Armchair Observations: What we can take from the CNN Republican Party Presidential Debate

After watching the Wednesday, September 16 Republican Party Presidential Debate on CNN, here are some things we can take out of it:

Both FOX and CNN were more interested in a wild show than a real debate.

CNN could have taken a higher road than FOX did in their televised Republican Party Presidential debate. Republican_Debate_September_2016_AP_imgStarved for ratings, however, CNN’s moderators, Jake Tapper, Dana Bash and Hugh Hewitt either could not or did not care to control the participants as many of them attacked each other wildly. The moderators might not have ganged up on Donald Trump as much as Megyn Kelly did, but there were too many superficial and lazy debate questions as opposed to offering an antidote to the usual coverage of the candidates by asking all serious issue-oriented questions. Perhaps the vast majority of Presidential debates over the past two elections were a reflection on an overall dumbed-down reality show-oriented society.

Donald Trump may have some good ideas, but his temperament seems a bit off for a man who wants to be President.

Understanding that Mr.Trump is the proverbial king of the mountain among the array of Continue reading

Please follow and like us:
0

Planned Parenthood: poor attempt at damage control could have been avoided

Many of our Harbinger readers have seen the tenth video (below) released by The Center for Medical Progress exposing Planned Parenthood’s alleged tracking of body parts from aborted unborn babies, which had been released earlier today. This is another video presenting proof of such action straight from members of Planned Parenthood, many of them with leadership roles.
ppf00245_4Naturally, the series of videos caused major outrage among anti-abortion activists and many other Americans. On the other side, political defenders if Planned Parenthood were shocked not that it happened, but that someone would have the nerve to expose the group’s actions.
It matters little what one’s feelings toward or against the organization are as by both legal and moral standards, such trafficking is wrong and indefensible on the part of these members of Planned Parenthood. Clearly, there are shenanigans within the organization and for that it is very easy to condemn the whole group. Still, and this is not to excuse them, it must not be overlooked that these people seem to believe they are doing the morally right thing and it is important to understand this issue from all points of view. Parts of aborted fetuses can be used to save the lives of others. Therefore, it stands to reason that while the trafficking of fetal tissue is illegal, perhaps already-living people might have been given a better chance to survive their own illnesses as a result. Continue reading

Please follow and like us:
0

September 11, 2001 – Never forget, but were the fallen truly honored?

Most Americans who were alive at the time of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the U.S. remember where they were at the time. Every year, ceremonies are performed in New York to pay tribute to those who lost their lives at the three Ground Zero locations and to honor rescuers. tt2Watching even a portion of any of those events reminds us of what is great about America.
What unfolded after the attacks, however, exposed some of the best and worst of many in this great nation. For the first time in decades, the majority of Americans came together in something of a solidarity with each other after finally realizing an attack from a little-known enemy could happen successfully on U.S. soil. America also showed something It had lacked since the Cold War: strength. From the swift military action taken to the Taliban in Afghanistan (with almost unanimous backing from Congress) to the symbolism of George Bush’s perfect strike throwing out the first pitch at a Yankee game, the sleeping giant known as the honest, hard-working people of Continue reading

Please follow and like us:
0

Kim Davis: A lesson in political self-awareness

By now most everyone has heard about Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who would not issue marriage licenses to gay people despite the Supreme Court’s decision on the issue earlier this year. There have been various opinions on this by many and the expected social media vitriol by the usual Keyboard Conan types.

kindavisWhere I stand on this widely over-exposed non-story is consistent with other issues of such matters: each person is allowed to have and express his or her own beliefs and opinions on anything, but when it comes to doing a job one is hired to do, one must either do the job or leave it if morally opposed to a portion or all of its tasks. Therefore, while Ms. Davis has the right to protest what she believes is wrong, refusing to do her job was improper. She could have taken other measures, like resigning and making her feelings known. She could have led a peaceful protest afterward, but chose to do something that would get private sector people canned instantly. Had a drug store counterperson refused to sell condoms or aspirin due to his or her religious beliefs, then that person would have been reprimanded or unceremoniously given the pink slip. Continue reading

Please follow and like us:
0

Welcome to Harbinging.

boooooooooox

Political discourse was never optimal throughout the history of the US, but these days it has devolved into chants, slogans, soundbites, memes, insults and childish exchanges. This needs to end before the movie “Idiocracy” becomes more prophetic than a comical concept. That reversal, however, will not begin without a great deal of effort.
Perhaps civil discourse might be attained if all sides of an issue learn the perspective of their adversaries. Both major political parties have held what has become a combined monolith of power in a system that was meant to be one providing more choices than simply one questionable character or another. When serious problems pique the interest of the general population, those in power will distract the most of the electorate with a divisive social issue which will, in turn, dominate social networks. Two prime examples are the vitriolic posts and countless news stories about the Confederate battle flag and gay marriage while President Obama and Congressoinal allies passed the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement and the recent over-coverage of a small-town Clerk who would not issue gay marriages while the President is strong-arming support in Congress for his ill-advised deal with Iran.
There are times, however, when a large number of people wised up to Government misgivings and hijinks. The Tea Party movement is an adequate example of such a time. Both parties were visibly terrified of the idea that people from all sorts of backgrounds and of sound mind (most of the TP protesters, at least) were banning together to question the way the country was being run and the direction it was being led. Republicans were losing primaries to self-proclaimed Tea Party advocates and Democrats were visibly intimidated, fearing losing their power to new adversaries from the center. To thwart the very people they were sworn to serve, officials and party bosses successfully branded them as “racists” or “extremists,” which soon minimized the threat to their power.
The fact is, we are all at fault for allowing political leaders, their hacks and wealthy advocates to dictate political discourse and the entire narrative. People who would otherwise speak up are in fear of being denounced as “racist,” “sexist” or any other kind of “ist” word that the terminally offended can dream up. Those on the Left are notorious perpetrators of such labeling. They had gone a step further over the past 25 years, trying to silence opposition by telling those they disagree with that they fear what they question. This is where the silly terms “homophobia” or “Islamophobia” came from. It is the equivalent of calling one’s opposition a “Chicken” as if a debate took place during elementary school recess.
Perhaps the content of this post is a small portion of the reason many center-right voters are enamoured with Donald Trunp and those on the ultra-left worship Bernard Sanders. Trump, as a political outsider, is loud, unfiltered, fearless and effectively deflects the vitriol being thrown at him while tackling tough issues. Sanders appeals to followers through promises of free college, class envy and an economically collectivist policy with a strong safety net during an economically volatile time. Setting aside how one feels about either Trump or Sanders, these men are the exact opposite of the typically-coroneted Presidential candidates either political party would prefer.
While this is an introductory post, via Harbinging, we will be delving into several issues and try to solve problems with political discourse and the system as it stands. We will also expose the intellectual dishonesty of meme/playground politics and revert Political Correctness back to the target of ridicule it was and should always be.
On a lighter note, the name of this blog comes from a frequent guest on a program I produce who knew he would be on the air discussing the markets the moment I walked into his office. Not a fan of media appearances, he would jokingly refer to me as the “Harbinger of Doom.” Soon, we will expand this website to include guest commentators and a podcast/radio show.

Please follow and like us:
0