Readers Write: Domestic deployment of the military, government shutdown, fraud, baseball

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Am I the only one worried about this? As reported on StarTribune.com Tuesday afternoon, in President Donald Trump’s speech to our military leaders on Tuesday morning, he proposed using American cities as training grounds for the armed forces and spoke of needing U.S. military might to combat what he called the “invasion from within” (“Americans are not the enemy, Mr. President,” Strib Voices, Oct. 1). He said, “We’ve brought back the fundamental principle that defending the homeland is the military’s first and most important priority” and that “the [cities] that are run by the radical left Democrats ... we’re going to straighten them out ... and this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room. That’s a war, too. It’s a war from within.”

When Trump started his speech by saying, “If you don’t like what I’m saying ... there goes your rank and there goes your future,” I don’t think he was joking. It seems to me he is planning to deploy the military against American people on American soil and get rid of anyone who refuses to obey his orders to do so. I can only hope that all military personnel, of whatever rank, will remember that their oath is to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, even if one of them is the president of the United States, and that esprit de corps does not mean loyalty to Trump nor obedience to unlawful orders.

Bill Kaemmerer, Edina

•••

So now the man residing in the White House announces that the real threat to this country is “the enemy from within.” Then let’s close our 700-plus military bases worldwide and bring home our million or so active-duty troops to really make things better at home.

How ridiculous is all this, and when will the feckless Republican enablers say that enough is enough?

Randy Sainio, New Hope

•••

So Trump told “his” generals he’s going to use them to fight in “a war from within.” Since when does a U.S. president declare war on the U.S.? Perhaps our allies in NATO will take action to defend us against the enemy threatening us? Will “his” generals remember their constitutional duty to defend us against a lying commander in chief who wants to invade and conquer us?

Ruth Berman, Minneapolis

I don’t understand the reasoning of several recent letter writers who have protested use of the term “fascist” to describe the behavior of the Trump administration. When the sky grows dark and wind whips the trees, we generally look up to see what’s going on. When thunder rumbles in the distance, we don’t ban the word “lightning.” When weather forecasters warn us of dangerous conditions, we don’t scold them for using inflammatory language.

Merriam-Webster describes “fascism” as “a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime ... that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition.” I don’t use the word lightly, and I don’t use it provocatively. I use it factually when I observe that many of Trump’s actions serve as prime examples to illustrate that definition:

Trump has violated and disregarded the law, condemned legal decisions he disagrees with, attacked individual judges and launched criminal investigations of attorneys who pursued cases against him. With his draconian cuts to federal spending, he has usurped powers reserved for Congress. He violated the Posse Comitatus Act when he deployed the National Guard to Los Angeles, D.C., Memphis and now Portland, and again when he directed 600 military lawyers to serve as temporary immigration judges. Trump has targeted universities, journalists, corporate executives and governors. Unable to stomach an election loss, he incited an angry crowd to attack legislators and law enforcement officers at the Capitol, then pardoned all who were convicted of these offenses. Now Trump has urged military officers to use U.S. cities as “training grounds” and to suppress “the enemy from within.”

Our democracy is crumbling. Piece by piece, more every day. Maybe Republicans are OK with that, with undermining the Constitution and the rule of law as long as the guy at the top enacts the right policies.

If so, they should state that clearly and own it. But others of us will continue sounding the alarm. Because by the time the tornado sirens go off, it may be too late.

Why has the U.S. government shut down? (“Parties dig in; unleash shutdown,“ front page, Oct. 1.) One word: “filibuster.” It is a Senate rule that requires 60 votes to cut off debate on legislation in order to pass it.

For most of the world, a simple majority is needed to pass legislation.

The filibuster has been used by the minority party to obstruct the majority party in power, causing gridlock. In my view, the filibuster contributes to divided government and should be ended.

With a simple majority, the Republicans could have changed the Senate rules to end the filibuster, known as the nuclear option, but they won’t. Both Democrats and Republicans have bipartisan support for the filibuster because it allows them to obstruct the majority party in power.

Why has the U.S. government shut down? Because Republicans and Democrats prefer the politics of division, obstruction and gridlock. They like it that way. Well, I don’t.

To those of us who recently wrote to complain about our government’s inability to detect fraud in government programs should remember this: When we simultaneously ask government to 1) fund worthy programs (e.g., an autism treatment program) and 2) want to shrink government to the size that you can “drown it in the bathtub” (e.g., fire agency inspectors-general and auditors) we will get fraud. Our behavior indicates we really have to do something about the acute bipolar disorder afflicting our body politic.

Americo Del Calzo, Edina

For all of its serene qualities, baseball has a long and outspoken history of criticism and outrage by owners, managers, players, media and fans (“Twins fans, quit bashing the Pohlad family,” Strib Voices, Oct. 1, and “If Pohlad does his job, support will follow,” Readers Write, Oct. 1). Recent opinions that fans should stop bashing the Pohlads suggests that we should be seen and not heard when Twins owners quit on the season with two months remaining. At the trade deadline on July 31, Cleveland was 54-54 and the Twins were 51-57. Detroit had a seemingly insurmountable lead at 64-46. Cleveland went on a tear and won the division as Detroit collapsed.

Our Twins quit that day. The Pohlads deserve criticism and more. How can fans root for a team next season knowing that the boss may cash in his chips? Loyalty is a two-way street.