Saturday, July 4, 2015

Mr. President, Who YOU Appoint to Be the Next Secretary of the Army Will Clearly Demonstrate If YOU Truly Care about the Army and Our Soldiers! Make the Right Choice!

Mr. President, Who YOU Appoint to Be the Next Secretary of the Army Will Clearly Demonstrate If YOU Truly Care about the Army and Our Soldiers!  Make the Right Choice!

As the son of a career military man, birthed by a military doctor and the first time I moved off a military base was when I got drafted, I thought I knew all there was to know about the military.  To my surprise, I learned more about what it meant to be a Soldier during my first 24 hours IN the military as I did being AROUND the military for my first 19 years!

With this experience, I have to ask the President to find someone who has donned a uniform in defense of this Nation to be our next Secretary of the Army, to lead our Army that has endured over a decade of sustained combat.  John McHugh, the present secretary, has announced he is leaving.

In my opinion there are several former Soldiers that meet that criterion but none better qualified than former Army Chief of Staff and current President & CEO of the Association of the US Army (AUSA), Retired General Gordon R. Sullivan.  Although 77 years old, the General is in excellent health and as AUSA president is intimately familiar with all the challenges facing the service.  A two tour Vietnam Vet with multiple other tours in Europe and Korea, he has never been political although In August 1993, President Bill Clinton appointed him Acting Secretary of the Army while he continued to serve as Army Chief of Staff so he has previous experience in the job.

True, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter never served in uniform but he did have 7 years in the Department of Defense prior to his nomination as SECDEF and he was smart enough to get retired Marine Colonel Bob Work, a combat veteran with over 27 years of active duty, to be his Deputy. Work also had four years as Under Secretary of the Navy.  Also true, outgoing Army Secretary John McHugh never served but it shows.  His seven years as secretary have been marked by reduced morale, increased suicides, declining readiness and a hollowing of the force not seen since the Carter Administration.  Although his deputy, Under Secretary Brad Carson, spent some time in Iraq as a Navy Intelligence officer after being turned out of Congress, he received his Direct Commission at age 42 to polish up his resume so he is hardly an experienced military man so will have little practical Army experience to help the next Secretary deal with the myriad of challenges he will face.

With all this said, rumors abound that President Obama intends to nominate Political Hack Eric Fanning to replace McHugh although he is definitely NOT what we need as our next Secretary.  Granted he is a seasoned community organizer having been a leader of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund helping Democrats get elected but this hardly qualifies him to lead our Nation’s Army in the final year and a half of the Obama Administration.  The next few years promises to be challenging as the Army deals with considerable force reductions and refitting from a decade of War.  The next Secretary needs to be able to hit the ground running with a deep understanding of not only how the Army runs but also has the deep respect of serving members -- Someone like General Sullivan.

Mr. President, this is another opportunity for you to secure your legacy.  Are you going to saddle the Army with a political hack who knows nothing about the Army, strategically, tactically or culturally, for your final time in office or will you appoint a “Gordon Sullivan” type that actually can do something to rebuild the Army after a decade of War.  This is your chance to demonstrate you really care about Soldiers and match your rhetoric with actions.  Appoint Gordon Sullivan NOW!

Saturday, June 27, 2015

Why the Republican National Committee (RNC) Needs to STOP Having John Bolton Send Out Solicitation Letters and E-Mails!

Today I received the below E-Mail from John Bolton soliciting contributions for the RNC and became so incensed that I fired back the below response explaining why Draft Dodging Chicken Hawk Bolton was the wrong person to use for fund raising and why he was the wrong messenger for talking about why the Democrats and especially Hillary Clinton are soft on National Defense.  Here is that exchange.

Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 1:20 PM
To: 'John Bolton'
Subject: RE: Act now before it’s too late

To be equally blunt, I am a retired Army Colonel Vietnam Vet and life long Republican so please DO NOT insult me by sending me an appeal for a donation from a self described Vietnam Draft Dodger and Chicken-Hawk like John Bolton!
            It’s a little difficult for us real Vet to take Uber-Chicken-Hawks like John Bolton seriously when he discusses today’s conflicts although I must admit he did demonstrate a certain “Military expertise” by his uncanny ability to “avoid armed conflicts” in his youth by doing everything short of maiming himself (which he didn’t have the guts to do) to avoid any brush with danger when his Country needed him during the Vietnam War.
            Born in 1948, John-Boy Bolton reached draft age in 1966 at the beginning of the real US involvement in Vietnam and when the War was still very popular but instead of subjecting himself to the draft, he enrolled at Yale.  Over the next four years while the fighting raged, John-Boy was the campus big advocate of Vietnam engagement while enjoying four years of uninterrupted student deferments.  In 1970 when his deferments ran out, he drew a low draft number but wanted to go to law school so John-Boy was sufficiently connected politically to get a highly a coveted position in the Maryland National Guard thus ensuring he would never be exposed to danger.  Now Reservists and Guardsmen are likely to be called up and serve in a war zone but during Vietnam, they had about as much chance of going to Vietnam as being struck by lightning.
            John-Boy wrote in his Yale 25th reunion book "I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy. I considered the war in Vietnam already lost."  He later explained that he decided to avoid service in Vietnam because "by the time I was about to graduate in 1970, it was clear to me that opponents of the Vietnam War had made it certain we could not prevail, and that I had no great interest in going there to have Teddy Kennedy give it back to the people I might die to take it away from."  Of course John-Boy could have gotten in on the ground-floor of the conflict in 1966 and anytime before 1970 to help ensure a different outcome.
            I would add that I went to Vietnam as a young second lieutenant in 1968 and extended there to come home a rather older and wiser Captain in 1970 and I can assure John-Boy that the War had NOT been lost by 1970 when he refused to serve.  Rather the Vietnamese were beginning to hold their own with reducing American direct combat support and it was not until the Democrat Congress completely cut off support to the South Vietnamese Army in 1974 while Soviet and Chinese increased their support to the North that the ARVN began losing ground.
            Hence, if even today John-Boy is still so misinformed about Vietnam and is not even ashamed of his deplorable personal conduct during that War even to the point of slurring those of us still serving in 1970, why should I believe anything he says today.
            Please NEVER again send me anything signed by John Bolton or any other draft dodging chicken hawk of his ilk!
COLONEL, US Army Retired

From: John Bolton []
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 11:04 AM
Subject: Act now before it’s too late

I’ll be blunt: we’re heading down a dark and dangerous path. The 2016 election is the make-it or break-it point for our nation’s future. It’s critical to reversing the failures of the Obama presidency and preventing a repeat in another Clinton White House.


I'll be blunt: we're heading down a dark and dangerous path.

The 2016 election is the make-it or break-it point for our nation's future. It's critical to reversing the failures of the Obama presidency and preventing a repeat in another Clinton White House.

That's why it is urgent you help the RNC meet their critical end of quarter goal before midnight on June 30.

The Obama-Clinton rudderless foreign policy has weakened our national defense, leaving us susceptible to our enemies. And it has diminished our standing on the global stage, causing America to lead from behind.

What we've seen time and time again under Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is this pattern of indecision, and worse, inaction. They have been so blinded by their own radical ideology that they can't even formulate a real strategy for taking on the world's enemies.

What this world needs now more than ever is American leadership. But to restore American leadership, we must elect a Republican to the White House.

We need a president who will defend the country. We need a president who will defend our core values. And we need a president who puts our national security at the center of every policy decision.

To make this happen, we need you to step up and act before Tuesday's deadline.

We must fuse our intense desire to win the White House with our need to keep House and Senate majorities that can support our conservative policies.

Act before it's too late: contribute to the RNC today.


Ambassador John Bolton

Tuesday, May 5, 2015

What Did Vietnam Generation Members of Congress Do in the War or More Appropriately, How Did Most Politicians Manage to Dodge the Draft?


Memorial Day and Veterans Day used to be my favorite holidays because it was the time when most of the Vietnam-era aged politicians would be polishing up their "why I couldn't serve" excuses.  With the passage of time, memories fade and people forget those tumultuous times when brave men and women answered the call when their country needed them while others founds way to avoid their responsibilities and let other serve in their place.  What used to gall me wasn't that I had to listen to such dribble from politicians but rather that they really expected me to believe them!  My last name might be ethnic but I didn't just roll off the boat last night!

Also, with the passing of time, fewer and fewer Members of Congress come from the 1941-1950 cohort, the prime draft age during that war.  There are still 27 Senators from that age cohort of which only three (3) saw active military duty but only one sports a Vietnam Service Ribbon.  In the House there are still 99 from that cohort with ten (10) having seen active duty but only four (4) are Vietnam Vets.  Then there’s Senator Blumenthal (D-CT) who claimed to be a Vietnam Vet but was really only a reservist whose only active duty was a short stint for training.  In his defense, he had seen a HBO rerun of the Oliver Stone movie Platoon.

Here is a graphic listing all the Vietnam generation Congress members that shows what they “did during the War.”

Active military service was an absolute certainty for any male born between 1941 and the end of 1950 unless he was morally, mentally or medically unfit, or took some overt action to "dodge" the draft.  THAT IS A FACT.  Draft dodging does not necessarily mean “illegal” as the Webster’s Dictionary of the time defined a “Draft Dodger” simply as “a person who avoids military service.”  Applying for student or occupational deferments, leaving the country, feigning homosexuality, hiring a sympathetic doctor to “discover” a disqualifying ailment or signing up for ROTC without any intentions of participating were all things people did, legally and illegally, to avoid performing their duty. Also, as Dan Rather reported in his discredited documentary on Bush 43’s National Guard service, Reserve and National Guard membership during Vietnam and present day service is much different.  Now Reservists and Guardsmen are likely to be called up and serve in a war zone but during Vietnam, they had about as much chance of going to Vietnam as being struck by lightning.  Slots in Reserve and Guard units were highly sought after and were normally reserved for the well off and politically connected.  Hence, I don't care if your name is Clinton, Cheney, Biden, Romney or a host of other politicians, I would appreciate it if you wouldn’t insult my intelligence with lame excuses.

President Bill Clinton, after receiving a host of deferments and two draft notices, finally received his notice to report for induction into the Army.  “Slick Willie” quickly sent a sworn affidavit to his draft board stating he was enrolling in ROTC at the University of Arkansas although he had no intention of ever enrolling at Arkansas let alone in ROTC.  He just needed to delay his induction long enough for the lottery to go into effect in hopes he would draw a high number.  He did and his unethical behavior resulted in someone less eligible and definitely less educated serving in his place.  He probably learned the wrong lesson from that experience of not being prosecuted for perjury as it possibly led to his later similar misconduct which resulted in his perjury conviction in the Monica Lewinski case.  Luck can only last so long!

Vice President Dick Cheney was equally diligent in his draft dodging efforts.  His claim that "If called, I would have been happy to serve" was a little disingenuous when in fact he did everything short of maiming himself (which he didn’t have the guts to do) to make sure he was unavailable to be called. When Cheney became Vietnam draft eligible, he applied for and received five draft deferments. During his 1989 Secretary of Defense confirmation hearings he testified that he “had other priorities in the '60s than military service” and that he received multiple deferments to finish a college career that lasted six years rather than four, “owing to sub-par academic performance.”  He then received a fifth "hardship" exemption when his wife was pregnant. Hence, he successfully “waited out” his draft board until he turned 26 and was no longer draft eligible!

Draft dodging must have been a plus in selecting vice presidents.  Joe Biden went through so many obscene machinations to dodge the Vietnam draft it was breathtaking.  After his fifth deferment ran out he actually received his Induction Notice and was unfortunate enough to pass his draft physical.  Undeterred by that small setback, Joe shopped around for a sympathetic doctor who successfully "discovered" an undetected childhood disqualification so Joe could send a less qualified (and definitely poorer and less educated) replacement in his stead.   I remember how Senator (and Medal of Honor recipient) Bob Kerrey put it in 1992 when he said  about the Draft “as I remember it, at that time if you could walk and chew gum, the military would take you.”   I was drafted in Biden’s hometown of Scranton Pennsylvania and my first hand experience was that unless you had a disqualifying condition that a doctor could visually detect like missing an arm or a leg, you were going to pass your draft physical.

Now Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney was really creative. Romney started out with two Student Deferments and then left the U.S. for a thirty-month stay in France as a Mormon missionary for which he received a “ministerial deferment.”  When he returned he received another two student deferments. Like Clinton, Mitt just needed to delay his induction long enough for the lottery to go into effect in hopes he would draw a high number.  He did and his unethical behavior also resulted in someone less eligible and definitely less educated serving in his place.  Unlike Clinton, Mitt supported the War and even Nixon's Cambodian Incursion so he and Dick Cheney qualify as Chicken-Hawks; politicians that fully support wars, just so long as they don’t have to fight in them.

I used to view Bush 43 with the same disdain as Clinton, Cheney, Biden and Romney until my research revealed he actually served longer on active duty than Al Gore did and was probably in more danger flying antique Air National Guard Convair F-102s than Gore was during his 4 month stint in Vietnam as an Engineer Brigade newsletter journalist or maybe even I was during my extended CIB earning combat Infantry tour.

The fact that so many Democrat and Republican politicians were Draft Dodgers shows that it was a bi-partisan character flaw that seemed to afflict politicians at a much higher rate than the rest of the general population.  The draft dodging politicians serving in Congress today can certainly campaign on their “Military expertise” by pointing to their uncanny ability to “avoid armed conflicts” in their youth.   

When evaluating Vietnam generation politicians, consider draft quotas were assigned by draft board and when one man evaded, one of his neighbors, often less educated or advantaged and always less eligible, served in his place.  also, because many of the more capable natural leaders avoided service, we often had to settle for less capable leadership.  Think of how many American lives could have been saved if leaders with the potential of Clinton, Cheney, Biden, Romney or many of those still in Congress had only done their duty.  Isn't it ironic how correct Clinton was when he used to say that "it's the little guy who plays by the rules that always ends up taking it in the neck."

Although much of the “history” of that era has been re-written by Draft Dodgers, up until Tet of 1968 the overwhelming majority of Americans supported the war and only then did the mood begin to slowly shift. It is arguable that the anti‑war movement never really enjoyed the support of a majority of the country as evidenced by the fact that Nixon won by a landslide in ’72 over a George McGovern who would have had us cut and run out of Vietnam before the end of his inaugural speech!

Despite the efforts of revisionist historians and Hollywood producers to ascribe only the highest of moral ideals to draft resisters while assigning the most sinister of motives to those of us who served, the truth is that the vast majority of draft avoiders were just plain "chicken."  So when you ask your Vietnam generation politicians “What did you do during the War?” these are the only three truthful responses they can give you:
  • When called, I responded and served.  Sometimes reluctantly but I did the right thing.
  • I was a quiet Draft Dodger!  I kept my head down; applied for all the deferments I could find, legal or illegal; and if my draft board finally found me, I did everything I could to make myself ineligible.  As a last resort if I just couldn’t beat the draft and my family was politically connected, I secured one of the coveted spots in the Reserves or National Guard so at least it was guaranteed that I would never be in danger of seeing Vietnam.
  • I was an obnoxious Draft Dodger!  I spent my time with flowers in my hair protesting the war and burning my draft while smoking pot and doing other drugs.  Unlike the quite Draft Dodgers, if my draft board caught up with me I went underground and often fled the country for Canada or Sweden.
Just one final thought, if the Clintons, Cheneys, Bidens, Romneys or many other Vietnam generation politicians were "unfit" to serve in their youth when their country needed them badly, what makes them any more fit to serve now?  At least they can begin on their way to redemption by being honest.  Instead of continually spinning yarns that "Ripley wouldn't believe" about why they didn’t serve, can't they just come clean and confess "I was scared, I didn't want to go, and I found a way to avoid it."  Then and only then can they begin regaining a little self-respect and the respect of the rest of us.

Saturday, April 25, 2015

The Price of Clintons! Going Up, Up, Up!

Times have really changed for the Clintons!  As Secretary of State, Hillary demanded hundreds of millions of dollars in exchange for “Official favors” but back when she was First Lady you could “buy the Clintons” for much less.  For instance, back in 1996, the Clintons’ price for a plot in Arlington National Cemetery for former Ambassador M. Larry Lawrence was a mere $200,000.  Of course that one didn’t work out so great because Veterans Groups made such a stink about this lying non-vet being buried in the company of brave Service Members that the Clintons were forced to have him dug up and removed.

Another good deal was the Clintons rented out the White House Lincoln Bedroom for a mere $100,000 contribution. A bit more expensive than the Hyatt, but it included a breakfast buffet.

Then there was the Marc Rich pardon that Clinton did on his last day in office.  That one was a bargain at just over $1 million including more than $100,000 to Hillary’s Senate campaign and another $450,000 to the Clinton Library.

Now days a million bucks won’t buy you a burrito with Hillary at Chipotle let alone a ride in the Secret Service chauffeured Scooby Van with her!

Can’t imagine what her (and Bill’s) price would be if American voters were ever to be so stupid as to elect her President!

Tuesday, March 17, 2015

Obama’s Bogus Gun Claims Scores 3 Pinocchios from Washington Post Fact Checker

“What we also have to recognize is, is that our homicide rates are so much higher than other industrialized countries. I mean by like a mile. And most of that is attributable to the easy, ready availability of firearms, particularly handguns.”

“And as long as you can go into some neighborhoods and it is easier for you to buy a firearm than it is for you to buy a book, there are neighborhoods where it’s easier for you to buy a handgun and clips than it is for you to buy a fresh vegetable — as long as that’s the case, we’re going to continue to see unnecessary violence.”

“People just say well, we should have firearms in kindergarten and we should have machine guns in bars. You think I’m exaggerating — I mean, you look at some of these laws that come up.”

–President Obama, remarks at a town hall at Benedict College, Columbia. S.C., March 6, 2015

These claims by Obama were so outlandish that Ripley wouldn’t have believed them let alone the WaPo Fact Checker so it sent Glenn Kessler in search of the truth.  Here is how Glenn dissected and evaluated each of the Prez’s assertions.

‘Our homicide rates are so much higher than other industrialized countries …by like a mile”

When Glenn called the White House out on this one and especially the “by like a mile” phrase, Obama’s minions tried to walk it back a bit but Glenn held them to exactly what the Prez said; he told the students the United States had the highest homicide rate among the nations of the industrialized world which is both factually incorrect and a flat out lie.  These statements were made by a person that couldn’t pick the gun out of a line up with golf clubs!

The “industrialized countries” is generally recognized to be the 36 countries the Organization for Economic Cooperation uses for its statistical analysis.  The OECD says the average homicide rate among the 36 countries is 4.1 per 100,000 people.

Brazil tops the list with a homicide rate of 25.5, or six times the average, with Mexico next at 23.4 followed by Russia at 12.8.  Tied for fourth place are Chile and the United States at 5.2 followed closely by Estonia at 4.7.

United States does have an above average rate but the Obama said that U.S. rate was higher “by a mile” when in fact the rate is five times lower than Brazil and four times lower than Mexico.

“It’s easier for you to buy a handgun and clips than it is for you to buy a fresh vegetable’

Appears no one could quite figure out what the Prez was trying to say here in that Glenn could find any place in the U.S where background checks are needed to buy vegetables. Even the White House couldn’t provide an explanation for Obama’s “vegetables and guns” comment?

“People just say well, we should have firearms in kindergarten and we should have machine guns in bars… You think I’m exaggerating — I mean, you look at some of these laws that come up.

Some states may allow firearms to be carried into bars and restaurants (unless the owner objected), but NO PLACE allows machine guns in bars. As a matter of fact, it takes a Federal license to even own a machine gun!

As for guns in schools, particularly college campuses, Florida is considering a proposal that does not specifically address kindergartens but would allow some school personnel to carry guns, provided it is approved by school administrators and would be limited to former or current law enforcement or military personnel but they must receive training at law-enforcement academies.  The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which supports gun restrictions, says “the vast majority of states – 48 of them – and the District of Columbia generally prohibit any person from carrying a firearm onto or possessing a firearm on school property, within safe school or gun-free school zones, on school-provided transportation, or at certain school-sponsored events.” Most states also require the expulsion of students who bring firearms onto school property, the groups says.

Appears to make this statement, Obama had been drinking in bars rather than carrying a machine gun into one


The Pinocchio Test

The president was “playing fast furious” I mean “fast and and loose” with the truth when he was talking to this group of college students no less. There is NO excuse for the claim that in some neighborhoods, it is easier to buy a gun than vegetable — or to say he’s “not exaggerating” when he claims that some people have proposed laws that would allow machine guns in bars … unless he, as President, intends to introduce legislation to make machine gun ownership in the US.

As for the US ranking on homicides among the industrialized nations, we might be slightly above average but to claimed the United States had rates that were higher “by like a mile” is so totally Bogus but typical Obama.  Tell a lie often enough and people might start to believe it!

The gun debate is serious enough that it should not be poisoned by exaggerated claims and faux statistics that are so outlandish that the students should have given the president a “strolling ovation” as they walked out on his speech.  The WaPo’s Glenn Kessler only awarded the Pres Three Pinocchios for this BS presentation but I believe he shortchanged him.  This one should certainly deserve the coveted Four!  If you want to see exactly what Glenn said, I’ll include his article uncut and uncensored below.


Three Pinocchios  



Tuesday, March 10, 2015

Republican Senators’ Ill-conceived Letter to Iran on Negotiation to Curtail Their Nuclear Program - Have We Begun a Destructive Game of “You Step on My Prerogatives and I’ll Step on Yours” Between President Obama and the Republican led Congress?

            On 10 March, 47 Republican US Senators sent a letter to Iran that has the potential to seriously complicate the Obama Administration negotiations and possibly even kill any potential agreement to curtail Iran’s nuclear program.  In my view this was a terrible and immature overreaction to President Obama’s recent arguably illegal and definitely improper actions that impinge on Congressional prerogatives.  Have we begun a destructive game of “you step on my prerogative and I’ll step on yours” between Obama and the Republican led Congress?  

One of the most egregious examples of the President’s impingement on Congressional prerogatives was his using his “pen and phone” to issue his Immigration Executive Order granting amnesty to about 6 million illegal aliens.  This gives illegal aliens social security numbers that will enable them to compete for jobs with legal Americans and even raid the US Treasury for $15,000 each by filing for three years worth of tax refunds for years they worked “off the books” and didn’t even pay taxes!

Like in football when it’s always the player that reacts to an illegal hit that draws the penalty, for some reason Republicans always get the blame when they react to Democrat provocations.  I suspect a great deal of the reason the Republicans are normally blamed is how the stories are reported by the naturally left-leaning mainstream press.  Examples:

Obama impinges on Republican prerogatives by issuing his “Amnesty for Illegal Aliens” and Republicans react by impinging on Executive prerogatives by inviting Israeli Prime Mister Benjamin Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress and now this letter to Iran.  The Republican lame excuse for sending the letter was to “instruct the Iranians that the President does not have the Constitutional authority to reach a meaningful understanding with them” and that any executive agreement “could be undone or modified by Congress or that a future President could revoke it with a stroke of a pen.”  I seriously doubt Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei needed the Republican’s gratuitous civics lesson on the limits of Presidential power but the Press never made the connection between the Democrat’s provocation and the Republican reaction.  Result: penalty Republicans for “Unsportsman-like Conduct!”

Obama becomes the first presidential candidate in a generation to reject public financing for his 2008 campaign after pledging to accept it and instead accepts unlimited corporate and “fat cat” donations and Republicans get blamed for later out raising Democrats with “fat cats” and for the Supreme Court “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission” decision.  Result: penalty Republicans for “Unsportsman-like Conduct!”

The Senate Democrats filibuster a motion to even debate the recent Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations Bill sent over by the House despite “regular order” would have allowed them to offer amendments and send the bill back to conference with the House to hammer out differences before a final vote.  Remember, appropriation bills MUST originate in the House under the Constitution and it was the Senate Democrats that halted “regular order” action on it yet the Liberal press shifted the blame to Republicans.  Result: penalty Republicans for “Unsportsman-like Conduct!”

I could cite several more examples but bottom line, when the Liberal press acts more like NFL Referees than impartial reporters of the facts and have a natural Liberal bent to blame Republicans regardless of whose really at fault, then when they call out an actual foul like this ill-advised letter to Iran, many Republicans just see it as another example of a press overreaction to Republicans reacting to Democrat provocation.  If the mainstream press were more “fair and balanced,” then maybe Republicans would be more apt to take them seriously and react when there is a real “penalty” called on them like this one.

The real question is when will this destructive game of “you step on my prerogative and I’ll step on yours” between Obama and the Republican led Congress end?  I would suggest that a good starting point might be halting what started this latest round of pissing contests, Obama’s Immigration Executive Order.  Even the Washington Post has come out in opposition to that executive order and questioned it legality and a Federal Judge has found sufficient reason to order it stopped until a challenge can be heard in May.  The President should let the Immigration issue play out in the Courts and ultimately I suspect the Supreme Court will decide it.  Unless one of the parties calls a truce, I suspect we will see repeated incidents of destructive behavior by both sides for the remainder of Obama’s term of office.  This could permanently damage the country and set a precedent for future Presidents and Congresses that they can get away with obviating each others prerogatives without limits.

Saturday, February 28, 2015

How Is FOXNews and Bill O'Reilly Weathering the "O'Reilly Scandal?" -- Appears Just Fine!

So how is FOXNews weathering the O’Reilly storm?  According to the widely respected Public Policy Polling conducted 26 February 2015, the week after the “O’Reilly Scandal” broke, here is how the public ranked all broadcast news outlets for Trustworthiness (most to least):

1. FOXNews      32%
2. PBS              14%
3. CNN              14%
4. ABC News     10%
5. CBS News      9%
6. NBC News      5%
7. MSNBC           4%  (Only 6% of Democrats even considered MSNBC Trustworthy!)

…so how is Bill O’Reilly standing up to the competition in the wake of his “scandal?”  Here are the latest released Nielsen rating numbers for 26 Feb 2015:

P2+ (000s)
25-54 (000s)
35-64 (000s)
Anderson Cooper 360

P2+ (000s)
25-54 (000s)
35-64 (000s)
Anderson Cooper 360

As a matter of fact, right after the “scandal” broke, Bill’s 23 Feb numbers jumped to 3,336,000.  Bill is even clobbers the competition in the coveted 25-54 year old demographic.

Whatever Bill's doing it seems to be working so if I were Bill, I'd keep on doing it. Before long the only people that will be watching Anderson and Chris will be their close friends and relatives.