Not Trump or Musk tariffs. REPUBLICAN tariffs.

I’ve never been inside a Hooters restaurant, though a story I found suggests I might have missed out. Peter Rothpletz wrote about his first time at Hooters when he was perhaps 15. I found his article in Pressreader, though I think it was originally in the Hamilton Spectator. Rothpletz was taken to Hooters by his grandfather. By that age he and likely is family could tell he was different, though he didn’t have words for the difference. When Grandfather went to the restroom his waitress slid into the booth and told him, “You’re perfect just the way you are, kid.” Following the news that Hooters is considering bankruptcy Rothpletz told this story. He was amazed at the number of gay men who told him about being taken to Hooters in what seemed to be, as he calls it, “Conversion therapy with a side of ranch.” But, much to the relief of the teens, the waitresses could see their discomfort and didn’t play along. Instead, they offered words of assurance. Hooters, known for how little their waitresses wore, became their gay safe space. Waitresses recognized when the men brought in boys that didn’t match the man’s version of macho. They would welcome the boys and tried to help them feel they were in on the joke. Perhaps these women – frequently stigmatized – see a kindred spirit in these gay boys. My dad would never have taken or gone with me to Hooters. Then again Hooters didn’t exist during my childhood. Alex Samuels of Daily Kos wrote about the effect of the stock market dive on billionaires, especially those that are cozying up to the nasty guy. Jeff Bezos worth down $15.9 billion, Mark Zuckerberg lost $17.9 billion, about 9% of his wealth. Musk lost $11 billion just on Thursday and $110 for the year. And the 500 richest, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, together lost $208 billion. Samuels wrote:

Of course, everyday Americans are feeling the pain too, or they will be soon. On Thursday, analysts at JPMorgan raised their forecast for a recession within the next year from 40% to a jaw-dropping 60%, The Wall Street Journal reported. A recession usually leads to a high unemployment rate, and if one happens, it almost surely won’t lead to these CEOs losing their jobs. Or their homes. Still, Trump doesn’t care how the little guy fares—but maybe, just maybe, he’ll snap out of it once he sees how hard his policies are hitting his friends.

In a pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin quoted Reed Galen of The Home Front:

These are REPUBLICAN tariffs. Not Trump tariffs. Not Musk tariffs. REPUBLICAN tariffs. A lot has been made of the Democratic Party’s declining popularity with Americans. We should remember that the GOP clocks in at about 36% approval. Two-thirds of the country doesn’t like them, either. Further, in the targeted messaging we need, utilizing Trump’s name and likeness only gives Republican politicians and voters a huge wall behind which to hide. There are many who will support what’s happening simply because Trump is the leader. Many Members of Congress are happy to let Trump take the heat so long as it passes them by. Don’t give them that option.

Greg Sargent of The New Republic wrote about Obama demonstrating how Democrats can move forward:

“People tend to think, eh, democracy, rule of law, an independent judiciary, freedom of the press—that’s all abstract stuff because it’s not affecting the price of eggs,” Obama said. “Well, you know what? It’s about to affect the price of eggs.”

In the comments are a lot of cartoons featuring penguins, in recognition of tariffs being put on Heard and McDonald Island. Like this one from Toonerman:

First penguin: The BBC says we’re getting tariffs! Second penguin: Never had em; are they like cod?

A tweet by David Frum, in response to a Reuters tweet that says, “IRS starts laying off 20,000 workers, eliminates civil rights office.”

The Trump tariffs incentivize smuggling. The Trump IRS layoffs invite cheating. Federal revenues will decline even before the Trump recession craters them.

Walter Einenkel of Kos wrote that Jack Schlossberg, grandson of President John F. Kennedy, has important questions for Musk that he posted on X.

If DOGE has found all this FRAUD and MONEY — then WHY: 1) no one charged with fraud? 2) govt spending has increased? 3) no distribution of savings? MAYBE — it’s a propaganda / data initiative that has nothing to do [with] the stated mission.

Einenkel then listed sources: Judd Legum found only $7.7 billion of DOGE’s claimed $115 billion has been verified. The Congressional Budget Office’s February Monthly Budget Review showed an increase in government spending. Einenkel concluded:

Considering the lack of evidence that DOGE has made any significant savings, combined with the abundance of evidence that Musk has compromised Americans’ private data and lucrative contract data—which he has been feeding into AI learning models—Schlossberg has a point. Now if only lawmakers would start listening to it.

A week ago (yeah, a lot to write about in the last week) Alix Breeden of Kos reported:

Businesses can now get permission to poison both the environment and the American people simply by sending an email to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin. Thanks to Zeldin, a company can shoot an email requesting a presidential exemption under the Clean Air Act to a slew of Joe Biden-era rules.

Groups in defense of the environment are outraged, calling the move an extreme and improper use of the Clean Air Act. Zeldin says his main goal is to drive a “dagger through the heart of climate change religion.” That’s after declaring climate change as real during his Senate confirmation hearings. The Sunday before, already seeing in what direction Zeldin is heading, Nancy Kaffer of the Detroit Free Press wrote an editorial, saying we in Michigan have seen this story before in the Flint water crisis. By that time Zeldin had said he won’t be protecting health or the environment, but making running a business cheaper. The Flint water crisis began when the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality under former Gov. Rick Snyder changed its guiding principles to “Be full partners in Michigan's economic development.” Kaffer pointed out that business has its own advocates, and it has deep pockets. The environment and residents are the ones who need advocates. MDEQ has been renamed Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE), whose deputy director had been James Clift. He said:

Almost all governments have agencies that specialize in economic development, and then they have environmental regulators. You think, if we have another agency doing economic development, why are environmental regulators also doing it? If you look at it as trying to help companies stay in compliance with environmental laws, then that's a natural fit for environmental regulators. When you couple it with deregulation, saying you are basically not going to regulate and protect the environment and public health and instead just going to look at economic development, it's very problematic. You're just going to roll back 50-plus years of environmental regulation, under the idea of helping business.

There may not be a direct line between this business-friendly posture and the Flint water crisis, but when a government department loses its way things don’t turn out well. And MDEQ lost its way in putting economic development ahead of public health in many incidents beyond Flint. The Flint water crisis happened ten years ago. In an attempt to save money state personnel switched Flint’s water source from the Detroit Metro water system to the Flint river. Those making the switch decided that certain steps in treatment didn’t need to happen. That resulted in corrosion the lead service lines, putting lead in the drinking water, in addition to allowing lots of other harmful stuff into residents’ homes. Lead is a neurotoxin. No amount is safe. Remedying the problem took way too long. Just a few people faced a penalty for the bad decisions. I believe the compensation package to victims is still tied up in court.