Bob Schwartz

Category: Politics

James Carville says Hillary is the most qualified presidential candidate since George Washington—and that includes Bill

James Carville says Hillary is the most qualified presidential candidate since George Washington—and that includes Bill. And the likes of Thomas Jefferson. Here’s what Carville just wrote to potential Hillary donors:

I read the other day that more of Bernie’s supporters have donated to support his campaign than Hillary’s.

I don’t mean to be cranky, but what in the hell is that all about?! We’ve got the best chance we’ve ever had to put a woman in the White House, and oh, by the way, she just happens to be the most qualified candidate maybe since General George Washington himself!!

Aside from Carville’s crankiness, it does make you want to list the credentials of the more than one hundred people who have run for President, some who made it, many who didn’t.

Just looking at the successful candidates, we’ve got a bunch of pretty qualified people. A number of them had been Vice President. Some of those who were Vice President had also been Cabinet members. And some of those had also been governors. Thomas Jefferson, for just one, comes to mind: Governor of Virginia, Secretary of State, Vice President, President. (Also wrote the Declaration of Independence, founded a university, etc.) But I guess it depends on what the meaning of “qualified” is.

One thing is clear. If Carville meant what he said, then the list of people less qualified than Hillary includes her husband, former President Bill Clinton. Don’t worry, Bill. With Jefferson and so many other underqualified candidates, you’re in good company.

Opioids and Heroin: Where Does It Hurt?

There is bipartisan agreement that we have a national problem of opiodd and heroin addiction. But few politicos are willing to discuss the hard questions.

The political consensus is that we address the addicts and how to treat and end their addiction. Which is a good and humane objective.

But there are two other aspects the politicos are less willing to take on.

Supply chain

The old school war on drugs went for the top of the supply pyramid. Think El Chapo. In the case of opioids, that supply chain leads up from pharmacies to doctors to pharmaceutical companies. But if you listen to the grandstanding from Democrats and Republicans, you hardly if ever hear the legal producers of the drugs called to account. It is true that product makers are not unconditionally responsible for how people ultimately use their products—not alcohol makers, not cigarette makers, not gun makers. But at least those suppliers can be spotlighted as significant stakeholders.

Where does it hurt?

Pain killers are a blessing to those who suffer from chronic physical pain or from intermittent severe physical pain. That kind of pain is a damnable thing, and we should all be glad that we have developed such a solution.

Millions of those who use painkillers, prescription and otherwise, are not in physical pain. But many of them are in psychic pain, whether out of loss, desperation, frustration, purposelessness, difficult circumstances, or just boredom. It is convenient but not completely helpful to lump these into “mental Illness” for which increased funding and access could be made available. This kind of pain is not illness; it is just a response to a condition or injury, no different than the hurt that might come from being hit over the head really hard.

Politicos don’t want to talk about this. The solutions to this kind of pain involve changes in society and in people’s lives that require lots of self-awareness, lots of politically tricky analysis, lots of controversial proposals that go beyond better addiction services. And lots of hard questions that politicos don’t want to ask, let alone try to answer. Such as:

Where does it hurt?

Bernie Sanders Is Barry Goldwater

Bernie Sanders for the Democrats is what Barry Goldwater was for the Republicans.

In the short run that might make the current generation of Democrats unhappy. In the long run, they should ask the Republicans how that turned out.

This is how it turned out. An unlikely, marginalized, and idealistic candidate tried to remind a party of its deepest philosophical roots. He won the party’s nomination for President, against all odds and against the wishes of many in the party, who believed he would lead them to total and inglorious defeat. Which he did.

Barry Goldwater also won. It is understandable that the Republican Party lionizes Ronald Reagan as its hero, model and godfather, since Reagan went on to serve two inspiring terms as President. But it was Goldwater, that embarrassment to some in 1964, who inspired Reagan himself and that first young generation of modern Republican conservatives (including Hillary Clinton, who began her political involvement as a Goldwater Girl).

We don’t know how the Bernie Sanders adventure turns out, either in the upcoming caucuses and primaries or at the convention. He is just as unlikely, marginalized and idealistic as Goldwater, and maybe less likely to win the nomination.

But in the long run, progressives who have been sidelined by the siren song of unwavering pragmatism—politics as the art of the possible—may be the winners. A new generation of genuine and fearless progressives may be born, even as the unlikely messenger is pushed aside.

In the words of Barry Goldwater, and as Bernie Sanders might also say:

“And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!”

Trump: Psycho Killer q’est-ce que c’est?

Stop making sense

There are lots of things left to say about Donald Trump. But say it once, why say it again?

Which segues into the song I think fits Trump pretty well. Maybe not as well as one of those Trump suits (the kind Macy’s stopped selling, not the kind that Trump has filed or had to defend, and not the kind in bridge).

I admit I can’t quite explain how it fits. But when I listened this morning to Psycho Killer by Talking Heads, I spontaneously thought “Donald Trump!”

I hate people when they’re not polite.

Listen here.

And here are the lyrics:

I can’t seem to face up to the facts
I’m tense and nervous and I
Can’t relax
I can’t sleep ’cause my bed’s on fire
Don’t touch me I’m a real live wire

Psycho Killer
Qu’est-ce que c’est
fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa far better
Run run run run run run run away

You start a conversation you can’t even finish it.
You’re talkin’ a lot, but you’re not sayin’ anything.
When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Say something once, why say it again?

Psycho Killer,
Qu’est-ce que c’est
fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa far better
Run run run run run run run away

Ce que j’ai fais, ce soir la
Ce qu’elle a dit, ce soir la
Realisant mon espoir
Je me lance, vers la gloire … OK
We are vain and we are blind
I hate people when they’re not polite

Psycho Killer,
Qu’est-ce que c’est
Run run run run run run run away

Notes:

For those who don’t know Talking Heads, Rock Hall inductees since 2002, please investigate.

For those who don’t know French, “Q’est-ce que c’est?” means “What is this?” And the French lyrics mean:

What I did, that evening
What she said, that evening
Fulfilling my hope
Headlong I go towards the glory… OK

Trump: Who’s the Wack Job Now?

Yesterday Donald Trump called U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders “a wack job.” He has also called U.S. Senator Ted Cruz “wacko” multiple times. Along with all his other free association invective, versions of “crazy” seem to be Trump favorites.

Back in November I wrote a post gently inquiring about Trump’s mental health. Now I discover that at the same time, actual psychiatrists and psychologists were considering the same thing.

Is Donald Trump Actually a Narcissist? Therapists Weigh In! appeared in Vanity Fair. Professionals raised genuine concerns that Trump’s history and his behavior during the campaign reflect a psychological shortfall, not an ideological or policy one. A shortfall big enough to put in question his fitness for the job he is seeking (and that he believes only he can succeed at).

As an observer, it isn’t hard to see some projection possibly going on here. Setting aside the lack of civility or respect in these accusations, neither Sanders nor Cruz nor any of the other “wack jobs” Trump finds are actually mentally unhealthy. Extreme, maybe, and not to Trump’s liking, but not crazy. Trump, on the other hand, may be revealing what he sees in the mirror. Besides a President.

New York Daily News Wins Pulitzer Prize for Trump-Palin Front Page

I'm With Stupid!

There is no Pulitzer Prize for newspaper front pages. And if there was, the New York Daily News is not going to win it. Too bad.

“I’m with stupid!” Sarah Palin pointing at Donald Trump. Three words. One photo. It does what media outlets continue to spend hours and pages on, while avoiding the obvious in the name of fair-mindedness—or for ratings and circulation. Or to avoid insulting a future President.

Journalism schools will not use this as a model of anything. We do need high-minded and thoughtful analysis. But once in a while, you’ve just got to cut through the blah-blah-blah and get to the point.

Donald Trump Wants to Make the Bible Great Again!

2 Corinthians

Donald Trump spoke to an assembly of students at Liberty University, one of the best-known evangelical colleges in the country. He quoted a Bible passage to show his depth of Christian faith and knowledge.

In doing that, he mispronounced the name of the New Testament book “2 Corinthians” as “Two Corinthians.” It is in fact universally called “Second Corinthians.” Anyone who has glancing familiarity with the Bible knows that, including five-year-olds in Sunday School. Every time there is a numbered series of books (such as 1 Kings and 2 Kings in the Old Testament, etc.), they are called by the ordinal number (First, Second).

Does this prove that Trump has little familiarity with the Bible? Yes. Does this prove that he is willing to cynically use faith as a tool to “close the deal” on the Republican nomination? Yes. Will this affect his support among evangelical Christians, Christians in general, or people of faith? Who knows?

Here’s the thing. It was no mistake.

Trump may not know much about the Bible or about the Presbyterian Church he identifies himself as belonging to. But he knows a “not great” situation when he sees it. Calling these books “First” or “Second” makes no sense. Plus, it’s a waste of time and breath. Everyone knows that Trump is all about making sense and not wasting breath.

And so, this is part of his strategy to make everything terrific. He wants to change the way people have been referring to the Bible for centuries.

He wants to make the Bible great again! Who can blame him? Thank you, Donald.

Bernie Sanders as John the Baptist

John the Baptist

The Democratic Party is in trouble. Politically, philosophically, spiritually, demographically. Bernie Sanders won’t save the party or win the presidency. But he is setting the scene for the party’s reform and renewal.

John the Baptist was a terrible candidate to lead a religious revolution. He was a wild-eyed radical who seemed to be crazy. His people skills needed work. But his cause found a much better spokesman and leader, who took it to the next level. And then some.

When you think carefully about the party and its recent Presidents and leaders, you look hard for real radical inspiration. Bill Clinton was affable and politically adept, but his was the politics of radical compromise, to the point of digging a rut in the middle of the road that invited neo-conservative disaster and greed. Barack Obama was genuinely inspirational, and has helped the cause of humane Americanism as much as politics would allow. But circumstances and inclination led him to solid pragmatism.

One problem with pragmatism is that it makes a terrible anthem and cause. Another is that it allows all sorts of accommodations that look to the would-be believer like nothing but surrender.

That’s where Bernie Sanders and John the Baptist come together. When the stakes are high, and the troubles are deep, that’s when you have to invoke big visions. That’s what gets people who have fallen into both practical and spiritual malaise to answer the call and start working for real change.

There are few in the Democratic Party willing or able to do this. Whether or not Hillary Clinton wins the nomination or the election, it is not her. If she wins the nomination but loses the election, the party will do some typical superficial soul searching. If she wins both, she may consolidate her power, and the power of the establishment, but the Congress will be even less effective than it is now.

Either way, it is possible that Bernie Sanders is unleashing something bigger than the Clintons or any tepid self-inquiry the party may pretend to engage in. He may not be heir to the spirit of Bobby Kennedy, but he might as well be saying this:

“There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?”

When Bernie Sanders is done with this election, another Democratic reformer and revolutionary will come along, and another. At that point, if we are lucky, millions of previously unengaged and disappointed people may come to the party dreaming and asking “why not?” And Bernie, like John the Baptist, will have prevailed.

Hillary in Iowa 2008

 

Hillary Iowa State Fair

“Character is destiny.”
Heraclitus

Will Iowa 2016 be Iowa 2008 for Hillary? Here are her thoughts back in 2008, as documented in Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin:

The problem was, she hated it there. Every day felt like she was stuck in a Mobius strip: another barn, another living room, another set of questions about immigration (from people who were anti-) and the war (ditto). She’d get back on the plane, slump into her seat, heave a deep sigh, and grunt, “Ugh.”

The Iowans didn’t seem to be listening to her, just gawking at her, like she was an animal in a zoo. Hillary would hear from her staff the things voters were saying about her: “She’s so much prettier in person,” “She’s so much nicer than I thought.” It made her ill. She found the Iowans diffident and presumptuous; she felt they were making her grovel. Hillary detested pleading for anything, from money to endorsements, and in Iowa it was no different. She resisted calling the local politicos whose support she needed. One time, she spent forty-five minutes on the phone wooing an activist, only to be told at the call’s end that the woman was still deciding between her and another candidate. Hillary hung up in a huff.

“I can’t believe this!” she said. “How many times am I going to have to meet these same people?”

Over and over, she complained about the system that gave Iowa so much power in selecting the nominee. “This is so stupid,” she would say. “So unfair.” She bitched about Iowa’s scruffy hotels and looked for excuses to avoid staying overnight. But among the sources of her frustration and bewilderment, the absence of connection was paramount. “I don’t have a good feeling about this, guys,” she told her staff on the plane. “I just don’t have a good feeling about this place.”

Why should the President be born in the United States anyway?

We are asking the wrong and less interesting question about the Constitution and presidential qualification.

A lot of people are talking about Ted Cruz’s birth (the place, not the biological event). The better question is whether the requirement, however interpreted, is in our best interest.

It isn’t. There are plenty of brilliant and capable non-native American citizens who would be terrific at trying to run this country with some vision and imagination. (Though most of them are too smart to want to get involved in the thankless insanity we are now witnessing.)

We have rules, and if any rules deserve respect, the constitutional ones do. But just because it’s in the Constitution doesn’t mean it’s the best idea.

I am not suggesting that we amend the Constitution, especially not for Ted Cruz. But we should at least be talking about maybe expanding the talent pool. Because if most of the current crop of candidates is what we get when we limit ourselves to natural born Americans, we could definitely do much better.