a book signing of Chelsea Clinton's It's Your World.  She signed our book, exchanged pleasantries, indulged us by posing with us for a photo, and we were on our way.  She's a lovely person to be certain, but to imply we had a meeting, would be more than a stretch.  It would border on an untruth.  The headline on Google for the above Reuters article is, "Pope Discussed Moral Economy with Bernie Sanders before Greece trip." Really? 

Sanders has now returned to the homeland. 


     However, last week, was another humdoozie for Sanders before he jetted off for Italy.  There was a rally on Wednesday, with thousands in Washington Square park.  Dr. Paul Song introduced Senator Sanders to the stage, but not before making a name for himself.  

      Dr. Song did apologize and clarified that he was not talking about Secretary Clinton but certain members of Congress.  Since the word "Democratic" was used in the phrase, one can conclude that he was referring to Democratic members of Congress.  Pity that a whopping bunch of those Democratic members of Congress are also Super Delegates who are for Clinton.  I don't know about them, but I strictly adhere to one rule during campaign season:
  
     Dr. Song has since resigned his position as Chairman of the Board for Courage Campaign, an independent organization that fights for a more progressive California and country, but does not endorse political candidates. 

     Then Thursday, there was the debate.  Nothing new really, just nastier.  Then 15 minutes prior to the end of the debate, Sec. Clinton brought up the fact that it was the ninth debate, and there had yet to be a discussion about a woman's right to choose.  I stood up at home and applauded.  Of course Sanders' is for a woman's right to choose; but allow me to point out that he would not have made it far, nor would Secretary Clinton in the Democratic race if either were not.  That doesn't mean there's nothing left to talk about.  Just as with economic, health, and foreign affairs, there is much to discuss when it comes to Planned Parenthood, abortion, birth control, and just because the candidates are both pro choice, and both pro immigration reform, doesn't meat that's where the conversation stops.
     Not now, not with Trump, Cruz, and Kasich; but believe it or not there is a group, Republican Majority For Choice.  They're growing and they could very well be the future of the GOP.
     So to not discuss it, is to not look beyond the here and now.  That tomorrow will be history
     
     This weekend, while Sanders was abroad, Clinton traveled to California, to take part of a fundraiser headed up by George and Amal Clooney.  The top ticket price for the dinner was if I remember correctly, was $325,000.  Yup that's nutty.  Golly can you imagine?  However.  Let's look at it from a couple of other views.  Or perhaps just not only the clip of the Chuck Todd interview with George Clooney where he agrees that it's an obscene amount.  The interview doesn't stop there.  Clooney goes on to explain that a lot of that money goes down the ticket to hopefully ensure more Democrat senators are elected, to help secure a spot on the Supreme Court to overturn Citizens United.  Which would greatly help get the money out of politics for future elections. 
      
     Now I know that the Sanders campaign takes great pride that the average amount of donations are $27.  Since there had been claims early in the campaign of amounts being $33.51, with 99% being less than $250 I was suspicious.  First off, I seriously doubt that I've given much more than $30 total this campaign season.  I have kids. Enough said.  So, the millions of young college students who are a big force in the Sanders campaign; always wonder they get their money.  And that $27; just a little too neat, that it is exactly 1% of the maximum amount one can give, $2700.  Even so, must be nice to have money to donate.  Not to mention throw at people...
If I was one who'd given hard earned money to the Sanders campaign; I would not be happy with this campaign tactic. 

     Back to the Clooney interview, (which I included the YouTube  interview in its entirety below).  After watching the interview,  I could not help but admire the difference between Clooney, and say, Susan Sarandon's interview with Chris Hayes in March.  Notice how Clooney says not one negative about Sanders.  He's even complimentary.  He explains all the positives about Clinton and thus the reason that he is supporting her and hopes that she will win.  But HE DOES NOT say one negative thing about Sanders.  What a world of difference between him, Morgan Freeman, Bradley Whitford, and surrogates for Sanders.  Who seldom give the reasons they are for Sanders, but boy, they can't wait to bring up all the reasons they are against Clinton.  There are times when the only thing new I see about the Sanders' campaign is that they have a new surrogate saying the same ol' about Clinton. 

     Good ol' Sanders, he never says anything, apology, denouncing, nothing, unless called out by someone like Claire McCaskill.  Nice to know that meeting about moral economy really sunk in.

     The networks to spite having him on every chance they get, hardly say boo to him about anything.  What the hell happened to journalism?  I may go into more on another day. 

Know I'm not alone in this thought. 


Here's an article, by Daily News Bin's Jack Wibbe driving home the point.

     I have a degree in Journalism from 20+ years ago, and from the News/Editorial classes, I remember one thing: "just the facts m'am".



For now, that's all folks.