Pages Menu
TwitterFacebooklogin
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jul 26, 2024 in Blog | 0 comments

Is the Glass “Half Full” or “Half Empty?”

 

 

IS THE GLASS HALF FULL OR HALF EMPTY?

While dining out last week in downtown Las Vegas, I got into a friendly but serious discussion with someone about how cocktails are frequently served in many bars and restaurants. Bruce Kramer, my longtime associate visiting Las Vegas from Philadelphia was on the other side of the argument.

We both ordered a Manhattan. When the cocktails arrived, they were served in oversized glasses. In fact, the glass was twice the size of the liquid content. A standard Manhattan is about 3-4 ounces, and it was poured into what looked to be a 6-7 ounce glass.

I was perfectly fine with this. Looked very normal to me. However, Kramer was visibly annoyed with the liquid to glass ratio. He thought the drink looked “cheap” — like he was getting shafted. In fact, Kramer then summoned over the bartender and lectured the cocktail master on his selection of glassware for this type of drink. And yes, while listening to Kramer’s impromptu TED Talk, I did several eye rolls as I enjoyed sipping my Manhattan.

I know I can be ridiculous, at times. We all have our biases and weirdnesses. A psychologist could have a field day explaining some of my odd proclivities, including a fear of rabbits. But I also thought Kramer’s argument was ridiculous. Absurd, even. The bartender realized he couldn’t win and replaced Kramer’s Manhattan and brought him over a” new” cocktail (probably the exact same contents) poured into what I call a baby glass. That glass was filled to the brim, which meant picking it up severely increased the chances of spillage. Well, that’s then our back-and-forth arguing began, ending with no resolution. Bored bystanders in our party refused to take a side, realizing the futility thereof, presumably not wanting to get in the middle of two junkyard dogs fighting about alcohol on a busy Friday night.

To me, this is a no brainer. I don’t care for stemmed glassware when it comes to cocktails. Again, this is a higher-risk spillage issue. However, with the liquid contents only about half full, it’s much easier (less risky) to transfer the liquor from the glass down the hatch, with a little swirl-play involved. It’s a bit like wine, which is always poured into an oversized glass, and the more empty space there is, usually the better the wine and more exclusive the establishment. The same thing goes for cordials and brandies, which are also served in large goblets, and take up no more than perhaps a quarter of the glass. So, why would anyone want, let alone demand their cocktail be filled to the brim of the glass?

I once thought Kramer knew his stuff and was the ultimate functional pragmatist. Proper glassware with cocktails is like architectural drawings and house designs, and I want to drink like I’m Frank Lloyd Wright. Simply put, Kramer is wrong. I must now re-asses my evaluation of his judgement and avoid oversized glassware with him. It’s like drinking with Monk.

Seriously, who would want a cocktail served in a glass all the way to the top? Isn’t the empty space much more practical, especially given many bars are crowded, and you often get bumped, especially at or near the bar where there are usually people around and drinking? I sure as hell don’t want to hoist tiny glassware while trying to navigate an $18 beverage from my hand to my mouth.

Pet Peeve: Small glassware (and small plates, for that matter). I want to enjoy the food and drink, not end up wearing it. Next time I’m with Kramer and they serve baby glassware, I’m sending my drink back. I’m sure that will thrill the bartender.

JOIN THE FUN DISCUSSION ON FACEBOOK HERE

Read More

Posted by on Jul 24, 2024 in Blog | 0 comments

Do Vice Presidents’ “Accomplish” Anything? (Ranking the Veeps from Best to Worst)

 

 

DO VICE PRESIDENTS “ACCOMPLISH” ANYTHING?

My rankings of Vice Presidents — from best to worst — may surprise you.

 

My friend, Arbella Azizian raised an interesting question with me in a discussion recently about Vice Presidents — both past and present. She shared her perspective that most Vice Presidents don’t do much in terms of either policy or leadership. Hers was a non-partisan point of view, meant to apply to the Vice Presidents of both political parties.

I pondered this point of view. This topic is certainly timely, because it came up right after J.D. Vance was chosen as Donald Trump’s running mate. And soon, we’re likely to learn who Kamala Harris (and Democrats) will select as their veep candidate. It also matters because the current serving VP is now running for President.

Have any Vice Presidents really mattered? Does the office weild any power or mean anything? It’s easy to say — no. However, some Vice Presidents have wielded significant influence. A few have altered history in a negative way.

Let’s ignore the obvious fact that Vice Presidents are only a heartbeat away from the top job and that several have moved into the Oval Office when Presidents died.

Accordingly, what follows are my rankings of Vice Presidents of the modern political era, listed best-to-worst.

Important: These rankings have nothing to do with policies or partisanship, or my opinions thereof. I’m ranking accomplishments and impacts while serving as Vice President only, irregardless of the positives or negatives of their decisions and actions. These rankings also don’t take into account what Vice Presidents did either before or after serving in office.

Note: Before proceeding, here’s a recent ranking by historians (CLICK LINK HERE TO READ MORE):

 

Now, here’s my list and analysis:

1. Dick Cheney — George W. Bush’s veep from 2001-2009 was the most powerful and influential Vice President in history, and it’s not even close. Cheney was a virtual “Co-President” given the enormous role in played in personnel decisions and executive policies–both domestic and foreign. Cheney was one of the key architects of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars (and subsequent occupations). Insiders also point to Cheney assuming the role as Bush’s “filter,” a virtual gatekeeper of information and staff that ultimately went to the President. He was Bush’s primary public spokesman on all matters of policy. He was on the news talk shows more than any other public figure. Cheney’s background as Congressman, Chief of Staff, and Secretary of Defense made him an essential component of the Bush Presidency who, history shows, was heavily involved in every decision that came out of the Oval Office.

2. Al Gore — Bill Clinton’s veep from 1993-2001 ranks high as an effective and influential second-in-command. Like Clinton, Gore was an energetic and youthful leader (43 when he assumed office) who was very active in advancing the Administration’s agenda. Gore previous role as Senator combined with a lifetime of Washington experience made him Clinton’s second-closest advisor (behind Hillary), going after issues including government waste and fraud, promoting the development of information technology, and advancing environmental initiatives. Gore also came out of the Clinton scandal’s unscathed which is also worth noting.

3. Richard Nixon — Dwight Eisenhower’s veep is tough to rank for obvious reasons. But let’s dismiss Nixon’s obvious baggage, and focus instead on his eight years within the Administration — 1952-1961. It’s important to remember Eisenhower suffered a heart attack that left him unable to perform his duties. So, Nixon stepped in and showed quiet leadership during the nearly two months of recuperation. Impressed, Eisenhower who had considered dropping Nixon off the ticket in the 1956 re-election, decided to keep him. In his second term, Nixon was tasked with roles varying from goodwill ambassador abroad to campaign advisor at home. Nixon also developed relationships with Soviet leaders that would be important years later during Detente (he was the first top American official to visit the USSR, and later welcomed and hosted Nikita Khrushchev when he toured the US in 1959. Also recall Nixon’s meeting with Fidel Castro that same year, right after the Cuban Revolution that might have altered history had Nixon won the 1960 election. I say Nixon is tough to rank because Eisenhower didn’t like Nixon, and insulted him on occasion — which either elevates or reduces Nixon’s place in 1950’s American politics, depending upon one’s perspective.

4. Mike Pence — Donald Trump’s veep is another who’s difficult to judge. Operating within the non-stop chaos of the Trump White House must have challenging, so credit Pence who provided some degree of sanity and normalcy. Pence’s public role during the COVID crisis was also admirable, juggling Trump’s inane lies and lunacy with actual governance and leadership behind the scenes. Pence was tasked with searching for and implementing COVID treatment and appeared to carry out his duties admirably. Let’s also remember Pence’s commitment to Constitutional principles when things mattered most, on the day of Trump’s Jan. 6th insurrection. It might not be a stretch to say Pence helped to save American democracy.

5. George H.W. Bush — Serving in Ronald Reagan’s shadow for two terms could not have been easy. Bush Sr. was clearly capable of wielding the levers of power, but never allowed his ambition or ego to outshine the President. Bush Sr. was a near perfect support staffer and advisor, though it’s also difficult to point to any specific accomplishments or policies he advanced in the period 1981-1989.

6. Joe Biden — When Barack Obama was initially elected in 2008, he didn’t have much Washington experience. Hence, he picked an established 35-year veteran insider legislator as his veep choice and Biden turned out to be an ideal pick over two terms. Much like Bush Sr., Biden wasn’t going to ever outshine the President, nor be credited with much other than personal loyalty by serving strictly in an advisory capacity.

7. Walter Mondale — The former Minnesota Senator served as Jimmy Carter’s veep 1977-1981. Like many other ex-governors (who had been outsiders), Carter pegged an experienced legislator as his running mate, who presumably would be helpful in navigating the political scene. Remembering anything specific from Mondale’s service as Vice President is difficult, especially in light of Carter’s Administration shortcomings, which was fraught with challenges–both domestic and foreign. An average midddle-of-the-road grade seems appropriate here.

8. Lyndon Johnson — LBJ was one of the great Senate Majority Leaders in history and later one of the most consequential Presidents of the 20th Century who posted a stellar record of achievements on domestic policy. However, his three-plus years as Vice President during the Kennedy Administration were a self-described wasteland. This was the most depressing era of Johnson’s political career, excluded from most Kennedy policy decisions. LBJ was selected to the national ticket strictly as a political compromise, and given the Kennedy Administration’s relatively few accomplishments (I rank JFK as the most overrated President of all time), pointing to any accomplishments by Johnson as veep is futile. Johnson was a great leader in so many ways, but clearly the wrong man for this job.

9. Hubert Humphrey — Given LBJ’s sweeping mid-1960’s domestic agenda, which was the most impactful presidency of my lifetime (civil rights, immigration reform, introduction of Medicare, etc.), one would expect the Vice President to receive some of the credit. However, most historians note that LBJ personally was the driving force behind the Great Society (just listen to the tapes of countless phone calls from the Oval Office). VP Humphrey played only a minimal role in crafting and advancing Johnson Administration policy and probably would have been far more effective had he continued serving in the Senate, where he was widely respected as a leader on progressive causes.

10. Gerald Ford — Ford ranks low on this list, not because of any personal misdeeds. Rather, he simply did play much of a role as he was in office only eight months and his entire tenure was consumed by the Watergate scandal and constant scrutiny of President Nixon. Fortunately, Ford remained unscathed by Watergate and historians praise him for his calmness and stabilizing influence following Nixon’s resignation. That said, it’s impossible to think of a single accomplishment or much of anything from Vice President Ford.

11. Nelson Rockefeller — Many Americans forget “Rocky” was Ford’s veep for nearly two years, 1974-1977. Rockefeller’s selection was largely viewed as a political payback for many years of public service. Rockefeller served as New York Governor for four terms, which were tumultuous times, but his tenure as Vice President is now largely forgotten. Also note that Ford later picked Robert Dole as his veep in the 1976 election, discarding Rockefeller who was politically inconsequential.

12. Dan Quayle — Vice President Quayle gets maligned for a number of gaffes and public missteps, which provided lots of fodder for comedians during 1989-1993, when he served. Quayle was initially selected for his youthful energy but never gained much traction as a communicator or someone with enough experience to advance Bush Administration policies. Some of the criticism is probably unfair, but Quayle was clearly a drag on Bush Sr.’s presidency and ineffective in the role as veep.

13. Spiro Agnew — Nixon’s veep was one of only two in American history to resign from office in disgrace. He was charged and convicted of bribery and tax evasion, in crimes unrelated to Watergate. Agnew was a puzzling Vice Presidential choice from the start, bringing no constituency, political contacts, knowledge, or experience to the Nixon presidency. Review the infamous Nixon tapes, containing hundreds of hours of recorded conversations, and Agnew’s voice is barely heard on any of them. He had virtually no influence nor advisory capacity to Nixon, even on his accomplishments. Utterly without charisma, politically dumb, inconsequential, and corrupt, by any measure Spiro Agnew ranks as the worst Vice President in history.

In summation, returning to the original question — I hereby conclude the answer as to Vice Presidential “accomplishments” varies widely. Most terms are indeed inconsequential, but there are also a few who have been quite impactful on history–both positively and negatively.

__________

Note: Current Vice President Kamala Harris is not ranked.

Read More

Posted by on Jul 23, 2024 in Blog | 1 comment

DEI is the New Dog Whistle

 

 

“DEI”

We’ll be seeing and hearing three letters a lot in the coming weeks and months ahead.

“DEI” is an acronym. It means: (D) diversity, (E) equity, and (I) inclusion. Yet oddly enough, “DEI” is intended by some as a derogatory term. It’s the new hate bait. It’s yet another ultra-conservative dog whistle. It’s MAGA red meat. It’s dangled to trigger sexism and racism. It’s designed to trigger fragile White male egos who simply can’t cope with positions of power and authority going to women or minorities.

— When a plane crashes with a female (or minority) pilot, it must have been a DEI hire.

— When a female Secret Service agent’s actions in the line of fire are misunderstood and get misinterpreted, it must have been a DEI hire.

— When the female head of the U.S. Secret Service messes up (and she did mess up), it must have been a DEI hire.

Yeah, like White men have a great historical record sans any mistakes or mess ups.

Now, it’s Vice President Kamala Harris getting the DEI tar and feather treatment. She’s become the presumptive Democratic Party nominee for president, promoted due to gender and race. according a class of self-entitled fossils of privilege who are pretty much responsible for the most of the world’s fuck ups. It can’t possibly be because of her numerous qualifications, right?

Earlier today, a MAGA Republican congressman and Trump-backer, Rep. Tim Burchett, called Vice President Harris “100 percent….a DEI hire.” The Tennessee good old boy who continues to deny results of the 2020 presidential election and often sounds a few brain cells short of a possum calls Harris “unqualified.” [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Hmmm.

Serving as a courtroom prosecutor, then the Attorney General of the largest state in the nation, then a U.S. Senator, then four year’s a Vice-President of the United States apparently doesn’t meet Rep. Burchett’s MAGA litmus test. But hey, Tennessee Timmy, let’s give the reality TV star so dumb he bankrupted three casinos a pass. Trump’s his guy!

Yesterday, I wrote about the fight to come. It’s going to get rough and tough. Let’s prepare ourselves for the sexualization of Kamala Harris and the overt misogyny to come. We’ll also see and hear the term “DEI” tossed around in the upcoming campaign. Presumably, MAGA Republicans don’t believe in DIVERSITY, EQUITY, and INCLUSION.

Next time you hear a Trumper blowhard spewing “DEI,” consider the source. Remember, the intent is to demean accomplished women and minorities despite their qualifications, usually coming from insecure fragile men who prey upon fear and hate. We must not let them succeed.

 

Read More

Posted by on Jul 22, 2024 in Blog | 0 comments

Ugly MAGA Misogyny and the Sexualization of Kamala Harris

 

 

UGLY MAGA MISOGYNY AND THE SEXUALIZATION OF KAMALA HARRIS

The vicious attacks based on sex have begun.

It’s been fewer than 24 hours since Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race. Yet already, the MAGA slime machine is kicking into overdrive.

MAGA ugliness is real. No surprise, because this is an ugly political movement littered with ugly people.

Note the flood of memes all of the sudden splattered all across social media (and shred by millions) going after Vice President Kamala Harris, who is now the favorite to win the Democratic nomination to run against Republican Donald Trump in November. T-shirts and other memorabilia are being hawked and sold to the rubes. We all understand the reason why. There’s a huge market for hate, because inside MAGA America — hate sells.

But this brand of hate is different, and quite revealing. To me, what’s most striking about many of these attacks on Harris — her character, her personality, her qualifications, her mannerisms — is the overt misogyny behind them. We are witnessing the deliberate sexualization of a highly-accomplished woman. These aren’t isolated incidents, rather it premeditated targeting that’s become way too common on the far-Right. This happened for many years with Hillary Clinton, once the political Right’s favorite target. Now, Harris is the latest prey in the MAGA hate hunt. Then, add the fact that Harris is of mixed race, from Oakland, California, and childless by choice, and MAGA misogynists are really about to lose their shit.

Whether intentionally by design or subconsciously, Incel Nation has constructed a mass pathos to subjugate and vilify women, whether it’s raising doubts as to their qualifications when in positions of authority (“she slept her way to the top”) or ambushing the dating history of a powerful female executive (“Harris got her start in politics dating a married man”). It’s not just words that hurt people. Let’s also remember — MAGA is the driving force behind overturning Roe v. Wade and passing Neanderthal state laws restricting women’s reproductive freedoms. It all fits.

I fully concede that Harris should be fair game as a presidential candidate. Clearly, she has vulnerabilities. Her record as attorney general, senator, and vice-president should be questioned. But this garbage is something else — it’s personal. She becomes the new poster girl. Prepare yourself for the worst. We’ve already seen a dramatic uptick on “camel toe” references, usually spread by porn-addicted salivating losers who obsess over women as objects for sexual gratification. The term is childish word-play on Kamala Harris’ unusual first name, which they often intentionally mispronounce. I have no idea why anyone finds this sexualization funny, but it’s real and it’s pervasive.

Indeed, we about to be bombarded with an onslaught of non-stop hate and recycled lies about Harris, especially should she become the nominee. Whenever Harris gets mentioned as a future President, 30-year-old stories about her past relationship with San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown get rehashed. Unfortunately, it’s mostly exaggerations and selective use of a distorted timeline. As proof, a Reuters News fact check confirmed the political pair did date from 1994 through 1995, the year before Brown became mayor. At the time, Brown was a legally a married man. However, records also show he’d been separated from his wife for more than a decade (a decade!) by the time he began a relationship with Harris. Their relationship was never a secret and they made frequent public appearances as a couple. Facts be damned, MAGA nation will twist and falsify what happened. Count on it. Harris, involved in a relatively short romantic relationship, gets painted as a whore. Meanwhile, MAGA hero Trump is a stud. What hypocritical slut shaming.

The real irony here is — those who are spreading and will share the lies about Harris had no issue with Trump’s lifetime of infidelities, multiple rape allegations (including a legal judgement), countless perversions of misogyny (‘you can grab them by the pussy”), and sleazy behavior (including lots of free time spent hanging out with sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein–which is well documented with photos and videos). Gee, why would MAGA women-bashers be bothered by any of this? They are Trump. Trump is them.

For those who point to Trump’s own private life (and sexual escapades) which has been the subject of attacks by Democrats in recent years, let’s be clear about the vast differences. Trump brought all those charges and scrutiny upon himself. He broke the law. He paid a bribe. He’s a felon. He willingly committed all those acts, said those despicable words, and often bragged about his many dalliances. This is all a matter of public record. Had Trump been, let’s say, squeaky-clean Mitt Romney, his past sexual history would never have come up in the election. So, let’s squash the “whataboutism.”

In American politics, the gender gap is widening. Now, we begin to see why. Recent polls show women supporting the Democratic nominee 58 to 38 pct., which reveals a whopping 20-point gap. Yet, Trump also leads in those same national polls among men, earning male support by slightly higher than 20-points. just wow — what an embarrassing indictment of American men. Shameful, in fact. Misogyny isn’t just alive, it’s thriving.

Perhaps this is why MAGA misogynists will continue using Vice President Kamala Harris’ gender against her. Because — sexualization against successful women works. Hate is powerful. Projecting hidden resentments and deeply concealed psychological complexes onto famous women through political attacks, and memes, and cruel bar talk becomes the ugliest of comfort zones.

Remember all this in the days, weeks, and months to come when you see Kamala Harris portrayed in overtly sexualized terms.

Read More

Posted by on Jul 21, 2024 in Blog | 0 comments

10 Immediate Thoughts on President Biden’s Withdrawl

 

 

PRESIDENT BIDEN DROPS OUT

After a very bad month, this is a very good day.

Here’s a short list of thoughts off the top of my head, for now.

1. President Biden made the right decision. It’s the right decision for the country, the party, and ultimately for Biden.

2. Even in his diminished capacity and some risks going forward, President Biden should be capable of completing his term through January, 2025.

3. Vice President Harris becomes the instant and obvious Democratic front-runner, especially with Biden’s endorsement contained in today’s official statement of withdrawl.

4. The Democratic National Convention must be an open process. It must not be a coronation. We should force VP Harris to win the nomination with her own talents and efforts, not hand it to her simply as a political inheritance. Pressure testing is good. A more challenging process (now) will make her stronger and better as a candidate in the national election (later), should she become the nominee.

5. I hope other qualified Democrats will enter the race. An ideal number of serious candidates would be 3 or 4. I also hope the competition will be respectful of one another. Democrats can’t be tearing each other down at this point. The singular focus must be on defeating Trump, reducing the dangers of MAGA, keeping control of the Senate, and winning the House.

6. This is the time for the DNC to take full command and announce some agreeable nomination process. Ultimately, it’s up to the party, collectively speaking, to pick the ticket and all delegates should be empowered freely with a vote at the convention to make the best selection. Forget about holding rushed primaries at this point. However, a couple of debates (if needed) would be ideal leading up to the Democratic National Convention in August.

7. The Biden campaign should free up all money and pledge it to the Democratic nominee. Period. End of story.

8. I don’t want to see Nancy Pelosi, Jim Clyburn, Hillary Clinton, or even Barack Obama puling the levers and making decisions. This time should be a complete reboot and total restart with new faces and energy. I realize this point is impractical and unlikely. However, the last thing Democrats should be wanting to see during this revamped nomination process is previous generations of leaders like Pelosi, Clyburn, etc. seeming like the real power brokers. Do not make this mistake!

9. This is very good news for Democrats. This is bad news for Republicans, who have concentrated most of their attacks and slime tactics on Biden. However, it’s far from a game-changer. I expect the odds on Trump winning will drop somewhat, though he’s still a solid favorite until a Democratic nominee is determined. Also, this is great news for down-ballot Democrats, who now won’t be dragged down by the top of a limp ticket.

10. Finally, President Biden should have handled this differently, or certainly better. I won’t dwell on the appalling mistake he made running for re-election in the first place. However, announcing his withdrawl from the race with a letter doesn’t make an impact on history nor advance the cause of preserving democracy. President Biden should have taken his moment in a nationally televised address, and like LBJ, Nixon, et. al. made a clear statement talking directly to the American people. This was a missed opportunity.

Still, we’re getting a new deal. We’re not drawing dead anymore. We’re live. Good news.

This is a good day.

Read More
css.php