Author: hamilton1788

Hamilton, the economic nationalist, and Jefferson, the small government democrat, are the yin and yang of American political history.  Then and now, they combine about as well as oil and water.  And yet, the Trump GOP features both.

The CLs are pure Jeffersonians.  Minus their support for social programs that help deserving white people, the Reactionaries, with their loathing of urban culture and support for states’ rights, are as well.  Trump, on the other hand, sounds like a caricature of Hamilton at times, with his tariffs, his love of military splendor, and his “America First” bluster.  No wonder the party struggles to get anything done!

If the GOP is both Hamilton and Jefferson, who are the Democrats?  Mostly, the people who were left out by both of them–minorities and women.

Issues and attitudes change, but there can be no doubt about it–Calvin Coolidge was a CL.  Personally austere, he was determined to keep the size of the federal government as small as possible.  He presided over a lopsided boom, and missed the Great Depression.  It is fortunate for his reputation, and for the country, that he did.

Hoover, on the other hand, was a PBP.  He was willing to use the power of the federal government to boost the economy even before the Great Depression.   In the final analysis, however, he was overwhelmed by the magnitude of the task before him, and he was unwilling to take the steps that were necessary to generate a real recovery, because he thought the cure ultimately was worse than the disease.  As history shows us, he was wrong;  FDR changed the country in innumerable ways, but he didn’t destroy it as a liberal democracy.

Hoover reminds me of Lord John Russell during the Potato Famine:  an intelligent and decent man who was constrained by limited government ideology from doing what needed to be done to respond to a disaster of unimaginable proportions.

After reading the articles about the Masterpiece oral argument, I was fairly convinced that the outcome would be a narrow decision for the baker, probably focused on some absurd distinction between bakers and other merchants.  That didn’t happen.  Instead, we got an even more narrow decision based on indiscreet comments made by various members of the Colorado reviewing panel that has no meaningful precedential value.  That was no accident.

The clear message from Justice Kennedy is that gay rights are worthy of protection, but that gay triumphalism won’t be rewarded, and that both sides need to be more tolerant of each other.  He believes the issue will become less contentious with time, and that the better course today is to avoid throwing gas on the fire.  Frankly, I agree with him.

One other benefit of the decision–it will have an impact on the travel ban case, as the Court will now have a more difficult time explaining away the significance of Trump’s tweets.

Bret Stephens says Trump is now officially the worst GOP president ever–worse than Herbert Hoover.  Is he right?  Here’s how the two titans stack up:

                                                Hoover     vs.       Trump

Party                                      GOP                        GOP

Successful Businessman    Yes                          Arguable

Accomplishment                 Famine Relief        Trump Tower

Gov’t Experience                 Yes                            No

Faced Crisis                          Yes                            Not Yet

Corrupt                                 No                              Yes

Second Term                       No                                ???

And the winner is . . . Hoover, by a landslide.  Unlike Trump, he was clean and competent.  More on him and the GOP tomorrow.

Deport illegal aliens.  Stop sanctuary cities.  Drain the swamp.

Those are the predominant themes in the campaign ads in South Carolina, where there are no sanctuary cities and very few illegal aliens, and where the swamp is colored bright red.

Can’t these people come up with something a bit more original?

The line on what is acceptable and what isn’t on TV is, admittedly, moving fairly rapidly, but there are still a few words that are entirely too vulgar to be used to describe anyone, and she used one of them.  The problem wasn’t her vehemence; it was simply bad taste.  That makes her case different than Roseanne’s; racism isn’t tasteless–it’s evil.

And why bother linking Ivanka to her dad’s views on immigration?  If you want to complain about, say, her business dealings, fine, but does anyone believe she could change his position on dealing with “animals?”  I just don’t see it.  Save your ammunition for issues on which Ivanka really could make a difference if she tried harder.

I will be on vacation for the next few days.  Postings will resume late Wednesday.

There is support in both political parties and in Europe for a stronger stance on trade issues with China.  In the face of that, Trump imposes tariffs on . . . steel and aluminum from Canada, Mexico, and the EU!

It only makes sense if you understand that Trump believes the following:

1.  Values do not matter in international relations–only interests do;
2.  Trade deficits are the scorecard by which international relationships are judged;
3.  Our so-called allies are among the worst offenders, and are no better than China; and
4.  Our financial and market power are so strong, we can bring the rest of the world to heel simply by playing hardball.

In the entire country, you can probably count the number of other people who believe these things on your hands.  They’re the ones making the decisions, however.

This is going to do enormous damage to our country.  By the time Trump leaves office, Israel and Saudi Arabia will be our only allies.  Obama wanted to encircle China;  after NAFTA collapses and Mexico and Canada turn on us, we will be the nation encircled by hostile nations.

 

My wife is on Facebook, but I’m not, and never will be, for the following reasons:

1.  No one outside my family has any reason to take any interest in the details of my life;
2.  While the use of the internet inevitably leads to some loss of privacy, Facebook takes that to a whole new level;
3.  Facebook’s business model requires them to sell information you would ordinarily think is confidential for a profit, which means that any reforms on their part can only be nibbling around the edges; and
4.  The “like” feature encourages unhealthy competition and imposes conformity within groups, both of which can lead to depression, particularly among teenagers.

The power of social media by the government to enforce both legal and informal norms has barely been explored, but you have to believe it will happen.  Imagine that you live in China and Xi is on a Chinese service similar to Facebook.  Wouldn’t you be afraid not to be his friend?  Wouldn’t you be afraid not to be on record liking his postings?

1984 is on the horizon, but I don’t plan to be a part of it.

Political correctness is commonly understood as an unwarranted hypersensitivity to slights tied to race, appearance, religion, or sexual orientation.  To many Reactionaries, however, it really means that the left refuses to accept and debate the “fact” that ethnic and religious minorities are a grave threat to the well-being of the country.

Of course, their use of the term “political correctness” in place of overtly racist words is an implicit concession that public displays of racism are unacceptable.  It is, therefore, itself a manifestation of PC.

That’s Kim Kardashian, of course, who apparently met with Trump at the White House to discuss prison reform.

Honestly, you couldn’t make this stuff up.  For his next act, I fully expect Trump to ignore his North Korea experts and call on Dennis Rodman for advice.  Since Rodman, unlike the experts, actually knows Kim Jong-un, talking to him would actually make some sense.

There are times when Trump looks like a dog peeing over Obama’s marks.  Is that really true, however, or is he primarily motivated by standard GOP positions, and by his own weird ideology?

I would break it down this way:

1.  Taxes and deregulation:  He has just adopted the default GOP position.  That includes his stance on Obamacare, which is shared by most of the party.
2.  Energy and the environment:  His position on climate change is also standard GOP fare.  Another Republican president might have chosen to stay in the Paris Agreement, but quietly refused to implement it;  making lots of noise is a reflection of his personality.  His affection for fossil fuels, particularly coal, is largely motivated by his personal thing about jobs done by brawny men.  Reducing the size of Obama’s new monuments, however, appears to be an effort to attack his legacy.
3.  Relationships with democrats and dictators:  He is primarily motivated here by his unique affection for strong men and his idiosyncratic beliefs about trade deficits.
4.  Russia:  Another weird, personal thing having nothing to do with the GOP or Obama.
5.  Middle East:  The attacks on Syrian chemical weapons facilities were a clear effort to distance himself from Obama.  His policy with regard to IS and the Syrian government is just a more confused version of what Obama did.  His rejection of the Iran deal was probably partially motivated by his desire to destroy an Obama accomplishment, but Saudi flattery and Israeli lobbying were more important factors.  Moving the embassy to Jerusalem was a rejection of longstanding policy, not just a slap at Obama.
6. The TPP:  Turning his back on Obama’s deal was consistent with his longstanding belief that the US should use its market power to impose its will on other countries on a bilateral basis.  He would have done it regardless of who negotiated the deal.

And so, the bottom line is that obliterating Obama’s legacy is not as important a consideration as ideology, whether his own or his party’s.

 

The most important thing to remember about Italy is that it is not Greece, for the following reasons:

1.  Italy has a much larger economy, and is much more important to the EU;
2.  The Greek crisis was essentially a Third World debt and hot money issue caused in part by the euro and exacerbated by the inability to devalue, as, say, Argentina would under similar circumstances.  Italy’s problems are chronic, and were not caused by the euro.  Getting rid of the euro will not make them go away, but would cause unimaginable short-term pain.
3. The Germans have far less control over the EU today than they did in 2015.  Bailouts, however, are no more popular now than they were then.

So where is this going?  Here’s my fearless prediction:

1.  The new government will not propose to get rid of the euro, but will run much larger deficits;
2.  Interest rates will go up substantially, but not to Greek levels;
3.  The EU will not take any effective action to bring the government to heel.  On the other hand, there will be no bailout, either; and
4.  Ultimately, the Italian people and the government will have to decide whether the pain of significantly higher interest rates is worth it.

State government in Florida has been dominated by the GOP for more years than I can remember.  You would think, as a result, that Republican candidates would emphasize the glories of living under Republican rule.  Instead, you get this:

1.  Adam Putnam, the Florida establishment candidate for governor, is running commercials in which he portrays himself as a humble fifth generation farmer supporting regular working people against the claims of a liberal elite that thinks everyone should go to college.  In reality:  Putnam went to the University of Florida; he is apparently worth about $30 million, which clearly was inherited; he has been a politician for a large part of his adult life; and the liberal elites he so despises are nowhere to be found in Tallahassee.  Any objections he might have to the way the state has been run need to be directed at Republicans.
2.  Rick Scott, the current governor, is running for the U.S. Senate.  His commercials call on the electorate to elect a businessman to drain the swamp in Washington.  Of course:  Scott has been a politician, not a businessman, for many years; the D.C. swamp is completely controlled by Republicans; and Trump was elected partly on the basis of his business background, which hasn’t exactly helped him drain the swamp.

What does one take from this?  The angry right-wing populist narrative is such an important element in GOP thinking, it has to be emphasized even when it doesn’t make any sense.

The country was settled largely by people fleeing religious persecution in Europe.  The indigenous people fought back, but were overwhelmed.  They ultimately wound up in semi-autonomous political areas with few resources and no political power.

The founders of the country were firm believers in Enlightenment values, both at home and abroad.  The country prospered and grew.  As time went on, however, its leaders started to view the world less in terms of rules, and more in terms of pure power.  Liberal democracy started to fray.  The public became more and more accepting of extreme actions if they were deemed necessary to protect their system, while the country became more isolated abroad.

Is it Israel or America?  You decide.

America is SEC football, and patriotic parades, and Blake Shelton on The Voice.

America is Silicon Valley, and the Metropolitan Museum, and the NBA.

America is Dolly Parton and Florida Georgia Line.

America is Lady Gaga and Kanye West.

America is hot dogs and apple pie.

America is pizza and tacos.

America is Dale Earnhardt at the Daytona 500.

America is LeBron James in Game 7.

America is John Wayne and Clint Eastwood.

America is Robert Redford and Brad Pitt.

America is West Virginia coal miners.

America is Uber and Tesla.

America is the plains of Nebraska.

America is the Manhattan skyline.

America is Ronald Reagan.

America is Barack Obama.

 

America isn’t just some of these things–it’s all of these things.

Enjoy your Memorial Day holiday!