Liberal’s Gun-Free Zones Still Putting Schoolchildren at Risk


Posted in Organizational Update | Leave a comment

“I Saw the Crisis Coming. Why Didn’t the Fed?” by Michael J. Burry



Posted in Economy | Leave a comment

After a Half-Century of Little Progress, Black Americans Need to Leave the Democratic Party

Posted in Organizational Update | Leave a comment


SF, where 1 BR apt rentals are $3,500, rooms are $2,000 and lunches are $25 min. A NY Times article “In San Francisco and Rooting for a Tech Comeuppance” published today, 3/8/16, is enlightening and disturbing. There were some classic reader responses as follows:

“Focusing on San Francisco alone unfortunately provides the mistaken impression that only San Francisco is detrimentally affected. In fact, much of the Bay Area, especially the East Bay which includes Berkeley and Oakland is adversely affected by the so-called “tech boom.” Home prices and rentals have skyrocketed everywhere. What used to be conventional “listings” are now auctions carefully orchestrated by real estate agents. Bidders with conventional financing are customarily shut out of the market by all cash offers or bidders aligned with a few “preferred” lenders. Most distressing is the fact that much of the “tech boom” is illusory, consisting of over-valued and hyped unicorns like Air BnB, Pinterest, Lyft et al. Privately traded and bankrolled by venture capitalists and hedge funds, these companies are “success stories” only as long as their investors remained convinced they have marketable value. When that convictions becomes unsustainable, their value evaporates and the bubble bursts. Is it any wonder why most people in the Bay Area want the bubble to burst to end this farcical and painful charade once and for all?” – Bob

“An entire American city, now out of reach of the working and middle classes. And thanks to “free market” ideology, discussing any meaningful regulation of the real estate market is taboo, and our only hope is an economic decline.” – Chris

“We feel your pain, San Francisco. We don’t have one industry to blame, we have many. None of them slightly beneficent. New York City is being dismantled blocks at a time, making way for the wealthy. We have a mayor who campaigned on “a tale of two cities” but has done nothing to stop it.” – Amy in NYC

“It doesn’t feel good to be hoping for a downturn–especially when many of your friends work in the tech industry. But sadly, the teachers, servers, non-profit workers, etc., among us are simply being left out of this boom. I’ve lived between SF and LA my whole life, have lived in SF the last 6 years, and I’ve never seen it this bad. I rent and I live in fear of eviction–I think about it every day. ALL of the renters I know are facing the prospect of eviction, and most of us are lucky enough to make a decent salary. It’s crazy.

A big part of the problem is the refusal in SF–and even more so in surrounding suburbs–to build enough housing. There’s actually a lot of undeveloped infill land that could be used to build dense affordable and market-rate housing. As a leftist (and one who favors rent control, environmental protections, affordable housing, higher taxes on the rich, etc.), I do think housing policy is one area where the left has gone astray. There’s not enough housing here. Period. We should build more AND improve protections for renters and the poor. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Beyond that, we can increase taxes on wealth, including repealing some or all of Prop 13, so we can pay for the things the city needs so desperately–more affordable housing, services for the homeless, better public transit. Income inequality is simply out of control here. Improving those service will help everyone, rich and poor (and whatever’s left of the middle class) alike.” – Jenny in LA

“Big American cities need to work on strategies to move real wealth and resources between cities and even neighborhoods. All these expensive hubs in LA, Boston, San Fran, NYC are surrounded by relatively poorer neighborhoods and cities that could benefit from an infusion of more workers and families. The real impediments to this are crime and perception of crime (yes there is more crime, but crime in middle class neighborhoods is reported and treated differently), public school quality, transport to work hubs, and access to robust shopping (groceries, pharmacies, pizza and deli). These types of programs might be expensive, but in the end, they might be worth it.” – Armand in Boston

Posted in Economy | Leave a comment


Posted in Organizational Update | Leave a comment


Posted in Foreign Policy | Leave a comment


If you’re not yet convinced that the American Party is needed, you will be after reading the following NYT column by former Budget Director David A. Stockman:

Posted in Economy | 4 Comments


Many Republican and Democratic politicians count on the electorate to forget their half-truths and broken promises soon after each election. Once elected, there’s no good way to hold them accountable and at the start of the next election cycle the spin machine is simply re-started. We’re reminded of the famous line from the film “The Hunt for Red October”, in which National Security Advisor Jeffrey Pelt (played by Richard Jordan) says, “I’m a politician which means I’m a cheat and a liar, and when I’m not kissing babies I’m stealing their lollipops…” Yes, yes, we know, there are in fact some politicians who genuinely mean what they say. The collective record in recent decades, however, is a poor one of failed leadership, broken promises, missed opportunities and poor governance. This blog post, however, is about the sleazy nature of the 2012 Presidential campaign, not about Obama policies or the record of Congress.

Why are we writing about this now, after the 2012 Presidential election? We’re writing now because it is crystal clear that millions of voters were deceived and misled by the Obama Democratic Party campaign. In this election’s aftermath, the results are already being spun into propaganda that the 2012 Obama victory defines some type of new Democratic Party coalition that will propel Democrats to victory in future elections. These Democratic Party pundits would have you believe that large majorities of Latinos, Asians, African-Americans, youth, union members and single women are going to mindlessly and thoughtlessly go into the voting booths of the future and push the “Democratic” button because they did so in this election. To which we say: RUBBISH.

Let’s think for a minute what this latest Democratic propaganda really says. It says that the votes of Latinos, African-Americans, youth and single women will now be taken for granted. That really would not be unusual for the Democratic Party because it already takes the votes of union members and entire Democratic-leaning states like California, New York and New Jersey for granted. Why bother planning to protect New York Harbor or San Francisco Bay from flooding when the schmucks are going to vote for you anyway?

The simple truth is that Mr. Obama was re-elected for three reasons. First, there remains a hangover from the George W. Bush years. All Americans remember the tremendous human and financial cost of the Iraq war and Mr. Bush’s policy of threat pre-emption at any cost. The country is tired of foreign wars, and Romney’s somewhat strident campaign rhetoric undoubtably cost him votes.

Secondly, majorities of Latinos, African-Americans, young voters and single women voted for Obama at least in part because they were deliberately deceived by the Democratic Party and Obama campaign. This is what can happen when you have a sitting President flying around the country on Air Force One for 18 months in campaign/fundraising mode rather than devoting his time and energy to the job for which he was hired. The lesson of the 2012 Presidential election is that if you tell enough people what they want to hear, mix in vague phrases like “hope and change”, “forward” and “we’re all in this together”, deceive millions more, spend 80% of the campaign’s duration slandering your opponent and appeasing certain voter blocs, you can win. That is all the 2012 Presidential campaign means.

Third, the Obama campaign mounted a major voter registration effort and had an effective grassroots “get out the vote” campaign. Is it honorable to deceive, mislead, slander and lie for one’s personal gain? Of course not. Whether such conduct is seen in our personal lives, business affairs or political campaigns, it is universally recognized as dishonorable. Mr. Obama won re-election, but without honor. Duty, honor and country will always matter in America. This may be one of the reasons why 500 former Generals and Admirals spent their own funds to endorse Romney in a full-page ad the day before the election. Their ad can be seen here.

Our next post will provide specific examples of the deception and slander that made Mr. Obama’s re-election possible.

Posted in The Necessity of a Third Party | 4 Comments


Campaign 2012 is insulting to every one of us. With 88 days to go the Obama and Romney campaigns, having gone negative early, have set a new, all-time low for campaign integrity, transparency, clarity, divisiveness and policy articulation. What makes this so damaging is that there has never been a more urgent need for the opposite: positive campaigning that offers real solutions to America’s many serious problems.

As the national debt increases at the rate of $5 billion per day, poverty reaches levels not seen since the 1950s, foreign policy issues multiply, the country becomes even more polarized and unemployment plateaus at 18%, we can’t help but be reminded when we listen to Governor Romney and President Obama of the cover boy of Mad Magazine, Alfred E. Neuman. Alfred was usually shown with the caption “What, Me Worry?”, indicating a total lack of intellectual interest in what was happening.

We’re not alone in commenting on the offensive and sleazy nature of this campaign. David Rothkopf of the FP group, publishers of Foreign Policy magazine, writes in an column on August 8, 2012:

“Apparently, the candidates and their advisers think that is what will work with us. They think we don’t see the big problems, care about them or understand them. They think that throwing mud and unsubstantiated claims and getting bogged down in distractions will tip the scales in their favor. So the sad punch line to all this pettiness is that in a campaign laden with name calling, the biggest insult of all is the one that is being directed at the American people. Amid all the dirt and the shallowness, this is the one that should produce the greatest outrage. But of all of them, it’s also the only one that could produce any good at all. It could get us to act and demand more and to reject negative campaigns. Take it personally. Every time you hear a politician sling mud at an opponent rather than addressing a real issue, recognize that you’re the one being dissed. Then do us all a favor and vote your anger.”

One problem, Mr. Rothkopf. The Republican and Democratic parties are the only two choices on the supermarket shelf. There won’t be real change until the emergence of the American Party.

Posted in Organizational Update | 5 Comments


Actually, it’s long overdue. U.S. law does not require that candidates for President undergo psychological testing. U.S. Presidents undergo only an annual physical examination that apparently does not include a psychological evaluation. Have you ever heard a President’s doctors pronounce him mentally sound?

This is the most powerful job in the world, with immense responsibilities, tasks, stresses and demands 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. A single episode of weakness could have damaging consequences for the country. Given the responsibilities of the office, aren’t psychological exams even more important than physical exams? At the time a Presidential candidacy is announced, and before a single donation is made, shouldn’t we have the knowledge that the candidate is mentally sound, with a psychological profile evidencing the traits that would allow him or her to be successful in that office? Wouldn’t a baseline psychological exam be helpful in any determination that may need to be made under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment in the event that there is a question of incapacitation?

Beyond evidencing sound mind, shouldn’t American citizens have access to a candidate psychological profile that tells us how the candidate is likely to behave in office? After all, candidates have no problem with asking us for donations!

So, why haven’t we mandated psychological examinations for Presidential candidates and the President? Could it be that the Republican and Democratic parties don’t want their Presidential candidates to be tested with their psychological profiles made public? Yes, we think that is precisely what’s going on. We resolve that any American Party candidates for President will undergo both physical and psychological testing at the time their candidacy is announced, with the results made public. Taking this one step further, we believe that all Presidential candidates should make all of their educational, testing and work-related records public.

The following list contains traits known to be present in a certain type of personality. Do any of these sound familiar?

– Subtly misrepresents facts and expediently and opportunistically shifts positions, views, opinions, and “ideals” (e.g., about campaign finance, re-districting). These flip-flops do not cause overt distress and are ego-syntonic (he/she feels justified in acting this way). Alternatively, refuses to commit to a standpoint and, in the process, evidences a lack of empathy.

– Ignores data that conflict with his/her fantasy world, or with his/her inflated and grandiose self-image.

– Feels that he/she is above the law.

– Talks about himself in the 3rd person singular or uses the regal “we” and craves to be the exclusive center of attention, even adulation

– Has a messianic-cosmic vision of self and his/her life and “mission”.

– Sets ever more complex rules in a convoluted world of grandiose fantasies with its own language (jargon).

– Displays false modesty and unctuous “folksiness” but is unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true self is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.

– Sublimates aggression and holds grudges.

– Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it).

Posted in The Necessity of a Third Party | 3 Comments