Who is really helping Louisiana?

It always amazes me how politicians just blatantly lie when it comes to re-election time, and don't even 'blink an eye' while doing it.  Steve Scalise, John Kennedy, and Garret Graves in their most recent TV ads are bragging about all the money they brought to Louisiana for infrastructure repairs.  In reality, all but one of the Louisiana Republican congressional legislators voted against the Biden administration's Infrastructure and Jobs Act which provided these funds.   

It was in fact Louisiana Rep Bill Cassidy that helped broker the bill, which has provided over $7.2 billion in Louisiana infrastructure funding, but he has been officially censured by the local Louisiana Republican Party for voting to impeach Donald Trump. And Scalise, Kennedy, and Graves went along with that proclamation. 

And as far as their legislative records are concerned, over the last two years Scalise's, Kennedy's and Grave's legislative agenda has been one of obstructionist by vetoing every piece of legislation proposed by the present administration whether beneficial to our country or Louisiana.

So, who is really helping Louisiana?  None of these guys, because all "Voted No and Took the Dough."   Pathetic.

A Will Sutton Apology is Due

Will Sutton's recent editorial in The Advocate was an insult to all female African Americans and he should formally apologize for writing it. In his diatribe he admits that Mayor Cantrell, and the other two examples he cites, aren't doing a particularly good job as mayors. However, he infers that it is important to keep them in their present jobs because they are Black females.  What an insult to the competent, strong female African  Americans who perform competently in their jobs.  In reality, Sutton is reinforcing the racist, stereotypical belief that female African Americans cannot be competent and that people should just tolerate that short coming.  Just how much more demeaning can an African American male be regarding his view of the women in his culture?  Maybe it's time for Sutton to self-evaluate how he inwardly really views female African Americans in our society.  We don't need to cut them any slack, for they can meet any standard set on their own.

Republicans Love to be Bullied

Well I finally got to hear what I’ve wanted to hear from day one regarding Republican politicians’ views concerning some of Donald Trump’s abhorrent behaviors.  I knew it all along, but I wanted someone to finally say it out loud.  And that someone was Ted Cruz, one of the top spineless members of Congress, who after Trump called his wife ugly and accused his father of participating in a plot to kill J.F.K., has still consistently supported him.  Most individuals would have never done that after such insults and insinuations, but then again it’s all about politics; to hell with your loved ones.

In a recent interview, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas was asked, “Why are your Republican peers hesitant to criticize former President Donald Trump about anything?” Cruz’s response was, “If they do, Trump turns around and punches them in the face."

He went on again to say, “It's a number of things, (because) unlike many people in politics, if someone criticizes him, he turns around and punches them in the face."

Cruz said he witnessed meetings in which "different Republican senators would criticize Trump, who would then spend the whole meeting just slamming them with a stick.”  However, “I like what we accomplished under Trump. I think there's an incredible record of policy victories.”

And finally Cruz added, “I disagree with a lot of the things Donald Trump says. And I made a decision that I wasn't going to be giving color commentary on MSNBC for every tweet or every statement that was obviously indefensible." In other words, he would remain silent about the indefensible ones.

So there we have it, Cruz’s admission, along with I suspect the mantra of many other Republican politicians, to embrace being bullied, and reinforce it.  

Sadly, one has to wonder if these individuals even know they have accepted Donald Trump as their bully. According to the Merriam-Webster on line dictionary a bully is “a blustering, browbeating person; especially one who is habitually cruel, insulting, or threatening to others who are weaker, smaller, or in some way vulnerable.”

So I guess now we can assume that the key to Donald Trump’s success in avoiding any fellow Republicans’ criticisms is his perception that they are, in fact,  ‘weaker, smaller, or in some way vulnerable.’  Quite pathetic,  but then again it’s mostly likely insignificant in importance to them in the world of politics. I just laugh at it all.

Maybe it’s time for some members of both parties to grow a spine and gain some self-respect, because it is definitely a scarce commodity now among many of them. I don’t have much in life, but it least I have self-respect.

Fascists vs Semi-Fascists

I must admit just when I thought that the political scene in the our country couldn’t go any lower, President Biden’s referral to MAGA Republicans as ‘semi-Fascists’  appeared to take it even lower.  MAGA Republicans, Republicans, and even some Democrats were up in arms about the disrespect these individuals were shown by the President.  Sadly, their memories conveniently failed them because this horrible event was, in fact, the second occurrence of the ‘Fascist’ term being slung around.  A perusal of the web turned up a 2020 video clip of Donald Trump exclaiming that Democrats want to, "replace American freedom with left-wing fascism. Fascists, they are fascists."

So there it is, we have one President declaring that all  Democrats are ‘Fascists’, and we have another President who claims some Republicans, known as MAGA Republicans, are ‘semi Fascists’.  One has to wonder, do either of these supposedly enlightened individuals even know what a ‘Fascist’ is?

According to Merriam/Webster on line dictionary a ‘Fascist’ is “someone that supports or promotes a political system headed by a dictator who typically rules by forcefully and often violently suppressing opposition and criticism.”  To further clarify the last point, these rulers often ‘arrange’ for those in opposition to ‘just disappear.’

I leave the judgement to each of you to consider if either U.S leader was correct in their assessment.

However, one thing is certain surrounding all of this, namely, that our politicians need to grow up and stop acting like entitled babies.  In particular, Donald Trump needs to stop using someone’s past behavior as justification for his present behavior.  And we as citizens also need to stop enabling Trump's present aberrant behaviors by justifying them based on finding examples of similar consequence-free behaviors by others which occurred in the past.

Just how can we progress as a society of the free world if we continue to make excuses for present behaviors that are clearly unacceptable, or worse, illegal?  Such behaviors SHOULD have been intolerable resulting in consequences when they occurred back then, and certainly shouldn’t be tolerable now without consequences.

Maybe we all just need to grow up and stop living in the past, and strive to make things better for the future.

I, for one, don’t care who did something unethical or illegal in the past and wasn’t held responsible for his/her actions.  That doesn’t justify ignoring it in the present and allowing the individuals to suffer no consequences for their latest actions.  I always thought the goal of a society was to improve on the past.

Pathetically, Republicans waste most of their societal time by attempting to defend the present indefensible actions of Trump by offering up examples of similar past actions that, for whatever reasons, eluded consequences or punishment.  No accountability then, so same rules should apply now?  Remember the old saying “Two wrongs don’t make a right?”  Grow up, and take it to heart.

So to all the self-indulgent politicians, engaging in unethical or illegal behaviors, man up and accept the consequences for your present actions; and we, as Americans, should demand they receive those consequences.

It was unjustifiable and unacceptable for Trump to make his statement in 2020 and the same is true regarding Biden’s current statement.  One does not logically justify the other.

It is important that we as a nation act more mature and rise above the childish behavior of each of these individuals.  Hopefully, we as a nation can also move on from the childishness of both in 2024.

Who's the Crook Now?

In July, 2016, Trump tweeted, “Crooked Hillary Clinton and her team were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.  Not fit!”

In September, 2016, Trump said that, “We also need the best protection of classified information. That is the worst situation. Hillary’s private email scandal, which put our classified information in the reach of our enemies, disqualifies her from the presidency. Totally.”

One wonders if it is simply an irony of history that in 2018 Trump signed a law that increased the criminal penalties for taking classified materials and changed it from a misdemeanor to a felony.

Last week’s headlines:  “After three previous formal requests were ignored, the FBI seized multiple sets of documents marked top secret from former President Donald Trump’s Florida resort home, Mar-a-Lago, when agents raided it Monday, according to a search warrant unsealed Friday.”

Maybe it’s time for those in the Republican Party, ironically dubbed as the party of 'law and order' to acknowledge the reality of Trump's actions and tweet using his own words, “Crooked Donald Trump and his team were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information. Not fit!”  "We also need the best protection of classified information. That is the worst situation. Trump's Mar-a-Lago scandal which put our classified information in the reach of our enemies, disqualifies him from the presidency. Totally.”  Are you listening Scalise, Kennedy and Cassidy?

Reminds me of the old saying,” People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”

So sad that any folks would even want Donald Trump for president again. Such a buffoon!

Cart Before the Horse

With full disclosure, I presently own a plug-in hybrid and think EV automobiles are the way of the future.  With that said, I fear that many will be turned off by the technology due to rushed implementation coupled with ingrained American driving expectations.

The United States encompasses a vast expanse of land, and Americans often like to be able to get from point A to point B as quickly as possible.  By in large we are an impatient group of individuals as evidenced by our love of fast food restaurants, speedy oil changing shops, on line companies that offer overnight or two day shipping, etc.

All of us grew up with gasoline powered vehicles, but a new era is upon us, the electric vehicle revolution.  However, if you purchase an EV now, and don’t attempt to understand the technology, and don’t relearn some of your vehicle expectations, you will regret your purchase.  Additionally, you will need to better understand what the real world performance facts are, as they relate to EV ownership, verses manufacturers’ claims.

One of the biggest advantages of owning an EV is the ability to fill it up (charge) at your home. However, don’t expect to do this by simply plugging it into an ordinary house 110/120 volt electrical plug, for it would take approximately 3 ½ days to charge from empty.  You will need to purchase and install, minimally, what is known as a Level 2 charger, which can cut the charge time down to 2 1/2 hours, if you purchase a top of the line charger and your EV has that capability.  Four to six hours is probably more realistic.

Additionally, according to CleanTechnica, there are approximately 150,000 gas stations in the U.S., each with an average of 8 pumps available, for a total of 1.2 million refueling devices.  Biden has set a goal of 500,000 electric refueling stations by the end of this decade.  However, this is all dependent upon Congressional approval of over $5 billion to help states implement this, and each state must submit a plan on how they intent to do this.  No plan, no money, and Republican controlled oil rich states have already opposed this plan.

Another change Americans must accept is the elimination of what I term ‘the quick in, quick out’ refueling expectation.  For now, if a charging station is equipped with what is termed “quick chargers”, and you own a Tesla EV, it will take on the average 10 minutes of charging to go an additional 150 miles at 70 MPH.  However, most other EVs can take as long as 20 to 30 minutes. But there is a catch; the outside temperature must be optimally around 70 degrees to get that range even from a 10 minute Tesla Quick Charger. Hotter or colder temperatures will impact that 10 minute charge.  Can Americans stand that 10, 20 or 30 minute wait if there is no line at a charging station?  A recent Twitter posting by a reporter for the Wall Street Journal claimed, “I spent more time charging the vehicle than sleeping,” when she drove an EV rental car from New Orleans to Chicago and back.

The last major adjustment EV purchasers must make is the acceptance of what the EV manufacturers’ claim is a vehicle’s driving range vs the real world, which, to be fair, is also a concern of gasoline powered vehicles; the EPA gas mileage ratings vs actual.

Let use the highly anticipated Ford electric truck as an example.  Ford advertises a 320 mile range on a full battery charge for its most expensive truck.  The less expensive one has a range of 300 miles. That figure is calculated with no load in the bed, one passenger, no air or heat on, no towing of any trailer, and a ‘moderate’ outside temperature.

InsideEVs tested several EV models and found that the range difference from what the manufacturers listed for their vehicles and what they got at 70 MPH was on the average 10% lower and that, “as little as 10 degrees change in outside temperature can have a meaningful impact on an electric vehicle’s range.”

Applying this fact to the Ford electric truck, purchasers should expect about 288 maximum real world miles from a charge, but less depending on the weight of the passengers, bed load, and outside temperature.  And while these same factors would affect a gasoline powered Ford truck, the lack of a ‘quick in, quick out’ refueling ability, and a limited availability of charging stations might irritate owners unless up front they understood the technology limitations.

However, once you start using the F150 electric for what it is designed for, as a truck, things go south quite rapidly.  Motor Trend magazine recently tested the new Ford 150 electric with real world tasks and shockingly found that when saddled with pulling a 8500 pound trailer driving range dropped to a dismal 90 miles on a full charge.  A similarly equipped 2022 F150 gas powered vehicle can cover over 250 miles under the same testing conditions on a tank of gas.

As I stated earlier, EVs are the way of the future, but a great deal more education of the public about the realities of owning an EV needs to take place or many are going to be turned off by EVs, and hate them. However, so far there appears to be no unified plan to address these issues, and the disinformation propaganda has already begun by the oil companies regarding this technology.

Sadly, we could see a strong push back against the EV technology because we as Americans don’t readily accept swift, radical change.  We just need to slow this adaptation down a bit, because presently there is no meaningful charging stations infrastructure in place once you leave the West and East coasts, and battery technology delivering more real world driving range has yet to emerge.  

EVs are not yet fully ready for full ‘prime time adoption’ as your sole means of transportation, but are fun to own as a second vehicle.  Performance wise they leave the combustible engine vehicle in the dust, and are the way of the future.  But if you buy one now, please understand the present limitations of the technology.

Totally Clueless to Deal with Abortion Legislation

I found Louisiana Republican State Representative Julie Emerson’s  recent newspaper Guest Opinion in which she appears to be bragging about how well written the abortion ban, which she co-authored, is "to protect the unborn,” absurd.  If one carefully reads her letter you can detect the fatal flaw of this legislation, namely, “We wrote Act 545 after thoughtful deliberation to protect the unborn life, mothers and good-faith physicians.” 

In reality, this act was not well written because it was penned by a group having no medical training or understanding of the procedures involved in this health care issue. Their focus was myopically focused on one single issue, the outcome of an abortion.  It is obvious from the text of Act 545, that the complexities of the health issues that might lead to the termination of birth, completely eluded them.

Doctors, not politicians should have written the legislative act, with only cursory guidance from our esteemed politicians.  They could have found many physicians with similar views on abortion to formulate this legislation. However, with all the ambiguity in Act 545, which Rep. Emerson, and our astute A.G., Jeff Landry, claim doesn’t exist, but which the majority in the Louisiana medical  profession claim does exist, it is obvious that they didn’t know what they were doing, and have nothing to brag about. 

Sadly, Louisiana is not alone in this fatal flaw approach as more and more politicians attempt to deal with the abortion issue, which is a health care issue as opposed to a political one.

The Supreme Court returned the issue of abortion rights to the states, but unfortunately what we have now is a bunch of clueless politicians writing and passing legislation about a complex medical scenario which impacts the health of women.