My thoughts & choices: 2018 #Arizona midterm election ballot

I got my early-voting general election ballot last week & let me tell you, it looks overwhelming: way too many propositions and choices, especially in the "judges of the superior court" section. 
As far as how I voted; for the most important choice of all: of course I voted for Kyrsten Sinema.
Sinema used to represent my district (in the house of reps) & I am well aware she's a centrist. Nevertheless, I know she'll be more independent of Democratic interest than McSally & GOP interests. In other words, McSally would be nothing more than a Trump/McConnell flunkie, Sinema would be more of an independent lawmaker.

Here are a few of the other choices I made that I deem important:

I voted "yes" on prop 419 which would require individuals and organizations to disclose any campaign donations valued at more than $1000 intended to influence a Phoenix election.

I voted "yes" on prop 127. Prop 127 would amend Arizona's state constitution to require utility companies to get 50 percent of the power it sells from renewable sources like solar, wind, and biomass by 2030. 
I'm surprised "the valley of the sun" is not actively researching and preparing for using solar energy in the future without a mandate from the voters. Heck,"APS" & "SRP" can afford to do some research on their own (APS earned $488 million in profits last year). Nevertheless, according to an article on Tucson.com, Governor Ducey signed legislation earlier this year with the specific intent of allowing utilities to ignore the mandate proposed in prop 127 by paying a minimal fee. Speaking of Ducey, of course I voted against him and for David Garcia.

I voted "no" on prop 126 which would preserve the states' & local governments' authority to impose a tax on services in the future, because you shouldn't be able to take away a potential revenue source for the state.

I voted "no" on prop 305 because if approved, it "would poke holes in the funding bucket of public education". Prop 305 wants to fund ESA expansion by taking away money from the public and charter school systems. 

I voted "no" on prop 306 because if approved: 
http://ktar.com/story/2254626/proposition-306-would-alter-arizonas-clean-elections-funding-system/

"It will take away the rule-making authority of Clean Elections and put it in a gubernatorially appointed partisan body that will eventually neuter Clean Elections, and we will lose our publicly financed system”

As far as the other important choice (for me): Mayor of Phoenix, I had to do research on four candidates. 
Of course I wouldn't choose the Libertarian or the Republican candidate so it came down to the Democrat Daniel Valenzuela & the supposedly Independent Kate Gallego:  

Kate Gallego is a Harvard and Wharton School graduate. According to a recent AZCentral (opinion) article she pretty much won a recent Mayoral debate. But she does support a water rate increase of about $2.35 per month in 2019 and an additional $2.29 per month in 2020 for the average consumer (less for people who don't use a lot of water). 

Like most people, I feel like I pay a lot for water as it is, but the "AZCentral" article does explain the increase would support "$1.5 billion in new systems for north Phoenix, repairs and replacement of aging water pipelines in south and central Phoenix and other updates to the city's massive water treatment and delivery systems".

Apart from that, I've found no negative news on Gallego (only did "research" on google for a few minutes though), Only other relevant info is, she has been endorsed by EMILY's list.

I did find some negative news on Valenzuela. First news story has to do with salacious unverified claims from an anonymous woman, however:

https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/media-allegation-against-phoenix-daniel-valenzuela-mayoral-10921744  "New Times was unable to confirm the veracity of the woman's claims and is not publishing the allegations, nor the video."

The other story has to do with reports Valenzuela was $12,208 in debt and his city salary was being garnished to pay back the money:

https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/phoenix-mayor-candidate-daniel-valenzuela-debt-garnished-10739330

"Court records include a 2006 agreement to obtain the open-ended credit plan; the document bears Valenzuela's signature, but does not mention his spouse."

Having large debts is not a big deal to me, but Valenzuela blaming his exwife for it does seem lame. However, I don't like "salacious claims" from a woman, then again, the claims are unverified.

I admit it was a tough choice between Gallego and Valenzuela. Valenzuela seems more than capable of doing the job, & he is endorsed by former mayors Phil Gordon, Paul Johnson and Skip Rimsza as well as by the "Arizona police association" and "the professional fire fighters of Arizona". 

Still, I chose Kate Gallego; it seems to me she's smart and willing to make hard choices for the benefit of the city of Phoenix. 

As far as the rest of the candidates & propositions there's too many to list, but I think you get the idea of how I voted. I did vote against the two Justices of the Supreme Court (Bolick, Pelander), because supposedly, if David Garcia were to win, he would appoint their replacements. 
Unfortunately, Ducey leads Garcia by a wide margin in recent polls. Speaking of it, every report I see from the MSM insists Arizona will remain red which I know is depressing. Nevertheless, I hope those reports don't stop you from voting early or in person: there's too much at stake and there's no excuse for you to stay on the sidelines.

Will we have a democratic blue wave or a Trump red wave in November?

I was reading an article in "Time" magazine titled "The real fake news crisis" by Katy Steinmetz (it was published a few weeks ago), when I came across this short paragraph:
 "If you've seen something before, your brain subconsciously uses that as an indication that it's true".
"This is a tendency that propagandists have been aware of forever. The difference is that it has never been easier to get eyeballs on the message, nor to get enemies of the message to help spread it." 

I know it's been said countless times before, but by retweeting everything Trump posts (even if we're only correcting lies) we are just helping him spread his message. I know people have to respond to the many lies and that's understandable. However, we have to do it in an effective way instead of just helping the Donald with his twitter metrics.

Looking at my Twitter feed, I admit, some days I get tired of the constant scandals & investigations surrounding Trump. But if I take a look at this blog during 2017, I can see I was consumed with much of it. Constantly reading and posting my thoughts about the Trump administration's many scandals. This year, not so much. Therefore, I fear many people are just like me & they will just tune everything out & won't even vote. Which is dangerous, because the news keep uncovering important stories like the allegations of tax fraud & evasion by the Trump family (recently reported by the NYTimes):
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html

By now, we all know that when there are damaging stories like the Trump-tax-schemes reported by the times, Trump prefers to dominate the news in other ways. & he knows his ridiculous tweets & campaign rally speeches will always be top news. Trump also knows many of his MAGA followers are in constant attack mode, attacking liberals, "SWJ's", immigrants, black athletes who protest during the anthem, etc. so he gives them what they want. 
The left, on the other hand, appears divided. Establishment and grassroots candidates still fighting it out long after the primaries have ended. Fighting for ideological purity or who is a real progressive. Some are even referring to it as the fight between the center-left establishment, the left and the "dumb dumb left". But come November; will the left, the center-left establishment and the democratic base actually unite and go out to vote? I hope so, but it doesn't appear likely.

The accusations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh are the unknown factor of the midterm elections. The narrative of the MSM in order to help the senate confirm Kavanaugh is that it will cause a red wave if he's not. But in reality, nobody knows. & the lessons of 2016 can't be forgotten. Many MSM political analysts assured us Hillary would win and she lost (despite getting more votes, of course). 

Thus, when I hear pundits talking about a democratic blue wave, I'm skeptical. It all depends on people actually going out and voting. & the democratic base is notorious for not voting in the midterms. A couple of weeks ago I watched part of a concert on MSNBC where the rapper "Cardi B" encouraged young people to go out and vote. Cardi B admitted she didn't vote in 2016 because she didn't think Trump would win. The question is: how many young people in the democratic base (who are busy with school & work) won't bother to vote because all they hear is talk of a massive Democratic blue wave? At the same time, you can never underestimate the ability of the political right and its older base to vote strategically: many on the right were willing to vote for Trump despite his moral failings & vulgarities because they wanted a right-wing Supreme Court Justice (or two, or three).

We are almost exactly one month away from the midterms. I am well aware because I am constantly watching the attack ads against AZ democratic senate candidate Kyrsten Sinema everytime I turn on the TV. And if anyone tells you they know what will happen a month from now, ignore them, go out and vote, & encourage everyone you know to do the same. 

John McCain passing & last tuesday's primaries

It's been a long summer here in Phoenix, hot humid weather, monsoon storms, power outages, trees falling down. Thankfully, all my trees managed to withstand the strong winds (so far). & thank God, because I really don't need any more expenses since all summer I've been living beyond my means; family celebrations, milestones, trips, etc. Hey, at least I had fun.  

I felt like writing this post because this past saturday, my senator, John McCain passed away. For a while there, the cable news channels (MSNBC, CNN) went on & on about a moment during the '08 campaign when a blonde woman asked McCain a question with the premise she didn't trust Obama because he was an "Arab". In response, McCain rightfully corrected the woman. However, McCain went on to lose the presidential election. & like many people, I was thinking; had it been candidate Trump answering the question, the Donald would have answered "Yes, I also suspect Obama is a secret Muslim foreigner, which is why I have a team of investigators looking into it" & a 2008 candidate Trump might have actually beat Obama.

By now it's old news; Trump rewrote the rules of campaigning & ran his presidential campaign using "alternative facts". Taking that into account, very soon the midterms will be here. And in many cases, it seems to me, politicians have learned all the wrong lessons from 2016. They probably believe relentless attacks (whether true or false) and complete obliteration of their rival's character is the type of rhetoric that wins elections. And looking at what happened to the McCain style of politics versus Trump, are they really wrong?

This past week, I've been seeing all kinds of posts and videos about John McCain. Many in the republican base hate McCain
that much is true. & since Trump appears to only govern for his base, earlier this week we got the ridiculous spectacle of Trump raising, lowering, then raising the flag again at the White House. 
Being from the left, how I actually feel towards McCain is complicated. I know McCain was wrong on many of his votes: He voted for the Iraq war (which I was against), he voted for the Trump & W Bush tax cuts, he chose Sarah Palin as running mate, etc. Nevertheless, I've always admired McCain because of his military service, heroism, and sacrifice in Vietnam. I even voted for him: one of my first votes as an Independent was my vote for McCain versus the extreme right-winger JD Hayworth back when republicans had open primaries in Arizona. 

I'm no longer registered as independent because: who am I kidding? I registered as a democrat right after the Bernie Sanders primary fiasco. And I'm glad I did, because during this year's democratic primary, I had questions about the candidates positions regarding progressive issues like affordable health care; public option, social security expansion, etc. Thankfully, I received an email from boldprogressives.org urging me to vote for David Garcia which as a registered democrat I was able to do, and Garcia actually won. There were also encouraging news from Florida where progressive mayor Andrew Gillum won as well. 

The november election is almost here, & the next couple of months will be a difficult political fight to endure & to watch. Because, even if we don't want to accept it, we all know the John McCain style of politics no longer wins elections. Nevertheless, like McCain going into communities and making his case directly to each constituent, progressive candidates' direct engagement with the people & an explanation of what's at stake, will always be an effective & righteous way to win.

Seleccion de Mexico vence a Alemania en su debut. Mundial Rusia 2018

Durante todos los mundiales que me ha tocado ver (desde que era chamaco), siempre he visto a la seleccion de Mexico eventualmente decepcionando y perdiendo la mayoria de sus juegos. 
De la misma manera, siempre he visto a mis familiares Mexicanos y Mexico-Americanos que son aficionados al futbol (y a la seleccion en particular), frustrados (as) pero resignado (as) a que "Mexico siempre pierde". 

Y despues de cada derrota y eliminacion (entre los mismos familiares y amigos), siempre oigo las mismas razones sobre el porque "siempre pierde la seleccion Mexicana". Son una variacion de lo siguiente: 
1) Porque las posiciones en la seleccion son asignadas por "palanca" (o por quien conoces) no por mérito o habilidad de los jugadores que la federacion pudiera encontrar entre la poblacion Mexicana.
2) Porque todos los jugadores de la seleccion quieren ser las estrellas del mundial y meter el gol.
3) Similar al punto anterior, porque no juegan como equipo y no pasan la pelota a sus compañeros en momentos cruciales.
4) Porque en la rara situacion que van ganando, se confian y los equipos contrarios se aprovechan y les meten varios goles.
5) Porque siempre hay ese urge entre la seleccion Mexicana a sentirse menos antes las selecciones de otros paises con mas historial de triunfo.

Este pasado domingo, antes de empezar a ver el juego de la seleccion Mexicana contra el campeon Alemania, yo ya estaba resignado a que Mexico hiba a perder. Por todas las razones mencionadas arriba y por la larga "tradicion" de fracaso. Aun asi, un dia antes habia visto a la seleccion de Islandia aguantar contra el poderoso equipo Argentino y producir un empate. Y como consequencia, pense: "Si al menos Mexico juega como el equipo de Islandia, pudiera similarmente al menos empatar". Pero de cualquier manera, ni siquiera yo estaba muy convencido de mi propio argumento. 

Sin embargo, todos los puntos de arriba fueron desmentidos por esta seleccion Mexicana del año 2018: nada de "palanca" para ser parte del equipo, solamente esta seleccion pudo haber vencido al gran equipo campeon Alemán (por primera vez en la historia), la seleccion protegio su ventaja pero continuo atacando, sin buscar ser las "estrellas" jugaron como equipo: durante el juego, el "Chicharito" Hernandez hizo el pase en el momento crucial a Lozano para que anotara el gol. Y nada de sentirse inferiores ante Alemania, Lozano lo aclaro en una entrevista despues del juego, cuando dijo: "nos partimos la madre" para ganar. Y Lozano tiene razon: esa es la unica manera de vencer a equipos de la categoria de los Alemánes.

Entre tantas noticias malas y tristes esta semana, como Trump separando a niños imigrantes indocumentados de sus padres en la frontera con Mexico, al menos con este juego Mexico/Alemania tuvimos la buena experiencia de David venciendo a Goliat. Solo nos queda esperar que en los siguientes juegos mundiales, la seleccion Mexicana siga desmintiendo a los escépticos (como yo).

Trump says he'll pardon himself

I recently watched a documentary on Netflix titled "Survivors guide to prison" about how to survive in prison. It was an eye-opening look at the injustices happening all over the country.

Today, I remembered the wrongly accused in the documentary upon seeing Trump's morning tweets. Because it seems to me Trump is using the same defense many people in jail wished they could use: prosecutors are biased & corrupt & the whole law enforcement system is broken. 

In addition to the "corrupt law enforcement" defense, Trump has (among the many overwhelming advantages over those wrongly accused), the powers of the presidency of the United States at his disposal. & even if Mueller does find the Donald culpable, the president now says he will just pardon himself: 

Interesting defense which would sound reasonable to unjustly accused people in jail, but one which most people with any common sense would soundly reject. Especially when Trump starts making it a partisan issue (13 angry democrats?) despite the fact the special counsel is headed by a republican (Mueller) who was appointed by another republican (Rosenstein). 

It is very frustrating for those of us who want a fair outcome to the investigation. Because the special counsel should have been headed by a prominent democrat for it to be fair. But it is what it is. Notwithstanding the fact he was initially appointed by republican, Mueller appears competent and impartial. Just don't start complaining & essentially lying about the Mueller investigation when you (Trump) are the most powerful man in the world & someone from your own political party is leading the probe.

A friend of mine recently told me: "Trump thought once he'd been elected president, he'd be able to do whatever he wanted, like a king" which is basically the same thing a recent NYTimes opinion article titled"Trump thinks he is a king" asserts:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/03/opinion/mueller-trump-executive-power.html
"The president believes he is above the law. That’s the takeaway from the confidential 20-page memo sent by President Trump’s lawyers to the special counsel, Robert Mueller, published over the weekend by The Times. And it’s the same sentiment that Rudy Giuliani expressed on Sunday when he suggested that Mr. Trump has the power to pardon himself."

What will be the fallout after Mueller probe is over? It is anyone's guess, but I know law enforcement and the rule of law are in the spotlight. Very few people think justice is fair for the average joe, but most people already think the rich & powerful are "above the law". Therefore, the trust we place into the U.S. justice system will be tested when the Mueller investigation reaches its final conclusion. 
I know Trump's tweets attacking the probe most likely won't change the outcome, but the brazenness of declaring oneself above the law is nevertheless interesting & necessary to discuss. 

I was sick. "Babylon Berlin". Immigration. & Trump's scandals.

Earlier this week I caught a virus & got sick. 
The first night I was sick, I slept for about two hours then I woke up drenched in sweat. I had to get up, drink water, and move to a couch in another room. Once there, I put the fan right next to me. 
But even then, I could only sleep for about another two hours or so. Then I would wake up sweating & I would have to drink more water. This went on all night.

Unfortunately, the night I got a sick I was watching the Netflix detective series "Babylon Berlin" about the German city in 1929. The last episode I watched (before getting a fever) was when communists were being indiscriminately killed on the streets by the cops. So all night, I had the same nightmare involving shooting all around me, me pinned down behind a shield, & dead women lying next to me. It seemed my body was fighting against the virus all night, & my mind was stuck creating a nightmare to "help me" visualize the battle.

The next morning, (in its battle against the virus) my body seemed to be doing ok , nevertheless, I took a day off from work and I binge-watched "Babylon Berlin". Fortunately, the virus left my body by the next day, so it's all good now: thank God. 
I also finished watching "Babylon Berlin" and was surprised by how compelling the series is. I especially liked the realistic portrayal of the chaos in the city & in the country in that particular & important moment in time. Especially the delayed but effective unmasking of the Nazi character in the series.

Makes me think about the chaos going on in this country right now. It's not easy to make sense of Trump's many scandals and it's hard to gauge the damage being done to our institutions and to the credibility of the United States. For example (just from the past week), Trump withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal, Trump's personal lawyer being paid off by U.S. & Russian entities, the steady political attacks on the FBI, and the constant stories of deportations.

Speaking of that, it's difficult to understand the effects of Trump's deportation policies, especially for people like me who I admit live a somewhat sheltered life, living in a mixed-race central Phx neighborhood away from the raids & its consequences. 
Still, as I've said before, I like to watch all kinds of news (except Fox news) including the Spanish-language noticieros (Univision & Telemundo). & I've been surprised at the increasing number of stories involving the deportations of undocumented immigrants. & even some immigrants who actually have a right to be here: like the brothers Simon and Fabian Rodriguez whose dad is a U.S. citizen: 

"U.S. Citizens Arrested and Sent to Immigration Detention Centers"http://www.kveo.com/news/local-news/us-citizens-arrested-and-sent-to-immigration-detention-centers/1170521901

Even so, Trump apparently still isn't happy with the pace of deportations. So he berated the female Chief of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen (in front of his whole cabinet) for 30 minutes! 
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/10/us/politics/trump-homeland-security-secretary-resign.html
"WASHINGTON — Kirstjen Nielsen, the homeland security secretary, told colleagues she was close to resigning after President Trump berated her on Wednesday in front of the entire cabinet for what he said was her failure to adequately secure the nation’s borders, according to several current and former officials familiar with the episode."

In addition to deportations affecting immigrant communities & causing labor shortages in some industries, as well as the recent withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, the Trump administration has kept Obama's drone attack policies and they've actually expanded on it:  

"The administration has quietly expanded how the U.S. uses military force around the world. The consequences are grave. Why is no one paying attention?"
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/05/09/donald-trumps-shadow-war-218327
"The numbers of special operations forces operating in Syria, Somalia, Yemen and the Sahel has reportedly increased..."

Politico asks why is no one paying attention? Most likely because we have grown comfortable with a mostly volunteer army fighting our wars. In the meantime, I (unlike most "poor people" who actually spend their money trying to survive), a single guy, in the words of republican senator Chuck Grassley, spend my time & money on booze, women & movies: 

REPUBLICAN SENATOR: TAX CUTS SHOULDN’T HELP POOR PEOPLE WASTING MONEY ON “BOOZE,” “WOMEN” 

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/12/chuck-grassley-women-booze-movies 

And I distract myself watching TV & Netflix. All this diverson seems to be well-coordinated to keep the U.S. population in an inattentive disposition. And it sounds like a good "Alex Jones" conspiracy, but one which Alex would never expand upon because right now he's a republican partisan & a Trump fan.

Nonetheless, as I mentioned before, if you want to momentarily distract yourself from the chaos going on in this country right now, I recommend "Babylon Berlin": it's a good show.

The controversy surrounding Joy Reid's blog posts (allegedly) from 2005-2006

In this current era, when our president is constantly lying. Lies about 3 millon "illegal" votes for Hillary, about him signing more bills than any president, about the republican tax cut "costing" him a fortune, about Stormy Daniels, etc. etc. etc: http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/byruling/false/   it's easy to dismiss attacks from the right (and their allies) about progressive personalities not telling the truth.

To be honest: I disliked Joy Reid during the Clinton versus Sanders 2016 primary "war" because I was in the Bernie camp. Nevertheless, nowadays when I wake up on saturdays, when I get a chance I turn on MSNBC and watch her show. 
I watch her show because I agree with Joy Reid most of the time. But most importantly, because I believe her political views as a second-generation immigrant & as a person of color are needed in the Trump era.

When I first heard the accusations against Reid I thought they were bullshit: just projection from closet Trump fans against an effective voice from the moderate left. But this article from the "Atlantic" made me question my initial reaction:

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/04/the-evidence-is-not-with-joy-reid/558935/

In the article there is a link to the twitter user who began this controversy.

So 

I read with interest the controversial blog posts from Joy Reid (allegedly) from 2005 and 2006: 

https://mobile.twitter.com/Jamie_Maz/status/986674364979523597

After reading the "Atlantic" article & the '05-'06 posts on Twitter, I still can't decide if they were written by Reid or not. And If I eventually do believe the posts were indeed written by her, I don't know if it's just my 2016 bias towards her making me arrive at that conclusion. 

It also makes me think; If I had written a political post in 2005-2006 about homosexuality, who knows what it would say? 
Even in this present day, I still hear people (online & in real-life) speaking in a derogatory manner towards gay people & sometimes I fail to speak up against it. 
As far as me, I don't believe I have ever expressed any anti-gay views over the years, but comments which might seem insensitive (at this moment in time): again, who knows?  

Even if the posts were written by Reid, I don't think MSNBC should fire her. There are very few people of color on TV with their own political shows, and the message it would send (though making many on the right happy) would negatively affect MSNBC with their own audience. 

In addition, firing her would not solve anything. Instead, IF the posts were written by her (there's still the possibility her account could have been hacked) Joy Reid could respond to this incident with a mea culpa. & use it as a teachable moment in the continuing acceptance of gay people in our society, and how far we have moved in just one decade. Cenk Uygur had a similar incident recently with very old blog posts which were deemed sexist by today's standards. Uygur aknowledged and apologized. Reid could do the same (again if she did write the posts) but time is running out.