Category: Uncategorized

For me, of course, the first thirty days of Trump have been exactly what I predicted and feared:  a toxic stew of blustering, bigotry, incompetence, corruption, and “alternative facts.”  I didn’t vote for him, however, so he doesn’t have to care about my opinions.  The question for today is, how is he playing to his supporters?

It depends on your reasons for voting for him.  If you’re part of the base, you voted for sturm und drang, and you’re getting exactly what you wanted.  He promised to shake things up, and he has;  if actual meaningful change has been slow, it is only because the corrupt establishment is so entrenched, and so vile.  If you voted for him hesitantly out of party loyalty or economic self-interest, on the other hand, you’re worried about what you see, but you’re probably still hopeful that the adults will be called in to tame him and make him a model Republican. After all, even though the optics aren’t good, he hasn’t started a war or caused a market collapse or taken away your health insurance yet.

And so, for a permanent shift in opinion, we will have to wait on events.   I think I might have been wrong about one thing, however;  he can’t really muzzle the MSM, because he needs them as a foil.  His battles with the media connect him with his base in a way that can’t be reproduced in any other fashion.

The problem, of course, is that he isn’t just the leader of his base, but that doesn’t seem to have occurred to him.

Nothing.

The dogs at Westminster are good-looking, intelligent, and loyal.  Can you say that about any of the GOP candidates?

Besides, at Westminster, the establishment always wins.  Maybe Jeb Bush should find a new line of work.

In the early days of this blog, I speculated as to the meaning of Trump’s hat and, specifically, as to when, in his opinion, America had last been great.  Today, I ask a broader and more complex question:  what makes America great?

There are multiple answers, and they reveal a great deal about the fissures in American politics today.

In Trump’s case, being great is clearly tied to being a winner.  He sees the world in zero-sum terms, like a never-ending athletic event.  And so, for him, what makes America great is:  (a) being rich; (b) having the most powerful military on the planet; and (c) having really great athletes.  Wait until you hear from him around the Olympics.  He will act as if those American gold medals belong to him.

In the case of a typical red person, being great is tied to American culture.  In many cases, there will be a strong religious element to this.  Red person greatness is also typically connected with ideas of limited government and personal self-sufficiency.

For a typical blue person, greatness is tied to our open, dynamic, cosmopolitan society.   We put up as few barriers as possible to excellence in every field.  The trade-off, relative to European countries, is more inequality.

For a red person, American greatness, therefore, is a profoundly conservative concept vulnerable to attack from outsiders, while for a blue person, it is “liberal” within the nineteenth century meaning of the word.  Red people value solidarity; blue people prefer progress.  How can the two ideas be reconciled?  Primarily by creating a welfare state that shares the benefits of progress with everyone and thus promotes national solidarity.  A little more overt respect for red culture wouldn’t hurt, either.

 

 

CROOKED MEDIA DON’T GIVE ME CREDIT FOR MY SUCCESSES! UNEMPLOYMENT RATE BELOW 5% DUE TO ME!  AND WITH MY NEW LABOR SECRETARY, EVERYONE WILL BE ABLE TO FIND A MINIMUM WAGE JOB!

There can only be one possible replacement for Spicer:  John Barron.

In Christie’s fantasy world, the amateurs around Trump will quickly display their incompetence and be replaced by adults like him.   Sanity will then prevail, and the GOP will live happily ever after.

Not so fast, Bridgegate-breath.  I know you’re desperate to get away from New Jersey and your pathetic approval rating, but things in Washington are not going to be that simple.

Trump has no idea how to run a government, but he craves popularity, and he constantly needs to show that he is in charge.  As a result, it is extremely likely that he will deal with his Cabinet and closest advisers the way George Steinbrenner handled his managers and general managers:  by taking credit for their successes, and quickly firing them for any perceived failures.  Instability is going to be the hallmark of this administration.  And so, while Christie may well get his chance, there isn’t going to be a happy ending to this story.

Several months before the election, I posted a satirical faux future news story about a deal in which Trump and Putin agreed to carve Europe into spheres of influence.   Now that the election is over, something at least vaguely similar to my post is likely to become reality, so it is time to analyze its pros and cons.

For Putin, the benefits of a deal are obvious:  the US drops its sanctions; recognizes the annexation of Crimea; and gives him a free hand in Ukraine.  His ultimate objective, turning Ukraine into a Russian vassal state, becomes feasible again. The question for the day is, what does he have to offer in exchange for these clear and tangible benefits?

Here are the possibilities:

1.  Assistance against terrorists:  There are several problems with this.  First of all, the war against IS is already being won; the caliphate is likely to expire in the next year or so without Russian help.  Second, Putin can’t help with domestic terrorists even if he wanted to do so.  Third, the US and Russian armies were designed to fight each other, not to cooperate, so getting them to share intelligence and otherwise work together would be very difficult.  Finally, the Russian style of fighting terror–essentially, collective punishment on a massive scale–won’t go over well with the American public, even if Trump turns out to be an enthusiast, which seems likely.

2.  Assistance with Iran:  The Russians didn’t want an Islamic neighbor with a bomb on their border, so getting them to cooperate in the negotiations that culminated in the Iran nuclear deal was not that difficult.  On the other hand, Russia (reasonably) sees Iran, not as a terrorist state run by crazy ayatollahs, but as a responsible business partner, so the likelihood of persuading them to apply pressure is pretty low.  The most important question here is, with or without a deal, would Putin extend the Russian nuclear umbrella over Iran to deter an American attack?  I doubt it.

3.  Assistance with China:  If we aren’t going to use a rules-based system to try to keep the Chinese in line, the only real alternative is brute force.  Russia could help by attracting Chinese military attention away from the South China Sea.  But would the Russians really agree to do that?  The risks would probably outweigh the rewards.

In short, in the real world, the Russians don’t have much to offer us, and they probably won’t deliver on anything they do promise.

The Trump nominee known as Andy.

For the pro-business crowd, he’d be handy.

He’s withdrawn his name.

He and Trump share the blame.

For me, his departure’s just dandy.

It is becoming increasingly clear that Trump had no issues with Flynn’s communications with the Russians, and few with his behavior towards the Vice President.  No, what got Flynn fired was the negative publicity that followed.

If that doesn’t tell you something about Trump’s personality and priorities, I don’t know what does.

While their circumstances are obviously different, Israel and South Africa have much in common:  both were states created by settlers who succeeded in dominating the much larger indigenous population.  Israel (with some remorse) engaged in some ethnic cleansing after 1948, but the Arabs who remained were given political rights and have thrived economically.  In South Africa, on the other hand, the government initially dealt with the threat presented by the indigenous population by creating the apartheid system.

My, how times have changed!  South Africa, whatever its current flaws, succeeded in eliminating the apartheid system with a minimal level of violence. Israel, on the other hand, appears to be on the path of creating South Africa-style homelands for Palestinians;  the only question at this point is whether it will be done by legal means, through annexation, or simply by creating facts on the ground (Netanyahu’s clear preference).

Given the analogy, the question for today is whether it is conceivable that a South African solution can be found for the Palestinians.  I doubt it, for two reasons: first, I don’t see a Palestinian Nelson Mandela; and second, the experience of the Holocaust is going to make the Israelis very, very cautious about running risks.

The ex-NSC man Mike Flynn.

His lies to Mike Pence were a sin.

I could go on and on.

I’m just glad that he’s gone.

For the country, his leaving’s a win.

Imagine how American history would have been different if Bill Clinton had actually been removed from office in 1998 or 1999.  Al Gore would have gone into the 2000 election as the incumbent, riding a wave of good will, with the country prosperous and at peace.  The Clinton legacy would have been far less of a problem for him.  He probably would have won easily.

And that points out the difficulty with impeachment under normal circumstances:  why would you, as the opposition party, want to replace the incumbent with someone of similar ideology, and less baggage?

These are not normal circumstances.  Trump presents a danger to the country; Mike Pence is a generic conservative Republican.  Both the Democrats and the Republicans in Congress would undoubtedly prefer Pence to Trump.  It is not absurd, then, to think that the GOP might suddenly decide to be shocked by Trump’s shenanigans a few years into his term if his poll numbers look bad, and take action on it.

That, presumably, is the reason that bookies in the UK are giving more or less even odds on Trump leaving office before his term expires.

I wasn’t planning to post this today, but I have to use it before its expiration date.

Flynn the Maniac

Everybody’s building

An empire in the House.

Some think that he’s the answer.

Some think that he’s a louse.

 

Everybody’s in despair.

No one knows what to do.

But when Flynn the Maniac gets here

Gonna turn into a real zoo.

 

Come all without, come all within.

You’ll not see nothing like the mighty Flynn.

 

He’s friends with Putin, like the rest

He thinks that Russia’s sweet.

And when it comes to terrorists

He thinks they must be beat.

 

Everybody’s just standing ’round the Don

Hoping for a tweet.

But when Flynn the Maniac gets here

Then they’ll be on the street.

 

Come all without, come all within

You’ll not see nothing like the mighty Flynn.

 

Parody of “Quinn the Eskimo” by Bob Dylan.

The message here, I guess, is that it’s OK to repeatedly lie to the American people, but never to Trump.

Red America has had a monopoly on overt displays of patriotism since Nixon and the Vietnam War.  Trump and the rest of the world are finding out that blue America loves its cosmopolitan, inclusive, dynamic image of the country just as much as red America loves its static, religious, blood and soil version.

Because we’re all fighting the power now, aren’t we?

Resist

Resist

Insist

On standing up for your rights.

His battle was won

But the war has just begun

No time to give up the fight.

 

Resist

Desist

He’ll be telling you to shut up.

They’ve been shouting at us for eight long years.

Now it’s our turn to interrupt.

 

Resist

His list.

Put yourself on it if you dare.

Just know if you do

They’ll be coming after you.

His people are everywhere.

 

Resist

It’s bliss

It’s a rush to struggle with the power.

At the end of the day

You will hear the people say

This could be their finest hour.

 

A little melodramatic, yes, but so is much of hip-hop.