Blog No. 228. Plans for Departure, Return and In Between

We are taking a brief vacation and no doubt a number of interesting things, scheduled and unscheduled, will occur before my return to these pages in August. One of the scheduled events is the testimony of Robert Mueller on July 17. His testimony may or may not prove to be dramatic, but it will surely be interesting and perhaps significant. In order to supply the calm perspective of RINOcracy.com, I have persuaded my good friend and RINOcracy.com subscriber, Ivan R. Dee, to provide some commentary on the event. Ivan is a longtime observer of government and politics who, before retiring, was an eminent publisher. I became one of his less-well-known authors in 2005 when he edited and published my biography of Ogden Nash. (We also share the bond, and sometimes burden, of being loyal Chicago Cubs fans.)

While I am away, I would also invite readers to take a few minutes to view the video of a very informative TED talk by Carole Cadwalladr, “Facebook’s role in Brexit—and the threat to Democracy.” As the title implies, the principal focus is how Facebook influenced, and arguably determined, the result of the Brexit vote. Ms Cadwaladr, however, makes explicit the relevance of that experience to Donald Trump, the 2020 election, and beyond. Readers can watch it here.

The next Democratic Debates will be held on July 30 and 31, and I will probably have something to say about them in August. In advance of the debates, I suggest that the moderators, among other things:

a) not only attempt to pin down the participants on the particulars of how they will fund their various proposals, but also elicit their views on the burgeoning federal debt. (According to a recent report by the Congressional Budget Office Federal debt is expected to rise from 78% of GDP in 2019 to 92% percent in 2029 and 144% in 2049, the most ever in history. “That level of debt,” says the report, ” would be the highest in the nation’s history by far, and it would be on track to increase more.”)

b) inquire what if any changes in the asylum law they would accept. (Should we be prepared to accept an unlimited number of adults and children with credible claims to be victims of gang violence or domestic violence?) Are there any changes in the law relating to legal immigration they would accept, for example, provisions with respect to “chain migration” and the lottery system?

c) ask if they support USMCA, the revision to NAFTA negotiated by the Trump administration and presently before Congress? Would they attempt to revive TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiated by Obama, initially supported but then opposed by Hillary Clinton, and abandoned by Trump?

Beyond that, my hope is that one or more of the candidates in the “moderate lane” would show the strength of personality and nimbleness of wit required to be a credible opponent of the Dissembler-in-Chief.