TWO ATTACKS ON SCIENCE

 In the past three days, Donald Trump has given two press conferences that have confirmed beyond a shadow a doubt that he is the worst president for scientific research in modern history, and maybe ever.  The first was a joint conference he made with Health and Human Services leader (and utter quack) Robert Kennedy Junior.  The second was a rambling, insulting and childish speech he made at the United Nations.  Both of them were full of his usual blustering, bragging and lying, that was no surprise.  But it's really the substance of both of them that's is so disturbing.

The first found Trump and Kennedy claiming that acetaminophen, the painkiller found in Tylenol, is linked to an increased chance of autism in children whose mothers take it during pregnancy.   They said this despite the fact that the Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine have found no such link.  The complicated part of this is that Tylenol is the most widely used painkiller during pregnancy because, of course, it's available over the counter.  And, more importantly, it can help lower  fevers in pregnant women, which can cause pregnancy complications.  Repeatedly during the conference, Trump loudly told women not to take Tylenol during a pregnancy, hectoring  them to "tough it out" (easy for a man to say!).   As Dr. Laura Andreson, an obstetrician told the New York Times, “It’s hard to wrap my head around what kind of thought process was behind making these statements.”  Along with this terrible advice, Trump also rambled about vaccines in general, at one point describing vaccinations by saying “It’s too much liquid, too many different things are going into that baby at too big a number.”  He also oddly asserted that the Amish don't get autism, and that autism rates in Cuba are lower than here because they don't have Tylenol!  But then what do you expect from a man who once suggested injecting bleach?

His speech at the UN was perhaps less dangerous, although just as embarrassing.  Along with repeating the laughable lie that he's been making for weeks now, that he has stopped seven different wars as president, and all but begging for a Nobel Peace Prize, he also decided to talk about climate change.   First he claimed that China has been building wind turbines to sell all over the world, but have very few in their own country; this is the exact opposite of the truth.  China now uses more wind power than any other country in the world.  He also flat out called climate change a hoax, and said that “If you don’t get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail.”  And later insulted the rest of the world by saying "Your countries are going to hell" (that was more about immigration than green energy, but it was a terrible thing to say either way).   

While Trump's attitude about green energy has been known for years (his hatred of wind turbines stems from his anger over one of them being put up near one of his gold courses in Scotland), it was still both maddening and depressing to hear him state them so boldly in front of other countries that have not ignored the overwhelming scientific  research on climate change (not to mention the record droughts, fires and floods that have plagued the world in the past few years). 

While the Republican party has often been at odds with science ever since Ronald Reagan forged an  alliance   between the party and Christian fundamentalists back in the 80's, the fact that we know have a president who has defunded scientific research at colleges he considers too woke while spewing nonsense about autism and climate change is a new low for the country.  The sad fact of the matter is that for the world to make the logical transition to green energy, it will have to follow China and not the US, which is what's happening.  America once stood at the vanguard of scientific research, but now we are falling behind.  The damage Trump is doing will affect both American and the world negatively for years to come.

POLITICAL VIOLENCE IS ROILING OUR DIVED COUNTRY

 Last Wednesday, conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was horribly shot and killed while engaging in a debate at a college in Utah.  Kirk was a young married father who's  family has suffered a terrible loss.In the wake of the shooting, some people on the left have quoted things that Kirk said in the past about gun control and  his reaction to other political attacks on people he disagreed with.  None of this can in any way justify what happened to him.

The real problem with Kirk was how successful he was, as he, like so many people in the right wing media world, channeled the frustrations of white men by saying that were the one truly oppressed group in our society.  At one conservative gathering he said that, "Actually MLK was awful. OK? He's not a good person." later adding that  "We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the mid-1960s." His connection to white men, especially young ones, was instrumental in getting Donald Trump reelected.  As much as I may find all that abhorrent, again, none of that justifies what happened to him.

But one point that should be made is that Kirk's is not the only recent political killing in this country: just a few months ago, former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband were assassinated by a Trump supporter who had reportedly made a long hit list of mostly Democratic leaders. (At the time President Trump released a perfunctory statement condemning the killings, but then he pointedly played gold instead of going to their funeral).  There was also Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s house suffering an arson attack, Democratic House member Nancy Pelosi's husband being assaulted and  a kidnapping plot against  Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.  But instead of mentioning any of those, in the wake of  Kirk's shooting,  Trump has only talked about attacks on right wing political figures.  In one interview on Fox News, when asked about what to do about right wing violence, Trump said, "I'll tell you something that's gonna get me in trouble but I couldn't care less. The radicals on the right oftentimes are radical because they don't want to see crime. The radicals on the left are the problem  They’ve vicious and they’re horrible and they’re politically savvy."  Later, when he was asked about how he was holding up after the shooting of a man that he considered a friend, Trump said that he was doing great and turned the conversation to the construction of a new ballroom in the White House!  Once again, he proved that there is no cure for being a  narcissistic psychopath.

Sadly, Trump is the absolute worst kind of person to have as our nation's leader at a moment like this, but then what do expect from a man who pardoned January 6th protestors who beat police officers?  So, instead I would like to end with some quotes from a man is who is saying the right thing after this shooting, Utah Republican Governor Spencer Cox:  “We just need every single person in this country to think about where we are and where we want to be. To ask ourselves, is this it? Is this what 250 years has brought on us? I pray that that’s not the case.” “If anyone, in the sound of my voice, celebrated even a little bit at the news of the shooting, I would beg you to look in the mirror, and see if you can find a better angel in there somewhere.”  

WILL THE SUPREME COURT RESTRAIN TRUMP?

 One of the ways that President Donald Trump has moved so quickly to consolidate his power is to declare an emergency about whatever he wants to control and then use emergency presidential powers granted from past laws to do what he wants.  He has already done this 11 times in his first 9 months in office. Probably the most dramatic use of this is his assertion that the  Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which allows for the speedy deportation of foreign born enemies during an invasion, permits him to deport Venezuelan gang members without a trial.  Unfortunately,  that act, which  was passed over 200 years ago,  was unspecific about what counts as an invasion, the Trump administration has made the  dubious assertion that gang members are actually invading our country like soldiers.

Recently, Trump's power grab has been hitting some snags; in the past two weeks, lower court rulings have been against him.  First, a move to deport Guatemalan children was held up by a judge in the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia.  Then Trump's sending of members of the US military to the city of Los Angeles was found to be illegal by the Federal District Court of San Francisco.  Also, his attempt to withhold billions of dollars in research funds to Harvard University was voided by the US District Court in Boston.  And then, in the most dramatic of these rulings,  just last Friday a federal panel of judges ruled that most of Trump's tariffs, the cornerstone of his economic polity, are illegal and will be voided next month.  

While all of these rulings make sense on the face of them, together they more importantly show that, despite all the Trump excusing Republicans holding congress, the American system may still be able to put some restraint on Trump's authoritarian views through the courts.  The ruling against his tariffs, for example, makes perfect sense when you consider that Trump asserts that he has the right to pass any tariffs he wants against any other country based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.  But that act also says that the president can only do so against an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”  The administration claims that our trade deficit with other countries is a threat, even though it has existed for years and has never stopped the US from having the world's biggest economy.  It's almost laughable how Trump doesn't seem to understand what a trade deficit is; countries that we have a trade deficit with simply sell us more of their goods than they buy of ours.  This is hardly a threat when you consider that a country like Canada has almost 300 million less people living in it!  So imposing tariffs that could cripple Canada's economy is hardly being done in response to a threat.  Again,  this ruling just feels like common sense.

But, then there's the Supreme Court, the same court that now has a 6-3 conservative majority, with 3 of those 6 conservative judges being appointed by Trump himself.  Inevitably, the Trump administration is going to appeal these rulings form lower courts to the Supreme Court (he's already requested a ruling on the Tariff decision as soon as next Wednesday).  So the question is,  will this extremist court side with our extremist president?  It's tough to say.

This year, there have been two rulings by the Supreme Court against Trump: the first was a presidential order voiding birthright citizenship (that was a no brainer even for this court; birthright citizenship is in the constitution).  The second involved cuts to the. US AID program.  Now, on the other side of the ledger, the court has sided with the Trump administration 7 times, on cases allowing for mass deportations, stricter immigration rules, and the gutting of the federal Department of Education.  Along with these rulings, last year the court made what appeared to be a peremptory decision when it ruled for him while he was out of office, stating that any president would have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts committed within their "core constitutional powers."  Basically giving him a blank check to try anything in his second term without fear of criminal charges.  Really, the  court is now so pro Trump, that one has to fear that his stated desire to be able to run for a third term (which has gone from a joke to a serious threat) may actually be upheld.  In other words, while I was glad that the lower courts ruled the way that they did, there's no guarantee that Trump's unprecedented attempt to run this country with absolute power won't be upheld by our highest court.  Yes, we live in very frightening times in this country.