Another Failure By The Louisiana State Legislature

Louisiana's governor John Bel Edwards call for a special session of the state's legislature to face the problem of a severe short fall for fiscal year beginning July 1 ended in failure.  The republican controlled House could not agree on what measures to take to deal with the short fall and so another special session will have to be called at a later date to deal with the same problem.

The republican controlled legislature has been broken since Bobby Jindal took office in 2008.  Their lack of a plan or policy lies in the conservative ideology of extremism which prevents them from dealing in facts with facts.  And the present situation of do nothing is being influenced by the republicans desire to defeat Edwards in the next election.  U.S. Senator John Kennedy who is said to be thinking about opposing Edwards has stuck his nose in the states business.  Too bad as he has been a failure at representing Louisiana in the U.S. Congress.

Governor Edwards has laid out a plan to bring Louisiana's fiscal house in balance and to seek a long term solution where future budget dealings would become more productive, reliable and lack the emergency of the last nine years that resulted in budget cuts that did nothing to correct the states real fiscal problems.

The people of Louisiana need to elect more democrats to the state legislature as a way to bring balance that is badly needed to that body.  That is one answer that would help in the future.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

Times Picayune Journalists Mark Lorando and Tim Morris: Out Of Touch Big Time.

Mark Lorando, editor of nola.com, wrote an editorial in the T.P. dated 3/11 titled, WHY COMMENTS ARE TOO IMPORTANT TO KILL,  AND HOW WE'RE MAKING THEM MORE CIVIL.  Tim Morris editorial the same day titled, WHY DO SO MANY AMERICANS DISTRUST THE NEWS MEDIA?  Both editorials took up a lot of space but never addressed the real problem and both related in some respect.

Lorando's opening statement asked the question:  Is it time to kill the comments on nola.com?  Lorando does not think so even though he states the problem is that not all commenters are interested in a civil, constructive conversation.  Of course, he is right on target there.  Nola.com is not "facebook" but is still a social media outlet.

The problem that Lorando does not address concerning uncivil comments is the fact that many commentaries written by journalists are uncivil to begin with and so invite uncivil comments in return by the reader.  In many cases the readers know the facts ab out a subject matter that was reported on and the comment may not be in diplomatic language.  There are also commentaries that journalists try to pass off opinions as facts that invite uncivil remarks.  The larger problem that exist appears to be the type of articles written which do not represent the story of the moment but instead, the sound bite that is making the rounds.

This writer believes there would be more productive comments on social media if the articles were more productive and challenging than usual.  An example is the news media continues to report the false claims about Hillary Clinton committing crimes concerning her email and Benghazi.  Both were investigated by three federal committees controlled by republicans and no crimes were found to be committed.  But the news media continue to run the story line every time the republicans open their mouth.  And of course they still run with Trump's story line of "Crooked Hillary."  I wonder if some one commented "Crooked Trump" would Lorando consider that to be uncivil?  There are many more stories just like Clintons carried on social media.

As for Tim Morris' commentary, the answer is easy.  Part of the answer is the same as above.  The news media is out of touch with the real issues most of the time because they have too  much idle time to fill and do so with stories that have no real bearing on what really matters and makes a difference for the country and its people.  

Morris, a Trump supporter tried to put former Presidents Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton in the same class with President Trump as being liars because they told lies about the Viet Nam War, Watergate and an affair.  Not even close because only Trump is a serial liar in both his short political life and his corrupt private life.  Morris is one of several journalists who like to link other people to Trump when Trump finds himself in trouble.  In fact they like to use the words "alternate facts, exaggerations and fake news" when talking about Trump's lies.  Morris' opinion column appeared in the March 4 issue of the T.P.

How  can people trust the media when the NRA and many in congress take the  most liberal view of the 2nd amendment and say all should be able to buy a firearm and that gun control does not work.  There is much  evidence to the contrary that the media could respond with but they go with the flow of the NRA and many elected officials.

A good example is a commentary in the T.P. of 3/11 which was written by a reporter from Bloomberg news.  He reports that the state of Massachusetts is a leading state in gun manufacturing but the state has strict gun control laws including an assault weapons ban and the lowest shooting death rate.  The Times Picayune should have reported that type of information after the Florida school shooting to balance out the facts compared to the status quo answers of  the  NRA and the gun lobby at the  time of the shooting.

The bottom line is there are just so many stories out there where the news media could offer rebuttal for the people to digest but just go with one side of the story and that is all the public hears.  And the Louisiana news media is the worse.  They are still trying to sell the public that the republican party is the best on fiscal matters, even after the 8 year fiscal mess Jindal left the state that is still taking a toll on the people and state services.

Trust will come to the news media when they earn it.

Note:  This  writer is a subscriber to the Times Picayune paper and has been so for over 30 years.  The paper is smaller and smaller with less news than ever before thanks to their promotion of the paper on line.  Online is what the company is promoting and the news via the paper has been lost.  The Picayune should be devoting time to making the paper a better publication for the news that really matters and makes a difference.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

The Sanctions Have Nothing To Do With It.

North Korea's President Kim Jong  better know as the "rocket man" to President Trump was able to gain the "trumpet man's" attention when he told the leaders of S. Korea he would be willing to meet with Trump and discuss North Korea's nuclear program.  President Trump accepted the offer we are told and possibly the meeting could take pace some time in May.  It was a turn around from Trump's so called tough talk who always said there had to be preconditions before any direct talks.

The Trump White House and some in the news media must have been delirious from a high fever and almost immediately proclaimed it was the sanctions that brought Kim Jong around.  But North Korea's leader is set to obtain what he has been looking for all along, respect and the desire to be treated like other nuclear countries.  Kim Jong has something to bargain and has leverage with and is using it.  If and when the two countries meet, talk and negotiate, no matter the outcome, N. Korea will be the winner.

N. Korea may have a limited nuclear capacity but they are a small country that occupy half a peninsula.  They are not going to attack anyone with nuclear weapons because they would be just a sitting duck for retaliation as they have no place to go and no foreign military operations.  North Korea has abided by the Korean armistice since it was put in place 65 years ago which should be enough evidence that they will not attack any other country thousands of miles from their territory.

North Korea loses nothing if they give up their nuclear capacity and in exchange obtain economic and financial benefits from an agreement with the U.S.  because Kim Jong is not going to use his nuclear weapons anyway, except if some one strikes first and his country needs economic and financial aid.  Plus he will have used his leverage successfully and gained respect for negotiating with The U.S., the most powerful military nation on earth.

If there are talks and they produce nothing and the U.S. attacks North Korea, it will be shades of Iraq again,  big, bad, powerful United States attacking a flea and then trillions of dollars in aid to rebuild the country.  No, sanctions is not in play here and Reagan did not end the cold war with Russia.  In the mean time this writer still believes the best out come would be a unified one Korea with one leader and one voice void of nuclear weapons and that the leaders of Korea accomplish that themselves.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

South Korea Leads The Way By Talking To North Korea

The Presidents of North and South  Korea and their advisers are giving President Trump and his Vice President fits over their meetings and talks which began before the Olympics began in South Korea.  Both Trump and Pence had to change their demands that North Korea had to meet before any talks could begin.  The leaders of the two Koreas are pushing for a meeting with the U.S. in this writers opinion because both want to unify the country and separate themselves from foreign intervention.

This writer also believes that North and South Korea may make their own deal.  North Korea will give up their nuclear program and weapons if South Korea ends its partnership with the U.S. and all U.S. military forces leave their territory.  That would end the tension and war games between the two and the peninsula free of external and internal threats.

North Korea, an economically poor country by their own choosing by aligning themselves with China and a dictatorial rule find themselves in a situation where they cannot compete with South Korea much less on the world stage.  Their conclusion was to develop a nuclear capacity and use that as a chip to negotiate with and be respected by their adversaries.

South Korea's President Moon Jae-in and his willingness to talk to North Korea with out conditions because he himself thought something had to be done about the status quo led to what seems to be a break through.  Time will tell and the people will soon see just who represents a serious desire to see a peaceful solution to the problem.  We will also see if the United States, China and Russia are really serious and acts responsible.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton: A Conservative's Target

Times Picayune opinion writer, Tim Morris did his best in a column dated 2/28/18 to try and link the Lewinsky-Clinton relationship that took place 20 years ago to the MeToo movement of the present that started with the numerous accusations against Donald Trump by many women who said Trump forced himself on them and sexually harassed them.  Some women said the encounter was physical with Trump pushing them up against a wall.  And of course we have Trump's words on tape how a star can do what ever he wants to a woman, even grabbing them by the you know what.

The conservative strategy when republicans find themselves in trouble is to bring a democrat into the situation and try and change the subject.  Morris who is a self proclaimed conservative tries to do just that with his article.  He uses a commentary by Lewinsky recently published in Vanity Fair who wrote her situation takes on a new meaning in the wake of the MeToo movement and talks about her lack of support from women at the time  She confirmed that her relationship with Clinton was consensual, the position she always claimed from the very beginning.

The article ends by saying:" Embracing the MeToo movement without condemning Clinton's behavior with Lewinsky has always represented a huge contradiction.  Lewinsky has it right."  Well no, both Lewinsky and Morris has it wrong.  The only thing common between the Lewinsky-Clinton relationship and the MeToo movement against Trump lies in the fact that both served as President and Trump at the time of the accusations was a powerful business man.  There was nothing consensual about the sexual harassment by Trump as alleged by the many women who made the charge and Trump's own words tell the real story  Clinton's behavior was condemned at the time and the republican controlled U.S, House impeached him.  President Clinton was tried by the U.S. Senate led by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and was acquitted,

President Trump has reached such a low level that conservative opinion writers are doing their best to try and cast Clinton, Obama and other democrats in the same mold as Trump..  Its good writing for the republican base but shows how low some journalists will stoop to support President Trump and his failure to lead.  But the MeToo movement won't let them forget about the trumpet man's words.

Lewinsky never accused President Clinton of sexual assault or harassment and was not the one who broke the story.  That distinction goes to Linda Tripp who Lewinsky confided in.  Tripp became a traitor to her own friend when she went public.  Unlike the women who accused Trump, Lewinsky defended her relationship with Clinton when she testified under oath before the grand jury and gave a deposition before congress

Lewinsky and Morris have it all wrong, there are no huge contradictions at all between the Lewinsky-Clinton relationship and the MeToo crowd.  The reason there was no MeToo crowd to support Lewinsky was Lewinsky's admittance that the relationship was consensual.  The MeToo complaint against Donald Trump is all together different and it comes from some 19 different women.  And that really says it all.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

It Appears That Gun Control Legislation Will Take Place After Parkland, Florida School Shooting.

This writer believes that the hand writing is on the wall and that Trump and the Congress will support gun control measures as follows:  (1)  Raise the minimum age to 21 from the current 18 to purchase firearms.  (2)  Strengthen the laws concerning background checks and purchases.  (3)  Ban the sale and use of bump stocks.  Trump, the republican party, the NRA and the gun lobby will all support those changes because banning assault style weapons will not be part of their plans.

Some democrats will support those three changes also but will also push for the ban on assault weapons because that is where the real problem needs to be addressed.  A 21 year old is just as capable of buying and using an assault type weapon as a 18 year old so nothing changes there.  Tightening gun laws will not stop the legal purchase of assault type weapons so there is no relief there and banning bump stocks which converts a rifle or gun into an automatic weapon was not used in the Florida mass school killings so it will not stop such future shootings.  Bump stocks were used by the Las Vegas shooter according to police last year in the record killing of 58 people and Trump and the republican party were silent about it until now.

The NRA and gun lobby will fake their displeasure but make no mistake help write the changes congress makes like they always do.  Their main interest is protecting their warped ideology that any type firearm should be allowed to be purchased and since Trump and the republican party receive the great majority of their campaign contributions, the NRA and gun lobby will be satisfied with the changes.

The best answer to the mass killings would be to ban the assault type automatic and semi-automatic weapons from the streets of America that are killing machines.  That is why they were created, to inflict the greatest amount of damage in the shortest period of time.  Any thing less than a ban is window dressing and the mass shootings and killings will continue.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

Cal Thomas: A Journalist Who Should Hand Up His Writing Pen

The conservative journalist in a Times Picayune opinion column titled, "Boldly going like no President before" Thomas finally admits that the Reagan administration never cut spending, quite a statement since Reagan left office over 30 years ago and the fact that Thomas' party is still proclaiming Reagan did cut spending.  The article makes no sense because Thomas proposes that congress does what he says they never do.

Conservative journalists follow the line of empty commentary because they can not find any thing positive to write about when republicans control the White House and the congress.  After 13 months in office the Trump White House is a good example of a lack of accomplishments so the people are exposed to Thomas latest opinion which is full of holes on reducing spending.  He also blames congress for Reagan's failure to cut spending using the words " congressional intransigence.

But you might know since the article was about reducing spending Thomas could not bring himself to inform his readers that the Clinton Administration that followed a republican administration and the Obama administration that followed a republican administration did reduce spending on a percentage basis and did a better job than the republican administrations before them. (covered in a recent commentary here in PolitiDose)


The reading public really deserve all the facts regardless of their political orientation.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

Conservative Journalists: Still Playing The Ditto Head Role Of The Republican Party

Andrew Taylor and Martin Crutsinger wrote a commentary for the Associated Press in a Times Picayune article dated 2/14/18 titled, "Trump's High-Spending Budget Reverses Longtime GOP Dogma.  Crutsinger, according to information on the web site of the AP says his expertise is the economy but one would never know that from the above article.  The article is about Trump's latest budget which is a $4.4 trillion piece if debt and deficit spending.

The co-authors wrote that the open embrace of red ink is a remarkable public reversal for Trump and his party and the title of the article uses the words "longtime GOP dogma.  But those who follow politics know that over spending and deficits by republican administrations goes back to 1960, which was the last time a republication administration balanced the federal budget under President Eisenhower.  And no republican President since that time has left office with a smaller deficit than when he took office.  In other words, the longtime GOP dogma was reversed a long time ago in 1960.
Both Taylor and Crutsinger like many other conservative journalists still try to pass the republican party off as fiscal conservative, but the record proves they do not exist and is pure myth.  And the greatest myth is that the Reagan, Bush 43 and Trump tax cuts would pay for themselves and of course, journalists wrote commentary about those tax cuts in support of the rhetoric.

Understanding the failed past is still the key to a better future but ditto head conservative journalists will continue to slant their commentary concerning the republican party and conservatism.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

Bill Clinton: A President Who Cared About Public Safety and The People.

President Bill Clinton accomplished what Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush never made an effort to do.  That is a ban on assault type weapons.  Reagan had no inclination to go up against the NRA and neither did his successor George H.W. Bush who kicked the can down the road to the Clinton administration.

But President Clinton picked up the challenge to pass the assault weapons ban that was in effect for 10 years and was a success.  And for those years the ban was in effect no American was denied his right to bear arms for his own protection like the NRA and the gun lobby was promoting.  Clinton stood tall in face of fierce opposition from the NRA, the gun lobby and the personal attacks from republicans and others.  The President's leadership and action demonstrated his knowledge about the gun issue and awareness of his responsibility to keep our people safe.

Clinton also did his best to help America's cities stay safe when he had congress pass legislation to put 100,000 new police officers on the streets of America to help the cities who could not afford to do so.  Many cities used those officers to help with community policing.  The federal government paid the cost of those extra officers and Clinton still balanced the federal budget.  President George W.Bush let both the assault weapons ban expire and did not renew the 100,000 police officers for the cities.

President Clinton had the courage and leadership to keep a domestic agenda for the citizens at the top of his priorities along with our national security  He knew the country could accomplish both and he reduced the deficit that made way to balanced budgets.   And as noted in other posts in PolitiDose, federal spending on Clinton's watch had the smallest percentage increase than any other administration in the past 50 years.

Understanding the past is still the key to a better future.  But, unfortunately, today America has no leader in the White House and the President's latest budget for the country contains serious cuts to domestic spending including schools.  And the republican party's position on gun control is to move slowly and not rush to judgement after the school shootings in Florida.  Its as if the country has not been there before.   What a shame our political leaders have forgotten the past.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio

The Administration Of President Barack Obama Demonstrated Once Again That Democratic Administrations Are Best At Controlling Federal Spending.

The final numbers are in for President Obama's eight fiscal years which ended 9/30/17 and according to the Office of Management and Budget the percentage increase in total spending outlays were less compared to the percentage under the previous fiscal years of President George W. Bush.   And that confirms the administration that had the two smallest increases in total federal spending outlays in the last 45 years were the democratic administrations of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Total spending outlays for Bush 43's eight fiscal years was $20.829 trillion  It was $29.080 trillion in Obama's eight fiscal years for a 40% increase in total federal spending outlays.  Total spending outlays for Clinton's eight fiscal years (preceding Bush 43) was $13.145 Trillion.  So total federal spending outlays in President Bush 43 fiscal years as shown above increased 58% over Clinton's eight fiscal years.

The big spender was President Ronald Reagan when you compare his eight fiscal years to the previous eight fiscal years of President Carter and Nixon-Ford (that is Carters first and only four years and Nixon-Ford last four years.  Total federal spending outlays under the eight years of Carter-Nixon-Ford was $3.614 trillion.  Under Reagan's eight fiscal years it was $7.554 trillion, a whopping 109% increase in total federal spending outlays.  And this is the President the republicans still say cut federal spending.  Yeah right.

When we compare federal spending in President Clinton's eight fiscal years to the previous eight fiscal years of President George H. W. Bush 41 and Ronald Reagan (four years under George H.W. Bush 41 and the last four years of Reagan) the answer is.  Under the eight fiscal years of the Bush 41-Reagan administrations total federal spending outlays totaled $9.570 trillion.  Under the eight fiscal years of President Clinton federal spending outlays totaled $13.145 trillion for an increase of 37%.

It should also be noted that under the Obama administration, year to year total spending outlays were less than the previous year three times for fiscal years ending 9/30/2010, 9/30/2012 and 9/30/2013.  The first time that has happened since 1955 according to the Office of Management and Budget.  As this writer commented many times in past PolitiDose articles, the republicans claim of being the fiscal conservative party is pure myth and the numbers prove it.

The Reagan administration was the first to break the trillion dollar spending mark in fiscal year ending 9/30/1987.  It took 14 years to reach the 2 trillion spending mark by the Bush 43 administration in fiscal year ending 9/30/2002 and it took Bush 43 only 7 years to reach the 3 trillion dollar spending mark in fiscal year ending 9/30/2009.  And we know that Trump's proposed budget for fiscal year ending 9/30/19 is projected to reach the 4.4 trillion dollar mark.  This writer believes the federal government will actually reach the 4 trillion dollar spending mark at the end of Trump's first fiscal year which ends 9/30/2018.

The people were sold a fairy tale concerning republican conservatism and being best at handling the federal government's fiscal house and finances and the news media ran with the rhetoric, but the readers of PolitiDose know the true story.  Conservative republican Presidents?  They have not existed since President Dwight Eisenhower who was the last republican President to balance the federal budget in 1960.

Stay tuned for the fiscal disaster that will take pace on President Trump's watch.  And when it happens, you will have read it here first in PolitiDose, your daily dose of political commentary.


This commentary written by Joe Lorio