THE TAJ MAHAL OF CRAP

Thank God that's over, the Republican National Convention. What a crap-fest of screaming nonsense. Didn't those people know that thing was being televised?

And all of it topped off by a 70-minute acceptance rant from the Big Monkey himself, Donald J. Trump.

Let's see if we can make any sense from his ramblings.

He weeps for Americans murdered by illegal Mexicans, but that's a given. Who's on the side of the murderer?

Still, make no mistake: Trump is blaming somebody here. He's blaming Obama (and by extension, Hillary Clinton), for allowing such a thing to happen.

Trump, we have to imagine, would not have let it happen.

How? I think we can only assume Trump would have had the Mexican offender executed on the spot for trying to enter this country. (Mexico doesn't have the death penalty, so it'd be up to us to put the monster down.)

Now this is just an implication of his outrage, not a stated position, but how else could Trump be sure the man would not sneak back into the country and kill more Americans?

We now have to assume the coming Wall would have Immigration Courts built into it, along with high-speed industrial-capacity gallows. Bodies could then be buried right there in the Wall (like getting buried in the Kremlin Wall, but not as big an honor). Or the dead could be fired back into Mexico with giant slingshots.

What Trump needs you to remember is that he will be the Law and Order President. And we will see the result of that on Day One, when American Law will again mean something. Crime will be a thing of the past.

He'll do this just by being Trump, apparently.

(And, of course, by hiring the right people to get the job done. Obama, in contrast, always looked for the wrong people, to make sure nothing ever got done, guaranteeing innocent Americans would get murdered by illegals. Or, for that matter, murdered by legals. President Obama, Trump need not spell out to the convention crowd, is truly despicable.)

Trump spent a lot of time excoriating the big, multi-country trade agreements that stole all those American jobs.

Trade agreements and illegals—the twin sources of job loss in America. And Trump is going to land on both those evils with fire in his eyes and murder in his heart.

Trump will personally renegotiate all trade agreements, and if he can't get his way, he'll walk away—whatever that means.

One actually specific thing Trump said (specifics were rare in the speech) was that he would not sign any multi-country trade agreements. He would deal with other countries on a one-to-one basis. And no agreement would be signed if even one American job could be lost. (Sounded like he said that, anyway.)

Since Bernie Sanders also pounded those same trade agreements as being responsible for American job loss (though economists would disagree), Trump is sure all of that man's supporters will flock to The Donald's camp.

Trump says the fact Sanders didn't get the Democratic nomination was proof the system is rigged. Had nothing to do with the fact Clinton started out the heavy favorite and Sanders didn't have time to change enough minds. It was entirely those damn super-delegates! (Though Trump didn't mention those guys specifically.)

Trump says American companies would not be allowed to fire American workers and relocate to another country—"without consequences."

He doesn't say what those consequences would be.

But it they leave anyway, despite the alleged consequences, don't fret. Trump's big tax cuts will brings all those jobs "roaring back" into this country. That and his removal of business restrictions, which he will do "very very quickly."

(There's a political joke: A Liberal is a man who hasn't be mugged yet. Here's another: A Conservative is a man who hasn't yet lost a child to corporate greed and indifference. It's an annoying fact: Only a federal government can regulate relative safety into the practices of American Big Business.)

More on immigration: If those bastards aren't taking your job, they're taking your life. Acts of terror by ISIS sympathizers are on a path to kill us all, and Trump is going to put a stop to it.

No Muslim will be allowed to enter his America until we can devise a vetting process that is one hundred percent accurate. And if that takes awhile, so be it.

Hillary, on the other hand, wants as many rabid jihadists as possible to be jammed into this country. Go figure!

Speaking of the massacre in a gay nightclub in Orlando, Trump says he would protect the LGBTQ community from the "violence and depression of hateful foreign ideology." (He probably meant "oppression," but it sure sounded like "depression" to me.)

Trump failed to mention the Orlando shooter was born in the United States.

Trump's once-potential running mate, Newt Gingrich, recently suggested the vetting should contain this question: "Do you agree with Sharia law?" This test, he says, needs to be applied to all Muslims currently living in the country. Those who like Sharia would be deported. Not clear what would happen to those born here. Maybe they could find room in the Wall.

(It would also make sense—and just out of fairness—to make sure everybody who believed the Bible's Old Testament to be the word of God would be kicked out of this country. Sharia is, after all, largely based on OT pronouncements. And let's not forget: The OT is, like ISIS, of Middle Eastern origin. Oddly, it's exactly the sort of "hateful foreign ideology" Trump is determined to protect us from!)

Trump would take care of ISIS in a hurry, mostly by getting other countries to weigh in. (A sign in the crowd: "ISIS Lives Don't Matter".) Think slaughter—and plenty of it. (We covered Trump and ISIS last time.)

Domestic matters: Trump would solve the VA hospital crisis by allowing vets to go to their own doctor or hospital for treatment. This makes sense, but it's nothing new. Still, by saying something sensible, does that prove Trump is not a complete lunatic?

(Son of a bitch!)

Trump says he will work to remove wording that prevents churches from promoting political candidates without losing tax-exempt status.

He didn't mention a corollary position: Letting blatantly political groups like Tea Party folks claim tax-exempt status. Maybe that's coming.

Trump laid out a long list of things going wrong with America, things he's going to fix, quickly and easily. He also says he's the only one who can get it done.

If America's infrastructure is falling apart, he will roll up his sleeves and personally rebuild those roads and bridges. By implication, Barack Obama doesn't give a crap about such things. (Never mind the President has implored Congress to tackle that problem on numerous occasions.)

In his speech, Trump makes a lot of promises, mostly offering no specific solutions, just saying he would take care of it, and fast. ("Believe me!")

And maybe he will. Check this out:

The one major claim Trump could have made, he left on the table, unsaid. Things may well get done during Trump's presidency, not because he's a miracle worker, but simply because he's a Republican (sort of).

If the Republicans retain control of Congress, they may well pass the laws Obama has been begging them to pass but they couldn't, lest some of the credit accrue to a Democratic President.

If Trump asks, they'll do it (or at least think about doing it, which is more than Obama gets). How come? If the Republicans can make that man look good, maybe he'll get a second term as President. Four more precious years without the threat of veto.

In this instance, the system is indeed rigged.

LEADERSHIP

So there's Donald Trump and his running mate, Mike Pence, sitting for an interview with Lesley Stahl. She wants to know how they're going to handle ISIS.

"I will declare war on ISIS," Trump declares.

Stahl wants to know if that means he will put American boots on the ground.

Not at all necessary, it turns out.

Trump will get the countries surrounding ISIS—and NATO (if those guys are still around; Trump doesn't seem to care if NATO exists or not)—to do the dirty work of eradicating ISIS.

He then goes on a rant to explain how ISIS was created by Hillary Clinton. (With Obama along for the ride.)

Mike Pence pipes up to congratulate Trump on his leadership skills.

Leadership, baby. You gotta love it!

Here's how Trump does it: "Hey, everybody, check out this problem! [Trump looks around, and points.] You, you, and you—get in there and take care of it!"

That's leadership! Identify a problem and get some guys to fix it. Just that simple.

It starts by locating a problem. Trump, famously, invented Mexico and its illegal immigrants. Nobody had ever heard of Mexico before he came on the scene.

Trump also noticed Islamic radicals, and pointed out how they could be a danger to us.

Shear genius at work!

Muslims were completely off everybody else's radar, but you can't stop Trump from ferreting out the really esoteric threats to America.

Unfortunately, Trump's plan for dealing with ISIS sounds a lot like: "Hey, let's you and him fight!"

Maybe this is how he thinks it's supposed to work. Not surprising: If, in his "real" life, he spots a problem, he just tells his guys to take care of it.

And they do!

But remember, those guys work for Trump. They get paid by Trump. They might even expect some bonuses and perks for jumping in there and taking care of whatever it is that's got the boss's panties in a twist.

In the other real world, what is it that will cause those countries bordering the Islamic State to rush in with guns blazing? Everybody in the region is a Muslim of some form. ISIS is exclusively populated by the majority faction of Islam, so it's easy to see how a lot of the local population might be reluctant to go against them.

And what's NATO's motivation? If Turkey, none too stable these days, were to claim it had been invaded by the IS, does that mean NATO (Turkey's a member) would step in to help out? Forcing Turkey to team up with their arch enemies, the Kurds?

Is the US going to pay those countries—and NATO—to fight our war?

Another glitch: I surmise that Trump's beef with ISIS is that they send fighters to hurt Americans.

If fact, it's the Americans who are killing Americans in this country, for the most part. Americans inspired by ISIS propaganda.

And by propaganda, I don't mean lies. It's perfectly true that ISIS is under attack by America (and other Western countries).

Now Trump wants to declare formal war on ISIS. (Or, at least, get Congress to do it, because he can't, by law, do it himself.)

After a declaration of war it doesn't matter who actually pulls the trigger on our behalf, America will be the aggressor-of-record. Every dying ISIS fighter will cry out for revenge against America.

And they'll get it, too.

ISIS doesn't have an Air Force, so those guys have to get in there and muck about with guns and knives to get the job done. None of this "death from above" nonsense. Those guys are real, hands-on heroes. They fight with honor for a deeply-held religious cause. (As annoying at that might sound, it's really kind of true. Certainly they believe it.)

Americans, on the other hand, are cowards who drop bombs from planes or fire missiles from drones flown by guys in Nevada. It's so unfair a fight even a moderate Muslim might be moved to retaliate.

Just the fading memory of a vanquished ISIS may inspire the faithful of every new generation to attack Americans wherever they are.

Trump's leadership will get a lot of American civilians killed, but maybe that's the way it has to be.

But wait, there might be a bonus!

What if a concerted effort to blast ISIS off the face of the earth serves to start Armageddon and bring Jesus of Nazareth back to the world? No devout evangelical President or Vice President could ever object to that.

(In the interview with Lesley Stahl, Trump made a point of touting his religious credentials.)

And if the world is destroyed and Jesus fails to make an appearance? Oh, well. Worth a shot, right? Christians have to do whatever they can to shape the story of the universe.

Besides: In the end, everybody dies anyway.

So, what's the difference?

QUICK, CALL THE BLACK POLICE!

Sniper in Dallas, the network news graphics proclaims. And off we go again.

How is this thing ever going to end? Let's take a look.

There are actually two separate problems:

1) White cops are seen on video shooting black guys.

2) People (mostly black people) are filled with anger and frustration, because they know white cops are murdering black folk for no reason.

Let's take the second problem first. How do you solve this perception of black murder at the hands of white cops?

You don't.

You're dealing with thoughts inside a human head, and you can't get those things out of there with dynamite.

Humans know what they know, and that's that. The brain plays along by editing mental perception of the world to make sure we get solid proof that whatever the hell pile of crap is inside our skull, it's golden, baby, now and forever.

How do you change those thoughts? You can't.

Because if you could change the thoughts, that would imply those who held those thoughts were somehow wrong—and that's impossible. Human beings are never wrong (as far as we know.)

Consequently, whoever might harbor the notion that white cops are systematically murdering black men, rest assured. You're in no danger of being proved wrong. You can't be, and you won't be. Case closed.

So let's abandon this fruitless quest and look at the first problem: White cops caught on video shooting black guys.

Is that a problem that needs to be addressed? Of course it is, but it's not as staggering a dilemma as Problem Two might suggest.

Turns out, only about one percent of the famous Black Lives Matter cases are actual, prosecutable instances of white cops murdering black guys.

If you eliminated all those real cases—and of course that absolutely needs to be done—you might not notice the difference.

One percent. Maybe.

[Which ones? Obviously, the cop who chased a black motorist, grappled with him, then shot the guy in the back as he ran away for the second time—that's an example of some kind of murder. And the Chicago cop who poured lead into the knife-carrying fellow in the middle of the street may well be prosecuted for his actions, though he claimed (and it's a hard claim to fully dismiss) that he was in fear of his life. (If he was in genuine fear for his life—in those circumstances, surrounded by fellow cops—he at the very least should not be retained by the police department.)]

Virtually all the other cases involved cops following procedure as best they could under often difficult conditions.

Blacks don't see it that way, and never will. Their minds are made up.

But when a cop stops you and asks if there are any weapons in the vehicle, for god's sake don't say yes, then start digging around in search of your carry permit. Keep your hands on the steering wheel and make no moves without the cop's instructions. Your life literally depends on it.

That goes for white guys, too. Believe it or not.

And when a cop comes up to you and says, "Turn around and put your hands behind your back," do it.

Don't just stand there, bristling with defiance, and demand to know what this is all about.

If there's a report of a man with a gun, the cops might not want to say the magic word until after you're in cuffs. If you're not the guy with the gun, expect them to remove the cuffs pretty quickly.

And that goes for black guys too, believe it or not.

I know it takes courage to let yourself be cuffed when you're convinced the cops have got the wrong guy, but it has to be done. Especially if you're black and you're pretty sure you're about to be shot dead.

The fact is, cooperating with the cops in those crucial first moments may be the only thing that keeps you from getting shot.

Like the cops often say when they bring out the cuffs: "For my safety and yours."

Easy to see how cuffing a suspect protects the cops; how does it protect you? It helps to relieve the tension of the situation. It tends to keep the cop from shooting you out of fear of what you might do to him.

(Perhaps a cop's greatest dread is that some dirtbag will grab his service pistol and use it on him. Even so, that device has to be handy to the cop—which makes it handy to the bad guy, too.)

So, if removing all the murdering cops leaves the other 99% of legitimate, duty-based shootings, how are the optics ever going to change for the better?

Putting aside the fanciful solution ("Set phasers to stun, boys!"), the only way we're ever going to end the stream of white-cop-shooting-black-guy videos is to end those encounters once and for all.

If a black man is the perp—or the victim—he must be handled exclusively by black officers.

That also means, if a white cop comes across a black man bleeding-out in the street, the best he'll be able to do is call for an ambulance...and then fade into the background.

Now, black officers will be following the same police procedures as their white comrades, but in at least some cases the black perp may relax a bit and not do any of those ill-advised things that might get him killed.

But not in every case.

Soon the nightly newscasts will fill with video of black cops shooting black guys.

Eventually, the popular narrative will shift. Not white cops murdering black guys for no reason, just cops in general murdering black guys for no reason.

That way Sniper in Dallas (or wherever) will feature photos of more black cops on the role call of victims.

A kind of victory for equality, I suppose.

And a new question: Do we reach for the champagne—or the cyanide-laced Kool-Aid?

WATERBOARD THIS

Following the attack on the Turkish airport, Donald Trump again called for waterboarding terrorists—and worse—with an eye to preventing future attacks.

I have to think this is mostly a slap at the Obama administration, the folks who called for a stop to enhanced interviewing techniques.

Trump is theorizing about all the excellent intelligence this country would have, but for Obama's mishandling of the situation. (Bleeding heart liberal, and all that.)

And theorizing is the right word.

There's no actual evidence we'd be any safer if we were still jacking around in the crap of random Muslims, looking for clues to the future.

As for stopping the Turkish airport attack, who the hell does Trump want to waterboard now? Maybe pry some chunk of human beef out of a terminal light fixture and have a go at it? No help there, I'm pretty sure. No, you'd have to ask the ISIS commander who sent those guys, and it's likely even that guy would not know the exact moment of the attack.

That someone might attack the airport is not news. No one need change into dry clothes for that information to come out. The world is packed with soft targets, and everybody knows it. The only solution is to be vigilant, everywhere and all the times.

Even so, it would probably not hurt to offer rewards to landlords who rent to standoffish young fellows dabbling in stinky chemicals. Might get some leads there.

Deploying nuclear aircraft carriers to hostile waters and launching sorties of fast-movers laden with smart weapons costs a crapload of money. Maybe some of that dough, deployed as reward money in hostile neighborhoods, could loosen up the intelligence market.

The sort of terror leaders Trump would have us torture are instead being killed in drone attacks and the like. Dead guys launch no missions. As for plans already in place, there are better methods of uncovering them than splashing water on a highly motivated soldier of Allah.

The fact is, the current level of terror violence will not wane until deeply religious folks get permission from church authorities to be less religious.

In the mean time, fighting violence with violence only begets revenge violence, over and above the violence called for in the holy books. But you have to do something, right?

If Trump is looking for somebody to waterboard, he could do no better than to raise his own hand. It may be the only way to find out what he really plans to do to solve the country's problems—aside from "we're going to take care of it and it's going to be great."

On the other hand, for torture to work, the guy beneath the dripping towel actually has to know the answers you seek. Can anybody be sure Trump has even an inkling of an answer to any of it? This may be something even he doesn't know—and won't know until he's forced to face the matter square on.

Somebody get a bucket and maybe we can find out.