“Not one of us …”

They aren’t saying this outright, but this is what’s really bothering the political establishment here and abroad about Trump and his cabinet picks. 

Career bureaucrats and politicians here are terrified that someone outside their realm may soon be running things. Everything they’ve believed in, everything they’ve been praised and rewarded for doing, may be subject to new scrutiny by people who have little in common with them. 

People who won’t appreciate the subtle “nuances” that make government work. People who don’t know or even care how the political game has always been played. People from the vulgar worlds of business and the military. People who don’t seem to respect the lofty tradition of, or requisite privileges attached to, “public service,” or the “sacrifices” public servants have made.    

The new people scare the crap out of them. There may be wholesale changes to their cushy little world. They may not find a sympathetic ear to whatever they want to do anymore. They may not be as insulated and protected.  Their hands may not just be tied, but their positions – and the prestige and power they’ve enjoyed – may be downgraded or even eliminated.  

It’s no wonder they’re worried sick.  It’s no wonder they and their allies in the media, the business world, the defense industry, the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries, the poverty-industrial complex, and others in the current political establishment are upset. In fact, every entity dependent on maintaining the status quo is suddenly at risk.

Trump and his cabinet nominees could upend everything. Not just within the immense government bureaucracy, but in how it interacts with all the other power players dependent on friends nested in it for their livelihood. 

Until now, it really didn’t make much difference which party was in control. Not much changed when Democrats were in control, or when Republicans were in control.

Sure, there were publicized fights over policy issues – but that was mainly for public consumption and campaign fundraising videos. If you’ve noticed, most clips you see on the nightly news of rants from some Senator or Representative seem to be recorded before an empty chamber. You almost never see opponents arguing in real time.  Doesn’t that seem strange? 

It’s not once you realize that both the House and Senate are essentially private clubs, with lots of special perks and amenities for members. The same leaders from both parties have been running the show off and on for decades.  Everybody in those clubs realized their most important mission once they became a member was to stay in the club.  As such, almost every vote cast is designed to keep them there; usually by pandering to special interests that support and fund their re-election campaigns. 

Elected Republicans always squandered as much money as elected Democrats. Industry and special interest lobbyists were always welcome; pay-for-play remained firmly in place no matter who held the reins.  Defense contracts for weapons the military didn’t want or need kept getting funded. Massive cost overruns by contractors were criticized, but approved anyway. The pork barrel kept rolling, using taxpayer money to help incumbents get re-elected.

Neither Republicans nor Democrats ever really killed a worthless program, a redundant agency or department, or held the heads of failed bureaucracies accountable. Even bureaucrats found guilty of wrongdoing faced nothing worse than reassignment or early retirement. 

Consequently, to most bureaucrats and government-dependent businesses and organizations, elections didn’t really have consequences.  There might be some minor inconvenience in some power shifts, but these would be temporary. Then things would get back to business as usual. 

That’s because the players that should matter – like the types of people heading departments or agencies – rarely changed; some people moved up or retired comfortably when administrations changed but the core bureaucracy remained intact.

Instead of bringing in true outsiders, new administrations simply recycled the same long-serving bureaucrats and career politicians from previous administrations or agencies. 

The result was the supposed new blood was simply repackaged old blood, with the same old ideas, the same old perspective, and the same political instincts:  to manage the way those before them had always run things, rather than take a risk leading in a new direction. 

That gave great comfort to the political establishment. People they knew, people just like them – cautious, risk-averse people – kept the status quo. 

All that’s now in jeopardy. And the establishment is very worried. In many instances factions are attacking wherever possible to maintain the status quo that comforts them. That’s why you see Republicans as well as Democrats attacking Trump’s nominees and his plans. 

Some of this is because a few politicians, such as Rubio and McCain, are settling old scores.  But other party-line Republicans are frankly miffed that nobody asked their permission or blessing before Trump set out his nominees for key posts or put forth his plans. The Republican Establishment isn’t accustomed to being so publicly ignored by members of their own party when it comes to trade, immigration, taxes, spending, or national security.

For the first time in a very, very long time, elections really do have consequences.

 

When Trump won he defeated the Democrat Party, the Republican Party, and the media.  He won without the support of any of those three; as such he rightly feels he doesn’t owe them anything.  Nor does he owe anything to any of the traditional power brokers and big donors, especially those who poured nearly a billion dollars into defeating him.  He didn’t need their help to win, and he doesn’t need their support now as he goes forward with his own agenda.   

Since he won the first time without them, it’s reasonable he believes he can win a second term without them, again.  They don’t have the same leverage anymore.

It’s not enough that he’s nominating people that threaten the way things are in Washington, he’s also taken a shot to the heart of the political establishment – he’s in favor of a constitutional amendment to put in term limits on members of Congress, too. So he’s an equal opportunity monster – ready to overthrow the hallowed tradition of career politicians from either party.

That puts him at odds with the entire basis for political clout in Washington: seniority and the power seniority accrues and wields to remain in power. 

Nothing is sacred, it appears. 

The potential ripple effect throughout the entire political establishment and the government bureaucracy is unprecedented.  Their worst nightmare has come true – Trump’s someone who doesn’t owe anybody anything, who isn’t beholden to special interests, who can bypass the media filter and go directly to the public anytime he chooses, and who doesn’t give a damn what the political establishment here or abroad thinks of him or his ideas.

Someone entirely unlike them, in other words. 

Is this dangerous? In some ways yes.  However, it’s also refreshing. 

Now, I don’t underestimate the power of the vast government bureaucracy and political establishment to grind away at whatever Trump and his appointees plan to do. I fully expect both to try to sandbag him and his nominees – should they be confirmed – at every turn. I fully expect both to try to rein him in and show him that they – not him – are actually in control. 

They’ll try by whatever means necessary to humble him and make him play the game the way it’s always been played; the game they know so well. 

I don’t underestimate them at all. Nor should Trump. 

However, the powers that be will be making a grave mistake if they underestimate him. 

The public is tired of nuances. They are tired of bureaucrats operating in a vacuum, a Congress that doesn’t accomplish anything, and a government many feel is out of touch.

The public voted for real change, and Trump promised real change. He may come off as a bully in the bully pulpit, but his ability to connect with the public has changed everything.  He speaks bluntly in a language the public understands, he reflects their frustration at business as usual, he scorns politics as usual, and frankly, he doesn’t need this job – he’s got nothing to lose. 

His opponents in the political establishment and the media have underestimated him before. They would be wise not to repeat that mistake. He’s not a flash in the pan, merely a temporary annoyance before things get back to normal. He has the potential to have sweeping impact.  

They need to take him as seriously as a heart attack. 

His nominees for most key posts come from the business world and the military – highly successful leaders accustomed to running big organizations, streamlining those organizations, and holding the people under them accountable for tangible results. They aren’t career bureaucrats. They aren't a product of the bureaucracies they seek to lead.  

Trump will also have the opportunity to appoint at least one, and possibly up to three, Supreme Court Justices as well as many justices to the lower courts in his first term.

Finally, the political landscape favors Trump. More politicians from states that switched from Blue to Red in the last election, not just for Trump but down ballot as well will face voters again soon. So Congress may get even more Red, or those former Blue-state politicians now opposed to anything from Trump may have to start being a bit more accepting to keep their jobs.   

Everyone in Washington and the sprawling government bureaucracy worried about their future because Trump’s “not one of us” has good reason for concern. Their concerns that his nominees to key positions are “not one of us” are also valid.

Too bad.  They've had their chance, and failed too often. 

It's time to give new people a shot.  

Martin Luther King Day …

Most people have never read the “I have a dream” speech. If they did, they’d recognize how far we’ve come since 1963 in fostering racial equality. We’re not a perfect nation, but we have made incredible progress from the time this speech was given.

That’s a point lost on many. Especially politicians who still use race as a weapon to further their political ambitions and to maintain their power.  

Too often those politicians “honor” Dr. King by naming some street, park, or school after him – usually in the poorest, most crime-ridden areas. In doing so it becomes a cruel hoax. His name is used to hide the reality that in most of those areas things have typically gotten worse for people of color.  It’s not because of white racism, discrimination, or out-of-control police as it was in the 1960s, but because of the indifference of politicians who take those communities for granted.

Politicians the people in those communities keep electing.     

If Dr. King were alive I’m not sure he’d feel honored by this. 

His message was one of hope and change; not acceptance. He wanted equal treatment; not special treatment. He cautioned against bitterness and hatred, and especially violence in pursuing racial equality. He wanted a unified nation; not one forever divided by race.

Most people only know a few lines of his speech. That’s unfortunate. 

So in honor of Dr. King, here is the entire text of the speech he gave on August 28, 1963. 

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. So we have come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we have come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds." But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we have come to cash this check — a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quick sands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.

But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.

We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. They have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.

As we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied, as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating "For Whites Only". We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.

Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair.

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.

This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning, "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring."

And if America is to be a great nation this must become true. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania!

Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado!

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California!

But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia!

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee!

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

The new third party …

It doesn’t have an official name yet, but there’s new third party in power. 

And Donald Trump is its first elected President. For better or worse. 

He was elected as a Republican by defeating his Democrat opponent.  But he’s not really a traditional Republican.  In fact, to win the party’s nomination he defeated all the traditional Republicans – usually by a wide margin – in the primaries. Most of them held to standard Republican “principles” while he didn’t and in many instances mocked those principles. 

Many times he sounded more like a Democrat, which he had been in years past, than what people expected from an establishment Republican.  Still, he swept most of the Republican primaries and got the nomination.

The Republican establishment was aghast. 

He blew off almost all of their litmus tests.  What did he stand for? Was he opposed to same-sex marriage? It didn’t seem so.  What about reforming entitlements? Nope, he didn’t seem to want to touch entitlements. What about banning abortions? He claimed to be pro-life, but seemed opposed to any Federal law that banned abortions under any circumstances. Free trade?  Nope, he promised harsh penalties on U.S. companies that sent their manufacturing jobs to other countries, plus tariffs on goods from countries he felt were engaging in unfair trade practices. Cutting government spending? Well, he proposed spending a trillion dollars on fixing infrastructure. 

And then there was Russia. He actually wanted closer ties with Russia – maybe even as a partner – to defeat ISIS and other radical Islamist groups around the world.  He saw China as much more of a threat – economically and militarily – than Russia.      

If the Republican establishment was freaking out, the Democrat establishment was even more perplexed.  Trump’s approach to entitlement reform, trade, and government spending on infrastructure was eerily similar to what many grassroots Democrats wanted.

A lot of what Trump said made sense to an American public exhausted by political posturing from both the traditional Republicans and Democrats on social mores and social injustice, with neither side ever getting around to solving the real problems.

Trump’s platform was amazingly simple.  Getting rid of the special interests. Fixing and simplifying the tax code.  Stopping illegal immigration.  Saving American manufacturing jobs. Making government more accountable to the people.   

Trump focused on the important stuff – like jobs, income, safety, and a government increasingly out of touch with its citizens – rather than social issues and political correctness. In doing so, he ran against the Republican establishment as much as against the Democrat establishment. 

Traditional Republican leaders despised him. Past Republican Presidents refused to support him. McCain and Romney – both former Republican Presidential candidates – publicly implored other Republicans to vote against him.  Many of his primary opponents, who had all publicly pledged to support the ultimate Republican candidate, reneged on their pledge.  One of these, John Kasich, Governor of Ohio, even refused to attend the Republican Convention in his own state. 

Trump’s Democrat opponent, Hillary Clinton, raised and spent nearly a billion dollars to defeat him.  Trump, on the other hand, spent a mere fraction of that.

The media was firmly in Hillary’s camp, as were Hollywood celebrities, rock stars, sports stars, Bill Clinton, and also Barack and Michelle Obama.

Trump had Bobby Knight and Scott Baio as his celebrity supporters.  If you don’t know those names right off the bat, you get my point.

In the end, Trump won, despite Republican opposition, despite Democrat, media and celebrity opposition, despite overwhelming odds against him everywhere.

So is he really a Republican President-elect?  I don’t think so. 

He’s not surrounded himself with classic Republican establishment types in his cabinet selections.  Instead, he’s nominated people who’ve been wildly successful in business and the military, and more than a few folks who would gladly and somewhat proudly admit to being well outside the political mainstream.

Republicans in the House and Senate – who increased or maintained majorities from his coattails – still aren’t sure what to do about him. He’s not one of them. When Republicans tried in the dead of night to get rid of an irksome ethics board, Trump called them out and browbeat them into pulling back.  When Republicans wanted to repeal ObamaCare immediately without a replacement plan in hand, Trump again called them out and made them reconsider. 

And he hasn’t even taken the oath of office yet.   

In my mind, what we are seeing is the emergence of a third party – unnamed as of yet – but with different priorities and a different agenda than either the Republican or Democrat parties. There are fights to come over the tax code – which Trump wants to simplify, and also to eliminate a great number of special tax provisions so loved by big campaign donors to both parties – and on a variety of other fronts. There are inevitable fights to come on healthcare, and whether the government can use its buying power to force down prescription prices, again targeting another group of big campaign donors to both parties. There will be many more.   

So opposition will come not just from Democrats, but also Republicans. 

I don’t think he’s afraid of either.  Nor of the media. I think he’s really charting an entirely different course. Whether he can pull it off is still an open question. But if he can deliver on many of his promises he’ll be the first of many to come who will overturn our existing two-party system. 

Which is probably long overdue.  

Hate crimes …

The recent brutal torture of a mentally challenged white guy by four young black people has brought up the topic of hate crimes again. 

Was it a hate crime or not? 

Actually does it matter?  I don’t think so. 

Ever since the concept of “hate crimes” started – as a way to add extra penalties to crimes already on the books – I’ve thought the concept stupid.

It’s always made me think of the scene in “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum” when one character says he is thinking of killing himself. He’s told that he can’t do that because it’s against the law. And the penalty is death.

That’s exactly what it’s like when prosecutors and politicians call for a murderer to also be charged with a hate crime. What’s the point? If the murderer is facing life imprisonment without parole or the death penalty, what more can anyone add to that?

At some point a crime is a crime, period.  Adding “hate” to a crime doesn’t make it any more of a crime than it already is. Plus, too often everyone gets bogged down subjectively determining whether something is a “hate crime” or not, instead of simply focusing on the crime itself.

Make no mistake: the determination of a “hate crime” is always subjective.  That’s been a major problem with the concept all along.   

When is something a hate crime? 

Let’s take two fairly recent examples.

When four young black people kidnap, torture and hurl racial epithets at a mentally challenged white guy – and post what they are doing in real time on Facebook – is that a hate crime?

When Dylann Roof – a self-proclaimed racist – goes into a black church and kills a number of black parishioners during their prayer service, is that a hate crime? 

It’s interesting to see how each is being treated by politicians and the media.

The four young blacks are being called stupid and irresponsible by a number of black community leaders and politicians. Many in the media are also hesitant to call what they did a hate crime.  Now, if you view the video, they made the white guy drink from a toilet, they slashed him, they made him say he loved black people, they repeatedly said “fuck white people” and “fuck Trump” all while they laughed and continued to torture their white victim. 

Clearly they are monsters. They did what they did because they wanted the world to know what they thought of white people and whites who supported Trump – that was their entire purpose.

So why the hesitation to call it a hate crime?  Take a guess. 

Let’s move on to white Dylann Roof. He hated black people – or so he stated – and shot and killed black parishioners while they peacefully prayed.

No one had the slightest hesitation determining this to be a hate crime.  The media, politicians, and civil rights advocates all came out quickly on this one. 

Personally, I think both crimes were inspired by racial hatred.  But in the end they were just horrifying crimes regardless of that. In one case, an innocent man was kidnapped, tortured and humiliated just for the Hell of it.  In the other, people were murdered for no good reason. 

I don’t think it should ever make any difference what the race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other traits are of either the perpetrators or the victims.Inserting “hate” into the equation shouldn’t have any bearing whatsoever on their prosecution.  Both should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law; adding “hate” to their crimes does absolutely nothing except appease certain factions of the public.

And the law – and punishment – should never be about public opinion.   

There’s another reason I’ve never liked the concept of “hate crimes.” It feeds a narrative that a crime perpetrated by one group is somehow worse – and should face stiffer penalties – than the very same crime, or worse, committed by a different group. 

That’s not equal justice. It’s fundamentally wrong. 

Spray-painting a synagogue with a swastika is a hate crime. Spray-painting “Black Lives Matter” on a monument to a long-dead white politician apparently is not. Muslims killing Christians and Jews at a department holiday party is not a hate crime.  If Christians or Jews killed Muslims at a holiday party it would be.  Burning a cross in a black family’s yard would be a hate crime; black rioters burning and looting businesses because they have white or Asian owners would not.

When someone mounts a painting of cops as pigs and a black person being crucified in the U.S. Capitol that's just freedom of expression.  But let a a couple of white guys drive through a college campus with a Confederate flag and it's a hate crime.  

You can’t have it both ways. That’s not how our justice system is supposed to work.

It’s time to get rid of the “hate crime” label and take race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other traits of the perpetrators or victims out of consideration.

A crime is a crime, no matter who does it, or to whom.