10-04-17 Tillerson’s comments today on the NBC commentary
Some people close to me think that my outrage at the media bias is crazy and unfounded. I guess it depends on what you want to believe. However, I challenge anyone to listen to the full statement and questions answered by Rex Tillerson this morning and then listen to the NPR commentators talk about that Tillerson session and tell me that my outrage is not well-placed (about 4:30PM Eastern Time on WBUR).
The NPR commentators pointed out that Tillerson did not specifically deny that he called the President a “moran.” When Tillerson was asked (listen for yourself), he said that the NBC report on that was too dishonest and low to even get a response from him. He was just flabbergasted that the press would even say such a thing. Listen to what he said…it is much better than what I can describe here. However the 2 NPR commentators went on and on about how he did not specifically deny the statement, therefore it is true. Where is the source if it is true! How can they just assume that it is true! What kind of intellectual dishonesty is this? How low can NPR stoop to create a non-proven story? Are they so desperate to say anything about about the Trump Administration as to not care if it is true or not? Now here is the ultimate kicker…the male commentator on NPR said with indignation that he does not understand how the Secretary of State can say such a thing about the President and not lose his job.
This hysterical progressive media just blows me away. Surely there are intelligent people on the anti-Trump, progressive bandwagon who see this as outrageous!
10-03-17 My personal Dilemma
I want to be happier and send out happier posts, but these times are very difficult for me.
Let me put this out there…I would be very happy to see Trump step down and allow a real leader like Mike Pence take over the office of President. Trump’s management style is so weak for a man who has run several large, successful organizations. His main problem, as everyone knows, is in his tweets, although most are somewhat reasonable and to the point. However, his tweet this past few days telling Rex Tillerson to stop trying to use diplomacy with the North Koreans baffles me. His is using an informal, wide-open forum to give direction to the Secretary of State. That is nuts, even if you give him the benefit of the doubt that this is just a negotiating or positioning stance to catch the attention of the North Koreans. His constant tweets responding to every little criticism is wearing me out. His ego gets in the way, over and over again. Why take on the Mayor of San Juan, Puerto Rico? Although I think her criticism is unrealistic and unfounded, she is on the ground facing a serious disaster. Trump’s responses make her a hero of the media and the progressives. Why assist the hysteria Mr. Trump?
I strongly support the policies and philosophies that propelled Trump into office. I would just like to see almost anyone else leading the charge today in getting things done behind these policies and philosophies. I admire his desire to work with the Democrats to find solutions to our key issues today. I don’t think Nancy or Chuck have any interest in compromising to a successful conclusion. They are worried more about how a successful bipartisan solution would benefit the Republicans; rather than how it might benefit the American people. Yes, I know, the Republicans haven’t been any better. But, hope we can move forward.
My unhappiness comes also from the relentless media bias and actual campaign to undermine all of the good that can come from good policies and philosophies. They aren’t being honest. They claim a balanced point of view. A very small example of the media language comes from the speech that Trump made to the United Nations. Fox News, claimed by the progressives as the most biased said: “Here is some of the reaction to Trump’s UN Speech…” NPR, NBC and CNN all opened their commentary with the words: “fallout from Trump’s controversial speech to the UN…” Usually these guys are not so subtle.
So that’s my personal dilemma.
10-01-17 Views on the Criticism of the Rescue and Recovery Response for Puerto Rico
I have seen many of your posts about Puerto Rico and I just want to give you my 2 cents (all it is worth) about what I see there.
I don’t think any of us understand the logistics of providing aid to an island in the Caribbean. I have a good friend who was responsible for the logistics of setting up U.S. military operations in several countries and regions in the world. It took months to get the supplies and personnel in place to even begin to set up operations on the ground, and they had several months upfront based on careful planning to even achieve what they did. It was all planned in advance.
Although not politically correct to say, the Puerto Rican infrastructure has been neglected for many years (the responsibility for the power grid is solely with the Governor and his appointed Board); the financial care and planning has left the island bankrupt. The storm devastated what was left.
It is so easy for us to say that the response should have been faster, better and more complete. Of course, many progressives are saying that he didn’t tweet enough about Puerto Rico. I also just heard NPR say that it has been 2 weeks since the disaster and Trump is just now visiting Puerto Rico. I for one choose to believe the many, many reports that show that so much is being done and just as quickly as humanly possible. Certainly one can choose to believe what CNN or NPR say about the complete failure of the recovery effort. However, CNN and NPR will never say anything that would imply that the Administration has done anything right since January 2017.
The size of the overall military-related community in Puerto Rico is estimated to be 100,000 individuals. This includes retired personnel.
Fort Buchanan has about 4,000 military and civilian personnel.
In addition, approximately 17,000 people are members of the Puerto Rico Army and Puerto Rico Air National Guard
, or the U.S. Reserve forces