Rationalization in the Age of Hypocrisy

It’s hard to understand blatant hypocrisy in this era of video everywhere. I regularly see politicians make profound statements only to be called out by an old video clip of them saying just the opposite of whatever point they had just made. Sometimes the video clip is not that old, maybe earlier on the same day. Hypocrisy has a twin brother, and his name is rationalization. To be a good hypocrite you need to be able to rationalize your stance, both of them. I won’t say that Republicans have a monopoly on these character traits, Democrats have also been guilty, but, of late, the Republicans have taken the twins to new heights.

Our current president and wannabe dictator has found a way to twist and turn the truth in ways unimaginable just a few years ago. He has found a convoluted path into the hearts and minds of an estimated 35% of average Americans. He has appealed to their baser racist beliefs, religious fervor, and/or greed in a way that seems to justify all that he does, no matter how bizarre. All of this support requires a certain level of hypocrisy and a healthy dose of rationalization. How do you, as a white supremacist or neo-Nazi, rationalize the fact that Trump has a Jewish daughter and son-in-law and at least gives lip service to his support for Israel? How do you, as an evangelical Christian, rationalize his un-Christian behavior and hedonistic lifestyle?  How do you, as a fiscal conservative, rationalize his taking the national debt to unprecedented levels? How do you, as a proud patriot, come to grips with this draft-dodger arguing that he is wiser than the Pentagon, the FBI, the CIA, the DHS, the Secret Service, and the Defense Intelligence Agency?  The bastions of our vaunted defense, intelligence, and diplomatic corps have been excoriated by this president, except in those rare instances when they make him look good.

The bastions of our defense, intelligence, and diplomatic corps have been excoriated.

The overwhelming majority of Americans are good kind-hearted individuals, but none of us is perfect. We represent, as a people, a broad mixture of races and religions, we have been afforded varying educational backgrounds, and we all dwell in various strata of financial stability; all of which influence our behavior.

While I would never condone racism, I do understand where some of it comes from. It is human nature to fear the unknown.  In the segregated south, I didn’t have an African American classmate until I went to college in 1963. Communities in Miami were either white or black and everyone knew where the color lines were. We had colored and white water fountains in the stores as well as separate bathroom facilities. When segregation ended nothing abruptly changed, in fact, much of its influence is still with us today.

Little Rock, Arkansas Integration Protest, 1959

In my road-trip travels across our country, I can remember talking to a waitress in a southern state. She was white, and worked with and served other white people. In our conversation, it was related that she had never traveled beyond the borders of the next town. Having grown up in an almost exclusively white southern environment, and not having much, if any, personal experience outside her own race, it would be understandable if she turned out to be a racist. Racism is a learned behavior.

Trump has tapped into that portion of our country where racism is, at the very least, an accepted behavior. You don’t have to be a white supremacist or a neo-Nazi; you can just be someone who tolerates racism because that is what you know. Your parents and friends may harbor racist feelings, and if you don’t have anything else to steer you in a different direction, you too may end up at that same destination. None of it is right, it’s just that I can understand why some otherwise “very nice people” might end up supporting Trump and are caught up in the now condoned racist behavior that will rip and tear at the very fabric of our nation.

Trump has also seemingly struck a chord with some members of the evangelical movement. Even with his abhorrent behavior and instances of sexual predation, he has managed to enlist their support. They seem to be willing to overlook all his peccadillos as long as he continues to stack the courts with anti-abortion judges.

That one topic carries the day for the evangelicals. Some evangelicals would probably be found to be racists too. They would just use religion as a rationalization to justify overlooking Trump’s anti-Christian behavior that would otherwise violate many tenets of their beliefs. While recently watching a historical film shot during the segregation riots of the ‘60s, I saw a woman holding a sign where she quoted some bible verse that she claimed proved that segregation was God’s way. Twisting and interpreting the words of religious doctrine can be used to prove almost any point. It is the same thing now being done to the Koran to justify the evil of Al Qaeda and ISIS.

On a lighter note, we come to greed. Many of those people in the upper echelons of our financial stratosphere would easily agree to take a hit at a future date for a financial win today. They see the rapid expansion of the national debt as someone else’s problem. As long as they see an investment portfolio on the rise, they can put up with anything. It reminds me of Wimpy of Popeye fame who “would gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.” These bastions of Wall Street rationalize this anti-conservative behavior with Wimpy-logic. Trump sells this to the masses (non-rich people) by giving them a little taste of the crust broken from the much bigger pie he is sharing with his wealthy compatriots.

Wimpy, of Popeye fame.

In whatever way you justify your support for President Trump, it will generally fall into one of the aforementioned categories. Sometimes you may tick multiple boxes. I believe that racism, at least an acceptance of racist behavior, to be the most pervasive of these. Greed, religious fervor, and misplaced nationalism may have a racist common denominator. We would all like to think we have made great strides correcting the wrongs of the past.  We would be wrong. All it took was a clever con man to sell America a nightmare disguised as a dream.

We can perhaps take some solace in the fact that there were 2,864,974 more of us that voted for Clinton than for Trump. Also, know that 7,804,213 voted for a third party or other candidates. That means that Trump lost the popular vote by 10,669,187. The really good people of America outnumber the basically good people who were hoodwinked by the con man, by a wide margin. America is great, but it needs to be better; certainly better than the likes of Donald J. Trump.  We can and will do better.  As of this writing, there are 373 days until the election that will either end this nightmare or signal the end of our democracy for the foreseeable future.  October 27, 2019 - November 3, 2020 = 373 days.

"The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive."  -- Donald J. Trump

Responsible Capitalism “千里之行始於足下”

JACK DALLAS·WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2019

Humans need oxygen to survive, but breathing pure oxygen for a long period of time will cause your lungs to fill with fluid and you will die. The condition is called atelectasis. When oxygen is available in the air, balanced with nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and other gasses, it sustains life.

Likewise, sodium, in its pure form, is toxic to humans. Chlorine is also toxic in its pure gaseous state. However, when these two come together as Sodium Chloride (NaCl), common table salt, can now flavor and preserve meat and can play a crucial role in maintaining human health.  Salt is the main source of sodium and chloride ions in the human diet.  Sodium is essential for nerve and muscle function and is involved in the regulation of fluids in the body.

As in the examples above, capitalism in its purest form cannot function and socialism is just plain horrible. Neither can properly function without some balance. Capitalism, where all trade and industry are wholly managed by private owners for profit sounds like it should work until you try to figure out who will pay for the roads to get merchandise to market. How does anyone earn a profit if there are no agreed-upon means of exchange beyond simple barter?  What happens when a corporate giant becomes powerful enough to stifle all competition and possibly causes harm to various sectors of our population and environment?  Some regulation is required. With regulation comes some government or social influence and control.

Socialism is regularly defined as an interim step to communism where the state controls all industry. This too is inherently bad and is at cross-purposes with our established democratic beliefs. American politicians who are regularly labeled as socialists do not really promote or defend the Marxist ideals of a pure socialist society but are committed to providing a balance between capitalism and the social needs of our society. They will generally promote the rights of workers over the pure profit motives of an unchecked industrialized nation.  The problem here is that not many people can differentiate among the various flavors of socialism and so all forms are labeled as something evil.  What both capitalism and socialism (democratic socialism?) need is balance and they both need to be better defined.

Politicians such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have been labeled socialists for want of a better term. Their farther-left-than-most views are probably doomed to failure. I say this, not because I find their ideals abhorrent, but because much of what they stand for cannot come to fruition in our current political environment. Their views are beyond the simple comprehension of many Americans and would never stand a chance in our bi-partisan arena.

We need a new term for an ideology that supports capitalism but also meets the social ideals espoused by many on the left. Whatever label we come up with can’t have “social” in the title. This new ideal needs to strike a balance between unbridled capitalism and the needs of the working class. Gordon Gekko of 1987 Wall Street movie fame, who eschewed “Greed is Good,” cannot be the guiding principle of American society and no form of Marxist socialism can be tolerated.

It is somewhere in this middle ground that we should set our goal. What we need is an enforceable balance to capitalism that manages the inherent greed of mankind and simultaneously fulfills the needs of the many. We can’t allow the Golden Rule to be twisted to “He who has the most gold, rules.” Somewhere between Sanders, Warren's ideas, and a process that allows capitalism to thrive in a fair and just manner lies what should be our ideological destination.

Even Bernie Sanders’ approach as a self-proclaimed “democratic socialist” has two major flaws. The first and most glaring flaw is the word socialist in the title. It’s a non-starter for most. The second flaw is the word democratic as it places the stigma of party affiliation on an ideal that should appeal to all. As I write this, I too am struggling to come up with a better term and I am open to suggestions. Perhaps “Responsible Capitalism” would work.

For brevity, I will refer to Responsible Capitalism as this new ideal. In it, one primary objective would be to completely restructure and simplify the tax code. No matter what anyone believes, taxes are unavoidable and our society cannot function without some form of revenue to otherwise support the needs of our society. The fact that we currently allow the very wealthy to have so much of a say in the creation of our tax laws, means that we should not be amazed that the rich are the beneficiaries of those laws. Taxes should be a fair means to an end. That end would be to raise enough revenue to run our country without an ever-expanding deficit. If we had a tax system that fairly taxed us, we should be able to solve the rest of this nation’s problems.  I won’t go into detail here about what a “fair” tax system should look like, but suffice it to say the system currently in place is not fair.  Not one person can argue that when $billion corporations pay NO TAXES, that this is a fair system.

Any Democrat who proposes reforms who doesn’t want to be labeled a “socialist” had better show how they plan to support our capitalistic system within their goals of social reform.  They need to abolish the term “social” in anything they discuss and remove that word from any talking points.  You can use such terminology AFTER you are elected.  Call your ideas Responsible Capitalism or whatever term best describes your ideology, just avoid the “S-word.”  Use it at your political peril.  One more point before we leave the topic of do’s and don’ts, cover the economy, job creation, infrastructure, and tell us all how you plan to pay for things.

Start here, Lao Tzu

These are complex issues and no simple solution will be the masterstroke that creates our new utopia. But, as they have said for millennia, “千里之行始於足下”  Or, for you who are a bit rusty with your Chinese proverbs written in hanzi, “A journey of a thousand Chinese miles starts beneath one’s feet.”   Since Chinese miles are about 1/3 the length of ours (their feet are smaller), that journey is, in reality, around 300 US miles.  That’s about the distance between Miami and Gainesville for you Floridians. You see, Responsible Capitalism is already closer than you thought.

Small Chinese Feet

Truth Exposed

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) released a “fact sheet” on October 21, 2019, that details President Donald Trump’s “shakedown” of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, as well as his “pressure campaign” to get Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and the subsequent “cover-up.”

“President Trump has betrayed his oath of office, betrayed our national security and betrayed the integrity of our elections for his own personal political gain,”   -- Nancy Pelosi

The document, titled “Truth Exposed,” includes text messages from Ambassadors Gordon Sondland, Kurt Volker, and Bill Taylor.  I have copied and formatted the text from the original four-page document.

Trump and Truth in a graphic depict a certain incongruity.

THE SHAKEDOWN
“Do us a favor though…” – President Trump
On September 25, the White House released a record of President Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Zelensky, which paints a damning picture of Trump abusing his office by pressing a foreign government to interfere in our 2020 elections.

President Trump has betrayed his oath of office, betrayed our national security and betrayed the integrity of our elections for his own personal political gain.

In President Trump’s own words:
“I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine…. I wouldn’t say that it’s reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine.”

“I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.”  “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.”

“I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it. I’m sure you will figure it out.”

THE PRESSURE CAMPAIGN
“As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.”– U.S. Ambassador Bill Taylor

In recent weeks, the nation has learned more about how President Trump abused the power of the presidency by using multiple levels of government – from Vice President Pence to the State Department, including Secretary Mike Pompeo, Ambassador Gordon Sondland, and Ambassador Kurt Volker – to advance a scheme to undermine our 2020 elections for his political gain, and then to obstruct the congressional inquiry into that scheme.

Vice President Pence is entangled in this scandal. According to press reports, in September, Pence met with Ukrainian President Zelensky in Poland and “conveyed the news that hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. aid to Ukraine was not going to be released amid concerns about the country’s lagging efforts to combat corruption.” The withholding of aid may have been an effort to pressure Ukraine into announcing investigations into President Trump’s 2020 political rival to help the president’s reelection.  Secretary Pompeo was a fact witness to President Trump’s stunning abuse of power.

The Secretary listened to the July 25 phone call between President Trump and President Zelensky in which Trump pressed the Ukrainian leader to interfere in our 2020 election by opening these sham investigations. Secretary Pompeo appears to have said nothing to stop President Trump from this inappropriate pressure campaign.

Text messages between Ambassadors Kurt Volker, Gordon Sondland and Bill Taylor paint the picture of a President who waged a months-long pressure campaign to shake down Ukraine for his own personal political gain, potentially using a White House presidential visit and critical military assistance to Ukraine as leverage:

The text messages between US officials:
State Department officials discuss a White House visit in exchange for a Ukraine statement:
[8/9/19, 5:35:53 PM] Gordon Sondland: Morrison ready to get dates as soon as Yermak confirms.
[8/9/19, 5:46:21 PM] Kurt Volker: Excellent!!! How did you sway him? :)
[8/9/19, 5: 47:34 PM] Gordon Sondland: Not sure I did. I think potus really wants the deliverable.

Concerns About Ukraine Becoming an “Instrument” in U.S. Politics:

[7/21/19, 1:45:54 AM] Bill Taylor: Gordon, one thing Kurt and I talked about yesterday was Sasha Danyliuk’s point that President Zelenskyy is sensitive about Ukraine being taken seriously, not merely as an instrument in Washington domestic, reelection politics.

[7/21/19, 4:45:44 AM] Gordon Sondland: Absolutely, but we need to get the conversation started and the relationship built, irrespective of the pretext. I am worried about the alternative.

Ambassador Taylor Sought Clarification and Expressed Concerns About Withholding U.S. Military Assistance in Exchange for Launching an Investigation:

[9/1/19, 12:08:57 PM] Bill Taylor: Are we now saying that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations?

[9/1/19, 12:42:29 PM] Gordon Sondland: Call me
...

[9/9/19, 12:37:16 AM] Gordon Sondland: Bill, I never said I was “right”. I said we are where we are and believe we have identified the best pathway forward. Let's hope it works.

[9/9/19, 12:47:11 AM] Bill Taylor: As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.

THE COVER-UP

“The President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election…  I am concerned these actions pose risks to U.S. national security...”    – Unclassified Whistleblower Complaint

On September 26, the House Intelligence Committee released the redacted version of a whistleblower complaint filed with the Intelligence Community Inspector General, which the IG found to be of “urgent concern” and “credible.”
The White House’s record of the July 25 presidential call between Presidents Trump and Zelensky corroborates allegations made in the whistleblower complaint, in particular, that President Trump betrayed his oath of office by using the U.S. government and outside actors to advance his scheme to shake down the Ukrainian government to interfere in the 2020 elections.

The whistleblower complaint states:

“I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. … The President’ s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.”

“I am also concerned that these actions pose risks to U.S. national security and undermine the U.S. Government’s efforts to deter and counter foreign interference in U.S. elections.”

“[S]enior White House officials had intervened to ‘lockdown’ all records of the phone call, especially the official word-for-word transcript of the call… the transcript was loaded into a separate electronic system… used to store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature.”

“One White House official described this act as an abuse of this electronic system because the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective.”

END

How To Elect A President, Or Not

How To Elect A President, Or Not
           by Jack Dallas

I don’t live in a cave on a mountaintop and no one is going to ask me the meaning of life. I know, but I’m keeping it a secret. However, I have made an observation of our times that we are going about this presidential selection process all wrong. We have two dominant parties who put forth a group of candidates. In the case of a party with an eligible incumbent, that person is normally the de facto nominee. For the other party, the individual selected is the one who best explains their solutions to the dominant issues of the day and manages to score points in the early primaries.

I submit that, while those proposed solutions to current issues may provide some insight to the candidate, they are somewhat meaningless in terms of what is feasible. Present incumbent excluded, we don’t normally nominate or elect a wannabe dictator who will attempt at all costs to push their uncompromising agenda on an unwilling electorate and uncooperative Congress. We should instead be evaluating the character and skills of the nominees. To that end, I think the current debate process is not very helpful. We end up with a broad field of individuals arguing the minutia of complex ideas such as healthcare, the details, and rhetoric of which will never match the final plan if implemented.

We all need to better understand the character of the individuals who want the job. A job interview if you will. Why don’t we examine each individual in a structured and detailed interview? Thoroughly review their Curriculum Vitæ and their detailed resume. We should know their accomplishments, education, and job experience particularly as it relates to our top presidential position. We should listen to those people close to them that the candidate may offer as references. We should also be able to hear from those individuals who have done business with that person in the past.  My neighbor recently retired from a police department position and decided to take a position with another department.  I was asked to complete a questionnaire and another p0lice sergeant contacted me for my thoughts and experience knowing my neighbor.  We should at least be that thorough with our president.  He should have a complete security background check in order to qualify for the position.  We shouldn’t have to wait until after they are elected to find out that we made a mistake.

Should we also listen to a candidate’s plans for top issues of the day, certainly? However, we should hear those goals and objectives only in the broadest of terms, as we all know that actual implementation will require compromise.
Candidates should be graded, perhaps by a group or panel conducting the interviews. They would be rated in terms of intelligence, knowledge of history, and all job experiences that might relate and be beneficial to the most important position in the world. School records would need to be provided. Tax returns would be released. An audit of the current and the preceding ten years of financial dealings would be reviewed and summarized by someone skilled in that area. Each candidate would get an equal amount of time for the interview in front of the panel. One or two people would ask a prepared list of questions along with any that would be predicated on the candidate’s response to an established line of inquiry. The interview would be taped and broadcast at various times on any station wanting to air the video and it would be available online.

At the end of each interview, the panel members would grade the candidate on the overall categories and then they would summarize their explanation of the scores they had given. The voting public will still make the final decision but at least it would be an informed decision for those willing to make the effort to know the candidates.  While this may sound like America’s Got Talent or some other reality show, perhaps that’s what we need.  The panel should be made up of respected and knowledgeable individuals, not necessarily newscasters for a host network.  They would be personable and smart and have a background where knowledge of our national politics and world events is part of their experience.  The questions would test a candidate’s knowledge of politics, history, world events, geography, and various problems facing America.

I would also submit that this process should be followed for the position of vice president. That position should not be appointed at the political whim of a particular candidate. The position of VP should be decided by the voters during the primaries. To date, nine vice presidents have ascended to the presidency by the death of the president or, in Gerald Ford’s case, by resignation.  We would elect both the president and the vice president.  We could even debate the merits of having the vice-presidential position filled by the VP with the highest popular vote, even if it is with the opposition party.  Wouldn’t that be an interesting dynamic?  I’m not proposing that as a solution but merely throwing it out as food for thought and debate.

Early in the political process, we would hear from all the eligible candidates who have managed to clear thresholds similar to criteria currently in place. We could hold a follow-up interview if that is deemed necessary. I would find such interviews far more educational than the chaotic situation and spectacle that is the current process. If Republicans had the knowledge of President Trump’s school and financial records, and interviews with those familiar with his business practices, he may not have been their candidate.

As for the meaning of life: Love yourself, Love one other person more than yourself, and Respect all others.

Now, back to my cave.

A Wise Man Can See More From the Bottom of a Well
Than A Fool Can See From a Mountaintop

And Then There Was One

By Jack Dallas

Our 2016 election was hacked and its outcome was influenced by Russian operatives under the direction of Vladimir Putin.  All of America now knows this to be true.  I say all but I should qualify that with, all but one person.  Yes, Donald J. Trump with his superior brain, his great and unmatched wisdom, his genius-level IQ, his “stable genius” outlook, and the IQ he “guarantees is greater than all” his opponents, doesn’t believe Russia hacked our election.  In fact, he is now trying to shift the blame to Ukraine.  To that end, he has had his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and his personal Attorney General, Bill Barr, traveling the world looking for the heinous Deep State that made Russia look guilty of election meddling and was ultimately responsible for the “witch hunt” that brought about the damning Mueller Report.

Rudy is very close to finding the Deep State

The Republican-led Senate has just issued its 85-page second installment of a five-part report of their investigation into Russian meddling into our 2016 election.  That report found that the Russian troll farm, known as the IRA (Internet Research Agency), “was overtly and almost invariably supportive of then-candidate Trump to the detriment of Secretary Clinton’s campaign.”   The report further went on to say, “The report confirms the findings of private researchers that African-American voters were targeted by the troll farm more frequently than any other group, in an apparent effort to suppress the vote and help Trump.”  Just a reminder, this is a bi-partisan report supported by both parties. That’s good news. We seem to be very good at investigating and analyzing issues ad nauseam.  What we are not so good at is drawing conclusions that beget reasonable solutions.

The report’s mealy-mouthed “solutions” included:

• educating the public to the dangers of unsubstantiated social media information,
• calling on social media companies to better police their content,
• calling on tech companies to share more information with government agencies, and the executive branch was asked to establish an inter-agency task force to monitor and deter foreign interference.

What the report didn’t suggest was approving the 2017 bill (Honest Ads Act) introduced by Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, that would identify who paid for television or radio ads. The report didn’t demand that candidates for office sign a pledge to not accept assistance from a foreign government.  The report didn’t identify who would police misinformation during the upcoming 2020 election cycle.  It would almost seem from their lack of serious demands for reform that Congress is unwilling to give up or restrict their election activities. This almost guarantees that Russia will do it again and that China, North Korea, Iran, and others with nefarious intent, will use our greatest asset, i.e., a free democracy, against us.  We write a report, say we are outraged, and then with a knowing wink and a nod, we do nothing. We have already had one presidential election influenced by foreign cyber-attacks; it looks like we are in for more.

[Footnote]   In doing the research for this article I stumbled on George Washington University’s curriculum for cybersecurity degrees and found the breadth of that offering interesting:

Cybersecurity Training at George Washington University

How Long Will It Take?

By Jack Dallas

Donald Trump was right. He could probably shoot someone on 5th Avenue and get away with it. So far, the former Republican Party has ignored all of his shenanigans. With dalliances of moral turpitude, even evangelical Republicans see no evil.

Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil

When Trump is caught in a bald-face lie, he is only stretching the truth or joking. When Trump abuses his power and influence to divert tax dollars to his various hotel properties, it’s just business as usual. When congress uses its constitutional authority to investigate matters within their authority, Trump claims to have more executive authority than has ever been wielded by any former president.  He most recently, through his lawyers, claimed that he and those close to him were “completely immune” from any criminal investigation. This claim gained the ire of Judge Victor Marrero of the District Court of Manhattan when he found that claim to be, “repugnant to the nation’s governmental structure and constitutional values.”

Most recently, Turkey got an apparent gift in the form of a presidential mandate when Trump decided to unceremoniously pull our troops from Syria. This last event caught our allies, our military, our congressional leaders, our envoys, and our diplomatic corps, completely off-guard. Turkey and Russia were delighted. The fact that Trump and his sons have bragged that they get “all the money they need” from Russia and the fact that Trump has two hotel properties in Turkey certainly didn’t influence his decision.

Trump Towers Istanbul, Turkey

When even his own party began to rebel at abandoning our Kurdish allies to the mercy of Turkey and their new Russian missiles, Trump rattled his saber and claimed to have super-powers of “great and unmatched wisdom.”  To quote Mitch McConnell, “A precipitous withdrawal of US forces from Syria would only benefit Russia, Iran, and the Assad regime.”  Wow, even Moscow Mitch was upset.  It remains to be seen if the indomitable Republican wall of support is cracking.

Humble Trump Tweet

Mitch missed one other entity that was rejoicing in the president’s decision to bail on our Kurdish allies, ISIS.  Yes, even though Trump in his great and unmatched wisdom has declared ISIS defeated, they don’t know that.  Even the self-declared “defender-of-all-things-Trump,” Lindsay Graham has come forth with his own analysis.  “ISIS is not defeated, my friend.  The biggest lie being told by the administration is that ISIS is defeated,” Senator Lindsey Graham told “Fox and Friends” in a phone call Monday.  “The Caliphate is destroyed, but there are thousands of fighters” still there.  Wow, Moscow Mitch and now Lindsay Graham, who could be next?   If you guessed Representative Peter King, a Republican from New York, you win the kewpie doll.  He tweeted that the move “betrays Kurds, strengthens ISIS and endangers the American homeland.”

Your Kewpie Doll

The latest worry for the White House, however, is Mr. Trump’s request for assistance from both China and Ukraine to further his political interests by digging up dirt on his leading Democratic opponent.  The defiant president has declared the investigation a “kangaroo court” and that he would stonewall all efforts.  This will buy him time in hopes that this will all go away but it also adds another obstruction nail in his political coffin.  We don’t yet have an answer to the original question as to How Long Will It Take, but there seems to be at least some breakdown in The Donald’s support.  To paraphrase Pink Floyd,

We don't need no education
We don't need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teachers leave them kids alone
Hey, teachers, leave them kids alone
All in all it's just another crack in the wall
All in all you're just another crack in the wall

Another Crack in the Wall