The funeral of former Vice President Dick Cheney is taking place today in the National Cathedral.
Lawyers are loath to say, “Never” or “Always,” but if you would have asked me in early 2009 whether I would declare what follows here, I would have given you 99 – 1 against.
On the most important national challenge of Mr. Cheney’s life, he got it right.
May he Rest in Peace.
“That [i.e., President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Great Gatsby-themed party on Halloween as food assistance benefits were cut off for millions, including millions of children] once and for all shows that Donald Trump doesn’t give a f—k about even looking like he gives a f—k. He doesn’t give a f—k – at all.”
You and I know: I will never achieve that level of insight or eloquence.
After over a year of consistently pessimistic notes, let me put forward at least a ray of optimism – at least of a type – at the end of this note.
The chances that our democracy will survive exist in a two-word paradox: Donald Trump.
While those of us who are sufficiently economically secure have been pondering the dangers that the MAGA movement presents to our republic, the vast majority of our fellow citizens continue to confront daily financial pressures. The political ramifications arising from the challenges they face are perhaps best captured in the axiom famously expressed over thirty years ago by former President Bill Clinton’s legendary campaign advisor, James Carville: It’s the Economy, Stupid. For too long, I didn’t viscerally appreciate how the decisive segment of 2024 Trump voters, who had no autocratic sympathies or dominant prejudices while seemingly having an inkling of the danger that Mr. Trump presented to our democracy, could vote for him over “the price of eggs.” Now, belatedly, I get it. (I know – it frequently takes me a while to catch on.) (At the same time, I have noted that the progressive media that was stressing the overall strength of the American economy while President Joe Biden was in office is now focused exclusively on the economic plight of the American majority. 😉)
The painful irony for the current MAGA Administration – of which its cohort is undoubtedly privately well aware — is that the economy is, practically speaking, in exactly the same place as it was during the last half of the Biden Administration: Inflation about 3%; the most-advantaged 20% of Americans ever richer; the other 80% of Americans ever poorer; a “real” unemployment rate that I’ve seen one economist place closer to 25% (due to millions receiving inadequate compensation for less-than-full-time work) than to the federal-government-reported 4% (the latter figure derived from decades-old, arguably no-longer-relevant methodologies); and generally rising stock market indices, driven by a few stocks whose core – the advance of Artificial Intelligence – seems poised to deprive as wide a swath of Americans of jobs as did manufacturing outsourcing during the last half-century. During its first ten months in office, the Trump Administration has done nothing to improve the American majority’s economic struggles. Since it is still relatively early in the term, I would guess that if the Administration had thus far positioned itself differently, a significant segment of our citizens would have been willing to provide Mr. Trump a longer runway on affordability issues, but as Mr. Stewart has noted, the President hasn’t even tried to look like he’s doing anything about the majority’s financial difficulties.
From a purely political handicapping perspective, I have frankly been shocked by the scope and breadth of Mr. Trump’s political blunders during his second term (here let’s put aside the more important perspectives, such as humanity, morality, and the rule of law). While his ICE agents’ Nazi Sturmabteilung-like activities, his stationing National Guard and active duty military in American cities whose local officials didn’t want them, his aggressive tariff policies, and his blowing up small boats in international waters without due process might sit equably with his most ardent and ill-informed supporters, they have clearly offended a larger swath of Americans; and it certainly appears that he has touched nerves across the political spectrum by literally ripping down part of the White House to build what wags are aptly calling a “Marie Antoinette” ballroom, staging a Great Gatsby party as his Administration was denying food assistance to millions of children and adults (including Trump supporters); ramrodding through the law extending tax breaks for the wealthy while cutting health care assistance to millions (including Trump supporters); and aiding a right-wing Argentinian government to the detriment of overwhelmingly Trump-supporting western cattle ranchers. These are the kinds of oblivious botches that a first-time Town Council candidate would know enough to avoid. The President’s missteps have been particularly stunning given his heretofore impeccable political instincts. It has seemed as if he wants to antagonize as many Americans as he can.
The resoundingly anti-Trump voting results occurring in early November – buttressed by many Trump Latino voters’ evident recognition and repudiation of the Regime’s fascist designs – indicate that the majority of Americans are deeply distressed by one or more Trump actions. I recall a report on Americans’ political preferences from not so long ago that our citizens now currently divide themselves into thirds: about 33% Democrat, 33% Republican, and 34% Independent. There has been a widely reported recent poll that placed Mr. Trump’s approval rating around 37%. If those respective reports are reasonably accurate, even I can do the math: as of right now – a key qualifier — Mr. Trump has lost the support of roughly 90% of independents. I will venture further: as election analysts decided in retrospect that they underestimated Mr. Trump’s popularity in 2016 because many poll respondents were embarrassed to admit that they were going to vote for him, I sense that a percentage of those respondents who today tell pollsters that they approve of Mr. Trump’s presidency are unwilling to admit publicly that their support is wavering. The President is arguably teetering on becoming a lame duck – at least under the patterns of traditional American democracy — less than a year into his term. The issue is how Mr. Trump proceeds from here – both tactically and substantively.
This is where the paradoxes begin. If Mr. Trump still cares what his supporters (if not the majority of Americans) think, he may want to do something to satisfy them – and given his past political track record, one cannot count him out — but I would submit that it is not within his compass to actually help them. All along, his rank-and-file MAGA supporters have believed that because Mr. Trump hates the same people and movements they hate, that he cares about them. He doesn’t. This may — finally – be starting to dawn on them.
The Administration is accordingly attempting to run plays from the old play book – falsehood, distraction, and denial.
“It was a con job. It was a con job – affordability they call it – was a con job by the Democrats. … The reason I don’t wat to talk about affordability is because everybody knows that it’s far less expensive under Trump than it was under Sleepy Joe Biden. And the prices are way down.”
They’re not.
I understand that Vice President J.D. Vance has recently blamed rising real estate prices on illegal immigrants, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has blamed rising beef prices on mass migration. Mr. Trump has ordered his Justice Department to investigate Mr. Clinton’s ties to Child Sex Trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
I don’t think it’s going to fly. When you’re in charge, and your supporters are still struggling, trying to satisfy them by inciting old prejudices will only work on the most gullible. Mr. Clinton has been out of office 25 years, and I seriously doubt that the vast majority of Americans care what any DOJ investigation uncovers about him. They will certainly not be deterred by any revelations regarding Mr. Clinton from thoroughly exploring Mr. Epstein’s ties to Mr. Trump, who’s still here.
In a couple of posts over the last year, I have noted TLOML’s observation, based upon her years providing therapy to seniors, that one’s core characteristics do not soften with age, but instead become more evident while one’s capacity to temper regrettable tendencies diminishes. This will be even more pronounced in Mr. Trump, who has arguably never attempted to temper his distasteful characteristics. Throughout his life, he has been obsessed with appearance, prestige, and riches. He’s going to be 80. He’s reverting to his unvarnished core – the gilded Oval Office, his love as a builder of ostentatious renovation (the ballroom, posting pictures of the gold fixtures in the Lincoln Bedroom), grand parties with himself as the guest of honor. Our experience over the last 45 years seemingly indicates that he cannot improve the economic fortunes of struggling Americans without significantly altering the current American economic and tax structure favoring our well off. He won’t.
If Mr. Trump’s apparent current unpopularity continues and/or increases, he will perhaps soon be left with one of two choices: to become a Dictator, or a Music Man. Either fits within his visceral profile.
The first option is obvious, and has been described here in numbing detail in past posts: The President clearly believes that everyone who opposes him, no matter how loyal in the past, is his enemy; he declared at the memorial service of MAGA Activist Charlie Kirk that he hates his opponents; he strikes back at, and seeks to destroy, his enemies. Under this scenario, Mr. Trump will seek to install a de facto autocracy by fabricating an emergency and usurping greater power to himself than he already has, manipulate election laws and procedures, put more military on the streets of “Blue Cities,” intimidate opponents, limit his adversaries’ access to the ballot box in the upcoming midterm elections, perhaps invoke Martial Law and/or suspend elections.
My response to anyone who considers this option unthinkable: You’ve been asleep for the last decade.
On the other hand, there is a rosier scenario, which I would submit is also in keeping with Mr. Trump’s psyche: that in the last analysis, he was simply the Music Man.
All will well recall Professor Harold Hill, made immortal by the late Robert Preston (and if you don’t, your time will be better spent watching the film, The Music Man, than reading this note 😊), who enters River City, Iowa (of course, “Eye-oh-way”) and persuades its worthy citizens that its pool hall will lead its youth astray – that the pool hall means Trouble — right there in River City – Trouble with a capital “T” and that rhymes with “P” and that stands for “Pool.” Prof. Hill persuades the River City residents to pay for instruments and uniforms to start a youth band, which will keep them on the straight and narrow. He declares that the youth will learn to play their instruments through his revolutionary “Think Method.” His plan – without giving away the plot for the one person continuing to read this who doesn’t know the story – is to leave town on the last train after he collects the money for the uniforms and instruments before the River City citizens realize … that the kids can’t play.
Mr. Stewart’s observation brought me back to what I believed about Mr. Trump back in 2015 and early 2016: that he launched his presidential campaign as a branding exercise; that his campaign was a con all along; that he neither expected nor wanted to win. His 2020 campaign was about fragile ego; he mustn’t lose. His 2024 campaign was about avoiding jail, making money, and retribution. Maybe he doesn’t want to be a dictator. Under this interpretation, although Mr. Trump shares the sentiments of true MAGA believers like Stephen Bannon, he doesn’t care about policy, or about the tens of millions he has scammed into believing in him, or about the Republican officeholders and officials whose party he has hijacked and careers he has ruined, or about what happens when he’s departed to his rabid disciples such as White House Deputy Chief of Staff (and de facto Anti-Brown-Immigration Czar) Stephen Miller, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, or to the truly hapless lickspittles he’s kept around for amusement such as Mr. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. His Supreme Court has rendered him almost immune from any action he takes while in office. His first two impeachment proceedings have proven that there will never be 67 Senate votes to remove him from office no matter what he does. When he takes Marine One out of Washington, D.C. in January, 2029, he’ll have Secret Service protection and health care for the rest of his life, a taxpayer-funded bunkerlike Mar-a Lago to live in, friends from Saudi Arabia to Moscow, and the riches he has always claimed but didn’t have.
Not a bad result for a branding exercise.
This is my Rosy Scenario, you say? Really?
I do. I am terribly concerned about what Mr. Trump and his cohort have already wrought for the generations of our children and grandchildren – irretrievable loss to American global standing and influence, a majority of our people remaining terribly economically challenged, a worsening environment, the AI challenge, lost intellectual capital, a spiraling deficit, the enhanced danger to democracies across the world, etc., etc., etc. Even if Mr. Trump doesn’t attempt to install an autocracy, another three years of his generally retrogressive policies will place our future in even greater peril than it already is. That said, if we emerge from this nightmare with our democracy intact, perhaps with the most strident segments of our citizenry on both ends of the political spectrum a bit chastened, focusing on issues of equality and economic prosperity for our citizens, we’ll still be the United States of America, and we’ll still have a better chance of righting ourselves than any nation in the history of the world. We can always scrape the garish gilt off the walls of the Oval Office.
I concede that you may well have concluded that I have succumbed to Prof. Hill’s Think Method 😉. Even if so, the notion that Mr. Trump might simply take the money and run provides me with some solace. In any event, perhaps this note’s reference to a classic American film has brought you a smile – and made you register a mental note to enjoy it again in the near future. 😊
I know; a hardly original post title. Also, that you’ve heard plenty from me lately. Even so, a short one I can’t resist.
Earlier today, I saw a picture of the destruction of part of the outside edifice of the White House, apparently part of President Donald Trump’s plan to alter the structure. I had been vaguely aware that Mr. Trump had announced White House remodeling plans, but have been so focused on his authoritarian actions that although the notion of his refashioning the structure rankled – in the same manner in which I’m offended that he’s turned the Oval Office into a gold-trinketed stage – it hadn’t really registered with me. (As to the Oval Office, every new president decorates it a bit differently; I had expected Mr. Trump’s successor – if there was one – to simply get rid of the inappropriate, garish gold).
A picture of the President’s ripping at the outside of the White House – literally, destroying part of the structure – was viscerally jarring to me. I would submit that it will be instinctively repulsive to a wide swath of Americans, even striking a chord with part of the MAGA base.
If Democrats don’t start running ads displaying pictures of the destruction of the White House edifice with captions such as, “Look at What He’s Doing,” using those as the symbol of authoritarian takeover now being undertaken by Mr. Trump and his minions, they’re even more politically inept than I thought.
We attended the NO KINGS Capitol rally in downtown Madison, WI, this past Saturday. It was a large, enthusiastic crowd; media estimates place its participants at around 15,000. With attendant rallies across outlying Madison areas – a close friend at a rally in nearby Stoughton, WI (population 13,000), estimated the crowd there at 500 – the total turnout in our environs probably approximated 20,000. Probably not enough in our Congressional district to shake the White House, but we’ll get back to that.
There were almost as many clever signs as there were marchers. A favorite: a picture of President Donald Trump on a placard bearing the inscription, “Does this ass make my sign look big?” Another sign with a complementary theme, more poignant: a picture of Mr. Trump on a placard bearing the inscription, “Does this ass make my country look small?”
There were a number of signs mocking MAGA’s fear and loathing of “Antifa.” I’m aware that there is a debate as to whether there is or is not an actual “Antifa” organization – Mr. Trump says there is, and has sought to declare it a terrorist organization, while I understand that former FBI Director Christopher Wray has formerly characterized it as more an ideology than an organization – but I believe that the word, “Antifa,” itself, is simply shorthand for “anti-fascist.” Although no one on any part of the political spectrum should ever resort to violence, or be part of any group that is willing to resort to violence, since the arguably most evil regime in the history of the modern world – responsible for the murder of millions, including millions of Jews – was proudly fascist, these signs seemed to be asking: What is wrong with being anti-fascist? Call me dense, but aren’t we still free because Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill led their nations in a world war against the fascist creed? (Clearly, I’m not consuming enough alt-right media to understand the MAGA angst.)
On to the omens. A sign I saw during the march that I considered particularly telling and potentially counterproductive (clearly unintended by the wielder): “Too Many Issues; Not Enough Signs.” If you’ve read many of these pages, you realize that in the context in which we’re speaking, I’m a one-issue guy: preservation of our democracy. I consider all other policy issues we face, no matter how important, subordinate to protecting our way of life. We heard several speakers and chants yesterday whose point I – and I suspect other moderates — might under other circumstances question or seek to qualify. I consider NO KINGS to be brilliant branding because it brings all of those who oppose the autocratic inclinations of the Trump Regime under one roof. To save our way of life they must stay together. They cannot allow themselves to be divided or distracted by “too many issues.”
Finally, an encouraging omen that I would consider dangerously ominous if I were a MAGA: the reported 1,000 NO KINGS marchers reported to have demonstrated in Janesville, WI. Janesville has about 66,000 residents, meaning that about a percent and a half of its people stopped what they were doing on a beautiful Wisconsin autumn Saturday to demonstrate. I pick Janesville for two reasons: TLOML and I know it – we lived there for three years when early married – and because it is former U.S. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan’s hometown and in the WI First Congressional District he represented in Congress. There were reportedly other significant NO KINGS demonstrations in other Wisconsin First cities. The Wisconsin First is now represented by Republican U.S. WI Rep. Brian Steil, also from Janesville. Mr. Steil held his seat by 2 points in 2024. There were also reportedly notable NO KINGS marches in the Wisconsin Third, currently represented by Republican U.S. WI Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who won his seat in 2024 by 3 points.
Referring back to my observation above, I truly doubt that the Regime cares about the Madison NO KINGS turnout; if there were only 50 Democratic seats remaining in the U.S. House of Representatives, Madison’s would be one. At the same time, I am confident that the Regime does care about holding the Wisconsin First and Third Districts in 2026. I don’t know whether political voter science has yet evolved to the point that analysts can project a candidate’s or issue’s overall popularity – or unpopularity – based upon the numbers of citizens who turn out at a rally, but clearly for every demonstrator who turns out at a rally, there are “X” more who don’t turn out but agree with – and will vote in accord with — the demonstrator. If I were Mr. Steil or Mr. Van Orden – or any other MAGA member of the House of Representatives across the country who won his/her office in 2024 by less than 5 points in a district where there were notable NO KINGS rallies last Saturday – I’d be feeling a wee bit insecure in my seat today.
On we march (figuratively as well as literally 😊).
“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”
I think we can confidently assume that President Donald Trump has never heard of Sun Tzu, but I would venture that a number of his strategists have.
The race to preserve the American way of life is beginning in earnest.
I have mentioned a couple of times in these pages since Mr. Trump was reelected that I presumed that Mr. Trump and his adherents recognized that on their best day, they only had the support of half of the American public, and understood that they needed to employ the Nazi model of the 1930s to quickly consolidate their control of our country if they were going to be able to reshape it to their vision. They have certainly done so. An exhaustive list of their nondemocratic activities since taking office would probably consume more life space that either of us have remaining, so let’s limit ourselves to just a few:
Deploying National Guard troops on the streets of Los Angeles and Chicago over the objections of local authorities, seeking to deploy them in Portland, OR (again, over the objections of local authorities), and threatening New York and other cities whose citizens clearly oppose the Trump Regime. (Add to that the Regime’s recent assemblage of all senior military officers, in which Mr. Trump’s vaguely referred to use of our active military in American cities. This was arguably intended to intimidate reluctant officers; these men and women are understandably worried about their careers like everyone else.)
Promiscuously employing ICE agents across the country. The incidents of ICE agents’ overzealous and at times unwarranted actions are too numerous to mention. I speculated in a post after Mr. Trump pardoned the January 6, 2021, insurrectionists that the pardoned Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers might provide the President his own private Sturmabteilung (the “SA”; Adolf Hitler’s Brownshirts, who terrorized Nazi opponents before he took power). ICE is arguably edging toward being the Regime’s quasi-legal Sturmabteilung. (ICE agents were recently walking the streets of Madison, WI. Madison’s “illegal” Latino population cannot be significant by nationwide standards; however, since Madison is the heart of anti-Trump sentiment in swing state Wisconsin, the Administration was laying a predicate.)
Blowing up small boats in international waters. There has been, of course, no evidence presented that any of these boats were carrying illegal drugs headed for the United States. The notion that we are fighting a “war” which justifies American use of deadly force without adjudication is absurd. This is rogue nation murder.
The Administration’s recently-commenced prosecutions of former FBI Director James Comey and New York State Attorney General Letitia James by some pretty former lackey lawyer of Mr. Trump’s for alleged crimes that career federal prosecutors were unwilling to pursue. The Regime isn’t trying to hide its attempt to seek retribution against its enemies; it is reveling in it. That is the point.
We don’t need to go back over the inaction of gutless Congressional Republicans, the complicity of the Administration’s Supreme Court, the Regime’s attempt to intimidate powerful universities that oppose it, and MAGA-controlled state legislatures’ current mid-cycle redistricting efforts to stave off the Administration’s otherwise historically seemingly almost certain loss of control of the U.S. House of Representatives in January, 2026.
Given Mr. Trump’s obvious dictatorial inclinations, all of these could be predicted. What I have found yet more instructive is Mr. Trump’s approach to the government shutdown.
In a post a few weeks ago, I asserted that forcing a government shutdown was an ill-conceived strategy for Democrats in their battle for public opinion because “… the next time that Americans ultimately blame a government shutdown on the party in power … will be the first time.” If reported polls are accurate, I have so far been wrong (I bet you find that shocking 😊); Democrats have been holding their own. Having been wrong has obviously never deterred me from offering further opinions, so I will venture this: Democrats have found such support among a wide swath of the Americans not only because their position against skyrocketing health care premiums has “broken through” to the public but because Mr. Trump’s marginal 2024 voters – the ones that put him over the top – have become uneasy with the Administration’s autocratic excesses, not what they expected (despite Mr. Trump’s clear campaign rhetoric; we always have to give him that) or wanted.
Mr. Trump is the savviest reader and manipulator of public opinion in our generation. He can read the polls. Account after account in the media has indicated that the increase in Affordable Care Act premiums and loss of Medicaid benefits projected to be wrought by his markedly unpopular “Big Beautiful Bill (the ‘BBB’)” will disproportionately adversely impact his voters. At the same time, he is so much better at messaging than the Democrats that on any day, he could sweep in, tell his lickspittle Congressional Republicans to support the legislative measures Democrats want, and claim that he brokered the peace. He clearly can’t give a damn about any increase to our federal deficit resulting from the Democrats’ measure; even his staunchest supporters would have to concede that he doesn’t care about debt. And a year from now, his gullible supporters won’t recall that their access to affordable health care was preserved by the Democrats’ stand.
So why doesn’t he deal?
I would submit that it is because his priority is consolidation of power, not policy or even popularity within his base. I’ll venture that he sees this as a pivotal moment; if Democrats are perceived – not among hardcore MAGAs, but among independents – to have scored a victory, he will be weakened when he has not yet fully taken control of the American populace. He is out to crush the opposition at this moment, when his autocratic measures are confronting increasing discontent in a citizenry that for 250 years has been accustomed to think and speak for itself.
All who read these notes are aware that we regularly tune in to MSNBC’s Morning Joe, and that my inclinations frequently align with the show’s host, former U.S. FL Rep. Joe Scarborough. That said, I have recently been raising an eyebrow at Mr. Scarborough’s observations about the ultimate political ramifications of the Trump Regime’s increasingly autocratic measures; his comments have frequently been in the vein, “What goes around comes around; they should be worried about the next time, when Democrats take control of the White House and Congress.” My attitude is different, formed from the approach that I took toward negotiating commercial arrangements for almost 40 years: assume that the other guy (in a genderless sense, of course 😉) is at least as bright as you are, and knows at least as much as you do. So if s/he’s acting in a way that seems contrary to his/her interest, what does s/he know that you’re not factoring in?
I would suggest that the answer is straightforward, certainly supported by Regime actions during its first nine months seemingly contrary to its own political popularity: MAGAs don’t intend to let it “come around,” or that there will be “a next time.” To suggest otherwise defies what is right before our eyes. Too many have spent too much of the last decade underestimating Donald Trump and the MAGA movement.
The next federal midterm elections will be held on November 3, 2026, obviously just a little over a year distant. When Mr. Trump was reelected, I thought that the struggle for the American way of life might be put off until the 2028 presidential election; now I think the upcoming election is the key.
Remember Sun Tzu. While all demonstrations against the Regime must be peaceful – to do otherwise plays into its hands – don’t be subdued. Hopefully, you will have the opportunity to participate in a NO KINGS rally today. Although we have seen any number of truly witty signs over the last nine months, I plan to carry the ultimate symbol of protest and freedom – an American flag.
First, something I should have added to the recent post relating to the passing of former Wall Street Journal Personal Financial Columnist Jonathan Clements: although Vanguard founder John Bogle, legendary investor Warren Buffett, and Mr. Clements all believe/ed that the American stock market would rise and individuals would reap satisfactory returns over the long run by investing in no-load, low-cost index funds tracking the markets, Mr. Buffett has famously said that he has no idea what the stock market will do tomorrow, and Messrs. Bogle and Clements would have undoubtedly agreed. Accordingly, any funds one requires for an impending purchase should be safely harbored until spent in a federally-insured cash account. There – my Irish Catholic conscience is clear (at least on this score 😉).
It appears that President Donald Trump is brokering an end to the Israeli-Hamas conflict. Whether any settlement will last – at the time this is typed, the shooting reportedly continues, and Middle Easterners have been warring for as close to forever as you can get in this finite existence – Mr. Trump may be achieving what I consider the most important immediate priority relating to the conflict: ending the brutal slaughter of Palestinians, particularly children. Although Israel’s activities were obviously precipitated by the Hamas attack, its response has been savagely disproportionate. This is no reflection on the Israeli people, but on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who should be in an international jail for life. Although I am not the first to say this, I acknowledge that Mr. Trump’s intervention was pivotal. The “only Nixon could go to China” analogy is grossly overused, but it is accurate here. The leaders of the cooperating Arab nations trust him because he thinks like they do. Although the objective terms of the announced pact overwhelmingly favor Israel, Mr. Netanyahu could have suspended his military operation in Gaza long ago had he wished to do so. When Mr. Trump pressured Mr. Netanyahu, as he reportedly did, to cease his military assault, Mr. Netanyahu was undoubtedly mindful that Mr. Trump was the only American president since the founding of Israel who could if he chose cut off aid to Israel and get away with it politically.
Putting aside the moral dimensions and looking at the assassination of MAGA Activist Charlie Kirk in cold political terms, it is arguable that the only things that the deranged young man who assassinated Mr. Kirk achieved through his heinous act was to drive all reference to Mr. Trump’s relationship with convicted Child Trafficker Jeffrey Epstein – the one area in which Mr. Trump had seemingly been vulnerable with his MAGA base – out of the media consciousness, and to provide Mr. Trump and his MAGA minions a pretext upon which to more aggressively harass and stifle the free speech of Mr. Trump’s critics.
With the return of the NFL season, I have been spending more time with sports media. This may just now be registering with me, but growing up in a family plagued by addiction – albeit a different one — I am appalled at the emphasis placed on gambling in these telecasts. I have noted repeated ads by FanDuel, by DraftKings, by BetMGM, am aware that there are many other online betting organizations, and hear plenty of betting talk among the commentators. So let’s take a bunch of immature, unmoored, desperate, mostly impecunious, mostly male young Americans and constantly wave the temptation to bet in their faces, make it easy to bet, make it look easy to win, and see what happens. I have not read the 2018 Supreme Court decision that enabled widespread online sports gambling and concede that this decision is not the most injurious to the American way of life that the Court has or will issue, but that doesn’t mean that easy-does-it online sports betting hasn’t and won’t lead to the ruination of quite a few (disproportionately young) lives.
I am disgusted with justifications frequently put forth to defend those Congressional Republicans who allegedly deplore Mr. Trump’s policies – and him – behind closed doors, but through their subservience enable Administration activities. Those seeking to rationalize these Republicans’ behaviors note that these officeholders fear being “primaried” by other MAGAs professing greater fealty to Mr. Trump, and/or that they fear literal physical retribution against themselves or their families if they don’t adhere to the MAGA line. I don’t buy it. These Republicans — if such do exist — are in the Congress of the United States. Nobody made them run for Congress. Under the Constitution, they each get a vote as to whether the United States should declare war on another nation – and if they so vote, thousands of military families, whether or not they agree with the declaration, will find loved ones in harm’s way. So these gutless Republicans fear losing a seat in Congress? As to the fear of physical retribution, they should, given the responsibility they have voluntarily chosen, be placing their own physical safety below that which they consider good for the nation and their constituents. While all can sympathize with a member’s concern for the wellbeing of his/her family, my reaction here is: send your family to live where they cannot be easily located by MAGA zealots while you finish out your term, announce that you are stepping down at the end of your term, and then do what you believe is right during the remainder of your term. If you can’t do that, take the simpler approach, and resign right now. Grow a … er … spine. You’re not in high school, the frat, or the sorority any more.
Enough impressions for one note. Nationwide NO KINGS rallies are scheduled for Saturday, October 18. Judging by the national website, there will be one near you, no matter where you are. If you plan to participate, anticipate that ICE or other Administration agents will establish a presence. STAY PEACEFUL. NEITHER PROVOKE, NOR BE PROVOKED. In the meantime, enjoy the fall weekend upon us.
As all who care are aware, the federal government will shut down on October 1 unless Congress passes the appropriate funding measures. The first time the government faced such a deadline during President Donald Trump’s second term, a sufficient number of Democratic Senators, led by Senate Minority Leader U.S. NY Sen. Chuck Schumer – to the extreme irritation of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party — supported Republican, Administration-supported measures to keep the government open. (I agreed with Sen. Schumer.) Now, understandably even further inflamed by Administration policies that are increasingly autocratic and clearly favor the interests of the well-to-do over the impoverished, and frustrated with their own glaring political impotence, many on the left are urging that unless the Administration provides certain concessions to Democrats (which I understand primarily involve ensuring against the loss or maintaining the continued affordability of health care for millions of Americans of lesser means), Senate Democrats should withhold the votes needed to continue to fund the government, thus forcing a shutdown.
All who read any of these notes are well aware that I am appalled by the Administration’s priorities and terrified by the direction our country is heading. While I acknowledge that Democrats’ choice has moral as well as policy dimensions, I nevertheless submit that causing a government stoppage would be an egregious political blunder for Democrats. Correct me if I’m mistaken, but the next time that Americans ultimately blame a government shutdown on the party in power … will be the first time. In these sorts of conflicts, the MAGAs have proven to be as savvy as they are ruthless. They don’t care if the government shuts down. One can easily anticipate that the Trump Administration will continue to pay federal debts, military defense costs, and immigration enforcement expenses, while laying off federal workers, trimming support for state services, Social Security benefits, Medicare reimbursements, and FEMA (remember, we’re in hurricane season). Timing is everything. The dangers to Americans’ health care costs that Democrats are seeking to avoid won’t meaningfully occur for months. On the other hand, how long will it take for those being laid off or on Mainstreet America to decide that Democrats are to blame for the jobs, benefits and services they’re losing now?
I’ll take this one: Democrats might be able to hold favorable public sentiment for about a week if they were skillful publicists. Unfortunately, Mr. Schumer and House Minority Leader U.S. NY Rep. Hakeem Jeffries couldn’t rally a class of kindergarteners to an ice cream stand. Democrats are seemingly expecting centrist voters, some of whom clearly either couldn’t discern or forgot that Mr. Trump incited an insurrection, ignored Mr. Trump’s 34 felony convictions, presumably believed that Mr. Trump would lower inflation while imposing tariffs, and were apparently confident that Mr. Trump would conclude the Russian/Ukrainian and Israeli/Hamas conflicts in one day, to look beyond the ends of their noses and grasp Democrats’ nuanced justification for bringing about a shutdown. I give the Democrats three days before they are publicly overrun by MAGA propaganda. The fact that Mr. Trump and Republican Congressional Leadership cancelled a negotiation session with Congressional Democrats scheduled for this week indicates that they agree with me.
I consider the October, 1974 Heavyweight Championship Title Bout between Champion George Foreman and Challenger Muhammad Ali to aptly fit the Democrats’ current situation. In the fight’s early rounds, Mr. Ali, the heavy underdog then well past his prime, let the younger, at that point stronger and more able Mr. Foreman punch himself out in the African heat before coming back to knock Mr. Foreman out. Mr. Ali understood that he had to absorb the punishment until the time was right to respond. If Mr. Ali had come out swinging too early, he would have lost.
The only way to win back America is to win at the ballot box. With all the obstructions I expect that MAGAs will institute to free and fair voting in 2026 and 2028, achieving electoral victory is going to be hard enough. Although it may be natural to focus on the 2028 presidential election, the Administration has moved so quickly to install an American Apartheid that the democratic aspirations of those who oppose its efforts may rest on Democrats’ ability to secure control of Congress in 2026. While premature gallant gestures will make some feel good, I would submit that Democrats cannot provide MAGAs with any pretexts that will enable them to shift blame for Americans’ difficulties elsewhere. I fear that progressives and liberals are living in their own delusional bubble as to how “the people” will ultimately attribute responsibility for the impending government stoppage. The time still isn’t right for a showdown. The one positive that could result from millions of Americans being callously deprived of their health care in 2026 is that no one – not even MAGAs – will blame Democrats. Democrats are so viscerally associated, across the political spectrum, with efforts to expand American health care that the coverage losses and degradations credibly predicted to occur in 2026 will be rightly blamed on the Trump Administration. If Democrats prematurely distract and inflame members of potentially decisive voter segments who may be having qualms about Mr. Trump’s leadership by forcing a government shutdown now, they may make their path to a 2026 electoral victory even harder than it already will be.
But what about the Comey indictment, you ask? I just added this reference to former FBI Director James Comey’s indictment yesterday to this previously-scheduled note to show you that I was still awake. While it remains important to note that the Administration was able to obtain an indictment from a panel of citizens who believed that there was probable cause, based upon the evidence presented to them by the Administration, that Mr. Comey had committed the crime for which he is charged, it is beyond any doubt that the United States Department of Justice is prosecuting Mr. Comey at President Donald Trump’s instruction because Mr. Trump hates him. The Administration’s action provides as clear a basis as we’ve had to date for the autocratic dangers I alluded to above. Frankly, although you have enough to worry about with your own psyche without hearing about mine, what surprised me most about the news of Mr. Comey’s indictment was that I received it with such equanimity. Then, I understood: the day this man was reelected, I knew what was going to happen. I already knew.
“The laws which I shall promulgate will not be complete in detail (that would be an endless task), but will present the gist and sense of the provisions.”
Over much of the last year, these pages have focused primarily on the threat to our republic presented by President Donald Trump and his MAGA acolytes. While the Trump Administration has moved even more quickly than I anticipated to establish an American Apartheid, in this note and at times in the future, I intend to venture sentiments as to how we might address various issues I consider of concern to the future of our nation – whether or not there is any realistic possibility of their being enacted. (The one addressed here would, given the Supreme Court’s decision, Citizens United v Federal Election Commission, require a Constitutional Amendment or a reconstituted Court.) There may be points at which the suggestions I offer in one of these notes might be inconsistent with what I express in another; in a nation as complex as ours, there are always competing valid interests in need of reconciliation. In these posts, I am going to try to follow the counsel of Cicero, and set forth a “gist and sense” of direction on an issue without delving into detail. (We’ll see how well I succeed. 😉 )
“In order to achieve the widest possible distribution of political power, financial contributions to political campaigns should be made by individuals, and individuals alone. I see no reason for labor unions – or corporations – to participate in politics. [Emphasis in Original]”
Mr. Goldwater’s book, published in 1960, was the first book I reread after I retired. Whether or not one agreed with him on all issues, he was a straight-talking, no-nonsense traditional conservative, not the MAGA variety. Since our nation, assisted by a Republican-dominated Supreme Court, has gone in the opposite direction from that urged by Mr. Goldwater 65 years ago, we are confronted – as he in effect suggested we would be – with a concentration of political power in few hands. The premise that money is speech is absurd.
I would suggest that our body politic would be better served by the following rules:
I have undoubtedly missed points that have occurred to you; there are certainly loopholes in what has been suggested; but you get the “gist and sense.” These notions may only be a start; but I would submit that instituting them would put us in a better position than we are now. Feel free to add any suggestions — or indicate why you feel what is set forth here is entirely misguided Noise 😊.
Stay well.
You can write this post; you don’t need me. A couple of observations to support yours:
First, consider again ABC Late Night Host Jimmy Kimmel’s comments on Monday night regarding the assassination of MAGA Activist Charlie Kirk – comments I understand that Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr thereafter called the “sickest possible,” and suggested could cause the FCC to revoke ABC affiliate licenses — which seemingly resulted in Mr. Kimmel’s suspension:
“The MAGA gang [is] desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it. In between the finger pointing, there was grieving.”
Any humor there? No. Arguably in poor taste? Sure. But as political commentary, Mr. Kimmel’s remarks seem to me remarkably benign. The first half of his first sentence — if that’s all there was — has all the earmarks of having been torturously approved by an angst-ridden lawyer (who, if so, may well have also lost his/her job), and doesn’t allege that Mr. Kirk’s murderer was a MAGA adherent. The remainder of Mr. Kimmel’s comments — given what we’ve seen spewed from President Donald Trump, Vice President J.D. Vance, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller since Mr. Kirk’s murder – is certainly tenable.
Second, not to be overlooked in the hubbub, is a social media post by Mr. Trump after Mr. Kimmel’s suspension, which declared in part:
“Kimmel has ZERO talent and worse ratings than even Colbert, if that’s possible. That leaves Jimmy and Seth, two total losers, on Fake News NBC. Their ratings are also horrible. Do it NBC!!! President DJT” [Capitalization of ZERO by Mr. Trump; italics added].
I could remark on the obviously ominous relentless nature of that declaration, but won’t. After all, you’re writing this one.
As all are aware, MAGA Activist Charlie Kirk, 31, was assassinated via long-range rifle shot on September 10. A few impressions arise, none terribly unique.
The first is my realization that as I decry MAGAs for staying within their own media silo, I clearly remain within my own. If you would have asked me on September 9 who Charlie Kirk was, I would only have been able to indicate that he was an alt-right influencer; I was not nearly as aware of him or of the outsized influence he apparently had on the MAGA movement as I am, for example, of Steve Bannon.
The second is the most important: no one should be a victim of violence, in the political sphere or otherwise. Mr. Kirk leaves a wife and two children. The terrible atmosphere of violence to which we have devolved need not be elaborated upon here. I understand that some on the right are loudly criticizing some on the left whom the rightists feel either haven’t shown sufficient remorse or perhaps indicated outright pleasure at Mr. Kirk’s demise. I don’t follow much in the social media sphere (quite an admission for a blogger 😉 ), but any expression of pleasure or satisfaction at Mr. Kirk’s passing is more than callous; it is barbaric. To the extent any such expressions have been made, those on the right are absolutely correct to condemn them. At the same time, although it is only human nature to feel more deeply the loss of those with whom one feels kinship, I would suggest that the rightists criticizing those on the left are entitled to expect the same level of regret from the leftists regarding Mr. Kirk’s passing that they themselves felt regarding the hammer attack on 82-year-old Paul Pelosi, or the June shooting death of liberal Minnesota House of Representatives Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman, or the spring arson attack on PA Gov. Josh Shapiro.
The third impression is as ominous as it is predictable. I have seen reported that in a video following Mr. Kirk’s death, President Donald Trump denounced the “radical Left” for rhetoric that he claimed to be “directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today” – while failing to mention the incidents involving Ms. Hortman and Messrs. Pelosi and Shapiro. The President reportedly added, “It’s long past time for all Americans and the media to confront the fact that violence and murder are the tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree day after day, year after year, in the most hateful and despicable way possible.” (Mr. Trump’s hypocrisy is, of course, palpable.) Also on the day of Mr. Kirk’s murder, the New York Times reported that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller tweeted, “All of us must now dedicate ourselves to defeating the evil that stole Charlie from this world.” [Emphasis Added] Coming from arguably the most partisan member of the Trump Administration, such an expression was chilling. It remains to be seen how aggressively the President and his acolytes will try to exploit Mr. Kirk’s assassination against their political opponents. In these situations, one rarely goes wrong assuming that they will proceed the most shamelessly.
Since Mr. Kirk’s assassination, I have become acquainted through various sources with a number of his pronouncements. Although Mr. Kirk was clearly an able, articulate, and bright man, I consider most of what I understand to be his positions to be abhorrent trash. I have seen one of his 2023 declarations, dealing with gun rights, quoted in several quarters, presumably because it is considered ironic by those who have cited it: “I think it’s worth [it] to have a cost of unfortunately some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights.”
While I have now confirmed that I agreed with Mr. Kirk on very little, I will nonetheless take the liberty of paraphrasing him: it is worth the cost of having those with whom we vehemently disagree speak and move safely among us so that we can all enjoy the First Amendment Right of Free Speech to protect our other God-given rights. That Mr. Kirk was struck down is as great a danger to our democracy as the divisive views he espoused. I understand that he frequently proclaimed his Christianity. May he, as I pray I will, be judged by a merciful God.
McCoy's Noise 