Progressive Thinking

Watching Trump felt like being strapped into a chair and force-fed a steady diet of lies, delusions, and chest-thumping fascist nonsense while an audience of Republican sycophants cheered like mindless drones.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - In his first address to Congress since returning to the White House, President Donald Trump delivered a 100-minute speech filled with grandiose claims and controversial proposals, prompting sharp partisan reactions. He touted his administration's "swift and unrelenting action," including reducing the federal workforce and adopting an assertive foreign policy, such as reclaiming the Panama Canal and seeking peace in Ukraine. Trump also announced plans for a new trade war with major trading partners and praised advisor Elon Musk for cost-cutting efforts, though some claims were disputed. The address highlighted deep political divisions, with Republicans applauding and Democrats protesting or walking out, underscoring the polarized state of American politics.

Somebody please slap me and wake me the hell up—because I refuse to accept that this is reality. Donald Trump just gave his first speech to Congress since clawing his way back into the White House, and it was exactly what we feared: a rambling, self-congratulatory, authoritarian manifesto disguised as a prime-time address. Watching it felt like being strapped into a chair and force-fed a steady diet of lies, delusions, and chest-thumping fascist nonsense while an audience of Republican sycophants cheered like mindless drones.

Trump’s speech wasn’t just bad—it was terrifying. It was an open declaration that he plans to rule with unchecked power, flanked by billionaire oligarchs like Elon Musk, while gutting the programs and institutions that actually serve the American people. In just six weeks, he’s already turned the government into his personal playground, and his speech was a victory lap drenched in hypocrisy, arrogance, and a disturbing lack of self-awareness.

Democrats Fought Back—But It’s Not Enough

Democrats, still boxed out of power in both chambers, were left with few ways to push back. Some, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Chris Murphy, refused to even attend, unwilling to participate in the farce. Those who showed up made their objections clear—turning their backs, holding up protest signs reading No Kings, Save Medicaid, Musk Steals, and refusing to applaud Trump’s parade of fiction.

But Trump, ever the insecure showman, used their resistance as a prop for his victim complex. “These people sitting right here will not clap, will not stand, and certainly will not cheer for these astronomical achievements,” he whined, as if he deserved a standing ovation for dismantling democracy in record time. The irony of a man who thrives on grievance politics complaining about other people’s lack of enthusiasm was almost too much to stomach.

Some Democrats weren’t content to sit in silent protest. When Trump had the audacity to preach about “law and order,” members of Congress fired back, shouting “January 6!”—a sharp and necessary reminder that this man inspired a violent attack on our democracy. Rep. Al Green of Texas took it even further, heckling Trump so forcefully that Speaker Mike Johnson ordered him removed from the chamber. Green, undeterred, declared afterward that it was worth it to make sure the American people know that not everyone is willing to roll over. And he’s right.

Trump’s Love Letter to Putin and Attack on America’s Allies

One of the most nauseating moments of the night was Trump’s absolute betrayal of Ukraine, signaling his willingness to abandon our allies while cozying up to Vladimir Putin. In the official Democratic response, Sen. Elissa Slotkin torched him for it, invoking Ronald Reagan—yes, a Republican—who must be spinning in his grave.

“President Trump loves to promise ‘peace through strength’,” she said. “That’s actually a line he stole from Ronald Reagan. But let me tell you, after the spectacle that just took place in the Oval Office last week, Reagan must be rolling over in his grave.”

She’s right. If Trump had been president during the Cold War, the Soviet Union wouldn’t have needed to collapse—we would have surrendered to it.

A Nightmare Dressed as a Leader

Then came one of the most honest responses of the night, from Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who summed up what so many of us are feeling:

"Somebody slap me and wake me the fuck up because I’m ready to get on with it.”

Same, Congresswoman. Same. Because this is not America. Not the America we fought for, not the America that claims to stand for democracy, not the America we should accept.

Trump’s speech wasn’t just a disgrace; it was a warning. He’s back, he’s more unhinged than ever, and if we don’t fight like hell to stop him, the next time he speaks to Congress, it won’t be as a president—it will be as a dictator.

A Litany of Lies

Trump's speech was a masterclass in misinformation. He falsely claimed that the United States has provided $350 billion in aid to Ukraine since Russia's invasion, a figure grossly inflated from the actual $120 billion. He boasted about uncovering "hundreds of billions" in government fraud through Elon Musk's cost-cutting measures, yet documentation reveals savings of under $9 billion, none involving actual fraud. These fabrications are not mere slips of the tongue but deliberate attempts to mislead the American public.  theguardian.com

Divisive and Dangerous Rhetoric

Beyond the lies, Trump's rhetoric was alarmingly divisive. He vilified immigrants, painting them as criminals and threats to national security, a narrative that fuels xenophobia and hatred. His comments on transgender individuals were not only insensitive but also harmful, stripping away the rights and recognition of an already marginalized community. Such language from the nation's leader is not just inappropriate; it's perilous.

An Assault on Democratic Values

Perhaps most concerning is Trump's apparent disdain for democratic principles. He praised his withdrawal from international agreements like the Paris Climate Accord and the World Health Organization, isolating the United States from the global community. His threats to impose tariffs on allies such as Canada and Mexico jeopardize our diplomatic relationships and economic stability. Moreover, his blatant disregard for factual information undermines the very foundation of an informed electorate, essential for a functioning democracy. theguardian.com

The Path Forward

In these trying times, it's imperative that we, as citizens, remain vigilant and hold our leaders accountable. We must demand truth, transparency, and a commitment to the values that have long defined our nation: equality, justice, and respect for all. Only then can we hope to steer our country back toward unity and progress.

How the Wealthy Exploit Crisis for Their Gain

LAKE GENEVA, WI - If you’ve ever seen It’s a Wonderful Life (1946), you probably remember the intense scene when the citizens of Bedford Falls panic and rush to withdraw their savings from the Bailey Bros. Building & Loan. The stock market had crashed, banks were failing, and people were desperate to get their money before it disappeared. And right on cue, the town’s richest man, Mr. Potter—the greedy, scheming villain of the film—offers to “help” the struggling townsfolk by buying their shares at 10 cents on the dollar.

Sound familiar? It should. This is exactly the kind of predatory capitalism that modern billionaires like Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and other ultra-rich elites thrive on today.

The Playbook: Crisis as Opportunity for the Ultra-Rich

Let’s break it down: in times of financial distress, regular people panic, while the ultra-wealthy see an opportunity to buy up assets on the cheap. Whether it’s real estate during a housing crash, stocks after a market drop, or even entire industries struggling to stay afloat, the playbook is always the same:

1. 1. Instill or Exploit Panic:
   Just like in It’s a Wonderful Life, when people panic and feel desperate, they make rash decisions. Whether it’s fear-mongering about inflation, economic collapse, or a banking crisis, fear drives down prices—making it easier for the rich to swoop in.
2. 2. Offer Pennies on the Dollar:
   Mr. Potter offered 10 cents per dollar for shares in the failing bank, not because he wanted to help but because he knew the desperate depositors had no better options.
   Today, billionaires buy foreclosed homes, distressed businesses, and bankrupt companies at rock-bottom prices while the average person is struggling to survive.
3. 3. Consolidate Power and Control:

◦             Trump’s Playbook: Trump made his fortune by taking advantage of bankrupt casinos, distressed real estate, and businesses in crisis. He famously bragged in 2006:"I sort of hope that happens because then people like me would go in and buy."

▪             Translation: When the economy tanks, he sees it as a fire sale.

◦             Musk’s Twitter Takeover: Musk bought Twitter when it was struggling, then gutted it, cut staff, and rebranded it into X—turning a struggling public platform into his personal fiefdom.

1. 4. Sell High Once Stability Returns:
   Once the crisis passes, the rich sell the assets back to the public at massive profits, just like Mr. Potter would have done with the bank shares he scooped up for pennies.

Real-Life Examples of “Potter-Style” Greed

• 2008 Housing Crash:

◦              Banks, including Goldman Sachs, BlackRock, and Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, bought foreclosed homes in bulk, turning them into rental properties.

◦              The people who lost their homes? Many had to rent from the same billionaires who capitalized on their misery.

• COVID-19 Pandemic:

◦              Small businesses collapsed, while big corporations and billionaires thrived.

◦              Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and other billionaires grew their wealth by hundreds of billions while millions of Americans struggled to survive.

• The Banking Crises (SVB, Credit Suisse, Etc.):

◦              In 2023, Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) collapsed, and while ordinary customers feared for their deposits, billionaires bought into other banks at discounts, knowing they would recover.

The “Bailey” Alternative: Collective Power vs. Predatory Greed

In It’s a Wonderful Life, George Bailey stands up to Mr. Potter by urging people to resist panic and work together instead of selling out their future for quick cash. Instead of letting Potter consolidate power, the town keeps its wealth within the community.

The lesson? The rich win when we panic. They lose when we organize.

Instead of selling our assets to the billionaires looking to exploit crisis, we should be:

• Investing in community-owned businesses and credit unions.
• Supporting worker co-ops and unions to fight against billionaire control.
• Demanding fair regulations that prevent the ultra-rich from profiting off collapse.

In short: don’t let the Potters of the world win. Because when billionaires tell you they’re “helping,” what they really mean is:

“I’ll take everything you have for a fraction of its worth. And once I own it, I’ll charge you to use it.”

Let’s learn from George Bailey—not Mr. Potter.

A Fractured Government in the Face of Presidential Overreach

LAKE GENEVA, WI - For as long as I can remember, I believed that the U.S. government was structured to prevent any single individual from wielding unchecked power. The Constitution, with its delicate system of checks and balances, seemed like an impenetrable shield against tyranny. I took comfort in the belief that our government had been designed with foresight: Congress to make laws, the judiciary to interpret them, and the president to enforce them, all while keeping one another in check. Yet, recent events have left me grappling with a sobering realization—these safeguards are far more fragile than they appear.

The idea of safeguards conjures an image of impenetrable walls, a well-oiled system that automatically curbs any abuse of power. But as we've seen in recent years, the architecture of American democracy is less a fortress and more a patchwork quilt, its strength dependent on the integrity of those who operate within it. And when those operators act in bad faith, the cracks become glaringly visible.

Trump and the Erosion of Trust in Safeguards

For many Americans, Donald Trump’s presidency was a litmus test for the resilience of these democratic safeguards—and for good reason. During his tenure, Trump’s behavior often challenged the norms of presidential conduct, leading to widespread perceptions of an administration operating without guardrails. These perceptions are rooted in several key factors:

1. 1. Defiance of Accountability: Trump frequently dismissed congressional oversight, most notably during his impeachment inquiries. His administration refused to comply with subpoenas and dismissed investigations as partisan witch hunts. This outright defiance weakened Congress’s role as a check on the executive branch.
2. 2. Weaponization of Power: Many viewed Trump’s use of the Justice Department as a political tool as emblematic of his disregard for democratic norms. From pressuring the department to investigate political rivals to publicly chastising federal prosecutors, his actions raised concerns about the erosion of judicial independence.
3. 3. Controversial Policy Decisions: Trump’s executive orders often skirted congressional authority, with policies such as the travel ban and family separations at the U.S.-Mexico border sparking fierce debates. While some supported these measures as fulfilling campaign promises, others saw them as examples of overreach and disregard for humanitarian principles.
4. 4. Rhetoric and Public Behavior: Perhaps most alarming to many Americans was Trump’s frequent attacks on the media, federal institutions, and even his own intelligence agencies. His rhetoric often undermined public trust in these pillars of democracy, with critics arguing that it emboldened authoritarian tendencies.
5. 5. The Capitol Riot and Aftermath: The events of January 6, 2021, solidified concerns about Trump’s leadership. Many saw his rhetoric and inaction during the Capitol insurrection as evidence of a president who not only failed to safeguard democracy but actively contributed to its unraveling.

These actions—and the inability of institutions to adequately respond to them—fueled the belief that the system of safeguards was failing. While Trump’s supporters argue that his actions were necessary disruptions to a dysfunctional system, his critics see them as proof that the checks and balances are neither automatic nor infallible.

The Power of Precedent—and Its Abuse

One of the most unsettling revelations is how much of our government operates on precedent rather than unshakable laws. Many of the "rules" that govern presidential behavior are informal norms—unwritten traditions handed down from one administration to the next. For example, the expectation of transparency in releasing tax returns, the respect for congressional oversight, and the restraint in using executive orders are not codified into law but are merely conventions.

When a president chooses to flout these norms, the government has limited recourse. Consider the power of executive orders, which are designed to allow the president to implement policy quickly in times of necessity. Over time, however, this tool has been used to bypass Congress altogether. While Congress theoretically has the power to check this behavior, the reality is that partisan politics often prevent it from acting decisively. Instead of confronting overreach, legislators retreat into their political corners, leaving the executive branch unchecked.

The Role of Congress: A Watchdog in Chains

Congress is meant to be the first line of defense against a president who exceeds their authority. Yet, in practice, its ability to restrain a rogue executive is hindered by deep partisan divides. When loyalty to party outweighs loyalty to the Constitution, Congress becomes less a check on presidential power and more an enabler of it.

We have seen this play out repeatedly. In theory, impeachment is the ultimate safeguard against a president who abuses their office. However, the process is inherently political, requiring not just evidence of wrongdoing but also the political will to act on it. Recent impeachment proceedings demonstrated how this safeguard can falter when senators prioritize their party’s fortunes over their constitutional responsibilities. Even overwhelming evidence of misconduct can be dismissed if political self-interest takes precedence.

A Frightening Fragility

What has become clear is that the system only works as well as the people within it allow. The framers of the Constitution envisioned a government of laws, but they also assumed that those in power would act with a baseline level of integrity and respect for democratic principles. What happens when those assumptions prove false?

Safeguards like congressional oversight, judicial review, and the rule of law rely on cooperation and good faith. When these are absent, the system falters. A president determined to undermine democratic norms can exploit loopholes, leverage divisions, and erode trust in institutions. And the more this happens, the harder it becomes to restore those norms.

Moving Forward: A Call to Action

This moment calls for reflection and reform. If the last few years have taught us anything, it’s that we cannot take our democracy for granted. Safeguards that depend on informal norms must be codified into law. Congress needs to reassert its authority, closing loopholes that allow for executive overreach. The judiciary must be protected from politicization, ensuring that it remains a neutral arbiter. And perhaps most importantly, we as citizens must demand accountability from our leaders.

The strength of our democracy lies not in its institutions but in our collective commitment to uphold them. If we are to preserve this system for future generations, we must recognize its fragility and work to strengthen it. Only then can we ensure that the safeguards we’ve long relied on are truly safe.

Trump's tone-deaf attempt to turn the DC plane crash into an excuse to scapegoat diversity initiatives only shows his dishonesty and incompetence.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - Donald Trump’s desperate attempt to blame diversity initiatives for the recent plane and helicopter collision near Washington, D.C. is not just absurd—it’s another blatant example of his dishonesty and incompetence. A preliminary report from the Federal Aviation Administration exposes the real problem: dangerously low staffing levels at the control tower of Ronald Reagan National Airport (DCA), a crisis that has been years in the making, exacerbated by Trump’s own policies.

According to The New York Times, the FAA’s internal report confirms that only one air traffic controller was on duty at the time of the crash—despite standard protocol requiring two. Handling both helicopter and plane traffic simultaneously is a complex job, often requiring different radio frequencies. With only one controller juggling both, pilots couldn’t communicate with one another, increasing the risk of a deadly accident.

This staffing shortage is no coincidence. For years, DCA’s control tower has been critically understaffed, operating with just 19 fully certified controllers as of September 2023—far below the recommended 30. The reason? Employee burnout, high turnover, and, most notably, budget cuts. Trump’s federal hiring freeze, his reckless dismantling of the Aviation Security Advisory Committee, and his FAA chief’s resignation at the whims of Elon Musk have only worsened an already dangerous situation.

Yet, instead of acknowledging his role in gutting essential agencies and leaving them woefully unprepared, Trump, true to form, is pointing fingers at DEI initiatives—a tired, baseless scapegoat he and the far right trot out whenever they need to deflect blame. But no amount of racist dog-whistling can change the facts: Trump’s policies have hollowed out critical institutions, weakened aviation safety, and put American lives at risk. If he and his enablers want to find someone to blame, they should start with the man in the mirror.

General policies and beliefs have real results when implemented.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - It’s ironic that many of the Americans who voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020 are now the same people who could face serious hardships from his federal program freeze. Trump drew overwhelming support from rural areas and working-class voters who have historically depended on federal assistance programs. Now, these communities could pay the price for his policy decisions, which seem to prioritize political theatrics over real solutions.

Rural America, one of Trump’s strongholds, has long struggled with economic stagnation, limited access to healthcare, and an aging population. Federal programs like Medicaid, agricultural subsidies, and infrastructure grants have been lifelines for these regions, keeping hospitals open, farms afloat, and roads maintained. Yet, the freeze on federal grants and loans could dismantle these very safety nets, leaving many of his voters in the lurch.

Take healthcare, for example. Rural hospitals are already closing at alarming rates—more than130 since 2010, according to the American Hospital Association. These hospitals often depend on Medicaid funding to stay operational. Cuts or freezes to these programs don’t just threaten healthcare access; they threaten lives. Trump’s rural voters, many of whom are older and face chronic health issues, will feel this impact acutely.

Then there’s agriculture. Trump’s trade wars with China forced many farmers to rely on federal bailout funds to survive. Now, with federal subsidies on pause, these same farmers could be left without the financial safety net they once depended on. It’s hard to reconcile the image of MAGA hats at rallies with the reality of family farms collapsing under the weight of frozen funds, but that’s the likely outcome of these policies.

Even infrastructure—something Trump himself touted as a top priority—could suffer. Rural communities rely heavily on federal grants to fund critical projects like roads, bridges, and water systems. Delaying these projects doesn’t just hinder economic growth; it risks public safety. It’s a cruel twist that the very areas that backed Trump’s promise to “Make America Great Again” could see their towns fall further into disrepair.

And let’s not forget food assistance programs like SNAP, which serve millions of low-income Americans, including those in rural areas where poverty rates are often higher than in urban centers. Freezing these programs will only increase food insecurity in communities already struggling to make ends meet.

What’s particularly striking is the disconnect between Trump’s rhetoric and the consequences of his actions. For years, he positioned himself as the champion of the “forgotten man and woman,” railing against elites and promising to put America first. Yet, this federal program freeze suggests a disregard for the everyday struggles of his base. It’s as if the people who put him in office have become collateral damage in his ongoing quest for power and attention.

This isn’t just bad policy—it’s bad politics. Many of Trump’s supporters may not connect the dots immediately, but the effects of these cuts will be felt in their communities soon enough. Rural hospitals will close. Farmers will struggle to stay in business. Roads will crumble. And when these realities set in, it’s fair to wonder whether his supporters will start to question whether their loyalty was misplaced.

Trump once famously said, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters.” Perhaps that’s true, but policies that undermine the health, livelihood, and well-being of his own supporters might be harder to shrug off.

For the sake of the communities that depend on these programs, let’s hope the federal program freeze is short-lived. If it isn’t, many of Trump’s most loyal supporters may find themselves reconsidering the promises they believed in—and wondering if they were ever truly remembered at all.