Readers: 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 the Revenge Revolution and author, Entry #1. List and general description of entries to date.
Note: most entries are formatted as conversations. Characters appear in a number of entries, with many entries building on previous conversations. Profile of characters (see link at top of page). You’ll catch on quickly. Thanks for your time and interest…and comments.
Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC. Conversation began Entry #289.
Gr
eenie: “Ready for another idea how to really make America great again?”
JC: “Yep. We could beat to death the idea of federally funded elections. Why don’t we tackle something less controversial?”
Greenie: “You mean like Jordan’s suggestion to bring back conscription?”
JC: “Why not? The alt-right crowd insists that only those who salute the flag, serve in the military and own guns are patriotic. I’m sure the alt-right will support conscription.”
Greenie: “Reinstating conscription should be a slam dunk. I learned that term watching the Final Four. Anyway, think of all the hard-liners who’ve had stellar military careers.”
Jordan: “You mean like Trump, Limbaugh, Hannady, and the former right-wing truthsayer, Bill O’Reilly.”
JC: “What a list of potential endorsers for conscription…except I don’t think any of them served in the military.”
Greenie: “Hold on. Trump went to military school. If you don’t think that was tougher than being in the real military, just ask the Donald…whatever.”
Jordan: “What’s as bad as their military experience is their education. O’Reilly is the only one with any kind of education. Limbaugh and Hannady aren’t even qualified to blow stuff out their you know what.”
Gre
enie: “Jordan, pulleeeze. Be a bit more diplomatic, will you?”
Jordan: “Well, Limbaugh dropped out after one year at some Missouri teacher’s college and Hannady bounced around three different schools and never did graduate.”
JC: “Alright, lets remove tongue from cheek and get serious. What are the benefits of conscription?”
Jordan: “First, let’s be clear. Conscription would allow either military service or non-military service with Federal agencies approved by the Selective Service.”
Greenie: “Just so I understand, you including women?”
JC: “Why not? If combat military service is not required, then why not include women?”
Jordan: “For now, we’ll include both men and women.”
Greenie: “How long do you have to serve?”
Jordan: “Two years…and then some sort of standby reserve in case there’s a crisis. But the reserve wouldn’t require any weekend training or anything like that.”
Greenie: “Eligibility at what age?”
Jordan: “Eligible at 18 but must begin service by say age 26. A person could get a deferment to attend trade school or college but would need to start by age 26.”
JC: “What if a woman got married and had a kid…or just had a kid? Would she still have to serve?”
Greenie: “Now, I’ll ask, ‘Why not?’ She could always service in a non-military capacity. Just giving some people an easy way out doesn’t seem fair.”
JC: “Then what kind of jobs would qualify outside the military?”
Jordan: “Federal agencies that have operations in most parts of the country. Agencies that serve people locally or work with the states to service people locally.”
Greenie: “You mean such as EPA, part of Interior, Education, HUD?”
Jordan: “All those agencies work.”
JC: “What about FEMA?”
Jordan: “FEMA’s a good add.”
Greenie: “Think how much more effective FEMA could be with a staff highly trained to help manage disaster relief.”
Jordan: “Same with EPA. There are lots of areas where an ‘EPA corps’ as it were, could help gather data or fix an issue before it becomes difficult and costly to solve. Just like that old commercial, ‘pay me now or pay me later.’ But later is almost always much more expensive.”
Greenie: “Are all the jobs we’re talking about outdoorsy kind of jobs?”
Jordan: “Not at all. The military has lots of jobs for non-combat personnel…and many are like office jobs.”
JC: “I can hear it now. Some people are going to claim what we’re proposing will be taking away jobs from others. Or worse yet, conscription will interrupt little Johnnie’s or little Susie’s career that mommy and daddy paid so much to prepare them for. How are we going to counter that argument?”
Jordan: “Give mommy and daddy the Bronx cheer. Really, there’s a number key benefits that stem from conscription. Most obvious is helping fix some of the country’s problems that kept getting put off by politics. #2 benefit, being forced to live in a disciplined environment, at least during the ‘basic training’ period; #3, being forced to learn to work with a team. I’m always amazed at how many young adults have never really been forced to work in a team. Even if they end up in a non-military job, everyone who goes through some type of basic training will have a much better understanding of the value of teamwork…and an inkling of how the military works. #4 benefit…”
JC: “…Let me try. #4, forced diversity. Exposure to a wide range of people and backgrounds never hurt anyone. Maybe we, that is societal we, could become a bit more civil if we understood others’ perspectives. Brilliant statement, huh?”
Greenie: “We know what you meant. This idea of conscription is starting to seem obvious but I know better. What about exemptions from serving? You know, exemptions for some serious medical condition…like bone spurs. I mean is everyone going to be forced to serve or will the loopholes be large enough to drive a truck through?”
Jordan: “Clearly, some people will be unable to serve. But the program should start with the assumption that everyone serves and then carve out as few exemptions as possible.”
JC: “You know, the time might be right to reinstitute conscription. Since the Revenge Revolution people seem more willing to explore old and new ways of trying to solve problems.”
Greenie: “I admit, when you first mentioned conscription, I thought, ‘that’s really a stupid idea.’ But, as I said, I’m starting to come around. Good idea, Jordan.”
Jordan: “Glad you think so. The idea of conscription, like the idea of federally funded elections, seems to have a foundation that’s sound and can contribute to really making America great again. But each idea needs a lot more work on the details. And, now, please excuse me. I need a break.”
(Continued)
Greenie: “Jordan, that’s quite a list of ideas about how to make America great again. We’ve got to call this project something else but let’s not spend time on that now. Which item on the list seems like a good place to start?”
JC: “I’m no legal scholar…and no comments please…but it does seem as if there aren’t any real legal barriers. Political barriers, yes, but not legal barriers.”
JC: “Let’s say there’s no major legal issue. Then how should Federal funds be allocated to the candidates?”
Jordan: “Good points. Try this. Presidential elections get the full $10/head funding. Off-year elections get $5/head allocated.”
JC: “Let me try the math. If I remember Ester’s Algebra class, that would be 200X+435X=$1,700,000,000. Using my hand-dandy phone, x equals almost $2.7 million. So Senate races get about $5.4 million and House races about $2.7 million.”
JC: “3rd-party candidates?”
Greenie: “Now, JC, I mean really. What’s a few billion in a trillion-dollar Federal budget – a rounding error? I agree the approach seems expensive until you begin to add up all the hidden costs with today’s approach to funding elections…and all the backroom deals connected to the funding.”
Greenie: “Because funds will be limited, the approach will likely also force candidates to get out on the campaign trail and meet the voters. Maybe we’ll get fewer negative ad blitzes and more time on the campaign trail.”
Greenie: “Oh, you mean like South Carolina’s Mick Mulvaney? What chutzpah. He bragged to a group of bankers that before he became part of the Trump Administration, he only talked to lobbyists who paid him. Wonder if he stopped the practice when he became director of OMB and consumer protection bureau for Trump? Pardon me — that seems like a rhetorical question.”
Greenie: “He retired from the House. I guess you call it retired if not seeking in November 2018 qualifies as retiring.”
JC: “C’mon, you love it. Now what’s the idea?”
Greenie: “Let’s keep in mind the past does provide some guidance to the future. You do agree with that, don’t you, Jordan?”
Jordan: “For one, Greenie’s articles about the Revenge Revolution. We might have more understanding about the causes of the Revenge Revolution than anyone in Congress, especially incoming members or staffers.”
(Following is the list from the brainstorming session about how to really make America great again. Over the coming blog entries, a number of these ideas will be discussed in more detail.)
Greenie: “You got it.”
JC: “We were trying to be more diplomatic post revolution. Won’t laying out the bare facts open old wounds?”
Jordan: “Greenie, you know better than I, but isn’t crafting an objective article oftentimes more difficult than say a pure opinion piece?”
Greenie: “Good question. Why? If the article is about lack of Republican leadership in the House and Senate, why hold back? Mitch McConnell did the country a major disservice by not squashing some of the cabinet nominees.”
Greenie: “The guy had been awarded some medal by the Russians. Look, I have no qualms about the head of ExxonMobil, or another oil company, working with the Russians. But don’t take the guy and put him in as Secretary of State. At State, he needs to protect American interests and not be concerned about personal or company interests. Making him Secretary created an immediate and obvious conflict.”
JC: “DeVos to be head of Department of Education was another lightweight. During the Senate hearings, Betsy, bless her little heart, couldn’t answer the most fundamental questions about how the education system works.”
Greenie: “But McConnell didn’t tell Trump. So Trump took the upper hand, berated McConnell publicly and McConnell shrank like a violet. In the process, McConnell became an enabler for Trump’s wacko behavior.”
Greenie: “The Speaker of the House appoints many of the committee chairs. Ryan could have gotten Nunes replaced with someone willing to pursue the investigation. It’s possible…and we need to check this for the article…it’s possible Ryan could have appointed Adam Schiff, a Democrat to lead the investigation.”
“OK with me. Anything in particular they want to talk about?”
Jordan: “Evangelicals must not have thought having multiple affairs constituted adultery. C’mon, only one of those affairs, as far as we know, was with a high-profile porn star. What’s the issue?”
Greenie: “Jordan, see what we mean? Repeated adultery, constant lying, publicly ridiculing people who had sacrificed a lot to work in his administration, mistreatment of women…and on and on. Yet, the evangelicals kept supporting him. Why?”
Greenie: “Good old Lincoln came to mind. And one of his famous quotes.”
Jordan: “But why do you think evangelicals were so easily fooled?”
JC: “Have you ever heard evangelicals question the fundamental tenets of Christianity?”
Jordan: “It’s as if the group was brainwashed.”
Jordan: “Let’s not forget evangelicals believing the absolute truths of the religious leaders of Fox News. OK, now how do you intend to write-up this politically incorrect analysis?”
Gelly: “Jordan, you have a call from a guy named Willie. Want to take it or should I…”
Willie: “Your voice mail said you wanted to talk about crypto-currency.”
Jordan: “In a way, the crypto-currencies remind me of the US prior to the creation of the Federal Reserve. Lots of variation in value and no one quite sure who’s in charge?”
Willie: “Another good question. A lot of the so-called crypto-currencies vanished early on. Some never got any momentum and some were never issued even after investor funds were taken.”
Willie: “A couple of crypto-currencies were backed by some assets. One was even backed by gold, but most were backed by nothing.”
Jordan: “While true that governments might have gone off the gold standard, governments do have assets…and a way to generate revenue. Governments can collect taxes. Save one or two, crypto-currencies had no assets and none had authority to collect taxes.”
Jordan: “Over the years you’ve dealt with the Federal Reserve. How did they view crypto-currency?”
Willie: “Two primary roles of the Federal Reserve are managing monetary policy and controlling the banking system. The already difficult job of managing monetary policy became much more difficult with the alternative-currency universe.”
Willie: “Most people did not fully appreciate how crypto-currencies forced the Fed’s hand. Crypto-currencies took a bigger and bigger slide out of the Fed’s monetary pie. In order to achieve the same result as before crypto-currencies, the Fed was forced to exaggerate changes in interest rates, both up and down. The exaggeration also affected Wall Street. As a result, the Fed was unhappy, Wall Street was unhappy, many investors were unhappy and the general public was unhappy.”
Willie: “Federal revenue. While the Fed is not responsible for collecting taxes, in order to manage monetary policy, the Fed needs to have a good idea of sources and uses of Federal funds.”
JC: “Grande, medium roast.”
JC: “And, so what?”
Sandy: “Hi, Jordan. If I recall, it’s JC, right?”
Sandy: “Sure you did. You wanted to ban the sale of all assault weapons…and even make owning one illegal.”
JC: “You’re right. I don’t understand. The assault ban still allowed ownership of all kinds of hunting rifles, shotguns, pistols. I’m not a hunter but why would you need an assault rifle to kill a deer? Where’s the sport in that? Maybe we should arm the deer. That would make it more fun.”
Sandy: “So why have a ban on owning assault weapons?”
First, it appears more and more people are realizing what the military and gun enthusiasts have known for some time – the AR-15 is not a sport rifle, is not a hunting rifle but is an assault weapon designed for killing as many people as possible in as short a time as possible.
Why such a harsh recommendation? First and foremost, these type weapons are not needed outside the military. For those who insist on firearms to protect self and/or property, hunting rifles, shotguns and pistols are more than adequate. For hunters, using AR-15’s is hardly sport, even if hunting elephants, lions, tigers or bears, which you shouldn’t be doing anyway.
Banning assault weapons is not unprecedented. Beginning in 1994 Federal law banned the sales of newly manufactured assault weapons. Former presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan, wrote to the U.S. House of Representatives in support of banning “semi-automatic assault guns”. The law passed with bi-partisan support. Congress let the law expire in 2004.
ll not be infringed.”
In that context, the Second Amendment seems perfectly logical. Guys, get it? The regular citizens of the country made up the military when the Constitution was written. And, if you’re a strict “Constitutionalist” and interpret the Constitution as originally written, the weapons were single-shot flint locks, not AR-15’s.
Get serious conservatives. If you understood government, you might realize that you already live in a country where the government allows you basic rights. That piece of property you think you own? Your right to ownership is a function of government. The freedom to travel? That freedom is a function of government. Hate to burst your conservative bubble, but the freedoms that you have are because the government lets you have those freedoms.
I hope these students ask their grandparents to coach them about how the grandparent protested the Vietnam War. Then the kids can go to Washington, march in front of the White House and chant, “Hey, hey, Donald J! How many kids did you kill today?”
Then came the week of February 12, 2018. The week started with some people celebrating the birth of a truly great president…Abraham Lincoln. The rest of the week, however, was mind-numbing blur of events…at least mind-numbing by pre-Trump standards.
The week ended with indictments of 13 Russians and a couple of Russian-run companies for meddling in the 2016 elections. So when the indictments were announced, how did the White House respond? Praise for the Justice Department? Condemnation of Russian interference in the elections? Nope. Only a claim there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians since the indictments indicated the meddling started before Trump formally declared his candidacy.
The Donald and his incompetents club are not close to being off the hook. Truth is Mueller didn’t exonerate Trump but tightened the noose a notch or two.
So what’s most disappointing then is the behavior of Republicans in Congress. And if you’re a hard-core Republican reading this, please no attempted counters that the Democrats are at fault. Pal, Republicans control the House, Senate and the White House. What more do you want? Yet, the Republicans seem clueless…and have stopped thinking. Did Trump suck out your brains so you can no longer think…and then take your morals along with the brains?
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan was talking out of his you-know-what, babbling incoherently about the usual Republican talking points – enforce the gun laws on the books, help the mentally ill and oh, yes, the Second Amendment is sacred. Oops, I almost forgot, we need to pray for the families of the people killed. While not next in line, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell repeated the meaningless drivel.
Guns are designed for one purpose…and one purpose only – to kill. What’s more, weapons designed for the military – AR-15-like weapons – are designed to kills lots of people quickly.
don’t hold water. As awful and frightful as this sounds…and it is…I could go to a gun show and buy weapons that allow me to shoot down a commercial airliner. What’s even worse, at most major airports I could position myself outside the perimeter of airport security and still be able to take down the airliner. Scary isn’t it.
Trump: “The list is tremendous…very long, very long. For one thing employment is higher than it’s ever been. Just look at all the new employees we’ve added this past year. Tremendous, right?”
Board Member: “So you want to compare the number of employees added this past year to employment say 20-30 years ago when the company was much smaller. Did I understand you correctly?”
Board Member: “Is it true you had an affair with an adult film star?”
Board Member: “Like I said, Mr. Trump, could you please explain your relationship with Deutsche Bank?”
Trump: “All those bankruptcies were not my fault. If the other partners had just…”
Trump: “A decent interest rate. You know what a tough negotiator I am. The other guy always loses.”
Board Member: “Well, when people came to the Don…not you, the head of the Corleone Family…they were in no position to negotiate terms. The Corleone’s always ended up with more than what you label a ‘decent return.’”
Trump: “’Laundering money’ was a slip of the tongue. I corrected myself.”
Mr. Trump, we know how you are obsessed with trying to appear wealthy. So part of our investigation included following the money trail. If you’d like we can take our findings to the FBI or IRS.”
Trump: “I don’t care what the Board thinks. You’re supposed to do what I say, not what you want to do. You’re supposed to be loyal to me. I’m the king…I mean president and CEO.”
Gelly: “Your predictions were pretty accurate.”
Jordan: “I know what you mean. My answer is the Revenge Revolution would have happened anyway.”
usrevolution5 