We need leaders . . . Not ignorant fear mongers

Hate speech.

It comes in many forms.

You can frame it any way you want, but in the end the governors who have said they wouldn't take any Syrian refugees are making hate speeches. Hate speeches that not only target Syrians refugees driven from their homeland by seemingly never-ending war. But the words also target U.S. citizens and legal immigrants (or their families) who happen to be originally from that region. Any violence against these people here should be laid directly upon these politicians.

Acts of such violence are rare compared to the population, but they set a tone that spreads far and wide. Today’s 24-hour news cycle spreads news farther and wider than ever before, with cable outlets, internet sites, blogs and regular TV and print media latching on to any story with national implications.

Vandals burning a mosque has national implications.

The same national implications of a suspected terrorist being arrested.

Donald Trump upped the hate speech bar the other day when he said all Muslims in this country need to be registered and tracked by the federal government . Ignoring the lessons of history, Trump apparently feels such tracking is needed to protect us . . . and by that I guess I mean non-Muslims . . . from terrorists. Presumably Mr. Trump’s would-be terrorists are all Muslims (another convenient editing of history). He fans the hate flames by making wild and inaccurate statements  . . . like “he knows” Obama wants to let 200,000 refugees into America . . . or, he saw “thousands upon thousands” of people in New Jersey cheering the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings.

Both comments are untrue . . . but they fan the fear that makes Trump appealing to some. 

We need to turn down the volume on such talk. Not only does it encourage violence from those who believe all Muslims are evil and they need to be punished and their mosques vandalized, but to even think about such a registration process would violate every inch of our Constitution and the fabric upon which this country was founded.

It may sound good to some people, but those people are reacting to fear, not common sense or logic. And Mr. Trump and those like him are pandering to those fears and that ignorance with their hateful words.

We need leaders, not fear mongers ignorant of the lessons past.

Thanksgiving . . . Embrace the day and all it brings us

Happy Thanksgiving.

As you sit down to your glorious Thanksgiving meal and give thanks for all you have, take the time to think about a few things.

Take the time to relax, look around you and truly absorb all you have. Not just the “stuff,” your nice home, cars and clothes, but your family and friends, each and every one of them. They are the gold in your life. We sometimes forget how lucky we are to have people around us that care about us, love us, take care of us and protect us, never asking for a thing . . . never having some hidden agenda. People we trust and love. People who maybe have saved us in one way or another. People who always seem to be there when we need them.

Take the time, too, to remember that not everyone is as fortunate as we are. Maybe they don’t have family with whom to share a Thanksgiving meal. Or maybe they don't have the money to buy the food for a Thanksgiving meal. It’s easy to overlook the fact that there are people who go hungry in this great nation, but there are. Tens of millions of them. Maybe make a contribution to a local charity in a family member’s name, or donate some food to a local food bank, or spend a little time this weekend volunteering at a soup kitchen. It doesn’t take much to make a difference.

Take the time, too, to remember those no longer with us. It’s a tough time of year for those who have lost family or friends. During the holidays, all those feelings of loss can be overwhelming, and the seat at the table that's now empty. We need to heal . . . that wound of loss slowly getting better over time, but there will always be a scar there, a place where we remember always.

Enjoy the day and all it brings to us.

Happy Thanksgiving. 

Talk can be cheap, but not talking can be a disaster

Sometimes people say "talk is cheap." Indeed it is, but we all know that and yet sometimes decline to believe it when it's our talk. We view talk as something of a delaying tactic, or a way to avoid confronting a real issue, or we view talk as easier. Other times we just don’t talk, leading sometimes to a festering of issues that remain unresolved and even creating new ones.

Talking can be a way of putting off decisions that might involve confrontational action of some kind, or perhaps avoid an argument. It is “cheap” energy we give out, but good energy. I had a boss that was fabulously non-confrontational and never created a situation where she had to come face-to-face with a personnel issue or a major conflict with any of her staff. A once close friend of mine never liked to hear any criticism from anyone, and took it as a personal assault, going immediately into defense mode, sometimes pouting or walking away. Others get defensive then counter attack with a short-fuse reaction to what they see as a personal assault.

Walking away is not a solution, of course. It’s another way to avoid and hide.

I’ve also had friends with whom I had sometimes brutal debates, discussions and yell-fests. The funny thing is that those were often the closest relationships I had because it was all out there. While they were generally not intimate relationships, they were strong connections, going back to my late teens. We’d sometimes argue ferociously  . . . then when it was over go out a grab a drink or dinner together. Kind of funny. Back then maybe we didn’t take so much so personally, so the tender areas were tougher. Maybe we just figured our friendships were stronger than even the biggest differences. 

They usually were.

I also think face-to-face conversation is worth many times a “messaging” chat or email back-and-forths. And forget those when you’re tired. Words get misread and tone becomes different . . . Short words become normal and edgier than they were intended. Forget it. Another thought? Don’t engage in any serious discussions after 10 p.m.  . . . That would go double now for any messaging in my book. Bad messaging can lead to unintended disaster.

I think we’ve lost the art of conversation to a large degree nowadays. Perhaps in part because we think we’re so well connected with our computers and smartphones. But we aren’t. We need to talk to our partners, friends and family more. In those cases, talk can be anything but cheap. Don't let feelings fester . . .

What better time to start than around holiday time, when we gather with family and friends?

The worst conversations, of course, are those that never take place. And never will. In the end, we have to decide that our actions, and the actions of others, are what are important to all of us. We always have a choice . . . sit back and do nothing . . . or step out of our comfort zone and decide that those people we care for are worth the effort, and maybe the discomfort, we have when we want to avoid, put off, delay and try to ignore decisions but instead are bold and choose to engage. Sometimes we just need to pick up the phone and say, "Hi." We aren't here forever, don't just put it off for another time. The last thing you want is to think, "Gee, I wish I'd just said something."

Time could be short. Make it all count.

Tag, we think your religion sucks so you have to register with the government . . . And other hateful, dumb ideas

The government this morning has ordered a stop to all immigration into the United States by Catholics. 

Citing “continued Catholic-Protestant violence in Ireland and England” as well as ongoing disclosure of attacks on young children by Church officials, DRK Security Chief Howard Johnson also told reporters at a press conference at the Washington Immigration Center in Washington D.C that the House was also expected to vote today on a program to require all Baptists in the U.S. to register with the federal government, providing information on their places of worship, family members and jobs.

“We know that two recent shooting, as well as the Oklahoma bombing were initiated by people claiming to be Baptists, so we feel it’s important to build this registration to better monitor the flow of Baptists throughout the U.S. and abroad. Homeland Security personnel will be fanning out across the U.S. to register members of churches, and we will be setting up registration centers at all airports and bus and train stations in areas heavily populated by Baptists,” he added.

According to GOP candidate Donald Trump’s spokesperson Donna Wannabe, Homeland Security is also investigating a similar registration program for Presbyterians.

“It may be,” she said, “That the registration of Presbyterians is the biggest piece of this increased security program. Those Presbyterians have infiltrated nearly all walks of life in Americaa, are a low-profile group and could be the biggest threat to our security.”

OK. OK. Ridiculous. But that’s the slippery slope we are finding ourselves on right now. Should we make sure any immigrants/refugees go through a careful vetting before they can stay here? Of course. Are they? Of course . . . a process that can take around 2 years. Should we constanly work to make it better? Of course.

So while the overall “risk” of allowing Syrians into the U.S. is fabulously small, we’ve let the entire discussion spin out of control to the point where we are talking about registering people based on their religions. Think about that for a minute. Then try to think about it if you were the one being told you had to register. Not because you’re a bad person . . . you may be the head of a major corporation or government agency or any may hold any number of other honest or high-profile positions in the business or social world . . . but now you have to register because . . . solely because . . . of your religion.

Where the hell is the outrage with that?

Why are not church officials from every religion in the world standing up and screaming about what a horrible idea this is? Why are not pro-gun groups, which pretty much hate anything having to do with registering anything, standing up and screaming about the Constitution and what a horrible idea this is?

This is where we find ourselves now. Let me note it again. We are entertaining the idea of registering people not because of any bad behavior or known risk, but based solely on their faith. Now, folks, it may or may not be a faith with which you happen to agree, but does that matter? Why aren’t we talking about registering Scientologists? Or Hindus and Buddhists (two religions continually immersed in violent conflict in India and the Far East)? Or Palestinians of all ilk since they seem to like to blow things up?

Stop it. Just stop it.

Stop feeding your visceral mind and start feeding the mind that actually can design and implement programs that actually work and don’t include government guys showing up at your church to take your name and address. Yes, your church. Think outside your comfy little box.

As a friend pointed out, this is not the 1800s and perhaps we shouldn’t be so embracing of the huddled masses are we were then (though history shows us we weren’t all that embracing of everyone). He’s right . . . this is a much different, more dangerous world. A world in which people can travel here and there easly and inexpensively.

But these arguments are simplistic and short-sighted.

The much greater risk is from those already here. They are the shooters and the bombers we’ve seen in the past here . . . the people that shoot up a mall, blow up a women’s clinic or kill dozens of people in a school. The risk is from within, whoever those people may be.

Let’s maybe start a reasonable dialogue so I can get the image of Jews getting dragged from their homes . . .

ISIS and other groups are a danger to us. But are refugees? Hardly. Politicians are cowards and afraid to risk going against any tide they feel well lose them their cushy jobs. Like many things, I believe I could grad 12 friends take over a conference room for a couple of hours and come up with a plan . . . a plan that keeps our doors open to those refugees who pass through our vetting process (which is come 1 percent of those who start the process) while culling those of higher risk . . . like travelers to those “dangerous” regions, like the Middle East (like Syria and Iraq) or Africa (like Nigeria).

Reasonable?

Think about this . . . we want to tag all Muslims in the U.S., citizens or not, and we’re arguing over allowing perhaps 10,000 Syrian refugees into the U.S. when, at the same time, we let some 70 foreign visitors into the U.S. every year.

70 million.

We currently have the best screening system of any country in the free world. Let’s not muddle the arguments on these issues with the extremism spouted by some politicians. If we have an issue, then let’s fix it. Calling refugees “rabid dogs” or registering people based on their religion (funny how the war on Muslims is OK, but God forbid we should demand all people be served in a restaurant or bakery) is racist and hateful.

Without getting all soft and fluffy, we are better than that. But if you see a growing number of brown shirts popping up around you, you might want to take a measure of yourself and your beliefs.

The attacks in Paris raise the fear factor around the world

Terrorism: the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal (Merriam-Webster)

Terrorism is also a low-cost way groups like ISIS can attack so-called “soft targets” like restaurants, concerts and sports stadiums where civilians cluster in often large groups with little or no security. One wonders if, even with increased security at some such venues, attacks by well trained and devoted attackers can be stopped. How can all such places be protected?

So more often than not, it’s the “chatter” between groups or individuals that attract the attention of anti-terrorist organizations, including loco police forces.

Unfortunately, as seen by the coordinated attacks in Paris, “chatter” can be non-existent, leaving anti-terrorist organizations literally in the dark about potential attacks. Now they need, therefore, to try and track weapons shipments (which means smuggling), local suspects and suspect groups and travel data. It seems to me much of this may be trackable, but much of it, too, seems like trying to grasp fog with your hand.

Patterns change, “networks” have isolated cells that don’t communicate with other cells, electronic data becomes sparse and suddenly the once obvious tracking disappears.

The simple truth is that even large terrorism attacks, like in Paris, may kill relatively few people in the grand scheme of things, but the attacks at regular, open venues raise the fear factor throughout the region. Suddenly maybe you don’t want a window seat at a restaurant, or you nervously check for back exits out of a movie theater or market, or you decide not to go to a bar frequented by ex-pats or your army buddies for fear it’s a target.

Terrorism is not new, but its effect may be more widespread in today globally connected world.

Day in and day out routines start to take safety into account. That’s something we take for granted here, but it’s something in the minds of every Paris resident and visitor now . . . and on the minds of those in Israel or Egypt or Kenya. We are lucky.

I’ll assume we only know a fraction of the efforts to fight these types of attacks, but in today’s world, the difficulty lies not only in identifying potential attackers and stopping them before they start killing people, but also a measured public response to such attacks.

Unfortunately, that response probably doesn’t have much impact many of the would-be terrorists. If the Paris attackers were “home grown” group, then does it really help to bomb ISIS targets in Syria. While the French have promised to intensify the bombing in Syria and throughout the region, one must wonder about those other home grown cells we know nothing about. The bombing certainly can eliminate ISIS (or Al-Qaeda) leaders and disrupt the chain of command, but can an air campaign stop the training, planning and actions of a determined group in Europe or elsewhere?

A friend of mine noted that these types of attacks are “scalable” like a war or standard military battle, with continual fighting, increased troop and supplies, bigger and bigger troop movements and escalating amounts of equipment and resources.

All very true. But the problem we face is a well-funded group of people focused on a wide variety of targets throughout the world. They are not restricted to a small region or a limited list of potential targets. They are not restricting themselves to military targets like some groups have in the past. Instead, they oppose all that is the West, so regular people gathered in regular people places are their fair game.

These attackers also hide among us. They don’t necessarily have to sneak into a target area. They may already be there. They could be the people you pass in the street every day.

So the nets are cast widely . . . over anyone we see as different, or “foreign,” or any number of other traits we think might be to blame for bringing terror to our doors. We’ll blame immigrants, poor people, people who don’t worship as we do, and anyone who we feel doesn’t embrace the Western way of life.

We have no real idea of how the professionals hunt for would-be bombers, but we sure know how politicians feel. They throw out their best guesses as to who they see as evil people. But let’s remember they are politicians, who often look to place blame simply and without much insight. And we listen. But beware the simple answers or the simple solutions. Some of the people who will try to kill us are, as we said, here already next to us. It can be hard to accept that, but a group of middle class people who might gather for a cocktail party are instead gathering to discuss potential targets. Maybe they didn’t travel to Syria or northern Africa. Maybe they never left Queens, or Montreal, or Paris. Maybe they trained on the weekends when we thought they we just a bunch of guys going camping. Or maybe they’re a bunch of women.

Like trying to grab fog with your hand. This weekend the people of Paris are shocked by the viciousness of the attacks and mourn to loss of those killed, put forth a brave “we are not afraid” face, and hope their skilled terrorist hunters can find the next shooters, bombers, planners and supporters before another attack. Around the world, security is increased in a show of determination, but the fact remains that while attacks may be stopped and plots thwarted, somewhere, sometime there will be more attacks and more people will die.

It’s not a war “over there,” but a different war waged anywhere in the world by warped people who think killing diners or concertgoers furthers their cause . . . A cause of intolerance, hate and violence. That’s scary. It may not be scalable as we’ve thought of battles in the past, but it is spreading. It spread here with the Boston bombing, and it will spread here again. If we’re lucky, the continued pounding from the air in Syria and other places, combined with the ground war there, and the terrorist hunters will neuter ISIS and other groups to the point of eliminating their foreign attacks, but we also know that those so-called home grown attackers can pop up anywhere and anytime.

So today we mourn with the people of Paris. Tomorrow we may mourn with other people in other places.

That is the mad, mad world in which we live today. 

Got some pet peeves? How about a few of those annoying Facebook things?

We all have pet peeves of one sort or another. 

Yes, I have a few . . . don’t put things in the refrigerator that are still in their packaging (like 6-packs of beer or plastic-wrapped energy drinks), relax about telling people what they “should” do, please don’t preach to me about anything . . . I cringe when I see tomatoes, onions or potatoes in someone’s fridge . . . It bugs me when people sing loudly to a song playing on the radio or in a bar (they’re usually off key and not as good as the artists to whom they are listening, of course) . . . Just remember to tip well and smile lots.

Yeah, don’t be mopey and don’t screw the server.

But one of the most continually annoying pet peeve areas, if you will, in people’s lives swirls in and around Facebook. In part, no doubt because Facebook is so much a part of people’s lives. We chat, connect, bitch and moan, complain, share our trips, meals and friendships on Facebook. I like Facebook, but some of the things there are annoying.

Let’s consider the dangling, unexplained post . . .

“Feeling crappy today” . . . “Can’t believe life sometimes” . . . “Depressed and angry” . . . “How can people be so bad?” . . . “Life is just terrible.”

And that’s it . . . no follow ups or explanations about what’s going on to. You thought it important enough to post the statement, why do that and not tell is why life sucks, or why you’re depressed, angry or feeling crappy?

We want to know, and you threw out the bait . . .

“Can little Johnny who lost his cat get 1 million shares? Share his photo if you care.”

You’re saying if I’m a good person I’ll share the photo and the story and a horrible person if I don’t. Really? I do care that little Johnny lost his cat, or has cancer, or a vet gets fewer “shares” than a bikini-clad female sunbather, but if I don’t want to share the 10 million of those posts that I see every day then I won’t.

Get over it. I’m not Satan.

What about those little sayings and inspirations we see every time we sign on? There seem to be about 20 million of them . . . and I “like” and “share” them frequently. And my Facebook friends share them all the time. I like them.

One of the problems, of course comes back to that “what do you mean” thing. We share one and suddenly all our friends are wondering if we’re getting married, or dumped our partners or are about to die.

Since I’m not getting married and have already tried the nearly dying thing as well, I’m usually in the clear, but I sometimes have a habit of sharing them because I think they’re worthy (though rather one dimensional) . . . before I really think about all the ramifications of sharing them . . . so sometimes that little “share” comes up in an email or phone call . . .

“Gee, no . . . I didn’t mean you . . .”

Oy

Of course I won’t get into the fact that many of those little sayings do reflect an oversimplified picture of something that may be going on in our lives. Oh well . . . In those cases, I’ve managed to smooth over the bumps that bumped a bit too close to home.

The continual onslaught of game offers, ads and targeted sidebar ads is also annoying . . . though I do understand the need to pay for what to us is a freebie social network. It’s just kind of creepy having an L.L. Bean ad pop up an hour after I bought a shirt.

I’ll also cop to getting peeved by people who seem to get all their news and information off Facebook, as apparently many people do. It’s Facebook, folks . . . The fact that you’re counting on it to provide you with real news and worthwhile articles is a big pet peeve of mine. Not as big a pet peeve as watching people cook a really good steak to well done, but a pet peeve nevertheless.

It’s nice connecting with people I don’t get to see much, or family across the country, or old classmates (maybe “old” is the wrong word . . . former?), but Facebook does hit my pet peeve button a few times . . .

I guess that’s not all that bad in today’s wired world . . .

Why, when it comes to talking about guns does all common sense leave the room?

There are few topics that elicit as much furor as a discussion about guns. Whether one believes people should be allowed to buy guns without restriction, or that nobody should be allowed to buy guns, there’s plenty of room for yelling, screaming and talking . . . and plenty of room in between the two ends of the argument.

And an argument it is, often with little sense or reasonable resolutions in sight.

I don’t want to take your guns, I merely think there should be a couple of reasonable steps taken to own one. I’m not interested in getting into the debate about “types” of guns here . . . We can do that another time.

But . . .

What’s the fear of having to register or wait a few days to pick up your gun?

Frankly, it wouldn’t bother me if I were buying a gun.

Why not have the same process apply at gun shows?

Again, it wouldn’t bother me if I were buying a gun. Why do I need a gun today instead of in a week?

Two points . . . There should be nationwide limits on who is allowed to purchase a firearm, and that should include restrictions on those who have a documented history of mental illness, those who have convictions for assault or domestic violence, and those convicted of stalking or similar threatening behavior. Simple.

Second . . . There should be a mandatory waiting period so those background checks can be run. We’ll also assume there’s a national data base connecting all law enforcement agencies so there are no gaps between local, state and federal checks.

I’ll also argue that any owner whose gun causes the accidental death of a child should lose the right to own guns. (You can add the accidental death of an adult if you'd like.) And finally, would it not be sensible to mandate that guns be safely locked either in a safe or with a trigger lock? Statistics show just doing that might save several hundred lives a year. The fundamental “problem” with guns is that if there’s an accident, it can be deadly . . . unlike an accident with your food processor, coffee maker or fax machine.

Some people freak at the words “restrictions” or “mandatory” or “regulations” when it comes to guns, but we routinely deal with those things when we register our cars, buy a bottle of wine, write a check, apply for a job or credit card, or vote, as examples. I don’t see a thing wrong with putting gun-buying onto the same field as most other things we do.

There are no “hurdles” seen for those things, so why if we try to apply them to someone buying a gun do they suddenly become threats to the very nature of America? Suddenly people start chirping about the Second Amendment, the government swooping in to take their guns and those silly concerned but misinformed parents.

Stop it . . . You probably haven’t even read the Second Amendment, and there’s not a thing in there about having an arsenal of semi-automatics and 10,000 rounds of ammo in your basement.

I grew up around guns. Not a basement full, but a couple for shooting skeet and trap, or grouse and pheasant or target shooting. I hunted mostly birds with friends and enjoyed plinking cans with my Dad at a dump in Vermont. I think that was during a time before everyone went crazy over “gun rights.” With the loudest fear and shouting coming from and fueled by the National Rifle Association, any past civil conversation has shifted to a very polarizing “us versus them” scream fest.

It doesn’t need to be that way. As grownups, we should be able to sit down at a table and figure out where there is common ground. No talk about assault weapons, or clip size or number of guns a person can own . . . Just a couple of reasonable rules that might save a few lives. 

We’ve stepped over the line here. Some people freak when Target or Waffle House says patrons can’t bring their guns into stores. Is that a reasonable response? My doctor’s office and the local hospital have signs by their entrances that advise, “No weapons permitted inside.” That’s fine with me. I don’t need to be sitting in a doctor’s waiting room filled with people carrying guns, and I’m guessing the staff wouldn’t be entirely comfortable with that either. We need to turn down the volume. Common sense has taken a vacation . . .

We need to walk through the process and see where we can close the gaps.

That’s a good start. 

Ups and downs . . . The end of fossil fuels, or just our usual short-term thinking?

Oil. Oil. Oil. Have we forgotten how valuable it is? Or are we merely accepting that it will never be as valuable as it once was?

Is this the end of the fossil fuel era?

Perhaps we’re at a tipping point. A point when we still use and depend on fossil fuels, but are moving ever closer to a place where we get our power from so-called clean sources, like solar and wind. It seems to me if we want to increase the use of solar and wind we need to make it ever more cost-effective for homeowners to cover their roofs with solar panels, have grey water systems, water storage and water collection systems, as well as small wind energy systems.

During the recent past hay days of oil and gas, investors boomed then busted even as the world seemed ever more on the edge of major crises in the Middle East and Ukraine and China Sea. But unlike days gone by, energy prices fell, driving virtually all speculators out of the markets and states like North Dakota, which banked heavily on its fracking surge, are left with empty real estate developments, rising unemployment (though still one of the lowest in the U.S.) and tons of busted dreams. Two other energy-heavy states, Louisiana and South Carolina also saw upticks in their unemployment over the past several months, even as most states saw their rates fall.

In the not too distant past, even a hint of global disruption would send oil prices higher and investors running to line their portfolios with gold as well. While gold prices have stayed pretty high (gold was about $350 an ounce in 2001, and is now just over $1,000 an ounce (down from a high of nearly $1,900 in 2011).

For history buffs, gold hit just over $2,000 in 1980.

Ups and downs . . .

A barrel of oil was $150 in 2008, just over $106 in 2013, under $40 earlier this summer and is about $45 a barrel now. Between the highs in 1980 of $115 and, say, 2008 and 20013, oil trended down to a low of $22 in 1998 before starting to rise gain.

Ups and downs.

Few of these things head up or down in a straight line, and today’s investors love playing short-term swings and not long-term holds.

So the energy economy doesn’t look so bright right now. Are we seeing a long-term trend, or are we a bit too focused on the now?

Clearly the game is changing with increased solar and wind use, though water shortages may turn out to be the nation’s biggest natural resource issue. But I’d be willing to bet a nickel that before my kids are close to middle age, they’ll see another major oil crisis, spiking prices and yet another push for more fuel-efficient cars, higher tax incentives for alternate energy construction and maybe even a few long lines at the gas station.

Ups and downs . . .

Too many cooks in the GOP kitchen, but maybe not enough burning the toast for the Dems

While the flock of Republican candidates is proving more is actually not good, the Democrats, once you get past Hillary and Bernie, look like they have a pretty weak bench. Two parties with very different problems. But the same result . . . uninspiring “leadership.”

I guess that’s really what we seem to be missing here . . . a leader. Someone who seems to rise above the maddening crowd. And a maddening crowd it is.

No?

People hate Hillary, don’t trust her, despise her “above it all” sense of entitlement and find her presentations stilted, practiced and robotic.

Bernie is a self-proclaimed democratic socialist with an all-in, in your face narrative that is nothing but straight shooting (as far as we know). But he’ll never attract anyone much to the right of center, though he is drawing big crowds and could be the anti-candidate candidate. He kind of comes across as your crazy Uncle Fred at times. No doubt many in business, the military and Congress are shaking at the thought of Bernie as President. People trust what he says, but we’ll see if his vision catches on . . . He seems to be fading a bit now.

Dr. Ben Carlson has surged ahead of the Trumpster in national polls, in large part, it would seem, because of his quiet demeanor and strong religious faith. But it seems to me the anti-evolution, anti-science candidate will get tripped up when people start to pay attention to what he says and has said. It could be, perhaps, that most voters don’t think government here should be based on Biblical passages and teachings.

Donald Trump himself has slipped a bit, something people said months ago would happen . . . though they thought his campaign would totally collapse . . . months ago. It has done everything except collapse. Trump’s appeal comes from his brash and unfiltered rhetoric, but how long will people follow the, “I’ll hire the best people” or “I’ll make it work” before they see there not much behind the curtain?

Rubio is the young charger and has stifled fellow Floridian Jeb Bush, who just doesn’t have any spark, seems forced and lacking direction and a message. Cruz is a hit with government and Obama haters, but hasn’t shown much of anything other than a willingness to shut down the government. Chris Christie is staking out his positions, but, like Graham, Fiorina and others just can’t get enough traction to move up the popularity ladder. He does seem completely at ease on the stump, though, so that may start to play with voters.

Lastly, John Kasich is a clear, more moderate voice, criticizing some of his GOP opponents for their seemingly shallow and often nonsensical policy statements and trying to sell his experience, but his may be a clear voice drowned out in the hurricane that is the Republican primary race. The primaries will probably shred his chances.

Candidates have gathered together to circumvent their own Republican National Committee over their displeasure with the debates thus far, and it wouldn’t surprise me a bit to see the top four of six candidates work a network deal to hold their own debate. Makes sense . . . there are simply too many candidates on the stage to hold a 2-hour debate and get more than a few minutes from each one.

It’s raucous to be sure.

And Democrats best not get too comfortable with Hillary and Bernie. She’ll be a mostly sitting target when the PACs start their billion-dollar attacks. Bernie may not have the Hillary baggage, but while he’s probably better on his feet than most of the Republicans, it’ll be a question of him getting his message through the maddening GOP noise.

We’re nowhere near those tipping points yet. Once the primaries and caucuses start, the GOP will be whittled down fast . . . no money, no campaign . . . That’ll make it easier for the last candidates standing to be heard . . . for better or worse.