LyrArc Article Gist
A man with a handgun and magazine of ammunition is shot by federal law enforcement officer on Jan. 24, 2026 as protestors confront federal law enforcement officers in Minneapolis. Earlier federal law enforcement in California, and in other states, Washington DC, Nashville Tennessee, have led to protests but not of the kind in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Minneapolis is a state with liberal views yet it also has a strange mix as it was in Minneapolis that local police shot an unarmed black man during the Covid epidemic. This time it is not local police in that role but local police under the orders of the state and local authorites, the mayor and state governor Frey and Walz, not cooperating with the federal law enforcement of immigration law in the US that seeks to remove migrants with crime records from the US neighborhoods and streets. Walz was selected by Kamala Harris to run on the Democratic ticket for president in the US against DJT and Vance in 2025. Republicans allege serious fraud in Minnesota and misuse of state funds that have added to the dangerous mix of politics in the state, that is found nowhere else in America. From the Republican point of view unwanted migrants from certain unstable countries with criminal records were allowed to settle in the state. Democrats and Democrat media are not cooperating as the national elections in the US were lost on just this issue of migrants illegal entry numbering about 7 million over the last administration of Biden with costs to the US of over $110 billion in federal and local funds. No one knows where this will end up yet the view world wide over migration is moving to safe neighborhoods and safe streets as essential human rights, essential women's rights, essential rights of all Americans and all Europeans, that the problems of failed states cannot be solved on American or European soil. The Monroe Doctrine was put in place for just this reason as respecting Russia as a power in its area of influence in Northern Europe means no intervention by Russia or  China in the western hemisphere, so that the US never faces the situation of Guatemala and central American states, or of Venezuelan failed states in sending millions in a stream through Mexico for illegal entry on US southern border. Overall US policy, domestic and foreign has changed to ensure safety wellbeing in the US as the first and only priority for all its citizens and the sum of good citizenship the main objective for the Nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
View from Le Monde in France on the visions of Macron, Merz,, and Rubio for rebuilding the transatlantic alliance.  France under Macron sees less hope for the rebuild of the transatlantic friendship. The Germans under Merz and Soder of Bavaria see it differently. As shown in Nina Haase's interveiw with Johann Wadephul Germany's Foreign Minister, he sees Marco Rubio's speech very positively and like Merz wants to rebuild the relationship. It is not fully understood in Europe that Vance was also. partly reflecting his own views and his own tendency to sound and act like DJT. RUbio was once a candidate for the presidency in 2014 whom DJT had to defeat in the primaries. Rubio's recent book on how the elites have failed US and Europe shows a man of his own convictions. He and DJT agree because he brings out the best that is in the Republican party today to look back at its heroes from the past, Teddy Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln with a profound belief in western civilization and America's role in it. When seen in this context it changes everything- all that talk of Vance means little because Vance is a much less experienced politician from the midwestern state of Ohio compared to Rubio with his long years in the Florida legislature and in the Senate in Foreign Affairs. Rubio speaks for the United States so much more so than an inexperienced and very young politician from Ohio who has emerged only in the last 5 years, compared to Rubio's 20 years in public service. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
One commentator in Norway says "an entire state apparatus has played bankrupt" with Norway's international reputation. British and Norwegian Royals Sarah Ferguson divorced wife of Prince Andrew,  Princess Mette-Marit of Norway, and the Epstein Files showing messages exchanged with Epstein even after much of his history was known, show a lack of judgement that reflects badly on Britain's establishment, on Norway's establishment. There are media reports of Mandelson, Starmer's UK ambassador to US of having sent messages to Epstein on matters relating to confidential plans of the government to sell state assets and about policy influence under a previous Labour administration.This suggests to people in Britain that Labour has failed to appoint people of integrity to important positions. Before Rutte of the Netherlands took over as head of NATO, the head of NATO Stoltenberg for 10 years was from Norway. The total population of Norway of 5.5 million is less than the population of the Houston region. Should it exercise such an important role in the affairs of Europe much less of the world? It was under Stoltenberg's appointment in 2014 as head of NATO after losing an election in Norway, with Merkel and Obama's support, that gradually changed the perception of NATO as too close to Russia's borders so that by 2019 when Covid took place the situation deteriorated in Europe beyond recognition. Russia and China joined together and Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 with Stoltenberg in a role in NATO that reflected more the British view of NATO than how DJT and other Republican leaders perceived NATO. As America turns this chapter of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama years of failed politics in which US lost control in its own backyard to drug trafficking gangs in Mexico and Venezuela, conducted wars in remote deserts and mountains in the Middle East, and lost its economic position to China, turned over NATO to  politicians who followed a British view of hostility to Russia that did not reflect the American view of working in cooperation with Russia, China and other major powers, this appointment of Stoltenberg a figure in the Norway establishment may be seen as another failure of the Merkel/Obama years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump has decisively changed the Republican party. Most Republicans support Mr. Trump personally, less the Republican party. Mr. Lindsey Graham, a senator from South Carolina, says of the Republican party before Trump that it had become a bit staid, that we looked like the banker next door who may foreclose on your house. Mr. Romney epitomized that in his view. Gone are the views on deficits, on wars, and on imports and transfer of technology to China as being acceptable.  Five years from 2015 when Mr. Trump came into prominence with his new style taking on the establishments of both parties with a fierce disdain for convention, both the Bushes and the Obamas and Clintons, the Republican party is completely transformed. Registered Republicans are now 60% non college educated in 2020 compared to 50% non college educated in 2016. The Trump policies on trade putting American workers first and America first have a resounding popularity with this audience- this should be no surprise after decades of job losses and factories shipped overseas under the previous administrations for 2 decades. Most of these workers are not college educated and are white and had enjoyed a good standard of living with a high school education in American factories till the shift of American manufacturing to China destroyed good paying jobs and impoverished the American working class.  Only 30% of college educated people are registered Republicans in 2020 compared to 40% in 2016. Overwhelmingly about 90% of registered Republicans are white.  They are majority male and older but there is a significant about 40% female and 40% young population under 40 years of age. This might resemble the party put together by Missouri Congressman Harry Truman as he led the Democratic Party in 1948 with a majority of non college educated Democrats, fighting for American workers and America first in the cold war with Russia. Truman also had a rough Missouri farm language and accent comparable to Mr. Trump's rough style and language disdainful of the old establishment and new tech establishment. Both were heavily disliked by the media and both did not let this bother them in any way. Both liked facing large crowds as Truman showed in campaigning by train across the country and Trump has shown in campaign rallies run in his own way. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Shear says president Biden is listening to his head about the US Border with Mexico- that he would close the US Border if the bipartisan bill is passed in the US Congress, the same day that he signs it to become law. The new bill agreed to in negotiations between Senator Graham and other Republican Senators and the White House ends current parole and asylum policy  that have led to chaos at the border. Shear who has covered presidents for 30 years shows that president Biden held the view that he was elected to provide a human face to the crisis at the border from international migration and close private prisons and poor treatment of children. He listened to both sides of his party during 2021 and 2022 after becoming increasingly aware that something was wrong and by Jan 2023 was convinced that tough action was needed at the border to deport Haitians and other people from central America smuggled northward with 13 flights a day to Haiti to deport illegal migrants.  He made his first major immigration speech at that time. The problem was that there was a major upheaval in Venezuela adding to the tide of illegal migrants as Venezuela sent millions to all countries in Latin America and north to the US, an international crisis playing out in Colombia and other neighbors for the last 10 years. When Lopez Obrador of Mexico closed his own migrant deportations Biden sent Blinken to Mexico with Homeland Security minister Mayorkas, and after discussions Obrador resumed the deportations. Trains going north in Mexico had conductors who were bribed to slow down to take on migrants. This was stopped and all trains going north were stopped at Eagle Pass in December 2023. Republican governors Abbott of Texas and DeSantis of Florida have sent busloads or flights of these migrants to New York and other cities in the US showing that the entire system of migrant handling was breaking down even as president Biden was convinced by his own advisers including Jake Sullivan that the border required tough action. The president increased planned legal migration to lower illegal migration from Nicaragua and rest of Latin America. By January 2024 Biden was convinced the only solution was closing the US Border immediately after the bipartisan solution. Lindsay Graham senior Republican Senator agreed with Biden with one problem- the Republicans in US House of Representatives did not think it right to work with president Biden to settle the problem.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Making some territorial concessions appears to be the only way for peace talks to succeed. For a long time there was insistence on territorial sovereignty of Ukraine by EU and NATO leaders. This appears to have prolonged the war- with needless loss of life on both sides, and costly damage to Ukraine infrastructure, a population that had to face additional winters and hardship in war ravaged areas. NATO's Stoltenberg from Norway, leaders of northern Nordic and Baltic countries, the UK, could take that position without having to face the hardship of the war. NATO had to be re-formed under a new name and new structure  following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with wariness about the possibility of centuries old since 1700 UK and Nordic historical adversarial relationship with Russia casting a shadow over that organization, and embroiling the US in conflicts not of its own choice or of wise leadership. This is the root cause of the Ukraine war. It would have been best to completely restructure NATO and give it a new name without Northern European nations leading it. Principles matter once soviet communism was no longer there NATO formed for its expansionism in 1950's had served it's purpose. Rasmussen from Denmark and Stoltenberg from Norway led the organization for the last decade and half from 2009-2014 and 2014 to 2025, with backing from Obama/Merkel for most of the period of the war in Ukraine. Also most of the period NATO expanded to Russian borders happened under Northern European leaders from Spain, Britain and Nordics (Solana, Robertson, Scheffer, Rasmussen and Stoltenberg) and the organization NATO getting the northern European slant based on historical adversarial relationship of Britain and Russia since 1700- for no other reason than the British wanting to protect its large Empire and commerce in India which in the 18th and 19th century included most of Asia. Under Robertson the UK Defense Secretary much of this transformation into turning NATO into something anti-Russian happened which was primarily because of British and Nordic perceptions of Russia as an adversary. Robertson added the following countries at the Prague Summit in 2002 to NATO- the Baltics, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Russia faced internal upheaval in those years and Yeltsin in resigned in 1999, Putin was elected in 2000. It is clear that Russia had suffered severe economic hardship in that period and Putin's first goal in 2002 was to stabilize the economy.  It could be said that this turning NATO over to UK and Nordics was a huge mistake considering that Russia was still the largest nuclear power after the US, and British policy was now determining US policy. And Britain's Robertson/NATO should not have involved itself in the Afghanistan war using Article 5, as the US could have handled this alone and limited that engagement. It got US involved in another conflict, conflict with Russia that was to come in Ukraine on the side of the Baltics and Ukraine, without US clearly understanding what the roots of that war was about and implied confrontation with Russia 20 years after the Prague Summit in 2002 under George Bush junior. The incompetence of Bush and Obama/Merkel laid the seeds of the Ukraine war in 2022 following Robertson, Rasmussen, Stoltenberg, small Nordic nations and Britain creating a conflict that did not need to happen, with loss of hundreds of thousands of lives of Russian speaking fraternal peoples of both Russia and Ukraine. The Republican sentiment under DJT of the tragedy of such huge losses of young people, and desire to end this loss of life, can nowhere be seen in bellicose talk in northern European nations, that take the US for granted to fight their wars.  The wisdom of Washington, Lincoln and TR/FDR clearly caution in getting involved in European centuries old animosities. For the US it meant in practical terms that it could no longer carry out the Monroe Doctrine essential for peace and good governance in the western hemisphere as only a Russia desperate to make its views known about NATO would interfere in the western hemisphere against US assertion of the Monroe Doctrine with the US Navy. Instead drug trafficking gangs took over Latin American countries and created a flow of fentanyl and millions of people through migrant traffickers across the US southern border. As America has expressed its concern for loss of Russian and Ukrainian men in the war for the first time under DJT Russia has distanced itself from Venezuela, Mexico and Latin America. The loss of hundreds of thousands of young Americans to fentanyl is a shared tragedy with the loss of hundreds of thousands of young Russians and Ukrainians in the last decade. How reliable are Northern European countries when it comes to protecting the eastern seaboard of the US with the acquisition of Greenland? It is a policy pursued by presidents since the Alaska Acquisition from Russia. By Seward, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman and DJT. Denmark the land where NATO secretary general Rasmussen was from followed by Stoltenberg from Norway  (for 15 of the years of the war in Ukraine 2010-2025) the US efforts to protect its eastern seaboard are rebuffed by both Denmark and Norway, and the US presented in a negative light as an imperialist power in the face of Danish East India Company's  colonial attitude since 1700 clearly imitating the colonial British East India company.  It shows Northern European nations looking out for themselves not for the US, and embroiling the US in their wars at the cost of the entire western hemisphere being destabilized. The population of UK, Denmark and Norway, Baltics is far less than the Mumbai, Shanghai, Sao Paulo , Berlin and Tokyo regions. Should the views of a small population in northern Europe of 2% of the total determine the future of US, Europe, China, India, Brazil, and other parts of the world with 5 billion people the 98%, when issues of war and nuclear conflict, nuclear buildup, the western hemisphere destabilized with drug trafficking gangs running rampant in countries, divide the world in opposing blocs, when the wellbeing of most of the world's people in Asia and Latin America, Africa is at stake by establishing a essential degree of cooperation by all sides. The US under DJT has chosen a wise policy of cooperation over conflict -with China, with Russia, with all the major powers, and with smaller powers. Reading the wisdom contained in the writings of Washington, Lincoln, TR/FDR confirms it is clearly the wise choice. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Mitch Smith of the NYT looks at the Grand Rapids area for the 2024 election. Grand Rapids is atownof 660,000  which is the second largest city in Michigan. Originally populated by Dutch settlers it now has about 10% Hispanics in addition to about 10% blacks. The Hispanic population has increased over time. Some Republicans such as Ben Ingrebretson have drifted away from the party and voted for Biden in 2020. In February he voted for Nikki Haley, part of the 34% who voted for Haley in Kent County. He approves of Biden's view of America as "a beacon" for the world but does not approve of stimulus spending or forgiveness of student loans. Grand Rapids is also the area where governor Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, went to school and which gave her a 10 percentage vote margin.

LyrArc Article Gist
A key figure in approval ratings is 46% with DJT getting 46% approval for the economy and on a range of issues including immigration. On tariffs the situation is steadily improving with new trade agreements with Japan, the EU, South Korea that were announced after or just when this WSJ poll was taken on July 20. Among Republicans 88% support the president and 66% strongly support him which says this report means more of them would turn out to vote. More significant is that the optimistic rating of the economy went up by 11 percentage points from April 2025 to 46% in July 2025. This is also the view of Fed chairman Powell. Each step of the way as DJT tariff actions result in tangible improvements in trade relations for the US and result in concrete real world trade agreements for a level playing field in world trade, the president's actions are seen in a different light. The first Trade Agreement with the UK, then with Japan and now quite possibly with the European Union. All this within 6 months of the president acting in February 2025. A major role played also by Bessent, Greer, Luttnick and others in the cabinet of ministers. This lifts perceptions of the president in the eyes of the American people in handling the economy, business and world trade, and protecting the interests of America's farmers, and rural communities. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Biden gives a rousing call to the Nation, on what he has achieved for America and its workers and families, for the people of 51 states, and what the tasks are for the future to 2035. It surpasses the State of the Union address 2024 in the vigor and importance of his message, 76 days before a national election to decide the future of the Nation and the World. Key parts of the speech selected by Lyrarc, on Infrastructure above and Manufacturing here with 800,000 new Manufacturing jobs created. "Because of you and so many electeds out there, American manufacturing is back. Where the hell does it say we wouldn’t lead the world in manufacturing. Eight-hundred-thousand new manufacturing jobs. Our Republican friends and others made sure they’d go abroad to get the cheapest labor. We used to import products and export jobs. Now we export American products and create American jobs, right here in America, where jobs belong. With every new job, with every new factory, pride and hope is being brought back to communities throughout the country that were left behind. You know you’re from it, many of you. You know what it’s like when that factory closed where your mother, your father, your grandmother, grandfather worked. And now you’re back, providing once again, proving that Wall Street didn’t build America, the middle class built America, and unions—unions—built the middle class.  It’s been my view since I came to the Senate and that’s why I’m proud to have been the first President to walk a picket line and be labeled the most pro-union President in history. And I accept it. That’s a fact. Because when unions do well, we all do well.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Elbridge Colby memo led to slowing of US shipments to Ukraine in July 2025 just as Russia expanded its drone and missile attacks on Ukraine. Leading DJT to resume all shipments and override Colby as he supported shipment of Patriot systems to  Ukraine, with Germany willing to pay for the cost. Who is Colby? Colby 45 years, was made undersecretary of defense for policy in DJT second term. He is the grandson of a former CIA director, attended school in Japan where his father was working at an investment bank, and later at Yale Law School. Colby's view is for the US to focus on Asia, specifically on China and the defense of Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan. He does not favor Ukraine in NATO, sees Russia as a potential partner, and is a Republican who opposed the war in Iraq as a monumental waste of American resources. Some of his views are controversial such as focus only on China when US faces other threats around the world. Colby opposed an attack on Iran and even argued that US could manage a nuclear armed Iran which he has now retracted. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The difficulties the new U.S. Treasury Secretary faces as she tries to navigate the politics in Congress and the tries to reach out to moderates and progressives within the Democratic party. All have different views on spending, and where stimulus money should go in a second stimulus. Her long experience with the Fed is seen as not preparing her for the political role of evaluating different opinions that are described by some experts as ten times more political than anything going on in Fed meetings. As a student of Prof. Tobin Yellen sees government intervention as needed in times of economic crises. Twice in ten years the U.S. and the rest of the world has been struck by economic crises- the bank leveraging behaviours and poor lending practices that induced the 2009 financial crisis and in 2020 the coronavirus pandemic. Lessons learned Yellen says about the 2009 recession are that not enough stimulus was provided after the initial stimulus to get a strong enough recovery. Democrats are eager to spend over $2 trillion in a second stimulus. Republicans much less so particularly with a new president. Even under Mr. Trump spending was set at under $700 billion by Republicans for a second stimulus. Another economic crises is one of the U.S. strategic economic position in the world. On this issue of trade Yellen's husband George Akerloff, also a economist is more skeptical of the value of free trade. The failure of the World Trade Organization to ensure a level playing field as China subsidized key industries, and the loss of America's manufacturing advantage over three decades is now the defining issue in American politics. It takes the shape of manufacturing communities that were once a part of Democratic party support shifting away after devastated local economies from the loss of manufacturing plants to China. It takes the shape of a Republican party that is committed to bring back American manufacturing, and a Democratic party that under Biden is seeking the same result. How much each party will invest in terms of making things happen to get this done is one of the issues facing all parties, Congress, the administration, Ms. Yellen, and the new president. Economics does not have the answers. As economists could not have predicted the increase in women participation in the workforce, the drop in Black and Hispanic unemployment rates under the Trump administration. The lack of moral will to get trade to work for the American worker was more of an issue under Democratic and Republican administrations for the last 2 decades, so that issues of growing inequality were never better addressed by any party. It depended more on focus of the president elected to help American workers, and to avoid the cost and distraction of foreign wars when American interests could be protected in other ways. Yellen was not able to make a difference at the Fed because of these reasons and low interest rates have both helped and hurt the middle class, as low interest rates meant Americans were less able to accumulate savings for retirement since 2000. Determination and action counts for more than ideology or policy is the lesson learned in building strong economies and manufacturing.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Investments made by president Biden and Congress of $1 trillion in manufacturing and infrastructure will take time to go into effect. It is wrong to say this shows limits of this policy of investing in America as it has increased growth, maintained employment levels, and helped America recover from the pandemic. Biden did this for the National good not for Democrats and it was designed to benefit red and blue states like. Its effects will be felt long after the next election cycle in just 3 years January 2028, so that to say that president Trump or Republicans would get credit is an erroneous notion. The next president could come from the opposite party and the long term effects of this could benefit all parties, giving everyone a stake in making it work. The narrow view also overlooks the great benefits from this investment of $1 trillion for America's trading partners and allies in Asia and Europe, the American leadership role in CHIPS and Science as a result, and the respect of the world in the way America has handled its economic affairs. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The French view of the DJT administration is that it is a rupture, an "historic rupture with immigration repression, aggressive trade policy, and undermining of federal and state institutions." This is far from the reality. In fact it is not a rupture, and far from that policy that DJT brought in the waning days of a tired cautious Obama administration that extended the war in Afghanistan long after it was clearly a failure from the Bush years. DJT called it common sense during his Inauguration speech waving his hands- so obvious, stay out of wars we have no purpose pursuing. Regain America's manufacturing base shipped out to China in the Clinton-Bush-Obama years 2000-2016 that helped the rise of China in phases of supply chain partner, competitor, adversary. French view Le Monde is that this is "aggressive trade policy," when in fact small towns across the US and France, and other industrialized EU nations, by losing their factory and industrial base to China have gone downhill losing jobs and standard of living. Tariffs and DJT policy was continued by Biden- there is no rupture. What French in Le Monde call "Immigration repression," is a policy of protecting border security including illegal drug and fentanyl flows and gang activity that was accepted by Biden and Biden-Republican Lankford legislation was agreed in 2024 to close the Border. There is no rupture from Biden on closing the Border.  With millions having crossed the Border illegally Republicans now have the support of Democratic Senators Gallego of Arizona and Fetterman of Pennsylvania in passing the Laken Riley Act in Congress to protect Americans and safeguard life in America.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post analysis of the Republican tax bill gives an exceptional view of the bill's impact and provisions. This is the first major change to the tax laws since 1986. The size of the bill is $1.5 trillion, with the Joint Committe on Taxation projection that the bill will increase tax revenues over a decade by $500 billion, meaning that it will cost $1 trillion being added to the deficit. What the bill does: 1. It offers a permanent tax cut to corporations by reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Industries benefiting the most are mining, real estate, technology, manufacturing. 2. The individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They are skewed to disproportionately help highest income Americans, much less lower income Americans and much more highest income Americans compared to high income Americans. In this sense it is skewed in a an unusual way to the highest earning Americans- a sort of Trump effect in place. The top 1% get a tax break of $51,140 in 2019, middle income people earning about $100,000 get about $1000 a year in 2019, tax payers earning around $50,000 about $380, and those earning less than $25,000 about $60 a year in 2019. Taxpayers earning about 150,000 get about $2000 a year tax cut. (Tax Policy Center) 3. The basic assumption is that tax cuts are revenue neutral if there is economic growth and most of that growth comes from corporations investing in growth. The problem as Greg Ip points out in the Wall Street Journal is that countries trying thsi approach in the past such as Britain have not seen such growth materialize. Corporate profits are the highest in 15 years as percentage of GDP, according to Vanguard founder Bogle, and are now 20% of GDP compared 11% in 1980. If corporations did not invest with this level of profits how much additional investment is going to happen, ask critics, especially as demand drives growth and wages are not boosted under this plan.  4.  Because the bill's changes to current law makes it likely that 13 million less Americans will be insured over a decade- from fewer people signing up for Medicaid and on exchanges for Affordable Care Act- it will hurt lower income Americans. Skewing at both ends of the income spectrum of this type is rare in American history particularly in the twentieth century after the Depression of the 1930's, and poses risks for social cohesion, making it unpopular with most Americans. A CBS News poll taken Dec 3-5 shows 53% of all Americans opposed, only 35% support the tax bill just passed in Congress.  5. Then why did Republicans do this? Republicans needed a legislative success after failure to repeal the Obama Affordable Care law. This pressure led to passage with Republicans probably aware that this is temporary tax reform requiring a real effort by both parties working together after the midterm elections in 2018 and as the presidential election approaches in 2019.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
George Washington's first Inaugural Address in 1789 from the National Archives speaks to us in 2024, for 2050, like the bells that toll from ancient cathedrals- "The circumstances under which I now meet you... refer to the great constitutional charter (US Constitution) under which you are assembled, and which, in defining your powers, designates the objects to which your attention is to be given. It will be more congenial with the feelings which actuate me, to substitute, in place of a recommendation of particular measures the tribute that is due to the talents, the rectitude, and the patriotism of the characters selected to devise and adopt them. In these honorable qualifications I behold the surest pledges that on one side no local prejudices or attachments, no separate views nor party animosities, will misdirect the comprehensive and equal eye which ought to watch over this great assemblage of communities and interests. So, on another, that the foundation of our national policy will be laid in the pure and immutable principles of private morality, and the preeminence of free government be exemplified by all the attributes which can win the affections of its citizens and command the respect of the world." "There is no truth more thoroughly established than that there exists in the economy and course of nature an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness; between duty and advantage; between the genuine maxims of an honest and magnanimous policy and the solid rewards of public prosperity and felicity; since we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained; and since the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered, perhaps, as deeply, as finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Gerson offers his assessment of president Obama's 7 years in office, saying that after this period the public has lost faith in American liberalism, that Obama held it all together through a self-centredness that is now replaced by public rage that has brought out other self-centred politicians in the Republican party, such as Donald Trump. Deutsche Welle summed up its view from Europe of the Obama presidency as a period that was little more than a transitional presidency. Gero Schliess writing in DW.com, says one of the tragedies of this presidency is that the much talked about change would come about only under a successor, in a best case scenario under a Democratic successor. Yet if Gerson is right Americans are losing faith in American liberalism after the Obama years, with the setbacks suffered by the white working class and the middle class in these years, and the political deadlock that has prevented action to help them. Speaker Paul Ryan recently convened a conference on this subject. In October 2014 Fed chairwoman Janet Yellen described the problem at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston conference on economic opportunity and inequality, questioning whether the trends were "compatible with the values rooted in our nation's history, and the high value Americans tend to place on equality of opportunity."...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Nation is faced with another Supreme Court decision as in 1868 for the 14th Amendment, in 2025 on birthright citizenship.  The 14th Amendment was written in the 19th century it had no concept of the 20th century and absolutely no idea of the 21st century we live in, unable to even conceive of conditions today, or even think of  setting rules for immigration today. It rejected the Dredd Scott decision of 1857 denying black people rights as citizens, restating the law of the land, had nothing at all to do with stating the opinion of the Judiciary on whether a mother flying in from Asia could secure US citizenship for a new born child by merely visiting the US. As in 1857, in 2025 the law is based on assumed historical facts as Lincoln said on Dredd Scott decision, that are not really true. Lincoln said in 1857- "That burlesque upon judicial decisions, and slander and profanation upon the honored names, and sacred history of republican America must be overruled, and expunged from the books of authority." The 14th Amendment was written to give black people the rights of citizens of the US, in a complete repudiation of the Dred Scott decision of the US Supreme Court of 1857 that deprived black people of rights as citizens because Judge Tanney said the British Empire had set up the institution of slavery in the American colonies and the British were responsible for the institution, little we can do about it. When by 1807 slavery was being banned in Britain and in 1838 totally banned in the British Empire. It created the idea that Americans were not the master of their destinies after the departure of the British to choose which institutions they would keep and which they would reject including slavery. Abraham Lincoln citing President Andrew Jackson said each the executive, the judiciary, Congress, and the common man were entitled to their own view of the US Constitution as they understood it. Lincoln also said Judge Tanney's decision in Dred Scott case was based on assumed historical facts that were not really true- Judge Tanney making no mention of the fact that in 1857 the British Empire had already abolished the institution for 50 years. The DJT Executive Order banning birthright citizenship shown here on the White House site has the title- Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship. It is written in  simple language in 1 page -Purpose, Policy, Enforcement and Definitions, Provisions.  The purpose clearly states that the Dred Scott decision of the US Supreme Court in 1857 is what the framers of the 14th Amendment had in mind when they drafted the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. A reading of the 14th Amendment makes this abundantly clear. The wording comes out at the outset reversing the Dredd Scott Decision of 1857. It's repudiation was why the Northern and Southern States fought the Civil War. The National Archives say that with Dred Scott decision to allow the spread of slavery to American territories in the West,  America moved one step closer to civil war. With such  momentous events in the history of the US 1857-1868 the framers of the 14th Amendment were not sitting down to write rules about what was right for America a century and a half later.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Republican says the party's failures to come up with alternative policies instead of simply opposing president Obama, has led to the atmosphere of negativism and anti-immigrant rhetoric that increases support for Trump in the party base. He cites as an example 2012 Republican presidential nominee Romney and his comments about "self-deportation." Other examples cited include pushing Rubio to where he repudiated his own immigration legislation just to maintain support in the party. He says this leaves him little option but to vote for Hillary Clinton.

LyrArc Article Gist
DJT 1.0 was led on the tariffs policy by USTR Robert Lighthizer, who had experience negotiating with the Japanese negotiators in the Reagan era. He is today respected by  Republicans, is seen in an important role in economic policy and to prepare the tariff policy actions of the new DJT administration. Lighthizer prefers to get Congress to take action with legislation. He also believes that domestic manufacturing will make gains with new and higher tariffs on Chinese imports. Lighthizer policy is falsely compared with Hoover Tariffs Act of 1930 when world trade was 9% of world GDP, today it is 63% of world GDP, and where under Hoover in 1930 the tariffs were across the board all countries 20,000 goods. Under Lighthizer on specific products where dumping is happening -steel, aluminium, autos, with Japan in 1960-70 or China 2000-2020 targeting American industries + technologies for takeover. And falsely when it comes to raising costs to each American family on average by $4000 a year by economists. The conventional view for business for 2000-2016 through Bush and Obama favoring free trade did not take into account the unusual experience of China which entered WTO in 1990, then expanded in a way unprecedented in history at 10-12% growth rates for 15 years destroying American manufacturing with dumping, having support of outshoring by companies in the US, and not giving reciprocal treatment for exports from the US to China. China also had unrestricted access to US technologies in this type of trade. Lighthizer's approach was to specifically address this problem not a general across the board tariffs on all goods (20,000 goods) on all countries as with the Hoover Tariffs Act in 1930. Lighthizer's approach adopted by DJT called for reciprocal trade response with China as the US had already done with Japan, not unilateral across the board tariffs, and when world trade had advanced to about zero tariff rates. And falsely compared to Hoover 1930 Act because under Hoover tariffs were 29-40%. raised to 60% when world trade was small, was 9% of GDP. The Biden administration has tacitly agreed with Lighthizer's vision by not reversing DJT tariffs. A new higher tariff will probably be selective based on the industry, country and what goals the US has set under the new administration for that industry. Some of the tariffs revenue may also be used for tax cuts. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Washington Post survey of 1200 readers on how the Republican healthcare plan of Speaker Ryan and the House of Representatives looks to them, how it affects them in their lives. Here Somasekhar of the Post gives the stories of 5 Americans. Some see the prospect of losing their insurance under the Republican plan even as they reach an older age, others a smaller segment says the Post, whose premiums jumped under the Affordable Care Act say they faced high premiums and high deductibles. The Post says the large majority of opinions have expressed anxiety over the proposed Republican Ryan House plan for healthcare. One of them is an uninsured poor farmer, Mr. Woosley,  income about $18000 who gained benefit from expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act,  one Mr. Smith, 32 years, a personal injury attorney who faces paying $10,000 if he did not take insurance and $10,000 if he took insurance because of high premiums so a wash either way deciding to do without it, one a tech worker Mrs. Powers, 62 years, income $22,000 on year and $4000 the next, from middle class during the tech boom but facing fewer opportunities and uncertain income from part time work, hit by the deep recession facing fewer opportunities as she gets older and now the prospect of losing insurance without government subsidies, one who is from the middle class who sees little benefit from the Affordable Care Act and is forgoing insurance because of the high premiums yet faces a penalty for not being insured under the ACA, another Mr. Blanchard, 52 years, is from the middle class, a computer programmer who lost his job in downsizing, earns $100,000 as a consultant self-employed, pays $767 in premium a month and relies on the Affordable Care Act which helps him gain freedom from working at a company that could downsize,  another is a middle class programmer Mr Riffle,age 44, and his wife, who does not qualify for a subsidy with a $71,000 family salary from working 4 jobs between himself and his wife- this person finds it too expensive for his salary to buy insurance $900 a month and $14,000 deductible under the Affordable Care Act. His views are worth listening to as they go to the crux of the problem- he says he may not be any better with the Republican plan. He sees the real problem as the high cost of health care in the U.S. and the only way this can be fixed is for members of Congress to be asked to use the insurance exchanges they create. If this sample is representative it shows that there are real problems with both the Affordable Care Act and the Republican plan, that the high cost of health care the problem lurking behind every plan that does not squarely address this, and till that happens and members of Congress experience what ordinary people face, this problem can never by fully solved.   Woosley, Smith, Powers, Blanchard, Riffle, and their personal experience is at the crux of what is right and wrong  with the Affordable Care Act, and also with the new Republican plan of Speaker Ryan and the House of Representatives. For every Woosley, Powers and Blanchard who benefit, there is a Smith and a Riffle who are indifferent or are affected by the high cost under Affordable Care Act and the current system of medical care with its high cost. The Affordable Care Act does not  tackle high cost, for that to happen the culture in America that makes it possible and acceptable to charge high prices must change. Another problem apart from bringing health care costs is that any solution needs to have the whole country behind it. If the notion that all people are entitled to basic health care is to stand, the whole country needs to believe it as they do in countries like France, Britain, Germany and Japan. If this has to be made a workable proposition health care has to be offered at a price that makes this possible to achieve, and that idea also needs the deep and broad sense of support from the culture in America similar to that in these other countries. Until that happens politicians in America will get elected and turned out of office in turns on issues such as health care, based on which side they take and which problems they choose not to face squarely and responsibly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The non-partisan approach taken by Republican governor Snyder of Michigan contrasts sharply with the approach of Governor Walker in Wisconsin and Governor Brownback in Kansas.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Senate voted 51 to 49 on a Democratic party measure for further reductions in 2012 Social Security payroll taxes for workers and employers, including a surtax on incomes over $1 million. A measure supported by the Republican party to pay for the payroll tax cut by reducing the Federal payrolls was defeated, with half the Republicans voting against it. Democrats hope to use this issue to show Republicans favor the rich over the middle class, as the payroll tax cut benefits most Americans. Polls show Americans by a large majority see Republican policies favoring the rich. A New York Times/CBS poll in October showed 7 of 10 Americans feel this way. Pollster Geoff Garin says the income inequality issue is beginning to override other issues including antigovernment feeling. This is one way in which the Occupy Wall Street Movement's slogan of "the 99 percent" has resonated with U.S. public opinion. The Democratic party sees this as an opportunity to define the campaign issues for 2012, with Republicans running for reelection cautious about being seen this way....

LyrArc Article Gist
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor talks with Joseph Rago of the Wall Street Journal. There is a fundamentally different world view between Obama and Cantor. Cantor does not hesitate to present his view and says President Obama did not like to be challenged on policy grounds in debt negotiations, leading to the famous "I'll call your bluff Eric" remark by Obama. Cantor sees no chance of reaching an agreement with Obama that would go towards solving the fiscal crisis and feels it would be best to focus on incremental wins. He says of the Obama-Boehner deal that it did not address the problems with Social Security and Medicare. Without the transformational changes that are needed in those programs he did not think it was worth the cost. Cantor is mainly responsible for the Republicans not agreeing to include revenue increases in the negotiations or the final deal. Cantor says the super-committee part of the deal which has to come up with savings, will only lead to incremental progress- considering the huge divide that separates their world view and that of President Obama. The real fight says Cantor is to prevent President Obama from getting re-elected....