Moron The Shut-storm

Saturday's newspaper column:

Where have you gone, Ronald Reagan-o?  

In an administration filled with ironies (the nicest way to put it), it’s particularly amusing that the Trump shutdown, in addition to accomplishing nothing other than pain for people about whom Trump couldn’t care less, may have permanently entombed an undead Reaganism: “Government isn’t the solution, it’s the problem.” (Among others are his voodoo economics, that he single-handedly ended the Cold War, and his Iran-Contra innocence.)  

First, let’s review: More than a month after rejecting the exact offer he just accepted, having originally indicated he would but backing off when Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh jerked on his leash, Trump has re-opened the parts of government he’d shut down to prove... something. He didn’t get his wall, but he managed to create hardship for 800,000 people and their families, and for those who depend on the services those government employees provide.  

“I am very proud to announce today that we have reached a deal,” Trump feigned, hoping we’d believe it was something other than what had been on the table from day one. Hoping we’d conclude the great negotiator had won the day, that his shut-storm hadn’t been a failed attempt at extortion, over a promesa he couldn’t keep. 

Being Donald Trump, boastful bully, he added that he has a “very powerful” alternative, but didn’t have to use it “at this time.” Meaning, of course, declaring a national emergency. Usurping the role of Congress in setting funding. Reducing the criteria for engaging emergency powers to presidential whim. Paving the way to unrestrained authoritarianism. Every sentient Congress-dweller ought to reject it, unconditionally. Because whatever else is true about illegal immigration, by no definition can it be called an emergency. It’s been on the decline for a decade (except at Trump properties).  

Also, being Trump, he lied. Said Democrats have “fully acknowledged” that a “barrier, a fence, a wall, or whatever you call it” (love that!) is an “important part of the solution.” They haven’t. His desperation to pretend Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi hadn’t pitched a double-header no-hitter was obvious. The genius deal-maker. How many bought it, other than O’Reilly and Hannity? Not Ms. Coulter. 

But to the point: when the shutdown began, Trumpists crowed it was a brilliant maneuver, which would expose “non-essential” government workers, a way to get rid of those paycheck-getting, do-nothing employees of the American people. Funny thing: it did the opposite. Turns out – who knew? – government does important work, without which bad things happen. Stuff for which government is, indeed, the solution. The shutdown proved the inverse of what rightists were celebrating.  

It also took creating another shutdown off the table. Though Donald seems to relish inflicting pain for its own sake, it’s doubtful he’ll try that stunt again. It’s “national emergency, behold my Putintial power,” or nothing. Extortion replaced by usurpation. At which time self-described conservatives who still support Trump will face a “Come-To-Jefferson” moment. 

If they’re okay with Trump declaring an emergency when there’s none, they’ll be admitting what they’ve heretofore pretended away: they’re delighted to have a dictator, as long as he’s dictating what they want to hear. (First they came for…) Because it will come down to this: do they accept America’s constitutional imperatives of checks and balances, separation of powers, co-equal branches, “elections have consequences,” or not? Is their professed patriotism, which they claim liberals lack, applicable only when they’re fully in charge? (Reminder: when Rs were fully in charge, Trump couldn’t get his wall.)  

Trump might be realizing his go-to thuggery won’t work anymore; that he’s facing in-charge Democratic Representatives who’ll neither be bullied nor countenance his lies; who’ll do the work demanded by our Constitution, lacking for the past two years. For once in his privileged life, he’s unable to get his way by coercion, barratry, or cheating. Were he capable, and if he wants to accomplish anything, he’d finally attempt to learn the job. No more bailouts from Daddy or Russia. No more prostrate, bi-cameral Republican majorities. The Constitution: it’s partly back, baby. 

As long as we’re high-fiving, let’s fantasize no more dereliction of duty by such miscreants as Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham. Who knows why they’ve rolled over, but their submissive acquiescence to Trump’s extortion (blackmail?) and demagoguery has been shameful and dangerous. And they’re already encouraging Trump to declare his emergency. So it becomes undeniable: dictatorship, is where they stand.  

Koo-koo-ka-choo, Mister Jefferson.

[Image source]

"Government Is The Problem" Is The Problem

Written by a man much more knowledgable than me, this article encapsulates the points I've been trying to make here for years:

....Thirty years ago, a newly elected Ronald Reagan made a fateful judgment: “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.” Taxes for the rich were slashed, as were outlays on public services and investments as a share of national income...

Reagan’s was a fateful misdiagnosis. He completely overlooked the real issue — the rise of global competition in the information age — and fought a bogeyman, the government. Decades on, America pays the price of that misdiagnosis, with a nation singularly unprepared to face the global economic, energy and environmental challenges of our time.

[...]

... Twice before in American history, powerful corporate interests dominated Washington and brought America to a state of unacceptable inequality, instability and corruption. Both times a social and political movement arose to restore democracy and shared prosperity.

[...]

Following our recent financial calamity, a third progressive era is likely to be in the making. This one should aim for three things. The first is a revival of crucial public services, especially education, training, public investment and environmental protection. The second is the end of a climate of impunity that encouraged nearly every Wall Street firm to commit financial fraud. The third is to re-establish the supremacy of people votes over dollar votes in Washington.

In addition to pointing out the error of a recent counterfactual comment here about corporate taxes,* it makes clear what the issue of income inequality is really about, as I've said as well: it's about having the means to do what needs doing if our country is to have a future. The writer seems a little more optimistic than I am about an incipient progressive era; but at least there's a conversation happening in some circles.

Demagoguing OWS as some sort of lazy hippie movement, wanting something for nothing, is easy; and god knows it works on those of teabagger mentality. But it's foggery. Ragged, often embarrassing (to me, at least), the protesters are nevertheless making an important point: we can't go on like this; where "this" is the unwillingness of so many Americans to help pay the tab for living in this country, combined with their willingness to cut funding for the future in order to pay for their selfishness.

And, no, it's not about being against corporate profits or individual wealth. They're what makes the world go 'round. Without wealth and profits, ain't no money to spend on our salvation. But since the Reagan era the trend is perverse and unsustainable: profit without payback; demonizing government as an excuse to accumulate money at the top while income for working people remains flat, the middle class shrinks; and while providing for the needs of the country becomes financially impossible.

_______________________

* I've said before and I'll say again: I have no idea what a proper corporate tax rate might be; and I gather that in the US, even if it's lower than it's been in a long time, it's higher than in most other countries. What that means, I don't know. But it's also true that the nominal rate seems to be paid by very few corporations, and many of our largest ones not only pay no tax at all, but manage to get tax "rebates" from the government. Most, I think, agree that's wrong. Except, of course, teabaggRs, who've opposed any efforts to close the loopholes that allow such travesty.