The Most Critical '26 Electoral Contest

 In the desperately important election this year, every closely contested race is a battle worth fighting.  There are a few state governor contests of that ilk, something like 10 different Senate races this year that could be considered competitive*, but not too many more House races than that, post-gerrymandering war, and probably a few hundred seats in state legislatures across the country.  There is the overall contest for control of the House of Representatives and for the Senate, and those two outcomes are massively important , but each is the result of a number of different elections, so one can hardly focus on those, in themselves--it is necessary to go into the next level down and look at what will drive those victories, or defeats. 

The race that I think is most critical, though, is the Senate contest in Texas, between Democrat James Talarico and Republican Ken Paxton.  The latter candidate was just nominated by his party's voters in a run-off election that ran off 24-year incumbent John Cornyn (who will remain as a dangerous zombie Senator whose emotional status is uncertain, like Bill Cassidy in Louisiana, similarly jettisoned from the Titanic Trumpist Tragedy. (ETTTTTS).  Paxton is the most Trumpist viable candidate ever, rating super highly on both the loyalty and coirruption scales. Texas is only rated as something like a 35-40% chance for Democrats to win in the prediction markets. 

It's only one Senate seat, and so the chances that it will be decisive are maybe one in 10 (but a little higher since the Platner controversy has made gaining the Maine seat more uncertain), but the implications are much greater.  Talarico is not just an unusual talent, squeaky-clean, and uniquely suited to be the Democratic candidate in Texas, due to his convincing Christian-but-not-Christian-nationalist vibe, but a potential national leader--in a Democratic administration, like Buttigieg, even if he isn't able to get elected this year. 

Beyond that, though, the Texas race has possibly decisive and enduring effect on the big picture:  control of the Federal government at the top. The thing is, we are used to looking at a certain set of midsize "swing states" as a fixed, or slowly changing, decisive group for purposes of Presidential elections.  States like New Hampshire, say, or Iowa, may be somewhat susceptible to flipping from one election to another, but they are too small in Electoral College votes to be at all likely to changing the outcome.+   We know the suspects; it starts with Pennsylvania, then it goes to Michigan, Wisconsin, and more recently Georgia and Arizona (the last two replacing Ohio, which went red, and Minnesota, now seemingly safely blue). 

There has not been a really big state that has looked even possibly marginal in its outcome since California and New York fell off the cliff for Republicans in statewide elections.  The only other states in that category is Florida, which seemingly remains inexplicably bad, and Texas.  If Texas were to become a "purple" state where the outcome of a Presidential election there is not certain, it would have a huge effect on the numbers--of Electoral College votes, and of spending on the contest, too. 

I'm way ahead of myself, but a Mark Kelly-James Talarico ticket, Kelly promising to serve one term, could carry the swing states and Texas and lead to the kind of 350+ EV rout that is needed (in 2028, or 2032 if we must defer our dreams) in order to put the GOP in its place, which is as a regional party no longer a threat to destroy our Federal government and our Constitution.  That would make reforms of the kind needed. 

* In order of likelihood of Democrats winning the contested seats (+4 net result needed):  New Hampshire (to retain vacating Democratic seat),  North Carolina (flip, Republican vacating), Michigan (again, to retain vacating Democratic seat), Alaska (flip, strong Democratic candidate), Iowa (Republican vacating), Ohio (flip of appointed Republican Senator), Maine (flip, with Platner being only moderately damaged in Maine voters' eyes), Texas (flip, vacating Republican due to the primary result), then ones like Florida (weak appointed Senator), South Carolina (good candidate flipping on flippant Lindsay Graham), and finally longshots in South Dakota and Louisiana.  Ranking above Florida are Nebraska and Montana, where the strong candidate who might flip the seat is running as an Independent..   I'm assuming Georgia is safe for Jon Ossoff against a disorganized Republican opposition.  He's also a Talarico-type rising star. 

 From this list, you could see that I rate Texas as the fifth-most-likely to flip, and thus not absolutely necessary, if Democrats hold their seats and come through in Maine, Iowa, and Ohio.  I'm counting on North Carolina and Alaska to get things started.  

+ Unless there is no majority in the Electoral College and it goes to the House, where the Constitution gives each state's delegation one vote.  That remains very improbable as long as there are only two major party candidates winning all the states (last time that didn't happen was 1968).  

1000 Songs

I finally broke down and signed up for the "Premium" (paid) version of Spotify.  I'd been freeloading (literally) for a few years, but it was getting unwieldy playing and managing my "Liked Songs" list, and in particular the lack of control over the sequencing of them.  I didn't really mind the ads; if they got too obnoxious one could always mute the volume for their duration.  Truth be told, Spotify was starting to make it very difficult to utilize in the free mode:  AI no doubt the culprit. 

 I took advantage of my new-found range of freedom to expand the list from some 500 songs to 1000, adding dozens of additional artists not previously put there in the haphazard way free Spotify permitted.  I think this is the max:  my poor cellphone was slowing down tremendously toward the end.  My plan is to keep it at this level, going forward.  As I tire with some of them, I will add some others, looking toward more recent releases, more jazz (I had binged about 50 jazz pieces before but didn't add any this time around), and the Psychedelic Furs (I forgot to put some add before I hit my limit).  I could probably cut some of the Beatles ones, which are mostly drawn from that great "Love" compilation done for Cirque du Soleil. 

Here are some stats for the 1000 songs: 66 rock artists are represented with a single song--this doesn't necessarily mean they are one-hit wonders, just that selectivity drove that. There are some 32 jazz artists with 49 cuts, headed by Miles with six and Coltrane with five.  There are 73 more rock/pop ones with between 2-4 on there, total of 220 songs, and 36 with 5-10, inclusive with 270 (average 7.5). In the top group are 24 with 395 selections (about 16.5 per).  Here I should say that I am going by the first name in the artist description, but combining some of the obvious ones together (for example, Jack White and the White Stripes, or Mark Knopfler and Dire Straits, though those are not among the top group). I also made some executive decisions that might be somewhat controversial:  I didn't combine the ones from The Band and Bob Dylan, though I did combine The Band with Robbie Robertson's selections. 

For those who know me and my music tastes, there aren't too may surprises in my top 10 (there was some clustering below Bowie in the 11-15 range): 

1.  Beatles/John Lennon 34 (no McCartney, Harrison, Starkey thus far)
2.  U2 32 (including two Passengers, one The Edge solo cut)
3. Blind Faith/Eric Clapton/Traffic/Steve Winwood/Derek and the Dominoes 32 (tie) - I would argue there is a continuum in the membership
4. Steely Dan 28 (maybe too many, but I didn't limit myself to the 1970-1980 period)
5. Talking Heads/David Byrne 24
6. King Crimson 20 (including one solo from Tony Levin--I know, not necessarily Crim)
7. Bright Eyes/Conor Oberst 19 (I feel this is totally defensible)
8. David Bowie 17 
9. (tie) Jimi Hendrix 15; Police 15; Joy Division/New Order 15 --(again, uniting that pairing could be disputed--a lot, but not total continuity in the personnel, though some difference in the sound)*

Yes, I know:  "OK, Boomer Dad"!  I swear there's a good number of women in the lists, and of soul performers, but none with 10 or more songs chosen.  I don't have much country, except some outlaw versioning, and only some of the very oldest hip-hop. 

I will have to do a "Songs of Resistance" piece shortly from the list-- things that might inspire us in the days to come, though they may have been written long ago.  (by that I mean 50-60 years ago, even) 

Ed.  This post was written late last year, but I held off posting to do some analysis on my "Top Shelf" of CD's, which I didn't get around to doing.  The stats here have changed marginally as I have added some artists and cut down a few that were overly represented (meaning additional songs that didn't make my cut).   

My understanding is that one can share a playlist with the broader Spotify community, which I will attempt to do, with the list as it stands now.   

 * Here are the Honorable Mention artists with 10 or more songs chosen (alphabetically): The Band (without Dylan), Beck, Broken Bells/The Shins, Bruce Springsteen, CSN&Y (various), The Doors, Gomez, Jefferson Airplane/Hot Tuna, The Kinks/Ray Davies, Paul Simon/Simon &Garfunkel, Yes/Wakeman, Santana, The Who/Pete Townshend. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 "Big Day Out" - Radiohead live album just released, from 1995 concert in Galway, Ireland. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTBmsXPcdcI 

Sports: 4 X 3

 We'll try a disciplined posting approach and see if it goes quicker and more concisely:  four sports leagues, and for each, a beef, a freak, and my personal fave. 

National Basketball Association:  We'll start with the one currently in the highlights.  The San Antonio Spurs and New York Knicks are at this moment in a critical game 1--if the Knicks can pull off a win here, at San Antonio, it will give them an edge for the series.  I'm rooting for the New York team, though I basically gave up on them after their last Finals run, in 1999 (against the Spurs, also).  They haven't won the title since 1973, while the Spurs, rising again after a few brief years of a downturn, have had more than their share. 

Beef:  Tanking, of course.  An unacceptable phenomenon of recent years, where teams not in the running for the playoffs try to lose as many games as possible in order to gain better odds to pick up the best players turning pro.  I won't say the Spurs did it, when they got their Freak, a couple years ago, but it has become too obvious, and there are various disincentives being discussed.  

Freak:  Victor Wembanyama of the Spurs, of course.  He is not only ridiculously tall, but very skilled.  I wish him success, and above all, good health.  Players that tall often have fairly short careers because of recurring injuries to their legs.  I hope he can beat that rap. 

My guy:  Shea Gilgeous-Alexander of the Oklahoma City Thunder.  I feel like he does everything right, including all skills on the court (passing, defense, the lost art of the midrange shot, and threes when he wants to) and a wonderful demeanor off it.  He faced off with Wemby in Game 7 of the recently-concluded Western Conference Finals, the matchup of the two best teams in the regular season.  SGA had the better game, but the Spurs had the better team on the night.  This rivalry is just taking off this season and will be one to watch in the coming years. 

FIFA World Cup:  Soccer/football's biggest event is coming up in a week.  The USA is singularly unimpressed and unimpressive as a host nation, so it's good there's two others helping out (Mexico and Canada).  There are several teams that could legitimately be considered favorites.  France has too many superstars, Spain and England are hungry and full of proven talent, but I like the defending champs, Argentina, with their incomparable captain, Leonel Messi, for the win. 

Beef:  They expanded the field from 32 to 48 nations (we'll call England a nation for this purpose, another beef to be explored someday), which is OK, I guess, though it would seem it makes it too easy to qualify (Italy somehow didn't).  The real beef is that it is now too easy to get through the first round to the knockout stages, which are now up to five rounds.  So, for example, France is in the toughest group by far, with tough first-round opponents in Senegal and Norway (see below), but they will get through anyhow because three of the four teams are likely to make it (Iraq is the unfortunate fourth).  So the pressure is not really that high for that round, which has a majority of the actual games (96 vs. 31 for the rest of the tourney, by my count). ***

Freak:  Erling Haaland, the super-tall, albino-looking center forward for Manchester City and Norway.  His opponents basically have to keep him from ever getting on the ball near the goal, where he hangs out, avoiding the offside calls, because he's next to unstoppable and very accurate when he gets it there.  In that regard, he's different from the classic advanced midfielders like Messi or the ageless Luka Modric, or the withdrawn centers like Kylian Mbappe, Mohammed Salah and Harry Kane, who go back and get it and then do their magic.

My guy:  Christian Pulisic, "Captain America" for the USA team (not named the team's captain, though).  His career has been up and down, with flashes of brilliance, frequent injuries, and prolonged dry spells.  He's another who goes back and gets it and charges toward the goal with fervor (another is Kevin De Bruyne, on Belgium, who's finally slowing down).  After a successful run in the German league, Pulisic flamed out on my team, Chelsea, a couple years ago, then regained brilliance with A.C. Milan in Italy for awhile, but he lost the flame late this season and the team will probably rebuild without him next year. If he can make some major contributions toward victories in the World Cup it will do a lot for his career and for the prestige of USA soccer, which is lagging a bit.  

 Major League Baseball:  They are coming up on about 40% of the regular season now, and it's clear who are the likely contenders, especially in the National League, the one I follow more closely:  the Dodgers, Brewers, Braves, and Padres.  My Reds are among the many teams looking to grab one of the two playoff berths available after those four. 

Beef:  The lack of parity is driven by the astronomical salary load of the Dodgers, and of lesser, wealthy franchises trying to keep up with them.  The modernized game--you can like the changes, or loathe them, but they have helped broaden fan interest, and the game is more global in its reach than ever--is in peril, with the possibility of a devastating lockout and strike after this season, the dispute being over the owners' proposed salary cap.  I take the players' side always in these disputes, but the owners' willingness to restrain themselves in this way is the correct viewpoint. ,

Freak:  That's Shohei Ohtani.  His ability to dominate in both hitting and pitching (this year, so far, especially the latter) is without rival in the modern game and brings fair comparisons only to the immortal Babe Ruth--Shohei's surpassing him in some ways (the homers and speed combination, longer pitching career), but the clock is ticking, and worshippers of the game give too much emphasis on longevity, which he can't match, unless you include his stats in Japan. 

My guy:  Elly de la Cruz, of my team, the Cincinnati Reds.  My fandom of the Reds is a very long story, and I hope Elly is able to have a long, successful career with my team, though as things stand now, he will likely go to a higher bidder in a couple years.  Elly can do it all--speed, fielding, power--though he hasn't tried pitching, as far as I know.  

Women's Tennis Association:  For this post, I will focus on the women's game** Tennis is the major sport in which women's participation is most fully comparable to the men's, in terms of money and talent.*  Yes, the men generally hit the ball harder, and they play best-of-five sets to the women's best-of-three, but there is the same high-profile, personality-driven excitement in this sport, which tests the individual like no other. 

Beef:  This year's French Open, the only one of the four Grand Slams played on clay, the more demanding in terms of stamina (not so easy to serve your way through matches), is close to killing players, due to the heat wave and the five-setters on the men's side.  They need to bring in one of the initiatives of the other Slams and give the players a fucking break once in a while.  They should also make the fifth set a brief one, like the super tiebreaker they have in doubles (for which longer matches would make much more sense). 

Freak:  Aryna Sabalenka is a big woman, tall and muscular.  Handsome, I'll say, and with an underrated sweet personality.  She has a big serve and a ferocious competitive temperament.  Though she ran out of gas the other day in her quarterfinal match (see above), she is hard to handle for everyone except the similarly tall, similarly powerful-serving Elena Rybakina.  Serena Williams is coming out of retirement at age 44, to take her shot at Sabalenka, I presume:  they have quite a bit in common, except the personality. 

My guy+:  Iga Swiatek was the top player for a couple of years, nearly unbeatable until the rise of the two giants I mention above.  Swiatek is a normal-sized woman player who does most everything right, except she strives so much it's scary. I hope her form can rise up again to her previous level, but I doubt it--the competition has gotten tougher.  

There are others in today's WTA for whom I have similar soft spots:  Coco Gauff, Naomi Osaka, and Elena Svitolina, to name three; they all have their challenges.  Coco's is her serve, which comes and goes, Osaka's is her mercurial mental state, and Svitolina's is her personal challenges as a mother, wife to a men's pro, and the stress of being Ukrainian. It's hard for me to choose when they face each other, but I quietly lean toward Iga most often. 

 

P.S.  The Knicks win Game 1.  Finished this one in less than hour--that's progress.  

**I've addressed the men's game often enough in other posts--at this moment, Sinner stands alone (though he also pooped out in the heat), until Alcaraz is back on the court.  For this tourney, I'm rooting for Zverev to win; he's worked long and hard and this is his best shot ever at a slam. 

*The other might be track and field, and the Olympics generally, which have given women a lot more competitive equality in recent decades, and have dealt pretty successfully with gender ambiguity issues. 

+"Guy" in the modern language meaning of person, without gender specified, to keep parallel in form with the other three sports' comments. 

*** I am not counting the abysmal 3rd-place game, which everyone knows should have been removed decades ago.  

 

. 

 

A Structured Settlement for Iran

 

 I am inspired by John
Oliver's piece on J.G. Wentworth and its approach, to propose something along their lines to end this miserably begotten war with Iran.  When it broke out, I insisted it was Bibi and Drumpf improvising and trying to create a distraction in order to improve their chances to avoid electoral catastrophe later this year.  It failed to serve its purpose, and we shouldn't have to suffer for their bad decision anymore.

There are really four causes that Bibi/Dickhead sought.  The first was the decapitation strike, which went off, but was never going to make regime change--they had missed the chance they had a few months before with the riots and their suppression.  So, forget about that one. 

The second is also to be ignored:  Iran will not stop assisting their allies in the region to cause trouble.  They pursue their perceived national interest, which is promoting Shia and irritating Israel.  Those two can duke it out forever and we don't need to get involved.  Israel does very well on its own with that.  It's really just a corollary of failing to achieve regime change.

The third is the Strait of Hormuz.  Iran's claim to control it all is most unjust:  there are nations on the shores on the other side  of it (Oman, UAE--Dubai) which have just as much right as Iran to control their territorial waters.  Basically, Iran can do what it wants with its side, but the other side should be protected, and the Gulf States' rights actively patrolled by UN forces. It's a global priority.  I think China would agree, and Trump should use his presumed leverage with Putin to get them to go along--all his sucking up for these decades should count for something. . 

Finally, there's the real horned dilemma, that of Iran's alleged intention to build a nuclear weapon.  The fact is that Iran has always denied that intention, saying it is contrary to their interpretation of Islam to have one.  I say, take them at their word*, but put strings on it.  Let them do what they want with their nuclear program, but provide an effective deterrent to their changing their mind and building a weapon, or showing they were lying all along about that.

What would be an effective deterrent?  Quite simple, really.  We inform them, publicly, that the day after they test a nuclear weapon, we will destroy their nuclear facilities with a nuclear weapon, or a couple of them if they are strategically necessary to "obliterate" their capacity to make more of them.  We have a good variety of them and could choose the appropriate one(s) if the case becomes necessary.  We inform China and Russia that is what we will do, so there is no mistake. This would also apply if they do a dirty bomb as a terrorist act.  We don't need to cause the mass casualties of an attack on a populated area, but if they are so foolish as to hide their facilities with lots of people around them, we take those sites out on a continuous basis with conventional weapons. I don't think Israel would have any problem with following through on that aspect. 

Seems monstrous, but that's nuclear deterrence for you.  Iran is a signer to the Non-Proliferation Treaty--we should penalize them if they fail to honor it.  Anyway, that's what nuclear powers do to nations that don't have the weapons--we bully them. I'm not even going to talk about Israel's unacknowledged nukes, but I will say this threat is pretty much what Hillary Clinton said years ago when addressing the issue of Iran's potential nuke. 

As for the "structured settlement" part, apparently a bunch of their assets are frozen somewhere (was it Belgium?)   We can start paying out those in (relatively small) installments as soon as they stop hostilities, which might make them willing to come to the table.  Then they can get a lump sum  (reduced by a few billion for handling costs) if they make an agreement to stay on their side of the Strait--that will be their "reparations"--the most ridiculous part of their requests. 

So, Drumpf--ready to deal?  

 

* I will admit that, since ancient times, the Persians were famed for being liars, and the modern Iranians are clever and deceitful.  Still, the deterrent will work if it has teeth and serious intent.  

America > Trump

Of this I have no doubt, or fear.  Though we have allowed this person of the lowest character and subterranean behavior to be elevated to our highest political office, he does not rule over us in the way he thinks. Instead, he clings to the throne with underhanded means, writhing in his self-made bunker as his level of popular acceptance sinks further. Though I am observing him from afar at present, it only makes it easier to see him digging his sinkhole of madness ever deeper. His attempts to distract from his evil past actions only create more damage. Watching his underlings from a distance--imagine how they can possibly remain beneath him!--failing in their appointed tasks and drawing ridicule upon themselves brings gratification, knowing I am largely beyond reach of their putrid scheming. 

Truth be told, America is greater than just the United States of America, though I have covered that subject before.  It holds a great idea, that of the universal human goal of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", but the truth that is self-evident in the domain of mankind's affairs these days is:  power.  Nothing more. The USA's power is unmatched (still), but the national government's purposes in this time are not worthy of this great land.  Greed, indifference to the global community, and the shocking, reactionary impulses to subject other nations' to our selfish interests are the unmistakable content of our external actions, mirroring similar foul intent domestically toward those without power or the means to resist. 

Our Own Litmus Test 

Yet we, the people of the USA, do have the means, if we act collectively to fight back.  We have only one effective, substantive way to strip this evil regime of its power, and we must protect that chance with all our own powers of action. Though the forces of oligarchy and incipient fascism seek to make our votes meaningless, we have--so far--still our chance this November. Are we worthy of our unrivalled privilege as a nation? Let's not waste this shot. 

I know better than to appeal to the cause of saving our democracy.  We are far from being democratic--ruled by popular will--in our national affairs, and that appeal failed loudly in 2024--the response amounted to a big, lazy yawn.  Still, we can work within the limitations of our constitutional republic to overthrow part of the system driving us downward and begin the reclamation project.  All the corrupt maneuvering and manipulation is still unable to prevent us from expressing our will, if our numbers are large enough and broad enough.  What drives the electorate may not be such a noble purpose as dethroning evil, but it is enough that our sense of frustration and desperation at the destruction of our economy and the quality of our public life move enough of us for a decisive electoral victory.  

A "litmus test" is an objective measure, in chemistry a device to determine a binary result, acid or base, though it can also have a directionless result proving neither. So it will be with our election:  victory or defeat, though the result could end up less than definitive.  It is easy to define victory in 2026:  gaining control of both the House and the Senate. Plenty of associated results would accompany that victory, not least would be breaking the Trumpist cult's sense of superiority. Getting one and not the other would not be defeat, but it would result in two years of dubious stalemate before another climactic showdown in 2028, which would then be under less-than-favorable circumstances. The good news is that victory in 2026 is feasible; more than that, it is still attainable, despite the enemy's attempts to cheat us of our opportunity.  If the Republicans are defeated in Congress, the forces of authoritarian rule will be checked, put squarely on defense, and defense is something they really can't employ well; their only mode is attack.*

Somehow we will have to muster both our people's warmth and humane nature, and our revulsion at injustice and practical objections, all at the same time.  Both our moral sense and our common sense.  I'm not saying it's going to be easy.  The shape of this battle is now pretty well formed; I will have more to say about tactics in the 24 weeks to come. 

Light in a World of Woe

 Pope Leo's recent words are enough to make me a Follower, if not a Believer with a paid subscription.  I am so proud that our co-national, first ever to that high position of authority and grace, has chosen to speak wisely and confidently for us.  "Masters of war", indeed. Am I allowed to say "our Pope"?  Not from a nationalistic, possessive point of view, but isn't he supposed to be for all us humans, not just the Catholics who are bound to swear allegiance?  Of all the groups deserting the Drumpfenreich's support, it appears that Trump's blasphemous behavior has hurt him lately with religious observants of Catholic and Protestant evangelical faith.  He'd already lost most women, the mass deportation fiasco reversed his gains with Hispanics, and his gross warmongering has undermined him with young men. Surely there can't be enough remaining for him to rig the election in his favor

 

*I give credit to Pete Hegseth for little, but he was right about that when he re-named his cabinet department.  A name is not everything, though, as he has proved that war is sometimes about more than killing more of them than they get ours, something we should have learned long ago. .  

 

 

Back to Bash

(Read while playing Amy Winehouse's "Back to Black", maybe) 

 To begin my discussion of where we are in the past few weeks since my last political rant, let's go back to the post where I suggested that acceleration had turned in the direction of reversing the harm Trump 2.0 is causing. That the brakes on destruction were being engaged, and I looked for and found signs that the reversal of that careening toward and over the precipice had begun. 

 

That was right before Trump and Netanyahu ordered their forces to renew the bombing of Iran, beginning with the decapitation strike on their political leaders. 

 

 To be clear, I said then that things were continuing to worsen, but I argued that deterioration would slow, ultimately reversing this enshittification. My perception was that our actual velocity was near zero, that the resistance internally and from the rest of the world was ending the bringdown

. Then they struck. 

 The outlines of the whole thing are clear enough now: there was an opportunity, deemed "unique", to take out the leadership in one fell swoop--"Seven in One Blow", if you remember from the child's fable--and it was seized. There were contingency plans for attacking Iran, destroying their military assets, going further with the infrastructure, but the exit strategy seems missing. 

 The results are indecisive, with a short-term reduction in Iran's capabilities to cause harm, and a new long-term threat in the form of Iran's ability to disrupt the economy (though at great cost to themselves). That's as of now, and basically it can be over if Trump shuts his digital yapper and hostilities end, driven by a lack of advantage for either side to continue. 

The only basis for believing that will be next is Trump's history with Taco Tuesdays. 

He's Drawing to an Outside Strait 

 I would insist that this diversion--assuming it does not escalate into a continuing conflict with global impact, hard to be sure what that would do to the Dickhead-in-Chief's popularity as he assumes an ever-more Big Brother-ish appearance--is Trump's attempt to regain control of his faltering momentum. Yet the winds of change remain against his success.

 So, I'm not admitting that I was wrong, just yet. Let's see if he really escalates, or if he does, just does it as a performance without substance. At any rate, I will admit that the my previous argument was one-dimensional (literally so), whereas the multifaceted status of deterioration in various fields of governmental failure differ in their speed, comprehensiveness of destruction, and reversibility, and the response is and must be a vector with directional change from the initial path. 

It's no more just left-right (long ago passed into irrelevance, all modern economies are mixed) or even freedom vs. authoritarianism (because we are stuck with a Leviathan, there's just too much power and money at stake), but it's Survival vs. Utter Destruction, for human civilization. And, as much as I'm trying to broaden my perspective beyond merely what is best for humanity to what will maintain life on Earth, the transformation returning to a state of nature between nations is too much for this society to endure.

Edit:  I forgot to say the obvious:   STOP THE WAR! 

 --

The Best Picture

 

Tonight the Motion Picture Academy will present its awards for the 2025 films they choose to honor.  In truth, all the nominated films have received their honor; this is about the show, and I have to admit that I am a total sucker for it. Somehow, the drama of this entertainment vehicle that has a little entertainment (Conan O'Brien this year) and a lot of tension and time-wasting gets me emotionally involved.  I know, not everyone feels that way. 

Anyway, the scuttlebutt this year is focused on the award for Best Picture, which is deemed to be a battle between voters for Sinners and those for One Battle After Another (hereafter OBAA).  It's gotten serious lately with lots of invective thrown around by backers of one against the other.  It seems to boil down, among the litigants, to some questions about which is more cool, more hip, more woke.  OBAA is accused by Sinners-backers of cultural disrespect of blacks and, well, Sinners is, in part, what they say it is, a violent celebration of vampire culture. 

Sinners is more than that, and in fact is worthy of serious attention in many ways.  I abhor the vampire trope and have had more than enough of it, and I'm not going to make allowance for Sinners' attempt to humanize or celebrate it.  It's simply not part of actual human experience, and never will be. On the other hand, Sinners is drenched in the blues, which I can always handle, and in the reality of Depression Era South.  The acting performance as Smoke/Stack by Micheal B. Jordan in it is profound, Oscar-worthy to be sure, much different in its complexity than his supposed main opponents for Best Actor, the rogue table-tennis freak played by Timothee Chalamet or the burnt-out rebel freak played by Leonardo DiCaprio. Remember, we're supposed to be voting for the skill of the actor, not the fame of him, the unusual nature of the charactor, nor the incredible lengths to which Chalamet goes to perform a role.  Though Chalamet's is the kind of role that wins, at least in the old days. 

No, back to Best Picture--that award-upon-award can not be reduced to two films; ten are nominated, including some foreign ones, and even ones not in English..  Spreading the candidacy among so many worthy films will water down the numbers, so that voters are not all funneled into one camp or another.  The result, in the modern days, is that the award for Best Picture has become one that can be unpredictable, even so unanticipated that it was read incorrectly off the card once.  That uncertainty has made that particular award less anticlimactic (usually). along with its going to some extremely unusual recipients lately (Parasite, Moonlight, Childhood, Everything..you know the rest). 

My choice, and it is unambiguous, with due regard both for Sinners and OBAA, is Hamnet.  I will give credit to Adam Baidawi, in an article about the film that focused on its lead actor, Paul Mescal, that it is "a body blow of a film"*.  That understates it--it goes through the heart, deep into the soul, and pulls it out.  It is unquestionably "best", in the sense "more good than any other", because it is about being a better person, about love, in a way that those two leading movies fail to represent. It will make its viewers better, and thus the world. It is only accessible to anyone who has been a father, a son, a daughter, or especially, a mother, or any woman, not to mention fans of The Bard. It is not out of bounds to claim it to be at least on the same film-making level as the other two (maybe not box office, or special effects). In particular, lead actress Jessie Buckley, in an unforgettable series of careful, fetching nature and close-up shots, is considered by most to be a sure bet to win Best Actress.  Chloe Zhao, the director, has won an Oscar before (though that's not a positive), and she has worked magic with the story of Hamnet, which I can't wait to read.. 

I don't guess Chloe will win, and I will grieve for that, but we can only celebrate the successes of the eventual winner, who will be either Paul Thomas Anderson for OBAA (often nominated, never a winner) or Ryan Coogler for his incredibly creative realization of a bizarre, but in its own way,  grounded story. That Best Director winner usually lines up with the aforementioned overall winner.  Sinners is the favorite, because there is a strong historical correlation between nominations and winning (and Sinners has a record 16 of them).  But just remember also this:  there is no best picture--we're talking about art here.   

 

*Really an excellent article in GQ magazine--something I'd never see--that came to me out of the blue on my phone.  Mescal is a highly-trained and awarded actor who was superb in his role as "Will" but was not even nominated for Supporting Actor.  That is an extremely competitive category with, besides Mescal's, four "sure thing" kinds of performances:  both Benicio del Toro and Sean Penn for OBAA, Delroy Lindo for Sinners, and the unheralded possible winner (he won the Golden Globe) Stellan Skjarsgard (sp).  

Forza Italia!

 The sponsors of the World Baseball Clinic breathed a sigh of relief when the Italy team defeated Mexico in their final game of group play, though Italy had already qualified to go through.  

That result saved the USA team from being eliminated in the first round.  USA had already suffered embarrassment when they went down to that Italy team, 8-6.  DreamTeam 2.0 was in great danger, but fortune favored the team.  They'd better not take their eye off the ball again, you could say. 

The "Italian" hero of the team was Vincent Pasquantino, born Richmond, VA and first-baseman for the Kansas City Royals.  That's OK:  Vinnie wasn't going to be the USA 1B--that honor goes to the renowned Bryce Harper--but he got three homers in the game that got the USA through, and then voiced positive statements about his Italian teammates (a mixed bag) and his "patriotic" feelings. 

Japan is probably the favorite at this point, if the travel bug doesn't get them. I saw the bracket briefly, the USA team will play Canada next. 

College Hoops (Men's)

Gearing up for some formidable March Madness this year.  What I like is that there are at least six teams that have proven themselves repeatedly against the best competition, coming out ahead 80% of the time or more.* To name them in order:  Michigan, Florida (defending champion), Arizona, Duke, Houston, Connecticut, and Michigan State.  That was seven, but one should never sell Michigan St. short in the NCAA.  All of them except UConn are in the big four of basketball conferences (Big 10, Big 12, Big SEC, and Big ACC) that have absorbed the best programs nationally regardless of their traditional regional concentrations. +

Because they have proven themselves so many times in conference play, even on the road,  I would expect six of the above to make the last 16, 5 of the last 8, and both of the finalists.  These teams should be relatively immune to upset-itis. 

It's not like that beyond the top two or three seeds in each of the four regions.  The two teams I have long followed, Louisville and Kentucky, are both going to be middling seeds, ripe for mild first-round upsets. On the other hand, they have enough talent to make it through three wins to the "Elite Eight".

The brackets get announced Sunday after the last of the conference championships.  The conference tourneys this week are just a warmup for real thing that begins next week. Most of the teams on the air in the big four are going to be between teams whose positions in the tournament are assured and almost fixed already.  So, the coaches would just as soon the team have its bad game now, if there is one, and mostly stay away from injuries. 

That is, unless your team is "on the bubble" of making the field of 68, which is where my newer team, the University of New Mexico Lobos, currently lie.   In the predictive analysis of Saint Joe Lunardi, who does Bracketology throughout the season, New Mexico is currently one of the first four teams out, spots 69-72 if you will # They are not likely to move back into the at-large selections, if Lunardi is right, so they need to win their conference tournament, to be sure, or at least win a couple of games to make the final, to give them a chance, of making "the Big Dance". I'd say they are "under the bubble", and there's not much air there.  It's all so Big!

NBA 

Victor Wembanyama is the story of the league this year, and the networks are taking every opportunity to show him nationally.  He is 7-foot-4 with highly developed ball skills, both ball-handling and shooting. He's a good free-throw shooter, a good passer.  He looks a little like Ralph Sampson, if you remember him, but he has French poise and better shooting touch. Mostly, though, he's 7-foot-4 and able to block lesser players' shots without leaving his feet.  

Wemby missed quite a few games early in the season, but since he's been back, it's just like old times for the San Antonio Spurs, one of the most successful franchises over the last 30 years.  The Spurs announced their challenge to the reigning champions, the Oklahoma City Thunder, in the NBA Cup, which they won.  They have won the majority of the games against the Thunder, and thus would get the tiebreaker in seeding if the teams finished tied, which they currently are very close to doing.  

The Thunder started the season seemingly unbeatable until they ran into the Spurs in that game, then after a poor stretch  their star Shea Gilgeous-Alexander got injured, and they seem almost vulnerable.  Almost.  They are still the favorites.  SA-OKC is indicated for the Western Conference final, though there are several other serious contenders. 

The Eastern Conference is not at all like that, in that there are no clear favorites.  Maybe the Celtics (my preseason pick for the finals, contrary to most predictions), who now have their star Jayson Tatum back, with his teammate Jaylen Brown among the top candidates for Most Valuable Player for keeping them in the running until now.  After that, though, the Pistons, Knicks, Cavaliers, and now the Hornets and Heat all look like they could make some magic in the playoffs.   

FIFA World Cup 

There are still several berths yet to be finally determined in the tournament, to be held in June and July in the USA, Canada, and Mexico. These are among the second-place teams from the group competitions, so they get another chance, in the interests of fairness, in the case they were just unfortunate in their initial groupings. 

I'm not sure if that's the case for Italy--they finished second to a worthy Norway team, in a tough group--or just that they underperformed tremendously. At any rate, they are in a delicate spot.  They need to defeat--in single-game combat--Northern Ireland, and then the winner of Wales and Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It may sound easy, but success is not certain, and the repercussions if Gli Azzurri fail to qualify will be tremendous. 

(Start with Italy, end with Italy) 

 

 * That works out to winning all of them at home, and 60% on the road or in neutral sites.  A high bar, one that bodes well for the tourney.  

+ For the Big 10 (now 18 teams) - originally the upper Midwest, now coast to coast; For the Big 12 (originally the Big 8, now 16 teams) - originally the lower Midwest; or the SEC ("Southeastern Conference", originally 10 teams, now 16, the Southeast, yes, as far as the Ohio, but now including the far side of the Mississippi; and the Big ACC ("Atlantic Coast Conference", originally eight teams, now 18/17 with teams at least 1000 miles from it).  Connecticut is in the Big East, which has 11 teams, but half are newcoming refugees from lesser conferences in the Mideast.  

#That's not strictly accurate, in terms of the rank order of the teams.  There are 20-30 colleges that are in because of their conference tournament victories that wouldn't otherwise be there, so the at-large selections are something like the 30 or so runner-ups or worse.  The Bigs get as many as ten teams in, or even more.  

Obit Dept.

Jesse Jackson- I remember the '84 Democratic campaign, when he made his most serious run at the nomination. As usual, I backed the wrong horse, John Glenn, who had the resume (first US man to circle the earth in space, elected twice senator from Ohio) but not the campaigning chops. I was young, but I think my instinct that the idea of a Democratic hero for President is more valid than ever, and it was always good.  

As for Jesse, I never believed he would win, in the way I did believe in Barack Obama as a viable black aspirant to win the White House. I appreciated Jesse's arguments, his classic ministerial manner of speech, though.  In the end, it was between Mondale and Hart, both obvious losers to Reagan.  Mondale was the won who ended up winning the loss.  

There was a lot more to Jesse, though, than his political candidacy.  He was a public moral goad to our country, ever since the days of MLK's assassination.  So he gets a lot of credit for the progress that has been made, and his loss signifies the tragedy of this moment. *

Robert Duvall - The most professional American (US) actor you could ever find. Acted in countless films, sometimes starring, sometimes in minor roles.  Always filled the role admirably; it seemed that he was that person, which left his true nature and feelings hidden. Most memorably put his stamp forever on the role of "consigliere"--counselor at-large--in the Godfather films. 

Lee Hamilton - a role model in so many ways, he personified characteristics like humility, wisdom, integrity, in his decades in Congress and in public service.  He may not be well-remembered anymore; I must do a little to deal with that and give my thanks. 

I followed his career from his earliest days in Congress in the '60's--he represented a part of Indiana of farms and medium-sized towns, and including Columbus, where I had politically active relatives.  He was a moderate Democrat who managed to get elected, by large margins, time after time as the political needle in Indiana moved steadily to the right.  (When he left Congress, his seat went to Mike Pence.) The area prospered, so that may have helped his ability to stay in place, but his specialty was foreign affairs and national security.  He was chosen to co-write the official review of 9/11 and its causes, which was and remains authoritative. 

Sonny Jurgensen - There was a time when I was a fan of the Washington Redskins.  That was the time when Jurgensen was their.   quarterback.  He made their team exciting, and that was the team we would normally get on our local game telecast (CBS, Virginia TV stations).  After him came George Allen as coach and Billy Kilmer as quarterback, and I walked away from them and their patriotic pretensions.  I have not turned back. 

Bill Mazeroski - Just slightly before my time as a conscious baseball fan, Maz's 9th-inning homer won the 1960 World Series for the Pittsburgh Pirates in a riotous seventh game against the New York Yankees.  He was more renowned for his fielding than his hitting, but he did have that one forever-memorable bomb, and it defeated the Yankees.  I respected that enormously; the next year (my first as a conscious baseball fan), the Yankees resumed their position on top against the team I follow, the Reds (preseason forecast coming soon). 

Mickey Lolich - I can't say that much, but I have a clear memory of that 1968 season.  Denny McLain won 31 games during the regular season, an incredible feat that may never be approached, let alone matched or exceeded.  Lolich was the #2 starter for those Tigers, but it was he who won three World Series games against the Cardinals, and their stud pitcher, Bob Gibson, who bested McLain.  Lolich had a better career than McLain.  

 

*I procrastinated on this post to the degree that I am finishing it while Obama, Biden, Clinton, Rev. Al et al. are commemorating Jesse (and tying it in with today's Drumpfenreich situation) so much better than I could.  Glory to Jesse!  

 

Fury at Epic Deflection

 I have only a few minutes to comment on the Iran gambit, which I admit I did not expect to come to pass so soon.  It was so unnecessary to open this box of hornets* as the deal which restored a block on enrichment was available.  Instead Trump yielded to the persuasion of Netanyahu, who has a make-or-break election of his own very soon, and went for the war option. 

The success of killing Khamenei adds a lot of complication to the affair, which could've been executed in a less maximalist way, but it was perhaps the intelligence that the Supreme Leader was having an early-morning meeting with his defense leaders that led Trump to act immediately.  For this, no doubt we can credit an Israeli spy on site, or near it. 

I will say that one who will find benefit from this is Putin's Russia.  One more hostile nearby neighbor to subvert.  It will raise the price of oil, which also helps them.  China will protest the action, even in the Security Council, because they will raise the very valid point that assassination strikes against foreign leaders are not conducive to effective diplomacy or government. 

The fanatics among the leadership of Iran will seek revenge in unknown places and times, so we must be aware that risks of life and limb are associated with this stuff.  We can hope that someone--perhaps the President of the state survived?--will be allowed to surface safely and soon, requesting an end to the carnage.

He was Bored of Peace, I say.  But never bored with a piece of gold. 

 

*In the Greek legend of Pandora's box, after she opened it and released all the evils flying out into the world, there remained one small, glowing object--hope.  I think of that as a firefly.  

  

U.S. vs. The World

 That was the headline that the NBA, in its desperation to find a reason to create basketball involving its All-Stars in a way that would appeal, came up with for this year.  I think it was a lot better than recent efforts, because in fact there are a whole lot of All-Stars from countries other than the U.S., enough to make a team that is very credible--especially if you include Canada now as something foreign.*

 The NBA, like Major League Baseball, maintains a token presence outside our borders in Toronto, barely a couple hours drive beyond.  The NHL has maintained its traditional franchises in Canada but has overwhelmed their previous dominance with a host of US teams based in places like Arizona, Florida, Anaheim and Vegas. While in football, of course, Canadians have their own thing which is inferior to ours and we don't have to respect it. 

Baseball differs a little in that regard, though, because the source of its players is increasingly from various regions of the world, almost outnumbering those from the US.  Indeed, there is a World Baseball Classic coming up, with teams from countries all over competing with the US.  We are not the favorites, nor even the best American team--that would probably be the Dominican Republic.  Japan can also put a scare into us, with Shohei Ohtani perhaps playing both ways--maybe even in the same game!  

Snark:And what is this thing about Puerto Rico competing against the US? That should not be allowed.  Donald--speak up for the "ownership" of that territory, and let's seize their players.  The Venezuelans, too, since we're running that country; there's some significant players from both./s.

Not Quite Ideal 

I am a fan of the Olympics, and I watched a lot of these Winter Olympics just finished.  First, I want to commend the Italians for putting on a good show, giving the athletes the opportunity to do their things under the best conditions for their sports (they have the advantage that bad weather adds to the drama without stopping most events), for filling the arenas and locales safely, and for managing the local chaos which the event always produces.  The closing ceremony was intensely "bello"; that one, and the Japanese one from the '24 Tokyo Olympics have together set the bar very high for creativity to be supplied by future hosts. 

The Winter Olympics feature a bunch of sports about which I know relatively little, don't normally follow, and which I have no aptitude nor desire to participate in anymore.  That's okay, but I am a fan of most sports and these are a good change of pace to see different ones.  I feel the same way about most of the sports in the Summer Olympics, too.  The Olympic sports that I most follow--baseball and basketball--are there, but not particularly well represented by national teams.  Those sports, and others such as soccer, volleyball, ice hockey, field hockey, and Ultimate Frisbee,  I would put in a separate event for national team sports. It would be a major draw in itself and bring the rest of the games closer to the original idea. #

The nationality aspect is the worst problem with the games, with the TV coverage strategy the second worst.  Abolish the medal count; make the medal award ceremony private, without the anthems.  As for the TV coverage of the Olympics, I've watched it in other countries, and the problem is always the same. It's about "our" athletes and whether they win medals. If anything deeper is provided, it's usually not about the sport, but it's about life stories. To their credit, I suppose, they are still holding to the '70's Wide World of Sports approach:  "the human drama of athletics".  But if there's no patriotic interest, no special narrative, it's not worth showing, as it presumably won't draw ad revenue.   Less editing, more channels, please--nothing that hard to do.  All that patriotic gore and media hype detracts from the focus of the Olympics, which must be the games and the athletes' incredible devotion and skill.

The nexus of media fame and athlete sometimes resembles a car crash.  It's particularly intense for the US participants in figure skating, the only sport in the winter games that is a major draw. * US figure skater Ilia Malinin got T-boned by the intense expectations which got to him mentally, freezing him up extraordinarily. It's truly unfortunate that his greatest audience so far in his short career saw his worst--his skating ability is miraculous, as he's shown in the past.  Women's skater Alysa Liu, who had been through the wringer of the public eye years before, quit a few years ago in reaction, but then came back for the love of the sport and skated (a much less difficult program) with joy and won the gold medal.

There wasn't much anti-American sentiment (referring specifically to "USA!"), though there was a typical unhinged Italian riotous protest off-campus, generally against the expenditure and land-use decisions, but also specifically against the presence in Italy of the US paramilitary force called by the acronym "ICE".  What the hell they were doing there is unexplained and inexplicable:  I'm quite sure there were no undocumented immigrants to the US among the Olympians gone abroad, and if there were some in the support teams or the volunteers at the games who are self-deporting, fine.  I guess they want to take credit, if there are some units toward their quota to be accrued.  .

Terrible Tariff Mess  

We all knew that the tariff regime imposed by Trump in executive orders last spring relied on a legal basis which was unsound. The Supreme Court has done no less and no more than making that clear, without providing any remedy.  The money collected by importers following their perceived requirement to obey was until now paid to the Federal government's Treasury.  The expectation from the Court's decision is that the money, collected contrary to law, must be refunded by the government to those who paid it in.  What those importers are expected to do with it has not been seriously considered. 

I think that the amount they are going to see will be only a fraction of the number collected from those tariffs--I have heard that amount is $170 billion.  Trump immediately reimposed tariffs under a different shaky legal justification, uniformly at 15%, so almost as high as before.  My prediction is that those importers will only get the difference between the old tariffs and the new ones, and that the effort to get it will require piles of bureaucratic paper and/or lawsuits.  Instead, Trump will seek to distribute money in checks signed by him to every US citizen, which works out to about $500 per individual, minus the amounts he pays after short-changing the importers.  He will sell it to them that this way, they don't have to deal with the complexity of reimbursing consumers. He may not get away with it this time, though.   

Tariffs are the classic Us vs. World kind of policy, but the world outside the US doesn't have as much problem with them as one might think.  Consumers abroad don't have to pay for them.  The issue is mostly about the uncertainty, there and in financial markets, and this new tariff policy will not end that, and the mess will continue as Trump tries to layer in penalties above and beyond.  

 As for "Bomb Iran", Trump has boxed himself into a scenario in which he will end up having to act, to do what Bibi wants him to do, in spite of the Iran government's desperation to avoid getting bombed again--or worse.  Whatever concessions they can make, and they are willing to make some--essentially the same ones they agreed to long ago in the multi-lateral agreement Trump trashed in his first term--they will not be enough for Bibi, and therefore, for Trump.  What a dumbass loser!

 

 *The surprising thing is that the US won vs. The World in both semifinals and so played each other in the "So What?" finals.  I don't really know more than that, as I didn't watch any of it.   In general, though, if the US takes on the world, it will lose. Even in a nuclear war.

# I support most of the Olympic ideal, though I have to give the Moderns some credit for finally abolishing the myth of amateurism.  One interesting note is that I heard a podcaster saying they had heard there is an informal agreement among nations not to start wars during the Olympics. (see the timing of the Sochi Winter Olympics and the initial invasion of Ukraine) I didn't know there is such a thing, but I know that in the original (Greek) Olympics there was the tradition that the warring of city-states would cease for the period of the Games.  

 +I am intentionally dismissing ice hockey from that honor:  its following in the US is intense but not so huge, and it's not a sport that most TV viewers can take in.  I will say that the broadcasters in hockey have a special talent for following that puck and recognizing each player involved, made more difficult by the constant, unannounced substitutions. 

As for the US' ice hockey team's gold medal, I salute their devotion and skill, like all the other NHL athletes who showed up.  

The reason figure skating is so central is because of its many female (and gay) enthusiasts.  Men are dragged in, and sometimes we are amazed, often amused--because we men tend to think it's amusing when people fall on their butts.  

One Year (+) of Going Down

 No sexual content--sorry!  Lots of metaphors, though. 

 Looking back at the decline, there are so many instances of violation and damage that it makes more sense to think of this time as something continuous. We can name many other quantities that have deteriorated, besides our confidence in rule of law, the constitutional guardrails and the prospects for democratic transitions:  US prestige abroad, prospects for international peace, voter satisfaction, consumer discretionary cash flow, job availability, etc.  have all headed in the same direction, some slowly (Trump approval has moved only somewhat, despite all) and some catastrophically "south" (confidence abroad about our reliability), but in synch with each other. 

While all these quantities are still measurably in decline, I would argue that the rate of descent has slowed. This is deceleration, or more accurately, acceleration in the contrary sense. When you apply the brakes of your car, you decelerate, but when you get to zero, the brakes will not propel you in reverse. Think of a cart on wheels with a sail, propelled forward, but running into a big wind that will not stop.  Eventually that cart (if no longer given forward propulsion) will slow, reach zero velocity, and then go backwards.  Or think of the line of the invasion of Russia by Napoleon, or by Hitler.  The forward momentum stalled, then reversed, until the line went all the way back to the starting point, and beyond. 

Where are we as we enter the fifteenth month since the election of 2024, the time when the dark force of the imminent return of Drumpfenreich+ took firm hold?  The push back against Trumpist attack started slowly but has gained force, here and abroad.  In mathematical terms, the first derivative is still negative, but the second has turned positive.  The tidal wave of outrages continues, but with less power as it slows. Or, to put it in positive terms, before a tsunami hits, there is a sharp retreat in the water line, a sort of suck, before it surges and covers all in its path. 

The push--the acceleration in a positive direction--must continue, beyond our starting point, which is now more clearly seen to have been unsustainable politically.  Trump is pushing forward, but his engine is losing steam, and there is a lot of friction and shaking within, and progress on the authoritarian project is growing more difficult.  The deportations continue, but the arrogance retreats. The courts' denunciations grow stronger, and even Congress is no longer cooperating as before.  One positive development is the position the state of California is taking to join WHO, the international health agency from which Trump has pulled out--there should be something similar for the international climate efforts.  Finally, various signs of weakness show that the Republicans are running scared into the midterm elections in November. 

If the acceleration continues, the teeter-totter will reach level by then, and then Trump's fortunes will head downward, toward the eventual butt crash on the ground.  Then the force will be so strong that even the ground will give way as he sinks to unprecedented depth.  So I believe. 

2026--the lead into the elections--will be filled with strife and anxiety and noise.  The noise is the grinding of the gears of the engine of their ship as it strains to keep moving forward against strong currents.  

 + I settled on the invented term during the first Trump administration.  It is not equating Trump with the Nazis--remember that Hitler's was the Third Reich.  (I do like the moniker Turd Reich, though.)  Other names that you could apply instead:  oligarchy, kakistocracy (rule by theft), loutocracy, lootocracy, autocracy, monarchy, Mafia rule, and, of course, fascism.  But not democracy--in spite of the narrow electoral victory, this is not rule by the people. 

 

Edit (2/22/26):  Here's a graph showing the course of the status (of our mind, of tariffs , of the assault on our civil rights, on the killing in Gaza, on the invasion of Ukraine, etc.)  I felt I should add an illustration for those who reason visually. The acceleration turns positive after just a few months,but it was so damaging it will take months to reverse, even with acceleration now on our side.  At this moment, velocity in any direction is basically zero:  deterioration is slowing to a stop, but not being reversed yet.

 

 

  

 

 

Renee Good

 Two observations: 

1) When the steering wheel of a car in motion is turned sharply to the right, the tail end shifts away from that direction to the left, especially with a long car. The agent, the one who did the shooting, was very close, videoing with his phone. Too close, and he got bumped. 

2) Why was he so close?  He was part of a coordinated effort to arrest Renee Good, on the pretense of the vital need to move her vehicle. They were rushing her, for the arrest, and he was documenting it.  It was somewhat planned, improvised, but incomplete due to her pulling out suddenly with the car--something I would say was not expected by the cops, as she was basically surrounded.  They expected her to surrender, not put it in gear and flee.

I would put the actual incident in the broad category of "killed while fleeing arrest", something that happens all too often, but with some very special characteristics in this case.  

First was the lack of any presumption of innocence.  It seems there may have been some bad blood building between her (and her partner) and the ICE force, though that hardly excuses what happened. 

Second, there is the unusual nature of the victim.  "Killed while fleeing arrest", in the US, is generally associated with a black male (who is presumed guilty, of course).  This was clearly a recognizably white, middle-class woman with a friendly demeanor. That was unusual in the extreme.  I'm not saying it's that different in nature from the more common form of killing the suspect who is trying to flee from arrest.  The message, it's clear, was that there was no mercy for irritating white women, either. 

Third, it was ICE killing people on the street.  Their nature as an organization seems to be more to capture and then let them rot  rather than summary execution. This comes down to ICE agents being armed and authorized to use lethal force (under limited circumstances).  In the case of the shooter,  he had been being trained to do so, though I suspect that level of skill might be rare in their force these days.*   What I think he had learned from the training was that he could use the pretext of his bump from the car to claim self-defense.

I mourn her unnecessary death and for her survivors.  

In the immediate aftermath of the incident, HHS Secretary Noem stated that the shooter, who was in danger of his life and firing in self-defense, had done everything right.  If so, and I seriously doubt it, that means the training is seriously wrong-headed--people try to escape arrest in many different situations, and the instinctive response to shoot, if you can, must be suppressed.  There needs to be more presumption that contacts with civilians avoid casualties at all costs, just as there should be such limitations with potential deportees, too.   Better yet, get ICE off the streets of our cities, out of schools and public places, and reduce their numbers.  

 

Happy Anniversary!

We think of annual remembrance as being a public event, like New Year's Day, or as some would have it, January 6, as an event worthy of an anniversary, with this one being the special crooked number 5. 

The anniversaries that mean more to me are the subjective ones.  Two examples: 

--I put on a t-shirt today that I dug up recently, going through a suitcase of old clothes for things to give away.  It's a nice white shirt, from Speedo, that was given at a Knicks game that I went to.  It helps me remember what was probably my best NBA game experience ever, from the period, roughly defined as the Patrick Ewing era, that I was a devoted follower with a share of season tickets. I noted that the 30th anniversary of it is coming up this February.  It was late Jordan, and all the 3-pointers were going in for the Knicks that day, who won by over 30 points. I'm keeping the shirt. 

--The date our marriage was celebrated in 1993 was September 11.  We find it very convenient for reserving a table at restaurants.

So, I have no objection if you celebrate an anniversary today.  If what you celebrate is the survival of our constitutionally-mandated Federal proceeding, despite the obstruction, okay.  If it's the riot. go tase yourself.  

Things Move Faster Now? 

I'm hearing a lot of "I can't believe it's been five years".  I feel, on the other hand, that from a political point of view, it has been five very long years, notwithstanding the slow pace of the cases against Trump (the cases against the rioters went much quicker).  He hit absolute bottom, faced a real prospect of having to run for it, but then, with the covering fire from his movement, was able to overrun his party and capture Our Flag. 

 January 6, 2021 at the US Capitol is very much analogous to November 8, 2023 in the Munich beer hall putsch .  It took Hitler almost 10 years to gain power; Trump's grab for almost unlimited power took only four.  The difference was the ability of today's wealthy insurrectionist-in-chief to buy protection in the US court system from high-end lawyers and compliant judges, with the substantial aid from a cross-section of US oligarchs. Somehow there was a finding that just running for President meant that he couldn't be tried for his most serious charges. 

Admittedly, Trump moved very fast since his inauguration, faster than he could effectively manage. I am observing this occasion by reviewing the hundreds of emails received in the month after the election, when the shock was receding and folks began to think about what was coming*.  It turns out that virtually all of what has happened was clearly foreseen--there were even hints of the Venezuelan Gambit and the Greenland Gluttony (Apparently Trump had already stared at the 2-D maps showing how f--ing big it appears to be).  

It was seen then that Trump 2.0 would be liberated from the restraints he observed (if unwillingly) in his first term. The story is emerging now that he considered a swap with Pootie of Ukraine for Venezuela, or of Greenland for Puerto Rico (sounds like a good deal for Denmark!)  Certainly people could see pardons for January 6 rioters (and we shouldn't have been surprised if Trump just auto-penned them),  The mutant monster known as DOGE was rising from the valley, but apart from its obvious giant footprint the extent of its cruel trail of destruction wasn't seen clearly. 

 

 

*The review is necessary to keep my email (of 25+ years) going; it's maxed out on its space, and I can't buy more.  Thing is, I don't have that policy of 'read and save or kill' when they come in. I get too busy.  I generate a page (usually from the last five years, when the size of emails increased) at random and plow through it.  This time, it was mid-December, 2024.   

 

  

  

Pottery Barn Status: Just a Crack?

One thing that the realization of the Venezuelan Gambit makes clear is poor Venezuela will be "run" no better than the US is "run" by these clowns.  That being said, the military and CIA had their act together impressively for the capture mission, and we are grateful for that. 

I do appreciate Rubio's expressed point of view, that this is just the removal of a corrupt, criminal leader*, and not a signal for massive violence or political upheaval.  It at least gets most of it over the hurdle of the questioning of the whole sordid affair and into the courts.  "It" being the complete disregard for the formalities before beginning the large-scale hostilities. 

It won't work, though, in my opinion.  Trump will give it a try, as the negotiations continue on his share of the oil revenue and on the mass return of the refugees. I have doubt whether he can succeed with this approach toward the current regime, the best outcome for him politically--a clean operation, declare victory, take the bump, move on--but we all know he has other options, as long as they don't involve a prolonged ground presence.  In his case, he might call up and use the poor National Guard of some compliant state to maintain security for oil workers. 

Having described the best possible outcome, we now have to consider the alternatives.  First is trouble from the official government and military of Venezuela, which so far has had a mixed reaction there: some are ready to cooperate, some take a more resistant stance.  It could merely be that they are not yet bought in to the new Trump system. So to speak. If they don't play along over the key transitional period of a few months to a year, though, it could get ugly. 

Next consider the opposition, as Trump Co. may end up having to do. The Trump approach surprised me by freezing the organized opposition out, after all the mutual flattery and the Nobel Prize nonsense for M.Machado.  In the long run, this could end up looking more like Cuba or Afghanistan than Iraq or Libya, especially if the general impression is that the Yanqui imperialists are stealing their money, once again, and meanwhile the bad deal they are getting from the government is continuing to bankrupt the nation. One thing I have yet to hear is the cost in Venezuelan lives of this initiative.   

Finally, the real deals.  What he's doing is effectively to help knock out one criminal narcotics conspiracy, on behalf of a larger, more organized one.  And what percentage is the Don going to get up front and from whom?  The oil project is a more long-term one that could end up working or falling disastrously short.  The reserves are there, if you can keep them.  In the very short term, there should be a drop in the commodity price for oil.  

 If he's smart, he will do what they did in Iraq, but more consistently and successfully, and "invite" the top 100 of the power figures of the formerly-Chavismo power structure headed by A. Maduro to depart, with a bar of gold bullion each.  Being very experienced in dealing with rampant inflation, they'll want that instead of questionable dollar assets. But depart they must. Then it'll be easier to impose his will and get his cut.  

Finally, it should help Dickhead Don in the continual battle to find domestic political distractions from the Epstein Files virus and from affordability. Gas prices should continue to help though the summer as a reaction to this.  Foreign affairs give Trump a lot more leeway to do his will when the courts can't or won't intervene. Congress will squawk but do nothing, and they already are disadvantaged because it happened while they slept.  If he doesn't watch it, though, he could become subject to arrest abroad at some point. The criminal.  

I have to admit that they brought this to a head faster than I thought they would.  I thought it would take more clear signs of impending recession to spark the attack. There was a little uptick in unemployment and continued Trump jawboning the interest rate, but we are all poorly-informed on the real prospects for the economy in the near future.  A big risk, but the phrase "world's largest crude oil reserves" was vibrating in Trump's feeble but cunning mind. 

My big question is:  how many fronts are we going to be dealing with, by the time this faux isolationist fait accompli artist+ is through?  I see four, easily: apart from potential rebellion in America South,  Israel trying to dominate in the Middle East, China squeezing Taiwan and disrupting the rest of East Asia, and Russia in the former Soviet Union, or even Eastern Europe.   And probably a politically weakened, physically collapsing, seat-of-diapered-pants driving greedmonger.  Think Baron Harkkonen going for the "spice", if you permit a "Dune" reference.   

  

 Epilogue: 

My draft response to Adam Kinzinger's video, which he taped just after Trump's press event, in frustration as the news kept changing early:  

I'm afraid I must resist the appeal not to jump to outcomes--which, after the safe return of the US capture operation personnel, and the count of Venezuelans lost in it, is all there are:   
I don't agree that "this is not Iraq"--there is the same lack of a clue of a plan.  Instead, this time it will be transactional negotiation at the point of a gun.  The main topics are the US cut of oil profits (and our loan will follow agreement) and allowing return of refugees on a large scale.  The current regime will not come to agreement, so they ("we") will move on to the next.  

Finally, the person who won the presidential election was not Nobel-prize winner Machado but the person the opposition put up when she was not allowed to run.  Gonzales.   Why not stick him in and then supervise elections, rather than invade and bomb?  (and help the oil industry there get back to production, of course) 

My response, edited: 

 I don't agree that "this is not Iraq"--there is the same lack of a clue of a plan.

the person who won the presidential election was not Nobel-prize winner Machado but the person the opposition put up when she was not allowed to run.  Gonzales.   Why not stick him in and then supervise elections, rather than invade and bomb?   

 

* I would suggest that the indictment should read, or should have read, "Conspiracy to distribute narcotics outside of usual cartel channels. "    I know the grand jury had to do it in a hurry.  

+Two French expressions in one sentence.  Is that too many?  

That Was "The Golden Age" That Was

 -- A little 2025, a little the last 80 years, and a Gore Vidal novel I just finished.  

 

 

There is no doubt that 2025 was a year of a distinct and recognizable change in the USA.  What it portends for the future is much in doubt--ain't it always that way?--but this year, taken as a data point, is truly what President Biden used to say, an inflection point. 

The effect of the attempted destruction of the federal government that was the chief initiative of the Trump Administration in this year may take long to fully reveal itself, whether or not there is ever a serious effort to reverse it.  The damage sought to our climate, cruel and casually imposed, may or may not be fatal in the larger, global sense. 

The damage to our international relations, though, and to our nation's position in the world order, is permanent. Even if we somehow regain our footing as a nation and can refrain from piratical kleptocracy in the new A.D. (After Dickhead), we will never again be the monopole, the only superpower, able to set and maintain the primary rules of geopolitics on the grand scale.  Diplomatic primacy, military superiority, the security of owning the world's reserve currency, the best military alliances, somewhat real economic dominance--these are all in question, even if we can maintain our momentum in a frenetic technological race. We can talk about the loss of moral posture below.    

What we shattered in 2025 was cracked by the fall of 2024.  It was no longer possible to dismiss the freakish Trump win in 2016 as an aberration.  This was the great realization abroad, and the implications of that fact, although not always viewed in the same way for its effect locally, always provides critical guidance on the national interest, because always relevant.  The USA was, indeed, that important. It will never be the same in that regard.

A 2025 retrospective post on Substack by Phillips O'Brien, an expert on the military-diplomacy nexus and the war against Ukraine, was titled "2025 In Review: The Year We Switched Sides".  That tells a lot of the story, and is almost incontrovertible in that case, but I disagree with the notion that this applies to us all (in the US) and across the board, but merely that, in the world to come, all will know that we can change sides without any consistency. Except greed, maybe. What has changed is that we are not in the clear leadership position anymore.  

"The Golden Age" 

The seventh and final novel in Gore Vidal's series of US historical novels came out in 2000.  He lived until 2012, but he was already 75 then and near the end of his highly productive writing career.  As with others in the series, he mixed real historical characters, using their authentic statements and writings to drive dialogue and interactions with invented characters which he strategically placed close to "the room where it happens" (to quote the play "Hamilton").  

The narrative centers around the journalistic career of an invented D.C. newspaper editor and publisher, Peter Sanford, spanning the years from 1940 all the way to contemporary time in 2000, though its focus was mostly on the time just before the US' entry into WWII and the immediate postwar period.  For the characters in the story (and clearly for Vidal), the intentional entry into that war was in order to launch a period of global dominance, though its gleam was ended after the (again, intentional) fabrication of the Cold War, which soon transformed into the Korean War stalemate (his character's view:  defeat and surrender), and by the betrayal of our values of the anti-Communist witch-hunt.  So, from that view, the Golden Age only lasted from 1945 to 1950.

Vidal's cynical view of American history reveals itself frequently through the story.  FDR knew the Japanese were going to attack; in fact, he welcomed it and forced it to happen. The sudden Wendell Wilkie rise to the Republican nomination to challenge Roosevelt's unprecedented third term was driven by by big money of New Dealers who wanted to make sure both parties were inclined to war, against popular opinion and the positions of the top Republican candidates, and included a murder to help ensure that the dynamics of the Republican convention favored the dark-horse candidacy of Wilkie.  Such are the creations Vidal puts into his story behind history. I was somewhat surprised he never mentioned the shocking story of the internment of Japanese on our West Coast. 

Sometimes he deals with known fact, often with popular underground wisdom, frequently he grants his characters the prophetic quality which comes only with hindsight, and he is not beyond inventing history.  In The Golden Age, Sanford's foil is an opportunist, Clay Overbury, who is a Senator due to take the Presidency in 1960 (instead of JFK, in the knowing whispers in Washington drawing rooms) before he dies in a plane crash.  The Sanford character is part of a family particularly close to FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt, and then later he has personal interactions with President Harry Truman. 

Vidal breaks down that fourth wall to some extent in this novel, which covers some events Vidal, as someone within the elite, witnessed personally, if peripherally. He even puts himself, "Gore Vidal", in a couple of scenes and ends the novel with Gore fictitiously interviewing Sanford, now Vidal's age of 75 and physically infirm, at Vidal's (real) home in Ravello, Italy.  Then the final chapter is told by Vidal in first person and wraps up the series with some philosophical musings about the existential reality, or lack thereof, of history, reality, and the greater historical context. It includes some unfortunate comments sarcastically referring to the fear of Arabs blowing up planes, just a year before the reality hit. 

I would point out that Vidal was also something of a scholar of ancient history and his whole limited 1945-50 range of US' period of true greatness is a slight at ourselves in comparison to the greater Golden Age of Athens.  It is instead to empire that the US is and was destined, in Vidal's view, something developing over several of his novels and many of his essays. 

With respect to Vidal's view, our Golden Age was not really ended by the Korean War or the rise of our stultifying military-industrial complex.  Our culture and its impact has been much more than military rule, domestic or abroad, and much less about governing the savages than about guiding them toward our interests.  With plenty of advantage over our rivals, we've been able to more than keep pace, militarily, economically, and above all, technologically. Until now.   

Last Words on this Regrettable Year:  

AI has achieved the right level to interact with American culture--that's why it's called "slop". 

I cannot complain too much about the year, as I have had little or no personal impact of the government insanity.  Just some people who've lost their jobs; I'm sorry for them, but that happens all the time as employers take it out on those below in the hierarchy.  The stress of constant challenge to our confidence in our supposed political leadership hurts deeply and reminds us of the need for reform, but we all recognize the failure in the scenes we are presented daily.  The most common injury is to morality and decency. 

And honesty. My greatest concern for 2026 is that the flood of fraud, combined with the tariffs, will inhibit consumer spending to the point that recession does come, and that Washington will then create some war as a distraction.  In my view, that is the only way the Republicans will be able to hold onto power in Congress. 

Postscript: The Golden Age of Food  

 The organic food movement grew some surprising legs, so it may survive locally, but global food availability--the incredible variety of food that is available today, because of both sea and air shipping--may be in serious danger.  The price of imports and supply chain issues may combine over time to end broadly-available exotic produce and narrow our diets, though there may remain pockets of gourmet for the most wealthy.