#228 Post Revenge Revolution: Lessons Learned — Presidential Physical, Mental Exams (Part 4)

27 Sunday Nov 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Lessons of Revolution, Societal Issues

First-time readers, the dialogue in this blog is set in the future (sometime after the year 2020). Each entry assumes there has been a 5th revolution in the US — the Revenge Revolution. More about Revenge Revolution and author, Entry #1. List and general description of entries to date. Annual assessment whether Revolution plausible.

Note: most characters appear in a number of entries, with many entries building on previous conversations. Profile of characters. You’ll catch on quickly. Thanks for your time and interest…and comments.

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC, start of work day. (Conversation starts Entry #225)

Gelly: “Jordan, could we hold off the discussion about lessons learned re economic policy decisions and the Revenge Revolution?

Jordan: “Sure, but why?”

Gelly: “Something about presidential elections has bothered me for a long time.”

Jordan: “Such as?”

Gelly: “Why aren’t presidential candidates subject to an impartial, rigorous physical exam…and mental exam? I mean. Given the responsibilities of the president you’d think…”

Jordan: “…excuse me but let me back up. Did you say presidential candidates should be subject to a rigorous physical and mental exam?”

Gelly: “Yes, and here’s why.”

Jordan: “But there’s already a provision in the Constitution to address your concern. If something happens to the president, the vice president takes over.”

Gelly: “I understand. If the president dies, there is a clear line of succession. A dead president makes it easy. I think everyone supports the VP as successor.”

Jordan: “Then what is the issue?”

Gelly: “Really, the issue is when the president is not dead but mentally incapacitated. There are no clear rules so the line of succession does not necessarily apply.”

Jordan: “You have an example?”

Gelly: “Ronald Reagan, toward the end of the second term…and probably earlier…showed signs of Alzheimer’s. Nancy Reagan tried to mask the problem. And credit to her, I think she did a good job.”

Jordan: “You’re getting on thin ice discussing mental acuity. How are you…rather how are we the public…going to measure mental acuity?”

Gelly: “You know I’m not a psychiatrist or any kind of medical doctor. But there must be some tests for early-stage dementia — Alzheimer’s or whatever.”

Jordan: “Reagan was president in the 1980’s. Your example is what more than 30 years ago?”

Gelly: “We have a more recent case…at least I think so.”

Jordan: “If I do a quick review of presidents since Reagan, the only one who seems to qualify as one of your ‘dementia candidates’ is Donald Trump.”

Gelly: “You’re right. And here’s my logic. First, his father, Fred Trump, had Alzheimer’s. I read that in his obituary in the NY Times. (trump-fred-obituary-nyt) Not sure if Trump’s mother had Alzheimer’s.”

Jordan: “From what I’ve read, the chances of having Alzheimer’s are greater if one parent has Alzheimer’s. Even higher likelihood with two. But still, even with two parents that’s not a guarantee. What else?”

Gelly: “Look at his pattern of behavior – before the campaign, during the campaign and after becoming president. Each period he exhibited an inability or unwillingness to concentrate and/or study.”

Jordan: “C’mon, a number of people have trouble concentrating or studying.”

Gelly: “True. But those people are not running for president…or elected president.”

Jordan: “What are you basing your conclusion on?”

Gelly: “To me the most striking behavior was how Trump’s position on an issue seemed to reflect ideas of the last person he talked to. Trump would proclaim one position then change his position after talking to someone with a different view. Then he might change again after talking to someone else. No one knew which Donald Trump was going to show up. Just listen to some of the White House staffers talk about the chaos that was created by the inconsistency of positions.”

Jordan: “Maybe that behavior is characteristic of a person who changes as he or she studies the issue. What else?”

Gelly: “Jordan, quit being so PC. What was equally scary was his seeming inability to comprehend complex issues. When presented with complex problems, he was like a deer-in-the-headlights – frozen.”

Jordan: “Many of his supporters thought Trump was able to simplify issues that others made complicated.”

Gelly: “People who thought that way either didn’t understand reality or didn’t want to face facts about Trump’s mental capacity.”

Jordan: “What else?”

Gelly: “Trump could not stand any criticism…so thin-skinned. Complex issues could not be openly discussed and decided because the ‘decider-in-chief’ relied on either ‘gut feel’ or the last person’s opinion rather than objective analysis. When someone challenged Trump’s opinion, he would often act like a bully, openly humiliating the person…sometimes even on Twitter. You cannot run an organization like that, let alone a country.”

Jordan: “Maybe his management style was bad but do you think that behavior is a symptom of dementia?”

Gelly: “What I know is this. The kind of behavior Trump exhibited…not just once but consistently over time…put the US and many countries at great risk. The behavior seemed to be outside the bounds of what I’ve read most psychiatrists consider ‘normal,’ with ‘normal’ constituting a very wide band.”

Jordan: “Well, there’s little doubt that some of his erratic behavior contributed to the Revenge Revolution. Not the only cause, obviously, but certainly a major factor. Is the lesson that we should take away — presidential candidates need to receive a thorough and objective physical and mental exam?”

Gelly: “Yes. Ideally the exam would be private and before the candidate made any public announcement. So if the exam suggested potential problems, the candidate could consider not announcing.”

Jordan: “Gelly, your idea is thought-provoking. A great next step would be to get people talking about the mental health of the president. Won’t be easy but it might catch hold. Now, can we get back to lessons learned from economic policy decisions?”

To be continued)

#227 Post Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 3)

19 Saturday Nov 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Causes of the Revolution, Lessons of Revolution, Stupid Is as Stupid Does

≈ Leave a comment

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC, start of work day. (Conversation starts Entry #225))

Gelly: “Jordan, what was that word you just used? Some kind of ‘tocracy’?”

Jordan: “Kasistocracy. Means government run by unsuitable people or a government that is unsuitable.”

Gelly: “Are you suggesting the Trump Administration was a…say that word again.”

Jordan: “Kas-is-toc-racy.”

Gelly: “Yes, the Trump Administration was a kasistocracy. Is that what you you’re implying?”

Jordan: “That’s not just my assessment. Many people in the US feel that way as do many US allies.”

Gelly: “I admit many actions by the Trump Administration at the beginning were a bit unusual.”

Jordan: “Gelly, you’ve gone from being blunt a few minutes ago to being Ms. Diplomat. You think the actions were just ‘a bit unusual’?”

Gelly: “OK, I’ll be less PC. The actions, starting with the Trump Transition Team, were stupid.”

Jordan: “Now, at least Trump is getting the same treatment I get from you and JC.”

Gelly: “Whoever was advising Trump, and likely Trump himself, had no clue about the breadth and depth of the task that needed to be done before Inauguration Day.”

Jordan: “The turnover of staff made it worse. The coup de gras…maybe the coup de gras of stupidity…was the VP-elect Mike Pence, who was supposed to be heading the transition team full-time, deciding to remain governor of Indiana until just before Inauguration Day.”

Gelly: “Pence deserved the ‘Stupid Is as Stupid Does’ award for that move. He reminded me Goofy. What was he thinking?”

Jordan: “Unfortunately, the Trump Administration dug itself a hole so deep before Inauguration Day it was never able to recover. It’s not as if the Obama Administration and others inside the Beltway didn’t try to help. Most of the people and many of the ideas were just ignored. Instead, I think most of the appointments were more like Trump lap dogs.”

Gelly: “The Trump kasistocracy…I love that word…increased frustration among voters, especially those who thought Trump was going to change Washington in a good way. So voter frustration increased…and voila, the Revenge Revolution…and Trump was fired.”

Jordan: “What’s the lesson from the Trump Administration so a kasistocracy does not happen again?”

Gelly: “Maybe the US needs to drop the Electoral College and go to a system where the presidential candidate with the majority of votes is declared the winner.”

Jordan: “Think that would prevent a kasistocracy?”

Gelly: “I don’t know. But in the span of 16 years there were two presidents elected who did not win the popular vote – Bush 43 and Trump. Do you know the last time that happened before Bush 43?”

Jordan: “As a matter of fact, I do. In 1888, Benjamin Harrison beat Grover Cleveland. It happened a couple of other times before 1888.”

Gelly: “Harrison to Bush 43 was 112 years. Then Bush to Trump was 16 years.”

Jordan: “If presidents were elected based on popular vote, I think that would quell some of the frustration of the side that garners the most votes but ends up losing the election.”

Gelly: “Agreed. However, I’ll bet people could live with the Electoral College if the quality of the candidates improved.”

Jordan: “The lesson might really be – improve the quality of the candidates. If so, then how?”

Gelly: “This might sound naïve but educating the public about issues would be a great start.”

Jordan: “As part of that plan, what about eliminating private funding of presidential elections? Let the Federal government fund presidential elections.”

Gelly: “Wouldn’t public funding be contrary to the Citizens United case?”

Jordan: “Yes, but we are post Revenge Revolution and have a new Congress…well, mostly new. Let Congress pass a bill to have the Federal government fund presidential elections. I can’t think of any Constitutional issues that can’t be addressed.”

Gelly: “If there is Federal funding, there should be an increase in the number of debates. And the debates should be about real issues. If public debates were increased and public advertising decreased, then the candidates could speak in more depth about issues. If they phrased an answer awkwardly or even made a mistake, they could correct the mistake in a subsequent debate. A minor slip now gets blown way out of proportion.”

Jordan: “Along those lines but a bit more esoteric, is the need to eliminate false equivalency.”

Gelly: “False equivalency meaning…”

Jordan: “When groups, and even the media, claim that two opposing positions on an issue should be considered equally legitimate.”

Gelly: “You mean like global warming?”

Jordan: “Good example. And like certain tax policies. There are other examples as well.”

Gelly: “What needs to be done to eliminate, or reduce, false equivalency?”

Jordan: “Both sides need to be challenged to provide evidence to support their position.”

Gelly: “So, for global warming the people who claim global warming has been caused by the effects of the industrial revolution, or at least made worse by the Industrial Revolution, they could use such data as the rate of increase in mean temperature per year over the last 125-150 years and/or the slope of CO2 concentration over the same period. The increase in the slope of both those curves indicates a major change has occurred.”

Jordan: “Compare that data set to those who claim global warming is a hoax perpetuated by 3,000+ scientists, a hoax by the Chinese or some other sinister group. Where are the data to support the argument? None exists.”

Gelly: “So you’re saying why should the naysayers get any airtime until they have some evidence, right?”

Jordan: “The naysayers can get airtime but the media need to be relentless in prodding the quacks to provide evidence. No allowing midnight tweets, including the president’s tweets, to be considered credible evidence.”

Gelly: “OK, then what about tax policy? Deciding which arguments about appropriate tax policy seems less clear.”

Jordan: “I agree that there is no hard evidence on some issues. But for other issues there are lots of solid data.”

Gelly: “Such as?”

Jordan: “Take trickle-down economics, or as Bush 41 called it, ‘voodoo economics.’ Bush 41 was spot on. There is no credible evidence of any country experiencing sustained economic growth based on trickle-down economics. Concentrating tax cuts with the rich does not trickle down and create significant job growth. Tax cuts for the rich concentrates wealth and can make the country poorer, not richer.”

Gelly: “Really? There’s no supporting evidence for trickle-down economics?”

Jordan: “Think about the theory? Give more money to the rich and they will magically create jobs. Why would they? No reasonable company or CEO is going to expand a facility or build a new facility without the prospect of an increase in demand. People need more income if they’re going to increase demand for goods and services. The only time trickle-down economics works — ‘build it and they will come’ — is in the movie, ‘Field of Dreams.’”

Gelly: “You need to tell me more. This is an important lesson.”

Jordan: “Let’s take a break but remember the letters MPC.”

(To be continued)

#226 Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 2)

14 Monday Nov 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Causes of the Revolution, Lessons of Revolution

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Lessons of Revolution

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC, start of work day. (Conversation starts Entry #225)

Gelly: “Jordan, ready to get back to work?”

Jordan: “All set. So far, we’ve discussed two lessons learned from the Revenge Revolution: (i) politicians need to act more rationally, and not act like Larry, Moe and Curley; (ii) people have a right to vote. No more suppressing rights of eligible voters. What’s next on your list of lessons?”

Gelly: “People started to understand the Constitution. That might sound silly but…”

Jordan: “That’s an interesting point. Any examples?”

Gelly: “One that stands out for me is the difference between the perception of the power of the president and the power granted in the Constitution. No question the president has enormous power to make change, but the power is much more limited than many people think…or at least used to think.”

Jordan: “Be more specific, please.”

Gelly: “To me what’s laughable…and in a way tragic…is how many Trump supporters in 2016 kept claiming that if Clinton were elected president, she would somehow overturn the 2^nd Amendment and take away all their toys, I mean guns.”

Jordan: “What was their rationale? How was she going to overturn the 2^nd Amendment?”

Gelly: “That’s the laughable part. I guess she was going to wave some magic wand.”

Jordan: “Like the wicked witch of the West?”

Gelly: “Presidents can’t run around an issue some Executive Order overturning part of the Constitution. Overturning an Amendment is nearly impossible. Did the Trumpsters ever listen in school? They should have learned the fundamentals of the Constitution in 7^th or 8^th grade.”

Jordan: “What else is on your list?”

Gelly: “Let’s stick with Trump. I think he realized…although it was some time after he took office…that the government does not operate like a business, and especially a family controlled business.”

Jordan: “You mean the CEO can’t just go around mandating that money should be spent on this project or to build that wall…or whatever? And do you mean that people in government aren’t just good little soldiers and jump up, salute and carry out the CEO’s orders?”

Gelly: “That realization must have been a shock to his system, and many of his supporters. Didn’t they understand that expenditures for the Federal Government are initiated and passed by the House? Not the White House but the House of Representatives. Clearly, the Donald was not used having someone else decide if, when and how much money could be spent on a particular project.”

Jordan: “Probably the only time someone put him on a tight budget was after he declared bankruptcy and the lenders forced him.”

Gelly: “Here’s another one that must have been a shock to Trump and many supporters. Being president is not the same as being on a TV show. Other than a few direct reports, the president can’t hire or fire anyone. Even many of the direct reports have to be approved by the Senate.”

Jordan: “You think he understood the many of the limitations of the presidency…let’s call them operational limitations?”

Gelly: “He probably had some vague idea but let’s not forget that the Donald had no…as in zero…experience in any key management role other than a family controlled business.”

Jordan: “You’re right. And even very large family controlled organizations are tiny compared to the Federal government. Government is a different game and Federal government is vastly more complicated.”

Gelly: “So the post-Revenge Revolution lesson is a simple one that I think people are starting to understand. The lesson is…”

Jordan: “…let me try. When candidates make bold claims during a campaign, the voting public needs to probe the candidate to understand how and why he or she will be successful in implementing the claim. No more getting away with just arm waving and lots of vague statements.”

Gelly: “Good boy, Jordan. Want a rawhide treat?”

Jordan: “Why do you and JC harass me?”

Gelly: “You’re such an easy target. Seriously, here’s another lesson — economics. Wanna guess what the lesson is?”

Jordan: “Claims for creating jobs, implementing tax cuts, reducing the deficit…and whatever else…make sure the approach is realistic and the numbers add up.”

Gelly: “Exactly. Let’s start with Trump’s claim to bring back manufacturing jobs so the under-employed or unemployed workers in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and elsewhere could work again. I mean really. What a crock.”

Jordan: “C’mon. You’re being too hard on Trump. All politicians shade the truth, a least a bit.”

Gelly: “His claims about reclaiming old-line manufacturing were not little bitty exaggerations but ‘pants-on-fire’ lies. It took a while for the Trumpsters to realize the old-line manufacturing jobs were gone…not just shifted to Mexico or China…but gone forever.”

Jordan: “I agree. The type of jobs in manufacturing are radically different from 20-30 years ago.”

Gelly: “Recently, my younger sister asked me to help chaperone her daughter’s class field trip to an auto assembly plant. I said yes because I thought it might be fun. Besides, it was for my niece.”

Jordan: “And…?”

Gelly: “The assembly plant is a different world from what I remember as a kid when our class visited an assembly plant. Rather than a bunch of people, which is what we saw, now there are a bunch of robots. Robots seemed to being doing most everything. There were some people…but not very many.”

Jordan: “And you know what? The robots don’t take lunch breaks, restroom breaks or vacations, or require healthcare benefits. Plus, using the robots improves consistency and overall quality.”

Gelly: “Has every manufacturing segment replaced people with robots?”

Jordan: “In varying degrees. And the number of robots and capabilities of robots is only going to increase.”

Gelly: “Then where did Trump think the old-line manufacturing people were going to work – making buggies and buggy whips?”

Jordan: “Who knows what he thought? But this we do know. The Trumpsters got very frustrated when the jobs didn’t come back.”

Gelly: “And just like they were a driving force in electing Trump. The old-line manufacturing guys were a driving force in leading the Revenge Revolution.”

Jordan: “Are you saying the Trump Administration was a kakistocracy?”

#225 Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 1)

06 Sunday Nov 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Benefits of Revolution, Causes of the Revolution, Stupid Is as Stupid Does

≈ 5 Comments

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC, start of work day.

Gelly (Jordan’s Assistant): “Good morning, Jordan.”

Jordan: “Morning, Gelly. Anything hot on the schedule this morning?”

Gelly: “Nothing for a while. You got a minute?”

Jordan: “Sure. Let me get a coffee first. (Gelly hands Jordan a coffee.) You’re really good. Thanks. What’s up?”

Gelly: “Don’t know what caused me to think about this but is anyone writing about the benefits of the Revenge Revolution? You know — lessons learned.”

Jordan: “Good question. Greenie is writing a series of articles about the causes. Matt is helping her on a few articles. I guess the answer to your question is, ‘no, not to my knowledge.’”

Gelly: “Well, maybe Greenie and Matt should write a few articles on lessons learned.”

Jordan: “OK, let me be the interviewer. What do you think are the lessons of the Revenge Revolution?”

Gelly: “The most obvious one to me is people have started forcing politicians to act rationally…like the rest of us have to act, or at least most of us. That change in behavior is a big switch.”

Jordan: “Such as…?”

Gelly: “Lots of examples. One that seems very important is Senators are effectively being forced to vote on judicial nominees. No more stonewalling.”

Jordan: “You mean like in 2016 when Larry, Moe and Curly…I mean Senators Burr, McCain and Cruz…threatened to block every judicial nominee if Clinton was elected president.”

Gelly: “Yep. Those guys acted like the Three Stooges. Let me correct my statement. Burr, McCain and Cruz couldn’t hold a candle to the Three Stooges. For the senators, a better description is more like ‘stupid is as stupid does.’”

Jordan: “Why do you think their statement about blocking all judicial nominees…and possibly other nominees…is so bad? The Constitution does not force the Senate to act.”

Gelly: “True. But you cannot have a functioning democracy if one body refuses to act on behalf of the people and only acts for itself. The country cannot operate when elected officials represent only a portion of the populous and, in effect, stab all other voters in the back. That kind of behavior was a cause of the Revenge Revolution. And since the Revolution people have been forcing elected officials to consider the electorate, not just special interests.”

Jordan: “Aren’t you being a bit naïve? There have always been biases and special interests in Congress.”

Gelly: “I agree. However, real people recognize there are different opinions on how to solve problems. Anyone with any brains, and that used to include Congress before the Republicans in Congress in the 1990’s started taking stupid pills, knows that working through a problem with someone else usually results in a better solution.”

Jordan: “What does that have to do with approving judicial nominees?”

Gelly: “Relevant because Larry, Moe and Curly…err, Burr, McCain and Cruz…refused to even consider working with Democrats to find a solution. The BMC boy’s idea of a solution was the proverbial, ‘my way or the highway.’”

Jordan: “But the country experienced the Revenge Revolution and the likes of Burr, McCain and Cruz are now off in the corner with their dunce caps.”

Gelly: “And the BMC boys deserve dunce caps. And eliminating such behavior is one of the lessons that needs to written about.”

Jordan: “Have another lesson of the Revenge Revolution for Greenie to write about?”

Gelly: “Making voting easier.”

Jordan: “Gelly, surely you don’t think Republicans made an effort to suppress voting, do you?”

Gelly: “Your great state, North Carolina…”

Jordan: “…Please, I’m only a visitor to North Carolina. A long-term visitor but visitor, nonetheless.”

Gelly: “…Your state North Carolina was cited by Federal courts twice in about six months for attempting to stop blacks from voting. Both cases were blatant. One judge indicated the state’s efforts were ‘with precision.’ Oh, no, Republicans made no effort to stop blacks from voting.”

Jordan: “Those efforts were to protect the other residents from voter fraud.”

Gelly: “Jordan, either your tongue is planted deep in your cheek or you need to go see a proctologist and have your head put back on the right part of your anatomy.”

Jordan: “She’s so subtle.”

Gelly: “No reason to be subtle. There was no credible evidence of any voter fraud. All the cases claimed by Republicans were proved to be false. People who are US citizens have a right to vote, period. Do these vote fraud-claim yoyo’s ever read the Constitution?”

Jordan: “You’ve come up with two good examples. Let’s chat more after I take a break.”

usrevolution5

~ USA Headed for a 5th Revolution! Why?

Monthly Archives: November 2016

#228 Post Revenge Revolution: Lessons Learned — Presidential Physical, Mental Exams (Part 4)

#227 Post Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 3)

#226 Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 2)

#225 Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 1)