Tag: Politics

By on

I once worked in a company where everyone, and I mean everyone, hated the Vice President for Human Resources. Being new to the corporate environment, I asked an executive in the know why then does she keep her job then. He just laughed and said she knows where all the bodies are buried, implying, in the process, that the President of the Company was greatly dependent on her discretion because of his many indiscretions. This analysis was proven correct because when a new President took over and she was the first person shown the door.

Which brings me to Pam Bondi. One of the dangers of firing and humiliating someone who knows where the bodies are buried is that person, once removed from office, can opt for revenge. I don’t know how angry Bondi is, I am hoping really pissed off, but she might, if sufficiently pissed off, be willing to reveal the graveyard map of Trump’s many indiscretions.

I do know that she was given an impossible job with high expectations from an unreasonable boss. Since she failed to satisfy the tyrant, her professional reputation in tatters because she tired to keep in happy and was humiliated by the boss in the process, she has absolutely nothing to lose any more and might be willing to point people to the relevant graves. Given Trump’s experience with troublesome ex-employees, I suspect he has paid Bondi off in some way or has something on her that will buy her silence. On the other hand, as the old saying goes: Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, we might be in for a summer of fun.

By on

Donald Trump acknowledged that he calls the Iranian military operation instead of a war because of legal reasons. Congressional Authorization, then, boils down to what the President calls his action rather than a universal understanding of what war is. You say potato, I say … Sorry, that old saying does work in writing but you catch my drift. Also, just as a reminder to the President, parsing phrases to avoid the unlikely retribution of Congress only really works if you don’t tell everyone what you are doing otherwise, in legal terms, this is known as a confession.

But, never mind — a military operation it is. This military operation has been going on a good month. Now I can quibble, and I will, about bombs and targeted assassinations being acts of war, but, say I wanted to be generous to Trump here, and agree with his characterization of those actions as being a military operation instead of a war.

When does a military operation become a war? And, just like that, an answer appears — when you send 50,000 ground troops. Bombing plus troops surely adds up to war. Or are we in some semantic Hell where Trump can call a war anything he wants and the Congress will agree to in order to avoid the wrath of Trump’s more rabid supporters. Apparently it is semantic Hell.

This whole operation is caught up in different definitions of words. Trump supposedly can only act without Congressional Authorization if it is an emergency. The USA would have to be in immediate and grave danger. My understanding of this power would be an impeding attack of USA was about to take place. There is absolutely no evidence that this was the case.

But the Iranians were trying to restart their nuclear program. No doubt, however, according to Trump the Iranian nuclear program was destroyed in a previous attack so the idea that so the idea that the Iranians had miraculously resurrected their nuclear capability to the point of an immenent attack is unbelievable. I am fairly certain there was more than enough time for Congress to review the problem and give its consent.

The Iranian, dare I call it, War is a disappointing display of hubris on the part of Trump and cowardice on the part of Congress. The whole point of Congressional Authorization for wars is that war is a serious business for a country. If we are going to take on such a responsibility it needs to come after careful consideration from the body that represents the all the people of the USA. For wars, particularly messy and potentially long term commitment wars to be won, everyone needs to be on board. This has not happened.

Instead we have semantic parsing of words so one man can drag a nation of 300 million plus people into a war dressed up like a military operation.

By on

The problem that many people, including myself, have with Donald Trump is he is, above all else, an asshole extraordinaire. That this detestable prick is president of the United States is both extremely depressing and a source of conflicting feelings about what he does.

So let me lay it out for my present destress:

  1. I dislike Donald Trump and disagree with most, if not everything, he does.
  2. I like the United States. It is my home.
  3. Donald Trump is the president of the United States.While I think he is a fuck up and fucking up everything he lays his tiny hands on, he also leads my country.
  4. I want my country to succeed whenever possible.

Which leads to the question, how can I hope for the best for my country with this miserable little shit running the country?

For example, the war with Iran. I think it is a big mistake. On the other hand, I think the world would be a worse place if the United States lost it. Muslim extremism, chaos in Iran and in the neighboring region, Women’s rights, Gay rights, things could get a whole lot worse if he were to lose. I can’t see how any of this would be better if the United States lost.

But, then, Trump is such a detestable man, if he wins, he will take credit for the victory and thus become even more insufferable. He will think he is smarter than he actually is and will continue governing as he had thinking he is wiser than he is. Thus making him even more likely to make even more risky decisions because he keeps rolling the dice and coming up a winner.

My one fond hope, though highly unlikely, is that Trump will be forced to work with Congress and our Allies to obtain a settlement that frees Iran from Muslim extremism while also bringing some peaceful resolution to the troubles in the region. So what I want, I guess, is for Trump to succeed only after he throws himself on the mercy of Congress and our Allies in order to ensure the victory.

Barring that, all I see is a mess.

By on

Every day, every new outrage, and I think is this the one that is going to bring the whole rotting edifice down but, to my surprise, the rickety all structure is still standing.

Yet the rot is so pervasive that almost anything could bring it down. It is both remarkably sturdy and remarkably vulnerable at the same time. How does it survive all this rot? Then I take a deep breath and remember, oh, right, now I remember — I am the problem. The present system, as configured, is all I know. Whatever comes next is unknown. This mystery is more than a little frightening. I want the system, with all its flaws, to survive.

It isn’t encouraging that every idea I have heard regarding change now seems to involve a bit of violence. It is mostly this fear of violence that keeps me firmly on the side of the present system for all its problems. There still is the notion of democratic give and take as the best way to resolve our problems despite the rot. I maybe wrong but the risk of political violence seems, at present, unwarranted.

What I fear though is this reflexive support for democracy is waning. To what I do not know. I do know that blood on the streets is to be avoided mostly because the idea is always that it will be the bad guy’s blood (read here the people who disagree with me) and not the good guy’s (read here the people who agree with me) blood. But we all know that once blood starts flowing, both good guys and bad guys bleed the same color and it is horrible.

I don’t have the answer but I do know this — the present approach seems to be a shouting match where the only way to win is to outshout the other guy. The gerrymander wars shows two sides with little confidence that either can win through the political process so they redraw the lines to keep their power. People appear to be giving up on changing minds through persuasion and creating imperfect but workable institutions through compromise.

And all we have is the rickety and rotting system to defend us in the coming political storm. It is a bit unsettling to think about.

By on 2 Comments

The one thing that keeps haunting me about Jeffrey Epstein is how many seemingly decent people knew something was wrong but did nothing. How can this be? Whenever I think the Holocaust, I think it couldn’t happen again because surely somebody would speak up before things got out of hand. Yet, Epstein Island, the Lolita Express come along to prove me wrong.

Jeffrey Epstein is a very small part of the problem too. There will always be assholes but, hopefully there are more decent people willing to stop injustice. This didn’t happen, at least, not for the longest time. Workers at his home, guests for the weekend all just continued on as if this was a normal way for a rich man to behave. Who am I to stop him?

There is the crux of the problem here when someone has money and power. What can I do stop him and, more importantly, what can he do to hurt me. Being in the warm sunshine of wealth and power has a price and that price is silence to their crimes. Who wants to tangle with a billionaire? They have more money and will probably win any legal struggle and not before bankrupting you.

The rich and powerful sometimes pay the price but, more often than not, they get off scot-free.

And it is still going on. All the lawyers redacting documents at the Department of Justice — marking through the names of the rich and powerful people who Epstein entertained — shielding them from justice for a few more years as many of these suspects race with death. Why exactly are they being protected? Their reputations?

I disagree that they should get this protection if all they did was spend the weekend with a known sexual predator, but it is something I could live with if I believed that anyone who partook of more than food, drink and place to sleep were being pursued. But, unless I am missing something, redaction also means the end of any investigation into what happened on Epstein Island, so I say fuck them, embarrass away. Embarrass so they lose their jobs. Embarrass so they can’t show their faces at Cape Cod. Embarrass so they can’t get their kids into elite schools.

If they are avoiding prison, they can, at the very least, be forced to hang their heads in shame. These seemingly decent people didn’t act and, if they get away with it, they will continue to keep their mouths shut as the rich and powerful continue their crime spree through 21st century America.

By on 1 Comment

I might be barking up the wrong tree here but something that rarely gets talked about regarding the Epstein Files really bothers me. Why didn’t the Biden Justice Department take action on these files when they had a chance in those long years between 2020 and 2024? It is baffling.

What is even more baffling is that until MAGA Republicans made an issue of releasing the Epstein Files, I was blissfully unconcerned about their existence or what should be done with them. I can’t recall it being an issue until the 2024 election which, in and of itself, reveals a lot. Nobody wanted to talk about it, so nobody was making an issue of it.

The question is why. I will take a wild guess here and say that they were protecting Democrats and Democratic donors from embarrassment.

Thanks to a bunch of MAGA yahoos the Epstein Files regained notoriety during the 2024 Election. They thought they could use them as a cudgel to swing at Democrats during the election. And swing they did. So hard, in fact, that Donald Trump, who probably thought he would never be forced to release them, joined in the swinging. It became an issue.

So Trump got elected, and some of his supporters continued to campaign, much to the chagrin of Trump, to see the Epstein files. Democrats, now in the minority and desperate find their own cudgel to knock Trump and the Republicans around, decided it was time for their release. Forced to do so by his Republican allies, Trump and his Justice Department redacted the files in such a way as to protect Trump and his allies while pointing the finger at the Clintons and their allies. Unfortunately for Trump, even the redacted files held a trove of information implicating Trump in Epstein’s crimes.

Now this is where things gets tricky for me. Thinking that I am a smart person and a political realist, I thought there could be nothing in the Epstein Files that actually could serve as hard evidence that Trump committed a crime. Why would the Biden Justice Department sit on evidence that could, if nothing else, damage Trump’s campaign for the presidency and elect a Democrat. Politics is rough and tumble enterprise. If you have to throw dirt on your opponent, your throw that dirt — particularly if the election is going to be close as the 2024 election was.

Yes, your allies might suffer some embarrassment or, even, God forbid, some legal trouble, but it would be worth it in order to defeat Trump — a right wing ideologue who’s personality was ill-suited for the presidency. You throw in everything plus the kitchen sink Well, apparently, I was wrong, you keep the most damaging information possible from the public.

Someone somewhere in the Biden Justice Department realized that they couldn’t just release files that were damaging to Trump. They would have to release all the files, even the ones damaging to Democrats, or nothing. Surprisingly, they opted for nothing. Protecting their allies was, then, more important than defeating Donald Trump.

Now here we are in the second year of a mad man wrecking the world all because people were afraid to reveal the bad behavior of their allies. To say that these people have distorted values is an understatement. They are willing to prop up a rotting system with an array of bad actors. Why? Well, maybe, we might be about to find out.

By on

TSA agents are no longer being paid due to a partial government shutdown. This is ridiculous. Really ridiculous.

First government shutdowns are ridiculous to being with. Taxes are being paid. There is money to pay them because, if there was no government shutdown, they would be paid. It is an accounting problem. Members of Congress are being paid. Since members of Congress are government employees and they continue to get their paycheck, there must be some accounting trick that makes this possible. Why not use this same trick with TSA agents.

I would argue that TSA agents are actually more essential to public safety than members of Congress. Millions of people travel by plane every day. Even I go to the airport on occasion and in order to board a plane I must go through TSA to get there. This matters to me.

On the other hand, I can’t tell you the last time I needed a member of Congress to do, well, anything. I think it is safe to say never. It would seem that the government would prioritize the TSA agents’ paychecks over, how shall I say this politely, unnecessary government employees like members of Congress.

It is down right irritating that Airports are begging for money in order to help TSA agents through this shutdown. I get that they are just trying to help out people who are having a hard time through no fault of their own. Yeah for their good intentions but this is a very bad idea and fails spectacularly to deal with the real problem — the ongoing congressional stalemate regarding budgets.

Trying to help these people through private charity only encourages Congress to continue in their intransigence. Why settle now when we can hold out longer to potentially gain the upper hand? Right. I can’t remember a time that this has happened but OK, hope springs eternal. The food banks and the gift cards only delay the inevitable, why not just cut to the chase.

Holding people’s paychecks hostage in order to get your way on something that you don’t have the votes for in Congress is quite simply wrong. The idea is that the Republicans will be shamed into giving into the Democrats. I’m sorry to say, I don’t think the Republican Party is capable of shame. So holding out for a win here is pointless. The party in the minority never gets their way and the only thing that really happens is a lot of hard working people are inconvenienced.

By on

Texas Legislators are discussing how to keep Furries out of the schools. Furries, in case you are unaware of what they are, and why should you as they are a complete figment of the right wing imagination, are children who identify as animals, specifically cats, and, therefore, require a litter box in their classroom in order to use the toilet. That there is no evidence that this is a problem in any Texas school is beside the point. Never mind. Some child could and, because of this highly remote possibility, the Texas legislature needs to act.

Now a Republican Congresswoman is fighting to keep strippers out of the classroom — a problem, again, with no reported occurrences. No matter the insignificance — the nation must act now because strippers in g-strings are camped outside schools just waiting to perform. It is sad, to say the least, that so much of what is troubling the right wing are not even remotely problems for our schools. But, by all means, lets spend precious time protecting children from strippers and furries when we could spend more time discussing an actual existential problem for pupils — something like, I don’t know, school shooters.

Think about it. If you can only protect children from one thing, who would your rather slip through the protective net for children — a school shooter or a stripper?

What’s the problem you may ask. These legislators are acting preemptively against a possible problem in this crazy world we live in. It isn’t hurting anyone and, if lighting strikes and it actually happens, there will be laws in place to protect children from the experience. But this isn’t some harmless ask from a publicity seeking legislator, it does real harm. Every moment these officials spend protecting children from these monsters under the bed is time, money and energy taken away from actual problems. It is a waste of time which isn’t harmless.

By on

I need to clarify one of my blogs – A Stopped Clock is Right Twice a Day.

First, I give the impression that I thought bombing Iran is a good idea. I don’t.

What I want to say is this: Since Trump has starting bombing Iran, I am going to hope for the best — which is a non-religious Iranian government takes over and the Mullahs are overthrown. Since the military intervention is a done deal, I am hoping for the best result especially for the Iranian people and the American military.

This doesn’t mean I like what Trump has done. I think he is rolling the die here and he doesn’t impress me as someone who knows what dice game is being played much less how to win the game. He didn’t consult Congress and he is doing a piss poor job explaining why we are at war. If it all goes wrong, it is his bag of shit to hold and no one else’s.

With that said, since he has gone ahead with the war, I want him to succeed even though I hate his guts, have no confidence in his ability to successfully pull this off and think he is an asshole. It also kills me that if he does succeed that he has all the diplomatic finesse of an adolescent boy getting laid for the first time. He will be talking about this for some time to come. Endlessly talking about it.

It will be annoying but much more preferable than a disaster in Iran which results in a stronger more authoritarian leader in Iran and more restrictive Islamic fundamentalism foisted on the Iranian people. It is a bad choice but a choice nonetheless.

Finally, I am amazed, yet again, how I can write something, reread what I’ve written to make sure it is what I want to say, publish it, only to realize it isn’t exactly what I wanted to say. My apologies and I endeavor to do better in the future.

By on

I have mixed feelings about Trump bombing Iran. I have to give him credit for again choosing his enemies wisely because, whether I like Trump or not, and I don’t, I think the Iranian government’s treatment of women and gays is horrible. They are assholes, and if I have to choose, which I am afraid I must, then the Mullahs are bigger assholes than Trump.

But least we forget, Trump is still an asshole. He should have consulted Congress before taking military action — something he had plenty of time to do as he has been considering bombing Iran for some time. There was no imminent Iranian attack or even an increase in Iran’s nuclear capability which Trump assured us months ago was annihilated. He also needs to explain what exactly our goals are here. Again something he has failed to do.

It undermines our world position. For instance, how can we complain if China were to invade Taiwan? We can’t refer back to International Treaties and diplomacy as the proper avenues of action when the U.S. kidnaps one country’s president and kills another’s supreme leader. Yes these processes make quick action difficult, but, then, that is precisely what they were intended to do. Stopping people from acting rashly. You can’t pick and choose which treaties you will honor and which you will ignore.

And, saying that nobody complained when Obama and Clinton did the same thing is hardly a credible defense. It is just saying I know it is wrong but if your side can do, so can our side. It is a 10 year old’s response for getting her hand caught in the cookie jar. The fact is, this time, your hand is in the cookie jar so explain it.

In the meantime, I am hoping for the best for Iran who now have a chance to get rid the Islamic fundamentalists while also pissed about Trump’s continued bad behavior. A stopped clock is right twice a day and all that.