The only reason the GOP would dump Trump

"The economy, stupid."

Remember when even the whiff of adultery could ruin a man's chances of becoming president or could get him impeached? Ha ha ha. That's so 1990s. (Though I'm guessing if a Democrat was caught screwing around, Republicans would be up in arms.)

So what does it take in 2017 to get impeached, or even censured by Congress? Apparently not racism, inciting violence, ethics violations, profiteering, shady (or illegal) business dealings, conflicts of interest, collusion with a foreign power, bullying, lying, or fraud.

In fact, I would wager that if Donald J. Trump stood in front of Trump Tower -- or anywhere on Fifth Avenue -- and shot someone, I doubt it would make a dent in his popularity, at least among his die-hard supporters. It might even raise it if the person he shot was black or Muslim. He would no doubt claim it was self-defense, and his supporters -- and Fox News -- would believe him and trumpet his innocence, even if it was proved that the attack was unprovoked.

And while Republican Senators and Representatives might initially condemn Trump for shooting someone, as some of them have in the past for his pussy grabbing, support of white supremacy, and other things, I doubt even that would move them to censure or impeach him.

No, the only thing that might possibly cause Republicans in Congress to impeach or remove Trump? If the economy went into a tailspin, meaning the stock market crashed, unemployment crept up, and we faced another recession.

Right now Trump is still enjoying the economic draft or slipstream left from President Obama's time at the wheel, similar to the economic situation George W. Bush inherited when he took office. And we all know how well that turned out.

And that quote at the beginning of this blog post, "The economy, stupid" (typically quoted as "It's the economy, stupid")? That was the rallying cry of the (Bill) Clinton campaign back in 1992, which helped get him elected.

Indeed, more than anything else (except maybe -- maybe) terrorism or the threat of terrorism, the economy is what determines who gets into or stays in office*. And if Donald Trump, the supposedly great businessman, turns out to be bad for business? Then, maybe, just maybe, he will be removed or voted out of office. But I wouldn't bet on it.



*I hear the spouse and many of my non-Republican friends yelling at their computer screens, saying "I disagree! The Russian thing is going to be his undoing!" To which my reply is, only if there is some major bombshell -- that there is indisputable proof that Trump personally colluded with Russians to influence the election -- will that possibly lead to impeachment. That's how crazy and depressing our political situation is now. Which, to quote Donald Trump, is sad.

Why Jon Ossoff (and the Democrats) will lose

Why do I think Jon Ossoff, the Democrat seeking to represent Georgia's 6th congressional district, will lose to Republican Karen Handel in today's special election, even though he's raised far more money and seems far more popular? Because Republicans vote and Democrats don't.

Obviously, Democrats vote, but their turnout is typically far lower than Republicans', especially in off-year elections. And the 6th has been a reliably Republican district since the late 1970s, when Newt Gingrich won -- and held onto the seat for 20 years (to be replaced by two more middle-aged white males).

And despite what they may say or write about a Republican candidate, when it comes down to a vote, Republicans almost always vote for the person with an R after his (or occasionally her) name. So it's doubtful that Ossoff will have managed to sway 15 or 10 percent of Republican voters to vote for him, even if they don't like Trump or Trumpcare/The American Health Care Act.

Moreover, Republican campaign strategists are very good at staying on message and getting Republicans to the polls. Their strategy: fear. Vote for the Democrat and you'll be paying higher taxes! (They'll grab your hard-earned money and give it to lazy minorities and illegal immigrants!) Vote for the Democrat and you'll be less safe (cause they'll take away your guns and will let criminals roam the streets)!

And despite plenty of proof to the contrary, the strategy always works. Just tell the people what they want to hear, even -- or especially -- if it's a bunch of lies. Because who's going to fact check? Most voters don't read anymore, let alone check the accuracy of what they're reading, especially on social media, or what they see on TV. And when faced with any facts that contradict their beliefs, they cling even harder to their beliefs. So it's really a no-lose situation for Republicans.

So what can Democrats do? I think part of the solution has to be going back to grass roots, old-fashioned campaigning, like what Ossoff's been doing -- and what Obama did in the 2008 presidential race. Going to lots of events that "real people," not just wealthy donors, attend. Going door to door, and/or to supermarkets, and the local car wash; attending sporting events at local high schools and colleges; holding town halls. And making people feel that you're listening to them.

Democrats also need to come up with some catchy soundbites, because when it comes down to it, people don't read or remember or really care about policy positions anymore. They want something short and pithy that you can put after a hashtag.

And Democrats need to register young people to vote and make sure they go to the polls on election day. Because the only real way to effect change is by voting.

Forget Comey. Trump isn't going anywhere.

To those who think James Comey's testimony before Congress yesterday is going to make any difference -- as in move Congress a step closer to removing Donald Trump from office -- think again.

We are at the point where, as Trump claimed back in January 2016, he (Trump) could "stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and... wouldn't lose voters."

Indeed, Republicans (assuming they still controlled Congress at the time of the shooting) would no doubt come up with a justification for the shooting and Trump would be made to look the victim.

"He's just new to this," House Speaker Paul Ryan would say. "He probably wasn’t steeped in the long-running protocols that establish how to use a gun."

Yes, this is where we are at in this country. As long as the man sitting in the Oval Office has an "R" (as in Republican -- or Russian agent) after his name -- and his party enjoys a majority in the House and Senate -- he can be a liar, an abuser of women and power, flout the constitution and ethics rules, allow a foreign power to influence foreign policy, and put his own special interests before the interests of the country he was elected to serve, because "when you're a [Republican], they let you do it." As long as you're for reducing taxes on the wealthy and allow Congress to pass laws favorable to wealthy special interests -- or undo regulations that those filling your campaign war chest or holding your debt want you to roll back.

And while no one enjoys paying taxes (except maybe my father, a registered Republican who always used to say to me that if everyone paid their fair share of taxes, we'd all pay a lot less in taxes), cutting taxes -- so-called trickle-down economics -- doesn't create more jobs or make the economy healthier. In fact, it does more harm than good. Just take a look at Kansas.

But that's where we are at here in the land of ME, ME, ME, WHAT ABOUT ME? Screw the sick (until you are sick). Forget about education. Fuck women (literally and figuratively). And to hell with the environment (which will soon resemble Hell if temperatures keep rising.) If you can save me a few thousand, even a few hundred, dollars a year in taxes, you have my blessing to do whatever you like, Donald and Republicans.

Sadly, it will be up to some future president to make America great again.

The GOP vs ISIS: A Comparison

After reading yesterday that the Trump administration planned to eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), as well as privatizing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (which is a bit of an oxymoron), ostensibly as part of an effort to reduce government spending (even though eliminating all three of these programs would barely make a dent in the federal budget), I thought to myself, 'Huh, you know who else hates the arts and wants to destroy them? Radical Islamists (aka ISIS)!'

That led me to wondering what else Conservative Republicans (cutting arts funding was the brainchild of Conservative thank tank Heritage Foundation) and Radical Islamists had in common. So I did some research and created this handy little chart. And gee whiz! The GOP and ISIS have way more in common than we thought!

Conservative Republicans	Radical Islamists
Want to subjugate women; believe women should be seen (if they are attractive) but not heard	Want to subjugate women; believe women should be neither seen nor heard
Abhor homosexuality	Abhor homosexuality
Resent the educated, dislike/distrust institutions of higher learning	Resent the educated, dislike/distrust institutions of higher learning
Believe Christianity is the one true religion	Believe Islam is the one true religion
Little or no tolerance for unbelievers or other faiths	Little or no tolerance for unbelievers or other faiths
Disdain the arts, want to defund	Disdain the arts, want to destroy
Will use whatever means necessary (gerrymandering, fake news) to secure their goals/leadership	Will use whatever means necessary (propaganda, bombs) to secure their goals/leadership

Also, while poking around the Internets (looking for a map I saw a while back showing the United States as a bunch of -stans*), I came across these two maps of the world.

This first one shows Ronald Reagan's view of the world, back in the 1980s:

The second map illustrates Donald Trump's view of the world in 2016:

Pretty interesting, no?

*If any of you find a link to that map, please send it to me.

It's the stupidity

Stupidity. According to the dictionary, the definition of stupidity is "behavior that shows a lack of good sense or judgement." Synonyms include "lack of intelligence," "foolishness," and "ignorance."

Well, this election cycle we have seen a lot of stupidity -- as in a lack of intelligence, foolishness, and ignorance. (And here I thought things couldn't get worse after Sarah Palin. Guess that was foolish thinking on my part.)

Maybe it's because I was taught from a young age to do my research and search out the facts -- though every person who has ever gone to school is taught to do that -- but I am stunned (though not surprised) by the amount of willful ignorance exhibited by so many supporters of the candidates running for President of the United States this year, as well as many of the candidates themselves.

I get knowing the facts, but choosing to not let certain negative things override (dare I say 'trump'?) your support of a particular candidate. (Do I think Hillary Clinton was stupid, or naive, to use a personal email server? Yes. Will that stop me from voting for her in the general election? No. And please, all you Republicans and Sanders supporters, do not take that comment as an invitation to dump all over Hillary in the comments, which are now moderated, for good reason.)

But being told and shown the facts, repeatedly, and refusing to believe them? That is just stupidity -- and willful ignorance -- and is not the way to make America great again.

Let's furlough Congress (specifically the House of Representatives)

Talk about "nonessential" government employees. Republican members of the House pretty much top the list. (As my friend, P., a banker, wrote me from England, "If the result of the shut down was that the first group of 'public servants' not to be paid was politicians an agreement would have been found." Yup.)

For those of you who vaguely remember your U.S. History (or Schoolhouse Rock), the role of Congress, the legislative branch of our government, is to pass laws and establish an annual budget -- and levy taxes and tariffs to provide funding for government services. Clearly the current Congress, the 113th, is not doing a good job of either. (And the previous one did a sucky job, too.)

In fact, the only thing this Congress, and by "Congress" I really mean the Republican led House of Representatives (and the one before it), has done successfully is to obstruct Federal appointments and legislation -- that is, not pass laws and to de-fund and/or cripple many essential government services -- and shut the government down.

Newsflash: For those wondering what constitutes an "essential" government service, per Speaker of the House John Boehner, keeping the House gym open is "essential" but the National Institutes of Health providing cancer treatments to children is a "nonessential" service. Ditto Head Start. Ditto issuing benefits to the families of military personnel killed in combat. [For a full list of what's closed and what's open during the government shutdown, check out this CNN graphic.]

Here in the real world, outside the Beltway, when a group of employees doesn't do the job(s) they were hired to do, you fire them.

[Personally, I think the Irish were onto something when they voted to disband their Senate, which many Irish citizens consider ineffectual or incompetent and not worth the 20 million Euro pricetag. However the measure was voted down by a slim majority. I'd be curious to see, however, how a national vote to disband the House, at least temporarily, would go down here.]

Oh, and for those of you who believe the BS that there is plenty of blame to go around, please to be watching this Jon Stewart Daily Show clip. (I could cite many other sources re the cause or source of the government shutdown, but I thought this was one of the more succinct and to the point -- and most amusing. You can skip ahead to around the 1:09 mark.)


[I also enjoyed the Daily Show clip titled "Jon Stewart's Rockin' Shutdown Eve," and not just because of the New York Giants quip. Though I'm all for the Giants doing whatever it takes to get more points.]

So how long will the Tea Party, representing just 18 percent of the United States (if even that much), hold the rest of the government hostage to its ludicrous demands? Got me. And will they refuse to raise the debt ceiling, which, btw, Congress raised 17 times under Ronald Reagan? I don't doubt it.

What can be done? Short of marching on the Capitol with pitchforks, probably nothing -- unless gerrymandering and allowing wealthy citizens to fund candidates is outlawed.

I just wish someone could make the crazy in Congress go away.

UPDATED: The Tea Party-inflicted government shutdown has cost over $1.6 billion to date and is draining an estimated $160 million daily from the U.S. economy. 401Ks, IRAs, and savings are also taking a major hit. And who pays the price? We, the taxpayers.

You might be a Republican if...

You might be a Republican if... you get your news from Fox.

You might be a Republican if... you think facts were invented by liberals.

You might be a Republican if... you don't believe in global warning (or climate change), or that it has nothing to do with people. (See "You might be a Republican if... you think facts were invented by liberals" and "you get your news from Fox.")

You might be a Republican if... you think evolution is just another liberal theory.

You might be a Republican if... you don't what Liberalism actually means -- and don't care.

You might be a Republican if... you are against people receiving government entitlements (Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, farm subsidies, corporate tax breaks, student loans, government loans), except if it's you, your family, or your business receiving them.

You might be a Republican if... you complain about taxes in one breath and complain about the poor quality of your schools, police force, roads, and bridges in the next.

You might be a Republican if... you are "pro life," except for those who can't pay their medical bills and pregnant women.

You might be a Republican if... you think women, blacks, and/or Hispanics should "know their place" (that is, at home taking care of the kids and having your supper and a drink ready when you get home from work; helping your sports team win a championship or else in jail; taking care of your lawn for minimum wage, respectively).

You might be a Republican if... you think cheating is wrong, unless your wife has her period or you're out of town on business.

You might be a Republican if... you believe government shouldn't interfere in people's private lives, unless they are a woman. 

Would someone please have sex with Rush Limbaugh?

Sorry for the disturbing visual/request, but I guarantee you that if Rush Limbaugh was having mind-blowing sex on a regular basis, he wouldn't rant and rave so much about other people's sex lives. (Hey, maybe that chick who did it with Eliot Spitzer, Ashley Alexandra Dupre, would do the deed, as a public service.)

Also, too, for those of you who didn't see Stephen Colbert's segment titled "Rush Limbaugh Apologizes to Sandra Fluke" on the Colbert Report the other night, take a look.

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

While I think Al Franken summed it up best when he wrote "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot," Stephen Colbert's analysis is a close second.

The imminent government shutdown explained in under 500 words

I don't write a whole lot about politics because I prefer to amuse my readers not offend them. But when my almost 13-year-old daughter got upset this morning when she saw a news segment saying the government was about to shut down, and she asked me how the government could let that happen, something inside me snapped. And I let loose.

And now I'm going to share what I told her with all of you. Fortunately for you, you can close this page if you don't want to hear what I had to say. My daughter, on the other hand, had to listen to my diatribe (though she said it helped her understand what was going on -- and she's used to mom ranting and raving about politics).

In a nutshell: I explained to my adolescent daughter that under President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, the government ran a surplus -- that is, it took in more money (mainly in the form of taxes) than it spent. Then under President George W. Bush, a Republican, the government squandered that surplus, in part by launching two unnecessary and costly wars, and wound up with a deficit -- that is spending more money than it took in. And that the deficit has continued to spiral out of control, and that Congress (which has a Republican majority) and the President (Barack Obama, a Democrat) wanted to do something about it, but that they disagreed on how to fix the problem.

I then reminded her that there was a fundamental, philosophical difference between Democrats and Republicans. That Republicans believed in a small Federal government whose primary (and some believe only) job was to protect this country from outside threats -- i.e., tax dollars should be spent on defense. Moreover, Republicans were against raising taxes and taxation in general. (Though really who likes taxes? Some of us are just more realistic about it -- and like the idea of good public schools and clean air and clean water and a social safety net.)

And so if money had to be raised or saved, Republicans believed the solution was to slash spending -- on everything except defense and, OK, entitlements (Social Security and Medicare), which make up the majority of the U.S. Federal budget. Which means that you have to slash spending on things like education, and school lunches, and PBS and NPR (even though the savings for doing so would be a pittance and would solve NOTHING), and other programs that help and benefit the 99% of Americans who are not millionaires and/or in Congress.

Democrats on the other hand, while they are not against cutting spending, don't believe it is a sin or a crime to occasionally raise taxes -- and prefer to cut spending strategically, so as not to inflict unnecessary pain or suffering on Americans.

And so we have an impasse, with Democrats suggesting billions in spending cuts, some of them quite painful, and Republicans continuing to say "fuck you." (Though I didn't use the F word when explaining this to my daughter.)

And if the Republicans in Congress and the President can't reach some sort of agreement today, the Federal government will shut down -- though every member of Congress will still get a big fat paycheck (and spare me the lecture about it's only because the Constitution requires it -- I know), even though the people who actually do the work for them, as well as millions of other Federal employees and soldiers who really need the money, will not.

Does that help explain it, Sweetheart?

UPDATE #1: Many thanks to FOB CRR for sharing this article, titled "It's Not Really About Spending," which clearly puts the blame where it is due.

UPDATE #2: Just received this thoughtful email from my Congressman, which contains information about the government shutdown and which services will be affected -- and which will not.

UPDATE #3: Government shutdown avoided. Nothing to see here. Move along.