The newly elected Congresscritter for New York's 3d district to the US House of Representatives is George Santos. As most of the literate world knows by now, George Santos is a liar. Bigly. Wherever his account of his life can be placed up against documentable facts, his account falls apart. His response to the disclosure of some of his lies is that, yes, he did tell untruths, create "embellishments" etc., but no he is not a fraud and did nothing criminal. Okay: Santos' lies are what we have come to expect from politicians and are not the biggest story in recent history. It is not even the biggest story of this hour concerning the still-unorganized House of Representatives of the 118th Congress. But I do have to say a few words about Santos. Or, specifically, TWO words with a little embellishment. The two words are: Goldman Sachs ? I am surprised that anyone would tell the lie that he told about having worked at Goldman Sachs. Republicans of "the base" h...
Posts
Let's make the following assumption: Hillary Clinton is about to win the Presidency, and the Democratic Party is about to regain control of the U.S. Senate. Control of the House may remain in Republican hands. Further, let's assume that Trump responds to the loss with his usual grace. He announces that (a) the election was rigged, (b) all major media, including Fox News, were part of the rigging, and (c) he'll keep the revolution going, he's going to create the Trump News Network, offering Movement News (after a lot of gastroenterology jokes, that phrase will be abandoned). Assume all that, with some slight variations at your discretion. What does this mean? What will our politics look like during the first four years of the HRC administration? I suspect that the Grand Old Party is headed for its final crack-up. The Reagan coalition has consisted, roughly speaking, of three parts: white nationalists (more or less openly avowed, or hotly denied, to be such); smal...
In the wake of the whole let's-not-default escapade, I don't see Cruz as the nominee of the Republican Party in 2016. He might be a nominee, though, in a fractured-party context. In much the same way that the Democrats had three nominees in 1948. Cruz would be a Henry Wallace type figure. The Bush family remains powerful in the Republican Party and I think they'll back somebody. This could mean Jeb, portrayed above, but if he doesn't want the job (and he might be rational enough not to want it) it'll mean some family associate. The Bushie to be named later (TBNL) will be the Henry Truman type figure in my '48 analogy. There may also be an outlier, a regionally-limited figure who nonetheless wants a spot at the table, like Strom T. in the 1948 Democratic context. In the 21st century Republican context, though, the regional outlier will be a northeastern Republican who will be open to the charge tha...