Trump hits head on the wall; declares national emergency:
Nobodyâs happy with Trump right now:
GOP thinks you can fool some of the people all of the time:
Everybody hates Socialism:
GOP skeptical of Green New Deal since they already have a plan for our money:
Trumpâs tariff negotiations are weighing on most Americans:
The Daily Escape:
Marijuana Museum, Amsterdam, Netherlands â 2017 photo by Wrongo
When Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Michael Bloomberg agree on something, itâs worth taking seriously, and neither wanted the Amazon deal with NYC. And this week, Amazon scuttled its plans to build its HQ2 in Long Island City, (LIC) Queens, New York City, citing opposition by âstate and local politicians.â
Amazonâs abrupt announcement to withdraw from the deal came after it was roughed up at two City Council meetings along with enduring the indignity of having to contend with anti-gentrification protestors and union leaders.
There were two big problems that Amazon faced in LIC. First, they were getting a huge tax subsidy, about $2.8 billion. The tax subsidy looked even worse when we learned this week that Amazon nearly doubled its profits to $11.2 billion in 2018 from $5.6 billion the previous year and, once again, didnât pay a single cent of federal income taxes.
It didnât help that the state and city announced the massive subsidies when both are also contending with large budget deficits. NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio, citing a shortfall of $1 billion in revenues, told city agencies to cut their budgets by $750 million by April. And these cuts would have to be recurring.
This helped build outrage about the nearly $3-billion corporate welfare program for Amazon.
The second problem was gentrification in the LIC neighborhood. Immediately after the announcement, real estate prices zoomed, precisely when Manhattan prices were falling. The NY real estate industry was to be one of the primary beneficiaries of the HQ2 project, but local residents would be driven out of their neighborhoods.
Amazon has a poor track record in Seattle. They had fiercely opposed a local tax on large companies to fund housing for the homeless, and got it reversed one month after it had taken effect. Microsoft, after the tax law was scuppered, pledged $500 million to fund affordable housing for the low and middle income in the Puget Sound area, and encouraged other companies to make similar efforts.
Amazon didnât join with Microsoft.
All is not lost. Amazon says it will still be expanding employment in NYC. And LIC has been a hot real estate/development market for several years, long before Bezos started playing his urban version of the Hunger Games. If the commercial construction in LIC over the past five years was happening in a second-tier US city, it would be equivalent to an entirely new business district.
A third problem was Amazonâs sense of entitlement. They expected zero push back, and their New York City campaign was inept. Amazon seems to have thought that since it had the governor and mayor in its pocket, all it had to do was show up for photo ops. The NYT points out Amazon didnât even hire a native to grease the wheels:
â…the company did not hire a single New Yorker as an employee to represent it in discussions with local groups. Its main representatives traveled between Washington and Manhattan, and only one had moved into an apartment to work with community members and foster support.â
Amazon’s leaving was celebrated by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who represents the district. She complained about the “creeping overreach of one of the worldâs biggest corporations“, and maybe that was the final straw for Bezos.
So props to AOC, and to the local politicians for standing up to this example of corporate welfare.
Itâs possible that Jeff Bezosâs sudden change of heart was that he couldnât stomach the idea of not being able to push around NYC the way he bullied Seattle into dropping its homeless tax. In NYC, heâd have to curry favor, feign interest in the concerns of locals, and make occasional contributions to the city.
Bezos may have felt all that was too high a price. But we should assume Amazon penciled out the deal, and didnât like the result. For Amazon, it may have been a prudent business decision, artfully dressed up as a response to the political opposition the incentive package was facing.
Maybe, itâs no longer business as usual in America. AOC and other young people may not have money, but that doesnât mean they canât use power.
These corporate tax subsidy deals never add up for the cities that make them. Maybe people in other cities will learn from this NYC moment, and fight against the selling of our cities and towns to the uber-wealthy.
Now, itâs time to let go of Amazon, AOC, and Trumpâs National Emergency. Itâs time to get some Saturday Soothing.
Start by brewing up a vente cup of Roasting Rabbi Coffee, where the company slogan is: âReleasing the Holy Spark in Each Bean!â Try their Breakfast Blend.
Now settle into your most comfy chair and listen to Valentina Lisitsa play Liszt’s Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2, recorded live in May, 2010 in Leiden, Holland:
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
The Daily Escape:
Buttermere Lake, Cumbria, England â photo by Matt Owen-Hughes
On Monday in El Paso TX, Trump attacked Democrats, calling them:
âThe party of socialism, late-term abortion, open borders and crime…To pave the way for socialism, Democrats are calling for massive tax hikes and the complete elimination of private health care…Theyâre coming for your money and theyâre coming for your freedom.â
Trumpâs focus on âsocialismâ is based on the few liberal Democratic presidential candidates who have called for Medicare-for-all, or environmental proposals intended to lower carbon emissions.
He brought up the âGreen New Dealâ, saying it would virtually eliminate air travel and that it sounds âlike a high school term paper that got a low mark.â
This is just the latest stage in the war waged by the right against the ideals and programs of the New Deal. Kim Phillips Fein, reviewing the new book âWinter War: Hoover, Roosevelt, and the First Clash Over the New Dealâ by Eric Rauchway, writes: (brackets by Wrongo)
Throughout the [1932] campaign, Hoover had attacked what he considered a âsocial philosophy very different from the traditional philosophies of the American people,â warning that these âso-called new dealsâ would âdestroy the very foundationsâ of American society. As Hoover later put it, the promise of a âNew Dealâ was both socialistic and fascistic; it would lead the country on a âmarch to Moscow.â
2020 will be all about messaging. Once again, just like 88 years ago, Republicans will run on socialism. Trump will add the threats posed by open borders and abortion to the right-wing stew.
The question is what will be the 20+ Democrats who are running for president be talking about? Michael Tomasky in The Daily Beast suggests: (emphasis by Wrongo)
I am saying, though, that Democrats should stop pretending they can unite the country. They canât. No one can. What they can do, what they must do, is assemble a coalition of working- and middle-class voters of all races around a set of economic principles that will say clearly to those voters that things are going to be very different when theyâre in the White House…
There is a power to fashioning a new political coalition around the concept of economic justice. We live in a time when politicians of both parties have followed a consistent strategy: massage the economic numbers and the media, keep the rich and powerful happy, and make sure you stay on the âfiscally conservativeâ side of the line.
Now, a few Democrats are pushing the party elders to re-consider economic justice as FDR did in the1930s. These Democrats intuit that most Americans are trying to reconcile the life they were told they would have with todayâs reality. The gulf between what they were told, and what actually happened is wide. And it looks as if it will only get wider.
Many Americans feel that they canât pay their bills anymore, and they are afraid. Their jobs aren’t stable, they can’t look forward to retirement. About 20% say they have more credit card debt than savings. The lives they thought they’d live are upside down, and theyâre not sure they can do anything about it. Quite a few followed their preachers and a few charlatan Republicans, and can’t understand why things are so scary and bad for them.
America is divided, but maybe not in the way you are thinking. It’s the left behinds and millennials who are worried about their future. And itâs both of them against the politicians, corporations and the oligarchs. As David Crosby sang:
“There’s something happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear”
In 2020, weâll be fighting for not just the soul of our country, but the meaning of American life: Should the one with the most toys win?
What is more important, universal health care, or outlawing abortion? Better roads and bridges, or keeping out immigrants? A better environment, or lower taxes?
Ocasio-Sanchezâs Green New Deal (GND) can easily be dismissed, but what really is the difference between how the Green New Deal might be financed, and how the Federal Reserve spent nearly $4 Trillion on its Quantitative Easing (QE) schemes?
The big difference is who profits. QE was welfare for the banks. For the GND, society at large would benefit.
You will get to decide, and plenty of people are already fighting for your attention.
Some are worth listening to. What will you choose to do?
The Daily Escape:
The Piedmont Kilns, Wyoming. They were built in 1869 to supply charcoal for the iron smelting industry in Utah. Part of a ghost town, three remain.
A wave of bankruptcies is sweeping the US Farm Belt, and Trumpâs trade disputes are adding to the pain. The primary cause is low commodity prices that American farmers have experienced for the past few years. Throughout much of the Midwest, US farmers are filing for Chapter 12 bankruptcy protection at levels not seen for at least a decade.
From the WSJ:
“Bankruptcies in three regions covering major farm states last year rose to the highest level in at least 10 years. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, had double the bankruptcies in 2018 compared with 2008. In the Eighth Circuit, which includes states from North Dakota to Arkansas, bankruptcies swelled 96%. The 10th Circuit, which covers Kansas and other states, last year had 59% more bankruptcies than a decade earlier.”
Those states accounted for nearly half of all sales of US farm products in 2017, according to USDA data. Since 2000, Chinaâs share of our agricultural exports has increased from two percent to about 19% in 2017. China has become our largest agricultural trading partner.
The rise in farm bankruptcies tracks a multi-year slump in prices for corn, soybeans and other farm commodities caused by a world-wide glut. Prices for soybeans and hogs further declined after Mexico, along with China, retaliated against US steel and aluminum tariffs by imposing duties on our AG products, and then slashing purchases.
Farmers generally supported Trumpâs tariffs when he started the trade war in 2018. Chinaâs retaliation was to virtually cease purchasing American agricultural products. As an example, China moved the sourcing of soybeans from the US to Brazil. When a low margin business like farming loses 20% of sales, only those who arenât in debt can survive. And most US farmers owe quite a bit to their bankers.
The Trump administration recognized the potential problem, and approved funding to bridge farmers across the decline in Chinese purchases, but the trade war has gone on for longer than anticipated.
Now, bankruptcies are way up, and exports to China are way down:
Source: Econbrowser
Unfortunately, we keep importing from China. But in the past year, the Chinese have stopping buying as much of our goods. Clearly, the bull our farmers got isnât in their barn, but in the White House.
Republicans are saying that the surge in farm bankruptcies isnât Trumpâs fault, that the problem with the farm product glut started years ago. But, if Republicans want to give Trump credit for the good employment numbers, and a still-robust stock market, they have to blame him for the bad as well.
Time to wake up America! Disruption without a strategy brings chaos. And think back to the SOTU, when Trump said how he stood between us and socialism. But Trumpâs picking winners and losers with his trade wars. Heâs using tax-payer money to subsidize farmers damaged by his self-imposed trade wars. That sounds eerily like socialism to Wrongo.
Wake up to the fact that farmers are pawns in Trump’s capricious tantrums against China. Those who have played chess know that most of your pawns are gone by the end of the game.
We start the new week as we ended it. Plenty of politics, not much in the way of progress for the country. Trumpâs Friday physical didnât go as planned:
Girl talk after the SOTU:
Executive time is seen as a good thing:
Trump hates House investigations, pledges to go another way:
VA governor Northam seeks place where moonwalking is OK for his political career:
Plutocrats favor the green deal we have, not the one we need:
Socialism for the rich is perfectly fine:
Trump announced North Korean summit, God shakes his head:
The Daily Escape:
Coyote in Litchfield County CT â February 2019 photo by Sharon Shea
For more than 30 years, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) has been one of the cornerstones of the international security system. But, on February 1st, Trump announced that the US would suspend its obligations under the INF Treaty. Shortly thereafter, Russiaâs President Putin announced that Russia will also officially suspend its treaty obligations.
Trump swings another wrecking ball! Defense One reported that Trump said that the US:
âWill move forward with developing…its own military response options and will work with NATO members and other allies to deny Russia any military advantage from its unlawful conduct.â
This means that Trump will start the development, production and deployment of formerly INF-banned weapons.
Until the treaty took effect in 1988, the US had hundreds of nuclear-tipped ground-launched cruise missiles, or GCLMs all over Europe. Today, all cruise missiles are either air or sea-launched. New GCLMs are likely to be returning soon. Contenders include converting the sea-launched Tomahawk cruise missile, and the air-launched Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile, or JASSM.
Walking away from the INF Treaty opens the door to both sides building land-based nuclear capable missiles with a range beyond 300 miles.
There are two things to think about: Cost, and Strategic necessity. Kingston Reif, a policy director at the Arms Control Association, said the cost of the new missile systems would be much higher than the $6 billion or so it cost in the 1980s.
On the subject of necessity, he says:
âThe United States can already…threaten the same Russian targets that new ground-launched missiles prohibited by INF Treaty would….In addition, no European nation has agreed to host such a missile, which could take years to develop. And even if one in Eastern Europe did, such a deployment would be a significant source of division within the allianceâone Russia would be eager to try and exploitâbe hugely provocative, and put missiles in a place where they would be especially vulnerable to Russian preemption…â
The downside to the US withdrawing from the treaty is that we currently have no strategy to prevent Russia from building and fielding even more and new intermediate-range missiles.
Since Russia already announced it will now build these new missiles, our NATO allies in Europe have decisions to make. They will have to pursue options to defend themselves, to mitigate the damage done by the collapse of the treaty.
Weâre entering a new Cold War with Russia.
Some believe that the INF treaty is obsolete, because many nations are developing effective missiles and launching capabilities that will be outside the limitations of the INF. Since we all will continue to develop these technologies, maybe the best we can hope for is to negotiate new treaties that address this increasing lethality down the road.
OTOH, Trump and his neocons are doing everything they can to encircle Russia with missile bases while claiming the moral high ground. We should expect them to utilize Poland, the Baltic states, and possibly Ukraine (if they can get away with it), as forward missile bases.
They figure that since geography favors them, why negotiate if you can win? Russia already called our bluff. For this strategy to work, the US must threaten Russia from Europe while simultaneously putting Europe under our new missile thumb. It might work, but there are many moving parts.
Republicans of course supported Trump, cheering about the breakup of a treaty signed by Ronald Reagan. When Wrongo grew up, the threat of nuclear annihilation was real. We drilled for it in school. He then ran a nuclear missile unit in Europe at the height of the Cold War. These were formative experiences that implied very dangerous consequences.
And think about our domestic politics: If someone were to run in 2020 as anti-Cold War II, they would have to say we need to work with the Russians to find a peaceful way out of this mess. Trump will then run to their right, saying Russia must be stopped.
Scared yet? A presidency based on disruption will do that to you.
Time for your Saturday Soother. Try to unplug from all the data that are streaming into your life for a few minutes. Start by brewing up a strong cuppa Hula Daddy Kona Coffee ($45.95/half pound) from the Big Island of Hawaii. You can see their plantation here.
Now settle back and listen to Abbaâs âThe Winner Takes It Allâ performed as a guitar instrumental by Gabriella Quevedo:
For those who may have forgotten the lyric, it includes this:
The winner takes all
It’s the thrill of one more kill
The last one to fall
Will never sacrifice their will
Think there will be winners in the new Cold War?
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
The Daily Escape:
The Cuernos del Paine in Chile â photo via Live Science. The 4,300-mile-long Andes, the longest continuous mountain range in the world, didn’t form slowly by one geologic plate sliding under another. They grew in two growth spurts helped by volcanic action. (Hat tip to Ottho H.)
What Trump said about El Paso in the SOTU:
âThe border city of El Paso, Texas, used to have extremely high rates of violent crimeâone of the highest in the country, and (was) considered one of our nationâs most dangerous cities. Now, with a powerful barrier in place, El Paso is one of our safest cities,â
Local politicians werenât happy with Trumpâs false claims that the city was violent and dangerous before a border wall was built. Trump was repeating bogus information from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. And, he had made the same claim at the American Farm Bureau convention in mid-January.
Here is an example of the local outrage. Jon Barela, the chief executive officer of the Borderplex Alliance, which leads economic development efforts in the El Paso region, tweeted:
Texas Monthly reports that El Paso has made lists of the nationâs safest cities for almost two decades. But what are facts when you have a wall to build on the back of a racist narrative?
Wrongo lived in El Paso for a time when he was in the military (Vietnam era), back before there was talk of a wall, before the Maquiladora factories became a part of NAFTA, when Ciudad Juarez was probably far more dangerous than it is today. But back then, El Paso couldnât be considered dangerous for someone who went to college in Washington DC, and lived on the outskirts of NYC.
One state over in New Mexico, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, has ordered the withdrawal of the majority of National Guard troops stationed at the US state’s southern border, denouncing as “a charade” President Donald Trump’s warnings about migrants swarming the border, saying:
“I reject the federal contention that there exists an overwhelming national security crisis at the southern border, along which are some of the safest communities in the country,”
Are you getting the theme here? Two of the states closest to âthe problemâ say there isnât a problem.
Kevin Drum at MoJo gathered the El Paso statistics. He shows that Trump cherry-picked the data, looking at 2005-2009. There was a spike from 400 crimes/100,000 people in 2005 to 450 crimes/100,000 people in 2008. Here is a chart showing the same statistics from 1993 to 2013:
Do you see the big reduction that came with the Wall? The Wall had almost no effect on crime in El Paso. It’s also important to remember that crime rates have come down throughout the US since the 1980’s.
The most damning fact about crime on the southern border is that it is way down. American Progress reports that:
We should remember that Trump is from Queens, an outer borough of New York City. He lived there during the 1970s and 1980s, so he knows first-hand what living in a high crime city feels like. He also knows that the high crime he (and Wrongo) experienced, wasnât caused by immigrants. That was when the Guardian Angels were founded in NYC. Trump lived there the whole time, he probably even took the subway.
His argument is false, and is clearly purely political. Heâs playing to the fears of those suburbanites too intimidated to visit NYC, even if they live less than 25 miles away. His audience is suburbanites in the Midwest and Northern states.
These same people believe European cities like London and Paris are full of Muslim âno-goâ zones. You can show them evidence that those cities are safer than their own suburbs, but that’s not the point.
Maybe “safe” really means “white”, so any place with too many non-whites is just too dangerous.
The Daily Escape:
The sleeping kid is Joshua Trump. He was bullied for sharing the same last name as, you know. The kid is one Trump who has already mastered âExecutive Timeâ.
 Young Trump kinda sums up the SOTU, along with this:
Certainly looks like an âFUâ clap from Nancy Smash. Photo by Doug Mills/The New York Times/Getty Images
Wrongo thinks the best part of the 1 ½ hour Trumpshow were the shout outs to people in the audience. They took up about 1/3 of the time, and provided some interest, even if most were ham-handed efforts to represent administration policy. These introductions of citizens in the SOTU audience have been around since Ronald Reagan in 1982, and usually give us a bit of a break from the eternal SOTU spewing.
Other than that? Vox makes a good point:
âThere were two truly well-done sections of the speech. One was the troll of the Democrats present around the divisive term âsocialism.â The other was a series of moments on the stories of Holocaust survivors and World War II veterans.â
Most of the speech was either recycled campaign themes from 2016, or possible 2020 themes being screen-tested for the Republican faithful. Republicans in the room were very happy to see that Dems wouldnât clap for the war on abortion, or for Trumpâs pledge that America would never be a socialist country.
Wrongo thought that Trumpâs review of the economy was effective. It is surprising that he doesnât reference Americaâs late-stage economic recovery from the Great Recession more often. That, along with abortion, marauding immigrants, and socialism are setting the stage for what we can expect from Republicans over the next two years.
Why did Trump threaten Democrats about investigations? He said:
âIf there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation. It just doesnât work that way!â
Heâs saying that he will obstruct legislation unless Democrats stand down on investigating him. Fat chance. He also said this:
âAn economic miracle is taking place in the United States â and the only thing that can stop it are foolish wars, politics, or ridiculous partisan investigations…â
Nobody should threaten Americaâs economy for personal reasons. That prompted some boos from Democrats. Even Republicans greeted Trumpâs threat to economy with near-silence. And the GOP werenât totally craven yes boys for Trump elsewhere in the speech. The part about trade was poorly received by GOP members. The part about pulling troops out of Afghanistan and Syria was also met with near-silence.
Nancy Pelosi said afterwards that even though Trump spoke of the honor of being in the House chamber to deliver the State of the Union:
âHe threatened the United States Congress not to exercise its constitutional responsibility of oversight.â
The SOTU was as boring as Sundayâs Super Bowl, but without the uncertainty of knowing who would win or lose.
Even before Trump opened his mouth at the SOTU, it was clear that America would be the loser.
The Daily Escape:
Bald Eagle on the Housatonic River, CT â February, 2019 photo by JH Clery
On Sundayâs Face the Nation, Trump was asked about Venezuela and whether he’d negotiate with President Maduro to convince him to exit. Trump put military intervention squarely on the table:
“MARGARET BRENNAN: What would make you use the U.S. military in Venezuela? What’s the national security interest?
DONALD TRUMP: Well I don’t want to say that. But certainly it’s something that’s on the- it’s an option.”
This seems to be part of a larger Latin American plan. The WSJ reports that the Trump administrationâs plans include regime change in Venezuela, Nicaragua and eventually Cuba. This is a multiyear neocon project that has at least some bipartisan political support. It may require military force, as Trump indicated to CBS that heâs willing to consider. One thing that the WSJ reports is this:
“US law-enforcement officials say they have evidence Mr. Maduro directed state resources to create what they allege has become one of the most powerful international narco-trafficking operations in the world, and with links to Hezbollah, the Lebanese group designated by the US as a terror organization.”
So, there you have the first Western Hemisphere argument to âfight them over there, rather than fight them hereâ.
As we said on Saturday, nothing unites a country like a sovereign enemy on its borders. Venezuelans may hate Maduro, but they also hate the US. China and Russia may be worried about the $50 billion and $17 billion Venezuela owes each respectively. Turkey has also supported Maduro. Although they all are Maduroâs allies, it is unclear if they would be willing to help, should the US intervene.
The consequences of all of our former interventions should be screaming at us. But, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Donald Trump seem deaf to the messages. Bolton said:
âWe think stability and democracy in Venezuela are in the direct national interests of the United States right now…The authoritarian regime of ChĂĄvez and Maduro has allowed the penetration by adversaries of the United States, not least of which is Cuba.
Some call the country âCubazuelaâ, reflecting the grip that Cubaâs military and security forces have on the Maduro regime. We think that is a strategic significant threat to the United States and there are others as well, including Iranâs interest in Venezuelaâs uranium deposits.â
Maduro is no prize. The Economist reports: (brackets by Wrongo)
In the past five years GDP has fallen by half. Annual inflation is reckoned to be 1.7m%…which means that BolĂvar savings worth $10,000 at the start of the year [will] dwindle to 59 cents by the end….People are malnourished and lack simple medicines, including antibiotics. Hospitals have become death traps for want of power and equipment. Blaming his troubles on foreign conspiracies, Mr. Maduro has rejected most offers of humanitarian aid.
Juan GuaidĂł, head of the Maduro opposition, and President of the National Assembly, has support from the EU, and the Lima Group of 12 Western Hemisphere countries (including Argentina, Brazil and Canada). The US recognized GuaidĂł early.
The question is, should we intervene at all? And if the answer is yes, how should we intervene?
The US is still Venezuelaâs main trading partner. Last week, we imposed curbs on purchases of the countryâs crude oil, and a ban on imports from the US of the diluents that must be blended with the extra-heavy oil from the Orinoco Belt to allow it to flow through domestic pipelines. The first hits Venezuelaâs oil exports, while the second curbs their production. This will reduce revenue from oil exports by more than $11 billion.
By ordering that payments for Venezuelan oil be put in bank accounts reserved for GuaidĂłâs government, the US hopes to asphyxiate the regime, expecting that the armed forces will then switch sides to GuaidĂł.
Venezuelans face the dreadful task of having to topple their own government. This primarily means persuading their army to change sides. Other nations can pledge moral support to Juan GuaidĂł. But sanctions and US threats may prove counterproductive.
Venezuela poses no threat to US security. Since GW Bush, weâve found excuses to attack Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. Weâve imposed economic sanctions on Russia, Iran and Myanmar. The gain for our security has been negligible.
Military intervention has become an occupational disease of Americaâs leaders.
The urge to help Venezuelans in need is natural. Doing nothing is painful and seems callous. But will intervening really help? Even states with despotic leaders are sovereign. They must make and correct their own mistakes, and ultimately, be strengthened by doing so.
Regime change in Caracas is one possible outcome of our intervention. Civil war is another.
It is a certainty is that American lives and money will be lost.
Trump must choose wisely if intervention is on the table.
Any bets on that?
The Daily Escape:
The Expectation â 1936 painting by Richard Oelze
(Patriots won a tough Super Bowl, and the chili was terrific!)
Ralph Northam is the Democratic governor of Virginia. Ralph is on pace to wreck his political life. Hereâs the story so far:
On Friday, Northamâs personal page from his 1984 medical school yearbook surfaced. It includes a picture of two unidentified people, one wearing blackface, the other in a Klan robe and hood.
Within a few hours, Northam says heâs one of the people in the picture, although he doesnât say which of the two people he is.
A few hours later, he says heâs definitely NOT in the picture, but he confesses to a different racist escapade. Around the time that he graduated from medical school, he participated in a Michael Jackson impersonation contest, and used shoe polish to darken his skin.
Eugene Robinson had a great take, using Jacksonâs tunes:
But Northam must have done enough in his youth to mistakenly assume that the picture in the yearbook was of him, even though he had never even seen that picture before Friday.
Is anything about his story even plausible, much less true? So the question becomes, what follows IF the story as heâs telling it now is true? Wrongo condemns his actions, and heâs certainly handled this as poorly as possible.
As a practical matter, his political career is over.
Wrongo was born into a racist family system. Both sides of his family were without doubt, white supremacists. But as a child of the silent generation, living in a white suburban NY culture, by 17 years of age, Wrongo and all of his friends had figured out that white supremacy was unacceptable.
If Northam had said, “I grew up in a place and time when racism was tolerated, and even at 25, I hadn’t quite left it behind. But my record shows I’m not that guy now, and haven’t been for 30 years. I am deeply embarrassed and sorry I was such a dope back then“, we could be more forgiving.
But instead, he says he doesn’t recall, and offers up a different racist experience while invalidating the first racist experience.
Northam is undergoing political death by a thousand cuts. Heâs done, he just hasn’t come to terms with it. Sadly, it didn’t necessarily have to be that way. He just wasn’t willing to do the difficult work of first, being honest with himself, and then, being honest with the rest of us.
Northamâs whole story is especially upsetting in light of studies that show that medical students believe black people feel less pain than whites. While Northam was training to be a doctor, apparently, he was dressing up blackface, and possibly in Klan costumes.
Did his racism have a negative effect on any black patients he may have treated?
Even if you take at face value his claim that he isn’t in that yearbook photo, he clearly remembered wearing blackface while dressing up like Michael Jackson that same year. If wearing blackface is disqualifying, then his Michael Jackson imitation is reason enough to step down. Remember that he said:
âI only blackened my face a little bit because everybody knows shoe polish is hard to get off your faceâ
Sorry, but most people have no idea how hard it is to get shoe polish off your face. Or, that shoe polish is the accepted method of blackening your face. Sadly, Northam clearly doesn’t think his blackface admission is disqualifying. He isn’t sorry for doing it–he’s sorry he got caught.
When this type of thing happens, someone always says we shouldnât punish him for something that happened 35 years ago, that we should forgive and forget. Some will say that Democrats are showing an inappropriately heightened sense of political correctness. That they are exaggerating the offense in this case.
We ought to forgive, but there can be no forgetting.
Time to wake up America! Racism is our original sin, and it is still practiced by both political parties, and by plenty of average citizens. We canât call for Rep. Steve King (R-IA) to resign for saying that White Supremacy is A-OK, and not also insist that Governor Ralph Northam step down.