My Custom Widget

Enter your information below

Enter a value:

Enter another value:

Result will appear here

How long can we live with an unsustainable way of making war?

It's been a while since I've posted in this journal, but I finally have something important to say.

Our special military operation against (read: war) Iran has been going on for several months now, and what do we have gotten for it?  As I write this, we got 18 service members coming home in body bags, a depleted munitions stock, an aircraft carrier coming to port due to an under-supplied, emotionally exhausted crew, and hundreds of billions of dollars deeper in dept.  We did not get regime change in Iran.  We did not eliminate the potential nuclear threat Iran poses.  And we did not vanquish our "enemy".  Instead, we have shown that the US is a paper tiger, and that Iran has the power to shut off 20% of the world's oil supply.

Our president is known for taking action based on the voice of the last person who spoke to him.  In this case, he was suckered into starting a war by the leader of Israel, a fellow crook in his own right.  Previous presidents knew that a war with Iran could not be won, at least, not with the effort Americans were willing to put into the war.  But, by starting this war, we have already lost it.   But, if you ask our president, he'll say we're winning the war, and that the Strait of Hormuz is open for shipping.  Yet, he'll act like a little child when someone asks him a question which holds him to account for his mistakes.  His ego is so fragile, that by not admitting any of his failings, he is unable to learn from his mistakes.  As a result, he keeps doubling down on his lies, and no one trusts him anymore.  Yet, people are afraid of him due to his ability to rally members of his cult to attack his enemies.

America is now $40,000,000,000 in debt.  For the first time in history, we are now paying more in debt service than we pay for defense.  This can not last for long.  This president would cut social spending in order to preserve our war machine.  But what good would that do?  We can't even defeat an enemy like Iran.  Our military is not nimble.  We still act as if we need to fight the wars of the 20th century, instead of those we need to fight now.  Instead of retreating into 1940's military technology, as our president would do with our aircraft carriers, we should be at the forefront of 2020's military technology, as Ukraine has exhibited with its use of drone technology.  I ask the question: why haven't we planned for the use of drones in warfare, given Ukraine's success of holding its own against Russia.

Unmanned vehicles (air, land, and sea) are the future of warfare, as they can enable militaries to fight wars while keeping their service members well behind the scenes in relative safety.  For those near the front lines of battle, they can provide the tools for defense that older, more expensive military tools and weapons can not provide.  Unmanned vehicles are cheaper and more effective than older military technology.  They have allowed Ukraine, a nation without a navy, to defeat the Russian navy and make it an almost useless asset.  Ukraine has developed a new way to fight wars, and all our president did was to say that Ukraine didn't hold any cards.  And Ukraine has proven that it has a stronger hand than our president would admit by being able to attack Moscow with its drones.  If anything, our war with Iran has shown that we hold a weaker hand than our current regime wants to admit.

Given the cost of proven drone technology vs. the cost of our overpriced military technology, I see a potential to kill several birds with one stone.  First, we can no longer afford to enforce a "Pax Americana" as we did for the second half of the 20th century.  So, let's wind it down to areas we can defend, and have other nations form healthy regional alliances for defense.  Second, let's take she savings from winding down the "Pax Americana" and do three things with it: (a) develop drone technology with Ukraine and build up stockpiles which both countries can use, (b) plug up holes in our social safety net (especially in healthcare, and (c) pay down our national debt.

Iran has tactics which it is using that we are not matching.  If propaganda is meant to modify public opinion, it is a cheap weapon in this internet age.  While our president is posting AI Slop on his social media accounts, the Iranians are posting entertaining "Lego Stories" on their feeds.  What's worse, as they are much more factual than the garbage our president is presenting as "Truth".  Truth Social is anything but truth.  Yet, Iran's videos cost almost nothing, spread further than our president's Truth Social posts, and contain more truth.  Who do you think should be believed?  Iran, a country who has said "Death to America" in the past, is no longer saying that (for now).  They are directing their anger (rightfully) towards our President and his regime.  What does this say for the legitimacy of the two contries' ruling elites?

The British empire fell because Britain couldn't afford to maintain it. As a result, it had to deal with decades of national decline. America is well on the same path to a similar national failure that could cripple us for generations.  And yet, our president's incompetency has given us an opportunity if we are wise enough to seize it.  Things are so FUBAR (F'd up beyond all recognition) that radical change may just be possible.  Licensing Ukrainian drone technology might help our military become more nimble and cost effective.  It may help America rebuild its industrial logistics, so that we can again build civilian products in the US, as we did with the aircraft and space industries.  We can learn from the past, and choose to take a different path than those who preceded us.

The big question is:  Will we learn the lessons of the past and make good choices.  I'm hoping that America will follow the lead of a wise woman (Mae West) who said: "Whenever given the choice between two evils, I'll choose the one I haven't chosen before."  It's time for something new, and even a bad choice of something new is better than the continued choices of something old we have been making as of late. 

The Fascists only control SOME of the levers of government - we still have hope

This past month, we have seen the murders of 2 American Citizens by Trump's Gestapo, ICE. His henchmen are labeling these killings as people wrongfully interfering with law enforcement activities in their propaganda releases.  But the public is starting to see through these lies.

Right now, we have both a worthless Congress and corrupt Supreme Court who are more than willing to make this country a fascist state. The rights given to all Americans under the first, second, and fourth amendments to our only apply for our 21st century Nazis.  For the rest of us, the Bill of Rights and the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments are worthless as long as the Trump is in power.   

What is happening in Minnesota can be seen as cruelty designed to intimidate the American public, something meant to trigger anticipatory obedience to authoritarian leadership.  This is exactly what happened in Germany during the 1930's.  Gradually, laws were implemented so that people wouldn't notice the erosion of their civil and human rights.  We're seeing that in the USA right now.  First, the Snowflake attacked Transgenders and their history.  (Look at what happened to the Stonewall national monument.)  Next, he started to erase the history of Blacks, Latinos, and other Minority Americans from national parks and other federally administered historic sites. And now, he's trying to erase America's "Original Sin", Slavery.  It's as if the White race could do no harm, and that everyone else was a criminal class not fit for America.

Currently, ICE is paying recruitment bonuses of up to $50,000 to new recruits.  This wouldn't be bad if they went through the full training that State Police and the FBI goes through - months of in-person training.  With ICE, it's less than 8 weeks of online training from what I remember.  How can anyone deal with potentially dangerous situations that could escalate to violence by only online training?  It's as if the design of this training is meant to encourage dangerous escalations.

Why is this happening?  The Gurdian has reported that Trump has cut funding for ICE body cameras, as well as for personnel oversight.  Elsewhere, it has been reported that Trump wants control of Minnesota's voter rolls and its public assistance rolls.  So what is really going on at another level?  As I see it, Trump will try and disqualify as many likely Democratic voting Minnesotans from voting, so that he can engineer a GOP majority in the House.  Additionally, he could be waiting for violence to break out, so that he can invoke the insurrection act and make it impossible for people to vote, also preserving the GOP majority in the House.

For the most part, we still can regain control of the House this year if we work for it.  Yes, we will have to keep our cool and stay non-violent even though Trump's Gestapo imprisons and and tries to kill us to force submission.  We need to remember the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's, and how Blacks gained de jure Equal Rights, albeit not de facto Equal Rights.  In my lifetime, we've seen people like Martin Luther King Jr. change from being seen as agitators to being national heroes worth honoring.  Trump wants to erase this movement.  We must not let it happen.

How do we stop him?  Simply make sure that as many people as possible see the truth.  Even MAGA loyalists are starting to say - "we didn't sign up for this."  There are some signs that even Fox "News" is souring on Trump as he descends further and further into dementia.  We must do our damnedest to prevent him from invoking the insurrection act, while also preventing him from asserting Federal control over state elections.  Once we gain control over one part of the legislative branch, we can cause Trump a lot of grief.  But first, we have to get there. 

 

Are we still heading towards Fascism?

 

Are we still heading towards Fascism, or are we already there?  That's a question that bothers most of us, as we are seeing the GOP repeat the same old lies.  They feel that is a lie is repeated enough, people will begin to accept the lie as truth - the same tactic the Joseph Goebbels used in Nazi Germany during the 1930's.  Yet, only the unthinking proletarians in the party actually believe this bunkum and act against their own interests, while the cynical elite gains from these lies. 

But why do I ask the question as "Still Heading Towrards" Fascism?  The answer lies in what is being reported by both the mainstream (old) media, and that being reported by "independent" (new) media, such as YouTube videos and Podcasts. Lately, I have found that the quality of the independent media varies greatly, as both progressives and conservatives tend to spin the news to favor their groups.  Yet, these same people are covering things that old media isn't reporting, such as our president's gradually failing health.

Yet, the question still remains: Have we become a Fascist state?

If we haven't become a Fascist state, we are awfully close to becoming one.  High level military officials have resigned, rather than carry out unlawful orders. DOJ Prosecutors have regigned, rather than subject people on our president's "enemies list" to wrongful prosecutions, and people are actively protesting in the streets.  Our president (and his henchmen) have called the recent "No Kings" protests as Anti-American.  What about protest is Anti-American?  Our country was built on protest, and our civil rights were gained through protest.  The ability to protest without fear is essential to a functioning democratic republic.  And we still have that ability for now.

The warning signs of impending fascism are disturbing.  We have a president who has caused major broadcast networks to cancel their late night comedic hosts for skewering him in their monologues.  (Fortunately, public outrage forced the network to restore one of these late night hosts to his platform.) This man labels any network who tries to report the news fairly as "Fake News" and reduces access to their reporters when they ask him embarrassing questions. To make things worse, the president has violated the "Posse Comitatus" law, preventing the use of the US Military for domestic policing activities. This man keeps testing the limits of our republic, and has so far found little push back against him.

So what can be done?

Right now, we need to "force" the old media to report all the facts available.  This will mean write-in campaigns, as well as using the new media to cover our resistance efforts.  Most Americans, including MAGALoonies have a sense of right and wrong.  Expose the crimes being committed by the current regime in ways that get their attention, and that's half the battle of winning their hearts.  Right now, people consume their news within news bubbles.  Find ways to break into the bubbles to get our voices heard.  Once people start to feel how unjust this regime is, its support will fall off.  The war in Vietnam ended because key voting blocks stopped giving the government the support it needed to continue the war.  The same can happen to this law-breaking regime.     

Some modest proposals for Government Reform.

 

Image of Johnathan Swift

Years ago, Johnathan Swift made a "Modest Proposal" to deal with starving related to the Irish Potato Famine.  It was satirical and meant as social commentary.  However, my set of "Modest Proposals" are much more serious, and are related to changes we can make to the United States Constitution to promote a more responsive government that serves the will and needs of the people.

Proposed Constitutional Amendments:

28. Direct voting for President/Vice President.

The current method of electing presidents is imperfect, due in part to the unequal power of an individual citizen's vote.  A voter for "Candidate A" in California has 1/3  the voting power as that of a voter in Wyoming who votes for "Candidate B" due to the nature of allocating electors in the Electoral College.

What I propose is direct popular vote for the presidency/vice presidency.  If no candidate pairing gets an absolute majority, a follow-up vote between the top 2 candidates takes place 4 weeks a fter the general election.

29. Recall Voting.

All elected offices in the federal government will be subject to recall if any one of the following conditions are met:

A. For the president or vice president of the United States:

- If the legislatures of 60% of the states vote for recall.

- If  5% of citizens in each state, 60% of all states vote for recall.

If a  recall election is called for, this official must receive 50.1% affirmative votes to remain in office.  Otherwise, the next in line for presidential succession will take his place for a presidential recall.  In the case of a vice presidential recall, the office is declared vacant, and the president may nominate a new person for the vice presidency.

B. For Congressmen/women and Senators:

                   -  If 5% of the citizens of the congressional district (for congressmen) or 5% of the citizens
                      of the state (for senators)  vote for recall:

          If a recall election is called for, this official must recieve 50.1% affirmative votes to remain
          in office.  Otherwise, a new election for this office must be held within 60 days of recall.

30.  Term Limits for Federal Office Holders.

        Upon enaction of this amanement, all currently serving elected office holders are exempt from
        term limits for the offices they hold.    

        A. No president may serve more than 10 years in total as president.  

        B. Senators and Congressmen are limited to 18 years of service in each office.

        C. Supreme court justices will be limited to 18 years in office.  The longest serving justice on the
             court must retire on 2 year intervals, so that 2 justices will  be replaced in every presidential 
             term.  In cases of death, inability to serve, resignations, or other early departures from the
             court, the president may nominate a new justice to complete the former justice's 18 year term.

        D. The supreme court may have no less than 9 active members or no more than 13 active members/
             If the court is expanded beyond 9 members, a random selection of 9 members must be selected
             to hear any cases before it.

31. All federal office holders must adhere to a code of conduct enacted by congress, and be subject to
      the rule of law.

      A. The president is subject to all laws governing his actions.  No immunity may be given by any
           court for actions which have been prohibited by congress.  

      B.  No federal office holder may profit from inside knowledge of information gathered by the
            government.  All insider trading laws that currently apply to the citizenry must apply to all
            federal office holders.

      C.  All federal office holders are required to faithfully exercise the powers of their offices.  Failure
            to do so will subject them to penalties under the law (both civil and criminal) after leaving
            office (in the case of the president) or while in office (for all other office holders).

32. Repeal of the 11th amendment.  All states are subject to federal law, and may be sued by individuals
      in Federal courts.

33. All territories of the United States with populations larger than the smallest population state will
      be offered the right to vote for statehood every 10 years.  If the population of that territory elects to
      become a state, it will immediately be given the number of seats in the house and senate based on
      its population.

34. The apportionmet act of 1929 is to be repealed, with the formula for allocating representatives in the
      House of representatives based on the law which was supposed to be used for the 1920 census.  

35. Three senators to be elected by each state, with one seat open for election every 2 years.  

36. Election Reforms:

      A. No individual or corporation may contribute more than $5,000 to any election campaign,
           nor may any individual or campaign bundle its contributions to a campaign..  

      B. Campaign ads may only be shown within 2 months of any election.

      C. All votes to be tallied and totals reported within 3 days of any election.

      D. People running for office may only use verifiable facts in their campaign literature and
           speeches.  Deliberate lies will result in diswqualification for the office being saught.

37. Revocation of Presidential Pardons.

      On adoption of this amendment, The House and Senate may repeal a presidential pardon if
      both houses vote for a repeal with a 60% majority for a period of 6 months.  Afterwards,
      Any presidential pardon issued within the last 6 months of a president's term may be repealed
      in the first 6 months of the new president's term.

38. Neutrality in designing congressional districts.

      On adoption of this amendment, all states have 90 days to have a non-partisan committee to
      draw up new congressional districts for the following congressional election.  Failure to show
      that a state's congressional districts have not been gerrymandered may subject all people
      responsible for illegal district design for criminal punishment, which may include the death
      penalty.

I have kept this list as short as possible.  Ideally, I'd have been able to reinstate the "Fairness Doctrine" for all domestic news and opinion sources: Print Media, Broadcast Media, and Internet Sources from within the USA.  This would have prevented both left and right from distorting fact and presenting misinformation labeled as "news".  Additionally, I would have looked to put guardrails on the right to keep and bear arms, so that crazy people can't own guns.  However, I would want the public to retain the power to overthrow the government when the ballot box is ignored or corrupted.  Realistically, I don't expect anything like these changes to be adopted.  But they should serve to start an honest discussion of what is needed to be fixed, so that our nation lasts another 250 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Clarence Darrow said it best.

 

"I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction."

Clarence Darrow

Recently, a right wing activist was murdered. No one important on the left is justifying his murder, but many are glad that this man is dead - he spewed hatred gussied up to sound acceptable to the younger generation. Although some of his points may have been valid (I never bothered to listen to this man's arguments), the general overtone of his messages have seduced people into believing the falsehoods spewed out by the right wing media. A quick look at the statistics will show that there are 3 times as many right wing assassinations than left wing assassinations in the USA. Yet, the right wing media conveniently ignores the murders committed by their loyalists and focuses on those from the left. Media bias in action to say the least.

I will never condone murder of any kind. Yet I wonder. If I could go back in time and erase the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and others from history, would it be ethical to save millions of people by removing one from the earth? It's a simple case of the "Trolley Problem" on a larger scale. Most people would do nothing and let god (if there is one) decide. It is the rare person who would terminate the one person's life to save five lives. Yet, this is what many generals are tasked to do in wartime. So we have an ethical dilemma - what would you do? Sadly, there is no one right answer to problems like this. We can be glad that someone is dead. But we must prosecute the murderer to the best of our ability and get the guilty verdict he so rightly deserves.

- - - - - -

Right now, we are in a battle for our freedom. We can not use violence to achieve our ends, now that an authoritarian regime is in control of the federal government. If someone were to use terrorist tactics to attack the government, it would only result in an even more forceful crackdown on our personal liberties. So, what should we do?

It is said that people who chose not to study history are doomed to make the mistakes of the past But people who know history are able to see patterns of evil and use proven strategies to combat evil used by others in the past. Now is the time to study the tactics and strategies of Martin Luther King Jr. and Mohatma Gandhi. Although both leaders were asassinated, they achieved much of what they wanted in life. For Dr. King, he helped America realize that equal rights for all must become part of America's DNA. For Gandhi, it was the liberation if India from British rule.

I can still remember this man who stood in front of a row of Chinese tanks. What would happen if more of us were to stand in front of our president's goons and capture them on video as they break the law and attack innocent people? We already have seen his goons sink a Quebecers' boat on Lake Ticonderoga (on the small Canadian part of the lake) claiming he was in American waters. We have seen his goons sink a Venezualan boat with the false claim they were smuggling drugs into America. And to make things worse, the regime has deported American citizens, all in its attempts to "Make America White Again."

What can we do to short curcuit our president's evil actions? The only answer lies in non violent actions. Blockading ICE vehicles when they are harassing people is one thing to do. Video recording their illegal actions and sending it to the media (YouTube.com, Print Media, and Broadcast media) is an essential way to expose their crimes. There are many more things that one can do non violently. Any form of non violent resistance is essential. One should read how Dr. King and Gandhi achieved their goals, and use their methods.

Hopefully, we're not too late to stop this slide to authoritarianism....

No one stood for anything except their desire for power

The second debate for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination.  Like most political debates, it was rich on talking points, and poor on any real substance.  

- - - - - -

During the first debate, only two candidates would say that they considered Trump unfit to serve as president.  It was fitting that there is no venom as strong as that from a politician who feels as if he was previously denied his place as #2 on the presidential ticket.  Chris Christie was that man.  Everyone else that made it to the second debate was willing to kiss the ass of Trump so that they could be his VP choice for the 2024 nomination.  

Why is this important?

The GOP no longer has any leaders who can steer the party away from the cult of Trump.  The only hope for the GOP would be for Trump to eat a prescribed diet from the Heart Attack Grill in Las Vegas, and pass away like its former spokesman.  Virtually all the candidates are afraid of Trump's followers, as many have used violence (or the threat of violence) to intimidate GOP leaders who believe in real law and order.  So, they avoid taking positions against him, even though they wish hed go away and give the GOP a better chance of winning next November.

90 years ago, another democracy was under threat from a cult leader (and his followers) who believed that his will would triumph over all.  Heck, a movie (Triumph of the Will) was made at one of his rallies won the a gold medal at the 1935 Venice Biennale, and the Grand Prix at the 1937 World Exhibition in Paris.  His nation was under great social stress as ours is today, and like Trump, he promised redemption.  True redemption never came, as this leader led his country into war and its distruction 6 years later.  Established politicians thought they could control this monster, as they once thought they could control Trump.  But the cult got out of control, and the evil leader ended up ruling everyone by fear - as is the threat if we let Trump get back into power.

- - - - - -

One problem with cults is that no one likes to admit that what they are part of is a cult.  The cult has its own myths that must be accepted to be a believer, and has its own reinforcement mechanisms to prevent its followers from questioning the cults beliefs or leaving the cult.  Some cults are benign, only affecting the lives of their followers.  Heaven's Gate was one of those groups, even though everything ended in a mass suicide.  Jim Jones' People's Temple cult was more malignant, as a congressman investigating the cult and 4 members who wanted to leave were murdered before the mass suicide in Jonestown.  (This is from where we get the expression "Drinking the Kool-Aid.")  But worst of all so far, is the cult of Trump.  At least 6 outsiders died as a result of the January 6th insurrection.  And yet, 35% of GOP members believe that the rioters were defending their country.  What flavor of Kool-Aid did they drink?

On January 7, 2021, most GOP legislators were willing to speak the objective truth about the soon to be former president.  Yet, within 2 weeks, they became afraid of their base and decided against impeaching him a second time (and finally convicting him for a threat against their lives.)  The leaders are afraid of the cult, and its leader is still spewing venom.  Trump has no respect for the rule of law, as it has never been effectively used to stop him from achieving his goals.  His followers have no respect for the rule of law, as they only want it applied to people who are not members of his cult.

- - - - - -

As I write this, one of the extremist members of Trump's cult is calling for the removal of the Speaker of the House for cutting a deal with the opposition party to keep the government running.  These extremists do not care how many people in their districts will be hurt by a government shutdown.  They only care about serving their cult's leader.  And he wants to destroy the government, so that it can not destroy him.

The year coming up will likely be a very interesting year.  But I yearn for the relative peace of my youth.  Things were much better when the two political parties would work out deals with other and both take credit for doing good things.  We need that spirit to return, and we need to develop mechanisms to keep the lunatics from gaining control of the asylum....