Can we call these presentations debates when there's such substantial agreement on the important issues: climate change, immigration reform, single-payer healthcare? On July 30 some candidates want to proceed quickly --especially in combatting climate change -- others want to proceed more slowly, in stages, some even advocating constitutional amendments to correct some of the more absurd Supreme Court decisions. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are the energetic elders, while Beto O'Rourke and Pete Buttigieg are youthful insurgents. The other potential candidates are more cautious because, apparently, they think caution necessary in order to win. Pete Buttigieg correctly says they will be called "socialists" no matter what they advocate; the only question in my mind is whether the fear of socialism can be stoked by name-calling in a population that seems quite comfortable with social security, Medicare and public schools.
In the July 31 debate it was Biden versus the crowd. Everyone had a gimmick of one kind or another: Biden wanted to build on what Obama had done, Yang wanted to give everyone $1000 a month (shades of Upton Sinclair), Inslee wanted to focus on climate change, Gillibrand on women's issues, Bennet on segregated schools, Gabbard (the only veteran on the stage) wants to stop the endless wars, De Blasio wants to "tax the hell out of the rich," Harris wants to stop predators (especially the one in the White House) as she did in California , Booker and Castro want to stop divisiveness Generally there was little disagreement about issues such as healthcare and immigration, with different plans for getting to single-payer healthcare and citizenship for immigrants. Biden stumbled a bit in defending his votes in the Senate and his role in the Obama administration while no one in the second debate offered the compelling progressive alternative that Sanders and Warren did in the first.
Thursday, August 8, 2019
Monday, July 1, 2019
Democratic Debates June 26 and 27, 2019
My continuing complaint: no mention of unions whatsoever. A number of candidates made references to the current state of inequality and stagnant wages but no one mentioned one of the biggest reasons: the decline of unions. I think a minimum wage of $15 is fine but I don't think that takes the place of active unions that fight for their members and I would like suggestions about how to reinvigorate unions.
As for the candidates themselves there was little disagreement on the major issues: single-payer healthcare (though there were various suggestions on the best way to get there), immigration (Sanders made the intelligent suggestion that we make a much greater effort to improve life in Central and South America) and a path to citizenship, major efforts to combat climate change, support our allies and avoid wars.
As for the individual candidates; I think Biden stumbled considerably in attempts to defend his record on busing and his vote for the Iraq war (his touchy-feely campaigning and Anita Hill were not discussed). For me the most articulate and intelligent candidates were Warren, Sanders, Harris and Buttigieg, who was even willing to admit "I couldn't get it done." Sanders inveighed against Wall Street and the insurance companies but did not have many specific proposals while Warren had quite a few. Gillibrand and Harris were the most articulate about family leave and subsidized daycare. Booker, de Blasio, and Castro were passionate about what they had done and what they could do and de Blasio was particularly articulate about speaking to the working class, as was Buttigieg about not forgetting those who do not go to college in the rush to eliminate college debt.
As for the candidates themselves there was little disagreement on the major issues: single-payer healthcare (though there were various suggestions on the best way to get there), immigration (Sanders made the intelligent suggestion that we make a much greater effort to improve life in Central and South America) and a path to citizenship, major efforts to combat climate change, support our allies and avoid wars.
As for the individual candidates; I think Biden stumbled considerably in attempts to defend his record on busing and his vote for the Iraq war (his touchy-feely campaigning and Anita Hill were not discussed). For me the most articulate and intelligent candidates were Warren, Sanders, Harris and Buttigieg, who was even willing to admit "I couldn't get it done." Sanders inveighed against Wall Street and the insurance companies but did not have many specific proposals while Warren had quite a few. Gillibrand and Harris were the most articulate about family leave and subsidized daycare. Booker, de Blasio, and Castro were passionate about what they had done and what they could do and de Blasio was particularly articulate about speaking to the working class, as was Buttigieg about not forgetting those who do not go to college in the rush to eliminate college debt.
Wednesday, February 13, 2019
State of the Union 2019
The most absurd part of Trump's surreal and sleazy state of the union speech was his denunciation of socialism, "we will never be a socialist nation." First of all, we already are: Medicare (which was originally denounced by the medical community as "socialized medicine"), public schools. public libraries, social security, the post office, etc. The major things we don't have that more "socialist" nations in Europe have are single-payer health care, free college education and childcare for working families. The fear of socialism, of course, is less immediate now for Trump than the fear of immigrants, a subject on which Trump continues to dissemble, including stating that a wall in El Paso has stopped illegal immigration when the evidence shows otherwise.
Among other things that Trump did not mention was the separation of families at the border (though he did denounce abortion) and two things important to the working classes; the shutdown of the government that deprived many workers of their paychecks, and unions, which were instrumental in raising wages until recently, when they have constantly been under attack by Trump and his allies. Otherwise the sotu was a typical Trump dog-and-pony show, including lauding WW II veterans and the Republican attendants popping up like "whack-a-moles" to applaud every absurd Trump assertion.
Stacey Adams's response to Trump was refreshing, pointing out that Trump mentioned nothing about the government shutdown, education, gun control, the burden Trump's trade wars have placed on American farmers, tearing families apart at the border, climate change, the affordable care act (which Trump claimed during his campaign to replace with something "better and cheaper" but has never made the slightest attempt to do), voter suppression and a respect for diversity.
Among other things that Trump did not mention was the separation of families at the border (though he did denounce abortion) and two things important to the working classes; the shutdown of the government that deprived many workers of their paychecks, and unions, which were instrumental in raising wages until recently, when they have constantly been under attack by Trump and his allies. Otherwise the sotu was a typical Trump dog-and-pony show, including lauding WW II veterans and the Republican attendants popping up like "whack-a-moles" to applaud every absurd Trump assertion.
Stacey Adams's response to Trump was refreshing, pointing out that Trump mentioned nothing about the government shutdown, education, gun control, the burden Trump's trade wars have placed on American farmers, tearing families apart at the border, climate change, the affordable care act (which Trump claimed during his campaign to replace with something "better and cheaper" but has never made the slightest attempt to do), voter suppression and a respect for diversity.
Tuesday, February 12, 2019
Manifest
The one current network show I watch is NBC's "Manifest," a mixture of science fiction, police procedural and soap opera. An airplane runs into some turbulence and when it lands it is five years later (the flight took three hours). The show for a while was about a government conspiracy to kidnap and interrogate the passengers, then turned into a show about some of the passengers "seeing" the future and recently has brought in non-passengers who disappeared for periods of time, have miraculously survived and also have "callings," seeing the future. One thing I like about the show is its unpredictability; too often I see a network show, like it and turn it on again only to find the plot exactly the same. Perhaps most network TV watchers want that kind of predictability.
The various plot strands are woven carefully together by creator Jeff Rake and executive producer Robert Zemeckis (who directed the Back to the Future movies). Josh Dallas plays Ben Stone, who returns from missing five years to find his wife with another man; his young son Cal, who was with him on the plane, has stayed the same age while Cal's twin sister Olive has aged five years. Stone leads the inquiry to find out what has happened, as well is what is happening: some of the plane passengers have died under mysterious circumstances. Next week is the final episode of the season and we'll see if the various plot elements continue to come together or further unravel.
The various plot strands are woven carefully together by creator Jeff Rake and executive producer Robert Zemeckis (who directed the Back to the Future movies). Josh Dallas plays Ben Stone, who returns from missing five years to find his wife with another man; his young son Cal, who was with him on the plane, has stayed the same age while Cal's twin sister Olive has aged five years. Stone leads the inquiry to find out what has happened, as well is what is happening: some of the plane passengers have died under mysterious circumstances. Next week is the final episode of the season and we'll see if the various plot elements continue to come together or further unravel.
Wednesday, January 9, 2019
Trump from the Oval Office, Jan. 8 2019
I know I haven't posted much on this blog recently, mostly because there's not enough good TV or radio to write about, e.g., I watched a couple of episodes of The Cool Kids -- the idea of a comedy about Shady Meadows retirement home sounded full of possibilities -- but the show, created by Charlie Day and Paul Fruchborn, spent more time on the inflated laugh track than on the dialogue.
Of course Donald Trump on TV last night was even more depressing: he looked like a turtle that was trying to sneak back into his shell as he dispensed his distortions in an attempt to get his wall, as though his manhood somehow depended on it. His most risible comments were how the wall would help African-Americans and Hispanics (unemployment is low now) and how it would stop drugs (most of which come in through airports or hidden in trucks and motorcars.) He even made a comparison with ex-Presidents living behind walls (not true) to protect their loved ones. I found myself waiting to hear about the virtues of Hadrian's Wall, The Great Wall of China and the Berlin Wall, until I remembered that Trump knows nothing about history and perhaps has never even heard of these walls.
Senators Pelosi and Schumer made brief responses to Trump's nonsense, suggesting (quite reasonably) that Trump open the government while talks continue and that we should not be governed by temper tantrums. Trump is certainly no friend of the working classes who are suffering without their next paycheck and has contradicted himself, suggesting that the furloughed workers are probably Democrats on the one hand (for which he has no evidence) and that, on the other hand, they support the shutdown!
Of course Donald Trump on TV last night was even more depressing: he looked like a turtle that was trying to sneak back into his shell as he dispensed his distortions in an attempt to get his wall, as though his manhood somehow depended on it. His most risible comments were how the wall would help African-Americans and Hispanics (unemployment is low now) and how it would stop drugs (most of which come in through airports or hidden in trucks and motorcars.) He even made a comparison with ex-Presidents living behind walls (not true) to protect their loved ones. I found myself waiting to hear about the virtues of Hadrian's Wall, The Great Wall of China and the Berlin Wall, until I remembered that Trump knows nothing about history and perhaps has never even heard of these walls.
Senators Pelosi and Schumer made brief responses to Trump's nonsense, suggesting (quite reasonably) that Trump open the government while talks continue and that we should not be governed by temper tantrums. Trump is certainly no friend of the working classes who are suffering without their next paycheck and has contradicted himself, suggesting that the furloughed workers are probably Democrats on the one hand (for which he has no evidence) and that, on the other hand, they support the shutdown!
Saturday, September 29, 2018
Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings, Sept. 27 2018
I didn't expect to find the hearings with Ford and Kavanaugh to be so riveting. They reminded me somewhat of the Hiss/Chambers hearings, when originally no one believed Chambers. Ford, of course, was not the disreputable character Chambers was at the time but she is still a woman and everyone remembered how Anita Hill was treated. The hearings on Thursday were like a horrible/funny scene from a Dickens novel, though with real lives and careers at stake, as doddering old men with names like Crapo, Grassley and Flake handed over the questioning of Christine Blasey Ford to Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell because of the fear of being labeled misogynistic, though they had no problem sucking up to nominee Brett Kavanaugh, a privileged white man. Kavanaugh played the victim of the Clintons and an orchestrated left-wing conspiracy in order to deflect attention from himself and his behavior. Kavanaugh's performance was eerily similar to Clarence Thomas's deflection of Anita Hill's accusations as "a high-tech lynching" in 1991.
Kavanaugh dissembled left and right, from saying the drinking age was 18 in Maryland when he got drunk in high school (it was actually changed to 21 even before he even reached 18) and misleading Senators on what "the Devil's Triangle" was (he claimed it was a drinking game, though his friends said it referred to sexual activity; Democratic Senators did not follow up to ask the rules of this "drinking game."). To me it seemed that Kavanaugh had been drinking during the hearing, as he was blustery and aggressive, even saying to one Senator, "Yes, I like beer; do you like beer, Senator?" Kavanaugh even mocked Dr. Ford for attending Holton-Arms school while he had attended the more prestigious Georgetown Prep and Kavanaugh said constantly "I went to Yale" and therefore he had no time for drinking, though several of his classmates said they had seen him stumbling drunk.
Dr. Ford's testimony was forthright and honest, even testifying to how the brain processes traumatic information (she is a psychologist). She did not testify about what she thought of Kavanaugh being on the Supreme Court but about what happened, to the extent that she remembered the details of what was a traumatic experience. Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell found no holes in her story.
A brief personal note: Kavanaugh reminded me of some the privileged boys with whom I went to prep school, who thought it amusing to have sex with women who they thought socially and intellectually beneath them -- Ford's description of the laughter while she was being assaulted was chilling --and I will add that regardless of Kavanaugh's crude behavior in prep school and college he should not be on the Supreme Court for many other reasons, including his Roman Catholicism that causes him to define birth control methods as "abortion-inducing drugs."
Kavanaugh dissembled left and right, from saying the drinking age was 18 in Maryland when he got drunk in high school (it was actually changed to 21 even before he even reached 18) and misleading Senators on what "the Devil's Triangle" was (he claimed it was a drinking game, though his friends said it referred to sexual activity; Democratic Senators did not follow up to ask the rules of this "drinking game."). To me it seemed that Kavanaugh had been drinking during the hearing, as he was blustery and aggressive, even saying to one Senator, "Yes, I like beer; do you like beer, Senator?" Kavanaugh even mocked Dr. Ford for attending Holton-Arms school while he had attended the more prestigious Georgetown Prep and Kavanaugh said constantly "I went to Yale" and therefore he had no time for drinking, though several of his classmates said they had seen him stumbling drunk.
Dr. Ford's testimony was forthright and honest, even testifying to how the brain processes traumatic information (she is a psychologist). She did not testify about what she thought of Kavanaugh being on the Supreme Court but about what happened, to the extent that she remembered the details of what was a traumatic experience. Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell found no holes in her story.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Cynthia Nixon and Andrew Cuomo, Aug. 29 CBS
Few distinct differences emerged between the two Democratic opponents for governor on Wednesday night; one debate for one hour was apparently not enough to get into details. The only significant difference was that Nixon was in favor of giving public employees the right to strike and Cuomo was opposed. I'm with Nixon on this one: as she said, "workers don't want to strike" but they need to have the possibility of that ultimate weapon to ensure good-faith bargaining.
Cuomo and Nixon are both in favor of a single-payer health system; Nixon would start it in New York while Cuomo feels it should be national.
Both candidates think more should be done about homelessness and the cost of housing; specifics were lacking.
Both are in favor of legalizing marijuana.
Both are in favor of raising the minimum wage to $15.
Cuomo accepts contributions from corporation and Nixon does not; Cuomo needled Nixon because she herself is a corporation (common for actors, she said).
There was an absurd discussion about the naming of the Tappan Zee Bridge after Mario Cuomo when some (unidentified) people want to call it the Mario Cuomo Tappan Zee Bridge.
Nixon attacked Cuomo for tolerating corruption and only becoming more progressive when she prodded him; he attacked her for releasing her tax returns on a Friday (that one I didn't quite understand)..
Nixon blamed Cuomo for the problems with the New York subway system and Cuomo blamed De Blasio and the legislature.
In sum: Cuomo came across as a pragmatic politician, Nixon as a progressive idealist not so different from Cuomo when he was younger.
Both candidates think more should be done about homelessness and the cost of housing; specifics were lacking.
Both are in favor of legalizing marijuana.
Both are in favor of raising the minimum wage to $15.
Cuomo accepts contributions from corporation and Nixon does not; Cuomo needled Nixon because she herself is a corporation (common for actors, she said).
There was an absurd discussion about the naming of the Tappan Zee Bridge after Mario Cuomo when some (unidentified) people want to call it the Mario Cuomo Tappan Zee Bridge.
Nixon attacked Cuomo for tolerating corruption and only becoming more progressive when she prodded him; he attacked her for releasing her tax returns on a Friday (that one I didn't quite understand)..
Nixon blamed Cuomo for the problems with the New York subway system and Cuomo blamed De Blasio and the legislature.
In sum: Cuomo came across as a pragmatic politician, Nixon as a progressive idealist not so different from Cuomo when he was younger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)