Meet Your Commander-in-Chief

Most Americans know that Donald Trump “dodged the draft” and managed to find a neighborhood doctor willing to diagnose him with bone spurs. He avoided obligatory military service during the Vietnam War era. With that in mind, I think all of us should find his July 2017 outburst at a Pentagon meeting deplorable.

Ма́ршал Росси́йской Федера́ции TRUMP
Reporting for duty

It seems that Pentagon military leaders, ones who actually put on the uniform to serve and fight for our country, were worried that the new president lacked foundation and background pertinent to our nation’s key defense alliances. They decided that a meeting that could provide him with such a background would be beneficial for all concerned. The meeting would fill the “gaping holes” in Trump’s understanding of America’s post-war history and provide him with information that would help him in his role as Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces. History and geography were not among Trump’s strong suits. His strong suit appears to be dark blue.

Tillerson and Trump

In addition to military generals, Rex Tillerson (former Sec. of State) and Gary Cohn (former National Economic Council director) were present at the Pentagon briefing. Also present was then-Secretary of Defense, Jim Mattis, one of the most knowledgeable military advisors on Trump’s staff.  Mattis had served in the Persian Gulf War, the War in Afghanistan, and the Iraq War. In all, General Mattis has 44 more years of military experience and 29 more military service awards than does Donald J. Trump.

Trump's military background  (left) versus the background of just one general in the room.
Trump holds the Order of  Lenin medal with the Make Russia Great Again cluster.

What they didn’t know at the time was that the new president had the attention span of a gnat on Adderall measurable in nanoseconds. Complex geopolitical strategy does not lend itself to eyedropper feedings. They began the briefing, Trump got bored and angry, and eventually, he interrupted the meeting with his own views.  Among his misguided ideas were:

• We should rent our military out to our host countries like South Korea since we are defending them.
• NATO was not our friend since some countries hadn’t paid their fair share.
• The Iranian nuclear deal was bad.
• Our war in Afghanistan had gone on too long, and the generals were responsible.
• When we “win” a war, we should get to keep all the oil.

It was at this point that Trump called Afghanistan a “loser war” and called his military leaders: “You’re all losers. You don’t know how to win anymore. I want to win. We don’t win anymore.” He went on to say, “I wouldn’t go to war with you people, you’re a bunch of dopes and babies.”

Tillerson later stood with a small group after the meeting and called the president, “a fucking moron.”  Word of this eventually got out and he was fired eight months later.  I wholly disagree with Rex Tillerson’s assessment.  Since he used an outdated term I will stick with that as a basis of my disagreement.  Under the old psychiatric classification system, a moron had an IQ of 51-70, and this is inconsistent with my personal observations of our subject.  Upon further investigation of the old classification system, we find that an idiot checked in at an IQ of 0-25, and an imbecile topped out in the 26-50 range.  I find that Trump vacillates between categories and lives somewhere between idiocy and imbecilic with occasional flashes of relative moronic brilliance.  All of these terms are no longer acceptable giving way to the term “intellectual disability.”

We should be careful in our classification however, as moderate mental subnormality may prevent him from being held responsible for his actions.  The only other reason to press for a better-defined classification of Trump’s intellectual disability would have been to prevent him from reproducing.  We all know that horse left that barn years ago; at least five times by most counts.

The takeaway here might be that, while we need a Commander-in-Chief to lead our military, perhaps we should require presidential candidates to at least pass a test that acknowledges a basic high school level of history and geography.  Morality is another matter and in this regard, the ballot box is our friend.  Perhaps this analysis partially explains why they can’t keep size 5 and 6 MAGA hats in stock.

Footnote:  I was surprised to find that the Buck v. Bell Supreme Court decision of 1927, which upheld the right of the states to enforce compulsory eugenic sterilization of the intellectually disabled, had not been overturned.  The case is tragic and provides an insight into the damage that can be wrought by narrow-minded individuals with the power of government to back them.

Patriotism; Let’s Get Something Straight

The vast majority of Americans are patriots.  This includes Democrats, Independents, and Republicans.  It includes White, Black, Hispanic, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, and Christian Americans.  Patriotism is not the exclusive domain of any one party or group.  I would easily state that 99% of all Americans are patriots.  No, that is not the result of some scientific study; I just pulled that number out of my ass since that’s where we seem to get our statistics these days.

From Wikipedia: Patriotism is the feeling of love, devotion, and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiment.  This attachment can be a combination of many different feelings relating to one's own homeland, including ethnic, cultural, political, or historical aspects.

It is a common occurrence these days that someone tries to make a point by claiming that he or she is a patriot and anyone with a differing opinion is some sort of traitor to our country.  Wrapping yourself in the American flag to make your opinion more valid is a sign of weakness.  I don’t know Colin Kaepernick, but I won’t question his patriotism for kneeling during the national anthem to protest police brutality and racial inequality.  I will question his judgment for the method he chose, but I won’t use this one act to question his loyalty to this country.

I, as a matter of choice, have an American flag mounted on my house.  I served four years in the U.S. Navy and still get goosebumps when I hear our national anthem.  None of this makes me more patriotic than any of my neighbors, many of whom were born in other countries.  I love my country but still, feel free to question its direction.  I find this questioning of national direction especially important at times like these.  National leaders who side with despots traditionally identified as our enemies should always be questioned as to their motivation.  Our moral compass should guide us along our path, not some blind allegiance viewed through red, white, and blue colored glasses.  Our patriotism should recognize the patriotic feelings of other nations and at least be tolerant or considerate of other views.

Today, an extreme form of nationalism, polluted with ethnic prejudice, xenophobia, homophobia, and religious bigotry, has been given solace by a supportive or otherwise motivated leadership.  An often hidden minority has found a new bravado in the infamous quote, “you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides,” in response to the violent protests in Charlottesville, Virginia.  Whatever our president may have meant by that statement, it was read by many as support for some of the “very fine” neo-Nazis.

Patriotism should not be defined by unwavering support for any single value plucked from our constitution.  Our patriotism should include support for the general values expressed in the sentiments of our origin documents, and that support should be tempered with an attitude of civility as we evolve as a more tolerant nation.  We should remember that fourteen of the twenty-one prominent Founding Fathers were slaveholders at some point in time.  Also among our Founding Fathers, while the majority would normally be identified as “Christians,” a large group advocated the Enlightenment religion of nature and reason known as Deism, or they were at least influenced by that rejection of the miracles and supernaturalism associated with traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs.

Slaveholders amongst our Founding Fathers

This statue of Justitia is displayed outside the Court of
Last Appeal, in Hong Kong.
She is a depiction of Roman art common since the 8th of January, 13 BC 

Patriotism and loyalty to our country is not that simple.  Blind nationalism should not be confused with patriotism.  Many totalitarian and authoritarian regimes from world history were founded in blind nationalism.  Adolph Hitler used blind nationalism to promote his Nazi regime.  True patriots should always want what is best for their country and questioning the direction of our leaders when our national ideals are being violated, is not unpatriotic; justice should be blind, patriotism should not.

Capitalism and The Demise of The Working Class

I am reminded of a song favorite from Tennessee Ernie Ford titled Sixteen Tons. The lyrics tell the tale of a coal miner who loads a record amount of number nine coal and finds himself deeper in debt.

“You load sixteen tons, what do you get?

 Another day older and deeper in debt

 Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go

 I owe my soul to the company store”

The company store reference was to the employer-provided store where the “captive audience” of workers shopped exclusively out of necessity. Workers were often paid in a company-issued script that was only good at such a store. The company also provided housing and charged rent. Before the advent of unions, such exploitation of workers being paid wages below subsistence levels could keep employees in perpetual debt. Today things are slightly different.

Tennessee Ernie Ford

The company towns and company stores mentioned above were prevalent in the 1880s and lasted until the mid-1930s.  After WW2, the U.S. enjoyed a great period of economic growth that lasted from about 1945 through the early 60s. This was the period of my youth. It was a great time for the middle-class as America established itself as the world’s richest country. Our GNP more than doubled during this period. There was a baby boom, a housing boom, and affordable mortgages were available for returning servicemen. With the advent of television, the Nelson family moved from radio to the tiny screen.

Ozzie, Harriet, David, and Ricky (Eric)

Ozzie and Harriet Nelson had two children, David and Ricky. This was a typical middle-class family of four. Ozzie went to his white-collar job with a briefcase and Harriet was a homemaker who looked after the boys. Ozzie’s job was a mystery and it didn’t play a role in the television version. In the 1952 film, Here Come the Nelsons, Ozzie was in women’s underwear. Perhaps that occupation would have been too delicate for the strict television censors of the day. We visited the Nelsons once a week from 1952 until 1966.

In 1960, the median income was $5,700, which was a 4% increase over the previous year. The minimum wage in 1960 was $1.00 hr. Fifty years later, in 2011, the minimum wage was $7.25 hr. Adjusted for inflation, the 1960 hourly wage would be worth $6.65 hr. in 2011 dollars. So, in half a century the hourly minimum wage increased by only $ 0.60. That works out to a 9% raise in fifty years. As with all statistics, you can find specific figures elsewhere that differ from these, but all of the charts, tables, and analyses that I visited painted the same grim picture where low and middle-income people are not much better off than they were even ten years ago.  In the chart below published by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) that claims to have been in business since 1914 advising Congress, the picture for all but the top 10% of our nation has been bleak.

Wage Trends Adjusted for Inflation; Vertical grey bars are recessions

One part of the CRS report stated that while more individuals in the job market had bachelor's or advanced degrees, that alone was not enough to raise overall wages. In the above chart, I only included the overall statistics but, as most of us will acknowledge, the picture for women and minorities is worse than the average shown.

While wages, purchasing power, and full employment are key factors when examining the fate of middle-class America, upward mobility or the chance thereof is also of extreme importance. There will always be a middle-class since someone will always be in the median strata of the income market but it is the lack of any chance to better your position that cripples motivation. The middle-class will not just die-out and join the poor but they will end up as financial zombies trudging along just trying to make ends meet.

Working Class Zombies Walking to Dead-End Jobs

It has become harder to get a really meaningful education as evidenced by the recent scandals of celebrities bribing university staff to gain admittance to top-ranked schools. Anyone who can through grades, athletic ability, or other means get into a highly rated school, will likely face crippling debt for a major portion of their greatest earning years.

What role does capitalism play in all of this you might ask?  Well, we are a capitalistic society and have been since our inception. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. If, as conceptualized in our constitution, we were a society where education and hard work were all that was required to become a success and have the ability to better our station in life, America would truly be the utopia envisioned by our founding fathers. This assumes a level playing field where everyone plays by the same set of rules. Even Stevie Wonder can see that this is not the case. There are at least two rulebooks in play here. One set of rules was written by the wealthy for the wealthy and one was written by the wealthy for everyone else.

I will use Donald Trump as an example. No, he is not the one to blame for all of this; he is just typical of the problem. I just started watching a Netflix series titled “Trump: An American Dream,” covering much of the life of our president. It provides a glimpse into the rarified atmosphere that is The Donald. I’ve gotten through the first episode of this 4-part series and found it to be balanced with both supporters and detractors. I mention it here only in that it typifies the entitled attitude of the wealthy. Donald Trump plays by the rule book written for him and by him.

Netflix:  Trump, An American Dream

We see in this first episode much of the 1977 development of The Grand Hyatt Hotel and how Trump, and we will assume many of the wealthy, take their share of the pie out of your share of the pie. He was able to get the City of New York (read taxpayers) to finance a major portion of the project with a 40-year tax exemption. As of 2016, this tax break had cost the city $360 million while the gross operating profits were amounting to $30 million a year; all of this on a property that cost only $120 million to build. Therefore, the New York taxpayers are paying their taxes to run the city that provides the wherewithal for Mr. Trump to make an obscene profit. We won’t go into the fact that Trump used political pressure and an unsigned option agreement with the city to push the development through.

Rendering of New Hyatt Regency with $400 million tax break

By 2016, Trump had used tax breaks, grants, and incentives to benefit 15 buildings in Manhattan to save him $885 million. Taxpayers are subsidizing the lifestyles of the rich and famous. This is not an indictment of Donald Trump but merely an example of the corrupt system that is the core of our problem; an unlevel playing field for the rich. Capitalism runs amok.

Capitalism is not inherently bad or evil but the greedy captains of industry and government make it so. More is never enough. Social programs, general education, infrastructure, healthcare, and the like are but inconvenient drains on their potential profits. This corrupt group of individuals will try to convince the general public that rising stock prices and better unemployment figures mean that their lot in life is rosy.

The “working class” is defined as a social group who work for hourly wages, generally doing manual or industrial work. Many in this group in years past were included in the middle-class. The working class is in need of refinement through education and job training. Proper assessment of their current skills and abilities would help guide the necessary curriculum for the required training. Due to the rapid advances in technology and the fast demise of many jobs in the retail environment, job training and a shift in education priorities will be essential if this group is to survive.

Our world is rapidly changing. Ozzie and Harriet, David and Ricky are all dead now. Their TV show lasted 14 years and, as of 2017, held the title for the longest-running live-action sitcom. In 1960, the average family size was 3.29 persons and a single wage earner provided all the income. In 2019, the average family is 2.6 people and two of those are likely to be employed. The Nelson family owned a single-family home while the typical family today can barely afford the rent. The shift in power from labor to business has been a boon for business but might be sounding the death knell for the American worker. As technology and automation reduce the numbers of unskilled jobs, small towns and small businesses seem likely to follow the Nelsons into oblivion.

I can’t say that Democrats are the answer to this situation since they have shared leadership in probably half of the period discussed above. How successful any politician can be in this atmosphere of unbridled capitalism remains to be seen. We need drastic changes in our tax systems to provide some equity in the burden. This is not redistribution in wealth but a leveling of the playing field. We need full access to both higher education that is structured on community needs and job training for a workforce out of touch with the current economy. We need to address our crumbling infrastructure, which will provide at least some stopgap employment for unskilled and semi-skilled labor. We, as a long-term goal, need universal healthcare. Universal healthcare should be phased in so as to not immediately displace the competing healthcare plans that have been negotiated by contracts.  Any politician, regardless of party, who works with these goals in mind, has my vote.

How Secure Are We?

This is a more important question than it would seem.  After all, we spend more money on our military than the next seven major countries combined.  Does spending more money make us more secure?  Under normal circumstances, I would say yes, but we don’t live in a time of normal circumstance.

Our national security is not just a spending issue.  It is a complex problem where any one of many components could provide a breakdown of serious or even catastrophic proportions.  You can have the biggest “Dirty Harry” gun on the block and still shoot yourself in the foot.  Our national security is provided by the sum total of our military equipment, our military training, our military leadership, our intelligence capability, and the guidance given by our political leaders who must decide where, when, and how.  Right now, I trust the first three, with the usual caveats, but the last two are highly suspect.

Our intelligence capability is a riddle wrapped in a mystery.  In addition to the usual alphabet soup of three-letter agencies like the CIA, FBI, NSA, DIA, BIR, et al., we have our State Department, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Homeland Security, etc., totaling at least 17 bureaus and agencies, that we know of, who are responsible for our intelligence gathering and analysis.  These entities gobble up over 67 billion of our tax dollars.  While I don’t doubt the capabilities of this group of intelligence gatherers, I do reserve judgment for their ability to both coordinate all of these efforts for the common good and the utility of this information when it either is ignored or bears a message some may not want to hear.  Two recent major examples of this breakdown were 9-11 and Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.

This brings us to the real fly in the national security ointment, the guidance of our political leaders who must decide where, when, and how to use what they know for our nation’s protection.  Twenty-six of our 45 presidents have served in some capacity in the military, but only ten served in the last century and none yet in the new millennium.  Military service should not be a prerequisite for becoming the Commander-in-Chief of all of our armed forces, but that person should be willing to at least listen to our intelligence services and our military commanders and weigh the advice coming from those with solid professional backgrounds.

Regrettably, our current Commander-in-Chief, has no military experience, doesn’t trust or believe our intelligence services, doesn’t listen to his own military advisors, but does apparently listen to advice from foreign leaders including our enemies, and readily takes advice from television talk show hosts on a variety of topics.  This is not only a dangerous situation but also a recipe for disaster.

Our congressional leaders are not much better when it comes to their pliability if faced with possible career-ending decisions.  None of them seems willing or able to stand up to this president, even when they know he is dangerously wrong.  It would seem that most would readily sacrifice the security of our nation for another term in office.  The patriotic cacophony heard from the right-wing fringe, represented somewhere within the 35-45% of the Trump base, inspires fear in those whose political futures have been hitched to the Trump star (meteorite?).  Consider in the mix the Military-Industrial Complex, whose mission is to profit from international discord, and you have another card yanked from the precarious tower that represents the codependency of the many pieces of our national security puzzle.

For those whose sense of national security and pride is defined by the size of the American flag in their front yard and how many Pabst Blue Ribbon beers they drank at the Fourth of July picnic, I would say, your naiveté is putting us all in danger.  The Republicans of my youth believed in our institutions and respected our military.  This president, and his followers by extension, have placed this nation in grave danger.  You can’t say you are a patriotic American and support our military but also support a president who trusts neither his military advisors nor his intelligence services.

Donald Trump claims to be the smartest person in any room but hides his grades and has threatened his schools with lawsuits if they reveal any information.  His bone spurs kept him out of the military but never hampered his golf game.  He said that he would hire the best people to assuage our fears of his lack of experience but has fired anyone who offered an opinion that differs from his own preconceived notions.  With Donald Trump as our president, our national security will be hampered and compromised to a degree that places us all at risk.

We need to remember in November.  Whomever we select to be our president in 2020, they need to be intelligent enough to listen to advice.  There is nothing more dangerous than a person who doesn’t know what they don’t know.