The Shutdown

Trump's most often repeated campaign promise was that he would build a 2,000 wall between the US and Mexico and make Mexico pay for it. When Mexico refused to pay for such a wall, it was expected that Trump would get the money from Congress because, after all, his party controlled both the House and the Senate. Yet, he failed there too because, as a group, Republicans regard negotiation and compromise as indicative of moral failure (as Kentucky senator Rand Paul put it, it's wrong for those who occupy the moral high ground to those who occupy the low ground). 

When you have a petulant president who is used to getting things his way, and he suddenly can't do it, bad things are sure to follow, the bad thing in this case being that Trump has refused to allow 800,000 government employees to draw their paychecks until such time as Congress allocates money for his wall, something that Congress was unwilling to do even before January 2, when the Democratic Party took control of the House of Representatives. Today marks day 31 days since one-quarter of federal employees drew their last paycheck. 

Trump opened the shutdown with the following words:

"I will shut down the government, and I am proud [that] I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it... I’m going to shut it down.”

A few days later, he blamed the Democrats for making him do it (I don't know if Republicans are too oblivious to notice or too immoral to care that Trump rarely opens his mouth without lying). Since the shutdown, the people who protect our borders are going unpaid, although Trump claims that the shutdown is aimed at strong borders; federal courts are not hearing cases; loans are not being approved; national parks are being robbed and vandalized; travel by plane is grinding to a halt; criminal investigations are ending prematurely; and so on ad finitum. All of these countless millions of people are suffering, not because of anything they did but because their president is in a snit. Such recalcitrance is what passes for strength among Republican voters.

On the bright side, Trump and Congress are still being paid, although the Secret Service agents who protect them are not. When the leader of the Congress advised Trump that, because of security concerns during the shutdown, he should postpone a speech he wanted to make to Congress; he denied her access to a government plane for a secret trip, although he allowed his wife to take a vacation in Air Force One. So what does Trump have to say to (and about) these people who are going unpaid and who, in many cases, are being forced to work because their jobs are deemed "essential"? 

1) He says that most of them voted Democratic, which, I suppose, means that it doesn't matter if they're paid. 

2) Despite having never lived a moment of his life during which he didn't have more money than the life savings of hundreds of thousands of us added together, he says that he can relate to not getting a paycheck. 

3) He says that those who are being unpaid will "get by like they always do" (he is apparently is referring to the fact that the Republican Party has often shut down the government when it didn't get its way, although it has never shut it down for this long). 

4) He says that those who aren't being paid are happy to make the sacrifice. 

5) He assures the country that he's eager to negotiate with the Democrats, but that they're unwilling to negotiate with him, and while it is true that he invited the two most powerful Democrats to the White House, it's also true that they went, and that Trump Tweeted the event as follows: "Just left a meeting with Chuck and Nancy [he calls others by their first names but demands that he be called "Mr. President"], a total waste of time. I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, 'NO." I said 'bye-bye.'"

Trump is the standard of truth to millions of Republicans who praise him to their children as an example of how a good man should live. To millions of Democrats, Trump is proof that the Republican Party represents the nadir of dishonesty and immorality. It is to millions an organization for people who take the position that, "As long as I get mine, then screw you," "America First" being code for "Me First, and You Not at All." I keep thinking that the day will come when these people are finally fed up with supporting a man whose behavior flies in the face of the very Christian values that they claim to hold dear, but since it hasn't happened yet, I find it hard to envision what it would take to make it happen.


Emma Springfield said...

As you are hoping I too hope that day is coming soon. We are on bad footing with our allies and being used by those who wish us harm. Our leaders are being laughed at all over the world. It will take some serious effort to regain our standing in the world as well as at home.

Elephant's Child said...

I suspect that if Congress was not being paid shutdowns would be a)rare and b) brief.
And yes, I do wonder what it will take. Sadly I can see him being re-elected, though I fervently hope not.

kylie said...

If an Australian Prime Minister tried such a stunt his own party would vote him out, if for no other reason than the damage to their prospects of re-election.
I don't understand how Trump acts so poorly and it is accepted, even applauded.
I was having the Trump re-election conversation with my son last night and he is convinced there will be no second term. I was stunned that he was elected to start with but having overestimated your countrymen once I am not about to assume anything sensible will happen at the next election said...

"I suspect that if Congress was not being paid shutdowns would be a) rare and b) brief."

No doubt. Shutdowns are unpopular with the public, so right away people start looking for whom to blame. Trump's words about being "proud" to impose a shutdown received wide coverage, but then when he did so, he blamed the Democrats for giving him no other option (by refusing to do what he wanted). THAT'S what a lying sack of shit Trump is, so why do millions continue to believe in him? I suppose they are like him in that logic, evidence, and consistency, have no place in their lives. I knew a man who beat his wife. He told me that he didn't want to do it, but when they argued, he would tell her to shut-up, and when she didn't shut him, he had no choice but to hit her, and hence it was her fault that he did so. Shut downs amount to saying to the public, "This is what I want to happen, and if you don't allow it, then I will refuse to give government employees their paychecks. Now do you want those people to go without the money they've earned? If you don't, you had better give me what I want." I can not imagine any scenario in which denying people their paychecks in order to beat other people into line is either fair or rational, but Trump's supporters are, for most part, okay with it. Their values--and hence they themselves--are the reverse of what I can respect. It's not about socialism versus capitalism, etc., but about common decency, and it saddens me beyond words to realize, that a full third of Americans (the number who support Trump) are seriously lacking in decency. There is no starting point from which to work with when you're dealing with people who are largely devoid of moral standards.

In the case of this particular shutdown, the issue is a wall. Models of possible walls have been built, and all of them can easily be cut through. Again, what Trump and his supporters want isn't grounded in reality, so does it make sense to give it to them so that the government won't collapse? It's as if they're saying, "If you don't want the government to collapse, then you better do what we tell you to do," which suggests that, while they're okay with destroying the government, they're counting on the fact that their opponents are not. It's as if they're kidnapping someone's child and threatening to kill it unless they're paid for keeping it alive. No one can give in to that kind of thing because it would be a short-term fix at best. In other words, we will be in the same spot every few months when Trump (or his Party) don't get what they won't. I support the Democrats in standing firm here no matter what happens. Peggy is supposed to fly to the other side of the country this coming weekend, but she has no idea if planes will even be in the air, and her problems are nothing compared to those of people who are unable to pay their bills. Trump and his supporters are like sewage blockages to me.

"I was having the Trump re-election conversation with my son last night and he is convinced there will be no second term."

I would guess that your son is right. Trump's approval rating is in the 30s, and this shutdown has hurt him by about ten percentage points. Of course, approval ratings go up and down, but his have never been high, and all it would take to put the nail in the coffin would be a financial recession, which, given his erratic behavior, I wouldn't be surprised but what we have.

Heidrun Khokhar, KleinsteMotte said...

It is very sad the he was ever elected in the first place. I suppose blind followers are blind in many other respects. Make America great again was a cheap slogan and if anything one might consider that the world sees US as a weaker power now and its people cannot agree to toss that liar out. I am disturbed by his lack of far greater issues on the global platform. Cyber attack’s are borderless. They require no wall nor can military stop them. And then we now have genetic engineering open to all. Kits to play with genetics can be bought on line. Wow that is not cool. Imagine what diseases could be created. Virus attacks may already be out there. Mysterious colds cause some children to loose mobility. Money and energy needs to be used far more intelligently. As for strong religious believers, they need to recognize we live in a new age where more and more wealthy powerful corporations are acting to have god like power thanks to the purchase ability of money. Trump got his most recent wealth from wealthy Russians. He is being played. So are those who believe in him. And

G. B. Miller said...

How conveniently we forgot the role of the Democratic party in all of this nonsense.

I guess, once a tunnel vision shrunken head such as yourself, always a shrunken head.

Welcome to the reality of you cheering on bullies.

Have a great life, and I seriously doubt that you have the spine to approve this comment.

Strayer said...

I don't know what to think anymore. My neighbors been furloughed. My nephew's getting married Sunday to a Brazilian and her parents are up from Brazil for the wedding and went to visit some national parks, all full of trash and filth now. I told my brother to make sure they took a bucket along, for a bathroom. I don't watch news anymore, I can't. I don't know how one would solve the southern border problem. I looked up numbers. 100k to 110k people were apprehended coming across the southern border without papers in October and November alone. Those are the ones caught. They have to be processed and held but cannot be held too long. There isn't enough space, judges or money to hold all these people, so ICE has taken to dumping them at bus stops. There are just so many coming, no way to keep up. I don't know the answer. said...

"He is being played. So are those who believe in him. And"

Did you comment get cut off? I agree with all that you said, but I'm also strongly in favor of keeping illegals from entering the country. I would simply need to see proof that a wall would do it, and I would need to see government employees being paid prior to any discussion.

"How conveniently we forgot the role of the Democratic party in all of this nonsense."

The role of the Democrats has been that been to say that to refuse to give government employees their paychecks has nothing to do with border security and amounts to holding the nation hostage. What sense does it make for you to say that you so value border security that you're unwilling to pay either the government employees who have nothing to do with providing it or the government employees whose job it is to provide it? Starting with Newt Gingrich, the Republican Party has become ever more hardcore, ever more willing to say, "It's our way or the highway." This is what counts as strength among Republicans.

"Welcome to the reality of you cheering on bullies."

Anyone who refuses to pay $25-billion for a wall that can be cut through, climbed over, or tunneled under is a bully? WHY are you so in love with walls? I think Pelosi was right when she said, “It's like a manhood thing for him. As if manhood could ever be associated with him."

"I seriously doubt that you have the spine to approve this comment."

You sure set yourself up for being proved wrong about that! I'm actually happy for your comment because it well represents the mentality of your party.

"There are just so many coming, no way to keep up. I don't know the answer."

I don't know the answer either, but whatever the answer is, it has nothing to do with giving people their paychecks, and I would point out that the only evidence for a wall's effectiveness is negative evidence (Google "cut through border wall"). To repeatedly say "give us what we want, or we won't pay government employees the money they've earned" is the antithesis of democracy, and since it is the Republican Party that does it, this makes the Republican Party itself the antithesis of democracy. Yet, a previous commenter referred to those who won't give in to bullying tactics as bullies. Truly, his is an Orwellian world, by which I mean a world in which war is peace, oppression is freedom, and so forth. What I see--and all I see--in the Republican Party is a coalition of people who lack the ability to reason or draw fact-based conclusions. They love Trump more than Jesus; listen to Fox "News" all day (and actually believe what it says); have a masochistic love for, and trust in, the wealthy; scorn the environment; have no respect for the human rights of anyone but themselves; couldn't care less about fiscal responsibility; and propose simplistic answers to complex problems. said...

Jody, I put a photo of a prototype border wall (that had been cut through) at the top of the post. The fact that a wall can be cut through (or otherwise bypassed) doesn't prove that it would be useless, but it does suggest that it's not the panacea that Trump represents it to be.

Unlike you, I do listen to the news (NPR, OBP, CBS, NBC, and ABC), but I rarely listen to Trump because his every pronouncement amounts to a campaign speech that is filled with lies and only appeals to his base.

Marion said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Snowbrush said...

"Obummer spent over $114 MILLION on vacations."

Obummer? God, Marion, if not for Fox-speak, you would be at a loss for words (does Sean Hannity still offer vegetarian callers a "free meal" at Ruth's Chris Steak House?).

As does Trump and other Republican leaders, you try to deflect every criticism with an attack, but I'll nonetheless respond to your points. First, as to who spent more on vacations, I would refer you to (or do you consider Snopes to be "fake news"?). As to Trump not drawing his salary, this multi-billionaire who puts other men--and women--at risk of being maimed or killed in pointless wars, complained bitterly when he took office that the job of president should cost him a penny. As it turned out, he has used it to further enrichen himself and his family, so I'm not impressed by his willingness to donate his $400,000 salary to charity. For one thing, it appears to be the only money he ever did donate to charity (having used his foundation for private ends, little things, you know, like a $10,000 painting of himself. For another, his vacations to Mar Lago alone costs far more than the office of presidency pays ( However, I would argue that presidents should pay for theri own vacations. By the way, did you mean to imply that it would be okay with you if Trump (and Congress) did draw his salary even while depriving other people of their's? As Jesus put it: "They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them."

Strayer said...

Yes, a barrier slows some down but certainly doesn't stop completely and is probably very difficult, in areas, for example along the Rio Grande, which rises and falls like any river. And through cities. Also rarely mentioned is the taking of privately owned land to build the wall through imminent domain. Our TSA workers do not get much money to begin with. I do not know how they are surviving but I doubt many government workers can hold out much longer. My neighbor among them. She works for the USDA, Farm Bureau division.

Marion said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
PhilipH said...

Trumps wall. What a frigging joke! He assured his loony followers that Mexico would foot the bill. Another idiotic proclamation from the biggest braggart of all time.

I think he must have a death wish. Vain old fart that he is.

Snowbrush said...

"Also rarely mentioned is the taking of privately owned land to build the wall through imminent domain."

And then there's the question of animal migration patterns, and the fact that, aside from building a few prototypes, all of which were easily breached, there's no evidence that a wall would work. Even people who live on the border and watch illegals crossing their property every night aren't of one mind about the advisability of a wall. You might also be aware that, until recently, Trump insisted that a wall actually be a wall and that it be built of concrete. Now, he's saying that a "steel barrier" would do; he doesn't care what it's called; and he's backed off on Mexico paying for it. Strayer, since you don't listen to the news, I'll mention that Trump's current demand for $5.7-million wouldn't begin to pay for the whole shebang. He would have to wait until the next time the budget came up, and shut the government down again in the hope of getting more money. To give in to this kind of tactic means the abandonment of democracy--it never works to reward a bully. Not that it matters, but I don't want open borders, and I can't imagine that any reasonable person would, but I don't care who shut the government down it or why they shut it down, I would never under any circumstances favor what Trump is doing.

Our TSA workers do not get much money to begin with.

I wish they would all stay home because they're not getting paid anyway, and staying home would surely end this shutdown sooner. Peggy is flying to Mississippi on Saturday, and we have no idea if she will be able to get there, or if she does get there, if she will be able to get back.

Snowbrush said...

"I know not the person of which you speak."

You consistently use the kind of slurs that are common to Fox (and without Fox, there would be no Trump) and that Fox commentators substitute for evidence and reason. Sean Hannity is probably Fox's best known commentator having taken the number one spot from Rush Limbaugh.

"I do not watch any news channel. I like Science Fiction, mainly on Netflix"

Well Marion, I frankly don't believe you because you get your beliefs about such things as how much "Obummer" spent on vacations from someplace, plus you consistently use Fox-speak, by which I mean twisting words into insults by adding, rearranging, or subtracting letters.

"Socialism has no place in a Capitalist country"

Do you understand that if you are seriously and consistently advocating a complete end to all socialistic measures, you are by definition a laissez faire capitalist, which means that you favor the abolishment of taxes and an end to funding for the military, police, public utilities, highway departments, pubic libraries, consumer protections, banking regulation, environmental protection, children's services, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, fire departments, and other social programs whereby everyone is taxed for the benefit of those who either need help today or might need help tomorrow. The closest this country came to laissez faire capitalism occurred prior to the Great Depression and resulted in that Depression. Even then, even at a time when unemployment hit 25% and people were on the verge of starvation, the pure market capitalists favored doing absolutely nothing to help anyone because to do otherwise would have been socialism, and they agreed with you in saying that socialism has no place in a capitalist country. Even today, I know people who cash their Social Security checks on their way to their Medicare-paid physician, all the while saying that they could never vote for a Democrat because Democrats are socialists, and they hate socialism. The fact is that Republicans are socialists too, the difference being that the people whom the Republicans are in favor of helping aren't the poor or the middle class but the rich.

Snowbrush said...

"He assured his loony followers that Mexico would foot the bill."

Trump is an anti-intellectual. He has no use for advisors, no use for evidence, and no use for reason. He instead "trusts his instincts," and his followers are fine with this because, like Trump, they think that, while an education might be fine for people like medical doctors, when it comes to running the country, knowledge and experience are a liability. They would argue that you, I, or any other non-socialist with common sense could do it, although it bothers me that they look at Trump and imagine that he has common sense. It's really quite amazing to have a third of the country worshiping the ground that Trump walks on, and the other two-thirds thinking that he is an obvious and unmitigated disgrace. Among those whose paychecks he is holding hostage--with my last commenter's blessing it would appear since it's not her money that's being withheld--are the people whose job it is to protect him. I refer to the Secret Service, people who surround Trump with guns all day everyday. It's tempting to hope that one of them will shoot him, but as to whether it would be for the good of the country, I don't know, one reason being that death tends to soften a person's image, and the man who would take his place isn't anything to brag about either (although he at least appears to be sane). Surely, though, it has to cross the minds of these Secret Service agents that the bastard in front of them is responsible for them not getting their last two paychecks for no reason whatsoever other than that he's in a snit.

Snowbrush said...

"I think he must have a death wish."

I think it more likely that he thinks he's invincible. I heard him being interviewed a month or so ago, and he was asked if, upon looking back at his first two years in the presidency, he had any regrets. He said, that, yes, he regretted the way that the "fake news" and the Democrats had treated him. When the interviewer said that her question pertained to regrets regarding things that HE had done, all he could come up with was to say that he regretted that, in his first few months in office, he had listened to his advisors as much as he had. Such is the man's ego. Like Hitler, Mussolini, and other dictators and would-be dictators, Trump trusts himself without limit, and while that approach can work for a while, the result is that everyone who works for him realizes that their jobs are dependent upon saying whatever it is that he wants them to say, and it's also true that politically fatal mistakes will eventually be made, plus living as he does puts a very low limit upon his ability to learn and grow. In fact, I think it might be all but impossible for Trump to learn and grow. Millions of Americans live in terror of what he might do if and when his presidency falls down around him. It makes one's head swim just trying to keep up with all his associates who have either resigned under suspicion of having committed felonies, or confessed to committing felonies, or been found guilty of having committed felonies. How many felons do you have in your inner circle? My point is that when this "Russia Investigation" comes to an end and the results have been announced, Trump is going to be exposed for the crook that he is. In preparation for that day, he has been stacking the federal courts with judges who--though condemned as unfit by the American Bar Association--will do everything they can to keep the investigation's findings a secret. If they succeed, we will have reached the day when our president has openly succeeded in putting himself above the law. I'm not speaking hyperbolically when I compare Trump to men like Mussolini, the question not being whether he is truly that evil, but whether he will succeed. I'm encouraged thus far that he hasn't gained more power than he already has, but two years is a long time, and there are millions of people who believe him when he says, "I alone can fix it," IT being whatever his followers disapprove of--a free and open press for example. He has actually said that it should be against the law to say unflattering things about him. Why this doesn't bother people like Marion and G.B. Miller, I can't imagine. I used to think that people across the political spectrum had faith in the safeguards that our founding fathers instilled in our system of government, so imagine my horror when I learned that millions are ready to discard them all and put their trust in this one horribly flawed man, their belief being that only he can make them safe.

Marion said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Snowbrush said...

"I fucking HATE NEWS CHANNELS & do not watch them. Why would I lie about that?"

Marion, I don't recall saying that you necessarily WATCHED news channels (although you said that I did, which I don't because I don't get cable), but you did say two things that led me to suspect you of lying. One was that you have no idea who Sean Hannity is, Hannity being someone who is on the radio for three hours a day, on TV for a couple of hours each night (or was last I heard), and whose influence is so great that he is regularly mentioned in all kinds of places. No matter where on the political spectrum one stands, to not know who Hannity is would be to live with one's head in a hole, and you obviously don't do that. The other was that you said that you don't watch the news, but you do watch science fiction. Because we were talking about news sources, I took this to mean that you get no news from any source, but if that were true, you wouldn't have so much misinformation because it doesn't come from science fiction, and if it did, how stupid would you have to be to quote it as fact! Well, where, then, does wrong political information tend to come from? It tends to come from Fox (as do the cutisms you're so fond of), which spreads it 24/7 both on the radio, the TV, and the internet. Fox listeners/viewers are like Moonies in that they all sound alike. As for why you might lie (if you were to lie--I can't swear that you did), I don't know. Maybe you're passive aggressive. I just know that, despite your protests, I see no evidence that you do think for yourself because of your use of shallow and insulting Fox-like cutisms (Obummer being the latest); your seeming inability to verify the statements you make; and such absurdities as complaining about a past president's (who you hated) vacation expenses while ignoring our current president's (who you adore) far greater expenses.

Back when I was more moderate than I am now (nothing radicalizes the other side as effectively as someone like Trump), I listened to Fox radio for hours a day, and I would get so mad that I would contact the "liberals" they did segments on. When I learned from those people that Fox would only take a part of a story and blow it out of all proportion (for instance, they would report a story about a "liberal" retirement complex not allowing an aged veteran to fly his American flag, but they wouldn't mention that his flag was box car size and would obstruct the view of his neighbors) presumably in order to sell advertising, I lost faith in Fox because of that, and also because Fox commentators regularly ridiculed, talked over, or severed the phone connection with anyone who disagreed with them. Fox is as dishonest and bullying as is Trump, and if not for Fox, Trump surely wouldn't be president because Fox created the anger and disseminated the false information that led people to vote for Trump. It's so easy to verify/de-verify Fox's stories, but if one is convinced that Trump is right when he says that, except for Fox, the whole world is lying about him and his party, then that person will see no need to do so. For instance, I have no reason to think that you even looked at the Snopes link I gave you. Perhaps, you don't even know that Snopes isn't a liberal website but a widely respected debunking site, the existence of which depends upon its credibility.

I awakened today to the news that Roger Stone (yet another of Trump's inner circle had been arrested). Marion, does the thought not occur to you that if a president surrounds himself with undesirables, that, just maybe, he too is a crook; and how do you feel about the shutdown anyway? If Trump keeps his word about extending it for years (which would effectively end our form of government), would you be okay with that?

Snowbrush said...

For the Australians and Brits who make up much of my active readership, I should say that Trump, despite promises that he wouldn't do so if Congress didn't accede to his demand for wall funding, agreed today to reopen the government, but only for three weeks. After three weeks, if he doesn't get Congressional approval for at least partial payment for his wall (he has been asking for $5.7-billion of a likely $25-billion total cost), he will either shut down the government again, or he will declare a "national emergency." If does the latter, and if it survives a certain challenge in the courts, he will be able to take money from other things to build his wall. In the unlikely event that Congress does approve at least partial wall funding, he can still shut down the government again in September (either for wall money, or for something else that he can't get in some other way) when another budget approval comes up. Shutdowns are nothing more or less than attempts to bypass the Democratic process by forcing the opposition party to do one's bidding.

Elephant's Child said...

I saw that he had agreed to a (very) temporary reopening. And wonder when he will next take hostages, and over what issue.

Snowbrush said...

"wonder when he will next take hostages, and over what issue"

If he gets partial payment for his wall now, he can shut the government down again in September for another payment. I listened to a radio program in which Republicans were asked how they felt about the recent shutdown, and they all responded that, "It was a small price to pay." They didn't explore the morality of beating some people into line by withholding other people's rightful earnings, and if they knew about the $11-billion cost, they didn't see fit to bring it up. The question now is whether he will shut the government down yet again in three weeks. The Democrats are talking of creating a law to forbid these shutdowns, but I have no idea if the Republicans would support it.

Starshine Twinkletoes said...

Great piece dear, I know pa read it and was blown away by how eloquent and sharp you are (yet again).

Obummer. Good grief. If people don't want to address the points made and can only manage to try and reflect with the old 'but what about you/him/her/they' for heaven's sake they should at least have the courtesy to look up if their comebacks are actually true. Otherwise, it's wasting time none of us have. You are superbly patient as ever, sending love your way sweetie X

Snowbrush said...

"Great piece dear, I know pa read it"

In his first or second letter to me, he expressed admiration for Trump's inauguration festivities, but, since I didn't know him well, I didn't tell him that my own feeling regarding it all was one of mortification for how much it cost combined with anger over Trump's easily provable lie that the crowd was the biggest in history.

"You are superbly patient as ever..."

Thank you. I often don't feel patient, but I at least try to remain evidence-based, so when someone refuses to look at my evidence or provide evidence for her own beliefs, I get the feeling that we're talking past one another rather than communicating with one another.

Marion chastised me at one point for complaining about Trump, saying that she didn't complain about Obama, but instead bided her time and voted his party out. Well, I too despised Obama, but if I didn't complain about him, it was simply because I didn't regard him as an existential danger to the nation. I have no idea if you've heard of Fox News (except from me), but Fox is the power behind the Republican Party (which makes Marion's claim that she has never heard of Fox's major commentator suspect), and it hardly knew what to do when the Republicans took control of both houses of Congress plus the presidency, yet the policies that Fox supported STILL weren't being implemented because the people it helped to elect couldn't agree among themselves. Fox soon decided to go back to attacking its detractors even if they were no longer in power. This is just what Fox and the Republican Party do, by which I mean waging childish attacks 24/7, referring to Obama as Obummer, Elizabeth Warren as Pocahontas, and, of course, Hilary Clinton as Crooked Hilary, although doing so robs both Fox and the Republican Party of all credibility. For example, Trump is to make his "State of the Union" speech later today in which he plans to blame the Democrats for all of the nation's woes even while calling for an end to partisanship, his definition of partisanship being anyone who dares to oppose anything he wants, in this case, his goddamn border wall. He put the nation in a partial shutdown for more than a month over that wall, and now he's threatening to do it again, although I can't imagine that even he is THAT stupid. More likely, he will try to build the wall by taking money from other things, an act that will no doubt end up in court, in which case it's anyone's guess which side will prevail. Peggy visited her father last week, and he said that he can't understand why people hate Trump so, not knowing that his own daughter wants to see Trump dead. What a wonder that people would elect such an obnoxious and alienating man to the presidency, and then express wonder that the other sides hates him. The last president that I respected was Gerald Ford, but I never imagined that I would hate a president so that I would have fantasies of killing him.

Starshine Twinkletoes said...

Pa has changed his tune these days and that is in no small part due to reading what you've written. We know all about the evil that is Fox, one of our main newspapers works in just the same way. Fox has much more control over your way though and is a foul manipulator.