Month: November 2016

Get ready for a catastrophe the likes and extent of which will be worse than anything America has ever experienced in its entire history; worse than the Great Depression; worse than Reconstruction; Jim Crow on steroids; and austerity with a capital A. Donald Trump is not recruiting a cabinet and department heads to run a government. He is recruiting a wrecking crew to ruin a government, and negate a century or more of progress. The worst of the worst from the Reagan and Bush years are coming out of the woodwork like zombies. Only they are not zombies. They are real live villains who hate government in all its forms (except military) and will be positioned to inflict the maximum misery upon those least able to defend themselves.

What is becoming even more disturbing than the election of a certified con man as president, is the type of people he is bringing into positions of authority. For example: Steve Bannon, the country’s leading white supremacist; John Bolton, America’s foreign policy loose cannon; Rudy Giuliani; and so many others. Will we be seeing villains like Elliot Abrams, Oliver North, even Henry Kissinger, and who knows who else? Will they be resurrected from the bad old days of Reagan and Bush? There were some good people in both of those administrations, but they are not the ones being talked about during the Trump transition.

Jack Stone(November 16, 2016) says Trump “got a mandate.” That’s about as silly and empty- headed as much of the quotable stuff spouted by Trump himself. Trump’s targets included: the ACA, ISIS, illegal immigrants, pregnant women, various federal regulations, and other things which I can’t even recall, but not one of his rants laid out any specifics that could be called a mandate of any kind. Judging by the management of his transition team, it is anybody’s guess what his real agenda will be, anyway.

We have to ask ourselves: Is the demonizing of Muslims and Mexicans that much different from the demonizing of Jews? And are those doing the demonizing today that different from their historic counterparts from Germany of the 1930s? if you make the comparisons, you might find them startling.

Will Republicans ever feel the shame they have earned by their eight years of obstruction and nongovernment in their effort to destroy the Obama administration? Think how much different our country would be if Republicans had produced a jobs bill for Obama to sign. Think of the good paying jobs involved in repairing all the roads and bridges, modernizing the airports, buffing up the power grid, renewing our blighted cities, and on and on. All of these good works were kept at bay for one reason, one simple but totally irresponsible reason: to keep Obama from ever getting any credit. They can gloat, brag, rub their hands in glee now that they have total control, but what they should be experiencing instead is a deep and hurtful feeling of shame.

[Note to the editor: this is not intended for the “as you see it” section. This is an essay for the Opinion page. Hopefully, we can get something started.]
There was some uncertainty about the future of Bernie Sanders’ “Revolution” if Hillary Clinton had been elected. Would there be competing objectives? Who will take on the leadership? Should we even try to keep the Revolution alive? Trump’s surprise election certainly wiped out any doubts. The goals are clear now. The country is at grave risk of a right wing tsunami of repressive legislation that will set the country back 100 years, and further widen the split created by the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. Just about every malady now bedeviling America can be traced back to the frenzy of deregulation following Reagan’s emasculating of all the regulating agencies of the Federal government. Now, with conservatives (that is regressives) in control, things can only get worse for ordinary Americans (the 99%) and they will stay worseP unless a countervailing movement can arise to resist the worst of the coming right wing depredations. Such a movement might take the form of . . .
. . . the MOVEMENT TO UNDO
This would be an organization devoted to shining the light of public awareness on congressional actions that are detrimental to the country as a whole or unnecessarily harmful to any specific portion of the population. The massively-financed campaign by the Koch brothers through ALEC to gain control of legislatures and advance their regressive agenda is a good example of what should be exposed. Here are some of the things we can expect:
Women’s health: Roe v. Wade is a high priority target. Obamacare: Trump’s “do it on day one” target is repeal of the Affordable Care Act. Who knows what, if anything there will be to replace it. Gerrymandering: The 2020 census opens up the opportunity for widespread mischief. However, the election of 2018 presents an opportunity to elect some neutral (that is non-Republican) members to Congress. Voter suppression: High on the list of several states. Privatization: Wherever there are juicy corporate profits to be made, Republicans will try to privatize the operation.
These are just a few of the issues we can expect to be launched during the first couple of years. We can hope that a strong and active “Movement to Undo” might be an inhibiting factor. And, hopefully, the election of 2018 will put more muscle back into the Democrat party.

Attention all writers of Letters to the Editor: Don’t bother saying “I told you so.” No one wants to hear it.

The crowd lined up to get into the Bernie Sanders rally (his only one in Santa Cruz) was huge, several blocks long. A TV reporter went up and down the line asking people why they were supporting Sanders. One grizzled old World War II veteran answered with words to the effect that Hillary Clinton simply cannot win a general election, and Sanders is our only hope against a heavily-financed Republican juggernaut. That interview never made it to the screen, but it’s just as well. No one wanted to hear such a negative prediction so early in the campaign. And right now, the last thing ANYONE wants to hear is “I told you so”.

Conventional wisdom (and Donald Trump) blame NAFTA and other bad trade deals for the massive closing of factories and laying off of workers, as corporations moved their operations overseas. But there is another factor far more responsible for the unemployment and neighborhood destruction of the 80s and 90s. That factor is corporate downsizing. Downsizing was forced on the economy by the tidal wave of mergers and acquisitions resulting from Ronald Reagan’s emasculation of all the regulatory agencies that had been doing such a good job of keeping corporate greed in check. He literally shut down all the regulators. All this downsizing could not have taken place otherwise. Financial tycoons and corporate raiders, like a pack of hyenas, attacked the American industrial structure en masse, buying up smaller companies then the selling off their assets to pay back the loans they took out to finance the acquisition. A few of the latter-day robber barons walked away with millions in their pockets and newfound positions of power. In their wake: shuttered factories, blighted cities, and millions of ruined families. Yet how many people know this massive restructuring of the American economy was the direct result of the Reagan revolution?

Here is a direct quote from Tom Decker’s letter in the November 4 issue: “If we are truly honest with ourselves, deep down we all know that virtually all government programs are vastly wasteful and very expensive while rarely, if ever, delivering the goods and services of the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness promised.” The attitude expressed in that paragraph is a sad commentary on what should be our feeling toward our unique democracy. Our public servants do the best they can to provide for the general public what individual citizens cannot do for themselves. This includes everything from massive public works (such as the Interstate Highway System, Hoover Dam, TVA, etc.”) right down to the local pothole patrol. Unfortunately, it takes money. And anyone can disparage any project, no matter how beneficial, as someone else’s “pet project.” Thankfully, people like Tom Decker are in the minority.