FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Donald Trump’s Name Increasingly Appears On Government Sites And Initiatives: But Why?

Since coming into his second term, Trump has, without any sense of modesty or rationale, placed his name on a number of government buildings and initiatives.  Why am I not surprised!  In my blog entitled Donald Trump and Extreme Narcissism in February 2016, I highlighted the fact that Trump has been described by numerous analysts as being an “extreme narcissist”.  I noted at the time that: “Basically, narcissism is recognized in psychologists/psychiatrists circles as a mental illness, often referred to as “narcissistic personality disorder”.  People with narcissistic personality disorder are characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance.  They have a sense of entitlement and demonstrate grandiosity in their beliefs and behaviour.  They also have a strong need for admiration, are manipulative, but lack feelings of empathy.”

Well, Trump has certainly lived up to this description given his current mental state of mind and behaviour.  Moreover, it is of no surprise that he has a quest to name things after himself and to accept awards of nebulous merit, some often invented such as the FIFA Peace Prize and the just announced inaugural ‘America First Award’ from the Republican Party.  The list of renaming of federal buildings in Trump’s name continues to go on.  One can start with the performing arts complex, the Kennedy Center, to which Trump’s name was added in December of last year.  Next, the Trump administration renamed the U.S. Institute of Peace after himself and, following a protracted struggle for control of the institute, put his name on its headquarters.  This organisation, almost gotten rid of by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), was renamed the Donald J Trump Institute of Peace apparently to “reflect the greatest dealmaker in our nation’s history”.  Around the same time, Trump announced the navy’s plans to develop the “Trump-class battleships” which are designed to meet the realities of modern maritime conflict.  In January, Trump rolled-out ​the government-supported investment “Trump Accounts” for American babies, calling on American businesses to contribute to employees’ family accounts.  Just today, the U.S. Treasury announced plans to put the president’s signature on all new dollar bills.  The move would be a first for a sitting president given that U.S. paper currency traditionally carries the signatures of the treasury secretary and the treasurer.

What does Trump’s obsession mean for the workings of the presidency, governance, the republic and the fundamental values ingrained in the American democracy?  Historically, self-aggrandizement has been in the domain of monarchs, dictators and autocrats for obvious reasons, having a lot to do with control of the populace and unrestrained power.  The American constitution was designed to prevent a president from pursuing the enhancement of the office’s power and image at the expense of the people’s house: “Congress”.  This past January, a CNN poll asked about Trump making changes to cultural institutions such as the Kennedy Center and the Smithsonian.  Fully 62% of Americans said he had “gone too far” on this count.  Even 3 in 10 Republicans reportedly said the president was going too far with those cultural changes.  Politically, this self-glorification has not gone well with the American electorate.  Trump’s continuous pursuit for more personal tributes and praise has only added to the public’s growing discontent with his administration.

Through blatant narcissistic tendencies, the above noted poll also showed that nearly two-thirds of Americans now belief that Trump is mostly out for himself.  However, even though the emperor wears no closes as depicted in a fable, there have been few in Congress and elsewhere, including Republicans, that have courageously come forward to speak out in the republic’s defence.  Also, Trump’s quest to name things after himself seems especially ill-timed and inappropriate given the current state of the U.S. economy.  One can only speculate as to which institutions and government initiatives the president will want to proceed needlessly with name association.  Given that he is an extreme narcissist, I doubt that the buck stops in the Oval Office.

Leave a comment »

Once Again, Concerns Are Being Raised Over Newsprint Media In The U.S.

In several previous blogs (search under “media”) I wrote about various current serious issues surrounding mainstream media in the U.S. Today, as in the recent past, another example of the potential demise of a newspaper has surfaced in the case of the Washington Post.  As reported by people with knowledge of the company’s finances, in 2022 the organization was on track to lose money after years of profitability.  At the time, The Post had fewer than the three million paying digital subscribers.  Moreover, despite the losses, The Post’s newsroom remained one of the most formidable in the country.  In 2013, Jeff Bezos, the billionaire founder of Amazon, had become The Post’s owner.  Bezos said repeatedly since then that he wanted the company to break even, not to rely on his largess.  He initially invested heavily, and the company thrived for several years, with the newsroom doubling in size.  However, by this past year, The Post was running over $100 million in annual losses.  Consequently over the past two years, the newsroom shrank by nearly half to about the size it was when he bought it. 

Next came Donald Trump’s running for a second term as president.  Normally, Bezos stayed out of the paper’s day-to-day operations.  Apparently, he had not shown up in the newsroom since 2023.  However, in the past two years he has dipped in more forcefully.  His more direct involvement has resulted in a series of jarring upheavals in strategy and leadership at one of the country’s most decorated news organizations.  Problems at The Post started actually several years ago, when its audience diminished after expanding during the first Trump administration and the Covid-19 pandemic.  During the last presidential campaign, Bezos ended presidential endorsements, effectively killing a draft editorial that encouraged readers to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump’s Democratic opponent.  As a result, there was reader uproar, as reflected in thousands of cancelled subscriptions. 

Bezos insisted an independent newsroom should be self-sustaining.  However, for example, foreign reporting is expensive.  As a key beat for The Post, foreign reporting is essential to keeping The Post competitive on national security.  Wanting to reduce the number of staff reporters in order to cut costs, Bezos further insisted that the newsroom perform today at the same level as before but with fewer staff.  However, there is no way to hit their target without affecting the scope of the newsroom’s coverage.  This resulted in most international correspondents and editors being laid off, including those in the Middle East, just weeks before the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran.

At recent meetings with a group of top Post journalists and business executives, Bezos reportedly remarked that the company had gotten off track years ago because of inattentive oversight, including from himself, and a sluggish response to changes in the media business.  Nevertheless, he reassured the group that he was committed to its future, and said he had spurned several offers to sell The Post.  The Washington Post represents one of the premier news outlets, along with such papers as The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.  The lost of The Post would be a great blow to mainstream media.  Increasingly Bezos, in light of his closer relationship with the Trump administration, has more frequently outlined his political and economic beliefs, which boil down to a mix of libertarian and pro-business policies.  Indeed, in January of last year, he traveled to Washington and was assigned a seat onstage near Trump at his inauguration.  Weeks later, Bezos’ reorientation of the paper’s opinion pages became official.  The fallout from the change was immediate.  Subscribers once again cancelled in droves.  Several Post Opinion employees resigned, including the opinion editor David Shipley.  Interestingly, Shipley now works as an editor at The Times.

As a result of the newsroom coverage of the Iranian war, Secretary of War (alias Peace), Pete Hegseth, has gone to war with the American press over Iran coverage.  He alluded to the administration’s belief that major news media are overly critical of the war’s objectives and daily operations.  Instead, he stated that American news media should reflect the war’s outcomes in more “patriotic” terms. This highly defensive reaction feels tone-deaf at a moment when the nation is at war — especially as polls show Americans largely disapproving of the conflict and are unclear about its rationale. 

One can only hope that news outlets such as the Washington Post, by invoking journalistic integrity, will continue to report the sequence of wartime events in unbiased and factual terms without undue interference from the White House.  Perhaps Bezos should adopt this principled stance and better support the independent work of his newsroom staff, rather than insisting that it reflect his own personal values and bias.


.

Leave a comment »

Interaction Between the U.S. and Canada Summed Up in One Word: Confusion

When the Trump administration first introduced tariffs against specific industries in Canada (ex. aluminum, steel and lumber), it created a good deal of confusion and uncertainty because of the integrated market existing between the two countries.  The initial excuse was that Canada had failed to secure the border from the smuggling of fentanyl from Canada into the U.S., which only accounted for less than 1 percent of the total entering the States.  Secondly, Trump argues that Canada has long benefited from a trade surplus with the U.S., not accounting for the import to Canada of American services. Then, suddenly Trump was openly promoting the annexation of Canada, making it the 51st state: something neither the vast majority of Canadians or Americans have supported at any time in the past.

As a result of Trump’s tariff imposition, Canadians decided to elect Mark Carney, a Liberal, as the 24th prime minister of Canada in 2025.  Carney, a former head of Canada’s central bank, has had to take a careful and sensitive route in dealing with Trump on both economic and foreign policy issues.  Take for example, the current war initiated by the U.S.with Iran, which the Canadian government was not apprised of before American pre-emptive strikes.  Canadian support for the U.S. is a touchy and complicated matter, remembering that Canada is part of the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) which conducts aerospace warning, aerospace control and maritime warning in the defence of North America.  As is the U.S., Canada is also a member of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and supports its allies in the defence of their sovereignty.  On the one hand, while Carney believes it is appropriate to support the U.S.; on the other hand, there are questions surrounding the legality of the attacks on Iran under international law and NATO’s non-involvement at the outset.  Also, the Trump administration’s primary motive for the attacks on Iran has been anything but clear from the outset, setting off confusion among NATO and other allies.  While NATO will defend itself against the resulting Iranian attacks on their bases in the region, there has been no indication to date that either Israel or the U.S. have sought the support of NATO military forces.  Once again, confusion reigns among the parties.

If any word can also express the current trade and foreign policy environment created by the Trump administration, it is “uncertainty”.  For Carney and other world leaders, this uncertainty has forced them to look at alternative economic, defence and trade arrangements, given the lack of American support for maintaining the normal global processes.  As a result, Carney has to seek alternative trade relations with other countries and has recently entered into formatting new arrangements with middle-power countries such as India, Japan and Australia — not to forget previous trips to several E.U. counties.  Indeed, just this week, Prime Minister Mark Carney and Japan’s Sanae Takaichi inked a new “strategic partnership” that signaled the next step in a recent drive to deepen military and trade co-operation between the two countries.  Just prior to that, Carney and his Indian counterpart announced what they’re calling a “new partnership,” a series of multimillion-dollar deals and a commitment to sign a free trade agreement by year’s end.  On March 4th, Australia and Canada signed new agreements on critical minerals as Carney made a landmark address to the Australian parliament, a sign of the developing bond between the “middle powers”.  The two countries will also deepen cooperation in areas including defence and maritime security, trade and artificial intelligence.

All if this is happening because of the political and economic policies under the Trump administration, which are confusing given that over 70 percent of Canada’s trade has always been with the U.S.  This close relationship with the U.S. has even been highlighted by the current Canada-U.S.-Mexico free trade agreement which Trump had negotiated and endorsed during his first term in office.  Now, it appears that he wants to replace this agreement with separate agreements with Canada and Mexico, which apparently would include new tariffs on their imports to the U.S.on selected products and services.  This has created a good deal of “uncertainty” and “confusion” within North American markets.

Moreover, when it comes to the U.S. policies, once can only foresee more confusion and uncertainty in the near future.  As Trump would no doubt brag, the ball now lies in the American court.

Leave a comment »