Our Evangelical Problem

 Mike Pence

Many have wondered how evangelical Christians could vote for Donal Trump. After all, they have spent years preaching to us that moral character was the most important factor in choosinga political candidate.  While preachers, priests, and bishops have, in defiance of the law, used their pulpits to convince congregations to vote either for a candidate or against a candidate, they  always argued that their candidate possessed a higher moral character.

And then this year, Donald Trump comes along, flaunting his lack of moral character.

One would have expected the Evangelicals would have been outraged at his past behavior and his current rhetoric. But, then an election occurred and according to the exit polls, the Evangelicals voted in greater numbers for Trump than they did Mitt Romney, John McCain, or George Bush. (They are a minority of 28% within the minority party, but they posesses disproportinate power because the GOP needs them to win.)

So what happened? How did they manage to ignore  Trump's many lies, his sexual ethics, his lack of interest in religion, his attitude toward women, his assault on the Eight Beatitudes, and his attacks on a religious minority? Apparently, they weren't really serious about about moral character; they were only interested in a few issues: criminalizing abortion, restricting LGBT rights, and reversing access to gay marriage. If Lucifer himself promised to promote their pet issues, they would have voted for him.

Technically, they should not care about any of these issues. No one is forcing them to have an abortion, no one is forcing them to have dinner with a transgender, no one is forcing them to marry a member of their own sex.

What it's all about is that evangelical Christians want to impose their beliefs on the rest of country. They want their religious beliefs and moral code to become the law of the land.

Fortunately, our Founding Fathers foresaw such a danger. Thus, in their wisdom, they gave us the First Amendment which, as Thomas Jefferson pointed out, builds a wall between church and state. And, of course, they seem to have conveniently forgotten that George Washington wrote: "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

This obsession with imposing their religion and moral code on the rest of us is extremely dangerous in a constitutional democracy. Just as they fear a government based on Sharia Law, others rightfully fear a government based on the beliefs of the evangelicals.

In the 2016 Presidential election, a man of dubious Christian pedigree changes his mind on abortion and says all the things the Evangelicals want to hear. Then he chooses Mike Pence, the poster boy for the Evangelicals, as a running mate, and they flock to the Trump tent.

Of course, it is quite possible that a politician sincerely can change his mind on an issue, but Mr. Trump's change seems to be pandering, and it apparently worked. And now he is obligated to fulfill his promise to the people who want to break down the wall between Church and State. (Most recently, Mr. Trump has backtracked on the gay marriage issue.)

The hope for our nation is that our judiciary has the integrity to prevent one religious group from imposing their beliefs on the rest of their fellow citizens.

The Country is Pissed Off, Pre and Post

Unhappy and worried Americans take to the streets exercising the rights of free speech  and t peaceful assembly. Others try to create violence within such a setting. Some Americans, consumed by hate, now feel free to harass, insult, torment, and even assault other Americans because of the shade of their skin.

All of this blatant hatred in a constitutional democracy as the result of a presidential election, in spite of President Obama's effort to make the transfer of power peaceful and smooth. The bottom line is Americans are pissed off. (Forgive the vulgarity, but after the language we were subjected to during the political campaign, my usage seems mild.)

The Clinton supporters are angry because their candidate, in spite of winning the three debates, leading in the polls, and winning the popular vote, lost the election.  They are outraged that the FBI inserted itself into the final stage of the campaign and  believe that the media was manipulated. They are also convinced that Vladimir Putin and the Russians took an unholy interest in the election, and disgusted that the winning candidate made statements threatening to many.

Prior to victory, the Trump supporters were angry with the status quo:  government, politicians, bureaucracy, social programs, lack of jobs, international trade deals, factory closings, Wall Street, and innumerable real and perceived injustices.  In many cases, this anger was fueled by fear, fear of  the other: immigrants, people of color, and especially Muslims.

After the surprising results of the election, the pundits on both sides tried to explain the results. The Republicans were quick to say: "The people who voted for Trump, although they may not have liked his character,  were voting for the conservative agenda." The Democrats were scratching their heads and asking themselves why Americans would vote for a sexist and racist.

There has been much analysis as to what the election means. Did Hillary lose it? Did Trump win it? Why didn't the Democrats go to the polls as they did in 2012? Since it was so close, did the 3rd party candidates flip it?

But the most important question is: if a sexist and racist candidate receives a majority of the electoral vote, does that mean those voters are also openly or secretly sexists and racists? I would hate to think that is the case. Granted some voters fit into that category (you know who you are)abolish, I hope that many who voted for him did so in spite of his sexism and racism,

And in the final analysis, it's not that difficult. The country is pissed off. The Trump voters saw Hillary as the same old boring vanilla and wanted a new more exotic flavor. The untried outsider has more appeal than the perceived insider.

So, Mr. Trump's problem is that after he and the Republicans build walls, expel Latinos, force Muslims to register (as of the present, they will not have to wear a crescent moon and star on their coats), abolish Medicare, build more pipelines, cancel citizens' health insurance, privatize National Parks, reduce taxes on the wealthy, cancel trade deals, renege on the Paris Accord, initiate a trade war with Chins, sabotage the Iranian Nuclear Agreement, and possibly withdraw from NATO. the country will still be pissed off - now, for other reasons.

Change simply for the sake of change does not work.

"Political Correctness" Is Not All Bad

Labeling something as "politically correct" appears to be a popular conservative put-down of almost any opinion contrary to their own. In their lexicon, if one is "politically correct," she/he is soft, weak or fearful of calling "a spade a spade"(pun intended).

Donald Trump has said: "I don't have time for political correctness."  Many have argued that political correctness is the "tyranny of manners," and others say it muzzles free speech.

In light of the rhetoric surrounding this year's presidential elections, I would like to make a case for discerning speech, i.e, what is frequently disparaged as "political correctness."

First, I am not advocating that "political correctness" should interfere with someone's free speech, but I am suggesting that the manner in which one expresses their thoughts should be within the constraints of civility. I think any serious adult can make their point without using words like homo, bitch, or retard, especially if these terms are directed at another person. These terms are even unacceptable on junior high playgrounds.

Referring to women or their body parts with the p-word or the c-word is beyond the realm of common decency and should not be tolerated. Using the f-word or n-word is wrong for many reasons other than an issue of "political correctness."


However, the term, "political correctness, " is in itself a caricature promoted by those who wallow in racist, sexist, and xenophobic diatribes. What is at issue is not political at all; it is about common decency and civility -- two values that have been thrown under the bus in 2016. In the most recent "town hall" debate, even the body language exhibited disturbing signs of inappropriate stalking. Who would have considered a candidate from a major political party would graphically boast about sexual assault?

The 2016 presidential election cycle is unique in many ways; and although it may influence future campaigns, I hope that the lack of civility will be proven to be an unacceptable tactic.

I long for the days of cultured conservatives like William F. Buckley who could attack an opponent without resorting to vulgarity and name-calling. "I would take you seriously, but to do so would affront my intelligence."

Trump Sees US as a Third World Country

Trump doesn't know what a 3rd World Country is.

In his first presidential debate with Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump said: "We are a third world country."

Such a comment is not surprising from a candidate who continually disparages our country. His campaign to "Make America Great Again," suggests that America is not great, and that we should go back to the way things were in the past.  The question then becomes: Where does he want to go back to?  The days of slavery? The days women were not allowed to vote?  World War Two? Bush's war in Iraq/?  Bush's Great Recession? The economic good times of Bill Clinton's Administration?

If we are a third world country now, what were we before Barack Obama became President -- a time we were facing another Great Depression?


And how would Donald Trump even know what a third world country is? Granted he flies all over the world in his private jets, but he never visits the impoverished countries of Africa. Why would he go there? They have no money. Donald Trump does not know what a third world country really is. He avoids countries that have no plush hotels and golf courses. He does not want to be near poverty and disease. Thus, he is hardly the one to tell us we are a third world country.


But, to be fair to Mr. Trump, he was probably speaking about the state of our infrastructure. (Of course, one never knows; he makes a career out of being unclear.) Even if he was speaking only of our infrastructure, the question remains: How would he know what a third world infrastructure is? His sons probably know a bit about third world countries since they travel the world to kill large animals.


Although our infrastructure is not that of a third world country, it is deteriorating and is in need of attention. What Donald fails to mention is that President Obama has been pushing for infrastructure improvements which would also generate new jobs, but Donald's  fellow Republicans in Congress consistently prevent any such projects. Unfortunately these GOP congress men and women have taken the position that they will prevent anything that President Obama proposes, even though all agree such proposals are for the good of the country.

It is an unfortunate day for our country when one of our major parties stymies the efforts of our President to enhance the country, and that same party's presidential candidate is trashing his own country and exalts the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin. 

My No-Way-In-Hell Bucket List

After a recent tennis match, a discussion of bucket lists evolved -- not surprisingly since all four of us will never see seventy again. As we soon discovered, none of us shared the same items. What one really wanted to do was likely to be considered a waste of valuable time by the other three. Some items were idealistic: develop a vaccine for the Zika virus; others were mundane and slightly unrealistic; score a hole-in-one.

That conversation made me realize that there are many items I would never put on a bucket list and as a result I developed the following list, "My No Way in Hell Bucket List."  Rather than accentuate the positive, I choose to concentrate on the negatives, the things I want to avoid at all costs.

• run with the bulls at Pamplona
• attend the Westminster Dog Show
• go hunting with Dick Cheney
• climb Mt. Everest
• spend a night on Riker's Island
• attend a Sarah Palin Family reunion
• vacation in North Korea
• hike the Salkantay Trail to Machu Picchu           
• learn computer code
• bungee jump from a bridge over a river gorge

• play golf with Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio
• participate in the Ididirod
• have dinner with Marcel Marceau -- several reasons
• attend a NASCAR or WWW event
• participate in the "La Tomatina" in Brunoi, Spain
• go with my friend, Hussein, to a Trump rally
• attend a Ted Nugent concert -- hate should be free
• watch a cricket match from beginning to end
• get to Carnegie Hall -- I'm not into practicing
• live in Texas -- let me count the reasons

I'm sure most readers have a "No-Way-in Hell" bucket list, even if they have not actually formalized it. For example,my wife, Sandy, would probably add: attending a rattlesnake hunt. 

Those who wish to add to this list may do so in the comments section below.

GOP Convention: Cleveland's Blessing or Curse?

When it was announced that that the 2016 Republican Convention would be held in Cleveland, the city and its inhabitants were delighted. Another sign of Cleveland's resurgence. What could go wrong? The 2016 Republican Convention would bring planes loaded with wealthy, white, males from all over the country to the shores of Lake Erie. Except for a few evenings designed for television, these guys would have nothing to do but eat, drink, gamble, party, and visit the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame --  all good for the local economy.

In addition to the 2,472 delegates, a phalanx of GOP apparatchiks, the candidates with their entourages, the usual swarm of paid lobbyists, and Corporate America will descend on Cleveland to wine and dine the party faithful.

Since rooms near the convention are at a premium, some Clevelanders with
desirable condos and apartments are renting them out for large sums and taking vacations in Europe or the Far East..

Although modern political conventions provide very little real news, the networks still feel compelled to cover them and that results in national, if not international television coverage. Always a good thing for a city.

The bottom line: a win-win situation for Cleveland and northeast Ohio.

But then Donald Trump happened. And then the "Anybody-but Trump" movement resulted in the possibility of a brokered or contested convention. As a result, the 2016 GOP Convention is shaping up to be much different than anticipated, and  may have unanticipated consequences for the city.

Street Riots at 1968 Democratic Convention

If Donald Trump does not have the requisite number of delegates (1,237) going into the convention, there is a real possibility of a contested convention in which the delegates after the first round of voting can vote for someone other than their own candidate. With some justification, Trump supporters fear other candidates or GOP insiders will lure away their delegates.

A Trump friend, Roger Stone has promised to organize protests at the hotels of state delegates "supporting the BIG STEAL,” i.e.  "stealing" the nomination away from Trump. On top of that it is reported: "Trumps Brown Shirts Already Issuing Death Threats To Republican Delegates."

Trump himself has promised "riots" if is not nominated.

That's not what the beleaguered Cleveland Police Department wants to hear. They obviously were prepared for the standard variety of protests that occur at all political conventions, but the threat of violence among the convention participants was probably not anticipated. The CPD is bringing reinforcements from other police forces, and now it appears they will be needed. 

Fortunately, although the Republicans think Americans should be able to carry guns wherever they want, firearms will not be permitted at their convention. That's a good thing for Cleveland.

Another blow to the Cleveland convention is the news that major corporations will not be participating. Most of their gala wine-and-dines are being cancelled.  Adios to those lavish corporate receptions and the dollars that paid for them. Another financial loss for the city.

And since the mega corporations are sitting out the GOP convention, they will skip the Democratic Convention in order to prevent the appearance of partiality. “Corporations don’t want their name or brand near Trump, and if they don’t participate in Cleveland, that means they can’t play ball at the Democratic convention. They have to do both or nothing,” said a person planning events at both conventions.  

Even some of the GOP politicians, particularly those running for office in this election, are finding reasons why they will not be in Cleveland for a Trump inauguration.  

• Senator John McCain (R, Ariz) told reporters that he is skipping the RNC for the first time in years.
• Senator Rob Portman (R, Ohio) isn't sure his schedule will allow him to attend his party's convention in his home state. He will, however, be in Cleveland for his own political events.
• Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill) have indicated they will probably not attend.
• Senator Dan Coats (R.Ind) is retiring at the end of the year, and has advised his colleagues they are better off staying at home.

Entertainers too are avoiding the GOP Convention. Joe Walsh withdrew from performing at the convention saying the Republicans misrepresented the event by indicated the concert was for veterans. Cheap Trick turned down $100,00 to perform at the convention.

But fear not, Cleveland. Not all is lost. Although she will not be permitted to carry her deer rifle, Sarah Palin will bring her road show to the shores of Lake Erie and provide some comic relief. In addition, the Ku Klux Klan may make an appearance to show support for their candidate. More fun for the CPD.

The television networks and news organizations may be the big winners if the convention is either contested or brokered. In recent years presidential conventions were non-events. The only news-value story has been the revelation of the nominee's running mate. If Trump does not have it wrapped up by then, this convention will generate wall-to-wall coverage,

And it remains to be seen how world-wide coverage will reflect on Cleveland's image. What originally seemed to be a slam-dunk win for Cleveland may prove otherwise.