Category: Uncategorized

Inspired by Trump’s threat to have the Boss investigated for campaign finance violations.

BANNED IN THE USA

(Chorus)

Banned in the USA.

Banned in the USA.

Banned in the USA.

Banned in the USA.

______________

I was born in a deep blue state.

To be a rocker was to be my fate.

Trump came along with his song of hate.

I don’t think that’s what made our country great.

___________

(Chorus)

__________

I did my level best to back the blue.

To save democracy for me and you.

But in the end, we all lost, it’s true.

Now Trump is after me; that’s nothing new.

__________________

(Chorus)

_________________

Trump’s just a bully; we can call his bluff.

We can’t give in to him and all his stuff.

We still can win; it won’t be that tough.

Come on people! Have you had enough!

_____________

Banned in the USA.

Banned in the USA.

Banned in the USA.

I’m a cool rocking daddy in the USA.

__________________

Parody of “Born in the USA” by Bruce Springsteen

---

---

Trump thinks climate change is a Chinese hoax. He is actively hostile to any attempt to prepare for the impacts of more frequent and powerful tropical storms. He wants to dismantle FEMA and return its functions to the states. In addition, he hates Ron DeSantis. What does this mean for a state that is already reeling from soaring insurance costs when the next hurricane hits, which could be as soon as a few months from now?

Nothing good, my friends. The only rays of hope here are that Trump owns property and depends on votes from Florida.

Ross Douthat doesn’t think that Trump has any kind of world view, not even “America First;” instead, to the extent that there is a Trump Doctrine, it is one that revolves purely around making random deals. Is he right?

Not exactly. It is true that making deals is a big part of Trump’s mindset, but so is mercantilism and the imperialism that springs from it. The other thing to remember here is that dealmaking means different things to Trump depending on the identity of the person on the other side. If it is an autocrat that he respects, he will offer terms that, in his eyes, are mutually beneficial; if not, the point of the negotiations will be to establish his dominance over the other party.

Netanyahu’s ultimate objective has always been to manipulate the American president into taking the lead role in a more or less perpetual war with Iran. He has on his side the admiration of large segments of the American right and Trump’s natural sympathy for a nation which, like American Christian nationalists, feels both entitled and surrounded by blind hostility. Will it be enough?

Netanyahu’s religion is alien to Trump. MBS, on the other hand, appeals to his autocratic prejudices, his aesthetic sensibilities, his materialism, and his enthusiasm for making deals. There was a time when MBS would have supported an Iran war, but not now; it would threaten his modernization project. In the end, he is likely to be the more persuasive of the two indispensable men.

We can probably be grateful for that.

Bibi Netanyahu is a religious man. He fervently believes that the Jews are God’s chosen people, and that he has been put on the planet to keep them strong and safe. He is the only person in Israel who can navigate between the shoals of mostly hostile world opinion. He is an indispensable man.

MBS, as far as I know, has few strong religious convictions. He wants to pull his country into the 21st century with the least possible amount of kicking and screaming from the reactionaries who have dominated Saudi politics for decades. He wants to be a modern version of Peter the Great. He is also an indispensable man.

Donald Trump has always argued that “he alone” can save America from crime, illegal immigrants, liberals, woke ideology, and foreigners who pick our pockets every day of the year. The failed assassination attempt undoubtedly increased the intensity of that feeling. He, like Bibi and MBS, is an indispensable man.

So what happens when the interests of these three indispensable men collide? For that, see my next post.

Trump was furiously making deals for the benefit of export-dependent American companies during his Middle East trip. That is part of the job, of course; all presidents do it. But Trump seems to do it with more relish than most.

There are two things to remember here. First of all, just because assisting Boeing is part of the job, that doesn’t mean it is the entire job; helping a few companies make money is no substitute for a coherent vision of foreign affairs. Second, selling farm products, energy, and weapons to foreigners is not going to make America as a whole rich again, let alone bring about the Godly Society.

He was a reactionary who blew up the world order and spent the rest of his life trying to protect his accomplishments. Against the odds, he was a supporter of a government safety net. He launched a culture war against his domestic enemies. He played hardball with a frequently uncooperative legislature for which he usually expressed contempt. In the end, when he lost power, the world wondered how it would get along without him.

That’s Bismarck. It’s also Trump, with the exception of the part about being a force for stability after he succeeded.

House Republicans have shown over the last few years that they are incapable of doing anything smoothly and gracefully. For the most part, they don’t do anything at all except suck up to Trump and own the libs. In the end, however, they accomplish the bare minimum necessary to keep the lights on, and no more.

Yesterday’s committee vote on the reconciliation bill was, of course, an embarrassment to the GOP, but the result won’t be permanent. After lots of kicking and screaming, the caucus will ultimately get something done. The Senate will then trash their work, and there will be at least two more levels of drama. When it is all said and done, however, the fear of failure will be powerful enough for some sort of “big, beautiful” bill to get through this summer.

The experience will be more proof to Trump that liberal democracy is a loser, and that he is better off doing everything himself.

GOP House members can be divided into three groups: idealistic CLs from bright red districts who want to cut the size of the welfare state dramatically and who will pay no price for doing so; PBPs from swing districts who know that big cuts will cost them their seats and the GOP its majority; and a large, fairly inert majority, which wants only to make Trump happy and get something–anything– done. Mike Johnson needs all three groups to get the “big, beautiful” bill to the Senate. Which side will cave?

Over the past two plus years, the Democrats have been willing to work with Johnson and the last two groups to keep the lights on. As a result, the CLs have been able to vote their ideology without sinking the ship. That won’t happen in this case, so recent history will not be a guide.

In the end, I think both fringes will give something, but the moderates will give more. They will be compensated with jobs in the administration after they lose in 2026.

After the announcement regarding the tariff pause with China, Scott Bessent explained that a decoupling of the two economies was undesirable, and that America’s objective was simply to protect economic activity that was tied closely to national security.

Well, that’s not going to get us to the Godly Society. And you thought Joe Biden was out of the White House!

Trump announced today that he was imposing tough new tariffs on the Vatican. When asked why, he explained that he had to do something about the Vatican’s huge trade surplus. The tariff would make America rich again.

Pope Leo protested, noting that the Vatican had no manufacturing, and that the trade surplus came purely from religious tourism. Trump responded by demanding that the Vatican buy American fighter jets for two purposes: to eliminate the deficit; and to prepare for an international crusade to be led by American believers against seculars, Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists.

David French argues that the new Pope and the Catholic Church do not belong to any American political party. Is he right?

Historically, no; Christian Democrats were the predominant faction within the GOP for most of my lifetime. Trump has changed all of that, however; MAGA is the antithesis of “compassionate conservatism,” which is the best succinct description of CD ideology you can find. As a result, the CDs have either turned into Reactionaries (e.g., Rubio and Vance) or Democrats.

And so, for now, French is right. Could that change in the future? Only after Trump leaves the scene and the Reactionaries lose their grip on the GOP.

A note to my readers: I will be on vacation until Friday. Regular posting will resume on Saturday.

Stephen Miran was asked by an NYT interviewer about Trump’s plans to provide more housing. He responded by citing the administration’s commitment to deregulation. He was then asked whether Trump had any intention of incentivizing deregulation at the state and local level. His answer, in a nutshell, was no; the federal government would provide an example, but that was all.

There you have it. The Trump “plan,” in reality, is to deport millions of immigrants, millions of whom work in the construction industry, while imposing tariffs on building materials and driving up interest rates. That should certainly do the trick.

Trump has apparently united Iranian public opinion behind the regime by announcing that the Persian Gulf would be renamed the “Arabian Gulf.” This, of course, comes after elections in Canada and Australia in which public loathing of him played a decisive role in favor of the left.

Trump, Bannon, and Musk believe in an international coalition of nationalists. They are creating one, but not the one they had in mind.

During the Biden years, America acted as a party–an ally of Ukraine–in the war. After his inauguration, Trump made it clear that America no longer had any interest in the outcome of the war and simply wanted to end it. That shifted his position from a party to that of a mediator.

To the surprise of nobody but Trump and Vance, America’s efforts at mediation have failed. Trump is now talking about enforcing new economic sanctions on Russia in order to impose the settlement of his choosing. In other words, he is threatening to become an arbitrator.

It won’t work; there are no new sanctions available to us that will force Putin to stop fighting. The only way we can facilitate a fair settlement is by rearming Ukraine, thereby persuading Putin that his ultimate objectives are unattainable–in other words, by becoming a party again.