Tag Archives: Trump

Jan. 20, 2017 and After

Julian Hawthorne, my great-grandfather, was a bestseller author, only son of Nathaniel, and a scamp, who spent time in prison for signing on to a stock swindle. He wasn’t near as bad as what we’re facing now, and he was literate.

Friday, January 20, 2017, Noon

In a few minutes

The most unprepared, outrageous clown

Will take the oath of Office

Of President of these

Disunited States.

He’s named billionaires, generals

Corporate leaders, incompetents

To run our Government.

It’s as if the Jester King of misrule

Isn’t ruling for a day, or a year,

But for at least four of them

And intends to bring his

Chaos with him, to the nation

To the whole world,


Yes, just because he can

And because he wants

The whole world

To watch his every move.


Three and a half million

Marchers, led by women

All over the nation

And more abroad

Happily demonstrate against

The hate and lies

Of the incoming Trump regime.

That’s bigger than Obama, or Trump

Bigger than Iraq

A tidal wave of cheerful

Peaceful opposition.

Trump twitters: why didn’t they vote?

Most did.

He lost the popular vote

By nearly three million,

But still, his press spokesman,

Fellow fabulist,

Claimed the biggest audience


For Trump’s Inaugural address.

So much for broadening his appeal.

By fighting the media

Even threatening them,

By preventing Canadian entry

At the border

If they oppose Trump.

He also hints how health care

Will be restricted,

Medicaid to block grants

Prior conditions reinstated

Risk pools promoted

Subsidies cancelled

Medicare eligibility age raised.

No wonder towns and cities

Were jammed with millions protesting

Trump’s ascension!

Millions more are terrified

The Donald will press the button

When a foreign ruler

Squints askance

At our thin-skinned leader.

Raise The Swamp

In our fast Trumpifying world, we may need a lot of protesters to block, or undo the damage Trump and his jolly wrecking crew intend to wreak.

I can write, call, turn out sometimes, canvass, maybe, and to a lesser degree, give money. I hope younger people, with more energy, can do more.

What does the still formative Trump government begin to look like?

His list of appointees and his radical proposals read as if he won by a landslide, yet no President lost more of the popular vote and still won election.

It’s even very possible, from the data so far analyzed, that the voter suppression laws enacted by Republicans in states they controlled, made the difference, although voter turn out was low in any case, possibly because both candidates were unpopular with any but their core supporters.

To look at the potential cabinet is to see, not appointments of someone who wanted to unite the nation he hadn’t really won, but as if he had won the landslide mandate he claims.

Maybe he believes his own lie? That voter fraud accounted for the almost 3 million votes more for Hillary.

Every appointee designee is marked, either as a consistent opponent of the very Department or agency they are supposed to run (into the ground?), or they’re hawkish Generals, or predatory Wall Street billionaires. A good many of them are lobbyists in Washington: so much for “draining the swamp.”

Trump talks of bringing people together, yet he labeled the Democratic members of  the Senate  “clowns,” “lead by head clown Chuck Schumer” in tweets from January 5th, just before the debate on repeal of the ACA began. He then recommended that they work together with Republicans to craft a new, better health care system. After calling them clowns.

Is the man serious?

Up until his briefing on the problem, he maintained that the idea of Russian hacking to influence the election was crazy, or sour grapes. After his intelligence briefing on the hacking, what did he say?

He said, in effect, ‘Well, maybe there’s something to the charges, but so what? Happens all the time, all over.’ Within the next day or two he reverted to claiming it was all just sour grapes.

On Trump’s side of the argument, the US interferes in elections all over the world, has been since the 19th century and Putin believes that Ukraine’s coup was US engineered, so he felt it was legitimate to act accordingly.

He may well have been right about US meddling in Ukraine, unfortunately.

His motivation for the hacking? Revenge, weakening the US, and maybe buying an ally.

Democrats are in the minority in House and Senate, but in the Senate they can mount a filibuster, or stop a vote through cloture, unless it’s a Presidential nominee, or a budget-related bill. So, their power to oppose is limited, but Schumer is now talking as if they’ll be stalwart opposition, delaying confirmations and blocking initiatives. Schumer says they’ll only collaborate if Trump offers positive proposals, like a real infrastructure program spending real money, not tax-breaks encouraging privatization (like building profit-making toll roads, for example and claiming that as infrastructure repair).

Trump seems, diabolically, to appoint people diametrically opposed to everything Democrats and moderates stand for. He just nominated a DAPL supporter (for completing the Dakota Access Pipeline) as the administrator of the Bureau of Indian Affairs! And another to be Energy Secretary.

But tweeting, calling Democrats clowns, is not going to unite people behind Trump. It’s an approach—I can’t call it a strategy—bound to alienate or distance anyone in the targeted group.

What is Trump about?

He seems to think he can function as President based on the personal loyalty of his family, his friends, his supporters and no one else. Anyone who is not loyal—and even some who are, like Chris Christie—are driven beyond his pale.

It’s true that with a Republican House and Senate, and a majority of states (but not a majority of voters), he’s going to get more of a free pass than he deserves.

Already, the GOP Congress is preparing legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act. And the Senate is preparing to hold hearings for Trump’s nominees, even though they haven’t completed their background checks (in some cases they haven’t even submitted their data). In addition, the House had attempted to eliminate independent ethics investigations for themselves, but the outcry against it was too strong. Trump didn’t say, don’t do it; he said put it off for a better time, wink, wink.

The latter event indicates that public pressure might work, sometimes.

On January 9th, the Senate Democrats staged a sleep-in protest, using all the social media they could, to protest the Republican move to repeal the Affordable Care Act (without any replacement), beginning on the tenth. Senators Warren and Schumer were on PCCC and MoveOn’s call-in to thousands of listeners, reinforcing the idea that we all have to call in and protest, any way we can, and why: repeal of the ACA would grievously hurt millions of people. As Senator Warren declared: repeal is one of the most irresponsible and damaging moves Republicans have ever made, but “if they break it, they’ll have to fix it.”

In other words, Democrats are finally standing up and resisting, resisting the right-wing aggression manifested in this first move in the Senate, and all the extremist nominations they want to ram down Congress’s throat without full  background checks.

What a con job! Trump and the GOP are setting the stage for ripping off the American people. “Drain the swamp!” Trump followers chanted during the campaign. He’s raising up all the swamp monsters and putting them in charge! Further, in any area in which Trump is not particularly interested, like abortion, fire-breathing Republicans just can’t wait to destroy everything Democrats constructed in the last six or seven decades.

Confirm this bunch without completed background checks? McConnell insists they should, a tactic to prevent some of his own party defecting on nominees revealed as compromised. The conflicts of interests Trump’s nominees bring with them may be even as complicated as Trump’s own. I don’t think even Ulysses S. Grant, or Warren G. Harding had as corrupt an administration as this one looks on track to be.

But unlike Grant’s or Harding’s times, now people are already informed and outraged. In addition, many more voted for Trump’s opponent, which tarnishes his legitimacy and Trump isn’t even inaugurated yet.

“May you live in interesting times,” is a French curse. It applies, right now.

Journal Entries On Election Results

Sunday, November 20, 2016

These times: She bought her boyfriend’s son the Christmas presents he wanted for his father: a Trump mug and Hillary toilet paper! Oh, yeah, she voted for Trump. She shrugged. Didn’t know anything about him, except he was for change; she voted for change. She refused to vote for Hillary, even though she wanted a woman President, because “she’s a liar.” It’s likely she voted for Obama eight years ago, for change, if she voted.

She’s a friend’s client. A youngish woman, divorced from a control freak, who persuaded her to have an abortion. She’s a Special Ed teacher who’s been laid off, been able to find only teacher’s aide jobs the last few years. Socially, she’s very liberal. But she’s glad she lives near a mall.

She doesn’t live in a rust belt state, but the rural region she calls home has been depressed for years. She’s one of many: more white women voted for Trump than voted for Hillary. Her local district elected an establishment Republican to Congress from an open seat, not the bright, young progressive (white) woman running against him.

It’s where I live, too.

When I canvassed for Bernie, I encountered Trump pockets even in my liberal town. You could tell they were the Trump kind of people by the proliferation of ATV’s, pickups and huge outdoor gas barbecues.

My local carpenter friend told me he couldn’t talk politics at his gun club; they were all for Trump; he’s afraid Trump will impoverish his clientele (people like me: retired, on fixed incomes) and therefore his own work. He probably voted for Gary Johnson, but he claimed he’d have voted for Bernie, if he’d been the Democratic nominee.

Bernie would not have been elected, since he couldn’t reach minorities: they didn’t understand him; he didn’t get them. His purely economic argument didn’t register with them.

Trump had no program, at least none he campaigned on. He promised,  though, to make their lives better “biglea.”

And now, he proposes to name a racist as his Attorney General, another as his chief strategist in the White House. And his VP is an extreme anti-abortionist, who tried to force his state to require formal cremation or burial for all miscarried or aborted fetuses. His National Security advisor is focused on “radical Islamic Extremists,” and apparently wants to declare war on Islam.

There may have been millions of women and men just like my friend’s client (above), who voted for Trump, because Donald waved his notoriously short fingers and claimed: “I’ll bring your jobs back.” “Only I can fix this.”

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Next, it looks like he’ll appoint General “Mad Dog” Mattis for Defense. From his bio he sounds like an aggressive cowboy. Look forward to more wars, probably all over the globe.

About his Chief Strategist, Jeff Bannon: as Howard Dean remarked: he’s anti-black, anti-immigrant, anti-Moslem, anti-Semitic and anti-woman. In other words, he’s a Nazi. And yes, Bannon looks forward to making the US as refuge for the European “race,” hopes to mobilize a movement of conservatives and populists. He says it will be exciting, “just like the 1930’s.”

There have been ‘incidents,’ where Trumpists bully people in parks or on streets, like three or more young white guys surrounding an African American and telling him or her to “Go home, where you came from!”

His “alt-right” does look like Nazis, although they call themselves White Nationalists.

I think we’re in deep shit!

The mainstream media seems to act as if there’s nothing really unusual here.

At least the competitors for DNC chair agree: there is something unusual here. We’ve got to stop this crazy man.

And his ‘movement.’

At the moment, we’re supporting protests at Standing Rock, where protesters have been beaten, shot with plastic bullets, tear-gassed, deafened by sound cannons, bludgeoned by water cannons in below freezing temperatures, arrested and put in jail anywhere in the state, after being strip-searched and deprived of all their belongings, including their clothes. Bail is set at $1600 at least.

Protesters (most not from the tribes, now) have to be dedicated, to commit to months, possibly years, in legal  hot water in order to make this point: that water is life; oil is not, the planet doesn’t need more oil pipelines, and First Nation lands should be respected. Instead, the pipeline company surreptitiously bulldozed sacred sites, after a court ordered them to stop construction.

Trump won the election with almost three million fewer votes than his opponent, Hillary Clinton, because the swing states, especially, didn’t recover from the Great Recession and Democrats were seen as uninterested in their problems. States, counties, districts that had gone for Obama for two elections, now went for Trump. Voter suppression most likely made the difference, especially in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Jottings of Our “Interesting Times” Or, Existential Dread

September 15, 2016

Fantastic images I’ve seen today, the last of which was the sunset sky turning vivid orange over the islands to our west, half of the horizon almost aflame. Another amazing image: Raven’s Nest, the most dramatic gorges on the approach to Schoodic point, looking out at Cadillac Mountain.

Monday, November 7, 2016

From the near sublime to what a columnist referred to as dread.

I, too, have been obsessing about the election as have so many others.

It feels as if we could be approaching either some apocalyptic end time, or greater and greater freedom and even more of the changes we need. We are at a fateful turning point.

Britain, in angst, voted tor protest and woke up to realize they had destroyed their world, instead. They replaced it with something poorer and coarser. All the polls had assured Britons that Brexit would not be voted in; and then it was!

I admit I have been obsessing over events, issues, Trump’s inane declarations (have you noticed: his only competent sentences are declarative?), and finally, polls. I am a Bernie Democrat, and I will gladly vote for Hillary, considering the alternative, even though I’m not thrilled by some of her policies; I think she can be pressured to do the right things most of the time.

And Hillary will certainly attempt to promote positive change in gender relations, hopefully between white and minority groups and between ‘Americans’ and immigrants.

I’m a man, very hetero, but I try not to be sexist. I am my wife’s partner and I admire her for her wisdom, her writing and her deep beauty in herself. But I’m not perfect.

I’m also in sympathy with gender-bending. I like to cook and to do some of the cleaning. I also wear my own skirts, fashioned from worn-out pants, as well as Scottish kilts, on occasion. When it’s cold I’d prefer a monk’s robe to pants. I like to dress up more than my wife does. We neither of us wear make-up.

And yet, I enjoy manual labor. I’m getting too old to do as much as I used to: I brought in firewood for three houses from our own woods. Now, I might cut down a tree, cut it and split it, if I can transport it a few hundred feet uphill. I used to teach college, too.

I count myself as a skier, although last year I only skied once, because there was only enough snow one morning.

Which brings me to an even deeper reason why this election has wrought such anxiety: the climate is changing even more rapidly, and chaotically, than scientists’ worst predictions, while a significant part of our nation, and of our political class, believe climate change is a hoax and refuse to believe we should do anything to mitigate—well, if it’s a hoax, there’s no reason to do anything, is there?

The denial on the part of these elites seems transparently corrupt: fossil fuel companies pay their bills, especially their campaign bills. Denial among the angry white men following Trump? Denial may be an expression of anger over losing their primacy, may be a rejection of an active role for government: responding to climate change requires more government restraints or controls. It’s certainly thumbing noses at authority. “If the fuckin’ scientists say our trucks an’ stuff cause climate change, then fuck’em!”

Of course the corrupted elite benefit, when the angry white men follow their lead: fossil fuel companies reward them in every way they can.

So, not only are we poised on either, the end of democracy as we know it, or a future that could be a little better, we are poised between even more dramatic damage to the climate and accelerated attempts to lessen climate change. We have no time to lose.

How many times in the history of the world have people thought the end was coming? Sometimes it did, but we have never faced a problem so global, so potentially horrific as this one, when we are tipped on edge, not knowing which way we will fall.

I hope for the best, others fear for the worst, but we are none of us prepared if the worst does come to pass.

Trump May Be a Rapist!

Donald J. Trump is not just a misogynist with a big, dirty mouth. The 2005 clip sounds worse than it reads. What made the video so powerful was that you could hear how sleazy he was, and then see him act the gentleman in front of the camera. Only thing is, in Donald’s case it isn’t just male posing. He has been credibly accused of rape at least twice, and of sexual assault many times. The first rape case was an accusation, in detail, of Trump raping his wife, not long before their divorce: the settlement included a gag order on Ivana, preventing her from speaking out about what he had done to her. She had previously accused him of  “forcibly penetrating” her without her consent—and ripping out her hair.

A case of sexual assault was filed by a “business associate,” who, with her husband, was negotiating with Trump for a business deal. The assault claim, also was wiped away, when the couple came to an agreement on another suit brought by her husband.

What makes both these and other assault stories credible, is not only Trump’s overall attitude and language about women, but a third case, brought in April, 2016, and refiled recently, anonymously, a Federal case. A 13-year old girl, was recruited from Port Authority for parties put on by Jeffrey Epstein, a billionaire, now a registered sex offender: class 3 pedophile—and a great friend of Donald’s at the time. She details four incidents in 1994 involving Trump’s assaults. In the fourth she claims, Trump tied her down, raped her and then threatened her and her family with harm or death if she told anyone. And he threatened that she would “disappear like Maria,” a 12-year old that the girl said had disappeared after the third incident. It’s those threats that make the court more likely to take on the case, even though it’s way past the statute of limitations.

The complaint, now a Federal lawsuit, with a lawyer, Thomas Meagher, also includes two corroborating statements, one, unusually, by a witness to the rape! The witness was the party planner for Epstein and the girl’s procurer. Her testimony could be devastating. Epstein was also accused of raping the girl, and beating her, because, he complained, he should have been the one to take her virginity, not Donald Trump!

Abusers always say, after the abuse: “I’m better now. I’ve changed. I’ll be a better man tomorrow.” That’s the gist of what Trump just said in his “apology” for his crude language about women.

Trump would be a disaster for many of the reasons that Republicans support him: promising to cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations, rescinding regulations, rejecting attempts at reducing climate change and repealing the health care law. Republicans accepted his wall, massive detention and expulsion of immigrants, his nuclear illiteracy and idiocy, his instability and on and on.

And while he is still innocent until proven guilty, I can’t imagine why any woman or any decent human being would ever vote for him—or vote for a third party candidate who can only take enough votes away from his major opponent to snatch a victory for Trump.

The major media should wake up, look into this rape case and publicize it all over this nation: if Trump were elected, he could well be convicted of sexual assault and rape of a minor during his elected term.

You also have to wonder: whatever happened to “Maria?” Trump could be responsible for her murder as well. We’ll probably never know.

Dakota Pipeline Outrage

This isn’t just corporate greed; there is something more, in the way the protesters have been (are being) treated, over the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The company’s worst abuse is akin to Islamic State destroying the historic ruins of Palmyra. For IS, it was western pagan influence that was being destroyed. In Dakota it was the irreplaceable heritage and artifacts of an already oppressed and nearly powerless people, beginning to stand up and proclaim their power.

On Friday, the tribal legal team, after extensive research, laid forth the precise locations of sacred burial sites on the pipeline’s right of way and submitted them to Federal Court in order to demand that pipeline construction be stopped, to protect them. A decision on this motion was to be made by the presiding judge this week.

Over the weekend, the company, with access to these legal documents, sent out bulldozer teams, miles from where they had been operating, to the same sacred sites listed, and bulldozed them out of existence!

This is only the latest attempt to destroy native peoples “standing in the way” of white settler progress, or in this case, a company’s profits. But the thoroughness of this outrage, along with the cooperation of company guards and police who used dogs and tear gas to disperse protesters, bespeaks something even darker than corporate greed.

Our nation was founded on genocide and slavery. This latest act by the bulldozer teams, is another injustice added to a long history of white people attempting to destroy native people standing in their way. In this case it was historic sites and artifacts, not only sacred, but also proof of the native peoples’ claims.

The brazenness of the attack speaks volumes about the tenor of American politics. Dialogue in the US has been jettisoned for confrontation. And lies. And violence, violence against black people, against cops, against the LGBTQ community, against women and against Native Americans.

I would not be surprised if the bulldozer drivers, their foremen, and their manager, were  all Trump supporters, possibly white supremacists. Even if they weren’t, this brazen act was made more likely, almost acceptable, through Trump’s rhetoric, the model he embodies in his raucous political campaign events and in his incitement to violence.

The outrages at the Dakota Access Pipeline could become the model, in turn, to angry white people all over this nation, if Donald Trump were elected. A nice future to look forward to.

While the protesters are insisting on prayerful non-violence; the police and company keep on trying to incite violent responses. Violent resistance would make it that much easier to jail all the protesters and resume full construction mode.

The tribal resistance to the pipeline is not just concerned with their burial grounds and the sanctity of their sites, but with likely water pollution from spills of dirty fracked oil. There have been too many spills around the country to allow a pipeline to go under the Missouri River and over an aquifer central to the Sioux’s water supply. If their water is polluted, tribal people might have to move out of the reservation, as well as its sacred lands, a subtle kind of genocide against ‘the natives’ once again.

It’s Not Who You Vote For It’s Who Wins That Matters

“But I love Bernie! He’s the first politician I’ve ever…”

I did not cry, when Bernie endorsed Hillary. I had worked for him, donated money, time, letters to the Editor, but when he endorsed Hillary, I agreed with him. To me, he wasn’t giving up; he wasn’t selling out; he was acting strategically. He saw that he could not win the nomination, although he had come tantalizingly close, and had mobilized a significant segment of the potential Democratic Party’s constituency.

Yes, obstacles were put there by the DNC and state Democratic parties; there was a conscious attempt by some in the DNC to diminish Bernie’s appeal in any way they could. But it’s probable Bernie still would not have won even without these sub rosa efforts. He couldn’t mobilize Black, Asian and Latino voters, or even Whites with less than a college education: the latter are Trump’s special constituency. He knew that. He’d tried, with BlackLivesMatter, and with other outreach efforts.

So, Bernie wasn’t selling out; he was acting strategically: when he stopped campaigning, did not endorse, but negotiated with Hillary. They both compromised; that’s the nature of politics that works. After he’d gotten what he could get—for all of us—he endorsed her.

Bernie has also stated over and over again, that Trump must be stopped, and he’ll do everything in his power to prevent his election. Why?

It’s not because he’s sold out; it’s because he’s gotten considerable concessions from Hillary, and they hold a lot of views in common to begin with, like their view of Supreme Court nominations. What he’s modeling is what you do in strategic voting.

The difference between strategic voting and ideological voting is in what each accomplishes. More narrowly, issues voting means you vote only for particular policies. The extreme example is the anti-abortion voter, who will only vote for a candidate who is explicitly anti-abortion, the more obdurate the better. If feelings are intense enough, issue voting may actually result in legislation and policy, but usually it’s never enough for the true believer—on whatever issue—and it only has impact on that issue.

Broader than issue voting is ideological voting. This is voting for a candidate who best exemplifies the voter’s ideological preferences, even if the candidate has no chance of winning office, and therefore no chance of putting that ideology into legislation and actual practice.

Ideological voting best describes the Bernie voter who gravitates to the Green Party’s Jill Stein, or the libertarian Republican supporter of Rand Paul, who supports Gary Johnson.

In a winner-take-all electoral system, which is what the US has had since its founding, and what our neighbor, Canada, to the North has as well, both issue and ideological voting can have paradoxical effects. In a winner-take-all political system, a plurality (not a majority), wins the election. In Canada’s case, for two separate elections, voters on the left split their votes between the New Democratic Party, the Liberal Party, and Parti Quebecois. While the left was in a clear majority, it lost, heavily, to Steven Harper, Conservative, who was funded by the oil industry in Alberta. So, all Canada’s support for combatting climate change was thrown out the window; government encouraged Tar Sands oil production, while social programs were radically defunded: the electoral structure permitted a minority to elect a large majority in Parliament. After two terms, the Conservatives were thrown out by a more unified left, behind the moderately leftward Liberal party. They had discovered how horrible it was to have a radical right-wing government.

The same thing can happen here. If the race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is close (still a real possibility), ideological votes for Stein and Johnson could be the deciding factor: not in one of the latter winning, (there’s no chance of that) but in the triumph of the Democrat or Republican candidate who loses the fewest votes to the third party candidate to his or her left or right.

In other words, if Jill Stein were able to attract a larger slice of former Bernie voters than Gary Johnson gained from disaffected Republican voters, it would become increasingly difficult for Democrats to win.

I suspect that Johnson also attracts issue-voting millennials, with his legalize marijuana position; many of these were former Bernie voters. His polling at twice the level of Stein, may in part be because of this, so he takes votes away from both Trump and Hillary.

The paradoxical effect of Bernie Sanders mobilizing young, left-wing voters, increasing the size of the left-leaning constituency (from left of center to far left) could permit Trump to win, if too many of these newly mobilized voters end up voting for Stein or Johnson: a minority, voting for Trump, could prevail over a left of center majority that is split into two or three parts.

Now, think of the consequences: instead of Bernie in the Senate being joined by a President and Congress that supports much of his agenda, and is likely to be responsive to pressure brought to bear by groups like Our Revolution and BlackLivesMatter, instead, Trump would be President.

Would Trump and the triumphant Republicans give credence to any left-wing group? Of course not. Bernie endorsed Hillary for a reason: her election would be the best chance to carry out much of his (and our) agenda in the next four years. With a Republican White House and Congress, we would get a Supreme Court that overthrew Roe v Wade and permitted even more voter suppression; the US would be ramping up of coal mining and oil drilling, not mitigating global warming; there would be an increase in racist policies at all levels, and rejection of virtually every policy that Bernie and his supporters advocated: instead of a public option for healthcare, you’d have a return to the monopoly-controlled market and rejection of even the minimal reform represented by Obamacare.

Strategic voting for a Bernie supporter, instead, would be: to vote for Democrats, however flawed they may be, because this would accomplish two things: it would prevent what could amount to a Fascist takeover, much like the minority Nazis taking over the German government in the face of a divided left and center, and it would increase pressure for the kinds of changes we (Berniers) all want.

Besides: if you love Bernie, strategic voting is clearly what he advocates, even despite the corruption of the Democratic Party by the likes of Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Further Bernie activists can do what Kelleigh McKenzie, co-founder of Ulster4Bernie, is attempting in Ulster County: to gain election to the NY State Democratic Committee, so she can help bend the party in a progressive direction. She appears to say: if you don’t like the Democratic Party, work on changing it.

That’s strategic thinking.

Emigrating To La La Land

A  fellow Bernier) sent me the link to a short film, as one of the reasons she could never vote for Hillary. Hearing veiled remarks about ‘corruption’ and ‘can’t trust her’ and just ‘follow the money,’ I realized: this is what Hillary first called ‘a right-wing conspiracy” back in the ’90’s. All the rumors of the terrible things done by the Clintons, or by Hillary specifically, have a funny way of never being confirmed or proven. And the conspiracy-mongers always have an explanation, how ‘she’ or ‘they’ wriggled out of it.

And it does come out of the right-wing. It’s the kinds of things right-wing radio ranters and the Enquirer have been shouting for years.

A current example, Clinton Cash was produced by Breitbart Films. The organization also publishes Daily Caller and is a well-known right-wing propaganda mill.

So, viewing Clinton Cash must be done with a healthy dose of skepticism. The film itself is rich in images of cash, of supposedly corrupt people being greeted by or hosted by or hosting Bill and Hillary and of a drawn, unattractive Hillary announcing decisions as Secretary of State—none of her announcements are actually shown, but the commentator helpfully tells you what nefarious deals they facilitated. So, there are a lot of inferences drawn, a lot of circumstantial “evidence” is mustered, but the inferences in all these cases are only insinuations.

Since Brightbart doctored videos that destroyed ACORN and then attempted to do the same thing to Planned Parenthood–posing as innocent reporters, they twisted the videos through deceptive editing, to show that PP was selling fetal tissue for profit, when it has never been proven that PP ever did: they sell tissue at cost, to cover handling expenses, since they want to make it available for scientific research. Why believe anything declared by Brietbart?

You have to realize, this is the same propaganda that animates Fox News, and the screamers in Cleveland calling for Clinton to be jailed or executed. It has about as much credibility as the failed effort to destroy Planned Parenthood.

And, almost all the stories about Hillary and Bill, extensively investigated over and over and found baseless, have been circulating on the Tea Party network for years. Now these same propaganda “news” groups are seeking new converts: among Bernie or Busters: to persuade as many Berniers as possible that they should NEVER vote for the demon, Hillary Clinton. Trump’s been pretty up front about that, himself.

Just to know where all this comes from should tell you how insidious and spurious it is.

I think Hillary has made some mistakes, because she listened to longtime experts in State, for example, to support the Honduran coup, and to overthrow Libya’s Qaddafi, without a realistic scenario for what should come after–both incidents NOT covered in this film. But to portray her and Bill as on the take, solely motivated by accumulating money on the backs of poor Haitians or Congolese is just completely BS. Yes, they sought funds to carry out their programs abroad, programs they believed would do good. They thought the people in charge knew what they were doing, or that the only way to get things done was to work with questionable people. That’s an especially old story in foreign development circles, where corruption is endemic and expected. Any politician trying to get things done will probably have to make questionable connections.

Bernie’s wife, Jane, is also supposedly tarred by questionable actions vis a vis an education fund. No one is pure.

As for Trump: his whole career has been built on legally (that’s why so many lawsuits) bilking contractors, workers, students, and ordinary people in virtually all his “business” dealings. That’s how he’s made his money.

If you don’t vote for the Democrats (including Hillary) you are making it easier for Trump to be elected, and he could win. He’d probably have the mob with him—and his own mob. He’s admired Putin and Saddam because that’s the kind of dictatorial regime he wants to lead himself: he’s also on board to discriminate against: immigrants, Latinos, blacks and the LGBTQ community (despite his careful repeating of the initials in his speech). He would abolish the health care act, privatize Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, while cutting taxes on the wealthiest, thereby creating huge deficits that would require slashing government services to any except the very wealthy. And, he’d build up our military (now accounting for 40% of all defense spending in the entire world), so he’d probably need new taxes: maybe an “America Tax”, a sales tax or a value-added tax that would hit the poor especially hard (they are his favorite victims in business, after all).

I’ll vote Democrat to protect my children, all of whom are identified as in the LGBTQ spectrum. I’ll vote to protect a Supreme Court that could become either even more conservative than it was with Scalia, or could be progressive if Hillary gets to appoint his replacement and the other Justices getting too old to serve. That court will serve long after I’m dead.

I’ll also vote to insure that we have someone leading our country who is sane, not unstable and unpredictable.

That Hillary has also signed on for a good part of Bernie’s agenda is a bonus we could work for. It would be impossible for us to even think about the Bernie agenda (except maybe through violent revolution) if Trump were elected.

The idea that, even if Trump got elected he couldn’t do anything, is unwarranted. He offered Kasich the Vice Presidency, in which he, the VP, would be in charge of Domestic and Foreign Affairs, i.e. the one getting things done for Donald. It’s very likely Pence signed on for the same deal. And there are all sorts of radical ‘conservative’ Republicans who would do the kinds of things outlined in their platform. Pence would dismantle as much of the Federal Government as he could, except for Defense, Homeland Security and DOJ. If he and Trump were elected, they’d probably take Congress, too. And, of course, the Supreme Court, since he, or Trump, would have the pleasure of appointing the most conservative, pro-monopoly-corporate, “Christian,” anti-LGBTQ lackeys they could find.

Tell me: what would voting for Jill Stein do, if Trump were elected?

Would her 3%—5% make a difference in the election? You can already see it in the polls: Jill takes votes from Democrats. Trump and Hillary were neck and neck, when Stein and Johnson were included in the latest polls, while a pairing of Hillary only against Trump shows Hillary slightly ahead.

Voting for Jill Stein, if Trump were elected, would signal to him that the left is divided and weak, so he can destroy us as predatory “leaders” are apt to do: by turning us against each other.

Maybe, he/they have already done that, with the help of Brietbart, Fox News, Limbaugh, and all the other right-wing propagandists.

I hope not, but if so: Welcome to their LaLa land!

War of All Against All?

It’s hard to believe Micah Johnson alone made so much mayhem, and up-ended a growing awareness that black lives haven’t mattered, but that they should. Now, some white people blame Black Lives Matter for Johnson’s rampage!
It’s almost as if some white racist group, maybe one of the ones endorsing Trump, paid and trained Micah in the fine art of killing white people, in order to start their much anticipated Race War.
It feels as if humanity’s response to trouble is violence. When violence becomes endemic in a society, dictatorship often follows: to quell it.
Thus, if we have well-armed crazies, or groups, attacking the police, and the police attacking civilians, it is likely that many will feel that the only answer is a ‘strongman’ aka a dictator.
Trump has not offered himself as Dictator, as Julius Caesar explicitly did, but he has presented himself as “strong,” “tough,” and independent, his own man, unconcerned with “political correctness,” appealing to white men angry about their loss of dominance, as well as their loss of economic security, and priority.
I suspect that Trump’s appeal to, let’s call them the white, psychologically disenfranchised, less educated men, is not so much in the substance of what he says—mostly zippy one-liners—but in the way he says it. His pronouncements are meant to enrage and mobilize, not to lay down a political platform. What he’s for may be fairly obvious, and is sometimes even revealed (like his comment that wages are too high), but as far as his followers are concerned, that’s not the point at all.
The violence on both sides of the divide legitimizes violence by the State. So, Trump’s projection of “strength,” much of it simply bravado, makes it that much more plausible to many, that what the US—and the world—needs is a Strongman: Trump as popularly elected dictator.
Many will see the shootings by and of police as justification for “a strong hand,” to bring society back to order—with white men on top, of course.
To create peace and positive relations between races, or between law enforcement and minorities is much more difficult. As Obama remarked, the tensions may not even be resolved in his children’s lifetimes, certainly not in mine (I’m 77).
But, through the civil rights movement, the feminist movement, the LGBTQ movement, American society has evolved beyond the patriarchal white supremacy of the Jim Crow era. Obviously, it has a long way to go. BlackLivesMatter posits a simple idea: black lives matter as much as white lives, not less.
So, how to respond to Trumpophiles?
Show that Trump, by both his pronouncements and his business actions, can’t be trusted: he’s changed positions, sometimes even mid-speech. Even more revealing, he’s ripped off the little guy, time and time again; that’s how he built his fortune, like the stereotypical crooked used car salesman multiplied many times over.
Then, look at what he favors (lower wages, punishing woman for abortions, tax cuts for the wealthy, dismantling government services, like Veterans care, Obamacare, small business loans. Want protection from loan-sharks like pay-day lenders? That’ll go away under Trump. Want protection from banks? Trump wants them as his friends; he wants to dismantle any regulations that “hamper” their operations, maybe even sub-prime mortgages redux, or pay-day loans. With his five bankruptcies in Atlantic City casinos, Trump made money; his creditors, including many small business-people, lost big-time: they were paid back pennies on the dollar.
That’s legal larceny; he transferred their work, and money into his pockets and kept it, because he hired sharp lawyers.
The real reason Trumpophiles support him is: because he implicitly and explicitly gives them the freedom to express their rage against the myriad “others” who seem to have challenged their supremacy and had significant successes.
That rage has a lot to do with our soaring rates of inequality, which create vast social gaps between people in, supposedly, middle class America.
Rage is also fear, which, may be the reason for the police shootings and the Dallas sniper.
Police are taught to shoot at body mass, the biggest target, which is why so many black people are killed. So many are shot, however, because white policeman have been taught from childhood to fear black men, so when they encounter one, the meeting is tense and the cop shoots because he expects the worst and acts on it: as he did with Philando Castile; shooting him because Castile was reaching for something, telling the cop he had a permitted gun, but was reaching for his wallet—the cop had asked for his license and registration. Because Philando was black, the cop shot him (four times), not knowing which he was doing: reaching for his wallet, or his gun. If he had been white, the cop would have waited a fatal instant longer and would not have shot him.
Micah Johnson wanted to kill white men, because he was afraid and angry that white cops were killing his people, so black people never felt safe. I know I’d be enraged; I wouldn’t go out to shoot cops, but desperate people do desperate things. How would you feel if you had to fear for your life every time you drove to work? How would you feel if everyone with your color skin, also drove in fear?
In the long run, the solution for the violence, desperation and anger is a radically more equitable distribution of wealth, to lessen the gaps, or tears in our social fabric.
In the short run, just recognizing that people are hurting and fearful on both sides, and sharing that fear and the hurt would get us started on the right track: closing, or narrowing social gaps and tears.
It will be a long road, but the alternative is a new kind of Fascism and/or race war.