POLITICAL JUNKIES

rainnyc

Ruthbru, how interesting! I'm also an amateur presidential history nerd. For no good reason, Lyndon Johnson and George Washington are among my favorites. Though one could not live with my DH, a Civil War buff, and not learn a thing or two about Lincoln.

ruthbru

Maybe we will have to start a History Nerds thread so we don't take over the election discussion!!!!

rainny, I just read a really good biography of Martha Washington called Martha Washington, First Lady of Liberty by Helen Bryan. It is a lot more interesting than it's title. It talks about the culture of that time, the roll of women, slavery, some of the family gossip, her first marriage, her children, letters written by Martha to friends (as she destroyed almost all of her & George's correspondence). Very interesting.

marijen

Theory on why Kasich still in the race (not mine so please no attacks).

The reason why may be more sinister than most would like to believe — and it has ties to Kasich's donors.

LifeSite News reported that none other than George Soros is linked to Kasich's presidential campaign. The Soros Fund Management was listed as the sixth highest individual donor to the governor's campaign, with $202,700 given thus far.

George Soros, of course, is a big-time liberal player who has donated over $8 million to Democrat presidential candidate Hillary' Clinton's campaign. Soros is behind the left-wing organization MoveOn.org and is associated with many other left-wing movements. He is no friend to conservatives, yet he backs Kasich — leaving us to ask why.

Speculation is that Soros wants to keep Kasich in the race long enough to sabotage the Republican Party and pave the way for a Clinton win. Of course, Kasich may be delusional enough to believe he could actually win the nomination, which, sadly, feeds right into Soros' plan.

marijen

He thinks he can win because he's delusional!! Day four of poor delusional Kasich. Get that man a kitchen aid for a reality check!

rainnyc

Ruthbru, I'll have to look for that biography. The one I know, which I quite enjoyed, was Martha Washington: An American Life by Patricia Brady. Yes, I always thought it was interesting that she destroyed her correspondence with George. It's as if she spent so much of her marriage sharing him with the colonies, the army, the country, but she wasn't going to share their relationship after they were gone.

Another book I enjoyed, which certainly is relevant to this year's presidential race, is Hidden Power: Presidential Marriages that Shaped Our History by Kati Marton. It's really about the 20th century presidents, and I thought it was very insightful, not only about the Clintons, but about FDR, the Carters, and even the Fords.

ChiSandy

Soros’ donations pale in comparison to the likes of Sheldon Adelson, the Koch Bros., and Rove’s various super-PACs. BTW, MoveOn.org was originally formed in the wake of the whole Lewinsky/Bill Clinton impeachment episode. That’s where the “move on” came from--the founders, though they disapproved of Clinton’s actions, were opposed to impeachment. They advocated formal censure instead. The original name of the organization was “Censure and Move On,” and it was limited to an online petition urging that Congress censure Clinton and then "move on" to more important issues facing the nation.They got so many signatures within their first week that they realized there was a much larger movement possible. In fact, it was originally bipartisan, counting a few anti-impeachment Republicans among its ranks. After the Senate acquitted Clinton in 1999, MoveOn formed its own PAC and began to address various liberal issues, which it continues to do. Though they do raise funds, they still primarily operate to spur grass roots action such as letter-writing, petitions, protests and volunteerism for liberal causes & candidates. (BTW, “liberal” is not a dirty word).

exbrnxgrl

(BTW, "liberal" is not a dirty word).

😎😎😎😎😎 Right on

Meow13

kayb, I want one of those stickers

exbrnxgrl

The presidency seems to age everyone. Talk about stress!

ChiSandy

I had three bumper stickers on my car:

“Real patriots pay taxes”

“I couldn’t afford a politician, so I bought this bumper sticker instead”

and

“I’ll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.”

Now that Bob has the Fusion Hybrid, they’re on his car. He says things get interesting on Southwest Side streets when drivers cut him off and flip the bird, and he gets the fish-eye sometimes from the other docs in the hospital parking lots. But his patients all tell him they love the stickers. Besides, if he peels them off they’re trashed and I can’t put ‘em on my own bumper.

sas-schatzi

Congratulations Ruthrbu

marijen

New theory on Kasich staying in, he wants to be VP

DivineMrsM

Ruth! All these years knowing you and I am just learning of your interest in all things presidential! The past couple of years, I've been quite interested in the White House building, studying the floor plans online, learning of all its remodeling/restoration over the years. I've read numerous First Ladies biographies (I love all the First Ladies) and am learning and understanding more of the presidents. Was thrilled to take a trip to Mt. Rushmore last May where I learned more about Teddy Roosevelt. Watching "The Butler" with Oprah got me interested in all this. I then read "The Residence" a book about the private side of the White House, and so many more good books on various related subjects. I watched Nancy Reaan's memorial service last week and as so very moved by it. I am thrilled you were selected to go to Springfield and spent a week immersing yourself in all the history there. Congratulations

Back to the subject topic, it's interesting to read how Kasich is supposedly being used as a pawn in this election. Being from Ohio, I'm not a Kasich supporter for many reasons.

I remember when Oprah started mentioning Barach Obama when he was an Illinois Senator and something told me he was going to be President. I mean, I just had a knowing. It was before anyone had really started hearing about him on a national level.

Ha ha ChiSandy, love those bumper stickers

marijen

I think there's a similarity between Donald Trump and Alec Baldwin

ChiSandy

Yup--his plans sound catchy, but read further and you’ll find, as Gertrude Stein (unfairly) said of Oakland, “there’s no ’there’ there.” Just like everything Trump, all sizzle and no steak, all style and no substance. 99.9% of Americans would never have to pay estate tax anyway, and the annual gift tax exemption takes care of relatives seeding their donees’ HSAs. (As for inheritance taxes, that’s a state statutory matter which the Fed gov’t can’t touch--different states have different inheritance taxes; and for one year, 2010, IL let its lapse).

Donald Trump resembles Alec Baldwin’s 30 Rock character, GE mogul Jack Donaghy, but for the hair. Trump & Baldwin have nothing in common except middle-age spread.

ruthbru

rainny, I just downloaded Hidden Power, thanks. Divine, I will have to check out The Residence too. I was teary eyed during Nancy's funereal too. (Yes, I do occasionally think about things other than Dancing With the Stars ). Another good First Lady book is First Ladies by Betty Boyd Caroli. And if you want to read an intriguing fictional novel about JFK, try Jack 1939 by Francine Mathews. In 1939, the real 22 year old Jack Kennedy traveled through Europe on the brink of WWII gathering research for his Harvard senior thesis. In this novel, he has been recruited as a spy by FDR himself, trying to stop the flow of German money flooding the United States to buy the 1940 election (which Hitler very much wants Roosevelt to lose).....the book takes JFK to all the places he really went, but with pretty interesting plot twists.

Okay, I have to go; my next post will actually have something to do with the present election!

rainnyc

Ruthbru, that novel sounds great! I'll look out for it.

I think the historical element lends depth and context to what we're seeing in 2016. I don't feel it's irrelevant, given that the comments paint in very broad strokes. Now, if we were getting into the nitty-gritty of Martin Van Buren's cabinet choices, that might feel a little tangential.

DivineMrsM, The Residence also sounds terrific! It's interesting what you say about Kasich, being from Ohio. I think a lot of New Yorkers feel that way about our governor, Andrew Cuomo, when his name occasionally gets floated on the Democratic side.

I remember vividly the summer of 2001, when I was very busy at work and had a toddler at home. I spent the whole summer reading David McCullough's massive biography of Harry Truman, finishing it around Labor Day, just a few days before Sept. 11. I so badly wanted Truman to be the president at that point!

DivineMrsM

ChiSandy, your commentary is interesting to read. And may I just say here that it makes me happy that all of the posters on this thread are engaged in the political process of our great nation, regardless if I share your viewpoint. I really like reading all the different perspectives.

Trump reminds me of a little kid running for elementary school president. You know how they promise they're gonna make sure free cookies are served every day at lunch, recess time will be extended, no one has to to homework, ect. And kids will vote for that person because they actually believe that kid wold make those things come to pass. But it never does because it's completely unrealistic. Trump claims he'll do so many grand things but I don't see his huge overhaul materializing. Promising change and exacting change are two completely different sides of the coin.

Rainy, I will check out the Hidden Powers book, too, sounds fascinating. I know the First Ladies wield great influence on their hubbies. Truman, what a down to earth president. I read a book about him by his daughter Margaret, years ago. He's one of my more fav presidents

Ruth and Rainy,another book I loved was "Upstairs at the White House" about JB White, chief usher there for 28 years, and his dealings withthe First Ladies from the Roosevelts to the Nixons. I didn't want the book to end!

ruthbru

I loved Upstairs too!

About John Kasich: Ohio Governor Says He Will Not Serve as Vice President for Donald Trump or Ted Cruz

"Under no circumstances. Are you people kidding me?" Kasich said in an interview to air Sunday on "Meet the Press," addressing media speculation that he may be a VP pick. "I'm running for president."

april485

If ACA is repealed and people are allowed to "choose" whether or not they purchase health insurance as is advocated by Trump, who foots the bill for all of those that can't pay in the ER? And, even with Medicaid, so many doctors do not accept it in my State, the mothers here still took their kids to the ER before ACA was passed. I think that Trumps idea of healthcare sets us back to where we were before all of the blood shed on the hill of the Clinton administration and President Obama took office and fought so hard for all people to have access to healthcare, despite pre-existing conditions. I cannot believe that anyone would think that it is right to not allow someone access to the best healthcare.

Is ACA perfect? NO. Fix it but scrapping it and starting over makes ZERO sense (and I have private insurance through my employer and am blessed to pay very little each month - less than 120.00 for both my husband and myself for full excellent coverage) to me and to those who need it.

Ugh...I am so confused on what this country is heading for anymore. I used to feel as though I had a grasp on where the candidates stood on the issues most of my life and now? Not so much...

BarredOwl

I am enjoying this thread as well.

In addition to the ACA mandate to provide those with pre-existing conditions with insurance coverage, the ACA is also the source of the legislation that established a regulatory pathway for licensure or approval of biological products that are "biosimilar" or "interchangeable" (i.e., "Biologics Price Competition and Innovation") with a biologic. Examples of such biologics are pegfilgrastim (NEULASTA®) and trastuzumab (HERCEPTIN®)).

BarredOwl

exbrnxgrl

I'm going to add a new issue to this thread, one that is near and dear to me as I am passionate about education. I believe a well educated populace, is the foundation for any stable, civil society.

Donald Trump, among others, wants to "repeal" Common Core Standards. My contention is that Mr. Trump (and too many others) do not understand what it actually is. As you read this, the key point to bear in mind is that it is NOT a federal mandate. It was adopted by individual states. It can be modified or rescinded as states see fit, not the federal government. It is also up to each state to decide how it is implemented, in terms of state content standards and adopted curricular material. Again, nothing mandated by the federal government. Here is a good explanation from politicfact, March 2016:

"The Common Core State Standards are a set of benchmarks for English and math developed after years of discussion between state education departments and private, nonprofit groups.

The aim was simple: Prepare pupils for college-level work and careers, and to make sure children in different states across the country were all learning the same things in school.

This goes back to 2007, when the state education officials in the Council of Chief State School Officers discussed creating standards everyone could use. The idea was that kids in, say, California schools would have the same academic goals as children in Alabama.

Two years later, in 2009, the council and the National Governors Association agreed to create Common Core with input from teachers, parents and education experts. The final guidelines were released in 2010, and states were free to implement them or not.

So far, 42 states have agreed to use them, with varying degrees of actual support. Minnesota only chose to use the English standards. South Carolina, Indiana and Oklahoma initially agreed to use Common Core, but have since withdrawn.

In the 2016 presidential race, several GOP candidates have vilified the standards as Trump has, accusing the federal government of overreach in trying to unify school boards under the U.S. Education Department.

Washington has done a bit to encourage states to adopt the standards. President Barack Obama's signature education program, Race to the Top, gave states that have adopted a set of standards extra points (40 of a possible 500) when competing for grants.

But the federal government didn't help create the standards, and has no control over how they're implemented. Even states that have adopted the standards are still free to set their own curricula.

In short, it doesn't matter who the president is, because there's not much the federal government can do about Common Core."

Not only am I a classroom teacher, but I have been a pilot teacher for my district's proposed adoption of new math materials. I also serve as an English Language arts teacher leader and have helped develop scope and sequence of Common Core for my grade level. I will be piloting an English Language Arts adoption next year.

Although it's interesting to say that content standards should be a decision at the local level, they never have been, even before Common Core. Standards have always been decided at the state level, then, implemented locally. However, prior to Common Core there were some vast differences in what a student, at a given grade level, was required to know from state to state. As a nation, shouldn't we want a 4th grader in Mississippi to learn the same things as a 4th grader inConnecticut?

Yes, as a teacher, Common Core has involved a learning curve. As with anything new, there have been frustrations and a few pitfalls, but overall, it simply makes sense. I teach grade 1, so my students have had Common Core in place throughout their, short, school lives. I can certainly sympathize with those in the upper grades and high school whose students have not had this foundation, but our kids are bright and with support and encouragement from teachers and parents can rise to the challenge.

We need to have a well educated population, a population that is prepared to compete in a global economy. We need this for all of our students, regardless of what state they have been educated in

As for Mr. Trump, who so famously said , "I love the poorly educated.", well, I just bet you do.

steelrose

Thanks for the explanation of "Common Core," Caryn. When that was thrown around during the debates, I didn't have a clue what they were talking about. As to Trump's "I love the poorly educated" nonsense… does this man ever think before he opens his mouth? There must be a method to his madness, but it's lost on me. Great comic potential though! We'll all be laughing 'til we cry.

marijen

No he's referring to Mother Theresa! We will be rich!

ChiSandy

MrsM, spot-on about the Trump-grade school kid analogy. Reminds me of Thomas Frank's book “What's the Matter with Kansas?" that came out in the spring of '04 and sought to explain the phenomenon of blue-collar rural citizens voting against their own financial interests and for the plutocrats. Basically, it was because the neocon and pro-Wall-St. conservative candidates played down those aspects of their platforms and concentrated instead on visceral fears regarding national security (remember the “vote Democratic and die"-esque campaign ads?) in the wake of 9/11; and more tellingly, on social and “values" issues that resonated with Evangelical and fundamentalist voters: abortion, gun control, and marriage equality. (Cynics called these issues the “3Gs: God, guns & gays). These voters were willing to essentially reward the 1% (years before the Occupy movement coined the term) with tax breaks from plutocrat-friendly candidates in return for promises that they would keep the country safe from abortion, gun control, and gay marriage and allow religion (in the form of conservative Christianity) to occupy pride-of-place in government. The dirty little secret that these voters didn't realize was that not only were these candidates relatively powerless to make good on these promises if elected but largely had no intention of doing so--the candidates' true agenda was policy that would benefit their largest campaign donors--not the people who placed their trust in them by voting. I knew even before I finished reading the book that John Kerry's chances were doomed. (The only upside was that John Edwards never did get to be one windsurfing accident away from the White House).

Since then (starting in 2009), some of those voters formed the nascent Tea Party movement and expressed populist anti-Wall St. sentiments, and new candidates picked up on that and carried that banner into office--all the while accepting donations from the wealthy (and welcoming the support of ads placed by plutocrat-funded and neocon-founded super-PACs), and once in office voting for the very agenda that benefited corporate interests and led serious assaults against the middle class. Moreover, much of the Tea Party movement was founded and fueled by xenophobic and race-based resentment against the election of Obama--playing on baseless fears that by no longer being part of the socioethnic majority that had been able to discriminate on the basis of race, religion, gender and sexual identity, that the tables were being turned on them and they would experience the very mistreatment they'd been meting out. The Tea Party movement added erosion of voting rights to the conservative agenda--fueled by anger and fear of a Black President, these voters have been all too willing to accept the bogus assertions of the conservative politicians that voter fraud is a serious problem--and these voter-ID laws (especially in their implementation) impacted almost exclusively those most likely to vote for Democrats: blacks, Latinos, students, the elderly and the poor. These groups often can't afford the types of voter ID deemed acceptable (in some states, official student photo ID isn't valid but gun and hunting licenses are) and even when provided free, provided in places difficult to get to and during extremely limited hours. (NC is the worst offender in this regard). Ironically, there's an infinitesimal number of instances of fraudulent voting--corpses stopped voting 30+ years ago, after Jane Byrne & Harold Washington ended the rule of the Daley machine--but thousands of times more instances of duly registered voters being prevented from voting. (Or in ghettos and barrios, tricked into missing elections by receiving handbills with erroneous information as to polling hours & locations--and even warnings of arrest of voters with outstanding warrants and even traffic or parking tickets should they show up to vote).

One thing that's bewildered observers was the opposition by an increasing numbers of the middle and blue-collar class to labor unions and burgeoning support for anti-union and pro-“right-to-work" candidates. This has proven to be a windfall for conservative business interests: a successful divide-and-conquer strategy to pit worker against worker, creating resentment by non-union workers against those in unions who enjoy higher wages and better benefits. The term “right-to-work" was a carefully-chosen oxymoron, creating the erroneous impression of freedom and liberty in workers, when the “rights" actually inure to management instead. It should be called “right to be either exploited or unemployed" for the worker, and “right to exploit workers" for management.

BTW, I freely admit to having a family income that in many cities places us into the 1%. So I also freely admit to voting against my own economic interests in favor of compassion, equality, and fairness.

ChiSandy

True dat, kayb! There is neither statutory nor Congressional prohibition against a President (first-or-second-term) nominating a SCOTUS justice in an election year, nor against the Senate voting the nomination up or down. There isn't even a Senate “rule" against it--the so-called “Biden Rule" cited by Mitch McConnell isn't a “rule" at all--it was an ill-advised suggestion by Biden in George HW Bush's last year in office that he refrain from nominating a Justice and if one were nominated, the Senate should delay acting upon it until after the election. Biden, in response to predictable outcry from the GOP, said he'd be willing to have the Senate consider a “moderate" nominee. But Biden's argument was never even elevated from the status of “remark" to that of a formal proposition submitted for passage as a rule; and the whole point was moot anyway, since no vacancy occurred that year after all.

Conservative columnist George F. Will today excoriated McConnell's and the GOP's recalcitrance by calling it “indefensible," “incoherent" and “a partisan response in search of a justifying principle” that “radiates insincerity.” When your own party's head cheerleader rips you a new one, it's time to reconsider. However, I suspect that among the most hard-line GOP members, the wheels of the cognitive-dissonance machine have been set in motion and Will may be denounced as a traitor to the conservative movement, rather than have his remarks taken seriously.

exbrnxgrl

Common Core standards tell teachers what to teach, scope, but not how to teach. That truly is a local decision with school districts deciding how they want their teachers to deliver the standards. Some districts will adopt curricular material (textbooks, workbooks etc) and insist that their teachers follow it to a T. Others may take different approaches. I believe that good teachers always add their own style and "flavor" to their teaching, and almost all of us supplement, augment and change things that are not working, but our common goal is to have all students meet their grade level standards by the end of the school year. With respect to the curricular material, and I can only speak to California, the state approves of chosen programs and then funds a certain amount of it's purchase, if a district adopts one of the chosen programs. Local districts are free to chose other programs, not state approved, but would receive no funding. So, in practice districts rarely chose materials that are not state approved. No curricular adoption is perfect, but there are usually some good choices.

Re:SCOTUS, Sandy, I appreciate your clarifying the process for us.

rainnyc

Exbrnxgrl, I nearly always agree with your incisive posts, but I have some sense of why Trump--ever giving people what they want to hear--is pushing the hot button on Common Core. In New York, the implementation has been a disaster, yoked to poorly thought out, punishing state tests, to the extent that over 20% of students across the state opted out last year. If my child were younger, I would certainly be opting him out. At least in our state, "common core" and "state tests" are synonymous, and they represent hours of classroom time devoted to numbing test prep, at the expense of art, science, history, recess--and all joy in education. I can believe that dedicated teachers--as I am sure you are--are making these standards into palatable and even sometimes inspiring lessons, but at least in my state, they represent dread and pain for our kids. I'm not a teacher, but after 12 years as a public school parent, I have enormous respect for the job they do.

And believe me, you could not pay me to vote for Trump.

exbrnxgrl

Yes! There is no federal mandate, law or decree that any state must adopt Common Core. It is and always has been a decision made by each state. On the local level, although school districts can decide how to deliver Common Core standards, I doubt that any could or would opt out of using Common Core to define what students must learn at each grade level. I imagine it would seriously effect their state funding! *

Why do I think the GOP wants to get rid of it? To be honest, I simply think they don't understand it. If folks really think Common Core standards are not appropriate, they need to deal with it on a state level. It is not a federal issue and no president, regardless of party affiliation, can "repeal" it as there is nothing to repeal at the federal level.

*The majority of public school funding comes from the state as well as local taxes. Federal funding is a smaller part and there are all sorts of other categorical funds such as Title 1, special education etc. It is very complicated and creates a great deal of inequity between school districts and even within school districts. When people talk about public schools, as if they were some homogenous entity, they are sadly mistaken.

exbrnxgrl

Here is a quick and easy fact sheet on Common Core. I send this to my students' families at the beginning of the school year.

http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/m...