December 30, 2020--Georgia On My Mind

Next Tuesday is Election Day again in Georgia. For just two races. 

Both senatorial seats are up for grabs and who wins or loses is uncommonly consequential. The majority leadership of the Senate is the actual big prize.

If the Republicans win just one of the seats they will retain control of the Senate and Mitch McConnell will continue as Majority Leader.

If the Democrats manage to win both they will take control and Chuck Schumer will replace Mitch.

Pundits see each race to be a tossup but with the GOP candidates perhaps likely to win the two.

But if my arithmetic is correct, the Democrats can still take control, even if they lose one seat.

Here's how--

If a sitting GOP senator decides that he or she is no longer a Republican and, like Bernie Sanders and Angus King, switches parties, becoming an Independent and, again like Sanders and King, who are Independents, caucuses as they do with the Democrats.

The Senate would then be deadlocked at 50-50 wth vice president Kamala Harris casting all tie-breaking votes. Including who will serve as Minority Leader.

A long-shot? Yes. But there is a plausible way for this to happen--Mitt Romney becomes the third Independent-Democrat.

Our politics has become unpredictable and stranger things have already happened, starting with the implausible Trump becoming president.

So stay tuned. 

April 25, 2019--Jack: Running Scared

A number of friends have been asking about Jack. One wrote, "I'm rested and can take a few stories involving him."

So, after a restful nap of my own I sucked it up and called Jack to see what was on his mind.

"You're calling to gloat?" Jack, already edgy, said.

I was but said, "I'm just wanting to know what you thought about the Mueller report."

"No collusion, no obstruction."

"So, you're still drinking the Kool-Aid?"

"Quite the opposite, I'm reading the report carefully. So I can come to my own conclusions."

"With the no-collusion-no-obstruction spin it sounds to me as if you're still on page one."

His not responding confirmed that Jack is not famous for being much of a reader. Like his president.

"If nothing else," I said, "If you do read any of it I recommend looking at volume two, the section about all the things Trump did to, well, obstruct justice. Like demanding that the White House counsel, Don McGahn, fire Mueller. McGahn refused and offered to resign. If he followed those orders that would have been a very big deal and Trump would likely have been indicted."

"I thought a president can't be indicted?"

"This may or may not be true. That policy has never been tested in court. But I didn't call to get into a constitutional debate, which neither of us knows enough about to have."

"So then to what do I owe this call?"

"Just to get your general view of things. Particularly what it means politically." I deliberately didn't mention that quite a few of my friends were asking about him. Talking with him could be unpleasant enough that I didn't need to have to also deal with his vanity. But it is true that a lot of people I know like hearing about him. 

"I think he's running sacred."

"Trump? Really? That doesn't sound like him."

"So why did he send out 50 tweets in 24 hours while he was in Florida this past weekend? That sounds like running scared to me."

"But you said he's feeling exonerated. He even said he's never been happier. So I don't get how he can believe he received a clean bill of health and at the same time be scared. Scared of what?"

"First of all you need to understand how right-wingers experience and respond to reality. We are at our best when we feel victimized. When we think things are unfairly stacked against us even if they aren't. That makes us furious and we act accordingly. That's why if you listen to Fox at night, to the Sean Hannities, or the ultraconservative radio talk show people, they're always in a rage even when winning. One would think they'd sound triumphant with Trump in the White House and until last November having majorities in both houses of Congress. But, no, they still raged as if Hillary was president and Pelosi and Schumer were running Congress. It would also be as if there was no Fox news. Just fake news from the New York Times and Washington Post."

"Interesting."

"Trump talks about winning and even when he does still sounds aggrieved. This is our default mode--frustration, fear, anger, rage."

"This sounds right to me," I said.

"But Trump is no fool. He knows the truth--he can claim vindication by Mueller all he wants, but he saw his poll numbers plummet to all-time lows earlier this week. Down to 35, 37 percent who still claim he's doing a good job. This is the core of his core. He knows with numbers like this even Kirsten Gillibrand or John Hickenlooper could beat him in 2020. So the 50 tweets, so the mobilization of his clown lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and that horror show Kellyanne Conway."

"You too," I said, "are sounding pretty worked up. Who are you feeling good about?"

"At the moment, no one. This includes his son-in-law, who looks to me like a bloodless vampire. He said really stupid things over the weekend--that the Mueller investigation is more dangerous to the United States than the Russians' involvement in the 2016 campaign. That was even hard for someone like me to swallow."

"So, that's it? That's all you have to say?"

"Hardly. Since you were nice enough to call me, I'll let you in on a little inside baseball."

"Shoot."

"Trump has a strategy to get reelected that depends on the Democrats. Like ju jitsu it takes one's enemies' strength and turns it against them. That's what Trump is up to."

"What's the Democrats' strength that he's using to his benefit?"

"Your sense of righteousness and fairness. You aways want to feel you're doing the good and right thing, which doesn't always translate into winning strategies."

"Give me some examples."

"OK. Let's talk about impeachment."

"Do we have to?"

"Only if you want to learn how to be smart."

"Shoot." I was feeling exasperated.

"Trump knows that half the Democrat caucus is obsessed with impeaching him. But they're the ones who represent mainly secure blue districts and won't be punished in 2020 by voters who don't want to see Trump impeached. These politically safe Democrats want to see Trump impeached."

"I agree that that could be true."

"But then there are those Democrats who are not wanting to make impeachment a priority because they are in red or purple districts and could be vulnerable to Republicans in 2020. For them, if the Democrats proceed with impeachment they will likely lose their seats and Nancy maybe her majority and speakership."

"But what about the race for the presidency? How does impeaching Trump help him get reelected? Your ju jitsu analogy?"

"It takes the Dem's eye off the ball. It gets them so worked up about impeachment that they don't talk about things people really care about--health care, preexisting conditions, student debt, women's issues, jobs for working class people, all the things that make Democrats strong. Again, Trump plans to turn this against them. And by doing so--he wins. Keep an eye on how he'll move to bait Democrats into impeaching him. As counterintuitive as it may sound he actually wants to be impeached."

"What a nightmare," I said, "Why did I ever listen to my friends and call you?"

"Aha!" Jack said, "I knew someone put you up to this!"

Cackling, he rushed off the phone.

January 8, 2019--Trump's Emergency

With the Mueller report likely to surface soon, Trump is experiencing his own private emergency and now he appears to want to drag the rest of us into a much larger, generalized one. A national emergency.

His is real, the one he has in store for us concocted.

At first, hearing about the possibility that Trump was finally trumped, with some Democratic friends I was gleeful.

"This only shows Trump's desperation," one said. Another, that "He's finally painted himself into a corner from which there is no way out."

But then I thought more about this. Yes, there may be no easy exit from the trap he clumsily set for himself, with Nancy Pelosi playing him subtly like a well-tuned piano. And on the other side, to his base, there is more trouble represented by Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, both of whom warned that they would call his manhood into question if he caved in to the Dems by agreeing to reopen the government as part of a deal that would get him a pittance more for his cement, steel, tissue paper wall, fence, barrier, curtain, whatever. Call it anything you like. He just wanted out of the trap.

For the man whose ghostwriter wrote the book on the art of the deals it was looking bleak. No deal in sight. Just plunging poll numbers.

But then there is the potential game-changing idea for Trump to declare a national emergency--he would claim, as he did last night in an Oval Office speech, that the country is threatened by caravans of murderers, rapists, gang members, and drug dealers, augmented by tens of thousands of terrorists sneaking annually across the border. And, oh yes, there is a humanitarian crisis.

Never mind that there were just six (6) potential terrorists who were intercepted by the border patrol during the first half of 2018. Compounding this lie, Trump went on, claiming most of the opioids threatening our young people are coming though the same way--strapped to Mexican MS-13 gang members, while in fact they are hidden in and smuggled across the border by otherwise legitimate big-rig truckers.

If Trump declares a national emergency (and he has the power to do so), he will no longer need Congress (read Democrats in the House of Representatives) to pass a Homeland Security Department budget with $5.0 million allocated for the wall because he will just redeploy those and many more billions from the Pentagon budget (in an official emergency he likely has the power to do that as well as deploy soldiers to take the lead in building the wall).

By this scenario Nancy and Chuck will become irrelevant, Trump will look extra macho to Ann Coulter, Rush will be re-smitten, and too much of the public will think that Trump did the bold and right thing to protect us from all those dangerous brown people heading north on moonless nights.

And then the final irony--since it will cost $50 to $100 billion to build a 500-mile wall, because the money will have come from the Pentagon budget, Trump will demagog Chuck and Nancy into coming up with enough to replace it. The last thing Dems want is to appear wimpy when it comes to military spending. You know--"support our troops."

This strategy is so perversely brilliant that it could have come from only one source. Trump's current senior staff and advisors are incapable of thinking about how to get themselves out of a paper bag and so a play this multi-layered and intricate is beyond their devious capacities.

Therefore this has to be the idea of only one possible person. One evil genius--

Steve Bannon. Remember him?

The only problem--it won't work. 

Trump's favorables will continue to hover in the 35 percent range. His act is becoming boring to all except his relatively few dead-ender followers. Even Steve Bannon will not be able to think his way out of that.

October 4, 2018--A Subdued Trump

Until a day or two ago Trump had been on a roll and, incredibly, at times almost sounded like a normal person.

He spoke moderately about deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein. After the ("failing") New York Times wrote about how Rosenstein contemplated wearing a wire to record Trump's irrational behavior, when all were expecting him to fire Rosenstein and perhaps even Robert Mueller, Trump said he really wants to "keep" Rosenstein, that he'll meet with him in a week or so, and "we'll see what happens." As if Trump had nothing to do with the what happens.

When Senator Jeff Flake got the Senate judiciary committee to delay a week before voting on Brett Kavanaugh's appointment to the Supreme Court, to allow the FBI time to reopen its background check, rather than returning to ranting about and mocking the Arizona senator ("Jeff Flakey"), he offered temperate comments about this being a good idea. "No rush," he again said, "We'll see what happens." He even offered to withdraw Kavanaugh from consideration if he is found to have lied during his testimony before the committee.

Then he bullied Mexico and Canada to agree to significant changes in NAFTA. Changes even Democrats such as Chuck Schumer praised. A new-seeming Trump barely took a victory lap.

I thought someone in the White House must have slipped some Thorazine into his Big Macs.

Most amazing, after Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's wrenching statement to the judiciary committee, rather than attacking her credibility, Trump spoke softly about how it is important to listen to what she has to say and, again, if it proved to be true, he indicated he would withdraw Kavanaugh's nomination. 

But then, on Tuesday, unable to contain himself, Trump lashed out, mocking Dr. Ford.

At a rally in Southaven, Mississippi, imitating her voice, he spun out this viscous two-character Q&A--

"How did you get home? 'I don't remember.' How did you get there? 'I don't remember.' Where is the place? 'I don't remember.' How many years ago was it? 'I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.'"

That, I thought, is the Trump I know. Playing to his misogynist base.

Where had he been? What had he been up to?

I suspect, probing to find his best political way to respond to all the battering before launching new lines of attack.

And then he found his strategy--

He set his nasty little dialogue in a new context.

At the Mississippi rally he told parents in the audience, in the era of #MeToo, boys are in more danger than girls. Daughters might be threatened by sexually assault but their sons might find themselves falsely accused of committing sexual abuse and thus have their lives ruined. 

He said, "It's a very scary time for young men in America when you can be guilty of something you may not be guilty of. This is a very difficult time."

This is red meat for his base. Especially for middle-age white men who have felt their prerogatives, their privileges threatened, initially by how they experienced the women's movement which, among other things, called for equal pay, sexual parity, control of their bodies, political and executive equivalence, and now by the MeToo movement.

Women with access to a microphone or blog or a corporate human resources office have the power, these disaffiliated men feel, not only to boss them around, but with a simple accusation potentially ruin their lives.

It doesn't help the progressive cause when cable news outlets such as CNN have guests drawing comparisons between Bill Cosby (a convicted sexual predator) and Brett Kavanaugh. No matter how despicable and slimy he feels, Kavanaugh has not been convicted of anything, much less being, like Cosby, a "serial rapist."

We may already be seeing the beginnings of the political consequences from the new Trump campaign to play on this anger, these fears. 

In a number of key Senate battleground red states where Democrats are seeking to retain seats, poll numbers are beginning to swing in their opponents' direction. In North Dakota, for example, Senator Heidi Heitkamp who was running neck-and-neck with Kevin Cramer is now trailing by about 10 points.

We need to get to work. There are just four weeks until Election Day. We know Trump will be campaigning full time. Assuming he doesn't get any more love letters from Kim Jong-un.

August 17, 2018--A Pocket Full of Distractions

I finally figured out why Trump doesn't button his suit jackets. Until now I thought it was a vain attempt to hide his William Howard Taft-like girth. 

Now I realize it was for another, to him more urgent reason--to give him quick access to the list of distractions he has secreted away in his inner jacket pocket so it is always ready at hand for him to refer to in order to change the subject when he does something wrong or makes a fool of himself. To distract us and the media. 

To change the subject, for example, from Omarosa and the N-word tapes to cancelling former C.I.A. director John Brennan's security clearance. 

Trump has this list nearby in the same way he has the nuclear codes at the ready. Those are schlepped along wherever he goes by a military aide in the so-called "football." 

The list of distractions, to him much more important, Trump carries himself. Close to the heart.

I was able to sneak a look at the list the other day, and for the sake of checks and balances and the historical record I here for the first time reveal what's on it.

He has the distractions categorized--so, for example, there are distractions in waiting about immigrants. They include--

Point out serious felonies perpetrated by illegal immigrants to remind your supporters they are murders and rapists.

Announce all children separated from their parents at the border have been reunited.

Claim Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi support amnesty.  

Mention Nancy Pelosi along with "no-collusion" at every opportunity or whenever her name comes to mind.

Under the distraction category Women--

Mention Maxine Waters every time you appear in public. Remind people that she supports Nancy Pelosi and this is evidence of her low IQ.

Talk about how smart you are: where you went to college, your IQ, how much money you are worth. About that, triple what your personal accountant itemized on your most recent 1040 form. (Don't worry about the tax implications)

Invite Laura Ingraham, Janine Piro, and Megyn Kelly to the White House for, like Obama, lunch on the lawn. (Don't mention Obama)

On August 26th, National Dog Day, announce you've changed your mind about Hillary Clinton. (Your supporters will stop chanting "Lock her up" every time you mention her name. Instead, they will bark)

Announce that you and Melania will be adopting a shelter dog. (You're the first president since FDR not to have one)

African-American distractions include--

Talk about black people who are some of your best friends: Don King, Mike Tyson, Dennis Rodman. Invite them to lunch on the White House lawn. (Consider inviting Obama, who is a black African)

Invite Miss Universe Pageant winner Paulina Vega to lunch on the White House lawn. (She may be from Colombia but she is still black)

Call Nancy Pelosi a low-IQ dog to demonstrate you are not a racist.

There are many media distractions. Here's just one that touches a few bases--

Announce you're going on Don Lemon's show to talk about your black friends. (He's black)

It's on CNN. (This shows the intrepid side of you--your willingness to venture into enemy territory. It's not the same as visiting Afghanistan, but we all know that's the last place in the world you'll be visiting.)

And with Lemon you get a three-fer: His blackness, CNNness, and his gayness. (He's out of the closet)

Then there are North Korea distractions--

Reprieve "Little Rocket Man." (To flatter him consider "Big Rocket Man")

Shoot down a North Korean jet off the coast of South Korea.

Bomb Syria

Bomb Tehran.

Bomb Venezuela.

Bomb Pyongyang.

Nuke Pyongyang.

Bomb San Fransisco (Nancy Pelosi's district).

Finally, there are the firings distractions--

Fire chief of staff Kelly.

Fire Jeff Sessions. (The attorney general)

Fire Stephen Miller. (Your senior advisor)

Fire Kellyanne Conway. (Counselor to the president--you)

Fire Sarah Huckabee Sanders. (Your press secretary)

Fire Mike Pence. (Forget that you can't do that. Fire him anyway)

Fire Sean Spicer. (Ignore that you already did that)

Fire Michael Flynn (Ditto. Fire him again)

Fire Steve Bannon. (Ditto)

Fire Paul Manafort. (Ditto)

Fire Anthony Scaramucci. (Ditto)

Fire Omarosa. (Ditto)

Fire Jared. (Your son-in-law)

Fire Ivanka. (Your daughter)

Fire Melania. (Your wife)

Fire Barron. (The youngest of you 3 or 4 sons)

Fire Nancy Pelosi. (Soon again to be Speaker of the House)

January 24, 2018--Losers & Winners

For days after Congress couldn't agree to a short term budget fix, which resulted in the government going dark, and then after three days it's reopening, if you spent any time watching cable news virtually all the talk was about who won and who lost.

Was the "Schumer-Shutdown," as the Republicans derisively referred to it, evidence that Democrats in the Senate "blinked" when they realized they had overstepped when they refused to make a budget deal?

Or was President Trump the political loser (no equivalent alliterative epithet for this) when he agreed to include six years of child healthcare, CHIP funding in exchange for a three-week continuing resolution?

Losers and winners is the way so much of our public life has come to be construed. Not what gets done but who's up and, especially, who's down.

But with their reporters scurrying around the halls of Congress to take the minute-to-minute pulse--especially of the dozen or so Democratic senators who are already running for president in 2020--these news sources missed the big picture--who actually won and what it may mean going forward. May mean.

The deal finally hammered out more than anything else was the result of a bipartisan group of about two dozen senators working together 10, 12 hours a day on something they and their colleagues could live with.

They met in semi-secrecy in Maine Republican senator Susan Collin's "safe office," her "sanctuary office," talking to each other about substantive issues for the first time in their senatorial lives, some reported, largely because they felt they couldn't depend upon their leaders--Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell--to come up with a deal as they were so immeshed in posturing and spinning the truth before the waiting microphones and CSPAN cameras.

Many of the participants in the "gang or 25" said that they were so fed up by being excluded from the sausage-making process of crafting legislation and so disgusted by the equivocation and mixed messages emanating from the president and his White House, where many felt Trump was being "led around by the nose," as Joe Scarborough put it, by "a 32-year-old kid," presidential advisor Stephen Miller, who looks like a picture of evil right out of central casting, that they took matters into their own hands and for a change earned their $174,00-a-year salaries (which, incidentally continued during the shutdown).

Some, after the agreement was struck, said that the experience of working together across party lines to "get things done" was the reason they originally sought public office--and here's the potential big headline--that not only did they feel good about what they accomplished (though the full story about that will not be known for some weeks as the centripetal political forces struggle to reassert themselves as the 2020 campaign heats ups), they said this is how they plan to work going forward. 

They claimed they will stick together and deal themselves in when it comes to what to do about the so-called "DACA kids," hurricane disaster relief, Obamacare fixes, infrastructure, and border security. Some "big stuff."

Are we at last witnessing an outbreak of comity and moderation?

As my grandmother used to say when any of us brought a new girlfriend home to meet her and perhaps (unlikely) pass her special muster, "We'll see."

Every once in awhile she revealed that she could actually smile. That's what I am planning to hope for now--that we are at a pivotal moment and it will take hold.

We'll see.

November 9, 2017--GOP In Full Panic Mode

After the Democrats' showing in Virginia, where they did much better than projected and where many saw the outcome as a negative response to the Trump presidency, Republicans, less than 24 hours after the results were known, were in full panic.

As they should be.

Most alarming to them is the huge turnout, especially among suburban women who a year ago formed an important part of the Trump constituency. Without them, the GOP may see their majority ended in the Senate and challenged in the House.

All of a sudden, everything to them seems bleak and even hopeless.

Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz must already be thinking about 2020.

Lindsay Graham and Jeb Bush too?

Can we please get Herman Cain stirring?

Most Republican members of Congress can't stand Trump and see him mainly as a political meal ticket. A ticket to ride. A signing pen if they ever manage to get anything passed by both houses of Congress. 

After Tuesday, don't expect to see too many signing ceremonies in the Rose Garden.

If these weasels conclude that Trump can't deliver the goods, they will dump him in a heartbeat. Many, gleefully. 

Someone else who until 48 hours ago seemed invincible was equally a loser. 2017's version of Karl Rove--Steve Bannon. 

Bannon who has been swaggering around for the past few months, masterminding the demise of the traditional Republican Party suddenly feels diminished. He's the one who convinced poor Ed Gillespie to pander to the Trump base during the last couple of weeks of the Virginia campaign. Under Bannon's tutelage, Gillespie made a big thing about the sanctity of Confederate statues and how we need to deport all immigrants.

How did that work out? With a week to go the race was supposed to be a dead heat. A few days later Gillespie lost by 9 points.

Expect Trump to try to cozy up again to Chuck and Nancy. Expect them to say, "No thanks."

They are expert at smelling blood in the water and they now have no interest in doing anything to help resurrect him. They're thinking Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader.

It's a crazy business but what a difference a day or two makes.

Governor Elect Northam

February 3, 2017--Once More, Jack

Though a number of friends recommended I not answer the phone when Jack calls, when he rang me again the other morning I ignored that advice.

I'm not exactly sure why some of my friends were offering such counsel, but I suspect it's largely because what Jack has been saying about me and my fellow Democrats rings truer than any of us would like--that we are in large part the source of our own political problems. That we didn't do enough to help Hillary Clinton get elected. That we took her victory for granted and spent more time talking about the election than becoming directly involved.

Thus far only one person I heard from, "Gala Girl," appears to have done well on Jack's parlor game challenge, Who Do You Know? She claimed to have friends from all of Jack's categories, except that she doesn't know any coal miners!

All the other readers and friends who either called or wrote to me confessed that for the most part they knew as friends very few plumbers, policemen, or waitresses. Some who disagreed with Jack about our being out-of-touch with Americans who elected Donald Trump, had no problem with the fact that they didn't know anyone currently serving in the military or working as a lab technician. And thus, like them, I should ignore Jack's jibes.

"Things are bad enough without us beating ourselves up about the results of the election," one said.

Jack on the other hand said, "I see you have a new obsession."

"How so?"

"With all the things going on this is what you're paying attention to?"

"What might that this be?" From his attitude I was already beginning to regret that I didn't let his call go to voice mail.

"With all that's going on from the immigration ban to Trump's on-going obsession about how many popular votes Hillary secured, you keep coming back to railing about congressional Democrats gathering the other night on the steps of the Supreme Court."

"I'm all in favor of activism of all kinds. In fact, we need more and more of it right now to show Trump that there will be political consequences for his words and deeds. Really, he needed to alienate the Australians? One of our loyalist allies?"

"I agree. But what seems to be sticking in your craw is the fact that that geriatric group of your congresspeople opted to sing This Land Is Your Land. What's with that?"

"It underlined for me how impotent and out of touch my party leaders are. Nancy Pelosi who can't sing is tottering around on her last legs and Chuck Schumer looks like he's ready for Weight Watchers or needs to check into a care facility. These are the people who are going to lead the opposition and help elect Democrats two years from now? I don't think so."

"I watch some MSNBC," Jack said. "That might surprise you, but I want to check out what Rachael is up to and your version of Bill O'Reilly, loud-mouth Chris Mathews. I want to listen in on what the left-wing opposition is saying and plotting. From my perspective, I'm happy to see not much to win over Trump-type voters. Though at least some of them are recognizing that progressives need to get out into the country to find out what's on voters' minds. You know visit some of those 21-percent counties."

"What are those?"

"Like the ones in Iowa and other swing states that voted for Obama in 2008 and again in 2012, giving him 21 percent margins but then this time around voted equally overwhelmingly, by 21 percent, for Trump. There's a whole lot to learn in those places. And there are quite a few of them.

"If you're looking to start a business, consider setting up a tour company that buses Democrats for overnight visits to these districts. Especially tell them which diners to go to to have breakfast with the locals."

"In some ways we're agreeing. Which brings me back to the other night at the Supreme Court. Not only are our leaders totally out of touch and self-involved, but This Land Is Your Land? This old hippie song? I mean, I like it. But do they think it appeals to millennials and Latinos and the working poor? I don't think so. If anything, they made themselves seem irrelevant and ridiculous."

"On top to that," Jack said, "I noticed that they didn't even know the words. They had to read them from a handout."

 "And meanwhile, back at the White House, Trump was firing people and on the phone talking to the Mexican president, warning him that if the Mexican police don't do a better job of securing the border he might just have to have American troops invade Mexico because there are 'bad hombres' there."

February 1, 2017--Your Land

Macho Donald Trump was in the White House Tuesday night firing Sally Yates, his acting attorney general for "betraying" the law and the Constitution.

At the same time, in a burst of faux-emotion, Democrats from the House and Senate, led by Nancy Pelosi and tearless Chuck Schumer, stood on the steps of the Supreme Court, and with a malfunctioning microphone, mainly off-key, sang "This Land Is Your Land, This Land Is My Land."

Enough said.

January 30, 2017--Jack Again

"I know you think something terrible's going on with me because, you're right, I hate talking on the phone."

It was Jack calling again.

"I read what you wrote about our last conversation," he said, "which you summarized pretty well. You, of course, made yourself come off better than you I fact did when we spoke." I ignored that.

"So, what's it about this time?"

"Things with Trump are happening so fast that I can't wait to May to talk with you. Who knows, by then, we might be at war with Mexico."

"I know you mean this as a joke but it could really happen. He's on such a rampage."

"Well, you know, I can't stand Democrats--present company excepted--but I find myself interested in trying to think what you guys might do to become more competitive. I prefer winning when challenged and at the moment you and your kind are pathetic. Sunday morning, for example, on TV, while criticizing Trump's new immigration policy, like John Boehner, Chuck Schumer, your minority leader, cried his way though his comments. What a wuss."

"I really appreciate your concern about us," I said, attempting not to sound as sarcastic as I was feeling.

"So I watched some of the left-wing Sunday talk shows. Meet the Press, among others, to see what they were saying. Michael Steele was on. He used to be the head of the Republican National Committee and is a smart and decent guy."

"I saw a bit of that too. I think that . . ."

"I didn't call to find out what you think but to tell you what I think." That's my old friend Jack, I thought and was tempted to hang up on him.

"He and Doris Kearns Goodwin, who was also a guest, were saying that the Democrats are in trouble because they don't have an appealing one-paragraph message of what they stand for and would do for the country if elected."

"That's what they said and I sort of agree with them. With emphasis on the sort of."

"I thought," Jack said, "that that's your problem. You not only don't have a clear message about what you're about but you still don't get the main reason why Trump won the election. Part of the reason was that he had a four-word message--Make America Great Again--and then let the voters fill in the blanks about what he meant by that. Including the nasty dog-whistle stuff."

"I agree with that. It was pretty basic and it's own peverse way brilliant."

"What you're all leaving out is the fact that Trump was not elected by Republicans. Sure, a lot voted for him but so did about the same percentage of Independents and, here's the main point, Democrats. If you exclude African-American Democrats, he got more white Democrats than Hillary. Many of them women. In effect, he was elected by Democrats. So to make any progress, Democrats have to recognize that and deal with it. Ask me why."

"OK, why?"

"Because though he's a billionaire who lives in a gold-leaf triplex on Fifth Avenue and has been married three times, he made people in the middle of the country and in small-towns everywhere, even in all the Blue States--New York and California included--he made average Americans feel like he cared about what they cared about and liked mingling with them. In contrast, these people felt that Liberals flew over their counties on their way from one coast to the other and had disdain for them and their concerns. You know, Hillary's deplorables."

"Oh, that again," I said.

"Ignore this at your peril. But I have something to help you and your fellow travelers."

"What's that?"

"You could play it as a parlor game when you get together with your friends for Chardonnay and Brie."

"You mean like Scrabble?"

"Whatever turns you on. But here's how my game works. It requires people to be honest about themselves. Which might be a problem for Liberals." He liked that jibe and I could hear him chuckling.

"The game is called Who Do You Know? and it requires someone to read a list of types of people and for each participant to keep a list of who knows, say, a lawyer or professor. I mean really knows. Not just hires a lawyer to draw up a will or a contract when buying a house. Or their psychology professor from college."

"You're being snarky because you know most coastal liberals will have lawyer friends."

"I confess I was being snarky. Sorry about that. In the meantime you want to play?"

"I'm game. Shoot."

Here's part of the Who Do You Know? list. Do you know, again really know, a plumber or electrician? An assembly line worker? Someone currently serving in the military? A wounded veteran? A nurse? A cashier? A police or fireman? A farmer? A waitress in a diner, not a fancy restaurant like your Balthazar? A body-and-fender man? A short-order cook? A maid? An X-Ray technician? A bookkeeper? A healthcare aide? A gardener? A Walmart employee? A coal miner? A stay-at-home Mom? A doorman? A fisherman? A painter, and I don't mean an artist? A . . ."

"You can stop," I interrupted, "I get your point and where you're going with this."

"How did you do?"

"Do?"

"I assume you were making your own list."

"Well, I sort of was." Without being specific, I said, "I confess to not doing as well as I'd like."

"Give it a try," Jack said, "The next time you get together with your lawyer and professor friends.  Maybe there is hope for you and them. Even though I'm a confirmed right-winger we need all of you socialists to be part of what we think of as Americans and we need to find ways to talk with each other. Not just across party lines but across occupational and cultural ones as well."

"I like that," I said. "You could be right so between now and May feel free to call again."

December 30, 2016--Bad Cop, Good Cop

Not that any of this is necessarily intentional, but Barack Obama finally deciding what to do to "punish" Russia for hacking into our electoral process, could offer Donald Trump an opportunity to reset relations with them. With "them" meaning Vladimir Putin.

Here's how it could work--

Clearly no-drama-Obama wanted nothing to do with this, looking to run out the clock on his presidency by not getting entangled in any last minute messes. If he was eager to retaliate, he would have done so weeks ago and not required relentless prompting and criticism by members of Congress from both parties.

And, of course, his move yesterday to expel 35 so-called Russian "diplomats," who are in fact spies, was at least equally motivated by a desire to poke president-in-waiting Donald Trump in the political eye as another form of retaliation for managing to get under even unflappable Obama's skin by dominating the news and not leaving the stage to Obama alone who is entitled to a un-interfered-with final bow.

As David Sanger reported in this morning's New York Times, Obama's move may effectively "box" Trump in.

What is Trump supposed to do with this in his desire "to make a deal" with Putin? Three weeks from today tell the Russians never mind, your 35 spies are welcome to return to the United States?

Republican leaders such as John McCain who hate Trump and are chomping to reset the Cold War while Democratic hawks such as Chuck Schumer are calling for more sanctions would have strokes if Trump were to reverse Obama's actions because, as he put it in his statement about this, it's "time to move on to bigger and better things." Whatever that means.

Trump wants a clear path to a deal with Putin but may now be flummoxed by a cagy Obama, having the last laugh and reminding the upstart that a presidency isn't over until it's over..

So here's the possible Trump trump move--

It's dawn the morning after the inauguration. Trump is as usual not sleeping. Rather than sending out a tweet, he somehow manages to restrain himself and rings Putin on the phone. After a few affectionate exchanges he says to Putin that he has an idea for a deal that would benefit each of them.

"Let's move quickly to reset things before the anti-Russians set in motion by bad-cop Barack Obama, who finally showed some cojones, pushes both of us into a new bankrupting arms race.

"Let's make the centerpiece of that resetting a solution that the two of us impose in Syria. Forget Turkey, they are a ridiculous country and not trustworthy allies. Let's take a chance and trust each other. Your economy is in a state of collapse and the congressional parties here are working to dominate the agenda even before I shake the confetti from that stupid parade out of my hair.

"You are looking to assert power and with us again become a dominate nation, even though, I don't have to remind you, your economy is the size of pathetic Italy's.

"What do you say, Vlad? Let's make a deal."

Who know? It just might work.

On the other hand, Putin might be loving things just the way they are and is playing Trump like the old KGB officer he was.

August 11, 2015--Michele, Ma Belle

Knowing my obsession with Michele Bachmann and her pray-away-the-gay husband, knowing how disappointed I am that she is not running for president this time around, knowing that with the exception of Donald TRUMP the current candidates are not that funny (I only made it through an hour-and-a-half of last week's two-hour debate), my Virginia brother and sister-in-law sent me a piece from Salon about how Michele is gleeful about the nuclear deal the Obama administration recently struck with Iran because it foretells the beginning of End Times.

As Salon reported, in an interview on the evangelical radio show, Understanding the Times (get it--the Times), Michele Bachmann gushed that we should all feel very "privileged to live" in the End Times which are rapidly approaching "now that Obama's negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran."

She claimed that this accord fulfills the biblical prophecy from Zechariah 12:3--"On that day, when all the nations of the earth are against her, I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations. All who try to move it will injure themselves."

The End Times are upon us, Michele revealed and "heaven's armies" are now advancing the cause. "The prophets longed to live this day. You and I are privileged to live in it."

The host of the show, Jan Markell, agreed. There "are consequences to doing things like this against God's covenant land [Israel], there are horrible consequences. You throw in other things such as the Supreme Court decision back in late June [about same-sex marriage] and a lot of other things--judgement is not just coming, judgment is already here."

It is only senators like Chuck Schumer," Bachmann sighed, who can forestall "God's wrath."

Here's where I get confused--

She cites Schumer (my mother used to call him Chuck Schmoozer) as the only one standing in the way of God's wrath, but aren't evangelicals looking forward to the End Times? Isn't that an essential step toward the emergence of the Antichrist (I know, he's already here in the person of Barack Obama), his reign, the Millennium, and ultimately the desired Last Judgement? So what's her problem? She should be ecstatic (etymologically literally) rather than bent out of political shape.

There's a solution--Michele, ma belle, it's not too late. The race is not over. In fact, no one is all that happy with the current field. The poll-topper, Donald TRUMP, has his theology all mixed up. When asked about his church going he admitted he doesn't attend that often. "When I go," he said, "I eat the little cracker." And though he's not impressed with the sacramental wine, he did admit he drinks "my little wine."

Think about how you could take him on. The discourse you two could engage in. For the rest of us, the two of you debating is almost too much to hope for.

Sont des mots qui vont très bien ensemble
Tres bien ensemble.