Free To Be Us — Liberalism Unshackled

By James A. Kidney Tuesday’s election results — President, Senate and House — freed liberalism from its shackles.  The ransom payment is high. In the long run, it may be worth the price.  The key is to put aside defeatism and start adopting new tactics now that the Democratic Party elite has been shamed and defeated by a horrible con man and his angry allies. Liberalism — by which I mean a set of political goals recognizing and trying to contain the power of the elite, bringing genuine equality of economic opportunity to those not sharing in the top five percent, and sponsoring a strong foreign policy using force as a last resort — has been treated by the Democratic Party for years as the smelly uncle at the dinner table who talks too much but contributes too little. Hillary Clinton embodied this party sentiment in her campaign, fully endorsed … Read more of this post . . .

Is Hillary A Stronger Candidate than Bernie?

   By James A. Kidney  clinton-v-sanders-1

Let’s agree that a Donald Trump presidency is a very scary prospect and that either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders would be a much better choice. Right now, Trump looks like easy pickins’ for either Democrat.

But now is not November.  One cannot rule out that as Trump collects campaign experts who might corral some of his worst traits, Republicans surrender all principles in favor of party loyalty, and Americans exercise their constitutional right to short term memory loss, the GOP “standard bearer” will become more palatable to larger numbers of voters.  Politico this week published a sardonic assessment of “The 12 Signs that Trump Will Win the White House” that, while improbable, recognizes the fluid process of an American presidential election.

Clintonistas are not containing their anger at Bernie Sanders and his supporters for continuing what they call a fruitless campaign for the Democratic nomination.  Although expressing confidence that Sec. Clinton will wipe out Republican Donald Trump in November (“like with a cloth,” as Clinton said when asked if she had wiped her home server clean), they also hate seeing any competition for the crown.  Their asserted confidence of victory is easily undermined by the least criticism of their candidate.

Hey, it’s a democracy folks.  People who want change are entitled to cast a vote for one who at least campaigns on the notion of bringing it.  Don’t demonize them for exercising the franchise.  (Clinton herself is careful not to demand that Sanders stop campaigning; that is left to surrogates.)

So Sanders is right to campaign to the end.  If he loses the nomination, as is likely but not certain, he will throw his support to Clinton, perhaps gaining a little more leftish Clinton on some issues in the process.  He knows Trump would be terrible.

One of the major contentions in support of Clinton becoming the Democratic nominee is that she is more likely to beat Trump in November than is Sanders.  “America will never elect a Democratic Socialist,” we are told time and again.  We have been told this not only by Hillary loyalists, but also by the Establishment media and its many pundits.  Since these pundits and editorialists have called every development in the presidential campaign accurately so far, what’s to worry?

Plenty, it turns out.  Bernie may be the better candidate to beat Trump.

Read more of this post . . .Is Hillary A Stronger Candidate than Bernie?

Why I (Belatedly) Blew the Whistle on the SEC’s Failure to Properly Investigate Goldman Sachs

By James A. Kidney The New Yorker and Pro Publica websites today posted an article by Pro Publica’s Jesse Eisinger about the de minimis investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission into the conduct of Goldman Sachs in the sale of derivatives based on mortgage-backed securities during the run-up to the Great Recession of 2008.  The details of the SEC’s failure to aggressively pursue Goldman in the particular investigation, Abacus, and its refusal to investigate fully misconduct by Goldman and other “Too Big to Fail” banks, stands not only as a historic misstep by the SEC and its Division of Enforcement, but undermines the claim that the Obama Administration has been “tough on Wall Street.”  The Pro Publica version contains links to a few of the documents I provided. No one in authority who was involved in the Goldman investigation ever gave me an explanation for why the effort was so slight. … Read more of this post . . .

Why Does Big Media Go Soft on Hillary Clinton?

By James A. Kidney              Recently, Big Media has attacked Sen. Bernie Sanders for being too vague and uncertain in answering questions during interviews with editorial boards of The New York Times and The New York Daily News about how to break up the big banks, his position on gun control, and other issues. A Washington Post political columnist, one who specializes in superficial “listicles” costumed as commentary, has even claimed that these interviews with Sanders and Donald Trump were, to quote the headline over his column, “the surprising success story of the election cycle.” Many, probably most, national political columnists and reporters have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo of the Democratic and Republican parties.  Electing Trump, Sanders or, until recently, Sen. Ted Cruz (who is now becoming the darling of Republican Party leaders), would put in the trash years of work cultivating … Read more of this post . . .

Is Wednesday When Sanders Has to Get Serious?

By James A. Kidney If Sen. Bernie Sanders is still realistically in contention after Tuesday’s big primaries in Illinois, Ohio and Missouri, he will have to start showing the voters how serious he is about important matters beyond economic inequality.  Most notably, he will have to pay attention to foreign policy. Sec. Hillary Clinton’s enthusiastic support from African-American voters assures her victory in the Florida primary and likely in North Carolina.  Though polls show her ahead of Sanders in every Tuesday primary, some of the polls have poor reputations and Sanders’ surprise showing in Michigan makes even more reputable polls suspect — at least until Wednesday. But assuming Sanders at least roughly divides the delegates with Clinton, he will remain a formidable candidate.  One hopes that will drive Clinton further to the left economically and cause her to focus her rhetoric more on the economic divide than on Pollyannish sentiments … Read more of this post . . .

Confessions of a Self-Hating Liberal? Not Quite.


By James A. Kidney

Most candidates on the GOP side of this presidential campaign — at least, all of those who seem to have a realistic chance at winning the nomination — bring with them nightmarish visions of impulsive nuclear holocaust, indentured servitude to oligarchic multi-national employers, mass deportation, continued assault on government and unlimited financial rewards-for-nothing to the one percent.

Hoorah for liberals!  We are uniters.  We are lovers.  We hate no one.

But we love no one more than ourselves.  We are, after all, the most tolerant, the most kind, the most sharing. All should flock to our banners.  Our common sense and compassion are obvious.

You know who liberals are, don’t you?  They are you and me.  They are white people who are well-off, well-educated and focused on almost anyone but folks who have lost their jobs in manufacturing, mining and other industries, mostly located between the East and West Coasts.

That is the area also derisively known as “flyover country.”

Who Liberals Love — and Who They Don’t

A good liberal loves to show tolerance for anyone who is “different” from his or her own identity group, especially if the difference is an easily identified one.  Liberals want to help such groups, preferably by singling out their needs as the most pressing for the entire country and to ravish attention upon these needs by asking everyone else to concede to the rightness of the liberals’ chosen cause.

Once this call for tolerance and policies promoting inclusion was pretty much limited to groups with a history of racial oppression.  In the last 20 or 30 years, liberals have also included gender, disability (mental or physical) and other categories in their pantheon of hand-wringing concern.  Now, a good liberal (including me), wants to help the refugees of wars started by us.  Those people aren’t even Americans!

Read more of this post . . .Confessions of a Self-Hating Liberal? Not Quite.

%d bloggers like this: