Or... is it the day that reality t.v. swallowed reality? Thus is the question as Teflon Don Trump told a California audience that "there is no drought." Well, that's the headline anyway... the actual quotes appear to be that drought or not, a President Trump will open up the taps for those he deems politically appropriate (presumably farmers who will vote for him)... overall actual and quite undeniable drought be damned.
The irony, of course, is that there is a certain insanity to American water management, especially in the far West, as it is-- perhaps paradigmatic of so many other American insanities, that represent longstanding power distributions, rather than any kind of sound management practices. Indeed, the very idea that the very same crops that grow East of the Mississippi, an area of the country blessed with usually plentiful rainfall, must also be grown in the more arid regions West thereof, is f'ing crazy... and yet, has been our policy for well-nigh over a century. Just one of countless insane policies-- that are nonetheless politically and culturally sacrosanct.
Whereas some people recognize that the overall American status quo is insane and clamor for anyone-- ANYONE-- who promises to change it (be it Bernie or, ahem, Herr Drumpf)... one hopes there is a subtle difference between the two year old having a tantrum and smashing the toy and the more, ahem, mature, who quietly clean up the mess.
Obviously, the simplistic "solutions" being offered presumably fit well for a population that has been duly pacified through well over a decade of "reality t.v.," and indeed, decades more of deliberate pacification by the aptly named idiot box (and Mr. Trump has been a master of its use, thus far at least.)
Which does make one ultimately ask, "Do androids dream of electric sheeple?"
Today's amusing anecdote would involve former Grand Inquisitor of the Clinton Presidency, Kenneth Starr, who so efficiently reported on the sexual peccadilloes of former President Bill Clinton as part of an investigative report that formed the backbone of the evidence in support of Clinton's impeachment (to wit, Bill Clinton set in motion the destruction of the American economy by allowing Bob Rubin to dismantle New Deal era financial safety measures set in motion the possible destruction of the planet by breaching the Bush/Reagan deal not to expand NATO to Eastern Europe in exchange for Russian acquiescence in German reunification failed to take meaningful measures to counter a rising al Qaeda threat fraudulently redefined how inflation and unemployment are measured to make himself look good lied about a blow job.)
The anecdote is that "it is being reported" that Ken Starr has been sacked from his current job as President of Baylor University in Texas for a sex-related scandal (not his own sex, mind you but that of Baylor's "student"-athletes, for which President Starr has, alas, not been particularly diligent about pursuing meaningful investigations.) Admittedly, Starr did such a thorough job investigating Mr. Clinton over his sex scandals that he might just be burned out.
Not quite sure what Trump or Hillary will do about the apparent downfall of Bill Clinton's personal Javert... we'll all just have to enjoy the moment, and see if the story is eventually confirmed.
Update (6-1-16): Mr. Starr was kicked downstairs from President to Chancellor, and has now resigned that position and will simply go on teaching at the university. University sports had a good run under him... apparently, at a really high price. Kind of like so much in our society and our culture... as the price now begins to swallow up the benefit.
Anyway, Mr. Starr did so much for all of us. Mr. Clinton was, and remains, a self-serving rogue, whose transgression at the time was to have lied under oath about something metaphysically trivial... that was his crime-- the gratuitous instinct to self-servingly obfuscate during a sworn deposition, rather than chose to simply avoid the question entirely and take whatever monetary or other consequences might befall him or even just out and out have simply said "we had sexual contact... what of it?". And on that deliberate obfuscation and trivialization of an oath, he could have been adjudged fit for office, or not. But Mr. Starr couldn't leave it at that: "the Starr Report" had to be about the grossest, coarsest, most prurient sexual details... we were to be a nation of voyeurs. And what was intended to be a character assassination of Mr. Clinton said far more about Mr. Starr. Who now has his comeuppance. Mr. Clinton's will presumably wait until November, when he will either become "the First Gentleman," or more likely, get to watch Donald Trump be elected President (assuming the nation doesn't get a deus ex machina, such as an indictment of Mrs. Clinton).
Most sadly of all, it's nearly 20 years later, and we're not rid of either of them.
President Emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights Michael Ratner, one of the "founding fathers" of the "Guantanamo bar" which coordinated representation of GTMO detainees, as well as a life-long fighter for human rights, has passed away; Candace has more. I interviewed Michael in 2006.
On issues local, national and international, Michael was a consistent voice for the downtrodden and brought the full might of his legal and rhetorical skills, often representing those who might otherwise be unrepresented.
This is a big loss.
Happy fifth of May, boys and girls.
I'll be part of an awesome panel at NYC's "Left Forum," on May 21st at noon at John Jay College for those interested, entitled "Close Guantánamo Now or Move Guantánamo North?"
But ... enough about me. Where was I going with this post?
Ah yes... le plus ca change plus ce meme chose. Now from where would "anti-establishment" candidate and now all-but-certain Republican nominee Donald Trump draw his campaign's finance chairman (and likely Treasury secretary and director of economic policy, or at least the king-maker for whoever said person will be)? For starters, it should surprise no one that Hillary Clinton hired Gary Gensler for that post, Mr. Gensler a former "financial regulator," but more importantly, an alumni of the Goldman Sachs. In all seriousness-- no one doubts that Hillary was hardly going to be particularly critical of an organization paying her fabulously well to speak to it... in this case, the illustrious Vampire Squid (the speeches were said to ostensibly be cheerleading sessions... yes, that was a bit of a parody... but you get the idea... there are really good reasons we probably won't see any transcripts.)
Alright, alright... Hillary stands for "the status quo" such as it is, of which Wall Street and Goldman are very significant players-- and, to some, big parts of the problem. We get that.
Which brings up "anti-establishment" candidate, Billionaire [reputedly] Donald Trump. OK... Mr. Straight-talker, who called out both Crooked Hillary Clinton and Lyin' Ted Cruz on their respective Goldman Sachs connections.
Well, advantage those of us who believed that the Republican Establishment's antipathy to rich White rich male alleged Billionaire Donald Trump was, oh, a kabuki... Some of us think that the whinging on the part of GOP mandarins was overstated.. unsurprisingly, the RNC Chairman now urges "party unity" behind Mr. Trump.
And so, it seems... we had a point on that. The only actual anti-establishment candidate running (not counting Rand Paul, perhaps) was none other than Bernie Sanders, whose bashing of Goldman Sachs, as far as we know, remains sincere. We know that the Donald stands for "business as usual," because the Donald has selected one Steven Mnuchin, a hedge fund manager, to be his campaign finance chairman. And in what I don't consider a surprise, Mr. Mnuchin spent a significant part of his career at... wait for it... the Goldman Sachs, where he was a partner.
In all honesty, Goldman's rather high-profile representation in the top-ranks of government (two of the more recent Treasury secretaries, Bob Rubin and Hank Paulsen, were Goldman honchos, as was former New Jersey Governor, Senator and Super-Villain Jon Corzine) is actually a variety of transparency. There are obviously other major players in finance with significant roles in the direction of economic policy, and we can't readily identify them. And, of course, in the "deep state" realm of the national security apparatus, finding the actual loci of power is even more difficult, if not downright hazardous to your health and safety.
That said, however, and I say this un-ironically, it's actually a breath of fresh air that we now know where each of the two almost certain major party nominees are drawing their key financial advice from-- because it means, boys and girls, that as usual, voting for one of the two "business as usual" major party candidates will not only be futile for those wanting any kind of "change"... there's an argument that it's affirmatively dangerous.
You can't say you wasn't warned. iFeliz cinco de mayo, todos!
|