Category Archives: a man with a plan

Trump Would Have Run In and Taken Out the Parkland Shooter? Seriously?

Since we’ve all seen that the best pace our tubby president can muster is a slow waddle, his boast is only partly plausible.  Assuming that he’d been there and actually taken any part in an attempted rescue of the children under attack in Parkland, I think it would have played out something like this.

The most charitable interpretation of what Trump might have done had he been near the massacre is that he’d have charged along on his golf cart, waddled down a hallway or two looking for an elevator rather than taking the stairs, (out of the question).  Then, exhausted, he’d have slumped against a wall wheezing from the effort of walking any farther from his golf cart than his usual distance.  That would normally be between his cart and where his ball lies on a fairway or green.

Of course, he’s never demonstrated a scintilla of courage in all the years he’s been braying on our TV screens, long before the Russians put him up to running for president.  (Coercion or bribery, inquiring minds want to know–but no icky details, please.  Some of us have weak stomachs.)  So it seems improbable that he would have done a damn thing.

But he would have said he did.  In his demented brain the two are seemingly the same.   (What really happened and what he said–after the fact– happened would not, in a million, billion years actually be the same. )

Yeah, I can see him zipping along in his golf cart, hair flying, bald spot showing, rolls of fat jiggling, racing away from any possible danger as quickly as possible.   Just like Fearless Leader of Rocky and Bullwinkle fame, our cartoon of a president would have made us laugh.

Or would have if it weren’t for the gruesome fact that real children were dying, their internal organs and bones being blown apart because no one–NO ONE–except the brave Coral Springs police officers, a few teachers, and the children themselves showed any courage at all during the horrific tragedy.

So zip it Mr president.  At this point we’d all probably be satisfied if you would just stop fooling around, tweeting, bragging, stuffing your face with KFC and Big Macs, and actually put in a day or two of actual work at your job.

But we know that’s not gonna happen.


Not Collusion–Maybe Putin Hired (Or Coerced) Trump to Run for President

My sainted Catholic Mom (to borrow a phrase from Gen. John Kelly) used to say that if there’s an obvious answer it’s probably the answer.

Putin was head of the KGB.  The head spook for one of the most repressive regimes of the 20th and 21st centuries.

Donald Trump is a careless person.  No telling what he was up to in Russia.  Money laundering seems to fit the data, among other things.  And he appears to be depraved.  For God’s sake the man bragged about sexually assaulting women on a regular basis.  We have his own word for it.  On tape.  Uh huh.  Bragging about sexual assault.   Who does that?

What else might he have been up to in a far away place where the pesky American law enforcement community is also far away?

And how hard would it have been for Putin to recognize the potential benefits of having a supposed American billionaire on the payroll.  Blackmail and extortion would surely be in Putin’s bag of dirty tricks.

Maybe Putin decided to throw the dice and put up his own candidate for the U.S. presidency.   Someone recently observed that Putin manages Trump as if he’s a KGB “asset”.   Maybe that’s because Trump is a KGB asset.

The data sure seems to fit the hypothesis.  The hypothesis?   Trump is a bought and paid for, or coerced, Russian “asset”.

That’s gotta be the spook coup of the century.


Fired Sexist Google Guy Doesn’t Look Like He Knows Much About Women

Life once again has given me the chuckles.

There was a story making the rounds on the news about a male Google engineer who wrote an incredibly biased email/memo about how and why women are not well represented in STEM (science technology engineering & math) professions.  He got fired for it and seems genuinely clueless about why that might be.

Of course the self appointed expert on women apparently has no education or credible research experience to support his ludicrously ill-informed diatribe.

So just who is this knuckle-dragger anyway?

Photos of the guy, James Damore, 28 have shown up and it seems pretty obvious that he’s not likely to know much abut women. He’s an unattractive pencil necked geeky looking guy who is probably not besieged by adoring women looking to hook up with him.  I suspect he not only doesn’t know much about women but also probably doesn’t even know many women.

So how did this expert on women’s abilities come by his lofty hypothesis about women’s capabilities?  Why just like most ignorant people who insist on pretending to expertise they don’t possess–he pulled it right out of his ass.

Damore’s opining on his ludicrous female stereotypes sounds pretty much like racists opining about why one ethnicity or another is inferior.  Hey, he’s no sexist, he’s just pointing out the obvious–that women are inferior.  Just as white humans simply point out that non-white humans are inferior, or women go on endlessly about supposedly inherent male cluelessness.  Right?

No.  Wrong.  Stereotypical thinking is the antithesis of informed inquiry and/or the scientific method of determining what is and is not true.  It is definitely not science and it is always wrong.  People don’t fit into neat little slots, people’s erroneous thinking does.

But that’s how many racists, sexists, and others who would discriminate against any entire class of people, think.  They think they’re just pointing out the obvious.

I suppose at this point I should launch into a litany of the attributes of pencil-necked geeks but, well, I don’t actually believe in stereotypes.



More on Knee Jerk Reactions, Fighting Fire with Fire

Amazingly, Trump and his surrogates brag that he fights back, that if
someone punches him he punches back ten times as hard, that he “fights fire
with fire”.

How can they think that mimicking an opponent is a good thing?  It’s purely
reactive. With Trump all it takes is a bit of criticism and he’s off to the
races, tweeting away–and not doing his job.  According to Sun Tsu (and
Miyamoto Musashi) the warrior chooses the time, place and mode of battle.
Letting oneself be constantly baited into over the top overreaction just looks
weak.  Trump comes off like a patsie, not a strong leader.  People rattle his
cage, he goes nuts, they do it again, predictably, so does he.  That is just way too much psychodrama for most folks.

By continually being drawn into childish twitter fights he’s wasting a ton of time that he could be spending on, oh, say, infrastructure, crime, gun violence, Middle East peace talks, Russian hacking of our businesses, elections and who knows what else, and….

So I’m not nearly as thrilled with the, presumably-viewed-as-manly habit
our president has of going off the rails at every little provocation.

By reacting so predictably, it takes virtually nothing for anyone who does
not wish us well to distract our president into following someone else’s
agenda. But a master tactician doesn’t fight fire with fire, he uses unorthodox
and abstruse methods and implements.  Cuts off the oxygen, cools the
temperature, removes the fuel, whatever.

Here’s a perfect example of the foolishness and penalties of knee jerk reactions,

Remember, at the Battle of Hastings, where England became Norman in the
fall of 1066?  After hours of bitter fighting, the English (under half-Danish
Harald Godwineson, King Harald II of England) had held their position behind a
shieldwall which the Normans could not break.  When the Normans got spooked and fled at some point, the English broke formation and pursued them individually and pell mell.  The Normans, seeing the opportunity, wheeled their horses around and picked off the undisciplined English one by one.  Two more times the Normans used the same ploy–pretended retreat followed by counterattack–to induce the English to break formation.  This turned the battle in favor of the mounted Normans.

That’s what knee-jerk “fighting back” got the English.  Their king dead, his body and jeweled gonfannon in the hands of his usurper, the end of Anglo Saxon rule in England, their lands, assets, pride and titles taken and endless abuse at the hands of the Normans for decades to come.

Mindlessly fighting back may sound good but patient critical analysis, and
then fighting back if it’s warranted, is a more sound way to proceed.
Usually. There are always exceptions but, in general, think first.  Just popping off as our president does is not just embarrassing, it makes us look dumb in front of our enemies.  And that definitely is not a good idea.

Mika Brzezinski is right about dictatorship vis à vis our country.

There is something profoundly unsettling about Trump’s continual “Oh
Come Let Us Adore Me” public events.  (Or, as Ms. Brzezinski puts it,
during his “dear leader” moments.)  The worst was when he introduced his
cabinet members one by one and each was compelled–whether explicitly by
Trump, or as a self-generated demonstration of their subservient status–to
do obeisance to Trump in the most uncomfortable way.  It was grotesque.

The Trump show’s possibilities are a dim echo of another great power’s
shift from republic to oligarchy to dictatorship.  That would be Rome.  Read
Tacitus, a somewhere-around-the-first-to-second-century AD (it is thought)
historian who chronicled that declension.  It’s all there.

Ms. Brzezinski seems absolutely correct in her analysis of what Trump, if
left to run wild, would/could and probably wants to, accomplish. Get rid of
those pesky rules. Regulations?  Anathema, get thee behind me!

Those rules he decries, which stipulate how the executive, legislative and
judicial branches of government are to interact and conduct business, are
archaic, says Mr., Trump.  That would be the checks and balances our
forefathers baked into the constitutional cake as a hedge against a power
hungry megalomaniac taking over as a dictator sometime downstream.  No
chance of that ever happening, right?

And now we have to endure those noted martial tacticians, Sarah Huckabee
Sanders, Melania Trump and Kellyanne Conway touting as somehow
praiseworthy the fact that Trump is easily baited and induced to respond to
someone else’s agenda.  While I’m sure these women have many fine qualities, they don’t know beans about the principles of successful conflict.  Neither they, or Trump, get it that a knee-jerk response to “fight fire with fire” or “fight back ten times harder” is strategically and tactically unwise and gives away the advantage conveyed by being the initiator of, not reactor to, any situation or issue.  Blindly responding to someone else’s ploys means someone else is pulling the strings.  Believe me ladies, that is not what ya want in a supposed leader.  A leader is supposed to make the other side dance to his tune.  Forever on the defensive is not a tactical road to success.

Whether it’s business, war, or civil society, if you don’t understand power
and have a plan for how you intend to use it–then don’t seek power.   Just
“fighting back” is not a strategy and simply emulating one’s opponents
leads to stalemate not success.

So, shut up ladies.  You’re clueless knuckledraggers or knuckledragger-enablers encouraging blindly “fighting back”.   Muhammad Ali frequently employed the tactic of getting an opponent to wear himself out reacting to Ali’s floating like a butterfly and stinging like a bee.  He used different techniques but the aim was inexorable–to make his opponent do what he wanted him to do.  It was called “rope-a-dope”.

In the contested endeavor, the wise leader chooses her/his own time and
place to contest it, whatever “it” is.  They’re not supposed to let someone
else sucker them into an inopportune course/time/place of action because of
low impulse control.  Make your opponent do what you want, don’t respond
to what he wants you to do.


A Solution for Arkansas

There’s an obvious solution to Arkansas’ problem finding a humane drug to execute its death row inmates. Jeez, it’s all over the news these days. And it’s one people voluntarily take for their own amusement, so it can’t bee too cruel.

How hard would it be for Arkansas to score some heroin on the street and just use that? Seems like a win, win to me. If taking human life can be considered a “win” that is.

Cheap, easy to obtain, no manufacturers’ complaints, and humane.

No, no, don’t thank me Arkansas. You should have thought of this yourselves.

Let My People Go!

Generally I try to steer clear of “cable news” because it’s generally just
“cable opinion” or “cable yapping”.  But the other day I happened to see
that Jeffrey Lord, the slimebucket who leaves an oily ring around my TV, has
compared Donald Trump to MLK.  My heart was warmed (and stomach turned) at his spirited and loathsome false equivalency which is being promulgated by a shameless CNN.

Yeah, that’s right.  The Donald is leading his peeps, the downtrodden
billionaires of the world, out of the wilderness to the promised land.  I guess
that would be the promised land wherein they have no restraints whatsoever
and can lie, cheat and steal their way to ever more profits and damn the cost
to everyone else.

Someone, please nominate the Donald for the Nobel Peace Prize for
championing the rights of the poor, poor pitiful (and monstrously entitled)
one percent.   The rest of what Mitt Romney deems “the takers” can just go
ahead and breathe toxic air, drink lead-laced, carcinogen infused water, be
fleeced by colluding politicians and corporate behemoths and shut the hell
up with their whining, right?

Yeah, the Donald, draft-dodging culture warrior,  is bravely leading his people out of their slavery.   And Jeffrey Lord is bringing the shy and overly modest Trump’s unheralded good deeds to the world at large.  You go guy.  Straight to hell that is.

What would Jesus say?  “Y’all know next time I’m comin’ back with an army don’t you?”