The Bomb on the Metrojet, "Non-Debates" and The Twelfth Amendment

                                                    

When is a Debate Not a Debate?

Traditionally, “debates” have consisted of arguments on specific proposals presented by a “pro” side and by a “con” side, followed by rebuttals by each side to the others' arguments, and finally, a summing up by each side in which the rebuttal may be answered or some final argument given, all of these segments being timed.  Judges then render a decision as to who won the debate.  An example of a debate topic might be “Resolved that term limits be imposed on Members of the House of Representatives.” 

The television programs which are billed as political debates are not debates at all.  They are forums during which the participants are asked questions.  Without real disagreement in regard to a particular topic or question, those seeking the Republican nomination for the Presidency, have little about which to “debate.”   The Democratic Party’s “debates” do include a greater difference of opinion among the candidates but still, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are not actually debating with one another about topics on which they might disagree, such as gun control, foreign trade and health care.  They are stating their positions and leaving it at that.

 

When the Presidential candidates are ultimately chosen, it would be excellent if they would actually “debate” with one another.  If one candidate wants the Affordable Care Act or the North American Free Trade Agreement repealed, or the Rowe vs. Wade or Citizens United decision reversed, he or she should state all of their arguments for doing so followed by the other candidate stating all of his or her arguments for not repealing these laws or reversing the Court’s decision regarding abortion or political contributions. (Who speaks first would be decided by a coin toss, and of course, only one item would be the subject of the debate.)

Then each would have an opportunity to present their rebuttals.  Merely presenting a difference of opinion by the two candidates is not a “debate.”  It is a forum, where they are asked questions, discuss issues, but not formally argue them, so it should not be called a debate. I suspect that neither major party candidate would actually prefer a true "debate."  But we should not be identifying the "forums" we now have as "debates."  That they are not.

Jack Lippman

 

Reminder:  If you have Republican leanings, check out the poll at the top right of this blog!

                                               



Why the Twelfth Amendment?

And speaking of “debates” or “forums” or whatever you want to call them, Rachel Maddow asked Hillary Clinton an interesting question during last week’s Democratic candidate forum in South Carolina.  She asked Clinton which one of the many Republican contenders for that party’s nomination she would consider naming as her Vice-Presidential running mate, if she had to.  Secretary Clinton declined to name one, indicating that if she did so, it would be to that person’s great disadvantage in the G.O.P.’s contest for the nomination, a “Clinton endorsement” being the last thing a conservative Republican would want.

Nevertheless, the idea of the President and the Vice-President being from different parties is an interesting one.  In fact, that was the way it was when the country started.  Although political parties had not yet been formed (and George Washington had cautioned against even having them), there were distinct differences between public figures in those days.  Washington, an aristocratic Virginia planter, had John Adams, a Massachusetts lawyer, as his Vice President.  If there had been organized parties then, they would have been in different ones. 

After Washington's terms as President, the provisions of the Constitution came into play whereby the candidate who came in second in the voting of the Electoral College would automatically become the Vice President.

Hence, our second President, John Adams (a believer in a strong central government), was stuck with Thomas Jefferson (a believer in states’ rights) as his Vice-President.  When Jefferson became President, he was stuck with the Presidential loser, Aaron Burr, another believer in a strong central government, as his Vice President.  Jefferson and Burr actually were tied in the Electoral College with the House of Representatives deciding the issue in favor of Jefferson. (Burr’s killing of Alexander Hamilton in a duel in 1803 is said to have resulted from bad feelings between the two men, which may have stemmed from Hamilton’s role in the House of Representatives deciding the election in favor of Jefferson.)

To remedy this problem, the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution was written, so that the Electoral College voted for both a President and for a Vice President.  And ever since 1804, it has been that way.  But if Hillary Clinton had been running against a Republican candidate in 1800, and had won, she would have been stuck with that Republican as her Vice President.  So Maddow’s question wasn’t entirely nonsensical, only 212 years too late to be pertinent.

JL

                                          

Thoughts on the Metrojet Crash in the Sinai

There are some interesting aspects of the crash of the Russian jetliner in the Sinai Desert in Egypt around which accounts in the media have been treading lightly.  We are not privy to what is really going on in regard to the crash investigation.  There is a lot of speculation being passed off as news, but I feel that the absence of certain information in the media regarding the crash points in the direction of what is really going on.

Most sources now seem to agree that the plane was brought down by a bomb which had been brought aboard before its take-off from Sharm el-Sheik in Egypt. 

  

Since the passengers and their baggage seem to have been passed through the usual screening for such flights, suspicion has centered on employees (baggage handlers, mechanics, cleaners, food service personnel, etc.) who may have had access to the plane.  How closely the background of such employees had been checked by the Egyptian government is open to question.  Nevertheless, I feel certain that the individual involved will be located, arrested and questioned … if he or she is still alive.

While Russia initially pooh-poohed the suggestion that there was a bomb on the plane, they subsequently cancelled all flights to Egypt, so I assume they are quietly accepting this explanation for the crash.  But they do so only after the highly unusual action of the United States and the United Kingdom sharing the technical basis for their believing there was a bomb aboard with the Russians.  The West, in doing so, is willing to reveal to Russia the level of its technical sophistication, information not readily given out.  This indicates the importance to the West of getting their hands on information the Russians glean from the plane’s wreckage, particularly in regard to whatever bomb residue, if any, they find.  Why is this so important to not only Russia, but to the United States, the United Kingdom and other nations as well?

One would be naïve to believe that the screening of passengers and baggage is the only screening that goes on in airports around the world.  I would suspect that every plane is exposed to an electronic examination of some sort before it is allowed to take off, such examination being designed to detect the presence of even minute quantities of explosive matter on an aircraft.  I suspect that such technology, which probably the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia and other nations possess, is being constantly updated and changed to keep up with the ongoing development of explosive technology throughout the world.  Needless to say, if my suspicions are correct, all of this is highly classified, and that is why such screening is not reported on by the media.

I suspect that the Russian Metrojet was fully checked out by this kind of screening before it took off.  The fact that there indeed were explosives aboard, bringing about the crash means that the bomb makers are one step ahead of the screening technology.    And that has everyone worried.  Perhaps that is the real, unreported, story.

    

This is why there has been an uptick in security measures at all airports and why the technical expertise of the FBI has become involved in the crash investigation.  In all probability, intelligence agencies throughout the world are busily attempting to determine the nature of the explosive that possibly evaded existing screening techniques and brought down the Russian plane.

JL

                                        

Reminder:  If you have Republican leanings, check out the poll at the top right of this blog!

HOW TO BE ALERTED TO FUTURE BLOG POSTINGS.

Many readers of this blog are alerted by Email every time a new posting appears.  If you wish to be added to that Email list, just let me know by clicking on Riart1@aol.com and sending me an Email.  

HOW TO CONTACT ME or CONTRIBUTE MATERIAL TO JACK'S POTPOURRI. 

BY CLICKING ON THAT SAME ADDRESS, Riart1@aol.com   YOU ALSO CAN SEND ME YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO BE PUBLISHED IN THIS BLOG AS WELL AS YOUR COMMENTS.  (Comments can also be made by clicking on the "Post a Comment" link at the blog's end.)

MOBILE DEVICE ACCESS.

DID YOU KNOW THAT www.jackspotpourri.com IS ALSO AVAILABLE ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICES IN A MODIFIED, EASY-TO-READ, FORMAT?   

HOW TO VIEW OLDER POSTINGS.                                                

To view older postings on this blog, just click on the appropriate date in the “Blog Archive” midway down the column off to the right, or scroll down until you see the “Older Posts” notation at the very bottom of this posting.  The “Search Box” in the right side of the posting also may be helpful in locating a posting topic for which you are looking.

HOW TO FORWARD POSTINGS.

To send this posting to a friend, or enemy for that matter, whom you think might be interested in it, just click on the envelope with the arrow on the "Comments" line directly below, enabling you to send them an Email providing a link directly to this posting.  You might also want to let me know their Email address so that they may be alerted to future postings.

Jack Lippman