Post mortem

COVID and its recovery being so painful was the true immediate issue no doubt...but the economy will be different in two and four years, and if Trump follows his promises on the economy, we will have a disaster in the future. If he screws up on the economy and increases the deficits and debt, and causes a serious recession, as those in my family with plenty of credentials predict, the pendulum will swing wildly the other way in four years. I still stand by my comments about the changing demographics. When Harris became the candidate, I wrote that her greatest liability was that she was black and a woman, and that was also her greatest asset. I was very wrong on the latter half of that sentence. She embodied as a person the fears so many have of our changing demographics and culture. Trump offers no solutions and in fact, will be the instrument making this country more miserable. Let us visit this in two or three years from now. If you followed my blog, you will have noted that national security and foreign policy were my priorities, and I see a disaster on the horizon as Trump joins the Axis of Evil as an appeaser. It is 1938 again..the year of my birth. 

Biden's ace: you may think he is too old, but he can still push the veto pen updated 2 21 23

There is plenty of harping on both sides of the aisle and popular opinions red and blue that Biden is just too old to run again for president.  There is a case for him to run again. In the meantime, we hear the beating drum for someone younger from both political sides.  He isn't macho enough, he stumbles over words, he is a lousy orator, he looks like an old man, and he acts and walks like one. Not macho enough? He was the first US president to visit a war zone (Kyiv, 2/20/23 )not controlled by US troops. As a family member and  former military said: That takes balls.  It is time for a new generation to run both parties. Biden's ace: you may think he is too old, but he can still push the veto pen.  Given the close divide in both houses of Congress, making veto overrides a non-starter,  that is a critical mass of power.    

We can expect the GOP to make another case: Biden is too liberal, too enamored with expensive government programs, too big of a national debt, and too tough on rich people's taxes to pay for these social programs, so cut the social programs(unspecified) and restore those tax cuts. They object to how Biden opposes their cultural government programs designed to protect kids from modern liberal values, including using government to limit self-sexual identity and protecting tender ears from learning about how others think about such unpleasant history as slavery. Above all, expect the GOP to continue protecting the unborn from the minute of conception, giving them priority over the mental and physical health of the mothers and their ability to shape their futures. Aid for the born is not their platform as the United States' maternal and infant deaths and length of life expectancy fall to the lowest levels in the industrial world. They fear the libs we'll take your guns away, even from those who are too dangerous to have them.

 The GOP goes for the gut as they base their case on appealing to emotions and instincts. They fly under the benign-sounding  banner of "cultural issues" and ask, "what's wrong with that?"  From the left's view, plenty is wrong. These are not pretty values that appeal to the good in all of us or the golden rule of Christianity. Their "cultural" view of democracy is rule by the use of the power of those they favor, even if they are in the minority in polls and election outcomes.  Laws are meant to be tools to manipulate by those in control and who plan to stay in control in the future. While complaining about permissiveness and inclusion as values advanced by the "libs" with government policy, those on the right, too,  advocate using government edict and laws and support strong men who flex their political muscles and lungs as tools to implement them.    Ban books, restrict access to the ballot box and women's ability to exercise choice, and control the minds of children by only teaching them the viewpoint of which they, those in government, approve are just a few of recent initiatives.  They ride the waves of bigotry and racial animous.  They hype fear of changing demographics in an attempt to slow it down by inventing ways to suppress the vote and rights of those they see as threatening them or who have values of which they do not approve.     

Here is a case for Biden running for a second term.

  What Biden has, an old man can still wield political skills developed and honed with a lifetime of experience. His weapons: a telephone and a pen, and he knows whose buttons to push to even get bi-partisan support.  He is stronger than he looks, as his recent 8-hour flight and a ten-hour train ride followed by a day of vigorous public diplomacy and a walkabout Kyiv, and then another train ride and a highly visible speech in Poland after that. Nonetheless, it does not demand physical strength to push a pen or talk on the phone.  

 It does not require a loud voice and soaring demagoguery as Biden demonstrated when he put down hecklers in the State of the Union address. He was quick on his feet. His mind was as sharp as a stiletto in classic put-downs from the podium.. Sometimes "sotto voce," a stage whisper,  a squint, a grin works just as well when a mind is as nimble as his.  What Biden can stop: GOP legislative initiatives which the majority of the public does not support: Biden's ultimate weapon: pushing the veto pen to stop a GOP House from rolling back health care, putting social security and medicare on the chopping block, to a national abortion ban. Who is in the Oval Office makes the most difference. His best argument for 2024? Imagine what would happen if the GOP pushed the veto pen to roll back these popular initiatives and women's right to choose. 

In his speech in Poland 2/21/23, it is clear Biden plans to phrase US foreign policy as democracy v autocracy because democracy means freedom. Freedom means various things to various people, but it also begins at home.  Those in America, too, are  seeing advocates of autocracy raising voices.  It is a movement in America, still a minority, that advocates for "strong leaders" who ignore  and defy the will of the voters.  We have seen some aspiring to be president skate close to autocracy. Florida Governor   Ron DeSantis, supports  the state  having policies that act to shape thought and practice of  citizens to reflect the views of a his preferred religious group that women should have no choice and  he promotes "anti-woke: legislation" which is an unmasked appeal to bigots. His edicts are shaping what children should learn about history that fits  his ideology . That  certainly is not freedom from oppression by one race over another or freedom from thought control by a government.   

What Biden brings to the table is an inherent blue-collar economic populism that rings true in his soul. He is the man of both the past and the here and now: his weapon, himself, Scranton Joe. shaped by a compelling life story of family economic struggles, tragedies, and governmental experiences that are just as relevant today. One of Donald Trump's biggest assets was that he recognized the need to prop up the rust belt. It was a logical political strategy. He wanted to bring manufacturing home to America, and without a background in how to pull the levers of beltway power, he settled for the most direct route: raise tariffs, an attack against the free traders who had always claimed a corner of the GOP.  His anti-union GOP traditional stance neutralized somewhat offset his newly found support from blue-collar workers. The devastating impact of COVID kept him from executing his plans, but the "buy and make it in America ball was picked up by legislative savvy Biden, who carried it to the end zone: the chips bill, the buy America government procurement edict, the switch to a new economy of environmentally friendly batteries.  EVs, windmills, and solar panels all made in the industrial midwest, which translated to jobs, jobs, jobs, and more well-paying union jobs.  The greatest millstone around Biden's neck and hangover from COVID  was inflation that which he left to the federal reserve, mostly a holdover from the Trump administration, which at least was not as bad as the rest of the world experienced. He released oil reserves and increased well pumping to offset the Ukraine war impact, putting weaning from dependence on fossil fuels on temporary hold while supporting full speed ahead of the development of renewables, with nary a yelp from the greens.   

What wise old men like him offer to America: stability in the face of scary, violent, divisive bigotry, a safe harbor from a nerve-shattering storm, and the will to empower those who felt marginalized. His weapon: empathy for those who are the victims regardless of race or religion and innate dedication to inclusiveness.  His is a steady hand at the wheel in such rough seas blown foaming high with cultural winds .  Like Nixon, the staunch anti-communist who opened up relations with Red China, Joe, an old white man, brought the message of inclusiveness to the rest of America in a way that no one of color could.

What he offers to the world is unmatched experience. Biden has an unusual advantage  in leading American foreign policy from serving for many  years as Senate foreign relations chair and an update as a recent vice president:  His weapon,  and a long-term personal knowledge of his greatest world power adversaries: Putin and Chi of China. He looked into their eyes and knows what they are about.  He is no one's fool.   

What we are facing are 50 years of unresolved issues in foreign relations that have evolved to present-day threats to American national security interests.  Putin in Russia is a continuation of the cold war mentality, if not under the red banner of communism, but the flag of hyper-nationalism with the goal of re-assembling Russia's influence and control as it was at the epitome of the power during the cold war as the USSR.  Biden's experience as a savvy participant in shaping and leading American foreign policy stretches over the same fifty-year span.  It is not only knowing the history and not repeating the mistakes in theory,  but he has a knowledge and understanding that no history book can provide, hands-on and personal involvement that has also evolved at the same time.  There is a profound contrast of Biden's foreign policy experience with the naive, self-serving, ignorant comments by Ron DeSantis or others who have had no experience or interest in foreign policy but who are aspiring to be president but who try to downplay Russia as a threat. It may cater to the American first wing of the GOP, but it only demonstrated his naivete and lack of foreign experience chops.  It is not only the contrast that is important; it is the danger to American national interests their ignorance caused as they mouth the same concepts and words that appeased and glorified the rise of fascism and tolerance of the German invasion of their neighbors before Pearl Harbor.   The aftermath of World War II saw the emergence of Russian imperialism in the form of the USSR. Biden has been there, done that, and is facing a similar threat all over again in the form of a former KGB agent who has made it his stated goal to reassemble the glory days of the USSR.

Let the 2024 games begin.  It is one team against the other,  gut v head, and feelings v problem-solving pragmatism. The divide is deep, fundamental, and as old as humanity itself.  It will be the weighing of one set of values against another by the few still in the neutral zone.

U.S. Life Expectancy Is in Decline. Why Aren’t Other Countries Suffering the Same Problem? | Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org)

U.S. Maternal Mortality Crisis Continues to Worsen | Commonwealth Fund

DeSantis downplays Russia threat after Biden visit - POLITICO

The power of slogans for good and evil (updated with comments on Charlottesville)

A version of this appeared in the Aug. 16, 2017 editions of the Sky Hi News

In political marketing successful slogans can determine the winner.  Donald Trump’s win was largely due to  a visceral and effective use of a slogan, "Make America Great Again". The most effective slogans inspire people,  and give them hope. They can also resonate with their worst fears and prejudices as the racist demonstrators in Charlottesville, VA illustrated last Saturday.

The slogan the Democratic Party has crafted recently, “A Better Deal” , did not exactly touch my heart.  Something that is  just relatively better is not a very inspiring goal. One that might be a positive umbrella with wide appeal could be something like  " for an America, a land of opportunity" . It promotes Democratic platforms of inclusion, supporting the integrity of democratic institutions and voter rights, a rational immigration policy, and helpful to daily  lives of more people from student loan relief and low cost trade schools, raising the minimum age,  and affordable access to health care.

Slogans can also be deceptive and difficult to fulfill. Donald Trump's slogan " Make America Great Again" was  vague enough that voters could imagine   their own  hopes and fears fitting under the  slogan’s umbrella, unless it was more exactly defined. It had an inspirational , nationalistic ring . Fact checkers found he  often lied about statistics and examples he cited to support his slogans and he offered few concrete "how and what" plan details to reach those goals. Trumps's attacks on Clinton's character and hard line immigration policies  fell under the  larger Make America  Great Again banner with the operative word "again" , a time past which meant to many before women's lib and the civil rights movement. There are in-depth post election studies  that showed  racism and sexism motivated a significant number of Trump voters in the  2016 election.

Trump's economic message was a promise he would make America great again by putting American interests first by going it alone without the burden of multinational agreements and reducing regulatory and tax burdens on business and individuals. We would return again to a nation of manufacturing instead of importing from countries to which we had exported our jobs . His  economic message went  virtually unchallenged  by Clinton, a fatal error, and her slogan, "Stronger together" never quite caught on. Her message strategy was not about togetherness for all. Instead, she appealed to certain demographic segments.

Trump’s sub slogans appealed to white supremacists and he has done little to criticize their use/misuse. Throughout the 2016 campaign and in Charlottesville, VA this past weekend, instead of calling out the KKK, alt-right, and neo Nazis, he condemned bigotry "on many sides". This was a glaring example of his continued reluctance in the campaign to say anything specific that would lose racists' support. White supremacists used another Trump slogan, "Take America Back", to rally their demonstrators and some wore Trump buttons. Democrats, Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) and some other GOP senators strongly and quickly called Trump out for not condemning the supremacists as evil doers. The next morning, an unattributed White House statement did "include" as bigots supremacist organizations by name. The following Monday, the President himself called racism evil and called out the KKK, neo Nazis, and white supremacists by name, to his credit.

Hate slogans provoke hate and threats of violence are met with threats and acts of violence. The only way out of such a vicious circle is for moral, religious and political leaders to point a different way. In the midst of the violence in Charlottesville there was another image, of a line of robed clergy singing of love and peace in spite of the KKK and Nazis intimidating them with tiki torch marches and Nazi slogans the night before.

A contrast with Donald Trump's initial message was Ronald Reagan's winning and  inspiring 1980 election eve address: " These visitors to that city on the Potomac do not come as white or black, red or yellow; they are not Jews or Christians; conservatives or liberals; or Democrats or Republicans. They are Americans awed by what has gone before, proud of what for them is still…a shining city on a hill....."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/04/17/racism-motivated-trump-voters-more-than-authoritarianism-or-income-inequality

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/14/trump-denounces-white-nationalists-after-violence/

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/13/us/far-right-groups-blaze-into-national-view-in-charlottesville.html

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/cory-gardner-calls-out-trump-we-must-call-evil-by-its-name/article/2631371

https://coloradopolitics.com/republican-sen-cory-gardner-demands-trump-lay-blame-white-nationalists-hatred/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/13/leading-republicans-call-on-president-trump-to-den/?utm_source=onesignal&utm_campaign=pushnotify&utm_medium=push

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/12/us/charlottesville-unite-the-right-rally/index.html

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2017/06/new_research_on_role_of_sexism_in_2016_election.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/28/fareed-zakaria-america-becoming-irrelevant-under-t

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_geoffrey_skelley/just_how_many_obama_2012_trump_2016_voters_were_there

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/28/fareed-zakaria-america-becoming-irrelevant-under-t

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_geoffrey_skelley/just_how_many_obama_2012_trump_2016_voters_were_there

http://theweek.com/speedreads/716802/trump-losing-base-democrats-have-lost-white-working-class-internal-polling-shows

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-congressional-map-is-historically-biased-toward-the-gop/

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/08/gop-could-still-win-midterms-in-2018-despite-low-approval-for-trump.html

https://www.yahoo.com/news/democrats-try-co-opt-populist-rage-hilarity-ensues-090005021.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/fights-in-advance-of-saturday-protest-in-charlottesville/2017/08/12

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/democrats-continue-line-behind-bernie-sanders-health-care-232205359--abc-news-topstories.html

How Hillary Clinton could turn the terrorist attacks to her advantage

Spooking the herd...New Jersey, New York, and Minnesota terrorist attacks...could be bad news for Clinton.  It plays into Trump's rhetoric and the fear factor upon which his candidacy has been based. The irony is that Clinton's reputation is that of an interventionist hawk and Trump talks a good game about being the hammer and fist, but has attempted to paint himself as an isolationist and a go it alone reliance on American military strength.  There are very few who do not recognize that the US cannot fight ISIS alone and that it takes a concerted effort world wide of allies, both European and Arab and other Muslims, to get the job done.  A strong case can be made is that Trump will not be able to lead the winning coalition.

Strength is what Trump radiates, but it is brute strength appealing to those who want a solution that is simple to grasp, but it the kind of strength that is blind, a counterproductive lash out.  Recent comments by Robert Gates and revealed in emails from Colin Powell that the world views Trump as a pariah and he insults to all of the Muslim world, dramatized by his stand on the Muslim ban. This makes him unfit to gather the kind of coalition we need and the cooperation we need from US Muslims.

Clinton must make it clear in the debates that she has the strategy to unite the world to defeat ISIS and that brute military strength conducted solo by the US will not work...and what Trump's strategy is doomed to failure because of his campaign of fear and hatred.  Clinton has at least the knowledge and understanding to be effective, while Trump is a bull in a china closet, doing more damage than good and inspite of his heated rhetoric is doomed to failure.

Romney's" change": eat our seed corn; Obama's "forward" fertilizes the future

“CHANGE”, Mitt Romney's newest theme, is butting heads with Pres. Obama's “FORWARD”. Obama is making investments in our future a priority. Romney wants to return to the past policies. It is a profound choice ultimately decided by voters who are looking for a candidate whom they can trust to govern in their self interests.

Romney's vision has been a moving target. Which Romney, the pre or post debates version, could we trust to govern? It is most likely he will keep promises to those who brought him to power through the primaries and whose continued support he will need for re-election to a second term. To win the primaries, Romney embraced some extreme positions on women's health held by the religious right, the tax protesting Tea Partiers, and the interventionist neo cons who steered Bush and our country to invade Iraq .

In Debate #1 Romney moved to the center, or so it appeared. He threw a 20 percent tax reduction bone to the middle class, and spoke little about tax cuts to wealthy job creators that he still supported. He professed to feel the pain of the 47 percent he had so disdained in private yet he has never disavowed plans with embracing proposed cuts to the poor's safety net (called immoral by Catholic leaders) and to unspecified programs the middle class treasures. Throughout 2012, he confused leadership of the world with militaristic bluster until he became a verbal peacenik in Debate #3.

Fact checkers and non partisan analysts call Romney's revised tax plans impossible to achieve because there are not enough upper income loopholes to cover the losses of tax income to the treasury. He is making promises which he could never keep without blowing a hole in the deficit or raising middle class taxes and eliminating their deductions. Facts count? Not necessarily. Pledging lower taxes is an ancient, winning political strategy.

Will Romney's riff that Obama's next four years be like the last? No. The International Monetary Fund predicts US growth over the next four years will be 3 percent a year. Respected analysts such as Moody's noted 12 million jobs would be created anyway by just staying the course laid out by Obama. Romney's promise to create 12 million jobs in four years is one pledge he could keep since it will happen even if he is not elected.

On some issues Romney does not need Congress to cooperate. These are promises he can keep. He has pledged to repeal Obamacare, with results that would return the 27 million uninsured to expensive emergency rooms, with no reduction in future health care costs. He has promised executive orders to exempt states from implementing Obamacare and he can choose not to spend money Congress authorized.

We can trust him to overturn Roe v Wade through his Supreme Court nominations that would end 50 years of women's control over their health decisions. The Court needs just one more conservative vote and the Senate approval rarely hinges on a nominees position on a future specific case.

Obama's FORWARD is straight forward. He positions are known and consistent. His plans for the second term are to complete what a stonewalling Congress stopped in 2010, to continue to implement Obamacare and Wall Street reform, and to seek solutions to the deficit similar his own Grand Bargain proposal.

Priorities count. Romney's is “ eat our seed corn” with large cuts in federal budgets: aid to education, investment in research and development, and infrastructure, meaning that the next generations will be stuck in the past for years to come while the rest of the world moves ahead. Obama promises to fertilize the future as he proposes the exact opposite.

Obama's course on balance leads to a better future. Romney can keep his change.

This is the column that appeared in the Sky Hi Daily News on line edition today: www.skyhidailynews.com
For more, visit www.mufticforumblog.blogspot.com and www.mufticforumespanol.blogspot.com

Who do you trust is the right question

In (Romney, Obama) we trust?  Pick one and ask ourselves whom we can trust to do what. Here is a case for trusting Pres. Obama over Gov. Romney .  Obama is on to something when he couches Romney’s last minute  90 degree turn to the center on both domestic and foreign policy issues  as “Romnesia” . Making  “who do you trust?” is  the logical follow up question Obama is now asking .

 The question we should be asking ourselves  is  which Romney  can we trust to  show up in the White House if he is elected?  Whose interests will he represent  in negotiating the profound budget reduction issues and in making the judgment calls on foreign policy in a very dangerous world?

We can trust Obama to carry on, to support legislation that even Congress stopped in his first term.  His newest “pamphlet” on his plans for the next term is simply a compilation of these.    Staying the course will also  12 million jobs in four years anyway, according to two of our most respected business analysts. 

The GOP’s favorite  line is that Obama  did not live up to   promises so  he has failed  to earn your trust by his own measure .  That has a hollow ring since so many of those promises  Obama  made were uttered  before he  was sworn in and the depth of the recession was  known.  Otherwise, the stimulus did create 3 million jobs as promised; the auto industry bailout worked, and the health care law was passed. The economy did not fall into the Great Depression 2, as it was headed in 2008,  and the current  trend lines show recovery in every sector, including jobs. . On foreign policy, Obama’s  pledge to get Bin Laden, to keep us safe from attack , and to get us out of our long wars have been or are being kept.

When Congress flipped into  Tea Party control in 2010, the GOP in Congress was able to block any of  Obama’s remaining agenda, from short term job creation to a Grand Bargain on deficit reduction.

Do we believe Romney’s true moderate self has emerged and we should take  his last most current position  as the real deal, even though it contradicts the position he held the prior  month?  Or do we look at it as a candidate willing to do what  it takes to be elected,  realizing the track he was on for the past year of campaigning was not winning?  Or do we consider to  whom he is beholden?

 Romney has shown no consistent allegiance to ideological values or even economic realities , abandoning them and supporting them when it advances his political fortunes or caters to his political backers. He even proposes an  age old political ploy of proposing a tax reduction to the middle class, even though there is no mathematically plausible possibility  to pay for it.

  If he dreams of a second term,  Romney will have to  live up to his obligations to the advisers and  supporters who are  responsible for his success to date.. They  are Tea Party people, big corporations and the wealthy, and neo cons   who have  supported intervention in  middle east conflicts  in the Bush administration. By his friends shall you know him.

What we can trust Romney to do is  to carry   through on commitments he made through the primaries and  the general election campaign  that have not changed:   overturn Roe v Wade, repeal of Obamacare, keeping 27 million in the ER for health care  ,  restoration of high costs for women's health and senior’s medication, and  elimination of  the guarantee  that Medicare will cover future health care costs .We can trust Romney to favor the “job creators”, the code word for the already wealthy,  in any tax reform , budget proposals and regulatory policy negotiations.