Prediction: Donald Trump will Declare Martial Law and Suspend the Constitution.

by Rod Williams, Jan. 18, 2025- Ever since the election and increasing so as we near the inauguration, many opinion writers and pundits have been writing pieces and speculating on news panels as to what to expect from a second Trump administration.

Much of what others predict and what I would predict is too daring. Some things he has said he will do; you can expect him to do. He has said he will institute a massive deportation plan on day one. I think it a safe bet to predict he will do so. I don't think the funding will be there or the time to deport anything like 15 million people, but I think it safe to assume that significant deportations will occur. I expect he deports those who have orders of deportation already who have not turned themselves in and criminals, which may add up to be about 2 million people. I then think the money, or the clock runs out and deportations stall. 

Along with the deportation prediction I suspect the campaign promise and speculation that he will secure the border is a safe bet. Again, that will take money to physically secure the border but when migrants get the message that they are not welcome and they see deportations occurring, border crossing will drop dramatically.

Those are the two easy ones. Beyond that one's crystal ball gets kind of cloudy. What about tariffs? I do not predict the massive across-the-board tariffs that Trump threatened. Economist of every stripe think that would be detrimental to economic growth and would be inflationary. I think Trump will be talked out of it. He will implement some limited tariffs, claim his threat of tariffs changed behavior, and declare victory.

What about Ukraine? I predict the war to end on unfavorable terms for Ukraine. If the war ends with Ukraine giving up Russian-occupied territory and no grantees for Ukraine security and with a prohibition on Ukraine joining NATO, then Russia will have won. After a couple years, Russia will resume its attack on Ukraine or subvert the country and turn it into a client state. An encouraged Russia intent on creating a Russian-dominated Eurasia is a threat to world peace. I don't like that outcome, but unfortunately, I predict that is what will happen. 

I predict we will not take the Panama Canal, purchase Greenland or make Canada the 51st state. I may be wrong, but I just don't think it will happen. Panama would be easy pickings and many Trumpinistas would cheer loudly. However, I think Panama may replace the Chinese company operating the port with a non-Chinese company, Trump will claim a victory and the threat to retaking Panama will be over. Trump spouts a lot of garbage that I have learned to not take too seriously. I don't think the US will invade and annex Greenland or force Denmark to sell it.   

I predict NATO will continue to exist but with a less robust American leadership. One thing to watch for is to see if nuclear proliferation increases. If nations, such as Germany, do not feel secure under the American nuclear umbrella, they may seek nukes of their own. That is a frightening proposition. This is not quite a prediction but something to watch.

I am predicting that six months from now the price of dozen eggs and the price of a gallon of gasoline will not deviate more than 10% from what they are today. 

What about retribution and the enemies within? I predict that there will be some investigations of the people on Kash Patel's enemies list, and it will cost the targeted a lot of money and anxiety. However, I am predicting Liz Channey will not be imprisoned. For the most part our institutions will hold.

So, what is my big prediction? I am going out on a limb: Within nine months of Trump's inauguration Trump will declare martial law. 

I am unsure of the pretexts, but it is what authoritarians do. Frustrated with the pace of deportation and the obstinance and defiance of sanctuary city mayors, Trump may declare a state of emergency and direct the military to engage in deportation activities. We may see nationalized National Guard troops raiding worksites and patrolling the streets.

The pretext for declaring martial law may be a terrorist attack. If we had a series of events happen in a close time frame, related or not, similar to what happened in New Orleans, Trump could use that as the pretext. I am sure he can find a pretext. I am not going beyond saying Trump will declare martial law and predict what the outcome will be. It could be short-lived and almost insignificant or it could be catastrophic. 

Sadly, I suspect that the majority of Trump supporters will support this. This is what they signed up for. They were looking for a strong man and will be pleased with decisive action. They will say Trump is bringing about law and order and defending national security. Abuses will have to get pretty extreme before his core supporters will care. Many of the new low-information Trump supporters will be back to playing video games. Activist liberals will care, but when they take to the streets that are under martial law that may just provide an excuse for further suppression. 

Why would I think Trump would impose martial law? For one, he has called for terminating parts of the constitution before. In Dec. 2020 expressing frustrated with his failure to hang on to power he advocated terminating parts of the Constitution. Here is a X tweet where he called for that:

Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections! (link)

On June 1, 2020, when the country was in the grip of riots as Black Lives Matter and Antifa led violent protest following the George Floyd death,  President Donald Trump gave a Rose Garden press briefing and Trump told governors and mayors to stop the disturbances, or he would:

I have strongly recommended to every governor to deploy the national guard in sufficient numbers that we dominate the streets. If a city or state refuses to take the actions that are necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them. (link)

During this period of the George Floyd riots Trump considering evoking the Insurrection Act but was talked out of it. My fear is that now, he will not have the same kind of people surrounding him as he did in his first term.

What could be the worst that could happen under a declaration of national emergency and martial law? We don't know. If he has the support of the American people and Congress, which he very well could have, his power would be virtually unlimited. He could exercise dictatorial powers, and then Liz Chaney could face a military tribunal, as Trump once threatened. If Trump seizes power through a declaration of national emergency and imposition of martial law and he begins to lose popularity, it may be difficult to force him to relinquish the power.

Martial law is essentially the same as suspending the constitution. Under martial law, the government could wield massive power. The right to trial by jury could be curtailed. The freedom of press could be suppressed. Elections could be delayed. The President could rule by degree. We have as a guide the World War II example of the U.S. military placing Hawaii under martial law.

Can he do it? Can he legally seize power and suspend the constitution? Yes, he can. It has never been done nationwide before in the United States, but there have been many instances in our nation's history where martial law has been imposed in certain regions for limited periods of time. There have been 68 instances in our nation's history where either state governors or the president have declared martial law. The first instance was Andrew Jackson declaring martial law in New Orleans prior to the Battle of New Orleans in 1814.

President Abraham Lincoln declared martial law in 1862 and applied it to “all rebels and insurgents, their aiders and abettors, within the United States, and all persons discouraging volunteer enlistments, resisting militia draft or guilty of any disloyal practice affording aid and comfort to rebels against the authority of the United States.” (*) 

In recent history, in 1957 Eisenhower used the U.S. military to integrate a school in Little Rock, Arkansas. In 1962, Attorney General Robert Kennedy sent federal troops to Oxford, Mississippi, to quell rioting following the admission of James Meridith to the University of Mississippi, and in 1963, 1964, and 1965 federal troops were used for the purpose of facilitating integration or protecting protestors. In 1992 George W. Bush used federal troops to restore order in Los Angeles following the Rodney King riots. 

While there has never been a nationwide declaration of martial law, there is nothing to prohibit it. The Constitution does not specifically make a provision for declaring martial law and the Supreme Court has never ruled on the matter. Despite the constitution not providing for it and the Supreme Court never acting on it, since martial law has been declared many times before, there is likely a legal assumption that a president has the authority to impose martial law. 

Top Stories

Rep. Andy Ogles introduces "Make Greenland Great Again Act" supporting territory acquisition

 Fox 17, Jan. 15, 2025 - ... In a statement on the bill, Rep. Ogles says "The acquisition of Greenland by the United States is essential to our national security. Joe Biden took a blowtorch to our reputation these past four years, and before even taking office, President Trump is telling the world that America First is back. American economic and security interests will no longer take a backseat, and House Republicans are ready to help President Trump deliver for the American people. That’s why I introduced the Make Greenland Great Again Act."

The bill authorizes President Trump to begin negotiations with Denmark following his inauguration on January 20, 2025. Once, and if an agreement takes place, Congress would then have 60 days for review. If there is no disapproval by Congress within the 60 day period, the agreement would go into effect and "take the full force of the law," per the bill language.

The bill also is supported by 12 other House lawmakers, including fellow Tennessee Representative Diana Harshbarger [TN-01], Reps. ... (Read More)

Rod's Comment: Disgusting!

Top Stories

'Speed bumps need to go': Hundreds sign petition to remove Nashville speed bumps

Nearly 500 people have signed a petition calling for NDOT to stop
installing speed bumps across Nashville.

(wsmv.com) — A petition in Nashville is gaining traction as nearly 500 residents call for the removal of speed bumps, citing vehicle damage. While the Nashville Department of Transportation defends the installations, petitioners seek more effective traffic calming measures. (link)

Top Stories

Continuing Choas at the Metro Arts Commission

 Metro Arts Commission Interim Director Resigns After Brief Tenure

The Nashville Scene, Jan. 15, 2025- Interim Metro Arts executive director Paulette Coleman tendered her resignation on Saturday after less than a year leading the department.

Coleman was named interim director in April following a botched fiscal year 2024 grants cycle that left artists and arts organizations with little faith in the department’s ability to distribute funds in a timely manner. The situation resulted in a conciliation agreement between the Metro Arts Commission, Nashville artists and other Metro departments to improve the grants process for future years. Coleman was tasked with overseeing the department through that rebuilding phase.

However, according to emails and letters obtained by the Nashville Banner, Coleman was failing to hold up Metro Arts’ end of the agreement, leading artists to question if Metro Arts was about to have a repeat of the FY24 grant cycle. ... second time in less than a year that the department responsible for distributing grants to artists and arts organizations is left without leadership at an essential time.

Former Metro Arts Director Daniel Singh resigned in May with a $200,000 settlement agreement. Before that, he had been on FMLA leave followed by administrative leave since February, leaving the department rudderless. (read more)

For more on the years of chaos at the dysfunctional Metro Arts Commission see the following.

• Audit finds array of problems at Metro Arts: improperly used temporary employees; did not correctly document their scope of work; paid them exorbitant salaries.
• Metro Arts director Daniel Singh agrees to Resign. Gets Paid $200,000.
• Metro Arts Commission Drama Update: Metro HR Concludes Councilmember, Commission Director Intimidated City Employees
• Walk-our Denies Quorum for Dysfunctional Arts Commission Meeting
• How Did Metro Arts Get Here?
• Things are still, still a mess at the Metro Arts Commission. Mismanagement could Imperil Metro Arts Budget. Race-based funding could be Unconstitutional.

• Metro Arts Commission, sicker by the day. Will Cheek to Resign amid Death Threats.
• Metro Arts Commision still Crazy after all These Years. Racism causes Director to take Sick Leave.
• Things are still a mess at the Metro Arts Commission. Metro Arts launches initiative to 'return land, money, and resources' to 'Indigenous, African, and Asian peoples'

 

Top Stories

Thoughts on the House Banning Boys from Competing with Girls in School Sports.

by Rod Williams, Jan. 14, 2025- Today the House of Representatives passed a bill that would prohibit men from competing in women’s school sports. The bill passed 218-206, mostly along party lines. However, two Democrats voted for the bill and some Democrats instead of voting against it voted "present."  Some Dems adamantly opposed the bill saying Republicans were fixated on the private parts of small children and saying the Republicans in the House were mean and cruel. 

Since the House does not have the filibuster, all it took was a majority of votes cast to pass the bill. It will be interesting to see if the Senate Dems filibuster the bill or allow it to pass. In the Senate, seven Dems would have to join Republicans for the bill to pass.

I am pleased to see this bill pass. I find it ridiculous that men, even men on hormone replacement drugs with fake tits, can compete with girls on the sports field of play. That said however, I have reservations about the Federal government dictating such policy to the states. If California wants to allow boys who think they are girls to play against girls, let them; if Tennessee want to ban it, that should be up to Tennessee. One size does not have to fit all. 

The House was able to pass this bill, which would dictate policy for the whole nation, because the Federal government provides funding for education.  While it provides funding, it does not provide much. Only about 8% of public education funding comes from the Federal government and for that small amount of money, the Federal government dictates education policy and social engineering for the whole nation. According to some reports, nationwide at the N.C.A.A. level there are only ten boys competing against women. In most places in this nation, local schools will never even encounter this issue. 

President Trump's DOGE is looking for cost savings and ways to cut the size of government. One place to start is to abolish the Department of Education and leave education up to the states. 

Top Stories

I'm Calling BS on the Homeless Vet Argument

by Rod Williams, Jan. 22, 2025- There are a lot of Facebooks memes that just annoy me. This is one of them.

Being a veteran is not a ticket to a free ride forever or an excuse for evading the consequences of your actions.

I suspect that some of the homeless holding up "homeless vet" signs are scamming you. Also, for those who are actual veterans, I suspect their being a vet had nothing to do with their homelessness. Bad things happen to veterans and non-veterans and both veterans and non-veterans make poor choices.

I am a veteran myself and served in Vietnam. Most vets, however, did not see combat. For many people serving ln the military, after basic training military service was not that much different than a civilian job. It didn't ruin you for life. For those who did see combat, for most it didn't warp them for life either. For those whom it did, the VA seeks to serve them, and they are likely receiving disability.

The argument that we must spend nothing on other services until certain other problems are solved, is nonsensical. This is the same argument that people make who say we should spend nothing on foreign aid as long as we have any poor people in America, or we should spend nothing on Parks as long as we have crime. Some problems will never be solved. The problem of spending money on immigrants and refugees is complex and I am opposed to the policy of putting people up in expensive hotels, however one can think this is a problem that needs to be addressed without to resorting to the homeless vet argument.

Top Stories

Trump revives 19th-century imperialism. Make Russia great again!

 Calling the U.S.-Canada border “artificial” is what Putin says about Russia and Ukraine.

by Fareed Zakaria, Washington Post, Jan. 10, 2025- Having campaigned on a policy of ending wars, making peace, putting America first and disentangling the country from the world, President-elect Donald Trump this week decided to revive 19th-century imperialism. 

In a single news conference, he pondered making Canada a state and acquiring Greenland and the Panama Canal by economic coercion — and declined to rule out using military force in the latter two cases. Republican leaders, whom Trump has only recently trained to denounce their party’s old foreign policy of expansionism and internationalism, quickly pivoted again and adopted the new party line, and are now showering praise on Trump’s grand vision and big thinking. Where will all this go?

Some say we are simply back to the “madman theory” of foreign policy, which posits that it’s good for the president to sometimes appear unpredictable, even irrational, because it throws adversaries off guard. It’s worth recalling that Trump tried this gambit in his first term, most obviously with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. He began by threatening him with nuclear war (“fire and fury … the likes of which this world has never seen before”) and then abruptly switched to romancing him with love letters. None of it worked. North Korea continued to build its nuclear arsenal, conduct missile tests (after a brief pause) and threaten its southern neighbor. ...

America has been so influential around the world because it has been able to persuade others that it seeks to act not just in its narrow self-interest but for broader interests — that it wants peace, stability, rules and norms that help everyone. That’s why it was able to get 87 countries to immediately condemn Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. That is why so many of China’s neighbors have allied themselves with the United States.

In the news conference, Trump proposed getting rid of the “artificially drawn line” between Canada and the United States. Of course, that is precisely what President Vladimir Putin says about the line between Russia and Ukraine. Or President Xi Jinping about the division between China and Taiwan. This is a world that makes Russia and China great again. (Read it All)

Top Stories

Tennesseans think there should be a limit on how much property taxes can go up each year

 

Top Stories

Poll: Majority of Tennesseans support school choice expansion

By Kim Jarrett, The Center Square, Jan 6, 2025 - A majority of Tennesseans polled by the Beacon
Center said they support Gov. Bill Lee's expansion of school choice statewide.

The poll of 1,200 registered voters shows 67% back the plan, including 73% of Republicans and 51% of Democrats. Just 13% said they oppose the extension and 20% are not sure.

Sen. Jack Johnson, R-Franklin, and Rep. William Lamberth, R-Portland, filed the "Education Freedom Act of 2025" in November. The bill would allow the state's school choice program, currently limited to Hamilton, Davidson and Shelby counties, in all of the state's 95 counties. Students who qualify would receive $7,075 in annual scholarships for tuition, fees and other private school expenses.

The bill also includes a $2,000 bonus for teachers and increase in starting teacher pay to $47,000 a year, beginning with the 2025-26 school year.

A majority of respondents (57%) also indicated they would be more likely to vote for a state lawmaker who supports school choice expansion while 12% said they would be less likely to vote for school choice proponents.

The school choice bill has received some criticism. The Hamilton County Board of Education passed a resolution in December asking legislators not to pass the bill as part of their legislative agenda.

"The board recommends retaining current limitations of the pilot program to evaluate the effectiveness including 200% poverty-level income eligibility and prior public school attendance, and to include holding private schools and homeschool programs accepting vouchers to the same accountability stands as public schools," the legislative agenda said.

House Democratic Leader Karen Camper called for a bipartisan discussion on education in a statement issued last week.

"While I appreciate the goal of empowering parents with more choices, I firmly believe we cannot afford to weaken our public school system in the process," Camper said. "Instead, we need to focus on strengthening public education by addressing key issues, such as resource allocation, accountability, and equity."

Part of Camper's proposal includes changes to the state funding formula for education.

"We should explore adjustments that allocate more resources to districts with higher needs, including rural and economically distressed communities, ensuring no child is left behind," Camper said. "A revised formula could also prioritize smaller class sizes, access to technology, and additional support for students with disabilities and English language learners."

Just 40% of those who participated in the Beacon Poll said they were satisfied with the state's education system, while 55% said they were not.

Top Stories

Memphis transit squeals past Nissan Stadium for pork spending award

By Kim Jarrett, The Center Square, Jan 7, 2025 - The Memphis Area Transit Authority won the Pork of the Year Award for 2025, squealing past a Nissan Stadium project that puts taxpayers on the hook for upgrades, according to a poll by the Beacon Center.

The transit authority spent money on a new downtown office and purchased a branded suite for Memphis Grizzlies' games at a hefty price tag, even though it was facing a $60 million deficit, according to a report from WREG.

The Beacon Poll pitted the spending against upgrades to the Tennessee Titans' current Nissan Stadium requested by the National Football League as construction continues on a $2.3 billion stadium funded by taxpayers.

The two projects were close – 35% of respondents voted for the Memphis project, while 34% voted for the Nashville project. A $1.5 million incentive doled out to a Lebanon restaurant came in third with 24% of the votes.

"While all three of the finalists deserved the Pork of the Year award, Tennessee voters agree that the way MATA ran an enormous deficit while spending money on luxury expenses that only benefitted their board members was both distasteful and unethical, ignoring their duty to regard taxpayers' interests. In order to recoup this irresponsible spending, the city must consider cutting bus and trolley lines, punishing the people who rely on public transportation the most."

Top Stories

CBO Estimates $710 Billion Deficit for First Three Months of FY 2025

Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, January 10, 2025 - The United States borrowed $710 billion in the first three months of Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, including $85 billion in the month of December, according to the latest Monthly Budget Review from the Congressional Budget Office. This ends the 2024 calendar year with a total of $2.0 trillion in borrowing.  

The following is a statement from Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget: 

As we start the new year ushering in a new administration and a new Congress, we must not lose sight of the fiscal challenges ahead. In the 2024 calendar year, we borrowed an astounding $2.0 trillion – not to mention we are only three months into the fiscal year and we have already borrowed $710 billion.  

Our unsustainable debt isn't something we can just shy away from, as 2025 is packed full of fiscal deadlines. This year we face the return of the debt limit, the end of discretionary spending caps, large parts of the 2017 tax cuts expiring, and reconciliation on the horizon. So far we’ve heard much about how lawmakers plan to spend more and tax less; we’ve heard much less about the opposite. But with these deadlines comes the opportunity for the incoming administration and 119th Congress to start the new year on the right foot.  

A great start would be committing to no new borrowing and guaranteeing all tax cuts and spending increases are fully offset. If lawmakers start the year working to improve our nation’s fiscal situation, then our future challenges won’t be so daunting.  

Top Stories

Biden's Title IX Rule to Include Gender Identity is Ruled "Unlawful."

By Brendan Clarey, The Center Square, Jan. 9, 2025- A federal court in Kentucky ruled Thursday that the Biden administration’s rulemaking expanding Title IX to include gender identity is “unlawful.”

The judgment from the United States District Court from the Eastern District of Kentucky sided with Kentucky, Indiana, Tennessee, West Virginia and private organizations and individuals. Critics of the rule lauded the court’s decisions.

Chief Judge Danny C. Reeves wrote in Thursday's order that the administration’s final rule overstepped its congressionally given boundaries. 

“Congress gave the Department authority to issue rules, regulations, and orders to effectuate Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination consistent with the objectives of the statute,” Reeves wrote. “However, the Department exceeded that authority in issuing the Final Rule and the text of Title IX shows why. 

“Put simply, there is nothing in the text or statutory design of Title IX to suggest that discrimination ‘on the basis of sex’ means anything other than it has since Title IX’s inception – that recipients of federal funds under Title IX may not treat a person worse than another similarly-situated individual on the basis of the person’s sex, i.e., male or female,” Reeves wrote. 

“As this Court and others have explained, expanding the meaning of ‘on the basis of sex’ to include ‘gender identity’ turns Title IX on its head,” Reeves wrote. 

“While Title IX sought to level the playing field between men and women, it is rife with exceptions that allow males and females to be separated based on the enduring physical differences between the sexes,” Reeves said. 

Reeves said that the final rule’s approach to locker rooms “does not make sense.” 

“Confirming the arbitrary nature of these new regulations, the Department has offered no rational explanation for the stark inconsistencies that will result if the Final Rule is allowed to go forward,” the judge wrote.

The court also said the rule violates the First Amendment because “the Final Rule’s definitions of sex discrimination and sex-based harassment … require Title IX recipients, including teachers, to use names and pronouns associated with a student’s asserted gender identity.”

“The Final Rule also is vague and overbroad,” Reeves wrote. “As the Court explained previously, several of the terms used in this regulation are so vague that recipients of Title IX funds have no way of predicting what conduct will violate the law.” 

The court also said the final rule violates the Spending Clause of the Constitution and is arbitrary and capricious.

“The Department does not provide a reasoned explanation for departing from its longstanding interpretation of Title IX,” Reeves wrote. “Although it relies primarily on Bostock, the Supreme Court was clear that the decision was limited to the context of Title VII and did not purport to address ‘bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind.’”

The court struck down the entire ruling, rather than the portions challenged by litigation. In the order, Reeves concluded that “the entire Final Rule and corresponding regulations are invalid and must be set aside.”

Reeves said that other courts have indicated it is unlawful and “would simply ‘cause a return to the status quo’ that existed for more than 50 years prior to its effective date.” The judgment is appealable. 

Critics of the Biden administration rule celebrated the order. 

“Huge blow today for Biden’s wildly unconstitutional plan to hollow out Title IX protections and instead use federal law to enforce gender ideology in public schools and colleges across our nation,” said Kim Hermann, executive director of the Southeastern Legal Foundation.

“Freedom has won in the Court’s decision to grant summary judgment for the plaintiffs in this case and to throw out the Biden Title IX rules as ‘unlawful’ — adding that it ‘offends the First Amendment,’” Hermann said. 

Hermann also said it creates a precedent for the other cases, including one in which her firm is challenging the Biden administration’s rules. The rule's implementation has remained piecemeal since legal challenges and court orders have halted its widespread implementation.

The Biden Department of Education attempted to expand the definition of sex discrimination to include gender identity and strengthen protections for pregnant students, citing the discrimination faced by LGBTQ+ students. 

Critics have said that it would redefine women’s sports and put female students at risk. 

The Biden administration recently withdrew its proposed rule that would have dictated how schools and institutions of higher learning would approach transgender athletes on single-sex sports teams. 

Top Stories

Trump Threatens Military Force to Take Panama Canal and Greenland. Congress Needs to Act.

click to view press conference

by Rod Williams, Jan. 7, 2025- President-elect Donald Trump has upped his rhetoric regarding taking military action against our neighbors.  He had previously said he might retake the Panama Canal which implies military action, and he had spoken of purchasing Greenland, which of course is not for sale.  Today said he would not rule out the use of military force to seize control of the Panama Canal and Greenland, declaring U.S. control of both to be vital to American national security. 

Much of what Trump said on the campaign trail was dismissed by his supporter as simply bluster and not to be taken seriously. Now that he is days away from taking office and he continues to talk of taking military action against friendly neighbors, I don't think one should be so sanguine. Not only has he talked of taking Panama and Greenland but has insultingly, jokingly called Canada the 51st state. He has also threatened to declare Mexican drug cartels Foreign Terrorist Organization. 

Declaring the Mexican drug cartels Foreign Terrorist Organization would open the door to a more hostile relationship with Mexico and could be a first step in justifying military action against Mexico. Not only is Trump threatening these actions, but he has threatened a trade war with both Mexico and Canada. 

Unfortunately, I think many Americans would be ready to support Trump aggression against our neighbors. The case for retaking the Panama Canal would be an easy sell. After all, we build it and when we gave it away, that was a contentious decision. And we could likely take it with little difficulty and little loss of life. After taking Panama, then it would be easier to sell the next foreign aggression. People could more easily be persuaded taking Greenland was essential to our national security than they can be persuaded that preventing China from taking Taiwan or Russia from taking Ukraine or continuing to support NATO is in our national interest. Not that they are right, but most people think simply. 

Trump as a candidate talked like an isolationist. I take his threat to cut support for NATO and his willingness to let Putin take Ukraine seriously. While it was Joe Biden who presided over the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, it was Trump who negotiated the American surrender in that war. These isolationist actions and utterances from Trump do not make him an isolationist nor are they contradictory to his threats against Canada, Greenland, Mexico and Panama. 

Trump's hostile posture and threats against our neighbors are consistent with a new theory of multipolarity. This grand theory holds that Russia should rule over an area called Eurasia. It also recognizes that there will be other regions of the world ruled over by other superpowers. This is viewed as natural and appropriate. This theory's prime proponent is Aleksandr Dugin, a Russian philosopher and activist. Dugin's books and essays and ideas are popular among people like Curtis Yarvin and Steve Bannon and others of the Trump intelligentsia. Dugin is often spoken of approvingly in speeches and interviews by people like Yarvin and Bannon and other Trumpian theorist. 

Whether this posture of hostility toward our neighbors is the result of adherence to new theories or just old fashion imperialism, colonialism and a desire for empire I don't know. In any event we should be concerned. 

The president has broad powers to authorize military actions without prior congressional approval. Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war. However, Article II, Section 2, names the president as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. A state of war can exist without a declaration. The War Powers Act however, says within 48 hours of committing troops to hostilities outside the United States the President must notify Congress and that after 60 days, the President must get Congressional Approval to continue the military action. With foes like Panama and Greenland the task of conquering those territories could be accomplished well within 60 days, probably within mere days. 

Normally after even a hard-fought campaign, the public and the loyal oppositions grant the winner a honeymoon period. A period of goodwill often follows a hard campaign.  Despite my concerns with Donald Trump and what I see as his authoritarian tendencies, I was ready to wish him the best and hope for the best.  I was ready to say, maybe Trump wouldn't be so bad. Afterall, I want him to get control of the border and expel criminals and cut government and rollback DEI and political correctness. Maybe, he wouldn't start a trade war, I reasoned. Maybe he wouldn't exact revenge on his critics. Before I had time to consider that maybe he would be sort of normal, he starts talking of making war on our friends. 

There can be no honeymoon when the new President-elect is promising military action against our neighbors and allies. Democrats, pundits, and sane old-style Republicans need to be loudly condemning this talk of military action against our neighbors. While I doubt it could pass Congress, there should immediately be a bill introduced prohibiting military action against Mexico, Canada, Greenland, and Panama without specific Congressional authorization. 

There can be on honeymoon. 

Top Stories

Our Fiscal Situation Has Deteriorated Dramatically Since 2001

 From Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Jan. 5, 2025 - 

In 2001, the federal government ran a surplus and CBO projected that the national debt would be fully paid off by 2009. Instead, our fiscal situation has deteriorated, with debt held by the public growing from 32 percent of GDP at the end of FY 2001 to 98 percent of GDP at the end of 2023. We analyzed what caused this debt growth in our paper, "From Riches to Rags: Causes of Fiscal Deterioration Since 2001." We find that debt growth can be attributed to both tax cuts (37 percentage points of debt-to-GDP) and spending increases (33 percentage points of debt-to-GDP). Another one-third of growth is due to recession responses (28 percentage points of debt-to-GDP). Absent these tax cuts and spending increases, the debt would be fully paid off. Our paper also finds that most of the debt, 77 percent of GDP, was approved on a bipartisan basis.

Top Stories

Remembering a Lifetime of New Year's Eve Celebrations. Thanks for the Memories.

by Kathleen Williams, Jan. 4, 2005 (originally written Dec. 2017) - My sister and brother-in-law have been hosting far-flung family and friends for all these years, every New Year’s Eve; but not this year. Attendance has dwindled. The unexpected loss of Uncle Sonny and regular party-going friend Linda Raintree left us out of the mood. And this year’s arctic blast is a deterrent for older aching bones with several family members who struggle to leave their homes now with impaired vision and mobility. So, the end of an era. I’ll miss it. 

Wow, we’ve had a great run! It’s been a blast, worthy of commemorating each passing year and I’m grateful. Thanks Rebecca and Dale for your generosity and hard work that gave me and so many others such fun over 36 years!!!! 

1980 was the first one at a little rented house in Donelson long before I’d met my husband and later children. I was just 20 years old. I’m now 58. So, the story of this party is a window into the story of all the partygoer’s lives. A snapshot. 

In 1979, Rebecca and I had sold both our cars for a better single car and bought camping gear for an extended tour of the U.S. Bad planning, insufficient funds, a dental emergency, and an old car brought us to a strange place. After about 4 months of camping along the beaches of Florida, Georgia, SC, and NC– we landed in Kenosha, Wisconsin. My now sister-in-law Jeanne Tredup was my brother Donnie’s then girlfriend. We made our way to her family’s sofas and a job at her Dad’s print shop. Later followed by jobs at a nearby theme park: Great America in nearby Waukegan, Illinois. Rebecca met her husband Dale (a high-wire ride mechanic) there that year and stayed, sending me home, alone and broke, back to East Tennessee. (After a month at home, I took off again with my brother Don and Jeanne across country on their honeymoon for 7 weeks -- a story for another time.) 

But that year, Becky and Dale got married and moved back home to Nashville and hosted our first New Year’s Eve Party. I remember my country singing boyfriend serenaded us in their kitchen into the wee hours of the morning – Brother Rod had introduced me to his music and Rod was an eager listener. New friends Lucy and Perky were there and I believe my family from East Tennessee who came about 50% of the time came that year. 

So many years, my dearest friend from high school came: Melanie Ault Watson Burman. In later years, with her wonderful artist husband Steve. Later parties took us out into the country when Rebecca and Dale moved to Joelton. First their little cabin in the edge of some woods and then out to the ranch house on beautiful Sycamore Creek, where my babies both grew up playing in the country. Our raucous music and fireworks disrupted starry cold quiet nights. Only hardy souls with designated drivers or graduates of “the Rod Williams School of Drunk Driving,” (a New Year’s Eve invention from oldest brother Rod) would make the trek. 

So, unless party goers were spending the weekend, turn-out could be low. It was a long windy way to that party. By the time, their move to Sycamore Creek occurred, we were having the next generation of revelers. I was 7 months pregnant for two of the gatherings and breastfeeding for two of them. Then came babies and toddlers and adolescents and teenagers and college kids. 

Sometimes 10 people would be hiding in the bathroom from each other to smoke weed – sometimes it was the adults and other times, it was the kids. (In case you’re shocked, you must have not partied in the ‘80’s. That was part of the scene then.) 

Dancing with babies in my arms. Dressing up for my good-looking husband in my flashiest and sometimes sexiest attire. Big hair and lots of make-up. Later dancing with my growing daughter and son. My nieces and nephews. My Uncle Sonny. Uncle Richard. My old mother, a teetotaler who is the life of the party and loves to dance. She came last year at 85 with her walker and still danced. 

Most of the parties have had these traditional activities which means they’ve all been a blast: Great food (my sister is an exceptional host and cook), raucous music, lots of booze and other party enhancers, political discussion and great conversations, jokes, extended family and friends with kids of all ages, Christmas lights and tree, fireworks (Dale sponsored and fired them off), party hats and blowers, the countdown and kisses, singing Auld Lang Sine, dancing. 

Then some unique traditions developed. Arm-in-arm the party winds down with a circle of the hard-core singing: Marshall Chapman’s “Waiting for the Times to Get Better.” Google it. It’s the perfect song to end the year with. (We had a chance to tell Marshall, a local music rocker – she loved it and we gave her a photo of us in the round.) A scratchy LP is drowned out by our shouting rendition. Afterwards, we have to play David Allen Coe, another particular event. A psychedelic dance by yours truly accompanied by Coe’s “Willie, Waylon, and Me“ became part of the annual activities and lots of dance swapping and hugging and a love fest to end the night. 

Sister Rebecca and buddy Melanie loved to share tequila shots and Brother Donnie developed the practice of passing around limes and salt with the request that we “lick our crotch” between our fisted index finger and thumb. That always gets a laugh. Perhaps it has something to do with the tequila shot.

Without these parties, I wouldn’t have gotten to know first cousin, once-removed Mary Beth Swindell and her husband Don and sons: Russell and Spencer. Nor had special moments with Uncle Sonny when we sang him a round of tribute songs each with the word Sun or Sunny or Sonny. (He died unexpectedly this year – I cherish the experience of this singing tribute.) Nor partied with my nieces and nephew’s friends: Delie singing Aretha Franklin, partying with the son of Dennis Ogle, my high school boyfriend: Jesse Ogle, nephew Justin’s best friend. 

On our drive home, we realized these teen-age guys had imbibed too much and a quick pull-off occurred just in time to avoid a messy van. Sitting on the bench seat with Jesse, I flung him over my lap and simultaneously opened the van door just in time to avoid a mighty hurl. Those country roads at 3 in the morning were rough on the over-indulged tummies. 

Without these parties, our sons may have never had the experience of gathering around Uncle Dale has he shot off fireworks sometimes with misfires landing under the deck we were all standing on or him tumbling down the creek bank and disappearing with sister Rebecca leading the applause like this was part of the act or the fireworks exploding under the car. The pyromaniac boys (Joey included) loved this annual activity. 

Because we had been having the parties for 20 years when the Millennium rolled around, we wanted it to stand out. So, Rebecca offered to let me and Don co-host and we brainstormed new activities: a huge bonfire, a nighttime hike, hot toddies in the barn, a time capsule, and a drum circle were added for this one special party. Uncle Sonny brought blue hair dye just for the occasion. 

I had recently attended a dance class and learned an African chant and dance: Good Feelings Come In – Bad feelings Go Out. It was a hit as everyone marched, drummed, danced and sang in a circle around the fire. After a few minutes brother Rod led us into a new version and chant: A, E, I, O, U, and sometimes Y and W. An instant success as everyone knew it and joined in. The time capsule had us sharing show and tell and then sealing them away. Uncle Sonny took it home and now I don’t know where it is. But I brought a family skate key that had hung in our Mama’s house for 20 years. Don and Donnie brought some writing they had done. Everyone brought something and slid it away into the plugged PVC pipe. 

Pine cone decorated cheese balls, peanut butter and powdered sugar pinwheels, caramel coated crispy oriental noodles, dazzling floral centerpieces (my sis is a master floral arranger), disco balls and disco lights, a throbbing base, and all the smiling, whirling, faces of all my living and departed kin and friends. 

Almost every New year’s Day we gathered again with out-of-towners at my Aunt Linda’s grand old house for black-eyed peas and corn bread and badly needed coffee to enjoy a more sober, somber affair. Still lots of stories and love to share. These are the holiday treasures to last a lifetime that cover so much of my life. Happy 2018! The end of an era.

The above was written by my sister Kathleen. She read it this New Year's Day when we gathered at her house where we enjoyed a good meal that included black-eyed peas. She captures perfectly the essence of those many New Year's Eve parties at by brother-in-law Dale and sister Becky's house. I miss those many years of New Year's Eve parties. Time marches on. Reflecting back, those years saw many changes in my life: marriage, divorce, birth of my daughter, marriage to the love of my life Louella, and ups and downs of life. To Kathleen, thanks for putting the memories in writing. To Becky and Dale, thanks for enriching our live and all the good times. Rod

Top Stories

Congressional ethics committee asks for further investigation into Rep. Ogles' campaign finances

 NASHVILLE, Tenn., Jan. 2, 2025, (WTVF) — The Office of Congressional Ethics is recommending a deeper look into Tennessee Congressman Rep. Andy Ogles' campaign finances after they came under scrutiny when he claimed to have personally loaned $320,000 to his campaign in 2022.

"The Board recommends that the Committee further review the above allegation concerning Rep. Ogles because there is substantial reason to believe that Rep. Ogles’s campaign committee accepted excessive contributions reported as personal loans and contributions from the candidate," the ethics board wrote Thursday. (Read more)

Top Stories

The Most Underreported Story of the Year: Intellectual Trumpism.

by Rod Williams, Dec. 31, 2024-  As the end of the year approached, in various major television studios journalist and other talking heads set around tables and reflected on the year and shared their view of the most significant news developments of the year.  One host of such a panel discussion asked what the most underreported significant story of the year was. In my view, the most underreported story of the year was the rise of intellectual Trumpism.

Some may scoff at such a thing as "intellectual Trumpism." I think it is accurate, and I think it is important.  Trumpism is a form of populism and populism is essentially a movement of the common people with a grievance who find someone to blame. At times it may be resentment of a racial minority or an ethic group or religious group. At times it may be the rich or capitalist or industrialist or some imagined cabal of secret influencers such as the Masons. Intellectual Trumpism is not populism.

In analyzing the Trump movement some will see the underlying basis of Trumpism as racism or Chrisian Nationalism. I think both of those elements are present in the movement but are insignificant. They do not contribute to foundational principles. 

Some will look at the kooks, such as QAnon and conspiracy theorist such as Alex Jones and see that as a basis of Trumpism. The kooks are also there but do not contribute a significant body of ideas that undergird the Trump movement. I imagine most people in the Trump movement see them as a joke and just weird. 

Some will see violent-prone groups such as Proud Boy, Three Percenters, or Oath Keepers as important components of Trumpism. They do exist and may be dangerous, but they do not provide a foundational ideology. 

There are a large number of highly educated and smart people with an ideology that make up Trumpism. This group of thinkers some would describe as "conservative" but in most regards they have very little in common with post-World War II American conservatism. If one were to label this group some might call them the "New Right," or "Far Right." I don't know that those labels fit. For one thing they are old terms, and I think we are seeing something new.  Also, it seems the mainstream media sees a new "New Right" about once every decade. "Far Right" is also overused and has lost any meaning and liberals have applied the term to people like Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh. "Far Right" is almost a synonym for very conservative.  If we need to have a label to describe this movement call it the "Dissident Right." That is the term some within the movement use to refer to themselves. 

Some will dismiss a bunch of smart people touting theories as insignificant. I disagree. Ideals have consequences. Without Karl Marx, we would not have had Marxism and Stalinism and Pol Pot. Communism led to the death of up to 110 million people and denial of freedom and human dignity for much of the world's population. Don't tell me theory does not matter. Without John Locke and Adam Smith and Edmund Burke and Hobbs and Rousseau, would we have had classical liberalism?  On, the other hand however, there are many intellectual movements that went nowhere. If Trump fails miserably and the public's hopes are dashed or if Trump simply dies, will Trumpism die with him? I don't know. Nevertheless, it seems like something important and concerning is happening. Time will tell how it plays out. 

Some will object and scoff and say Trump is hardly an intellectual and how can he be the leader of such a movement. I agree that Trump is not an intellectual. I doubt he has ever read a serious thoughtful book. As president his aides said he would not even read policy papers before important meetings with world leaders. I think with Trump, what you get is what you see. Trump is the person the philosophers hope will bring to fruition the vison they have. That does not mean Trump understands it or is part of it or even aware of it. 

So, what do these Trump intellectuals believe? What is their point of view? To boil down to a couple or three paragraphs volumes of essays and books and presentations is difficult and, of course, there are variations of opinions among the individuals. Also, some of what I read is esoteric and while I am fairly well read, I am only a casual student of philosophy. I don't want to pretend I understand more than I do and some of it is complex and difficult to grasp, but in essence the below paragraphs state the kernel of their argument. 

Democracy has failed, they argue. America has problem. The American people have become weak and decadent and demoralized, and we lack leaders who will take decisive action to right things.  Not only is America experiencing this, but so is Western civilization. Civilization took a wrong turn about the time of the enlightenment. The modern Western emphasis on individual rights is mistaken. Some deny we have innate rights. We are not endowed by our creator with rights as the founders proclaimed; rights are a result of cultural norms that developed over long periods of time. Rights are not universal.  Also, they emphasize the supremacy of people over the individual. This ideology is much more a philosophy of communitarianism as opposed to individualism. 

In order to fix things, we need a strong leader they say. Some of the thinkers in this movement refer to the leader as a strong CEO and some call for a monarch. Some say we need an "American Caeser." For this strong leader to accomplish things, he needs more power. They look at things like checks and balances and separation of power and independent government agencies as impediments to decisive action. When Donald Trump says he may find it necessary to suspend the constitution or when he speaks about using the military to impose order and combat crime, he is speaking their language.

While conservatives are generally advocates of a strong market economy and free enterprise and believe a corporation's job is to earn a profit for its shareholders, the Trump intellectuals tend to suspicious of contemporary capitalism. They believe that commercial interest should serve the interest of the people. They are especially suspicious of multinational corporations. They are also critical of the role that consumerism and consumption has on culture. Having lots of toys distracts and keeps us content and drains society of its vitality.

When it comes to foreign affairs and America's role in the world, they also think we are on the wrong track. They think we should not be exerting American influence around the world. They are not however idealistic, naive, principled isolationist. Many of these thinkers are enamored of a Russian philosopher and activist by the name of Aleksandr Dugin who argues that a multipolar world with different nations dominating their respective region is desirable and normal. When Donald Trump expresses doubt about our NATO alliance and when he appears ready to greenlight Putin's conquest of Ukraine and when he talks about acquiring Greenland, Panama, and Canada, and setting the stage to justify invading Mexico, this aligns with their view. When Donald Trump makes nice and is complementary of authoritarian world leaders, they see this as a positive thing.

There are a lot of people involved in the intellectual dissident right movement and the movement looks to a previous era of thinkers, many long deceased, for guidance. I am throwing out some names one should be familiar with to understand this movement. These are in no particular order and by including a name below does not mean to imply that they are all on the same page or are in agreement. Also, I am not attempting to smear anyone. Some, I am not sure even deserve to be considered part of this movement but some in the movement claim and quote them, so they are included for that reason. For several of the names on this list, I have only the briefest acquaintance with their work. I know who they are and that is about it.  

Here is the list: Steve Bannon, Curtis Yarvin, Alexander Dugan, Friedrich Nietzsche, Leo Strauss, Julius Evola, Carl Schmit, Martin Heidegger, Aleksandr Dugin, Bronze Age Pervert (BAP), James Burnham, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Yoram Hazony, Oswald Spengler, and Peter Theil.

There are other whose names I cannot recall who need to be on this list, I am sure. Some, such as Tucker Carlson promote the views of some of these people but he himself, in my view, is not sufficiently intellectual nor is he a theorist so I am not including him in this list. As Tucker himself says, he is just asking questions. There are other like Carlson who promote the theories but are more advocates than thinkers, so they don't make the cut for the list. Others who espouse some of the views of the people on the list are omitted because they lack the credentials or gravitas to be taken seriously. It is hard to know where to cut off the list. Since this is my own list, it would no doubt differ from someone else compiling a list.  Also, I have only put people on the list and not organizations. There are organizations such as the National Conservatism Conference and Clairmont Institue who are supportive of some of the views of the intellectual Trumpian movement, but I am restricting this list to individual thinkers. Who should and who should not be included is a subjective matter. 

I may do a Part II to this post and summarize what some of the people on this list contribute to the movement, what they think, and why they are important. I also have come across some articles that shed more light on the movement. I may summarize and link to such articles. Stay tuned for updates. 

Top Stories