When Rome Looked Like the US…

Fortunately, I’m good at depression.  I mean, I’ve been practicing for years.  After awhile, you don’t really expect to feel…anymore.  You work out ways to get through another day without spewing – to the extent possible – your internal darkness around everywhere.  People prefer jokes and smiles.  I can do that, normally.  But it’s got me today.

I spend a lot of time with history.  I spend a lot of time paying attention to the “doings” of politics.  I’ve been watching a war play out daily in this once great nation for something like 35 years and I pretty much see the end-game in progress.  It’s the war between the “haves” and the “have-nots” – a class war the “haves” initiated with the “election” of Ronald Reagan and the “have-nots” didn’t even know they were – or should have been – fighting.

One can see the parallels in this once-great nation to two different periods in time: France, just before their revolution and Rome, just as the Republic failed and shifted to empire.  Neither period proved beneficial to the increasingly impoverished masses.  In BOTH cases, the rich were doing just fine.  Too fine, some might say.

Today, I’m more focused on Rome.  Most people know about the Roman Empire.  Many people don’t realize the empire was born a Republic.  They even had a Senate.  Today, history understands Julius Caesar as Rome’s first Emperor but nobody called Caesar the Emperor at the time.  The people of Rome, the work-a-day folks going about their business, didn’t even realize a change had occurred.

Caesar maintained the Senate.  He even allowed for the presence of dissenters, so long as there weren’t so many as to create actual dissent.  The creep of empire was relatively slow.  Romans didn’t go to sleep in a Republic one night and wake up in an empire the next morning.  That’s not how it works.  It’s a slow but steady movement away from the norms of Republic to new “norms”.  Things that aren’t supposed to be…but are anyway.

Things like enriching oneself and family by not only accepting but openly requesting emoluments from people who have business with the ruler; “tributes”, let’s call them.  Systematically replacing people trying to do the Republic’s work with toadies who will do as they’re told and NEVER counter the ruler is another step in the parade to authoritarianism.  A larger governing body – in Caesar’s case, a Senate – that refuses to stand up to the abuses of the ruler in order to protect their own positions, or in the belief that they’re doing so, until it’s far too late.

Yes, the Roman Senate eventually stood up to Caesar but the damage was done.  Rome maintained the trappings of a republic but was never a true republic again.

As it stands right now, it seems like the American Congress is going to support Trump regardless of how outrageous his or his family’s behavior becomes.  It appears, to me, like the transition is pretty much complete.  It all LOOKS the same.  We still have a Congress but they’re clearly not going to challenge Trump.  We still have a “Supreme Court” but they’ll keep making decisions that serve the privileged elite at the expense of the masses.  For many of us, the day-to-day realities of just getting through will seem unchanged.

In France, once the aristocracy had just gone too far for the masses to tolerate, the people rose up in one national riot and began lopping off heads – some deserving, some…not so much.  Maybe the same thing will happen here so the US won’t get hundreds of years as the dominant empire of the day.  But a Reign of Terror as the “hopeful” offset to brutal empire?

I’ll tell you this: I find it all pretty depressing…

 

Dem Wars…

When Dumb Donald took power, I consoled myself with the notion that the Democrats need only take back three seats in the Senate and he’d be thwarted.  Not completely, of course, but at least conservatives wouldn’t have free rein to ride roughshod over everything I think is important in a civilized society.

Now I’m less certain.  I’ve been a little startled by what I’ve been seeing in social media ever since Bernie Sanders and Tom Perez started their “Come Together” tour.  Some people don’t seem to taking the point.  They don’t even seem interested in the message.

Look, I get it.  Purist party loyalists are furious Bernie ran, preferring their own narrative that had he stayed out, Hillary would be President today.  Independents are furious about the discrepancies of the race – the DNC was supposed to facilitate, not manipulate, the primary.  They believe, likewise, that if Bernie had been given a fair chance, he would be President today.

Here’s the thing, it doesn’t matter.  Coulda, woulda, shoulda.  Yesterday’s news.  We can spend the rest of our lives pounding each other over the head with what we think might have happened, could have happened, should have happened if only…whatever.  It doesn’t matter.  What matters are those three seats in the Senate.

But the sniping continues.  Tom IS the DNC (read: status quo).  Bernie isn’t even in the party!  My understanding is that people have been abandoning the major political parties in droves.  That suggests Democrats, alone, can’t get the job done but then, neither can Independents.  We need each other.

From what I’ve seen, it doesn’t look much like Bernie and Tom like each other.  But they’re still out there, together, calling for unity.  They’re doing it because they know that focusing on what happened yesterday can only harm efforts for tomorrow – and tomorrow is more important than yesterday.

I’m not suggesting that anyone “get over it”.  Keep your wound, whichever wound you’re nursing.  Take it out at night.  Pet it, cuddle it, seek comfort from it.  But then put it away.  Don’t allow it to take your focus off the bigger picture.  I’ll do the same.  Let us stop antagonizing each other with details that matter not a whit to anything we face coming at us from the front because I’ll tell you this: the only way we’re going to save our society from devolving into the “Trump Dump” is to work together…

Yesterday Guiding Tomorrow…

This once-great nation was first established under the Articles of Confederation.  The Articles called for a weak central government with a strong emphasis on states rights.  It lasted about ten years before failing.  The time came to replace the Articles of Confederation and the members of the Continental Congress looked at other governments around the world.  They had the advantage of history to guide decisions they were making about the future…

When Alexander Hamilton was establishing the economy of the United States after the Constitution we all recognize today was created, he looked again to historical examples.  He was able to pick and choose the parts that worked well and discard things that hadn’t been as successful…

These days, I find myself using the same techniques to try and divine the future and offer up some ideas that I think might help in the next iteration of the United States.  If the inference is that the United States 1.0 has failed, I believe it.  I can explain but that’s not what I’m on about today.  For now, suffice to say there’s going to be trouble in the country.  Big trouble.  It’s a prediction of history.  My concern, here, is that when it happens, I fear the uprising will throw the baby out with the bath water by which I mean they may decide that, because the Constitution failed, they should go in some other direction.

But I think our Constitution was very well done.  It didn’t fail so much as it was “undone.”  As it happens, it needs only a few tweaks here and there to correct the errors that allowed the selfish few to bring it down.  The problem, as I see it, is one of those that have existed since time began: everyone thinks of themselves as ethical and upright.  This means the Congress critters of the late 18th century were not concerned enough about instituting controls over themselves or certain protections which have proven necessary over time.

So I’ve looked outward and backward and attempted to pick and choose ideas that will help when it comes time to start again.  I’ll give you an example.  After years of study and consideration, I’ve come to the conclusion that the loss of the independent media in America was the single most important victory for the privileged elite who mean to turn this country into their own personal fiefdoms.  They managed it by simply buying most of the media outlets.  Now we don’t get actual news anymore.  Now we get “infotainment” and there’s nothing people can do about it…because of the First Amendment.  You see, the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech but freedom of speech includes freedom to lie.

I wouldn’t change that for individuals but accurate information is vital to the survival of a free society.  Unethical individuals have proven, now, that the destruction of accuracy in media equates to the destruction of the Republic.  It might seem as though the balance  – individual freedom of speech vs a requirement for honesty in news – is too difficult to achieve but look at one small addition to the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.  Notwithstanding this guarantee, any organization that purports to be a news agency may not deliver false or misleading information.

One sentence.  It’s not even MY sentence.  I borrowed it from a successful model: Canada.  It does nothing to stop the Rush Limbaughs of the world and it shouldn’t.  Opinions are opinions and everyone has one but news…well, that’s important.  When websites or Russians or whomever flood social media with “fake news” it would be nice to have a place to go for REAL news; actual journalism, investigative reporting, that kind of thing.

A rule that requires news organizations to be honest is a rule that protects the Republic.  Yes, Fox “News” might have to change their name but not their content.  OR, their content if not their name but that’s exactly the point.  I hold that ANY source that pretends to be “news” but delivers misleading and/or outright false information is harmful to America.

I’ll tell you this:  I’ve given this idea a great deal of thought.  I know some will say it’s a bad idea but I can’t escape the notion that the people who will say so are the very same people who want to lie to you for their own benefit…

Am I wrong or am I right?

Paths to Destruction…

Bad day all around, eh?  Trump orders attack on Syria, Republicans order attack on the Constitution.

I saw video of the gas attacks on civilians on ‘Vice News Tonight.’  Heartbreaking.  Unconscionable.  Unimaginable.  Any other words you can come up with that mean “assault on the civilized mind”.  I think Trump’s response was pure emotion.  On the one hand, I’m forced to admit, I kind of like that he was so outraged by the murder of innocents that he felt compelled to act.  My own, initial emotional reaction was the same: stop this now!  But my intellect tells me I’m wrong to feel that way, to feel good about a “feel good” response.  Because on the other hand, I don’t think it was a measured, well-thought-out action.  It was JUST an emotional response.

You get stung by a bee.  In the moment, it might feel good to “retaliate” by using a stick to whack the hive.  Intellectually, though, bad move.  You discover exactly HOW bad only after you strike.  How many “bee stings” has 45 generated with his emotional, not intellectual, answer?

My understanding (if one can understand the Syrian conflict) is that part of the reason the US has taken a more cautious approach in the past is because we don’t know who all the players are, let alone what they’re trying to do.  The one piece of information we DO have is that Russia backs Assad in Syria.  Do we now find ourselves in a proxy war with Russia?  Only time will tell.

There’s this: if it’s true the Russians have information that would be damaging to Trump, something like this might certainly be a catalyst to bringing it out…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Speaking of destruction, the coup seems complete now.  Republicans – who only retain the power they have by cheating (gerrymandering, to be specific) – have turned a dishonorable, intentional blind eye to the abuses of the so-called “President” because he’s one of “theirs”.  They’ve allowed him to nominate an ideologue candidate for the “Supreme Court” to fill a stolen seat.  Now, they’ve invoked the so-called “nuclear option” to install the nominee who shouldn’t be.

So, by my count, the Presidency is rigged.  (If nothing else, Trump is guilty of violating the emoluments clause.)  The Congress is rigged.  (See the aforementioned gerrymandering.)  The “Supreme Court” is rigged.  (Clarence Thomas committed perjury and Neil Gorsuch sits in a stolen seat.)  The American press is rigged.  (In service to the American aristocracy.)

So where do we turn?  What’s left?  How do the American people fight back against this now very UN-American government?  In my head, I keep hearing John F. Kennedy: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

Shit, man…

Here They Come Again…

I know that powerful individuals in this and in other states are enemies to a general national government in every possible shape.
– Alexander Hamilton, Federalist #85

I don’t want to abolish government.  I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
– Grover Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform, 2001

The GOP is threatening “tax reform” again.  By now, we’ve all seen what they mean by “tax reform”: more for those who need the least, less for those who need the most.  The part that bothers me more than any other is the idea that those who need the most, need the most because of those who need the least.  (Yeah, just linger on that a minute.  It’s important.  I’ll wait.)

The American people are constantly being told that the best plan is to give all the money to the pampered elite and then, magically, everyone will have more money!  It’s always the “magically” part the GOP leaves wanting in detail.  Ask them to flesh out the mechanism of the magic and they mumble.  They treat is as a “no brainer”, which it must be since using one’s brain easily exposes the falsehood of the position.  By now, most of us have noticed that every time this particular piece of…nonsense gets floated, the lower classes suffer.

Schools suffer, infrastructure suffers, emergency services suffer.  Life gets harder for the average American in just about every measurable way.  Rich people just get richer and really don’t understand all the commotion from the rabble.

Reagan launched his ‘Hate America’ scheme quietly.  (“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”)  Ever since, we’ve been treated to the fairy tale of trickle down pseudo-economics.  After 37 years of this, it’s clearly obvious that the only thing that trickles down is misery.

But, apparently, they’re bringing it, anyway.  To this point, the so-called “President” has been thwarted in his biggest efforts.  This, I fear, will be different.  The Putin Puppet benefits personally from tax cuts for the wealthy and the Congress critters benefit personally from tax cuts for the wealthy so everyone with a voice on the subject is on the same page.  Those of us who have to carry the burden of the rich man’s benefits…need not apply.

So…it’s time for the next fight: stop “tax reform”.

Personally, I prefer the “income redistribution” model that made America great in the first place.  I know, I know, I just stepped in it, didn’t I?  I dared use those words that conservatives spit as though “income redistribution” is a bad thing – or, perhaps, as though “income redistribution” isn’t exactly what’s going on via their “tax reform” in the first place.  But I’m also quite aware that the corporate media has been amazingly successful at demonizing the idea of “income redistribution” so I’ll be happy just trying to stop this next round of tax rigging for now.

I’ll tell you this: it’s no accident the GOP wants to choke the financial life out of our government.  It’s the only way they can destroy it, once and for all…

Rachel and Trump’s “Taxes”…

I dislike false information whatever the source.  False charges give cover to genuine charges, making it more difficult to separate which is which.  The thing that bothers me the most is that there’s so much very real stuff to legitimately attack there’s no reason to stoop to insinuations and baseless accusations.  Besides, the truth is, I lean left so I expect more from progressive information providers and I’m always a bit more disappointed when bullshit comes from the left but that’s my own bias.

Having said that, I’m pretty disappointed in the “Trump taxes” pseudo-story highlighted by Rachel Maddow.  I used to be pretty fond of her but, I confess, I haven’t watched regularly for a while.  MSNBC seems to be ground zero for the liberal bubble and it scares me to spend too much time in either bubble.  It’s FAR too easy for them to pull a person in, as it were.

I know that she’s been asking a lot of questions about the Trump/Russia connections.  I’ve also noticed she hasn’t drawn any conclusions; just asked some leading questions.  I don’t like that, either.  It’s a technique I first noticed on Fox “News” years ago and, as I’ve already said, I expect more from the left.

People on the right commonly note that people on the left are “so easy”.  We take the bait far too quickly.  People on the right are…well, right about that.  We do and I suspect that, in this case, that trait was used against Maddow.  Most Americans want to see Trump’s current taxes.  It’s not prurient.  There’s a massive amount of relevant information in the taxes besides what came in and what went out.

But Maddow knew she didn’t have THAT information.  In short, she had a summary sheet that showed how much came in and how much went out with zero detail.  A rich guy brought in a bunch of money and paid out a bunch of money?  12 years ago?  That’s not news.  It warranted a mention at the end of the show.  “We received this document – anonymously – that purports to show that Donald Trump brought in a lot of money and paid out a lot of money.  12 years ago.  There was no other information.  We didn’t want to be accused of “sitting on” it so we posted it on our website where people can see it but…I wouldn’t waste my time.”

But, from what I understand, that’s not what happened.  First there was a pre-show Tweet: We have Trumps taxes.  Then there was an hour-long special dedicated to the “taxes”.  Okay, so she’s no accountant but somebody should have been able to explain to her there was no useful information in that document before she went on.  I suspect she went on with it – like that – because she knew it would be a ratings grabber.  But you know who said that?  Donald Trump!  And what do you suppose the White House is going to do from now on as she asks more and more questions about Russia?

Worse, upon further review, it turns out that a solid case can be made that the original leaker of the “taxes” might well have been the Donald, himself.  If that’s true, she totally got played – because people on the left are so easy.

I’ll tell you this: it seems to me that for a single ratings bump Rachel Maddow damaged, perhaps surrendered, her credibility.  At the very least, she handed her opponent a cudgel to use against her at will.

Am I right or wrong?

 

 

 

 

Driving the So-Called PotUS Craz(ier)…

I have an idea.

What if we all – and I mean everybody, real or imagined, who didn’t vote for him – what if we all joined Twitter, followed the so-called PotUS, and every time he tweeted something everybody tweet back “STFU, Donnie!”

Just that, nothing else but EVERY time.  What’s he going to do?  Would his overblown ego allow him to block us all?  Wouldn’t it be fun knowing he would actually try?

Who’s in?

The So-Called Corner Office…

Today, just for today, I’m kind of laughing at our so-called POTUS.

It struck me in the wee hours of this morning that what we’re seeing with this flurry of poorly written, not vetted Executive Orders is the result of decades of false information that government should be “run like a business”.  It doesn’t bother me that the conservative rank and file buy into that fraudulent message but the President is supposed to know better.

Government isn’t run like a business and it shouldn’t be.  That’s because government has a different role in civilization than a business or even a household.  (I used to run my kids out of my favorite chair using the term ‘Eminent Domain’ but a household still runs more like a business than a government…)

Now, I know that when the corporate media feeds the ‘government like a business’ message into the conservative bubble, they only mean that government should have a balanced budget.  But even that’s not as important in a government as it is in your business.  (No, I’m not arguing in favor of deficit spending, merely pointing out that a government can get away with spending more than they have easier than a business…)  The fact is, the main thing business and government have in common is the word ‘budget’.  After that, pretty much everything is different.

But the so-called POTUS doesn’t seem to know it.  That might explain why he keeps issuing edicts – apparently scribbled out over in the corner by his little racist sidekick – and expecting them to be carried out.  (It does not explain why he then holds them up like a five-year old showing off his macaroni art.  Perhaps he’s expecting praise for successfully writing his name?)

Apparently, he actually sees himself as the CEO of a company called The United States of America, inc.  He expresses “his vision” and expects people to do as they’re told.  He doesn’t care if his orders anger people and he doesn’t expect to be challenged.  (Hmm, come to think of it, there IS a form of government that operates that way.  It’s called a dictatorship.  Not good, bigly…)

In what appears to be an attempted return to Nixon’s “when a President does it, it’s not illegal”, this maladministration actually argued before the Ninth Circuit Court that the judicial branch has no right to second guess the executive.  Well, guess what, Cubby?  Not only do they have the right, it’s their job.  (Please have someone read you a little thing called the Constitution.  And I mean it.  Please.  Have someone read it to you.)  Turns out, business is easier than governance…

The GOP controls both houses of Congress and they don’t seem inclined to “notice” the violations of precedent, protocol, the law, or even logic emanating from this White House so long as it’s “their team” in control.  For his part, the so-called POTUS hasn’t seemed to notice the giant rubber stamp sitting just up the road and it seems it hasn’t crossed his so-called mind that he could use Congress to get what he wants.  Let’s hope nobody tells him…

I’ll tell you this: I’ve been a bit butt-clinched since January 20 worried about the next crazy thing the so-called POTUS might pull out of his…um…the air…amid concerns that our checks and balances seem to be on life support while a set of tiny little fingers tries to pull the plug once and for all and I was pretty relieved to see the courts do their job.  So today, just for today, I’m kind of laughing at our so-called POTUS…

Republican “Ethics”…

Republicans silenced Elizabeth Warren because #ShePersisted in trying to tell the truth about Jeff Sessions.  What is it about the truth conservatives have such a difficult time with accepting?

It’s a disturbing pattern.  The White House has tried to shut off information by shutting down government websites and issuing orders to various agencies not to make comments (or, more likely, corrections).  Now Republicans in Congress invoke an unusual maneuver to force her to sit down when she tries to repeat an unpleasant truth about an unpleasant Senator.  Rule 19.  So, he should be protected from his own history by an obscure rule that indicates, basically, that if one speaks truthfully about him it impugns his character?  The truth impugns his character?

If speaking the truth about a person impugns the character of that person, neither the  speaker nor the speech is the problem: it’s the person.

But this is the Republican way.  If the truth makes one’s position less defensible attack the truth.  But the truth doesn’t go away just because Republicans are willing to try to manipulate reality.

We need a new rule.  If a person who currently works for government is nominated for a Cabinet position and accepts the nomination, they must resign their current position before their confirmation hearing begins.  Sessions’ confirmation was scheduled AFTER De Vos’ confirmation so he could vote for her as Senator, THEN sit for his own – apparently carefully scripted – confirmation “hearing”.

What honest and honorable things are the Republicans doing that they dare not allow to be seen?

I’ll tell you this; it’s cowardly.  If they have to lie about their nominee, how are they NOT confessing knowledge that their nominee can’t bear up under scrutiny?

A Little History on ‘States Rights’…

There is much talk these days about “states rights”.  (In fairness, there has been much talk of “states rights” since the country was founded.)  It’s a very popular theme from the conservative sector of this country.  Basically, the concept is that the states should remain sovereign with the Federal Government acting as little more than the final arbiter of disputes between the states and handling military needs.  I suppose when the phrase is thrown casually about without much thought it sounds good but in practical application it doesn’t work.  That’s history, not hypothesis.  I know it doesn’t work because We, the People started off with that very form of government…and it didn’t work.

Essentially, the colonies declared independence and formed a new government under the Articles of Confederation.  The states remained sovereign.  Congress could settle disputes between states, make treaties and alliances, maintain a military (in theory) and coin money backed by the full faith and credit of…well, faith but that was it.  They had no real authority over the states.  Even in the ‘settle disputes’ part, they could rule but not enforce.

Have you ever seen any of the paintings of George Washington at Valley Forge?  Look closely at the men and you’ll see they lack pretty much everything one needs to support an army.  Do you know why?  States rights!  See, under the Articles of Confederation, Congress could ask states for money but couldn’t compel them to pay.  The states would promise money, men, and resources but then, focused on their own, local concerns withhold some of what they promised.  In short, each state acted in each state’s individual interest.

You can see the problem.  The name “United States of America” was first coined in the Articles of Confederation but we were not so much a “united states” as a loose alliance of independent republics, emphasis on “loose”.  During the revolution, Washington and Hamilton came to understand the need for a central government with authority to tax and to compel states participation because they were on the receiving end of “states rights”.  The loose alliance nearly cost us the war.  Then, it nearly cost us our nascent nation when soldiers who had deferred their pay for the war effort came to collect – and the states still couldn’t be compelled to pony up.

The Articles of Confederation – the first form of the United States – lasted about 10 years before it’s shortcomings became obvious.  Then it was replaced by the Constitution that became the Constitution we all know and love (and hate and fight about) today.  You and I might talk about Federal overreach and find agreement.  Certainly, there are areas of the document that could use some tweaks here and there.

But I’ll tell you this; every time I hear the phrase “states rights” I think back on the birth of this once great nation and how “states rights” almost ended us even before we got started.  It doesn’t make any sense to me to revert to a form of government that has already been tried and failed.  So why do I keep hearing about “states rights”?