Sunday, December 17, 2017

Christmas


Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, May 21, 2017

DINOSAURS, A Cheat Sheet

I went to my local toy store (Harbor Freight) and discovered that they have wooden dinosaur puzzles for $1,99 each.  I got a couple and put them together right away, ostensibly for my granddaughters . . . well, okay, they saw them when they skyped us on Mothers' Day and they wanted them, so now they are going to my granddaughters' house.

The problem is that with them being adopted by my granddaughters, I'm going to have to know the names of these prehistoric creatures. And, well, I have trouble with names longer than my hand. Once I get past the names, it's "How big were the real dinosaurs, Paw Paw?" So I developed this cheat sheet to help me remember their names and size (in the order of construction):

Styracosaurus



pronunciation: sty-RAK-oh-SOR-us:

 etymology: According to DinoChecker, Styracosaurus is derived from the Greek "styrax" (spike on the end of a spear) and "sauros" (lizard), referring to the huge spikes on its frill. 

wiki: Styracosaurus

link to size illustration

location: North America (Alberta, Montana)

period: Cretaceous (Campanian stage, 75.5-75 million years ago)

Parasaurolophus


pronunciation: pah-ra-SOR-oh-LO-fus

etymology: According to DinoChecker: Parasaurolophus is derived from the Greek "para" (near), "sauros" (lizard) and "lophos" (crest) because of its once-thought affinity with Saurolophus due to their superficially similar crests. They aren't as closely related as Parks—the coining author—initially thought.

wiki: Parasaurolophus

link to size illustration

location: North America (Alberta, New Mexico, Utah)

period: Late Cretaceous (76.5-74.5 million years ago)

Pleisiosaurus


pronunciation: plē-sē-ə-ˌsȯr, -zē-

etymology: According to Online Etymology Dictionary. 1825, from Modern Latin Pleisiosaurus (1821), coined by English paleontologist William Daniel Conybeare (1787-1857) from Greek plesios "near," related to pelas, + -saurus.

wiki: Plesiosaurus (Loch Ness Monster a descendant?)

link to size illustration

location: Lias of England

period: Early Jurassic

Spinosaurus

pronunciation: SPIEN-oh-SOR-us

etymology: According to DinoChecker: Spinosaurus is derived from the Latin "spina" (spine) and the Greek "sauros" (lizard) because of the large paddle-like spines raised along its back.)

Wiki Spinosaurus

link to size illustration

location: North Africa

period: Cretaceous (Lower Albian to lower Cenomanian stages)

Dimetrodon

pronunciation: dīˈme‧trəˌdän\

etymology: According to Google: modern Latin, from di- ‘twice’ + Greek metron ‘measure’ + odous, odont- ‘tooth’ (taken in the sense ‘two long teeth’

wiki Dimetrodon

link to size illustration

location: southwestern USA and Germany

period: Early Permian (Cisuralian epoch, 295-272 million years ago)

Mammoth

pronunciation: M AE M - uh th

etymology:  According to Oxford English Dictionary: All of the earliest quotations indicate that English-speakers first encountered the word as a result of the discovery of mammoth bones in Siberia. If ‘read’ carefully, this information can tell us a lot about the emergence and development of the word mammoth.

wiki: Mammoth

link to size illustration

location: Africa, Europe, Asia, North America

period: Pliocene epoch to Holocene epoch (from 5 million years ago to 4,500 years ago)

Pteranodon

pronunciation: tə-ˈra-nə-ˌdän, -ˈrä-\

etymology: According to Google: modern Latin, from Greek pteron ‘wing’ + an- ‘without’ + odous, odont- ‘tooth.’

wiki: Pteranodon (a pterosaur, not a dinosaur!)

link to size illustration

location: North America (Kansas, Alabama, Nebraska, Wyoming, South Dakota)

period:late Cretaceous

Stegosaurus

pronunication:  STEG-uh-SAWR-us

etymology: Dictionary.com: from Modern Latin order name Stegosauria (O.C. Marsh, 1877), from comb. form of Greek stegos "roof" (from stege "covering," stegein "to cover," from PIE root *(s)teg- "cover," especially "cover with a roof" (cf. Sanskrit sthag- "cover, conceal, hide;" Latin tegere "to cover;" Lithuanian stegti "roof;" Old Norse þekja, Old English þeccan "thatch;" Dutch dekken, German decken "to cover, put under roof;" Irish tuigiur "cover," tech "house;" Welsh toi "thatch, roof," ty "house") + -saurus. The back-armor plates in the fossilized remains look like roof tiles.

 wiki: Stegosaurus


link to size illustration

location: western USA and Portugal

period: late Jurassic (from Kimmeridigan to Tithonian ages: 155 - 150 million years ago)

Tyrannosaurus

pronunication: tye-RAN-uh-SAWR-us

etymology: DinoChecker: Tyrannosaurus is derived from the Greek "tyrannos" (tyrant) and "sauros" (lizard). 

 wiki: Tyrannosaurus

link to size illustration

location: western North America

period: Late Cretaceous (Maastrichitan age: 68 - 66 million years ago)

STEPPING BACK IN TIME, AN OVERVIEW


HUMAN TIMELINE

PALEOLITHIC ART TIMELINE







TRIASSIC TIMELINE





















PERMIAN TIMELINE












Dimetrodon
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, April 10, 2017

Internet Privacy Protection


Now I know why they call it the DarkNet  : )

When I learned that the Republican government relaxed Internet privacy protection so that Internet service providers (ISP) can sell our personal information, I was driven to find ways to protect our privacy. This led to a few of nights of obsessive internet gazing, It was a struggle to escape the information vortex, but, like Odysseus's escape from Charybdis, I brought back the goods : )

First, what are the issues? Well, whenever we use the internet to look for stuff, look at stuff, buy stuff, send stuff, or get stuff, our computer turns the stuff into little packets of information that is sent and received through our ISP.  The packets themselves are information about us doing things ("talking", "listening", buying, selling, looking, reading); the packaging contains information that could identify us; and the packet paths tell where we are and who we're communicating with. So, it looks like we have at least 3 issues:
  1. Protecting our identity
  2. Protecting what we're doing
  3. Protecting who we're doing it with
The strategies that have evolved to address these issues are:
  1. Encrypting the packets
  2. Tracking protection
  3. Virtual private networks

1. As a user, we can tell when our packets are being encrypted when we see "https:" in our web browser's URL window. Luckily, since most of us will look at that last sentence and see gibberish, our most popular web browsers, Chrome and Firefox, have "HTTPS Everywhere" that facilitates our encrypted communication. The following links will let you install them in your browser:



2. There doesn't seem to be a all-inclusive strategy to provide tracking protection. The FoxFire browser allows you turn on Privacy Option: "Tracking Protection in Private Browsing". This option uses a list to identify and block trackers. The Chrome browser has an Incognito Window feature, but it only prevents your browser history from being saved, it doesn't stop tracking. That being said, Ghostery provides a webpage by webpage solution that may work for you. Here are links to install them in your browser (if you decide to create an account with Ghostery, you'll be able to access browser level functionality via the ubiqitous 3 dots in the upper right . . . Even though I did this, I'm wondering if I didn't trade lots of neferious trackers for one sly one : )


3. The last strategy, using a VPN, will construct a virtual tunnel through your Service Provider's "wall" so that you can do your internet browsing on the other side.  The challenges with the VPN solution is that, unless you're Internet savvy and can set up a VPN on your own, you'll be renting a VPN connection (or you should be, because if it's free, it will be your VPN provider who may be selling your privacy).

The problem that you run into when looking for the best VPN is that you need some expert advice delivered in language you can understand. Luckily I found one that does a good job of looking at 110 and whittling it down to 3 VPNs with a clear commentary on the process they used. Here are the 3 listed in order:
  1. NordVPN                      ($70/yr)
  2. ExpressVPN                  ($100/yr)
  3. PrivateInternetAccess  ($40/yr)


I ended up renting TorGuard VPN because my original evaluation track led me through the DarkNet. Speaking of which, if you don't want the VPN route, consider using the Tor Browser with Tracker Protection enabled. (PC mag review)




REFERENCE:

  1. How the Republicans Sold Your Privacy to Internet Providers, by Tom Wheeler, New York Times, Mar 29, 2017
  2. Worried about companies spying on your browsing? Here's what you can do, by Selena Larson, CNN, Mar 29, 2017

  1. Here's How to Protect Your Privacy From Your Internet Service Provider, by Amul Kalia, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Apr 3, 2017
  2. Three privacy tools that block your Internet provider from tracking you, by Ian Paul, PC World, Mar 29, 2017
  3. VPNs won't save you from Congress' Internet privacy giveaway, by Klint Finley, Wired, Mar 28, 2017
  4. The Best VPN, Reviews.com, Feb 20,2017
  5. Darknet, wikipedia
  6. Tor (anonymity network), wikipedia
  7. Tor Browser Review and Rating, PC Magazine, Jan 25, 2016


Posted by at 5 comments:

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Affordable Care Act revision, Part 3

The GOP leadership and the President resisted the analysis of the Congressional Budget Office, but realized that their repeal and replace agenda is dead in the water unless they make some changes. The Republic in action : )


As a result of the Congressional Budget Office analysis, the GOP health plan will need to be revised before it has a chance of getting out of the House and into the Senate. House Speaker Paul Ryan plans to make some changes with healp from the White House and the U S Department of Health and Human Services.


REFERENCE

  1. GOP Senators Say House Health Bill Won't Pass Without Changes, by Kristina Peterson, Michelle and Louise Radnofsky, The Wall Street Journal, Mar 14, 2017
  2. Republicans are flirting with class warfare in their health care bill, by Henry J Aaron, Brookings, Mar 13, 2017
  3. The CBO shows there is no rational justification for the GOP health plan, by Eitorial Board, Mar 13, 2017
  4. Affordable Care Act revisions would reduce insured numbers by 24 million, CBO projects, by Amy Goldstein, Elise Viebeck, Kelsey Snell and Mike DeBonis, The Washington Post, Mar 13, 2017
  5. Patient-Centered Medical Home Checklist,
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, March 13, 2017

Affordable Care Act revision, Part 2

Rob from the poor, give to the rich?

(Note: this is my translation of House GOP health bill adds up to big tax cut for the rich, by Stephen Ohlemacher and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldiver into a graphic)

The President and the GOP have endorsed a plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Part of this plan includes cutting the taxes that fund the program. This will reduce ACA revenues by $600 billion over the next decade.  $500 billion of these tax revenues will be 'distributed' as follows:


  1. Savings of $158 billion for high-income individuals and families. 90% of this money will benefit earners in the top 1% who are making making $700,00 or more. The other 10% will mainly benefit earners in the top 5%.
  2. Tax savings of $117 billion for individuals earning over $200,000 and married couples earning over $250,000. This action will drain the Medicare trust fund and violates President Trump's promise not to damage Medicare
  3. By lowering the medical out-of-pocket health deduction threshold from $10,000 to $7,500, $35 billion will be kept by taxpayers.  The average medical deduction for American families earning less than $100,000 is about $7,500. Over $100,000 the itemized deductions exceed $10,000, thus the main beneficiaries will be earners in the upper 20%.
  4. Savings of $145 billion on market share fees for health insurers.
  5. Savings of $25 billion in fees for pharmaceutical companies and importers
  6. Excise tax savings of $20 billion for medical device makers and importers
  7. A savings of $400 million for insurance companies by repealing $500,000 limit on the amount of an executive's pay that the health insurance companies can deduct.

House Ways and Committee chair, Rep. Kevin Brady said that despite the lost tax revenue the overall bill will not add to long term budget deficits.  (This made me wonder if he expects to be uninsuring more Americans as a way of saving money . . . and I got my answer Monday!)

I did a lot of reading putting this graph together and came away with three things:
  1. I agree with Sen Ron Wyden of Oregon,, "This bill sends a loud and clear message. Tax cuts for special interests and the wealthy matter more that your health care." Thus my snarky title, 'Rob from the poor, give to the rich'.  But, the truth be told, it was the wealthy's money to begin with.
  2. The people who are struggling voted for Trump because he promised them work; they didn't vote for him to repeal the Affordable Care Act. It's not 'his' 59 million voters who don't earn as much as a member of Congress ($174,000) who are invested in repealing Obamacare; it's the 5% who own 63% of the country's wealth who want to get out from under Obamacare.
  3. The Affordable Care Act is working as a way to provide health insurance for our poor and as a means to redistribute our wealth.  If Congress is going to improve the health insurance aspect, they will need to be circumspect about changing the rules and they will need to build confidence among the private insurers. If they are going to go about redistributing our wealth,  they need to identify the "elephant on the table" and deal with it.

REFERENCES:
  1. House GOP health bill adds up to big tax cut for the rich, Stephen Ohlemacher and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldiver, Associated Press, Mar 7, 2017
  2. Tax credits work differently in 'Obamacare' and GOP plan, by Stephen Ohlemacher, WMTW News 8, Mar 11, 2017
  3. $250,000 a Year Is Not Middle Class, by Bryce Covert, The New York  Times, Dec 28, 2015
  4. Who Are the Top 1% Income Earners?, by Financial Samurai, updated 2017
  5. What Percent Are You?, by Andrew Van Dam, The Wall Street Journal, Mar 2, 2016
  6. Making a killing under Obamacare: The ACA gets blamed for rising premiums while insurance companies are reaping massive profits, by Angelo Young, Salon, Oct 28, 2016
  7. Healthcare shocker: These insurers are making money on Obamacare, by Michael Hiltzik, Los Angeles Times, Apr 27, 2016
  8. Opinion: I'm a former health insurance CEO and this is what Obamacare repeal will do, by J B Silvers, MarketWatch, Jan 4, 2017
  9. Better Off Before Obamacare?, by Olga Khazan, The Atlantic, Nov 14, 2016
  10. The True Cost of Healthcare, by David Belk, MD and Paul Belk, MD, 2016
  11. Pharma: an industry shaped by shareholder value, by Dan Bobkoff, Marketplace, Jun 15, 2016
  12. Millions might lose health coverage? Not to hear Republican leaders tell it, by Philip Bump, The Wasington Post, Mar 12, 2017
  13. The Average National Income Tax Deduction, by Tom Streissguth, Chron, 2010 data
  14. Average Itemized Deductions, by Eric Scott and Brenda Au, 2011 data
  15. The one tax graph you really need to know, by Ezra Klein, The Washington Post, Sep 19, 2012
  16. How Does the ACA Individual Mandate Affect Enrollment and Premiums in the Individual Insurance Market?, by Christine Eibner and Evan Saltzman, Rand Health, 2015
  17. 2017 Tax Guide, by Bankrate
  18. Pharmaceutical industry gets high on fat profits, by Richard Anderson, BBC News, Nov 6, 2014
  19. Key Facts about Uninsured Population, Kaiser Family Foundation, Sep 29, 2016
  20. The House GOP Health Plan Makes Obamacare Look Good, by Alan S Blinder, The Wall Street Journal, Mar 13, 2017
  21. CBO Sees 24 Million More Uninsured, $337 Billion Deficit Cut With GOP Plan by Stephanie Armour and Kristina Peterrson, The Wall Street Journal, Mar 13, 2017
  22. Wealth inequality in the United States, Wikipedia
  23. Tax Savings from Repealing Obamacare, by Kevin Drum, Mother Jones, Mar 21, 2017
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Unaffordable Care Act, Part 1

So I did some research into the Affordable Care Act and the Republican repeal and replace strategy. Boy, talk about com-pli-cat-ed!


After some reading, it boils down to:
  1. Is the Affordable Care Act working?
  2. How much does it cost America?
  3. What's wrong with the Affordable Care Act?
  4. What are the benefits of the Affordable Care Act?
  5. Will the Republican replacement plan work better than the Affordable Care Act?
  6. How much does the Republican replacement plan cost?
  7. How do the alternative Republican plans affect me? 
  8. How do the alternative Republican plans affect America?
  9. Has public opinion about the ASA changed?

It doesn't look like I made it less complicated, but here goes:

1. Is the Affordable Care Act working?
2. How much does it cost America?
  • When the Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost for the first 10 years (FY2010-FY2019), they calculated a debt reduction of $143 billion.  When they recalculated in 2012 for an 11 year period (FY2012-FY2023), they calculated a debt increase of $1.252 trillion. 
3. What's wrong with the Affordable Care Act?
  • It's complicated
  • The penalty tax is hard to understand
  • Plans were canceled for 1 million people because the health insurance companies didn't comply with ACA's ten essential health benefits
  • Medicare reimbursement changed from a fee-for-service to a value-based payment creating a painful transition for the hospitals
  • All medical records must be computerized
  • Health care costs could increase over the short term as many people receive preventive care for the first time
  • Families lose some tax deductions for uninsured medical costs
  • Higher income families pay additional Medicare taxes (affects 1 million individuals and 4 million couples who make more than $200,000 and $250,000 respectively)
  • Between 3 and 5 million people lost their company-sponsored health care plans.
  • Health care and health insurance companies pay additional taxes to help pay for ACA benefits
  • The ACA lowers cost by making health insurance affordable
  • The ACA lowers cost by emphasizing prevention
  • The ACA lowers cost by improving how healthcare itself is delivered
5.What does the Republican ACA repeal and replace plan do?
  • It keeps some of the changes that Affordable Care Act implemented.  Senator Rand Paul quipped that it sounds like Obamacare Lite based on media reports.
  • It does away with individual mandate, which is a requirement that most American obtain and maintain health insurance or pay a tax penalty.  It's a way to help pay for the ACA, providing about $64 billion for the first 10 years. 
  • Instead of a individual mandate tax to encourage people to stay insured, insurance companies will be allowed to levy a 30% surcharge for a year on the premiums to people requesting to be re-insured.
  • Income-based subsidies would be replaced with age-based tax credits that may be less generous to people with low income. These tax credits could be perceived as entitlements.
  • The Medicaid expansion to include additional low-earning Americans would continue until 2020.  After that state adding Medicaid recipients would no longer be federally funded.
  • The federal-state Medicaid program would be changed from open-ended federal financing to a limit based on enrollment and costs in each state
6. How much will the Republican replacement plan cost?
7. How do the alternative Republican plans affect me? 
8. How do the alternative Republican plans affect America?
9. Has public opinion about the ACA changed?
  • Yes.  Since the Affordable Care Act was implemented in 2010, public opinion has shifted according to a 2015 survey by CBS News
Bottom line, the Affordable Care Act is working but needs to be improved. The repeal and replace plan that the Republicans presented this week includes many of the ACA's provisions.  The driving force for repealing it seems to be trumped up Republican pride.  The American people cannot afford to pay $350 billion to assuage partisan pride.  Congress and the President need to get their act together and improve the Affordable Care Act.  

REFERENCES:

  1. Is the Affordable Care Act Working?,  by Margot Sanger-Katz, Abby Goodnough, Reed Abelson, Anemona Hartocollis, Sabrina Tavernise, and Robert Pear, The New York Times, Oct 26, 2014, 
  2. Uninsured Down Since Obamacare; Cost, Quality Still Concerns, by Nader Nekvasil, Gallup, Aug 29, 2016
  3. How much Did Obamacare Cost?, by Kimberly Amadeo, the balance, Jan 12, 2017
  4. What is Wrong with Obamacare? by Kimberly Amadeo, the balance, Feb 4, 2017
  5. House Republicans Release Obamacare Repeal and Replace Plan, by Dan McCue, Courthouse News Service, Mar 6, 2017
  6. Republicans unveil bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, by Lauren Fox and Deirdre Walsh, CNN, Mar 7, 2017
  7. Fully repealing Obamacare will cost $350 billion, by Tami Luhby, CNN, Jan 4, 2017
  8. How the Republican plans to replace Obamacare could affect you, by Kim Soffen and Denise Lu, The Washington Post, Jan 17, 2917
  9. Republicans' Obamacare replacement bill: The winners and losers, by Tami Luhby, CNN, Mar 7, 2017
  10. The American Health Care Act: The Republicans' bill to replace Obamacare, explained, by Sarah Kliff, Vox, Mar 6, 2017
  11. Republicans' Obamacare repeal plan would cut taxes on the wealthy, by Brian Faler, Politico, Mar 6, 2017
  12. Poll: Obamacare and the Supreme Court, by Sarah Dutton, Jennifer De Pinto, Anthony Salvanto, and Fred Backus, CBS News, Jun 22, 2015
  13. Lawmakers take up Obamacare revision without an independent scorekeeper, by Karen Tumulty and Max Ehrenfreund, The Washington Post, Mar 8, 2017
Is there something we can learn from other countries about how to manage an effective and efficient system?:

Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

"Heard" of President Trump's faux gnus fearing a faux coup?




REFERENCES:
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, March 6, 2017

Pope Trump




For a few years I've been concerned about how political thoughts had become beliefs.  Why else would sensible men and women who represent us stay locked in partisan stalemates instead of working together to solve the myriad of problems that we face.

Today my concerns have been justified by our President.  His thoughts become his tweets, his tweets become his beliefs, and his beliefs seem to become his reality.  Unfortunately, because he is our President, his "alternative fact" based reality effects the workings of our government, and, as Senator Sanders points out, America's standing in the world. The paradox is, I think he wants to make our government work but he seems to be getting in his own way.

My cartoon today is where my thoughts went after reading Dana Milbank's It's the Truth According to Trump, Believe It!.



Reference:
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, March 5, 2017

"Heard" of President Trump's fake gnus?


REFERENCE:
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, February 26, 2017

Fake News



Reference:

Fox News Interview With Fake Expert on Sweden Further Baffles Swedes

Trump's baffling 'Sweden' comment came from a Fox News segment


Trump’s Ban of Reporters at Press Briefing Isn’t Just Wrong, It’s Unconstitutional

Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, February 18, 2017

What do Moderates read?


In this era of political partisan-ism, where does a moderate turn for the "truth". As an engineer I needed to research which ways the news skews.  Two summaries of media leaning provided me with an overview of the new news world:
  1. SlothMark: A decent breakdown of all things real and fake news.
  2. Pew Research Center: Media Sources: Distinct Favorites Emerge on the Left and Right
The first, by an imgur user named SlothMark, is skewed left as even I know that the New York Times and the Washington Post skew liberal.

The second, by the Pew Research Center, is an extensive analysis based on the audience attracted to the various sources. I'm especially intrigued by the graph showing the Ideological Profile of Each Source's Audience:




Looking at this graph, a few things occur to me:
  1. No source is moderate.  (The WiseGeek provides incite to this phenomenon.)
  2. The average respondent leans liberal.
  3. The media that attracts liberal minded respondents is more evenly distributed along the ideological axis than the media that attracts conservative minded respondents. 
These observations led to looking at how respondents were determined to be liberal/conservative. The basis for this is their response to ten positions: Items in the Ideological Consistency Scale

Reviewing these ten either/or positions I find a kernel of truth on both sides. It also made me wonder where I would fall on the liberal/conservative axis.  Here is what I think about each of the positions:
  1. I've worked in government positions and I know we were wasteful and inefficient but we also did a better job than people perceived (+/-). 
  2. Ineffective and inefficient government regulation does more harm than good but government regulation is necessary to protect the public interest (+L). 
  3. Some people do game the system, and it is not limited to poor people; poor people do have hard lives and we as a society should help them get unstuck from their hard lives, if possible (+/-). 
  4. Our society, with government collaboration, should more effectively help the needy (+/-). 
  5. People who can't get ahead today in the USA do have responsibility for themselves but they may be trapped by circumstances that they can't overcome by themselves. Racial discrimination is a reason why many people of color can't get ahead in some of our communities (+/-). 
  6. Immigrants have always been both a burden and an asset for the USA, but in the long run they (we) have strengthened our country (+L).  [Without immigrants NONE of us would be Americans.]
  7. The best way to ensure peace is through a combination of good diplomacy and military strength (+/-). 
  8. Using the salaries of business executives as a barometer, some corporations make too much profit but in general many corporations make a fair and reasonable amount of profit.(+C)
  9. Environmental laws and regulations are required for the longevity of a habitable environment. (+L)
  10. Government should neither encourage nor discourage individual sexuality. (+/-)
Even though I see myself as moderate, I lean liberal. Based on this and the Ideological Profile of Each Source's Audience I'll explore:
To experience both ends of the conservative/liberal spectrum, I'll scan:



Posted by at No comments:

Friday, February 10, 2017

Pied Piper

I thought about doing mice caricatures, but I felt that would have been disrespectful for the Senate Republican leadership (plus I'm not real good at drawing mice : )

Senate Republican leadership positions:

  • John Barrasso (Republican Policy Committee Chariman)
  • Roy Blunt (Vice Chair of the Senate Republican Conference)
  • Mitch McConnell (Majority Leader of the Senate)
  • Cory Gardner (Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee)
  • Mike Carpo (Chief Deputy Whip)



Posted by at No comments:

America First?



References:

How the U.S. ethics chief took on Trump and became a reluctant Washington Hero, by David Montgomery, The Washington Post, Mar 30, 2017


Posted by at No comments:

Monday, February 6, 2017

National Security Council

National Security Council



References:

With National Security Council Shakeup, Steve Bannon Gets A Seat At The Table


Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Liberty Enshrined



With two Executive Orders, President Trump and his advisers are creating a 'shock event' (I confess that I didn't know they were doing this until I read the News and Guts post linked below).  A 'shock event' is cover for some ultimate goal. It stands to reason that if this goal was for the benefit of the country, cover, and therefore shock events, wouldn't be needed.

 Our system of government has checks and balances which, in order to work, will require bi-partisan collaboration. It is the early days of President Trump's administration and expecting Congress to work together to see through these 'shock events' and act to benefit the American people is naive on my part.


Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Patriotic Devotion




Inspired by Andrew McGill's article in The Atlantic:

What Does Trump's 'Day of Patriotic Devotion' Really Mean?

Posted by at No comments:

Monday, January 23, 2017

"Alternative Fact"




Kellyanne Conway says Donald Trump’s team has ‘alternative facts.’ Which pretty much says it all.


Here is a 2014 Rolling Stone article by Reid Cherlin that provides a sketch of media's metamorphosis and an insider's view of The Presidency and the Press
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)