* * *
Political Scene Remains Fuzzy
Paul Krugman’s June 3 posting is primarily devoted to the appointment of the unfit and inexperienced Bill Pulte, from the family of builders, as Director of National Intellegence. It is a additional job for him as he also continues in his existing position as Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which oversees the U.S. housing finance system and is not reluctant to refer Trump’s critics to the DOJ to look for purported mortgage fraud.
Pulte’s only virtue is absolute loyalty to Trump. Krugman started off on June 3 by declaring that Trump is ‘no longer interested in governing’ and ‘is filled with rage and obsessed with revenge.’
The Founding Fathers, after breaking away from the English king, never anticipated a president like Trump. Neither did American voters. If Congress has its say, they will not allow Pulte’s appointment. But temporarily, in an ‘acting’ capacity, he has this second job.
* *
It should not be forgotten that Republicans still wield power in Congress. When the Senate just passed the immigration bill Trump wanted, it rejected a Democratic effort to tie a rider to it that would have permanently killed his not-quite-dead ‘slush fund.’ The ‘acting’ Attorney-General says he is not pursuing it further but the President implies otherwise when asked.
Republicans do not give up easily, making the November mid-term elections even more important because Trump will be president until January of 2029. That’s why the Democrats need to win control of both Houses of Congress in November, a demanding challenge. And that’s not even mentioning the war against Iran that he started and the inflationary troubles his tariffs have brought about for the American people.
Nevertheless, I sense that finally realizing that many of his actions are illegal, Donald Trump is seeking immunity for himself and his family from future prosecution, and possible incarceration if indicted and found to be guilty. A Democratic takeover of both Houses of Congress might lead there. And the president is not counting on the Supreme Court riding to his rescue.
Even though it appears that he may have backed off a bit due to public and Congressional reaction to his outrageous, but not-quite-dead ‘slush fund’ deal ripping off American citizens and taxpayers in exchange for his dropping his phony lawsuit against the IRS, the ‘immunity’ part of that corrupt deal still seems to remains safely afloat, aimed at preventing any future investigation of Donald Trump’s (or his family’s) tax returns.
Those familiar with the ‘Monopoly’ board game know Trump’s greatest fear is losing his ‘Get out of Jail, Free’ card and being forced to pick up a new card which might very well instruct him to ‘Go to Jail, Go Directly to Jail, Do not Pass Go, and Do not collect that $1,776,000,000 (you were planning to steal to use to compensate those January 6, 2021 insurrectionists who were convicted and punished for their actions on that date).’ That’s why the November 3 mid-term election is important, if not crucial, for Democrats. Nothing comes easily.
JL
* * *
About Souces of Information, Particularly ‘The Bulwark’
Online sources of information come and go, some surviving by asking followers to pay for the bulk of their content via subscriptions while others remain free, but are not reluctant to ask for donations.
Somewhere in this mixture is ‘The Bulwark.’
Jackspotpourri is reluctant to include information from ‘The Bulwark’ itself or from other comments appearing on their news and opinion sites. Why? ‘The Bulwark’ seems to be trying to be all things to all people; its roots are clearly conservative Republican and ‘Neo-Con’ but they do a good job of hiding that.
Here is an Artificial Intelligence summary of where ‘The Bulwark’ is politically. I still do not trust them.
“The political orientation of The Bulwark is center-right, primarily defined by its staunchly anti-Donald Trump, "Never Trump" conservative stance. Founded in 2018 by former Republican operatives and conservative commentators, the publication focuses on defending liberal democracy and often partners with moderate Democrats and independent voters to push back against right-wing populism.
Here is a breakdown of the publication's political identity and core themes:
• Founders & Contributors: It was launched by key figures in the conservative movement, including Sarah Longwell, Charlie Sykes, and Bill Kristol.
• Political Philosophy: While rooted in traditional, pre-Trump conservatism and neoconservatism, the editorial board now broadly describes its mission as the protection and preservation of liberal democracy.
• Coalition Building: Because of their unified opposition to the MAGA movement, they frequently collaborate with and appeal to moderate Democrats and disaffected left-leaning voters who prioritize institutional norms and democratic guardrails.
For more details on their editorial stances or to read their latest columns, you can visit The Bulwark.”
* *
I wonder how ‘The Bulwark’ would position itself if the Democrats gain control of one or both Houses of Congress in November. Would they remain an ally of liberal Democrats? Would they resurrect a Republican ‘opposition’ status? I just don’t know.
Meanwhile, other online sources of free information are disappearing every day. They come and go, depending on the solidity of their financing. Nevertheless, I continue to follow the free KOS site, which constantly begs for donations, as well as the ‘free’ part of Professor Heather Cox Richardson’s ‘Letters from an American.’ Also, I do pay to subscribe to the printed and delivered (by USPS snail-mail) New Yorker magazine, giving me access to their online material, as well as paying for the New York Times online version and the daily delivered South Florida SunSentinel print newspaper.
There is no longer any free lunch, even at ‘The Bulwark.’ As for social media sites like Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, or ‘X,’ I just do not have time for them. That goes for much of what’s on YouTube as well.
But getting back to why I do not trust ‘The Bulwark:’ its conservative background has a strong base in American hisory. Let’s look at it.
Back in 1789, the new nation’s new Constitution (replacing the Articles of Confederation) provided for a census. In 1790, legislation establishing it was passed, one of the purposes of which was the apportionment of representatives in the House of Representatives. (Senate seats were then still filled by State legislatures.)
That legislation specified that slaves would be counted as three-fifths of a person, and this was considered a fair compromise in those days. Years later, the 1861-1865 Civil War, and the resulting 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution finally corrected that injustice, getting back to the Declaraton of Independence's saying that 'all men are created equal.'
But by 1876, racism backed by ‘Black Codes’ passed by State legislatures, had reappeared, it being a dominant theme among local Democrats.
In that year, 1876, a neck and neck electoral college race resulted in a deal both major parties liked, awarding the patronage-rich presidency to Republican Rutherford B. Hayes and withdrawing the occupying Union troops from the defeated South, satisfying to Democrats.
That is when the switch in the political philosophies of our two major parties took place, but still leaving conservatism dominant for both of them. Once in office, the Republicans strongly manifested that, and the Democrats, unually out of office, belatedly grasped at more liberal ideas, such as civil service reform.
It might be an oversimplification, but that is where we are today, personified by a conservative President Trump contrasted with the more liberal ideas of out of office Democrats. And that is why I am cautious of the conservative and neo-con ideas behind ‘The Bulwark.’ (A neo-con is a liberal who switched allegiances in a rightward direction.)
Given the right candidates, a deal such as was made in 1876 is possible and 'The Bulwark's' genesis suggests that they might use that opportunity to advance their own conservatiive ideas. As I said earlier, I do not trust them.
JL
* * *
Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri
Your comments on this ‘blog’ would be appreciated. My Email address is jacklippman18@gmail.com.
Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it (Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.) If you want to send someone the blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or you can provide a link to that address in your email to them.
There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog. Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com , or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting.
Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com
More on the Sources of Information in Jackspotpourri: The sources of information used by Jackspotpourri include a delivered local daily ‘printed’ newspaper (now the South Florida Sun Sentinel) and what appears in my daily email; that includes the views of many contributors, including the New York Times and other respected journals.
Be aware that when I open that email, I first quickly glance at and screen out those sent to my very old former email address and those considered ‘promotional’ by Gmail’s system as no more than advertisements or requests for donations.
Besides these sources, I also utilize the Google search engine where I can look up any subject I want. Lately, these search results have been headed by a very generalized summary clearly labeled as being developed by AI (Artificial Intelligence). On occasion I might use such search results, but when I do, I will say that I am doing so. Generally, however, I try not to use such summaries in preparing Jackspotpourri.
After such ‘AI’ search results, there follows the other results of my search. Unlike the anonymous AI-generated summaries, the sources of these results are clearly indicated, giving them a greater credibility than any AI summary.
It comes down to who YOU want to be in the driver’s seat in seeking information: yourself or something else (Artificial Intelligence), the structure of which somewhere along the way had to have been created by others, with whose identity I am neither familiar nor comfortable. At least when I read a column by Timothy Snyder, for example, I know from where it comes, and to some extent, what to expect.
Caution should be exercised in using Artificial Intelligence. Always!
JL
* * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment