HOME   //   PROFILE   //   RSS

GOP - Time For Defcon 4

by John Jazwiec

I am getting tired of members of the Republican party saying they are disappointed in Trump.

The real Donald Trump came out today. Both as not having the credibility as the moral leader of the country and lacking the temperament required of the highest office in this country.

There are millions of Americans that are upset and scared for their safety tonight.

Trump threatens the very existence of the GOP.

So it's time. Not impeachment. But Defcon 4.

House and Senate leadership need to introduce and vote for censure. That's the proper response for the GOP and for all Americans now.

Trump - It's All About All The People

by John Jazwiec

Trump is only interested in his base and twitter.

So it is ironic and poignant, that Obama's tweet, is the second most liked tweet ever. The first was by Ariana Grande responding to the Manchester terror attack.

Screen Shot 2017-08-15 at 5.21.52 PM

Obama and George W. Bush were presidents for all people. Trump's just isn't.

Obama's picture is genuine Obama. Even his detractors would agree with that. Ask yourself this: can you picture Trump in this picture instead of Obama?

And the white haters didn't march talking about Robert E. Lee. They were there to spew their ugly and radical views as an end to its own. 

Charlottesville - My Non Politically Correct Comments

by John Jazwiec

The GOP Is The Party Of Lincoln. I know it is heresy to say this, but Lincoln wasn't a great president. He may have been a great writer, but that's about it. Lincoln couldn't prosecute a quick and successful war  - it took four years - even though the North had a superior advantage. He fired Generals too many times (compare that to FDR who plucked Eisenhower from obscurity and stuck with him). He even hired and fired George Meade twice. He threatened to lock up the Supreme Court and suspended habeas corpus. The "Great Emancipator" first wanted to ship African American slaves back to Africa or an island. It took him two years to sign the Emancipation Proclamation, which only affected Southern slaves, for the wartime reason of starting an insurrection. Finally, he only won reelection, after Sherman - god knows what Grant was doing in the trenches around Petersburg for over a year - won the battle of Atlanta. Lincoln might have been poised to become a better president in his second term starting with the 13th Amendment. But comparing Trump to the "high ideals" of Lincoln? Sorry. I don't get it. 

Every Confederate monument under seize? This nation was forged out of its civil war. It is our shared history. Taking down a General Lee monument? It shouldn't have lead to armed crazy whites and domestic terrorism! But General Lee? Lee fought in the Mexican American War. Lee was Lincoln's first choice to become the General Of The Potomac. Lee didn't believe in slavery. Lee wanted to free the slaves at the beginning of the war. In a Gallup poll, Lee was voted the 8th best general in American history. Are we just going to have Yankee monuments of winning battles like Gettysburg? We can't have Southern monuments of winning Southern battles like Chickamauga? Monuments mark history. To deny history is wrong. 99% of Americans are smart enough to separate 19th century historical markers from 21st century normalcy. 

Supporting free speech and assembly but ... I didn't and don't have a problem with crazy people assembling and talking nonsense. Best to leave them alone in their fringe world. But I don't support free speech and assembly when groups are carrying guns and automatic rifles. I don't support inciting domestic terrorism. Were local and state officials caught off guard that militant white guys would be packing? They plan their next protest on 9/11 in Texas. Let's hope law enforcement is ready for an armed and dangerous bunch of white men. Like having checkpoints for protesters and non-protesters - in and out of a defined space - with metal detectors and shakedowns. 

White Christians and people of the Jewish faith. "White Nationalism" differs from "White Supremacy" in that the latter believed non-whites and Jews were inferior, while the former believes they should be expunged from American soil. Of course it is a semantical rebranding. All of this Christian nonsense is idiotic. The four Gospels or "good news" - not history but symbolism - were rooted in Judaism and Roman terrorism. It is critically important to understand the Gospel writers were Jews. Jesus dying on the cross took meaning, because the Jewish scriptures were full of persecution and execution. In Mark, the first Gospel - which was written just after the first Jewish revolt and the destruction of the Temple - Jesus is mocked and dies crying out "why have you forsaken me". That is what the Jews were feeling at that time. In Matthew, the second Gospel written 15 years after Mark, the war is a more distant memory. Jewish priesthood has ended. Now there is a debate about the rabbinical movement and the holiness of the Torah. In Matthew, Jesus goes up to the mount and comes back with the same books as Moses did, which were the basis of the Torah. In Luke, the third Gospel, Luke is mainly concerned with Jewish collaboration with Rome, like the Jewish historian Josephus. In John, amongst vying sects of Judaism, John tells a story of a Jewish sect, that is losing power. The New Testament - right or wrong - sees itself as an extension of Judaism. That's why it takes great pains to start with an Old Testament and uses Judaism sayings in the New Testament. "Christianity" is as much a story of post Roman Judaism, as is "Diaspora Judaism". In other words, being anti-semitic, is a farce. "Christians" are really only a Judaic sect. For radicals to deny they are of Jewish origin, is as uneducated, as the members themselves. 

Trump's Real Stock Market V - Why He Finally Came Out Against Bigotry

by John Jazwiec

Screen Shot 2017-08-14 at 12.53.27 PM

I have been talking about Trump's favorable/unfavorable "stock market" for sometime. 

His unfavorable ceiling of 60% and more importantly his consistent favorable floor of 36% have been "trading within narrow bands". 

Gallup polls on a three-day rolling average. 

Trump - who is more concerned with polling then you and I - can see he broke his favorable floor of 36% down to 34%.

His "base" I promise you, isn't homogeneous. There is racism still in this country. But a great deal of Trump's voters, and I heard it all weekend from them, were disgusted with the Unite Right rally. And what really broke "their back" was Trump not acknowledging that there was an act of domestic terrorism. 

Hence today, Trump, after more than 48 hours, denounced the bigotry of white supremacists. 

Again, I don't think Trump is a bigot. But I do think Trump, thinks he is his most important constituency. 

So the cards were on the table. The polling numbers were in. And Trump's only conclusion was he needed to say something more forceful. Not because of a sense of moral outrage. But rather a stronger sense of political survivalism. 

Because 61/34% - in the first six months of a presidency - his not only unprecedented, but it isn't sustainable. Even if you are spending money on 2020 campaign adds, while Rome is burning.

The Presidency Is The Comforter In Chief

by John Jazwiec

Fifthteen times Barack Obama mourned with the families of the 15 terrorist attacks during his presidency.

Who can forget him tearing up, after Sandy Hook, saying "when I think of those kids". Those families were mostly Republicans. Obama understood that terrorism crosses party lines.

Each of his 15 visits with the families of the victims was emotional draining. But he understood that was a part of the job.

One by one on Thursday, inside an arena in downtown Orlando where friends and relatives of the victims of the nation’s deadliest mass shooting had congregated, Mr. Obama embraced mourners sick with loss. He told them that the nation stood with them and that his own heart was broken, offering words of comfort for a tragedy that he confessed he could not fathom.

“Their grief is beyond description,” Mr. Obama said after a two-hour meeting with the mourners. “Through their pain and through their tears, they told us about the joy that their loved ones had brought to their lives.”

Behind closed doors, Mr. Obama told the grieving that it was the 15th time during his seven-and-a-half-year tenure that he had had to offer these sorts of condolences after a shooting, according to those who attended.

“There were times when he choked up,” said Angelica Jones, a performer at the Pulse nightclub, where a gunman killed 49 people and wounded 53 on Sunday. “And it’s a hard thing to do when you’ve got mothers crying out. He was up to it.”

He grasps for words of sympathy, comfort and condolence and offers long, tight embraces that the mourners will remember far more vividly than his words.

I don't believe Trump ever thought to call the family of Heather Heyer, less go visit the family. He certainly didn't acknowledge her death from the podium. 

Obama wasn't the only president who has played comforter in chief. His predecessors all did it too. 

Trump didn't only fail to communicate a clear moral statement this weekend. He instead treated it like a nuisance. That's not presidential by any measure of past presidents.

"Unite The Right"?

by John Jazwiec

The tragedy of this weekend's Charlotteville "Unite The Right" rally - from predicted and then actual injuries and fatalities - is all the more upsetting, because it's so devoid of history and so pathetically individualistic.

The rally should have been called "Unite The White Fringe" or I am turning in my white card. 

Groups of White Nationalists, Neo-Nazis, the KKK and the Alt-Right, chanting this country's soil belongs only to white people, and not non-whites and Jews, and hurtling racial epithets at both, ignores this county's history and our long-term arc. 

Our grandfathers fought a war against Germany precisely because they abhorred nationalism/fascism and genetic disposition and persecution. 

I am sure these want-to-be-Denny's workers watched Band of Brothers. Saving Private Ryan. And all the films about the war against Germany's Nazi regime. They couldn't find empathy with those soldiers and their mission? It's not like I am asking them to read all 1400 pages of the "Rise and Fall Of The Third Reich". 

Also, are you telling me, that these white fringes, have never seen a Holocaust movie? They didn't see the Diary of Anne Frank? Didn't see Schindler's List? Didn't see the Pianist? Didn't catch the Zookeeper's Wife? Jeez, I am not asking them to read Elie Wiesel’s "Night".

Are you telling me that these people have never seen movies of African American struggles? They didn't watch Roots? They didn't watch Mississippi Burning? They didn't watch Tuskegee Airmen or Something The Lord Made? It's not like I am asking them to read "Life Upon The Shores 1513 - 2008" by Harvard's Henry Louis Gates.

But a lack of empathy, is probably not the only reason, these people traveled to Virginia, when normal people are enjoying their weekend and chilling. 

Unite The Right and its collection of deplorables, are really more motivated by a pathetic sense of individualist need. Specifically, how can they merry their declining economic and social status with some cause other than themselves.

"Unite the White"? You are not going to win. You can't move time backwards. You can't change the economic darwinism that has made this country the greatest economic powerhouse in history. You might have someone in the WH - who for political expediency gives a crap about you (I don't believe he cares about you, nor does he care about anyone else but him, and he is not motivated by bigotry). But you are living on borrowed time.

You took the fight to Virginia. Ole Virginia. But you lost. Go home. Get a job. Or get a skill or an education. In the meantime, just go back to your chatrooms and stay out of our cities. Our lives matter.

Why Would North Korea Test Missiles Against The Waters Around Guam?

by John Jazwiec

There is a method to the madness of Kim's madness.

And it isn't being reported correctly. 

Kim's is asking for plans to "launch 4 conventional missiles against the waters around Guam". Why?

Certainly, it could be argued that, that Kim is just reacted to Trump and doesn't want to lose face.

But I think he is "thinking" of gaming out his defense against an American attack. Namely an artillery/missile attack on South Korea. "Thinking" - asking for plans - also allows him to game the diplomatic process.

He's picking Guam because the 4 missiles would have to travel over Japan, which has deployed and has ready, the US PAC-3 Patriot Missile Defense System. 

By sending 4 missiles over Japan, Kim would be stress testing one of the US's Missile Defense Systems. Not reported - but logical - Japan, in the absence of South Korea, could try to shoot down the 4 missiles.

What if Japan doesn't? Then Kim knows that Japan and the US are not acting in concert or at worst gets to see how other missile defense systems (like on ships patrolling and sites unknown) work/don't work. What if Japan's missile defense system doesn't work? Then Kim would not feel he has to worry about South Korea's defenses. What if Japan's missile defense works? That's good intelligence and the only thing that happens is that 4 missiles didn't fall into the waters off of Guam. Which they likely believe, wouldn't illicit a US response. 

It's madness for sure. But there is some method to it.

A Story Now Better Told

by John Jazwiec

But then General Kelly - according to reports - "helped" to end Scaramucci ten-day role at the WH this afternoon.

Only two explanations can account from all of these knee-jerk behavior/decisions. Either Trump is playing some kind of three-dimensional chess, OR the Military/GOP has taken some, or a lot of, Trump's keys away. 

I hope I am wrong. But July - from my notes - seemed to have been bookends to a story not yet told. - July 31st.

Time Magazine has a new cover story out that reports on General Kelly's decision to become Trump's chief of staff.

First, Kelly was asked by Trump to be his chief of staff twice and turned down both offers. 

Second, Kelly, after being influenced by Mattis, McMaster, and Dunford - fellow military associates - was convinced to take the job as a duty to country, in the midst of an emerging dangerous North Korean crisis, in which they all agree Trump can't be completely trusted due to his temperament and lack of knowledge of foreign affairs.

Third, Kelly told the WH staff - all three hundred - that their duty was to country, the president and the American people. In that order. All things that are supposed to be implied in their role as members of the executive branch, but were not necessarily how they were acting. 

This has now gone from a story not yet told, to a story better told. The military hasn't taken away Trump's keys. But they are acutely aware that this president must be better managed. And it is hard to see, how they would allow Trump - beyond rhetoric - to make any North Korean military action unilaterally. 

North Korean Crisis Has Nothing To Do With Nuclear Weapons

by John Jazwiec

The Kim dynasty is a corrupt cult of personality, where military personnel are motivated to serve, because they get housing and enough to eat, while the rest of the population does not. Thus subverting military personnel and families to defend the Kim dynasty. Their military, their sheer numbers and tactical artillery, also have historically been both a deterrent to South Korea and it's ally the US, and a means to unite the Korean continent. Finally they also see an ICBM/Nuclear capability as another way to buttress the regime.

For its part, China looks upon North Korea as a pain, but it's the only buffer between a China surrounded by a US allied-Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. Forget about the economic arguments. China's trade with North Korea pales in comparison with the US. So UN votes on economic sanctions - with Chinese support - mean little to China. But keeping Kim and North Korea as a buffer is paramount. China would also bear the brunt of any refugee crisis from any military action. And it is important to note that Koreans are cultural different from Chinese. 

Also, tough talk from Trump and Mattis isn't intended for a North Korean nor Chinese audience. Rather it is intended for a South Korean audience. Senator Lindsey Graham teased that out days ago, if you listened closely. He said that any war would be fought "there" vs. "here".

The South Korean government has not wanted to provoke the North by deploying US THAAD missile technology that is already on the ground. Paradoxically, while the US ICBM shield isn't proven (some argue it is and some have taken great pains to say it isn't), THAAD is.

THAAD is capable of defending about a 100 mile radius horizontally and vertically. Seoul could be protected - to the extent it has enough missiles - if THAAD is operational. 

The US can't just fire off a nuclear warhead at North Korea. For many reasons. But the largest two are that China would be affected by its fallout and the US would break a +70 year history of the world using nuclear weapons only as a deterrent. 

No, the US's best chance to maintain peace - besides diplomacy - is for the South to deploy THAAD, position regular and cyber (knocking down North Korean command-and-control) military power to the region in months and not days, all in order to discourage the North from what the US and China fear most: a military war of utter people and economic destruction of the Korean Peninsula. Besides the inhuman threat, such a war would severely damage the world economy. Both the US and China can't have both.

The Democratic Party's Only Winning Formula

by John Jazwiec

The ill-advised shift of the DNC - lurching to the left as a response to Trump called "A Better Deal" - is a total misread of the country's zeitgeist and strategically makes no sense.

Most times the best offense is to exploit the weaknesses of your opponent.

If I was branding a winning name for a new Democratic Party, I would call it "Rationalism". 

Trump and today's GOP - totally different from the past GOP I called home - isn't rational. It has a disdain for any intellectualism or any guiding principle. The party of William F. Buckley and George Will has sold it's sole for a hodgepodge of desperate voters that now include the Tea Party, White Nationals and Anti-Immigrants. Truth and basic arithmetic are subverted for votes and sustained tribalism to ensure political survival.

The Tea Party isn't rational. It posits any federal funding as a populist evil, where the only winners are people that need an anti-Washington dopamine fix and the politicians who hypocritically enjoy the economic and power benefits from the very institution they feign to despise.

While Nationals are not rational. They long for the days of yore - which history has naturally obliterated as it always does - and think that the GOP has the power to reverse the one constant in the universe: that time only moves forward.

Anti-Immigration isn't rational. Economies grow from two sources: productivity and population gains. While I applaud the need for smarter immigrants - in this regard, I am more demanding in that I don't think foreign students who matriculate from the greatest universities in the world should have a choice in their future citizenships - there are simply too many jobs that non-immigrants are unwilling to do. And these uneducated immigrants, do go on to spend their wages on staples that sustain and grow our economy.

Furthermore, the workers who get their staples from say 7-Eleven, go on to become owners of 7-Elevens, and their children go on to college and become the next Ted Cruz's and Marco Rubio's. Finally, Cruz and Rubio - like millions of Americans who found success after one generation who were not considered "desirable" - turning on their roots shows gross hypocrisy. 

A Democratic "Rationalism" would be in stark contrast. Instead of progressive reform - bordering on not being rational - would be a party that is based on facts, would be based on the arithmetic of CBO scoring, would be a based on intellectual reasoning, and would be based on telling the truth and a lack of hypocrisy.  

Political parties change. They always have. They change because of voids left by failed ruling parties in the present. The country isn't longing for more spending and a larger government. But it is, and will be, longing for an end to "truthful hyperbole" and straight and reasoned talk. 

That's a party I would support. If only so the GOP is forced to make needed changes that have been laid bare by being in the majority, not being able to govern and nominating a president who was able to subvert their party due to inherent weaknesses. 

« Previous | Next »
From athletic scholar and satirist to computer programmer to CEO success, John Jazwiec brings a unique and often eccentric perspective to business and supply chain challenges. Exploring how they can be solved through the leadership and communication insights found in untraditional sources. This CEO blog demonstrates how business insights from books on history to the music of Linkin Park can help challenge and redefine “successful leadership.” Read Jazwiec’s Profile >>

Hierarchy of corporate success

What does it take for businesses to break out of bad habits and succeed?
Download John’s free white paper >>