Cal Thomas has lost all sense of reality

After reading Cal Thomas’ editorial opinion in the Monday, March 27^th Advocate, it is obvious he has lost touch with reality.  In his column he advocates for Donald Trump to withdraw from the 2024 presidential race “for the good of the country.”  Donald Trump is not concerned about what’s “good for the country.”   It has always been what is good for him.  He schemed to overturn the legitimate election results, culminating in the January 6^th debacle ‘to restore him to power.’  Today he advocates for his followers to “raise up” and “take our country back” soley because of his possible indictments, not because of his love for America.  Additionally, his business empire profited immensely at the expense of the tax payers during his presidential term.

Sadly, Cal Thomas also fails to understand Trump’s two major personality flaws, the abhorrence of being seen as a “loser” and revenge.  In Trump’s world a “loser” is the epitome of the lowest form of existence.  That’s why he has never conceded the 2020 election nor sent the usual congratulatory message to Biden on his win.  To do so would completely destroy Trump as a person.

Additionally, most everyone who has had an association with Donald Trump will agree he is obsessed with seeking revenge on those he perceived as being disloyal.  This was quite evident in his continual revolving door firing practices of his cabinet advisers during his presidency and his recent threats to “punish those Republicans” who endorse or assist other candidates.  Trump relishes the fact that if he is once again elected he can “rain down terror” on all those that maligned him.

So basically, Cal Thomas needs to get real because his wish for Trump to graciously bow out of the 2024 presidential race is never going to happen.

 

Old age, time to go

It’s time to remove the old timers from Congress.  Sounds like I’m advocating for age discrimination doesn’t it?  And, yes, regarding the individuals running this country, age discrimination should take front and center stage since many of our representatives are no longer relevant.

Today, almost 25% of our esteem members of the U.S. Congress are over the age of 70.  This contrasts with the fact that 50% of the country is 38 years old or younger.  Interestedly, from the 1950’s to 1980 about 10% of Congress was under the age of 40. It rose to about 17% in the 1980’s, but today is about 4%.  This occurred at the same time that the median age of U.S. residents continued to decrease.

Additionally, in the 1960’s, and for the next 30 years,  the median age (50% above, 50% Below) of Congress hovered around  54 while that  figure jumped seven years in the 1990’s to a high of 61 years by 2022.

At this point you make rightfully ask, “So what’s the big deal about all this?”  The big deal is that you can’t stop the realities of Farther Time and how it effects one’s cognitive functioning.

As one ages, their brain begins to shrink, resulting in more difficulty in processing information, multitasking, reduced attention span, and remembering things.  Fluid intelligence, our ability to reason, declines dramatically in most people because we get slow.  And let’s not confuse someone’s IQ score with their cognitive abilities. An individual’s IQ does not change with age.  In other words, if you compared someone’s IQ taken ten years ago with their current IQ score, there would be similar scores because IQ is always measured relative to other people your age.  So when old folks brag about their high IQ, it’s kind of irrelevant.  It just mean it’s high compared to others their age, but they may still suffer from reductions in cognitive abilities due to the aging process.

In reality don’t you agree that individuals charged with making decisions about running our country and its interaction with other countries throughout  the world should be able to operate at their peak both physically, and more importantly, cognitively?  Additionally. these same individuals should be in tune with those they represent.

And this same discussion applies to our country’s leaders.  Joe Biden will be 82 years old and Donald Trump will be 78 in 2024. They along with the old timers in Congress need to ride off into the sunset instead of drawing a salary on the public’s dime to perform in a job governing people that they can no longer relate to, and lack the physical and  mental ability to perform at peak capacity.

Term limits is one way to stop these old folks in Congress from continuing.   Some in their 80’s have served for 40 years or more.  However, since that would take a vote of the U.S. Congress to even give voters a chance to decide if they favor term limits, I doubt that any of our congressional leaders would vote for legislation that would put them out of a job.

Sadly, with the present system in place, our U.S. Congressional leaders are going to become still older, and more and more disenfranchised from those they purport to represent.  And that will have continued dire consequences for our society.  However, the good news is, in 2024 we can stop the process at the presidential level.  Please give the old folks the heave ho.  In full disclosure I am 78 years old and have no business being a member of the U.S. Congress or President of the U.S.

Legislative Censorship Replacing Parental Child Rearing

As the battle cry continues to ramp up among all ‘concerned citizens’ about how we must protect minors from what they deem ‘inappropriate material’ on social media and now in our libraries, one has to wonder where the role of a parent fits into all this.  It seems that nowadays parents are so overwhelmed by their parental responsibilities that they need government assistance in controlling the behavior of their children. 

These folks continue to buy their minor children smart phones, tablets, and laptops, and feel good about themselves for keeping their kids ‘technologically’ up to date.  They may also assist them in gaining access to their local library and feel good about themselves for assisting in the ‘intellectual development’ of their children.

Then they stop, for whatever reason, when it comes to controlling the use of these entities and are happy to abdicate that responsibility to government regulation.  I am willing to bet if I were to examine the laptops, tablets and smart phones of the children/grandchildren of our esteemed ‘child protector’ Attorney General Jeff Landry, and the legislators proposing laws to ‘protect’ minors from what they deem allegedly ‘inappropriate material’ now available in our libraries, I would not find one device with the parental control settings activated.  And how many of these 'child protectors' go to the library with their kids? 

These battle cry folks all talk a good game about this hot topic but apparently feel that they as parents have no personal responsibility in regulating the behavior of their kids.

How many periodically check the internet browsing history of their kids’ electronic devises to see where they go on the net, or regulate their Facebook/TikTok interactions?  My kids thought they would outsmart me by deleting their browsing history each night.  A blank history is definitely a ‘red flag’ for confiscation of the device.

Parents need to get off their butts, for ultimately it is THEIR responsibility to supervise their kids, not politicians.  All of this so called ‘protective legislation’ simply serves as an enabler for these lazy parents, guardians and grandparents.  Pathetic.

Let's put the blame where it belongs

Even though LSU has a questionable past regarding the handling of sexual assault cases, the latest incident of a tragic rape and death of a co-ed in no way should be connected with the other cases involving LSU as is presently playing out in the media. The entire blame rests with the bar serving underage kids and the state of Louisiana for its lack of oversight.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that most bars located near the LSU campus are probably breaking the law by serving underage clientele for monetary gain. And this could be easily checked out by the state conducting sting operations involving underage informants in these bars.  But then again that would involve a genuine pro-active approach by the state of Louisiana instead of its present re-active approach after some tragedy occurs.  

Removal of this bar's liquor license obviously should have occurred BEFORE this student's death.  One has to wonder just how many other bars are doing the same thing. The bar owners and its management team are directly responsible for this woman's death along with the state by not doing its job and serving as a facilitator, not LSU.

The City Bailout for Mardi Gras

I am totally confused by the recent monetary proposal made to Mardi Gras crews by Mayor Cantrell. I can't remember the last time that a business model was proposed without knowing its cost. Apparently in a cash-strapped city Cantrell has offered up a blank check, with the City Counsel's blessings. How could this take place without any cost estimate being made accessible to the public?  I can't find the expected cost anywhere in media reportings. It also seems that whatever the cost, the city's coffers should not be used to fund costs beyond its manpower limits. Mardi Gras crews are private entities and the city, based upon its manpower, provides security for these groups.  As was the case last year, proposed parade routes were adjusted based upon these limiting realities.  If changes are desired by crews to go over and above the proposed plan, sound business practice would suggest that any costs associated with such changes be born by the crews rather than the city.  So just how much will this one shot spending cost the city, and could the monies be better spent to make long range lasting improvements for its residents?

And yes, I realize that proponents of the cash offer will point out that Mardi Gras will supposedly add to the economic wellbeing of the city and will provide a good return on the additional money the city spends.  But then again just where is that money that the city earns spent for long range improvements since these are funds over and above its operating budget?  Where is fiscal accountability for all of this in a cash-deficient city?

Is Donald Trump Finally Past the Point of No Return?

When Donald Trump was running for President he once made the statement, "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?  It's, like, incredible."

Before his stint as President of the U.S. Trump was accused of sexual assault and still today faces an accusation of rape in newly-filed charges by E. Jean Carroll.  He paid hush money to a porn star, childishly disparaged anyone who disagreed with him, and publicly mocked individuals with disabilities.  Additionally, Trump’s presidential aberrant behavior included humiliation of world leaders, and a coziness and admiration for worldwide dictators and white supremacy groups.

He scammed individuals with his fake Trump University, resulting in an out of court settlement of over $25 million, and the Donald J. Trump Foundation, a non-profit, which he utilized as his personal bank account, and which also involved a $2 million court settlement.

And let’s not forget his two most recent scams.  In 2020, Trump whipped his supporters into frenzy with pledges to overturn the election and promises to support Republican candidates in the midterms. However, he did not spend any of this campaign money on supporting mid-election candidates, nor pay for any election audits.  Actually, he did use the donated funds to pay the salaries for aides and political advisers, as well as events, travel expenses and fundraising outreach to supporters. He also spent more than $8 million of these donated funds in legal fees paid to various firms for frivolous lawsuits, and attorneys to defend himself in a second impeachment trial.

The other recent scam occurred in September 2021, which involved individuals who thought they were making a one-time donation to his 2024 re-election campaign.  These folks discovered later that by default reoccurring WEEKLY donations had been set up until the election date for each contributor using electronic deposit.  Many ended up with over drawn bank accounts.

Then there's the recent fiasco of Trump taking home classified documents belonging to the U.S. government and lying to his own attorneys when ask if he had returned them all.

However, none of this rattled his supporters or the Republican politicians throughout the country.  His Republican and Evangelical support remained solid and silent about all of this ethically and morally questionable behavior.

However, as weird as this may sound, a recent Mar-a-Largo dinner party may in fact have opened a crack in the blind support of Donald Trump.  It is hard to believe that with all Trump’s past behavior, a simple dinner with two anti-Semites, one of whom who is also a white nationalist, would cause such a ruckus.

But I guess now, as usual, we are talking about votes and not moral or ethical values, and sadly that is what our politicians are all about.   Will Donald Trump get dumped over a dinner, with what some consider deviant guests?  And if this is the only reason, based upon his past behavior, how pathetic is that?

Louisiana Rep Steve Scalise has Finally Decided to Work Again

I was glad to see in a recent Advocate interview with Rep Steve Scalise that he has finally decided to 'get off his butt' and once again productively contribute to Congress and Louisiana.  During the last two years his major accomplishments included being a minion for ex-president Trump's sorted delusions, and serving as an obstructionist in the House to veto ANY legislation proposed by the present Biden administration including his infrastructure bill which brought billions of dollars to Louisiana. Ironically, Scalise, and his fellow Louisiana Republican minions used this influx of monies in their re-election ads to tout how THEY brought money to Louisiana to fix its infrastructure, despite all but one voting against the bill.  

It has been a pathetic waste of two years for Rep Steve Scalise, but that's politics, and I'm glad he has decided to start earning his salary once again.