August 22, 2018--The Fall of the House of Trump

On split-screen TV, on the same day, during the same hour, with the conviction of Donald Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort, the guilty pleas of Trump fixer Michael Cohen, who will now sing like a canary, with the reminder yesterday that former National Security Advisor and confessed felon, Michael Flynn is still spilling the beans to the Mueller investigators, and the promise of more troubles to come (like the indictment of Don Jr?), well short of two years into his presidency, before our eyes, Trump World is unraveling.

As a result we can expect to see a great deal of desperate, out of control behavior by our deflating president.

There will be firings, there will be pardons, expect an intensification of insults and threats to soft targets such as Little Rocket Man, expect distractions, including some wave-the-dog military action. Expect more unhinged rallies like the one last night in West Virginia, and of course there will be more tweet storms with Mueller and Sessions in the crosshairs as Trump also continues to savage Omarosa, Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary. 

Melania will disappear from sight (also yesterday she announced she's about to take off on a solo trip to some "s-hole" countries in Africa) as will the Kusners. Unless Jared as well finds himself under the Mueller bus.

One thing not to expect--more than a handful of critical comments from wimped-out Republicans. They helped create Trump, rode his coattails to congressional leadership, doubled their bets on him as the midterms approached, and now will trickle down to insignificance with him. 

It is too late for these "rats" (Trump's word) to abandon ship. Live by him, die by him. As Tennyson wrote, to class up this sordid tale, we are seeing "Nature red in tooth and claw."

No one in Congress is writing a profile in courage.

And don't expect anything Trump perpetrates to protect him beyond Election Day. Even if Mueller is fired, like the Pentagon Papers, his report will see the light of day and, as a result, after Democrats win control of the House in early November, investigative hearings will begin January 2nd, Trump will be impeached by the House by the fall of 2019.

Though he will not be convicted by the Senate even if Democrats retake the majority since that requires an impossible 67 votes.

But in spite of this Trump will not retain the presidency beyond 2020. Knowing he can't win reelection, after declaring "mission accomplished," expect him to opt out for "health reasons." He will do a Nixon and turn the keys to the White House over to Mike Pence. Another nightmare in waiting.

But rather than focusing on that, let's enjoy the moment and the evidence from yesterday that the "system" may be working.

Paul Manafort Mugshot

January 29, 2018--Reiterating

With the Mueller investigation at full boil, with so many moving parts, it is again time to step back and look for a big picture that links most if not all the seemingly disconnected pieces.

Previously, I've turned to Ockham's Razor, employing that ancient philosophical tool that seeks the simplest but most comprehensive explanation when confronted with seemingly unrelated, even contradictory elements.

In Trump's case we have just this week seen the White House and the Trump enablers at Fox News and Republicans in Congress in almost complete disarray.

There has been a sustained campaign in general to undermine the credibility of the FBI and Robert Mueller's investigation in particular. There has been the absurd charge attributed to the president that the reason Mueller is incapable of being fair is because of a dispute about membership fees at one of Trump's golf courses! And we have been hearing about a secret Illuminati society within the FBI leading efforts to depose Trump and his administration.

And of course there is the revelation that back in June Trump ordered the White House counsel, Donald McGhan, to fire Mueller, even though he does not have the power to do so. He in turn threatened to resign (in a rare burst of integrity from among the Trump people) if forced to proceed.

There is more, much more. All of it, though, made coherent with the help of the 14th century Franciscan friar--

Trump's desperate behavior is because ONLY HE KNOWS THE FULL TRUTH AND EXTENT OF HIS OWN INVOLVEMENT IN RUSSIA-GATE, and because that truth is so devastating, he is frantically grasping at anything that he feels can rescue him from this self-made crisis.

Trump alone knows the full and truthful story of his and his minions' involvement in colluding with and encouraging the Russian government to intervene on his behalf in the 2016 election.

Only Trump knows fully what he and his acolytes have done to cover up, to obstruct their malfeasance. What he and they have done to obstruct justice.

Trump is the only one who knows all the details of Trump, Inc's business involvements with Russia, including the massive sums of money that were likely laundered in the process.

Trump alone knows the truth about what is included in the infamous dossier. Not the Clinton campaign's minimal involvement, which they have attempted to generalize, but Trump's business dealings in Russia as well as his possible involvement with Russian prostitutes.

Only Trump knows what his children and son-in-law have been up to in regard to everything from conspiratorial activities to money laundering to attempts to subvert justice.

Only he knows the full story of his adulterous affair with pornstar "Stormy Daniels" and what appears to be Melania understandably leaving his side.

Again, the panicky behavior we are witnessing is the result of the truth about Trump's involvements, the full extent of which he and only he knows.

It's enough to make one crazy. And that is what we are seeing. But the end is near. Quite near.

May 5, 2017--Winners & Losers

Though Republicans members of the House of Representatives did not pause to see what the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office would say about the consequences of the healthcare legislation they rushed to approve, the New York Times did an instant analysis of who won and who lost.

What the Times found should be no surprise and suggests why GOP House members were in such a hurray to vote--if any of them took the time to read the legislation (few did) they might have been embarrassed to be made aware of what was in the bill and what they were heartlessly voting for.

It also might have given them pause before, like needy children, they rushed to Big Daddy at the White House to have him praise them for their dastardly deed. And, yes, to have a Bud Lite together before heading back to their home districts for yet another ten day-vacation. They had after all had to work for their $174,000 salary for two whole weeks since their last "recess."

Here are the winners and losers--

Winners:

High-income earners--eliminates taxes for couple earning at least $250,000 a year.

Upper-middle-calss people without pre-existing health conditions.

Young middle-class people without pre-existing health conditions.

People who opt to go without insurance--the bill eliminates the individual Obamacare mandate.

Large employers--eliminates employer Obamacare mandates.

People who want less comprehensive coverage.

Losers:

Poor people.

Older adults in most states.

People with pre-existing health conditions in many states.

State governments because of cuts in Medicaid--including, little noticed, for special education.

Hospitals--because up to 24 million people will lose coverage and thus hospitals will have fewer patients. Millions will again seek care in high-cost emergency rooms.

Planned Parenthood which will not be allowed to receive any government funds for at least one year.

Mach 25, 2107--The System At Work

Many of my friends who have feared that Donald Trump is a crypto-fascist in the mold of Benito Mussolini, that he doesn't believe in representative democracy and plans to overturn our system, need to take another look at the power of the American political system to resist Strong Men and protect itself.

This resistance expresses itself mainly though the power of our vaunted system of political checks and balances.

Take today's defeat of the Trump-Ryan plan to repeal and replace Obamacare. The bill was among the meanest spirited to ever come before Congress with a real chance of being approved. It would have led to the illness and death of hundreds of thousands of Americans. It had the tincture of fascism about it.

But it never even came to a vote.

Forget for the moment the internecine war within the Republican Party that contributed to Trumpcare's defeat. That internal warfare is another illustration of the system working. As do the street demonstrations and dissent-filled town hall meetings.

We may have a totally unqualified and unstable person in the Oval offie, but as of today he and his powers are dramatically diminished and there is no chance that he will turn into an American Duce

Consider this progress and move on to other things to be concerned about and resist. Like tax cuts for the wealthy.

June 13, 2016--Narcissism

In an insightful column in Friday's New York Times, "The Unity Illusion," David Brooks gets it right.

He argues that there are two fundamental reasons why it is unlikely (he feels impossible) that Donald Trump will be able to, perhaps have a genuine interest in seeking unity with mainstream Republicans. Those, anyway, such as Paul Ryan, who are more or less true conservatives.

First, because Trump is not a conservative since conservatives, to Brooks, unlike Trump--

. . . believe that politics is a limited activity. Culture, psychology, and morality come first. What happens in the family, neighborhood, houses of worship and the heart is more fundamental and important than what happens in a legislature.

Ah, if only true, I would consider becoming a conservative Republican. But then I would have a problem with Republican-dominated legislatures interfering, when self-interested or pandering, in the private lives of women, minorities, low-income, and gay people. But this subject is for another time.

More interesting and persuasive is Brooks second point-- that

. . . Trump by his very essence, undermines cooperation, reciprocity, solidarity or any other component of unity.

This is because, psycho-history time, he is afflicted with a  personality disorder--alexithymia, clinical narcissism. This means that Trump is unable--

. . . to identify and describe emotions in the self. Suffers have no inner voice to understand their own feelings and reflect honestly on their own actions. 

Unable to to know themselves, or truly love themselves, they hunger for a never-ending supply of admiration from outside. They act at all times like they are performing before a crowd and cannot rest unless they are in the spotlight. 

To make decisions, these narcissists create a rigid set of external standards, often based on simple division--winners and losers, victory or humiliation. They are preoccupied with luxury, appearance or anything that signals wealth, beauty, power and success. . . . 

Incapable of understanding themselves, they are also incapable of having empathy for others. They simply do not know what it feels like to put themselves in another's shoes. Other people are simply to be put to use as suppliers of admiration or as victims to be crushed as part of some dominance display. 

This all derives from Christopher Lasch's 1979 book, The Culture of Narcissism, which presciently argued that much of American culture was trending in this clinical direction. Nearly 30 years later we see all around us the living proof of that. Not just among nominated and elected officials.

March 21, 2016--No, Not Trump . . .

For once David Brooks got something right.

In his New York Times op-ed on Friday, "No, Not Trump, Not Ever," in addition to comparing him not inappropriately to biblical tyrants, he acknowledged that he was too slow to pick up on the Trump phenomena largely because, from his Washington-New York Times cocoon, he has been out of touch with those Americans who are most alienated, Trump's core supporters, and, like it or not, a large part of America's reality.

This is one of the things I have been saying here, encouraging my progressive friends to venture forth more directly into this part of American consciousness. And into America as well. Suggesting that perhaps they, we, have too few Republican friends and are thus out of touch with an important part of the story. Not what we hear from country-club Republicans but from the more down-scale ones.

It is one thing to read about someone working three jobs to keep a family afloat or about others who feel inadequate because they cannot can't afford to contribute anything to their children's college expenses or to hear about someone who used to have a well-paying job and was for years a solid member of the middle class who no longer is able to take her family out to dinner and a movie; it is quite another to actually know people living in these strained circumstances.

To avoid being misunderstood, I should add that getting in closer touch with that story does not in any way mean moving toward endorsing Trump's candidacy much less ignoring his outrageousness. It simply means that to get closer to an understanding of what has been happening here, one needs to balance the condemning with more understanding.

As he sees Trump approaching the nomination, Brooks wrote--

Well, some respect is in order. Trump voters are a coalition of the dispossessed. They have suffered lost jobs, lost wages, lost dreams. The American system is not working for them so naturally they are looking for something else. 

Moreover, many in the media, especially me, did not understand how they would express their alienation. We expected Trump to fizzle because we were not socially intermingled with his supporters and did not listen carefully enough. For me, it's a lesson that I have to change the way I do my job if I'm going to report accurately on this country.

I hope others of his colleagues will heed this. And the rest of us as well.

October 13, 2015--"M Train"

I was going to write about the Republicans struggle to come up with a new Speaker, about how they are trying to woo Congressman Paul Ryan to allow them to elect them.

He is playing hard to get, but since he really wants to be President he doesn't want to seem too eager for this lesser job, two heartbeats from the presidency.

Here's his plan--

Be coy about the Speakership and then do it for the sake of the party and, of course, of America.

Then next year, after the GOP presidential candidates wind up in a scrum without a candidate with either a majority or mandate, blushing politician that he is, allow them to nominate him. Come to him, as now, plead with him. Promise him anything if just he would only save them from themselves.

Recall, he's the one who makes his staff read Ayn Rand. That alone should disqualify him but, for the faithful in his dysfunctional party, that's what they most love about him. That he's a man of ideas. Even if crackpot ones.

Hillary, as of this week with a 20 point lead over Bernie in the polls (forget Joe Biden), must be sitting back, smiling, and lighting up a victory cigar.

But, rather than writing about any of this titillating stuff, if you haven't yet picked up a copy of Patti Smith's on-going memoir, M Train, I recommend it. It's not quite Just Kids level, but still special.

Here's a brief taste--

We want things we cannot have. We seek to reclaim a certain moment, sound, sensation. I want to hear my mother's voice. I want to see my children as children. Hands small, feet swift. Everything changes. Boy grown, father dead, daughter taller than me, weeping from a bad dream. Please stay forever, I say to things I know. Don't go. Don't grow.

September 14, 2105--What's With Ben Carson?

Not only has Dr. Ben Carson surged into second place in polls of Republican voters, almost in a statistical dead heat with Donald TRUMP, but national polling shows him doing best among GOP candidates in the all important head-to-head with Hillary Clinton.

According to the latest CNN poll, TRUMP and Hillary are tied, Clinton bests Jeb Bush by 4 percentage points, but loses to Carson by 5 points.

It's still very early, but this makes one think.

An African-American, evangelical, conservative surgeon?

So he is not just an unexpected and unusual Republican favorite but his appeal goes beyond the evangelical base of the Grand Old Party and includes many Democrats and Independents.

Of course he has that anti-government thing going. Along with Carly Fiorina and Donald TRUMP, the three non-establishment candidates, they garner well over 50 percent of potential Republican primary voters.

We tend to think of African Americans as pretty automatically voting for Democrat candidates. The last three Democrat nominees for president received on average about 90 percent of black votes.

One question, then, about Dr. Carson--would he get more than 10 percent if he were the nominee? Obviously, yes, and that would give him quite a leg up in key swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania,  Florida, and Virginia. In the general election if he could carry those four states he'd be well on his way to winning the presidency.

But that's political inside baseball. It does not say much about Crason's clearly wide appeal.

Some remind us that there is a long tradition of Black conservatives who have thrived on the national political scene. Senator Edward Brooke of Massachusetts and Colin Powell come to mind. Many feel Powell would have been able to win the GOP nomination in 1996 and had he done so would have had a good chance of defeating Bill Clinton.

Carson's cultural conservatism appeals not only to large numbers of blacks (about one-third self-identify as social conservatives) but also to white and Latino religious conservatives. His views on abortion and same-sex marriage (he opposes both) are cases in point.

Like other African-American conservatives who preceded him, he comes off as comfortably non-militant. He doesn't threaten as many whites as did Jessie Jackson and even Barack Obama.

I think, though, that there are other reasons why he is doing so well. Primarily because he is a physician, not just because he is anti big government. Then, there is kind of surgeon he is (neuro) and the fame that accrued to him from his successful, highly publicized effort to separate conjoined twins.

Many feel we are in our national core virtually terminally ill and in need of treatment. Metaphorically, of course, but those who feel this way, considering the state of our national health, may be thinking why not call on a doctor to heal us?

And then there is the further metaphor of his work with Siamese twins. As with them, we were at one time a conjoined body politic, but in recent decades have lived separately and angrily in our partisan corners. Little gets done. We barely speak to each other.

Carson is someone who understands the difference between being united and being separate. And how to do both successfully.

By this logic, I doubt if he would have the same appeal if he were, say, an orthopedic surgeon.

One the other hand, remember George W. Bush who declared himself, "a uniter, not a divider"? Though we know how well that turned out, we did elect him with an assist from the Supreme Court.

August 7, 2015--Friday at the Bristol Diner: Tony Said

He said, "I don't care."

"You mean you'd vote for someone who won't tell you what he'd do about immigration?"

"I told you," he said, beginning to get heated, "I don't care. I really don't."

Jack, who was sitting opposite Tony, stared at him.

"It's his biggest issue. His political claim to fame."

"How many times do I have to tell you, I don't care.

"Or what he would do about the Middle East." With that Tony turned to the window and started humming.

"Can you believe this?" I asked Jack who shrugged and shook his head.

"You're from New York, right?" Tony turned back to us. I nodded. "You remember that skating rink in Central Park?" It didn't register at first. "It was an ice rink. The city owned it."

"It's coming back to me," I said, knowing now where this was headed.

"There was some sort of a problem with it. The cooling system. It made slurry, not ice. For years. I forget how many, the city kept trying to fix it. Spent millions. Maybe over five years but still no ice. My boy, Donald Trump, The Donald, said he couldn't take it any more. He said he'd fix it and pay for it himself."

"I remember that," Jack said.

"Again, I don't remember how long it took. At most a few months. That was years ago. As far as I know the ice machine is still working."

"It is," I admitted.

"So now you know why I'm for him. He knows how to get things done."

"You don't care what those things are that you believe he can get done? Like what he would do to 'get things done'," I made air quotes, "with the 10 million illegal immigrants who are here--hundreds of whom I assume mow the grass on his golf courses?"

"I know he got in all sorts of trouble when he said the Mexicans here are murderers. That was ridiculous."

"And so?"

"And so, as I said, I don't care. Don't get me wrong, we should figure out what to do with all the illegals--most are doing work that none of us would want to do. Like pick lettuce in the hot sun. And I believe that Trump would figure that out."

"You mean like fixing the ice skating rink?" Jack asked.

"I know they're not the same thing. I'm not that deluded."

"So what are you then?" I said, "It feels as if you drank the Trump Kool Aid."

"Maybe I did, but let me put it to you another way--The other candidates, from both parties, have all sorts of position papers about immigration and education and the environment. But we know that once they get into office they never get done what they promise to do. Maybe in their first year or two a new president can get a few things through Congress. Whatever you think about those policies. But after that all those position papers and their speeches about this or that mean nothing. And then we're left with a president who can't get anything approved and who has to fall back on whatever ability he has--forgive me, she or he has--to get things done."

"Like what?" Jack asked. "Give me an example or two of what Trump could get done after he realizes he can't get anything through what will for sure continue to be a gridlocked Congress?"

"Well, first of all, as someone who knows how to get things done on a large scale, the people he hires--appoints--to say the Cabinet: the secretary of state, of the treasury, health, education would be the same kind of get-it-done people he hires to build his hotels and casinos and condos and golf courses. People, who if they don't get the job done, get fired."

"You mean people like his daughter, Ivanka?" I couldn't help but ask.

"Yeah, like her. Like Kennedy appointing his brother attorney general. remember that? Though with that I suspect you didn't have a problem." He winked, knowing he had made a good point. "Look, no matter who wins, Democrat or Republican, no matter how much they cut the budget, there's still lots of money around to do things with. Like rebuild the infrastructure. Not all the money you or I might like, but enough to make at least a bit of a difference. Wouldn't you admit that for doing that--fixing our roads--Donald Trump would do a better job than Jeb Bush or your Hillary?"

I couldn't disagree with that. "But what about foreign policy?" Jack asked, "You'd trust him to be commander in chief? He doesn't even know where Iran is on the map."

"First of all you don't know that. You're just being partisan. We need to get away from that--making everything partisan--and focus on fixing things as best as can be done. Like our southern border which is still like a sieve after decades of politicians promising to fix it. Again, who would you prefer to work on that? Bush? Walker? Rand Paul? Ben Carson? Or Trump? I vote for Trump."

"That's clear," Jack said with a sigh. "Before I have to leave, here's more ammunition for you."

"I'm all ears."

"I forgot where I read it earlier this week, but some columnist for the Times or Washington Post said that Trump is the first post-policy candidate."

"A what?"

"Post-policy. He was making your point. That it doesn't matter what his so-called polices are. Or even if he has any. All that matters is what people believe about him. Like you--you believe he can get things done. You're not interested in the specifics of what that means. Just that you believe he can. That a lot of people are fed up with 10-point plans to fix our education system or white papers about creating jobs. Trump is attractive because he gives you and many others the feeling of competence and a certain kind of hope for a better future, a better America."

"Now you're talking."

August 4, 2015--The Southernization of America

Anyone interested in understanding the conservative resurgence or revolution, if you will, should turn off Fox News and read Godfrey Hodgson's prescient, 1996 eyeopener, The World Turned Right Side Up: A History of the Conservative Ascendancy in America.

If you are interested in the intellectual roots, he does a good job of summarizing the contributions of serious economists such as Friedrich Hayek; pseudo-serious novelists such as Ayn Rand; polemicists like William F. Buckley, Kevin Phillips, and Irving Kristol; evangelical religious leaders such as Jerry Falwell; and political figures including Barry Goldwater and of course Ronald Reagan.

All of this is familiar ground for anyone paying attention to the cultural and political shift rightward, but nowhere all pulled together as well as by Hodgson.

For me, noteworthy is Hodgson's insight--or at least his clear statement--of how the ideology and politics that followed on in the South, transforming it from the Democrats' Solid South, after the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965 were signed into law, and quickly became solidly conservative and Republican. The South at that time became the South that we now know and live with, continuing today to shift inexorably to the right.

Nothing that new about that. But what is new is Hodgson's perception that much of the North shortly thereafter--certainly by 1980 when Ronald Reagan became president by picking off millions of so-called Reagan Democrats--became southernized.

This happened in two stages--first there was the dramatic population shift of northerners to the former Confederate States and thereby their accruing electoral power. Reallocation of members and redistricting meant more seats in the House of Representatives for conservatives at the expense of liberal states such as New York and Pennsylvania; and, as Texas and Florida passed New York to become the second and third largest states, there was a dramatic increase in the South's number of votes in the Electoral College. With the South also becoming solidly Republican that made it much more difficult for Democrats to control Congress much less the White House.

The second stage, the result of Reagan's appeal to traditional blue collar Democrats and his election and reelection, subsequently turned a number of blue states into purple states (Pennsylvania is a good example) and over time threatened to turn a few northern purple states to red states.

Perhaps the most dramatic example of that transformation, and perplexing to progressives because of its role in the history of the emergence of the Progressive Movement, is Wisconsin, where Scott Walker managed to get elected governor three times, largely by acting as if Wisconsin were South Carolina.

As in the South he appealed to hawkish hyper-patriotism, belief in American exceptionalism, evangelical impulses, anti-affirmative action forces, a desire to limit government of all kinds, dog-whistle racism, and above all attacks on unions. Thus, Wisconsin has tipped to the right and now culturally and politically could become a permanent part of the emerging conservative majority.

June 24, 2105--Republican Demons

Republican politicians are struggling now with demons of their own arousing--the demons of white supremacy and racism.

Here's the problem--

Until 1963-64 when the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts were passed by Congress and signed into law by Lyndon Johnson, politically, the South was the "Solid South" with all offices from dog catcher to sheriff to governor and senator totally in the hands of Democrats. Republicans were seen as the party of Lincoln, the president who pressed the Civil War.

That all began to change as Richard Nixon, seeing an opportunity for the GOP, implemented his Southern Strategy, a blatant appeal to white southerners to switch their allegiance to Republicans who, in spite of the law, would not put pressure on them to integrate, act affirmatively in regard to college admissions and employment, or encourage black people to register or turn out to vote.

In fact, with GOP leadership, the opposite happened, including supporting elaborate schemes to suppress minority-voter turnout and pressing for cutbacks in federal programs that served many people of color--food stamps, Medicaid, public housing, welfare.

And so by the 1980s, schools in the South remained largely segregated, laws remained on the books that did not allow whites and blacks to marry, and with the exception of gerrymandered congressional districts that were carved out to create a few with black voter majorities, virtually all elected officials were white and Republican.

Now, the Republican electoral base, especially party activists who through their engagement during primary campaigns, that base which disproportionately determines who will be nominated for gubernatorial, congressional, and national office, is largely made up of aging white men.

And sad to say, since a large part of that base harbors anti-minority, even racist views, to attract their support it is necessary for candidates to pander to their prejudices.

Even now, after the massacre in the Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston, GOP aspirants to the presidency are speaking equivocally about what happened (Rick Perry called it an "accident") and dodging the controversy surrounding the Confederate flag that flies on the grounds of the state legislature.

With the notable exceptions of thus-far non-candidate Mitt Romney, who immediately called for it to be removed, and just yesterday South Carolina governor Nikki Haley's call for it to be taken down, all other Republican candidates have spoken out of both sides of their mouths.

For example, both Jeb Bush and his estranged mentee, Marco Rubio punted questions about the flag by saying they felt "confident that the state will do the right thing."

More troubling, more toxic, as a way to cozy up to racists and cater at the party's bigoted base, many of the current Republican candidates have accepted campaign contributions from white-supremasist organizations that the church shooter followed and to whose websites he contributed comments and manifestos.

One stands out--

The Council of Conservative Citizens, which, according to the New York Times, in the council's words, opposes "all efforts to mix the races" and calls for the dismantling of the "imperial judiciary" that  in 1954 required the desegregation of the nation's public schools.

The council as well has been a generous funder of many of the current GOP nomination seekers. Though as the result of the murders in Charleston, some of the candidates last weekend returned the money or contributed what they received to charity, one wonders what Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, Scott Walker, and even Nikki Haley were thinking when they accepted council support.

It is actually clear what they were thinking and attempting to say by their tacit involvement with this hate group--

Wink, wink--you know we're with you. In spite of what we may have to say to appear tolerant, we stand with you, share your views, and won't cause you any pain. We'll make sure you can keep your guns, even of the same type that kid used in Charleston. And again, in spite of what we may have to say, we won't take away the flag you so passionately choose to salute.

May 8, 2015--Mike Huckabee

Mike Huckabee--or Mike Huckleberry as my mother refers to him--this week announced to no one's surprise that he is again running for president.

There is room in the Republican clown car for him since he is literally a lot smaller than he was in 2008, the last time he ran, thanks to lap-band surgery and the pressure to look slim on TV during the years he had a talk show on Fox News. He has little chance of winning the nomination but should see a bounce in his lecture fees and at the minimum during the campaign be good for a few laughs.

In regard to that, he started off with a few zingers--

First, to differentiate himself from all other GOP candidates, while calling for cutting or eliminating almost everything else, he offered strong support for retaining Social Security and Medicare pretty much as they are. Chiding other Republicans--specifically those many no-shows in the Senate who, on the public payroll, are running for the presidency--Huckabee called for cuts in their own fat government pensions and health care benefits instead of those of more vulnerable citizens.

This was a smart move for him, considering his likely 65+ year-old base of supporters, and fits right in with the Populist passion to take regular swipes at anything having to do with government.

But beyond this, he is such a fiscal conservative (a GOP requirement) that he advocated the elimination of much of the rest of the federal government. Supporting the military--another imperative--aside. For that he wants to spend more and presumably use our troops more aggressively than he claims they are at present. Do I hear in Iran?

From his perspective I get eliminating the Department of Education--the federal role in education has for decades been a Republican whipping boy, with claims that it exists only to promulgate socialist, secular propaganda in our public schools. Of course, neither Huckabee nor any of the others tell us what they would do about various forms of student financial aid (the largest part of the DOE budget) that even Republican critics use to help them and their children pay for college.

OK so we'll figure out how to make that work. Probably through privatization--give those programs back to the banks. Who cares if it would cost billions more than at present. If the private sector is in charge, to conservatives by definition that's better than the government playing a role.

And of course, top of the list of federal agencies to be eliminated is the loathsome IRS. Even poor Rick Perry last time around was able to remember that was one to the three programs he would eliminate--he needed help with the other two. Perhaps soon he'll tell us which they are since he too is about to grab a seat in the clown car.

Without the IRS why would anyone feel compelled to pay taxes? Talk about America becoming just like Greece where hardly anyone does.

But, of course, that would be a good thing--no tax money means no federal government. Sure, Huckabee and his colleagues would have to figure out how to pay for the military and border security. Their two favorite federal programs.

Maybe we'll privatize the military. Turn it into a for-profit operation. For example, let Boeing or United Airlines run the Air Force, GM or Ford the Army, and Carnival Cruise Lines the Navy. Issue stocks and bonds to support it and peg dividends to how many wars we can drum up and  . . .

And then we could hire Blackwater to take over border security. Look how good a job they did in Iraq where the Bush administration had them provide security for American operatives. No matter a host of them were recently convicted of murdering Iraqi allies.

Do we want the CIA, FBI, NSA? If so, is it possible to privatize them? We could contract with Facebook and Google to do the electronic surveillance. For marketing purposes, by collecting big data about each of us, they are already doing a version of that.

Do we want an FDA to offer assurance that our medications work and are safe? Not if we have to spend tax money to do so. But since we do want to avoid the undue side effects of new medications (the current scary ones are enough) we could turn the FDA functions over to Pfizer and Novartis. They'd jump at the chance to fast track the approval of their own new products.

Our crumbling federal highways and bridges? Sell them to Abu Dhabi. They already have experience running the parking meter concession in Chicago so maybe we should ask them to repave our interstates.

The Government Printing Office and Mint? Turn them over to Citibank. In the early days of the United States banks offered their own currency so this would be a strict-constructionist way to manage our money 2015-style. And while we're at it, get rid of the Federal Reserve. With Citibank controlling the money supply, who needs them?

Federal Prisons? Many states have already privatized theirs so why not the U.S. government.

The airports? A perfect role for JetBlue.

The postal service? A no-brainer--FedEx is already handling a substantial portion of our packages and is venturing successfully into mail service. So let's turn the rest over to them.

And of course we should sell the national parks to Disney. That's an easy one. Grand Canyon Land. Yosemite World. Love it! Now if Disney would only add a water slide at Old Faithful and . . .

March 30, 2015--GOP Clown Car: The Minstrel Show

Considering that he's been widely featured in the news after becoming the first Republican to officially enter the race for the 2016 presidential nomination, I should probably write something about him. But there's nothing that unusual about Senator Ted Cruz as a candidate--the GOP has a long tradition of welcoming demagogues into leadership positions.

Recall, his spooky lookalike, Senator Joseph McCarthy, who, back in the 1950s, was for some years the nation's most powerful Republican. He snooped around ferreting out alleged Communists who had supposedly infiltrated Democratic ranks, making things up when the evidence was thin, ranting that there were thousands of actual Communists in government whereas there were just a handful.

Like his political alter ego, Cruz played the Red card when by innuendo he accused Barak Obama of being influenced by the Harvard Law School faulty which, he slimed, was substantially made up of Communists while Obama was there as a student.

What is interesting about Cruz is the nature of his demagoguery and his craven pandering to a Republican base which he pretends to represent. It is ironic that he has grabbed this representational mantle for himself considering that he has at least as elite an eastern establishment Republican patina as the president-in-waiting, Jeb Bush. Cruz actually has more elitist credentials--he went to Princeton as an undergraduate and was a top student at Harvard Law School whereas poor Jeb attended only the more utilitarian University of Texas and has no advanced degrees.

It will be quite a Svengali act for Cruz to pull this one off--to fool enough Tea Party folks that he's a man of the people.

As evidence of his bona fides, last week on the CBS Morning News he spoke about his musical conversion (he's all about conversions). With faux sincerity, he told about how though earlier he was a fan of "classic rock," after 9/11 since the "rock community" "didn't stand up," whereas country musicians did, he became and is now a devotee of all things country. I guess he missed all the concerts and benefits organized for first responders by the "rock community." Too isolated in that Harvard cocoon I suppose.

But today I am writing about another familiar Republican presidential archetype--the candidate who is the star of his own political minstrel show where, as a black men, he behaves in ways and says things openly about blacks that racist white Republicans talk about only in private. And by his very being gives credibility to what hard-working white folks in their hearts know to be true about lazy black folks.

He is neurosurgeon Ben Carson who, though barely paid attention to by the mainstream media, somehow still manages to come in sixth in lists of people most admired by Americans. Just below George W. Bush and slightly ahead of Stephen Hawking.

He is best know for leading a team of surgeons in 1987 in a 20-hour operation to separate Siamese twins joined at the head and then in 2013 for appearing at the National Prayer Breakfast and, with President Obama on the dais just ten feet away, delivered a speech in which he criticized Obama's health care and economic policies, dissing him to his face.

The next day he was embraced by Rupert Murdock's Wall Street Journal in an editorial titled, "Ben Carson for President." This based on a 15 minute speech at a congressional breakfast.

From that day forth he has been a Republican darling, and now, having given up his practice and making the rounds as a paid-for-play speaker articulating a vision for American that for all intents and purposes would eliminate our social safety nets and not give away our treasure to people (read of color) who are too lazy to support themselves and their families. He also delivers on rightwing hot social issues, as a "scientist," questioning evolution and comparing homosexuality to beastiality.

I call this a minstrel show because it is a performance pitched exclusively to the emotions of resentful and bigoted whites put on by the very kind of person (of color) who is the butt of the stereotyping.

Dr. Carson is at least the third in a string of such self-denogating African-American Republican presidential aspirants.

First, in 1995, there was Alan Keyes, a give-'em-hell talk show host who was best known for his violent opposition to abortion rights and his untutored ways. This alone would have been enough to excite the William Kristols of the world who at all times have an eye open for people they can benignly promote who speak to the subliminal fears and urges that can be used to manipulate the behavior of the Republican base. No matter Keyes was caught illegally paying himself out of campaign funds. Actually, perfect. This only confirmed that "they" cannot be trusted to responsibly handle money. There is that tendency, isn't there, they snicker, for "them," when money's around, to act "Nigger Rich."

Herman Kane was next and much, much more entertaining. Not only didn't he know what he was talking about when it came to economics (9-9-9) but when it came to foreign policy matters he appeared to be map-phobic. He not only couldn't see Russia from his house, he didn't even know how to locate it on the map. For country-club GOPers he was a living stereotype. "Them" himself.

And now comes along Ben Carson, another token gift to Republicans. He brings race front and center into the "debate." First, who better to excoriate Obamacare, seeing it as basically a program that the doers are taxed to provide for the takers, which he quickly translates into a form of economic redistribution from whites to blacks. To make this point explicitly, Carson frequently likens it and other Democrat-supported social programs to "slavery," with Obama, in this ironic case, the nation's chief plantation owner.

Among other things, a black man--Carson--holding a black man--Obama--who is also a Democrat as responsible for slavery, or its reintroduction, is a brilliant form of racist jujitsu that absolves Republicans of any responsibility for attempting to suppress minority voting rights or roll back Civil Rights legislation.

March 17, 2015--Scott Walker: Take One

By some accounts, Wisconsin governor Scott Walker is the GOP front runner for the 2016 presidential nomination. Jeb Bush, with his last name and all the money has been able to extract, is close behind.

To some this is shocking--how could a politician whose claim to fame is that he took on the state's municipal unions, but is unsure where Iraq is on the map, how could he be the front runner when someone as senior and well-bred, as well-tutored and well-financed as Jeb be barely hanging on to second place?

Perhaps precisely because Walker is not senior, not well-bred, not well-tutored, and not yet well-financed. He's the "not" candidate.

The Republican base, which Walker primarily appeals to, is fed up with the well-educated and well-sired, and like the appearance that he is running on the cheap without the help of the Adelsons and Kochs. They also love the fact that Walker took on the unions. So much so that they jumped with glee the other day in a speech to CPAC when he claimed that confronting the unions prepared him to battle ISIS.

Members of the permanent government and the remnants of the mainstream press were aghast while in Peoria and all over Iowa the base ate it up. To them it was red meat. And though red meat will kill you, they still can't get enough of it.

Members of the Establishment don't get the emotional power of this anti-union thing. Especially the particular animus Walker and his coven have toward municipal workers--benign folks such as teachers, the police, firefighters, sanitation workers, county clerks, EMS responders.

Most of them aren't making out-of-line salaries and they are often provide vitally needed services. So what's the story?

With the economy uncertain, with people who have basic private sector jobs worried about their declining pension savings and whether or not their jobs will be off-shored to India, with their cost of health care continuing to rise (though at a slower rate thanks to Obamacare), with their kids more and more in debt with student loans, they look at how tenured teachers are doing, how firefighters are faring, how cops in their neighborhoods are retiring after 20-25 years of service at 80 percent of their last year's salary (bulked up by overtime), retiring at 50-55 with guaranteed pensions and lifetime healthcare coverage, and it makes them resentful, envious, and mad as hell.

Walker, who never even entered college, embodies all those frustrations and provides the delicious spectacle of beating up on these workers and their unions.

So he's number one in the current polls, but of course last time around even Donald Trump was in the lead. For about a week. As was Michele Bachmann. Also for a week. And we know what happened to them. The smart money (or the big money) may be on Jeb Bush but the action and passion on the ground is with Scott Walker.

As my grandmother used to say, "We'll see."

March 13, 2105--GOP Clown Car Update

I'm so excited. It is reported that South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham is running for the GOP presidential nomination. That's the only explanation why he is spending so much time up in frozen New Hampshire.

If he actually enters the race, stay tuned for lots of laughs.

He is best known as John McCain's butt boy. Graham is rarely spotted except when half hidden behind or nestled near his idol, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate.

Like McCain he is prone to making bad jokes that reveal more truth about him--as Freud would suggest--than laughs.

Recall McCain's "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" during his race against Barack Obama. He of course felt he was being pretty cool knocking off the Beach Boys' "Barbara Ann." Many of the rest of us, though, thought he was semiconsciously tipping voters off about what he would do if elected.

In fact, McCain seems still to embrace this point of view. Incredibly, he was one of 47 GOP senators this week to sign an open letter to Iran's leadership, suggesting that unless they suspend their uranium enrichment program entirely these hawkish senators would ratchet up sanctions even more than at present or, if that failed, that they would press the military to bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

Graham went even further in his lame joke. He suggested that he endorsed a military coup d'etat. He really did.

In Concord, NH on Sunday he said--

Here is the first thing I would do if I were President of the United States: I wouldn't let Congress leave town until we fix this. [Sequestration budget cuts for the Pentagon] I would literally use the military to keep them in if I had to. We're not leaving town until we restore those defense cuts. We're not leaving town until we restore the intel cuts.

It elicited a few self-conscious chuckles but unleashed a bit of a tempest in the press. So much so that a Graham spokesperson had to walk his comments back, assuring us that he was joking.

If he wants to be president, he should try harder to discover a sense of humor or hire some better joke writers.

In the meantime, the clown car is set to take off. Thankfully it already contains Rick Perry, Chris Christie, Ben Carson, and, yes, The Donald. Now if we could only get Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann back on the stump, the next 12 months, with Lindsey in the mix, could be quite a riot.

February 25, 2015--Two of a Kind

Appearing on CBS's Sunday show, Face the Nation, Senator John McCain said that he is "ashamed of my country" for allowing Vladimir Putin to annex Crimea and push militarily to overthrow the government of Ukraine.

Host Bob Shieffer was stunned. "I'll say this, senator, I've known you for a long, long time, interviewed you many, many times, and I've never heard you say I'm ashamed of my country."

McCain added, "I'm ashamed of my president and I'm ashamed of myself that I haven't done more to help these people."

Adding himself to the list of who to be ashamed of softened his otherwise outrageous characterization of his president. It is not appropriate for a senior senator to express these divisive and mean-spirited feelings. Yes, disagree, disagree strenuously, disagree fundamentally, disagree profoundly, whatever; but to be ashamed crosses the line and thus stunned veteran journalist Shieffer.

McCain was trumped in mean-spiritedness last week by Rudy Giuliani, formerly known as America's Mayor. Over the weekend at a Scott Walker fundraiser at New York's 21 Club, he said, "I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America. He doesn't love you. And he doesn't love me. He wasn't brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up, through love of this country."

And he didn't walk it back, reiterating later that he was merely expressing his feelings.

Giuliani, and to a lesser extent, John McCain are suffering from Dick Morris Syndrome. Sensing that they are both aging and losing influence and power. For Rudy, who ran disastrous campaigns for the Republican presidential nomination, to see rising empty-suit political stars such as Scott Walker grabbing attention and headlines, it is hard because of his kind of colossal ego. Ditto for McCain who still can't accept the fact that he lost the national election in 2008 and that Barack Obama is president.

In Dick Morris' case, he began his professional political career working for Upper-Westside liberal Manhattan Democrats and then moved into the center of the Bill Clinton reelection campaign until he was forced out when he got into a scandal involving a prostitute. Next stop for him was Fox News and after making a fool of himself there (predicting on air a landslide victory for Mitt Romney), he descended further and is left now pandering to that 20-30 percent of the GOP base that takes Glenn Beck, Russ Limbaugh, and black helicopters seriously. There's money to be made there by writing books about how Obama is seeking to turn America into a totalitarian state with him self-imposed as president-for-life.

These same dead-enders are now the people with whom Giuliani is left to cavort. What a sad fate.

January 20, 2105--Mitt Redux

Just as I was slipping into despair that my favorite sitcom would not return for another season--the Republican Clown Car--what with no Herman (Pokemon) Cain and no Michele (pray-away-the-gay) Bachmann, how would I spend the next two years? Stuck with House of Cards, Shark Tank, Dancing With the Stars, and God help me, Girls? I might even have to develop a taste, I moaned, for the Home Shopping Network.

But I can calm down. Things are beginning to shape up.

No only are Bachmann and Cain making noises that they might in fact run for the 2016 nomination but there is also Rand Paul (who looks like a clown), Ted Cruz (who looks like Joseph McCarthy), Jeb Bush (who looks like George W. Bush), Scott Walker and Paul Ryan (both of whom look like Eddie Munster from the Munsters), Chris Christie (who, in spite of his lap-band surgery, still looks like he belongs more in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade than the White House), Donald (you're fired) Trump, and who can forget Rick (love-the-new-glasses) Perry, especially if he's on the same meds he was using in 2012 when he reminded us that the American revolution occurred during the 16th century.

Then, of course, thank you Mitt Romney who is back for a third run. Etch-A-Sketch Mitt who this time around promises to run a campaign devoted to "lifting people out of poverty." The same Mitt who three years ago called this same 47 percent of the population "takers."

I'm sure some of his Republican opponents will remind us that this is the same out-of-touch Romney who drove to Canada with the family dog strapped to the roof of his car, offered to bet Perry $10,000 about his position on health care reform, and in his new zillion-dollar California house has an elevator for one of his wife's Cadillacs.

He may have been a gaff-prone candidate (I confess to looking forward to the inevitable new ones) but every poll of likely GOP voters shows him doing much better than even Jeb Bush when it comes to a potential race against Hillary Clinton.

If Mitt and the rest of the cast of the nomination-seeking candidates don't do it for you, there is also now a new rising star--African-American neurosurgeon Ben Carson who already has a long list of fun quotes, including a recent one that claims that "Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery."

It continues to amaze me how Republicans manage to find black politicians who are as regressive on race as their GOP country-club colleagues. It's clearly a comfort to the Fat Cats and the source of mid-winter amusement to me.

January 14, 2015--It's Not His (Obama's) Fault

My Florida friend Henry is counting the days until the end of the Obama administration.

"Only 664 to go. Days," he said jauntily the other day. "When I checked this morning on the Obama Countdown Clock that added up to 15,959 hours or 957,393 minutes. None too soon for me."

"You're pretty serious about this," I said. "I know you haven't liked him from the beginning but now you really seem to hate him. You're a smart guy otherwise, so tell me why you do."

"He's screwed everything up. In the Middle East, in race relations (and you know I'm not a racist), and especially the economy."

"The economy?" I couldn't let him get away with that. "I know you can't stand Obamacare and what you claim it means to you as a small business owner--though as I've pointed out to you through the years it's actually good for you with your staff of less than ten. But isn't the rest of the economy in pretty good shape exactly a week short of his having been in office six years?"

"Good shape? With so many still employed, salaries of middlc-class workers not growing, and all those young people still without jobs or underemployed?"

"Much of that is true. Things are far from perfect, but what do you say about his list of accomplishments--starting with gas prices. Aren't you impressed that that gas-guzzling pickup of yours is costing you at least $1,000 a year less to gas up than it did two, three years ago? You were blaming Obama for high gas prices then so does he get some credit now that they're lower?" He didn't respond.

"And what about your favorite--the stock market? When he took office it was languishing. But yesterday the S&P 500 Index closed at 2,023. That's a 145% percent increase. Not bad, yes? And a big deal for middle-class workers who have much of their retirement savings in stock funds. Does Obama get any credit for that?" Fiddling with his coffee, Henry didn't respond.

"And unemployment? The rate last week dropped to 5.6%, the lowest since 1999, the last year of the Clinton presidency. What do you think about Obama's role in that? You didn't hesitate to blame him when it was much higher so now that it's significantly lower, what do you think?" Again he ignored me.

"Then your actual favorite--inflation. You remember how five or six years ago you were touting Peter Schiff as your economist of choice who was predicted that because of Fed and Obama fiscal policies inflation would soon be at Weimar Republic levels and you were buying gold to protect yourself from the sky falling? How's the inflation rate looking to you now at 1.3 percent? These days we're actually worried about deflation. And how's your $1,900-an-ounce gold doing? The last time I checked it was way off its panicky peak and was selling for only $1,240 an ounce. And what's Schiff peddling these days? Not anything positive about the Obama Economy I suspect." More silence.

"I could go on but these are a few highlights which could also include low interest rates, a stronger dollar, how the deficit has been cut by more than a half--from $1.4 trillion annually to $514 billion-- and how America is becoming energy self-sufficient. So I guess this means you hate Obama for other reasons. Enlighten me. I'm willing to say you're not a racist, but what is it then?" He stared at his watch and said he needed to run. He had a meeting he needed to get to.

After he left Rona and I continued the conversation. She said, "One of my favorite things besides conservatives refusing to give Obama any credit for the improved economy is their explanation about why it's better. That they can't deny--that's it's better."

"I know where you're going with this."

"First, all of a sudden the leading Republican candidates for the presidential nomination are expressing concern about inequality and the plight of poor people."

"I saw that even Mitt Romney is. The same Mitt Romney who two years ago was moaning among rich people in Boca Raton about the 47 percent of Americans who are the 'takers.'"

"And then there was new Republican senate majority whip John Cornyn on Morning Joe two days ago ignoring the question about Obama's role in improving the economy while claiming that the reason things are better is because business leaders, when they saw the Republicans were about to take control of both houses of Congress, began to hire people. He suggested it was a sort of Mitch McConnell bump."

"This is so preposterous--the economy began doing better six years ago on the first day Obama took office and now Republicans are claiming that the good news is the result of the election in November, all of two months ago. I love it."

It was by then time for us to go. "One more thing," Rona said. "Is there really an Obama Countdown Clock?"

"Indeed there is. You can look it up on the Internet. In fact, you can even buy one."

"Amazing."

December 15, 2014--Backbone

For all the years of his presidency, Barack Obama has been criticized for his reluctance, almost visceral reluctance to confront Republican members of Congress who are devoted to undermining his presidency and thwarting his legislative agenda.

Critics claim that Obama has no appetite for confronting or even working with members of Congress. He is no Lyndon Johnson, they say, nor even a Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton who seemed to have been adept at collaborating with the opposition in order to get at least some of their agenda accomplished. But things are so bad now, it is alleged, that Obama doesn't even like involving himself with Democrat members of Congress.

In fact, he is so reluctant to deal with Congress that he is prone to negotiate with himself, preemptively giving up on programs in which he believes without a struggle or fight to avoid a confrontation and compromise down the road where, if he were inclined to do so, he would get some or all of what he sought.

The best example of this came during the battle over health care reform, over what eventually came to be known as the Affordable Care Act or, more popularly, Obamacare. He was an advocate for a time of the single-payer approach. A version of Medicare for all, but traded away that progressive and more cost-effective option without much of a fight and got nothing in return, no quid pro quo from Republicans. Just grief, which continues.

So, last week, when there was controversy about what to include in the $1.1 trillion bill to appropriate money to run the government, to avoid yet another shut-down, President Obama finally showed some political backbone and worked the phones to urge wavering members of Congress to support the bill before the House of Representatives and Senate. A bill that was passionately opposed by an unlikely coalition of liberals and Tea Party stalwarts, led principally by Nancy Pelosi in the House and Elizabeth Warren and Ted Cruz in the Senate.

But ironically the arms Obama twisted were those of reluctant Democrats who were upset by a rider stuffed into the 1,600-page bill by financial institution lobbyists that was designed to gut a major provision of Dodd-Frank, legislation passed four years ago to rein in some of the same kinds of risky practices of banks, using taxpayer-insured money, that led to the crash that became the Great Recession and which cost taxpayers hundreds of billions in bailout money.

So, with his new-found gumption, Obama wound up challenging Nancy Pelosi, who carried the congressional water for him for Obamacare and the economic stimulus, and not Mitch McConnell, who said on day-one of the Obama administration that his goal as minority leader was to assure that Obama would be a one-term president.

If he was going to fight for something, why didn't the president stand with fellow Democrats and fight to have that pro-big-bank rider purged from the bill? Even if it meant seeing the government shut down. That would have made Obama look like a leader, shown him supporting Main Street over Wall Street (good politics), and again having the Republicans to blame for pulling the plug on most of the operations of the federal government (even better politics).

Or am I missing something?

November 24, 2014--A Child Shall Lead Them

Though often misapplied, this from Isaiah 11:6-9, could have been the title of Barack Obama's Thursday night speech about immigration.

No matter what one thinks about his use of executive powers to shield about 5.0 million undocumented immigrants from deportation, one would have to agree that in content it is all about family values. So if Republicans can for a moment stop fulminating about what they claim is Obama's emperor-like behavior, they might see that, politically, he has again snookered them.

Even if they find a way to defund Obama's actions or get the federal court system to overturn them and declare them an abuse of constitutional power (both questionable), they will pay a fierce political price when they are seen to be opposing what Obama did--protect families from being torn apart by the Immigration Service.

Specifically, Obama's executive action (the most ambitious and extensive in American history--Reagan's so-called "amnesty" executive order in 1986 covered only 100,000 illegal immigrants) calls for more border security (he can do this administratively and the GOP loves anything having to do with sealing our borders), taking action to make it easier for immigrants with high-level technical skills to remain in the U.S., and the continuing deportation of undocumented criminals (Obama has done 80 percent more of that than all previous presidents combined); but--and it's a very big but--those 5.0 million affected by his executive orders are all protected from deportation if and only if they belong to family units.

What he is doing pertains just to the 5.0 million or so who have lived in the U.S. for five or more years and are either children or the parents of children who are here legally. Here legally because they were born in the USA and thus are citizens (see the 14th Amendment) or were brought here illegally before the age of four and are now legally protected.

Childless individuals and couples will not be protected.

In other words, the only adults who will not be rounded up and deported are those "illegals" who are parents.

Obama's approach is not amnesty nor a "path to citizenship," but rather a statement about Family Values.

Something always trumpeted by Republicans and emphasized by their religious leaders. Thus, the political brilliance of Obama's move. And, of course, its humanity.

At their political peril, if Republicans continue to ignore the family values that undergird Obama's actions and focus instead on process questions and issues such as the separation of governmental power, they will find themselves in future elections with very few Latino supporters.

My prediction, therefore, is that because some in the Republican Party are smart enough to figure this out and after a few weeks of demonologizing Obama for acting unilaterally they will pass a series of bills to make what Obama did irrelevant, because what he said Thursday evening was that his executive orders are designed to defer deportations so that covered immigrants will be able to "stay in the country temporarily" (the deferring and temporality parts are what will keep his actions from being overturned in the courts)  and that if the Congress presents him with an acceptable bill he will sign it and tear up his executive orders.

Indeed it may turn out that a child will lead us.