I trust you’ve all enjoyed drinking the and served them to many friends. Everybody loves the highly alcoholic drink but hates its namesake.
Now that this brutal election season is well underway, and fall is just around the corner, it’s time for a smooth bourbon-based drink that will keep you warm and cozy while you watch the debates or while you try to forget them.
This cocktail is made from much more common spirits than the Trump cocktail. The Biden cocktail has about half the ingredients – all of which are very common and not too expensive.
- 2 oz. Maker’s Mark bourbon
- 1/2 oz. Kahlua coffee liqueur
- 1/2 oz. Disaronno Originale amaretto
- 3 dashes Scrappy’s chocolate bitters (made in Seattle)
- one and Disaronno into a mixing glass half full of large ice cubes (you don’t want to water the drink down), add three dashes of chocolate bitters and stir gently for about 20 seconds. Strain the mixture into a chilled martini glass and add a maraschino cherry.
What you get is a rich, smooth mixture that tastes kind of like a Manhattan, but is darker, sweeter, and has a coffee kick and a nutty finish. It’s perfect for “Sleepy” Joe Biden.
I have tried this with rye, and found that it gives the drink a sharper taste. I also tried a couple of different bourbons but settled on Maker’s Mark, because it blends well with the two liqueurs.
I have to say I’m both baffled and chagrined by the skepticism expressed by some on the left towards the Never Trump Republicans of such groups as the Lincoln Project and Republican Voters Against Trump.
For one thing, these are people who, at great personal and professional cost, have refused to surrender to the vileness, narcissism and authoritarianism of Trump and his GOP enablers in the administration and in Congress, despite long careers spent in the party. Their rejection of Trump’s assault on our democratic institutions as well as his xenophobic and racist appeals are every bit as heartfelt as those of any Democrat, as encapsulated in a New York Times op-ed by former Republican consultant Stuart Stevens, who has also written a book on the subject. For another, the hard-hitting, Trump-eviscerating ads produced by both groups, for example here, here, and here are a potent demonstration of how good these guys are at what they do – and why Democrats in the past have struggled to win elections, public support for their policy positions notwithstanding.
Yes, NeverTrumpers played a role in creating the monster that is the GOP today, no question. But now after seeing what their creation has become, they want nothing more than to kill it for the good of our country. And if the Bernie Sanders wing of the party is skeptical of what they will want afterwards, assuming Joe Biden wins the election, who cares? I don’t hear any NeverTrumpers referring to the prospect of endorsing Biden as akin to being compelled to eat half a bowl of shit, as the co-chair of the Sanders campaign did recently. Right now disaffected NeverTrump Republican Biden supporters are looking a lot better to me than perennially disenchanted Bernie supporters who can never quite be relied upon in a crunch when their guy loses.
Is there a place for many of these NeverTrumpers in the Democratic Party whilst the GOP continues in its present form and/or until a more traditional center-right party emerges? Maybe and why not? Since when have liberals been shy of engaging in robust policy debates.
But right now, all of this is beside the point. NeverTrumpers like the rest of us recognize that four more years of this president and GOP governance (to use that term very loosely) will be akin to committing national suicide. That must not happen, and we need all the help we can get to ensure it doesn’t.
Very first thing I would like to see addressed by Congress in 2021: make it illegal to claim that election fraud has happened or will happen where there is no evidence presented and no basis for an official investigation is established.
I have a hard time seeing how undermining faith in the core process of our democratic republic is any less dangerous than pulling a fire alarm in a crowded school hallway because you didn’t study, calling in a fake bomb threat at the airport because you’re running late, or spreading misinformation about a stock because you’ll make a fortune if the price tanks.
Afford our democracy the same protections that we provide the stock market: https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answerstmanipulhtm.html.
The latest term of the United States Supreme Court delivered a mixed bag of decisions that, on the whole, should please conservatives even if appearances may be to the contrary. For example, DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) won a temporary reprieve but only because of doctors at abortion clinics in the state to have admitting privileges at hospitals was set aside, this was primarily on the grounds that it was virtually identical to a Texas law that had been struck down just four years ago. Chief Justice Roberts only joined the more liberal justices because he felt bound by precedent but not before opening the door to future abortion restrictions, challenges to, which suggested, may be viewed more skeptically.
Finally, the very welcome news that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does prohibit LGBTQ employment discrimination may be undermined by the court’s fulsome embrace of religious rights that may override those of the LGBTQ community in where the two clash in the future.
However, somewhat overlooked this term was the court’s decision not to hear challenges by the gun rights crowd to a plethora of state and local firearms restrictions much to the chagrin it has to be said of its most conservative members. This is very good news indeed since it appears to reaffirm the majority’s view in a SCOTUS dominated by conservatives that the misguided decision in District of Columbia v Heller upholding the individual right to own a firearm nevertheless and I can think of three reasons why he has sided with the liberals/moderates on this issue.
First, Roberts is no doubt mindful of Heller’s assertion that the decision did not mean that the regulation of gun rights was foreclosed. Casting doubt on that element of Heller would serve to undermine the entire decision and make it appear as a meaningless, not to mention dishonest, gesture to those concerned about gun violence. Second, to go further than Heller itself and eviscerate the ability of federal, state and local governments to regulate firearms would simply invite a future more moderate court (and, yes, that day will come) to revisit Heller as a whole, thus undoing one of the Roberts’ court’s landmark decisions. By refusing to go to the extreme, Roberts may protect Heller and his legacy.
Finally, whilst his most conservative brethren are likely driven by ideology to the exclusion of common sense, I doubt that Roberts wishes his legacy to add substantially to the carnage of gun violence in a nation already plagued with far more than any other advanced society.
Whatever his reasons Roberts in this case has done an enormous service to the country by ameliorating the otherwise pernicious effects of Heller.
In this timely piece from the LA Times we learn about two working mothers, one in California and one in Texas, and their very different health care experiences thanks to the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid to low-income adults, or lack thereof, in their states. The California mum (Jenny) whose state enthusiastically embraced the ACA, has health coverage which kicked in last year when she was hospitalized from a severe infection. Texas on the other hand opted out of the Medicaid expansion and the Texan mum’s (Courtney) experience reflects that fact; without health coverage she’s not able to afford asthma inhalers nor dental treatment for a broken molar she received in a domestic dispute. Courtney’s been living on Orajel, she says.
In fact recent research has concluded that the Red States who refused Medicaid expansion suffered a higher mortality rate among near elderly low-income adults compared to states that expanded the program. The result is that the states who opted out likely sustained almost 16,000 avoidable deaths during the period studied.
The fate of the ACA now rests in the hands of an ideologically extreme right-wing Supreme Court (SCOTUS) in California v Texas stemming from an effort by Texas and 17 other Red States joined now by the Trump administration to overturn the ACA. (The result will not be known until next year). It’s difficult not to see this as anything other than a continuation of an expanding war on Blue States who typically provide their citizens with more and better services. It’s bad enough that Texas and the others demonstrate such a studied unconcern for the health and well-being of their own residents, but it’s truly reprehensible that they’re driven to seriously damage that of low-income people in the rest of America. Apparently, Texas politicians will not rest until Jenny’s experience in California mirrors that of Courtney. Misery really does love company it seems.
And if Republicans win the November election, we can be assured that any chance of a meaningful replacement for the ACA in the event that SCOTUS throws it out will be just as dead as those 16,000 people who died prematurely. Nor should we forget that if the law falls, all who enjoy private health insurance will once again be subject to caps on their coverage, prohibitions on pre-existing conditions and the other means of victimization in the tool bags of the insurance companies.
All of which is a strong reminder that the sooner we crush the GOP at the ballot box, the better it will be for our collective welfare.
Consider these words written in 2012 by non-partisan political scientists Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein:
The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; anding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.
Eight years on things have got demonstrably worse. Republicans continue efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act both legislatively (in 2017, which failed) or in court as GOP states led by Texas pursue a lawsuit currently pending before the Supreme Court that may see the ACA overturned next spring. The consequences to millions of Americans would be devastating.
This in the face of a virulent pandemic with more millions of Americans losing their jobs and their health care who will likely need the ACA. In the current health crisis, the Republicans’ rush to open up the economy before infection rates have decreased or we have adequate testing and contact tracing capabilities promises to cause thousands of unnecessary deaths – particularly among the elderly.
Near the end of a book I was reading recently was this description of a familiar political leader:
He was impervious to advice. He listened but did not absorb the opinions of others. If critics persisted (according to one of his senior staff members) ‘he would break into short-tempered fits of enraged agitation’. He brushed aside uncongenial facts so habitually that his staff began to filter out intelligence of the worst complexion. He displayed in all this not a shred of self-criticism. When things went wrong he blamed others’.
Characterizing his subject as sulky, vindictive, intolerant and irascible, the author goes on to cite his subject’s poor powers of leadership which were masked with a self-constructed myth of infallibility. Add a few more equally unpleasant traits such as bullying, endless lying and bullshitting, a complete absence of empathy and a demand for loyalty from others which goes unreturned and we have a fairly complete picture of Donald Trump, right? Indeed. But the the excerpt is from Why the Allies Won by historian Richard Overy, published in 1995, and the subject is Adolf Hitler.
Now obviously Trump is no Hitler. For one thing, Hitler wrote a book, Mein Kampf. Trump, who has the attention span of a gnat and can’t even sit still long enough to read the President’s Daily Brief (with potentially disastrous consequences) has likely never even read a book cover to cover much less written one (having a book ghost written for you doesn’t count).
More significantly, there is no evidence that Trump harbors a megalomaniacal desire to conquer the world; in fact he has more of a penchant for retreating from commitments abroad and betraying allies – Kurds and Afghans so far, and probably our NATO allies too given half a chance. And whilst Trump is monstrously incompetent, narcissistic and vile (among other things), there is no evidence that he is an actual monster capable of acts of unspeakable evil. Fortunately for us, Trump is constrained by his own enormous limitations, principally his own monumental stupidity; for example, he is still andemic even after everything that’s happened.
There really isn’t much doubt about this and it has been amply demonstrated both publicly before our eyes and in myriad accounts from those who have had to deal with him. He has some smarts, of course, but they’re confined to a gift for relentless self-promotion combined with an uncanny ability to manipulate the media and to exploit the vulnerable by drawing out their very worst instincts.
Second his ambitions, thank the Lord, seem to be limited to getting re-elected and, as Max Boot writes, “..the rallies and the ratings“. His ineptitude protects us from his worst authoritarian instincts but also carries with it devastating consequences for the nation in the face of a deadly pandemic.
All the caveats aside, however, the similarities between the two men’s character traits are unmistakable. Trump’s demonstrated lack of empathy and under constant bombing, or his soldiers later in the war sustaining one crushing defeat after another.
One more trait they share is a gross overestimation of their own abilities. Hitler thought he was a better general than his field marshals whilst Trump thought he could actually function as president of his nation. Both were wrong. For Germany it brought catastrophe but then a better future. Will America salvage something good also from our own ongoing catastrophe? The jury is still out on that one.
Some recent polls show Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic is approved by 55-60% of Americans. That is simply insane. Here’s why.
A New York Times article succinctly summarized the administration’s early inaction and mistakes regarding the looming public health disaster:
A series of missteps and lost opportunities dogged the nation’s response.
Among them: a failure to take the pandemic seriously even as it engulfed China, a deeply flawed effort to provide broad testing for the virus that left the country blind to the extent of the crisis, and a dire shortage of masks and protective gear to protect doctors and nurses on the front lines, as well as ventilators to keep the critically ill alive.
‘This could have been stopped by implementing testing and surveillance much earlier — for example, when the first imported cases were identified,’ said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Columbia University in New York.
This despite warnings by the intelligence community in early January of the seriousness of the spreading virus in China, not to mention numerous and urgent red flags raised on both the possibility of pandemic and our lack of preparedness to meet it. That lack of preparedness was caused primarily by the administration’s own self-inflicted wounds such as dismantling the National Security Council Directorate for Global Health and Security and Bio-Defense established under President Obama which would have been laser focused and vocal on the emerging crisis in Wuhan, had it still been around, and the idiotic unraveling of our network of public health liaison officials in China established and buttressed in both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations which likely prevented the alarm being raised even earlier.
And then of course there’s the testing debacle which has made us a laughing stock for our incompetence and contributed materially to the fact that we now have more infections than any other country and are heading to a best case scenario of between 100,000 to 200,00 deaths from COVID-19.
But the greatest of Trump’s sins was the fact that thanks to his efforts to downplay the deadly threat posed by the virus we lost valuable time – two precious months of inertia and fumbles in fact – which combined with other missteps has ensured that while South Korea will be the exemplar of how to handle a pandemic, we will be at the other end of the scale, an example of what not to do. And how many scores of thousands of preventable deaths we will we suffer as a result?
Through it all, Trump has bombarded the American public with a mountain of lies and bullshit – a cascade that continues unabated, interspersed with blaming everyone and their mother for his disastrous handling of the pandemic whilst congratulating himself on a job well done. And now, somehow, he’s able to swing from saying on February 26th that we only have fifteen cases and that “..soon it will be down to close to zero..” to congratulating himself that there will only be 100,000 or 200,000 dead Americans when this thing is over.
I get that in times of crisis Americans tend to rally round the flag and the president. But history will not be kind to Donald Trump in his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic no matter what he does from this point (in contrast to many of our state governors and local officials who stepped up to fill the void of absent federal leadership). And neither should we.
Do you find yourself running out of words to describe President Donald J. Trump? Well then you’ve come to the right place. I started compiling a personal dictionary of adjectives to describe him since he began his campaign that I’d like to share with you now. This is a work in progress that I will keep at the top of the blog for awhile – maybe until Election Day. I plan to link the words to news stories and opinion pieces that are apropos to the words.
Here are the words you can use to meticulously describe President Trump.
Incompetent Aberrant Presumptuous Cynical Wanton Retaliatory Amoral Puerile Malignant Atavistic Neurotic Autocratic Bawdy Negligent Sordid Catty Malevolent Severe Belligerent Ignominious Mercurial Bigoted Tyrannical Incurious Salacious Brazen Calamitous Vindictive Rapacious Persecutory Sinful Churlish Evil Volatile Combative Acrid Lewd Confused Kackistocratical Resentful Hubristic Contemptuous Mendacious Contentious Impulsive Corrupt Vituperative Crooked Slimy Cruel Decadent Repetitive Indignant Deceptive Insolent Antagonistic Detestable Nihilistic Pugnacious Dictatorial Dumb Reckless Duplicitous Egotistical Extreme Feckless Amateurish Snide Glandular Rude Capricious Greasy Megalomaniacal Harsh Misogynistic Truculent Coercive Hostile Wicked Hurtful Immoral Arrogant Imperious Profane Inane Scandalous Petty Inimical Licentious Circumlocutionary Louche Aggressive Manipulative Vainglorious Mindless Wayward Narcissistic Xenophobic Nasty andemics” target=”_blank”>Nepotistic Obscene Erratic Obstructive Paranoid Bellicose Destructive Perfidious Soft Petulant Crass Racist Defensive Rakish Annoying Ribald Demagogic Savage Desperate Scornful Captious Shameless Authoritarian Stupid Vexatious Abusive Vulgar Devious Bullshitter LOSER