Survey Problems

As the US elections draw near, we look to information online to help formulate an assessment of the political climate. A Washington Post poll released today entitled “A New 50-state Poll Shows Exactly Why Clinton Holds Advantage Over Trump”, attempts to explain why Hillary Clinton is leading in what they portray as a national poll. This is only one of many polls that seem to give an honest unbiased sampling of all US voters, but as I will show, this is far from the truth.

Link to the Washington Post Survey is found here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-new-50-state-poll-shows-exactly-why-clinton-holds-the-advantage-over-trump/2016/09/05/13458832-7152-11e6-9705-23e51a2f424d_story.html

As you may have found in the above link, the survey was conducted through a company called Survey Monkey. A description from Wikipedia describes survey monkey as, providing “free, customizable [sic] surveys, as well as a suite of paid back-end programs that include data analysis, sample selection, bias elimination, and data representation tools.” In other words, it is a do-it-yourself survey making website. What could be wrong with that?

Digging deeper into the Washington Post story I found a link about how the surveys are conducted. As it turns out, the surveys conducted through Survey Monkey are taken only by those who subscribe to Survey Monkey. In other words, if you do not know about Survey Monkey, then most likely you do not know about the surveys generated by them, and are unable to cast your vote. I am sure many that have never heard of Survey Monkey (me), those that do not have access to the internet, and others such as the elderly (my mother and father) will never have an opportunity to have a vote on that site.

How the survey was conducted is found here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/06/how-the-washington-post-surveymonkey-50-state-poll-was-conducted/

Unfortunately, media outlets tout surveys performed as if they went door to door all over the nation, poll in hand, interviewing voters to give you the results they so proudly display. As we can see this is not the case. This latest survey from the Washington Post is just a survey of  those that subscribe to Survey Monkey. Who is to say that those that routinely take polls at Survey Monkey are individuals without multiple emails, computers/servers and Survey Monkey accounts. What prevents those from using Twitter from putting out a mass tweet to all their followers informing them of Survey Monkey and a presidential poll? In order for your vote to be counted, you have to go to Survey Monkey and subscribe giving them a monetary benefit. I will not use Survey Monkey for that reason alone. I have nothing against Survey Monkey, but how does promoting their service help me?

This was not an attempt to pick on the Washington Post either, as many other mainstream media outlets have surveys that are formulated from a select group of people. Keep in mind these surveys are not reflective of the entire US population. They only capture the votes of the population that knows of the survey service and those that can spread the word, via social media, to like minded individuals, in order to subscribe and vote on those surveys. Obviously, those that do not use or know about survey web sites or even those that do not have internet access, are still voters, and they will vote for their choice.

Advertisements

The Upside Down Flag

We have seen the US Flag flown upside down recently during protests. Many would assume this action is disrespectful to the flag. Without investigating each person flying the flag inverted, we may not know their intent. I have looked into the US Flag Code and reviewed some examples of those displaying the Stars and Stripes with the “union” side down.

The US Flag Code, Section 176, paragraph A, states: “The flag should never be displayed with the union side down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property”. As you can see, there could be occasions that warrant the display of the flag with “the union side down”. The reasons for displaying the flag with the union side down is very subjective to the individual and their justification for doing so.

Traditionally, a vessel displaying their nation’s flag upside down was interpreted as an SOS. This alerted other vessels that there was a potential to lose the ship and the lives aboard her. Therefore, other ships in the area would rush to her aid. This was viewed as an appropriate reason to invert the flag and display it.

First, I would like to address honest mistakes. Back in 2015, in Arizona, a marine reservist drove past a fast food restaurant with his girlfriend and noticed the Stars and Stripes flying upside down on the flagpole. He quickly turned around and immediately cut the flag down from the pole. He obviously felt that it was a sign of disrespect. When confronting the manager he found that it was an honest mistake by an employee and that it was not intentional. The manager felt the marine reservist over reacted. By the way, this is one of the reasons I no longer eat at fast food restaurants. If they can not get the flag right, imagine what they are doing to the food.

My initial reaction to the above situation was, “How could someone raising the flag not know it was upside down?” Well, after being on the internet since the 1990s, teaching college for 12 years, and eating at fast food restaurants, I have met numerous individuals that more than likely would not notice, and quite possibly not know the difference. This does not mean I am giving them a pass. Ignorance is not a good defense. However, assuming the manager was telling the truth, the intent was not to disrespect the flag or the country it represents.

Next, I want to address a very subjective occurrence when a protester carries a flag upside down on a pole during a demonstration. Obviously, burning the Stars and Stripes is a grave sign of disrespect to the flag and country, there is no question in my mind about that, but let us focus on the display of the flag with the union side down. Again, this is a very subjective action, and in no way demonstrates my position on any protest or the reason for the protest.

A couple months ago during a Black Lives Matter demonstration, an individual was walking around with a flag pole over his shoulder and displaying the flag with the union side down. My initial reaction was of anger, but I tried to think about this action rationally. After all, he was not burning the flag, he was displaying it. I thought about the US Flag Code and the phrase, “…as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property”.

One could argue that the protester or his property were not in extreme danger. Some will argue that the protester may perceive that innocents, of a particular race, are being targeted and gunned down in the streets by police for no reason. Again, this essay is not about Black Lives Matter or why they came into existence. Instead it is about displaying the flag, and how subjective it is to each individual as to their justification for doing so, other than a sign of disrespect.

Another example are the Native American protesters displaying the Stars and Stripes with the union side down. The mainstream media seems to push the narrative that this is solely about the pipeline and the risks it could pose environmentally. However, the Native Americans have another argument: the destruction of sacred and culturally significant sites.

I will attempt to provide a little background: The land that the pipeline is going through is considered sacred and culturally significant. The disputed site was surveyed, the information was presented to the judge, and was subsequently ignored. Only the Army Corps of Engineers recognized that this was an injustice and did not move forward with construction. Some would argue that it is no longer the Native American’s land. Others will argue that the way this land was taken from the Native Americans was unacceptable. Regardless, the land owner himself invited the Native Americans to his land in order to conduct the survey that was presented to the judge. The seizure of land, the desecration of sacred grounds, the potential destruction of their land surrounding the pipeline by oil leaks and contamination of their drinking water, are their reasons to display the Stars and Stripes upside down.

In this heated political environment, many others are justifying the flying of the US flag upside down. Some state their way of life is being threatened, therefore their lives and country are ultimately threatened. This includes former servicemen. Some feel that the information collected by the government on its citizens, the pointless or mindless wars that our servicemen and women are being asked to fight, or the treatment veterans receive when they seek care for injuries, warrants this action. Again, this topic is very subjective to the individuals that are choosing to fly the flag with the union side down.

In fact, with the strong message the inverted flags send, some have chosen to capitalize on this point. You can find upside down flags on t-shirts, coffee cups, bumper stickers and underwear. I respect their right to do so, however, just like crying wolf, too much exposure may diminish the urgency and meaning of displaying the flag with the union side down, therefore, the attention given, could be lessened. That said, if my vessel is flying the Stars and Stripes upside down, I am not issuing a political statement, and instead, requesting immediate assistance.

As we view these inverted US Flags, many of us can formulate what it means to us and what reasons we consider valid. We can project what we feel are valid reasons to others and we also have the freedom to sit back and debate these points. Personally, I will always view a US Flag upside down as a sign of distress, initially, until I investigate and find out otherwise. Ultimately, if the flag is flown as a sign of distress, and not meant as an insult to those that still love Old Glory and our country, we can at least pause and look into the reasons for these expressions.

References (don’t click, instead copy and paste into the browser, it’s acting derpy):

http://www.usflag.org/uscode36.html

What Did This Marine Do After Driving Past An Upside Down American Flag?

http://www.scoopnest.com/user/kaitlynross1/752656984609058816

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/6/did_the_dakota_access_pipeline_company

Veteran Explains Upside Down Flag Controversy

Survey Problems

As the US elections draw near, we look to information online to help formulate an assessment of the political climate. A Washington Post poll released today entitled “A New 50-state Poll Shows Exactly Why Clinton Holds Advantage Over Trump”, attempts to explain why Hillary Clinton is leading in what they portray as a national poll. This is only one of many polls that seem to give an honest unbiased sampling of all US voters, but as I will show, this is far from the truth.

Link to the Washington Post Survey is found here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-new-50-state-poll-shows-exactly-why-clinton-holds-the-advantage-over-trump/2016/09/05/13458832-7152-11e6-9705-23e51a2f424d_story.html

As you may have found in the above link, the survey was conducted through a company called Survey Monkey. A description from Wikipedia describes survey monkey as, providing “free, customizable [sic] surveys, as well as a suite of paid back-end programs that include data analysis, sample selection, bias elimination, and data representation tools.” In other words, it is a do-it-yourself survey making website. What could be wrong with that?

Digging deeper into the Washington Post story I found a link about how the surveys are conducted. As it turns out, the surveys conducted through Survey Monkey are taken only by those who subscribe to Survey Monkey. In other words, if you do not know about Survey Monkey, then most likely you do not know about the surveys generated by them, and are unable to cast your vote. I am sure many that have never heard of Survey Monkey (me), those that do not have access to the internet, and others such as the elderly (my mother and father) will never have an opportunity to have a vote on that site.

How the survey was conducted is found here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/06/how-the-washington-post-surveymonkey-50-state-poll-was-conducted/

Unfortunately, media outlets tout surveys performed as if they went door to door all over the nation, poll in hand, interviewing voters to give you the results they so proudly display. As we can see this is not the case. This latest survey from the Washington Post is just a survey of  those that subscribe to Survey Monkey. Who is to say that those that routinely take polls at Survey Monkey are individuals without multiple emails, computers/servers and Survey Monkey accounts. What prevents those from using Twitter from putting out a mass tweet to all their followers informing them of Survey Monkey and a presidential poll? In order for your vote to be counted, you have to go to Survey Monkey and subscribe giving them a monetary benefit. I will not use Survey Monkey for that reason alone. I have nothing against Survey Monkey, but how does promoting their service help me?

This was not an attempt to pick on the Washington Post either, as many other mainstream media outlets have surveys that are picked from a select group of people. Keep in mind these surveys are not reflective of the US population, but only the population that knows of the service, and those that can spread the word to like minded people to subscribe and vote on those surveys. Obviously, those that do not use or know about survey web sites or even those that do not have internet access, are still voters, and they will vote for their choice.

Does the Democratic Party have the Courage and Integrity to ask Hillary Clinton to Withdraw from the Presidential race?

To All Hillary Democratic Party leaders,media pundits, Superdelegates, and loyal Hillary supporters that do not understand why Bernie or Bust supporters do not want to support Hillary.

HRC is actually under indictment and has been for some time. Almost on a daily or weekly basis there is some new Clinton scandal. Hillary herself is constantly changing one of her stories or statements and exposes herself as a liar or at best a person of bad judgement. Who wants a President that is a liar and constantly under scandal with bad judgement? What makes you think that anyone of sense would want to vote for such a candidate just because she is the lesser of two evils or just because she is a woman? The Democratic party has chance to welcome independents and Bernie supporters into the party by allowing them to participate in a democratic process. The Democratic party damaged their integrity in Nevada and with all the closed primaries, Superdelegates, and potential voter fraud. The Democratic Party  is rapidly turning into The Demagogue Party.

Bernie supporters are not just made up of social justice warriors. They are made of  independent voters and young people. They also include people of all ages and backgrounds from the increasingly disenfranchised working and middle class. It is fashionable to admire liars, cheaters, and frauds as long as they make money doing it. That there are still young people or any people out there that can still believe in democracy, honesty, and integrity is just short of a miracle.  It is not the Bernie supporters out there that are destroying the party. They are trying  to help the party by showing you what you are becoming in the worlds eyes and what is happening out there beyond your little bubble. The Democratic Party is a supposed to be a party of the people and for the people, not a good old boys and gals club that will snuggle up to the wealthy so closely that their noses become brown. Our Democratic Party leaders have gotten so insular that they have are making clueless and out of touch decisions.  Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate for the Presidency is a one of those clueless and out of touch mistakes. But mistakes can be corrected if you dare to admit them and fix them.

Was Harriet Tubman the Best Choice to be Displayed on U.S. Currency?

I personally think that people displayed on a country’s currency should be chosen from amongst that country’s top political leaders (i.e. Presidents,cabinet members, Leaders in the House & Senate, Supreme Court Justices). Also, many of our federal senators or representatives have shown unique and significant individual accomplishments. The criteria for the person to be chosen to be displayed on the $20 bill was to be from among prominent African-American women. I think we had more appropriate choices in this category. So while I applaud Harriet Tubman’s accomplishments she was not a President,a cabinet minister, a U.S.Senator, a U.S. Representative, nor  a Supreme Court Justice. There are numerous Black women that have served in some those capacities(i.e. 1) Shirley Chisholm, first African-American U.S. Representative and the first woman to run for a major party presidential candidacy 2)Carol Elizabeth Moseley Braun, first female African-American U.S. Senator and also a presidential nominee candidate in 2004, 3).Patricia Roberts Harris first African-American woman to serve in a U.S. Cabinet position. I would have preferred to have seen one of them on our money.

Feminism or Sexism

Women for over the past 168 years have fought for equality at the political, social and economic level. It is evident that in many ways women have achieved these goals. However, in this election cycle it appears that there is a renewed call to arms on these topics. For many that have fought for equality, this is confusing, insulting and unsubstantiated.

An interesting article at http://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/WIC/Historical-Essays/No-Lady/Womens-Rights/ shows the women’s rights movement started in 1848 by Elizabeth Stanton, a mother of four, and Lucretia Mott, a Quaker abolitionist. Stanton created the, “Declaration of Sentiments, Grievances, and Resolutions” that stated, among other things, that “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal.” This early movement focused on institutional and social barriers such as family responsibilities, lack of educational and economic opportunities, and a desire to be included in the political process.

Seventy years later in 1918, the United States House of Representatives passed a voting rights amendment but it was not approved by the senate until 1919. Finally, on August 26, 1920 the 19th Amendment was ratified and became law when Tennessee became the 36th state to support it thus giving women the right to vote. Even though the 14th Amendment addressed citizenship rights and equal protections, it did not specifically give the women a right to vote as the 19th Amendment provides. Of special note, the 15th Amendment created 50 years before the passage of the 19th Amendment prohibited the discrimination of the ability to vote based on race, but did not give a vote to women.

Interestingly, before the passage of the 19th Amendment, a number of states gave women voting rights. Some women could even vote in territories before they became states. Mainly southern states prohibited women from voting. Thirty two states and territories allowed women to vote before the passage of the 19th Amendment. A map provided here shows the breakdown of states that allowed women to vote: http://constitutioncenter.org/timeline/html/cw08_12159.html

Jeannette Rankin was the first women elected to congress in 1916. This is the 100th anniversary of that election although there does not seem to be much fanfare. She was elected to congress before the enactment of the 19th Amendment. Although she had a controversial voting record during her career, this is an outstanding achievement in a state that granted women the right to vote only 2 years prior to her appointment as a congresswomen.

We could go on to describe the other achievements by women elected to congress such as: Patsy Mink in 1964 who became the first woman of color elected to congress, Shirley Chisholm in 1968 became the first African American women elected to congress, and Yvonne Burke, Cardiss Collins, and Barbara Jordan (all African American women) elected to the 93rd Congress (1973-1975) along with 14 male African Americans. However, that is not the focus of this commentary. I am merely providing an historical summary of some of the first achievements of women in politics.

I think it is obvious that the social lives of women in the United States have improved since Elizabeth Stanton’s and Lucretia Mott’s women’s rights movement of 1848. In the 19th century US and before, women’s lives were shaped by their economic class, nationality or race. Not only were women excluded from most jobs, they were prohibited from obtaining an education in order to pursue those jobs. Women could not own land and when they married, their possessions became property of her husband. Today, few would ever think of such a time as we routinely make our purchases. A short but concise accounting of women’s lives in the 19th century US and before is found here: http://womeninushistory.tripod.com/

In today’s society, women in the US not only marry a man of their choice, but are free to marry another women instead.  Entire product lines and marketing strategies are devoted to women. Healthcare for women is very specific to their sex as it pertains to Gynecology for women’s health and Obstetrics for maternity needs. Many employers offer paid maternity leave as a fringe benefit. Also, a women may take up to 12 weeks off from work per the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 after each pregnancy.

Not only are women allowed to pursue any degree that they desire in US colleges, they also account for 57% of all those enrolled in college. Women have led in college enrollment since 1979. This outstanding accomplishment shows women’s understanding of how higher education improves their chance of employment and therefore may improve their quality of life. No longer is a women’s lifestyle dependent on how much their companion may earn, but instead on what they may be able to earn themselves. More on college enrollment can be found here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/the-gender-factor-in-college-admissions/2014/03/26/4996e988-b4e6-11e3-8020-b2d790b3c9e1_story.html

Economically, women have prospered in the United States. Since the enactment of the Equal Pay Act of 1963, it is a violation of federal law for an employer to discriminate against an employee on the basis of sex. Employers in 1963 had to comply with this act immediately. Employers had make their pay equal even if that meant paying existing female employees more than their current salary to be brought up to those of men. More can be found on this federal law here: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/epa.cfm

In this election year, a common political platform being embraced is the gender pay gap. A common quoted figure is that women earn 79% of men’s hourly wage. Depending on your source, you may be able to find the pay gap is actually closer to 92% of the men’s hourly wage. Other sources will show that among millennials, women are making more than men. One approach on this topic is found here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-the-real-gender-pay-gap/2016/04/24/314a90ee-08a1-11e6-bdcb-0133da18418d_story.html

I am not a statistician nor do I have access to the data I would need to accurately compile statistics. I would also need a large task force to do individual interviews across the nation. However, I have worked in executive management in large hospitals and developed policies and procedures not only at corporate level, but also for smaller doctor’s groups. I have hired and fired. I have attended seminars and workshops since the 1980s and have been proactive in addressing wage inequalities.

As I have stated in previous posts, I worked in the healthcare industry for 25 years and in college level education for 13 years. I have never seen a policy in any setting that would allow for wage discrimination for any reason, including gender. As a business professional that has networked with other business professionals, the topic of wage discrimination confuses me as I have yet to see institutional wage discrimination let alone a single company attempt such folly.

Hourly employees in hospitals, for example, are paid according to a pay scale. The pay scale gives a pay range for a particular job based on qualifiers such as education, certification and experience.

Example Pay Scale:

Job A pays $7.25 to $10.00 per hour (entry level).

Job B pays $10:01 to $15.00 per hour (supervisor).

Job C pays $15.01 to $20.00 per hour (manager).

…and so on.

Suppose you have the qualifications for Job B and you apply for that position. A human resource professional will check your stated education, certifications, and references showing your experience and interview is scheduled. The interview not only includes a face to face discussion, but many times an employment test is given to identify typing or writing proficiency. Additional tests may be required to demonstrate your math, logic, reasoning, ethics, problem solving or leadership skills. If it is shown that you have at least the bare minimum requirements for the job, you may be called back for a private or group interview that outlines job responsibilities, benefits, expectations, and sometimes pay scale, etc.

Obviously, if you are applying for Job B, the human resource professional and your manager will want to hire you at something below the $15.00 per hour maximum shown above. After all, if the most you can earn in Job B is $15.00 per hour, a new employee is hired at an hourly rate lower than that so the employer can provide an annual pay increase or raise. Annual pay increases based on productivity or goals reached is a big incentive for employees to do well or improve.

Once you are called back for your final interview, an offer is made and you may either accept, reject, or negotiate the hourly rate. If we are using the pay range in Job B shown above, the human resource professional or your hiring manager, based on your qualifications, may offer you the job at $10.50 per hour. Again, you may accept, reject or negotiate that rate. It is sometimes argued that men may be better negotiators when it comes to asking for more pay. If that is true, is that really wage discrimination? Studies have shown that when a women asks for more pay, they get more pay. More on that point is found here: http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/12/pf/gender-pay-gap/

The same is true for salaried employees. Each salaried position has a pay range. If you qualify, apply and are offered that position, again it is up to you to ask for more pay or demonstrate you are worth more. I have never met a manager that would hire a man for more money just because he is a man.  Why in the world would they do that? However, it does make sense that the manager would try to hire any employee as far from the top pay in the range provided to allow for pay growth in that position as a performance incentive.

Statistically women may earn less than men. I will err on the side of caution and go with the studies that may show this is true. However, to call this institutional wage discrimination is not fair to employers that, in good faith and in all fairness, have policies and procedures written and followed in accordance with federal, state and local laws to address income inequalities. If anyone can show me even one employer that has a different pay scale for women and men I would be very interested to see it. It is illegal. It can be reported to, and prosecuted by, the federal government.

It is insulting to allow a presidential candidate to run on a platform of wage discrimination reform and convince voters there is a problem that only he/she can address. Each one of us can be watchful and report those employers that we suspect are paying men more than women for that same job. It does not cost you a dime to report them and the employer can take no action against you for doing so. I for one will be the first at the picket line in front of any employer’s business that is shown to have a different pay scale for women and men.

It is an insult to ignore the efforts of both men and women of the past 168 years that have fought for and achieved equality for women. It is also malicious and unfair. Specifically, it has been 53 years since legislation has been passed to ensure the fairness of wages. The war has already been fought and won. Perhaps we need to look at other factors causing a wage imbalance other than a fictitious institutional policy of wage discrimination.

What has happened to the Democratic Party?

Since my last  post, I have been watching the Democratic primaries.  The modern Democratic Party is in turmoil.  The youth are demanding a place in the party and introducing some different ideas for the new age. Old policies and rules may need an update.  We have two choices as a party at this time. We can allow them in with open arms and help them with their new ideas  or we can turn them away and let our party die out.

The old Southern Democrats of my youth are now Republicans and what passed for Republicans in the south of my youth are now Democrats of the Hillary Clinton type.( i.e.  They talk the talk of  liberals but they do not walk the walk.)  The liberals of my childhood in the 60’s and my college days  in the 70’s have all but disappeared.  But, here comes Bernie Sanders who’s policies are  setting the disenfranchised and the young on fire with hope and ideas. My mind flashes back to that camelot atmosphere that the Kennedy’s caused in this country and the world of my childhood.  The ideals and hope that the Kennedys gave this country in the 60’s had to be lived thru to believe. It was  truly a gift to be a child in those times. Anything was possible  in our minds if we worked hard and fought for it together.

Democrats  today and even in my youth were considered liberals and the majority of Southerners were conservatives in a Democratic party. The irony of this did not escape me in my 20’s.   A ” true” Southerner in my youth was in the  Democratic  party, end of argument. Southern Republicans of my time were  essentially democratic conservatives that were wealthy or big business men. My family is from the deep South( Mississippi and South Carolina) and my upbringing was one with with deep conservative roots.  Like many Southern families in the late 1950’s and into the 60’s my parents moved to Houston,Texas for employment opportunities and to get off the farm. We went “home” to Mississippi every major holiday.Being raised in a large city in Texas in the 60’s was a step away from my roots, but my parents made sure that I kept my deep southern traditions, values, and accent.  I was raised to be the quintesential southern lady.

During my time at University of Texas, I like many others in the 70’s were awakened and became liberal and idealistic. We had lost the camelot of our youth and wanted that world back. We realised we would have to re-create it ourselves. All of our stands and how we chose to express our views were not always right, but the message was a sincere and honest rebellion against things that were wrong in society. My college days were those of political struggle and change as we faced what was happening in Vietnam and the wrongs of our society. Bernie Sanders followers are the doing the same in their time. They are trying to right the wrongs as we did in the 70’s and are having to fight against the establishment. However, they are fighting  a much more important battle. They are litterally fighting for theirs and our livelihood and futures. It is not just a battle of youth against the establishment, but a politcal and economic revolution.  A huge contingent of people spanning all ages (true liberals, the economic disenfranchised,  and the castoffs) are moving together towards one goal. They do not want to ” take their country back” and disenfranchise others ,but to make it better for all. We were only scratching the surface of societal wrongs in the 70’s. The current political revolution of Sanders campaign is more akin to the labour disputes of the early 20th century without the violence.

It is perhaps time that the entitlement establishment moves over a bit to share seats instead of hogging the entire seat and in some  cases the entire bus for themselves. So wake up establishment democrats and look around you for new and fresh ideas to carry us into the future. Stop looking  at anyone that is not part  of your little group and seeing a  half empty glass of ideas and proposals  and and notice that their glass is half full. And guess what .. you can even fill it up and refill it if  you work  together.

It is hardly surprising that people are upset at the democratic  party in general. It is a sad day when our party chooses to try and not just propose but anoint a candidate (Hillary Clinton) that showed a lack of good judgment at best when she was our Secretary of State.   She even has the audacity to suggest that her husband (who was impeached as president) should be in charge of the economy if she were to be our President.  Then the party and their annointed one, have the additional audacity to say to women, vote for her to make history as the first woman president jsut because she is a woman. As women we worked hard for equality and I want to proud of the first woman President, not ashamed. We have had quite enough male Presidents without good judgement without adding  the first woman President to that list of poor choices.

The Democratic Party has lots its way in America’s current trend towards being the entitlement society that faces no consequences. You might as well just step up and declare yourselves aristocracy. And you can say to your totally clueless friends  about the starving masses without bread…  “Let them eat cake”.