Google Analytic

Monday, December 23, 2019

Trump’s smoke-and-mirrors trade deal with China


While the benefits of the trade war are speculative, its costs are real: The Tax Foundation estimates that Trump’s tariffs have cost Americans more than $88 billion so far, making this one of the biggest tax hikes in history. To cushion the blow, the administration gave $28 billion to farmers — twice the cost of the 2009 auto industry bailout. Waging a trade war is like hitting your head against a wall; it feels good when you stop. But most trade experts agree with my Council on Foreign Relations colleague Edward Alden when he says: “It’s hard to see this China deal as the vindication of the president’s tactics. It’s a pretty small deal, coming at a pretty high cost.” Indeed, the New York Times reports that Chinese hard-liners are “jubilant and even incredulous” that they have gotten such a good deal. They have good cause to cheer because the real issues with China — from trade barriers to militarism in the South China Sea to human rights violations — remain unaddressed. Trump would rather trumpet “our GREAT new deal with China” than take serious action to address the real challenges from China.

By Max Boot 

Columnist


 

 

Friday, December 20, 2019

Cajun Christmas


Saturday, November 23, 2019

Deeply immoral trashing of public servants by GOP


From article:
Partisan extremes in the United States have become entirely consequentialist in their ethics. The overriding goal may be the end of Roe v. Wade — or its preservation. It may be passage of gun control legislation — or protection of the Second Amendment. In each case, the objective — always measured in saved lives — means everything. But if the objective means everything, then how do we judge the character of leaders or the morality of political methods? If ending Roe, for example, is really all that matters, wouldn’t a corrupt or lying politician who opposes Roe always be better than the ideological alternative? This is a point I have sometimes pressed with pro-Trump, pro-life evangelicals: Would you support a rapist who opposes Roe over a pro-choice Democrat? How about a serial killer? The result is usually uncomfortable silence. If political outcomes are truly all that matter, there is no way to draw necessary moral lines.
 
Since Trump is on “our” side in the culture war, any excess can be forgiven. There is no penalty for corruption, deception or cruelty. And more than this, many Trump supporters have begun to enjoy the transgressive side of our brutal political culture.
Why should we care? Because democracy is hard to sustain in the absence of certain values. Self-government requires ethical hierarchy — a belief that honor is better than dishonor, fairness is better than exploitation and truth is superior to lies. American freedom is not based on relativism; it is based on the belief that the dignity of human beings is a knowable, universal truth. And the success of that principle is demonstrated in the way we treat each other.
There are categorical commitments to respect and truthfulness that can’t be subordinated to partisan outcomes. And they point to an essential, post-Trump task: restoring a decayed moral environment.
By 
Columnist
 
 
 

Thursday, November 21, 2019

It’s the Wise Men vs. the wise guys in Trump’s America

In midtown Manhattan, Trump learned to dominate the news — in his rise, that meant the New York Post, with its screaming, one-sourced stories, an early harbinger of the presidential Twitter strategy. He learned the power of TV. And he learned that tough guys — or “killers,” in a favorite approbation of Trump’s — like Ailes, who presided over this stew of often-abusive power, money and misinformation, were the kinds of guys he could count on.
For one thing was certain: The Wise Men of 68th Street or the United Nations or any of the traditional institutions of expertise weren’t his guys. The question America now faces in impeachment and, should Trump prevail, in the 2020 election, is whose New York will serve us best in the long run — the wise guys’ or the Wise Men’s?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-the-wise-men-vs-the-wise-guys-in-trumps-america/2019/11/14/277f1850-0708-11ea-ac12-3325d49eacaa_story.html

Saturday, November 9, 2019

In Syria and elsewhere, Trump is making Russia great again


From article: Trump has sacrificed the high ground at home as well as abroad. He engages in blatant self-dealing — conditioning aid to Ukraine on political help for himself, operating hotels where foreign emissaries stay, paying off a mistress in violation of campaign finance laws, obstructing justice, etc. — and claims immunity from any consequences. His lawyer argues that Trump couldn’t be prosecuted even for shooting someone. This allows Putin to say: You think I’m bad? Everyone’s corrupt. Look at the United States.

Trump is further normalizing Putin by emulating the Russian leader’s strongman tactics. He calls opponents “human scum” and the media “the enemy of the people” while launching an investigation of the investigators who dared to probe his links with Russia. Trump is also helping Russia by denigrating the FBI, CIA, and even his own ambassador to Ukraine and one of his own National Security Council staff members as agents of a nonexistent “Deep State.” He is thereby undermining the individuals and institutions most dedicated to combating Russian designs. The leading Russian hard-liners — Fiona Hill and John Bolton — have already left the White House, no doubt to Putin’s delight.

“Russia likes seeing President Trump in the White House in part because it provides the Kremlin a chance to point to the ugly side of American politics — to say, just as they did with [President Richard M.] Nixon, look how sordid, how hypocritical,” former Russian foreign minister Andrei Kozyrev recently wrote in the New York Times. The only way to undo some of the damage, he argued, is to impeach and remove Trump. That would send a message to the world similar to the one sent by Nixon’s resignation: “Moral principles still matter in American politics and policy.”


 

 

Democrats preside over stronger economies

Article: But the question naturally follows: Why are expectations for strong stock performance higher when Democrats ascend to the Oval Office? One plausible reason is that their Republican predecessors often leave behind a screwed-up economy with stock prices already depressed.
 Presidents don't have total control over an economy. There are lots of influences — new technology, energy prices, demographic changes — that can boost or drag economic performance.
 But history suggests that economic governance goes south when a Republican president has a Republican Congress backing his bad ideas. Start with 1930, when Republican Herbert Hoover made a troubled economy worse by launching a trade war. Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt had to pick up the pieces.
 Another example is 2008, a time of near financial collapse. George W. Bush's administration had encouraged speculation in house prices, let Wall Street run wild and supercharged deficits thanks to large tax cuts and little control on spending. (Bill Clinton had left him a booming economy with budget surpluses.) Barack Obama inherited Bush's mess.
 It would be unfair to compare investment performance early in Obama's presidency, when stocks had nowhere to go but up, to that of Trump. So let's compare the first 33 months of Trump with the last 33 months of Obama.
 Under Trump, so far, the S&P 500 has risen just over 33%. During Obama's last 33 months, it jumped almost 48%.
 Republicans argue that a Republican-controlled Congress curbed President Clinton's ability to spend. There may be some truth to that. But George W. Bush had Republican majorities in both houses of Congress — for half his presidency — when all fiscal discipline flew out the window.
 The same can be said for the first two years of Trump's presidency. We're now running annual deficits of around $1 trillion a year. And Trump's trade war adds further drag.
 The economy may not currently be "in deep trouble," but what can you say to those who still believe in Trump's magical powers to make everyone rich? You're on your own.
https://www.tribstar.com/opinion/columns/froma-harrop-democrats-preside-over-stronger-economies/article_e99c0a3e-00c2-11ea-9d75-17eb5ca27efa.html?fbclid=IwAR3hIcL00-ylbi_5b0qmSKUvmdwfQzqnUtegj3Ww8F3z9jhwLIjr7Zhw8Tk

Monday, September 2, 2019

Don't Try to Explain Away Trump's Crazy Ideas

Loopiness at the highest level encourages a certain type of staff response. According to the Axios report on the nuclear proposal, the shocked national security briefer answered, “Sir, we’ll look into that.” Which is the answer of a staffer hoping the topic will never be raised again. Under a president such as Trump, a considerable amount of White House staff time and energy is devoted not to managing urgent crises or pursuing the country’s good — but to minimizing the damage of the boss’s strangeness and poor judgment. In this type of atmosphere, the agenda is often set by a leader’s obsessions, rather than by opportunities or obligations. Staffers must hold their breath at every presidential press availability, and during every tweet storm, wondering what random, ridiculous notion might dominate their week, or month, or year.
Then-Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) once referred to Trump’s White House as an “adult day care center.” This means, among other things, that it can’t properly focus on the needs of the nation.
Outside of government, it is easy for Trump’s followers to become invested in his nonsense. The authority of the presidency can give absurd proposals and theories a veneer of credibility. And because of the demands of political tribalism, lunacy can become defined as loyalty. Craziness can spread like a flu epidemic. However low Trump goes, his supporters go low with him.
And then there is the risk — however effective the White House staff, Congress and the courts might be at blocking Trump’s pixilated ideas — that one of them might slip through. And let’s hope it has nothing to do with nuclear weapons.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-try-to-explain-away-trumps-crazy-ideas/2019/08/26/569dc736-c82d-11e9-a4f3-c081a126de70_story.html

Wednesday, August 14, 2019

Trump doesn’t just pollute the social environment with hate. He is the environment.


Eric Hoffer (circa 1898-1983), the longshoreman philosopher, said that “rudeness is the weak man’s imitation of strength.” This anticipated the essential fact about the 45th president — Trump’s fascination with what he utterly lacks and unconvincingly emulates: strength. Hence his admiration for foreign despots and his infantile delight in his own bad manners.

It is one thing to have a president who, drawing upon his repertoire of playground insults, calls his alleged porn-star mistress “Horseface .” Polls indicate that approximately a third of Americans, disproportionately including religiously devout worriers about the coarsening of America’s culture, are more than merely content with this. It is quite another thing to have a president who does not merely pollute the social atmosphere with invectives directed at various disfavored minorities; he uses his inflated office not just to shape this atmosphere but to be this atmosphere.

When Gerald Ford became president after Richard M. Nixon’s resignation, he told the nation: “Our long national nightmare is over.” Today’s long — and perhaps occasionally lethal — national embarrassment will continue at least until Jan. 20, 2021. If it continues longer, this will be more than an embarrassment to the nation, this will be an indictment of it.

Read more from George F. Will’s archive or follow him on Facebook.

 


 

 

For Trump,Empathy is a Foreign Language


When Robert F. Kennedy spoke on the topic of national division at the Cleveland City Club shortly before his death, it was the culmination of a very different public role. “Too often we honor swagger and bluster and the wielders of force; too often we excuse those who are willing to build their own lives on the shattered dreams of others.”

That is exactly what many in the corporate world, and many conservative Christian leaders, are doing in their devotion to Trump: honoring swagger, bluster and force, and excusing a leader who constructs his political success on the cultivation of contempt and slanders against the weak. By their nearly blind support, such leaders are complicit in Trump’s rule by resentment.

“But we can perhaps remember,” said Kennedy, “that those who live with us are our brothers, that they share with us the same short movement of life, that they seek — as we do — nothing but the chance to live out their lives in purpose and happiness, winning what satisfaction and fulfillment they can.”

It is only on empathy — the virtue most foreign to the president — that unity can be built.


 

 

 

 


 

Wednesday, June 27, 2018

A Reckoning After Trump’s Border Separation Policy: What Kind of Country Are We?

The story we tell the world is also the story we tell ourselves. Trump began June by blowing up the G-7 gathering of the world’s leading democracies by refusing to sign a joint statement endorsing “shared values of freedom, democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights and our commitment to promote a rules-based international order.” He slapped tariffs on Canada, Mexico and the European Union, advised France to drop out of the E.U., and urged Germans to support right-wing anti-immigrant parties intent on deposing Chancellor Angela Merkel. The leaders of France and Canada replied by citing “values,” but Trump had moved on to Singapore, where he praised North Korea’s dictator Kim Jong Un, whose regime actively operates a network of gulags, as “a funny guy … very smart … his country does love him. You see the fervor.”

Karl Vick
Time Magazine





 

Tuesday, June 26, 2018

Why many white evangelicals are not protesting family separations on the U.S. border


 
by Michelle Boorstein and Julie Zauzmer  Washington Post

For many conservative Christians, the brutal headlines of children torn from hysterical parents are weighed against other concerns, chief among them what social conservatives call religious liberty regarding issues of marriage and abortion.

But the remarks of many conservative Christians point to what is perhaps the biggest driving force in the diverging attitudes toward the border crisis: culture war. A desire not to be on the same side as secular, socially liberal forces that to many are by far the biggest threat to America.

White evangelicals — who have been among President Trump’s strongest supporters and who perhaps more than any other faith group have Trump’s ear — share the denunciations of families’ being separated, but they believe the issue is more nuanced than media portrayals suggest, and they still view strong support of Trump as important to their other aims.

More liberal faith groups have loudly criticized the Trump administration on this issue. A long list of denominations — several historically black churches, Quakers, Muslim groups, mainline Protestant groups such as the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church (USA), almost every major Jewish group — have issued strong statements condemning the family separations. Many religious leaders took up the call in their sermons this week, some especially objecting to Sessions’s use of the Bible to defend the policy.

Catholic bishops called separating families “immoral” and floated the idea of holding prayer vigils in front of federal courthouses — a tactic that has worked in opposing abortion clinics.

The Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, passed a resolution favoring a legal solution that considers a path to citizenship and calling for families to be kept together, as well as endorsing the importance of border security.

Other religious conservatives see the sudden prominence of immigration in the news — when problems have existed for decades — as a Democratic scheme to slam Trump, and are focused on shoring up support for a president they consider their ally in protecting what they see as the Christian character of America. They are far more focused on what they see as a war for the Christian soul of America, So even if conservatives in his sphere disagree with the White House policy of separating families, they’re not going to partner with more liberal or progressive voices. This is a battle for ideological supremacy.

While conservative evangelicals say they want to find compromise on immigration, that are suspicious of critics of the administration and believe that keeping the Trump movement together needs to come first. They point to one of evangelicals’ key goals in voting in Trump, the appointment of a conservative Supreme Court justice — and note that that justice, Neil M. Gorsuch, recently participated in the high court’s decision in favor of a baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple.

The culture war, in other words, rages on.


 

Wall Street Journal Editorial Board on Immigration


As Trump Veers from Traditional GOP, He Bends It Toward Him


As Trump Veers from Traditional GOP, He Bends It Toward Him

Republicans made an uneasy bargain with the president, but it is his party now more than ever

By Gerald F. Seib  The Wall Street Journal    June 18, 2018

There are three related but separate explanations. One is the nature of the implicit bargain Republicans have made with the president. The second is Mr. Trump’s tightening grip on the party’s base. And the third is simple fear of crossing him.

The upshot is that the GOP has become Mr. Trump’s party in recent weeks, far more than before.

From the outset of the Trump era, traditional Republicans, and many conservative activists, essentially have accepted a kind of deal with the president. He would provide them help on three issues of great importance to most mainstream Republicans: tax cuts, deregulation and appointment of conservative judges.

 

 

Tuesday, December 19, 2017

The religious right isn't doing much for religion


  Peter Wehner, a prominent #NeverTrump conservative, has disowned the evangelical label. He says that the “support being given by many Republicans and white evangelicals to President Trump and now to Mr. Moore have caused me to rethink my identification with both groups. Not because my attachment to conservatism and Christianity has weakened, but rather the opposite. I consider Mr. Trump’s Republican Party to be a threat to conservatism, and I have concluded that the term evangelical - despite its rich history of proclaiming the ‘good news’ of Christ to a broken world - has been so distorted that it is now undermining the Christian witness.”
  The close association with Trump has alienated nonwhite and women who have identified in the past as evangelical, The New York Times reports.
 Now, we are NOT saying that Christians should refrain from participating in the political life of the country, nor are we saying that Trump and this particular generation of evangelical leaders are solely responsible for the decline in religiosity. However, what we are saying is that obsession with political power and cult-like followings of secular political leaders do not preserve faith or create a religious revival. To the contrary, this breeds anger, resentment and obsession with politics, not faith. The notion of Christians as victims in America, martyrs in a culture war, is both at odds with reality and an example of blame-shifting. To cultivate a more religious society and one more in tune with their own values, faith leaders might consider spending less time licking envelopes for Roy Moore and more time tending to their spiritual flocks.
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/15/jennifer-rubin-the-religious-right-isnt-doing-much-for-religion/

The Spirit of Christmas

Thursday, December 14, 2017

Wake up, John Doe. You're the hope of the world.


American Rhetoric: Movie Speech

"Meet John Doe" (1941)

 

                                                     John Doe Delivers National Radio Address

 

 

If anybody should ask you what the average John Doe is like, you couldn't tell him because he's a million and one things. He's Mr. Big and Mr. Small. He's simple and he's wise. He's inherently honest, but he's got a streak of larceny in his heart. He seldom walks up to a public telephone without shoving his finger into the slot to see if somebody left a nickel there.

 

He's the man the ads are written for. He's the fella everybody sells things to. He's Joe Doakes, the world's greatest stooge and the world's greatest strength.

 

Yes, sir -- Yes, sir, we're a great family, the John Does. We are the meek who are -- who are supposed to inherit the earth. You'll find us everywhere. We raise the crops; we dig the mines, work the factories, keep the books, fly the planes and drive the busses. And when a cop yells: "Stand back there, you!" He means us, the John Does!

 

We have existed since time began. We built the pyramids. We pulled the oars for Roman emperors, sailed the boats for Columbus, retreated from Moscow with Napoleon and froze with Washington at Valley Forge.

 

Yes, sir. We've been in there dodging left hooks since before history began to walk. In our struggle for freedom we've hit the canvas many a time, but we always bounced back! Because we're the people -- and we're tough.

 

They've started a lot of talk about free people going soft -- that we can't take it. That's a lot of hooeyl A free people can beat the world at anything, from war to tiddle-de-winks, if we all pull in the same direction.

 

I know a lot of you are saying "What can I do? I'm just a little punk. I don't count." Well, you're dead wrong! The little punks have always counted because in the long run the character of a country is the sum total of the character of its little punks.

But, we've all got to get in there and pitch. We can't win the old ballgame unless we have teamwork. And that's where every John Doe comes in. It's up to him to get together with his teammates. And your teammate, my friend, is the guy next door to you. Your neighbor -- he's a terribly important guy that guy next door. You're gonna need him and he's gonna need you, so look him up. If he's sick, call on him. If he's hungry, feed him. If he's out of a job, find him one.

To most of you, your neighbor is a stranger, a guy with a barkin' dog and high fence around him. Now, you can't be a stranger to any guy that's on your own team. So tear down the fence that separates you. Tear down the fence and you'll tear down a lot of hates and prejudices. Tear down all the fences in the country and you'll really have teamwork.

I know a lot of you are saying to yourselves, "He's askin' for a miracle to happen. He's expectin' people to change all of a sudden. Well, you're wrong. It's no miracle. It's no miracle because I see it happen once every year. And, and so do you -- at Christmas time. There's somethin' swell about the spirit of Christmas, to see what it does to people, all kinds of people.

Now, why can't that spirit, that same, warm Christmas spirit last the whole year around? Gosh, if it ever did, if each and every John Doe would make that spirit last 365 days out of the year, we'd develop such strength, we'd create such a tidal wave of good will that no human force could stand against it. Yes sir, my friends, the meek can only inherit the earth when the John Doe's start lovin' their neighbors.

You better start right now. Don't wait till the game is called on account of darkness.

Wake up, John Doe. You're the hope of the world.

 



 

View from the culture war’s front lines


 

View from the culture war’s front lines

Q: What about overall? If you had to say where things are at today, in terms of church-state separation, compared to when you took over at Americans United in 1992, where are they?

A: Overall things have advanced. I don’t believe this administration’s negative view will prevail very long because it’s inconsistent with what the American people want. They don’t believe government money should go to promote religion. Their hearts and minds are far, far moved from where they were 25 years ago…I think there is an enormous growth in tolerance…Once you make a certain amount of progress, you never get back to the same starting point. People have become more tolerant, more accepting.

It’s only a bad time because the Supreme Court looks to be at genuine risk of falling into the hands of a majority of so-called Originalists.

 I do this sermon called ‘The Two Worst Ways to Make Policy: Constitutional Originalism and Biblical Literalism.’

The Bible is a wonderful book, but it’s not an ethics textbook, that’s not how it was created. And Constitutional Originalism depends on the fiction that you can tell exactly what the first Congress meant when it passed the Bill of Rights. Most of that is lost to history.

 

Q: But you came from a pretty conservative part of the country [he grew up in Bethlehem, Pa.]

A: I remember in high school going to a debate between Buckley and [Socialist leader] Norman Thomas. I thought: Man, this is going to be fun! My Dad and I were big Buckley fans. I can still remember the feeling, sitting in the bleachers, thinking: ‘I think something life changing is happening’ to me. Buckley was talking about himself, and Thomas was talking about community, and how you have to take into account concerns of everyone, and I’m thinking: ‘This is kind of like what I learn about in Sunday school!’ Years later I was with Buckley and I said: ‘Your failure that night created me.’

I realized that night [that] this super-conservativism is just inconsistent with moral principles. Because you can’t live a life that doesn’t touch everybody else’s.

 


 

Tuesday, July 25, 2017

Liberals, Hold You Heads Up!


Sometimes I get so upset at ourselves for not holding up our heads and be proud for what Democrats and Liberals have done for America. Why don't our leaders in congress shout it out! We have many young people that may not know this political history and we have many politically unaware citizens that certainly don't know. I made this video in 2008 to spread the word.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV7PiqF36WE

When I first started studying politics I noticed how the "right" does a great job at demoralizing the other side. I would say going on 30 years. It worked so great many people over the years have voted Republican. I just hope what we see now in our politics, that America has not turned into a far right country. Help us all if it has!

Thursday, July 13, 2017

The Hijacked American Presidency

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/opinion/trump-hijacked-american-presidency.html

Every now and then we are going to have to do this: Step back from the daily onslaughts of insanity emanating from Donald Trump’s parasitic presidency and remind ourselves of the obscenity of it all, registering its magnitude in its full, devastating truth.

There is something insidious and corrosive about trying to evaluate the severity of every offense, trying to give each an individual grade on the scale of absurdity. Trump himself is the offense. Everything that springs from him, every person who supports him, every staffer who shields him, every legislator who defends him, is an offense. Every partisan who uses him — against all he or she has ever claimed to champion — to advance a political agenda and, in so doing, places party over country, is an offense.

We must remind ourselves that Trump’s very presence in the White House defiles it and the institution of the presidency. Rather than rising to the honor of the office, Trump has lowered the office with his whiny, fragile, vindictive pettiness.

The presidency has been hijacked.

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Inside Russia’s Social Media War on America


For many Americans, Russian hacking remains a story about the 2016 election. But there is another story taking shape. Marrying a hundred years of expertise in influence operations to the new world of social media, Russia may finally have gained the ability it long sought but never fully achieved in the Cold War: to alter the course of events in the U.S. by manipulating public opinion. The vast openness and anonymity of social media has cleared a dangerous new route for antidemocratic forces. “Using these technologies, it is possible to undermine democratic government, and it’s becoming easier every day,” says Rand Waltzman of the Rand Corp., who ran a major Pentagon research program to understand the propaganda threats posed by social media technology.


If that sounds alarming, it helps to understand the battlescape of this new information war. As they tweet and like and upvote their way through social media, Americans generate a vast trove of data on what they think and how they respond to ideas and arguments–literally thousands of expressions of belief every second on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and Google. All of those digitized convictions are collected and stored, and much of that data is available commercially to anyone with sufficient computing power to take advantage of it.


That’s where the algorithms come in. American researchers have found they can use mathematical formulas to segment huge populations into thousands of subgroups according to defining characteristics like religion and political beliefs or taste in TV shows and music. Other algorithms can determine those groups’ hot-button issues and identify “followers” among them, pinpointing those most susceptible to suggestion. Propagandists can then manually craft messages to influence them, deploying covert provocateurs, either humans or automated computer programs known as bots, in hopes of altering their behavior.



By raising doubts about the validity of the 2016 vote and the vulnerability of future elections, Russia has achieved its most important objective: undermining the credibility of American democracy.
For now, investigators have added the names of specific trolls and botnets to their wall charts in the offices of intelligence and law-enforcement agencies. They say the best way to compete with the Russian model is by having a better message. “It requires critical thinkers and people who have a more powerful vision” than the cynical Russian view, says former NSA deputy Inglis. And what message is powerful enough to take on the firehose of falsehoods that Russia is deploying in targeted, effective ways across a range of new media? One good place to start: telling the truth.

http://time.com/4783932/inside-russia-social-media-war-america/

Trump’s Loyalty Test

“It is significant that we take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office or entity,” reads an explainer on the oath on the FBI website. “A government based on individuals–who are inconsistent, fallible and often prone to error–too easily leads to tyranny on the one extreme or anarchy on the other.”
In practice, this means the FBI is built to resist loyalty requests from a President. Andrew McCabe, the bureau’s acting director and a candidate for the job, has testified to the Senate that there will be no letup, whatever the wishes of the President, in the inquiry into his campaign’s contacts with the Russians. “There has been no effort to impede our investigation to date,” he said. “You cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, from protecting the American people, from upholding the Constitution.”


Both factions have labored to protect the President from his worst instincts. Aides have tried everything from restricting access to the Oval Office to filling the President’s schedule in a futile bid to minimize distractions. Staffers are frustrated by leaks about staff turmoil coming from Trump’s extended circle of allies. But Trump has so far resisted attempts to impose order, insisting on long stretches of unstructured time to watch television and call allies. Unlike most CEOs, he is an “instinctive and reactive” leader, in the words of one aide, “unwilling or incapable” of hewing to a long-term strategy. Others inside the White House have likened his itchy Twitter finger and obsession with cable chatter to a drug addict who cannot grasp that his habits have become a problem. A single segment “can take over the day” for the entire West Wing, complains a staffer.
The result is a dysfunctional workplace. The President has made clear that he believes he has been let down by his staff. Meanwhile, his staff is increasingly hesitant to sacrifice their credibility for a boss who won’t protect them. When news of the classified intelligence given to the Russians came out, the press office, still reeling from supplying bad information on the firing of Comey, sent out McMaster to issue a spirited defense. One day later, when news broke of Comey’s memo alleging that Trump had asked him to drop the Flynn investigation, no White House staff rushed to the cameras. Instead, reporters received a denial from the White House by email. No adviser to the President chose to attach their name to his defense.
http://time.com/4783929/president-trump-loyalty-test/

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

Trump Isn’t a Pragmatist. He Doesn’t Understand Ideology.

Article: It is widely known that Trump — whose political profile over the decades has vacillated from liberal to conservative to moderate to populist, and supported and opposed abortion rights, higher taxes on the rich, and universal health care — does not care very much about political ideas. This explanation is true, but incomplete. The president also does not know very much about political ideas. And it is not merely the details of policy that he lacks. Trump has no context for processing ideas. He does not understand which kinds of ideas imply support for which kinds of policies, nor why political figures tend to believe what they do, nor why they agree or disagree with one another. He is capable of forming strongly held beliefs about people in politics, but he does so in entirely personal terms. Trump’s flamboyant, weird ignorance reveals a distinct pattern. He is not so much nonideological as sub-ideological.
Trump thinks about politics like a low-information voter, which enabled him to speak their language naturally. His stated belief during the campaign that he could expertly craft a series of popular deals — “it’s going to be so easy” — appealed to low-information voters because it earnestly described the political world as they see it. Trump’s experience as a developer and professional celebrity have put a narcissistic gloss on Trump’s low-information worldview. He sees politics as a variation of real estate or reality television — a field where the players are sorted not so much as combatants on opposing teams (though they may compete at times) but on a hierarchy of success, with the big stars at the top sharing interests in common. His vague boasts that his presidency would create terrific things that everybody loves and is winning again is a version of how he truly sees the world.
Politics is a strange institution that forces committed professionals who have coherent philosophical beliefs to persuade voters who mostly do not. Barack Obama accomplished this in highbrow fashion. His characteristic political style was to incorporate the values of both left and right and try to technocratically synthesize the perspectives together. (“There’s not a liberal America and a conservative America; there’s the United States of America.”) Trump accomplishes it in lowbrow style, by literally not understanding the source of the disagreement.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/trump-isnt-a-pragmatist-he-doesnt-understand-ideology.html?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Intelligencer%20-%20May%203%2C%202017&utm_term=Subscription%20List%20-%20Daily%20Intelligencer%20%281%20Year%29

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Deconstructing Trump-speak

Deconstructing Trump-speak
"Trump's trademark talk is full of rambling, aside-filled bursts of simple but definitive words, laden with self-congratulatory bravado and claims that have fact-checkers working overtime," AP's Matt Sedensky writes after asking linguists about Trump's rhetorical signatures:
• Kathleen Hall Jamieson: "The public speech of the president in the past has been crafted speech, it has been considered speech. Presidents prepared before speeches, presidents prepared before press conferences, presidents had stock answers ready to give."
• "Word choice is typically simple — to Trump, things are terrible or incredible, best or worst. Asides are frequent. And repetition is rampant: When Trump wants to get a point across, he makes it again and again."
• "Trump has suggested there's method to his word choice ... that the simple terms he often opts for can be more effective than the flowery eloquence listeners may be used to from presidents. 'I went to an Ivy League school. I'm very highly educated. I know words; I have the best words,' he said during the campaign."
• Historian Kristen Kobes Du Mez of Calvin College: "I don't know that any president has ever used 'super-duper' in his rhetoric before."

The Trump Doctrine
Yahoo's Olivier Knox, surveying a wide range of diplomats in Washington, finds that Trump's "unpredictable approach to world affairs [has] unsettled rivals, but also sometimes unnerves even close allies who wonder if anyone can speak with authority for the Twitter-reliant commander in chief."
"They also noted that a large number of pivotal positions at the Pentagon and State Department remain vacant, hindering the regular policymaking process."

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Without Truth there is no Trust.

Trust is a transaction between leaders and those they lead. Throughout our history, the deeply held beliefs of various Presidents have taken the nation into war, delayed the pursuit of peace, alienated allies, appeased enemies. At other times, presidential beliefs have conquered the continent, freed the slaves, taken us to the moon because the President firmly believed we could get there. As citizens, it is vital that we be able to believe our President; it is also vital that we know what he believes, and why. This President has made both a severe challenge.
Nancy Gibbs, EDITOR This appears in the April 03, 2017 issue of TIME.


Without truth there is no trust.

Speaking on national television the night before that 1970 election, Senator Ed Muskie of Maine addressed the real choice confronting the voters: "There are only two kinds of politics. They're not radical and reactionary or conservative and liberal or even Democratic and Republican. There are only the politics of fear and the politics of trust. One says you are encircled by monstrous dangers. Give us power over your freedom so we may protect you. The other says the world is a baffling and hazardous place, but it can be shaped to the will of men. "Cast your vote," he concluded, "for trust in the ancient traditions of this home for freedom."

Thursday, March 16, 2017

The Man Who Wants to Unmake the West


 

Europeans are starting to worry that Steve Bannon has the EU in his cross hairs. Here's how the White House could genuinely help pull it apart. To Bannon, a strengthened EU is nothing less than a risk to civilization: a body that dilutes national identity and whose border policies allow Islam to invade the West, one refugee at a time.

Bannon was an executive at Breitbart News, an activist-editor-gadfly known mostly on the far right, and the “Brexit” campaign was something of a pet project. He hitched onto the Tea Party movement early in Barack Obama’s presidency and noticed a similar right-populist wave rising across the Atlantic, where fed-up rural, white Britons were anxious about immigration and resentful of EU bureaucrats. The cause touched on some of Bannon’s deepest beliefs, including nationalism, Judeo-Christian/Catholic nationalist identity and the evils of Big Government.

Bannon’s vision, as laid out in public remarks and private conversations, opposes international organizations in favor of empowering nation-states.

Bannon’s public remarks, and accounts from people who have spoken with him, make clear he believes Brexit and Trump’s election are part of something bigger, a global political revolt that could restore what he calls lost “sovereignty” on the continent.

Bannon told an audience of religious conservative activists at the Vatican in 2014. “That is really the building blocks that built Western Europe and the United States, and I think it’s what can see us forward.”

To Bannon, however, a strengthened EU is nothing less than a risk to civilization: a body that dilutes national identity and whose border policies allow Islam to invade the West, one refugee at a time. Bannon, who did not respond to interview requests, has repeatedly made clear his views about Europe. Most revealing is the widely read transcript of his Vatican talk, in which Bannon declared that “the world, and particularly the Judeo-Christian West, is in a crisis." Europe’s citizens, he said, are restless for “sovereignty for their country, they want to see nationalism.” And, Bannon added: “They don’t believe in this kind of pan-European Union."

Bannon has approvingly cited Maurras’ distinction between the “legal country,” led by elected officials, and the “real country” of ordinary people, as a frame for the populist revolt underway.

Bannon “made it clear he had lost faith in Europe as secularism and arriving Muslim immigrants had eroded traditional Christian values as the founding pillar of our civilization,” Rose wrote. “Losing the Christian faith, in his view, has weakened Europe—it’s neither willing nor able to confront Islam’s rising power and some European Muslims’ insistence on privileged treatment of their religion."

Bannon’s solution? Rebuilding the firm borders between European states—to keep the Muslim immigrants out, and to keep in the religious and national identity. “I have admired nationalist movements throughout the world,” Bannon told the Wall Street Journal shortly after the U.S. election. “I have said repeatedly, strong nations make great neighbors."

 

 

 

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/trump-steve-bannon-destroy-eu-european-union-214889

 

 

 

But do they? Many a European leader, not to mention historian, disagrees. Runaway nationalism led to, among many other horribles, Franz Ferdinand’s assassination and World War I, and gave us Hitler, Mussolini and Milosevic. Those things, in turn, drew America’s military across the Atlantic.

 

“I don’t get it. Americans have spent a lot of their history either fighting against Europeans or fighting on behalf of Europeans against other Europeans,” says Charles Kupchan, who served until January as the top official for European affairs at the Obama White House. “Anybody who wants to bring Europe down risks putting us back in the 19th century or the early 20th century.”

 

European officials note that this happens to be a goal of Russia’s president, Putin, who is busily undermining the post-Cold War internationalist order in favor of a nationalistic, geography-based power politics. A U.S. effort to dismantle the EU, one Western European government official says with distaste, “would put America on the same side as Putin.”

 

The thought is rattling Europe at the highest levels. In January, Donald Tusk, president of the EU’s European Council—who calls himself “an incurably pro-American European who is fanatically devoted to trans-Atlantic cooperation”—sent a letter to member states characterizing the Trump administration as a menace to the Union, alongside the likes of Russia and radical Islam. “[W]ith the new administration seeming to put into question the last 70 years of American foreign policy,” Tusk wrote, America now had to be considered not a stalwart friend of the EU but a “threat.”

 

Wolfgang Ischinger, former German ambassador to the United States, put it in starker terms in remarks at a February security conference in Munich attended by top Trump officials. “Is President Trump going to continue a tradition of half a century of being supportive of the project of European integration, or is he going to continue to advocate EU member countries to follow the Brexit example?” Ischinger asked. “If he did that, it would amount to a kind of nonmilitary declaration of war. It would mean conflict between Europe and the United States. Is that what the U.S. wants?

 

 

 

 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is a favorite target of Breitbart, almost always in the context of her “open door” migrant policy. The news site, formerly run by Bannon, is working toward opening a bureau in Berlin in time for the country’s general election later this year, in which Merkel will seek a fourth term.

 

Not long ago, Breitbart cautiously praised Emmanuel Macron, a center-of-left French presidential candidate running as an independent, as a “French Tony Blair” willing to consider dismantling an unreformed European Union. But the site has since changed its tone, going all in for Marine Le Pen, while deriding the “Pro-EU Macron,” in articles such as, “France Blames Russia For Poor Performance of Left-Wing Presidential Candidate.”

 

In a January letter to EU member states, Donald Tusk, the European Council president, lamented the rise of “national egoism” within Europe, taking a shot at the kinds of Euroskeptic movements Bannon has encouraged. Still, after a February meeting with Mike Pence, Tusk said the U.S. vice president had committed America’s “unequivocal support for the idea of a united Europe.”

 

 

 

Elections to watch:

Netherlands- March- Dutch election results: Europe's far-right populists fail first test

France - Spring

Germany - September

Italy - Summer

 
and Mexico - Summer 2018

Deep States and Demagogues


It really is an upside down world when I am posting a Bret Stephens column. As a political junkie, the world has titled off its axis a little too much for comfort. It is indeed, a lopsided world for many of us.

But as the Turkish example reminds us, whatever else exists in Washington, it isn’t a deep state. When Mr. Trump demanded the resignations of 46 U.S. attorneys, they all left, except for Manhattan’s Preet Bharara, who asked for a firing and got it. The CIA is run by a Trump appointee, and the only generals in charge of federal departments are the ones the president nominated to their positions. The GOP establishment has rolled over for the new president. As for the “corporatist, globalist media” that Steve Bannon rails against, it also includes Fox News. This is paranoid time. Specifically, we are again in territory best identified by Richard Hofstadter in “The Paranoid Style in American Politics.” The paranoid style can be evidence of irrationalism bordering on mental illness. It can also be a form of a cunning instrumentalism to destroy your political opponents by stoking hysterical fears in your supporters. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is a master of the latter method. What about Mr. Trump? Conservatives used to understand the ideological provenance of words and the consequences that flow from treating political differences as mortal threats to the state. Too bad too many intelligent conservatives gave up worrying about the use of language sometime last year. They will come to regret what they’ve allowed, perhaps only when they, too, become its victims. ~Conservative Opinion Writer Bret Stephens
https://www.wsj.com/articles/deep-states-and-demagogues-1489446006

Republicans are defining lunacy down

Children sitting in Professor Trump’s history class would learn that Obama was America’s first Muslim president; that his co-religionists celebrated in the streets following the 9/11 attacks; that their vaccination schedule is the dangerous scam of greedy doctors; that Ted Cruz’s father might have been involved in the death of John F. Kennedy; that Hillary Clinton might have been involved in the death of Vince Foster; that unnamed liberals might have been involved in the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. More recently, Trump has claimed — based, so far, on nothing — that Obama ordered the bugging of Trump Tower. And Trump’s allies, with the White House’s blessing, have alleged the existence of a “deep state,” conducting what talk radio host Mark Levin calls a “silent coup.” Trump does not support things because they are true; they are true because he supports them. And he expects everyone who works for him to publicly and vocally embrace his version of reality. Day by day, Republicans are lowering their standards of sanity to defend an administration seized by conspiracy thinking. If they do not stand up to this trend, they will be defining lunacy down. ~Conservative writer Michael Gerson
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-are-defining-lunacy-down/2017/03/13/7f505ba4-0821-11e7-b77c-0047d15a24e0_story.html?utm_term=.93e7412f7449

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

States are writing bills to require presidential candidates to release tax returns

States are writing bills to require presidential candidates to release tax returns: They're responding to President-elect Donald Trump's decision to not release his tax returns during the presidential campaign, breaking decades of precedent.