The Trump trials are exposing what is broken about our political culture. Politicians don’t know how to talk to people. They can schmooze and beat around the bush. They can use a thousand hours and a hundred thousand words to do nothing in a way that appears like hard work. But, they don’t know how to talk to people so that something actually happens.
To a business man, the phrase “I need your help” is a polite way of making a request easier to turn down. In politics, asking for “help” is code for bribery. The two aren’t at all related. When Trump told the Ukrainian president he wanted “help”, he was being polite. But, the swamp in Washington mistook Trump for speaking their evil language of bribery. In psychosemantics, the term is “projection”.
Trump’s impeachment is purely along party lines. Statistics and figures agree. If you’re a Democrat, you think his call to Ukraine was wrong. If you’re a Republican, you think his call to Ukraine was somewhere between necessary and excusable. Any exceptions are marginal. This is pure party politics, which means that we can’t debate the ethics of Trump’s phone call among fellow Americans with any more success than we can debate guns, abortion, and redistribution of wealth. Now, impeaching the incumbent president for whatever lame reason we can contrive has been added as one more topic in a party-politics worldview.
Most rules that Democratic politicians object to are rules that the same Democrats created to use against Republicans just a few years prior. This new precedent won’t be any exception. It might even come in handy one day, one way or another.
Trump’s popularity is soaring. The impeachment this week helped the popular president even more—well, if an “impeachment” that the House speaker chooses not to transfer to the Senate is an actual impeachment. In the words of Sen. Mitch McConnell, the House doesn’t demonstrate much leverage by not, “sending us something we do not want.” Not sending the Senate something the Senate does not want has made Trump even more “popularer”.
Whether Democratic or Republican, everyone should think the House is an embarrassment to the country. Even Putin thinks the House is laughable. Smart Democratic voters won’t want their politicians barking up trees, starting fights that help the other team. But, there is a danger—power corrupts and supermajority corrupts “superly”. Democrats are handing the nation a supermajority Republican party by 2022, when the third round of Senate elections for Trump’s tenure take place. That is when our freedom will be at more risk than it has ever been; when good people no longer have accountability they are no longer good.
Fortunately, while many Democratic voters don’t value the Constitution that started the trend of ending slavery for the first time in human history, at least they know the power of gridlock. Democrats like checks and balances when they don’t have power. That might be enough to save freedom.
Who does Pat Roberson think he is? Who gets to say whether or what America’s “mandate from Heaven” is? We can talk about Kurds and allies and defending the defenseless. But, once we start using grandiose terms like “Heaven’s mandate”, that opens a whole new discussion.
If we’re going to go all Bible-thumping Bible-happy about America and Heaven, we need to look at what John saw in Heaven in Revelation 12, where a woman and her newborn baby are given eagle’s wings and saved from a dragon. The woman giving birth is Israel. The eagle’s wings could only be America. If anyone is going to argue that America even has a mandate from Heaven—which may or may not be true—it would be to protect 1. Israel and 2. the unborn. But, that’s assuming that America even has such a mandate. Syria, as much as we all should love all people, is not part of Revelation 12 and should be left out of this melodramatic “mandate from Heaven” freak talk.
Yes, America—and every other country—should all look after human rights and the good of all people—not only Christians, but non-Christians as well. Pat Robertson presumes the old, classic, “us four and no more” thinking we have come to sadly expect from Sunday morning culture. As for Syria, Russia is there and should be able to police wild stuff. America is spread too thin. And, the world would be safer if more nations hunkered down and stayed home. Scary and unpopular as it sounds, America needs to pull out of Syria because we don’t have the unlimited resources of God and because we are indeed needed elsewhere.
Who should look after the Christians in Syria? The Christians should. Rather than playing on old superstitions, such as that America exists to favor Christians or that “good Christians” squabble over petty differences, Christians should act like the family they are. Jesus told Peter, “Those who live by the sword die by the sword.” Military might is not how God works with Christians. He uses military to direct global politics, but shooting enemies of the Sunday crowd is not God’s mode of operation, no matter how much Mr. Robertson thinks so. Heaven cares about Christians, but its strategy for Christians is to love each other and spread love—that is Heaven’s mandate for how Christians should be looked after.
When we face our challenges, some leaders cower in fear, too scared to give an answer that should seem obvious. When asked the trap-question, “Should the president ask a foreign government to investigate a political rival?” the obvious answer is, “If the rival broke the laws of that government, of course! Otherwise no Republican or Democrat would be able to enforce laws against the other.” Why can’t Republicans say that? When one finds oneself with power one didn’t earn, one won’t know how to beat the toughest problems, no matter how obvious things may seem to everyone else. Congressional Republicans will either level-up their game or pack up and go home. This isn’t pee-wee politics anymore.
Democrats in Congress seem to have forgotten all about looking after Americans, though. The House is trying to impeach a president who won’t be removed by the Senate—it’s pointless. But, to understand Democrats, one must understand the Democratic voters. They might not know that impeachment is pointless, just how Mr. Robertson doesn’t know that a “mandate from Heaven” comes from Heaven, not sensationalist TV. But, sensationalism is the trend, for now.
American deadlock trudges on. Trump promised a wall and he won’t back down. Democrats won’t back down either. Both show solidarity with their respective platforms. The only group that seems to favor backing down is Congressional Republicans, who want Trump to get this over with any way possible. For the compromising Republicans on Capitol Hill, Trump’s refusal to sign a “wallless budget” isn’t a “wall” strategy as much as it is a “shut down” strategy. Trump and Congressional Democrats see it differently.
Keep watch; it just might be Jared Kushner who saves the day.
The term “free speech” has taken a new meaning. While speech has kept less and less freedom from the tech bosses, the monetary cost of speaking out has essentially become free. With speech becoming more and more “financially free”, the media industry can’t find a way to stay solvent.
Newspapers and local news broadcasters seek collective ways to work against the tech giants, but they only rearrange their immediate problems with no long-term solutions in sight. The dwindling news industry is attacking “free” platforms of semi-free speech: social media. That’s the clue of where news & information will head in the future.
Former President George Herbert Walker Bush, the 41st president, is dead at 94.
While the Bush family and the nation mourn, politics continue as usual.
The “Mark Meadows Plan” for Congressional Republicans foreshadows political posturing of the next two years: Democrats will be a powerless foil supporting the re-election of Trump. Just how Democrats harassed the Regan administration with the Olly North investigations, harassed Supreme Justices Kavanaugh and Thomas with sexual harassment allegations—just how the House Republicans harassed Clinton with the Kenneth Star -led investigation—so will this Democratic House irritate the electorate over the next two years. Even if the House impeaches the president as it did Clinton, there isn’t foreseeable traction in the 52-seat strong Republican Senate.
The latest “shock and faux” campaign from the press attempts to scare readers with the notion that Russia did not exercise leverage over Trump—but they could have—because Trump decided not to build a project in Russia that everyone knew about him not building when he would have been allowed to build it anyway. The reason, as this latest “wow” campaign goes, is because Trump is now reported to be the center of the Mueller investigation. Really? That’s news?
The next two years will be as entertaining as watching a cat who thinks it’s a god, but just can’t figure out why it can’t get anyone to obey.
This was an astonishing victory for Republicans for any year, especially a controlling party midterm. Senate Republicans have rarely held this many seats since the FDR days except Reagan and W Bush. Losses in the House were among the lowest losses for a controlling party midterm. By gaining seats in the Senate, Republicans are winning the long game. We are headed for a possible supermajority by the end of Trump’s second term. In the next two years, House Democrats will have just enough power to be irritating, but not enough to make any difference, other than helping Trump get re-elected in 2020.
Democrats are darned if they do and darned if they don’t. Trump’s appointees can be approved faster and impeachment in the House would die in the Senate. Opposition party power is good for presidential elections. Trump’s best course of action would be to deliver the strongest Conservative proposals so Democrats can go on record as obstructionists. The best course of action for Democrats would be to talk and vote like Republicans, which has always been historically favorable, proven with Democratic Rahm Emanuel -led “blue dog” victory in 2006.
Results are still being counted. At last count, Democrats gained 30 seats in the House and had control of the House by 7. Most of those states had Democratic Senate and gubernatorial victories. In this victory for Democrats, nothing seems out of the ordinary. The election results appear to be real and fair; Democrats won the House fair and square.
The question of some after-election counting and recounting, however, seems sketchy. The Arizona Senate race looks like a lost cause for the Republican candidate. Arguably from Senate voting records, the Arizona seat up for grabs was not gained by Democrats except in name only. That Senate seat will be up the election Trump leaves office. But, that’s a different story from a cluster of recount fiascos in Florida and Georgia, where recounting is a matter of procedure, not questionable results. The losers in those elections are pushing in hopes that close results can easily be tipped. If recounts were to change those results, that would open bigger questions, bigger objections, and bigger investigations. So far, the number of ballots in question would not change the results; miscounts would.
Even with the ground Republicans took, Democrats outspent Republicans by roughly $300M. Ironically, Democrats campaign on a platform of opposing big money and suspect business man Trump of trying to buy the presidency. The spending was bad optics for them.
Trump’s proved helpful on the campaign trail. Many Republicans who pushed him away lost. Senate Republicans defeated incumbents in Florida, Indiana, Missouri, and North Dakota. Senate Republicans also held vacant seats in Tennessee and Utah. 26 Republicans retired, more than any midterm year since 1974, the greatest retirements being 27 in 2008.
FDR holds both the greatest midterm gain and midterm loss since his time as president. After FDR, the greatest midterm loss was Obama’s first midterm. The greatest midterm gain in the Senate was Trump, the second-greatest being JFK with +3. This was a favorable midterm year for Republicans. But, already you read that right here at Pacific Daily Times before the election. So, while Republicans had a historic election, Pacific Daily Times has set a new standard for accuracy in the media.
