I will Vote for Kamala Harris

by Rod Williams, July 26, 2024- In November I will cast my vote for kamala Harris. 

It is not with any enthusiasm. I don't want to, but I feel I must. It is the only responsible thing to do. I do not think she will advance good policies. I expect I will seldom agree with her. I do not think she will steer America in the direction I think it should go. However, I do not think she will become a dictator. I do not think she will shred the constitution. After four years of Kamala Harris, I expect America to still be a democratic republic; with four more years of Donald Trump, I have my doubts.

This decision to vote for Kamala Harris was not an easy one to make. Quite frankly, it saddens me to come to this decision. I have been a Republican my whole life. I have worked in campaigns and contributed money. I have not been just a casual Republican either, but one who was a Republican because I was a conservative. I am a student of political philosophy and ideas. I know what I believe and why I believe it. 

I have never voted for a Democrat for any significant office. I have never voted for a Democrat for president or congress or governor. The only time I have ever voted for a Democrat was for Davidson County offices when only Democrats were running, or the only serious candidates were Democrats. This time, however, at this advanced age and after a lifetime of voting and working to elect Republicans, I will vote for a Democrat for president. 

I will vote for Kamala Harris, not because I like her or agree with her but because Donald Trump is unfit for office.  In our 248-year history there has never been a threat to our republic like that of Donald J. trump.  That is why I will vote for Kamala. If there was a bumper sticker or yard sign that said, "Harris for President ... because she is not Trump" I would display it.

I did not vote for Donald Trump in 2016. I thought he was a political lightweight and a showman. I saw him as a carnival barker and a reality TV personality. I did not see him as someone serious enough to run the country. I did not see him as a conservative or even a Republican and did not see him as a very thoughtful person. Trump was certainly not a traditional Republican. I thought he was Republican just as a matter of convenience and thought he would have been just as comfortable being a Democrat.  Trump was a wealthy successful businessman but there are a lot of wealthy successful businessmen who are Democrats. 

I did not see what it was that made Trump attractive to Republicans. He had a lot of Hollywood liberal friends and did not talk like a Republican. On the issues, it was difficult to find anything that would define him as a Republican. Trump was pro-choice before he was pro-life. He registered as a Republican in 1987 and since that time, he had changed his party affiliation five times. In 2001 he was a registered Democrat. In a 2004 interview, Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer, "In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat."  In a July 2015 interview, Trump said that he has a broad range of political positions and said, "I identify with some things as a Democrat." (link) I thought his Republican credentials were very thin. And I did not like his bombastic, crude, and rude and undignified demeanor. So, I did not vote for Trump in 2016. I don't remember who I voted for. I think I cast a protest vote for the Conservative Party candidate.

Durning his four years in office, Trump often made me cringe and I thought he was often reckless and undignified. However, he did not screw up badly and I was pleased with his stopping the massive influx of illegals pouring across our southern border and I was very pleased with his successful Supreme Court picks. So, when 2020 rolled around, I voted for Trump. 

After Trump lost the 2020 election and tried to hold on to power despite his loss, I knew he was a dangerous man unfit for office. In my view, the truth matters and the lies about the2020 election are dangerous. Donald Trump's refusal to concede an election he had resoundingly lost was unamerican and dishonorable. Donald Trump attempted to unravel the fabric of our democracy and attack the foundations of our republic. He tried to overturn an election and he violated his oath to the constitution. I knew I could never vote for him again.

My disgust with Trump was about more than just the one-day or rioting of January 6th when he incited a mob to prevent the counting of electoral ballots. It was also the fielding of fake electors, the pressuring of state election officials to find him the votes to change the outcome, the putting at risk the lives of election workers by false allegations of fraudulent vote counting and stuffing ballot boxes, and the lies about Dominion voting machines changing votes, and the draft executive order that would have directed the defense secretary to seize voting machines. The lie upon lies for months as he tried to hang on to power did it for me. The only reason Trump did not go further in his attempt to hang on to power was that he was surrounded by some good people who talked him out of what he wanted to do and people who would not do what he wanted them to do. If Trump were reelected, he would not have those kinds of people around him. We hung on to our democracy because a few honorable people would not buckle.

As a practical matter it really doesn't matter for whom I vote. There is no doubt which way Tennessee will go in the election. In reality we do not vote for a presidential candidate; we vote for electors who vote for the president. All of Tennessee's 11 electoral votes will go to Donald Trump and I know it and I fully support the way we elect our president and am supportive of the electoral college.  As a result of the electoral college and knowing how Tennessee will vote, I recognize my vote will not affect the outcome. While I could never vote for Trump, I could vote for a third party candidate, or simply not vote, or I could write in a name. Until recently, I thought I would write in Mike Pence, or Liz Channey, or maybe write in my own name. However, the more I thought about it, I have felt that that was insufficient and, in some way, cowardly. 

Voting is normally about casting a vote for the candidate who most closely aligns with your values and your evaluation of what are the best policies for the country, or for some people, in some cases, which candidate will give you something or not take something away from you.  

For me, this election is about more than that. This election is about making a moral statement about the threat to our democracy. I know my one vote won't make a difference, but if we lose our Republic and my grandson ask me, "Granddaddy, what do you do when Trump ended American democracy?" I don't want to have to explain the intricacies of the electoral college and why I set on the sideline. I want to say I voted against him

Top Stories

Trump’s party isn’t going to cut spending.

Excerpted from The Dispatch, by Nick Catoggio, Published July 19, 2024 - It is technically possible, I guess, to reduce the national debt while also reducing federal revenue if you’re willing to slash spending aggressively enough. But it’s so wildly unrealistic, especially for the GOP in its current incarnation, that it stands out as a brazen lie even by Trump’s standards.

It’s not the sort of lie you tell when you’re trying to put one over on voters. It’s the sort of lie you tell when you don’t care a whit about an issue and can’t be roused to pretend otherwise.

Trump’s party isn’t going to cut spending. If there was any doubt about that, his record during his first term—before the pandemic, not just after—removed it. For him, fiscal policy is determined by what’s good for his near-term polling, not what’s good for America’s long-term health. “No tax on tips” is a nice example: That’s stupid for many reasons, starting with its effect on the deficit, but it might help him win Nevada. The same goes for his interest in replacing Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell with a flunky who’ll cut interest rates on his say-so. Reducing rates would goose inflation, but the immediate stimulus to the economy would give Trump some “numbers” he can boast about.

The growing burden of servicing the national debt is one of the two biggest challenges facing America, yet the Republican nominee has never so much as glanced in the direction of meaningfully addressing it. In 2016 he ludicrously vowed to eliminate the debt in eight years while simultaneously swearing up and down that he wouldn’t touch entitlements, a promise that persists to this day. The only thing one can say in his defense is that, incredibly, the other party is even less serious about fiscal stability than Republicans are. (link)

Top Stories

Trump Denounces Project 2025 and gets Rally Attendees to Boo it. That Should not Reassure you.

An example of the left's demonization of a
a reasonable proposal for conservative governance

by Rod Williams, July 22, 2024 - At a rally yesterday in Grand Rapids, Michigan Donald Trump again denied knowing much about Project 2025 and he denounced it and called the policy proposals of Project 2025 "radical," and "seriously extreme."

This is the Newsweek report:

"Like some on the right, severe right, came up with this Project 25, and I don't even know, I mean some of them I know who they are, but they're very, very conservative," he said. Some members of the audience booed at this point.

"They're sort of the opposite of the radical left, OK; you have the radical left, and you have the radical right, and they come up with this, I don't know what the hell it is, 'It's Project 25!' 'He's involved in Project,' and then they read some of the things, and they are extreme, I mean they're seriously extreme. But I don't know anything about it, I don't want to know anything about it," he said.

This is weird. It is weird that Trump can try to distance himself from Project 2025 when his close advisors are on the committee producing the thing. It is also weird that Trump would distance himself from proposals that fleshes-out much of what is assumed to be his agenda. It is even more weird that Trump, just a few days ago, claimed he had never even heard of it.

Project 2025 is an initiative directed by the Heritage Foundation with the participation of up to 100 other conservative think tanks and organizations, with the aim of promoting a conservative agenda if Trump is reelected. The Heritage Foundation describes it as "our 180-day Transition Playbook and includes a comprehensive, concrete transition plan for each federal agency." The plan had input from more than 400 scholars and policy experts from across the conservative movement and around the country. In addition to the transition plan, the project is creating a data base of potential employees, sort of like a LinkedIn site for conservatives interested in working in the new administration.

The plan has four main policy aims: restore the family as the centerpiece of American life; dismantle the administrative state; defend the nation's sovereignty and borders; and secure God-given individual rights to live freely. I guess if you are liberal, those are things to freak-out over. I support all of those policy aims. 

There are some specifics with which I am not on board, but overall, Project 2025 is a list of mainstream conservative proposals. It is a bold plan but like a lot of other bold plans much of it will never see the light of day. Some of it will not be approved by Congress, some will not withstand legal challenges, and some will simply be discarded upon further consideration. Across all of government at all levels there are probably more plans that do not come to fruition, than plans that do. 

The left has gone total freak-out over Project 2025 and treating it as some sinister secret plan for a fascist remake of America. You can find lots of YouTube videos with the scary music to accompany the narrative. Rachel Maddow of MSNBC said Project 2025 is a plan to create a government that doesn't do anything other than serve Donald Trump, "and that is what it is all about." I know that is weird, but that is her summary of it. 

I am sure some are reassured that Trump has denounced Project 2025. Some less engaged voters who are just casual consumers of political news, may have heard the left freak-out, thought Project 2025 was something to fear and made them wary of supporting President Trump. So, Trump calling the plan "radical," and "seriously extreme" may have reassured them. That is not my reaction.

I think it is telling that Trump equates the radical right and the radical left and places himself in the center. Of course, the terms "left" and "right" are imprecise terms and they are fluid. Some positions that were once considered right wing positions, are now considered left wing positions and vice versa. A couple examples are protectionism and America's leadership role in the world. Also, the modifier "radical" does not serve much of a purpose. If the Heritage Foundation is "radical right wing," then when you call some group like the Proud Boys "radical" right wing it kind of loses its descriptive function and its sting. 

When Trump denounces both the radical left and the radical right, he tries to place himself as the centrist who is above it all. I know those on the left who see Trump as America's Hitler will find this ludicrous, but I think Trump does see himself as this pragmatic centrist figure. I think he sees himself as a common sense, pragmatic, patriotic person who thinks certain things need to be done and he does not bother to label them as "conservative" or "liberal" positions. 

One example of how this lack of an ideological foundation could be concerning is when it comes to interest rates. If Trump wants to goose the economy and sees lowering interest rates as a way to do it, he could pressure the Fed to cut those rates, which might give a temporary boost to the economy followed by more inflation. Or, when it comes to foreign entanglements, he could weaken America's alliances, the result of which could be to embolden our adversaries and encourage aggression. I think it is dangerous when one does not have core values and a set of firm positions. Of course, we do not want a person who is inflexible, but we need a leader who is grounded in a set of believes. 

Trump does not have a well-founded ideology and he is not a very thoughtful person. I can see that he would see conservatives and liberals as cut from the same cloth and as those who would frustrate doing what needs to be done to save our country, as he sees it. Don't forget that when Trump came on the scene, he had many Hollywood liberal friends and was comfortable in liberal circles. Trump was even pro-choice before he was pro-life. He registered as a Republican in 1987 and since that time, he has changed his party affiliation five times. In 2001 he was a registered Democrat. In a 2004 interview, Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer, "In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat."  In a July 2015 interview, Trump said that he has a broad range of political positions and said, "I identify with some things as a Democrat." (link) I know those who are liberal see Trump as a radical right-winger, but I don't think he sees himself that way and neither do I. I don't even think Trump is a conservative. 

I am concerned that Trump pretends not to know much about Project 2025 and concerned that he is denouncing it. What this signal to me, is that Trump is going to run his own show. Trump is not going to take advice from anyone. If Trump is reelected, he is going to fill his cabinet and inner circle with absolute yes-men loyalist. Instead of policy experts from long established scholarly conservative think tanks, we will see people like Steve Bannon and Michael Flynn and Majorie Taylor Green and Roger Stone giving Trump advice. Trump will pick his advisors from among people who think like he does. He will not take advice from people who will tell him,"Mr. President, we can't do that." He is not going to want to hear from people who will say, "Mr. President, that would be unconstitutional."  

J. D. Vance once said of Donald Trump that he is America's Hitler. I would not go that far. Maybe America's Peron, or America's Mussolini, however. Trump is a populist nationalist and one who values emotions over thought. He is not going to be restrained by institutional norms or moderated by establishment conservative thinkers. He does not want a set of policy positions, or someone else's agenda and plans to guide him; he wants to do what feels right day by day.

Instead of being reassured by Trump distancing himself from Project 2025, I am concerned. 

Top Stories

The Bread-and-Circus Stage of American Decline

by By Nick Catoggio, The Dispatch, Published July 19, 2024 - ..... 

A few hours before Trump’s speech, CNN anchor Jake Tapper asked Sen. Marco Rubio what he expected from that evening’s address.

Rubio pointed to the assassination attempt as evidence of the gravity of this moment. “At least in my view of it, it sort of reminds us that at the end … we’re not in the entertainment business, right?” he said.

Define “we,” Marco.

Of the eight people who immediately preceded Trump onstage on Thursday evening, fully half were entertainers. Tucker Carlson is a storyteller; Hulk Hogan is a pro wrestler; Dana White runs UFC; Kid Rock is Kid Rock. The person who spoke before Carlson was Alina Habba, who nowadays merely moonlights as an attorney while working her full-time job as a right-wing media “personality.”

The Republican Party is in the entertainment business. It didn’t used to be, but there are a lot of things it didn’t used to be that it is now.

There’s an obvious method to the madness of having figures like Hogan and White soak up primetime television minutes that would have otherwise gone to elder statesmen in a party whose base hates many of its own leaders. Working-class voters (and not just white ones) are Trump’s bread and butter; watching Hulk Hogan hulk out over “Trumpamania” surely stands a better chance of moving votes than watching Mitch McConnell burble insincere platitudes about a nominee he hates.

That may be especially true among the lowest of low-information voters inclined to give Robert F. Kennedy Jr. a look, as my colleague John McCormack speculated yesterday. The mix of cranks like Tucker and tough-guy showmen who cater to America’s “bro” demographic was aimed directly at the Joe Rogan fan base, which is sizable.

But understanding the convention line-up purely in strategic terms is reductive, I think.

It’s possible that the likes of Hogan and White were invited for no better reason than that Trump famously enjoys wrestling and ultimate fighting—and he has for decades. The American right is a monarchy now, and kings have always had jesters. It’s the job of a royal court to present silly amusements for His Majesty’s entertainment.

The likelier truth, though, is that a guy who figured out that you could become president by becoming a television game-show host first is following his instincts by treating politics as entertainment.

Consider the most notable line from Trump’s speech, which wasn’t about his near-assassination, Joe Biden, or the 2020 election. It was this: .... 

Pitted against a beauty-pageant promoter, Joe Biden’s party doesn’t stand a chance. (continue reading)

Rod's Comment: I agree. And Nick did not even mention the porn star entertainer. 

Top Stories

Trump Hasn’t Changed, but the GOP Has

By Molly Ball, Wall Street Journal, July 19, 2024, MILWAUKEE—Donald Trump took the stage a
humbled man, the bandage on his right ear testament to his recent brush with death. It had taught him, he said, that “the discord and division in our society must be healed, we must heal it quickly.” He told the story of the attack in vivid detail: the blood pouring everywhere, the crowd that stayed in place as the bullets flew, the feeling that God was present as he rose and raised his fist.

The packed arena of Republican delegates hung on his every word, creating an intimate silence. And then, as if to reassure them that they hadn’t in fact lost the politician they all loved so much, he broke the spell and reverted to form, complaining about his persecution at the hands of the justice system and rambling for another hour about the usual witch hunts and fake statistics.

It was a fitting conclusion to the jubilant Republican convention that ended Thursday in Milwaukee: a statement that the Trump of 2024 isn’t some wimpy, watered-down version—it is Trump, but more so. The political gamble of his third presidential campaign is that this, not some moderating concession to propriety, is what will win the election. And so far, it looks like a good bet. (read it all)

Top Stories

J. D. Vance Pick Represents Another Nail in Coffin of Reagan Republicanism

 J. D. Vance Pick Represents Another Nail in Coffin of Reagan Republicanism

Top Stories

Backlash after Metro CM Ginny Welsch implies Trump asked for assassination attempt

Rod's Comment: CM Ginny Welsch's action blocking a resolution denouncing the assassination attempt of President Trump, denouncing political violence, and honoring the innocent murdered bystander Cory Compenhavor  and those wounded in the assassination attempt is creating a backlash and calls for her to resign. The backlash is well deserved. She should resign. This story has been picked up and is being reported on by news outlets around the nation and is being shared on social media and getting lots of views on YouTube. 

To read the text of the resolution blocked by Ginny Welsch, follow this link. 

Top Stories

Senator Marsha Blackburn, Senator Bill Hagerty, and Congressman Mark Green may be Trump 2nd term Cabinet picks.

by Rod Williams, July 19, 2024- While anything could happen between now and the election, I think it is safe to say the odds greatly favor a Donald Trump second term. Speculation is circulating as to who will make up Trump's cabinet in the second Trump term in office. Among those rumored to be considered for a cabinet slots are Senator Marsha Blackburn, Senator Bill Hagerty, and Congressman Mark Green. 

In picking people from among member of Congress for positions in the new Trump administration, Trump will want to pick those from states with Republican governors so the created vacancy will be filled by a Republican. Should any of the three potential cabinet picks mentioned about be selected for a cabinet or other position in the administration, Governor Bill Lee would select the person to fill the remainer of that person's term. 

Punchbowl News says Marsha Blackburn is being considered for Commerce secretary, Bill Hagerty for Treasury secretary, and Mark Green for Homeland Security. According to Newsweek, Ramaswamy could be in line for secretary of commerce, so Marsha Blackburn may have competition from another serious contender for that seat. Washington Examiner mentions Senator Hagerty as a potential pick for a top national security role.

All of this is speculation at this point, but it seems Mark Green has some serious competition for Secretary of Homeland Security seat. Punchbowl says former Trump ICE official Tom Homan is largely seen as the frontrunner for that seat right now. USA Today says Vivek Ramaswamy wants the position. Axios says that Peter Navorro, a Trump loyalist and an influential senior advisor to Trump, sees Ken Cuccinelli returning as head of Homeland Security. All of these people are being mentioned for, or jockeying for, or being considered for a position that Project 2025 says is on the chopping block for elimination. 

Top Stories