Any look I take at the new Windows 10, just released, come through the perspective of a confirmed Linux user – this is being written on a computer with a Linux OS, as have been all our recent books and much more. So when I look at the new Windows screen – like the image above – what hits me is how similar much of it is to my Linux (Mint, Cinnamon) screen. Same overall screen approach; same control bar at the bottom; similar view on pressing the start (on Linux, menu) button, except that we Linux users don’t have that annoying checkerboard imagery. (But because Linux is so customizable, we could create it if we wanted to.) And something else: Microsoft is urging people to upgrade, for free, from earlier editions of Windows, promising “We’ve designed the upgrade to be easy and compatible with the hardware and software you already use.” In the past, the wisdom I’ve always heard was, if you want a new version of the Windows OS, get a new computer, because such upgrades are problematic in Windows. (Not so in Linux, where such system updates are routine.) Has Microsoft made upgrading relatively seamless now? It’d be a big plus for the users if they have.

Share on Facebook

First Take

trahantlogo1

What do you do with sixteen candidates? It’s a thorny problem for Republicans. Why’s that? Because right now one of those candidates, Donald Trump, is loud enough to drown out all the other “major” candidates.

Wouldn’t it be fun if the nomination contest was more like a basketball tournament? Then top-seeded Donald Trump would battle 16th seed Ohio Gov. John Kasich a battle of ideas. Or how about dropping the bunch in the jungle Naked and Afraid. We could even start voting and eliminate a candidate every week, until it’s just the Republican versus a Democrat.

Enough. Back to the chaos. And Donald Trump.

As The Washington Post put it on Sunday: “For yet another week, Trump talk dominated the Sunday morning political shows, with several devoting roundtable discussions to his disruption of the GOP presidential primary and at least two of his GOP rivals using their clashes with him in recent days as a means of securing interviews on the shows — during which they continued to clash with him.”

On August 6 in Cleveland the first debate is set, an opportunity to raise serious issues. As if. It’s more likely that it will be Trump versus the other nine candidates tossing one liners back and forth.

Of course American Indian and Alaska Native issues don’t get attention this early anyway. Usually that happens late in the campaigns, during the general election, when a position paper is released that outlines the candidate’s official policy. That’s too bad. It would be good to press candidates from both parties about how they see treaties, the federal-Indian relationship, and the management of federal programs that serve Native Americans.

Then again it’s pretty clear where most stand. The Tea Party wing of the Republicans — Trump, Marco Rubio, Scott Walker, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Rand Paul — would dramatically cut federal spending. Paul has even called for the elimination of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and drastic cuts at the Indian Health Service. If any of this happened, the Sequester would be the Good Old Days.

Even a self-described serious candidate, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, suggests its time to reshape government. A few days ago in Tallahassee, he said that as governor he used a hiring freeze to shrink state government. He suggested the same approach would work in Washington where only one employee could be hired for every three who retire or leave government service. Bush also said it ought to be easier to fire federal employees. “There are a lot of exemplary employees in the federal government, but they’re treated no better than the bad ones,” he said. “The bad ones are almost impossible to effectively discipline or remove.”

Candidate Kasich was chairman of the House Budget Committee when President Bill Clinton declared the “era of big government is over.” That suited Kasich then. And now. One proposal at the time was to “reinvent” the Bureau of Indian Affairs with a block grant program. “The reinvented Bureau of Indian Affairs would provide block grants, rather than engaging in the direct provision of services or the direct supervision of tribal activities,” the House proposal said. This “would reduce the central office operations of the BIA by 50 percent and eliminate funding for the Navajo and western Oklahoma area offices. It would eliminate technical assistance of Indian enterprises, through which technical assistance for economic enterprises is provided by contracts with the private sector or with other Federal agencies.” Congress would have ended direct loans and reduce loan guarantees.

The Republicans running for president all share contempt for the Affordable Care Act (and most don’t know that would include the provisions of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act.) All are also supportive of more development, such as the Keystone XL pipeline, and generally dismissive of any action to limit climate change.

I don’t know. I’m still partial to a Naked and Afraid competition.

Mark Trahant is an independent journalist and a member of The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. For up-to-the-minute posts, download the free Trahant Reports app for your smart phone or tablet.

Share on Facebook

Trahant

raineylogo1

There a few changes in military recruiting stations since I signed up in one many, many years ago. Most now are staffed by members of each branch of the military rather than just one recruiter who could sign you up for any service. Today, they’re often located in strip malls rather than office buildings as they used to be. Slick promotional DVDs of colorful military action have replaced the old, dog-eared pamphlets.

My recruiter back then was an old “tanker.” I wanted the Air Force but that old sarge was pure Army from his shorts out. He wore a back brace, had “locked” knees and gnarled hands that gripped two canes. He’d served in North Africa under Patton where temperatures in those steel coffins topped 120 degrees daytime and dropped to the 40’s at night. Repeated exposure to cold and condensation caused crippling arthritis. He was overweight and deformed but he recruited with the best of ‘em.

These days, recruiters all look like they posed for “best-of-the-best” posters with tailored uniforms, all leather shined to a high gloss, smartly pressed pants, permanent-pleat shirts and regulation haircuts kept that way by nearly daily trips to the barber.

This description of latter-day recruiters probably fit all the personnel in that Tennessee recruiting station the day they were murdered. The day a deranged soul, with a semi-automatic, butchered five unarmed men. But “deranged” doesn’t stop there.

Flipping through Faux Neus a few days ago, I happened across “Judge Jeannie.” Her right wing rant was the recruiting office murders and how “Obama is to blame.” Not President Obama. Just “Obama is to blame.” And, from somewhere in the demented Faux audience, the network has dug up a Black police chief as much a racist as any white I’ve ever seen.

Let’s take a minute to discuss “Judge Jeannie.” Jeannie Pirro was 12 years a county court judge in Westchester County, NY. During that time, lobbyist husband, Albert, was convicted of tax evasion and conspiracy involving over $1 million. Jeannie was investigated by the feds for illegally taping her husband’s phones, trying to catch him committing adultery and other things. American “family values” at their best.

Jeannie made runs for lieutenant governor and U.S. senator with “significant contributions” from her ex’s friends while he remained in the slammer. But she couldn’t raise enough money or political support from the public and withdrew both times. Rejection. Then Faux Neus. With her non-journalistic background and political failures – a natural.

Back to the present. Jeannie’s charge was that “Obama” had prohibited recruiters from being armed. Not true. Except to her. If “Obama had not stopped recruiters from having guns they could’ve defended themselves and wouldn’t be dead.” The chief agreed! Repeatedly. Another “Obama failing.” said he. I flipped off – before I flipped out.

I’d bet the farm no president of these United States ever knew – or had given much though to – whether recruiters had guns in recruiting stations. I’d wager the same that no president – including the current one – ever ordered recruiters be armed or not armed. Like so many other Faux Neus charges about “Obama’s failures,” no thought has been given to cabinet secretaries, department heads, the IRS, Joint Chiefs of Staff or anyone else in government supervisory roles. Just “Obama.”

Successful recruiters have two main tools. First, they must look, talk and act like the best each branch of service has to offer. Many are combat vets with a lot of “salad dressing” on their chests. They’re smart, well-trained to “read” people, conversational, use proven sales tactics to make a case for new recruits to see “the best the military offers.” It’s a sales job. “Products” are patriotism, travel, education, lifetime careers, advancement and all the things young people look for and ask about.

Most recruiting offices are in malls or strip malls. Years of testing found access important for recruitment. The Tennessee office was next to an Italian restaurant. You can’t stash recruiters away someplace “safe” and you can’t arm them for defensive postures any more than you’d buy a car from a guy in a bulletproof glass cage. They are not in the offices to “return fire” when some nut – deranged local or terrorist – takes a shot.

Recruiting offices will continue to be targets for attack. They represent the American military – “the Great Satan” – and are not equipped repel armed cowards hitting “soft” targets. Like schools in Afghanistan or weddings in Iraq. There is no bulletproof way to change that. Not if recruiters are to be effective in their work. Before international terrorism made their offices hazardous duty.

The military will figure this out and do what it has to. No, I’m more worried about the “Judge Jeannie’s” of this world who keep up the lies and false propaganda to stir up people who fall for her B.S.. Far too many do. To me, she’s more the “enemy within.” Millions accept what she says without question – without checking – without confirmation of any kind – because she’s that “nice looking lady.” “And she’s a judge.”

No, my friends. She’s just another Faux Neus hack with clay feet up to her chin. She’s had her turn with both sides of the law. You want a friend? Go talk to a recruiter. They’re far more honest.

As for the civilian nuts showing up to “protect” the military, go home before you hurt someone and get sued down to your red-white-and-blue shorts.

Share on Facebook

Rainey

From this week’s Idaho Weekly Briefing: An Idaho Fish & Game report on how this summer’s heat may be affecting fish and fishing rules.

Warm water temperatures came earlier than usual to many of Idaho’s fishing waters, but it’s unlikely to lead to fishing closures or restrictions similar to those that neighboring states have implemented.

“In many streams, what we’re seeing this year with water temperatures happens every year, we’re just seeing it sooner than normal,” said Jim Fredericks, chief of the Department of Fish and Game’s fisheries bureau.

A heat wave in late June and early July spiked water temperatures, but many waters have since cooled to normal summer temperatures. That doesn’t mean fish haven’t been stressed, particularly trout and other coldwater species, but conditions are not likely to affect fish populations now or in the near future based on current water conditions.

Warm water is a common occurrence during summer, and several factors come into play when it happens. Summer migrations into headwaters, cold tributaries or around underwater springs are a normal part of life for trout in many Idaho rivers. In lakes and reservoirs fish move to deeper, cooler water. Many rivers, or portions of them, have dams that allow water temperatures and flows to be adjusted.

The feeding activity of the fish also helps minimize the problem. Fish that can’t find cooler water typically become lethargic and decrease or stop eating, which means slow fishing and a corresponding drop in fishing pressure.
While closures in neighboring states won’t affect Idaho, Oregon and Washington have implemented restrictions on the Snake River where it shares a border with Idaho.

Joe DuPont, Fish and Game’s Clearwater Region fisheries manager, said fishing pressure for sturgeon, and catch rates in the Snake River from Idaho anglers, are likely to be low.

“I’m confident the sturgeon in the Hells Canyon reach of the Snake River are not going to be impacted by anglers due to temperatures,” DuPont said. “Catch rates drop so much that very few get caught. You can’t stress them out if you can’t catch them.”

The department is monitoring the Snake River, and he noted that during spring, two dead sturgeon were reported by multiple callers to the department.

“When a sturgeon dies, we get repeated calls,” Dupont said. “If large numbers were dying, we would know about it.”

Fish and Game officials have the authority to implement emergency fishing closures in extreme cases, although they aren’t expected.

That’s not to say anglers won’t see some noticeable effects from warmer. Anglers and others may see localized fish die offs, a few of which have already occurred. Anglers may also notice the effects of stress on individual fish, such as parasites, lesions and other physical signs.

Anglers can also reduce stress on fish by not fishing during the warmest parts of the day, and if they plan to release the fish, land them quickly and carefully release them. If anglers see fish go belly up after being released, they may voluntarily stop fishing until the water cools. Early mornings are typically when the water temperatures are coolest during the day.

The window when temperatures are above a comfortable level for fish are typically short-lived, and most fish can withstand the temporary stress. As water cools, typically in late summer when days get shorter and night temperatures drop, fish resume their normal routines and anglers will likely see catch rates improve. (photo/Nan Palmero)

Share on Facebook

Reading

stapiluslogo1

Is Idaho Donald Trump’s kind of place?

We now have a pretty clear idea of who all the major contenders for president will be in 2016: At this point all or nearly all have announced. (The New York Times declared the field unofficially closed after the announcement last week of Ohio Governor John Kasich.)

So who’s the Republican now most likely to pick up support in the Gem State?

The last couple of nomination contests weren’t good normal case studies, because Mitt Romney had unusually strongly connections to the Idaho area, between his ties to Utah and his Mormon religion, which he has in common with about a third of Idahoans, the bulk of that third being Republican.

Romney aside, the hearts of many Idaho Republicans seem traditionally to go toward insurgent and anti-establishment contenders, and candidates who match up with the Idaho self-image.

The biggest share of those Idaho Republicans who didn’t back Romney in the nomination fight in 2012 went for Ron Paul, whose candidacy was an irritant to much of the establishment. In 2000, there wasn’t really an insurgent candidate. George W. Bush got much of the state’s support and was the big favorite nationally from early on, but there was a significant base for Alan Keyes as well. In 1996, Pat Buchanan was the closest thing around to an insurgent anti-establishing candidate, but he never organized substantially in Idaho, and never picked up a lot of national traction.

When Ronald Reagan, still probably as popular in Idaho as he ever was, got his start, he was an insurgent candidate, running from a long-shot mode in 1968 and as a serious but definitely outsider challenger to a sitting president in 1976. And Reagan won that 1976 Idaho primary hugely, with 74.3% of the vote, his best vote anywhere in the country that year. A lot of the affection for him in Idaho built from that time, from his role not as a front runner or incumbent but as a challenger to powers that be.

Also liked: Challenger to powers that be who are dismissed by them. People like Helen Chenoweth and Sarah Palin picked up a lot of traction in Idaho in no small part for that reason. Their backers might call it being unafraid to speak the truth, their critics might call it speaking foolishness, but in Idaho you’ll find enough voters in the first camp to form a significant base.

Does Donald Trump fit into that mold? Or does someone else do so better?

Reagan had been a governor, but many of the people who like Trump say that much of what they like about him is that he’s an outsider, so presumably someone who hasn’t been a governor or a senator might have some particular appeal. They also like the idea that he “can’t be bought,” that he’s independently wealthy enough that he could do as he chooses. These concepts would have some resonance in the Idaho Republican electorate. Across that very large Republican field of candidates, only three, Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina, have not been either a governor or a senator. And Carson and Fiorina are not top-rank contenders, at least at present.

And this time there aren’t any Republican candidates who touch the self-identity chords in Idaho the way Reagan, George W. Bush or Mitt Romney did.

Might Idaho be Trump territory? Could be, if The Donald lasts in his campaigning hothouse long enough to get to next year’s Idaho primary.

Share on Facebook

Idaho Idaho column Stapilus

From a report by the Washington Secretary of State’s office.

Paul Allen’s Initiative 1401, requiring a state crackdown on trafficking of endangered species/parts, has qualified for a spot on the statewide Washington ballot this fall, Secretary of State Kim Wyman announced late Wednesday.

State Elections Division crews completed scrutiny of voter signatures on a random sampling of I-1401 petitions and showed that sponsors submitted more than enough names to qualify for a state vote.

To earn a ballot spot takes 246,372 valid signatures of registered Washington voters – 8 percent of the last votes cast for governor. Sponsors turned in over 347,000 signatures and about 10,000 were randomly chosen by computer algorithm for a full check.

The check showed an error rate of about 14 percent, compared with the average rate of 18 percent in recent decades.

The check showed that 9,101 signatures in the sample were accepted, 1,321 were rejected because the signer wasn’t a registered voter, 120 rejected because the signature didn’t match the one on file. Only one duplicate was found, an unusually low number.

The text is here.

Our website for signature-checks is here.

Election Director Lori Augino said the signature-checkers now turn their energies to Tim Eyman’s Initiative 1366. The measure is an attempt to pressure the Legislature into placing a constitutional amendment on the 2016 ballot to require a two-thirds vote in both houses to boost taxes in Olympia.

Eyman and the campaign also turned in a large pad, with signatures over 339,000 total, so I-1366 is widely expected to make the ballot also. No other referenda or constitutional amendments will appear on the fall ballot.

Wyman applauded the continuing citizen interest in “direct democracy” via the ballot box.

“About 700,000 people from all over the state with various political views took part in gaining ballot access for the two 2015 initiatives,” she noted. “Ballot measures always seem to generate voter turnout and this year, with no statewide or congressional races, this is an important factor in generating interest.”

Share on Facebook

Washington

The U.S. House legislation banning state requirements to label genetically modified foods must be watched closely in Jackson County, Oregon – where exactly just a requirement passed a couple of years ago by voter initiative. Oregon narrowly rejected such a requirement statewide last year, but a new effort easily could be tried again in 2016 – and, if structured right, could match requirements in Vermont, Connecticut and Maine. The House legislation now goes to the Senate, where little groundwork has been laid and chances of quick passage seems less than even. If it doesn’t pass, look at this as providing more impetus for states to continue running out their own requirements.

Share on Facebook

First Take

harrislogo1

I was putting together one article, and stumbled on this topic instead. And I think it describes beautifully what the Independent Party is attempting to bring to the political table.

The term “Transpartisanship” has emerged to provide a meaningful alternative to “Bipartisanship,” and “Nonpartisanship.” Bipartisanship limits the dialogue process to two political viewpoints or entities, striving for compromise solutions. Nonpartisanship, on the other hand, tends to deny the existence of differing viewpoints in exchange for cooperation. Both the bipartisan and nonpartisan approaches can discount the multiplicity of viewpoints that exist, which often results in incomplete and therefore unsuccessful outcomes. In contrast to these, transpartisanship recognizes the existence and validity of many points of view, and advocates a constructive dialogue aimed at arriving at creative, integrated, and therefore, breakthrough solutions that meet the needs of all present.

The IPO doesn’t reject ideology or attempt to ignore the fact that ideology will always exist. In fact ideology is the root of many good and novel ideas and solutions. However, an idealogue – whether conservative or liberal – accepts that political critique must take place on the enlightened grounds of the search for human happiness needs based on the use of reason.

On the other hand, a politically orthodox person may reject compromise and even debate and discussion because they believe there is a transcendent order based on some higher moral authority, and to compromise that order – despite the well reasoned arguments of others – is not possible because reason can’t trump their belief and faith. There can be little compromise with a politically orthodox person.

Bi partisanship relagates the search for better government to a binary argument, where unique solutions are set aside as the two sides coalesce around the most common position. (or the position of the largest and most powerful within the coalition.) Regardless, it results in only two viable solutions.

Non partisanship must fail because it refuses to acknowledge that there are consequential ideological differences within our political system, and without honoring, acknowledging and making provisions for those differences, honorable compromise is unlikely.

The Independent Party, knowingly or not, seems to be a transpartisan political movement. Member surveys have identified four areas that have widespread support among it’s membership. Membership that includes voters from the liberal to conservative ends of the traditional spectrum.

Government has a vital role to play in the marketplace in protecting the little guy from the big guys (consumer protection)
Government has a vital role to play in economic development, but any government benefit to a business must return as much to the taxpayer as it costs. (Taxpayer Return on Investment)
We must reduce the power of money in politics. Campaign finance reform
We should increase job training and education to meet the changing needs of our economy.

By refusing to adopt positions on hot button issues, the IPO has rejected orthodoxy from the political right and left. The IPO doesn’t deny those are important issues to some of the politically orthodox. It just accepts the ideological divide on some issues and that enlightened reason won’t solve a disagreement based on political orthodoxy. But the IPO acting as transpartisan still understands our need to work together on solutions that we do agree on. The IPO doesn’t limit itself to exploring the Republican or Democratic solutions, goals, or ideology only. Campaign finance reform is more of a Progressive Party issue than a Democratic priority. And Taxpayer return on investment is closer to Libertarian model of refraining from interfering in the market through government action, than it is to the Republican platform of granting tax breaks to any big business that asks.

The IPO is an emerging major party. There should be no expectation that because it hit major party status in February 2015 that it also has the same funding, infrastructure and candidate pool that the other major parties have. Developing membership, local member infrastructure, candidate recruitment, and a political bench will take some time. So chillax for a bit and let things develop.

But, if the IPO is transpartisan, you should eventually expect to see non orthodox IPO candidates that span the ideological spectrum *. Candidates pledged to working together for the common good using enlightened reasoning. You should expect to see right of center IPO candidates in the red districts, and left leaning candidates in the blue districts. In fact, you could see a far left candidate as an IPO candidate in a deep blue district if the Democratic candidate there was seen as a TPP backing, CRC spending, Tax Break giving traditional Democrat.

Share on Facebook

Harris

Lots of parsing going on with the comments of Ted Wheeler, the Oregon state treasurer whose decisions on office-seeking for next year will likely shape a good deal of Oregon politics. Before the John Kitzhaber implosion at the beginning of this year, Wheeler probably was the best single bet to become the next governor of Oregon, in 2018. Now, incumbent Kate Brown (back then still the secretary of state) seems well positioned to hold the office in 2016, and that gives Wheeler two main unappealing choices, both involving challenging an incumbent: Brown for governor, or Charlie Hales for mayor of Portland. Here’s where the tea leaves come in, and also the tenor of the Oregonian story about this, which puts some emphasis on how a number of Portland-area money are trying to persuade Wheeler to challenge Hales. Wheeler does have local political strength, remember, from his days when he was elected to and served on the Multnomah County Commission. So the betting seems to be running in the direction of mayor. Wheeler says he’ll announce a decision (which could include running for nothing next year) within a couple of weeks. Whichever way, Oregon politics 2016 will take a turn. (photo: Wheeler, standing between Sam Adams and Jeff Merkley.)

Share on Facebook

First Take