Author Joseph Epstein Fails To Grasp That Trump Must Be "Nullified"- There Is NO Option "B"

"Yeah, I look forward to the wonders of my next term as president!"


 Joseph Epstein is an author, one of many, whose mental faculties appear to have been deranged and eviscerated by Trump.  Perhaps, like his fellow brain- eviscerated compadre (Lance Morrow) he lost his reason and logical capacity by being inundated  by Trump's tweets and verbal garbage. Or perhaps he became infected by the same false equivalence virus that has felled so many in or around the 4th estate.

We know this much, on reading his latest WSJ op-ed ('The American People Have Been Spoken To',  June 10, p. A15) it appears he's not only compromised by the false equivalence bug but fails to grasp how essential it is to see the back of Trump by January, 2021.   In regard to the former, Epstein continues to make the specious case that "the American people" (voters namely) are being led around by the nose by both parties. Essentially being lectured to, i.e. "Politicians (no distinction) lecture us on what we want, need, deserve and are really interested in."

Not stopping there but further amplifying this egregious claim, by writing:

"What each of our two parties is chiefly concerned about, and has been over the past two years, is putting down, degrading and humiliating the other party."

Hmmm....funny, but the ONLY party I've detected doing that, as well as degrading and humiliating the whole nation, is the GOP - as they bend over backward to kiss the ass of the criminal narcissist in the White House.  Jeezus peace, you'd think they were defending the Prince of Peace himself, and not a 2-bit grifter, con man, traitor and felon who ought to have been hung long ago.  The Democrats, by contrast, have bent over backwards to try to bring a semblance of sanity and rectitude back to this country, daily being pounded into a cesspool by Trump and his cabal.

As the WaPo's Eugene Robinson argued Monday a.m. on 'Morning Joe', and kudos to him for having no blinkers on like Epstein, and the other members of the 'Trump can do no wrong' stable:

"I think you have to go back to the Harding administration at least to find this level of corruption. I mean let's call it what it is. Just work your way through that swamp creature cabinet of Donald Trump's and then down in the agencies and you just see the most amazing sort of self-dealing, and self-enrichment.  That's what he's brought to Washington. That's what he's after. He follows perhaps the cleanest administration we've seen in a long time. In the Obama years nobody got indicted, nobody got arrested and nobody got convicted.

And here we are in what is really a cesspool. It is breathtaking. But again that's what Donald Trump is."

None of what Robinson noted was false or "fake news" especially about the Obama administration being among the cleanest in American history. So why isn't Epstein able to see that, or admit it, instead tossing out the tired old worn out trope that "all politicians are liars and slime balls". Or better, "both parties treat Americans like they just fell off a turnip truck." Well, because it serves his cynical purpose, i.e. that he isn't really about damning the politicos of both parties at all, but finding a clever, indirect way to provide more cover for Trump by seeming to damn both parties..  As he goes on, fully exposing his motivation:

"Since Hillary Clinton's loss in the 2016 presidential  election, the Democrats have been seeking a way to nullify Mr. Trump's victory.  Republicans, meanwhile, have done all they can to ensure Democrats are never viewed as anything other than obstructionist, malignant creeps."

But the two charges are nowhere near equal in gravitas. The first, for anyone perceptive enough to see it, is far more insidious because it tries to call into question the Dems as they've rightfully questioned Trump's legitimacy.  As time has gone on that withholding of legitimacy has been more than substantiated.  Indeed, it's clearly evident Trump is not qualified to lead this nation, and moreover - had the electoral college done its due diligence - never would have been elected on the basis of Electoral college votes.

Epstein's one -sided hammering of the Dems, in a piece one would have thought should be balance, then goes on:

"The forthcoming election figures to be not in the least about what is 'best' for the American people. But whether power can be wrested from Donald Trump....To be sure many would say that defeating Mr. Trump is in itself what is best for the "American people"."

Well, I am in that camp and make no apologies for it. Especially as we've learned (NY Times yesterday) Trump is only interested in peripheral aspects of his campaign and has no firm plans for a 2nd term, other than doubling down on his daily tweets from the toilet, attacking all perceived political enemies, telling 100,000 more lies and sowing more chaos and division. In meetings with aides he wants to focus on campaign songs, selection of campaign merchandise and other twaddle.  It's also been reported he has never even asked to see a budget for 2019.  Most alarming, Trump has no clue what he'd even attempt to accomplish in a second term - assuming voters were dumb enough to grant him one.  According to the Times' piece:

"Mr Trump rarely if ever speaks to aides about what he hopes to accomplish in a hard won second term....He's shown no interest in formulating a new message for his campaign, instead continuing with the slogan 'make America great again' and adding that he 'also wants to keep America great.""

But it can't be so long as Trump is fouling the nation with his lies, despicable behavior and crimes against the Constitution. It can only go further into Trump's cesspool and will be totally unrecognizable if he's given a 2nd term.

After co-host Willie Geist presented the gist of the NY Times account on the same 'Morning Joe' episode, Mike Barnacle - also on the panel - responded  while saying there is way too much overthnking:

"This is a man who only cares about himself. Every day is just an extension of his show with set up villains - it's either Joe Biden, the Mexican government, whatever .  This guy is just obsessed with himself, not the country, not any formulation of plans to improve the country, Not any goals for his administration's first term and certainly not for what would be a second term set of goals. It's only himself."

This is a guy, in other words,  who's played out, who has no new ideas if he even had any in the first place. He needs to resign,  to get the hell out of office, willingly, even if not officially sent packing by the voters (who may be too enamored of their 401k balances to protect the nation's welfare.).  He simply isn't qualified to manage this country.  As Eugene Robinson  added, appropriately:

"This is what Donald Trump has been from day one.. He runs the country the way he ran the Trump organization. He sort of ad libs his way through an episode of the Trump show. That's what he's doing with the country. That's  why nobody in his administration has any idea what's coming out in the next tweet, or what the next policy change will be. It's always been all about Donald Trump.  My question is whether people in the country begin to understand  he's really about himself, and not about them."

All of which skewers Epstein's brain dead claim at the end of his piece, in regard to the next election:

"Whoever wins, the loser figures to be - the American people."

Nope, sonny. The winner will be the American people, if we can evict Trump the toad from office!  This is a no -brainer!

 In line with this, former Sen. Claire McKaskill put in her important 0.02 on that  same 'Morning Joe':

"Over forty percent of the country thinks this guy is okay.  I mean if you're us and you're watching this president, and watching his lying and undermining the country on the world stage you're saying 'How in the world can forty percent of America think this guy is okay. So as long as his number stays above thirty percent I think the Democrats are going to continue to panic but I think that panic is perfect and appropriate."

Well, rather than panic, I would say the Dems (especially Pelosi)  need to be seen acting and bringing impeachment proceedings to break the Dotard stonewall. Look, despite the Mueller Report describing how this nation was attacked by a hostile foreign adversary in that 2016 election,  Epstein accuses the Dems of wanting to "nullify" (with damned good reason) Trump's election. Failing to process it should be nullified!  Trump, his campaign team and family KNEW about the Russian skullduggery and welcomed it using a form of "coded" conspiracy exchanges with GRU assets. Then to top it all off, Trump tried to obstruct the ensuing investigation into it.

Worse, the Russians are still at it as I write, seeking to undermine the 2020 election and Trump hasn't said a damned word about it, Hell, as Janice puts it, he "bloody wants their help again".   So long as he keeps getting it no wonder he yaps about being "a president for life".

McKaskill and the rest of us with more than air between the ears have to nonetheless recognize that there are millions of blinkered, brainwashed zombies among our fellow citizens. People who likely don't read (i.e. the full Mueller report) and are incapable of thought outside FOX news.  Those like letter writer Elaine Little (in Monday's Denver Post) who scribbled, in reference to the House Democrats:

"No legislation passed, nothing! It appears the only thing they're bent on doing is rehashing the Mueller report and trying  to discredit the president and prepare for the next election.  Their self-importance is disgraceful and their service to the country is minimal."

Well, I could likewise say this woman's brainpower is minimal especially if she sincerely believes the Mueller report is being "rehashed".   Her moral compass is also affected, either by the sort of propaganda meted out by the likes of Epstein, or FOX News, as when she claims the Dems are "trying to discredit the president".  Nope, that reprobate has discredited himself, now by over 10, 700 lies at last count, and committing obstruction right in front of our very eyes by his stonewalling on lawful subpoenas.

That this ninny doesn't even grasp the  Article I powers granted congress under the Constitution tells me she ought to have her citizenship revoked.  And the fact she isn't aware of how Bitch McConnell is burying every bill that makes it to the Senate  - over 140 so far - suggests to me she needs to ease up on the Xanax.  If the majority of citizens are more like this zombie than wide awake and alert to Trump's perfidy, then yeah, it is time to push the panic button!

On an end note, the other thing Epstein gets wrong is how Aristotle perceived politics. Epstein claims he defined it "as the practical science for making citizens happy".    But in his great work, 'Politics' Aristotle is clear (cf. Book I, cc.I, a:)

"The ultimate object of the state is the good life.. The naturalness of the state is proved by the faculty of speech in man....It is founded on a natural impulse that tends toward political association."

The emphasis by Aristotle on the 'good life' transcends "happiness" which is predicated on mercurial emotions. One can "feel" happy after his team wins the Superbowl, but crushed and depressed if it doesn't,  after all. It is the stuff of mainly trivial concerns and fleeting subjective emotions. By the "good life",  Aristotle instead meant one based on the judicious exercise of  will which consistently chooses the maximization of  faculties, such as reason, to attain maximal good in society.   Thus, a moral compass is also essential  . In his Book V of The Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle writes:

"We see then that all men mean by the term Justice a moral state such that in consequence of it men have the capacity what is just and actually do it, and wish it. Similarly also with rspect to Injustice, a moral state such that in consequence of it men do unjustly and wish what is unjust.."

Aristotle didn't rest there, but actually demanded a proportionality to Justice in its particular expressions.  If he was faced with the political world of Trumpism today, Aristotle would be appalled at the lack of justice and the reign of injustice. As Epstein ought to as well, if he were not so blinded by Trumpism.

28-Year Old Democratic Socialist Beats The Dem Establishment & Explains How Medicare For All Is Feasible

Dems' latest Wunderkind, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,  who won big in New York's 14th Congressional District.

As a Democratic Socialist - member of the Democratic Socialists of America  myself- I was elated on learning Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez  - who knocked off a 10 term establishment Dem- is also a member.  Incredibly, Ocasio-Cortez was working behind a bar 9 months ago and had helped start Flats Fix, a tacos and craft cocktail spot in Manhattan, before launching her political career.  We're now aware that  the  outcome has been to send Rep. Joseph Crowley down to defeat and an early, unexpected retirement.  Heck, maybe he can get a new gig as a D.C. lobbyist.

That was despite the Dem establishment's candidate having an 18 to 1 advantage in campaign spending.   An 18 to 1 advantage and Crowley lost by 57% - 43%,  which is not exactly close.

In May, encouraged by the activists she’d been working with,  including a group from the Democratic Socialists of America, the 28-year-old Ocasio-Cortez filed to challenge Crowley to represent New York's 14th Congressional District.

Most of her limited $300,000 in campaigns funds were spent on bilingual posters, which she said were designed to look “revolutionary," and her viral campaign video, created by a socialist team called Means of Production.   I suspect it was the video which had most impact.

Wifey had informed me of Ocasio-Cortez's upset win the night before, but my initial reaction (before I even learned she was a DSA member)  was more or less ho-hum: Another newbe woman, ousting an old line Dem (likely in hock to lobbyists) and maybe just a flash in the pan. So what's new?

Yesterday morning all that changed when I watched her interview on 'Morning Joe' and beheld a lively,  intelligent and articulate woman who was super confident and could summarize her basic message in 30 seconds. (As co-host Mika Brzezinski put it: "Take note, Dems! You need to reduce your two to three minute messages!")

What most impressed me was how she answered Willie Geist's question of how she would pay for a  “Medicare for All” program, not to mention massive forgiveness of student loan debt.   Geist said those sounded like "endless wrapped Christmas  gifts". She didn't miss a beat and said we needed to re-examine those tax cuts which had created a $1.4 trillion deficit and went mainly to corporations and the wealthiest.  She emphasized that $400 billion of those giveaway cuts could have forgiven all the existing, outstanding student loans in default.

She said all that was needed is the political courage to act.  Of course, that is where the proverbial  bear sits with his buckwheat. 

For some time now I have been hammering on the tax issue and explaining how all the programs regarded as "pie in the sky" by the Right and Dem Neoliberals  -  from Medicare for all, to free college,  to expanding Social Security-   can be achieved by re-ordering priorities.  To attend to all of these, Ocasio-Cortez' solution of redirecting tax cut money is basically correct, as I had earlier brought up the German model, i.e. where budget surpluses are plowed back into the commons and used for social insurance enhancement.   See e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2018/02/do-americans-really-want-big-government.html

The question posed in the post header was 'Do Americans Really Want Big Government?'  And the answer embodied in Ocasio-Cortez' model is that they do.   In the link above I cited Germany as an example nation, where our long time friends Reinhardt and Elli live, adding:

 "Germany has among the highest taxes in the world and a habit of heavy state spending."

But can most Americans live with that?  Because for sure what Alexandria is proposing are not freebies, nor can they be paid for merely by redirecting tax cuts. No, because the tax cuts themselves need to be halted entirely so as not to create added deficits - which the scoundrels of the Right will use to cut existing programs.

Thus, it is critical to not only deep six tax cuts, but to increase tax revenues. As Megan McCardle recently put it in a Denver Post op-ed ('What's Really Obstructing Left Wing Dreams'):

"The American Left has developed a fantasy that a large expansion of the welfare state can be financed by taxing only the rich....In fact European welfare states pay for themselves by taxing ordinary people very heavily."

How heavily? UP to 40- 45% in Germany even higher in Denmark, Sweden. McCardle references the top tax bracket would kick in at $45,000/ year if we adopted Scandinavian standards.  But then those nations enjoy vastly superior civilized care levels, as opposed to survival of the fittest mandates. See e.g.

• Oprah got perfect response from Danish woman on their social welfare state 

For sure, current American marginal tax rates - certainly for the three middle income quintiles- would need to go up dramatically. (It is likely the best policy to leave the lowest quintile alone and eligible each year for the earned income tax credit). The least tax rate for the next quintile would be 25 percent, and graduating from there to 45 or 50 percent. Say, for $75,000 - 100,000 earners.  (High earners would take 50- 75% tax hits, in proportion to their total incomes, including investments)

Where McCardle is correct is that it's preposterous that we can fund every proposal by "grabbing the same few pieces of high income tax capacity".  No, most sensible people - even Democratic Socialists - realize that's not possible. Which was why many of us strenuously objected extending the Bush tax cuts for the middle class. E.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/08/democrats-must-stop-playing-politics.html

Over many separate posts I had noted that respected sources including The Financial Times had repeatedly pointed out that merely taxing the rich could not support social programs.   And that's absolutely correct. Even the Repukes know higher taxes are the life's blood for preserving Social Security and Medicare, which is why they are always ready to cut them after passing giant tax cut packages.  This isn't rocket science.

Where McCardle is wrong is in asserting we are daft to want to eliminate the cap (FICA) on Social Security taxes.  No, my argument - and I would hope Ocasio-Cortez'-  is that we need that elimination because the existing system benefits mainly the wealthy who don't need Social Security income.  Besides, if taxes are raised to German or Scandinavian levels, Americans need to be able to depend on expanded Social Security benefits - which eliminating the FICA cap would provide. 

But again, are Americans willing to go this route. According to WSJ columnist William Galston ( 'Americans Want Big Government') they are.  Galston cited a poll that showed  58 percent of Americans (the "highest share ever recorded")  agreed that:

"the government should do more to solve problems and help meet the needs of people"

In addition, Galston cited a Pew research poll from last April which showed that for the first time in eight years:

"Americans favored a larger government offering more services over a smaller government providing fewer services."  

This is all very commendable but many of us who are Democratic Socialists also want to see  how our fellow citizens react when faced with actual tax increases on a German or Scandinavian scale.

I believe both Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and I can agree that the jury is still out. I, for one, am not yet convinced most Americans can break free of their addiction to tax cuts.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/natasha-hakimi-zapata/79882/how-a-socialist-latina-millennial-beat-a-wall-street-favorite

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/richard-eskow/79881/how-to-cover-a-revolution