I’m Done With Airlines

Wallis Simpson, the Duchess of Windsor, had it right, she refused to fly on airplanes. I’m in her camp now. I spent five hours yesterday trying to catch a flight to Trail Mix Southern Command, but my flight was canceled with no explanation and no options offered for getting there. At least I got a full refund.

Airlines these days handle passengers as they do baggage. What’s next? Bar codes around our necks and we just lay down on conveyer belts.

That’s it. I’m done. Back to cars, boats and trains.

Hitting the road soon for my next trip to Orlando. Some 14 hours it’ll take, but I suspect a halfway stop in Florence, SC, will be better than mooing along with the airport herds.

What Do China and Cuba have in Common?

By eProf2, a Trail Mix Contributor

The quick answer is they both have Communist governments. And on Friday last Donald Trump decided there isn’t a common United States policy for Communist governments like China and Cuba.

The Trump administration wants to engage in more contacts and trade with China, even though during the presidential campaign he said China was at the root of U.S. economic problems, which were catastrophic. The president and his family have been courting Xi Jinping for more trade and trade mark recognition for Trump products and properties. Trump himself seems to be indebted to Chinese banks while his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, was, and could still be, in negotiations for a New York City billion dollar property with China.

There is an appearance that if the Trump family is economically involved with a nation-state U.S. policy will tilt in that direction. There are many examples of this in the first five months of the Trump administration (Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, et cetera).

Cuba: No Pay No Play

Cuba, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to have a Trump connection. It was reported that Trump once sought hotel rights in Cuba even though the embargo for U.S. businesses was in effect. Trump was turned down by the Castro government. The Friday announcement will severely cut back on business connections and restrict individual travel to the island nation with some exceptions.

The rationale for re-imposing major parts of the fifty year old embargo was that the president didn’t want U.S. dollars flowing to the Cuban military and government. Where does he think U.S. dollars go in China?

Two other rationales have been written about extensively. The first is that all things Obama must be repudiated; thus, Obama’s overture to open relations with Cuba must be overturned. Second, Trump needed to appease older, conservative Republican Cubans in south Florida, who through their hatred of Castro voted for Trump; a single interest group of voters who Trump courted in order to win the electoral college votes from Florida.

Both rationales are not valid arguments when formulating foreign policy. Internationalists must be scouring the world to see what the next foreign policy decision will be made on the basis of Trump investments, loans, and close personal relationships.

This is not the way to implement national interest policy. Both China and Cuba can take away some lessons from Trump’s decision last Friday: U.S. policy can be changed quickly when Trump’s interests “trump” those of the United States.

More Posts by eProf2

Canada Steps Up. Bring It On.

In a move I suspect will expand, Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Chrystia Freeland, asserts that her nation shall step into the breach of our TV president’s abdication of US global leadership and respect:

“The fact that our friend and ally has come to question the very worth of its mantle of global leadership puts in sharper focus the need for the rest of us to set our own clear and sovereign course,” Freeland told the House of Commons last week. “To rely solely on the U.S. security umbrella would make us a client state.”

“We will make the necessary investments in our military, to not only address years of neglect and underfunding, but also to place the Canadian Armed Forces on a new footing – with new equipment, training, resources and consistent and predictable funding.”

Trump Under Oath? Danger

Perhaps the most dangerous possibility our president faces now is giving sworn testimony. James Comey confirmed today to the Senate that Independent Counsel Robert Mueller is investigating obstruction of justice.

If that’s the case at least two consequences emerge: that Trump will be called to testify and that his hinted-about tapes of the Comey conversations will be subpoenaed.

Can Trump tell the truth under oath? The risk of perjury, given his nature, is so great that I can imagine his team doing everything possible to avoid it.

Do the tapes exist? Mueller can certainly call his bluff with a subpoena. Either they must be produced, refused to supply, or Trump acknowledges his tweet hint was bullshit — or, even worse for Trump, they were destroyed. None of these outcomes go well for him.

As things stand, Comey and Mueller are all over Trump’s ass. Wouldn’t want to be there.