I have been asked a couple of times lately what I think of the primaries going on right now.  I told everyone I would be posting thoughts on cornersoapbox.wordpress.com.  I have yet to do that.  I will be posting this on that site as well to get a start on political conversations.

Today however I am writing another – yet another – open letter to the news media.  Sunday afternoon I was watching Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday.  I like Chris Wallace.  I liked his father Mike Wallace.  I believe both of them men of integrity despite Mike’s occasional scrapes.  I believe they look for truth and report it.  Sunday I was very disappointed in Chris Wallace.  So perhaps this is an open letter to Chris Wallace.  I just re-titled this blog!

On Sunday Chris was interviewing John Kasich.  For those of you who asked he is my choice for the man to run for President of the Republican party.

During the interview Wallace quoted Rubio , showed a clip and made a judgment that was incorrect.  You can find all of this by looking at the transcripts. (1)

Chris Wallace said this:

WALLACE:  Governor Kasich, you’re on the show today.  We’re very happy to have you here.

I want to ask you — I want to ask you about Marco Rubio because he has suggested to his supporters that to try to stop Donald Trump, maybe his supporters in Ohio should actually vote for you.  Take a look.


RUBIO:  I have a voter in Ohio conclude that voting for John Kasich gives us the best chance to stop Donald Trump there.  I anticipate that’s what they’ll do.


WALLACE:  Governor, following that same logic, should Kasich supporters in Florida support Rubio so he can beat Trump?  It’s winner-take-all, instead of splitting the anti-Trump vote?

You can see what Marco Rubio actually said by checking the video. (2)

Marco Rubio said:

“If a voter in Ohio is motivated by stopping Donald Trump and comes to the conclusion that John Kasich is the only one who can beat him there ten I expect that is the decision they’ll make.  I can tell you in Florida I am the only one that can beat Donald Trump.  If someone supports Ted Cruz or John Kasich if you vote for them in Florida you’re in essence voting for Donald Trump.  If a voter reaches the same conclusion in Ohio then I think that’s what they’re going to do as well.    (question by reporter) I’ve not talked to John Kasich about this – you asked me a question -I’m giving you my observation clearly John Kasich has a better chance of winning Ohio than I do.  If a voter in Ohio concludes that voting for John Kasich gives us the best chance of stopping Donald Trump there then I anticipate that is what they’ll do.”

As I read this nowhere in this statement did Marco Rubio say he wanted his supporters to vote for John Kasich.  Of course it can be taken or inferred that this is what he is saying.  In fact his campaign came out and said they urged voters to vote for Kasich.  Rubio did not say that in his statement.

This is the fine line of which I am speaking.  Even in the reporting and Wallace using the video clip from Rubio, Rubio did not suggest to his supporters to vote for Kasich.  He clearly stated that if voters made the assumptions and wanted to stop Trump they would vote for Kasich.  He did not release them to do so.

I hear you out there and yes I can see how this is a veiled release yet his words did not say that.  Chris Wallace came to that conclusion.  I must also add that Rubio’s campaign did come out and urge voters to vote for Kasich.  All that being said in this particular answer Rubio did not say those words.

The second media note I wish to make is from Breitbart.  Now again I like their news reporting and take umbrage with the headline that came up in a chat I had this morning.

The Headline was:

REPORT: Soros Money Funding John Kasich’s Presidential Bid

followed by:

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Soros Fund Management is one of John Kasich’s top financial contributors.

Interestingly, as Breitbart News has previously reported, John Kasich has made a series of extreme statements on immigration that place him to the furthest leftward reaches of not just the GOP Presidential field, but the Democratic Presidential field as well. For instance, Kasich has said that enforcing our immigration laws and deporting the illegal immigrants is not “humane.” Kasich likened deportations to the Japanese internment camps of World War II. Kasich has also pledged that he will enact amnesty within the first 100 days of his hoped-for Presidency– in effect, meaning that those who support John Kasich’s presidential campaign are voting to enact the largest amnesty in U.S. history by April 30, 2017.

Breitbart goes on to show George Soros, a noted donor to liberal causes, gave John Kasich’s campaign $202,700.(3)  The inference of the article was that since Soros is funding Kasich that Kasich will be a liberal President – at least not conservative.  Where is the truth?  The truth is Soros gave Kasich $202,700.  I wonder if that is enough to buy legislation.  We must remember that the President cannot enact nor pass any legislation.

The third piece of questionable reporting is last night in the reporting of the primaries.  The Drudge Report had a screen shot of Trump over Cruz by 13% in Missouri when in fact at the time Cruz was leading by .7%.  Big difference.

My conclusion is I make up my own mind when I hear the words from the candidate themselves.  Sadly Chris Wallace has now joined the ranks of all the other reporters in that my trust at least needs to be earned back.

It is going to be a long campaign year I am afraid if the two winners now end up there in September.  It also will be very interesting and wild I believe.












(1) http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2016/03/13/can-donald-trump-unify-republican-party-fractured/

(2) http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/03/11/marco-rubio-ohio-voters-sot.cnn

(3) http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/10/us/politics/george-soros-and-other-liberal-donors-to-fund-bid-to-spur-latino-voters.html?_r=0




Well here we go again.  It is time for we voters to sort the wheat from the chaf.  We have to listen to the ‘noise’ of the Presidential campaign and sort out what is true or what is untrue.  After listening to yesterday’s news shows I am even adamant that I want to be part of the truth telling.  I am hoping that I can contribute to this with my blogs if I write one on politics.  While I am a registered Republican I will not shrink from calling them to task either.

Today is the first.  I watched the head of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman-Schultz sit on the Fox News Sunday talk show and deny knowing anything about an ad put out by the Priorities USA Super PAC.  After being shown the clip of the ad she said, “I have no idea the political affiliation of folks who are associated with that Super PAC.” 


The head of Priorities USA is Bill Bolton who was a deputy press secretary to President Obama.  She looked quite uncomfortable when John Roberts, the guest commentator, called her on it.  As a Senator and head of the DNC I am sure she knew about this.  If not perhaps they need to look for another person to run the party. She ‘walked’ it back on Monday.

The ad is about a man who leads the viewer to believe that he lost his job and his wife died as he had no health insurance due to Bain Capital and Mitt Romney.

There are facts that surround this ad.  The steel plant was closed.  The man in question in the ad was offered a buy out not fired.  His wife had her own insurance and did not die until 6 years after he left the plant.

Wolf Blitzer interviewed Bill Bolton who is one of the people involved with Priorities USA four days before the interview the DNC chair gave on Sunday.  Perhaps she should have watched the news before her interview.  Blitzer’s is really a good interview and you can find it at:


In the end of it Wolf Blitzer does not agree with what he has heard and the last bit of dialogue is:

BLITZER:  So even though so many fact checkers says it is inaccurate, it’s not responsible, it’s misleading, you’re still going to go ahead and play it?

BURTON:  Well, Wolf, just like we just talked about, what we are – what this ad does is it tells a story of one guy and the impact that Mitt Romney had –

BLITZER:  It’s misleading to tell.

BURTON:  Well, this is your opinion.

Got to give Mr. Blitzer  kudos for a good interview and we need more just like this.  We need all interviewers to be as strong.

In a letter to the NY Times last week, on August 6th, Bruce Weinstein, author of “Ethical Intelligence” and “Is It Still Cheating if I Don’t Get Caught?”asks that politicians from here on out not try to distort what their opponent says.  He asks that they share their vision for America and to represent that vision accurately.  He also acknowledges that his may be seen as a naive request.  He believes that truth-telling must be the call.  We no longer have the ‘luxury of cynicism’.


In searching to find out who tells the truth most in politics it was interesting that each party believe they are the best.  I could not find a definitive poll.  I am certain it is caught in ebb and flow of varying degrees of half truths or white lies. 

The Tampa Bay Times politifact.com was most interesting.  The promo said, ‘PolitiFact.com is a project of the Tampa Bay Times to help you find the truth in Washington and the Obama presidency.’  This site has a truth-o-meter.  My favorite rating was a flame and the words, ‘pants on fire”.

There are also other websites like factcheck.org, snopes.com and then you can read whatever you choose and sort out if it is truth or not.  For me I rather hear the people speak the words themselves as I have said before.  In order to be an informed voter we must be informed with the REAL truth – not a biased source’s brand of truth.