Category: national politics & policies

initiative, referendum, and recall national politics & policies

Impeachments Are Forever?

Pharaoh Thutmose III, history, myth, memory,

The impeachment of President Donald J. Trump, just concluded in the Senate with an acquittal, was — so far as the Senate trial portion of the exercise is concerned — the least partisan presidential impeachment in U.S. history.

That’s because Senator Mitt Romney (R-Utah) was the first senator ever to vote against his own party in such a proceeding.

Before we give the notorious flip-flopper a ticker-tape parade, or query too deeply into his personal animus against Trump, let’s acknowledge that the House impeachment, proper, was heavily partisan, and is only going to get more-so.

What? you ask.

How can a past event get more or less of anything?

Well, House Republicans, expecting a big backlash against Democrats next November, are already plotting to “expunge” the impeachment from the record.

As if to stick it to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s bizarre point that her House’s action would be “an impeachment that lasts forever.”

Sorta like Pharaoh Thutmose III chiseling his mother’s name — Hatshepsut — off the monuments of Egypt.

The Republicans’ planned “damnatio memoriae” is a good clue to the moral of this story: the impeachment process is . . . “not good,” to apply a Trumpian mantra.

Now, the process of impeachment has long seemed to me like a great idea — another one from those wise framers of the Constitution.

But with persistent partisanship, this constitutional recourse has not worked out very well.

Overall.

Historically.

Whether in 1868, with Democrat Andrew Johnson, or 1999, with Democrat Bill Clinton, or today, with Trump’s failed ouster, the impeachment process has proved (Romney notwithstanding) maddeningly partisan, and looks like it will only get more partisan — with House Democrats already talking about a second impeachment of Trump.

We need some new form of recall.

Citizen-based, perhaps?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags history, memory, myth, Pharaoh Thutmose III

ideological culture national politics & policies

The Blue Plate Special

Blue Plate Special, Democrats, socialism,

The biggest stories don’t always come in threes, but they sure did this week.

The Iowa Democratic Caucus debacle, President Trump’s State of the Union Address, and the Senate’s acquittal of the president after the House’s impeachment — big stories of big losses for Democrats.

As I write this, we still lack a “winner” on the Democratic side in Iowa. Blame is publicly given to the goofy “app” the Iowa Democratic Party bought to make the caucusing and counting oh-so-much easier. But I wouldn’t blame Bernie supporters for engaging in a little conspiracy conjecturing — the maker of the app has close ties to the Clinton machine.

And if you cannot sniff a concerted anti-Bernie agenda on the part of establishment Democrats, your sniffer is broken.

Indeed, The Young Turks ably showed how major-media news sources skew stories away from the socialist from Vermont — by emphasizing the candidacies of Biden and Buttigieg.*

One can see why centrist Democrats would want to scuttle a serious socialist movement within their party, but it may be too little too late. After decades of courting the Gimme-Gimme vote with Loot the Rich demagoguery, socialistic attitudes have long been on the menu. So getting a hot, steaming socialism served back at them as a Blue Plate Special?

Priceless.

Literally.

But not costless.

For the cost is reasonability and decorum. After Trump ceased speaking before Congress yesterday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ripped up copies of the president’s address just to show her disdain for the president.

But it also shows frustration. The speech is over. Impeachment is over. Iowa is, incredibly, not yet over. And Pelosi’s party — under her guidance — is in complete and utter disarray.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* Ana Kasparian makes a pretty convincing case that Senator Bernie Sanders is the most popular of the three, and could even bring in independent voters.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Blue Plate Special, Democrats, socialism

national politics & policies political challengers

Defamed by the Devil

Challenged to a push-up contest at a town hall campaign meeting in New Hampshire, Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) hit the floor and won.

The presidential candidate (polling at 5.4 percent in the Granite State) probably will not win the nomination, alas.

Or her lawsuit against Hillary Clinton.

Lawsuit?

Yes, a slander suit against the author of What Happened.

It is one thing to publicly call out Mrs. Clinton for her prevaricative snipes — but sue her?

Boldness, at the very least.

Would you dare to stand directly in Hillary’s way?

Not to give credence to old #ClintonBodyCount conjectures, which connected a number of strange deaths in close proximity to her and her husband’s transit through the firmament of power, including old and more recent “suicides” . . . but the hashtag #TulsiDidntKillHerself is now trending on Twitter.

The lawsuit — dubbed a publicity stunt by David Frum in The Atlantic — involves Hillary’s public speculations (or conspiracy theory, if you will) that Tulsi is a “Russian agent.”

“Tulsi Gabbard is running for President of the United States, a position Clinton has long coveted, but has not been able to attain,” explains the lawsuit, filed in the State of New York. “In October 2019 — whether out of personal animus, political enmity, or fear of real change within a political party Clinton and her allies have long dominated — Clinton lied about her perceived rival Tulsi Gabbard. She did so publicly, unambiguously, and with obvious malicious intent.”

I am not a lawyer, but . . . while Mrs. Clinton’s insinuations-and-worse were malicious and almost certainly untrue, perhaps even diabolical, in our politics lying is the norm and hardly legally actionable.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Hillary Clinton, Russia, Tulsi Gabbard

national politics & policies political challengers

Reality TV 2020

It shocked some, surprised virtually all — save Scott Adams — when mega-branding braggart, businessman, and reality TV star Donald “You’re Fired!” Trump slapped his way to a trifecta, winning in decades-long bastions of blue — Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin — en route to his “landslide” Electoral College win.

How could a candidate viewed negatively by 61 percent of voters mere days before the election possibly win?

Well, consider the alternative: Hillary Clinton’s negatives were 52 percent in that same poll. Moreover, two-thirds of voters harbored “doubts about her trustworthiness.”

Entering Trump Year IV, the president’s approval rating remains under water, and, following the House impeachment, he’s being tried in absentia in the Senate. Plus, the Democrats get to choose a low-negatives/high-positives candidate to run against him.

What could go wrong?

Everything.

Except for promising to give away free stuff to everyone, it’s all very unsettled. Even The New York Times, “in a break with convention,” if not reality, has endorsed two candidates: Senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.

Klobuchar? She’s stuck in seventh place in New Hampshire.

Four candidates vie for the lead two weeks before Iowa and three weeks before New Hampshire: former Vice-President Joe Biden, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Senators Sanders and Warren. “Sleepy Joe” tops the latest Iowa poll while self-declared socialist Bernie leads in New Hampshire — and pushes ahead of Biden nationally.

And to meet Sanders’ surge?

Mrs. Clinton.

Being lovable.

As always.

Of the current Democratic front-runner, “Nobody likes him,” Hillary sniped, channeling her inner Mean Girl. “Nobody wants to work with him, he’s got nothing done. He was a career politician. It’s all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it.”

Cluster-yuck 2020 is Reality TV at its best.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Bernie Sanders, cat, Hillary Clinton, reality TV

national politics & policies

Much Ado in D.C.

Donald Trump, State of the Union, Twitter, impeachment,

The impeachment trial of President Donald J. Trump began yesterday, after much stalling by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had postponed sending the House impeachment documents to the Senate after the finalization of the impeachment vote a month ago. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts swore in the assembled senators — 99 of 100 signed their oaths — and a schedule was announced.

The question of new documents and testimony remains a bit up in the air. “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says a federal watchdog’s report on President Donald Trump’s freeze of aid to Ukraine makes it more important for Congress to get new testimony and documents,” according to the Associated Press. Seems odd that a trial would require more information than was present in the original indictment, er, impeachment, but I’m no scholar of the legality of this issue.

I do remember the last presidential impeachment.

And it was a real partisan — indeed, all-around — let-down.

Interestingly, that trial was held around the time Bill Clinton was to give 1999’s State of the Union address. And he gave it, indeed, in the midst of the whole brouhaha.

Defiantly.

What will President Trump do? What should he do?

I don’t know. But I know what would be fun: deliver it via Twitter.

The Constitution, as I’ve noted before, does not specify a format of the annual presentation before Congress. Thomas Jefferson wrote it out and had it delivered. No speech at all.

But the idea of the Twitterer-in-Chief tweeting it and even not correcting the spelling errors? Priceless.

He could end with “Covfefe.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Donald Trump, impeachment, State of the Union, Twitter

Accountability crime and punishment national politics & policies

Protector Protection

cfpb, watcher, eye, consumer, bureaucracy, power,

Government organizations are here to help. How do we know this? They have names that say so!

Take the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Great name. It is all about protecting consumers, right?

Created as part of the Dodd-Frank legislation that was pushed through Congress following the 2008 financial implosion, the CFPB is tougher than the usual run-of-the-mill government agency, however. In the words of Cato scholar Ilya Shapiro, it is “the most independent of independent agencies.” It has a single director, who is almost impossible to remove, and it is empowered to make, enforce, and adjudicate its rules.

And punish violators.

The CFPB doesn’t have to answer to anybody, not even to secure funding.

If this does not raise at least a teensy sense of alarm, let me offer two words of caution: power corrupts.

We all know the ease with which regulatory agencies may abuse their power over us — and few are as insulated from the rule of law as is the CFPB; its near-immunity from oversight makes the ‘power-corrupts’ problem much worse.

The law firm Seila Law LLC — which helps clients deal with debt problems — has sued to challenge the constitutionality of how CFPB is structured. Although lower courts have not been sympathetic with Seila’s argument, the case has now been accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

A satirist once famously asked, who will watch the watchers?

In the United States, we should ask, who will protect us from the protectors?

By the Constitution that would be the Supreme Court.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing