Is Trump Endorsing The Best Candidates?

There is no doubt that Donald Trump has been endorsing a ton of people this election cycle. And while most of the people he’s endorsing for Congress and the nation’s governor’s mansions have been non-incumbents, you have to ask yourself if they are actually the best candidates for the job?

Here in Arizona, Trump’s endorsed candidates swept through the primaries with wins. The closest contest was for Governor, where former newscaster, Kari Lake defeated businesswoman, Karrin Taylor Robson in a “too close to call race”. Polls leading up to the primary last Tuesday had Lake up by as much as 18 points, but she squeaked out a 2 point win that took four days to decide.

In Missouri, Trump made one of the weirdest endorsements I’ve ever heard of. He endorsed “Eric”. The problem was, there were two Eric’s in the race. Eric Greitens, was the former Governor of Missouri who had resigned amid sexual misconduct scandals. Eric Schmitt ended up winning the primary by a pretty resounding figure. Trump’s endorsement in Missouri came on Monday before the election.

My whole question here is whether Trump is endorsing the best candidates, or just the candidates that have been saying that the election was stolen from him in 2020. That was the case in the four people he endorsed here in Arizona. And in every situation where the candidates clamored about the election being stolen, Trump supported. At least that’s the way it looks.

Now, it does seem that Trump has a magic touch when it comes to the endorsements. Of the 57 endorsements that he made involving non-incumbent candidates, 33 won, 9 have lost and one is in a run off. 14 of the endorsed candidates are awaiting their primaries. That’s a 78.6% win ratio so far. If Trump doesn’t have sway in the Republican party, he’s on one hell of a hot streak! But again, are these the best candidates for the job? Or, are they just supporters of Donald Trump?

It has yet to be seen whether the Trump candidates can actually win the general election in November. It doesn’t necessarily look good in a lot of key races. In Arizona, Blake Masters, the Trump endorsed candidate trails incumbent Mark Kelly for the Senate seat by 9 points. In Georgia, Hershel Walker is trailing Raphael Warnock by 4.4 points in the latest poll. In Pennsylvania, Democrat John Fetterman leads Trump endorsed Mehmet Oz by 11 points. And in Nevada, Adam Laxalt trails incumbent Catherine Cortez Masto by between 3 and 8 points.

In the Governor’s race in Pennsylvania, Democrat Josh Shapiro leads Trump endorsed Doug Mastriano by 7 points.

In each of those cases, Trump endorsed candidates won their primaries pretty easily (except for Lake in Arizona), and are in need of help in the general election. There’s time to turn that around, but it’s interesting that some of those that Trump endorsed, like Oz in PA, have turned their back on Trump. It hasn’t helped. My point here is that while Trump may hold sway in the GOP, is it enough to cross the finish line when it counts in November? So far the answer seems to be no.

It almost harkens back to the days of the Tea Party. They were great at winning primaries, but sucked when it came to winning the seat in November!

We’ll have to wait and see what happens as the races tighten up next month!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Oh, You’re Going To Feel It All Right…

The Senate passed their “Inflation Reduction” Bill yesterday in the Senate. It now goes to the House where they will vote on it as soon as they get back from their summer recess on Friday. It wasn’t nearly what Biden wanted originally, but he’ll be happy to take any win in a year and a half of total discontent.

And you’re going to be the ones paying for it.

It’s name “inflation reduction”, but 230 economists have said, “No, it will increase inflation in the long term. In fact, inflation won’t start to come down until probably sometime in 2024, possibly after the presidential elections!” They have indicated that there will be a tax increase, which anyone with a brain knew was coming. You don’t go $32 Trillion in debt, and not expect a tax increase of some sort. And it will indeed hit the middle class. In fact, if you’re one of the 47% of Americans that doesn’t pay income tax now, you will pay income tax up the road. And you can blame this bill.

But the Democrats don’t care about that. They got billions of dollars in new spending that can go to their beloved climate change. And yes, there will be a little bit of a savings that will be used to pay down the federal debt IF the numbers all come together like they said it would (it won’t). They are talking about $300 billion going to lessen the federal debt. By the way, that takes care of 0.9375% of the debt. And do you think that will make a difference? Before you answer, realize this. The government authorized $300 billion in NEW debt this past week!

But let’s take a look at what the bill does and doesn’t do. It will raise $739 billion in new taxes. It will spend a total of $433 billion. The Corporate Minimum Tax will set 15% as the floor that corporations will pay. Of course, that will be passed on to you and me in higher prices. There will be about $288 billion set for the pharmaceutical industry in lower drug prices for Medicare. Seniors on Medicare will have their drug costs capped at $2,000 a year. If a drug company raises the price of drugs more than the inflation rate, they have to rebate that back to Medicare (so look for huge drug cost increases before the bill goes into effect!). Failure to do so is a 95% excise tax.

The IRS is getting $80 billion of the $433 billion in spending to beef up their agents. Those folks are expected to bring in an additional $124 billion in taxes through additional audits. And there will be a “Stock Buy-Back” tax on corporations that buy their own stock back. It will bring in about $74 billion.

As far as the spending goes, it basically guarantees Obamacare premium subsidies for the next 10 years at a cost of $35 billion. It modifies or extends green tax credits for the next two years. It will raise the SuperFund tax on oil companies to 16.4%, and greatly increases other taxes on fossil fuels. There will be about $501 billion according to the Tax Foundation in additional spending with the bulk of it going to environmental spending.

The Tax Foundation says that the GDP will drop by 0.1% because of the bill. The Gross National Product will rise about 0.05%. Capital Stock prices will drop 0.3%, and the average wage of Americans will drop about 0.1%. It will also cost the country about 30,000 jobs.

Overall, most economists are predicting that this huge of a spending bill (though a lot lower than the $3 trillion Biden wanted) will cause a continued slowdown in the economy, a loss of jobs, and loss of wages for the American workers. It’s just one more reason why the Dems needed to get it passed now before they lose Congress in the fall.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

WaPo’s “Power Rankings”

Assuming that Joe Biden doesn’t know what state he’s in come next year and decides that he probably is better off not running for reelection, who would be the top Democrat choices? Well, the Washington Post has a thing called their “power rankings” of Democrats that could vie for the position. It’s kind of like the power rankings that you see in college and professional sports, except this is involving people, not teams.

Here’s the lineup so far:

Leading the way is K-baby Harris. I’m really shocked that she is showing up at number one! WaPo admits, she’s gaffe prone, charmless, a cackling witch, and voters hate her. Why anyone would think that she would be ranking in any power rankings at all, much less have the top spot is beyond me.

Number two on the list is Pete Buttigieg. They cite his intelligence, his debating ability, and the fact he wasn’t alive during World War II as assets. But his negatives are just, if not more strong than his strengths. He has done a terrible job as Transportation Secretary, he’s totally inexperienced at executive management, and the electorate wasn’t impressed with him in 2020. What makes them think he’s going to be any better this time around?

At number three on the WaPo list is California Governor, Gavin Newsome. They list his willingness to embrace progressive legislation, and his ability to play to angered voters over the whole Roe v. Wade thing as his top assets. Of course, he has a lot of negatives too. People in Cali can’t wait to leave his state because of his politics, and he recently survived a recall election. Usually going through a recall election isn’t what one would consider a resume enhancement.

Fourth on the list is Michigan Governor, Gretchin Whitmer. There are some out there that feel that Whitmer may just be the strongest candidate the Democrats would be able to field this time around. She does indeed have executive leadership experience, but doesn’t have a household name.

After that, you’re down to a bunch of wannabes. Minnesota Senator, Amy Klobuchar, New York Representative, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Georgia Senator, Raphael Warnock, New Jersey Senator, Cory Booker, and Ohio Senator, Sherrod Brown round out the list.

That tells me a few things. One thing that it speaks volumes of is that with the exception of maybe Whitmer, there aren’t any real new names on the list. And there really isn’t anyone that I would consider to be nationally a strong candidate. It’s one thing to win an election in a Congressional district, or maybe even a state-wide election. It’s quite another to put together a campaign to amass 270 electoral college votes.

The other thing that I find interesting is that nowhere on the WaPo list was former first lady, Michele Obama. She’s more popular than anyone on their list, and even though she hasn’t publicly said she would like to try for the job, she’s certainly seems to be hinting at it. And I think she’d probably be a much tougher opponent for anyone on the Republican side to beat. She would pull away just enough independent voters to make it a horserace.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Sinema Balks, Gets Bill Changed

Apparently, the whole reason that Arizona Democrat Senator, Kyrsten Sinema was against the proposed multi billion dollar climate change and liberal spending bill only because of the “carried interest tax loophole” closure.

Senate Majority Leader, Chuckles Schumer had no choice but to remove that provision from the bill in order to persuade Sinema to get on board. Once that was out of the bill, she was OK with the rest of it apparently.

The bill was designed to charge money managers with an additional tax because of a loophole Schumer wanted to close. Schumer claimed that because of that loophole, money advisors were able to pay less tax than most middle and lower income people. Personally, I don’t buy that since 48% of Americans don’t pay any income tax at all. That would include most middle and lower income people!

By taking the closure of the loophole out of the bill, it would cost about $14 billion in revenue. So, Schumer decided that he would hit corporations with a tax any time they instituted a stock “buy back” program. That typically is done when the stock is at a lower price than the company believes it should be. They then buy back as much stock as they can, which drives the share price north. The added tax to the corporations were estimated to add about $74 billion in revenue, a huge amount compared to what was pared out.

So, it looks like corporations won’t be as quick to re-purchase their own stock when the bill passes. Overall, the bill is seen as a tax and spend boost for Democrats that will allow them to get closer to Biden’s social spending targets to be ultimately wasted on climate change issues that haven’t been proven to do anything to actually reduce climate change. That’s because, as more and more scientists are starting to realize…it’s the earth’s cycle, not Jimmy’s mom’s SUV that is the cause of it.

Even if the Democrats are able to push this through, as it looks now, it’s going to be too late to actually accomplish anything come November, where the GOP is still poised to take over at least the House and quite possibly the Senate.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

The Difference Between The Right And The Left

I have sat quietly watching the Supreme Court decisions unfold in June. Oh, don’t get me wrong. I was happy to see the fact that the state of New York, which quite frankly I’ve always viewed as not just liberal but run by a bunch of narcissistic idiots that would never be allowed to even run for office in another state, get their anti-gun carry law banned. And I was happy that a “right” that was never granted by the Constitution (abortion) was overturned and given it’s rightful place back to the states, as should have happened some 50 years ago.

But what all of this has taught me is the overriding difference between the left and the right.

When the right has something passed that they don’t like, they go along with it until it can be changed. Oh, they may hold peaceful (that should have been underlined, in bold and in Italics!) rallies, as the pro-life group had done with abortion for decades. But they don’t riot in the streets. They don’t threaten bodily harm to the members of the high court. They don’t cry and weep incessantly like we’ve seen over the past few weeks. They go with the flow, gather up their members and when the time is right they change it.

What the left does is hold riots. They threaten. They go to violence almost immediately. If you don’t go along with what the left wants on an issue, you’re “cancelled” or banned. You’re the pariah. You’re the problem. It doesn’t matter that what they want makes no sense. It doesn’t matter that what they want is wrong. That doesn’t have anything to do with it. They want some crazy idea to be thrust, and they are going to spin it as “saving the children” (well, not in abortion’s case), or taking medicine or food out of grandma’s mouth. But they never give you both sides of the equation. Just because in the New York case, people can carry guns now without going through an arduous process, they think it’s going to lead to more crime. And the liberal media is going to highlight any time there is a shooting anywhere in the state, just wait.

As far as abortion is concerned, the left has always been more about protecting a non-existing “right” of women’s ability to choose what to do with her own body, rather than protecting the life of the unborn within that body. They knew they could never win an argument if killing a baby was a part of it, so they made it about “women’s health”. It’s not about women’s health. It’s about eliminating a pregnancy without regard to what they are actually doing so the women who are doing it don’t feel ashamed or guilty for killing a baby.

Of course, there are other differences as well. There’s the whole large government vs. small government argument. And you’ve got the states rights vs. federal government argument (which I thought the 10th Amendment answered quite clearly). And they don’t accept any argument that runs counter to their addle-minded way of thinking.

One of the best arguments I heard over the few weeks was, “Guns are in the Constitution. Abortion is not. Period.” Tough to argue with that one.

And until we get the youth of America educated properly, and not indoctrinated in our public schools, this fallacy of whatever I believe is right and what you prove to me that it isn’t right is dead wrong and you don’t deserve to live! has to be eliminated from our society.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Fixing Elections

Oh, I’ve talked about this before, but it keeps coming up as a major topic of conversation. So, some people aren’t getting the message. I’d ask that you reblog this, cut and paste this, email it, whatever you have to do to all of your friends and family, and all of the elected officials in Washington, DC. They need to know how to fix the whole election problem because it’s obviously not getting through to them.

Here’s what I would do.

First and foremost, You can only register for your right to vote at a government office of some sort. Maybe it’s the Attorney General’s office. Maybe it’s your Secretary of State’s office. Maybe it’s the DMV. Somewhere that is controlled by the government. You have to do it 90 days prior to you actually voting whether it’s in a primary or in a general election. You need to show proof of citizenship, which can be through a driver’s license (unless you live in a state like New York that let’s illegals get drivers’ licenses), a state ID card if you don’t drive, or a passport in order to obtain your registration. Any one of those things, except a passport, which is federally mandated to cost money, is free to obtain (well…a drivers’ license isn’t free, but it’s cheap).

Second, all elections will be held on a Saturday or a Sunday. I don’t care which day, but make it on the weekend. It doesn’t matter if it’s a primary or a general election. And it doesn’t matter if it’s a statewide election, or a national election like what we have coming up in November. It becomes a legal holiday, and ALL businesses must be shut down between the hours of 6am and 7pm, and those hours are for every state. That way you don’t get some states opening at 7am, and closing at 8pm. Everybody does the same thing. And everybody gets the day off work since no businesses can be open during an election. Everybody that votes gets a purple ink stain that will fade after 14 days. No ink stain, means you haven’t voted.

There are to be no mail in ballots. There are only to be absentee ballots because of medical reasons and a doctor’s signature is required. A doctor can only sign if the person cannot leave their house. They would be allowed to mail that in. Military personnel can also vote absentee ballots if they are out of the country, but their ballots must be back at their local election headquarters no later than one week prior to the election.

All voting must be done by one type of machine. That machine must be vetted so it doesn’t arbitrarily vote for one candidate “by mistake” as has happened in the past. If it does, the company is fined $1 million per fraudulent vote. You have to make it valuable to the company that they produce a “clean” machine. All machines must be tabulated no later than 11pm local time. Failure to do that means that the elections officials are fined $1,000 for every miscounted or vote that’s failed to be counted. Again, it’s motivating to get it done. If they need more volunteers, then get them!

You can only demand a recount or take something to court if the end result is within 0.5%. So, if you lose by a couple of percentage points, you cannot bog down the already clogged courts with your silly lawsuit. Be a man (or a woman) and accept a loss.

Any fraudulent voting, voting more than once, or as another person, you are tried for treason and sentenced to life in prison without the chance for parole. And whomever you voted for is fined $1 million per vote that was determined to be fraudulently voted, not to be paid out of campaign funds, but out of personal funds.

There. I’ve fixed it. I doubt there would be any real problems with this system other than people screaming that they have somehow been “disenfranchised” because they couldn’t cheat. Oh well, tough baked beans.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Biden Administration Going To Extra Lengths To Avoid “Recession” Word

Technically, the United States is in a recession. The technical definition is any time the Gross Domestic Product of the country goes negative for two consecutive quarters. Just don’t say that around the Biden White House. You’ll probably get shocked with a cattle prod if you do.

They are doing anything possible to avoid having to admit that we are indeed in a recession. That throws Joe Biden’s claims that his low joblessness numbers indicate a “booming economy”, and that’s just not what most Americans feel right now.

The White House Council of Economic Advisers Chair, Cecilia Rouse, and member Jared Bernstein have issued the following statement, “While some maintain that two consecutive quarters of falling real GDP constitute a recession, that is neither the official definition nor the way economists evaluate the state of the business cycle. Based on these data, it is unlikely that the decline in GDP in the first quarter of this year—even if followed by another GDP decline in the second quarter—indicates a recession.”

In other words, we didn’t like what was coming our way as far as another recession during Joe Biden’s term in office, so we’re going to redefine it in such a way where we don’t have to call it a recession. That’s like saying there is no crisis at the southern border, even though there is a crisis at the southern border. It’s something that Joe Biden can’t blame on Vladimir Putin, or COVID necessarily, since we’re a solid year away from the pandemic, so he has to find a new way to deal with it.

Here’s the problem the Biden administration faces. The FED is going to be raising interest rates again some 75 basis points (3/4 of a point). They did that back in June for the first time in 30 years…and they need to do it again because inflation edged up to over 9%. Wall Street is sitting on pins and needles because they hate interest rate hikes (it costs more for companies to do business when interest rates go up). So, if that happens, the markets will most likely drop. That signals to those folks with 401k’s and investments in the marketplace that they are losing money. That’s not a good thing when you are trying to tell people that everything is hunky dory.

The other problem Biden has is that the yield curve is inverted. Now, that means that the interest rate on the 10 year notes are lower than the yields on the 2 year notes. That has been the case in every single recession we’ve gone through in the last 67 years. It’s a harbinger of bad financial tidings to come, and yes, our yield curve has been inverted for quite some time now. It does show that we are heading to, if not already in a recession.

Regardless who’s definition you want to use to define if we are in a recession or not, the American people feel pressure. They feel that they are worse off today than they were a year ago. In fact, they feel they will be worse off next year at this time than they are today. That is what a recession does. And people have a tendency to pull in the spending, putting off buying a new car, or new furniture. They don’t invest in new houses (housing costs for existing houses are already down about 5% in the last month). And they don’t go on vacations, or go out to eat as often. That means supply outpaces demand and that’s never a sign of growth. It’s a sign of contraction. It’s a sign of recession.

So, forget what you’re hearing from the Biden administration. We are indeed in a recession. We weren’t in a recession last year. We are now. It’s not Trump’s fault. It’s not COVID’s fault. And you can’t blame Vladimir Putin for this one. This one is squarely on the shoulders of Joseph Robinette Biden. Remember that next time he tells you the economy is booming!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Let’s Explore Biden’s Climate Change Fallacy

Well, it’s going to be one part of the fallacy, but it’s the part that is causing probably the most angst that we all seem to be dealing with these days. That would be the move to an electric vehicle or EV as they are called.

During the past two weeks, my wife and I have been traveling about this great country of ours. We do it every year. We stop by eastern Texas to see my son and his family, and we’re getting ready to head back to the desert after visiting my daughter and her family in eastern Missouri. We’ve seen gas prices range from $5.20 a gallon in the desert of Arizona, to a low of $3.25 in the Houston area. And all the while I know Joe Biden is trying to keep gas prices high intentionally, regardless what he’s telling you. He wants to make it painful to keep gasoline and oil as the main lifeblood of our economy. He wants to go to electric. He’s right that it could be cleaner, it could be less expensive, but he’s wrong that we’re ready to transition to EV’s just yet. Here’s why.

  1. The upfront cost of an electric vehicle is expensive…upwards of $50,000 to $60,000 (not for a hybrid, but for an honest to goodness EV). That could be two to three times what you’re used to paying for a vehicle. They say you can recoup it in gasoline savings…but it would take a good long while to do so. And it just isn’t a feasible option at this juncture.
  2. The technology isn’t ready yet. When you look at EV’s, I have no doubt they have a place in our transportation future. It’s just not ready today, or even in the next year or two. Battery life and how far you can go on a charge are woefully lacking. Say you can go up to 300 miles on a single charge with a current lithium ion battery. That’s better than it has been, but if you’re driving across country, that could take you a week and a half to do so.
  3. Charging stations (better known as the infrastructure) is sorely lacking. We just aren’t ready to have enough charging stations yet. And when we do, do you want to have to stop two or three times a day to spend a half-hour to an hour charging your car? That could add a few hours each day to your road trip. That’s not something I’m necessarily excited about.
  4. Battery technology needs to be greatly improved…especially in the more extreme climates of the north and the desert southwest. When we moved to Arizona, I learned quickly that batteries that are guaranteed to last four or five years only last maybe two to two and a half years in the desert. The extreme heat of 115 degrees quickly fries the electrolytes in the battery. And lithium ion batteries don’t have the cranking power in the frigid tundra of the northern tier of states when it gets to be below zero. That needs to be improved.
  5. The safety of the vehicle can be called into question. Lithium ion batteries pose a risk for fire fighters trying to rescue occupants trapped inside of EV’s. They’ve been known to catch fire, which leads to a rather disastrous explosion on occasion. Ask any firefighter that has been trained in EV rescue. They’ll tell you it’s not something they’d prefer to do.
  6. What to do with spent batteries is yet another problem. Lithium ion batteries are classified as hazardous waste, so it’s a very time consuming effort to recycle them. A lot of companies are just burying them in the the Nevada deserts instead. Again, the technology hasn’t caught up with the idea of EV’s yet. It will…we just aren’t there yet. And replacing batteries is rather costly. If you want to replace a Tesla battery pack today, you’re looking at $16,000 or so. They say that price will drop to around $5,000 to $6,000 by 2025. That’s still quite a shock to the system. The good news is that most of these batteries are guaranteed for eight years or 100,000 miles. So, unless you keep a car a good long while, you may be lucky enough to get away with not having to replace the battery. Unless you live in the far north or the desert southwest where the life of car batteries is typically halved.

The upside to going with EV’s is that yes, it is cheaper to fill the “tank” with electricity than it is with gasoline. But will the savings be enough to pay for the additional costs that you’ll have to bear in buying the car and replacing the batteries? Today, probably not. Up the road, when the technology catches up with the idea of EV’s, it’s probably going to be the way to go.

Still, Joe Biden is amped up to get gas prices artificially high so he can make EV’s appear to be a better deal than they really are to the American public. You could say it’s an idea that is maybe ten to fifteen years ahead of it’s time. And I have a feeling Joe Biden won’t be around in 2035 or so to see it come to fruition. Just a hunch!

Carry on world…you’re dismised!

Surge of Illegals Hurting Dems’ More Than GOP

You would think that a political party that wants open borders, instant citizenship and the right to vote without telling anyone who you are or if you are even eligible to vote would be happy that over 2 million illegals are now in this country since Joe Biden took office! That’s 2 million more voters that the Democrats feel will be voting for them because they are letting these folks into the country. Ah, but as is usually the case with liberalism, it seems that it’s going too far. And Democrats are starting to push back on the whole scene.

District of Columbia Mayor, Muriel Bowser has asked the federal government for help. See, ever since Texas Governor, Greg Abbott started sending bus loads of people from Texas where they illegally cross the border, to Washington, DC, the DC folks, which of course is a “sanctuary city”, have been saddled with having to pay for all of these illegals. And when Arizona Governor, Doug Ducey heard about what Abbott was doing, he rented a bunch of busses to do the same thing. Most illegals come in through either Texas or Arizona.

Now, New York City Mayor, Eric Adams is also starting to complain. See, New York City has a right-to-shelter law he has to follow. If anyone shows up in New York City, they have a “right” to get shelter. And you know the cost of shelter in the NYC, right? It’s starting to add up. Busloads of illegals are being shipped to New York from Florida, where Florida Governor, Ron DeSantis didn’t like the fact the federal government was sending those illegals to Florida to be housed until their immigration hearings. So, DeSantis started sending them by bus to the Big Apple.

Thought Bowser and Adams are complaining that the three governors are “tricking” the illegals into getting on the busses, it’s not those three that the two mayors should be mad at. It’s their own President. Joe Biden is the one that is allowing these folks into the country illegally. Yes, in essence, Joe Biden is the one breaking the law. But no one yet, has started screaming at him. If he just had allowed the “Stay In Mexico” policy of Donald Trump to continue, none of this would be happening. Better yet, if he did something like actually fixing the broken immigration system, rather than scream that there is no crisis at the southern border, or put someone so inept as K-baby Harris in charge of it all, none of this would be happening.

But it is.

And now, the big city Democrat mayors are finding it harder and harder to find the funding necessary to house and care for thousands of illegals that just show up in their city, not knowing where to go or what to do. They need food, water, shelter, new clothes, jobs, and it seems (as is usually the case), Democrats don’t have a plan on how to deal with them once they get here. I call it “eating your own”. We have reached the point where the Democrats aren’t really mad at Republicans as much any more as they are at their own members.

More popcorn please!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

But Do You Believe? Do You REALLY Believe?

I have to admit, I missed this one when it came out as I was traveling. MSNBC Anchor Katy Tur admitted to the world that she feels she could be “doing more harm than good” in the way she anchors her newscasts. There’s a simple reason for that. Americans have lost faith in TV anchors. Oh, not just the Katy Tur’s of the world. They’ve lost it with ALL newscasts.

Only 11% of Americans have a great deal or a lot of confidence in television news according to a Gallup poll taken back in June. Newspapers didn’t fare much better hitting an all time low of just 16%, the first time ever that medium was below 20%. 46% of Americans have little or no confidence in newspapers. Only 5% of Republicans and 12% of independents have confidence. Democrats fare much better as 35% say they have confidence in what they read.

For television it was even worse. The confidence level fell below 20% for the fourth consecutive year. A majority at 53% of us said we had very little to no confidence in TV news. 8% of Republicans, 8% of independents and 20% of Democrats have any confidence in what they see on TV.

The whole reason for the distrust is simple. Newspapers and TV News have been making up stories. We left the “spin” in the dust eons ago. Now these media are just plain out making things up. They editorialize in the middle of newscasts or on the news sections of a newspaper. Things that belong as editorials are absolute rant sessions.

And what is really disturbing to me about all of this is that our Founding Fathers looked to the press (at the time only newspapers) to be the guardians of truth for our new nation. That’s what Freedom of the Press was all about. It was the press that was supposed to shine a light of truth and honesty into the dens of iniquity that would occur from time to time in our government. No one would have believed back then that the press in that day (which wasn’t very honest or unbiased either….ever hear of “yellow journalism”?) would be untrustworthy.

The media, and I’m talking ALL media needs to get back the credibility that they’ve lost. What’s the first thing you do if you’re taking over a country? You take over the media. Once you control the TV, radio, and newspapers in a country, you control the reporting of what’s going on. And you can say whatever you want. That’s what’s happened in this day and age in America. It’s sad, and it’s sickening. And it’s a good thing that at least one journalist that is doing it, admits that she’s troubled by it. There should be scads more!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!