The Monday Morning Teaser

So poof! Last week’s trade war against Mexico is over, at least for the time being. The new crisis is with Iran: Did they attack oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman? Will anyone believe us if we say they did? What will we do about it and why? In the reality-TV presidency, each week needs its cliffhanger.

But I decided that the featured post needed to be about something that isn’t part of the Trump Show, at least not directly. So I call your attention to the speech Bernie Sanders gave this week defining what he means by socialism and explaining why he thinks we need it. That post “Socialism: What’s in a word?” is about not just Sanders’ speech, but the larger context in which other candidates may agree with Sanders on specific programs but still not want to talk about socialism. Why do either Sanders or his rivals care about this label, so that Bernie wants to claim it and all the other candidates want to avoid it?

That should be out between 9 and 10 EDT.

The weekly summary starts out talking about the most recent examples of Trump administration lawlessness: He says he would accept the help of foreign governments in the 2020 campaign, and Kellyanne Conway will continue violating the Hatch Act without consequences. From there it will cover the Mexico deal, such as it is; what we know about the Iran situation; the demonstrations in Hong Kong; the upcoming Democratic debate; and a few other things, before closing with something I haven’t found yet.

Oh, and I went to an impeachment rally in Boston Saturday. I don’t think this is going to happen without people in the streets.

The summary should be out noonish, or maybe a little later.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • Elaine Corn Soohoo  On June 17, 2019 at 9:39 am

    If, when speaking of socialism in the context of health care, Bernie Sanders has never admitted that Medicare isn’t socialism in theory. It isn’t free. It requires ever rising premiums just for the basics. It is as much a product as a box of Brillo. Of all programs, Medicare should be amicably bi-partisan. It’s got the social evenness that [most] Democrats prefer as a start. It’s got for-profit private medical insurance brokering additional coverage accordingly to one’s ability to pay, forming a caste system every conservative could love — needless death from lack of coverage aside. What’s not to like? I loved Bernie until I realized in the 2016 run-up he NEVER explained how Medicare functions. Just Medicare for All, over and over. Did he ever tempt us with the possibility that a tax might be lower than the sky high premiums paid by those under age 66 to insurance rackateers? No, he did not and has not. He can’t possibly anymore hide the taxation required for Medicare for All. But he can give us some numbers to show that it might pencil out as a better deal than relying solely on private insurance until age 66. This country will never be able to vanquish the medical insurance complex, but it can be diminished, for they are the true death panels. Having access to health care can make a lot of other problems go away. We’ll feel more secure as a people, happier, a little bit like Norway. No, don’t use Norway. Republicans hate Norway almost as much as they hate most Americans. However, all candidates on next week’s debate stage would do well to EXPLAIN Medicare in a few short phrases. Most Americans want to have a doctor when needed. Doctors need to be paid. A tax will be cheaper than an Anthem premium.

  • Eric Henningsen  On June 17, 2019 at 10:50 am

    Thank you for your efforts to make sense of things. Please continue.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: