“Roseanne” a highly rated TV Show especially in middle America was tossed off the air shortly after its namesake star Roseanne Barr tweeted a weird and bizarrely racist tweet. We agree it was out-of-bounds and she should suffer consequences, but was pulling the hit show the right way to go? What struck us with all the elitist hand wringing by numerous panels across the airwaves from all sides of the political spectrum was how few of these talking heads ever saw the show. For instance, Rich Lowery the editor of the National Review on a CNN panel illustrated this best when after a long comment on the controversy admitted he had never watched the show. Judging from the reactions from the rest of the panelists, actual knowledge of the show was limited if not non-existent. Print commentators are no better. Washington post Columnist Kathleen Parker put it to Roseanne this way, “she’s what happens when a struggling network (ABC) sells out in a bid to capture President Trump’s base.” She obviously never took the time to watch the show or god forbid maybe she did but just didn’t understand it. For all these elites who never saw the show, we would like to point out this is exactly the kind of show we need on TV. A middle American family living pay check to pay check trying to survive in a sea of change. A family with health problems, daughters stuck in dead-end jobs, a mixed race grandchild with ex and current military parents and a grandchild with possible gender identity problems. One sister is conservative and the other liberal. The patriarch is coping with a changing construction labor market. Talk about diverse people dealing with real problems. More importantly, the show did it with great humor. This is anything but the Trumpist propaganda as some people have portrayed it. Like shows before it such as “All in the Family” and “Will and Grace” they presented problems and situations not by hitting people over the head but by showing real people in ways the audience could relate to and begin to understand. Humor can bring an understanding in ways other venues just can’t. While the program had big audience, apparently the elites demanding the cancellation of the show weren’t part of it. If they watched the show, they might have seen its great value.
Uncategorized
The Future Party 3
How realistic is it a new successful major party could actually come into existence? With any new product, the first question, is there a market for it? While on the surface overwhelmingly Republicans appear to be Trump supporters. The Wall Street Journal /NBC polling put Trump’s approval rating among Republicans is 80% to 15% disapproval. Looks as if Republicans and Trump are synonymous. However, the poll dug deeper to show only 54% favor Trump over party while 40% favor party over Trump. While Trunpists are clearly a majority of in the party, a sizable put party above Trump. Conversely, The Liberal dominated Democrats are near unanimous is their opposition to Trump 91% to 7%. Yet while those Democrats considering themselves liberals has grown to 51%, 47% consider themselves moderate/conservative. Serious minorities in both parties are less than enthusiastic Trumpists or liberals even though they’re not dominant in either party. This means the candidates put forth by the dominant wings of their respective parties may not reflect their views and desires. Given the extreme wings control of primaries they aren’t likely to get such candidates reflecting them any time in the future.
So what, you might say. They’re just minorities and minorities don’t win. Remember we’ve just mentioned Democrats and Republicans, but according to the latest Gallup Poll, Republicans make up only 24% of the population while the Democrats are marginally better at 29%. Fully 45% are independents. These are people refusing to identify with either party let alone with their extreme wings. Taken together with the party minorities it appears there is major part of the voting public not fully served by the candidates of the two major parties. This is a market worth pursuing.
The “Future Party” Continued
Given our two major parties either are in alignment on major policies or in silent agreement to keep certain hot button issues at the boiling point, a little competition might be expected to come in to take advantage of an under served market. There actually are people who have noticed continuing down our present fiscal path can only end in disaster. The only question is when. Maybe they’ve noticed our rapidly aging population and realize it is also on the verge of declining. Just to keep our social programs going we need more not fewer people. Free markets have raised millions and millions of people out of grinding poverty and some recognize this and fear the effects of a reversal. We live in a shrinking world and it’s unreasonable to think we can be a walled off “Big Switzerland.” Most don’t want to be asked if they’re pro-life or pro-choice when they’re actually somewhere in the middle. Instead of endless fruitless fighting about guns many are asking if all these people knew the perpetrators of these mass murders were disturbed or had mental problems why was d nothing was done? All these people just might be asking “where do I go to find somebody to represent my views?”
Progressives may feel they have won the culture wars, but the backlash has contributed mightily to the fact Democrats control very little that matters. Further it has greatly contributed to the nations ugly divide. An update of William Graham Sumner’s “Forgotten Man” might be illuminating. In his 1876 essay he put it in algebraic terms,
As soon as A observes something which seems to him wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X, or, in better case, what A, B, and C shall do for X… What I want to do is to look up C. I want to show you what manner of man he is. I call him the Forgotten Man. perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. he is the man who never is thought of…. I call him the forgotten man… He works, he votes, generally he prays—but he always pays…”
The “Future” Party
The funeral of Barbara Bush, the matriarch of a preeminent Republican family illuminates just how broken things are. While former Presidents of both parties attended there was a notable no-show, the present Republican President Donald Trump. Now sitting presidents don’t always go to first lady funerals, but who wouldn’t want to be seen paying his respects to “America’s Grandmother,” especially a publicity addict like Trump. He didn’t go simply because he wouldn’t have been welcome. Think about it. The leader of the Republican Party wasn’t welcome at the funeral of the wife of one Republican president and the mother of another. If this doesn’t alert the nation to a major split in one of our two major parties nothing will. In fact, most of the Republican attendees must feel they no longer have a party. Rolling over for the present President would mean surrendering their values. According to recent polls, they are a minority in their party, with the President viewed favorably by at least 70-80% of Republicans. As the Senator from Arizona, Jeff Flake, found there is no room for those old Goldwater-Reagan people in the present party.
A move to the other major party offers no welcoming home either. If you’re a free market Republican strongly favoring trade agreements such as the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) you might find kindred souls among the Democrats. After all, it was negotiated by the then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton under the Obama administration. Surely on this issue at least these Republicans could join with Democrats. This would be way off base. To placate the dominant progressive wing of that party, Clinton simply ran away from her own handiwork. Bernie Sanders and the progressives didn’t want any part of TPP so she caved. Odd, the dominant Trump wing of the Republicans had exactly the same position on TPP as the dominant progressive wing of the Democrats. On closer inspection this isn’t odd at all . On major issues these supposed blood rivals are in basic agreement or have symbiotic relationship. Continue reading
China
If the Russian situation isn’t enough to keep you up at night, our “policy” in the Far East should do the job. North Korea threatens us with nuclear tipped missiles it hasn’t quite perfected and we agree to a summit that can do nothing but enhance the prestige of that country’s dictator. We are counting on China. to apply pressure on the North Korean Dictator Kim to give up his Nuclear weapon systems, at the same time we are on the verge of a trade war with them over their predatory trade policies. Seems China is in a fortuitous of position to get a pass on trade if they help us on North Korea. How did China get in this position and we ended up on the horns of the dilemma?
Now, North Korea is a Chinese Satellite much the same as Belarus is to Russia. Both look to their masters before taking any action. What if Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko was determined to undertake a nuclear program to threaten its NATO neighbors especially Poland, Lithuania and Latvia. Would our President meet with him to get him to give up his program? Of course Putin would offer to mediate the problem if we would remove our sanctions on Russia for his good offices. One would like to think we wouldn’t fall for this and would properly hold the puppet master Putin responsible . and go right after him.
Yet this is the same as our East Asia Dilemma. If Kim didn’t know his master he wouldn’t have been on the next train to Beijing when Xi whistled. Don’t be fooled with the reports China has been taken aback by North Korean actions. If China didn’t want North Korea to have Nuclear missiles it would never happen. Kim would get the message and stop the program or he would be gone and someone more obedient would take his place After all China is the only country providing anything of value to North Korea. There would be no collapse sending millions of starving Koreans into China, just a quiet military coup. Those that have profited so handsomely from North Korean Stalinism only have to be assured of their positions with the new boss. So why doesn’t China make the move? Simply because this situation serves China’s purpose. Think about it. China threatens major trade routes counter to our and our allies interests. They steal our and other’s intellectual property along with other unfair trade practices. Without the North Korean situation, we would be taking a much more adversarial attitude towards China. Yes we’ve threatened put on some tariffs but those will probably go in payment for any help China gives in halting the North Korean Nuclear program. You just can’t punish someone when you’re simultaneously begging for their help. China has us just where they want us.
Detour on the Road 