The 1/1-15/20 TPP column by Connie Schultz implies two demographic groups might be persuaded to vote against DJT. One of these is liberal Christians (like her mom was): Surely these folks are quite different than the “Christian supremist” (excellent and apt term!). Those who truly ask WWJD must be nicely (but relentlessly) told “vote against Trump.” I would like to envision Ms. Schultz working with Mayor Pete in this effort. The second group is female voters. They already do have a non-Trump preference but this asymmetry could (and should) be more pronounced. DJT and the Republicans generally will allow rape and domestic violence standards to regress back to what they were in the ’50’s (when we were presumably great). Ditto laws on equality of employment (including promotions). Do women really want either of these? I would like to envision Ms. Schultz working with the Obamas on this effort.
In my opinion, the current president has a fair chance of being re-elected, if those who oppose him do not have a clear ethic of voting for whomever opposes him. I prefer Bernie, but if it’s Biden, Warren or Buttigieg or Duval or Yang … OK. Even if it’s Bloomberg, who more-or-less buys the candidacy. Anyone but Trump. No sulking. If we have a significant number of folks who refuse to vote because their preferred candidate didn’t win the nomination ... down we go.
JOHN PALMER, Huntington, W.V.
Some political pundits claim that although Elizabeth Warren is best suited to be our next president, she is “too radical,” “too far left,” to win Middle America’s votes. But, a large majority understands that current Republican leadership has gone waay too far “right,” where the top 1% is served while the rest of us scramble.
Most Americans feel that the economy is rigged for billionaires who don’t pay their fair share of taxes, leaving the rest of us to pay for necessary government services. Warren stands for a 2% property tax on billionaires’ assets over $50 million.
Most believe our election system is rigged for oligarchs who control the messages, the legislation, and the candidates with unlimited campaign contributions. Warren stands for changing this unfair system.
A majority knows they are getting ripped off by private health insurance companies. Warren proposes a transition to Medicare for All.
Most people want affordable college education that benefits students and fulfills our country’s need for educated citizens. Warren has a plan.
Elizabeth Warren is not radical left, she’s central, offering the substantial changes we need to repair the damage being done to us daily.
BRUCE JOFFE, Piedmont, Calif.
I fear the Republican members of the US House of Representatives and the US Senate. They are my “nemesis.” nnThey are much more “conservative” than are our conservative-Republican citizens who they are supposed to represent. While research indicates that 63% of Americans who identify themselves as Republicans do NOT want Social Security benefits to be cut, my estimate is that 95%-99% of Republicans in the House and Senate DO want to cut Social Security benefits. My research and studies tell me that about 75% of them (and perhaps more than this) would LOVE to abolish Social Security as well as every other federal government social program that helps people, but will never admit it to the public because they know that most
Republican citizens do not believe in that. Do you know how many tens of millions of our fellow Americans would be devastated if all of these programs were abolished? It scares the dickens out of me.
If you doubt my belief that most Republican members of the House and Senate are secretly cold-hearted “Survival-of-the-Fittest” Social Darwinists, then please read the award-winning book “Dark Money” by 12-time award-winning author and journalist Jane Mayer, and then tell me what you think.
STEWART B. EPSTEIN, Rochester, N.Y.
Some may dismiss as extravagantly hyperbolic Ted Rall’s depiction [in “A Grim New Definition of Generation X,” 2/1/20 TPP] of current youth as mere spectators comprising a “Generation-X”, i.e., an extinction-bound cohort hurtling helplessly to their and the planet’s doom in the face of imminent climate catastrophe. All burnt toast.
In fact, Rall’s trenchant critique simply dices up urgent existing global warming pronouncements scientifically couched, and serves up a steamingly overdue plate of sear-your-face-off climate evisceration goulash with a side order of environmental blunt, hot-sauce smothered.
Rall largely dismisses electoral politics as hopelessly tardy at this late date. But he also concedes that some sort of vital last-ditch climate activist revolution would duly remain untelevised in favor of more palatable whistling-past-graveyard end-times diversions, as ascribed by feckless levers of social control, etc.
Despite Rall’s barely satirical final-days prescriptions with bowl of popcorn at the ready, the chance to exit extinction for kids and the rest of us realistically leaves no practical resort. Americans must vigorously stomp on a zero-emissions electoral gas pedal, and vote boldly in Election 2020 with hopes of finally propelling futile incrementalism into climate reclamation overdrive.
MIKE WETTSTEIN Jr., Appleton, Wis.
This is a response to John Vidal’s excellent article on climate change in the 2/1/20 issue. I dislike being negative and pessimistic, but I am thus in this case. Two factors:
Ordinary citizens in developed countries are greatly pleased with the varieties of luxury that modern life has provided, and most of them obviously will not readily relinquish them — and they apparently will compartmentalize their minds to separate their pleasures from the issue of climate change. (A French poet once wrote that almost everyone wants beauty, clarity, luxury, and calm in their lives.) Meanwhile, billions of other people want a share.
A huge factor in any nation or civilization is for the creative ones (leaders) to get the uncreative followers to imitate them. This generally worked in the growth of Western civilization, but most leaders (not only political leaders) fail on climate change: in setting national policy, in determining corporate action, and in setting good personal examples. This is due to vanity and never-ending competition that causes many to vie to be Number One at the extremely-high risk of living on a second-rate planet rather than for them to accept being in a competitively inferior position on a first-rate planet.
An English army general supposedly said, “We usually don’t see the writing on the wall until our backs are against it.” Can you imagine our great-great grandchildren in fights with other bottom ninety-percenters over diminished resources — when technology will enable power-holders in the top one percent to keep tabs on almost everyone?
RICHARD SIBLEY, Phoenix Ariz.
Thanks to Karl Grossman for alerting us to “Trump Get’s Space Force to Assert Domination” [2/1/20 TPP]. This new Space Force purportedly started as a joke, but has now “evolved into a warfighting domain” as the new “mission of the United States Space Force.”
I shake my head in disbelief at the sycophants that enable this man’s juvenile, infantile mind. He seems to see the world as his private reality movie stage and his role as playing the vanquisher of the latest imaginary Star Wars villain. Much like my six-year-old great grandson, who, in grandiose displays of menacing facial expressions, wild body gestures and savage sound effects, swings his plastic, collapsible lightsaber through the air as if he’s just such a conquering hero tasked with saving the universe from, well, the latest imaginary Star Wars villain.
This spectacle can be cute in a six-year-old. It’s not only embarrassing in our president, it’s downright scary, as if he hasn’t put our world in enough peril already!
NANCY CHURCHILL, Oregon, Ill.
At this stage, it will be hard to determine why President Trump pulled out of Iran’s nuclear agreement, which leading nations were “all right” with. Was it an anathema (almost anything proposed by President Obama)? Or Trump thought it was a temporary deal. The blame mostly goes to Mr. Mitch McConnell, who never accepted President Obama as his elected president, and continuously whispered in the president’s ears that President Obama was no good for the Country.
G.M. CHANDU, Flushing, N.Y.
There are many new figures of speech today, such as “owning it,” “the new normal,” “speaking our truths” and “transparency,” once only associated with Scotch tape.
The most misunderstood is “mindlessness,” which can result from concussions, Fox News, PTSD, poor diet and orange dye. The mindless have to only think about themselves, because of poverty, lack of education or insecurity. Embracing these opportunities are cults, gangs, government, scams, the NRA and social media. HELP!
But, sadly, where was PETA when Hannibal’s elephants trudged across the Alps? The SPLC during the Christmas Crusade? The FDA during War of the Roses?
No one is mindful of our SOS. It’s up to us to change the direction of our country, so the USA doesn’t get tangled up in Red tape. At least not nyet.
FLORA ORMSBY SMITH, Marblehead, Mass.
We all know this: Violating the Emoluments Clause, withholding congressionally directed funds, obstructing justice, obstructing Congress, colluding with the Russians.
But Trump will be an asterisk on history, not a precedent. He only got away with his criminal behavior, we know, because the Republican Party is owned by Trump. Historians are saying this will be precedent for future presidents being allowed to brazenly act criminal, but we know he would have gone to jail were it not for the Senate enablers — and historians have to report that, in any other situation, so would Trump. And that is no precedent for presidential criminality.
LEE KNOHL, Evanston Ill.
From The Progressive Populist, March 1, 2020
Blog | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links
About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us