Previous | Next | Senate races | Menu
New polls:
Dem pickups: (None)
GOP pickups: (None)
Sunday Mailbag
Today's letters cover a lot of ground.
Politics: TrumpWatch
G.W. in Oxnard, CA, writes: I disagree with D.M. in Berlin that Convicted Felon Trump (CFT) is a narcissist. I got an A in psychology 101 in 1979 and I'm sure there have been no advancements in the field in the intervening years, so I feel qualified to give my expert opinion. CFT doesn't have a superiority complex with narcissistic tendencies, he has an inferiority complex and his overcompensation for his very well-founded feelings of inferiority leads to behavior that mimics narcissistic tendencies. CFT felt unloved and unappreciated by his parents, for good reason. His mother, an immigrant, is the source of CFT's pathological hatred of immigrants. CFT could never earn his father's respect, leaving him with a pathological need for approval. This is why CFT enjoys having fans who believe—or at least are willing to say they believe—things that are provably false. CFT had the richest people in the country at his inauguration and partners with Elon Musk because it allows him to have the illusion of being on a par with those men. For those who dislike the fact CFT has suffered no consequences for is misdeeds, it may be small solace, but at least you can know that CFT has always been a miserable person and always will be. He will never be able to prove he isn't as inferior as he feels. That is because he is, in fact, as inferior as he feels.
C.S. in Linville, NC, writes: As a parent of a 2½ year old toddler I think DJT's behavior is even simpler and earlier rooted than the formation of his EGO. As readers of this site who are parents surely remember, toddlers have a uncanny way of trying to get what they want and keeping attention on themselves. I can only imagine how awful DJT must have been as a toddler. I'm willing to bet whoever looked after him (his nannies) did what ever was quickest to shut him the he** up during his tantrums, which I'm positive were numerous. Raising a toddler while watching DJT's constant need to have attention focused on himself has made me realize he is still a spoiled little brat toddler at his core.
G.L. in Chicago, IL, writes: In response to the question from D.A. in Minneapolis about Donald Trump's random capitalization of words in the middle of sentences: My parents do that too. They'll claim that it's a holdover from German (which they don't speak, but it is the largest part of our ancestry, and the language does capitalize all nouns). However, they started doing it when they joined the tea party, and it only comes out when they're writing about politics. I see it a fair amount from right wingers, seemingly when they're especially impassioned and want to show how incredibly important their words are(n't).
P.H. in Davis, CA, writes: You wrote" "[Trump] has a particular, longstanding animus about wind energy. And whatever the reasons for that might be, they aren't solely political. He has been railing against windmills and wind farms since the 1990s, long before he was a politician for sale to the highest corporate bidder."
The reason is that he felt wind farm turbines off the coast of his golf course property in Scotland would ruin the views from the property.
R.G.N. in Seattle, WA, writes: As I observe the calm acceptance and even acclaim awarded to the Trump administration by many of its supporters, I am reminded of the book enumerating and explaining The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity by Carlo M. Cipolla. The first basic law warns the reader that "always and inevitably, everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation." This explains a convicted felon and liar being elected in the presidential election.
The second law states that "the probability that a certain person will be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person," explaining how otherwise normal and basically nice people can make such a stupid mistake. There are more laws explaining why people would make a bad choice without gain and the possibility of loss, why non-stupid people underestimate the damage stupid people are capable of, and that stupid people are the most dangerous type of person. It's a short book, but it explains so much about the last presidential election and the outcome of stupid choices made by a majority of voters.
S.N. in Sparks, NV, writes: You wrote that "the administration is already considering changing Fort Liberty back to Fort Bragg." In the MAGA worldview, this makes perfect sense. Honoring an insurrectionist is much more important than honoring liberty.
J.B. in Socorro, NM, writes: In your Crazypants Roundup, you suggested keeping track of the number of lawsuits triggered by the actions of the current administration. Just Security has recently started such a tracker. Currently the count is at 33.
E.W. in Silver Spring, MD, writes: For those who wish to track the XO related lawsuits that are piling up, a tracker has been put together at CourtWatch.
D.E. in Lancaster, PA, writes: Sometimes I feel I'm so connected to world through the Internet. Then, other times, I feel perennially late to the party. I just discovered this funny take on the famous Mary Poppins word, "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious," but then discovered you can get the MAGA version on shirts and coffee mugs:
I hate when my invitation gets lost in my spam box!
But is this phrase referring to Elon or the other guy?
J.L. in Los Angeles, CA, writes: Has anyone noticed the irony? Trump isn't dismantling the "deep state;" he's creating it!
A.V. in Cedar Falls, IA, writes: I don't ask for much. But please, please, camera crew working today's Super Bowl: One more shot of Taylor than Trump for the day.
I'm not a Swiftie, it's just that I know it will drive F.F. von Clownstick crazy. The tirade, oh the tirade afterward.
And Philly fans, I'm counting on your boos to fill the state, and not just the stadium.
Politics: MuskWatch
M.S. in Springfield, OR, writes: What Elon Musk is doing now with the federal government should come as no surprise to anyone who has worked in the tech world.
I worked at an Internet start-up company during the dot-com boom and bust of the late 1990s and early 2000s. During the boom, it was like an office party and work combined. Twelve- to eighteen-hour days, catered meals, a recreation room with pool tables and ping-pong, visiting chair-massage therapists, refrigerators packed with energy drinks, cabinets filled with junk food. Work was life and life was work and "fun" was the operative word. But no one denied why we were really there: to stick around long enough for the company to go public and make us all rich.
There was talk that we'd get on the stock exchange in about a year. But then came the bust. One day in early 2001, a stranger came in and announced he was the new CEO and was bringing in a new leadership team. Over the course of an hour, about half the workforce got a tap on the shoulder from one of the strangers, was escorted to a private room, then a few minutes later packed up their personal items from their desk, said good-bye, and left. Throughout the ensuing year, the departures continued. Any given week might bring a single layoff, or an entire team. Sometimes we would see the tap on the shoulder; sometimes the person simply disappeared. Fun had turned to fear. Then it was my turn. I heard later they got it down to the two founders and a handful of friends, after which they were bought by another company.
The techies didn't make up this purge method, but they do approach it from a unique context. The goal is to consolidate money, power and control into the hands of the few; that by itself is also nothing new. The unique part is that the purpose of the product or the consequences of its use are immaterial. Whether or not someone buys a widget or a piece of gossip, or if they even need it, is irrelevant. All that matters is that the consumers of widgets and gossip use the platform owned by the wealthy few.
We can see what happens when this thinking is applied to the functions of government. The shared reality of systems created for the benefit of the many is antithetical to the self-centered myopia of the few. Elon Musk and his ilk are not driven by some ideology of government efficiency or responsible economics. They are breaking things and having fun. And they have never had access to such a magnificent playground. The only question is whether or not any adults will show up to send them home before they topple the swing sets and poop in the sand.
J.A. in Austin, TX, writes: I wonder if the seizing of the payment apparatus of the government isn't part of a larger plan than just stopping payment to individuals and groups that Elon Musk and Musk's Rats don't like. If they are willing to ignore the existing budget passed by Congress, and they have control of the payment system, why not just pay for anything they like? Who are those idiots in Congress to tell us the best way to spend money? Congress passed its budget, now let them enforce it.
A $10 billion payment to Trump? Why not? Nothing to stop them. And why stop at just $10 billion?
And if doing something like that crashes the U.S. dollar? Who cares, they have Dogecoin, or $Trump, or whatever imaginary pretend money they can make other suckers believe is worth something. Or they will have put all their assets in rubles. And they'll turn around and blame it on a "globalist" banker conspiracy that hates America and "real" Americans.
H.S. in Lake Forest, CA, writes: A 5:30 pm Friday announcement, presumably by the new acting director of the NIH, has thus far been under the radar in mainstream news, but has the scientific community spinning: The NIH will limit indirect costs of grants to 15%, retroactively for all existing and future grants, amounting to a savings of $3-4 billion. It may not be obvious to the general public, but this policy, if allowed to stand, will be the end of the U.S. as a research powerhouse and place of innovation. Most major research universities, such as UCLA, have indirect cost rates of 50-60% in order to afford the infrastructure necessary to run research operations. Some of the famous biomedical research institutes of the country, such as the Salk, Scripps, and Burnham institutes, home to many Nobel Laureates, require 80-90% overhead to break even, and would have to declare bankruptcy within a year if this stands.
Personally, I bless the day I decided to leave my professorship at one of these prestigious research institutes and move to a tuition-driven healthcare university of lesser prestige but better work-life balance. Many of my colleagues are not so fortunate, and I fear for the impact of this on the entire higher education enterprise in the country.
There was a time, not so long ago, when support for research and education was a bipartisan issue. Not so much in the times of MAGA. I guess keeping people ignorant will keep them in the MAGA tent.
S.C-M. in Scottsdale, AZ, writes: I speculate that Marko Elez's resignation (whatever that actually means) is more a result of him coming to realize he is extremely vulnerable to prosecutions because of his actions. He may have been awakened to the very real possibility that Musk nor Trump will actually protect him in the future.
J.E. in San Jose, CA, writes: It seems the biggest barrier to Elon Musk and his Gen-Z engineers controlling federal financial levers may be COBOL, or at least their lack of understanding how to use it. Perhaps we can negotiate some concessions by giving them the instructions. After they agree, we'll provide them—in cursive.
G.W. in Oxnard, CA, writes: In your item "MuskWatch: Pushing All the Wrong Buttons?", you wrote, "We stand by our view that there is no way that two men who both have giant egos, who both see themselves as "disruptors," who both pride themselves on being "alpha males" can co-exist, long-term."
I have a wild theory as to how it might be possible for the arrangement to last for a long time: Musk has leverage to ruin Convicted Felon Trump (CFT). Perhaps the legendary (mythical?) pee pee tape or some other kompromat. Perhaps Musk bought CFT debt from whoever held it (maybe Russian oligarchs who were eager to sell the debt because they thought CFT was going to lose the election?) and CFT is not in as good a financial position as he pretends, and he would be ruined if the debt was collected. This seems implausible, but the longer Musk serves as senior co-president, especially while creating bad press and decreasing approval ratings, without significant pushback from junior co-president CFT, the more plausible this speculation would be.
G.R. in Iqaluit, NU, Canada , writes: Saw this today. Hopefully it caused a major rift in the Musk-Trump bromance:
Politics: Gaza
F.D. in St Paul, MN, writes: So, now we're going to use the U.S. Military to "cleanse" Gaza, take over the Panama Canal, occupy Greenland AND suppress dissent in the United States, using only leaders that pass TFG's loyalty tests? Good luck with that.
E.F. in Baltimore, MD, writes: Even Donald Trump isn't deluded enough to think he can actually get away with this. Any Arab leader who signed on to his Gaza plan would promptly find himself assassinated or overthrown. To use your own words from the following section, he's "pumping out vast mountains of... stuff." Just another distraction, to overload the chattering classes while he continues stealing everything in D.C. that isn't nailed down. Not that he wouldn't love stealing some valuable Mediterranean beachfront property, too.
The sanest explanation for all this insanity, is that it's his extreme opening bid in a negotiation, so he can allow himself to be bargained down to something not quite so insane, like a plush resort inside the Gaza Strip. But even that can't happen, as long as Hamas still has a presence there. They like money, too, but they won't abandon their vendetta against Israel.
S.K. in Bethesda, MD, writes: I think you may have missed one thing that could stop Donald Trump from moving forward with his plan. If OPEC—or, more specifically, the Arab oil producing countries—feel strongly about it, they could reduce production and drive up gas prices. It's fair to ask whether they feel strongly enough about it to do that, but historically, they have needed to demonstrate solidarity with the Palestinians to avoid domestic unrest, and this plan could be a step too far. If gas prices go up, or are even threatened to go up, that will definitely get Trump's attention (and yes, we aren't currently dependent on Mideast oil, but the market is the market and if they reduce production, prices will rise, even for us).
P.G. in Berkeley, CA (with an assist from John Milton), writes: Samson was captured by the Philistines (a tribe that lived in Gaza and became famous for their disdain of culture). He was brought to their temple and bound with chains since he was really strong, being Samson. To make it impossible for him to harm them, his eyes were torn out, rendering him eyeless.
Samson was really strong, as I noted. So, in a fit of rage, he pulled on his chains so hard that the temple was torn down around him. He was killed, the Philistines were killed... everyone was killed, actually. (There is some metaphor in there for sure.) But because of the destruction, the land became available for new development. A young member of the tribe of Israel named Kushner came unto Gaza and decided to build resorts for the wealthy of all nations in a secret pact with his father-in-law Don, a leader of another very big nation. But Kushner and Don didn't really have money for such a project. Using their wiles, they convinced the rich of other nations to give them the money in exchange for promises not to poison them. Delilah was sent to work in the kitchen. And so luxury came unto Gaza.
J.C. in Oxford, England, UK, writes: I can't believe you're missing the big picture. Join the dots, people!
M.D.H. in Coralville IA, writes: I posted something similar to your views about those who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Kamala Harris because Joe Biden failed to make Israel stop killing people in Gaza, noting that I and many others had posted warnings before the election that Trump would be worse.
A friend who is a U.S. citizen of Palestinian descent was deeply upset by my post. I am sympathetic; her family was violently expelled from their homes some decades ago and she knows people who were more recently killed by Israeli bombs. But I refused to take down my post because as tragic as the situation is, hard political reality in the U.S. is what it is, and tactical errors have consequences. Should I have taken it down?
Politics: Oh, Canada!
K.T. in Sechelt, BC, Canada (by way of M.L. in Brookings, OR), writes: As a citizen of Canada, it is impossible to ignore the actions of Donald Trump. The U.S. is no longer seen as a trusted partner and ally to Canada. He wants to bully us into surrender of a 51 state. Canada has already started to boycott American-made goods and is rallying within provinces and territories, united to strengthen our interprovincial economy and increase trade with our other allies. Canada has had a long history of sharing the longest border, natural resources and goods and fighting next to the U.S., as an ally, in many wars. Now Canada is forced into a corner defense. We have implemented retaliating tariffs and committed to buy other than American products. The liquor stores have pulled all U.S.-made alcohol from their shelves. I was at the store today and there are small maple leaf stickers on shelves to highlight and remind us to buy Canadian products first. There is lots of produce from Mexico and central and south America that is in our stores and the U.S. produce will fade away. British Columbia has a huge greenhouse agriculture and will probably be expanded.
As a citizen of the U.S., I find it quite remarkable to see Trump for a second swipe as USA president. He gets a pass from Americans for his lies and bullying. Are we so exhausted from his continuous babble of slander and nonsense, false and misleading claims, that there is no energy for change? I read that he talks so much that they've had to hire additional stenographers to keep up. Last time in office, he had people around him that had some common sense and direction. Presently Trump seems surrounded by a powerful gathering of greed and focus of personal interests. History has shown that world balance can change very quickly and with devastating consequences; from rule of order to chaos. Impulsive decisions can lead to irreparable fallout. Maybe the Democratic Party remains stunned that they lost the election? Is there new leadership for change? Where is the challenge from the present government of legislators and judges to uphold the Constitution and follow the rule of law? Trump is moving fast and breaking things. He's throwing axes in the World-smash room-Stage, and we watch. It's madness!!
The U.S. is already looking like a different country and it is leaving a "stain" on the world entities with its proposals and policies.
T.G. in Toronto, ON, Canada (by way of G.C. in South Pasadena, CA), writes: To my American friends:
As many of you know, I have often jokingly referred to Canadians as polite Americans. Over the years, we have built a deep friendship and mutual respect for each other. However, considering the undeclared economic warfare the U.S. administration initiated against us this weekend, I trust you understand our politeness has its limits. Canadians now see you not as a partner but as an adversary.
In simple terms, your country has initiated economic warfare against mine by imposing 25% tariffs on everything we send you. Our response is to charge 25% on everything you send us. As our Prime Minister stated, "We didn't ask for this."
To put this in perspective, several provinces will be removing U.S. wines and liquor from their shelves. These empty shelves will serve as a stark reminder to Canadians of the issue. In Ontario alone, California wineries stand to lose $1 billion in sales, and Kentucky bourbons are about to disappear from the shelves, leading to a significant loss of revenue. That's just one province; there are nine more and two territories doing the same thing. Cars are going to become more expensive on both sides of the border because automobile manufacturing has become transnational. There are North American manufactured cars, not just U.S. cars. (Personally, I would love to see a 200% tariff on Teslas.)
For those guacamole lovers, expect avocados to increase in price as Mexico responds. Up here, grocery stores are already marking which products are made in Canada. This will hurt California, as we learn to do without strawberries in winter, preferring to wait until they are ready up here in late spring. Florida orange juice is on the tariff list, and the Florida and California citrus industries are about to take a hit. I can assure you, the price of eggs will be the least of your worries. These are small matters, but they result from economic warfare.
Some of you may be wondering how we got here.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the intention to implement a massive tax cut will only balloon your deficit. The belief that tariffs are the solution to this shortfall is misguided. Targeting your largest trading partner to cover the costs of poor policy is puzzling. If you buy our maple syrup, there is now a 25% tariff payable by the vendor, who has three options: absorb the 25% hit, pass on all or part of the increase to you and take the loss, or reduce the price or expenses to keep selling. Absorbing the cost is unlikely, which means your price for maple syrup will rise or people could lose their jobs. Yes, the U.S. Treasury will pocket the tariff, but it will merely offset the deficit created by the tax reduction.
Don't expect price reductions; instead, anticipate price increases. While I agree that the focus on maple syrup seems trivial, the effects on its price will extend to the costs of cars, houses, and anything else that involves purchases from a Canadian company.
As an aside, if you are a heavy-duty Temu customer, you're going to pay the China tariff—something that was overlooked in the uproar. Your cheap items just became more expensive.
You may have also heard that we are being punished for being lax on our border and for supposedly acting as a funnel for fentanyl into the U.S. In reality, only about 1% of that substance—43 lbs last year—originates from Canada. The same holds true for illegal immigrants; for us, a caravan consists of roughly 10 people. Also, do you honestly believe people will sneak into the U.S. when the temperature is 20 degrees below zero? Clearly, you are being fed a significant lie or gaslit.
Your government is not kidding when it promotes the idea of squeezing Canada and, when we capitulate, assimilating us into the U.S. Really? That isn't going to happen and, frankly, polite Canadians aren't so polite when a bully kicks sand in our faces. Your Special Forces gained profound respect for our guys in Afghanistan when they discovered first-hand how Canadians demonstrated the "Find Out" part of "F**k Around and Find Out."
As recently as this afternoon, February 3, after a call with our Prime Minister, your President, according to the Canadian Press, was pretty clear about his intentions: "What I'd like to see, Canada become our 51st state," Trump said from the Oval Office. The President said he'd like to see vehicle manufacturing take place entirely in the U.S. and the country doesn't need Canada's energy. Trump said if "people wanted to play the game right, it would be 100 percent certain they become a state."
Keep this in mind when gas prices in your Midwest rise thanks to the 10% tariff on the oil and gas you get from Alberta or, if things get really bad, the lights go out in the northeast U.S. as Ontario stops supplying electricity to New York state and others. As it is, electricity prices are most likely about to go up in New York thanks to the tariffs.
What concerns me most is that your elected representatives are silent when an undeclared economic war is declared on their watch without consultation.
I don't know how this will end. I just want each of you to know we will still be personal friends, but I'm not sure if the same can be said about our countries.
G.L. in Kelowna, BC, Canada, writes: While we certainly won't be lobbying Ottawa to outlaw Electoral-Vote.com, I can provide an out-of-country report on the impact of tariffs.
You have focused, unsurprisingly, on the direct impact for U.S. citizens, consumers, businesses of putting a 25% tax on everything coming into the country from Mexico and Canada, and an additional 10% if originating in China.
The other consequence—quite aside from the retaliatory tariffs#8212;are that your neighbors are pissed. Not the governments, the people themselves. Within hours of the tariff announcement, I overhead people in stores asking if they could easily identify "what's safe and what's from the enemy" (and staff responding positively to help remove U.S.-originating products from baskets). Today, when Donald Trump backed down and promised an extra month before implementing anything, I was in the recycling depot listening to angry working-class Canadians discussing how anyone in D.C. who thought we were going to become a state could "go f**k themselves," and how they were committed to cancelling various south-of-the-border vacations and U.S.-based purchases. I won't pretend I'm immune#8212;I've put back on the shelf things labeled "product of the U.S.A./Produit des E-U," and canceled some subscription plans from U.S.-based business that were nice, but not necessary.
Former Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland put it well in a CNN interview, noting that Americans are capitalists—they understand that the customer is always right—and that punching their biggest customer in the face wasn't a good way to run a business arrangement.
Even with Trump backing down, and saving U.S. residents from the immediate cost increases of tariffs, U.S. employees and exporters are going to feel the pain of their closest, richest neighbor deliberately choosing to forego products, or willingly spending more to get them someplace else. That's now locked in for a generation or more, because we know the U.S. isn't a trustworthy trading partner, and we've been shown that one man can both negotiate a new trade deal in 2018, and then call his own work a disaster in 2025.
So, if you're in the U.S., and you work in a factory that sells car parts to Canada, or at a cranberry farm that exports juice to Canada, or if your company was about to provide contracting services to Canada—if you wind up in economic difficulties when your customer pulls out, the only person to blame is a ketchup-throwing, diaper-wearing toddler playing golf in Florida. And while few people reading this supported him, you're all going to suffer for his tantrums.
M.A. in Montreal, Québec, Canada, writes: You wrote: "And as soon as Canada finally gets around to outlawing electoral-vote.com, it could make all of our readers into felons."
Ironically, I can imagine a near future where electoral-vote.com is banned in the U.S. and accessible in Canada. But don't worry, we'll be setting up proxies.
R.L.S. in Portland, ME, writes: Just a quick thank you for ending Monday's post with a much needed laugh. It really helped. We all need those lighthearted asides to keep out the pervasive gloom. I'm just hoping the King and Assistant President do not rescind any extradition treaties with the 'Nades. Maybe there's at least a glimmer of hope that some of us Electoral-Vote.com felons will get our just reward. A little prison time as guests of our neighbors north of the border is starting to look pretty good about now.
P.W. in Springwater, NY, writes: Far be it for me to tell you how to run your website, but do you think it might be time for electoral-vote.com to curry favor with Canada?
As of Monday morning, we should all be applauding Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for being the one politician who is standing up to the First Felon (FFOTUS). It's a shame U.S. politicians are too frightened to follow suit. In fact, rather than hoping that Canada, which according to FFOTUS, "ceases to exist as a viable Country...[and] should become our Cherished 51st State" I think we New Yorkers should lobby to become Canada's 11th province. Think of the advantages: no retaliatory tariffs for us, and no Trump! FFOTUS might even ask Co-President Musk to facilitate our leaving. He could claim his "fraudulent" New York conviction was of no significance because it was adjudicated in a foreign country, the Republican majority in Congress would grow, and he would rid himself of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and most especially, Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). In spite of the fact that the there might be negative economic consequences if New York departed, as you have pointed out, FFOTUS really doesn't care about things like the deficit, so I bet he'd be willing to give up his failing Trump Tower and count New York's entry into Canada as a "win."
(V) & (Z) respond: All we can say is: Who needs the Super Bowl, Saturday Night Live and Krispy Kreme donuts when you can have the Stanley Cup, Kids in the Hall and Tim Horton's, eh? (Does that help curry favour with our neighbours to the north?)
J.E. in Whidbey Island, WA, writes: I encountered this photo in my social media feeds on Monday. Seems like an apt metaphor.
Politics: The Air (Traffic) Up There
D.J. in Aurora, IL, writes: As someone who has logged his fair share of right seat time and now works in airline operations, I thought I might offer an industry perspective on the politics of flights at Washington National (a.k.a., DCA). The top 200-or-so most congested airports in the world generally follow the slot guidelines created by International Air Transport Association (IATA). This article has a great overview of that. The TL; DR version is that a slot is simply a license by an air carrier to takeoff or land during a particular time of day and, in some cases, time of year. Slots are usually awarded by a combination of auction and incumbency. Interestingly, slots do not always obligate a carrier to service a particular city pair or fly a particular type of aircraft, but changing the origin/destination and aircraft type does need to be coordinated in advance. Adherence to the time slot is paramount. Most airports have a use-it-or-lose-it policy that requires a carrier to use the slot or it will be given to a competitor. That causes some inefficient side effects, like ghost flights. If you've ever flown a nearly-empty airplane to a slot-constrained destination, this may be why. The United States loves to be exceptional, so we follow our own rules at three airports: JFK, LaGuardia, and Washington National, where the FAA directly administers the slot assignment process. We're not that creative, though, so it is mostly the same process that IATA follows, with the exception that Congress sets the slot limits, and Washington National has an inner and outer perimeter slot limit.
The first level of politics comes into play when deciding how many slots should be available. It's a game of tug-of-war between carriers, airport authorities, the host city, and regulators, who each have their own priorities. This is usually handled discreetly, but it is widely known that Delta Airlines advocated for more slots at Washington National while American and United opposed expansion. Cities also typically want more slots to serve their citizenry and spur growth, but sometimes oppose increases for a variety of reasons such as community noise or safety. Safety is the paramount consideration here, but it can be very hard to see where the line, is once the decision is taken out of the hands of the FAA. Until the recent tragedy, DCA had operated without a commercial fatality for over 40 years, even as traffic more than doubled. Every system has a breaking point, but it would be a distortion of bigly proportions to call the airport dangerous, as even after last week it is objectively orders of magnitude safer to fly to DCA than to get to D.C. just about any other way. Politicians, for their part, have been muddying the water with hyperbole for years when arguing that flights to DCA can or cannot be expanded for safety reasons. Take Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), who took the lead in speaking out against expansion, citing safety. I'm sure it's a coinkydink that United Airlines is a top donor. Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) argued strongly that expansion was safe. His #6 donor? Georgia-based Delta Air Lines. Luckily, we all know what it means when a politician's lips are moving... The best way to improve safety here is undoubtedly return control of the slot limit to the FAA. I've heard that bureaucrats are passé now, so I'm not holding my breath.
Once the number of slots are set, they are awarded and regulators approve carriers' operating plans for what cities they will serve. Safety comes into play pretty much only in the determination of what aircraft can operate on the route, but thankfully those rules are not politicized. While a carrier's routes are largely a business decision based on a fantastically complex strategic and logistical optimization problem, airlines are not blind to the impact that their choices have on relations with cities, pilot and flight attendant unions, alliance partners, and regulators. In today's partisan world, if a certain senator who happens to chair the Commerce committee (cough, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-TX, cough) or lead the Aviation subcommittee (cough, Sen. Jerry Moran, R-KS, cough) wants to connect their favorite city, a carrier might be wise to weigh that in their decision-making process. That said, Wichita (ICT) has been deserving of better access to D.C. for decades. It was the only top-100 U.S. metro in the DCA inner perimeter without service to either National or Dulles. American, in particular, has been expanding connections at ICT for a number of years, so this might be more of a case of fortuitous alignment of interests. Of course, since it is a zero-sum game, Wichita's gain is someone else's loss. American has reduced frequency to other markets.
I hope I've been able to shed some light on a complex subject!
R.A.G. in Seattle, WA, writes: Your comments about Air Traffic Control are accurate. Indeed, the whole story is intricate and (unsurprisingly) deeply political. Use of the country's airspace (the National Airspace System) has a 100+ year history, and includes interesting tidbits like why the president travels in it with the call sign "Air Force One" (or "Marine One," etc.).
One piece of the story is that much of what is coming home to roost now is that Ronald Reagan famously fired all of the U.S. Air Traffic controllers in the early 1980s, as they dared go on strike in concert with their union PATCO. At that time, much of the workforce was well-trained, experienced professionals*—many of them Vietnam era ex-military. Reagan summarily fired them en masse, and replaced them with untrained scabs. The Air Florida Flight 90 crash in 1982 at DCA is attributable to this action, as lines were long due to the slowed ATC work, and the pilots of that flight decided not to de-ice again because they'd need to get in line for departure again. Delays = pissed off customers = management threats to pilots = bad decision making = death. Recall this was not many years after deregulation of the airlines under federal law.
How do air traffic controllers learn their job? From experienced professionals, as actual documentation of how the tools work were never a priority. And there were now no experienced professionals to pass along their trade. Fast forward 20+ years, and those poorly trained controllers retired, passing their poor training on to a new generation that is now getting to retirement age as well. And this generation was just offered buyouts.
(V) very much understands the issues with legacy software that requires experience in use to be effective. It isn't just that the ATC systems are dated (they are) but the people running them are not being treated well because of political decisions, a precedent set by Saint Ronnie. And the most recent crash happened at the airport that now bears his name. Ouch.
You can bet Co-President Elon Musk is considering using AI to "update" these safety systems. I try not to draw a parallel to the legacy, dated systems that are in use to control the nation's nuclear arsenal. I've seen how "updating" those to AI turns out.
J.B. in Newport News, VA, writes: You wrote "Given that this appears to be an area where the budget-makers tend to cut corners, we think it is entirely believable that an overhaul is needed."
My sister-in-law worked on the ATC upgrade software as a Federal contractor for over three decades, interrupted by furloughs due to continuing resolutions and changes in prime contractors. It was almost as far from completion when she was forced into retirement as at the beginning. Requirements changed, the funding gaps forced largely new crews to start over many times, etc.
R.T. in Arlington, TX, writes: For over a decade, I've said that I'm glad Microsoft has never written flight control software, because I never want a pilot to have to reboot a plane's flight computer after it seizes up mid-flight. In more recent years, God help us if an unscheduled update starts while in flight.
Given how many times SpaceX has blown up test rockets, I can't imagine anyone turning Elon Musk loose with the air traffic control system. "Fail fast" is not going to work there.
A.K. in Pico Rivera, CA, writes: It is interesting that Donald Trump is leaning in on computers and software as the solution to the air crashes. His "solution" to the 737 max problems was to do away with software.
C.J.P. in Los Angeles, CA, writes: "I think what is going to happen is we're all going to sit down and do a great computerized system for our control towers. Brand new—not pieced together, obsolete," Donald Trump vowed.
Did this system reach obsolescence during the last 4 years? He handed Joe Biden a modern air traffic control system four years ago and now it is no good?
L.E. in Santa Barbara, CA, writes: In light of Co-President Musk's hackerboys takeover of the federal personnel/payroll system and Co-President Musk's interest in fixing it, I thought this old Dilbert from 1996 would be appropriate:
(Note: I think Scott Adams is an a**hole, but I was able to easily find this out on the web without ever clicking on his website.)
R.P. in Gloucester City, NJ, writes: You wrote: "The notion of making changes to complicated software, on the fly, when lives are on the line, sounds like a very bad idea to us."
Hm, "on the fly"—pun intended? It's a nice one.
(V) & (Z) respond: Very much intended.
Politics: Right Cross
R.G.N. in Seattle, WA, writes: At the Annual National Prayer Breakfast, Donald Trump announced to the audience that "We believe in our destiny and trust in the providence of almighty God." I suspect he used the imperial "We," but the audience probably regarded the announcement as inclusive.
What God was Trump referring to? Considering that the majority of those assembled considered themselves Christians, perhaps he was referring to Mammon, referred to in the Christian Bible as the Babylonian god of wealth. However, Trump is of German ancestry, so perhaps he was referring to Njǫrd, the Germanic god of wealth. My personal bet would be on Plutus, the Greek god of wealth who was blinded by Zeus so he couldn't choose who deserved riches.
A.L. in Sudbury, MA, writes: Trump's anti-Christian-bias task force can start by investigating Trump's own revocation of ICE's Sensitive Locations Policy. Christian churches of all types run immigration assistance programs and some offer sanctuary. These profoundly Christian endeavors are now under threat, thanks to faux Christian Trump and his administration. Anti-Christian bias indeed.
K.S. in Sharon, MA, writes: You wrote: "We are not aware of such expressions of anti-Christian sentiment."
(Very) long term (and never-miss-a-day regular) reader, but first- or maybe second-time writer. I think you missed the code here. "Anti-Christian bias" means preventing "Christians" from discriminating against users and providers of health care they don't like—abortion, contraception, gender affirming care, etc. "Anti-Christian bias" means preventing public accommodations from discriminating against people and groups they find egregious to their god such as LGBTQ people, loose women, woke liberals, etc.
In short, "Anti-Christian bias" is code for any effort to hold "Christians" to compliance with antidiscrimination laws targeting other populations.
F.L. in Allen, TX, writes: You wrote that Gayle Benson, the owner of the New Orleans Saints, who is embroiled in a pedophilia scandal, is a devout Catholic.
I grew up in Baton Rouge and went to LSU (twice) and have been a long-suffering Saints fan. I was brought up Catholic (quelle surprise), but if asked I say I'm a catholic with a small "c." I've been in Texas (for all my sins) for too long, as this was news to me.
To my point, I wish to coin a new political-religious term: CINO—Catholic in Name Only.
Politics: Reasons for Optimism
P.R. in Arvada, CO, writes: It seems as if, every week now, there are questions wondering if there is anything that can be done to stop the Trump Administration, or looking for some hope that it will not be so bad in the end. I have a couple of observations that may help make life easier while it seems as though everything is going to hell in a handbasket.
First, during this initial period where everything is happening everywhere all at once, take a step back and realize that you are worrying about something you can't do anything about. Now is the time to focus on what to do when the dust settles. As an example, if you ever end up in the situation where your house or neighborhood is threatened by a natural disaster, it can be overwhelming watching it happen. Lots of second-guessing what you could have done but didn't, etc. It doesn't help. The best thing to do is to prepare for the moment you can get back to your house. Have you called the insurance company so the assessor can get there (especially important when there are lots of other houses at risk), what do you need for clean-up, do you need help, etc.? You can be very productive preparing for tomorrow instead of focusing on something you can do nothing about. In the same way first responders are active during the disaster, there are a lot of people whose sole focus is on the here and now filing lawsuits to stop things from happening, making sure people have information they need to get past the initial blitz, etc. We can focus on how to help tomorrow.
Secondly, for as much as Donald Trump claims to have a mandate and the backing of the people, even he seems to know this isn't really true. Next month the budget is due. If what they are doing is truly popular, a significant number of their goals could be achieved. Cut funding to USAID? Done. Cut funding to the Department of Education? Done. Cuts to [insert pet program here]? Done. Just now they could be talking about what they are cutting and how much they are saving and how it is the will of the people. None of this is happening, though. A fully legal, constitutional way of doing things would achieve their aims and take a lot of effort to get back if it was even possible. It isn't happening because there is no support for it, even among Republicans.
This administration is definitely going to hurt some people, but we can help those people. The country will still be here in 4 years, though. Let the first responders work today, and write to your representatives and tell them you expect them to very vocally explain what they are going to do when they have the House or the Senate or the presidency again.
Politics: The Resistance
S.K. in Sunnyvale, CA, writes: You wrote: "And please be clear, we do not see this as a partisan issue at all. It's a good government versus very bad government issue, in our view."
With the trajectory of a particular party's rhetoric (particularly from their caucus that purports to defend freedom) over the past decade or so, good government versus bad government has become a partisan issue.
E.H. in Westford, MA, writes: Regarding "Are Democrats Falling Into Musk's Trap?", the event I attended in Springfield, MA, on Wednesday was specifically to resist Project 2025 and the Trump/Musk coup. "We Choose To Fight" was coordinated nationally by Indivisible, and timed to work alongside the Democratic filibuster in the Senate over the appointment of Russell Vought to oversee OMB. I have not yet investigated enough see why the USAID site was the one that got so much coverage, when nationally we were highly focused on Vought, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump. I was told at the Springfield event that the previous day's event was covered that evening by Rachel Maddow on her MSNBC show, before the USAID protest.
I don't think Democrats are falling into a trap. We do need to get even better at powering our messages through the social and mainstream media.
J.G. in Santa Monica, CA, writes: Love you guys, but I totally disagree the idea of Democrats protesting the elimination of USAID is walking into a trap. It's all hands on deck right now. The blue team finally got off the mat and David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel are quibbling about appearances. I know you're just reporting what they said, but give me a break. The Democrats need to oppose Donald Trump and Elon Musk at every turn. They have limited Congressional power. They need to protest a government takeover that is not popular with their supporters.
As Steve M. wrote at No More Mister Nice Blog: "People won't look back on this and think, 'Eeeuww, Democrats defended foreign aid!' They'll think: 'Trump seized absolute across-the-board power, and these Democrats put up a fight.' If Trump wins, they'll see that as treason. If he loses, they'll see it as heroism."
J.B. in Waukee, IA, writes: Regarding "Are Democrats Falling Into Musk's Trap?", you've fallen for the biggest ruse of all time: thinking that Elon Musk is a strategic genius and not just a Nazi deadbeat dad in a k-hole.
I'm not going to listen to the David Axelrods and Rahm Emanuels of the world, who still think it's 2008. They're about as relevant to the current political landscape as James Carville is. I don't care to listen to his advice, either. It's important for Donald Trump's and Elon Musk's opponents to demonstrate and protest and call their members of Congress because otherwise they're giving Trump and Musk their tacit approval. They want people to be complacent so they can continue to fleece the rubes and swipe confidential information. I would imagine many of those protesting are not there to save USAID specifically. but to register their disapproval in the current unlawful overreach that Musk is spearheading.
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) is right about the urgency of the moment, but the protests help shed light on Musk's misdeeds. He'd much rather everyone ignore him while he usurps power from the shadows.
J.G. in Chantilly, VA, writes: Sure, you don't have to swing at every pitch. But what do you do when the ball is deliberately thrown at your head?
Every keen observer, including the speakers in front of the Reagan Building, know damn well that foreign aid is the beta test for attacks on the Department of Education and other agencies. This was repeatedly stated by the speakers there and at the rally on February 5, near Capitol Hill. But you also have to remember that the representatives have constituents who work for USAID or are USAID implementers. They cannot ignore that fact. Moreover, this is an attack on core American values, such as democracy, prosperity, and although it now seems like a quaint idea, decency.
And foreign aid is not as unpopular as suggested. It is like the Affordable Care Act. A majority used to hate "Obamacare," but the same majority liked the ACA and what it does. When you ask "Do you think the U.S. should promote democracy abroad? Do you think the U.S. should respond to humanitarian crises? Do you think the U.S. should stop the spread of diseases?" the answers are more positive. In the past 30 years, USAID has enjoyed broad bipartisan support, including voices now MIA such as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and now Acting USAID Administrator/Secretary of State Rubio. It's not the top American priority, but at less than 1 percent of the national budget, it's generally worth that penny.
There was an old Fram oil commercial years ago where a mechanic would point out that a $5 oil filter could save thousands on an engine overhaul. He concluded by saying "You can pay me now, or... pay me later." If Ebola or some other disease finds its way to the U.S., Americans might regret saving that penny. Or, more accurately, having Elon steal it from them.
R.L.D. in Sundance, WY, writes: You wrote: "Democrats don't get credit for trying" and then gave an example of Biden not getting credit for student loan forgiveness.
Look, I'm all-in on the party that isn't trying to overthrow the government, but damn, I'd give them all kinds of credit for trying if they ever get off their collective ass and did some actual trying. It's very much the disappointment I had with Barack Obama when he pre-compromised on universal healthcare and we got a re-branded Romneycare out of it. Or when various people did illegal things and tanked the economy so badly we called it The Great Recession, but Obama said, "Eh, whatcha gonna do?" and refused to prosecute. Or when George W. Bush instituted wildly inappropriate and, I would say, unconstitutional warrantless wiretapping and Obama not only failed to undo things right away but even closed his eyes and stuck his fingers in his ears, humming "Walking on Sunshine" as loudly as he could so that he could avoid dealing with the Snowden revelations.
I'll vote for Democrats because they aren't actively trying to institute dictatorship in America, but I'd stand up and actively campaign for them if they would take their oaths of office to defend the Constitution against these domestic enemies seriously. You don't get credit for wringing your hands while the enemy is inside the gates and pillaging. This is more important than re-election.
L.S. in Black Mountain NC, writes: Last week I wrote in, with despair, asking what citizens can do that actually has an effect and is not just patting ourselves on the back for "doing something." There were helpful responses from (V) and (Z) and several readers, but none really answered my basic question of "what works?" Then I saw a Facebook post allegedly quoting a former Senate staffer, who explained why phone calls to senators and representatives (or alternatively, personal interactions like town halls) are the most effective means of activism. (Basically it boils down to the fact that phone calls are tallied every day, but other kinds of communication take longer to process.) Next I discovered the website and app of 5calls.org, which explains the same thing and provides mechanisms (including scripts) to help you make calls on issues that matter the most to you. I haven't started using it yet, but thought others who have a lot on their plates these days (who doesn't?) might like to look into it.
Also, as mentioned by Heather Cox Richardson in her February 5 edition of Letters from an American: "Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) noted on Facebook that the U.S. Senate phone system has been overwhelmed with around 1,600 calls a minute, in contrast to the 40 calls a minute it usually receives."
Thanks to (V) and (Z) and others who responded!
R.S. in Indiana, PA, writes: "I Did That" Stickers Are Out:
With many vendors and varieties available online!
A.G. in Scranton, PA, writes: The item "Few Politicians Are Popular" proved my point.
Anything with that "D" near to it is immediately poison to around half the country. Add the words "Black," "Black woman," "gay," "transgender," or "Lesbian" as a prefix to anyone's party association when they are referenced and, Christ, things get even worse because they've done a genius job making "openly gay Democrat" or "Congresswoman Johnson, the first Black woman to head such and such committee" the epitome of all that is wrong with America.
Rich guys and their... creepy (that's a generous term) hacker friends and fanboys running government isn't a problem. Nope, it's them gays!
Ugh.
Politics: The Nancy Pelosi Fan Club
E.D. in Saddle Brook, NJ, writes: While I'm sure there are people who don't like Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) because she's not progressive enough, that's not what drives the hate. Pelosi is the face of insider trading in government. The Pelosi family is notorious for making major stock trades right before major news becomes public information. They generally outperform the market by a huge margin. The trading activity is probably according to the letter of the law, but comes across as highly unethical. And, of course, Pelosi is highly against any laws to limit trading by members of Congress.
I'll also add that she can generally come across as unnecessarily nasty. She's not as bad as Kyrsten Sinema, of the "curtsy and a thumbs down" votes, but she generally has a very condescending and mocking tone when talking about anything even slightly progressive. It doesn't come across as concern over whether or not the votes are there. It comes across as laughing at politicians who dare to want to make things better.
I think a lot of the negative feelings toward Pelosi are about her as a person and not about her performance on the job.
L.B. in Ashburn, VA, writes: You wrote: "Also noteworthy is that 20% of Democrats don't like Pelosi, probably mostly progressives. After all, she tried to get stuff done, She knew no progressive bills could ever pass Congress, so she never tried."
I am solidly a Democrat, but not a full-on progressive. I hate Pelosi because she and other geriatric leaders have not built a pipeline of new leaders. She doesn't empower or mentor the younger generation to lead, she stomps on them to keep them from moving up.
Every third beg for money I get from the Democratic party has some "Nancy Pelosi needs your help" angle to it and it infuriates me. The face of the Party should be someone under retirement age, and someone still holding a major office. She can be a mentor in the background if she still wants to participate.
One of the biggest things I see holding Democrats back is, in an age of social media, they have far too many leaders who struggle to operate Microsoft Word. While Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is more progressive than I would like, she's figured out how to pull the strings of social media in a very effective way. Imagine if there were 20 or 30 Democrats with her social media savvy flooding the zone! Pelosi and others should recognize the need to learn some new tricks from her.
Lots of industries have mandatory retirement ages for safety-critical jobs. Congress is the ultimate safety-critical job; kick them all out after they turn 65.
Politics: Star Wars, Nothing but... Star Wars
E.G.G.-C. in Syracuse, NY, writes: You might have seen this one, but in case you haven't, I wanted to share:
C.F. in Waltham, MA, writes: I remember when I saw Revenge of the Sith, with this scene, followed by the comment about how democracies end (not in the clip). I thought, even back then, before Donald Trump, that this was a warning about our possible future. I didn't expect it to actually happen, but I think I was wrong, except it only took the slimmest of majorities in the voting public and legislature. As Trump continues to seize more power, we will see if this new malevolent dictator can be as bad as the fictional emperor in what he eventually carries out.
All Politics Is Local
R.F. in Port Huron, MI, writes: In the Michigan U.S. Senate race, State Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D) has thrown her hat in the ring, so Mayor Pete will have some stiff competition if he decides to get in. In the gubernatorial race, you also did not mention that Lt. Governor Garlin Gilchrist (D-MI) will also be looking for a new job along with AG Dana Nessel (D-MI). Obviously, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D-MI) has the jump on the governor's race, as of today. That is on the Democratic side, so far. Plus, you have the other mayor (Detroit's Mike Duggan) running as an independent for governor. On the Republican side, Reps. John James and Mike Rogers, and right-wing media personality Tudor Dixon, as possibilities for either the Senate or the governor's mansion.
D.H. in Lisbon Falls, ME, writes: Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) should read this quote from a real senator with courage (also from Maine!), carefully each day:
Maybe Collins will finally find some moral courage, someday.
R.B. in Cleveland, OH, writes: I realize that the two special elections for Florida are in deeply red districts, but it would be political malpractice if the Democratic Party didn't heavily advertise Donald Trump's plan to shut down FEMA and leave states on their own for disaster relief. They could even easily boil this down to a slogan: "Trump (or GOP) to FL: Go Fund Yourself."
R.H.D. in Webster, NY, writes: Regarding "The Empire State Strikes Back?", there is currently a pause in considering a change to the rules for calling a special election in anticipation of Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) becoming U.N. Ambassador. In part, this is due to a threatened lawsuit by the state GOP if this new law passes.
Leading the charge is Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), who is mulling a run for governor next year. To show the effects of Trumpism among the Empire State's GOP, he has now called on the Trump Department of Justice to investigate Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-NY) on RICO charges. Lawler was once a reasonable, moderate Republican. But now he's turned up the rhetoric on Hochul, since he knows where his bread is buttered if he wants to get the gubernatorial nomination. That was the same thing with Stefanik, a moderate member of Congress until TCF came along.
On a side note, the local offices of Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY) were shut down recently amid a wave of threats.
So even though we are a blue state and Trump no longer lives here, he's having a major impact on our political discourse.
M.N. in Madison, WI, writes: While I like the idea of a piece highlighting the fight against authoritarianism, depriving the people of NY-21 of representation in Congress isn't it. Rather the opposite, in fact.
(V) & (Z) respond: Fair point.
History Matters
S.K. in Sunnyvale, CA, writes: To paraphrase something you wrote in this week's Q&A: In 1796, one party claimed that their opponent wanted to seat himself on the throne as a king, while the other party claimed that their opponent was a radical and an atheist who wanted to outlaw Christianity and burn every Bible in the country.
I see that this hasn't changed.
M.M.F. in Nagoya, Japan, writes: I have a serious complaint. You and your readers have recently made so many excellent book recommendations that I'm never going to be able to get through everything. Kindly stop until I'm caught up.
In any case, I'm finally reading Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals, and I've been struck on page after page by the way the Lincoln is basically exactly the opposite of Trump in every way that matters. A few examples:
- "He had packed his own trunk, tied it with a rope, and inscribed it simply: 'A. Lincoln, White House, Washington, D.C.'"
- "As Nicolay later wrote, 'Had Mr. Lincoln been an envious or a resentful man, he could not have wished for a better occasion to put a rival under his feet.' Seward's effrontery easily could have provoked a swift dismissal. Yet, as happened so often, Lincoln showed an 'unselfish magnanimity,' which was 'the central marvel of the whole affair.'"
- "'I will accept the commission,' Butler gratefully told Lincoln, but 'there is one thing I must say to you, as we don't know each other: That as a Democrat I opposed your election, and did all I could for your opponent; but I shall do no political act, and loyally support your administration as long as I hold your commission; and when I find any act that I cannot support I shall bring the commission back at once and return it to you.' Lincoln replied, 'That is frank, that is fair. But I want to add one thing: When you see me doing anything that for the good of the country ought not to be done, come and tell me so, and why you think so, and then perhaps you won't have any chance to resign your commission.'"
- And a bonus: "For weeks, Seward and Stanton had worried that secessionists would choose this day to besiege the capital and prevent the electors from meeting. The day, Lincoln learned, had passed peacefully."
Not living up to Lincoln's standard is understandable, but having less respect for the democratic process than the secessionists...
H.R. in Madison, WI, writes: You wrote: "Will Trump be the New McKinley?"
Your comments focused on things William McKinley did that Trump likes. I would suggest that there is an additional reason Trump is talking about a return to McKinley-era policies. That reason is found in Project 2025. The authors talk about rejecting "Wilsonian elites." The authors of Project 2025 look to return to the era of McKinley, not because of what he did but because of what he didn't do. They want to return us to the time before Woodrow Wilson, before the federal government was given the authority to regulate business.
It was during the Wilson administration (1913-1920) that the abuses of unregulated, unchecked corporate power (including the financial power of the big banks), were finally and for the first time countered by a series of fundamental reforms, including:
- The first federal income tax
- The creation of the Federal Reserve
- The creation of the Department of Labor
- The creation of the Federal Trade Commission
- Laws banning child labor
- The Clayton Act (regulating monopolies, but excluding labor unions)
Together, these things represented the acceptance of the federal government as having a direct role in regulating our economy. It was based on the realization that the power and influence of the trusts and monopolies that had grown so great during the Glided Age that power could only be checked by giving the federal government the tools it needed.
And this is exactly what Trump, Vought and Project 2025 are seeking to destroy.
B.O. in Hadley, MA, writes: As a Michigander, I would like to comment on your answer about states that have not been the home of a U.S. President. You listed Michigan among the states that have "not birthed a president." Gerald Ford was born Leslie Lynch King, Jr., in Omaha. But after his parents separated, he went with his mother to Illinois and then to Michigan. He was educated in Grand Rapids, and then at the University of Michigan; after Yale Law School and service in the U.S. Navy, he returned to Grand Rapids, where he got involved in politics and was U.S. Representative for Michigan's 5th congressional district for 25 years before becoming Vice President. The online biographies I have found don't mention exactly when his mother brought him from Illinois to Michigan, but he must have been 2 years old or younger. So while it's technically true that he was not born in Michigan, he's even more closely associated with our state than Andrew Jackson and Andrew Johnson are with Tennessee.
S.D.R. in Raleigh, NC, writes: I have an amusing anecdote related to the question about which states have had the most or least presidents.
I often drive by the North Carolina Capitol. On the east side of the building is a statue of the three presidents that North Carolina claims as being from North Carolina: Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk and Andrew Johnson.
Several years ago, my wife and I went to Nashville to see the eclipse. We were there for a whole week, so on one of the other days we visited the Tennessee Capitol. And in one spot inside the Tennessee Capitol, there are busts of the three presidents that Tennessee claims as being from Tennessee.
You guessed it: Andrew Johnson, James K. Polk and Andrew Johnson.
J.T.M. in Phoenix, AZ, writes: I'm surprised (Z) didn't mention a third strong reason for the relative stability of the post-World War II order: Mutual Assured Destruction.
All of the wars since World War II have involved second/third world countries, or a single superpower fighting a second/third world country. While geography and the physical separation of superpowers undoubtedly plays a role, the superpowers have avoided direct confrontation with rivals. Instead, they've used proxies for many conflicts. The only exception I can think of is the Korean War, where China got involved against the U.S. But at that time, China was not a superpower and did not have nuclear weapons. They had huge amounts of manpower, of course, but the conflict was unlikely to grow beyond the Korean Peninsula.
Regardless, I would argue this dynamic still rules competing major power relations. A country with nuclear weapons must be dealt with differently than one with only conventional arms. I think even the most rhetorically aggressive countries are extremely reluctant to open the nuclear Pandora's Box. North Korea maybe... but even they seem to have a certain rationality behind their seemingly crazy actions.
M.M. in San Diego, CA, writes: Two other possibilities for most important novels before 1900:
- Herman Melville's White-Jacket; or, The World in a Man-of-War (1850) brought an end to flogging in the U.S. Navy.
- Theodore Dreiser's Sister Carrie (1900) was a leap in reality based fiction, in which a very young woman breaks with social convention and becomes a married man's mistress. Naturally, it was banned, but the door was open for nonconforming protagonists and an acknowledgment that sex existed.
A.S. in Black Mountain, NC, writes: Living in Mississippi for 13 years, I was introduced to Fannie Lou Hamer and I want to add her to the list of "unknown" significant Black Americans. There was a woman with a backbone.
T.B. in Leon County, FL, writes: Harry T. Moore is another person D.A. in Cincinnati should know about. He slightly missed the Civil Rights Movement leader classification, as he and his wife, Harriette, were assassinated on December 25, 1951 (her dying 9 days later). He was an NAACP leader and did a lot of registering of voters, and was generally a tenacious and effective organizer and educator.
J.M. in Portland, OR, writes: Your comment that Ida B. Wells proved that lynchings were mainly of successful Black men was a shocker. I knew about lynchings, of course, and that they were horrible and grossly unfair. I had never heard that they were used to punish the slightest bit of success a Black person could achieve. That just adds another layer of horrible. So being "uppity" was a capital offense. Shame on all of them.
Where the Streets Have Many Names
T.B. in Leon County, FL, writes: Further to your response to I.K. in Portland, I read that more places (e.g., streets, glaciers, ocean currents) on Earth are names for Alexander von Humboldt than any other person, largely because of his: (1) larger than life biography and (2) dying just before a century of exploration and expansion.
J.W.L. in Washington, DC, writes: Some cities use alphabetical mnemonics and do generally avoid politicians' names. The northwest quadrant of Washington, DC, has, going north, C, D, E, F, and G streets, and so on; and then two-syllable streets (Belmont, Crescent, Euclid, Fairmont, Girard, and so on, to Upton and Van Ness); and then three-syllable streets (Albemarle, Brandywine, Chesapeake, Davenport, to Tewkesbury, Underwood, Whittier). However, it complicates the matter with doublets and triplets, so Crescent, Clifton, and Chapin are broken extensions of each other, and Appleton is wedged between Albemarle and Brandywine, and Burlington and Butterworth are wedged between Brandywine and Chesapeake. (A few politicians' names do get in, such as Garfield in the two-syllable group.)
On a different tack, the oldest parts of West Palm Beach, FL, have streets named after plants, going south: Banyan, Clematis, Datura, Evernia, Fern, Gardenia, Hibiscus. Many U.S. cities presumably have similar schemes.
G.R. in Tarzana, CA, writes: Regarding street names in Los Angeles, having been a huge fan of Fractured Fairy Tales featured on The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle and Friends, you couldn't imagine my joy when, having moved to Los Angeles, I discovered Edward Everett Horton Lane in Encino. To this day, I still smile every time I drive past it.
Hello, Dolly!
B.W. in Suwanee, GA, writes: I'm not a fan of country music but I could not agree with you more on what an amazing person Dolly Parton is. She is right up there with Jimmy in my book!
B.C. in Walpole, ME, writes: A small-town postmaster, Matt, once told me that his small-time country band (he was the drummer) played a county fair in Pennsylvania. A manager person came to them and said that Dolly Parton, the fair's headliner, had a problem: Her band was stuck on some highway. The manager drafted Matt and his band to back Miss Dolly. I asked, "How did that go?" He said that she turned out to be every good thing you've ever heard about her and more, and that she gave them the confidence to be her band. When he told me the story, many, many years later, he was still glowing.
J.C. in Shawnee, OK, writes: I did not pay as much attention in college as I should have, so my first job afterward was as news director for a 250-watt, daytime only, AM radio station in small-town Oklahoma. The boss, though, was Glen "Sky" Corbin, a former DJ of some reputation in Lubbock, TX. Early in her career, Dolly went to the radio stations to ask the music directors to play her songs. Sky said she was a charmer. She would grab his hand and flirt with him, "and my response was always, I'm going to play your record right now, Mama."
P.C. in Reston, VA, writes: You missed one piece of Dolly Parton news that was very meaningful to those of us whose lives were moved/changed/improved by the groundbreaking show Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I'm not being facetious—for a lot of people, straight and gay, the show was incredibly affirming. Last week, a reboot of the series was announced with some very talented people, including Sarah Michelle Gellar, who will resume her role as Buffy, and one of the executive producers for the new show is.. Dolly Parton. Her good deeds know no bounds.
J.C. in Norman, OK, writes: Just an addition to your note about Dolly Parton's duet with Four Non-Blondes on "What's Up?" That song was one track on her 2023 album, Rockstar. That album also contained a duet with gay icon and Heavy Metal God Rob Halford, the lead singer for Judas Priest.
Gallimaufry
S.M. in Scotts Valley, CA, writes: I assume when you wrote "Just in case the second hint flew over anyone's head, it was a reference to the Zodiac Killer, who remains at large, though he's probably dead" that you did it expecting lots of people correcting you by pointing out he's currently a part-time senator from Texas and full time podcaster. Nice one.
T.S. in Seattle, WA, writes: So happy to see you mentioned The Museum of Jurassic technology in your places to visit in Los Angeles! If any readers are so inclined, I recommend the "Tell It to the Bees" exhibit as well as the miniatures of Hagop Sandaldjian.
My family has been friends and donors to the museum for almost 40 years now, and the exhibits keep getting better every year.
If you ever need a dose of alternative reality to set your mind apart from the fresh horrors on the news everyday, this is the place to go.
A.H. in Newberg, OR (alternatively, A.H., Liberal Left Lunatic), writes: J.J. in Johnstown observed: "I've noticed lately, let's say after 12:01 p.m. in January 20th, that the language in your posts has gotten a little coarser, like using colorful metaphors as Spock would say, and less professorial."
Stick with your instincts. I am conversant in five languages: English, Construction, Politics, Snark and Profanity. And I appreciate the power of all of them!
M.M. in Weaverville, NC, writes: As a political junkie and veterinarian of long standing (near 50 years), we in the know judge dachshunds as being "low-dogs" adjacent in the list to Basset Hounds or, more familiarly (judging by physical exposure), as long land sharks. Because of their Napoleon-complex stature, they certainly take offense at rain-sodden ground, thinking it not unlike a Russian winter.
Otherwise, aside from this tongue-in-cheek canine appraisal, keep up the good work you three do; even better than a grand cup of coffee in the morning.
R.L.P. in Santa Cruz, CA, writes: I want you to know that I very much appreciate your weekly, curated mailbag. If would surprise me to learn that any other newsletter has a more insightful audience.
(V) & (Z) respond: We wanted to run this letter not because of the kind words about us, but because we agree about the audience.
Final Words
O.C. in Chicago, IL, writes: Stjepan Filipović, shortly before being hanged: "Death to fascism! Freedom to the people!"
If you have suggestions for this feature, please send them along.
Previous | Next
Main page for smartphones