Skip to main content

The Final Daze


Most of us will be happy/sad when the national presidential campaign is finally tucked into bed. It has been a wearying 20 months. Ted Cruz began the show by throwing his name into the presidential ring way back in March 2015. Hillary Clinton, the Lucretia Borgia of the Democratic Party, announced a month later in April. Donald Trump, the Genghis Khan of Republican contenders, announced two months after Mrs. Clinton in June. Mr. Trump’s announcement was followed by shrieks of laughter; but, as the philosopher says, he laughs best who laughs last. Not only has the American campaign season lacked substance and manners, it lasted far too long, a boon for the media that seek to keep us aroused while it is hauling in cash by the truck load.


By the way, speaking of cash by the truck load, the reader, I hope, will permit a brief parenthetical remark.

It always was a whisper in the whirlwind, but some readers may recall the planeloads of cash President Barack Obama sent to Iran to procure the release of American prisoners held by Revolutionary Guards who, 37 years earlier during the Carter administration, had kicked off the Iranian Revolution by abducting and holding as prisoners for 444 days 52 American diplomats and citizens attached to the U.S. Embassy. Capturing Americans and holding them for ransom appears to be a major weapon in the Iranian diplomatic arsenal. And it works every time.

The Iranians squeezed $1.8 billion out of Mr. Obama, who said, winking heavily, that the payments in cash and gold of $400 million delivered by plane secretly at night – instantly convertible into Hamas terrorist salaries -- were not ransom payments. They were payments the United States owed to Iran the assets of which were frozen by the United States after Iran had violated the American embassy and its personnel. Mr. Obama was simply cleaning the ledger of old debts. As always, when oleaginous politicians speak out of both sides of their mouths, the real story of the ransom payment is much more interesting – but it involves a mathematical calculation, and American eyes tend towards half-mast when money is mentioned in news stories.

A Jewish publication, Mosaic,has the full story, which reads like a chapter pulled from a spy novel written by a tax accountant:

“The president was returning $400 million in Iran’s “Foreign Military Sales” (FMS) account with the Pentagon, plus $1.3 billion in interest, but he failed to mention that in 1981, when Iran filed its claim before the Claims Tribunal at The Hague, the U.S. had responded with a counterclaim for $817 million for Iran’s violations of its obligations under the FMS program. In 2016, with both the claim and the counterclaim still pending, it was possible that Iran owed billions of dollars to the U.S., not the reverse.”

That’s right, dear reader: After the credits and debits in our national ledger had been balanced, IRAN OWED THE UNITED STATES A DEBT. The United Stated owed Iran NOTHING, nada, zip. In mob lingo, “we was had” – by Mr. Obama, who needed a nuclear deal with Iran to close an upcoming election, not the first time in the Obama administration that the campaign tail wagged the foreign policy dog.

Should this datum appear prominently in the current presidential campaign? Why, of course it should. And yet it whispers to us from the whirlwind.

Instead, we are warned by Congressman-for-life John Larson of the 1st gerrymandered District that the KKK may steal the election in Connecticut.

Mr. Larson is seeking his 10th term in the U.S. House of Representatives, and he worries, we are told by Neil Vigdor of the Connecticut Post:

“White supremacists are mobilizing across the country — including right here in Connecticut — to keep African-Americans and other communities from voting on Election Day,” Larson wrote. “This is a disgusting attempt at voter suppression, and it will not stand.”

Which is the more likely: that elections in Connecticut will be overturned by guys in white hoods, or that Democratic voters in the 1st District, realizing that a Democratic President has disgraced himself by paying a bride in convertible cash to the enemies of “the Great Satan” – that’s us – will shake off their usual political habits and cast their votes in less than a week for Matthew Corey, Mr. Larson’s Republican opponent?

Actually, both are equally improbable. And that is what is wrong with our politics. It is a sclerotic system – Mr. Trump, the hyperbolist, calls it a “fixed” system – that allows for little change precisely at those moments in our history when the American public is screaming for change. Term limits would address this problem and lead to a reinvigoration of small “d” democratic government, but neither the media, comfortable with the politicians it reflexively endorses both in its editorial and news pages, nor the politicians so favored want democracy, which is unafraid to disturb the political universe.


And so, instead of democracy,  we get the KKK marching on the Capitol building in Hartford, their burning crosses alight in the dark night, and Congressman Larson standing before them, risking all and protecting ballot boxes with his fearless body.       

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p