New York Newspaper Calls For Gov. Cuomo To Resign

The problems just continue to grow for New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.

Four women have now come forward to accuse him of sexual harassment, and many of his ex-staffers are now accusing him of promoting a toxic environment among those working in his administration.

But perhaps most important is the charge that his administration hid many nursing home deaths from COVID-19 to avoid making the governor look bad.

That's what the Albany Times-Union details in their editorial asking the governor to resign. Here is part of what the newspaper's editorial board had to say:

First Gov. Andrew Cuomo hid the truth about deaths of nursing home residents from the public. Then his administration lied about why. Then, pretending to come clean, it lied about why it lied. 

Enough. Mr. Cuomo has squandered the public’s trust at a time when it’s needed more than ever. Amid an enduring pandemic, it is vital that people can believe what their governor and their government are telling them, and that the rules they’re asked to follow and the sacrifices they’re asked to make are truly in the interest of public health. It is time for Mr. Cuomo to resign, and for those who helped him deceive the public to go, too.

We do not say this lightly. We endorsed Mr. Cuomo for governor three times. He has brought to fruition a host of important progressive goals. But between his manipulation of state ethics bodies, multiple allegations of sexual harassment and these latest revelations on nursing home deaths, he has lost the credibility he needs to lead this state, especially in the midst of a public health crisis.

As we wrote in our last endorsement of him: “New York still matters. It's the fourth-largest state and the financial center of the world. It's the birthplace of women's rights and LGBT rights. It embodies the American melting pot. With its wealth, its legacy and its diversity come a special responsibility to stand as a moral voice in America.”

Mr. Cuomo can no longer be that voice.

USA Today Endorses Joe Biden For President

USA Today has never endorsed a presidential candidate in the past, but they are doing so this year. They are endorsing Joe Biden. Here is just a small part of what they had to say.

Four years ago, the Editorial Board — an ideologically and demographically diverse group of journalists that is separate from the news staff and operates by consensus — broke with tradition and took sides in the presidential race for the first time since USA TODAY was founded in 1982. We urged readers not to vote for Donald Trump, calling the Republican nominee unfit for office because he lacked the “temperament, knowledge, steadiness and honesty that America needs from its presidents.” We stopped short, however, of an outright endorsement of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. This year, the Editorial Board unanimously supports the election of Joe Biden, who offers a shaken nation a harbor of calm and competence. . . .

It's no secret that the Editorial Board disagrees with Trump not just on his approach to the coronavirus but also on fundamental issues, from health careand climate change to immigration and trade. Policy differences, however, are not the reason behind our first-ever presidential endorsement. Diverse views, even ones we think are wrongheaded, are a staple of American politics and something to celebrate.

If this were a choice between two capable major party nominees who happened to have opposing ideas, we wouldn’t choose sides. Different voters have different concerns. But this is not a normal election, and these are not normal times. This year, character, competence and credibility are on the ballot. Given Trump’s refusal to guarantee a peaceful transfer of power if he loses, so, too, is the future of America's democracy.

For nearly four decades, the Editorial Board has stood for certain core values: truth, accountability, civility in public discourse, opposition to racism, common-ground solutions to the nation’s problems, and steadfast support for First Amendment rights. These aren’t partisan issues, or at least they shouldn’t be.

Donald Trump has trampled each of these principles, making more than 20,000 false or misleading statements, ducking responsibility for his actions, spewing streams of invective at his critics, trafficking in racial fearmongering, governing more as the leader of the red states than of the United States, and relentlessly attacking the free press.

Everything about Biden’s nearly half-century political career suggests he would do a far better job of respecting these values. “We need to revive the spirit of bipartisanship in this country, the spirit of being able to work with one another,” the Democratic nominee said in a recent speech in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.

Biden is a worthy antidote to Trump’s unbounded narcissism and chronic chaos. Having surmounted heartbreaking personal loss  — his first wife and year-old daughter died in a car crash, and his son Beau died of brain cancer — Biden exudes decency and empathy. Ask yourself: Can you imagine Joe Biden denigrating servicemembers as losers? Cozying up to autocrats abroad? Shaking down a foreign leader for dirt on a political opponent? . . .

Biden is an experienced hand with working-class roots who understands the American dream. He knows the levers of power and how to wield them. He has a history of working across the aisle on such issues as health care, racial justice and the environment. He has the knowledge and the personality to begin repairing America’s tattered reputation around the world. . . .

This extraordinary moment in the history of our nation requires an extraordinary response. With his plans, his personnel picks, his experience and his humanity, Joe Biden can help lead the United States out of this morass and into the future. Your vote can help make that happen.

The Des Moines Register Cancels Release Of Its Poll

I had planned to use this space to report the results of the Des Moines Register Poll. That poll is considered the "gold standard" of Iowa polls, and would have been the final Iowa Poll before the caucus was held. But on Saturday, the day the poll was to be released, the newspaper canceled the poll's release.

Here is how the newspaper reported its cancellation:

Nothing is more important to the Register and its polling partners than the integrity of the Iowa Poll. Today, a respondent raised an issue with the way the survey was administered, which could have compromised the results of the poll. It appears a candidate’s name was omitted in at least one interview in which the respondent was asked to name their preferred candidate.

While this appears to be isolated to one surveyor, we cannot confirm that with certainty. Therefore, the partners made the difficult decision to not to move forward with releasing the Iowa Poll.

Des Moines Register Endorses Warren For President

With only a few days to go before the Iowa Democratic caucus, the state's largest newspaper (the Des Moines Register) has endorsed a candidate in the Democratic race for the presidential nomination.

The paper's editorial board has endorsed Senator Elizabeth Warren.

Here is what they had to say about their endorsement.

The outstanding caliber of Democratic candidates makes it difficult to choose just one. 

But ultimately Iowa caucusgoers need to do that. Who would make the best president at this point in the country’s history? At a time when the economic deck has become so stacked against working Americans that the gap between rich and poor is the highest in more than 50 years? At a time when a generation of war has stressed military families and sapped the treasury?

The Des Moines Register editorial board endorses Elizabeth Warren in the 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses as the best leader for these times. 

The senior U.S. senator from Massachusetts is not the radical some perceive her to be. She was a registered Republican until 1996. She is a capitalist. “I love what markets can do,” she said. “They are what make us rich, they are what create opportunity.” 

But she wants fair markets, with rules and accountability. She wants a government that works for people, not one corrupted by cash.

A former Harvard professor and expert in bankruptcy law, she helped set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The agency was specifically designed to prevent a repeat of the banking crisis and look out for little guys swindled by lenders and credit card companies. 

She believes government should actively work to prevent and respond to abusive practices that jeopardize individuals and the country’s economy. 

Warren doesn’t measure the health of the economy by looking at the stock market or an unemployment rate that doesn’t count the longtime jobless or chronically underemployed. She measures it by how working families are doing. Many are not doing well, and Warren seeks major reforms to help them.

A qualification: Some of her ideas for “big, structural change” go too far. This board could not endorse the wholesale overhaul of corporate governance or cumulative levels of taxation she proposes. While the board has long supported single-payer health insurance, it believes a gradual transition is the more realistic approach. But Warren is pushing in the right direction.

She believes access to health care is a human right. 

She would make climate change a top priority and use her executive power to roll back Trump administration policies that prop up fossil fuels. 

She says corporations should have less Washington influence, children should be protected from gun violence, child care should be affordable, immigrants deserve compassion, mass incarceration should end and the wealthy should pay more in taxes.

Those ideas are not radical. They are right. They would improve life in America, and they are generally shared by the other Democratic candidates, who bring their own strengths to this race. 

Former Vice President Joe Biden would restore credibility in the White House and respect among allies around the world. Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg brings refreshingly smart, youthful optimism. Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota offers a track record of bipartisan achievement. Much like Warren, Bernie Sanders champions the working class.

But at this moment, our country needs more. We need a president who can work the levers of government to translate ideas into signed laws and effective regulations. We need a president committed to bringing our troops home from open-ended foreign entanglements. We need a president who understands that the American dream itself is at risk: the ideal that someone who works hard and plays by the rules can get ahead, and that their children will do even better. With Warren, the Oval Office will be occupied by someone who has made rebuilding the middle class her life’s work.

These tall tasks will require resilience and courage in the face of inevitable attacks from the GOP — both during the campaign and while in office. 

Warren has proven she is tough and fearless.

But toughness can also be perceived as divisive, as can rhetoric that vilifies the wealthy, lobbyists and corporations that employ millions of people. Relentless attack mode threatens to further fracture a country riven by party, income and racial divides.

Unifying the country may not be possible, but to gain the support required to govern, she must show that her vision will lift people up rather than divide them.

Warren’s competence, respect for others and status as the nation’s first female president would be a fitting response to the ignorance, sexism and xenophobia of the Trump Oval Office. 

She is a thinker, a policy wonk and a hard worker. She remembers her own family’s struggles to make ends meet and her own desperation as a working mother needing child care.

She cares about people, and she will use her seemingly endless energy and passion to fight for them. 

At this moment, when the very fabric of American life is at stake, Elizabeth Warren is the president this nation needs.

Is Trump A "Moron" Or Just An "Obnoxious Racist" ?

(Cartoon image is by Chris Britt at Creators Syndicate.)

Prime Minister Netanyahu likes Donald Trump. But other Israelis are aghast when they look at the narcissistic conman living in the U.S. White House. Consider these remarks by Chemi Shalev in his column in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz:

“Stupidity is one of the more easily accessible and widespread explanations for Trump’s behavior. It’s true that Trump has claimed in the past that his IQ is much higher than that of Obama or of comedian John Stewart, but in that case, he’s doing an excellent job of concealing his intelligence, as his visit this week to Puerto Rico showed.”

“(R)ather than trying to cheer up Puerto Ricans, as he did in Texas, or console them, as he would later do in Las Vegas. Trump insulted the island’s residents on their own home turf. He told them they should be grateful they weren’t hit with a ‘real catastrophe’ like Hurricane Katrina, which devastated New Orleans in 2005. He didn’t stop complaining about the drain of Puerto Rican recovery on the federal budget, which he didn’t even mention in Texas or Florida. And to cap it all off, Trump was filmed tossing out paper towels to his audience in a scene deemed by one broadcaster as ‘the least presidential ever.’”

“Prejudice and racial stereotypes are such a prominent feature of his personality, they maintain, that he just can’t keep them under lock.”

“He has described himself as ‘the least racist person ever,’ but since he launched his presidential run by describing Mexican immigrants as rapists and murderers. Trump has described Puerto Ricans as lazy, Muslims as wannabe terrorists, African-Americans as thugs, Jews as proficient with money and women as inferior sexual objects. It’s only among neo-Nazis, apparently, that Trump has found ‘some fine people.’”

The U.S. president has shot himself in the foot so regularly that it is only natural to assume he may not be the sharpest pencil in the box.” 

“But even if we assume that Trump is far from stupid, and definitely not a ‘moron', most people would agree that both his election and his presidency are an insult to America’s intelligence, as well as the world’s.”

Trump's First Trip Has Been An Embarrassment For U.S.

(This map of Trump's trip is from the BBC.)

I read the opinion of one pundit that said Donald Trump has actually looked "presidential" on his first foreign trip. That has to be a sick joke. He has praised nations with serious human rights violations (Saudi Arabia, Israel) and berated nations that are the most democratic -- calling Germany evil and berating most Nato nations. He also refused to assure Western European NATO nations that the U.S. will live up to its NATO obligations (making many wonder if they still have a solid ally in the U.S.). He was also seen pushing other leaders aside to make sure he was in front for photo opportunities. In short, his first foreign trip has been an embarrassment for the United States.

Is it any wonder that he is not respected in the free world? If you doubt that, consider this editorial from the German newspaper Der Spiegel. I post only part of the editorial below:

Donald Trump is not fit to be president of the United States. He does not possess the requisite intellect and does not understand the significance of the office he holds nor the tasks associated with it. He doesn't read. He doesn't bother to peruse important files and intelligence reports and knows little about the issues that he has identified as his priorities. His decisions are capricious and they are delivered in the form of tyrannical decrees.

He is a man free of morals. As has been demonstrated hundreds of times, he is a liar, a racist and a cheat. I feel ashamed to use these words, as sharp and loud as they are. But if they apply to anyone, they apply to Trump. And one of the media's tasks is to continue telling things as they are: Trump has to be removed from the White House. Quickly. He is a danger to the world.

Trump is a miserable politician. He fired the FBI director simply because he could. James Comey had gotten under his skin with his investigation into Trump's confidants. Comey had also refused to swear loyalty and fealty to Trump and to abandon the investigation. He had to go.

Trump is also a miserable boss. His people invent excuses for him and lie on his behalf because they have to, but then Trump wakes up and posts tweets that contradict what they have said. He doesn't care that his spokesman, his secretary of state and his national security adviser had just denied that the president had handed Russia (of all countries) sensitive intelligence gleaned from Israel (of all countries). Trump tweeted: Yes, yes, I did, because I can. I'm president after all.

Nothing is as it should be in this White House. Everyone working there has been compromised multiple times and now they all despise each other - and everyone except for Trump despises Trump. Because of all that, after just 120 days of the Trump administration, we are witness to an American tragedy for which there are five theoretical solutions.

The first is Trump's resignation, which won't happen. The second is that Republicans in the House and Senate support impeachment, which would be justified by the president's proven obstruction of justice, but won't happen because of the Republicans' thirst for power, which they won't willingly give up. The third possible solution is the invocation of the 25th Amendment, which would require the cabinet to declare Trump unfit to discharge the powers of the presidency. That isn't particularly likely either. Fourth: The Democrats get ready to fight and win back majorities in the House and Senate in midterm elections, which are 18 months away, before they then pursue option two, impeachment. Fifth: the international community wakes up and finds a way to circumvent the White House and free itself of its dependence on the U.S. Unlike the preceding four options, the fifth doesn't directly solve the Trump problem, but it is nevertheless necessary - and possible. . . .

The U.S. elected a laughing stock to the presidency and has now made itself dependent on a joke of a man. The country is, as David Brooks wrote recently in the New York Times, dependent on a child. The Trump administration has no foreign policy because Trump has consistently promised American withdrawal while invoking America's strength. He has promised both no wars and more wars. He makes decisions according to his mood, with no strategic coherence or tactical logic. Moscow and Beijing are laughing at America. Elsewhere, people are worried. . . .

In "Game of Thrones," the Mad King was murdered (and the child that later took his place was no better). In real life, an immature boy sits on the throne of the most important country in the world. He could, at any time, issue a catastrophic order that would immediately be carried out. That is why the parents cannot afford to take their eyes off him even for a second. They cannot succumb to exhaustion because he is so taxing. They ultimately have to send him to his room - and return power to the grownups.

"Religious Liberty" Bills Seek To Legalize Discrimination

(Cartoon image is by Carlos Latuff.)

It's nice to see an editorial like this from a reliably conservative newspaper like the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Far too many people and institutions on the right are willing to justify discrimination as long as it is cloaked in religion. The Star-Telegram editorial board writes:

Religious liberty laws don’t give religious freedom — they take it away. 

The Constitution protects religious freedom. It’s a fundamental right that any American can exercise, so these bills don’t do anything but discriminate against a minority group — this time the LGBTQ community. 

None of these laws are necessary, and all of them are damaging. 

Seventeen “religious liberty” bills have been filed in this year’s legislative session, all discriminating against the LGBTQ community in one way or another. 

The most controversial is House Bill 3859.

Along with three similar bills, it would protect faith-based child welfare organizations when they exercise their “sincerely held religious beliefs.” 

Which means this bill protects these organizations from being sued for not providing abortions or contraceptives, or for denying adoptions or foster care placement that somehow go against their religious beliefs. 

Bill author Rep. James Frank, R-Wichita Falls, says HB 3859 isn’t politically charged, but rather is meant to help provide quality homes for children in child welfare services. 

Organizations like the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops are worried about litigation and hesitant to continue in the child welfare system without religious liberty protections. 

But “sincerely held religious beliefs” is so vague that it could open up some worrisome doors.

The bill says the “sincerely held religious beliefs” can’t be used to discriminate against race, religion, ethnicity or national origin, but it says nothing about sexual orientation.

The language in the bill would allow child welfare organizations to deny members of the LGBTQ community the ability to adopt, become foster parents or even engage with child welfare services. 

The bill does mandate that a “secondary service provider” be ensured if a service is against the original provider’s belief system, and it cannot be used to deny “necessary child welfare services” from another provider, but these are slapdash attempts to make the bill seem less discriminatory. 

HB 3859 was left pending in committee. 

It would be a shame if faith-based organizations stop working in the welfare system because of possible litigation, but we shouldn’t have to discriminate against a whole community to help kids in need.

"Most Worrisome Thing About Trump Is Trump Himself"

(This caricature of Donald Trump is by the inimitable DonkeyHotey.)

The following is a new editorial by the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times:

It was no secret during the campaign that Donald Trump was a narcissist and a demagogue who used fear and dishonesty to appeal to the worst in American voters. The Times called him unprepared and unsuited for the job he was seeking, and said his election would be a “catastrophe.”

Still, nothing prepared us for the magnitude of this train wreck. Like millions of other Americans, we clung to a slim hope that the new president would turn out to be all noise and bluster, or that the people around him in the White House would act as a check on his worst instincts, or that he would be sobered and transformed by the awesome responsibilities of office.

Instead, seventy-some days in — and with about 1,400 to go before his term is completed — it is increasingly clear that those hopes were misplaced.

In a matter of weeks, President Trump has taken dozens of real-life steps that, if they are not reversed, will rip families apart, foul rivers and pollute the air, intensify the calamitous effects of climate change and profoundly weaken the system of American public education for all.

His attempt to de-insure millions of people who had finally received healthcare coverage and, along the way, enact a massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich has been put on hold for the moment. But he is proceeding with his efforts to defang the government’s regulatory agencies and bloat the Pentagon’s budget even as he supposedly retreats from the global stage.

These are immensely dangerous developments which threaten to weaken this country’s moral standing in the world, imperil the planet and reverse years of slow but steady gains by marginalized or impoverished Americans. But, chilling as they are, these radically wrongheaded policy choices are not, in fact, the most frightening aspect of the Trump presidency.

What is most worrisome about Trump is Trump himself. He is a man so unpredictable, so reckless, so petulant, so full of blind self-regard, so untethered to reality that it is impossible to know where his presidency will lead or how much damage he will do to our nation. His obsession with his own fame, wealth and success, his determination to vanquish enemies real and imagined, his craving for adulation — these traits were, of course, at the very heart of his scorched-earth outsider campaign; indeed, some of them helped get him elected. But in a real presidency in which he wields unimaginable power, they are nothing short of disastrous.

Although his policies are, for the most part, variations on classic Republican positions (many of which would have been undertaken by a President Ted Cruz or a President Marco Rubio), they become far more dangerous in the hands of this imprudent and erratic man. Many Republicans, for instance, support tighter border security and a tougher response to illegal immigration, but Trump’s cockamamie border wall, his impracticable campaign promise to deport all 11 million people living in the country illegally and his blithe disregard for the effect of such proposals on the U.S. relationship with Mexico turn a very bad policy into an appalling one.

In the days ahead, The Times editorial board will look more closely at the new president, with a special attention to three troubling traits:

1. Trump’s shocking lack of respect for those fundamental rules and institutions on which our government is based. Since Jan. 20, he has repeatedly disparaged and challenged those entities that have threatened his agenda, stoking public distrust of essential institutions in a way that undermines faith in American democracy. He has questioned the qualifications of judges and the integrity of their decisions, rather than acknowledging that even the president must submit to the rule of law. He has clashed with his own intelligence agencies, demeaned government workers and questioned the credibility of the electoral system and the Federal Reserve. He has lashed out at journalists, declaring them “enemies of the people,” rather than defending the importance of a critical, independent free press. His contempt for the rule of law and the norms of government are palpable.

2. His utter lack of regard for truth. Whether it is the easily disprovable boasts about the size of his inauguration crowd or his unsubstantiated assertion that Barack Obama bugged Trump Tower, the new president regularly muddies the waters of fact and fiction. It’s difficult to know whether he actually can’t distinguish the real from the unreal — or whether he intentionally conflates the two to befuddle voters, deflect criticism and undermine the very idea of objective truth. Whatever the explanation, he is encouraging Americans to reject facts, to disrespect science, documents, nonpartisanship and the mainstream media — and instead to simply take positions on the basis of ideology and preconceived notions. This is a recipe for a divided country in which differences grow deeper and rational compromise becomes impossible.

3. His scary willingness to repeat alt-right conspiracy theories, racist memes and crackpot, out-of-the-mainstream ideas. Again, it is not clear whether he believes them or merely uses them. But to cling to disproven “alternative” facts; to retweet racists; to make unverifiable or false statements about rigged elections and fraudulent voters; to buy into discredited conspiracy theories first floated on fringe websites and in supermarket tabloids — these are all of a piece with the Barack Obama birther claptrap that Trump was peddling years ago and which brought him to political prominence. It is deeply alarming that a president would lend the credibility of his office to ideas that have been rightly rejected by politicians from both major political parties.

Where will this end? Will Trump moderate his crazier campaign positions as time passes? Or will he provoke confrontation with Iran, North Korea or China, or disobey a judge’s order or order a soldier to violate the Constitution? Or, alternately, will the system itself — the Constitution, the courts, the permanent bureaucracy, the Congress, the Democrats, the marchers in the streets — protect us from him as he alienates more and more allies at home and abroad, steps on his own message and creates chaos at the expense of his ability to accomplish his goals? Already, Trump’s job approval rating has been hovering in the mid-30s, according to Gallup, a shockingly low level of support for a new president. And that was before his former national security advisor, Michael Flynn, offered to cooperate last week with congressional investigators looking into the connection between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.

On Inauguration Day, we wrote on this page that it was not yet time to declare a state of “wholesale panic” or to call for blanket “non-cooperation” with the Trump administration. Despite plenty of dispiriting signals, that is still our view. The role of the rational opposition is to stand up for the rule of law, the electoral process, the peaceful transfer of power and the role of institutions; we should not underestimate the resiliency of a system in which laws are greater than individuals and voters are as powerful as presidents. This nation survived Andrew Jackson and Richard Nixon. It survived slavery. It survived devastating wars. Most likely, it will survive again.

But if it is to do so, those who oppose the new president’s reckless and heartless agenda must make their voices heard. Protesters must raise their banners. Voters must turn out for elections. Members of Congress — including and especially Republicans — must find the political courage to stand up to Trump. Courts must safeguard the Constitution. State legislators must pass laws to protect their citizens and their policies from federal meddling. All of us who are in the business of holding leaders accountable must redouble our efforts to defend the truth from his cynical assaults.

The United States is not a perfect country, and it has a great distance to go before it fully achieves its goals of liberty and equality. But preserving what works and defending the rules and values on which democracy depends are a shared responsibility. Everybody has a role to play in this drama.

Rather Is Right - A Lie Should Be Called A Lie

(Cartoon image is by John Cole in the Scranton Times-Tribune.)

A few days ago, the editor of the Wall Street Journal was on NBC's Meet The Press. What he said there was very disappointing. He said his newspaper would not be using the word "lie" when discussing the falsehoods by Donald Trump. His reasoning for that was:

I'd be careful about using the word, "lie." "Lie" implies much more than just saying something that's false. It implies a deliberate intent to mislead. I think it's perfectly -- when Donald Trump says thousands of people were on the rooftops of New Jersey on 9/11 celebrating, thousands of Muslims were there celebrating, I think it's right to investigate that claim, to report what we found, which is that nobody found any evidence of that whatsoever, and to say that. 

I think it's then up to the reader to make up their own mind to say, "This is what Donald Trump says. This is what a reliable, trustworthy news organization reports. And you know what? I don't think that's true." I think if you start ascribing a moral intent, as it were, to someone by saying that they've lied, I think you run the risk that you look like you are, like you're not being objective. 

I disagree, and so does Dan Rather. Here is Rather's reply:

A lie, is a lie, is a lie. Journalism, as I was taught it, is a process of getting as close to some valid version of the truth as is humanly possible. And one of my definitions of news is information that the powerful don't want you to know. 

So this statement (see attached article) from the editor in chief of the Wall Street Journal about how his paper will report on Donald Trump’s potential (likely?) future lies is deeply disturbing. It is not the proper role of journalists to meet lies—especially from someone of Mr. Trump’s stature and power—by hiding behind semantics and euphemisms. Our role is to call it as we see it, based on solid reporting. When something is, in fact, a demonstrable lie, it is our responsibility to say so.

There is no joy in taking issue with the Journal’s chief editor. His newspaper is a publication for which I have deep respect for the overall quality of its reporting. But, as I have said before and will say as long as people are willing to listen, this is a gut check moment for the press. We are being confronted by versions of what are claimed to be “the truth” that resemble something spewed out by a fertilizer-spreader in a wind tunnel. And there is every indication that this will only continue in the Tweets and statements of the man who will now hold forth from behind the Great Seal of the President of the United States.

Some journalists and publications will rise to the occasion. Some will not. You as the paying, subscribing public, can use your leverage and pocketbooks to keep those who should be honest brokers of information, well, honest.

Conservative Newspaper Blasts Trump's Failure To Divest

Many of his most rabid supporters may not realize the trouble Donald Trump is creating for himself by refusing to divest himself of his business interests (and putting his stocks in a blind trust), but many conservatives do understand. And that includes some reliably conservative newspapers.

This is from the editorial board of the traditionally conservative Dallas Morning News:

Donald Trump's refusal to draw lines between his businesses and the presidency continues to pose new appearances of conflicts of interest. And the man doesn't take the oath of office until next month.

So far the president-elect has refused to release his tax returns and reneged on a promise to tell the world how he would prevent his vast private holdings from appearing to influence his presidency.  Now his sons,  Eric and Donald Trump Jr., are scrambling to distance themselves from the Opening Day Foundation, a newly formed Dallas-based charity, after questions over whether the nonprofit is peddling access to their father during inauguration activities.

There is a certain irony to this latest kerfuffle. As a candidate, Trump assailed Hillary Clinton for the appearance of pay-to-play ties between contributions to the Clinton Foundation and access to the former secretary of state. 

How is the Opening Day Foundation much different? Created by Trump supporters Tommy Hicks Jr., the eldest son of Dallas billionaire Tom Hicks, and Dallas hedge fund manager Gentry Beach, the conservation charity, while legal, had troubling signs of a quid pro quo. Donors who give $1 million would have a private reception with the new president and a hunting or fishing trip with Eric or Donald Jr. 

In response to public backlash, Trump's sons have moved to excise their names from the charity registration documents. Separately, Eric Trump has pledged to stop soliciting contributions for his own unrelated charitable foundation, which supports causes like the fight against childhood cancer, to avoid pay-to-play allegations.

Still, Trump family business and the presidency remain a potentially toxic brew. Ivanka Trump was forced to stop marketing the 18-karat diamond piece she wore during an appearance on 60 Minutes to ease concerns that she was cashing in on her father's pending presidency. And it remains disturbingly unclear why Trump family members attended the president-elect's first meeting with a foreign head of state and a recent meeting with U.S. technology executives in his office. 

The motivations behind the decisions that Trump makes as president will remain suspect — and subject to endless rumor and speculation — until he liquidates his foreign and domestic holdings.  Like Democratic and Republican presidents before him, he needs to put stocks, bonds, real estate and other assets into blind trusts run by independent managers to minimize conflicts of interest. 

Otherwise, suspicion will undermine his every decision, every action his administration pursues. Did he do what he did for the good of the country? Or for the good of the Trump family coffers? 

The office of the president shouldn't be so cheapened. 

Trump owes the American people more than a vague promise to do the right thing. He needs to show us that he's doing the right thing. Now.    

Texas Legislature Still Plans To Defund Planned Parenthood

In the last legislative session, the Texas legislature tried to completely defund Planned Parenthood (in spite of the fact that only 3% of what they do is abortion, and no government money goes toward providing any abortions). They were thwarted when President Obama threatened to cut off Medicaid funding for the state if they defunded Planned Parenthood.

But they no longer have that obstacle. With Trump about to be sworn in, there will be no one in the federal government to stop the defunding, and Texas legislators are already saying they will do that when they meet next month.

The only thing that defunding will accomplish is to deny health care to thousands of Texas women, especially poor women in the state. It won't stop a single abortion. But those legislators know that. This is just a sully bit of political theater meant to please right-wing fundamentalists (who hate Planned Parenthood).

At least one conservative newspaper has had enough of this nonsense. The editorial board of the reliably conservative Fort Worth Star-Telegram is calling for the legislature to abandon its war on Planned Parenthood. Here is their editorial:

Fighting Planned Parenthood isn’t worth the battle, but that doesn’t seem to stop officials from taking up arms.

In December 2015, Gov. Greg Abbott pledged to defund Planned Parenthood. Now, after a year, the state has issued a final notice to the healthcare organization. Planned Parenthood could lose its $3.1 million Medicaid funding.

The whole battle between the state and Planned Parenthood has been a frustrating, arduous ordeal — all over something that taxpayers don’t even pay for.

It’s all brought on by the abortion services provided by Planned Parenthood. That’s done by a separate entity from the Medicaid-eligible health programs, and no public dollars fund it.

The governor's office says Planned Parenthood is “no longer capable of performing medical services in a professionally competent, safe, legal and ethical manner” after allegations last year that the organization sold fetal tissue for research. 

Planned Parenthood has already filed a lawsuit. Federal officials warned the state that booting the healthcare provider from Medicaid could be illegal. Other states have failed in attempts to do the same thing.

So all this trouble could be for nothing.

We get that some state officials really don’t like Planned Parenthood, but couldn’t all the energy and taxpayer money in this fight be used somewhere else? Maybe to fix the broken Child Protective Services?

It would be a better use of state’s time and money.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article122318964.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article122318964.html#storylink=cpy

KKK Newspaper Backs Trump's Hate-Filled Campaign

The picture above of the KKK newspaper (The Crusade), from the Washington Post, parrots Donald Trump's campaign slogan -- Make America Great Again. While it stops just short of an official endorsement of the Trump campaign, the paper makes it clear that the KKK backs the campaign of Donald Trump. here is some of what was written in that paper:

“ ‘Make America Great Again!’ It is a slogan that has been repeatedly used by Donald Trump in his campaign for the presidency. You can see it on the shirts, buttons, posters and ball caps such as the one being worn here by Trump speaking at a recent rally. … But can it happen? Can America really be great again? This is what we will soon find out!”

“While Trump wants to make America great again, we have to ask ourselves, ‘What made America great in the first place?’ The short answer to that is simple. America was great not because of what our forefathers did — but because of who our forefathers were.”

“America was founded as a White Christian Republic. And as a White Christian Republic it became great.”

Why would the KKK support Donald Trump? It's certainly not because that campaign endorses diversity and equality. It's because the KKK recognizes a kindred spirit in Trump. They have seen his bigoted and hateful views against many other Americans (Hispanics, Muslims, women, Blacks, etc.), and they like it. It aligns with their own hateful views.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram Says No To Donald Trump

The parade of conservative newspapers abandoning the Republican presidential candidate continues. This time it's the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Their editorial board stops short of endorsing Hillary Clinton, but they do ask their readers to NOT vote for Donald Trump. The editorial board writes:

The dominating image and personality of Republican nominee Donald Trump have defined the 2016 presidential race, and for some of what he has shown us we should be thankful.

The fact that millions of Americans have joined his anti-establishment, anti-government, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-free-trade, anti-news media message must open our eyes to how truly unhappy many of our neighbors are.

Many sincerely believe our economy and our leaders have not and will not treat them fairly. They are angry. Our next president, no matter who it is, must change that.

Still, most of what Trump has shown us has been so dark, so negative, so lacking in the knowledge and demeanor essential in our president that we must urge our readers to reject him.

He has said and done so many things during the course of his campaign, from outright bullying his GOP rivals (“little Marco” and “lyin’ Ted”) to fanning the flames of bigotry (“rapist” Mexicans) to truly repugnant comments about women, that we have taken his measure and found it not only lacking in moral standards but profoundly dangerous to our nation and its highest office.

Should his mouth, so unfettered by reason or humility, be loosed on the world with the power of the Oval Office behind it, we could hardly blame friendly nations for withholding trust or unfriendly ones for raising their guard.

We should have known. It’s not like Trump’s TV reality show personality has changed. We just didn’t think it would get this far – and clearly, the Republican Party didn’t either.

Trump announced his candidacy on June 16, 2015. Before the year was out he would sayMexican immigrants are criminals, that John McCain is not a war hero because he was captured and that he knows more about ISIS than our generals. He mocked a handicapped reporter, called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” and aligned himself with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

He was just getting started.

In the next few months he would favor torture, comment on the size of his genitals on national TV, demean the wife of Sen. Ted Cruz, insult the president and people of Mexico by insisting they would pay for a wall between our two countries despite their objection, cast doubt on our NATO commitments, lashed out at the parents of a Muslim U.S. soldier killed in Iraq, hinted that “Second Amendment people” could eliminate Hillary Clinton and, as we all know, was exposed as bragging about assaulting women.

There’s a reason the real issues about running our country have taken a back seat in this election campaign.

It’s Trump’s inability to devote more than brief and shallow attention to those issues before diverting the conversation to absurdity — like saying if he wins Clinton will be jailed or claiming the election is rigged and balking when asked whether he will accept its ultimate result.

Trump may say this election is about “America First,” and we all must learn from that. We must pay attention to the millions of Americans who have rallied to that message.

But we need a president who is more than a slogan. We need a leader.

Many of his followers say they like Trump because he makes no attempt to be “politically correct.” In a troubled world, a troubled economy and a nation that needs sound domestic policy, Trump is not correct for anything.

The Star-Telegram Editorial Board recommends rejecting Donald Trump for president.

The Miami Herald Endorses Hillary Clinton For President

Newspapers across the country are overwhelmingly endorsing Hillary Clinton for president. The latest to jump on the bandwagon is the Miami Herald. Here is some of what they had to say:

Let’s make clear what the 2016 presidential election isn’t about:

It is not about choosing between a bad candidate and a worse one. The narrative that Hillary Clinton is the lesser of two evils is patently wrong. Ms. Clinton is a pragmatic, tough-minded woman of accomplishment and political conviction with a demonstrated mastery of policy. She is politically flawed. However, Donald Trump is a damaged human being.

It’s not about an entertaining, shoot-from-the-hip renegade outsider taking on a mainstay of the entrenched political elite. That was Sarah Palin vs. Joe Biden back in 2008. No, Mr. Trump is the elite, one who has managed to talk a good game to fire up frustrated and frightened mostly white Americans with a campaign of hate and xenophobia.

For her part, Ms. Clinton has used her insider status to work aggressively on behalf of the disenfranchised, here and around the world. She has not won every battle, but she fights the good fight, and she fights the right ones in the name of equality and democracy.

It is not about Bill Clinton. He’s not running for president. Been there, done that.

It’s far more important for Americans to understand what election 2016 is about: Most starkly, our values, our national identity and even the enduring power of the Constitution are in question — and at stake. Most simply, Americans will define just who we are.

And Hillary Clinton is by far the best person in this race to lead us to a definition of which we can be proud. She will protect the best interests of this nation, its standing on the world stage and even democracy itself. . . .

Mr. Trump’s demerits are well-documented — in print, on video, on the debate stage. And they are legion, so the CliffsNotes version will do:

The billionaire Republican candidate is a boastful, self-centered egomaniac who lacks a record of public service or familiarity with the issues. Indeed, he clearly seems to lack any political convictions whatsoever, except those of convenience.

He’s the star of this political reality show of his own making, a sick parody of a real political contest. He’s the ringmaster of a circus that attempts to conceal his lack of gravity by relying on the entertainment value of insults, exaggerations, lies and promises completely devoid of credibility and substance, characterized by his pie-in-the-sky vow to “make America great again.”

It’s telling that it has played so well.

Americans are legitimately — even universally — frustrated with our dysfunctional government and the two-party system. There are many causes for the problems that plague us: hyper-partisanship; the outsized voice that our campaign finance system gives people of great wealth; the lack of civics education; the coarsening of public discourse — to name a few.

The media — both entertainment and news — also share blame. Talk radio and cable TV play to what divides us, and too many of us have reveled in the carnival that the 2016 election process has become. Too often, the media have irresponsibly valued style points and show biz over facts. Mr. Trump has seized on these opportunities.

And he has given voice to many voters’ anger and forced us all to grapple with it. He deserves credit for that. But nothing more.

His repeated demonization of Mexicans, immigrants, women and African Americans, among others, has brought campaign rhetoric to its nadir. His vile words in that 2005 “Access Hollywood” video were not so much a revelation, but rather more of the same sordid history. His business dealings have been called into question; he has threatened to abandon our allieswhile praising our enemies; he has claimed to have a secret plan to defeat ISIS and boasted that he knows more about the terrorist group than America’s generals, insulting some prominent military veterans and war heroes along the way. He has waffled on torture, abortion and his proposed ban on Muslims; he has claimed repeatedly that he’ll force Mexico to pay for a border wall.

Even more worrisome is the threat that he represents to constitutional freedoms. In normal times, the Constitution is not at stake in a presidential election, but this year is a frightening aberration.

Mr. Trump, who has barred some reporters from his campaign because he dislikes what they’ve written, has threatened to change libel laws to punish critics. During his second debate, he vowed to put his opponent, Ms. Clinton, in prison. Only a candidate who’s a dictator at heart could see such a threat as a campaign talking point.

Religious freedoms are also under siege. He has repeatedly targeted Muslims; last month, he joked about excluding people who aren’t “conservative Christians” from one of his rallies. But to any one who reveres what this country truly stands for, it was no joke.

He has incited his supporters to go to polling places in “certain neighborhoods” to make sure “bad things” don’t happen. It is chilling reminder that voter intimidation is a battle that, incredibly, still must be fought in 21st-century America.

With such horrible judgment, his Supreme Court appointments could wreak havoc for generations to come.

Mr. Trump has shown neither the desire nor the potential for growth. We would add “shallow” to that long list of negatives. On the debate stage, he reiterated that the campaign has “changed” him, presumably for the better. But he punted when asked how meeting single moms and unemployed Americans had made him a different man. In addressing the 2005 video, he was contrite for a nanosecond, then said, incredibly, that no one had more respect for women more than he. As women come forward with stories of unasked-for and humiliating groping, the word “contempt” comes closer to the mark. When an African-American man at the town-hall debate asked if Mr. Trump could represent all Americans, the candidate launched, insultingly, into his simplistic “the inner city is a disaster” refrain.

This man, so shallow, so lacking in self-awareness, cannot possibly represent this nation’s “better angels.”

We remain struck by the image of Khizr Khan, a grieving father brandishing his Constitutionat the Democratic National Convention in July. He asked if Mr. Trump ever read it. We implore all Americans to read or reread it to renew their sense of who we are as a nation. Within lies the glorious answer to “Who are we?” Hint: We are not what Mr. Trump seeks to bring to the Oval Office.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Ms. Clinton is often accused of being secretive, which is true up to a point. Yet most of her adult life has been lived in the glare of the public spotlight. She has the scars and headlines to prove it. She may be the most scrutinized individual in public life. Her flaws have been chewed over for years. And yet she’s still standing, an accomplishment in itself. Throughout her trials and triumphs, she has shown an admirable level of resilience and self-confidence.

The sum of all her flaws amounts to little compared to Donald Trump’s total lack of fitness for the presidency. Hers are the mistakes of someone who has been in the public arena, fighting for policies she believes in and battling critics, throughout her entire adult life.

His flaws are the product of self-indulgence, the absence of contributions to the betterment of society and the lack of discipline he has shown throughout the campaign. To believe they are both equally flawed is to indulge in false equivalence.

That goes double for anyone in Florida thinking of “sending a message” by voting for a third-party candidate. A vote for such a candidate means taking a chance that the rest of the electorate will do the right thing. That worked out well in 2000, didn’t it? This year, the stakes are too high to sit it out or vote for an also-ran.

The priority of every voter who cares about standards of honesty and decency, not to mention the future and direction of this country, is to reject what Donald Trump represents. America does not need an arrogant, self-absorbed charlatan in the Oval Office. It needs a steady hand in perilous times, a voice of compassion in pursuing policies that help, not hurt, the disenfranchised; a leader capable of narrowing, if not healing, this nation’s divisions.

For all these reasons, the Miami Herald recommends HILLARY CLINTON for president of the United States.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article108145747.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article108145747.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article108145747.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article108145747.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article108145747.html#storylink=cpy

more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article108145747.html#storylink=cpy