What Lies and is Orange All Over? The Republican Finalists, of Course

By Walter Brasch

Donald Trump, whose ego is larger than Trump Towers, called  Sen. Marco Rubio “Little Rubio,” a derogatory reference to the Florida senator’s height.

Rubio responded by saying that Trump’s hands were too small for the size of his body. “And you know what they say about guys with small hands,” Rubio counterpunched, adding that Trump “doesn't sweat because his pores are clogged from the spray tan.” Trump, said Rubio, “isn't gonna make America great, he's gonna make America orange.” The pro-Rubio crowd in Salem, Va., loved it. Unfortunately, Rubio wouldn’t be able to zing Trump much more, dropping out of the race for the Republican nomination less than a month later.

During the past two weeks, just when the people didn’t think politics could sink lower, Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) proved the people wrong.

Lyin’ Ted was behind the latest attack, said Trump.

“Was not.”

“Was so.”       

“Was not!”

The media circus had left Rubio in the Everglades and rolled onto the elementary school playground where Trump and Cruz, now the two leading candidates for the Republican presidential nomination, were squabbling and jabbing at air over pictures of their wives.

A photo of Trump’s wife, nude and alluring, first appeared in a 2000 GQ photo spread, and was widely spread by social media 16 years later, challenging voters to decide if that’s what they wanted in a First Lady. Later evidence revealed that a Cruz SuperPAC, officially unaffiliated with the campaign, was probably behind planting the salacious photo in front of the voters.

Retaliating, Trump tweeted side-by-side pictures of his wife and Cruz’s wife; the glam-photo of Melania Trump, a former model, was something that models send to agents to get photo shoots; Heidi Cruz was seen in a photo that made her look to be too ugly to even be a stand-in for the Hansel-and-Gretel witch.  When Cruz called Trump “classless,” the man once known as The Donald threatened to “spill the beans” about Cruz’s wife. The beans, coated with the ink of the National Enquirer, sprung the news upon a public that salivates at every sordid allegation in the presidential race, that Cruz had multiple extramarital affairs. Cruz, as expected, denied the allegation and claimed Trump and his “henchmen” had planted the story. Trump denied it.  

About the same time the national media and every blogger in America had published the 75^th rerun of the same story and were looking for something else to amuse themselves when ISIS terrorists killed three dozen and injured more than 150 persons in Belgium. The “Barnum & Bailey It Can’t Get Any Worse” political media circus took center stage, and the elephants began talking. President Obama was in Cuba on a diplomatic mission when the terrorists attacked. After the obligatory comments by the Tea Party wing of how the U.S. needs to turn the desert into glass and attach a monitor to the back of every Muslim who survives the genocide, even those who are U.S. citizens, they attacked President Obama, condemning him for being in Cuba when he should be in the White House leading the destruction of ISIS.

The right-wing, more concerned about TV lights and sound levels than reality, is unaware that the president of the United States doesn’t make policy and defense decisions for Belgium or that the president has full communications and dozens of civilian and military aides wherever he is, not just in an office in a building in the nation’s capital. It really doesn’t matter what the candidates and their own staffs believe, the reality is that the blathering was recorded by the media and then channeled to the public who are waiting to hear every syllable of every word that Trump, Cruz, and fellow politicians are spewing. The voices also follow the dictate that whatever President Obama or any Democrat says or does is wrong. Jimmy Carter stayed at the White House for six months during the Iran hostage crisis, and the Republicans said he was wrong to do so. George H.W. Bush vacationed in Maine during the beginning of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, and the Republicans backed the one-term Republican president for not being in the White House, knowing he had just as much capability to function in Maine as he did in Washington, D.C.

But, Obama is different. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell so decreed in 2008 that the primary function of the Republicans would be to block whatever Obama wants, even if it is good for the country.

So the past two weeks, the clowns were juggling attacks not only on a sitting president who isn’t eligible to run for any more terms, and Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, the two leading Democrats for the presidential nomination, but also on their own leading candidates, who are daily proving that hype will always trump the truth in a presidential election.

In Wisconsin, Trump demanded that Ohio Gov. Kasich drop out of the race, arguing that Kasich couldn’t get the nomination, even if he won every one of the remaining primaries. Kasich, a conservative who appears to be a moderate in a party that has been skunk-sprayed irrational by its Tea Party wing, declined Trump’s offer.  

So far, Clinton and Sanders have focused primarily upon policy issues and not resorted to bar room politics. If either expects to win the election, they now need to focus upon the greater issues of a campaign—their opponent’s appearance.

[Dr. Brasch, an award-winning journalist who has covered politics at all levels for more than 40 years, is also the author of 21 books. His latest book is Fracking America: Sacrificing Health and the Environment for Short-Term Economic Benefit.]

Donald Trump: A Problem Even for Conservatives

By Walter Brasch

      The bully of the playground continued to be in the media spotlight and charging ahead to the Republican nomination for president.

      In the 11th Republican debate, Donald Trump, bold and arrogant as always, kept up the attack against his three remaining opponents. To the man who once delighted in being called The Donald, Sen. Ted Cruz was “Lyin’ Ted,” a reference he made more than just a few times. However, several political fact checkers over the past three months have dismissed Trump’s claims as little more than half-truths, exaggerations, and lies. Politifacts, which checks candidate statements, revealed that about three-fifths of what Trump said during the campaign are incorrect. Among some of the errors Trump has made are that some of the families of the 9/11 suicide crews were in the U.S. prior to taking the lives of almost 3,000; that five detainees at Guantanamo Base, Cuba, whom Obama released were back on the battle field attacking Americans; that Mexico sent its citizens, especially criminals, into the U.S.; that the U.S., under the nuclear ban treaty with Iran, would be required to defend that nation if there was an attack by Israel; and that several polls show him ahead of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Several times over the past two decades, Trump has flip-flopped on issues,  and then later claimed he hadn’t.

      Sen. Marco Rubio, said Trump during the debate, was “the little man.” Rubio, however, got in a penetrating remark about Trump’s small size of his hands possibly being the size of another part of his body. There was no fact-checker present to verify if Rubio was accurate on that statement.

      Sens. Cruz and Rubio, both far-right conservatives and political rivals, have banded together to denounce Trump, each hoping for the Republican nomination, each facing a storm of Trump’s blustering that has led voters to place him firmly in command of getting that nomination.

      Ohio Gov. John Kasich, more moderate than each of his three rivals and sharper on foreign policy than them, has tried to remain above the bickering, but the debate and the campaign have deteriorated into little more than a bar room brawl, with name-calling dominating a voice on issues and Trump, Cruz, and Rubio interrupting and talking over each one numerous times. In contrast to the Democrats’ debates, which focused upon issues, this one in Detroit was more like a heated session of TV’s “The View” than a true debate, with Trump’s profanity-laced debate points duplicating his profanity-laced campaign speeches.

      A few hours before whatever the Republicans wanted to call it, Mitt Romney, the Republicans’ nominee for president in 2012, called Trump a phony and a fraud. “If Donald Trump’s plans were ever implemented, the country would sink into prolonged recession,” said Romney who argued that Trump’s proposal of a 35 percent tariff-like penalties “would instigate a trade war and that would raise prices for consumers, kill our export jobs and lead entrepreneurs and businesses of all stripes to flee America.”

      Turning to foreign policy, Romney plainly stated, “If we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished.” Romney said that Trump, who believes he’s “very, very smart,” is not “very, very smart.” In response, Trump numerous times before, during, and after the mock-debate called Romney a loser, adding that Romney’s campaign was a “catastrophe” and “an election that should have been won by the Republicans.”

      One part of Trump’s not so smart knowledge of the issues was when he declared he could save $300 billion from the federal budget solely by a regulation of drug prices, an outlandish claim with no substance. However, there have been numerous examples, other than his demeanor, of Trump not being qualified to become the president.

      Although he blares constantly about his $10 billion bank roll and how smart he is as a businessman and entrepreneur, while refusing to release any documents to substantiate his business income, Trump has declared bankruptcy of properties four times. Several of his companies—among them Trump Airlines and Trump College—have failed.

      Before his campaign Trump ostentatiously claimed that President Obama was born in Kenya not Hawaii and questioning Obama’s right of the presidency. The truth, upheld by newspaper notations, a birth certificate, and the federal courts, proved Trump and the “birther movement” wrong, but yet they have been consistent in throwing out their nonsense. He claimed that Sen. John McCain, subjected to torture by the North Vietnamese, was not fit to be president because of that imprisonment. “He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured,” said Trump.

      During the campaign, Trump mocked New York Daily News reporter Serge Kovaleski’s muscular disorder; he mocked Hillary Rodham Clinton’s appearance.

      He has HHH  unleashed numerous policy proposals, most of which have little foundation of reality.

      He has repeatedly stated that if he was president he would build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico, and require Mexico to build that wall. However, he never addresses how he will get Mexico to fund that 2,000 mile wall. He has claimed that President Obama plans to allow about 250,000 Muslims from Syria to emigrate to the U.S., a claim that is about 11 times larger than reality. More important he doesn’t publicly look at the expense of additional border patrol agents and staff to patrol that wall, or how to keep illegal immigrants from tunneling under the wall, or going around the wall by boat or air, especially since he has proposed no new budget for the Coast Guard.

      He now says he had spoken out against invading Iraq after the 9/11 attack, but the facts are clear that he never supported going into Iraq. He claims he has seen thousands of Muslims on the New Jersey side of the Hudson River cheering when the planes from Al-Qaeda, but again, experts and eyewitnesses dispute those claims.

      He says he wants a moratorium on all Muslims entering the United States, which is allowable under the Constitution, but doesn’t negate innumerable arguments of the logic or morality of banning those who pose no threat to the U.S. nor why he is singling out one religion other than the fact that some radicalized Muslims, less than .001 percent of the 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, pose any clear and present danger. He also doesn’t address how to fund an increase in the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and staff to enforce stricter immigration rules set by executive decree.

      He was slow to renounce the endorsement of David Duke, former hrand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

      Although he viciously attacks his last three opponents, he has thin skin. When anyone challenges his opinions for any reason he bellows back in superheated hyperbolic attacks. When Fox News anchor Megan Kelly posed tough questions to him, his response was to refuse to show up for a debate that she later hosted. This past week he dropped out of as a speaker at the Conservative Political Action Committee meeting, unwilling to accept the few boos and jeers that would surely be sent to him, and not needing C-PAC for support.

      Several Republican leaders have spoken against Trump; many conservative talk show hosts agree, hoping for a Cruz or Rubio nomination. But this time they are solidly in the minority as Trump, using a $100 million campaign of misinformation, has unleashed his inner soul of demagoguery upon voters, to make them believe that a billionaire is just like a lower middle-class citizen who does go to bars, has a few drinks and sometimes engages in verbal profanity to argue his position.

      If the Republicans have a contested convention or if Trump has captured enough delegate votes to be the nominee it could mean a continuing decline of the Republican party that would diminish the prospects to retain their Congressional majority and also affect local races.

      [Dr.  Brasch is an award-winning journalist, professor emeritus of mass communications, and author of 21 books, His latest book is Fracking America: Sacrificing Health and the Environment for Short-Term Economic Benefit. The book is available through www.greeleyandstone.com or amazon.com]

The Trump Tower of Egotistical Exaggeration and Lies

by Walter Brasch

      When the presidential primaries began more than a year ago, the two leading candidates were Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democrats and Jeb Bush for the Republicans. It seemed at that time that there would be another Clinton–Bush race in the general election.

      That, as any voter knows, has changed drastically.

      Sen. Bernie Sanders, officially an independent but running as a Democrat,  has shuffled off his one-digital support to being about equal to Clinton among Democrats, tying with Clinton in Iowa, beating her in New Hampshire, but losing in Nevada. Sanders’ supporters tend to be younger and are energized by his presence and persistence in pushing a liberal agenda that focuses upon individuals and how government can assist a broad spectrum of the population. His campaign is similar to the support for Sens. Gene McCarthy and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968 and Sen. George McGovern four years later, both of whom energized those in their 20s and 30s and older voters who identified themselves as liberals. Sanders could still win substantial support from Super Tuesday, March 1, when voters of 11 states cast their ballots. However, several states are in the south and southeast, which lean heavily conservative, even among Democratic voters. Although Sanders has pushed Clinton more to the left, she might be able to go into the Democratic convention with a substantial lead and the nomination.

      Sanders is helped by the Republicans who have hammered Clinton’s failure to separate her personal and federal emails during the entire time she was secretary of state. The problem got traction from Clinton’s weakness early in her campaign to adequately defend the use of personal emails and not using an encoded federal system. Since that time, she has faced a Congressional hearing and had not only explained her reasoning for using one phone but managed to erase any doubt of her violation of federal laws. But the Republicans continued their attack, spreading distortion and half-truths, using the media to channel their message. A couple of dozen emails were classified confidential or secret, but only after Clinton left office.

      On the Republican side, the race has evolved from Bush as the leader in early polling to the presence of 15 candidates, all more political sounding than presidential. By the end of 2015, the candidates were shown in editorial cartoons as clowns clustered in cars. Donald Trump was portrayed by almost every stand-up comedian and in the media as just your average ordinary boisterous and egotistical billionaire with a hilarious hair-do to being the chief clown to being the possible Republican nominee.

      The nine Republican debates were mostly random acts of personal attacks rather than true debates. Several times Trump called out “liar” to Sen. Ted Cruz, but several political fact checkers point out that about three-fourths of Trump’s statements are half-truth, exaggerations, and outright lies. This would be the same Trump who numerous times said that President Obama is a Muslim who was born in Kenya, and has challenged Cruz’s citizenship, which has been constitutionality affirmed by having an American mother.

      Among his more outrageous proposals, he has repeatedly stated he said he would deport all 11 million undocumented foreigners in the U.S., and build a wall along the entire U.S.–Mexican border. But, Trump doesn’t address the issue of cost—and how a conservative could justify that cost for building and then monitoring it—or the more realistic probability there will be innumerable problems to round up even a fourth of the illegal immigrants and separate them from their parents, or ways to tunnel under, climb over, or just go around that wall by entering the U.S. by boat on two coasts or by planeloads of immigrants and refugees who would land in desolate air strips with no control towers. This, of course, is the same Trump who used about 150 illegal immigrants to help build the Trump Tower.

      He has played to the fears of a radical terrorist Muslim invasion by arguing for a moratorium on any Muslim trying to enter the country, an inane proposal that would require several million dollars to enlarge the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and support staff, already at 20,000, and would ultimately be shot down in the federal courts.

      Among all his boasts and braggadocio, with his name in giant letters on office buildings, hotels, casinos, and a questionable failure at Trump College, he has defaulted into bankruptcy four times. Trump’s speeches are accepted and applauded by voters who believe bar-room profanity laced into ignorant chatter is just the kind of speaking that they do, and see the billionaire as one of their own.

      By Super Tuesday, most of the Republican candidates and all of the moderate Republicans will have dropped out of the race, run over by the Trump express, fueled almost entirely by Trump’s own money and more media coverage than any other candidate. With the moderate Republicans out of the race, it appears the most conservative ones—Sens. Cruz from Texas and Marco Rubio from Florida have the best chance to defeat Trump. Trump has shown enough strength to capture the delegates in the conservative south and southeastern states on Super Tuesday, possibly making his nomination inevitable.

      Trump’s message appeals to those who see him favorably as an outsider to Washington politics and to those whom Trump has managed to play to their fears and paranoia.

      But none of that matters because he spews out what a traditional base of conservatives want to hear, and his rhetoric supersedes how he plans to carry out any of his proposals, but gets him the votes he needs to be the Republican nominee.

      Far more important, his rhetoric sounds as scary as anyone who began as a small voice of the people and then became their dictator.

      [Dr. Brasch’s latest book is Fracking America: Sacrificing Health and the Environment for Short-Term Economic Benefit.]

      

Sick of Presidential Politicians Grubbing for Votes

by Walter Brasch

      Like millions of Americans in the middle of February I have the flu.

      Unlike millions of Americans I have a deadline.

      Forced to stay at home, sucking Vitamin C drops, I have read newspapers, listened to radio, and watched television as a source of diversion.

      Dominating the media is the campaign for the presidency.

      In Iowa, all of the candidates went to fairs, restaurants, and anywhere there was any sign of carbon-based organic life to grab votes. Because hogs and corn stalks haven’t yet been granted the right to vote, the candidates resorted to talking with humans, and making sure that everyone got more useless swag than the presenters at the TV awards shows. The newspaper reporters were doing their best to report interactions between candidates and humans; the TV reporters were reporting on the polls. Very few were asking the tough questions.

      When the votes in the caucuses were finally decided, Hillary Rodham Clinton barely edged Bernie Sanders on the Democratic ticket. However, it was a victory for Sanders who was getting single digit acceptance a few months ago; for Clinton, it was a hit in the head that she needed to revitalize her campaign.

      For the Republicans, Donald Trump, as expected, continued spewing insults at his rivals, shouting about immigrants and building something along the U.S.–Mexican border that would make the Great Wall of China look like a picket fence. Sugar-coating his own rhetoric, he somehow convinced Iowans that America was no longer great, but in his hands, which were holding up his ego, he would make America great again. One of his solutions was he “would bomb the shit” out of them. He never explained how he was going to do that with a nation and military that he thought wasn’t so great. Nevertheless, Iowa Republicans swooned over his carnival squeals and delivered him a blue ribbon victory.

      Minutes after the election results were announced, the candidates, trailed by a horde of byline hungry reporters, began their rapid descent upon New Hampshire, where they shampooed, rinsed, and repeated their assault upon anything with a heartbeat. The Republicans increased their attacks on President Obama, renewed attacks on Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, and erroneously called Bernie Sanders a Communist. Underlying their vitriol for Democrats was a pile of vitriol of each other, invoking the legacy of Ronald Reagan while grossly violating his 11th commandment that Republicans should not be attacking each other. For Clinton and Sanders, their own debate was more like a sharp discussion of issues rather than personal attacks. When the votes came in, Trump again got the plurality, but Ohio Gov. John Kasich surprised the media and the poll analysts by coming in second. Two candidates dropped out of the race; the rest scrambled their positions and staff trying to figure out why they no longer were second or third, and what to do to body-slam Trump who was scoring points by pretending to be an extreme conservative by launching an even greater fusillade of insults at what he believed were a bunch of wannabe losers.

      By the time the candidates and reporter menagerie made it to South Carolina, Sarah Palin and Donald Trump were basking in a love fest while Nikki Haley, governor of the third state in the primary shuffle declared her support for Marco Rubio and not Jeb Bush. To account for that insult, the former Florida governor brought in the heavy artillery—his father, the 41st president and his brother, the 43rd president, a reminder to the voters that the Bush genetic markers called for another Bush to surround the White House.

      Somewhere during the campaign, the candidates stopped long enough to pretend they were in a legitimate debate. For the Republicans, it was a case of Trump vs. The Other Guys, all of whom seemed to be trying to get media attention.      Sometime between the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries, Supreme Court associate justice Antonia Scalia died. Within minutes, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell declared he would block any nomination that President Obama presented for confirmation. The other Republican leaders and presidential candidates picked up the message and ran with it, declaring that a president in the his final year should not nominate a Supreme Court justice, fearful that any nominee would be a liberal whose presence on the Court would turn it from a 5–4 conservative majority to a 5–4 liberal majority. Barack Obama, backed by most elected Democrats, said he was still the president and would fulfill his constitutional responsibility to make nominations.

      By the time the gaggle of reporters and what’s left of the candidates limp into Super Tuesday, March 1, the public will be burdened by the last of the presidential swag and hoping that everyone—candidates, on-air reporters, and bloviators—get

laryngitis.

      As for me, hopefully my flu will be over and I’ll be able to find amusement in something other than a flush caused by high volume egotistical hyperbole laced with half-truths and statements, all of which are enough to inflate my blood pressure.

     [Dr. Brasch is an award-winning columnist and author of 21 books; his latest book, published this week, is Fracking America: Sacrificing Health and the Environment for Short-Term Economic Benefit. Assisting on this column was Rosemary R. Brasch.]

      

Marching Bands and High School PE

by Walter Brasch

      The Millard Public Schools in Omaha, Neb., will not allow its students to substitute marching band for its requirement that students take three semesters of physical education.

      The proposal would save about $75,000 a year, according to the administration. But, the administration also said if the proposal was implemented it would negate the district’s emphasis on wellness and promoting physical fitness.

      There are two issues here.

      First, as almost everyone who ever was a member of a marching band knows, it’s physically challenging. Every member must not only march, sometimes at a rapid pace, but also read music, do maneuvers and play an instrument at the same time.

      Some parades are a mile; the Rose Parade is 5.5 miles. Students train not just to march, but to march the entire distance.

      For majorettes, it means marching, throwing and catching batons, a feat not many can do if they are not physically fit.

      Waiving PE credit is reasonable.

      But, the second issue is physical fitness.

      Many school districts, dating back many decades, required physical education every semester. Exceptions were made for athletes.

      The reason for PE dates to the ancient Romans—Mens sana in sano corpora—a sound mind in a sound body. Until the past few years, junior high and high school students took PE classes every day for all semesters. For many, it meant frustration at not being able to climb ropes and accepting being hit and possibly injured by participating in dodge ball; it could also mean embarrassment and towel snaps in the locker room if the teachers weren’t paying attention.

      However, for a nation fixated upon iPads, smart phones, and video games, requiring PE makes sense. The classes also helped acquaint students with recreational sports—bowling, volleyball, swimming, and other activities they could enjoy long after high school.

      Requiring only three semesters seems to be a compromise between requiring PE every semester and not requiring it at all. Schools should require students to take PE, possibly every semester, just as they require students to take English, math, and history classes.

      However, requiring physical education classes in college may not make sense for students who are now adults. These classes—some colleges require three or four classes as part of graduation requirements—may sometimes be nothing more than a place to put varsity coaches who are better at blowing a whistle than delivering academic content in a classroom.

      But, give the high school students in marching band a break—they already are physically fit and contributing every bit as much as varsity athletes who get waivers from taking PE.

      [Walter Brasch was in his high school marching band and orchestra and was also a tennis player before beginning a career as a journalist and college professor. His latest book is Fracking America: Sacrificing Health and the Environment for Short-Term Economic Benefit, available through greeleyandstone.com, amazon.com, and local bookstores.]

A Large Problem for Circuses

By Walter Brasch

      By May, there will be no more elephants in the Ringling Bros. Barnum & Bailey circus.

      The circus management had originally said it would cease using elephants by 2018, but revised its estimate by two years. Management said the cost to retire the elephants to the Ringling Brothers Center for Animal Conservation in Florida is less than it had first anticipated. The 13 Asian elephants on tour will join 30 others at the 200 acre facility, which has a $2.5 million annual budget.

      “Our family’s commitment to save the majestic Asian elephants will continue through our breeding program, research and conservation efforts at the Center,” said Alana Feld, executive vice-president of Feld Entertainment.

      P.T. Barnum first used an elephant in his circus in 1882, having purchased Jumbo from a London zoo. Since then, most circuses have toured with performing elephants, most of them Asian females because of the difficulty to train male elephants after they reach maturity. (Almost no circuses use the larger African elephants.)

Why Ringling Bros. is removing its elephants from the touring company is because of increasing public pressure and charges of animal cruelty, much of it leveled by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and other animal rights groups.

      “We were very pleased that the elephants with Ringling Bros. will no longer suffer a miserable life on the road where they spend a great deal of time in boxcars and perform grueling circus tricks under the threat of punishment,” says Nicole Paquette, HSUS vice-president for wildlife protection. The circus, says Paquette, “had been one of the biggest defenders of this kind of archaic animal abuse, and the imminent end of its traveling elephant acts signaled that even one of the most tough-minded and hardened animal-use companies now recognized that the world is changing and it had to adapt.” 

       Thirty-one countries either restrict or ban animal performances in traveling circuses, citing cruelty in training the animals, according to Animal Defenders International.  For elephants in circuses in the United States, it means confinement in cages, chains on one of their legs to restrict their movement when not performing, and the use of bullhooks, which resemble fireplace pokers, to prod the elephants to follow directions.

Executives of circuses and entertainment companies that provide the animals to the entertainment industry, fairs, and carnivals, claim the use of bullhooks is humane. The HSUS disagrees.

      “There is no way to humanely use a bullhook,” says Paquette. “The hook is used to apply varying degrees of pressure to sensitive spots on an elephant’s body, causing the elephant to move away from the source of pain, often causing puncture wounds and lacerations,” she says, pointing out, “When the hooked end is held, the handle is used as a club, inflicting substantial pain when the elephant is struck in areas where little tissue separates skin and bone. Even when not in use, the bullhook is a constant reminder of the painful punishment that can be delivered at any time.”

      Even the presence of elephants at zoos, where handlers seldom use bullhooks, has been controversial because of limited room for the animals. The Detroit zoo was the first to eliminate the elephants; other zoos have followed, some because of space restrictions, some because of the cost to feed and maintain the largest land mammals.

      In the wild, elephants, an endangered species, face even more danger. Several companies, many of them based in the United States, sponsor hunting packages.  For $35,000–$60,000, guides lead trophy-hunting Americans and others to herds. The companies claim they are saving the elephants because there are too many for the grasslands, and that the people can then cut up and eat all parts of the animal. Other hunters poach in restricted areas, solely to get the 10-15 pound ivory tusks, which can bring $1,000–$2,000 a pound in the black market. Botswana and Kenya have banned big game hunting, but other countries have allowed limited hunting because of the income from fees and related costs of two- and three week hunts that help the local economy. There were about 10 million elephants on two continents in 1900, according to the World Wildlife Fund; today, there are about 400,000. About 40,000 are Asian elephants, about 160,000 fewer than in 2000.

      The decision by Ringling Brothers to retire its elephant acts isn’t just a victory for the Humane Society and animal activists, it’s a victory for the humane treatment of all animals. For those who want to see elephants, there are several sanctuaries where elephants are protected in near-wildlife environments.

Ringling Bros. and all circuses need to now retire the rest of their animal acts.

      Every other circus—big or little—every fair and carnival—big or little—needs to eliminate wild animals performing tricks or serving as rides for those who pay a few dollars to go around in circles. Circus animals are not needed as an attraction. Cirque du Soleil, for example, presents an exciting show to millions every year, and doesn’t use animals.

      Let other circuses and fairs follow that example, and let us hope that more countries ban trophy hunters from the slaughter of big game animals.
      [Dr. Brasch is an award-winning journalist, and author of 20 books. His latest book is Fracking America: Sacrificing Healthand the Environment for Short-Term Economic Benefit. The book is available at amazon.com]

Sarah Palin’s Quixotic Quest for Relevance

By Walter Brasch

      She’s back and tightly holding Donald Trump’s coattails.

      That’s right, Sarah Palin, having again found the media spotlight, is casting her shadow across the more thoughtful conservatives.

      This past week she declared her undying love and support of Trump’s attempt to seize the presidency from the more experienced and knowledgeable candidates in the Democratic, Republican, and Green parties, and is blathering her way throughout Iowa, New Hampshire, and several early primary states to stir up Trump’s far-right base.

      At a media circus press conference this past week in Ames, Iowa, Palin gave the far-right wing goose bumps of excitement with her opening declaration, “Looking around at all of you, you hard working Iowa families, you farm families and teachers and teamsters and cops and cooks, you rock and rollers and holy rollers!”  And then she asked the crowd, “Are you ready for the leader to make America great again?” Her question echoed that of Trump, and brought a flushed frenzy to the target audience. The question also had undertones of stating that the United States was not great, was not the world leader in numerous areas and, to the far-right’s belief, not a world leader in waging war, something the Republicans have become adept at and known for.

      Palin’s 20-minute endorsement, filled with a “you betcha” here and a “Hallelujah!” there, rambled on, attacking President Obama, who isn’t running, while avoiding anything about those who are climbing in the polls and about to catch the man who, until he declared his candidacy for president, liked being known as The Donald.

      Palin’s endorsement may have been because she was looking to cement an irrational possibility to be a part of a Trump administration. Several months earlier, she had declared, to the amusement of anyone who ever studied science and energy, “I think a lot about the Department of Energy, because energy is my baby, oil and gas and minerals, those things that God has dumped on this part of the earth for mankind’s use, instead of relying on unfriendly foreign nations for us to import their resource.”  Why she wanted to run the Department of Energy was clear—she wanted to be the one to ride it into extinction.

      But the Tea Party darling may have endorsed Trump not because of any ideological similarities, as both proclaimed, but because she needs media exposure. Sen. John McCain and some delusional advisors had plucked Palin out of Alaskan obscurity to be the Republicans’ vice-presidential candidate in 2008. On a full-time campaign, she had become a part-time governor. After the McCain-Palin combination failed to land many blows on the Obama-Biden ticket, and was soundly defeated, Palin decided that Alaska wasn’t big enough for her. She resigned the governorship half-way through her first term, wrote a best-selling book that only the extreme right-wing thought was well-written, began commanding $100,000 for speaking fees, and was courted by, and signed by, Fox News as a commentator.

      However, even Fox News, which has corralled most of the conservative loons to be commentators, tired of having to deal with Palin’s errors, outrageous observations, and falling ratings. Palin’s and Fox’s PR machines claimed the divorce was amicable. 

With her popularity fading, her speaking engagements slowing down, and media coverage of her family’s problems rising, Palin needed a platform to restore her reality show road show. That media glow lays in the endorsement of the narcissistic and bombastic billionaire front runner whose three marriages and four bankruptcies haven’t reduced his appeal to the Republicans’ family values base.

      It’s important that Palin get off the stage so that the conservatives who actually know what they’re talking about can command some of the media attention that has been focused upon Trumpian rhetoric and not substance.

Major Catastrophe: Major Media Problem

by Walter Brasch

    On Oct. 23, Southern California Gas technicians discovered a leak of methane from a failed casing on one of the pipes in its Alisa Canyon storage facility, about 30 miles northwest of Los Angeles.

    The company estimates it will be the end of March until it can plug that leak from the pipe that is about 9,000 feet deep.

  About 77,000 tons of methane, a greenhouse gas that can widen the ozone hole in the atmosphere, have already gone into the air.

    Residents in the area have complained of nausea, dizziness, headaches and nosebleeds from the sulfur-like odor that is put into natural gas to identify it. 

    Residents of about 3,000 households have been relocated. Hundreds are now living in hotel rooms, and will be there for at least two more months.

    The L.A. Unified School District closed two schools until March 2016.

    The Federal Aviation Administration banned flights under 2,000 feet from going within a half-mile of the leak.

    Gov. Jerry Brown has declared a state of emergency for the area.

    It is the worst methane leak in U.S. history, amounting to about 15 percent of all hourly greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.

    A reminder:  The leak began almost three months ago.

This past week, the major TV networks reported it.

    Those of us who are in the anti-fracking movement have known about this leak almost from the day it first occurred. Many of us have written about it.

    There is one critical question. Why have the mainstream national media not reported this catastrophe much earlier?

    Here are two possible answers. First, the media have laid off thousands of reporters, especially those who cover the environment, in an attempt to raise corporate profits.

    And, second, they are too busy channeling what Donald Trump says to devote much time to domestic issues, especially ones that directly affect Americans.

[Dr. Brasch is an award-winning journalist with 40 years experience in newspapers, magazines, and as a multimedia writer-producer. He is also the author of 20 books, the latest one is Fracking Pennsylvania.]

Blathering in Front of TV Cameras

By Walter Brasch

      Several TV networks covered the Rose Parade. ABC, NBC, RFD, the Hallmark network, and Univision had frequent interruptions to unleash commercials on us. The Home and Garden network ran the two hour parade uninterrupted—except for endless on-air self-promotion about HGTV and its programs.

      The networks had commentators who chatted with each other and seemed to spend more time enjoying being on air than in reporting the parade.

      They aren’t unusual.

      TV news—including parade coverage—has become more of a personality-based medium than a news medium. The Happy News TV anchors chat with each other. A few seconds here. A few seconds there.

      “With Tonight’s weather forecast is Susan Brown” has been replaced by: “Hey, Suze, so what’s up with the weather?” To which the forecaster responds, “Well, Jimbo, looks like you’ll be driving to work tomorrow in a bit of snow.” Jimbo, of course, responds with some inane happy talk about wishing he had an SUV, and then Suze mentions she likes the snow because she enjoys skiing. Then, she discusses the weather forecast, which is usually accurate for what happened 10 years ago but often is partially or completely wrong about the week-long projections.

      At the end of every segment filed by a field reporter, the anchor says something profound like, “Thanks Megan, for that very interesting and informative report about the supermarket opening.”

      TV management long ago brought in high-priced news consultants who think that the babbling patter between the field reporters and talking heads makes them more likeable—more human. Gives us insight into their personalities.

The news consultants—and the news directors—and the TV personalities are wrong.

      We don’t care about what they ate for dinner, their predication of who will win the bowl game, or how tough they had it driving to the studio. TV news should not be a modified Facebook posting. Just give us the news, weather, and sports. More important, please try to give us at least as much news as sports—and, perhaps, as much in-depth information about government as you do about weather. Frankly, we don’t care that much about what the temperatures were 10 years ago, what caused a thermal inversion, or how you’ll be cheering for your alma mater in the Sand Dust Bowl. We do need to know why there is a budget impasse and how it affects each of us.

      And, please, when hosting parades, give us facts about the floats and bands, and some behind-the-scenes news—and let us hear and see the parade, and not your ceaseless blathering.

      [Dr. Brasch is an award-winning journalist and professor emeritus of mass communications. His latest book is Fracking Pennsylvania.]

Violating the Constitution is Not a Public Right

by Walter Brasch

      For at least 17 years, the officials of Monroeville, Pa., a 30,000 population Pittsburgh suburb, have recited the Lord’s Prayer before every council meeting.

      This violates the First Amendment. And it’s not even a gray area. Finally, the ACLU sent the council a letter, threatening to file a lawsuit.

      The response by Bruce Dice, the city solicitor, was that the council will try its best to abide by the Constitution, and will make changes. Dice, who has been solicitor since 1998, says government “should not be sponsoring prayer or direct residents about religion.”

      At its Jan. 12 meeting, the Council will consider an ordinance to have different members of the clergy, representing different religions, deliver prayers at each meeting. The decision of who will lead the council and residents in prayer will be on a “first come, first served” basis, says Dice. There are 25 Christian churches—21 Protestant, two Roman Catholic, two Serbian Catholic—and two synagogues in Monroeville. Thus, it is entirely possible that 12 Protestant ministers will be the “first come, first served” clergy to lead prayer services. The proposed ordinance does not address religious diversity, but is specific there will be a prayer at the beginning of every meeting, thus continuing to fuse government and religion.

      When the ACLU sent its letter to the Council, many residents stood firm in their beliefs about Christianity and prayer at council meetings.

      One resident claimed he was offended not by the Christian prayer, but by the ACLU. A minister claimed, “We’re all tired of losing rights.”

      No one is losing any rights. The right to violate the Constitution does not exist.

      One council member said he wouldn’t be quiet and would continue the practice, much to the applause of many residents, few of whom read or understand the Constitution.

      Mayor Greg Erosenko, who led the prayers, added his voice. Using the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, he said, “It’s very sad that we have come to this, taking what happened in California. Not just Monroeville, but I think our whole country needs a lot of prayer.” He said he was a devout Christian, and that the nation was founded on the Christian faith.

      He’s also wrong. The Founding Fathers were specific in stating that the nation was not founded on the Christian faith, that people have a right to their own beliefs, and that there must be a separation of church and state. Many of the Founding Fathers—including Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, and Thomas Paine, whose pamphlet, Common Sense, was one of the most important works of journalism that led the charge to independence—were deists, not Christians.

      The Monroeville Council recognizes reality. A continued violation would have resulted in a federal lawsuit. It would cost the taxpayers a lot of money—and they would lose.

      If the seven-member Council supports the proposed ordinance of having a rotation of prayers and religions, the issue is back into a gray area of separation of church and state, but it does reduce the dominance of a municipal government supporting one religion.

      The only major question is why did it take a threat from the ACLU for the solicitor and Council to make the change to abide by the First Amendment to the Constitution?

      [Dr. Brasch is an award-winning journalist who is also professor emeritus of mass communications from Bloomsburg University, where he taught First Amendment issues, as well as public affairs reporting, feature writing, and media editing and production courses. His latest book is Fracking Pennsylvania.]