It's Not That Simple, Stupid!

"It's the economy, stupid!" is what James Carville said in a meeting to then Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton's presidential campaign staff during the 1992 Presidential campaign.  That phrase has had a lasting legacy in political lore because it perfectly captured the mood of the American electorate during that campaign cycle where the United States was in a recession and 64% of Americans disapproved of President Bush's job performance.   It was the perfect phrase for the perfect time.   I would like to flatter Carville through imitation by offering a slightly different version of his message to my fellow Americans during this presidential campaign; It's not that simple, stupid! 

While watching the debate Monday night between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, it hit me why Donald Trump is doing so well in the polls.   To put it bluntly, he's simple.   He's a simple man.  He likes beautiful women, big buildings, and lots of money.   He lies constantly because some people believe him.   He routinely insults large groups of people in generalities.   He says Mexico is sending rapists to America although he supposes some of them are good people.   He says African Americans can't walk down the streets in their neighborhoods without being shot.   He calls women fat and ugly.   He talks about Marco Rubio being Little Marco.   He calls Elizabeth Warren Pocohantas.   He calls Ted Cruz Lyin Ted.  He calls Jebb Bush Low Energy Jeb.     He says no one will vote for Carly Fiorina because nobody wants to look at her face.   If I told you all of these things had come from a first grader you would not be surprised because we expect first graders to be simple.   But this came from one of the two major candidates for the Presidency of the United States.   And current polls show that half the electorate plans on voting for this very simple man.   The reason, half of America has become very simple. 

His solutions for Americans are also simple.   To stop the Mexican rapists from coming over he would simply build a wall.  To stop terrorists from entering the country he would simply ban Muslims from coming into the country.  To stop the press from reporting unflattering stories about him he would simply strengthen our libel laws.   To get the economy back on track he would simply negotiate better trade deals.  If NATO countries weren't current on their payments he would simply not defend them if attacked.  If an Iranian battleship taunted one of our Navy vessels at sea he would simply drop a bomb on them.  To defeat Isis he would simply wipe them off the face of the map.   To stop crime he would simply reinstitute stop and frisk even though the courts have already ruled it unconstitutional (of course then he said he would only do it in Chicago).   The solutions are so simple and according to Donald of the 320 million people in this country,  he is the only one that can save us because everyone else is so incompetent.    It's that simple.  (I'm not kidding he actually said that.  See the video)

But here's the problem for Donald, and for all of the rest of those who think that the solutions to this nation's problems are simple, it's not that simple, Stupid!  If it were that simple the problems would have been solved already.   I'm going to tell you guys something about Washington D.C. and the people who actually run your government day to day that you might now know.  They are literally the smartest people in the country.   Now I'm not talking about the elected officials.   We can all see that some of them aren't that bright.   I"m talking about the staffers, the lobbyists and the career bureaucrats, the people that actually do the work in DC.  That kid that was valedictorian of your high school class?   There are 200 kids smarter than that kid that will get turned down for White House Fellowships this year.   Chances are there are 3 people who work on your United States Senator's staff that are smarter than that kid.   There are probably 20 people who lobby for the NRA or Goldman Sachs or the Motion Picture Association of America smarter than that kid.   One of the reasons I love Washington DC so much is that there are so many incredibly smart people walking around that town every day.   I thrive on talking to smart people.  Washington DC is to me what I imagine the Miss Universe pageant is to Trump.  

And that's not even to mention the Presidential cabinet level appointees who actually run the agencies.  Attorney General Loretta Lynch has a degree in English and American Literature from Harvard and a degree from Harvard Law School.  Treasury Secretary Jack Lew has degrees from Harvard and Harvard Law School.  Secretary of the interior Sally Jewell has a mechanical engineering degree from the University of Washington. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsak has a degree from Hamilton College in New York and a law degree from Albany Law School.  Julian Castro, the HUD Secretary, has a degree from Stanford and a law degree from Harvard.  The President has degrees from Columbia and Harvard Law School.  The First Lady has degrees from Princeton and Harvard Law School.   All of these highly educated people from the very best institutions of higher learning in the country are working full time on solving this nation's problems, but Bubba from Omaha who is in his second year at Omaha Junior college taking night classes has the solutions.   Because it's simple.  

My point is this.  Nothing simple gets to the President's desk.  Anything simple is handled well before then.   Again, the President of the United States has at his disposal the very smartest people in the country working on all of these issues that we fight on Facebook about every day.   That's all they are focusing on.    And when they come up with proposed solutions they have to forge consensus with other people who are also the very smartest people in the country.     And then they listen to lobbyists who are some of the very smartest people in the country.  And then they have to get those ideas through to Congressional staffers who are some of the very smartest people in the country.   And then it goes to those Cabinet level departments, and eventually may get to the desk of a Cabinet Secretary.  And if all of those very smart people can't come to a consensus, it might end up on the President's desk for an executive decision.   So you take something that a lot of folks think is very simple like the Keystone Pipeline.    All of those very smart people have been working on this for years and still have not come to a consensus.   What are the odds that Bubba from Omaha is going to figure it out when has not yet figured out his remedial math classes that don't give him any college credit.   If it were simple it would be fixed already.  Donald's evidently to simple, or to stupid, to know that.  

Is the Church Failing Us??

"It is appalling that the most segregated hour of Christian America is eleven o'clock on Sunday morning?" - Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

I went to church this morning.  Although I still consider myself a Christian, this isn't a regular occurrence any more.  But my wife is out of town and this morning I went to church with my daughters.  Although I stopped believing in literal interpretations of the Bible years ago it is still the book that is the foundation of my belief system.   Even though I"m in the midst of a personal spiritual journey, the words of Jesus Christ have been my moral compass for my entire life.  Those teachings have served me well, and my wife and I try to impart those teachings to our children.    

 I also went to church this morning because I felt that I needed something to help me deal with the mounting anger and frustration I've experienced this week in the wake of two more police killings of black men that by all appearances were unwarranted.   Two more people that look like me who are no longer alive primarily because they looked like me.  Two more families who will have to survive the loss of a loved one unexpectedly for no reason at all.   President Abraham Lincoln once said, "I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go. My own wisdom and that of all about me seemed insufficient for the day."  That's part of the reason I went to church this morning, the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.   

 The church I attend is one of the contemporary, non denominational churches that have become so popular in America.  That's an actual picture of the sanctuary above.  An accurate description of one of the services would be Amateur Night at the Apollo with a sermon at the end.  Today's service was pretty typical.  The sanctuary reminds you of a modern Broadway Theatre.   There is awesome lighting and the optics and sound of the production from the stage is phenomenal.   Service started with a few contemporary gospel selections from a Praise and Worship Team right out of VH1 central casting.   The music, vocal performances, and stage presence were outstanding, as good as you will see in nearly any professional theatre production.   The words to the songs and a live stream of the stage were displayed on the three gigantic plasma screens surrounding the stage and the crowd was really into it, signing along and really into the music.  As I stood and tried to follow the words to the song one thought kept popping into my mind.  How can all of these people be so happy?  Do they not know what happened this week?  Am I missing something? 

 A little more background about my church.  When I first started attending the church we met in a small hotel meeting room, and the church had about 60 members.  Today we meet in the sanctuary above, which seats 2500 people.  There is no mortgage on the building, the final $1.2 million payment was made last year.  There are multiple services.  The church does wonderful work.  There is a phenomenal children's ministry.  They do mission trips to spread the gospel.   One of the things I love most about the church is everything is done in decency and order.   Every volunteer worker you encounter is friendly and professional.   The motto is "a place where no one walks alone", and I know from experience that they work hard to make the slogan a reality.   

 The church congregation is overwhelmingly black.  There is probably 10 to 15 percent non black membership, but it's a "black church".   The church is located in Collin County in Texas.  The median household  income in our area is over $90k per year.  I think that black people make up about 7% of the population.   One running joke I like to tell half in jest is there is one black family on every street in Collin County, and they all go to our church.   Even though the church is overwhelmingly black, it's message is race neutral.   As the minister said in the sermon today, we consider ourselves "Christians first".  A white female was the first person to appear on stage to address the crowd this morning, and the sermon was delivered by the Director of Family Ministries who is also a white male.   The church really does practice what it preaches. 

 So back to my dilemma this morning.  I think every day about the number of black men that have been murdered by policemen on camera, and the fact that the murderers often face no legal consequences.   The main tenet of the Christian faith is that God is in complete control, and nothing happens unless God allows it to happen.   So I'm wondering in church this morning how can all these black people be so happy worshipping a God who continues to allow our people to be murdered, and who continues to allow their murderers to go unpunished?   Am I the only one in this sanctuary filled with black people that wants to know why God is allowing this to continue to happen?   Am I not a good Christian because I have that question?  How can we have an entire church service this week when we've had two high profile killings of black men caught on camera and have only a couple of passing references to "systemic racism"?  Am I the only one wanting to hear something that gives me hope that I won't be the next black man lying dead in the street because a police officer thought I "looked like a bad dude'?  I'm listening intently to today's sermon on being a "Christian first", and I'm wondering how this helps me when a cop pulls me over.   

 The minister today said that God allows those in positions of authority to be in those positions and we should respect that fact.  So by that rationale God allowed Betty Shelby to be in the position where she could end Terrence Crutcher's life on that highway in Tulsa last week.   Am I the only one that has a problem with that?  This is a recurring theme at our church, that God allows those in authority to be in authority and we should respect them until God replaces them.   So does this mean Rosa Parks was wrong for not giving up her seat on that bus?   Was Harriet Tubman wrong for leading slaves to freedom?   Were those students in the South wrong for sitting at those lunch counters in Woolworth's when it was against the law to do so?   Was John Lewis wrong on that bridge in Selma? Being that the church has always been so fundamental to the black community in America, how does this teaching impact our existence in this country. 

 There is a theory that Christianity was forced onto slaves in this country to make them more amenable to being slaves.   The belief being that being a slave was God's choice for them and that their role as good Christians was to find a way to be content in their circumstances and await their reward in the afterlife when they get to heaven.  Again, when you accept the main tenet that God is wholly omnipotent and in complete control it makes it easy to accept this "life that was chosen for you" belief.   And that's what bothers me about my church experience this morning.   I went there looking for something to bring some level of understanding to why black men keep getting killed in the street by police officers.  If not understanding at least some sense of comfort that I could take into next week.  What I got was that these killings are somehow a part of God's ultimate plan, and my job if I'm pulled over by a police officer is to be a "Christian first".   I'm just wondering how Terrence Crutcher would have communicated that to Betty Shelby.  The Tulsa cop in the helicopter didn't say "that looks like a Christian".  He said "that looks like a bad dude".  So how do I as a "Christian first" deal with a police officer who may not recognize what that looks like? 

 The civil rights movement in this country was led by the black church.  Ministers were and in many cases still are some of the most revered figures in the black community.    Black churches are historically among the most successful organizations in the black community.   The black church of the 60s by and large encouraged their congregations to be a part of the movement.  They allowed civil rights groups to hold meetings in their buildings.  They organized marches.   They formed informal operations networks that fed, housed, and helped protect leaders of the movement when they came through their towns.   And this was before cable television, the internet, and social media.   Without the black church, there is no Montgomery bus boycott.    There are no lunch counter sit ins.   There is no March on Washington.   There is no voting rights act.    The black church was instrumental in all of these gains that changed life in this country as we know it.   

 So what about the black church today?  What other black organization has built multi million dollar buildings completely from member donations?  I find it interesting that the black church is one of the few institutions that black people have never really tried to integrate.  Some estimates show that black churches have collected more than $420 billion dollars since 1980.   Rev. Creflo Dollar's World Changers Ministries reported $69 million in revenue in 2006 according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution.   These are non profit organizations whose product, Jesus, is free to everyone according to my understanding of the Bible.   I'm wondering if the black church today, especially the black mega church, has become too much about entertainment and net worth than about helping to improve the lives of its community.   Dr. King talked about the disappointment of the black community with Christian churches in his last book, Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community.  He wrote "it is disappointment with some Negro clergymen who are more concerned about the size of the wheel base on their automobiles than about the quality of their service to the Negro community."  This is the disappointment I"m feeling today.   Substitute "size of their plasma screens" or "size of their private jets" or "size of their campus and main sanctuary" or "size of their television audience" for "size of the wheel base of their automobiles" and I am feeling that disappointment.   I don't know what the solution to the problem of the police killing black people with no consequence is, but I do know that in America if you have $420 billion you can find a way to solve almost any problem.  

 I talk about the black church because that's my community but this isn't to say I don't have the same questions about Christian churches with majority non black memberships.   White Christian churches also played an enormous role in the civil rights movement.   They were often in solidarity with the black churches.   Like the black churches, they offered their buildings for meetings and encouraged their members to support the movement.  They participated in marches and lunch counter sit ins and they participated in those informal networks that were so important to the movement.   In talking about the disappointment of the black community in Where Do We Go From Here Dr. King also said "it is disappointment with the Christian church that appears to be more white than Christian, and with white clergymen who prefer to remain silent behind the security of stained-glass windows".   The Dallas area is very conservative, there are churches on every corner.   I wonder how many white churches today even mentioned the killings of the two black men by police this week?    If white Christians don't hear their religious leaders talking about these incidents, that may explain why so many white Christians are comfortable being silent on the issue.  Or worse, they feel comfortable trying to find ways to justify the killings.   They certainly aren't silent when someone kills an animal.   Any sensational animal killing is sure to flood my Facebook timeline with remorse and regret about the inherent value of "all of God's creatures".    Yet these same Christians have not had one comment about Terrence Crutcher being executed on camera by Betty Shelby.  What are they teaching in these churches on Sunday mornings.   

 I am a Christian.  I've tried my best to live my entire life based on the teachings of Jesus.   My Christian faith has carried me through some very difficult times in my life.   This for me is one of those times.   Words can't describe the level of frustration and rage that are running through me right now, or the fear that I might be the next hashtag.   Or worse, that one of my kids might be the next hashtag.   Hardly a day goes by where I don't see a police officer.   It's hard for me in those moments to think of myself as a "Christian first".   I know that if I have an encounter with this police officer for whatever reason, I could end up dead and the officer would probably walk away unpunished.  I know the first thing they will print is that I was 6'4 and 250 lbs.  I know that reporters would dig through my past and print every unflattering thing they could find about me and not do the same for the policeman.   I know they will find the most unflattering pictures of me.  I know they will go through my Facebook posts and paint me as an angry black man who hated police officers.  I know they will write about the time I got suspended from elementary school for participating in a childhood prank.   I know they will talk about the time the police arrested me in college for stealing a car.   I know they won't mention that the car was actually mine and the charges were dropped.  I know that at least one conservative website will find another Tyrone Wilson who has done a lot worse stuff than me and report that it was me, and I know that article will get 15 thousand likes on Facebook.   

 This knowledge eats a little at my soul every day, but I am a Christian.   So I went to church today seeking solace, seeking refuge, seeking something that would help me to better deal with the feelings that this knowledge arises in me every day.   Karl Marx once said "religion is the opium of the people."  I went to church today looking for that opium.  I don't think I'll be going back next week.  

The Election We Deserve

It's been a while since I've written in this blog because, frankly, the choices in this election disgust me.  I keep saying to myself that America is better than this, we should have better choices to hold the highest elected office in the country.   Then I'm reminded of something my parents always told me; you get what you deserve in life.  What they meant was if you are an adult, whatever your present situation or status is, it's a result of choices that you have made over the course of your life.  That's when it hit me, this is the election that we Americans deserve.

American society is as polarized as I can remember in my lifetime, and this election is a direct reflection of that polarization.  You see it everywhere.   The opening weekend of this NFL season had the same fans who were calling San Francisco 49ers quarterback Collin Kaepernick unpatriotic for peacefully protesting by kneeling during the national anthem booing President Obama while he was making a statement remembering the 9/11 attacks.   I'm sure those people see no contradictions in those actions because to them the national anthem and the flag represent America but President Barrack Hussein Obama does not.  They see no irony in that position.  This is where we are as a country.   

Thanks to the internet and social media, we now live in a country where we can have access to only the news that reinforces our predetermined positions.   Ever since Rush Limbaugh proved in the 90's that there was money to be made in media outlets dividing Americans, more and more entrepreneurs have been creating new ways to divide us.   Of course there was a liberal bias in the media prior to the advent of Fox News, but it was nowhere near the extent that conservatives claimed.  And the fact is most reporters before the advent of Fox attempted to be objective reporters of the facts.  But Roger Ailes and Fox News proved that there was money to be made in completely biased reporting, and the rest of cable news quickly followed.   And now we are at a point where you can get completely partisan news on television or the internet all day long.   You can watch Fox if you're conservative or MSNBC if you're liberal and never have to really get an opposing point of view.   You can subscribe to Brietbart or the Drudge report on the internet and have conservative propaganda delivered to your email box every day, or you can subscribe to Raw Story or The Huffington Post and get liberal propaganda delivered to your email box all day.  This is where we are is a country.  

There have been a series of incidents captured on video where police have killed unarmed black people who were stopped for minor incidents and walked away with no legal consequences.  At the same time, we saw white criminals like Dylan Roof taken alive after killing nine people in a South Carolina church.  Not only was he taken alive, but the police actually made a stop at Burger King to get him some food because he was hungry.   These incidents lead to the formation of the #blacklives matter movement.  This is literally a movement that was simply asking police to stop killing black people.  Many on the right immediately came back with an #alllivesmatter movement, which evidently missed the point that every one of these high profile incidents involved a black victim.  Some United States Congressmen on the right even labeled #blacklivesmatter a terrorist group as did FOX News number one host Bill O'Reilly who vowed to have them disbanded.  This is where we are as a country.

There is big money to be made in dividing Americans, so we are divided daily.   We are divided based on race.  We are divided based on income.   We are divided based on geography.  We are divided based on religion.  We are divided based on sexual preference.  We are divided based on education.   The media loves the divisive stories because when they touch one of these hot button topics they ignite our passions, our fears, and we watch more intently.  What better way to get the Latino community to pay attention than to keep playing clips of Donald Trump saying that Mexicans are rapists?   What better way to get poor people to pay attention than to keep saying that Hillary Clinton won't release her Wall Street transcripts?  What better way to get African Americans fired up than to keep playing clips of Donald Trump saying we can't walk in our neighborhoods without being shot?  What better way to stir up resentment in white Americans than to keep playing clips of Hillary calling half of Trump supporters deplorables?  The media keeps putting the most incendiary stuff out there, and we keep eating it up.   This is where we are as a country.

And finally there is the internet and social media.   I will be the first to extol the virtues of social media, but there is also a dark side.  That dark side allows many of us to express our ugliest and most revolting thoughts behind the safety of a keyboard and computer screen only to those we deem most likely to be receptive to those thoughts.   Worse yet a lot of the websites that post news stories let us post things anonymously.  If you go and read the comments section under any article that deals with anything remotely controversial (and even some things that don't appear to be controversial at all, like the President's daughter's admission to Harvard) you will find some of the most vile and disgusting things you will ever hear coming from a human being directed at another.   This is the real America.  This is who we are as a country.

Which brings me to this election.   Of the 321 million people in this country, we are left to choose from two millionaires from New York to be President.  One is a reality TV show star who is a prototypical con man.   He refuses to release his tax returns.  He lies so shamelessly and constantly that reporters don't even try to get the truth out of him anymore.  He's insulted Latinos, African Americans, muslims, women, and veterans on the campaign trail.  He mocked a handicapped reporter at one of his rallies.  He repeatedly retweets white supremacists on Twitter.  He has talked on numerous occasions about how he would like to date his daughter.   The other candidate has been in public life for nearly 30 years and has been involved in scandals for nearly the entire time.  From her great commodities trading results in Arkansas to Whitewater to Vince Foster's suicide to the emails and the Clinton Foundation.   Her supporters will say none of those scandals ever resulted in anything, but the fact is there is a trail of people who have been charged and convicted or plead guilty in many of those scandals, and every poll shows that people just don't trust her.   But the Republican primary voters rebuked their party leaders and gave us Donald Trump as their candidate.   And the Democratic establishment made sure that no one was going to beat Hillary Clinton to be their candidate.   This is where we are as a country.

The Bible says you reap what you sow.  My personal hero Malcolm X once talked about chickens coming home to roost.   America was on the right trajectory coming out of the civil rights movement. The progress was slow and painful but it was evident.   We were moving towards being more inclusive, more diverse, more tolerant of people who did not look like us or who worshipped differently from us.   Somewhere along the line we turned backwards.   I'm not sure it began with Rush Limbaugh, but I do think Rush was the first to figure out how to make money by pitting us against each other.   This being America, it didn't take other entrepreneurs long to catch on and copycat.   For the last 25 years in this country these entrepreneurs have been dividing us, and we fell for it.   Instead of continuing to embrace the differences that made this country great we retreated to our tribes and developed this "us versus them" mentality.   Most of us can easily get through the week without once having a meaningful conversation about an important topic with someone who has a different point of view than we do.    That is why we are left with these two deeply flawed candidates.   I love this country as much as anyone.   That's why this election is so disappointing.

As my parents always told me, you get what you deserve in life.  This is where we are as a country.  This is the election we deserve.   

Don't Let the GOP fool you, Cruz is Trump Lite.

Ted Cruz

I'm a beer drinker.   I prefer the darker, stronger beers like Ambers, IPAs and Bochs but I often have to go with the "lite" versions because as much as I like the stronger stuff, they have too many calories and carbs and I know they are more detrimental to my long term health.  Not that Michelob Ultra is the cornerstone of a healthy diet, but it's better than the alternatives that I prefer.   Such is the state of the current Republican Party establishment in the race for their party's nomination.   They seem to now be finally accepting the fact that the voters in their primaries prefer the stronger stuff (Trump), but it seems that they are now trying to push the lite version (Cruz).  But I would give Americans the same warning my doctor gives me with beer, the lite version may not be as bad as the real thing, but beer still isn't good for you.

Ted Cruz is the most despised politician in Washington by other politicians, that's a universally accepted fact.   But drip by drip, you see and hear rumblings of politicians that have publicly spoken of their disdain for Cruz endorsing him for the Republican nomination.  Even Lindsey Graham, who said publicly that choosing between Cruz and Trump was like choosing between "being shot or being poisoned", has evidently chosen the poison, endorsing Cruz.   The fear of the GOP establishment of the Trump phenomenon can be felt from coast to coast, and evidently they have now decided that Trump would be such a disaster that Cruz is an acceptable alternative.   But here's the rub.   If you look closely at their stated stance on public policy and issues (to the extent there is any stated policy by Trump, he's very thin in that department), Cruz and Trump are basically identical.   Choosing Cruz over Trump is like drinking lite beer and still getting all the calories and carbs.  

Let's look at some of the hot topics during the election.  Abortion?  Neither believe in a woman's right to choose.  Affirmative Action?  Both against.  Same Sex Marriage?  Both against.  EPA regulations too restrictive?  Both agree.  Gun control?  Both against.  Obamacare?  Both against.  Government stimulus for economy?  Both against.  Privatize Social Security?  Both agree.  Expand the Military?  Both agree.  So what's the difference?  The difference is although Cruz professes to be the one politician in Washington that refuses to play the game, the GOP establishment evidently has decided that he is more willing to play the game than Trump.   It truly appears to be the case of the lesser of two evils.

Donald Trump

It will be interesting to see what happens, because as much as the GOP establishment is trying to get their voters off of the real thing (Trump) and switch to the lite version (Cruz), the voters seem to realize that they get the exact same thing from both, so they for now are sticking with the real thing.  Although Trump may not get the required 1237 delegates needed to win the nomination before the GOP convention, he almost surely will enter that convention with more delegates than anybody else.   Will the GOP establishment snatch the voter's choice from them and try to stick them with substitute?  Only time will tell.   

Is Hillary Clinton the Mike Tyson of Politics? Does She Have a Glass Jaw???

Hillary Clinton

I've always been a huge boxing fan.   Like most boxing fans, I held Mike Tyson in high regard.   I had him ranked as one of the greatest heavyweight boxers of all time.   Then a couple of years ago I was watching a documentary on Iron Mike's career.  The documentary detailed every fight he ever fought.  As the documentary progressed, I was certainly impressed by Tyson's awesome display of power and aggressiveness as he knocked out foe after foe.   Then something dawned on me.  None of the guys that Mike Tyson knocked out were great boxers.  Most of them were, in boxing parlance, bums.   His first loss was actually to a boxing bum, Buster Douglas.  As far as I can tell, Douglas was the first boxer to actually hit Mike Tyson.  He did beat Michael Spinks, who was really a light heavyweight.   But the only really good heavyweights Mike Tyson fought were Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis, and Andrew Golota.   He didn't beat any of them.  It turned out Iron Mike had a glass jaw.  He couldn't take a punch.

Rudy Giuliani

What does any of this have to do with Hillary Clinton?   I've observed Hillary Clinton's entire political career, which for the purposes of this post I will start with her time as First Lady of the United States.  I watched her run for the Senate in New York.  While many thought her primary opponent would be heavyweight contender Rudy Giuliani, he ducked the fight and instead she ran against Rick Lazio who could be the Buster Douglas of politics except he never had a big win.   In boxing parlance, Lazio would be a bum.  I watched Hillary perform admirably in the Senate.    In her Senate re-election campaigns, she quickly dispensed two more political bums, Jonathan Tasini and John Spencer, with the same ease that Mike Tyson defeated Michael Spinks.   By the time she announced that she would run for President in 2008, she was every bit as intimidating as Tyson was that night in Tokyo before he fought Buster Douglas.   I vividly remember a politically active friend of mine asking me to help raise money for a then relatively unknown first term Senator from Illinois named Barrack Obama.  Even though I really liked what I had heard from Obama I asked my friend what was the point?   I told him Hillary was inevitable.  If he could show me any way that Obama could possibly defeat Hillary I would raise the money.   He couldn't.   We know the rest of the story.  The relatively unknown first term Senator, in boxing terms, knocked her out.

But Hillary made an impressive comeback as President Obama's Secretary of State.   She had a few hiccups along the way but left that office appearing to be at the top of her old "Iron Mike" form.   By the time she announced that she would be a candidate for President in 2016 she seemed so inevitable that she drew no serious contenders to run against her.   The two sacrificial lambs that threw their hats in the ring were Martin O'Malley and Bernie Sanders.   Clinton was expected to mow both down easily, and O'Malley did go down early in the first round.   But Bernie Sanders not only refuses to go down, he has started to hit Clinton.   His win in Michigan last night was his hardest punch yet, and it appears to have the Clinton campaign staggering.  

Donald Trump

As dominating as Hillary Clinton has appeared to be as a politician, she has yet to defeat a heavyweight.  Let's be honest, Bernie Sanders is no heavyweight.   No one gave him any chance to compete at the beginning of this process and hardly anybody who covers politics for a living gives him any chances of winning the nomination.   Yet he's still in the ring, still throwing punches, and still connecting.   Meanwhile, awaiting the winner of this contest is a true heavyweight the likes of which we've never seen before, Donald Trump.     So it will be interesting to me to see how Hillary reacts.  If you will remember, when Mike Tyson realized that he couldn't beat Evander Holyfield he resorted to street fighting, biting Holyfield's ear during the fight.   When Hillary Clinton intentionally misled a national television audience in Detroit during a debate by saying that Bernie Sanders had voted against the auto bailout, a claim that almost all political observers say is false, to me it was the equivalent of biting Bernie's ear during a fight that she sensed she might be losing.    

So where does Hillary go from here.  We know what happened to Mike Tyson.  He went from being feared to being hated to being pitied to actually becoming a sympathetic figure. He had his own fairly successful one man show and has made bit appearances in movies and TV sitcoms. In my opinion Mike Tyson is not only the most overrated boxer of all time, but he may be the most overrated athlete in the history of sports.  He never beat a good heavyweight, not once.   I'm not saying that's Hillary's future.  She does have an incredible resume and she has shown a remarkable ability to leverage that resume into revenue, so I don't see the one woman show in her future.   But as a lifetime boxing fan I can tell you that once the world discovers you have a glass jaw, your best days are usually behind you.   Time will tell.

Republicans Still Don't Get It. The People Want Trump!!!

Donald Trump

Often over the last eight years I've said that our American system of government only works if the American people respect the results of elections and consent to be governed.   I've also said that the current breakdown in both our governing and our politics can be traced back to the fact that the American people, particularly those in the Republican party, no longer respect the results of elections and increasingly refuse to consent to be governed.  For eight years Republicans have acted as if President Obama had not been elected not once but twice by a majority of the American people.  Despite those elections, they insisted that the American people preferred their policies, not his.   They have virtually shut down the ability of our government to get anything done because they refuse to acknowledge that they lost the last two Presidential elections.  Super Tuesday provides the latest example.  Republican voters across the nation are sending a message through their votes that they want Donald Trump to be their nominee for President.  But the Republican establishment is once again telling the voters "we don't give a damn what you want, we know what's best".   It seems they will never learn.

Anybody who reads this blog knows that I'm no fan of Trump, but the fact is he is winning election after election fair and square.  Yet all I see in the news this week are efforts by the GOP establishment to deny Trump the nomination.    They appear to have conceded now that he will go into their convention in Cleveland with the most delegates, they are just hoping to keep him below the 1237 delegates needed to clinch the nomination.   All indications are that if that happens, there will be a concerted effort by the powers that be to nominate someone other than Trump (my prediction is Mitt Romney, because maybe the third time is the charm lol).  Just how dumb are the people running the Republican Party?

Mitt Romney

It's too late to stop Trump.  The horse is out of the barn.  The voters want him.  The man has finished first in 10 of the 15 primaries and second in 4 of the other 5.  There is no doubt that the people who voted in GOP primaries thus far want him to be the nominee more than any of the other candidates.   Yet there is a concerted organized effort among the party leaders to stop him.   The aforementioned Mitt Romney plans to give a formal press conference today for no other reason than to try to derail the Trump juggernaut.  The time for this unified front against Trump was months ago, before the people started to vote.   Now that the people are speaking, and saying unequivocally that they want Trump, what does it say to the voters if the party says no?   What can the party possibly hope to achieve by denying the people their choice?   We have seen this before, the Democratic Party tried it in 1968 and it didn't work out so well.   If the Republicans have seen any of the footage of the crowds that are showing up at Trump rallies how can they expect not to have a repeat of Chicago in 1968 if they deny Trump the nomination?

Democratic Convention 1968

Now don't get me wrong, I completely understand why the grownups in the GOP don't want Trump.   He's not what you want as the face of your party.  He lies repeatedly, he's a blowhard, he's embraced racist and bigoted rhetoric to win support, he makes promises that will be impossible to keep, he's narcissistic, and he's basically funding his own campaign so he will be almost impossible to control as the nominee.   I get all of that.  But the people want him, and isn't that what this country is about, we the people (or in this case, they the people.  I don't think Trump will win the general election)?   Like I said, respect for elections and the consent of the people to be governed are the two fundamental principles that make our democracy work.   I think what the Republicans should have learned by now is that if you keep encouraging people to ignore the results of elections, eventually those people will refuse to consent to be governed by those that won the elections (the Cliven Bundy incidents are great examples of this).  

And what exactly does the GOP establishment expect Trump to do if they are successful in denying him the nomination, quietly go away and encourage all of those who voted for him to support the party nominee?   Trump will launch a third party run quicker than a #blacklivesmatter supporter gets thrown out of one his rallies.   There is no doubt his voters will go with him and he will get more votes than the GOP nominee in the general election.   Denying Trump the nomination if he gets the most delegates is telling the voters of the party that we would rather Hillary Clinton be President than respect your votes.    Is that really the message the party wants to send?

So my advice to the GOP?  Ride it out.   If the people elect Trump, you have to give them Trump.   And the argument that he is only getting 40% of the votes so that means 60% of the voters prefer someone else is hilarious on its face.   He's getting more votes than any two other candidates combined.   Respect your voters and honor their ballots.   There are many that voted in the Democratic primaries that do not necessarily want to see Hillary Clinton become the nominee, but it appears the majority of those voting prefer her.    The Democrats are going to give their voters what they want.  I don't think the GOP wins the White House with Trump, but I am 100% certain they lose the White House (again) if Trump gets the most delegates and they deny him the nomination.  At least with Trump they have a chance.  Of course then they would have to deal with President Trump.   But one thing I've learned about the GOP, they have no issues obstructing everything a President wants to accomplish, despite what the voters say.   I've seen them do it the last eight years very effectively.   The one thing I know for sure is this, if we keep ignoring the results of elections in this country, eventually the people will refuse to consent to be governed.  When that happens, the whole house of cards collapses. 

Disavow? Donald Trump IS David Duke

Even though it was 25 years ago I can still vividly remember it today.  I walked into Dr. Susan Howell's political science class at the University of New Orleans and there he was in the front of the room, David Duke, candidate for the Governor of Louisiana.   He was speaking to the class that met before ours (Dr. Howell would never in a million years have invited David Duke to speak to her class, lol) which was just wrapping up.   Duke was leaving as I was entering and I think, seeing the shock and recognition in my eyes, walked up and extended his hand.  He said "I'm David Duke and I'm running for Governor, and I am asking you to vote for me".   I shook his hand and said something to the effect of that's probably not going to happen but I'll keep on open mind.  

The 21 year old version of me was much more inclined to give people the benefit of doubt.  My personal hero, Malcolm X, transformed from a petty street criminal to a racial separatist who thought all white people were devils to be a powerful voice for the reconciliation and love of all people.  Plus my Christian faith taught me that we are to forgive people and give second chances.  So I was willing  to take Duke at his word and consider the possibility that he had realized the errors of his Ku Klux Klan past, even though I still was probably not going to vote for him for Governor.

What does any of this have to do with Donald Trump, and why am I thinking about that incident now?    Because the political story of the day is that Donald Trump is in hot water for not disavowing Donald Trump and Ku Klux Klan, and not explicitly saying that he does not want his support or the support of white supremacist groups.   It made me think about the 1991 Louisiana Governor's race between Duke and Edwin Edwards, and the similarities between Trump's current campaign and Duke's campaign in 1991.   Anyone who studies that campaign will have to admit that Donald Trump's 2016 campaign for President is much more overtly racist than David Duke's campaign for Governor in 1991.

David Duke actually disavowed the Ku Klux Klan and all white supremacist groups unequivocally in 1991.  Trump refuses to do so in 2016.  The campaign themes are virtually identical.    A New York Times article in 1991 said of Duke, "Now, his message is a blend of dark and light, stories of welfare mothers and their unwanted babies contrasted with allusions to a morality based on his newly professed, born-again Christianity. His bottom-line image -- that of a nation decaying from within -- strikes a resonant chord, particularly in a state that has been reeling economically for almost a decade."   Substitute Mexicans and Muslims for welfare mothers (although I'm sure Trump supporters detest them too) and the exact same can be said of the Trump 2016 campaign.   He often refers to his Christianity, his infamous Two Corinthians gaffe notwithstanding, and the oft repeated theme of his campaign is to "Make America Great Again".    

Their base of support is virtually the same, mostly disenchanted, poorly educated, working class white workers who feel that they are victims of the progressive movement in America over the last 100 years.   As best I can tell the "Again" that Trump supporters want to go back to when America was "Great" is the post World War II era where blacks, latinos, and women were largely second class citizens and almost of the government programs designed to help Americans were overwhelmingly designed to benefit the white middle class.   But there is another similarity that we shouldn't miss.

David Duke and Edwin Edwards

David Duke always outperformed the poll numbers, many think because although a lot of people actually did support him they were too embarrassed to tell pollsters for fear of being branded a racist (I mean why would someone think you were a racist for supporting the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan for Governor, right?).   And very few elected officials were willing to endorse Duke for the same reason.    I'm sensing the same phenomenon with the Trump supporters.   Even though the "poorly educated" that he professed to love so much last week turn out in huge numbers at his rallies, my sense is that there are a lot of highly educated, upper middle class whites who also support Trump but are just too ashamed to say so publicly for fear of being branded a racist by their black friends and coworkers.  Trump is winning virtually every demographic in the Republican primaries so far, not just the poorly educated.

As I said, Trump's campaign is actually much more racist than Duke's was.  David Duke at least tried to temper his racist language and apologized for his racist past.   Trump uses overtly racist language regularly, particularly when referencing the Latino community.  Trump has at least on two occasions retweeted messages from white supremacists to his 6.5 million Twitter followers, including one that contained a factually incorrect statement that blacks killed 81% of white homicide victims (in case you're wondering the FBI says the actual number is 15%.  82% of white homicides are committed by  other whites, yet we never hear about white on white crime being a significant problem.  But that's for another post).   But Trump's supporters don't seem to care.  He's well on his way to being the Republican nominee for President of the United States.

Every now and then the 1991 Governor's election comes up when you talk to people from Louisiana.  There are some great stories that came out of that election, and a movie really should be made about former Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards.  In my opinion, he may be the greatest politician of my lifetime in terms of pure political skill.   But the thing that I will always remember is that in the general election David Duke won 61% of the white vote (The article in this link is a great read about David Duke's amazing track record of success with white Louisiana voters.   That's not a misprint.  In 1991 if the electorate was limited to white voters only, a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan would have been the Governor of the State of Louisiana, and he would have won in a landslide.  It makes one wonder if Duke had been willing to be as brazen as Trump and be more overtly racist and unapologetic if he might not have actually won the Governor's mansion.

But here is the good news.  Duke didn't win.   As I say often in this space, we usually get things right in this country in the end.   Trump won't win the Presidency either, even though he will be the Republican nominee.   What I will be interested in is how high a percentage of the white vote Donald Trump gets in the general election.   That more than anything else in this election cycle will tell me how much progress we have made in changing hearts and minds in this country since 1991.  But don't look for Trump to disavow Duke any time soon.  Trump is the 2016 version of Duke plus a billion dollars and a reality show. 

P.S.   As an aside, the 1991 Louisiana Governor's race gave me two of my all time favorite political slogans/ quotes.  Thought I would share them in inverse order.

1991 Edwards Campaign Bumper Sticker

2.   Governor Edwards was thought by some to be corrupt, and eventually did go to jail, as did Duke.   But like I said, the man was a brilliant politician.  His campaign had bumper stickers made for the election that said "Vote for the Crook.  It's important."

1.  When asked if he had anything in common with David Duke, Edwards replied "The only thing we have in common is we're both Wizards under the sheets".

Trump's a Winner? Give me a break! He's the Biggest Loser

"If I'm President we'll win so much, you'll get bored with winning".    Those were the words of Donald J. Trump on September 9, 2015.     As Donald never gets tired of telling us, he's a winner.   He wins at everything.  He wins at business, he wins in life, he wins wins wins.   Just ask him.   Now I'm a big believer in affirmations and speaking things into existence.  I absolutely believe that can be done.   But I've come to learn over the years that no matter how many times I say that I weigh 185 pounds, every time I get on a scale I'm forced to confront the fact that it just isn't so.   Monday night in Iowa Donald Trump, figuratively speaking, got on the scale.  And as much as I'm certain he would prefer it not to be so, he now has to confront the fact that he is not a winner, he is a loser.

Truth be told, a quick Google search will make you wonder why Donald is so comfortable calling himself a winner.   He's certainly had some business success, just ask him.   His name is on some of the finest properties in the world, and he has managed to make lots and lots of money.   But is he really a winner?   I mean he did start off with a "small" $1 million loan from his father, the guy isn't exactly a rags to riches story.   But he did turn that into billions, so no doubt there have been some victories.   But there have also been some losses.

1.  Trump Airlines.   You probably don't remember Trump Airlines do you?   Trump bought the Eastern Air Shuttle which operated flights between Boston, New York City, and Washington DC, and renamed it the Trump Shuttle.  The shuttle had been in operation for 27 years before Trump acquired it.  He operated it for about 4 years before declaring bankruptcy.  He never turned a profit, he defaulted on his loans, and the company was turned over to his creditors.    When it came to Trump Airlines, Donald was a loser.  

2.  Trump University.  In 2004 Trump launched "Trump University".  It wasn't really a school but a series of real estate workshops in hotel ballrooms around the country.  He promised to teach ordinary people his real estate secrets that would make them rich, sometimes charging them tens of thousands of dollars.  One former student says he spent nearly $35,000 for his "certificate" from Trump University.  Because it was not really a school, New York State Education Department Officials told the company to change it's name because it was misleading.    They changed the name to the Trump Entrepreneur Initiative in May 2010, and stopped operating all together shortly afterwards.   Estimates say Trump made $5 million from the university, and now according to The Washington Post, "In three pending lawsuits, including one in which the New York attorney general is seeking $40 million in restitution, former students allege that the enterprise bilked them out of their money with misleading advertisements."  In the case of Trump University, Donald was a loser.

3.  The Bankruptcies.  Donald the great businessman has actually filed bankruptcy four times.   The Trump Taj Mahal in 1991 where Donald was forced to give up half his stake in his casino in addition to being forced to sell his yacht and his airline.   The Trump Plaza Hotel in 1992 where he was forced to relinquish a 49% stake in the hotel to his lenders.   Even though he remained CEO in title, he didn't earn a salary and had no say in the day to day operations of the hotel according to the New York Times.  Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts in 2004 where he had to reduce his ownership share from 47% to 27%, but he did remain in charge of operations.  Finally there was Trump Entertainment Resorts in 2009 where even though they continued to use his name in licensing, he was forced to resign as the company chairman and had his corporate stake in the company reduced to 10%.   I think reasonable minds can agree that in all four of these instances, Donald was a loser.

These are three examples of where Donald actually lost but the list goes on.  Does anybody remember any of these:

Trump Vodka

Trump Mortgage

Trump: The Game

Trump Magazine

Trump Steaks

Trump Ice

The New Jersey Generals

Tour de Trump

GoTrump.com?

And what about the line of Trump clothes that started out in Macy's and now you see them at all the discount stores?   Didn't he also have a Trump Cologne? And these are just the things that you find in a quick Google search.  Imagine how many other things he's put his name on that have failed.  I think percentage wise Kim Kardashian has had more business success.  She knows better than to try to sell steaks for heaven's sake.  One thing is clear, Donald loses a lot.

So there you have it.  When Donald steps on the scale, I'm not sure it says winner.  I think it says loser.  In fact, in Donald parlance, he loses all the time.  He lost at airlines, he lost at steaks.  He lost in board games and casinos.  He lost in football and in travel.  He lost in vodka and he lost in clothing.  He just loses loses loses.  And now he's lost in politics.  To a guy who was born in Canada.! He just may be the biggest loser I've ever seen.  

Random Friday Thoughts. Iowa Debate. Trump Veterans Show, Iowa Caucus, Flint Water - New Video of the Week Feature

Debate Moderators

Iowa Debate:  I hate to admit this but I missed most of it.  Not because Trump wasn't there but because I was at my daughter's volleyball practice.  I heard about an hour and I've seen a lot of clips.  It seems like Ted Cruz missed Trump the most.  He got a feel of what it's like to be in the hot seat as the frontrunner.   I love what Fox did in playing clips of the candidates taking positions that are polar opposites of their current positions and asking them to explain.   Most debates don't do this because the candidates negotiate that out, but kudos to Fox.  I have a suspicion that the real reason Trump did not attend the debate is that somebody at Fox tipped him off to the format.  Can you imagine with all the crazy stuff he has said?   I heard someone on television say it was like the bully was on vacation and everybody felt it was safe to come outside and  play.  That's certainly what it looked like.  Jeb Bush was a different person without Trump there to beat up on him.   Rubio and Rand Paul both had what by far were their best debates of the campaign.   Everybody except Cruz should hope that Trump skips all the debates.

Trump Veteran's Show:  I'll give Donald Trump one thing, he has balls.  To skip the last debate

before the Iowa caucuses is risky, although I agree with Trump in that I don't think there's anything he can do to lose most of his supporters.  Anyone who is supporting Donald Trump isn't going to be swayed by him discussing policy, he hasn't talked specific policy during his entire campaign.   In lieu of debating Donald decided to throw a benefit for veterans that he claims raised $6 million.   This will be interesting if anyone decides to do some real reporting.  I've been involved in a few fundraisers and anyone who has will tell you getting pledges is the easy part.  The hard work is in collecting those pledges and making sure the money gets distributed where it's supposed to.   Organizations who raise money every year, like the American Red Cross, have issues with this.  If Donald Trump can prove that he actually collected $6 million and most of it ended up helping veterans, I would be shocked.  This event was put together in 24 hours.  There is no way he could have set up a 501 3c tax deductible charitable organization in 24 hours so the contributions will not be tax deductible.   That might not matter to Donald with his $1 million dollar pledge, but my guess is to some of the other pledgees it might.  I do think it was a politically brilliant move.  But it does bring to mind the issue of wealth inequality in our company.  Trump raised $6 million with 24 hours planning while 8,000 kids in Flint Michigan under the age of 6 drank poisonous water to save $36,500 a year.   What were those people doing with that extra $6 million last week?  Why hadn't they already thought of donating that money to veterans' groups or other good causes; cancer research, a cure for AIDS, autism, clean water in Flint?  All in all, a great move for Trump.

Iowa Caucus:   I talk about this every week, and the only thing that has changed this week is I think Bernie is running out of steam.   Unless something happens over the weekend, I think Hillary will win in Iowa on the Democratic side.   At least that's what the polling indicates.   I think Team Clinton's aggressive attacks on Bernie this week have had an effect.  I don't mean Hillary herself, but her surrogates on the ground and in the media.   There has definitely been an increase of negative press on Bernie this week, and if you don't think it was being fueled by Clinton surrogates then you just don't know the Clintons.  This race has been stacked against Sanders from the beginning, from DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz's limited debate schedule with horrible time slots to lining up superdelegates for Clinton before the first debate, the Democratic National Committee has been little more than a Clinton SuperPac in the Democratic Primary.  It appears that although Sanders has certainly fought the good fight and brought Hillary a little to the left, he will come up short in Iowa.  If he does that's probably the end of any legitimate chance he has to win the nomination.  To date Sanders has declined to go negative on Clinton, it will be interesting to see if he continues to keep it clean when he's staring at defeat on Monday.

On the GOP side, I think Ted Cruz was right in the debate last night.  If Trump wins I don't think there is any way the GOP can stop him from getting the nomination.  And I'm pretty sure he wins Monday night.  Something to think about for the GOP; if Trump or Cruz dropped out of the race I'm almost certain most of their voters would go to the other candidate.  That means something like 60 to 70 percent of Republicans who are being polled in these primary races prefer a buffoon who refuses to discuss specific policy or a guy that virtually everybody in the Republican Party hates.   What does that say about the future of the party?  None of the guys who are supposed to be "legitimate" threats to win the nomination (Rubio, Jeb, Christie), seem to have a chance.  On a personal note, I was glad to see Proof of Life for Ben Carson last night.  I really was worried about him, lol.  

Flint Water:  It's clear now that somebody needs to go to prison behind this colossal foul up.  The latest thing I read this week was that Michigan state officials actually sent clean water to a building with state employees in Flint in January 2015, well before they admitted to the Flint Residents that there was anything wrong with the water.   How Governor Snyder can remain in office in good conscience baffles me.  I think if the Governor really wants to show that he understands the seriousness of the situation in Flint that he should move his office and live in Flint until the water is drinkable again.   That would be leadership.    I won't hold my breath.   I'm still waiting to see what the Federal government will do to make this situation right, and that includes President Obama.   This did occur on his watch.

Video of the Week:  Rachel Maddow shows pipes from a house in Flint, Michigan.

Until next week.  

When Was America "Great"???

Donald Trump

Dumbass Donald's campaign slogan, "Make America Great Again" seems to be resonating with a lot of voters in the GOP primaries.  I've asked the question several times of Trump supporters; when was this time when America was "great" that we are going to go back to?   To date I've only received one response.   I'll save that one for last.   It puzzles me that so many want to go back to a time yet so few are willing to articulate exactly when that time was.   Since I can't get many responses, I'll try to guess.

I'm going to start with the "greatest generation", generally regarded as the generation who grew up during the Great Depression and went on to fight in World War II, or as Donald Trump might say, WW2.   Tom Brokaw is generally acknowledged to be an expert on this time frame in U.S. History which began around 1920, also known as the "Roaring Twenties".   Some things to consider about this period:

• Women did not get the right to vote until August 18, 1920. 
• America got it's first commercial radio station on November 2, 1920, KDKA in Pittsburgh.  The fist broadcast was the returns of the Harding-Cox presidential election.  
• The U.S. Congress passed the 18th Amendment on January 16, 1920 which made the production, transport, and sale of alcohol illegal.  (Alcohol consumption or private possession however, was never illegal)
• The stock market Crashed on October 29, 1929, beginning the Great Depression. 
•  Unemployment in the U.S. was about 25% 
• Around half the nation's 2600 banks closed by 1929.  According to Tom Brokaw, Businesses were failing everywhere, sending four and a half million people onto the streets with no safety net. The average American farm family had an annual cash income of four hundred dollars. 
• Also, according to Brokaw, "The majority of black Americans were still living in the states of the former Confederacy, and they remained second-class citizens, or worse, in practice and law.

It's generally accepted that the Great Depression didn't end until the U.S. got involved in the war in 1941, and that it ended mostly due to government spending on the war.    Maybe it's just me, but I think America in 2016 is greater.  

So I'm still searching for that time period when America was "Great".  Let's try the President Reagan years, 1981- 1989.  I graduated in high school from 1987, and I generally remember it being a pretty good time in my life.   I know my conservative friends often talk with great fondness of the President Reagan years.  This was the merger mania decade on Wall Street, the era of Gordon Gekko and "greed is good".  Some things to consider about that time period:

• The minimum wage was frozen at $3.35 an hour for his entire Presidency.  President Reagan thought there should be no minimum wage for children.  
• The country did have economic growth, but most of that growth benefitted those who were already rich.  President Reagan's supply side economics philosophy was the beginning of the dramatic income inequality we see in the country today.
• Hundreds of savings and loans collapsed, costing the federal government $130 billion to bail out the depositors.  
• The federal government's drastic reduction of aid to U.S. Cities put an enormous strain on city budgets which led to increased homelessness and poverty in our nation's largest cities.  Many of our cities still have not recovered.
• The U.S. government secretly facilitated the sale of arms to Iran in direct violation of U.S. law. 

Even though I think it's pretty accurate to say the Reagan years were "great" for the richest 1% of Americans, I'm not sure it was actually great for the rest of us.  I think most economists look at the Reagan years as one big vacation that America took and put on a credit card.   That bill wasn't paid until President Clinton left office.  Looking at the Reagan years versus today, I'm still going to go with today as being greater.

The one actual response I got to the question was 1947.   Right off the bat I recognized that this was before the Voting Rights Act and before integration in the South, so I knew it wasn't necessarily a great time for people that looked like me.  But still I went to look up some facts from 1947.  Consider these:

• Jackie Robinson signed with the Brooklyn Dodgers on April 1st to become the first Black professional baseball player.
• President Truman signed the National Security Act, creating the CIA, the Department of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the National Security Council.
• The Hollywood 10 were blacklisted by Hollywood studios after refusing to co-operate with the House Un-American Activities Committee. 



Jackie Robinson

• The Civil Rights movement had yet to occur, America still operated a de facto apartheid system in almost every respect.  

With all due respect to my conservative friend.  I still prefer today.

I often say that the biggest problem with our politics today is Americans by and large have become selfish and lack empathy.   Whereas previous generations of Americans have generally elected politicians based on the theory that which benefits the most of us benefits us all and makes us a stronger society, there has been a shift where Americans today only vote for self interests.   We now vote for politicians who promise to make life better for me, even if it means doing things that aren't in the best interests of the country.   When I hear Trump supporters say they want to "make America great again" I don't think they're talking about making America great for all Americans.   I think they are talking about making America "great" again only for Americans that look, act and think just like them.