Issue link: https://www.epageflip.net/i/674539
GregStevens,Publisher Chip Thompson, Editor EDITORIALBOARD How to have your say: Letters must be signed and provide the writer's home street address and home phone number. Anonymous letters, open letters to others, pen names and petition-style letters will not be allowed. Letters should be typed and no more than two double-spaced pages or 500words. When several letters address the same issue, a cross section will be published. Email: editor@ redbluffdailynews.com Fax: 530-527-9251 Mail to: P.O. Box 220, 545 Diamond Ave., Red Bluff, CA 96080 Facebook: Leave comments at FACEBOOK.COM/ RBDAILYNEWS Twitter: Follow and send tweets to @REDBLUFFNEWS Despite repeated pummelings — four more losses Tuesday night, including a blowout in Pennsylvania — Bernie Sanders still can't find the high road on his mental GPS. He'sstillsteamedthat Democrats have the temerity to run Democrats-only primaries (he's not even a Democrat), says he's gonna win in irrelevant West Virginia on May 10 and continue to battle at the convention to the bitter end. Perhaps, if Bernie is at all interested in losing with grace and class, in uniting with his victorious foe for the most existential crusade of our era — preventing an unhinged racist demagogue from owning the nuclear codes — he will take a moment to read what Hillary Clinton said to her disappointed followers on June 7, 2008. The primary season had ended four days earlier. She had virtually split the nationwide popular vote with Barack Obama, but she fatally trailed in the delegate count. Her delegate deficit was actually far smaller than Bernie's current deficit, but did she whine about "rigged" primaries? Nope. Did she have the gall to insist, as Bernie did on Monday, that her victorious foe surrender to her issue agenda? Nope. Here's a small sampling of what she said: "The way to continue our fight now, to accomplish the goals for which we stand, is to take our energy, our passion, our strength, and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama, the next president of the United States. Today, as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him. And I ask all of you to join me in working as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me." That's the way to do it. You face reality, and eat humble pie for the greater good. The big question is not whether Bernie is toast — that's been obvious for weeks (he's losing the national popular vote by 57 to 43 percent, which in electoral parlance is known as a landslide). The real question is whether Bernie will stand down in a graceful manner. We're still six weeks away from the final contest, so there's time. Right now, however, we're getting mixed signals. Tad Devine, a strategist in the Bernie camp, signaled the press early Tuesday that his candidate is prepared to "reassess." But on the same day the Bernie camp sought new donations by emailing a photo of the Clintons at Trump's wedding. The candidate himself said Tuesday night he's proud of winning minuscule Rhode Island, "the one state with an open primary." He's stoked for "the 14 contests to come" and is vowing to fight at the July convention for the issue agenda that's losing decisively at the ballot box. (Here's what I mean by decisive: In the Pennsylvania exit polls, 52 percent said the nominee should "continue Obama's policies." Only 32 percent said the nominee should "change to more liberal policies.") So we'll see which way Bernie plays it. As an outsider, a western European- style socialist who merely caucuses with the Democrats, he's comfortable with defiance. On TV the other night, he insisted that it's "incumbent" upon Hillary to make the first move toward winning over his fans. Which is quite cheeky, given the fact that she's the winner and he's the loser. On the other hand, Bernie has been an inside-the Beltway politician for the past quarter century. If the Democrats win back the Senate this fall, presumably he would very much like to chair the Senate Budget Committee next year. Despite all his self-righteous thunder, he knows how to do deals. He hinted as much the other night, on MSNBC, when he said, "I will do everything in my power to make sure that no Republican gets into the White House in this election cycle." If he wants to stay in the race through California, fine. And if he stops trashing Clinton on the stump, and hoses down Tim Robbins and his other celebrity dilettantes — that's when we'll truly begin to know whether he's doing everything in his power to kill the Trump poison before it fatally infects this country. DickPolmanisthenational political columnist at NewsWorks/WHYY in Philadelphia (newsworks. org/polman) and a "Writer in Residence" at the University of Pennsylvania. Email him at dickpolman7@gmail.com. Dick Polman Hillary can show Bernie how to lose with grace Cartoonist's take The headlines alone tell the tale: "How does Hillary run on a bad economy" (J. Hinderaker), "Hillary to run against… Obama?" (re: Obama's economy, S. Hayward), "White House struggles to explain weak economy as Obama boasts of job growth" (Dave Boyer), "As GDP Flatlines, Obama Brags About His Economic Record" (Investors.com), and "Simply the worst—Obama is first president ever to not see single year of 3% GDP growth" (Jim Hoft). Hoft: "The rate of real economic growth is the single greatest determinate of both America's strength as a nation and the well-being of the American people. On Thursday, the Commerce Department announced that the US economy expanded at the slowest pace in two years. GDP growth rose at an anemic 0.5% rate after a paltry 1.4% fourth quarter advance. "Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%. Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate. Barack Obama will be the only U.S. president in history who did not deliver a single year of 3.0%+ economic growth. "According to Louis Woodhill, 'Assuming 2.67% RGDP growth for 2016, Obama will leave office having produced an average of 1.55% growth. This would place his presidency fourth from the bottom of the list…above only Herbert Hoover (-5.65%), Andrew Johnson (-0.70%) and Theodore Roosevelt (1.41%).'" Accompanying two of the articles is a chart by The Center for Economic and Policy Research: "Index of Real GDP Since Start of the Recession for the Last Four Recessions." The Reagan economy, 8 years after the 1981 recession, was over 35% larger, meaning more jobs, higher wages, greater tax revenue, etc. The Clinton economy was almost 30% larger after 8 years; but Clinton did nothing to grow the economy beyond accepting Republican mandates that no taxes be raised and spending be constrained. The George Bush economy grew similar to the Clinton economy for almost 7 years following the 2001 dot-com crash and terrorist attacks, becoming about 20% larger. CEPR comments: "The weak growth for the quarter puts this recovery even further behind any prior recovery at the same stage. After eight and a quarter years, the economy is only 10.1% larger than its pre-recession level of output. A typical recovery would have seen at least twice as much growth." Sanders, Trump (or any Republican candidate) can run against said weak economic performance, while Hillary tries to skate past providing corrective policies— she has no new ideas. Sanders' prescription is essentially to double down on the same type of centralized control and micromanagement that produced our current "malaise." F.D. Roosevelt's similar policies extended the Great Depression from a bad recession into an additional 7 years of misery, a pathetic record rescued only by WWII (per UCLA economist Lee Ohanian). In general, Obama and most Democrats are treating bad economic numbers, as well as expectations by some that another recession approaches, as illustrated by Michael Ramirez. He drew a cartoon that showed Obama standing high on the stern of a sinking Titanic-like ship labeled "U.S. Economy," proclaiming, "See, it's never been higher." Hinderaker offers some reflections on what actually occurred and what, if any, credit Obama can claim: "Democrats love to cherry pick statistics to make the case that Barack Obama's stewardship of our economy has been successful. Obama himself often claims to have saved the world economy from disaster, but how? If anything averted collapse, it was the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which was executed by the Bush administration, for better or worse. If any government measure saved the economy, it was TARP. "The 'stimulus' bill that didn't stimulate anything was enacted in Obama's first year (DP: remember the recession officially ended in June of 2009, before any Obama/ Democrat policies went into effect); that had only a fraction of the predicted impact and no one claims it somehow rescued the world economy. Nor did Dodd- Frank, which was passed in 2010, after the financial crisis had passed. Dodd-Frank's principal effects were to devastate community banks and starve small businesses of capital." D. Boyer wrote, "White House press secretary Josh Earnest said that congressional Republicans were in part to blame for the weak growth, saying the economy would be stronger if Congress had agreed to Mr. Obama's proposals for higher spending on infrastructure projects three or four years ago—their 'stubborn refusal to consider any of President Obama's priorities.'" Irony abounds over such arguments after Democrats got their stimulus wish list, together with trillions of dollars of deficit spending; Obama admitted, "there are no shovel-ready projects." Investor's Business Daily observed that, "while Obama claimed to have saved 'the banks' and 'the auto industry,' he didn't save either industry. Obama's only contribution to GM and Chrysler's bankruptcy process was to protect union interests at taxpayer's expense. Dodd- Frank didn't save banks… His stimulus was a massively expensive bust…Obama talks about 14.4 million new jobs since 2010, without noting that working age population grew by 15.8 million over those same months. He touts the 5% unemployment rate, but fails to mention that it would be more like 10% if millions of Americans hadn't given up looking for work altogether." From the waste of government green energy subsidies, to Obamacare, to deficits, taxes and regulations—100% Obama's responsibilities—this weak economy is Obama's alone to bear. Don Polson has called Red Bluff home since 1988. He can be reached by e-mail at donplsn@ yahoo.com. The way I see it Obama's economic delusions On TV the other night, he insisted that it's "incumbent" upon Hillary to make the first move toward winning over his fans. Which is quite cheeky, given the fact that she's the winner and he's the loser. Don Polson Assemblyman James Gallagher, 2060 Talbert Drive, Ste. 110, Chico 95928, 530 895-4217, http://ad03. asmrc.org/ Senator Jim Nielsen, 2634 Forest Ave., Ste. 110, Chico 95928, 530 879- 7424,senator.nielsen@senate.ca.gov GovernorJerryBrown,StateCap- italBuilding,Sacramento95814,916 445-2841, fax 916 558-3160, gover- nor@governor.ca.gov U.S. Representative Doug La- Malfa, 507 Cannon House Office Building, Washington D.C. 20515, 202 225-3076 U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, One Post St., Ste. 2450, San Fran- cisco 94104, 415 393-0707, fax 415 393-0710 U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, 1700 Montgomery St., San Francisco 94111, 510 286-8537, fax 202 224- 0454 Local TehamaCountySupervisors,527- 4655 District 1, Steve Chamblin, Ext. 3015 District 2, Candy Carlson, Ext. 3014 District 3, Dennis Garton, Ext. 3017 District4,BobWilliams,Ext.3018 District 5, Burt Bundy, Ext. 3016 Red Bluff City Manager, Richard Crabtree, 527-2605, Ext. 3061 Corning City Manager, Kristina Miller, 824-7033 YOUR OFFICIALS OPINION » redbluffdailynews.com Tuesday, May 3, 2016 » MORE AT FACEBOOK.COM/RBDAILYNEWS AND TWITTER.COM/REDBLUFFNEWS A6