Don't Cross This Line Or Else...

Somethings are becoming very clear.

Trump thinks that he can do anything he wants. 

•     Break any law he wants. 
•     Ignore the Constitution.
•     Make Republican law makers do whatever he says to do.
•     Ignore any of the norms that would apply to any other president.
•     Defy the courts.
•     Destroy the DOJ and FBI.
•     Prosecute anyone who opposes him without any proof of wrong doing.
•     Spend any money he wants without authorization.
•     Harm people and institutions when it suits his needs.
•     Use our military in any way he wants.
•     Threaten our allies.
•     Pardon without explanation people who do not deserve it.
•     Use the power of the presidency to enrich himself, his family and his friends.

He thinks a critical number of his voters will support him no matter what.

Trump has lost his mind.

The Supreme Court has said that Trump cannot be prosecuted for anything pertaining to his core duties as president. They've also basically said anything Trump does while in office is part of his official duties.  That means the only control over the president is impeachment.

Voters, Republicans, Democrats and independents, need to draw some lines that clearly state things that they believe will necessitate Donald Trump's impeachment.

These include:

• Starting a war without Congressional approval.  Venezuela will not start a war with us.  If there is a war it is because Trump wants one.
• Using the government or military to manipulate or overturn election results.
• Unleashing the military against citizens.
• A pardon or commutation for Ghislaine Maxwell.
• Impeding the release of the Epstein files.

I'm sure there will be more impeachment lines that will need to be drawn.  It is important we make these red lines bright and clear.  Trump has to believe that Republicans, Democrats and independents will impeach him if he crosses any of these lines.

Update 01/17/2026

I would like to add another red line.  Any overt act take control of Greenland.  Articles of Impeachment should already be written so they can immediately be sent to the House if he makes a move.

Why Do Republicans Hate CPB, PBS and NPR?

The Republicans in Congress just voted to de-fund the public media organizations CPB (Corporation for Public Broadcasting), PBS (Public Broadcasting System, domestic TV service) and NPR (National Public Radio).  These media organizations were established by Congress decades ago.  For much of the time since then Republicans have complained that they are biased "liberal" media and they are unfair to Republicans and Conservatives.  

As a long time regular viewer of PBS and a listener of NPR, I disagree.  PBS shows a wide variety of shows including Sesame Street, Daniel Tiger, Ken Burns documentaries, Master Piece Theater, and some news, political and cultural shows.  The news shows seem to me to be very fair and balanced unlike FOX news or MSNBC.  NPR provides many shows including news, weather, science, entertainment, etc.  In many rural areas NPR may be a primary provider of news and weather.

I have been confused by the vehement hatred of these public media outlets by Republicans/Conservatives.

I think I've figured out why Republicans hate them. 

I asked ChatGPT to summarize principles of Democrats and  Republicans.  You can click on the links to see its answers.  I also asked ChatGPT to make a summary list to compare Democratic and Republican principles.  Finally I asked ChatGPT to define the principles of a Liberal Democracy.  You can read these to get a more detailed description of each.

According to ChatGPT":

Democrats tend to emphasize:

• Collective responsibility through government action,
• Equity and inclusion for historically marginalized groups,
• Public investment in health, education, and the environment,
• And a belief that government can and should help level the playing field for all Americans.

In essence, a liberal democracy blends majority rule with minority rights, ensuring that even unpopular groups have their basic freedoms safeguarded.

The principles of the "liberal" Democratic party seem to more closely align with ChatGPT's description of a liberal democracy.  So Republican's consider any institutions that believe in the ideals of a liberal democracy to be biased towards and aligned with Democrats.  But sorry Republicans, the U.S. Constitution was designed to define a liberal democracy for the United States.  This was long before the Democratic Party was created.  The founders fell short of a liberal democracy in some areas (slavery, universal suffrage), but until recently we have been moving forward to complete the project (more about this in future posts).

We have a First Amendment which guarantees free speech, but which party likes to ban books?  Which party believes in an historical interpretation of the Constitution and then chooses to ignore the opening clause of the Second Amendment?  

Which party is the worst proponent of gerrymandering?  I know Democrats have also been guilty of gerrymandering, but it is Texas Republicans who are trying to take gerrymandering to a new level.  

Which party would like to implement universal health care?  Which party wants to cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, SNAP?  In the current environment, which party is standing up for rule of law and due process?  Which party is trying to destroy the principle of separation of powers?  Which party has neutered congressional oversight?  Which party is trying to make courts impotent?  Which party is trying support medical science? Which party is trying to keep independent agencies like the DOJ and FBI truly independent and not subject to executive pressure? Which party believes in the unitary executive?  Which party is trying to mitigate climate change?  Which party has been more willing to get big money out of politics? Which party is more interested in funding early education (like Head Start).   Which party is trying to fund food for school children?  Which party is trying to destroy our world class higher education system?

So Republicans hate CPB, PBS and NPR because these organizations work very hard to provide objective information and services that reflect the ideas of Constitution and the people of this country.  They may not always be perfect, but they are always working to be provide facts and objective truth. 

And Republicans hate them for this.

Differences Between Conservative and Liberal Beliefs

I asked ChatGPT to do a side-by-side comparison of typical Republican and Democratic party principles.  The answers are provided below.  I included them here because I want to reference this in a later post. 

Principle	Republican Party (Conservative)	Democratic Party (Liberal/Progressive)
Role of Government	Limited government; more power to states and individuals	Active government role in addressing social and economic issues
Taxes & Economy	Lower taxes, deregulation, pro-business	Progressive taxation to fund public services and reduce inequality
Healthcare	Market-based solutions; repeal/replace the ACA	Healthcare is a right; expand ACA or pursue universal healthcare
Social Safety Net	Reduce size of welfare programs; encourage self-reliance	Strengthen programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid
Individual Rights	Emphasize gun rights, religious freedom, property rights	Emphasize civil rights, voting rights, and protections for marginalized groups
Abortion	Pro-life; support restrictions or bans	Pro-choice; support access to abortion and reproductive healthcare
LGBTQ+ Rights	Mixed; some support traditional definitions of gender/marriage	Strong support for legal equality and protections for LGBTQ+ people
Climate and Environment	Skeptical of regulations; favor fossil fuels and energy independence	Support strong environmental regulations; invest in clean energy and climate action
Immigration	Emphasize border security, reduced legal immigration, strict enforcement	Support path to citizenship, protections for Dreamers, more humane policies
Education	School choice, parental control, charter schools, reduce federal role	Invest in public schools, affordable college, universal pre-K
Gun Policy	Defend Second Amendment; oppose most gun control laws	Support background checks, red flag laws, limits on certain firearms
Law and Order	Strong support for police and tough-on-crime policies	Criminal justice reform, address systemic racism, community policing
Foreign Policy	“America First,” military strength, skeptical of global institutions	Multilateralism, diplomacy, alliances like NATO, global leadership
Judicial Philosophy	Originalist interpretation of Constitution	Living Constitution; support judicial decisions that expand rights
Voting Rights	Emphasize election integrity, voter ID laws	Expand voting access, oppose voter suppression, support automatic registration

Notes:

• These are general trends and do not apply to all individuals in either party. Both parties include moderates, libertarians, populists, and progressives. 
• Platform positions may shift depending on current leadership, national events, or generational changes.

Above is the side-by-side comparison of care principles of Conservative Republicans and Democrats as provided by ChatGPT.  You may  or may not agree with the results of this comparison,  Feel free to comment if you have issues with this description.  Anonymous comments are allowed, but please keep them civil.

What Principles Define A Democrat?

I asked ChatGPT "What principles would the Democratic Party say define a Democrat??"  The answer is provided below.  I included it here because I want to reference this in a later post.

 1. Equality and Civil Rights

• Strong support for equal protection under the law, regardless of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

• Defense of civil rights legislation and expansion of anti-discrimination protections.

• Advocacy for voting rights and access to the ballot as essential components of democracy.

2. Economic Opportunity and a Fair Economy

• Support for progressive taxation—higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations to fund public programs.

• Emphasis on raising the minimum wage, strengthening unions, and ensuring fair labor standards.

• Support for social safety net programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food assistance, and housing support.

3. Healthcare as a Right

• Belief that everyone should have access to affordable healthcare.

• Strong support for the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), with many favoring expanding it or transitioning to universal healthcare (e.g., Medicare for All, in the progressive wing).

4. Environmental Protection and Climate Action

• Acknowledgment of climate change as a major threat, with support for aggressive environmental regulations and investments in clean energy.

• Support for international climate agreements (e.g., the Paris Accord).

• Promotion of environmental justice to protect vulnerable communities from pollution and climate-related harms.

5. Expanded Access to Education

• Support for public education, universal pre-K, affordable college or free community college.

• Emphasis on reducing student debt and investing in teachers and school infrastructure.

6. Women's Rights and Reproductive Freedom

• Support for a woman's right to choose and access to abortion and reproductive healthcare.

• Advocacy for equal pay, paid family leave, and workplace protections for women.

7. Gun Safety Reform

• Support for stricter gun laws such as background checks, red flag laws, and bans on assault-style weapons.

• Framing gun violence as a public health and community safety issue.

8. Immigration Reform

• Support for a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, especially Dreamers (those brought to the U.S. as children).

• Advocacy for humane border policies and opposition to family separation and mass deportation.

• Belief that immigrants strengthen the economy and enrich American culture.

9. LGBTQ+ Rights

• Support for full legal equality for LGBTQ+ individuals, including marriage equality, anti-discrimination protections, and access to gender-affirming care.

• Opposition to legislation that targets or restricts LGBTQ+ individuals in education, healthcare, or public life.

10. Democratic Institutions and Voting Rights

• Efforts to strengthen democracy, such as expanding early voting, fighting voter suppression, supporting D.C. statehood, and reforming the Electoral College.

• Proposals to reform institutions like the Supreme Court or the filibuster to ensure more responsive governance

Summary:

Democrats tend to emphasize:

• Collective responsibility through government action,
• Equity and inclusion for historically marginalized groups,
• Public investment in health, education, and the environment,
• And a belief that government can and should help level the playing field for all Americans.

Above is the description of a Democrat as provided by ChatGPT.  This may or may not reflect what you believe are the principles of liberal Democrats.  Feel free to comment if you have issues with this description.  Anonymous comments are allowed, but please keep them civil.

 

Schumer Was Correct

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is being severely criticized by fellow Democrats for his YES vote on the Republican CR funding bill and letting it become law. Democrats wanted Schumer to vote NO which would have caused the government to shut down. Most Democrats thought a NO vote would be one of their few chances to stop or at least slow Trump's radical agenda.

Schumer thought that shutting the government down would only give Republicans more power to implement their plans.

I agree with Schumer.

Limited government has been a guiding principle of Republicans for decades. Ronald Reagan said the government was the problem, not the solution. Grover Norquist, a well known Republican advisor from the 1980s, wanted to cut the government so deeply that he could “drown it in a bathtub”. Trump shut the government down for about a month during his first term. Republicans like government shut downs.

I haven't figured out what Trump's overall plan is for the country (assuming he has one), but it obviously includes destroying the government, the economy, Democrats, the rule of law, the free press, the Courts and probably the Constitution. A long government shutdown that he could blame on Democrats helps him meet his (and Putin's) plans.

If Trump and Musk really wanted to down size the government and make it more efficient, they wouldn't be firing thousands of employees by in-discriminant means or decimating government departments and agencies.

We need to fight Trump every way we can. Helping him shut down the government does not help the country at all. Once the government was down, how would Democrats every get it going again without Republican help? Do you really think Republicans would make any adjustments or concessions to their bill to get Democratic votes to restart the government? Republicans did not ask for or allow any suggestions from Democrats when writing the CR funding legislation. Why would they do anything during a shutdown they were happy to have? 

It would take Democrat's making concessions and promising enough YES votes before Republicans would bring the CR bill up for another vote. So instead of stopping the Republican's CR bill Democrats would just put the country through the turmoil of a possibly long shutdown and show the country how truly politically weak they are.

Republicans Owe Democrats a Supreme Court Justice

If the Democrats win back the Senate this November, they should refuse to allow a Republican nominee to be added to the Supreme Court.

President Trump can nominate a new justice and Democrats should hold hearings, but Democrats should not vote to confirm the nominee.

The Republicans stole a Supreme Court Justice from President Obama and Democrats.  Until that theft has been repaid, Democrats should refuse to approve any Republican Supreme Court nominee.

I realize that this could lead to a political war that prevents any new justice from being added to the court until the presidency and Senate are both held by the same political party.

That would be terrible, but Republicans started this war.

President Trump could solve this problem by letting Democrats pick the next Supreme Court Justice, should there be one.

In fairness, if there are two openings in Trump's last two years, he can fill the second after he lets Democrats fill the first.

Once the stolen seat is returned to Democrats, we can all hope that both parties agree to nominate only centrists to the court.  Republican presidents can nominate and have confirmed qualified, center-right justices and Democratic presidents can nominate and have confirmed qualified, center-left justices.

We have to get back to working together to keep our democracy strong and stop needless, counter-productive political wars.

Responsible Chickens

The recent budget debates that threatened to shut down the government have been compared to a game of chicken. An example of this game was depicted in the movie "Rebel Without A Cause". Two young men race to run their cars off a cliff. The object is to see who jumps out of their car first and therefore is a "chicken".

The budget battle wasn't really a game of chicken. The two guys were risking their own lives in those cars. Politicians were risking the American people and economy.

The two guys in the car were willing participants. They may have been pressured into the game, but they could have said they wouldn't play. Republicans and Democrats had to play the game and reach an agreement or the government would have shut down.

The choice was over the stakes and what the other side would agree on. Republicans chose to set the stakes high and then force negotiations to the eleventh hour to see how far they could push Democrats. This wasn't a game of chicken, it was blackmail perpetrated by Republicans.

This wasn't so much a fight over the budget as a test by bullies to see how much Democrats were willing to compromise rather than hurt the country. Democrats jumped first and further. I guess they are the "chickens".

What would you pay for?

In the current debate over the deficit and budgets, Republics want to take any tax increase off the table. Their current framing is, we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. That is, cut spending; do not raise taxes.

It is clear that Republics and Democrats have a different philosophy about the purpose of government and how to pay it. In general, Republics believe that less government is always better (at least that is what they say, if not always what they do). Government is the problem, not the solution. Republics want to decide how much they are willing to spend on government (which is always less than what we spend today) and then determine how to distribute that money. Preference is always given to the generators of wealth.

In general, Democrats believe that government is about creating a civil society. Democrats would rather first decide what is important to do and then decide how to pay for it (sometimes). Preference is given to the less fortunate. The Democratic position is obviously harder to sell.

While Democrats have certainly authorized new spending without determining how the additional expenditures would be paid for, they managed to live under the PAYGO rules of the 1990's. Had these rules been extended, the budget busting 2003 tax cut, the Medicare prescription program and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might have had to have been paid for instead of just adding to the debt.

The two Bush era tax cuts added significantly to our debt. Let me state again, tax cuts when you are already running a deficit without the same dollar cuts in spending add to the long term debt! Republics constantly berate Democrats about spending more than we have revenue to pay far and passing that debt on to future generations. Fair enough. But cutting taxes without cutting spending has the same affect and is just as destructive. The math is simple. Revenue minus expenses equals surplus or debt. When you are already running a deficit, increasing spending without increasing revenue will increase the debt. Likewise, decreasing revenue without decreasing spending will increase the debt.

Contrary to popular belief, the Republics have actually been winning the deficit/debt debate. "Starve the Beast" has been Republic dogma since Ronald Reagan. This is the policy of always cutting taxes without concomitant cuts in spending in the belief that the eventual fiscal crisis will force drastic decreases in the size of government.

Republics have succeeded. The public believes we have a fiscal crisis generated by too much spending not a problem generated by a weak economy, tax cuts and spending. The discussion is how do we cut taxes, expenditures and the size of the government. Why aren't we also discussing what functions of government are worth paying taxes to support and how do we generate the revenue to pay for them?

Hell No We Won't

The Democrats and Republicans have each chosen the slogans they will use to guide their campaigns this fall. It is

"Yes We Can!" versus "Hell No!".

Democrat or Jackass

Ralph Nader will forever be a pariah to many Democrats who believe he took votes from Al Gore and cost him the 2000 election.

Now we hear Hillary Clinton supporters whining that they are still so upset with the primary they might vote for McCain or at least not vote for Obama.

I find if hard to believe that many Hillary Clinton supporters would be comfortable with a McCain administration that would largely be a continuation of current Bush and Republic policies.

These people are clearly not Democrats, just jackasses who since they didn't win now threaten to take their votes and go home.

I expect that most of these people will come to their senses before November, but their support is needed now. Wake up people!

Tag Team: Democrats vs John W. McCain, III

Clinton and Obama should pledge that for the rest of the nominating process they will treat Senator John W. McCain as the opponent, not their fellow Democrat. Democrats fear that the during the next few weeks, in their attempt to secure the nomination, Obama and Clinton will damage each other and make it easier for McCain to defeat them in the general election. Since, for the Democrats, it should really be a contest about who can beat McCain, start the general election campaign now. It would be two candidates (and campaign treasuries) against one. Obama and Clinton should make their case to Democratic primary voters by showing which one will be the best at beating John McCain. They should each realize that for the sake of the country, to paraphrase McCain, it would be better for either of them to lose the nomination than for a Republic to be elected president.

For a more detailed discussion, see my post below.

Clinton/Obama Tag Team Against McCain

I was hoping that Senator Obama would score a decisive victory over Senator Clinton in Texas and Ohio. We can't afford a continued Democratic nominating process that might weaken the eventual Democratic nominee. Too many times I’ve watched Democrats nominate qualified candidates only to have them trounced in the general election by a Republic.

The past eight years have made it clear.

• The American voter doesn’t know a qualified candidate from an unqualified candidate.
• The country can’t afford another president like Bush (John W. McCain is just Bush Heavy).
• It is the responsibility of the Democrats to nominate a candidate that can win. Whether or not that candidate is the most qualified is not important.

With that in mind, I propose that Clinton and Obama make a pact and take a pledge.

Clinton and Obama should pledge that for the rest of the nominating process they will treat Senator McCain as the opponent, not their fellow Democrat. Democrats fear that the during the next few weeks, in their attempt to secure the nomination, Obama and Clinton will damage each other and make it easier for McCain to defeat them in the general election. Since, for the Democrats, it should really be a contest about who can beat McCain, start the general election campaign now. It would be two candidates (and campaign treasuries) against one. Obama and Clinton should make their case to Democratic primary voters by showing which one will be the best at beating John McCain. To paraphrase McCain, they should each realize that for the sake of the country, it would be better for either of them to lose the nomination than for a Republic to be elected president.

Michigan and Florida need to schedule primaries. Those voters plus Pennsylvania would be judging which candidate is better against McCain. Even if the voters don’t follow the script, we would have weeks of tag team effort and massive campaign funds to use against McCain. Obama and Clinton can highlight their differences, but do nothing to attack or weaken their Democratic opponent. If the Democrats stay united, they will have significantly weakened support for McCain and made the true general campaign, no matter which candidate is nominated, much easier.

Obama and Clinton should also pledge that the losing candidate will whole heartedly continue to vigorously campaign and raise money for the winning candidate. It would be their responsibility to deliver their supporters to the Democratic nominee. This should be a team effort all the way through Election Day in November.

Michigan and Florida must be primaries, not caucuses. While Obama may do better in a caucus, this is a test for electability in the general election. New elections in Michigan and Florida are just a matter of money.

In a country that abhors rewarding law breakers, it may seem unfair to give Michigan and Florida such power after they ignored party rules, but the blame should go to party and elected officials, not voters. Besides, Democrats should focus on winning not retribution. One way to appropriately punish Michigan and Florida would be to require that all delegates from those states be new people. Florida and Michigan would have to come up with new slates of delegates and any super delegates that owe their credentials to association with these states would have these credentials revoked.

Democrats need to stay focused. This is not about Clinton or Obama. It is about putting a Democrat in the White House in January, 2009!

Go Joe!

I've been watching the presidential candidates as they position themselves to win the nomination. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both are strong candidates. I was impressed by Bill Richardson early on, but lately I've been a little disappointed. While I would have never thought of Chris Dodd as presidential material, he has shown himself to be a strong candidate with well stated positions.

At this early stage of the campaign, any one of these people would make a good candidate.

At this point, I don't believe John Edwards has what it takes. I'm not sure what is missing, but I don't see him as a winner against a Republican candidate.

My favorite candidate is Joe Biden. I've watched him on the news shows many times and I'm always impressed. He's a passionate man who doesn't seem to be afraid to say what he thinks. Occasionally that gets him into trouble, but I would rather have a candidate who takes a position and vigorously defends it than a candidate who chooses words carefully so as not to offend any group. You are never sure what they really believe.

It is still very early, but if you haven't been watching Joe Biden, start. This guy is definitely presidential material.