Weinstein. Why do Conservatives (and quite a few Democrats think) the Dâs have a âHarvey Problem“?
Is it a surprise that Democrats took money from someone who turned out to be despicable? Yes. But isnât the real question what the Democrats did with the money?
Conservatives want you to believe that Democratic political contributions are like holy water, where one unsanctified drop spoils the whole font. There is no excusing Weinstein, and if the D’s were doing helpful things for this scumbag, thatâs inexcusable. But there is nothing inherently wrong with taking/using Weinsteinâs money before they found out how deplorable he is:
Trump thinks the press writes disgusting things. His friends agree:
The GOP believes in a few things, more or less:
Iran, DACA, ACA, EPA. Trumpâs plans are working just perfectly:
Fish Drying in Shenzhen, China earlier in September. Shenzhen is home to Foxconn, Appleâs iPhone manufacturer. It is about 30 min. from Hong Kong.
Our national nightmare; The Apprentice: POTUS Edition, has the Donald regularly turning up the outrageousness. It is frightening how easily many of us are manipulated by his antics, because we are intellectually lazy. Wrongo was happy to see Nicolle Wallace coin a new term for what Trump is pedaling:
Weaponized Patriotism. Isnât Trumpâs effort to equate standing for the National Anthem to âpatriotismâ, weaponizing patriotism? If you follow Trumpâs ideas, all that really matters are the symbols. This was Trump on Saturday:
Wouldnât you like to see one of these [NFL] owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, âGet that son of a bitch off the field right now, out, heâs fired. Heâs fired!
He then went on to state that any player so exercising free speech should be âfiredâ and unemployable at their career job. Trump added that he believes fans should walk out if players donât stand for the anthem:
If you see it, even if itâs one player…Leave the stadium.
Phony patriotism is a strong argument to use against a population that is ignorant of civics.
The refusal to stand for the playing of the National Anthem causes Trump and his fellow travelers, (who all profess to understand, and believe in the Constitution and Bill of Rights), to claim that the NFL playersâ expression is disrespectful and intolerable.
What are we saying when we say that someone “disrespected the flag,” or “disrespected the country,â when they choose to not stand for the National Anthem? The flag is a piece of cloth that represents many complex things, including the Constitution.
If we let Trump deny this expression of resistance, we are creating a situation where all of our rights are just privileges that can be denied on a whim. Trump canât be allowed to say, âI believe in the 1st Amendment, but not for people who kneel during the National Anthemâ.
If Trumpâs reaction to Colin Kaepernick is unchallenged, Trump gains the position of defining which actions are ârespectfulâ for Americans. But, it is a very American thing to resist, or rebel against what we perceive to be the symbols of the governmentâs abuses of power.
It may be disrespectful, but it must be tolerated.
This is todayâs America: People allow their perceptions to control them. And who controls perceptions controls the people. Many Americans equate the flag and the National Anthem with patriotism. And according to Trump, patriotism means you support the government, and you support our foreign wars. Anything less is “un-American”.
But one can love his country while hating his government, or some of its actions. This phony form of Trumpist patriotism is a weapon against independent thinking. Itâs a weapon that keeps people ignorant of the underlying problems that make our government ineffective.
Time to wake up America! We are a free people, and most of us want to stay that way. We need to look for the story behind the story when someone equates not standing for the Anthem with âunpatrioticâ. Perhaps it is just Trumpâs politics. Perhaps he is trying to deflect people from thinking about his latest struggling effort to repeal and replace Obamacare, or how Trump is bungling the effort to blunt North Koreaâs aggression.
To help us wake up, here is the late Liam Clancy with âThe Patriot Gameâ. The song is about the death of a young man during a campaign by the Irish Republican Army during the 1950s. He bought the story:
The words were written by Dominic Behan, brother of Brendan Behan. Dominic was angry that the Clancy Brothers cleaned up the lyrics by removing this verse that referred to head of government, Eamon de Valera:
This Ireland of mine has for long been half free,
Six counties are under John Bull’s tyranny.
And still de Valera is greatly to blame
For shirking his part in the patriot game.
Bob Dylan stole the song, turning it into âWith God on Our Sideâ, and Dominic Behan wanted to fight Dylan physically for the theft.
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
Thereâs a depressing overtone to Charlottesville that suggests the arc of history is the energy behind the story. Is the nationâs soul about to be divided as it has been many times before? Americans get two chits: One for the ballot box, and another for the soap box. Many people feel compelled to use both. The existential question is how best to use them.
The Charlottesville incident left a woman dead, and many others badly injured from a car-ramming. It has the flavor of a âfirst shotâ in a new civil war. And the presidentâs criticisms of counter-protesters in Charlottesville seem to be far outside the mainstream. Frank Bruni, NYT:
Weâre stuck for now with a morally bankrupt plutocrat for president, someone so defensive and deluded that heâs urging more nuance in the appraisal of neo-Nazis.
Still, many Republicans have been reluctant to condemn Trumpâs Charlottesville rhetoric. The right would do well to excise any association with the Hitlerites who chanted âblood and soilâ in their torch-lit pseudo Nuremberg rally in Virginia. America remains the land of the free and the home of the brave, but Nazis? Nein, Danke.
We have two conflicts arising from Charlottesville:
Does every group still have the right to assemble (peacefully) and speak their minds?
What are we to do about the symbols from our divided past?
The 1st Amendment protects most speech, but not the sensibilities of those who are exposed to it. Some speech is guaranteed to be offensive. America has lived with neo-Nazis, the KKK, et al for Wrongoâs entire lifetime, and has survived it, no matter how odious. Even the ACLU assisted the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville.
But there are recognized limits. No one has a right to incite violence. Individuals have no right to defame someone. Some of the limits are easier to define than others: The concept of inciting a riot can lead to a subjective reading of the facts and the application of nebulous standards.
Todayâs wrinkle are the armed demonstrators. They imply that a peaceful assembly could be placed at grave risk at any moment. It shouldnât be difficult to foresee that local people will come out to confront neo-Nazis and white supremacists that are marching in their town. That creates even greater risk of physical violence, and requires that local police are well-trained and disciplined.
Second, there are Confederate statues all over America. The white supremacists who went to Charlottesville to “protect” Leeâs statue need to hear that we will not re-litigate the Civil War. The southâs and the nationâs history are what they are. The Civil War should be given due weight, learned from, pondered, and not shunted aside. Are Robert E. Leeâs existence, deeds, and historical relevance news to anyone?
A suggestion: In Bulgaria, the USSR monuments were removed and placed in a single museum park. The museum’s collection covers the period 1944 to 1989, from the introduction of communism in Bulgaria, to the end of the totalitarian regime. Herding those statues into one place makes a statement that speaks loudly about the era, and how the USSR deprived Bulgarians of their rights.
Maybe a few such statue parks could have a similar effect here.
Letâs not get sidetracked from the most important issue before us: How we remake the US economy so that it provides a decent standard of living and expanding opportunity to as many people as possible.
There are plenty of “deplorables” who would benefit from universal health care, inexpensive college tuition for their children, infrastructure that worked, and good-paying jobs. Uniting the US population around programs that achieve these goals would do much to subdue the angry ethnic divisions that these âpolitical entrepreneursâ are trying to foment.
Moreover, this program is not of the right or the left.
It’s a path toward political stability and a better society â one that would allow people the opportunity to develop into contributing, thoughtful citizens, capable of fully participating in the Republic.
Ok, a tune to help you think about peaceful assembly and whether the statues should stay or go. Here is Depeche Mode with “Where’s The Revolution” from their 2017 album âSpiritâ. Wrongo didnât know they were still working, much less producing relevant tunes:
Takeaway Lyric:
You’ve been kept down
You’ve been pushed ’round
You’ve been lied to
You’ve been fed truths
Who’s making your decisions?
You or your religion
Your government, your countries
You patriotic junkies
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
⌠the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.â George Washingtonâs First Inaugural Address (1789).
It is worth thinking about the state of our Democracy on our 241st birthday and how the American people are handling Washingtonâs experiment. At the time of the countryâs founding, seven of the 13 states, representing 27% of the population, could command a majority in the Senate. Today, more than half of the US population lives in just nine states, while the other half of America lives in the other 41 states. The voters in the biggest nine states have equal representation in the House, with 223 Representatives, while the other half has 212.
But in the Senate, itâs a different story. Because of the population concentration, the half of the US living in the largest nine states are represented by just 18 of 100 Senators. The other half of the country living in the other 41 states have 82 Senators, more than four times as many. Today, with the filibuster, 21 of the 50 states, representing 11% of the population, can muster the 41 votes necessary to reject a bill, or to stop the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice.
You donât have to be good at math to see how much less representation in Congress those living in the big states have today. The four smallest states have eight Senators combined, giving California, with two Senators, only a quarter as many as Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming, even though California has 14 times the combined population of these states.
Wrongo raises this as a structural example of the now near-permanent political division in America. It is difficult to see what big idea, or great emotion, can bridge that divide and bring us back to some semblance of unity.
(Marist contacted 1,205 US adults using landline and mobile phones between June 21 and June 25. There is a 2.8% margin of error).
The poll shows that Republicans in particular are very receptive to Trump’s attacks on the media, and a healthy chunk of Republicans want the media restricted. When asked if they trust the media, only 30% of US adults overall said they do trust them to at least a âgoodâ amount. But there are stark differences along party lines:
9% of Republicans say they trust the media, while 56% of Democrats and 28% of Independents say they do.
And on the Constitutional right to freedom of the press, four out of 10 Republicans said the nation had âgone too far in expanding the right,â while two out of 10 Independents and one out of 10 Democrats agreed with that statement.
Overall, a quarter of US adults said the press had too many rights.
52% said the nation should preserve the right to protest and criticize the government. But 41% percent of Republicans think the right to protest should be scaled back. Only 7% of Democrats and 11% of independents said they feel the same way.
When asked about the right to vote, six out of 10 Americans overall think that our right to vote is fine the way it is. But among Republicans, 25% think the US has gone too far in expanding that right.
Among people making less than $50,000 a year, only 1 in 4 trust the media at all.
More 18-29 year olds trust Trump (27%) than trust the media (22%).
Meanwhile, 40% of Trump supporters think America has gone too far in allowing people to criticize the government.
Let that sink in, and then try to think about how we ever battle back to a middle ground where America has a chance to once again row the boat in the same direction.
On to music. Here are the Grateful Dead with their take on âSmokestack Lightningâ, originally recorded by Howlin’ Wolf in 1956. The Dead performed this 18+ minute version in February, 1970 at the Fillmore East:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyJeqd3H_Rs
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
Cinco de Mayo parade in Puebla Mexico, where Mexico defeated France in 1862
Happy Cinco de Mayo! At the Mansion of Wrong, its ahi ceviche with mango, jalapeno, cilantro, ancho chili, lime juice and tequila in toasted won-ton wrappers. And Don Julio Anejo to wash it down. Not bad.
But among yesterdayâs depressing news regarding the House passage of the Obamacare Repeal and (not) Replace, was the Orange Overlord signing yet another Executive Order (EO) touted by the Trump administration to protect âReligious Libertyâ:
The EO directs the IRS not to enforce the Johnson Amendment. The Johnson Amendment is a part of the tax code that forbids 501(c)(3) organizations (including churches) from participating âdirectly or indirectlyâ in political campaigns.
Churches have historically been free to discuss and promote any issue or idea. So, they can address things like civil rights, reproductive rights, police violence, or the sanctity of law and order. They can also urge people to get out and vote on Election Day.
In other words, they can push and prod about all kinds of civic issues and engagement, in order to get their members to cast their votes.
The red line for the Johnson Amendment is actually endorsing a candidate. Churches can give a sermon about the evils of abortion, and let the attendees connect the dots to a candidate, but it’s a violation of the Johnson Amendment for the church to connect the dots directly, and tell the members to vote for a specific candidate or party.
Trumpâs EO removes that red line. It will let churches give full endorsements so they can tell their congregants that God wants them to vote for Candidate X, and if they fail to do so, He will be angry and the baby Jesus will cry.
Trumpâs EO leaves the decision whether to enforce the Johnson Amendment in the hands of the IRS. That means the IRS could pick and choose which institutions to penalize, and it might be your church, and not your neighborâs.
In February, Trump promised to âdestroyâ the Johnson Amendment. But, presidents canât âdestroyâ laws with EOs; that takes an act of Congress. Republicans may try repealing the Johnson amendment as part of their tax reform package.
The executive order the president will sign today isnât really so much about âreligious freedom,â as it is being framed by Trump and the religious right. This is actually designed to further erode one of the remaining restrictions on campaign finance.
LeTourneau points to the âindirectâ efforts by Franklin Graham to elect Trump last fall, and offers him as an example: (brackets by the Wrongologist)
To the extent that the IRS ignores this statute, Graham will be able to accept tax-free donations to Samaritanâs Purse [Franklin Graham is president] (or another non-profit he might set up) that will go towards endorsing and advocating for the political candidates of their choice. That will likely make Franklin Graham a major player on par with the Super PACs in American politics.
LeTourneau thinks the EO has little to do with âReligious Freedomâ, but instead opens a path for professional evangelists like Franklin Graham to become king-makers in our politics.
This turns âno taxation without representationâ into ârepresentation without taxationâ, a Republican wet dream that could undermine whatever remains of our campaign finance regulations. Where is the lack of religious freedom here? Churches don’t have to apply for tax-exempt status, and they could then say (or do) anything they want.
They just would have to pay taxes like everyone else.
OK, here’s some music for Cinco: Here is âOye Como Vaâ by Santana. It was written by Tito Puente in 1963, and popularized by Santana in 1970 on his album Abraxas:
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
Spicer called his White House staff into his office last week to reiterate his frustration with the continuing leaks of WH information, sources with knowledge of the matter said. He informed them that the use of encrypted texting apps, like Signal and Confide, is a violation of the Federal Records Act.
NOW they care about the law? Using a Republican National Committee email server for official business is illegal, but that hasnât stopped the White House from using it. Does Spicer have any concerns about the unsecured Android smartphone his boss tweets from every day? More:
Then, with White House counsel Don McGahn standing by, Spicer asked his staff to provide him with their cell phones so he could ensure they were not using those apps or corresponding privately with reporters.
Spicer then specifically asked his staff not to leak information about the meeting or his efforts to crack down on leaks to the media.
But someone in the room leaked all of it. They leaked that the leaky White House is trying to stop the leaks, (except for WikiLeaks) which, of course they love. Maybe someone should take a look at The Donald, who is currently taking a leak on the First Amendment.
Perhaps the gang who canât shoot straight should have realized that people could delete incriminating information, or communicate with reporters in some way that might not be on their phones at all. Wrongo reveres the TV series âThe Wireâ. Apparently, Mr. Spicer has never watched it, and hasnât heard of âburnerâ phones.
And itâs got to be difficult trying to maintain your loyalty to a team when the boss distrusts the team members. Unless there is a national security issue, there canât be a reason to allow a government official to âinspectâ your private mobile phone.
Many fun nicknames have been suggested for Sean Spicer (Cranky Spice, Whiny Spice). Wrongoâs current favorite is âSearchy Spiceâ, although his nickname in college was âSean Sphincterâ suggesting that he is in the right job: Hanging out with one of the worldâs biggest assholes.
Thank you to the brave Americans inside the belly of the beast who put their country first. LEAK ON!
Next week in Spicerâs office: colonoscopies.
Here is a video about office investigations from the ever-popular TV series, âOfficeâ (BBC version):
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
And enjoy (not) watching the Overlordâs address to the joint session of Congress tonight.
After all, you can read both fake news and alternative facts about it everywhere tomorrow.
