Day 17 of Nat’l Emergency: Dispelling Wild Musings on Cuomo, de Blasio, Mt. Sinai, China

The coronavirus is not only spreading fear, illness and death throughout the land but it also is fostering some wild musings. 

Take, for example, the idea that with his daily press briefings New York governor Andrew Cuomo has become the darling of Democratic hopes and should supplant Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders as the presumptive party nominee for president. To take the whimsy to an even higher level, it is being suggested that Cuomo try to unite the country through a fusion ticket by selecting Nikki Haley, Trump’s former United Nations ambassador and former Republican governor of South Carolina, as his running mate.

There is no denying Cuomo has become a media star for those seeking straightforward talk about the pandemic. He can be funny, empathetic, angry, resolved, informed, attuned to science ... all that and more compared to science-denier-Trump. Cuomo reminds us of New York mayor Rudy Giuliani after 9/11. 

Trouble is, Cuomo also has lots of negatives too numerous to list here. Foremost is his belief that only he knows best and, like Trump, he is willing to pick fights with those he disagrees with. All politicians fight, but Cuomo, like Trump, is another in-your-face type of guy and we already have seen enough of that type of leadership. Plus, we’ve also seen how Giuliani worked out. 

As for Haley being part of a fusion ticket, this is not Israel or any other parliamentary government where a no confidence vote can force an election. Haley might be liked for standing up to foreign governments and the Palestinians but she is as right wing as they come when considering domestic issues. She would not be a logical choice for any Democrat as a vice president fusion nominee. 

John McCain might have won the presidency had he chosen Joe Lieberman instead of Sarah Palin as his running mate. The former Democratic senator from Connecticut was less liberal than most Democrats. As much as Republicans and Conservatives would have been angry at his selection they would still have voted for McCain over Obama while independents put off by Palin’s lack of experience and intellect would have been okay with Joe.

Right now there is no Republican who is pro choice that the Democratic Party would accept.

So dream away those seeking a national unity ticket. We will wake you up after November so you can see the carnage Trump will inflict on the country whether he wins or especially if he loses.

First Amendment Cries: Social distancing vs. religious rights. New York City mayor Bill de Blasio ran afoul of the religious police by suggesting that churches and synagogues that don’t adhere to the coronavirus lockdown guidelines could face “permanent” closure of their buildings (https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-n-y-c-mayor-synagogues-that-don-t-comply-with-coronavirus-rules-may-be-shut-down-1.8717453).

Temporary, I can understand and agree with. Permanent? Not so fast. Let’s give Mayor Bill the benefit of the doubt, that in the passion of the moment he exaggerated a trifle. He’s not being anti-religion, nor is he giving Islam a pass, as some of his detractors have suggested by his referring only to churches and synagogues and not including mosques. 

All that said, there have been repeated violations of the social distancing rules by too many faith leaders and their adherents. For God’s sake, don’t these people know plagues have no religious affiliation? In that sense plagues, along with other natural disasters, are truly the most ecumenical misfortune.

Where Are They?: Two top officers of Mount Sinai hospital system in New York City are sequestered in Florida while their staff of thousands battle the pandemic in the Big Apple (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8164043/Mount-Sinai-execs-safely-tucked-away-FLORIDA-vacation-homes.html). Does it matter?

For sure it is bad optics, but shelter-in-place does not preclude staying in luxury quarters. Unless they are directly involved in treating patients there is absolutely no need for them to be on site. Anyone who is not directly involved in patient care or in facilities management to keep the hospital clean and open should not be required to be on site. 

I wonder, before the article on their whereabouts appeared, how many Sinai employees had any idea where their “leaders” were riding out the pandemic storm. Let’s hold them accountable for how the hospital is supplied and functions during the crisis, not from where they are issuing their executive orders. 

For perspective on how other company CEOs are working from home, link to https://nyti.ms/3bmVQeS

The Blame Game: When the pandemic is over, and it will end, sometime, we no doubt will collectively turn to placing blame on those responsible for its spread. Many already are agreeing with Trump that COVID-19 should be called the China Virus. You decide what you will call it. 

On a more serious note, there seems little disagreement that the virus began its devastating journey in China and that the Chinese authorities mishandled its spread and the flow of information that would have aided other countries. 

Some voices are calling for some form of censure of China, perhaps from the United Nations or other world bodies, even as China denies its guilt and is embarked on a campaign to help other populations, particularly in Third World nations, combat the epidemic while continuing to finance infrastructure projects in those countries. 

It appears we have learned nothing from history, past and present, that liars who repeatedly and loudly proclaim their lies as truth are able to convince a large segment of the populace that their lies are truth and that truth is fake news. 

I would venture to say that the vast majority of people in downtown Nairobi or Khartoum or Munich or Rio de Janeiro do not pay much attention to the rhetoric of the UN Security Council but do start believing messages that are bombarded to them by media influenced or controlled by despots and would-be despots. 

The U.S. might claim it has one of the most educated populations but the fealty almost half of our people display toward an incessant, unrepentant liar proves my point that Goebbals, the Nazi propaganda chieftain, knew of which he was talking and acting. 

Perhaps our only hope for the future is to mandate the departure of any American company deemed strategic from China. Yes, it goes against laissez-faire capitalism but our national security is at stake if China is our major supplier of technical, electronic and healthcare equipment and supplies. 

Concurrent with that action must be a concerted effort to educate Americans that their strategic safety is more important than saving a few pennies, even dollars, by buying from the Chinese and instead they should pay more for made-in-America goods. Growing American manufacturing capacity will grow the middle class and, guess what, we will return to the America of the 1950s that Trump trumpets his love for. 

Day 7 of National Emergency: Does a Wartime President Have the Power to Delay Elections?

Our fearless, fearful, fear-mongering draft-dodger leader now embraces a self-proclaimed title of “wartime president.” 

As comically absurd as that moniker sounds, it is true, to the extent that we and the world are at war against the coronavirus. So let’s consider what qualities we might want our president to have.

According to UShistory.org, the website of the Independence Hall Association, some common leadership qualities that good presidents appear to have include: 

*A strong vision for the country’s future

*An ability to put their own times in the perspective of history

*Effective communication skills
*The courage to make unpopular decisions
*Crisis management skills

*Character and integrity

*Wise appointments

*An ability to work with Congress

We want someone with character and integrity who can instill in us trust and confidence. Sadly, from day one of his presidency Trump has spouted falsehoods (let’s call his pre-election humdingers as campaign rhetoric) that undermine any hope we might believe him when it matters. 

Wednesday he promised big news from the Food and Drug Administration. Thursday he said the FDA greenlighted a malaria drug for treatment of COVID-19. But shortly thereafter the head of the FDA had to correct him. The drug had been approved for limited usage and further study as it has severe, sometimes fatal, side effects (https://mol.im/a/8131613).

We’d want a leader who can inspire us with calming, motivating oratory, much like Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill did during World War II. Or how Obama comforted the nation after several mass shootings. Trump’s communication skills when he isn’t riffing on his standard rally speech are pathetic. He has a hard time reading prepared text, which in itself is anything but inspirational. At the beginning of his presidency Trump made a big to-do about installing Churchill’s bust in the Oval Office. Inspiration is not transferable from a slab or marble. All the more reason to be disappointed by his failure to express compassion for those ill or now unemployed. He is heartless.   

In a crisis we want a leader who recognizes his or her limitations, who can acknowledge his/her imperfections, who can accept the advice of experts, be they generals, scientists or doctors. Trump rated his pandemic response performance a “10,” rejecting his earlier dismissal of the coronavirus as anything more troublesome than the flu. He has repeatedly undercut expert advice. Here are several comments he made about the viral outbreak over the last several months:

“There’s nothing to worry about”

“It’s a Democratic Hoax”

“It'll be over by April”

“It’s a pandemic”

“I take no responsibility”

“I always knew it was a pandemic”

“This snuck up on us” (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-coronavirus-snuck-up-on-us_n_5e731e27c5b6eab779424d52)

Hail Caesar: Of all the deaths to be lamented from the pandemic, the most tragic may well be to our democratic republic.

I do not mean to be histrionic. But Trump may as president be able to postpone or cancel next November’s election as part of his emergency powers.

I, along with other commentators, have long opined that Trump would not go lightly from the Oval Office if he loses the election. It doesn’t take a genius to reason out his possible move to negate the election if his polling numbers plummet and he and his hard-core advisors believe he has no way of winning November 3.

The COVID-19 disaster provides the “perfect” shield for a power-grabbing play. Though The New York Times last week said it would be near impossible to postpone the election (https://nyti.ms/2U6p3n5 ), it might easily pass constitutional review given the composition of the Supreme Court.

In the midst of wars and economic depressions no president has invoked emergency powers to deny the American people the right choose their leader every four years. But no president has been like Trump. He has upended norms both domestically and internationally. Moreover, he has cowed the Republican Party into such deep submission that it is doubtful any but a handful of elected GOP officials would object to his postponing an election that might very well cost them control of the Senate and with that future federal court nominations. A sign of their anxiety was Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s overture to elderly Republican federal judges to retire so Trump would have the chance to fill their seats with conservative judges. 

Around the world we have seen juntas and strongmen dissolve duly elected governments, proclaiming they did so in the interests of national security and even of democracy, couching their treachery with a vague promise of conducting elections when the emergency has passed. Of course they define when that time arrived, if ever.

Trump has acted like a banana republic president. He has teased about serving beyond the constitutionally mandated two terms. A national emergency declaration abolishing the November election would enable his dream to become a reality.     

The rise of an American autocrat would not occur in a vacuum. Trump has witnessed, envied and even lauded Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, India’s Narendra Damodardas Modi, China’s Xi Jinping, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, The Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte and Saudi Arabia’s Prince Mohammad Bin Salman.

He feels more comfortable with foreign strongmen than with any of his recent predecessors who valued America’s leadership and moral standing throughout the world.

How ironic that an acknowledged germaphobe might achieve his ultimate coronation because of a pandemic. 

Are You an ABT Voter—Anyone But Trump?

Are you an ABT voter—Anyone But Trump?

Wait. Before we get into the original subject of this blog, let me aver that I believe The New York Times, specifically columnist Bret Stephens, must have hacked my iPhone. Heck, if Jeff Bezos’ iPhone could be hacked, who am I to think mine couldn’t, especially when it contains a really juicy story idea about ABT voters. And to show you how nefariously ingenious The Times’ caper is, the paper also ran an Op-Ed piece entitled “Jeff Bezos’ Phone Hack Should Terrify Everyone” (https://nyti.ms/37oujrL), directly above a Stephens article on ABT voters. How cunning to try to misdirect the scent of the crime from its editorial room.

Late last week I started writing a blog on ABT. As I often do, I wrote the beginning on my iPhone in bed before sleep stopped my progress. But I couldn’t fall into deep slumber. Too much on my mind. Too many tasks to accomplish. So I wrote a To Do list in my iPhone before finally allowing zzzz’s to overwhelm my consciousness.

Not suspecting any skulduggery I posted a Friday blog on my recent purchases of cardigans instead of the Anyone But Trump theme.

Imagine my excitement then when Saturday afternoon I opened The Times to see the following headline:

“Anyone But Trump? Not So Fast,” a column by Bret Stephens printed directly under the aforementioned opinion piece on Jeff Bezos (https://nyti.ms/2Rnl0mc). 

I quickly checked my iPhone for literary comparisons to what Stephens wrote. After all, it is not uncommon for good ideas to simultaneously formulate in the minds of several journalists. That’s when the hacking was “revealed” to me. Revealed might not be the right term, for my ABT story and my To Do list were nowhere to be found in my iPhone.

Now, some of you might be thinking I just forgot to save the ABT story. You know, you’re thinking he’s already admitted to being “old,” another synonym for forgetful or just plain tech-challenged. Yeah, true on all counts. But why would I lose the To Do list, as well? I’m thinking The Times hackers stole that file to really mess with my sanity.

I’ve no proof for these wild allegations. Just a deep-seated journalist’s hunch. Or more probably, a pixieish imagination. Anyway, time to talk about ABT and Stephens’ analysis.

I am an ABTer, though I admit I am not enthusiastic about any of the choices Democrats are proffering. There’s goodness in most of them and cautionary traits as well. Unlike many punsters on the left and right I do not fear a Warren or Sanders presidency tilting our government too much to the extreme. None of the Democratic candidates has the bellicosity Trump has displayed to cower the party into cult-like submission. Any Democratic president will have to work with Democrats in Congress to forge consensus, middle of the road changes that first and foremost restore progress achieved in the Obama years to environmental, civil rights, labor, health care, and abortion rights causes, to name a few initiatives. 

Anyone, I believe, would be better than Trump. 

In offering a defense against Trump’s impeachment, Stephens wrote, “First, the argument (for impeachment) overstates the extent to which this presidency has eroded the foundations of liberal democracy at home and abroad. Has Trump abandoned NATO? No. Has he lifted sanctions on Russia? No. Has he closed the borders to all immigrants? No. Did the president steal the midterms, or stop Congress from impeaching him? No. Has he significantly suppressed the press? Again, no.”

I disagree.  Has Trump weakened respect for the judiciary? Yes. Has he weakened our constitutional checks and balances system of government? Yes. Has Trump strained relations with allies? Yes. Has he eroded the credibility of our intelligence and law enforcement services? Yes. Has Trump strengthened the dark forces of white nationalists? Yes. Has he emboldened despots and autocrats around the globe? Yes. Has Trump corroded America’s historic values? Yes. Has he debased the bond our word used to be throughout the world? Yes. Has Trump made lies and falsehoods the new standard of presidential speak? Yes. Has he made Americans and the rest of the world lose trust in what America stands for? Yes.

But all of those actions do not rise to the level of an impeachable offense. They just show he is a bad, dangerous president. 

What are impeachable offenses are his attempt to extort Ukraine into interfering in the 2020 election by announcing a corruption investigation into his political rival, Joe Biden, in return for a White House meeting and the transfer of withheld military aid approved by Congress, and the obstruction of the House of Representative’s probe of his actions by refusing to release documents and allowing his aides to testify about the Ukrainian affair. 

Stephens and I shared an editorial construct. But we diverged in our execution. I prefer mine to his. I hope you do, too.

Wimping Out: While I’m blasting away at The Times, let me also opine that the flagship newspaper of American journalism wimped out when it came to its dual endorsement of Senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar as the best choices for the Democratic Party presidential nomination. 

I’m not against the failure to choose a singular candidate. Rather, what immediately struck me as cowardly is the decision to publish the joint endorsement on a Monday, not on Sunday. 

I know that Monday, January 20, coincided with commemoration of Martin Luther King Jr. Day and was exactly one year prior to the inauguration of our next president, but if The Times wanted the biggest bang for its buck it would have printed its choices in the issue with the largest circulation of the week (1,087,500 copies)—the Sunday edition—which enjoys readership almost double that of the weekday issues (571,500).  

Impeachment Charges, Biden Lets Loose and Historic Facts

Here’s an example of what one of my graduate school journalism professors called a “nothing new” headline:

“House Impeaches Trump.”

Here’s another example:

“Senate Acquits Trump.”

It doesn’t take a genius to know as sure as the first headline will be realized before Christmas, the second will follow in short order, possibly before the end of January.

Unless Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has an epiphany and switches his allegiance from the autocratic orangeman in the White House to the U.S. Constitution there is scant expectation Trump will face any penalty greater than history’s assessment of his guilt. 

However, in the debate over what charges the House of Representatives should level against the nasty-man-in-chief, there is an important bit of politics that must be played out. Should Trump be charged merely with abusing the power of his office for personal and political gain through an attempted bribery of the president of Ukraine to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden in return for arranging a White House meeting and unfreezing Congressionally approved military aid, or should the House lay out a laundry list of offenses including obstruction of justice? 

Those in favor of the former argue it would be a more focused indictment, easier for the public to wrap its mind around. That argument, however, presumes the possibility of a conviction. 

Ha! It will never happen (not “would never happen” which implies “maybe;” under McConnell it is a certainty the Senate will not convict).

The Democratically controlled House, therefore, should engage Republican hands by throwing the kitchen sink at Trump, forcing GOP senators to go on the record to condone each and every behavior that is injurious to American interests and constitutional norms. Make each senator run on his or her compliance with actions they would never tolerate if a Democratic president undertook them. 

A Biden Bite: A show of raw emotion was just what Joe Biden needed to spark his candidacy. But I would suggest the former vice president should not have called an Iowa farmer a “damn liar” during a campaign stop Thursday for regurgitating Trump and Fox News charges that he sold access to the Obama presidency and helped his son Hunter obtain a lucrative job with an energy company in Ukraine, a position for which he had no experience.

Instead of directly insulting the 83-year-old retired farmer, Biden should have countered thusly: “You’re repeating falsehoods, lies, that were created by Russia and Vladimir Putin and promulgated by his corrupt ‘useful idiot’ in the White House and his unscrupulous supporters in the House and Senate. You’re repeating a false narrative which is undermining our democracy.”

Biden took a more in-your-face response. It displayed fire in the belly that has been lacking and, if he is fortunate enough to secure the Democratic Party nomination, will be required if he is to successfully confront Trump.

Historic Facts: Just when you thought the public could not get any crazier, here are two stories that boggle the mind:

A majority of Republicans believe Trump is a greater president than Abraham Lincoln (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7742883/Majority-Republicans-think-Donald-Trump-better-president-Abraham-Lincoln.html). I’ll let you parse that one without further reflection on my part.

Here’s the Mideast Problem in Brief: In a speech in November, Riyad Al-Aileh, a Palestinian political science lecturer at Al-Azhar University, said Jews only came to the region “as invaders 70 years ago.” Another Palestinian “intellectual,” Abir Zayyad, an archaeologist and member of Fatah’s Jerusalem branch, asserted “We have no archaeological evidence of the presence of the children of Israel in Palestine in this historical period 3,000 years ago, neither in Jerusalem, nor in all of Palestine.” 

So there you have it—A rejection not only of Jewish heritage in the land of Israel but also, by inference, of the existence of Jesus, his visit to the temple in Jerusalem and his later return to the city, his trial and crucifixion. A rejection of Roman historical records. It makes one wonder how any peace can be achieved when one side is so delusional. 

My Letter in The Times Lights the Way

It took more than two weeks, but The New York Times finally published my letter to the editor, online Sunday and in Monday’s printed edition. 

Back on April 12 two of Thomas Edison’s great-grandsons opined in The Times that “the Department of Energy now wants to roll back new efficiency standards (for light bulbs) signed into law by President George W. Bush and updated, as required, during the Obama administration” (https://nyti.ms/2VDXgtT).

The proposed withdrawal is another example of Donald Trump’s demonic compulsion to eliminate any vestige of progressive action by his predecessors, especially if it smacks of any environmental benefit to reduce the impact of climate change.  

The Edison progeny advocated public and congressional opposition to any plan by the Energy Department to narrow the scope of energy saving standards. 

It was in that context that I sent my letter to The Times. With slight editing to my original submission, The Times ran the following:

“We cannot rely on the Trump administration to do the right thing when it comes to enforcing light bulb energy standards. Instead, private enterprise must lead the way.

“Large chain stores—Walmart, Target, Kmart, Home Depot, Lowe’s, Menards, Costco and Ace Hardware, as well as Amazon—should exert their public service commitment by not buying or stocking less energy efficient incandescent light bulbs.

“Retailers can shine a positive light on the future direction of our country.”

Naturally, not everyone is on board with any plan that would deny consumers the opportunity to buy cheaper 100-watt incandescent bulbs compared to more expensive L.E.D.s. In response to a friend who brought up the issue after seeing my letter, I wrote back, 

“Yes, it will cost more and the poor would be disproportionately hurt. But just as we have required seat belts in cars at a higher cost, just as we require food safety inspections that raise the price of food, just as we have tolls on roads that make travel costlier, there are some mandates that are put in place for the common good. Call it totalitarianism. Or socialism. Or saving the planet for our grandchildren. Doing nothing is not an option for long term survival.”

Here’s how the Edisons put it: “Few actions can reduce the carbon dioxide emissions that are warming the planet as cheaply and easily as replacing energy-wasting bulbs with highly efficient ones. The group (the Natural Resources Defense Council) estimates that if every household in the United States replaced just one old bulb with an L.E.D., the country’s overall electric bill would be cut by more than $5 billion in 10 years, and two million metric tons of carbon dioxide pollution would be avoided. 

“The savings are so big because the average American household has around 40 lighting sockets, and many still employ energy-wasting bulbs. We need efficiency standards to spur more innovation and ensure that our store shelves carry new bulbs reflecting the latest technology.

“Regrettably, special interests have reared their heads once again. Big bulb manufacturers supported by the Energy Department prefer to take the cheap, inefficient and environmentally harmful path for short-term profits. They would sacrifice our common good for their selfish greed.”

This was not my first letter published in The Times. Eleven years ago, when Allianz was reported by The Times to be near to securing the naming rights to the then new Meadowlands stadium where the New York Giants and Jets would play, I revealed the link between the company and its history of insuring Nazi death camps. To its credit Allianz already had disclosed on its website its association with the Nazi regime. But The Times article merely identified Allianz as a German financial services company (no doubt that is how the company identifies itself in press releases).

After my letter was published The Times followed up with a major story entitled “Naming Rights and Historic Wrongs.” Less than a week after my letter appeared, after intense public rejection of the Allianz overture, Allianz abandoned its bid. Only then did MetLife step in to secure the naming rights (https://nosocksneededanymore.blogspot.com/2010/01/chain-of-one-person-events.html).

Yes, Michael Cohen Is a Convicted Liar, But "Rats" Are Often Used to Take Down Crime Bosses

Throughout his examination by Republican representatives Wednesday, Michael Cohen was called a convicted liar. All true. Since he was a convicted liar, their reasoning went, he was not to be trusted, that what he was testifying about Donald Trump’s failings could not be believed. Several GOP interrogators based their disdain for his credibility on their experience as district attorneys or positions in law enforcement. 

They were mimicking the comments of their don, Trump, who has labeled Cohen a “rat,” a moniker often used by organized crime figures to describe a turncoat, someone who provides evidence on the inner workings of the mob. 

Which got me to thinking about the Mafia and how the authorities have been able to topple many crime families. Take, for example, a kingpin of the Gambino famiglia almost surely known to fellow New Yorker and Queens boy Trump—John Gotti. Gotti was brought down by the testimony of one of his henchmen, Salvatore “Sammy the Bull” Gravano. Despite confessing to involvement in 19 murders, Gravano had enough credibility to sway a jury to convict Gotti.

Other instances of felons revealing the scope of illicit activity are numerous, the most recent being witnesses during the trial and conviction of drug lord El Chapo, Joaquín Guzmán Loera. In other words, DA’s and cops rely on liars, murderers and felons of all stripes to convict crime bosses. Here’s a link to some other prominent cases: https://aboutthemafia.com/tag/mafia-rats

Go ahead, Republicans, impugn Cohen’s conviction for lying all you want. Significant from Wednesday’s hearing was the fact that not one Republican defended or denied the substance of the claims against Trump, other than Mark Meadows assertion that he never heard Trump make a racist remark (Meadows, himself, was revealed to have made a racist comment about President Obama: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019/02/28/mark-meadows-2012-vow-send-obama-to-kenya-resurfaces/3013304002/).

Cohen’s appearance before the House Oversight Committee was a loooong opening act in what may ultimately be the first scene of an impeachment procedure. To go forward the House would have to hear corroborating testimony from Trump’s chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, and others Cohen claimed had knowledge of misdeeds by Trump as candidate and now president. 

It’s a long shot, at best. An even longer shot that the Republican controlled Senate would vote to convict. Best case scenario for Democrats: contentment with more hearings that expose Trump grifting. 

Meanwhile, a wounded Trump—a twice wounded Trump now that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has denied him any hope of a Nobel Peace Prize by rejecting Trump’s denuclearization deal—will be explosive in his battles with Democrats. Whenever cornered by facts, Trump attacks with innuendos, lies and threats. He is sure to unleash a blizzard of tweets.

Speaking of blizzards, it might snow again tonight in White Plains, though not much more than a dusting. So far this winter I’ve used my snowblower just once. 

Lots of other municipalities, some places you’d hardly expect, have been inundated with snow. Tucson provides an example of how locals are reacting to the uncommon: https://www.weather.com/storms/winter/video/tucson-police-investigate-strange-white-powder-falling-from-sky?pl=pl-the-latest. Enjoy!

Trump Pitches Gun Control. Is He Going Progressive?

With an executive order that unilaterally banned bump stocks and simultaneously earned him the wrath of the National Rifle Association, are we witnessing the emergence of Donald Trump, progressive president?

The candidate-supported-by-the-NRA-who-became-president told the group’s national conference last April, “The eight-year assault on your Second Amendment freedoms has come to a crashing end. You have a true friend and champion in the White House.”

But that was before the massacres at Parkland, FL, and Las Vegas. Trump told the NRA he was “going to come through for you,” (https://nyti.ms/2pb8wjr), but he’s a master at reading the public mood which appears to be in favor of reining in unbridled gun ownership. He seems to now favor allowing states to raise the legal age to buy assault style rifles like the ones used in Las Vegas and Parkland. His proposals on guns control may be released Sunday.

Trump knows that no matter how stiff the restrictions he would place on the sale and possession of guns, Democrats would impose tighter prohibitions, leaving him as a distasteful but still the only viable choice of the NRA. 

He probably also feels he no longer needs the $30 million the NRA posted for his election campaign. It would be nice to have, but no longer a necessity. He does, after all, have the power of the presidency to supplement his already proven power of publicity to transmit his message to the public.

As noted in The New York Times article last April,  Trump was a “supporter of restrictions on guns before he entered politics.” Is he going back to his “natural” tendencies, his, in the words of Ted Cruz, “New York values?” Is he truly a progressive, ready to come out of the conservative closet?

Not so fast. 

If there has been one underlying tenet of the Trump Doctrine of governance it is to overturn any vestige of Barack Obama’s presidency. If it were within his power to remove Obama’s and Michelle’s portraits from the National Portrait Gallery, I am convinced he would do it. 

Rather than have beliefs grounded in thought-out principles, Trump is an opportunist. His seeming shift on gun control comes from tragedy. One wonders if it will take another Deepwater Horizon-like catastrophe to reverse his administration’s lifting of safeguards for off-shore oil and gas drilling (https://nyti.ms/2DgK2Jo).

There have been several articles on how regulations protecting people and the environment have been scaled back or eliminated under Trump. Here’s a list The Times compiled as of January 31, 2018: https://nyti.ms/2xVTnW9

Around the same time—the anniversary of Trump’s inauguration—the Intelligencer section of New York magazine published a piece on how he has tainted our country (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/trump-inaugural-address-one-year-later.html). Here are three salient paragraphs:

“The elegant simplicities of campaign rhetoric—or, in Trump’s case, the brutal simplicities—never align with the ugly and complex reality of governing. But Trump’s presidency has presented an especially jarring contrast, since the rhetoric has borne no relation whatsoever to what followed. It’s not that he overpromised but that his promises were fundamentally a con. He and his loyalists possessed not the faintest idea how to address the crises he identified, not even a theory that could lead to a detailed response. Trump’s program has instead defaulted to the preexisting desires of his party’s ideological and funding base, resulting in a regulatory and tax agenda virtually—and in some cases literally—dictated by the business lobby.

“For instance: The federal government will no longer withhold subsidies from for-profit colleges that fail to give their students meaningful skills or educations and saddle their graduates with overwhelming debt. Restaurant owners stand to legally take for themselves tips intended for their servers. Financial advisers will be able to knowingly steer their clients toward investments that benefit the adviser’s firm but not the client. Environmental Protection Agency investigators must now obtain permission (from their fanatically anti-regulation administrator’s office) before even asking companies to track the pollutants they emit. Nursing homes and banks will be allowed to force their customers to sign mandatory arbitration clauses that leave them unable to sue if they are abused or cheated. And on and on. The party’s political messaging has increasingly consisted of ignoring the costs of these measures (higher deficits, lax regulation of risky or antisocial business activity) while highlighting whatever fractional benefits trickle down to the non-business-owning public.

“Employment has grown no faster under Trump than it did at the end of his predecessor’s term. The economy produced slightly fewer new jobs in Trump’s first year than it did in Barack Obama’s last. The primary evidence of the “success” of Trump’s pro-business policies has been to rebrand the essentially continuous conditions of the recovery he inherited as dazzling prosperity rather than bleak misery.”

Progressive? No. A most emphatic, NO! 

Guns Pose a Danger, And That's the Truth. Plus, Who Was Marjory Stoneman Douglas?

It is often argued that only a liberal, Democratic president can alter progressive policy. Only a Republican president can do an about face on conservative dogma. Thus, a Richard Nixon could open a dialogue with and recognize Red China. Bill Clinton could institute work requirements for welfare recipients.

In the wake of the Parkland, FL, high school shooting, with numerous corporations retreating from financial discounts for National Rifle Association members and major retailers like Walmart, Dick’s Sporting Goods and the Fred Meyer division of Kroger tightening gun sale guidelines, it is no wonder that Donald Trump is seeking cover for his heretofore unassailable backing of the NRA. He is, at least publicly, rethinking his previous unqualified support of second amendment rights that many have come to believe far exceed the intent of the founding fathers.

It is a savvy move by Trump but one that does carry risk. Savvy because Trump needs to expand his base. What better way to appeal to independents, and even some Democrats, than to crater into their gun control mindset? Trump is a master at reading the public mood. Clearly there is growing momentum for a review of our national gun toting policy, finally, after the second largest student death toll. 

Sure, NRA members and Trump’s conservative base won’t like it, but at this point in time he is their man. No one else in the Republican party can buck him at the polls. So they’ll vote for him because they know any Democrat would demand even tighter gun laws.

Savviness comes with risk. If Trump doesn’t deliver more restrictive gun control he will be held accountable by independents and Democrats as an empty suit (which, given his corpulent state, is hard to imagine any suit he wears being less than overfilled). He would not be able to claim Democrats wouldn’t vote for gun control. Nor could he allege Republican congressmen and senators thwarted him because, as already evident, Trump now controls the GOP.  If he truly wants gun control it will happen. 

He must deliver on his promise.

Delivering on any promise is, of course, a challenge for Trump. More than once he has reneged on public promises. Recall how, with cameras rolling, he told a meeting of bi-partisan legislators he would accept any deal they brought him on the future of undocumented workers and border security. Just days later he rejected their proposal. So pinning Trump down on gun control may be as difficult, especially after he gets an earful from Wayne LaPierre and his fellow NRA sharpshooter elite. 

It’s always amusing and often instructive to listen to how late night comedians parse the news. After Trump told a televised bi-partisan meeting of legislators Wednesday he would favor taking guns away from “mentally ill people or others who could present a danger without first going to court,” (https://nyti.ms/2t6wkJo), Stephen Colbert noted he was “doing something Obama never did—he is coming for your guns!” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6dIrs0RurA)

If I were an NRA member, or simply a gun enthusiast, I wouldn’t worry. The odds of Trump following through on this initiative are as long as his ability to tell the truth.

Speaking of telling the truth, departing White House communication director Hope Hicks is reported to have acknowledged to the House Intelligence Committee earlier this week that she occasionally had told “white lies” in support of Trump’s candidacy and presidency.

“Well, duh,” commented Colbert. “Telling lies to white people is what got Trump elected.”

Touché. But not really. You’d have to be pretty naive to believe politicians and their staffs don’t dissemble the truth, not now-and-again, but pretty regularly. Just accept it as the price of any government doing business, hopefully, in the best interests of their constituents. Of course, that’s why we need a free, unbridled press to put the truth on the record.

Perhaps I missed it, but in all the coverage of the mass murders in Florida there has been nothing on Marjory Stoneman Douglas, the woman for whom the high school was named. Gilda passed along this article from prospect.org that provides a vibrant portrait of this extraordinary champion of environmental and women’s rights: http://prospect.org/article/who-was-marjory-stoneman-douglas

Trump Benefits From Apple (a day) Windfall

An Apple a day, or a week, or a month, could keep Trump in the White House through 2024. 

Apple’s announcement Wednesday that because of the new tax law it would repatriate $252 billion in cash that it held overseas while investing heavily in new infrastructure and employees over the next five years has the Trump administration and Republicans crowing that their fiscal strategy is working to, what’s that phrase?, “make America great again.” 

Apple isn’t alone in feeding the Trump broadcast of vigorous economic resiliency unleashed by the new tax bill (https://nyti.ms/2FOcNQ2). The stock market is at record highs. Unemployment is at or near record lows. Consumer confidence is way up. Oh what a triumphant Trump we will see Saturday on the first year anniversary of his inauguration.

Is it all Trump magic? No doubt he deserves some credit, but to use a sports analogy, ex-New York Yankees manager Joe Torre could not have led his team to four championships in five years without the building blocks (Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettite, Jorge Posada and Bernie Williams) his predecessor Buck Showalter and former general manager Gene Michaels left him. Similarly, Trump inherited an already vibrant economy from Barack Obama. Indeed, Obama’s task was much harder as he had to rebuild a devastated economy left by George W. Bush. Too many Trumpsters fail to remember this and fail to give Obama credit for turning the economy around.

If the “economy, stupid” is the key to winning the next presidential election and the 2018 mid-term congressional contests, Republicans would seem to be sitting quite comfortably in the driver’s seat. 

Yet, there are signs that all is not hunky-dory in Trumpland. The president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing criticized Trump for not following through on his promise to restore the competitiveness of American steelworks (https://nyti.ms/2FOwes0). Factory workers in Indianapolis are reportedly angry their jobs weren’t saved (https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/1610a4c72aef4cd3). How effectively laid off workers return to their jobs in the coal and steel industries, in Rust Belt manufacturing, may tip the balance at election time.

No need to rehash Trump’s boorish behavior. If you aren’t aware of it you qualify for the Rip Van Winkle dummy award. But seriously, are 2018/2020 shaping up as referenda on economic self- and national interest vs. personal- and national values? It appears so.

As a dyed-in-the-wool anti-Trumpster, I am wary of this election choice, wary because too many lack compassion, what has been called Christian charity, for their less well-off neighbor. I worry that with the increase in standard deductions to $24,000 for married couples and the resulting fewer itemized deduction tax returns, less charity will be donated to the hungry, to the barely clothed, to the poor who live in squalor, to the infirm, to research to cure the sick. When the choice becomes personal vs. public standing, too many may seek cover under a private, secret ballot.

I fret that selfishness will triumph over generosity, that accessible borders will yield to restricted entry, that democratic values will be toppled by autocratic whims, that intolerance of the strange and different will supersede tolerance, that history and science will be dismissed as irrelevant. 

I am troubled that Trump exacerbates, even encourages, this meanness of the American spirit. 

Perhaps most troubling is the separation of our citizenry from the ideal of E Pluribus Unum (out of many, one) into a multi-fractured hash of special interests, denying the legitimacy of others and not willing to dialogue earnestly with them. 

Without doubt Trump is not the person who can unite us, not that anyone else jumps to mind at this time. It’s a sobering realization that for the foreseeable future we will remain a much divided country. 

A Video Presidency: In case you didn’t see this analysis on Politico, here’s an interesting perspective on Trump’s attention to his physical presentation: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/19/donald-trump-accomplishments-216481

Goodbye HuffPost: My gig and that of 100,000 other writers as non paid contributors to HuffPost is over. The Web site announced Thursday it no longer will accept unsolicited independent articles. 

Since April 2016 I have had 99 submissions published on HuffPost. 

Catching Up On the News: Playing Trump, English Corn, Christmas Lights, Mall Stores

Not sure how many of you read the business pages of your newspaper but there’s a lesson to be gleaned from an article in Tuesday’s New York Times Business Day section: It pays to look beyond the public announcements and hoopla for the real reason why companies take action and the resulting impact.

Case in point, according to The Times, is the intriguing reason Broadcom, a semiconductor maker, announced last month it would move its headquarters from Singapore back to the United States. Donald Trump hailed it as another example of his ability to lure companies to return to America, thereby increasing domestic jobs. 

But after looking behind the PR wall, The Times reported Broadcom’s real reason for the move was to remove an obstacle it might have faced as a foreign-based company in its hostile pursuit of Qualcomm, a major chip manufacturer. Moreover, if the takeover were successful, it would be likely that the net U.S. employment level of the combined companies would be lower than current figures by perhaps as many as 5,400 workers. 

One wonders if Trump has any idea of how he is being played by savvier business executives. https://nyti.ms/2l2GnLT

Ears of Corn: As a former editor I like nothing more than finding inconsistencies (okay, mistakes) in texts or film/TV show dialogues. So I immediately stopped my viewing of the first episode of the new season of Vikings when I heard Bishop Heahmund of England pray for vengeance against the invading Norsemen that included “slaughter them in battle, cut them down like ears of corn at harvest.” 

That last sentiment would have been a neat feat considering that the time period portrayed in the show was the fourth decade of the ninth century—corn was not known in Europe until after the New World was discovered more than 650 years later!

Christmas lights:  Does anyone else see the irony of the inept New York City Times Square subway bomber using Christmas lights to detonate his pipe bomb? 

You would think a devout Muslim would not risk the success of his venture on infidel-inspired holiday lights. Or perhaps he was hoping the lights would be a reversal of the peace on earth message extolled by Christmas. 

At any rate, one would think a lesson learned is not to trust the quality of Made in China products.

Souie: When I read Trump’s tweet about Senator Kirsten Gillibrand I immediately thought, “What a pig Trump is.” 

In case you didn’t see it, you might appreciate the response from USA Today which begins with the following statement:

“A president who would all but call Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand a whore is not fit to clean the toilets in the Barack Obama Presidential Library or to shine the shoes of George W. Bush.” Click on the link for the full editorial: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/12/12/trump-lows-ever-hit-rock-bottom-editorials-debates/945947001/

Mall Stores Ban Moore: Among comments to The Times article on the selection of Democrat Doug Jones over Republican Roy Moore as Alabama’s U.S. Senate replacement for Jeff Sessions was one Gilda noted for me from nilootero: “Evidently, black lives, and black votes, really do matter.”

In voting for Jones, Alabamans rejected his opponent whose resume includes the fact he was banned from a mall. Take a moment to view Seth Meyers’ mall store sendup of Moore’s failed candidacy (it begins around 46 seconds into the accompanying clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzrYPuOYvYQ&list=PLR_ww2xUWgajGdik4ES4oQRRgmQAEXPnu&index=7

Economy, Not #MeToo, Will Decide 2018 & 2020

As much as it pains and disgusts me to acknowledge it, the elections of 2018 and 2020 will not be tipped by the revulsion to sexual predators generated by the #MeToo movement. To be sure, the reaction to sexual harassment will introduce the electorate to more female candidates, but their success will largely depend on the state of the economy of the individual household rather than on the abstract level of the stock market or the unemployment rate, the latter superceded by the growth, decline or stagnation in real wages, the former being mostly a measure important to those lucky enough to have a retirement fund linked to Wall Street investments.

As I write this, it is less than 24 hours from the verdict Alabama voters will provide on whether their state has the backward values ascribed to them by Eastern and Western establishment liberals by voting in an alleged pedophile as their next junior U.S. senator, or if they will provide a solid rebuke to an administration and Republican Party that has abandoned principle in favor of grabbing power for power’s sake. 

Donald Trump is taking a victory lap for the state of the economy during his first year in office. Too bad he is dissembling and claiming credit for a recovering economy Barack Obama set in motion.

It is generally recognized that the economy during the first year of a new presidency is reflective of the prior administration’s handling of fiscal matters. Obama, for example, had to deal with the recession he inherited from George W. Bush. Unemployment kept rising during his first year as president. But the last seven years of his presidency saw economic growth, which has continued into the first year of Trump.

Trump can aptly claim a reduced regulatory environment as his cabinet and agency heads dismantle protections. Wall Street, which cares not about the long term impact of fewer immigrants to fuel farms, manufacturing and high-tech industries, and is indifferent to lower environmental and worker protections, is at an all-time high. 

But the true test of Trump’s reforms will come later, as most voters will find their taxes are not lower, especially compared to the whopping reductions the super rich will receive. Their real income will not go up, as business leaders will not flow their companies’ reduced taxes into higher wages. And industries Trump said would rebound, such as coal and construction, will not bounce back. 

The other day the Associated Press fact-checked Trump’s claims during a stump speech in Florida. His dissembling is historic. https://apnews.com/4431ee4931ed40cea9e44b7a9deecb03

The ironic thing is that Trump blasts the media when mistakes are made. He is right to demand accuracy. But he wants reporters who make mistakes to be fired. Imagine if he abided by his own standard. 

Mass Shootings, an Intractable Dispute and McConnell's Imprint on Our Future

From a Los Angeles Times article on the killings in Northern California Tuesday: “I thought this only happens to places like L.A. or New York,” Jose Garcia, owner of La Fortune Convenience, told the Los Angeles Times (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-norcal-elementary-school-shooting-20171114-story.html).

Now, why would he say that? In the 16 deadliest mass shootings in the United States since 1949, not one, not one!, occurred in either Los Angeles or New York City (http://cnn.it/1F5wWwy).

Sadly, mass shootings are part of Americana. They happen in schools, in churches, in McDonalds, in nightclubs, on military bases. But not in New York or Los Angeles. 

Numb. Week after week crazed men and the occasional woman perpetrate numbing acts of violence against innocents, many of whom are children. As a nation we are repulsed. But let’s put our reaction in historical perspective.

From our earliest days as colonists to European monarchs, to our formation as the United States of America, we have rarely done anything but accept, and even condone, mass killings, either on our soil or in foreign lands, by our citizens or other peoples. Consider our treatment of Native Americans. Or the death trips chained Africans endured crossing the Atlantic below decks aboard slave trading ships. Or the way we turned our backs on thousands of desperate souls fleeing Nazi Germany. Or how we mostly ignored the ethnic warfare in Rwanda and the Balkans? 

It is hard to find solace in our historical record. 

From a Sunday New York Times article on Trump administration efforts to find a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, here’s a quote: “After 10 months of educating themselves on the complexities of the world’s most intractable dispute, White House officials said, Mr. Trump’s team of relative newcomers to Middle East peacemaking has moved into a new phase of its venture  …” (https://nyti.ms/2ji06GG).

Now, Jews for decades have been pleased to be recognized for outstanding feats. Entertainers, scientists, Nobel Prize winners, athletes and so on, including a remarkable victory in the Six Day War, they all evoke cultural pride among the “chosen.” But there is no joy in associating Israel with “the world’s most intractable dispute.” Israel, for one, would argue it has sought peaceful co-existence from day one of its statehood in 1948 and even before. But let’s not argue that point.

I’d rather focus on the highlighted phrase. Should we not consider the friction over Kashmir between Pakistan and India, two nuclear powers, an equally, if not more, intractable, and potentially more dangerous, dispute? What about Korea? What about the Kurds wanting their own country and stifled by Iraq, Turkey and Syria? 

I’m sure there are other hotspots around the globe that could share equal billing with the Israeli-Palestinian discord, so let’s not be so quick to label any dispute the most intractable.

As long as we’re talking Israeli-Palestinian issues, earlier this month, November 2, marked the 100th anniversary of the issuance of the Balfour Declaration that stated the British government’s support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”  

Rather than go into a dissertation on the history and pros and cons of the document, let me be personal about the Balfour Declaration. Several years ago, as part of my part-time work as a real estate agent, I had the extreme good fortune of seeing a draft of the Balfour Declaration, with handwritten notations and edits, hanging in the home of a client. That was a priceless moment.

He’s the One: Stephen Bannon wants him thrown out of office, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is arguably the politico most responsible for the rightward shift America will undergo for the next several decades.

McConnell’s unprecedented obstruction of judicial nominations during the last year or more of Barack Obama’s presidency has resulted in the appointment of conservative Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court and a slew of like-minded jurists to lower federal benches. These lifetime positions will set a reactionary tone for decades putting at risk hope for progressive, humane decisions that favor civil rights and individuals versus corporations and government (https://nyti.ms/2hqRzk3).

The Bannon trope against McConnell is a public relations fight that obscures what is really happening in Washington. Congress may be crawling along but the real deconstruction of government is happening at the cabinet department level where regulation after regulation is being rescinded or amended to eliminate or reduce safeguards intended to protect workers, the environment and consumers.

The avuncular McConnell is a tempting target, in appearance and legislative accomplishment, but keep in mind it was his strategy that made a vote for Trump synonymous with a choice for the next Supreme Court justice. 

Four American Deaths Spark Another Controversy

They were surprised by the ferocity of the attack that claimed their lives. Questions about prior intelligence. Questions about how quickly military support could reach them. Questions about how and what the families of the fallen Americans were told.

No, I am not referring to the 2012 deaths in Benghazi of four foreign service professionals and the prolonged multiple investigations by a Republican-controlled Congress set on besmirching the integrity of Secretary of State and eventual Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

No, these deaths occurred October 4 in Niger, an African country I would venture to say perhaps one percent of Americans could locate on a map and probably fewer knew we had military personnel stationed there fighting Islamic militants.

One wonders how diligent and aggressive the still-GOP-controlled Congress will be in purusing the tragic events and pursuing accountability. We can only hope that statements about the need for committee hearings will produce more than momentary soundbites.

Into this now politically charged sadness comes White House chief of staff and retired Marine general John F. Kelly, not by his own volition but rather because of the extraordinary but now seemingly day to day bad and/or clumsy behavior of his boss, Donald Trump, who chose to politicize the conveyance of solace and a nation’s gratitude to the families of fallen soldiers. 

Kelly is a good soldier. By that I don’t mean he is a good tactician or a good leader of men. He probably is. Rather, he is a “good” soldier in the sense that no matter what his commanding officer says or does he will not disavow him. He will not criticize him. He will give him cover to continue behavior that is inappropriate. Maybe like what Quentin Tarantino just admitted to in the Harvey Weinstein scandal (https://nyti.ms/2l0ZZ2N). Hears evil. Sees evil but speaks no evil. Washington and Hollywood: two peas in a pod.

You don’t become a four-star general merely by way of military expertise. Politics plays a part. Schmoozing up your superiors. Making nice to elected officials. Press reports bend over backwards describing Kelly as above the political fray of instigator-in-chief Trump roiling the waters with whomever he has a beef, be it on legitimate matters of policy or personal peccadilloes transformed into public shaming and bullying. 

Throughout it all Kelly has remained steadfast. He dismisses as inaccurate reflections pictures of him pained and distraught as the fulminator-in-chief goes off on one of his tirades. He’s never considered resigning, he says.

But his defense of Trump’s conversation with the widow and family of Sergeant La David T. Johnson, killed in Niger, and his attack on a Democratic congresswoman has opened Kelly to the contentious nature of American politics. Kelly is learning that his words are subject to parsing, as well. He got caught in a big mistake when he wrongly criticized Rep. Frederica S. Wilson for taking credit for securing funding for an F.B.I. building in Miami named for fallen agents (https://nyti.ms/2l33Wnj). 

Here’s an example of what can and has gone wrong. From Thursday’s New York Times: “Peggy Noonan, a former speechwriter for President Ronald Reagan, said Mr. Kelly’s blunt remarks will have impact because of the stark contrast with an administration that has repeatedly lost credibility with the public.

“‘Its great power was you knew he was telling the truth, and in all specifics,’ said Ms. Noonan, a Wall Street Journal columnist. ‘Kelly comes to the podium and it was credible, and you felt a kind of relief, and respect and gratitude.’” 

I wonder what Noonan thinks now. I wonder how quickly Kelly will come to Trump’s defense the next time—and you can bet the farm there will be a next time—the provocateur-in-chief strains credulity.

My Man McCain: Let’s be grown up about this: Politicians generally are not the most upstanding, unselfish, heroic individuals. Their main pursuit in life is self aggrandizement, most visibly demonstrated by their quest for election, then reelection, through often sleazy deals with benefactors and policy positions crafted to appeal to narrow interest groups that do not necessarily have the public good as their paramount interest.

Which brings us to John McCain. He is an exasperating politician. He is a conservative Republican which implies a proclivity toward defense spending and a less than robust ratification of entitlement programs. Yet he has moments when he is downright noble and heroic.

In 2008 he rebuffed a supporter of his presidential bid after she claimed Barack Obama was not an American or a Christian, that he was “an Arab.”

“No ma’am,” McCain said. “He’s a decent family man, a citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues, and that’s what this campaign is all about.”

“He is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president,” McCain said. “If I didn’t think I’d be one heck of a better President I wouldn’t be running, and that’s the point. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments, I will respect him. I want everyone to be respectful, and let’s make sure we are. Because that’s the way politics should be conducted in America.”

With his last sunset visible on the horizon because of an aggressive brain cancer (the same type that felled Ted Kennedy), the 81-year-old Navy veteran, prisoner of (Vietnam) war hero, U.S. congressman and senator from Arizona and Republican presidential candidate has a biography that will fill a full page of a broadsheet newspaper. In many ways he is like Obama, “a decent person.” 

But I would be scared if he were president because for every intrepid vote to deny the elimination of Obamacare, McCain falls back into party discipline to, for example, support a budget that would reward the rich and gut assistance programs for the needy. From my perspective he keeps switching too often from occasional white hat to near constant black hat.

Tributes to McCain keep poring in. Here’s one from David Brooks in The Times (https://nyti.ms/2zohY5n). And his speech the other night when he accepted the 2017 Liberty Medal Award from the National Constitution Center was a stinging critique of the current state of national leadership and its withdrawal from what made America great. Here’s video of his remarks: https://youtu.be/RoQDCgE9HVU

Perhaps it would be appropriate if McCain had a one-on-one chat with Kelly. Someone, after all, needs to tell the general when it is his duty to correct his superior, even a president. For the sake of the country.