Category: Uncategorized

The Trump tax cut has been a failure, both economically and politically. Even the GOP base, and some billionaires, can support higher taxes on the wealthy today so long as the proceeds are used for purposes that don’t offend the sensibilities of reactionaries. And so, if the objective is to reduce inequality and improve the lives of average Americans, the real questions are:

1. What taxes should be raised, and how?
2. How should the money be spent?

As to #1, the consensus answer clearly isn’t the unconstitutional and impractical wealth tax; there is no need to reinvent the wheel here. The place to start is with the indefensible exemption of capital gains and income above roughly $130,000 from FICA. Next, I would substantially increase the estate tax. Third, I would roll back a large part (probably not all) of the corporate tax cut. Finally, I would increase the highest marginal rates of income tax to somewhere around 50 percent.

How would the money be spent? First, on filling the holes in Social Security and Medicare. Second, on infrastructure improvements. Third, on a larger EITC. Finally, I would increase Obamacare subsidies with anything that remained. Since the reactionary right only hates spending programs which appear, in their eyes, to benefit unjustly privileged, lazy minorities, these ideas should meet with their approval.

In the end, there are only two options for the American military presence in Afghanistan: the Korean model, in which we stay indefinitely to maintain a stalemate; and the Vietnam model, in which we make an ostensibly face-saving deal with the enemies knowing perfectly well that it ultimately result in the destruction of our allies.

Trump’s preference for the Vietnam model was clear even before he sold out the Kurds in Syria. Can there be any doubt about his intentions now? They don’t even have oil in Afghanistan. I’m afraid opium doesn’t count.

If I’m a member of the Afghan government, I’m working on my exit strategy today. Waiting would be a serious mistake. From Trump’s perspective, on the other hand, the most important concern is to make sure that the Taliban’s parade in Kabul takes place after the 2020 election. Nothing else will matter to him.

America is more divided today than it has been since the 1960’s. How can that be fixed? Well, I don’t have any idea how to stop identity voting, but I can suggest some constructive policy positions that would have substantial support from both sides of the aisle. And so, I will be running a special feature entitled “Reuniting America” this coming week.

I did a parody of this song for Bernie years ago, but this one is even more timely.

RUDY CAN’T FAIL

How’d you get so rude and reckless?

Your image is no longer speckless

And the libs eat you for breakfast.

Rudy can’t fail.

__________

He replies:

I know that my job makes you nervous

But I’m working in Donald Trump’s service

‘Cause owning libs gives me purpose.

Rudy can’t fail.

________________

He went to the White House

To realize his dream

‘Cause what he needs, only Trump has.

The left may curse

And they’ll press him till he hurts.

Rudy can’t fail.

_______________

He’ll never get over his temper

And he’s hated by all the right papers

But Trump is his only savior.

Rudy can’t fail.

________________

How’d you get so rude and reckless

When your boss is so obviously feckless?

Now the libs will eat you for breakfast.

Rudy can’t fail.

Parody of “Rudie Can’t Fail” by The Clash.

Donald Trump’s ethics revolve solely around power. He has it, and you don’t. The strong do as they will, and the weak suffer what they must. Ubermen aren’t constrained by ethics or the law. If you don’t like it, too bad! Get over it!

Except that when someone else has the hammer, he immediately goes into victimhood mode. Where’s my due process? It’s a rigged witch hunt! Poor, poor, pitiful me!

Does anyone out there find this as grating and obnoxious as I do? Don’t you just want to tell him to get over it?

AOC and Ilhan Omar have endorsed Sanders. Is that a game changer?

Of course not. Bernie may, in the end, win the race to the left with Warren, but that won’t help him win the nomination. Only a massive recession can do that.

You’re Mitch McConnell, and you’re looking at conducting an impeachment trial in a few months. You’re reasonably confident that there will not be enough votes to remove Trump from office, so your real objective is to limit the damage in the 2020 election. With that in mind, how do you run the trial?

In general terms, he has two choices: he can run it as an actual de novo evidentiary hearing, with lots of live testimony and cross-examination; or he can use the record created by the House and just hear legal argument on it. The first approach, from his perspective, is high risk and high reward; Trump may insist on it in an effort to completely vindicate himself, but if the American public hears lots of credible testimony on TV from clearly honest civil servants about a quid pro quo (which will probably happen), the optics won’t be too good. The second approach is weaker theater, and less risky, but it requires the Senate to rely on a record that won’t be favorable to the GOP cause, to say the least.

There is no perfect choice here. I’m guessing that McConnell will ultimately pick a process that looks more like the second option, and that the defense will ultimately be that the attempts at a quid pro quo were improper, but not egregious enough to constitute “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Will Trump agree to that, as opposed to a long shot attempt at total vindication that is more consistent with his public statements and personality? We’ll see.

Impeachment may present a greater problem for Susan Collins than for Trump, because it leaves her with two lousy options. If she ultimately votes to convict, the Trumpist right in Maine will be outraged, and she needs every vote she can get in 2020; on the other hand, if she votes to acquit, she will lose swing voters that she also needs, and she will be sending the message for all time that selling foreign policy for private gain is OK. It’s an unappealing menu, to say the least.

So what does she do? Trump will probably survive with or without her support, and the Trumpist right has nowhere else to go. If I were in her position, I would view a vote for conviction as the better option. Of course, she could try to find middle ground by acquitting, but supporting some sort of censure motion, but that is unlikely to satisfy anyone.

Thomas Friedman is right; the heroes of the Ukraine investigation are the civil servants who had the guts to risk their jobs and tell the truth, not the Democrats. Trump, of course, thinks these people are part of the “deep state.” Is he right?

Of course not. The witnesses against him are complying with the law and ordinary ethical principles attached to liberal democratic government. A “deep state” operates lawlessly in the dark purely at the whim of authoritarian politicians in power. It is the antithesis of the bureaucratic opposition to Trump.

Trump was undoubtedly hoping that the MSM would fall for his favorite false equivalence trick, and that Biden would be damaged by the Ukraine story just as much as he was. It isn’t working, because this isn’t 2016, and the MSM have learned to push back vigorously against his lies. They are making it clear, every time the story comes up, that there is no evidence that the Bidens did anything illegal. The consequences are plain to see.

It is unpleasant and unprecedented for reporters to have to call our president a liar over and over again, but what else can they do, if they want to avoid becoming mouthpieces for the lies? No wonder the Trump campaign is pouring so much money into Facebook, which won’t do the same thing.

It’s November, 2020. It’s a beautiful day. The sun is out, and the sky is blue. American unemployment is below 4 percent, and the country is more or less at peace. The markets are doing pretty well. Life seems good.

But Elizabeth Warren says America has turned into a hellhole, and that drastic change is needed, immediately. It’s an emergency. We have to do something now.

Can she persuade the public that the apparent idyll is an illusion? If she wants to win, she will have to.

So Trump won’t use American troops to protect the Kurds, but he has no problem keeping a few in Syria to protect the oil. Need I say more?

Many Democrats are worried that an unsuccessful attempt to impeach will result in an electoral disaster in 2020. I don’t think that will happen, for the following reasons:

1. Trump is guiltier than Clinton was;
2. You can make a much better case that his actions are “high crimes and misdemeanors;”
3. The country is even more polarized now than it was then; and
4. 1998 was a midterm election. Overreaching by the GOP helped to drive up Democratic turnout. 2020 is a presidential election, so the bases will already be mobilized, and turnout should not be an issue either way.

(Donald Trump is alone in the Oval Office when he hears an infinitely deep and powerful voice.)

G: DONALD TRUMP!

T: Tucker, is that you?

G: Of course not. Fox News works for me. It’s one of my mysterious ways. I am God.

T: No, you’re not. There is no power greater than I am. Just ask my base.

G: You’re about to find out otherwise.

T: Why? I support your people. I make sure they get religious freedom and conservative judges. They call me King David, or Cyrus, or something.

G: In some ways, they’re worse than you are. They should know better.

T: So what do you want?

G: You’re going to be afflicted by the Democrats. They’re going to impeach you. And they’re led by a woman! How’s that for justice!

T: So what? I’ve learned from the WWE that every story needs a good villain. They’re just giving me a foil to run against. Biden isn’t very inspiring, and I’ve kind of worn out the Pocahontas thing.

G: Not even your base can protect you from me.

T: So what exactly do you have in mind? How does it end, assuming you know?

G: I haven’t decided yet. Either you get removed from power, or you stay in office and destroy America. I could go either way.

T: What do you have against America?

G: They elected you, didn’t they?

T: Well, it’s been fun, but I have to go. It’s time for Fox & Friends.

(God sighs and leaves)

It’s not very inspiring or heartwarming, but you can make a fairly strong realpolitik case in favor of selling out the Kurds in favor of the Turks. We have few direct national interests in Syria; after all, we lived with the Assads without complaint for decades. Leaving a handful of troops as a tripwire was not sustainable in the long run, and would not have given us meaningful leverage in any future Syrian political settlement. Turkey is an extremely important NATO ally and a natural enemy of Russia. We’ve sold out the Kurds before; they had to know it was coming at some point. And so on.

But you would never do it like this! You would exact the highest possible price from Erdogan in exchange for withdrawing. You would get some security guarantees for the Kurds before you made the deal. You would make sure the withdrawal was accomplished in a safe and systematic way. You would insist that the Turks stop playing footsie with the Russians. You might even demand that Erdogan restore some measure of real democracy in Turkey. And once the deal was done, you would stick with it and avoid offending the Turks. In the event, none of that has happened.

Trump has succeeded in making us look ridiculous and completely unreliable. The big winner, as usual, is Putin; he may not have many resources at his disposal, but he keeps his promises to his friends.