in all the world is more dangerous, than sincere ignorance and
-- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
from April 1, 2019
This is a
Nederlog of Monday,
This is a crisis
log but it is a bit different from how it was until 2013:
I have been
writing about the crisis since September
1, 2008 (in Dutch, but
since 2010 in English) and about
the enormous dangers of
surveillance (by secret services and
by many rich commercial entities) since June 10, 2013, and I will
continue with it.
moment and since more than three years
problems with the company that is
supposed to take care that my site is visible 
and with my health, but I am still writing a Nederlog every day and
I shall continue.
2. Crisis Files
five crisis files
that are mostly well worth reading:
A. Selections from April 1, 2019:
1. Give Directly to Candidates, Not
The items 1 - 5 are today's
selections from the 35 sites that I look at
everyorning. The indented text under each link is quoted from the
link that starts the item. Unindented text is by me:
2. The Trump slump is coming — it may
already be here
3. Republicans want to do vast harm on health care
4. Robert Mueller, the media and the "Russia skeptics"
5. 'Shame!': DHS Asks for Power to Deport Unaccompanied
Directly to Candidates, Not the DCCC
This article is by
Jake Johnson on Truthdig and originally on Common Dreams. I abbreviated
the title. It starts as follows:
Yes, I entirely agree
with this proposal of Ocasio-Cortez. She might have added that
the policy of the DCCC is also quite undemocratic, for it
seeks to help those who have been elected (many of whom are corrupt) at
the costs of those who have not been elected.
Denouncing the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee’s new policy of cutting
off firms that work with primary challengers as “divisive” and
“harmful,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Saturday advised
small-dollar donors to stop giving money to the DCCC and instead donate
to progressive candidates directly.
“The DCCC’s new rule to
blacklist + boycott anyone who does business with primary challengers
is extremely divisive and harmful to the party,” tweeted the
congresswoman from New York. “My recommendation, if you’re a
small-dollar donor: pause your donations to DCCC and give directly to
swing candidates instead.”
Here is one more bit from this article:
Yes indeed. And this is a strongly
Ocasio-Cortez went on to
list three swing-seat House Democrats up for reelection in 2020: Reps.
Katie Porter (Calif.), Mike Levin (Calif.), and Lauren Underwood (Ill.).
The New York
congresswoman’s call for small-dollar donors to “pause” donations to
the DCCC comes amid a growing progressive revolt against the campaign
arm’s new policy, which states that the organization “will not conduct
business with, nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns, any
consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting member of the House
Progressives vowed to
back against the rule, arguing it will disproportionately harm
left-wing organizations looking to transform the party by ousting
Trump slump is coming — it may already be here
article is by Ian Reifowitz on AlterNet and originally on Daily Kos. It
starts as follows:
Yes - or at least I think
the Wall Street Journal, NBC News and the Washington Post wrote the
truth, in so far as that can be derived from statistics (which is less
than many people who do not know much of statistics believe).
It appears this was the
week where the economic fantasies put forth by The Man Who Lost the
Popular Vote came back to reality. The headlines on Thursday were not
Wall Street Journal: U.S.
Economy Had Less Momentum Heading Into 2019 as Corporate Profits
NBC News: Economy slumping
faster than expected, with fourth-quarter GDP revised down
Washington Post: GDP
revised downward for 2018 as U.S. economy shows more signs of slowing
As the headline of a New
York Times analysis put it: “Trump Owns the
Economy Now, for Better or Worse.”
Here is some more:
Well... I suppose I agree
that Trump probably was fantasizing, but I think it is a bit too
strong to write that "Trump has failed", indeed mostly because this
certainly was not only or mainly Trump's mistake (I think).
Trump, both before and
since taking office, has repeatedly promised to increase U.S.
economic growth to 4 percent per year: “We’re bringing it
(the GDP) from 1 percent up to 4 percent. And I actually think we can
go higher than 4 percent. I think you can go to 5 percent or 6
percent.” Putting aside legitimate concerns about the usefulness of GDP
as a measure, we now know that Trump has failed, again, to not only
reach 4 percent annual growth, but even to reach 3 percent.
What seems true is that the American economy is declining.
Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:
I don't know whether Zand
is correct, and indeed no one knows, but I do hope for
a recession in 2020, for the simple reason that a recession would
considerably increase the chance that Trump is not re-elected
in 2020. And this is a recommended article.
like the Federal Reserve and the International Monetary Fund, have
significantly reduced their economic outlook for 2019 and beyond. And
here’s Moody’s Analytics economist Mark Zandi: “2018 will be the
high-water mark for growth in the Trump administration.” Zandi
predicted growth would slow to 1.1 percent next year, and sees a
recession in 2020 as more likely to occur than not.
want to do vast harm on health care
This article is by
Leo Gerard on AlterNet and originally on the Independent Media
Institute. I abbreviated the title. It starts as follows:
week, U.S. Attorney General William Barr, a Republican, announced that
his predecessor, Jeff Sessions, just hadn’t gone far enough when he asked a federal judge to kill the Affordable Care
Act’s (ACA) protections for people with pre-existing medical conditions—that
is, stuff like asthma, diabetes and high blood pressure.
told an appeals court that he does not want it to merely murder that
one provision but, instead, will insist that it massacre the ACA’s entire 1,990 pages—death
to every clause protecting patients from insurance company abuses,
every portion devoted to containing costs, every phrase extending
health care to the nation’s young adults and working poor.
say, for I did not know this. Also, what I want to know is
how Barr is going to help those who need the Affordable Care Act.
Well... this seems to be the answer:
I say! For this means that
Barr wants to rip the medical insurance of some 150 milliom
Americans (or 133 million if the 21 million are included in the 133
It is critical, Barr insists, to deprive the
ACA’s guarantee of medical insurance access to 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions
and to increase medication and premium costs for 60 million senior citizens on Medicare. Also, of
course, Barr says, the court must restore the medical insurance caps
that bankrupted and killed Americans who suffered diseases that are
expensive to treat, like cancer, or whose babies were born prematurely
requiring costly long-term care.
is essential, Barr contends, that the court rip insurance from 21 million people covered by the ACA health
insurance marketplaces and Medicaid expansion; that the court deny
insurance to 2 million young adults covered by their parents’
plans; that the court foreclose substance abuse treatment to 800,000 Americans suffering opioid addiction.
Well... I said in 2016 that in my psychologists' opinion, Trump is insane (and yes, I
have extensive experiences with insane persons) and I wrote on the same
day that I think that Trump is a
I still think so, and I now include William Barr as a neofascist.
Here is a basic explanation for those who need basic explanations:
Yes, of course. And here
is some more evidence of how sick other Republicans get:
who drive a Mercedes, spend half a million bucks to get their children
into high-status universities and lull away weekends at $3 million Nantucket beach homes will always
have health care. The price is irrelevant to them. Even if denied
insurance, they can afford chemotherapy, or the monthly bill for
insulin or the cost of a leg broken in a sail-boating accident.
everyone else, for coal miners and code writers, for registered nurses
and Starbucks baristas, for Amazon warehouse workers and independent
truck drivers, health insurance is vital. Workers, whether low-income
or middle class, don’t have hundreds of thousands sitting around for a
heart transplant or repeated cancer treatments or neonatal care.
I fear all of that is quite
true. Here is the ending of this article:
a result, Republican governors and lawmakers denied Medicaid to
millions of eligible low-income working people and their families. Some
Republican governors went so far as to defy the will of the people of
their states. In Maine, for example, voters approved expanding Medicaid
in 2017 in a binding referendum by 59-to-41 percent after the
Republican governor five times vetoed Medicaid expansion proposals. Even after the referendum and a court decision ordering
expansion, the Republican governor refused to do it. Not
until a Democrat took the governor’s seat this year did it happen.
Similarly, Virginia and Kansas got Medicaid extensions only after they
elected Democratic governors.
Idaho and Utah, just like Maine, Republicans are defying the will of
the people in their states who passed referendums to extend Medicaid.
The message is clear: to Republicans, health
care is a right only for the rich; the rest can suffer and die. The GOP
Hippocratic oath is: Do vast harm.
Yes, given the evidence
that is in this article that is alas quite true. And this is a strongly
Mueller, the media and the "Russia skeptics"
This article is by
Andrew O'Hehir on Salon. I abbreviated the title. It starts as follows:
It’s not all that
surprising, I think, that Robert Mueller has filed his report to the
Justice Department on whether President Trump’s campaign conspired with
the Russians and we don’t really know what’s in it. What’s perhaps more
surprising is that Mueller’s unread report has become yet another
symbolic black box in a world that seems full of them, a mysterious
cipher that represents everything we don’t know, don’t understand and
don’t agree on — and perhaps on some broader plane the difficulty of
knowing anything for sure, amid the existential disorder of American
That’s too much weight to
carry, no doubt. I’m as curious to read Mueller’s full report as the
next person, but I hold out no hope that it will resolve all unanswered
questions about the nature of Donald Trump and what really happened in
the 2016 election.
Well... I consider all
of the above obviously true, but add that one must be fairly to
very naive to expect from any government's report (by any
government, I'd add) "that
it will resolve all unanswered questions".
Also, I have read too
little of Salon and also too little of O'Hehir to say what their
position on - let's say - Russiagate was since 2016, but it seems to me
that the opinions of O'Hehir on that question were (and are) not
Here is some more:
[T]his has been a bonanza
week for the tribe of “Russia skeptics” on the left. By that term I
mean those who believe that elaborate conspiracy theories about Trump,
the Russians and the 2016 election, and an accompanying mystical
reverence for Robert Mueller and his sacred task, were either
completely delusional or a waste of time (or both).
Perhaps the leading Russia
skeptics in the media are Intercept editor and former Salon columnist
Glenn Greenwald and Rolling Stone reporter Matt Taibbi, although there
are certainly others. I have a cordial relationship with Greenwald
(although I don't know him well), who recently
told Democracy Now! that mainstream had gotten the Russia story
"radically, fundamentally and deliberately wrong ... in a very
Well... as far as I am
concerned - and I have read most of Greenwald's writing on Russiagate -
I think Greenwald was almost completely correct on this issue.
Here is some more:
Arrayed against them, of
course, have been the “Russia alarmists” of the mainstream media, led
by Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes of MSNBC, Jonathan Chait of New York
magazine and an army of establishmentarian talking heads, including
former CIA director John Brennan, former
director of national intelligence James Clapper and numerous
others. Following their lead, if more cautiously and with more
attention to detail, have been the teams of reporters and editors at
the New York Times, the Washington Post and elsewhere, who have
consistently produced defensible but arguably slanted reporting along
the lines of “beneath all this smoke, there’s got to be a fire.”
I think all of the
above were not only quite mistaken, but also quite dishonest.
Also, these liars wrote most of the mainstream news that most
I still do not
know either O'Hehir's position or Salon's position, but I suppose by
now it was considerably more pro Russiagate than myself,
Greenwald or the VIPS.
Here is the ending
of this article, which is plain baloney:
Well... as to the first
But the really important
I believe, is not to keep a scorecard of who’s right and who’s wrong,
but to recognize that nobody is 100 percent right about any of this. In
the famous words of screenwriter William Goldman, nobody knows
If you believe that it is "really important" "not to keep a scorecard of who’s right and
who’s wrong", firstly you are not thinking as a journalist, and
secondly you should (and would) not have written the present
And as to
the second statement (" the famous words of screenwriter William
Goldman", which I never heard before, and whom I never heard of):
As quoted it is
for the simple reason that every sane adult knows quite a number of
things, to start with the language in which Goldman denies he knows
anything. And I do not think this is an honest article, and
will not recommend it.
DHS Asks for Power to Deport Unaccompanied Children
This article is
by Eoin Higgins on Common Dreams. It starts as follows:
I say! Well... I have said
above that given the opinions of William Barr, who wants to exclude
something like 125 million or more poor Americans from being medically
insured, that Barr is a neofascist, and I now also include Kirstjen
The Donald Trump
administration is looking
at ways to codify deportation of unaccompanied minors, a move that
was decried by progressives, liberals, and even some on the right.
Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, in a letter to Congress, asked
for authority to begin deportation of children who arrive at the border
without accompanying parents or family members.
Here is some more on Nielsen:
First of all, I do not
think that families seeking asylum commited any crime by seeking
asylum, and I also think that the only persons who should be locked
up "in detention" are those who have provably committed a crime,
which means that I think Nielsen's request seems to me to be a form
of criminal sadism.
The request—which also asks
for the authority to keep families
seeking asylum in detention while they await their cases being
heard and for the authority to allow requests for asylum to be done in
their home countries rather than at the border—is likely a non-starter.
The Democratic majority in the House of Representatives is not inclined
to vote in favor of helping DHS, or the Trump administration more
broadly, with immigration.
Nielsen also took her case
to the American people via Twitter in a lengthy thread detailing her
goals for the request.
"My greatest concern is for
the children," said Nielsen, "who are put at high risk by this
emergency and who are arriving sicker than ever before after traveling
on the treacherous trek."
And second of all, she gets a first prize for sickening hypocrisy:
Your greatest concern is not at all for the children; your
greatest concern is to keep as many people as is possible - always
excepting white billionaires - from immigrating into the USA.
Then again, I am happy that "the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives is not
inclined to vote in favor of helping DHS, or the Trump administration
more broadly, with immigration", so Nielsen's plans are less likely to
Here is one last bit that shows that not all Republicans have lost
Yes indeed, and this is a strongly
Even Nicolle Wallace—a
proud Republican and the former communications director for George W.
Bush, for whom Nielsen also worked—was amazed.
"What is happening??"
end of 2015 that
xs4all.nl is systematically
ruining my site by NOT updating it within a few seconds,
as it did between 1996 and 2015, but by updating it between
two to seven days later, that is, if I am lucky.
claimed that my site was wrongly named in html: A lie.
They have claimed that my operating system was out of date: A lie.
just don't care for my site, my interests, my values or my
ideas. They have behaved now for 3 years
as if they are the
eagerly willing instruments of the US's secret services, which I
from now on suppose they are (for truth is dead in Holland).
two reasons I remain with xs4all is that my site has been
there since 1996, and I have no reasons whatsoever to suppose that any
other Dutch provider is any better (!!).