"Who Else Besides Trump?"

  

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Who Else Besides Trump?”

November 19, 2024

 

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community,

they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

                                                                                               Senator Charles Schumer

                                                                                               The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC

                                                                                               January 3, 2017

 

“Too much power has been delegated to unaccountable bureaucrats.

Undoing this is necessary to restore American greatness – but

fraught with risk. The unelected elite are powerful and fight dirty.”

                                                                                                Liz Truss

                                                                                                Prime Minister, Great Britain, 2022

                                                                                                The Wall Street Journal, November 13, 2024

 

The paradox in Senator Schumer’s statement – a statement unchallenged by Ms. Maddow – is that he admitted to (and would have agreed with) Ms. Truss’s words written five years later – that unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats exert unacceptable power over our nation’s most powerful people, let alone the rest of us. Neither he nor Ms. Maddow acknowledged the irony embedded in their exchange.  

 

……………………………………………………………….

 

As I wrote on November 6, I felt relief, not joy, with the election’s verdict. But as my wife and I spent six days driving around Pennsylvania and Virginia visiting grandchildren, I thought of the election and its consequences. And I concluded that the growing power of the state and its threat to individual freedom has become so powerful that a traditional Republican candidate might not be willing to confront such an oppressive force – that it would take an individual unafraid to incur the wrath of the administrative state. 

 

There is no question that a government that looks after 335 million people needs a professional bureaucracy. The President and the Executive Branch appoint roughly 4,000 individuals, a tiny fraction of the two million federal civilian employees. The Hatch Act, passed in 1939, prohibits partisan political activity among civilian employees in the executive branch of the Federal and District of Columbia Governments, even as it excludes those Presidential appointees whose jobs depend on Senate confirmation. Nevertheless, violations of the Hatch Act have become rampant in recent years, especially in intelligence agencies and within the Justice Department, as “lawfare” was waged against Mr. Trump and some of his backers.

 

It is, though, the natural instinct of people to defend their jobs, to expand their bureaucracies; it is how they personally advance. It is why slaying the dragon of government bureaucracies is so difficult. But unchecked government growth leads to inflation, bloat, bias, waste, and ultimately to either a government that collapses, or one that assumes dictatorial controls. That being an unpleasant prospect, some restrictions on that growth must be imposed, no matter how unpopular.

 

Is Mr. Trump the right man for the job? Obviously, the question is unanswerable. It is not that I am without concerns. Some of Mr. Trump’s nominations, especially former Florida Representative Matt Gaetz, I find troubling, as I do the possibility that he might use “recess appointments” to bring on board those who may not receive Senate confirmation. Adhering not only to the words of the Constitution, but also to its intent, is paramount to the survival of our Republic. However, when I weigh what Mr. Trump proposes versus what has happened overseas, at our border, to inflation, to crime in our cities, and to our culture, schools, and universities over the past few years, I side with those calling out, “Halt!”

 

…………………………………………………………………….

 

Mr. Trump does not satisfy the traits I seek in a friend. He is crude. His bluntness in public is rude. He is incapable of humility. He seems barren of humor, especially the ability to laugh at himself. He is not introspective, nor does he seem to have an interest in history, or even in political philosophy. I don’t understand his love affair with the three trillion-dollar cryptocurrency market, and I believe markets that size should be regulated. I wish he had nominated Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo to be in his cabinet rather than the abrasive Matt Gaetz or the untested Pete Hegseth. But none of us get everything we wish.

 

Character is important, but that and my personal preferences are not necessarily the qualities we need in a political leader when we are drowning in debt, living with a collapsed border, and enduring an education system – the most expensive in the world – that has failed our youth, all at a time when cultural issues are more important to elements of the Democratic Party than defending the country’s citizens. The problems we face are not unique to the United States. Classical western liberalism is under threat, as western democracies seem to have forgotten that individual freedom needs defending against those who seek power, as exemplified by dictators in countries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Evil, as the Bible teaches us, is ever-present. The United States is not perfect as we all know, but its form of government, and the liberty it provides the individual, is unique in the annals of human history. It is a country that has benefitted from capitalism, that understands the critical nature of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand,” encourages entrepreneurship, a country that offers, not equality of outcomes but equal opportunities to those who have ability and aspiration. Trump is a fighter for those things he believes in, for working-class people – regardless of race, nationality, or gender – and for all those who love this country, warts and all.

 

Despite being harried by a media that hates him and hounded by political opponents who used the power of the state to try to destroy him, and opposed by bureaucrats who do whatever it takes to defend their turf, he never quits. He is tenacious. The media and his political enemies claim he wants to become a dictator, but they don’t listen to all that he says – if they understood his proposal for a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) – they would realize he wants to limit the power of the state, to remove onerous regulations and to reduce the taxes that fund the leviathan that has become our federal government. Writing about DOGE in Saturday’s New York Sun, Newt Gingrich stated: “Unearthing what is wrong and discovering what could be right is the ultimate contribution of this project.” A smaller government, with power returned to the people, is the goal. Nevertheless, there are risks. Can Musk and Ramaswamy work their magic with DOGE, without disrupting the economy and/or financial markets?

 

Mr. Trump is not my ideal of a President, but I understand why history called him at this moment: Respect for the opinions of others, accountability and personal responsibility are traits needed but in short supply in the media and in our governing classes, as the world moves further into the 21^st Century – a world that will never be free from enemies to democracy. Will Mr. Trump be up to the task of navigating these shoals? I don’t know, but I suspect it will take someone outside the slipstream of politics as usual. We need a course-correction – a secure border, increased defense spending, mutual respect, an assurance that the concept of personal responsibility is alive and well, and accounta

"2024 GOP Platform - Some Thoughts"

 Biden has decided to drop out of the Presidential race. The Washington Post called it a “stunning decision,” but for most observers it was expected. Now, with the attempted assassination last week of former President Trump, the race, as Alice would say, “gets curiouser and curiouser.”

………………………………………..

 

This essay comes at the suggestion of a friend. At almost 1500 words, it is 20% longer than most of my TOTDs. Perhaps, as Mark Twain would have suggested, it just required more time on my part. At any rate, I found it a good exercise – to read the Platform, some of the convention speeches, peruse comments from columnists, and just to reflect on all that has transpired over the past couple of weeks. Attached you will find the 15-page GOP Platform.

 

You may find mistakes or disagreements in my analysis. Please accept that my opinions overlay my analysis.

 

Best regards, Sydney

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“2024 GOP Platform – Some Thoughts”

July 22, 2024

 

“The American people have proven time and again that we

can overcome any obstacle and any force pitted against us.”

                                                                                                                2024 GOP Platform

                                                                                                                Adopted by RNC July 15, 2024

 

The Platform, predictably bland and clichéd but positive in tone, carries the title “Make America Great Again.” It is an expression of both traditional conservativism and conservative populism. It is dedicated “To the Forgotten Men and Women of America,” those made famous by Hillary Clinton’s term “deplorables.” The dedication reflects the new base of the Republican Party, not the coastal elites who in places like Connecticut a couple of generations ago dominated the Party. Today’s Republican Party is more representative of America’s middle class – working men and women, of every race, nationality, and religion. The Platform’s preamble is titled “America First: Return to Common Sense,” an expression of nationalism and a reference to judgement based on practical observations and universally accepted facts.

 

A political party’s platform must be generic, as it must appeal a large swath of voters. There are, approximately, 162 million registered voters in The United States. According to an April 2024 study by Pew Research Center, registration is about equally divided between Democrats and those who lean Democratic (49%) and Republicans and those who lean Republican (48%). Keep in mind, America is noted for its individualism, citizens who, historically, have not marched to assigned drummers. Republicans, especially, tend to be free-thinkers, more difficult to lasso and corral.

 

The over-arching tone of the Republican Platform is “America first,” as regards trade and the border, and a return to common sense, as regards manufacturing, the border, energy independence, military strength, and equal treatment of all under the law. This analysis does not pretend to be complete, but among its subjects, the document addresses the economy, defense/national security, education, culture and size of government.

 

• The Platform recommends energy independence, reducing regulation, and making the 2017 tax cuts permanent, while imposing tariffs on some imported goods. Without providing solutions, the document reflects inherent contradictions between free markets of traditional conservatives – Jospeh Schumpeter’s theory of creative destruction – and economic populism, the protection of jobs, industries and communities affected by globalization and changes in technology. Finding the balance between these competing forces will be the job of Congress, through debate and discussion. In his speech following acceptance of the GOP nomination, Donald Trump spoke of the need for improvements in education to help people become more competitive in today’s dynamic economy, i.e. a focus on community colleges. The document encourages innovation in emerging industries, such as Crypto, Artificial Intelligence and Space. It argues for the reduction of interest rates, without explaining whether that will be a function of government or markets. And it promises to do away with taxes on tips.

 

• It calls for ‘Peace through Strength,’ re-building the military to counter China, and to ensure that our military remains “the most modern, lethal and powerful force in the world.” It calls for building an Iron Dome Missile Defense Shield to cover the United States, but at what cost it leaves unsaid. It advocates securing our border against illegal immigration, strengthening alliances (including NATO), and championing “strong, sovereign, and independent nations in the Indo-Pacific…” Echoing President Obama in November 2011, the Platform calls for a pivot to Asia. But little was said of current, explicit threats from China, Russia and Iran.

 

• In terms of education, the Platform call for an environment “free from political meddling” and the restoration of parental rights. It supports school choice, and encourages merit pay for teachers in place of tenure. It advocates overhauling standards on school discipline, including the suspension of violent students. It ensures students are taught fundamentals like reading, math, science, history, civics, and the “restoration of a classical liberal arts education.” The Platform notes that the U.S. spends more per pupil than any other country in the world, yet results have been mediocre. It suggests the Department of Education in Washington be shut down, and return responsibility for education to the states. 

 

• As for culture, the document promotes the “sanctity of marriage, the blessings of childhood and the foundational role of families…” While the document says abortion rights belong with the states, it opposes late term abortions but supports mothers and policies that advance prenatal care, access to birth control and IVF. The Platform would keep biological men from participating in women’s sports, and it would stop taxpayer-funded schools from promoting gender transition and taxpayer funding for sex change surgeries. Parents’ rights include knowledge of their children’s attitudes toward a possible sex change. It calls for the cutting of federal funding for sanctuary jurisdictions that release criminals onto the streets, and it would require that local authorities cooperate with ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement). It promises to deport illegal aliens who have violated our laws. 

 

• The Platform quotes Mr. Trump in his promise not to “cut one penny” from Medicare or Social Security: “Republicans will restore economic stability to ensure long-term sustainability of Social Security.” “Republicans will protect Medicare’s finances from being financially crushed by the Democrats plan to add tens of millions of new illegal immigrants to the roles of Medicare.” Nothing was said about the enormous deficits both plans generate. However, there is a promise to slash “wasteful” government spending, and to reinstate President Trump’s deregulation policies from his first term, “which,” the Platform claimswithout providing proof, “saved Americans $11,000 per household.” 

 

The Platform reflects a changed Republican Party, something that has been underway for a long time. It has become what Peggy Noonan recently described in The Wall Street Journal: “a populist, working-class, nationalist party.” It is a Party that puts less emphasis on living within our means and on free-market economics and reflects more of what George W. Bush in 2000 called “compassionate conservativism.” Columbia professor of economics Glenn Hubbard described the differences in last Friday’s The Wall Street Journal: “Conservative economic policy traditionally has emphasized the openness of markets and growth. By contrast, the populist conservative ideas under discussion at the Republican National Convention focus on people and places hard hit by the disruption that accompanies openness and growth.” Finding the balance is what democracy is about.

 

The concern of free-market capitalism is understandable, as the United States has out-sourced much of its manufacturing to places where labor costs are less. While that has harmed labor in the U.S. with the disappearance of manufacturing jobs, consumers have benefitted from lower prices. An imposition of tariffs, to limit imports, will cause affected countries to retaliate with their own tariffs, which will limit exports and possibly cause a global recession. But the Platform recognizes innovation, which reflects an understanding that economies are dynamic, that change is constant, that old industries die and new ones are formed. As mentioned above, Mr. Trump, in his speech to delegates, did talk of the need to improve education, saying that individuals should “raise their expectations.” Nevertheless, there is no perfect way to protect all people from changing economic conditions. An open border is distinctly not in our interest, and closing the border is not xenophobic when accompanied by increasing the number of legal immigrants. Unfortunately, while immigration reform was mentioned, increasing legal immigration was not mentioned. 

 

As for the Platform and the Republican nominee, Nikki Haley spoke for many of us in her Convention speech: “We should acknowledge that there are some Americans who don’t agree with Donald Trump 100% of the time. I happen to know some of them. My message to them is simple: You don’t have to agree with Trump 100% of the time to vote for him. We agree on keeping America strong. We agree on keeping America safe. And we agree that Democrats have moved so far to the left that they’re putting our freedoms in danger. I’m here tonight because we have a country to save and a unified Republican Party is essential for saving her.” I want to close with words Mr. Trump expressed in his acceptance speech, because they echo my beliefs, and they suggest a more sober and reflective man: “None of us know God’s plan, or where life’s adventure will take us. But if the events of last Saturday make anything clear, it is that every single moment we have on earth is a gift from God. We have to make the most of every day for the people and the country we love.”

 

This essay reflects my understanding of the Republican Platform, which may be fallible. I don’t agree with all parts of it, but that is understandable. We are a large and diverse country with millions of individual opinions funneled into two political parties. We never vote for the perfect candidate but for the one that most closely mirrors our beliefs and ideals.

"Are Things as Bad as They Seem?"

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

Thought of the Day

“Are Things as Bad as They Seem?”

March 11, 2024

 

“Just when you thought that things couldn’t get any worse, you find out that they’ve

always been a lot worse than you thought they were. And then they get worse.”

                                                                                                                                Philip Kerr (1956-2018)

                                                                                                                                The Pale Criminal, 1990

 

Debt, including unfunded liabilities, threatens to bankrupt us. The southern border has become a porous venue for a record number of illegals and the drugs many bring into this country. An epidemic of crime has transformed our cities. Democrats have weaponized the criminal justice department to go after political opponents. Republicans, in a rush to isolationism, have abandoned global responsibilities – underestimating threats to democratic institutions posed by Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un, and Iran’s Mullahs. Color-blind meritocracy and biological sex have given way to harmful fantasies, with preferential treatment for some groups and favored pronouns for others. A desire for clean energy is countered by demand for clean-technology factories and electricity-hungry data centers, “leaving,” as Evan Halper wrote last week in The Washington Post, “utilities and regulators grasping for credible plans to expand the nation’s creaking power grid.” Biden’s mandate that two thirds of all new cars be electric by 2032 will increase the demand for electricity. One asks: is the country witnessing the death of common sense and entering a death spiral? 

 

I suspect everyone, no matter their political preferences, agrees that we live in contentious times – politically, technologically, and culturally. Of the two Presidential candidates, one is visibly senescent and the other is “the crudest trash-talker in politics,” as Barton Swaim wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. AI threatens to disrupt our lives in unknown ways. DEI, CRT, gender neutral bathrooms and gendered-altered athletes have turned high schools and universities into places alien to parents and alumni.

 

Perhaps we should step back. “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes” is an aphorism usually attributed to Mark Twain. It suggests that while each era is different, there are recurring themes. And as George Santayana observed, we are disadvantaged regarding the present and the future when we ignore the past. And, while our current situation is unique, the United States has survived bigger schisms – the biggest being the Civil War when eleven southern states seceded from the Union to form the Confederate States of America. That Lincoln was able to prevent England and France from recognizing the Confederacy and keep the Union intact, while abolishing slavery, is something for which every American should be grateful. 

 

While the Civil War created chaos, the two-and-a-half decades leading up to it were unsettled, and not just because of slavery. In the twenty-four years before Abraham Lincoln was elected in a four-way race in 1860, eight men served as President. The three decades leading to the Civil War saw the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution, an event that raised living standards, but that also created winners and losers: Railroads and steamships disrupted traditional means of travel, and the telegraph radicalized the way people communicated. The McCormack reaper increased the value of large Pennsylvania and Ohio farms, while lowering the value of smaller New England farms. The Singer sewing machine revolutionized the clothing industry. All were examples of Joseph Schumpeter’s “creative disruption.” More than a third of the nation’s population increase over the thirty years prior to the Civil War was due to immigrants, mostly from Ireland and Germany. Growth spurts are usually accompanied by hiccups. 

 

Turbulent times continued: Lincoln was assassinated in 1865, and over the next thirty-six years two more Presidents would be assassinated – James Garfield in 1861 and William McKinley in 1901. Native Americans continued to be attacked, captured, and placed on reservations. Black Americans continued to experience bigotry and segregation, and the late 19^th Century saw the birth of the Ku Klux Klan. The Industrial Revolution continued, with electricity, autos, and telephones being introduced, creating dislocations for carriage makers and purveyors of gas lamps, but positively affecting living standards.

 

Once again, we live in politically rancorous times, with cultural appropriation in schools, universities, and businesses and disruptive technologies like social media and artificial intelligence. Democrats have what they want in Donald Trump as the presumptive Republican nominee, and Republicans have what they want with Democrats sticking with Joe Biden. Both parties are more interested in attacking their opponent than in promoting their candidate. Neither candidate shows any interest in reconciliation. Trump, in a statement that showed how unhinged he is from reality, claimed to have no need of Nikki Haley’s supporters, Independents, or disgruntled Democrats. In his State of the Union, Biden made no effort to appease Republicans unhappy with Trump. Instead, the speech was, as Ben Domenech wrote in The Spectator, “unhinged…spewing invective at half the country.” – the campaign speech of an angry old man, which served as a preview of the road to November.

 

Unless, unless something changes. Last Friday, No Labels held a virtual 800-delegate meeting, and the members voted, “near unanimously” as NBC put it, to move forward with the process of forming a presidential ticket to run in the 2024 election against Joe Biden and Donald Trump. An official ticket was not put forward, but one is expected. Regardless, given the ages of Biden and Trump and should Robert Kennedy, Jr. and Harvard professor and civil rights activist Cornel West persist in their presidential bids, conventions this summer may be wide-open affairs. 

 

And yet, are things as bad as they seem? No one can see into the future. Classicists remind us that empires end, and so might the United States, a nation that has stood as a defender of freedom for the world’s democracies, and a country that provides hope for the world’s oppressed. But is now that moment? I recall the late 1960s and ‘70s when society was frayed and politics were in disarray, yet we survived. It is possible that the last stanza of Edgar Guest’s (1881-1959) poem published in the March 4, 1921 issue of the Detroit Free Press will prove prescient for today’s over-whelmed American voter:

 

“And you never can tell how close you are,

It may be near when it seems so far,

So stick to the fight when you’re hardest hit – 

It’s when things seem worst that you must not quit.”

"Time for a Third Party?"

                                                                     Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Time for a Third Party?”

February 16, 2024

 

“Third parties are like bees: once they have stung, they die.”

                                                                                                                                Richard Hofstadter (1916-1970)

                                                                                                                                The Age of Reform, 1955

 

As Professor Hofstadter wrote almost seventy years ago, third parties do not have an encouraging history in American politics. In 1912, Theodore Roosevelt’s Progressive “Bull Moose” Party handed the election to Woodrow Wilson. In 1924, Robert LaFollette’s Progressive Party garnered 16.6% of the popular vote, but probably did not affect the election’s outcome. As well, Strom Thurmond in 1948 and George Wallace in 1968 ran effective campaigns but did not affect elections in those years. However, Ross Perot’s Independent Party in 1992 probably cost George H.W. Bush his re-election.

 

John Templeton once said that the four most dangerous words in investing are “this time it’s different.” Those words are ordinarily applicable to third party candidacies. However, this year does seem different. Assuming that the two lead candidates stay the course – not a sure bet – November’s election will be between two of the widely unliked (and least qualified) candidates in American history[1].

 

With Robert Kennedy, Jr. already in the race and with No Labels standing in the wings, perhaps the most comparable election would be that of 1860, which fielded four candidates: Lincoln was the Republican candidate, Stephen Douglas the Democrat, John Breckinridge ran as a Lecompton Democratic candidate, and John Bell from the Constitutional Union Party. When the smoke cleared on November 6, 1860, Lincoln had won just under 40% of the popular vote, Douglas 29.5%, Breckinridge 18.2% and Bell 12.6%. However, in terms of Electoral College votes, Lincoln was the clear winner, with 180 votes out of 303 cast.

 

Voters are often told that a vote for a third party means a vote for the opposition. In other words, Democrat leaders today tell voters that a vote for Robert Kennedy, Jr. is in fact a vote for Donald Trump. History suggests their warnings are justified, as no third party candidate has ever won the White House. In Shakespeare’s The Tempest Antonio speaks to Sebastian: “What’s past is prologue.” 

 

But the past is not always prologue? Humans have advanced, driven by those who dared to experiment, to try something new. Consider the telegraph, railroads, telephones, cars, airplanes, space travel, computers, the integrated circuit, and artificial intelligence. Our Founders, in 1789, chose a new form of government. They looked to the past but created something new – a representative, republican democracy, in which the individual was paramount and government limited. Three equal and independent branches were devised to help prevent any one person or branch from taking control. The government born in Philadelphia was, as Lincoln proclaimed at Gettysburg eighty-seven years later, a new concept in human history, a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

 

Today’s two political parties did not exist in 1789. It was not until 1828 that the Democratic Party was formed, as a vehicle to help elect Andrew Jackson. The Republican Party was formed in 1854 by forces opposed to the expansion of slavery. Today, neither party is what it was a generation or two ago. The country club crowd of the northeast, once solidly Republican, has become decidedly Democratic. Internationalists of the 1950s, once solidly Republican, have become, under Mr. Trump, anti-globalists. 

 

Today, two aging men (though younger than me) – one with obvious declining cognitive powers and the other a tactless, uncouth individual who threatens to dismantle NATO – head both parties. Is it not time to seek a third way? Or, if not a third way, is it not time for leaders of both parties to recognize their flawed choices and nominate someone who can move the country forward in a manner acceptable to the majority of voters? I recall once having lunch in the Senate dining room in the early 1970s. I remember the sense of camaraderie that permeated the room – Republicans and Democrats dining together. Famously, President Reagan and House Speaker Thomas (“Tip”) O’Neil, while poles apart politically, enjoyed a mutually respectful and affectionate relationship. And similarly, Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich had a mutually beneficial meeting of the minds. But I cannot imagine President Biden enjoying a drink with Speaker Mike Johnson any more than I could have imagined former President Trump sitting down to exchange stories with former Speaker Nancy Pelosi. That loss of political camaraderie has become the people’s loss.

 

No Labels was launched ten years ago, initially among House members, as fault lines between the parties widened and deepened. Today, fifty House members, split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, meet regularly. The House effort is led by Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA). Five years ago, No Labels began an effort to organize a similar group in the Senate. Today, their leaders include Joe Manchin (D-WV), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Krysten Sinema (I-AZ). Their goal is to find common ground, at a time when extremists from both sides dominate their parties, along with news and social media platforms. 

 

Will a Third Party, like the mythical Phoenix arise from the ashes of today’s political conflagration? I am unsure. My hope is that both parties recognize that their current preferences for President will lead to more division at home and to a more dangerous world abroad. Ironically, Democrats hope Trump is Republicans’ choice, just as Republicans hope Biden heads the Democratic slate. 

 

As I have written before, the Democratic Party, being more disciplined, is more likely to drop the Biden-Harris ticket than Republicans to dump Trump. However, as a conservative, it is my hope that Republicans recognize the futility of sticking with the flawed and (nationally) unelectable Donald Trump. They have an opportunity with Nikki Haley who polls well against Mr. Biden. But will she gain the necessary votes in the upcoming primaries? She does not generate the fanaticism of Trump followers, but she appeals to a broader array of voters. If both parties stick with today’s leaders, a Third Party candidate seems, to this observer, a likely alternative.  

 

 

 

 

---

---

[1] To be clear, in my opinion, it is not age that is the problem; it is the mental condition of one and the character of the other. Both, in varying degrees, are corrupt and neither seems to appreciate history. As to who is most corrupt, I leave that for you to decide. There is no doubt that Mr. Biden is cognitively impaired and we, the public, have no idea who is the puppeteer pulling the strings in his administration.  There is no debate about Mr. Trump being a boorish, loose cannon in a complex and multi-cultural world when tolerance and grasp are needed. Worse, he has become an isolationist just as the world is turning more dangerous. However, Trump’s appeal, we should not forget, is to those millions of forgotten men and women ignored by identity politics, elitism, and political correctness.

"First Out, Next In"

 Why would Biden first warn and then give time to our enemies before retaliating for the deaths of three American soldiers? It makes no sense for a Country that has responsibility for maintaining world peace. It is as though we have let our faults govern our goodness and reflects a failure to understand the presence of evil, and that power is an aphrodisiac. From Napoleon to Hitler, from Stalin to Mao, from the Iranian Mullahs to Putin and Xi Jinping individuals have wanted to control the world. The United States and the West have stood in their way. We must stop contemplating our navels and apologizing for past sins, both real and imagined. We cannot hide from our responsibilities. The United States and the nations of the West are not perfect, but they are good and certainly better than the alternatives. 

 

…………………………………………………………………………………….

 

Yesterday would have been my paternal grandfather’s 151^st birthday. Tomorrow is my daughter’s birthday. Birthdays, especially of grandparents we knew well, remind us of the past and bring it forward into the present. They tell us of how life has changed and how young is our country. I loved talking to my grandfather about his youth in Boston. He grew up in a world without cars, at a time when most homes did not have electricity or phones. When he died on February 3, 1963, a day shy of ninety, 98% of homes in the U.S. had electricity and there were almost seventy million cars on American roads. He was thirty years old when the Wright Brothers first flew at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. By the time he died, 58 million Americans were flying annually. Will the sixty years provide as much change? We cannot know, but with advances in technology, especially artificial intelligence, that cannot be ruled out. Medicine, communication, education, and entertainment should all benefit. And of course there will be other changes we cannot conceive. 

 

………………………………………………………………………………………….

 

Apologies for the long preamble. As for this essay, it is a look into the near future, so no more than a hope and a guess. 

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.bolgspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“First Out, Next In”

February 5, 2024

 

“It is really true what philosophy tells us, that life must be understood backwards.

But with this, one forgets the second proposition, that it must be lived forward.”

Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

Danish theologian and philosopher

Journals, 1843

 

Edward Bellamy’s 1888 utopian novel Looking Backward showed the difficulty of getting the future right, especially when idealism co-opts reason. National socialism proved a disaster to Germany and Italy (and the world), and state ownership of industry deep-sixed the Soviet Union. Kierkegaard suggested in the rubric above, life is best lived with an understanding of history. And as George Santayana famously wrote in Life of Reason: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

 

Divisiveness characterizes our age, like the years leading to the Civil War, the McCarthy era of the early 1950s, or the late 1960s when the Country was divided by the Vietnam War. In last Friday’s The Wall Street Journal Lance Morrow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center wrote: “Exaggeration is the traditional style of American politics, but permanent culture wars, the global pandemic, the agitations of social media and the collapse of party discipline – and, not least, the role modeling of Joe Biden and Donald Trump – have left Americans discontent with mere exaggeration.” We have, he added, “gotten addicted to apocalypse…”

 

Is there a way out? Can reason subsume emotion? Is a middle ground achievable? I think there is, but I don’t believe that either Mr. Biden or Mr. Trump will lead the way. The former is in cognizant decline and the latter has become detached from reality. There are big issues that separate the two parties, but democracy is about debate and compromise, not incoherent brawling, which is what our politics have become.

 

The title of this essay stems from my belief that the first of the two main contenders to drop out of the race for President (as unlikely as that now seems) will assure that his Party wins November’s Presidential election. At this point there is no sign that such a possibility is being considered. Neither candidate is widely admired, let alone respected, yet both appear likely to secure their Party’s nomination. In a head-to-head race, polls have them pretty much divided. As for losers, if either were to win, that would be the American public. The likelihood of a Biden-Trump rematch makes this an intractable problem for a majority of voters, as forever Trumpers battle imperious Progressives. 

 

As an amateur observer of the political scene, it seems to me that the first to drop out would likely be Mr. Biden. His lack of mental acuity becomes more visible every day, and Democrats are the more disciplined of the two Parties. Their leaders, no matter what they now say, know that Mr. Biden’s health will continue to deteriorate and that Vice President Kamala Harris is not a viable candidate to lead the world’s most powerful nation. Mainstream media, which serves as their propaganda arm, is beginning to suggest a change would be in the Party’s best interest. On the Republican side, M.A.G.A. Republicans remain vehement defenders of a man they feel has been treated badly. But the conservative media is mixed. While Fox News and Epoch Timesare all-in in their support for Mr. Trump, The Wall Street Journal takes a more muted approach, as do The New York Sun, National Review and The Spectator. And we have both the Biden and Trump nominations being supported by mainstream media. Biden’s support stems from his identity politics and his preference for Washington’s Woke bureaucracy. In contrast, mainstream media would prefer the “deplorable,” but nationally unelectable, Mr. Trump over the electable Nikki Haley.  

 

Will either man drop out of the race? I suspect not willingly. But control of the White House reaps enormous benefits – the coattail effect of elections, control over the political direction of the country and the world, and the direct appointment of thousands of jobs. Democrats, as mentioned above, are more methodical, more controlling than Republicans; they appeal to the group, not the individual. While they have extremists, like the “Squad,” the entire Party has moved left since the Obama Presidency. On the other hand, Republicans have always been a Party of individuals, of oners, where the group is less important than the person. However, “Forever Trumpers” have changed the calculus. Their backing of Trump is less about policies and more about anger as to how he and they have been belittled. To borrow an Obama line, they believe that having Trump in their corner is like bringing a gun to a knife fight. As Hoover Institute senior fellow John H. Cochrane wrote in Saturday’s The Wall Street Journal: “…there is no better way to stick it to the elites than to vote for the man who drives them most crazy.” 

 

For a conservative like me, these are sad days. This should be a Republican cycle given Mr. Biden’s low polling numbers, our moral decay, and our decline in the eyes of the world. Consider: the Country faces an out-of-control immigration crisis; a war in the Middle East that is spreading; a Russia intent on reclaiming its past empire; a China insistent on controlling the South China Sea and its trade routes; an Iran on the cusp of becoming a nuclear power; overwhelming debt and deficits; the lingering effects of inflation; and a focus on identity that has worsened race relations. There is no question of the fervor of Mr. Trump’s followers, but, as we saw in 2018, 2020, and 2020, he has no coattails. Control of the White House without control of Congress means we tread water. Difficult problems do not get resolved.

 

Predicting the future is a fool’s game, yet as the Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard wrote life must be lived forward. So, using the past as guide we make predictions. As I wrote earlier, I believe there is a chance Mr. Biden will be persuaded to give up his quest. But for Mr. Trump to do likewise is unlikely. If Republicans want a dog fight, they should go with Mr. Trump. But the best shot for Republicans to keep the House, take back the Senate and the White House is to support Nikki Haley in the upcoming primaries. She is Republicans’ best hope for victory, and for America to take back our values, families, schools, and cities.

"Choices"

 Given today’s politics, it is easy to become dispirited, at least it is for me. It is why I enjoy reading novels and history – history to remind me that much of what we experience has happened before and to put in context our experiences versus what has happened to those in the past; novels because they allow me to escape to other times, and because good novelists create characters that provide insight into people today, showing that good and evil have always been with us.

 

Attached is another essay – not to convince you of the correctness of my position – but to explain why I think and feel as I do. As an essayist, I find that I write primarily for myself.

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swstotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Choices”

January 29, 2024

 

“It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.”

                                                                                              Dumbledore, head of Hogwarts, speaking to Harry Potter

                                                                                              Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, 1998

                                                                                              J.K. Rowling (1965-)

 

Free choice, where it does not break the law or infringe on the rights of others, is fundamental to our rights as Americans. We make hundreds of choices every day, some significant, others not so. Next November’s election represents a significant choice. It has been portrayed as critical because, or so we are told, democracy is on the line. Progressives, and their propagandists in mainstream media, would have us believe that the election of Donald Trump would signify the end of democracy. And there is no question he is mean-spirited, has spoken of retribution against those who oppose him, and may go to jail. On the other hand, many of us on the right believe democracy is at risk because current political trends suggest we are, with the degradation of individualism, headed toward group-think, socialism, and central planning. One is reminded of Yeats: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst/ Are full of passionate intensity.”

 

As for Trump, despite his well-publicized flaws, consider what he faced in his first term: the weaponization of the intelligence services; retribution by his political enemies; along with the pursuit of identity politics, the elevation of the group over the individual, the imposition of DEI into many aspects of our lives, and the inflicting of ESG into our investment and financial organizations – the phony feel-good elements of Wokeism. Keep in mind, threats to democracy can come from the left as well as the right. So what does a thoughtful voter do? Colleen Hoover, a writer of romance stories for young teens, wrote in Hopeless: “Sometimes you have to choose between a bunch of wrong choices and no right ones.” Given what our options for President are likely to be in November, voters may face a similar ineluctable conundrum – a “Sophie’s Choice” between two bad options, the rock shoals of Scylla or the whirlpool of Charybdis. However, there are nine months to go until election day and much could happen, especially with two far-from-ideal elderly candidates.

 

In my opinion, it is too early, at least for Republicans, to raise the white flag. This may also be true for Democrats, as Biden’s polls are the lowest for a sitting President since Jimmy Carter. “Forever Trumpers” on the right and the Progressive wing of Democrats, along with their minions in the media, have already decided that Trump will be the Republican nominee and Biden the Democrat. That is what leaders of both Parties want. “Forever Trumpers” care more about the man than the Party, while Democrats see Trump as the Republican candidate easiest to beat. Republicans – the smaller of the two parties – are the Party of the individual, so managing them is like herding cats. Democrats, in contrast (and at least outwardly), remain unified behind an aged, cognitively-impaired man. As President, Mr. Biden has been marching to the beat of Obama-era Progressives – those who believe in big government, that race and gender supersede class distinctions, that racial and gender equity should repudiate merit, and that the imagery of a tossed salad better describes America than the concept of a melting pot. The latter is particularly jarring, as it promotes segregation rather than assimilation.

 

Is it not possible that the wishes of a majority of Americans – Independents along with moderate Republicans and Democrats – are being ignored by Party leaders and mainstream media? 

 

To win the Democratic nomination, the winner must have the votes of 1,969 delegates. While Biden won New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary via write-ins (against the wealthy Minnesota businessman, Representative Dean Phillips), his name was not on the ballot, so, at this point, Biden has no delegates. To win the Republican nomination, the winner must have the support of 1,215 delegates. As of now Trump has 32 and Nikki Haley has 17. While Trump, like Biden, appears to have the advantage, the race for Party nominee is not over. Most polls show Haley as the more formidable candidate against Biden. As for Biden’s competition at this point, Dean Phillips will likely not warrant a footnote in a history of 21^st Century American politics. Third party candidates could cause a change: No Labels may in fact nominate someone, and the impact of Robert Kennedy, Jr’s. run for the White House is unknown. Nevertheless, with two aging white men just out of the gate and hobbling down the track, the race is yet to be run.

 

According to Ballotpedia and as of 2022, Democrats comprise 38.8% of registered voters, Republicans 29.4%, and Independents 28.6%. While extremists now appear to control both Parties, to win a victor must appeal to Independents and to moderates in both Parties, which is why, in my opinion, Nikki Haley would be the better (and more redoubtable) Republican candidate. And it is the reason why mainstream media has been so quick to argue the helplessness of her quest and the inevitability of both Trump and Biden.

 

But even if Biden and Trump are on the ballot in November, the choice then confronting us would be more than personality differences between two aged, flawed men. Who would be their running mates? More important is what the election of either man would mean in terms of the future of the country. Progressive Democrats – the Obama branch of the Party – advocate statism with a larger role for government. Last week in New Hampshire Representative Dean Phillips (D-MN), promised to provide thousand-dollar American Dream Accounts for every baby born in the country, offer free college tuition for all, and guarantee a $15.00 per hour minimum wage.  Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA), who leads the polls to become his state’s next Senator has promised to abolish the Senate filibuster rule, increase the number of justices on the Supreme Court to thirteen from nine, cancel at least $50,000 in student loan debt for every borrower, increase the corporate tax rate from today’s 21% to 35%, legalize the harvesting of votes, and institute a pilot program for a “Universal Basic Income.” And these Democrats claim to be preserving democracy!

 

We live in the greatest democracy the world has ever known. It is not perfect, but it has evolved over time into a fairer system and will continue to evolve. There is no end of history. We face threats from China and Russia, as well as rogue states, and challenges unknown to those who came before us: artificial intelligence and cyber warfare. Thus it is most important not to lose focus on the principles upon which our nation was founded, those embedded in our Constitution and Declaration of Independence, in the “Golden Rule,” and in the moral and ethical lessons from our Judeo-Christian heritage. The voting booth is where we exercise our choice as to who will represent us in government. We do not seek the perfect candidate, but rather the one who best represents our opinions and beliefs. Voting is a privilege, an honor, and a duty. So think carefully; don’t be influenced by slogans, bullied by advocates, or hustled to decide betimes.

 

As Dumbledore said to Harry Potter, the choices we make define who we are. “We are our choices” is a line often ascribed to Existentialist philosopher and novelist Jean-Paul Sartre. And we are all familiar with Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol when Ebenezer Scrooge is confronted with the ghost of his late partner Jacob Marley. “‘You are fettered,’ said Scrooge. ‘Tell me why.’ ‘I wear the chains I forged in life,’ replied the Ghost. ‘I made it link by link, and yard by yard; I girded it on of my own free will, and of my own free will I wore it.’” Come November and no matter whom you vote for, the consequences will not be as dire as they were for Jacob Marley. But in a country that has survived and thrived for almost 250 years voting should be taken seriously. Make sure you exercise the privilege. The choice is yours. The future belongs to our children and grandchildren.

"To Whom, or to What, Do We Owe the Phenomenon that is Donald Trump?"

 Writing is a difficult form of communication. In his weekly Wall Street Journal column this past Wednesday, Holman Jenkins, Jr. wrote: “No matter how carefully I choose my words, I can’t make you know all or exactly what I mean.” I understand what he is saying. First, it is not easy to take a half-formed idea and translate it into comprehensible English. And second, words can be defined differently by different people. What, for example, is meant by ‘truth’ or ‘justice,’ not to mention ‘diversity,’ equity,’ ‘inclusion,’ or ‘proportional,’ as the latter applies to the Israeli-Hamas war?

 

This essay had a particularly tough gestation. Fortunately, my wife is a close reader, saving me from even more embarrassment. I appreciate your forbearance. 

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

December 1, 2023

“To Whom, or to What, Do We Owe the Phenomenon that is Donald Trump?”

 

“Oh, the unintended consequences of perfidy.”

                                                                                                Andrew Levkoff

                                                                                                A Mixture of Madness, 2012

                                                                                                

Donald Trump is like a battery-operated Hyper Pet Critter Dog that runs helter-skelter around the floor. As long as its battery is charged it will annoy most everyone except its owner. Trump’s battery life appears inexhaustible, but is it, and who or what is responsible? 

 

Since January 6, 2021, it has become common for Democrats to claim democracy is under attack, with Donald Trump as prima facie evidence. In a speech on November 2, 2022, shortly before the midterms, President Biden said: “In our bones, we know democracy is at risk.” Just over two months ago, and citing the January 6 attack, he repeated the warning: “We know how damaged our institutions of democracy – our judiciary, the legislature, the executive – have become in the eyes of the American people, even the world, from attacks within, the past few years.” It is a message that resonated with voters in 2022. Will it succeed again in 2024? In that same 2023 speech, he warned that democracies “can die when people are silent – when they fail to stand up or condemn threats to democracy.” While he did not refer to him by name, he was speaking of Donald Trump.

 

The impetus for his remarks was January 6, and the “attack” on the Capital by Trump supporters. But in both remarks Biden failed to mention that democracy did survive – that the only fatality was that of Ashli Babbitt who was shot dead by a Capital policemen and that Vice President Michael Pence certified the election results, which made Joe Biden President. Nor did he acknowledge that the people were not silent – that the “attack” was condemned by Democrats and Independents – and by many Republicans – and all of mainstream media. More than 1,100 rioters have been charged with close to 300 having been given prison sentences, ranging from six months to eighteen years. The people have not been silent about January 6.

 

In the months since, Trump has been charged with ninety-one criminal counts, enough to keep his name in the news continuously, and for his supporters to gather strength from continued insults to their hero and to their intelligence. One asks: Is the phenomenon of Trump an unintended consequence of progressive intemperance? 

 

While I am not a fan of Mr. Trump, I voted for him twice because I believed, right or wrong, that he was better for the country than alternatives. I am a fiscal conservative, socially liberal in the classical sense, and one who is concerned about a degradation in the values that have made this country unique among nations – reverence for family, respect for the law and for others, personal responsibility and pride in our nation. 

 

In 2016 disaffected voters felt that government had become too elitist – too distant from the common man. The Tea Party, which called for smaller government, was deemed extremist, as was the House Freedom Caucus. And progressives’ calls for DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) were seen by those on the right as hypocritical, as universities, big corporations, mainstream and social media, and tech companies had no interest in diversity of opinion or inclusion of those who did not conform to the accepted progressive narrative. As Amir Taheri wrote recently for the Gatestone Institute: “…Trump has given voice to millions of voiceless Americans who feel uncomfortable with the status quo and harbor fears, genuine or imagined, about the future.” It is understandable what made him attractive in 2016. What is less comprehensible is why the left now gives him so much free press.

 

In their determination to minimalize Trump, Democrats instead elevated him. Presumably this was done because they thought that since Biden had beaten him in 2020 he could do so again in 2024. Trump was (and is) the nominee Democrats prefer. But Trump recognizes the wisdom attributed to Phineas T. Barnum, that all publicity is good publicity. Progressives in Washington and their lackeys in mainstream media, both blinded with hatred for Trump, have served, unwittingly, as his re-charging stations. Mr. Trump benefits every time a rioter from January 6 is jailed, or when another criminal charge is filed against him. Mr. Trump is on social media, on networks’ and cables’ evening news, and in the headlines. “Exposure to a candidate’s name…can lead to an increase in the candidate’s likeability,” is the wisdom from Wikipedia. 

 

It is true that democratically elected leaders can become dictators. In 1921, Fascist Benito Mussolini was elected to Italy’s Parliament and a year later was handed ultimate power by King Victor Emanuel. In July 1932, Adolph Hitler was elected to the Reichstag. Six months later, as leader of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, he was appointed Chancellor by President Von Hindenburg. For an American President to assume dictatorial control, he or she would need the backing of the military and the intelligence agencies, and support from the press. That was never going to happen to Mr. Trump, as we know from the way he was treated when President, especially by the intelligences services and the media. Keep in mind, extremists inhabit both ends of the political spectrum. And it is the left that is unguarded by watchdogs of democracy.

 

……………………………………………………………

 

Both Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump, but particularly Trump, agitate emotions rather than reason. We need citizens educated in the basic principles of democracy. Eleven years before the Declaration of Independence, in 1765 John Adams wrote that “…liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people.” Today, if knowledge of civics were required to vote, many of the electorate would be disenfranchised. 

 

Nevertheless, the country has faced challenges in the past – many more severe than what we now face. Men like Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan appeared when needed, and the nation had a course correction. The American actress Ilka Chase reputedly once said: “Democracy is not an easy form of government, because it is never final; it is a living, changing organism, with a continuous shifting and adjusting of balance between individual freedom and general order.” She was right.

 

Was Trump the best answer to the concerns so many had seven years ago? Perhaps not, but there was a sense that government had become too elitist, too distant from people and their traditional beliefs in faith and family, a concern that has intensified over the past three years. Yet, the man who has been pilloried has been kept alive by the very people who detest him the most. Mr. Trump craves attention. And the media gives it to him: publicity-seeking prosecutors seeking criminal charges and a never-ending rehash of the January 6 saga. If he were ignored, he might fade away. But the media realizes he drives viewers and eyeballs, more than the failing Mr. Biden. And woke progressives cannot help themselves, so the public is constantly exposed to him. It falls to conservatives – not Mr. Trump – to save our republic. Enter stage right (I hope), Nikki Haley.