To Tell The Truth? Biden On MAGA

Social media is abuzz about Biden's attack on MAGA. On twitter, it seems that every MAGA supporter framed Biden's comments as an attack on at least half of America. Such a description begs the question that half of America are MAGA followers.  Since not even half of Americans are Republicans and not all Republicans are MAGA followers, it is logical to conclude that the MAGA portrayal of Biden's comments cannot possibly be true. But truth is not a friend to those who want to manipulatively persuade fellow Americans into following them

But what about Biden's claims about MAGA followers? You know, those who twice believed pre-election claims that only a fraudulent election could defeat their candidate, who so passionately embraced conspiracy theories designed to slander their political opponents and inject unwarranted distrust in our institutions, many of whom view Trump as a messianic political savior, who participated in or supported the invasion of the Capitol with the intent of overthrowing a legitimate election, who have sought positions in government in order to control voter participation and vote counting, who have threatened to take elections out of the hands of voters, and who fervently defended Trump's illegal possession of classified documents and how he stored them in unsecured locations at his residence while having foreign guests visit him.

And none of the above includes the two most major MAGA star politicians: Trump and DeSantis. Both of them used their positions in government to try to discredit or even take revenge on their critics and dissenters. Both of them have used their positions in government to censor historical materials about our nation's history which have narratives they don't approve of. Both of them have appointed yes-men people to medical/science positions in government\. And one of them, Trump, to be specific, called the MSM the enemy of the American people and has publicly expressed envy of and/or admiration for tyrannical dictators like Putin, Erdogan, and Jinping. In fact, Trump actually praised Putin for how he had Russian forces attack Ukraine.  And Putin supported the reelection bid of Donald Trump

So was Biden's assessment of MAGA followers wrong? I see no evidence of that. None. Zero. Zip. The evidence supports Biden's portrayal of MAGA followers. So should Biden have said what he said? The answer to that question is more difficult to answer because it all depends on the purpose of making those claims about MAGA followers.

If Biden merely wanted to reveal the threat that the MAGA movement poses to our nation, then Biden was right to tell the truth. 

But if Biden also wanted to avoid marginalizing any group of Americans, then the answer is a clear "NO.' In other words, Biden had his own deplorable moment in publicly denouncing MAGA followers.  In football terms, Biden committed a 'turnover,' a possible momentum changing one. All of the political capital gained from his recent legislative victory, the January 6th hearings, and the revelation of the kinds of documents recovered from Trump's Mar-A-Lago residence was put in harm's way.

But there is another problem with Biden making such public claims about MAGA followers. What Biden did worked as well as trying to tame a wild animal by cornering it. Of course, Biden wasn't trying to control MAGA as much as he was trying to score political points for fellow Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections. But Biden's singling out MAGA as an enemy of democracy was as politically effective as giving William Tell a shotgun to knock off an apple from the top of a person's head. And MAGA opportunists have not been slow at trying to make non-MAGA Republicans feel like victims who need the MAGA movement as a law firm for a class-action lawsuit.

Yes, the MAGA Movement gives every indication of wanting fascism provided that it is one of their people who is at the top. Yes, it was the MAGA Movement that first demonized their political opponents. Yes, it is the MAGA Movement that casts their leader as a Messiah who was hand-picked by God to save us. And yet, those in the MAGA Movement are fellow Americans with each one is made in the image of God.

We need to reach out to the MAGA people by focusing on the actions and rhetoric we object too rather than asking society to marginalize them. We need to point-by-point show where their claims are wrong with the hopes that we can turn some of them around. And we need to listen to their legitimate concerns, while ignoring their conspiracy theory driven fears, that those in the MAGA Movement have. That is how Biden should be speaking to the MAGA Movement.

How To Approach Putin As A Hostage Taker

Last week, this blog described part of what Putin has done with his invasion of the Ukraine was using the whole world as a hostage (click here for last week's blog article ). He did that by implying a possible use of nuclear weapons on anyone helping the Ukraine by putting his nuclear forces on high alert. 

Last week's article went on to discuss the growing lack of self-restraint that we see in the world today along with the questioning of our government's knowledge of Putin's mental state. I mention all of these things because they should play a role in how the world respond to Putin but seems to be significantly absent.

Fortunately, President Biden has directed aid to the Ukraine without making probable direct confrontations between  the U.S. and Russian forces. In fact the same could be said for all NATO forces. But despite the caution exercised, I have fears of a nuclear exchange occurring. And like the old commercial for Lays Potato Chips, my fear is that once nuclear weapons are used, leaders will not be satisfied with just one nuclear exchange. That fear caused me to watch the British version of the American movie The Day After (click here for a brief description ) called Threads (click here for a brief description ). I picked the movie Threads because I could watch it for free. In that movie, what started as a confrontation between Soviet and American forces in Iran over oil led to a limited nuclear exchange and that exchange led to other exchanges until there was a full scale nuclear war. 

In any event, despite the wisdom of lowering the probability of direct confrontation between American or even NATO forces with those of Russia, we need to further revise our current approach to the Russian invasion of the Ukraine. And the reason for that is precisely because of what was written last week: Putin has made the whole world his hostage. And thus, the world's leaders should include hostage negotiation tactics and strategies in its approach to the Russian invasion of the Ukraine. It's not that the world's approach to Putin  should be reduced to that of some kind of hostage negotiation. But it is that hostage negotiation approaches should be a major part of how the world's leaders approach him.

Having said that, we should realize that calling Putin a war criminal, though true, doesn't help. It doesn't help because for America to complain about other nations committing war crimes and breaking International Law is like the pot calling the kettle black. For though we Americans like to tell ourselves that we, unlike many other nations, practice the Rule of Law, the fact is that it is the nations with the strongest militaries that try to enforce the Rule of Law on the rest of the world while they themselves practice the Rule of Force. Thus, the hypocrisy of nations like America accusing Putin of war crimes and not abiding by the Rule of Law can only unnecessarily irritate the hostage taker, Putin, and that is not what one should want to do when engaging in hostage negotiations.

If we didn't live in the nuclear age, we could better afford to use our military to stop the Russian invasion even though it still might not be the wisest choice. But we live in the nuclear age. And our top priority right now must be to avoid a nuclear exchange. That doesn't mean that we should sit idly by while a tyrant with imperial dreams dancing in his head has his way with nations that he feels entitled to invade. But it does mean that we need, along with providing support for the Ukraine and some sanctions that target Russia, constant communication between Western leaders and Putin. We need open lines of communication between all of those leaders. We also need to employ the services of leaders of those nations that either continue to choose to business with Russia or those who side with Russia, none of whom want to see a nuclear exchange. It is the leaders of those nations who can provide a reality check for Putin should he be considering using nuclear weapons at all during the invasion of the Ukraine.

Perhaps, the worst approach is to make Putin seem like the target. What Biden said about how Putin should not be the leader of Russia had already been said in the economic sanctions that have been applied against Russia. For it seems that the replacing of Putin as the leader of Russia is a strategic goal  at least for Biden. Here we should note that we should not feel safe from a nuclear war because we are employing  economic sanctions rather than using military confrontation. Why? WW II, especially its European theater, should provide a sufficient reason not to. That is because wars have started over economic sanctions. Yes, we should use some economic sanctions; but we can go too far with them.

Despite the fact that Putin doesn't deserve to be a leader, he should not be the target of our actions. Rather, the invasion of the Ukraine itself should be. And we need to keep in mind that what we absolutely cannot afford to have is even the possibility of a nuclear exchange over the invasion. Yes, it would be preferable for Putin to get what he deserves. But again, the Rule of Law is applied only to the weak, not the strong. And that is our reality in the nuclear age.

Killer Vlad

 Being publicly called a killer by the leader of the free world is not an honor sought by many people. And perhaps that is why it was not very much appreciated by this year's recipient, Vladimir Putin. By all of the reports I've seen, Vladimir Putin, leader of Russia, was upset with Biden when he called him a killer. Here, we might want to think of how Steve Urkel's trademark comment, 'Did I do that?' would sound like in a thick Russian accent. So Putin's reaction, though understandable because who wants to be called that in public, did not match the facts on the ground.   Whether via assassination directives or policies, Vlad is a killer.

But why was Putin surprised at Biden's accusation? Was he surprised because, though true, making such a public accusation was considered to be 'bad form.' If so, did Putin consider it bad form because Biden's claim about Putin was like the pot calling the kettle black?

After all, does Putin order the assassination of individuals? Does the US has a drone strike assassination program? Certainly the targets are chosen for different reasons, but the end result of murder is shared.

Has Putin's policies led to the indiscriminate killing of people? Guess who can join him in doing the same? At least every American President I lived under and that goes back to Ike. As for Ike, we really don't think that innocent people were indiscriminately killed in American aided or directed regime changes that brought brutal dictators to both Iran (1953) and Guatemala (1954)?

Though the name 'Killer Vlad' does not have the ring to it for Putin that  'Killer Joe' would have for President Biden, and that might be partially due to the Benny Golson composition (click here for the music), those names would be accurate, real world descriptive monikers for both men. And perhaps that is why to be publicly called out for his killings by Biden seems to have struck a nerve for Vlad.

Where We Are Now Under Biden

 James Corden from The Late, Late Show performed a parody about Biden replacing Trump from the musical Les Misérables using the song One Day More. In that parody, Corden sings the following to describe what life will be under Biden. It goes, 'politics are dull again.' And that is pretty much the current state of things.

Of course there is news  from the political front. The Biden Administration has already overseen an increase in the production level of the vaccines, has authorized a military strike in the Middle East, has given the Saudi Prince responsible for the death of Jamal Khashoggi a free 'get out of jail' card based on the past principle that he was 'too big to fail,' and has passed a $1.9 trillion Covid relief package. But with all of that activity, there is a drop in the political drama in which these things occurred. And that drop is due to the change in personality type of the President. President Trump craved fanfare and accolades, President Biden seems not to. Thus, politics have become dull again.

Of course there are other subjects to talk about, but we should note that Biden's approach to some issues tends to be reductionistic in that his focus becomes centered on fewer and fewer issues. That has been the case with the Covid relief package. Biden was so focused on getting relief to the American people that the issue of the deficit was all but ignored. The problem with ignoring the deficit is that it can become so great that it can seriously threaten our economy.

Biden's reductionism is not new. Most drastic changes used to solve large problems are reductionistic in that they focus so much on avoiding the icebergs from the one problem that they risk sailing into the icebergs from other problems. As mentioned above, Biden was so focused on passing the relief package that he trivialized, or even ignored, the icebergs that come with the rapidly growing deficit.

Regardless of how appropriate the Covid relief package is, the fact is that we have other issues to navigate. And if the only way we solve our problems is to employ reductionism, unwanted side effects could become larger and larger until we actually sail into one or more icebergs that come from other issues and problems.

One method Biden could use to avoid the reductionistic approach is to be willing to collaborate with reasonable Republicans. Biden had that chance before proposing his Covid relief package. After all, there were reasonable Republicans who were trying to responsibly reduce the final price of the package. But Biden would have no part in that. Again, getting the dollar value his team had picked was too important to consider what problems could arise from the price of the bill. And part of that is because Biden has campaigned and entered the office with a kind hero complex where he is going to accomplish what is necessary to rescue the American people from Trumpism. Such a complex makes it more natural for one to use the 'my way or the highway' approach to problem solving.

In a sense, Biden's approach to the Covid relief package is helping to maintain the deep divisions that currently infect our nation. That impedes on Biden's promise to be a uniter.  And failing to unite both elected officials and the people carries with it its own set of icebergs that endanger our journey.

 

 

 

 

The Other Strongman In The Room

 Both 2020 Presidential candidates were old men who are authoritarian by nature. And though Biden's authoritarianism dwarfs that of Trump, it is still there. It is there and it is fueled by purpose and position.

Biden's authoritarianism can be found in his lack of collaboration with reasonable Republicans in the stimulus relief package he is promoting. Yes, he listened; but did he collaborate to any significant degree? For what good is listening when there is no collaboration?

Biden's authoritarianism is also exhibited by his the military strike on Iranian militia groups in Syria. The strikes were said to be in retaliation for attacks on US forces in Iraq. But how are we to know? Suppose some nation bombed a group of Russians in the US. How would we interpret such actions? To whom are we accountable for bombing another nation?

Biden has set himself up for hubris by promising to both restore US leadership in the world and personally undoing the considerable damage President Trump caused at home. But those promises can easily become licenses for trying too hard, for overreaching, and for abuse of power. The US strike on Iranian militia groups in Syria provides a key example.

To whom is the US accountable to for its actions in the world? The answer is no one but the President and the rest of our own government. So the recent US military response is self-certifying. For there is no world court or international judicial body that the US is going submit its case to and wait for approval from before acting. Nor is there any international court or body that the US will make itself accountable to. In fact, the bombing was in response to our military presence in Iraq which has its roots in President Bush's invasion of Iraq. And in that case, to whom did President Bush believe that the US was accountable to? We have to realize that we are the biggest foreign presence in Iraq.

The Middle East is a mess in large part because we have relied on the rule of force there. And we do so because we can. As a result, some of our allies imitate us in doing the same. One only has to look at Israel's treatment of the Palestinians or Saudi Arabia's war on Yemen to understand the reliance on the rule of force by the US and its allies. 

One can also learn about our reliance on the rule of force by examining our history in the Middle East. Here, one only needs to look at long list of regime changes where we replaced uncooperative governments with tyrants .

Yes, Trump is a wannabe dictator. He wants to be the CEO of the nation and many of his Christian supporters want him to have the powers of a king and be able to overrule Congress and the Courts when they disagree.

And yes, Biden is not the wannabe dictator that Trump is. But Biden is a wannabe hero who rescues America and the world. In being such, his position allows him him to presume the power of being the ultimate judge over over others in his foreign policies. And in presuming such, he becomes like Trump in that he relies on no external reference points to judge any actions he wants to take--a traditional approach followed by his predecessors. His domestic approach however is more accepting of the judgments of the Courts than Trump's approach was.

This desire to be a wannabe hero and the power to act like one makes Biden a different kind of authoritarian leader than Trump is. But it still makes him an authoritarian leader. And it is the authoritarian part that we should resist. For it is authoritarianism that helps fuel hubris and its after effects.