Democratic Debate or UFC Free for All?

Are the Gloves Off or Were They ever On?

I watched another debate last night on CBS with seven Democratic candidates. Firstly I don't know who was in control - the candidates or the moderators. For sure the latter lost control.

When will the people who run these things finally get it? At times the debaters were like seven piranhas fighting for the last fish in the Amazon! Give them their allotted time, a warning, and then cut off the microphones after 10 seconds. They will soon learn to wrap up. I thought the moderators were the least impressive.

The jabs and belly punches got pretty bad. If they think they will ever unite after Super Tuesday when things will really be rocking they are hallucinating. If one ever faces off against Trump, all Trump has to do is replay some of the finer moments with a "You really think THESE people can run the country?" type comment.

I have said it before. It is time for a woman. Of the two, Klobuchar is by far the best on image, perceived energy and drive. Although no doubt smart, Warren still looks and sounds like a teacher.

Women have been cleaning up after men for centuries. Following Trump, two of them are probably needed.

Now wouldn't THAT shock 'em? President AND Vice President. I like the idea and have said so before. Unfortunately I have to wonder if they could get along for eight days let alone eight years.

So sad. Too bad. Thelma and Louise. Just keep 'em away from any cliffs.

#thebrewsterblock

Food for Thought

Thought for Food Maybe Not So ...

Here I go again, right off the top. I am seated in front of a PC on this free website where I can pretty much write or express myself in any manner I please. What will it be today? This is also without - I hope - concern for lawsuits, fines, or reprisals. I did get some hate mail once. What a fantastic freedom.

There are places of course where this is not the case. I happen to be in Canada. I wonder whether my neighbours to the south are as lucky anymore. If their current leader and the networks that support him have their way, maybe not.

The sad part however is that I only started to enjoy writing later in my life. I have no credentials or degrees in journalism etc. but at least have the right and freedom to try. My biggest problem is that today not many people want to read it. Naturally that could be because I am not a household name, have no following, and maybe I'm just not very good. I accept that but I think there is more to it.

Some solace can be gained by my awareness that long established newspapers and magazines are also having a tough time staying in business despite their sometimes famous writers. I suspect it is for the same reason. Loyal fans of those outlets still enjoy reading a newspaper but they are a dying breed. 

Younger audiences want news snippets and off the wall videos which they can experience in seconds and forward to their "friends" whom they might never have met. Tweets fit the bill and funny, outlandish stunts. 

I'm afraid that I am too late to talk about anything meaningful for more than a few sentences and nurture a following. I have to dumb it down or jazz it up. So no, expressing thoughts for food or any form of compensation is just not going to cut it. If you write it they will come is the stuff of movies but not blogs.

I should turn to lying through my teeth, grow outlandish hair, or wear a tie a foot longer than it should be. Look what it has done for others.

#thebrewsterblock

DEMS Demolishing Their Chances

Democratic Party Donkeys or Jackasses?

I am repeating myself but I am not as bad as the Democrats and CNN. You would think that this #2020 election would be a slam dunk for the Democrats. We thought that in 2016 and look what happened.

They want to defeat Trump. We all get that. We all want that. Sadly, they are not going to accomplish it. Here is my reasoning, which I have outlined before.

In short, people are sick and tired of the non-stop Trump bashing. It is not that we sympathize with POTUS - far from it. He needs to be sent packing. But the long term harping by the Democratic contenders and in particular CNN will almost ensure a Trump victory. The sad thing is - he knows it as well.

Both CNN and the Dems. are guilty of assuming that the general population is stupid. They are not. They might be apathetic, but most can see a good thing from a bad one. I believe that the best way to beat him is to redirect all of the dollars you waste trying to convince the electorate how bad and evil he is to proving just how good you and your policies are compared to his. Let the people see the difference

NOBODY wants to be lectured to - Bernie! Sure you need to point out the worst of the things he does but give us a break. I watch CNN a lot and by the time I see Don Lemon before retiring I have already heard it all before during the day. Same message, different dramatics. 

Both the Democrats and the network have criticized Trump repeatedly for tweeting and dwelling on the negative instead of reminding his people about the good things he thinks he has accomplished. So true!

But they have both spent almost 3 years doing the same thing. You need to change tactics guys.

You are shooting yourself in the hoof!

#thebrewsterblock

Time for the Democrats' Moment of Truth

Rally 'Round the Nominee? Very Soon We Shall See!

For many months now we have heard leading Democrats say how important it is to beat Donald Trump at any cost. This is the number one goal. It has become a daily hue and cry.

Very soon they will all have their chance to put their support where their mouths are. As is always the case in both parties, the remaining nominees have the axes out against each other. The latest victim is of course Bloomberg.

The same Democrats and for sure yours truly were all over Republican Senators for selling out during the impeachment trial. You heard it all - no backbone; no conscience; letting down their voters; placing themselves first etc. I still agree with all of that.

Now however, the remaining Democratic Nominees will have to be reduced to one. Then we will see who has the courage of their convictions in the donkey party. They all want to win. Last night Erin Burnett on CNN tried to pin down Warren on whether she would support Bloomberg if he wins. I did not hear any resounding "Yes". (Burnett also tried to pin her down on accepting a large campaign contribution from a "Super PAC" which she has said she was against but Warren failed to say she would renounce the group.) Lack of backbone or just a little backtracking?

So will they all throw their support behind the winner - even if it is Bernie or Michael? Or will they continue the infighting and walk right into the Trump bear trap?

If they fail to support each other at the critical moment they will look like real Jackasses and not true Donkeys.

#Brewsterblock

Pardon Me Mr. President?

Pardons: Strength or Weakness?

Today we heard that President Trump has used once again his power to pardon individuals of his choice. This can be regarded as either a highly admired refinement to a system of government, or a leak in the hull of a great ship that needs repair. Wisdom or folly?

You can Google about all major pardons made by U.S. Presidents. I am restricting this to the Presidential power which can only apply to federal crimes against the United States. Take note: the one exception is impeachment, thank goodness. Similar powers belong to State Governors.

Many people are all over Trump for this and expecting him to do it again with Roger Stone. In fairness, many Presidents have used this power and often in controversial ways. Here is a list of past Presidents and their numbers of pardons, most to least:

https://www.thoughtco.com/number-of-pardons-by-president-3367600

This varies from Franklin D. Roosevelt with 2819 to George H. W. Bush with 74. Obama granted 212 of them.

I see it as a very visible black eye in the system. In my opinion the process should be changed. One person can be just too biased and often for the wrong reasons. Any pardon is usually preceded by a lot of study and assessment resulting in advice to the President. This is only reasonable. Apparently however, he or she can ignore all of this and you know who is famous for this.

My suggestion would be to have a vote in the Senate - one which is deliberately brief. It should also require a substantial majority - more like 80% in favour. From what I can see the last majority in the Upper House over 80% was back in the 1800s. This should ensure some representation on both sides. This way it would indeed be a combination of many opinions. Surely genuinely deserved cases could find a bipartisan audience.

Here is another approach and possibly a backup to the case where a party has a more than 80% majority. This would entail the Chief Justice simply drawing randomly an odd number (no ties) of Senators' names. Each person must vote either yes or no on each case. The details of each pardon would already have been defined. A committee would bear witness to the ballads being legitimate before any draw.

Changing the constitution is not easy as most anti gun people know. Surely there would be more of an even split on this change?

The Brewster