Who Really Stands Behind Our Troops?

Who Really Stands Behind Our Troops?

Republicans have always been very good at delivering the pro-troops message – they're reliably tough on national security threats from foreign lands. Building up and maintaining the strongest possible military has been a key issue that has moved millions of Americans to put their trust in Republican congressional and presidential leadership over the years. But are the Republicans really the party of a strong U.S. Military?

Under the Kennedy administration, spending for the military went UP, a marked increase from the previous TWO administrations of Truman and Eisenhower. After Kennedy was succeeded by the Republican Nixon and Ford administrations, military spending actually WENT DOWN. Following Republican Ronald Reagan's eight year presidency, both the H.W Bush and Clinton administrations saw a DECREASE in military spending.

And who, in recent history spent the MOST on the U.S. Military? That would be none other than the Democrat, Barack Obama. Yes, you read that correctly. The “soft on crime and the military Democrat” Barack Obama increased military spending drastically. Obama’s budget proposal ignored caps on military spending set by the 2011 Budget Control Act. He added $38 billion to the $523 billion restriction set by the Act.

It would seem that if you want increased spending on the troops, it's best to have a democratic administration in Washington.

Source: David Stockman and the New York Times

I Think I Know Who Wrote that Infamous Times Op-Ed

The biggest guessing game in Washington and New York today is not how many years the collective members of the corrupt Trump administration may end up with when the dust of corruption investigations all settle, but rather who is the author of the explosive New York Times Op-Ed that appeared in today's paper, setting politico mouths wagging and ordinary folks running for their dictionaries.

In the short wake of news that Watergate hero journalist, Bob Woodward was about to unleash the most devastating book to hit the Trump administration since...ever...the New York Times piece smacked the White House with all the strength of a very well calculated tsunami, sending dozens of WH staffers and hangers-on scrambling to get their personally written denials into the president's hands before the Accuser-in-Chief could start tweating his own dark suspicions.

I've been thinking a lot about the possible  identity of this sordid White House whodunnit and I've come up with a name. It may not turn out to be the right name, but I think, all things considered, it's a pretty fair reach.

The last few hours have presented any number of possible culprits, from Vice President Mike Pence (too obvious) to WH lawyer Don McGhan (he's been in the headlines enough, without this) to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coates (too obvious) to WH Chief of Staff John Kelly (way too obvious). The list goes on, up, down, sideways and through a confusing prism of possibility.

But one name is glaringly absent from the speculation and I think it may just be the one that, finally, we'll all come to view as most obvious of all: WH chief advisor, Kellyanne Conway.

Yes, THAT Kellyanne Conway, the loyal Republican ragamuffin who has been by Trump's side since the very beginning, the same Kellyanne who had as much to do as anyone, with pulling off the biggest election day upset since Truman crushed Dewey.

THAT Kellyanne Conway.

I can hear the moans of disturbed shock and vicious head snapping. NO WAY IN THIS WORLD. Not loyal-to-a-repulsive measure Kellyanne Conway. But, as WH Press Secretary Sarah would say, "Look..."

Kellyanne Conway knows the ins and outs of White House politics better than anyone within miles of the Beltway. She's been around forever, playing a number of key roles for a variety of Republican politicians. Her success record is enviable. And of course, there's that little crowning achievement of the 2016 election. She's seen it all, she knows it all, and she's smart enough to know where it's all going. Additionally, she's just savvy enough to know the speech patterns of the big WH players, so that certain choice words (which she does not use) like "lodestar", (which Mike Pence DOES use) are sprinkled throughout of the piece to push off those nasty journalists and WH insiders who so desperately want to out the author.

Kellyanne was interviewed on Fox about the Times piece yesterday, and she was admirably coy, which is a fair description of her most valued talent. Know the Spin, enjoy the seat on the Throne. Kellyanne would just laugh away any accusation that she was the author of this "treasonous piece," as Trump quickly called it, but the eyes reveal everything and if you look at her countenance through the Fox appearance you might pick up a few clues. For one thing, she never denies authorship.

Then, there's the matter of Kellyanne's husband, George. George Conway, a conservative Washington Lawyer, has made a peculiar mark for himself by being one of Trump's fiercest agonists, and he capped off his place in the peanut gallery Pantheon by tweating about the Times piece moments after it was announced. Talk about putting the shiv in the rotting corpse. There has been a lot of discussion about the strange dynamic behind this Washington Power Couple and it is not altogether unreasonable to think that George is beginning to have some influence over his more famous partner.

Lastly, if you look closely at the Times piece you may find, as I did, that there is a certain gentle, even elegant form to the prose. It's impassioned, well considered, and cogently presented. It's the kind of piece someone who has been around for a very long time--someone who knows what they're talking about--might commit to paper.

Someone like Kellyanne Conway.

Deficit Spending and the Pols Who Just Can't Decide

Deficit Spending and the Pols Who Just Can't Decide


Republicans love to hold themselves out to the American voter as the party of fiscal responsibility. Their talking points constantly attack “reckless” Democrats who  live to spend, spend, spend (mostly, they claim, on social programs like Medicare--a huge spending program which Republicans previously opposed but now favor, since their constituencies now support it). 


Ask the man or woman on the street which party has their best financial interests in mind and you will probably always hear that its the Republicans who are the more responsible, more economically responsible party. After all, Republicans are “conservatives” and there's nothing more conservative than being cautious with money.

Unfortunately, history does not bear out that Republicans and Conservatives are fiscally responsible. In fact, over time, the Republicans have shown a penchant for being wildly Unconservative when it comes to public spending. Apparently, nothing makes a politician more liberal with money than having sway over someone else's finances. Especially if there's an R after their name.

Let's get something right on the table. No bias in these pages, no Fake News, or fudged stats. Barack Obama holds the prize (prior to the Trump administration) for being the president who oversaw the biggest budget deficits in U.S. History. 6.69 trillion in deficit spending marked the eight years of the Obama presidency. 

But, wait. Republicans hold second, third and fourth place in the Deficit Spending Hall of Infamy. Second place goes to George W. Bush at 3.29 trillion over two terms, Ronald Reagen at 1.412 trillion, over two terms, and finally, George H.W. Bush at 1.03 trillion in his single term as president. 

Remember, Congress has to vote to approve the budget of the United States and an awful lot of “conservative” Republicans seem to have no problem voting for these budget-busting budgets.

When Democrat, Bill Clinton inherited the giant deficits of his predecessor, George Bush, he quickly turned things around and left office with a budget SURPLUS.

Source: Investopedia, Mary Hall.

Values from Your Friendly Politician

Republicans have been saying they are the party of “family values” for so long that many Americans believe this is true. Because they espouse “family” based valued (but, often don't follow them in their own private lives) Republicans are thought to be more respectful of the family unit, more willing to go that extra mile to support legislation intended to help the American family succeed and prosper. 

Conversely, many voters consider the Democrats to be a threat to the institution of the family. After all, Republicans are happy to have voters believe that Democrats are the party of free-love, crazy communes and all sorts of questionable “alternate lifestyles.” If voters value their American family lifestyle, they'd better vote Republican. 

Or, maybe not.

Rather than being the template for true “family values,” a disturbingly large number of Republicans have been accused of being serial cheaters and involved in any number of tawdry political and romantic scandals (Roy Moore, anyone?) The Right Wing loves to hold up Bill Clinton as the poster boy for sexual scandal but it's time to remember that, in addition to the scores of Republican Senators and Representatives who have been driven from office by sexual and financial scandals over the past fifty years, the current occupant of the White House has been accused by no less than 13 (!) women of sexual assault. And yes, Donald Trump is a very vocal proponent of Republican family values.