Initial Post

This is the first blog I have ever done or even been a part of. I have been doing a sort of a blog for many years, using articles from the Wall Street Journal as a basis for my commentaries. I'm going to see if I can incorporate those articles into this blog in some way. I think it would be interesting to watch how my commentary has changed – or not – over the years.

I will invite all of you who have been the willing/unwilling recipients of my rather uneven thoughts of the past. I don't pretend that the future will be any different, or even any more interesting.

Wednesday, August 31, 2016
Today, Donald Trump put it to the Mexican president, telling him about Trump's agenda. It was an absolutely masterful show, and the press responded appropriately. Well, Fox News responded appropriately.

Donald Trump finally got his due, the polls have risen appropriately, and will probably rise a great deal more as this all sinks in.

Hillary is maintaining her aloof stance, as well she should, because everything else she has ever done that puts her into the public eye makes her sink in the polls.

That just meansthat the public doesn't like her, and she knows it.

The more people hear about her, the less they like her. She obviously has some very astute handlers who have coached her to stay out of the limelight as much as possible.

She is a truly awful candidate. I just wish people would realize that a vote for her is a vote for a crooked,deceitful person.


Tuesday, August 30, 2016
Primary Election Day
This was the day that many Republican candidates were supposed to have been supplanted by their in-party challengers. As far as I can tell that didn't happen.

They changed my polling place once again, back to the old polling place. Seems kind of silly, but there's some hidden, probably confusing and nonsensical, reason for this change. No one at the polling place seemed to know. The turnout was incredibly light. At the time I was there, there was one other voter. And because of my needs for various things, my voting took quite a while.
Sunday, August 28, 2016
This has been an eventful week, especially on the Hillary front. But first let me relate the events of Friday, and with that as a background we'll go back and discuss the political situation.
Friday was an all day Continuing Education event, which granted hours required to maintain my active architectural registration (I got 1/2 the yearly requirement that day).

The kickoff to this event was the President of the Tampa AIA chapter performing introductions and other ancillary tasks. To my dismay, he announced that the first two hours would be a presentation concerning parts of the Clinton Global Initiative.
My dismay sprang from experience. In addition to the fact that this program of building innovation was being promulgated as a part of the Clinton Mafia agenda, this was a new "Building Standard" to add to the "LEED" Standard that was introduced in the early 2000's.

The joke was (My joke, anyway): how do you spell bullshit? L-E-E-D.

LEED is bullshit on a lot of different levels, probably the worst of which is a certification which has no legal authority. It is a credential which can be used to impress people who look at architecture in the same way as your grandmother– my how cute.
LEED is a subject for a whole article on its own.
The new program is called WELL Building, and the connection with the Clinton name immediately puts it in the same bullshit category as LEED.
And it might be. At least that's what it might become. It's a highflown bureaucratic set of "recommendations" which is the sort of thing that huge bureaucracies in Europe have thrived upon.

It's also the sort of thing that the Clintons and other statists have been pushing for the United States for decades.
At its best, this new standard may bring order and manageability to a hectic industry.

The LEED effort has led to some actual gains in the industry, while the detriment that it has brought has been very pervasive but subtle. If you're interested, here are the links to both:

Beware that those websites are marketing efforts for the two streams of bullshit.
Architects are mostly idealistic people, and hardly ever realize when their profession is being threatened at the core. That's what this is. Architects have lost a lot of their control of the building process, especially here in Florida, where there is no impediment in place to keep structural engineers from practicing architecture.The practice of architecture is not just about making buildings that stand up; there is the whole design sector of weatherability, conformance to handicap laws, and other things that structural engineers, per se, are not necessarily competent to design.

There are efforts to give people credentials across the board from medical professions through legal ones. Architecture is no exception.

The current crop of people who want to become professionals is putting pressure on the traditional professionals to include newcomers. The tradition that someone who is competent to practice the profession is the only person who may be licensed to practice it is coming under fire. There is a lot of pressure for professions to develop sub professions, which is what the advent of these two certifications is all about.I know of two new sublicenses which have been created within the building consulting firm classification, both of which can be practiced by registered architects interior design and roofing.
One of the many dangers here is that there will be confusion in the marketplace and the consumer will be affected by not knowing which "professional" to consult.

Fortunately, so far architectural registration trumps registration as LEED or other building designer, and governing authorities are not recognizing a role from these sub professions in the design process.

All that being said, the first two hours, the portion of the presentation which addressed  WELL were actually very interesting, and illustrated a series of trends that will influence the building industry for decades if not centuries.
The biggest problem with this new standard is the one that accompanies any new government program, and that is overreach.

Overreach is the typical government response when given the opportunity. The Clinton Initiative adds another whole realm of sleaziness that might not be  present otherwise. Sleazy confused overreach is the probable result of all this, but, as for me, I will have been rendered into ashes long before it has reached its ultimate conclusion.
And now on to Hillary. If my previous narrative were not enough, the Clinton Global Initiative has inserted itself into the narrative of this election. The Clinton Global Initiative was a little known ploy of the Clinton Crime Family until very recently. Hillary's transgressions were being summed up in her email problems before the last couple of weeks.

The email problems are pretty significant and there are thousands of them that have been recently located. Conveniently, many of the newly discovered missing emails will not be available till – drumroll – after the election.

Who would have ever thought that?

But the depth of sleaziness is slowly being revealed without the emails. Clinton Global Initiative is being shown in its true light. Democrats are covering for CGI by saying how many good things are being rolled out under the auspices of Bill and Hillary – and Chelsea who is head of it – therefore it is all good.

CGI may be 80% blameless, but that other 20% contains programs that are highly questionable as is the amount used for expenses. (The percentages are made up by me and are probably not even close to actuality.)​
Hillary's dirty. She used the office of Secretary of State as an auction house, selling her services in office to the highest bidder.

She was also selling future favors.
One occurrence of one of these offenses could send her to jail. But there is evidence of thousands of occurrences.
And this stuff doesn't come cheap. The Clinton Global initiative estimates it's own value at $12 billion and proudly publishes that number on its website. 
This is the sum of the money which came from Bill and Hill giving speeches? That's their story and they're sticking to it.

Kimberly Strossel of the Wall Street Journal wrote a wonderful editorial on the subject yesterday: 

The other undernoted but important revelation is that the media has been looking in the wrong place. The focus is on Mrs. Clinton’s missing emails, and no doubt those 15,000 FBI-recovered texts contain nuggets. Then again, Mrs. Clinton was a busy woman, and most of the details of her daily State/foundation life would have been handled by trusted aides. This is why they, too, had private email. Top marks to Judicial Watch for pursuing Ms. Abedin’s file from the start. A new urgency needs to go into seeing similar emails of former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills.

Mostly, we learned this week that Mrs. Clinton’s foundation issue goes far beyond the “appearance” of a conflict of interest. This is straight-up pay to play. When Mr. Band sends an email demanding a Hillary meeting with the crown prince of Bahrain and notes that he’s a “good friend of ours,” what Mr. Band means is that the crown prince had contributed millions to a Clinton Global Initiative scholarship program, and therefore has bought face time. It doesn’t get more clear-cut, folks.

That’s highlighted by the Associated Press’s extraordinary finding this week that of the 154 outside people Mrs. Clinton met with in the first years of her tenure, more than half were Clinton Foundation donors. Clinton apologists, like Vox’s Matthew Yglesias, are claiming that statistic is overblown, because the 154 doesn’t include thousands of meetings held with foreign diplomats and U.S. officials.

Nice try. As the nation’s top diplomat, Mrs. Clinton was obliged to meet with diplomats and officials—not with others. Only a blessed few outsiders scored meetings with the harried secretary of state and, surprise, most of the blessed were Clinton Foundation donors.

This is someone we need in the White House?

I cannot express strongly enough how important it is that Hillary Clinton never be elected.

Barack Obama is a terrible president. But, he told everyone that he was going to be a terrible president. He made no secret of the fact that he despises the United States, its white majority, and all that it represents. He had secrets about his methodology and about his ruthlessness, but his goal was never in question.

And Hillary has the same goals. She has told us as much.

Where the two of them differ is in the degree of their honesty. Obama is very willful and will not allow tiny little impediments like the Constitution to get in the way of his megalomania; we know to watch out for the things he does.


I mark his honesty quotient (HQ – I just made that up) at ~50%.

Hillary (HQ~10%), is even more dangerous because she has no scruples.


And on top of that she's a plain crook, and will damage the United States in ways that, resourceful as he is, Obama never thought of.

And she has help from Bill – we know what a prince he is.