bureaucracybusters

Archive for the ‘Business’ Category

WHY THE POOR VOTE REPUBLICAN: PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Medical, Politics, Social commentary on September 18, 2026 at 12:08 am

Republicans have long tried to prevent or eliminate programs that aid the poor and middle-class, including:   

  • Social Security (since it began in 1935)
  • Medicare
  • National health insurance
  • Food stamps
  • WIC (Women, Infants, Children).

So why are so many poor Americans now flocking to this party’s banner?

Two reasons: Racism and greed. There are historical parallels for both.

First, race:

In 1999, historian Victor Davis Hanson noted the huge gap in wealth between the aristocratic, slave-owning minority of the pre-Civil War South and the vast majority of poor white Southerners.

Victor Davis Hanson (@VDHanson) | Twitter

Victor Davis Hanson

“Before the war in the counties Sherman would later ruin, the top 10% of the landowners controlled 40% of the assessed wealth.”

In contrast, “more than half of those who were lucky enough to own any property at all still possessed less than 15% of the area’s valuation.”

So Hanson asked: “Why did the millions of poor whites of the Confederacy fight at all?”

He supplied the answer in his brilliant work on military history, The Soul of Battle: From Ancient Times to the Present Day, How Three Great Liberators Vanquished Tyranny.

One of those liberators was General William Tecumseh Sherman, who led 62,000 Union troops in a victorious “March to the Sea” through the Confederacy in 1864.

So why did so many poor Southern whites literally lay down their lives for the wealthy planter class, which despised them?

According to Hanson: “Behind the entire social fabric of the South lay slavery.

“If slavery eroded the economic position of the poor free citizens, if slavery encouraged a society of haves and have-nots…then it alone offered one promise to the free white man—poor, ignorant and dispirited—that he was at least not black and not a slave.”

And the planter class and its allies in government easily fobbed off their poor white countrymen with cheap flattery. Said Georgia Governor Joseph Brown:

“Among us the poor white laborer is respected as an equal. His family is treated with kindness, consideration, and respect. He does not belong to the menial class. The negro is in no sense his equal. He belongs to the only true aristocracy, the race of white men.”

Related image

Arlington House and plantation, former home of Robert E. Lee

Similarly, poor whites now flock to the Republican Party—which holds them in equal contempt—in large part to protest the 2008 election of the first black President of the United States.

According to a Pew Research Center study released on July 22, 2011: “Notably, the GOP gains have occurred only among white voters; a 2-point Republican edge among whites in 2008 (46% to 44%) has widened to a 13-point lead today (52% to 39%).”

Since the 1960s, Republicans have pursued a campaign policy of “divide and rule”—divide the nation along racial lines and reap the benefits at election time.

  • Republicans opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  • Republicans opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
  • Republicans, with Richard Nixon as their Presidential candidate in 1968 and 1972, pursued what they called a “Southern strategy”: Use “code language” to stoke fear and hatred of blacks among whites.
  • Republicans have falsely identified welfare programs exclusively with non-whites. (Of the six million Americans receiving food stamps, about 42% are white, 32% are black, and 22% are Latino–with the growth fastest among whites during the recession.)

Thus, in voting Republican, many of these poor whites believe they are “striking a blow for the white race.”

And they can do so in a more socially acceptable way than joining a certified hate group such as the American Nazi Party or Ku Klux Klan.  

Since 2015, openly racist groups such as the Klan and the American Nazi Party have flocked to the banner of Presidential candidate mogul Donald Trump. By enthusiastically courting their support, the real estate mogul has made it possible for Republican candidates to openly display their own racism.

Now greed:

In the hit play, 1776, on the creation and signing of the Declaration of Independence, there is a telling exchange between John Dickinson and John Hancock. It comes during the song, “Cool, Cool, Considerate Men.”

Dickinson, the delegate from Pennsylvania, urges Hancock, president of the Second Continental Congress, “to join us in our minuet.”

By “us” he means his fellow conservatives who fear losing their property and exalted status by supporting American independence from Great Britain.

John Dickinson

Hancock declines, saying: “Fortunately, there are not enough men of property in America to dictate policy.”

To which Dickinson replies:  “Perhaps not. But don’t forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor. And that is why they will follow us.”

Today,  poor whites generally identify with the CEOs of powerful corporations. They believe the Republican gospel that they can attain such wealth—if only the government will “get out of my way.”

They forget—or ignore–the truth that government, for all its imperfections, is sometimes all that stands between them and a wide range of predators.

In return, the CEOs despise them as the privileged have always despised their social and economic “inferiors.”

Unless the Democratic Party can find ways to directly address these bitter, Politically Incorrect truths, it will continue its decline into insignificance.

WHY THE POOR VOTE REPUBLICAN: PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Medical, Politics, Social commentary on September 17, 2026 at 12:10 am

On July 22, 2011, ABC News carried the following story:     

The Pew Foundation, analyzing voter identification, found “the electorate’s partisan affiliations have shifted significantly” since Barack Obama won office in 2008.

The GOP had gained strength among white voters, most specifically “the young and poor.”

A seven-point Democratic advantage among whites under age 30 three years ago had turned into an 11-point GOP advantage. And a 15-point Democratic advantage among whites earning less than $30,000 annually had swung to a slim four-point Republican edge by 2011.

Pew Charitable Trusts - InfluenceWatch - InfluenceWatch

In addition:

  • The GOP gains had occurred only among white voters.
  • Republicans had made sizable gains among white voters since 2008. Fifty-two percent of white voters called themselves Republicans or leaned to the GOP, compared with 39% who affiliated with the Democratic Party or leaned Democratic.
  • Democrats had lost their edge among lower income white voters.
  • In 2008, Democrats had a 15 point lead among white voters with family incomes less than $30,000.  By 2011, Republicans had a four-point edge among this group.
  • The GOP’s lead among middle income white voters had grown since 2008, and Republicans held a substantial advantage with higher income white voters.
  • Republicans have made gains among whites with a high school education or less. The GOP’s advantage over Democrats had grown from one point in 2008 to 17 points in 2011 among less educated whites.
  • Republicans had made smaller gains among whites voters who had college degrees.

What is fascinating about these findings is this: The Republicans have, since 1980, pursued a policy of gutting programs aimed at helping the poor—while repeatedly creating tax-breaks for the wealthiest 1% of the population.

For Republicans, the patron saint of this “love-the-rich-screw-the-poor” ideology remains Ronald Reagan–two-time governor of California and twice-elected President of the United States (1981-1989)

Ronald Reagan, who taught Americans to worship the wealthy

Among those charting Reagan’s legacy as President was former CBS Correspondent David Shoenbrum.

In his bestselling autobiography, America Inside Out: At Home and Abroad from Roosevelt to Reagan, he noted:

  • On January 28, 1981, keeping a pledge to his financial backers in the oil industry, Reagan abolished Federal controls on the price of oil.
  • Within a week, Exxon, Texaco and Shell raised gasoline prices and prices of home heating oil.
  • Reagan saw it as his duty to put a floor under prices, not a ceiling above them.

America Inside Out: Schoenbrun, David: 9780070554733: Amazon.com: Books

  • Reagan believed that when government helped business it wasn’t interfering. Loaning money to bail out a financially incompetent Chrysler was “supporting the free enterprise system.”
  • But putting a high-profits tax on price-gouging corporations or filing anti-trust suits against them was “Communistic” and therefore intolerable.
  • Tax-breaks for wealthy businesses meant helping America become stronger.
  • But welfare for the poor or the victims of a predatory marketplace economy weakened America by sapping its morale.

“In short, welfare for the rich is good for America. But welfare for the poor is bad for America, even for the poor themselves, for it encourages them to be shiftless and lazy.

“Somehow, loans to the inefficient management of American corporations would not similarly encourage them in their inefficient methods,” wrote Shoenbrun.

Republicans have sought to dismantle Social Security ever since that program began in 1935. And Republicans have furiously opposed other programs aiding the poor and middle-class—such as Medicare, food stamps and WIC (Women, Infants, Children).

In short, this is not a political party with a history of rushing to the defense of those most in need.

So the question remains: Why are so many poor Americans flocking to its banner?

The answer lies in the history of the American South—and slavery.

FAILING AT IRAN, NOW HE WANTS CANADA: PART ONE (OF THREE)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 14, 2026 at 12:11 am

The history book on the shelfIs always repeating itself. 

–“Waterloo,” by Abba

To understand what is happening in the United States today, it’s necessary to realize this:           

  • Its decent, democracy-cherishing citizens find themselves in the same position as decent, democracy-cherishing citizens of Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945.
  • And just as Germany’s government became a ruthless dictatorship, so has that of the United States.    
  • And just as ordinary, peace-loving Germans hoped for a powerful, democratic outsider to remove the menace of Adolf Hitler, so do ordinary, peace-loving Americans hope the same will happen to Donald Trump.  

Newly released doctor's letters show Adolf Hitler's fear of illness | Adolf Hitler | The Guardian

Adolf Hitler 

From 1939 to 1945, those democracy-cherishing outsiders consisted of Canada, England and the United States. (The Soviet Union reluctantly joined this alliance only after it became yet another victim of Adolf Hitler’s aggression.) 

In the case of the United States, that solution can only be achieved economically—by pressuring Right-wing Republican members of Congress in Red states to end their support for Trump’s dictatorial agenda.

And the only democratic countries with the power to do this are Mexico and Canada, America’s foremost trading partners.

The 2024 elections gave Republicans not only the White House but control of the House and Senate. 

Head-and-shoulders shot of Trump with a serious facial expression, his right eye partly closed. He is wearing a dark blue suit, a pale blue dress shirt, a red necktie, and an American flag lapel pin. Parts of the image are slightly out of focus. The background is black.

Donald Trump

Republicans don’t care that Trump has trashed the institutions that Americans have cherished for more than 200 years. Institutions like an independent judiciary, a free press, and an incorruptible Justice Department.

He has viciously attacked all of these—and Republicans have either said nothing or rushed to his defense. 

What Republicans truly fear about Donald Trump is that if they dare to hold him accountable for his lifetime of criminality, his Fascistic base will turn on them—and turn them out of Congress. 

If they are conflicted—whether to continue supporting Trump or desert him—the reason is the same: How can I hold onto my power and all the privileges that go with it?  

Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo, President of Mexico

Head shot of Carney wearing a suit and tie

Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada

Lea-Kim, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons

Republicans—with Trump as their Fuhrer—are utilizing the same my-way-or-else “negotiating” strategy as Nazi Germany’s Fuhrer, Adolf Hitler. 

And Democrats—out of cowardice and/or ignorance of history—are, as usual, refusing to publicly make this comparison.

Thus, America’s rescue from Trump can only come from outside the United States.

Donald Trump has proven his affinity for dictators and dictatorships—lavishing praise on Russia’s Vladimir Putin, China’s Xi Jinping and North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un.

There are two reasons for this—and his hostile behavior toward democratic leaders:

  1. Trump admires dictators, desires to become one himself, and is now stocking essential federal agencies—such as the Pentagon, FBI and Department of Homeland Security—with his political hacks to make this a reality.
  2. He knows that compared to the dictatorships of Russia and China, democracies such as those of Canada, Mexico and Ukraine are comparatively weak militarily. 

At a November 30, 2024 dinner at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s estate in Palm Beach, Florida, he told then-Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that Canada could become the 51st state of the United States.

Canada’s Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, who attended the dinner, insisted that Trump was joking.

But on December 2, Trump threatened to impose a 25% tax on all products entering the United States from Canada and Mexico unless they stopped the flow of drugs and illegal aliens.

And on December 3, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform an AI-generated image of himself standing on a mountain with a Canadian flag beside him. Its caption: “Oh Canada!”  

Trudeau had requested the Mar-a-Lago meeting to convince Trump that the northern border is completely different from the southern one with Mexico. 

A vertical triband design (red, white, red) with a red maple leaf in the centre.

Canadian flag

“Less than one percent of migrants coming into the United States irregularly come from Canada and 0.2 percent of the fentanyl coming into the United States comes from Canada,” Trudeau said in Parliament. 

During 2023-2024, American customs agents seized 43 pounds of fentanyl at the Canadian border, compared with 21,100 pounds at the Mexican border. 

Most of the fentanyl reaching the U.S. is made by Mexican drug cartels using precursor chemicals smuggled from Asia. 

As with Adolf Hitler, attempting to reason with Trump will prove fruitless. He respects only superior force. 

But he has blinked when confronted with serious opposition.

Thus, on February 1, 2025, he threatened to hit Mexico and Canada with 25% tariffs, accusing them of injecting huge amounts of fentanyl and huge numbers of illegal aliens into the United States. This allowed him to look tough to his legions of uneducated, Fascistic voters.

But then Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney threatened to retaliate with their own 25% tariffs on American goods.

And the financially conservative Wall Street Journal-–whose target audience includes business leaders, investors, and affluent consumers—called Trump’s threat “the dumbest trade war in history.”

Suddenly, Trump found a way to declare victory, claiming that Mexico and Canada would vastly increase border security to stop the flow of fentanyl and illegal aliens.

And dropping his threat of a trade war.

WANT TO NEGOTIATE WITH TRUMP? STUDY HITLER: PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 4, 2026 at 12:10 am

The “negotiating” methods of German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler serve as a useful guide to what domestic and world leaders can expect from trying to reach an agreement with President Donald Trump.      

In September, 1938, seven months after seizing Austria, Hitler gave another exhibition of his “negotiating” methods.                 

This time, the target of his aggression was Czechoslovakia. Once again, he opened “negotiations” with a lie: The Czechoslovak government was trying to exterminate 3.5 million Germans living in the “Sudetenland.”

Then he threatened war: Germany would protect its citizens and halt such “oppression.”

For British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, the thought of another European war erupting less than 20 years after the end of World War I was simply unthinkable.

He quickly sent Hitler a telegram, offering to help resolve the crisis: “I could come to you by air and am ready to leave tomorrow. Please inform me of earliest time you can receive me, and tell me the place of the meeting. I should be grateful for a very early reply.”

[Mistake #1: Showing his willingness to placate a brutal dictator. Such men see any concessions as weakness—leading to only greater demands. Trump, like Hitler, relishes attacking those weaker than himself.]

The two European leaders met in Berchtesgaden, Germany, on September 15, 1938.

Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler

Hitler denied that he had threatened war:Force? Who speaks of force?“

Then, suddenly, he accused the Czechs of having mobilized their army in May. They had mobilized—in response to the mobilization of the German army.

“I shall not put up with this any longer,” shouted Hitler.I shall settle this question in one way or another. I shall take matters in my own hands!”

Suddenly, Chamberlain seemed alarmed: “If I understood you right, you are determined to proceed against Czechoslovakia in any case. In the circumstances, it is best for me to return at once. Anything else now seems pointless.”

Hitler, taken aback, softened his tone and said they should consider the Sudetenland according to the principle of self-determination.

Chamberlain agreed to the cession of the Sudetenland. Three days later, French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier did the same. No Czechoslovak representative was invited to these discussions.

[Mistake #2: Instead of conceding to Hitler, which emboldened the dictator, Chamberlain should have pressed his advantage. When Hitler faced an opponent he couldn’t bribe or cow—such as British Prime Minister Winston Churchill or Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin—he raged and sulked.

[When Trump faces an opponent he can’t buy or intimidate—such as Special Counsel Jack Smith or Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei—he does the same.] 

Chamberlain met Hitler again in Godesberg, Germany, on September 22 to confirm the agreements. But Hitler aimed to use the crisis as a pretext for war.

He now demanded not only the annexation of the Sudetenland but the immediate military occupation of the territories. This would give the Czechoslovak army no time to adapt their defense measures to the new borders.

To achieve a solution, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini suggested a conference of the major powers in Munich.

On September 29, Hitler, Daladier and Chamberlain met and agreed to Mussolini’s proposal. They signed the Munich Agreement, which accepted the immediate occupation of the Sudetenland.

The Czechoslovak government had not been a party to the talks. Nevertheless, it promised to abide by the agreement on September 30. 

It actually had no choice. It faced the threat of an immediate German invasion after being deserted by its pledged allies: Britain, France and the Soviet Union.

[Mistake #3: Selling out an ally and making a concession to an insatiable dictator—and believing that Hitler could be trusted to keep his word.

[Just as Chamberlain sold out Czechoslovakia, Trump plans on selling out Ukraine to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. He’s blamed Ukraine for starting the 2022 war—even though Russia invaded Ukraine.

He’s long wanted a Trump Tower in Moscow. Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky can’t give him that. Putin can.]

Chamberlain returned to England a hero. Holding aloft a copy of the worthless agreement he had signed with Hitler, he told cheering crowds in London: “I believe it is peace for our time.”

OnThisDay 3 September 1939, Neville Chamberlain addressed the nation in a public broadcast that Adolf Hitler had ignored Britain's ultimatum to withdraw German troops from Poland and that consequently a state of

Neville Chamberlain

Hitler—still planning more conquests—knew better. In March, 1939, the German army occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia.

Chamberlain would soon be seen as a naive weakling—even before bombs started falling on London.

Believing himself invincible, Hitler turned his attention—and demands—to Poland. 

German General von Manstein meets Hitler for dinner, to propose ambitious new plans for the Western invasion: rather than fighting French & British troops in Belgium, encircle & trap them against Channel

Adolf Hitler and his generals

Believing himself invincible, Trump now threatens violence against Canada, Greenland and Cuba.

Hitler ordered the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939. To his surprise, France and England honored their pledges to support Poland—triggering World War II. Six years and 50-56 million deaths followed.

On February 28, 2026, Trump—in concert with Israel–attacked Iran without warning. To his surprise, the Iranians closed the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20-30% of the world’s oil total daily oil supply passes. This has triggered a global oil crisis and severely tightened international energy supplies.

Hitler couldn’t “turn off” the war he had started. He could only lash out as his enemies multiplied.

The same has proven true for Trump.

WANT TO NEGOTIATE WITH TRUMP? STUDY HITLER: PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 3, 2026 at 12:10 am

To understand the “negotiating” style of Donald Trump, it’s essential to study that of Adolf Hitler.     

Both men, dictatorial by nature, did/do not believe in compromise. Their idea of “compromise” was/is: “You do what I want—or I’ll destroy you.”                 

In Hitler’s case, his mania for absolute control began with the Nazi party and eventually extended to Germany. Then it reached to Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Norway, Denmark, France, Greece, Yugoslavia and Russia. At least 50 million men, women and children perished in the wars he unleashed from 1939 to 1945.

Newly released doctor's letters show Adolf Hitler's fear of illness | Adolf Hitler | The Guardian

Adolf Hitler 

Similarly, Trump’s mania for control started with building a real estate empire. Then it encompassed his “reality TV” show, The Apprentice—and finally politics.

He began dominating the Republican party by winning a series of Presidential primaries—and then the White House. Then came asserting control over the Justice Department and the judiciary—up to the Supreme Court.

Re-elected in 2024, he now seeks to dominate Americans, has asserted but failed to control Iran, attacks Mexico and Canada with trade wars, and threatened Greenland and Panama with invasion.

Much can be learned about Trump’s “negotiating” methods—and what it takes to counter them—by studying those of Germany’s Fuhrer.

Robert Payne, author of the bestselling biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (1973), described Hitler’s “negotiating” style thus: 

“Although Hitler prized his own talents as a negotiator, a man always capable of striking a good bargain, he was totally lacking in finesse. 

Related image

Donald Trump

“He was incapable of bargaining. He was like a man who goes up to a fruit peddler and threatens to blow his brains out if he does not sell his applies at the lowest possible price.”

What Payne writes about Hitler applies equally well to Trump.

Hitler revealed his “bargaining style” in 1938, when he invited Austrian Chancellor Kurt von Schuschnigg to his mountaintop retreat in Obersalzberg, Germany. 

Hitler, an Austrian by birth, intended to annex his native land to Germany. Schuschnigg was aware of this, but felt secure in accepting the invitation. He had been assured that the question of Austrian sovereignty would not arise.

The meeting occurred on February 12, 1938.

Shuschnigg opened the discussion with a friendly compliment. Walking over to a large window, he admired the breathtaking view of the mountains.

HITLER: We haven’t come here to talk about the lovely view or the weather!

Austria has anyway never done anything which was of help to the German Reich….I am resolutely determined to make an end to all this business. The German Reich is a great power.  Nobody can and nobody will interfere if it restores order on its frontiers. 

[Like Hitler, Trump relies on insults and anger to put his victims on the defense.]

 Kurt von Schuschnigg

SCHUSCHNIGG: We simply have to go on living alongside one another, the little state next to the big one. We have no other choice.

And that is why I ask you to tell me what your concrete complaints are. We will do all in our power to sort things out and establish a friendly relationship, as far as it is possible to do so.

HITLER: That’s what you say, Herr Schuschnigg. And I am telling you that I intend to clear up the whole of the so-called Austrian question—one way or another. Do you think I don’t know that you are fortifying Austria’s border with the Reich? 

SCHUSCHNIGG: There can be no suggestion at all of that—

HITLER: Ridiculous explosive chambers are being built under bridges and roads— 

This was a lie, and Hitler knew it was a lie. But it gave him an excuse to threaten to destroy Austria.

[For Trump, winning—not truth—is all that matters. During his first term as President, he told a documented 30,573 lies.]

HITLER: I have only to give one command and all this comic stuff on the border will be blown to pieces overnight. You don’t seriously think you could hold me up, even for half an hour, do you?

The S.A. [Hitler’s private army of Stormtroopers] and the [Condor] lLegion [which had bombed much of Spain into rubble during the Spanish Civil War] would come in after the troops and nobody—not even I—could stop them from wreaking vengeance.

Schnuschigg made a cardinal mistake in dealing with Hitler: He showed fear.  And this was precisely what the Nazi dictator looked for in an opponent. 

[Like Hitler, Trump relies on fear: “Real power is—I don’t even want to use the word—fear,” he said in March 2016 when still only a candidate for President.]

Contrary to popular belief, Hitler did not constantly rage at everyone. He used rage as a weapon, knowing that most people feel intimidated by it. 

In the case of Schuschnigg, Hitler opened with insults and threats at the outset of their discussion. Then there was a period of calm, to convince the Austrian chancellor the worst was over.

Finally, he once again attacked—this time with so much fury that Schuschnigg was terrified into submission. 

With one stroke of a pen, Austria became a vassal-state to Nazi Germany.

[Like Hitler, Trump threatens only those he feels are weak—thus his threats to use military force against Canada, Greenland and Panama.]

“THE HUMAN PRINTER” AND HER ADONIS: PART THREE (END)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Medical, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 2, 2026 at 12:10 am

President Donald Trump is haunted by the fear of a third impeachment action against him if Democrats retake the House of Representatives in the fast-approaching midterm elections scheduled for November 3.      

Speaking at a rally in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, to support Senate candidate Darline Graham, sister of the late Senator Lindsey Graham, Trump warned: “If we lose the midterms, I am going to be impeached. They are going to impeach me. They have no idea why!” 

On the contrary: Democrats know well why they want to remove him from office. Among their reasons: 

  • Starting an unprovoked war with Iran.
  • Attacking longtime American allies like Canada, England and Greenland.
  • Cozying up to Communist dictators such as Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping and Kim Jong-Un.
  • Ordering the Justice Department to indict his critics such as New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey.
  • Flooding Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, with 3,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents who terrorized (and murdered) both American citizens and illegal aliens. 

Related image

Donald Trump

Trump’s Republican accomplices in Congress fully understand the threat he faces—and what it poses for them. Thanks to his unprovoked war on Iran, oil shipments have been constrained worldwide—and Americans are furious at soaring prices for gas, food and housing.

Meanwhile, Trump arrogantly claims that “affordability” is a “Democratic hoax.” And, like Adolf Hitler contemplating architectural models while Nazi Germany neared destruction, he focuses on vanity projects like a 90,000 square foot White House ballroom and a towering “Victory Arch” overlooking Arlington Cemetery. 

As a result, Trump’s current national approval rating hovers between 33% and 38%. And Republicans fear that his unpopularity will spell doom for their own re-election prospects.

On June 26, Mike Johnson (R-LA), Speaker of the House of Representatives, warned his colleagues:

“If we were to lose the midterms, heaven forbid, these Democrats, y’all, impeachment’s not even the biggest concern. They will turn every committee of Congress into an investigative body, and they’ll go after the president’s family, the Cabinet, his donors and friends—half of you in this room will be targeted.”

Mike Johnson

Frederick Wellman, the Democratic congressional candidate for Missouri’s 2nd District, was quick to agree:

“You’re damn right we will investigate crimes and corruption. Who moved $180 million in oil futures 15 minutes before Iran announcements? Who has gotten sole source contracts because of their connections to the Trump family

“Where did our Social Security data go when DOGE downloaded it into portable hard drives? Where are the rest of the Epstein files? On and on this Congress has chosen covering up crimes instead of stopping them. That ends in November.”

Donald Trump is notorious for being thin-skinned. He has never displayed a sense of humor—nor an ability to laugh at himself. And he cannot abide listening to news that contradicts whatever he wants to do or believe.

The role that Natalie Harp plays in his life cannot be fully understood unless one accepts this fundamental truth: Trump, like Adolf Hitler, believes that if he just thinks positively, reality will bend to meet his wishes.

For this, he needs—and devours—a constant supply of “happy news” that confirms what he wants to believe. “News” that Harp is thrilled to constantly supply.

Thus, six months after launching a war he expected to be over in four to six weeks, Trump could say: “Right now, the situation is so good.”

Trump said this after leading reporters on a tour of the White House’s South Lawn to show off his latest renovations.

Presidents—and tyrants—who substitute “happy news” for hard truth usually come to a bad end. Hitler fired generals like Heinz Guderian—the architect of his sweeping victory over France in 1940—when they told him an offensive could not be continued or that their soldiers were needlessly dying for lack of supplies. 

It did not win Hitler his war.

As Donald Trump lurches from one self-manufactured crisis to another, two warnings from Niccolo Machiavelli, the Florentine statesman and father of modern political science, take on special meaning: 

“I must not omit an important subject, and mention of a mistake which princes can with difficulty avoid, if they are not very prudent, or if they do not make a good choice. And this is with regard to flatterers, of which courts are full, because men take pleasure in their own things and deceive themselves about them that they can with difficulty guard against this plague.”

And:

“It is an infallible rule that a prince who is not wise himself cannot be well advised, unless by chance he leaves himself entirely in the hands of one man who rules him in everything, and happens to be a very prudent man. In this case, he may doubtless be well governed, but it would not last long, for the governor would in a short time deprive him of the state.”

Noted historian Barbara Tuchman put it even more directly: “A great empire and little minds go ill together.”

“THE HUMAN PRINTER” AND HER ADONIS: PART TWO (OF THREE)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 1, 2026 at 12:10 am

Michael Wolff, a longtime biographer of Donald Trump, recently published letters from White House aide Natalie Harp to the President in The Daily Beast.      

Among their revelations: 

“If there is anything else I have done to cause you trouble, please forgive me. I want things to always be right between us. I also know I’ve been distracted all week (forgetting to eat throughout the days, and even forgetting to sleep, and only catching a couple hours at a time).”  

And

“I never want to bring you anything but joy. I’m sorry I lost my focus. You are all that matters to me. I don’t want to ever let you down. Thank you for being my Guardian and Protector in this life.”

On August 16, Georgia’s Democratic United States Senator, Jon Ossoff, said at a campaign rally in Atlanta: 

“He golfs and trades stocks. See, he doesn’t want to do the job. He wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the Emir of Qatar.”

A clip of this remark was widely shared on social media. 

Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia in his official portrait, taken in 2021 right after his election to the Senate.

Jon Ossoff

Ossoff didn’t accuse Trump and Harp of tripping the light fantastic, but the White House immediately and viciously reacted as if he had: 

  • White House Communications Director Steven Cheung: Jon Jackoff has to be the biggest cuck loser in politics. Instead of denigrating hard working people serving their country, Jon should look deep into his soul and ask himself why he’s a miserable person who hates this country. It’s because he’s a radical, extremist Dumocrat.” [“Denigrating” actually means “insulting.” The word Cheung meant was “praising.”]
  • Trump spokesman Davis Ingle: A cringeworthy, feminine theatre kid cosplaying as Barack Obama.”  
  • Right-wing CNN pundit Scott Jennings: “A garbage human.” 
  • When a CNN reporter asked Trump about Ossoff’s remarks, a White House-run X account attacked her as “a disgraceful, humiliating embarrassment to her alleged profession.” 

Even some Democrats feel that Ossoff went too far. One of these was David Axelrod, former advisor to President Barack Obama.

“No one has been more consistently eloquent or incisive in exposing @realDonaldTrump than @Ossoff. The paragraph from his weekend speech that has gotten so much attention was a brutal takedown. But two words in it, ‘with Natalie’ seemed gratuitous and unnecessary,” Axelrod wrote on X.

David Axelrod

This despite the fact that Trump has built his political career on countless brutal insults to both Republicans and Democrats.

The attacks on him haven’t fazed Ossoff: “It’s been amazing to watch this White House melt down over this all week,” he told MS NOW. “These White House staffers are adults, public officials paid by the taxpayer with immense power in positions of public trust.” 

Even if there is no affair between the President and his adoring aide, their relationship underscores a fundamental Trumpian dilemma:

On one hand, he craves not simply loyalty but constant adoration. He must be repeatedly told he’s the most handsome, brilliant, powerful, beloved man on the planet.

On the other hand, his flagrant greed, egotism and constant attacks on a seemingly endless number of people—politicians, journalists, celebrities, ordinary Americans—ensure that the hatred he spews is returned in kind. And this makes him all the more desperate to feel adored. 

Thus, enter Natalie Harp.

Ossoff’s comment has clearly touched a White House nerve. And it couldn’t have happened at a worse time for Trump.

He’s an 80-year-old, easily distracted man who repeatedly falls asleep in public events—such as during White House meetings or a World Cup game. He launched a losing war on Iran, predicted it would be over in four to six weeks, and has seen it spiral into six months with no end in sight.

Meanwhile,  Iran continues to control the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20 million barrels of oil used to pass each day. That flow has been reduced to between two million and six million barrels each day.

Strait of Hormuz

This has created a worldwide spiral in oil prices—and fueled inflation in the United States and other nations. But as prices for housing, energy and food soar in the United States, Trump claims that “affordability” is a “Democratic hoax.”

Like Adolf Hitler contemplating architectural models while Nazi Germany neared destruction, Trump focuses on vanity projects like a 90,000 square foot White House ballroom and a towering “Victory Arch” overlooking Arlington Cemetery. 

Trump is haunted by the fear of a third impeachment action against him if Democrats retake the House of Representatives in the fast-approaching midterm elections scheduled for November 3. 

Speaking at a rally in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, to support Senate candidate Darline Graham, sister of the late Senator Lindsey Graham, Trump warned: “If we lose the midterms, I am going to be impeached. They are going to impeach me. They have no idea why!” 

His Republican accomplices in Congress fully understand this as well. Most of them now hold their positions to his support—or by not daring to cross him in any way.

And they fear that his current unpopularity—at  33% to 39%—will upend their own chances for re-election.

“THE HUMAN PRINTER” AND HER ADONIS: PART ONE (OF THREE)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Medical, Military, Politics, Social commentary on August 31, 2026 at 12:10 am

Letter #1: “I never want to bring you anything but joy. I’m sorry I lost my focus. You are all that matters to me. I don’t want to ever let you down. Thank you for being my Guardian and Protector in this Life.”    

Letter #2: “I miss the days when you used to call, during my talkshow days, and we’d talk about everything and nothing. I want to get back to that synergy. We shouldn’t have to talk about work all the time! ! 

“And please, when I fail, will you tell me? You have the absolute right to cuss me out, if need be, when I deserve it, because no one knows or cares about me more.”

These weren’t the gushings of a starry-eyed high school girl toward a beloved object of affection.

They were the gushings of 35-year-old Natalie Harp, special assistant and executive assistant to the President of the United States since 2025. And the object of her affection is an 80-year-old married man with a notorious history of adultery.

Members of President Donald Trump's inner circle are secretly fed up with the aide who is enabling his unhinged late-night Truth Social rampages. Most nights, the president fires off dozens of posts

Natalie Harp was born in 1991 and raised in California. She graduated from Point Loma Nazarene University in 2012, and from Liberty University in 2015 with an MBA.

By 2017, Harp began suffering from chronic pain and complications incurred by a medical error involving intravenous therapy for stage II bone cancer.

In 2019, Harp praised then-President Trump for signing a federal right-to-try law which allowed her to access experimental treatments which she credited with saving her life.  

Trump invited Harp to speak at the 2020 Republican National Convention She compared Trump to the sympathetic character, George Bailey, of It’s a Wonderful Life.  

Trump also asked her to serve as a member of the advisory board for his 2020 Presidential campaign. Harp worked for the Right-wing television channel One America News Network from 2020 to 2022.

She later became an aide to Trump for his 2024 Presidential campaign as a key figure in his communications efforts. 

In January 2025, Trump appointed Harp to the position of special assistant to the President and executive assistant to the President, with a government salary of $150,000. 

Natalie Harp

She worked intimately with Trump and other national security figures for more than one year minus a security clearance. One national security official warned that this position gave her access to more sensitive information than any other Trump associate.

One White House staff member said that she “plays into the less productive and more troublesome parts of his nature, putting things in front of him that aren’t vetted.” 

Dan Scavino, a political advisor and former golf club manager who had handled Trump’s social media accounts, largely gave control of Trump’s Truth Social account to Harp.

She used it to post a racist video depicting former President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama as apes. She also posted an AI-generated image of Trump as Jesus.

Among her duties: Posting remarks Trump dictates to Truth Social, texting on his behalf, and sporting a portable printer to feed him documents, praise and upbeat news articles. This last task has earned her the nickname: “The human printer.” 

No doubt to Trump’s humiliation, Harp has also been dubbed as his “diaper nurse.” Some former associates and critics have claimed or joked that he uses adult diapers due to age or health. But there is no evidence that Harp serves in any nursing, medical or caregiving role.

Still, the rumors persist.

Head-and-shoulders shot of Trump with a serious facial expression, his right eye partly closed. He is wearing a dark blue suit, a pale blue dress shirt, a red necktie, and an American flag lapel pin. Parts of the image are slightly out of focus. The background is black.

Donald Trump

And Trump appears flattered by her devotion. He calls her “sweetie” and “my Natalie.” And he’s told other aides that “Harp is the only one who loves him as much as his wife and children,” the New York Times reports.

Only recently has her role as Trump’s groupie-turned-government employee become widely known. And the man responsible is Georgia United States Senator Jon Ossoff. 

At a campaign rally in Atlanta on August 16, Ossoff, a Democrat, said of Trump: “While the sailors on the [USS Abraham] Lincoln fight his war, while he fruitlessly drains our munitions and oil reserves, the president sleeps through his meetings.

“He golfs and trades stocks. See, he doesn’t want to do the job. He wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the Emir of Qatar.”

A clip of this remark was widely shared on social media. 

Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia in his official portrait, taken in 2021 right after his election to the Senate.

Jon Ossoff

The week before the rally, Harp was among a small group of aides who joined Trump when he switched airplanes in Turkey to thwart a possible Iranian missile attack.

Those who were not allowed to board the decoy plane included:

  • Secretary of State Marco Rubio;
  • Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent;
  • White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller;
  • White House Communications Director Steven Cheung. 

Ossoff’s comment immediately brought Harp—and Trump—a burst of thoroughly unwelcome publicity.

Maggie Haberman, a New York Times reporter and the author of Regime Change, a scathing profile of the Trump administration, called her Trump’s “binky…a comfort blanket.” 

Natalie’s estranged brother, Preston, laughed on CNN when he learned that his sister had jumped into the trunk of a Trump motorcade SUV when there wasn’t room for her to sit during a trip to court in 2023. 

THE RIGHT’S NEW TARGET: “THE ODYSSEY”–PART TWO (END)

In Business, Entertainment, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on July 29, 2026 at 12:10 am

Most of what Americans believe about the ancient world comes from blockbuster movies—many of them dating back to the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s.

Among those beliefs: 

THE ISRAELITES WERE THE GOOD GUYS. That’s because Biblical movies were based (often loosely) on Old Testament stories. And the Old Testament was written by Israelites.

  • The Israelites were never portrayed as being as ruthless as their enemies, despite this instruction in Jeremiah 51:22-23: “With you I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens. With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, captains and rulers.” 
  • “Sansom and Delilah” (1949) and “The Ten Commandments” (1956), pitted noble Israelites against, respectively, evil Philistines and Egyptians. 
  • Even when a major figure like King David (Gregory Peck in “David and Bathsheba” (1951) committed major sins like adultery and murder, the movie ended on a high note: God forgives him and sends rain to quench a parched Israel.

A big difference once existed between how audiences treated movies based on Greek mythology and those based on the Bible.

Audiences were content to enjoy films based on Greek myths without taking them seriously. But those watching movies based on Bible stories assumed they were watching history unfolding before them.

This was never truer than audiences’ reaction to director Mel Gibson’s 2004 blockbuster, The Passion of the Christ. Orthodox Christians flocked to the movie, which blamed Jesus’ crucifixion on Jewish high priests, not the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate.

A sepia colored image showing the face of bearded man covered in blood, on his head is a crown of thorns.

Now audiences seem to believe that “The Odyssey” is delivering history, not mythology. When the first trailer was released in December, critics said that Odysseus’s boat looked like a “Viking ship.” 

“I wonder whether we have become inclined to treat mythological material as though it were historical material,” said Susan Deacy, professor of Classics at the University of Roehampton and the author of The Greek Gods and Their Worlds. “Yet the Odyssey is continually being reimagined, with pretty well every age producing its own Homer.” 

Many viewers were surprised to hear British actors, such as Tom Holland, speaking with American accents and using modern, contemporary expressions. 

But Deacy said this is based on cinematic tradition, not historical accuracy. The ancient Greeks did not speak either modern American English or formal British English. So conversational language may actually be closer to the spirit of Homer’s oral storytelling than the formal style often used in historical films.

Susan Deacy

Susandeacy, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

Audiences didn’t “treat mythological material as though it were historical material” in 2004, when Wolfgang Peterson’s “Troy” hit movie screens. It featured Brad Pitt as Achilles, Eric Bana as Hector, Orlando Bloom as Paris, Sean Bean as Odysseus and Diane Kruger as Helen.

Among its deviations from Homer and Greek mythology:

  • Menelaus, the husband of Helen, is killed by Hector (instead of returning to Sparta with Helen).
  • Agamemnon is killed during the fall of Troy by Briseis, the woman once held captive by Achilles. (According to Greek myth, he was murdered, upon his return home, by his wife, Clytemnestra.)
  • Achilles infiltrates Troy in the wooden horse—and is killed on the city’s last night. (Greek mythology has him killed at the gates of Troy before the Greeks erected the Trojan horse.)
  • Most incredibly, Paris and Helen escape Troy to presumably find happiness somewhere else. (In Greek mythology, Menelaus intends to kill Helen for running off with Paris. But when he sees her, she bares her still-magnificent breasts and yells: “Kill me!” He’s so dumbstruck by her beauty he drops his sword and walks hand-in-hand with her to his ship for the voyage home.)

For those seeking a movie that adhere closely to the Iliad, the winner, hands down, is “The Fury of Achilles” (1962). It’s an Italian drama set in the tenth year of the Trojan War directed by Marino Girolami and starring Gordon Mitchell as Achilles.

It lacks the spectacle of “Troy” (owing to CGI) but is surprisingly sympathetic to its main characters—Achilles, Hector and Priam.

In one deeply moving scene, Achilles tells Briseis that every other Greek soldier hopes to return home, but he is doomed to die at Troy. He knows he has a vulnerable spot, but he doesn’t know where it is. He knows he is fated to kill Hector, Troy’s finest warrior—and that he himself will die soon afterward. 

Fury of Achilles (1962) - IMDb

Hector is similarly treated with sympathy, knowing he must die—and that when he does, his beloved city will soon follow him. But then he kills Achilles’ dear companion, Patroclus, and feels obligated to accept Achilles’ challenge to single combat.

And finally there is Priam, king of Troy, who, as in Homer, movingly pleads to Achilles for the body of his son, Hector. Achilles answers: “Your son is luckier than I. He has a father who mourns him. Who will mourn me when I’m gone? My father is dead.”

And elderly Priam replies: “If I am still alive when you are dead, I will mourn you as another son I have lost.”

At which point a sorrowful Achilles hands over the body of Hector to his grieving father—and the movie, like the Iliad, comes to an end.

THE RIGHT’S NEW TARGET: “THE ODYSSEY”–PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Business, Entertainment, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on July 28, 2026 at 12:17 am

Once again, the Right is enraged—this time, at a movie. 

And not just any movie—“The Odyssey,” which looks to be the blockbuster hit of the summer.

It’s based on the epic poem, allegedly written by Homer, who lived between the eighth and ninth centuries. And while Homer likely earned nothing from his work, the film version of it opened with an estimated $124.5 million in domestic ticket sales and another $139.6 million from overseas, 

Its director, Christopher Nolan, garnered the 2023 Best Picture Oscar for “Oppenheimer.” With a production budget of $250 million, it’s among the most expensive R-rated movies ever made. Universal is spending $125 million to market it.

Picture of director Christopher Nolan smiling at the premiere of The Odyssey in New York

Christopher Nolan

PhilipRomano, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons

The movie stars Matt Damon (the “Ryan” in 1998’s “Saving Private Ryan”) as Odysseus, Tom Holland as his son, Telemachus; Anne Hathaway as his long-suffering wife, Penelope; Zendaya as the goddess, Athena; Robert Pattinson as the suitor Antinous and Charlize Theron as the sea nymph Calypso.

So far, so good—for the Right.

But then comes the “controversial” part: Nolan cast Lupita Nyong’o, a black actress, as Helen of Troy and Elliot Page (a “transitioning” actor) as a soldier.

Right-wingers are furious that that a black woman has been cast as Helen. 

Film poster showing Odysseus (Matt Damon) standing in a battle position, with the Trojan Horse behind him, engulfed in ash and smoke.

Right-wing commentator Matt Walsh wrote on X: “Not one person on the planet actually thinks that Lupita Nyong’o is ‘the most beautiful woman in the world.’ But Christopher Nolan knows that he would be called racist if he gave ’the most beautiful woman’ role to a white woman. Nolan is technically talented but a coward.” 

Elon Musk charged: “Chris Nolan has lost his integrity.” And he vowed that that before the end of 2026, his AI tool Grok “will make a full-length movie of ‘The Odyssey’ that is historically accurate and true to the art of Homer.” 

“By historically accurate, he means whiter than Christmas at Cracker Barrel,” comedian Colman Domingo joked during his stint as guest host on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!”

The Right’s fury can’t be based on the historical record—because the Odyssey is not history, but mythology. And according to ancient Greek myth, Helen was hatched from an egg laid after her mother was visited by Zeus in the form of a swan.

The Helen that Right-wingers envision is a product of Hollywood movie casting.

Sponsored Ad - Odyssey, The

Troy did exist, and was located in northwestern Anatolia, in present-day Çanakkale province, Turkey. It lay just a few miles south of the Dardanelles strait, which connects the Aegean Sea to the Black Sea. This put the city in a highly strategic position controlling major ancient trade routes.

As a result, the famous Trojan War might well have been fought over conflicts in trade, rather than the alleged seduction/kidnapping of Helen, Queen of Sparta, by Paris, prince of Troy.

On the other hand, wars have been fought over perceived slights to the ego of one ruler by another. In William Shakespeare’s play, Henry V, the French Dauphin mocks Henry by sending him tennis balls, implying that Henry is a callow youth rather than a serious monarch. This leads Henry to invade France.

As for Elliot Page: Transgender surgery did not exist in the time of Homer. But homoerotic relationships certainly did—most famously among Greek soldiers.

Today, Right-wingers like Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth fear that homosexuals make poor soldiers. But their choice in sex partners did not prevent the army of Alexander the Great from conquering most of the known world of his time.

The truth is that most of what Americans think they know about the ancient world comes not from scholarly books but blockbuster movies—many of them dating back to the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s.

Among those beliefs:

THE ANCIENT ROMANS SPOKE WITH BRITISH ACCIDENTS. That’s because British actors played Roman aristocrats in so many movies during the 1950s and 1960s. 

  • Laurence Oliver, Peter Ustinov and Charles Laughton played high-born Romans in “Spartacus” (1960) and Richard Burton and Rex Harrison played them in “Cleopatra” (1963).
  • Romans didn’t speak English. They spoke Latin—which at that time was the language of world commerce. Today, it’s not used as a primary mother tongue in any community. A movie whose characters spoke Latin would find itself with an extremely small audience. 

Laurence Olivier - Spartacus

Laurence Oliver in “Spartacus”

SPARTANS WERE THE GOOD GUYS. “The 300 Spartans” (1962) and “300” (2006) celebrate the three-day battle of Thermopylae, where 300 Spartans and 6,700 other Greeks held the narrow pass against a huge Persian army. If the Spartans existed today, these films could serve as recruiting advertisements for their skill at war.

So far, so good.

What these films don’t say:

  • The Spartans ruled a slave empire whose people farmed the land, supplied food and served as military laborers. Their forced labor gave Spartans the freedom to focus completely on military training. 
  • Once a year, Spartans were allowed to murder any helot they desired, just to remind their slaves who was boss.
  • Spartan men were required to live apart from their wives in all-male barracks—and sneak out to have conjugal visits with their wives.
  • Homosexuality played a major role in the lives of Spartans.