I’m sure you wouldn’t need to be around this site long to surmise that I’m not a “fan” of Donald Trump (despite the fact I hope the republicans nominate him).  However, today as I was driving to work, I couldn’t help but think that some of his recent comments are in TOTAL agreement with many of mine over the past 10+ years – and, of course, they could be the comments that finally lead to his undoing.

In the last republican “debate” Trump said something along the lines of (in response to Jeb Bush’s absurd claim that his brother “kept us safe”) how can you claim GW Bush kept us safe when 9/11 happened on his watch.  I actually managed to listen to some of the comments and Trump CORRECTLY pointed out there was fair warning and that the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA had sufficient intelligence to prevent the attack – but, they basically weren’t speaking to each other.  And, despite the protestations from Dick Cheney himself (the next day to Trump’s comments?) the Bush “regime” had repeated warnings from the CIA and others in intelligence that an attack was imminent and that planes might be involved.  And, they responded to the warnings by doing pretty much NOTHING.  I’ve read this in more than one book authored by people who were “in the know” at that time.

Trump also (CORRECTLY) pointed out that GW Bush (along with Dick Cheney – and all the surrogates who willingly or unwittingly participated in the scam – sorry Colin Powell) LIED the United States into the Iraq war which has had a more profound NEGATIVE affect on America than virtually any foreign policy decision in the history of this nation.  (that last part is my characterization)  Trump is CORRECT when he lays the present dysfunction in the Middle East at the feet of Jeb’s Brother (and, because I have a good friend who might read this and admires GW I have to add we’ll probably never know how much of all this should fall directly on Dick Cheney).  Of course, Trump is doing this as a way to attack Jeb (and probably not thought out all that well in the face of a party which has already spent years in rewriting their history in a way where they can blame President Obama for all this – AND, of course, EVERYTHING else in the world they can portray in a negative light.

One of the things, in my mind, that makes Trump so dangerous – should he somehow become president – is his tendency to “shoot from the hip” in making comments that appear to have no rational thought behind them.  The contrast the other day when I happened to be watching TV (hard for me to stomach) “news” where excerpts from campaign speeches by Trump, Cruz, and Rubio were followed by a press conference given by President Obama was stark.  My impression of Obama was that I’m thankful we have an “adult in the room” dealing with the complex issues any president in today’s world will be facing.  Trump, on the other hand, was claiming that – evidently, because he’s “smart” and “a good negotiator” – the rest of the world will bow down in – fear? respect? I’m not sure what he’s thinking? You pick the word – to the way he’s going to “Make America Great” again.  Evidently, that’s a sound bite that’s enough to get about 30% of republicans to believe Trump would be a great president.  The reality: people around the world don’t “fear” Trump, they fear “we the people” might vote him in as president.

Of course, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio – to me, are almost worse.  I’ve read that Cruz was the master debater in college and it’s clear he’ll take whatever side of an issue that’s going to “work” for the audience he’s speaking to and, apparently, he’s good at it.  I’m not sure if the traditional republicans – who, by now, are – I’m guessing – finally realizing the results of allowing the Koch Brothers and the “Tea Party” (and all the Billions of dollars) to hijack their party feel any better about Cruz than they do about Trump.  Either one of them will, I predict, generate a MASSIVE turnout among Democrats based exactly on the human emotion Trump (and Cruz) imply would be how they would operate as President – and, that is FEAR.  Cruz portrays himself as a Christian.  Is that the word that comes to your mind when you hear his name, or hear him speak?

And, Marco Rubio?  Is he the third alternative?  I guess the exposure he got from Chris Christie in Christie’s “last stand” wasn’t enough for the republican “establishment” – whatever that is.  I saw Nikki Haley on stage the other day with Rubio – I have to believe that will be more of a downer for her than any help for him (outside of South Carolina) – but, the truth is (and, you won’t get this on the “news”) that both Haley and Rubio, along with virtually ALL the other’s on the so-called republican “clown car” (with the notable exception of Trump) are “regulars” at the “fund raisers” put on annually (maybe semi-annually now with all the money floating around politics) by Charles and David Koch.  Trust me, those two guys are going to go down in history for what they’ve done to this nation – and whether it’s eradicated in 2016 or it takes more time for people to understand the reality of the “Koch Brothers” – they will not be able to hide from what they’ve done.  And, they will have brought the focus on themselves by trying to actually BUY the government of the United States of America.

I wrote the other day about my impressions of the kid glove treatment the so-called “liberal” alternative to Fox “news” – MSNBC – is giving the “positive” or “moderate” republican candidate, John Kasich (another of the republicans feeding at the Koch trough) .  And, he probably is the most “moderate” of the bunch.  Of course, he’ll bring as another round of “boots on the ground” in the Middle East PLUS a confrontation with Russia for good measure and working class Americans could expect more voter suppression and union busting in a “Kasich administration.”  That’s “moderate” in today’s republican party.  Honestly, I don’t understand how any working class American could vote for any of them.

When I listen to the voters expressing themselves I can’t help but thinking a couple of things – and, one is an indirect indictment on my life’s calling.  First, Trump – on more than one occasion (and, I heard this my self, it’s not “second hand”) referred to America’s voters as “stupid.”  In listening to some of the reasoning of people supporting him, I’m leaning in the direction of agreement – although, in my heart, I’m with President Obama in believing that – overall – the American Voting public will NEVER vote someone like Trump (or Cruz) into the White House.  Often, I hope my instincts are wrong, but NOT in this case.

The second thought, which is unflattering as I’ve spent the last third of my working life teaching 6th graders, is that Americans are allowing themselves to be brainwashed by our 24/7 cable media cycle.  People are regurgitating sound bites and talking points they are exposed to on network “news” that is often time pure misinformation and too often LIES without fact checking.  I wrote the other day on my disappointment (and alarm) at MSNBC – the so-called “liberal” alternative to Fox – with their lack of vetting and investigative reporting as they continue to expose members of the republican “clown car” to their “liberal” audience in a way that gives credibility to people who don’t deserve it.  For example, it would NOT be hard to show the RACIST leanings, through outright comments, innuendo, or – even worse – the “code” that’s permeated republican “talking points” since President Obama took the oath of office – from virtually ANY of the candidates in the republican primaries. I’m as guilty as anyone else in expecting the media to do honest investigative journalism – but, absent that, it’s incumbent on “we the people” to do the investigating ourselves – with multiple sources.  (That’s what I teach my 6th graders)

In my mind, if you’re a republican candidate you DON’T get a pass from comments made by many republican “leaders” when they claim their “number one goal is President Obama’s failure” unless you publicly repudiate the comments.  If you’ve participated in a RECORD number of filibusters as a way to OBSTRUCT every initiative of the President – without an alternative proposal – you should be held ACCOUNTABLE (here, I’m referring to Cruz and Rubio).  If you’ve been part of the “birther” movement, you should have to explain your motivation.  And, investigative reporting SHOULD be exposing all the code to the American people as part of the vetting process.  Cruz, Rubio, and the others (and probably more-so, Trump) have made a plethora of coded comments that they’re getting away with ONLY because – EVEN MSNBC is letting them.  If you claim to be a “strict constitutional” candidate, you should have to explain why you’re going to prevent President Obama from nominating a replacement for Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court!  I could go on.

They want to “take our country back.”  What exactly does that mean? (I think you probably know)  President Obama has been called by many of them a Muslim – explain how you KNOW this – SOMEONE should call them on that.  Bernie Sanders calls himself a “democratic socialist” so that’s “fair game.”  However, for those republican candidates who have referred to President Obama as a socialist, communist, or even fascist – they should have to explain themselves.  Where’s the evidence?  And, I’ll use myself as an example of what I’m talking about.  I’ve, myself, said that I believe that the republican party is pushing America toward fascism.  If I was running for President (actually, even just “because” I’ve written it) I would expect to be able to back up my comments with “evidence.”  That’s what I’d like to see (at least) MSNBC demand from these republican candidates if they’re going to continue causing me to have to stomach the interviews.  I’m OK with exposing the audience to all the candidates, but why do we have to be so nice to people who are anything but nice.  Why allow them to hide the “real” them?  Yes, Trump continually refers to himself as “nice,” but do you actually believe an African American, or a Latino American, or a Muslim American, or – I could go on and on – actually believes him?  What does he mean by nice?

I watched the republican “Benghazi” committee spend a very long day attempting to sabotage the campaign of Hillary Clinton a while back.  In the process they allowed Clinton to defend her actions as Secretary of State, to demonstrate an incredible knowledge of how our government functions (knowledge the republicans on the committee – surprisingly – lacked), and to show that she’s got the experience to run this government.  I would love for the republicans who want to be president to have to endure a similar “vetting.”  I’d like them to have to answer for comments made years ago, I’d like to have their emails made public, and – basically – give each of them a chance to PROVE they are capable of being given the “keys to the safe.” (and, by that I’m talking about the nuclear codes)

America didn’t know what it was being “gifted” when the Supreme Court (RIP Justice Scalia) somehow decided they should choose our president giving us the GW Bush/Cheney disaster.  (and, if you don’t like that characterization, I can argue for hours with you – Bush/Cheney were possibly the worst EVER – I realize many republicans have short term memory issues – but, just a reminder:  Bush/Cheney gave us 9/11, the Iraq War, the disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina, and the TARP bailouts – to name a few of the notable disasters)  If America’s voters want another republican DISASTER (re: Bush/Cheney) at least we should know what we’re getting beforehand!  Trump told the TRUTH about 9/11 and the Iraq War to republicans. It will be interesting to see how many of them “jump ship” in the face of such a rarity in republican politics: honesty!  “We the people” need to know the (complete) TRUTH about Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, and any of the others (including Bernie and Clinton – although, I can’t imagine there’s much more about Clinton that’s not already in the public domain) so, if a republican wins the White House, the war with Russia – for example (via Kasich and ?) – is not a surprise.