PMC Commentary

Attacking Dr. Fauci is Jim 'the gym' Jordan, another "originalist" who ignores the Constitution

Jim Jordan, a United States congressman sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution, totally ignores its First Amendment, which specifically ensures "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This guaranteed right Mr. Jordan never mentions — nor, unfortunately, does Dr. Fauci — although that is the fundamental, critically important, constitutional difference between a BLM protest and an open "Gym."

The Bill of Rights says nothing about the right to go to work or to work out or to attend church (it only protects the "establishment of religion"). It still dazzles my brain to think that Republicans, who have made a national religion out of the establishment of their politics, persist in being the worst offenders of straightforward constitutional language.

Trump, his Christians, and his lions

To the pseudo-godly lady who says Trump "fights for righteousness," she's correct in one sense: With his own spoken righteousness in my corner, "I'd like to punch him in the face."

This, also from the Lincoln Project, satirizes(?) how any sane Republican would react after coming out of a three-and-a-half-year coma:

Someone needs to take Trump out for ice cream

Trump is setting psychological records for phenomenal self-pity, which makes me increasingly suspicious that he is deliberately attempting to lose the election. He can then finish what little business career he has left — next up: further swindling his vestigial base via his own media outlets, hawking pillows and vitamin supplements — while dodging criminal and civil suits in state and federal courts.

"Aides have described him as pained by the widespread rejection he is seeing in public opinion polls," reports the Times, "even as he continues with self-sabotaging behavior rather than taking steps that might help him, like getting involved in negotiations for a deal on Capitol Hill to lift the economy."

While doing nothing to lift the economy, he's also encouraging his own voters to risk contracting the coronavirus on Election Day out of distrust of mail-in ballots, which, in a word, is insane. (And that, of course, "could negatively affect not just Mr. Trump, but a host of down-ballot candidates," which is really beginning to piss off Messrs. McConnell et al. Even the House minority leader, the hilariously misspeaking Kevin McCarthy, said "we’ll find a way" to vote on 3 November — one supposes without simultaneously killing a sizable portion of their base; that is, just get your ballots in by Election Day, you dolts.)

In a separate piece, the Times notes that "the Trump campaign has completely gone off the air, temporarily suspending all television advertising nationwide as the campaign undertakes a 'review' of its advertising strategy under the new campaign manager, Bill Stepien." Has no one at Campaign HQ taken a look at the calendar? Did Trump not demand at least running some sort of anodyne campaign ad in the downtime interim? (President Obama thrashed Mitt Romney in 2012 largely by raising Mitt's negatives throughout the summer, not belatedly in the fall.)

On the other hand — and this has only amplified the president's self-pity — there's just not much harm the Trump campaign can inflict on Joe Biden. "The pause [in advertising] comes after several weeks of attacks against [Biden] on policing issues," continues the Times, which "sought to sow fear and division about the racial justice protests around the country and falsely depict them as violent." Instead, Trump's ads did nothing but increase Biden's lead. Plus, attacks on the former vice president as a socialist have proved absurd, as have ads depicting Biden as mentally feeble, "approved" by a manifest madman.

What must really anger a moneymonger like Trump is that his campaign has spent more than twice as much as Biden on "television and digital advertising, according to Advertising Analytics, an ad tracking firm." And every Trump dollar spent has only aided his opponent.

All of these marvelous negatives have reduced Trump's daily schedule to tweeting and pulling the sheets over his head while muting cable news (assuming he's not golfing). From being a jackass, "The Thrill Is Gone," goes the song — as is his presidency.

Uncrazy Quote of the Day

It seems crazy but not TOTALLY out of the realm of the possible that a boycott-the-election movement starts among a certain faction of conspiratorial-minded Trump voters.

— Sam Stein (@samstein) July 31, 2020

Sam Stein is the Daily Beast's political editor and a frequent MSNBC commentator.

But, Sam, the crazier it seems the more likely it is totally within the realm of the possible.

In the irony department, Mr. Stein is correct. The more often Donnie Despot tells his Trumpeteers that the election is "rigged," the less likely they are to vote. (Which would be kind of a shame, since they'd otherwise show up at the polls without a mask.)

Obama's eulogy of John Lewis

I had a difficult time of it — watching President Obama's magnificent eulogy of Rep. John Lewis this afternoon. And my difficulty arose from the oddest of reasons.

Obama spoke of another man's decency; he praised another man's aspirations; he admired another man's splendid accomplishments; he thanked that other man for having inspired his own dedication to public service; he touchingly stressed how he would have never achieved what he achieved had it not been for that other man's example; he placed compassion over hatred; he encouraged the nation to unite and overcome mindless prejudice; he again told us that only we can make America what it is meant to be — and to never believe that one man alone can fix it.

Obama's ringing eulogy was — after years of Trump and Trumpism's indecency, inhumanity, conceit, indifference to public service, promotion of self-interestedness, chest-pounding, sundry hatreds, divisions, and an overinflated, ugly ego that has decimated this nation rather than fixed one damn thing — well, it was almost a foreign language to me. I choked up several times, as I am wont to do when touched by such beautiful souls: those of President Obama and Rep. John Lewis.

The president concluded by saying God bless us all. If he's out there, may he especially bless these two wonderful men.

They always find a way to dig themselves a little deeper

On Twitter, ABC News correspondent Will Steakin recalls the reporting of a network colleague on 23 April of this year: "Mark my words, I think he is gonna try to kick back the election somehow, come up with some rationale why it can't be held" — Joe Biden on Trump, to Johnny Verhovek in an ABC News virtual interview.

Responded a Trump campaign spokesman, same day: "Those are the incoherent, conspiracy theory ramblings of a lost candidate who is out of touch with reality." According to RealClearPolitics aggregate polling average, on 23 Apr. Biden led Trump by only 5.9 points.

Then, among other Trump blunders, came this today.

And that's just one reason that now, by July's end, Biden is leading Trump by, like, 93 points.

Just another distraction

It's always difficult to say with reasonable certainty which Trump-induced crisis he is distracting from by creating another crisis, such as his comment to Fox News' Chris Wallace last Sunday that he might reject the election's results: "I think mail-in voting is going to rig the election."

That unpresidential bit of lunacy seemed a species of what we might call generic distraction. Polls showed Joe Biden thumping Trump throughout most of the nation and, most ominously for the incumbent, in battleground states. That, along with Trump's increasingly wretched economy and his steady-handed, stay-the-course negligent homicide of tens of thousands of Americans had all conspired in his mind to spark the perfect moment for an utterly unsubstantiated "rigged-election" accusation. No particular catastrophe among the three seemed to stand out.

But this morning?

With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a great embarrassment to the USA. Delay the Election until people can properly, securely and safely vote???

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 30, 2020

That lunatic distraction came just minutes after the Commerce Department reported that the G.D.P. had fallen at a staggering annualized rate of 32.9 percent during the second quarter — the "second worst" in recorded history, observes the NY Times. (And the Labor Department announced this morning that another 1.43 million new unemployment claims were filed last week.)

"Kids can go to school, but we can't vote?" responded the Lincoln Project to Trump on Twitter. Then there are the little matters of a federal statute requiring a presidential vote on the Tuesday following the first Monday in November and the U.S. Constitution's amended provision that a president's four-year tenure begin on 20 January — leaving even an illegal postponement in an insurmountable time-crunch (short of a coup, which won't happen).

What is just as expected as another of Trump's outrageous distractions? "So far, no major Republican figures [are] criticizing the president [for his tweet]," reports the Times. "Republican state chairmen said they have not seen it" and "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ignored questions about it."

And so it goes. For another three months. 

Louie Gohmert … enough said?

​​​​​I'm indescribably relieved that the dumbest man in the United States House of Representatives, Louie Gohmert, can now be treated early for his most unfortunate covid affliction. I want Louie to hang around and be reelected by Texas' 1st congressional district another 20 times before he finally succumbs to chronic stupidity. I mean, who else could so naturally have come up with this?

"I can't help but think that if I hadn't been wearing a mask so much in the last 10 days or so, I really wonder if I wouldn't have gotten it. But, you know, moving the mask around, getting it just right, are bound to have put some virus on the mask. That's most likely what happened."

GOP @RepLouieGohmert, who just tested positive for COVID-19 tells a reporter he blames wearing a mask for his result: "I can't help but think that if I hadn't been wearing a mask so much in the last 10 days or so, I really wonder if I would have gotten it." pic.twitter.com/S6l2xU2oiL

— The American Independent (@AmerIndependent) July 29, 2020

My only regret? His infection was detected on the morning of the day he was to have flown to Texas with Trump on Air Force One — up close and personal, as they say. So Louie got bumped. Damn!

The upside? Here's a shot from Tuesday: That's Attorney General Bill Barr (unmasked) on the right, and Gohmert (unmasked), on the left — not far behind at all. So there's still hope.

Coming Soon: Carpentariat's Studio

(I'm leaving this post up for the day [Wed.]. Appointments to meet. See you Thursday.)

Within, probably, the next month, I will have completed redeveloping my art studio and, perhaps, completed an oil painting or two as well. It's been some time since I featured any of my earlier work, so I want to reacquaint you with my dominant style — some of which is reproduced directly from old-school impressionist masters. (The first two paintings, for instance, are taken from Monet; both have been sold.) The third I have no memory of its source, and I lost track of the piece years ago. The same is true of the fourth work — and please don't ask what possessed me to paint Vivian Leigh, since I have no recollection whatsoever. I'll also be introducing a new style, which I may need to play with a bit before working up a full piece on canvas. I shall be posting new works in oil, with price attached, framed or unframed. Then I can live a double life: that of a starving writer and a starving artist.  

Thanks for touring.

She's better than Alex Jones

Daily Beast:

A Houston doctor who praises hydroxychloroquine and says that face masks aren’t necessary to stop transmission of the highly contagious coronavirus has become a star on the right-wing internet, garnering tens of millions of views on Facebook on Monday alone. Donald Trump Jr. [who has been temporarily banned by Twitter] declared the video of Stella Immanuel a "must watch," while Donald Trump himself retweeted the video…..

Immanuel, a pediatrician and a religious minister, has a history of making bizarre claims about medical topics and other issues. She has often claimed that gynecological problems like cysts and endometriosis are in fact caused by people having sex in their dreams with demons and witches.

She alleges alien DNA is currently used in medical treatments [now who can argue with that?], and that scientists are cooking up a vaccine to prevent people from being religious [having lost the vaccine war to fight, specifically, the Christian evangelical strain]. And … she has said that the government is run in part not by humans but by "reptilians" and other aliens [OK, she may have something there].

This otherwise frightfully cretinous video and presidential endorsement of it actually comforted me. I'm assuming that men are also subject to having but soon forgetting inordinately dreamy sex with demons and witches, and since my STD test of four or five months ago came back clean as a hell's houndstooth, my underworld affairs have so far proceeded innocuously.

A desperate novelty morphs into unprecedented political stupidity

What should a president do when 114, no-insignia federal agents have figuratively parachuted into Portland, Ore. — "already the site of aggressive policing tactics that activists and city officials across the country say are inspiring more-violent clashes and re-energizing protests"?

Why the answer is simple, if you're der Führer in a bunker: You send an additional force of 150 secret police — who have been "followed by larger, better- equipped and more-aggressive crowds … [which] exhausted federal resources before it exhausted the protesters."

And he should do so when the city's population, which was originally protesting racial injustice, is now protesting the Führer's swelling police state.

It's a brilliant political strategy for a president far down in the polls but who is trying "to sell himself as a law-and-order candidate, the antidote" to lawlessness (largely his own) and disorder "that developed on his own watch." Portland suburbanites should enjoy seeing their once-comely downtown area converted into a kind of Warsaw ghetto.

In fact, why should the president not worsen his lawlessness, disorder and violence by expanding the fascist forces of black-vanned spooks to other major cities? Reports the Washington Post:

"In Seattle, protesters who saw camouflage-clad officers standing in their streets at a distance on Sunday wondered if they were the federal agents who were seen snatching protesters off the streets of Portland. 'We don’t even know who we’re dealing with,' said one protester, Madeline, who declined to give their [sic] last name because they feared police retribution."

Isn't that precious? Millions of Americans now fear America's growing equivalent of the Gestapo — which, for Trump, is so politically helpful, don't you think?

When just being stupid isn't enough

Those who are stupid enough to support Trump are also, it logically follows, those who are offensive enough to wear the latest in mask fashion.

As Dean Wormer thoughtfully instructed Flounder, one of his less than finest of college students, "Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son."

Peter Navarro, the always-wrong Larry Kudlow of trade

How unspeakably childish of one of Trump's top lieutenants: 

Dr. Fauci is 79-years-old, and to the best of my knowledge has never been known for his baseball pitching skills, which lie juuust a little outside his profession of studying infectious diseases. One could more easily mock Navarro for virtually every stupid position (meaning every position) he has taken in his profession. Aside from inanely advocating the U.S.' withdrawal from President Obama's thoughtful Trans-Pacific Partnership, there's this, from Wikipedia:

According to Politico, "Navarro is perhaps the most extreme advocate in Washington, and maybe in all of economics, for an aggressive stance toward China"…. Navarro put his attention to China in the mid-2000s. His first publication on the subject is the 2006 book The Coming China Wars: Where They Will Be Fought, How They Can Be Won. Navarro has said that he started to examine China when he noticed that his former students were losing jobs, concluding that China was at fault"…

[In a 2012 documentary], of the more than dozen China specialists contacted by Foreign Policy, most either did not know of Navarro or had only interacted with him briefly. Kenneth Pomeranz, University of Chicago professor of Chinese History, said that his "recollection is that [Navarro] generally avoided people who actually knew something about the country"….

Navarro has called for repatriating global supply chains. According to Politico's Jacob Heilbrunn, such a move "would be enormously costly and take years to execute"….

Navarro has characterized foreign purchases of U.S. companies as a threat to national security, but according to NPR, this is "a fringe view that puts him at odds with the vast majority of economists." Dartmouth economist Douglas Irwin noted that the US government already reviews foreign purchases of companies with military or strategic value, and has on occasion rejected such deals….

Navarro has also said that the United States has "already begun to lose control of [its] food supply chain," which according to NPR, "sounded pretty off-the-wall to a number of economists" who noted that the US is a massive exporter of food. Dermot Hayes, an agribusiness economist at Iowa State University, described Navarro's statement as "uninformed"….

The Economist has described Navarro's ["odd-ball"] views on the trade deficit as "dodgy economics," while the Financial Times has described them as "poor economics."

I bet Fauci would have been in the strike zone if a face shot of Navarro had been in the catcher's mitt.

A Jolly-good move

Former Republican congressman David Jolly, one of MSNBC's excellent and exceptionally insightful commentators, tweeted yesterday morning that "[I] haven’t ruled it out, but strongly considering the U.S. Senate seat in ’22. Will consider whether either [the Senate or governor's office] is the right decision and decide about this time next year."

He later tweeted:

Lot of unexpected news today at the Jolly house. We'll make decisions in due course. But for those who asked, I'll clarify one decision with certainty. I left the GOP and am not returning. I will not be on the '22 ballot as a Republican.

— David Jolly (@DavidJollyFL) July 27, 2020

What's remains unclarified is if Jolly would run as an independent (his current self-identity) or as a Democrat. One hopes the latter — and that he chooses a Senate run — but running as even an Anti-Mason or Greenbacker is preferable to associating with the disgraced, once human but now walking dead of the Republican Party.

What's remains unclarified is if Jolly would run as an independent (his current political identity) or as a Democrat. One hopes the latter — and that he chooses a Senate run other than a governorship pursuit — but running as even an Anti-Mason or Greenbacker is preferable to associating with the disgraced, once human but now walking dead of the Republican Party.

Some more helpful Democratic advice from … the Wall Street Journal

Somehow the Wall Street Journal found the refreshing open-mindedness to publish an op-ed by Ted Van Dyk, a 40-year veteran of Democratic politics. There's just one teeny-weeny little issue that should be pointed out, however: Van Dyk's essay, titled "Why Do Democrats Defend Disorder?," reads more like a polemic from Ted Cruz or Louie Gohmert than any Democratic strategist. You think maybe, just maybe, that's how the Journal found its impartiality?

"After President Trump’s dispatch of federal officers to protect federal facilities in Portland, Ore.," writes Van Dyk, "some Democratic politicians characterized the officers as 'storm troopers' or 'secret agents' bent on sending 'peaceful protesters' to concentration camps. I watched attacks on the Portland federal
building on television as they were happening. The officers were uniformed and clearly identified. The perpetrators weren’t peaceful protesters but black-clad thugs using hammers and baseball bats to damage the building. Others attempted to set fire to it….

"It seems incredible that elected Democrats are supporting initiatives to defund the police, releasing prisoners from local jails, and even removing law-enforcement officers from schools."

Mr. Van Dyk must have heard about Trump's "concentration camps" on some obscure, far-left radio talk show dominated by paranoid dimwits who have studied the tactic of Alex Jones' invented hysterics. Most of the shanghaied protesters had committed no crime. And below are 28 seconds of friendly, peace-securing "federal officers" greeting a courageous Navy veteran — who had the audacity to violently, aggressively stand there — with swinging batons and tear gas.

Van Dyk also promotes the popular fallacy of "elected Democrats … supporting initiatives to defund the police." Though it's true that that slogan contains the most harebrained phrase in the history of political propaganda, it's also profoundly "in-credible that elected Democrats" are supporting its literal initiative. Some relatively minor reappropriation of municipal funds to starving social services rather than the increasingly militarized police is what these pols are now advocating.

The author also charges that Democratic mayors and governors are simply "releasing prisoners from local jails" as though the incarcerated had drawn a lucky card in a monopoly game — rather then even mentioning that the covid crisis is hitting correctional institutions the hardest. Being forced to contract a deadly case of coronavirus is scarcely proportional in punishment for having ignored a dozen parking tickets. Van Dyk continues his sweaty handwringing with panic over "removing law-enforcement officers from schools" — even though we have witnessed how useless they've been in cases of school shootings.

Van Dyk concludes his more-Republican-than-Democratic screed by observing that "many of Mr. Trump’s policies deserve criticism, but this isn’t one of them. Democrats are presenting a pro-chaos caricature of themselves, which will discredit them with the public if they maintain it."

In op-eds, short essays and blogs the use of generalizations is, however regrettable, necessary. There is simply not space enough to scribble politically as though one is writing in grueling detail an ironclad legal contract. But Mr. Van Dyk's use of generalizations — "[presumably all?] Democrats are presenting a pro-chaos caricature of themselves" — is far more than a loose summation. It's vacuous. (And therefore worthy of the WSJ's opinion page.)