Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
Welcome back to the ongoing saga of "The Arsonist Fireman." In this week's episode, our protagonist lights a fire which could burn down the entire Western world -- starting with its military alliance -- before grabbing a fire extinguisher and singlehandedly snuffing it out. As usual, he then wonders why everyone doesn't congratulate him on having bravely averted such a disaster.
Most of the world is breathing a big sigh of relief right now, while wondering to themselves: "What the heck was that all about?" Well, your guess is as good as mine, since answering that involves plumbing the shallows of Donald Trump's psyche (which is always fraught with uncertainty).
Personally, I am leaning towards: "It was all performative; it was just Trump making sure that all eyes were on him during the Davos conference at the expense of all others," since this fits in perfectly with his own planet-sized ego. He caused a crisis so everyone would freak out, then he "solved" the crisis by backing down. In the meantime, the world's eyes were upon him and his every utterance -- which is exactly what he wanted.
Today marks the end of the first year of Donald Trump's second term in office. One down, three to go.
Looking back, the most notable thing about Trump's first year back was how he has thrown himself fully into the Silicon Valley maxim to "move fast and break things." Trump has indeed moved fast, and he has indeed broken many things -- some of which will take a very long time to put back together and some of which may just stay broken forever.
In another four days, we will have survived the first full year of Donald Trump's second term in office. That's right -- one down, only three more to go!
(Sigh.)
The defining feature of this past year has been -- just like it was in his first term -- the continuing cycle of being so aghast at Trump's planet-sized ego, flailing insecurities, and toddler-grade tantrums and thinking to oneself: "Well, it surely can't get any worse than this!" -- only to wake up the next morning, read the headlines, and find out that yep, it sure can get worse, in ways you would never have imagined in a million years, pre-Trump.
The Democratic Party -- and liberalism in general -- needs to take a stand. So far, they have mostly been reactive, fighting back against Donald Trump and his administration. Trump will do something outrageous, and Democrats then react to it. But there's no cohesive plan to any of it -- nothing that ties it all together into an actual political agenda. So it would behoove them to steal a page (actually a whole lot of pages) from the Republicans, and come up with a "Project 2029" document that lays out what their vision of the federal government would be, if they win the White House and Congress.
Last week, I wrote an article noting that Republicans in Congress were showing signs of life, by standing up for themselves instead of just allowing Donald Trump to do whatever he feels like doing at any particular moment. I ended by wondering if this would prove to be a trend, since Republicans in Congress will have to face their voters later this year in the midterm elections -- meaning their own self-interest (in getting re-elected) might become more important to them than appeasing Trump. Several developments that seem to point to Republicans being more willing to contradict Trump have appeared since then, although none of them were as dramatic as actually voting against Trump's wishes (as happened last week). But they're still worth pointing out.
Metaphorically, you could go with either pigs or clocks. Take your choice: "Even a blind pig can sometimes find an acorn," or: "Even a stopped clock is right twice a day." But perhaps that's too dismissive, since Donald Trump suddenly championing an issue that originated among progressive Democrats is not really just random chance. Trump is doing so for his own political benefit, plain and simple. But in this particular case, progressives should still try to work with him to see if some sort of deal could actually be achieved. Because the biggest beneficiary could be the American people.
It has been a week of stunning events and dangerous rhetorical excesses. Currently the political debate is divided over the question of when government officials can use deadly force against people who are protesting or ignoring orders from those officials. This question is steeped in politics, as it so often is. Whether a person deserves death at the hands of the state almost always has a political element to it, which is not exactly a new thing.
Congress is actually showing some signs of standing up for itself. This is remarkable, since for the past year they have been no more than a rubber stamp, approving anything Donald Trump wants while ignoring anything he does to encroach on their constitutional powers. Today, however, several votes were held which did indeed push back on Trump in notable ways. All of them will likely wind up being merely symbolic, but it is still refreshing to see at least some signs of life from Congress.
There's an issue emerging in the political world that -- so far -- has not adequately been addressed by either party. This means there is a big opportunity for one of them to jump onto the populist side of the issue and get out in front of a growing amount of rage among some voters. So far, though, neither party seems all that interested, meaning the deep pockets of the industry leaders might win out over how average voters see the issue. So far, the only politician positioning himself on the side of average people is (no real surprise) Senator Bernie Sanders. Everyone else, to one extent or another, seems to be either supporting or ignoring the impact of new data centers being built all across the country.