In 1939, the American novelist Ernest Vincent Wright self-published the 50,000-word novel Gadsby, a lipogram in which the letter “e” does not appear. Since “e” is the most common letter in English, producing a sustained work that is e-less is a tricky thing to do.
You might be asking yourself, “Then why do it? Isn’t it just a pointless exercise?”
Well, is writing a sonnet a pointless exercise? That has plenty of constraints, too, if it is to be a proper sonnet.
But to move from the literary to the political realm, I suspect that writing a novel—or perhaps I should say, “a work”—without the fifth, you know—is akin to writing about Elon Musk’s dust-up with Donald Trump without using, oh no, “bromance.”
In part, it’s a matter of nausea avoidance. If I read another headline with that silly neologism, I might just scream.
So I am going to avoid it here (and, no, I haven’t used the word; I have merely mentioned it).
The amusing aspect of this little drama is that it revolves around the Mr. Etna-like eruption of knowing commentary by people who know nothing about Trump, Musk, their relationship, or what really precipitated their break—if, that is, there really has been a break and not just a bit of calculated theater.
About all that, I know exactly as much as you do, which is to say, nothing.
No one would describe what has happened—or, rather, what is happening still—between them as a personal example of the stately quadrille, the movement of European alliances in the eighteenth century that danced to tunes established by the War of the Austrian Succession (1740-1748). That set concluded with the Diplomatic Revolution of 1756, in which Austria changed partners from Britain to France, while Prussia linked arms with Britain.
To read what some in the commentariat have been writing, you might conclude that the Musk-Dump-Trump routine was a world historical event worthy of analysis by Talleyrand or Henry Kissinger.
A clever friend came much closer to the truth when she observed that
The Trump-Musk breakup is performance art for the Age of the Internet Era. Two cartoon-like celebrities with massive egos went from a superhero duo to arch-nemeses with the tap of a phone. It’s no different from Wrestlemania III, when friends and “faces” Hulk Hogan and André the Giant went from friends to enemies in the twinkling of a body blow. Back then, only 8-year-old boys took the performances seriously. Now, the entire commentariat is atwitter with apprehension and advice.
The ostensible issue, as all the world knows, is Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. I say “Trump’s bill,” but, of course, while the bill centers around the agenda (the “promises”) that Trump made in his campaign, it is, like all such bills, something that originated in the House of Representatives. Having been worked over by the special interests there, it is now being picked apart and modified by the Senate before it goes back to the House and has a final pow-wow with the Senate before landing on Trump’s desk, something that is supposed to happen by July 4.
Simply describing this extended process brings us to one possible source of Musk’s unhappiness, assuming that it is genuine and not feigned. “This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill,” he wrote on X, is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.”
That was before he asserted that he was responsible for Trump’s victory in the 2024 election, suggested—then retracted the claim—that Trump appeared in the Jeffrey Epstein files, suggested that Trump be impeached, and called for the creation of a new political party.
Elon Musk, the man behind Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink, SolarCity, the Boring Company, and who knows what else, is used to being the man in charge. He is a genius who Gets Things Done. Like Jack Aubrey in the Patrick O’Brien novels about the British navy in the Napoleonic Wars, he is used to saying “Make it so” and then watching while whatever he ordered was accomplished.
That’s not the way politics works in a bureaucratic, quasi-democratic regime like the United States. It’s not so much that compromise is the name of the game—though it plays a role—as that horse-trading and jockeying for advantage are. It’s messy. It’s imperfect. But it’s the system under which we live.
In the commentary on the Trump-Musk mini-series and the OBBB, two slogans have often recurred. One is Bismarck’s observation that the origins of laws and sausages ought not to be looked into too closely. The spectacle is unedifying.
The other slogan is the old saw that “the best is generally the enemy of the good.”
Both are true.
The Big Beautiful Bill is far from perfect. In my view, it does not cut enough spending or zero out enough programs. But it does a lot. The White House has listed fifty things that the bill accomplishes, from making Trump’s original tax cuts permanent, adding new tax cuts, and boosting border and immigration security to eliminating funding for Biden’s Green New Deal programs, unraveling woke DEI policies on America’s campuses, and upgrading the military.
It also adds between $2 and $3 trillion (depending on who you ask) to the already gargantuan federal debt over ten years.
That is one thing that earned Musk’s ire.
But remember that in the previous ten years, the people we elected to govern us added $18 trillion to the federal debt.
The federal debt, now some $37 trillion, is unsustainable. I think that Treasury Scott Bessent is right. The responsible way out of that burden is a combination of spending cuts and policies that encourage growth.
As I say, the BBB is far from perfect. But there is an important sense in which Trump’s spokesman, Stephen Miller, is right when he says that the bill is the “codification” of Trump’s campaign promises.
The spat between Elon Musk and Donald Trump has been entertaining for those addicted to what Henry James called the imagination of disaster. However, the investor Bill Ackman was right when he noted that he supported both Trump and Musk and argued that “We are much stronger together than apart.”
It was encouraging to see Musk reply, “You’re not wrong.”
There are, in fact, many signs that the split between Musk and Trump is resolving itself. We must credit the Democrats with playing an important role in the healing process. Their unfettered delight at the explosion of acrimony between the two had a dampening effect. “Few things,” Musk noted, “could convince me to reconsider my position more than Adam Schiff agreeing with me.”
It’s by no means clear that Donald Trump will be offering more golden keys to Elon Musk. But I suspect that before long, the two will once again be cordial, if not chummy, partners.
I wish Elon had stuck to his original criticism and not wandered into the weeds. Donald Trump actually agrees with him. However Trump is now a politician and he has to get elected to prevent even worse damage than what chronic deficit spending will do. So do House and Senate members in 2026.
I have often said that a republican government based on a democracy can’t make it as originally intended when the majority of the voting population represent recipients of over 70% of expenses. “One Big Beautiful Pork Filled Bill” will assure reelection by dependent, expectant, recipient voters. Politicians are fearful that if they don’t bring back pork they will not be reelected. Pork can be more important to the addicted voters and supporters than national security, open borders and inflation. Republicans have been pushed to the left by big spending, generous Democrats for as long as I can remember. Consider Robert Byrd who was responsible for building a Coast Guard station in the dry state of West Virginia. His constituents were proud of what he spent on their state. I use the word ‘generous’ facetiously. There is nothing generous about the consequences associated with bankrupting a nation.
Elon sees the Bill for what it is. Not only is there a lot of pork but most of the spending, based upon Constitutional Article I, Section 8 is clearly unconstitutional. Preventing such is how the people keep a government in check instead of the other way around. Such spending can be done by states, cities and communities but from inception the American Republic was designed with firewalls and restrictions in place regarding what the federal government would be empowered to do with tax revenues. That way ultimately people can vote with their feet which prevents one size from being imposed upon everyone. I often remind myself of what a pro life friend was told by President Trump regarding protection of the most vulnerable. The then aspiring to be President quipped that he first had to get elected. Obviously he is aware of the need for a cultural attitude modification and that rarely can be achieved instantaneously. I said something similar when dealing with closing the garbage dumpsters in Yellowstone Park which the Grizzly Bear population, including their offspring, were dependent upon for generations. Even bears are not born with foraging instincts. They need to be taught lest they might starve to death. Despite warmings from the PhD Craighead twin brother wildlife biologists they did so anyway and 40% of the bear population succumbed in a not so nice fashion.
It took a century to turn America into a semi-socialist country and there is no humane way to immediately turn off all of the government spigot without doing considerable harm. That is what Elon Musk needed to understand before he went completely native. On the other hand Donald Trump is dead set on paying for future social expenses by increasing the money stream into the federal coffers via tariffs, reducing capital expenditure risks, making investment capital available, removing regulations and permanently stemming the power to regulate by a federal leviathan that seems to know nothing about constitutional boundaries. It would be also be nice if he fully understood that charity and benevolence were never designed to become affirmative Constitutional endeavors and I see no Amendments that made that possible. I believe he knows but most other politicians he is required to work with don’t.
In the meantime it would be very beneficial for these two gladiators to reunite and stay in the same lane. They have much more in common with each other and what the American people voted for than what they disagree on. In fact they don’t disagree. Elon wants to fast-track and Donald wants to slow walk until Congressional leverage is greater and more secure and people are given the opportunity to choose between rewarding work and self-reliance than chronic.dependency. They both should also be thinking about the public who loves them. People enjoyed the relationship they had and in the troubled times we are all in they both, acting harmoniously, provided Americans with much needed psychological gratification.
I understand Musk’s, albeit, misdirected anger at Trump. Musk placed his mission to country above that to his companies in a heroic effort to slay government waste and fraud, and found his efforts amounted to almost nothing. In truth, less than $10 billion in cuts amount to less than nothing. But it isn’t Trump’s fault.
As usual, Congressional Republicans mouth empty promises on fiscal responsibility, but continue to protect their rice bowls at every turn. And as much as Musk (and even Donald Trump) sees the US Government as a very large corporation, it isn’t.
The president influences the budget but, cannot command the budget. That duty falls to the 535 lawmakers in Congress—-nearly half of whom, delight in the idea of the BBB failing. The remaining half are a collection of patriots, and hucksters who laughingly refer to themselves as conservatives.
Instead of the deep cuts promised, all we can really expect is a light shave. Still, making the Tax Bill of 2017 permanent is worthy of consideration. So too, are the temporary cuts to taxes on overtime, tips, and Social Security. And nothing says they can’t be made permanent later.
Musk wasn’t betrayed by Trump. He, and the American people were betrayed by Congress.
We understand the issues and it took us years to learn. Despite his awesome talents and achievements Elon is like Donald Trump was in 2016. The difference is that, like Trump he will learn fast and, fortunately, Trump has his back which, unfortunately, no one had for Donald. He did it alone and now Elon can use his shoulders.
The overtime exception from taxes is a very big thing. It encourages people to work over 40 hours to get rewarded as opposed to penalized… brilliant!
I like Mr. Kimball’s description of this ridiculous spat as “WrestleMania III”. It is pointless, needless and juvenile. Very disappointing that Trump and Musk are acting like characters from Lord of the Flies.
Meanwhile, Los Angles is engulfed in riots that threaten to make the Rodney King riots of the early '90s seem like a day at Disneyland. I suggest both men realize there is more at stake than their brittle, planet-sized egos.
Get over it and deal with our out of control spending and fiscal issues. Good grief!
From what I’m hearing, even the first $9 billion tranche of DOGE cuts, the lowest of the low-hanging fruit, is not going to pass. I can’t say I’m surprised. Republicans began talking about defunding NPR, PBS, Planned Parenthood, and foreign aid over forty years ago. In that time, they’ve had ample opportunity to do so and never have. Why would they do it now?