It is so hard to keep up with the scandals in the news. A great example is the "Better Call Wohl" scandal currently percolating through social media. Basically a couple of Trump drones have launched a ham-fisted attempt to tar Robert Mueller with sexual assault allegations. It's collapsed to hard, it set off seismographs.
But it sucked up news bandwidth, and now the "story is out there" in conservative echo chambers. No doubt when Mueller makes his report public, idiot conservatives will decry the report based on this foolish stunt by a moron.
But, as Ezra Klein notes, all of this barrage of bullshit detracts from even greater scandals. In the case of his article, Klein notes that the Republican Party has embraced lies so brazen and absurd that it could be said to constitute a crisis in the very idea of electoral politics. The term "gaslighting" has been thrown around a lot these days, but when you have the very people suing to end protection for pre-existing conditions say that they are protecting pre-existing conditions... it's tough to use another word.
As we get closer to what will hopefully be a massive accountability moment for the Republican Party, we see them embrace racism and anti-Semitism and outright, bald-faced lying.
That should tell you what you need to know about the state of Republican politics.
Wednesday, October 31, 2018
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
Peak Trumpism
This is really a perfect distillation of Trumpism.
First, it's based off a lie: "We're the only country in the world with birthright citizenship." That's a lie.
Second, it's essentially more of the racism and xenophobia that has defined this "man" for years.
Finally, it's almost certainly illegal and unconstitutional. The language of the XIV Amendment couldn't be clearer: "All persons born...in the United States...are citizens of the United States..." Exactly where is the legal wiggle room that exists for unilateral action by the Executive?
If Trump issues this, the DC Circuit - I believe - would have first crack at it. It will rule it unconstitutional, because, duh. If it goes to the Supreme Court, I have a hard time seeing John Roberts imperil the legitimacy of the Court by siding with Hair Furor and re-writing the Constitution. My guess is that Clarence Thomas might also side against this move. Alito? Who knows? The real test would be Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Who do they serve? Trump or the law?
First, it's based off a lie: "We're the only country in the world with birthright citizenship." That's a lie.
Second, it's essentially more of the racism and xenophobia that has defined this "man" for years.
Finally, it's almost certainly illegal and unconstitutional. The language of the XIV Amendment couldn't be clearer: "All persons born...in the United States...are citizens of the United States..." Exactly where is the legal wiggle room that exists for unilateral action by the Executive?
If Trump issues this, the DC Circuit - I believe - would have first crack at it. It will rule it unconstitutional, because, duh. If it goes to the Supreme Court, I have a hard time seeing John Roberts imperil the legitimacy of the Court by siding with Hair Furor and re-writing the Constitution. My guess is that Clarence Thomas might also side against this move. Alito? Who knows? The real test would be Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Who do they serve? Trump or the law?
Monday, October 29, 2018
Sunday, October 28, 2018
The Counter Attack
Hugh Hewitt has begun the pushback against the reality of the links between the rhetoric of Donald Trump and Fox News and the acts of violence that we have seen across the country. He has, naturally, reached for "both sides." There was, indeed, a man who shot up the GOP Congressional softball practice, nearly killing Steve Scalise.
Outside of that, Hewitt has to stretch his moral relativity pretty thin. Yes, GOP politicians have been yelled at in public places. They have not been attacked, they had their dinner ruined. How in the holy hell is that equivalent to the attacks in Kentucky and Pittsburgh? How is that the same as mailing pipe bombs to people?
Secondly, and most importantly, when Hewitt reaches for groups like Antifa, he should note that every single Democratic politician has decried their tactics. Whatever sympathy might exist for the use of force to protect counterprotestors from actual Nazis, no one supports pre-emptive violence by Antifa, aside from fringe figures on the far Left.
Meanwhile, the two biggest official mouthpieces of the Republican Party - the President and Fox News - routinely churn out hate speech that demonizes and de-humanizes those "others" along racial and religious grounds. The Pittsburgh shooter explicitly referenced that "migrant caravan" that is 1,000 miles away and full of "Middle Easterns" and "funded by Jews." I wonder where he got that idea?
When people complain about PC culture, they usually are complaining about speech codes. "You can't say that" rubs people the wrong way in a country that prides itself on its civil liberties. What we are seeing, though, is what happens when you hand the world's biggest pulpit to a hatemonger.
I've been writing about my worries for democracy should Democrats win the national popular vote by 7% and still not flip the House. I worry, because the GOP will not have paid a price for their trampling of governing norms, and I worry because it will be harder to keep the groups on the Left that are willing to embrace violence from making their case that violence is the only road out of this faliure of democracy. The argument that democracy has failed, therefore we must take to the barricades will be harder to countermand.
But what we are seeing is the use of Rightist terrorism even before the votes are counted. What happens should Democrats win in 10 days? What happens should/when Democrats regain the White House in 2020? Trump has already shown himself incapable of repeating the fantasies and fictions of Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson. What happens when the subpeonas pile up and the indictments come flying?
What does the minority do, when the majority regains control of this country? I think last week was a taste.
Outside of that, Hewitt has to stretch his moral relativity pretty thin. Yes, GOP politicians have been yelled at in public places. They have not been attacked, they had their dinner ruined. How in the holy hell is that equivalent to the attacks in Kentucky and Pittsburgh? How is that the same as mailing pipe bombs to people?
Secondly, and most importantly, when Hewitt reaches for groups like Antifa, he should note that every single Democratic politician has decried their tactics. Whatever sympathy might exist for the use of force to protect counterprotestors from actual Nazis, no one supports pre-emptive violence by Antifa, aside from fringe figures on the far Left.
Meanwhile, the two biggest official mouthpieces of the Republican Party - the President and Fox News - routinely churn out hate speech that demonizes and de-humanizes those "others" along racial and religious grounds. The Pittsburgh shooter explicitly referenced that "migrant caravan" that is 1,000 miles away and full of "Middle Easterns" and "funded by Jews." I wonder where he got that idea?
When people complain about PC culture, they usually are complaining about speech codes. "You can't say that" rubs people the wrong way in a country that prides itself on its civil liberties. What we are seeing, though, is what happens when you hand the world's biggest pulpit to a hatemonger.
I've been writing about my worries for democracy should Democrats win the national popular vote by 7% and still not flip the House. I worry, because the GOP will not have paid a price for their trampling of governing norms, and I worry because it will be harder to keep the groups on the Left that are willing to embrace violence from making their case that violence is the only road out of this faliure of democracy. The argument that democracy has failed, therefore we must take to the barricades will be harder to countermand.
But what we are seeing is the use of Rightist terrorism even before the votes are counted. What happens should Democrats win in 10 days? What happens should/when Democrats regain the White House in 2020? Trump has already shown himself incapable of repeating the fantasies and fictions of Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson. What happens when the subpeonas pile up and the indictments come flying?
What does the minority do, when the majority regains control of this country? I think last week was a taste.
Saturday, October 27, 2018
The Wolf At The Door
Today's shooting at a bris...a bris, Jesus Christ, we are a morally bankrupt society...is the THIRD EXAMPLE THIS WEEK of Right Wing violence.
In Kentucky, there was a racist attack that killed two African Americans.
In Florida, there was the MagaBomber.
In Pittsburgh, we have an Anti-Semite shooting up a synagogue.
At first, the Right Wing Wurlitzer went with the "False Flag" bullshit. (They ignored the Kentucky shooting.) Now that we have had three incidents in one week, it's worth asking why. The Wurlitzer will say "Lone Nut." But that's such a feeble dodge.
First, why is it that all these "Lone Nuts" seem to be breaking towards the Right? Yes, there was that awful attack on the GOP Congressional softball practice. Inexcusable and terrible. Since then, however, we've had many incidents of RW violence.
Second, look at the targets: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, African Americans, Maxine Waters, Robert De Niro, Jews...these are the attacks that eminate from Donald Trump at his Volkstrum rallies. Every attack on George Soros is code for anti-Semitism. Who the hell is George Soros? Does anyone remember him at a public appearance? On CNN? Why is he the face of Judaism and "Globalism?" Because Trump and Hannity and Limbaugh and Coulter and Carlson have made him the face of Judaism.
Trump has routinely led his cult in chants of hatred and targeted the very people and groups that Sayoc targeted. He and Fox News have made an industry of demonizing groups of people that are different than Cesar Sayoc, Robert Bowers and Gregory Bush. They have made them un-American, inhuman, things.
Now, yes, yes, the caveat, "not all Republicans."
Here's the thing, if you support Trump, you are supporting the conditions that empowers Sayoc, Bowes and Bush. Those men are all likely crazy. But that crazy needs a focus to start building bombs and shooting up places of worship. Trump provides it. The GOP abets it.
In Kentucky, there was a racist attack that killed two African Americans.
In Florida, there was the MagaBomber.
In Pittsburgh, we have an Anti-Semite shooting up a synagogue.
At first, the Right Wing Wurlitzer went with the "False Flag" bullshit. (They ignored the Kentucky shooting.) Now that we have had three incidents in one week, it's worth asking why. The Wurlitzer will say "Lone Nut." But that's such a feeble dodge.
First, why is it that all these "Lone Nuts" seem to be breaking towards the Right? Yes, there was that awful attack on the GOP Congressional softball practice. Inexcusable and terrible. Since then, however, we've had many incidents of RW violence.
Second, look at the targets: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, African Americans, Maxine Waters, Robert De Niro, Jews...these are the attacks that eminate from Donald Trump at his Volkstrum rallies. Every attack on George Soros is code for anti-Semitism. Who the hell is George Soros? Does anyone remember him at a public appearance? On CNN? Why is he the face of Judaism and "Globalism?" Because Trump and Hannity and Limbaugh and Coulter and Carlson have made him the face of Judaism.
Trump has routinely led his cult in chants of hatred and targeted the very people and groups that Sayoc targeted. He and Fox News have made an industry of demonizing groups of people that are different than Cesar Sayoc, Robert Bowers and Gregory Bush. They have made them un-American, inhuman, things.
Now, yes, yes, the caveat, "not all Republicans."
Here's the thing, if you support Trump, you are supporting the conditions that empowers Sayoc, Bowes and Bush. Those men are all likely crazy. But that crazy needs a focus to start building bombs and shooting up places of worship. Trump provides it. The GOP abets it.
Friday, October 26, 2018
Well, Of Course We Were Right
Being right about Republicans is getting tiresome. Yes, Trump is really that big an idiot. Yes, there are a lot of racists in the GOP. Yes, Evangelicals are hypocrites.
And, yes, Brett Kavanaugh's appointment to the Supreme Court was deeply corrupt.
And, yes, Brett Kavanaugh's appointment to the Supreme Court was deeply corrupt.
Thursday, October 25, 2018
But Why?
In a move widely foreseen by people paying attention, a Right Wing Nut Job has been mailing bombs to people that Trump has been demonizing from the stump. Trump's fingerprints are metaphorically on those acts of terror.
In another predictably event, the Right Wing Wurlitzer cranked into tune and began singing their same old song: this was a "false flag operation." False flag operations is a term for when a country flies the flag of another country to provoke a third country. It's all very Tom Clancy. In the context of Sandy Hook and Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school and now attempted bombings, it means that Democrats are sending Democratic icons lethal devices in order to kill them and provoke outrage.
But why?
I mean, not why would Democrats do that, because it's self-evidently crazy. The bigger question is why that 27% of the American public who believes this bullshit would believe this bullshit.
Some don't, of course. I doubt Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh are peddling this out of deep convictions. It's expedient and it satisfies your listeners, that same 27%.
Others have been so toxified by Fox News and the aforementioned Limbaugh types that they honestly believe Democrats are that devious and cold-blooded. Anyone who has watched the Democratic party over the years would be surprised at this characterization.
Others have so invested themselves in their own self-righteous opposition to anything to the left of John McCain, that having their fellow travelers exposed as wannabe Timothy McVeighs and Eric Rudolphs violates their sense of their own specialness.
The Republican Party needs to have a reckoning with their mentally disturbed and hateful base. I'll outsource to Andrew Gillum:
The point isn't that every single Republican is a racist or a terrorist. It's that they apparently are OK with being associated with them.
In another predictably event, the Right Wing Wurlitzer cranked into tune and began singing their same old song: this was a "false flag operation." False flag operations is a term for when a country flies the flag of another country to provoke a third country. It's all very Tom Clancy. In the context of Sandy Hook and Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school and now attempted bombings, it means that Democrats are sending Democratic icons lethal devices in order to kill them and provoke outrage.
But why?
I mean, not why would Democrats do that, because it's self-evidently crazy. The bigger question is why that 27% of the American public who believes this bullshit would believe this bullshit.
Some don't, of course. I doubt Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh are peddling this out of deep convictions. It's expedient and it satisfies your listeners, that same 27%.
Others have been so toxified by Fox News and the aforementioned Limbaugh types that they honestly believe Democrats are that devious and cold-blooded. Anyone who has watched the Democratic party over the years would be surprised at this characterization.
Others have so invested themselves in their own self-righteous opposition to anything to the left of John McCain, that having their fellow travelers exposed as wannabe Timothy McVeighs and Eric Rudolphs violates their sense of their own specialness.
The Republican Party needs to have a reckoning with their mentally disturbed and hateful base. I'll outsource to Andrew Gillum:
The point isn't that every single Republican is a racist or a terrorist. It's that they apparently are OK with being associated with them.
Wednesday, October 24, 2018
The Hack Gap
This piece by Yglesias is really, really important. Basically, the Right has hacked into the hacks who curate our news. The Right makes a bad faith argument (Benghazi! Her emails!) and then creates a story by holding hearings or whatever. The media reports on the hearings then drops it. The Right pillories the press for not covering it to the degree that Breitbart and Fox are covering it, and the media - terrified of being called biased - amp up their coverage. This creates the Clinton email "scandal."
Another example of this is "both sides." Chuck Freaking Schumer released some prime "both sides" bullshit yesterday, comparing someone vandalizing Majority Leader McCarthy's house to the bomb sent to George Soros' house. Today, bombs were sent to the Clintons' and Obama's.
Bombs.
But, you know, someone was rude to Mitch McConnell and Sarah Sanders in a restaurant, so... same thing.
Trump is out there calling the Democrats a lawless mob, bent on violence. As with so much in Trumpistan, every allegation is a confession. And if - and who knows - the media gives breathless wall-to-wall coverage of the bomb threats, the Right will push back with some bullshit about the Migrant Caravan or that time someone yelled at a Senator in an elevator, and the narrative will change and "both side" and yadda yadda yadda.
The different information ecosystems in this country are destroying us. One, however, is built on lies.
Another example of this is "both sides." Chuck Freaking Schumer released some prime "both sides" bullshit yesterday, comparing someone vandalizing Majority Leader McCarthy's house to the bomb sent to George Soros' house. Today, bombs were sent to the Clintons' and Obama's.
Bombs.
But, you know, someone was rude to Mitch McConnell and Sarah Sanders in a restaurant, so... same thing.
Trump is out there calling the Democrats a lawless mob, bent on violence. As with so much in Trumpistan, every allegation is a confession. And if - and who knows - the media gives breathless wall-to-wall coverage of the bomb threats, the Right will push back with some bullshit about the Migrant Caravan or that time someone yelled at a Senator in an elevator, and the narrative will change and "both side" and yadda yadda yadda.
The different information ecosystems in this country are destroying us. One, however, is built on lies.
Tuesday, October 23, 2018
Shiny Objects
Trump and the right wing media are now obsessing about a "caravan" of migrants working their way up from Guatemala towards the United States. There are about 5,000 of them, maybe. They are coming to claim asylum. I guess that "get tough" approach of wrenching children from their parents really worked, hunh?
Anyway, this is what the GOP will need to rely on to rally their base. Stoking fears of Ferriners! Trump is even saying there are "Middle Eastern" in the crowd, not apparently clarifying what form of "Middle Eastern" is in the crowd. Hopefully the food. Middle Eastern and Mexican foods are two of my favorites.
The disgusting thing is, it just might work.
Anyway, this is what the GOP will need to rely on to rally their base. Stoking fears of Ferriners! Trump is even saying there are "Middle Eastern" in the crowd, not apparently clarifying what form of "Middle Eastern" is in the crowd. Hopefully the food. Middle Eastern and Mexican foods are two of my favorites.
The disgusting thing is, it just might work.
Monday, October 22, 2018
There Are No Good Dictators
Robert Kagan was a Neo-Con architect of our disastrous Iraq invasion, but he is also a legitimate "Never Trump" guy, in ways that quite a few Neo-Cons (Max Boot, Bill Kristol) are. He makes an interesting argument that serves a sort of endorsement of Iraq in terms of the idea of spreading democracy, by force if necessary (though that doesn't appear in the op-ed piece above).
The basic idea is that we routinely convince ourselves that "this" dictator is actually a really good guy who will eventually help build the institutions of democracy. We liked Saddam, because he was a bulwark against Iran. We liked the Shah, because he was a bulwark against communism. That naive embrace of dictators is one of the reasons why we have such a dysfuncational foreign policy in the Middle East. While we did pivot away from supporting people like Pinochet and the apartheid regime in South Africa, we continued this policy of believing that THIS Middle Eastern despot was actually a good guy to support.
The latest iteration of this is Mohammad bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. MBS did a few cosmetic reforms, like allowing women to drive, while destroying his enemies via a ruthless suppression campaign. The Khashoggi assassination has ripped some of the mask off his PR-driven foreign policy, but Kagan is right to note that we have traditionally not been very forward thinking in how we support autocrats. (I can remember Bush 43 and to a lesser degree Obama being suckered in by the idea that Putin might lead to reforms that truly democratized Russia.)
In fact, the way most dictatorships fall is by revolution. Maybe it's peaceful (Eastern Europe, Mexico) but more likely it's violent. And those violent revolutions swing wildly in the other direction. The oil-fueled monarchs of the Middle East, with their pro-Washington, pro-Israel foreign policy, will collapse into Islamist regimes. So we continue to support people like Mubarak or the House of Saud, because we fear the alternative. All the while, our actions make sure that the coming alternative will be worse.
We are trapped a burning house, that we made out of kerosene soaked logs that we lit on fire ourselves.
The basic idea is that we routinely convince ourselves that "this" dictator is actually a really good guy who will eventually help build the institutions of democracy. We liked Saddam, because he was a bulwark against Iran. We liked the Shah, because he was a bulwark against communism. That naive embrace of dictators is one of the reasons why we have such a dysfuncational foreign policy in the Middle East. While we did pivot away from supporting people like Pinochet and the apartheid regime in South Africa, we continued this policy of believing that THIS Middle Eastern despot was actually a good guy to support.
The latest iteration of this is Mohammad bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. MBS did a few cosmetic reforms, like allowing women to drive, while destroying his enemies via a ruthless suppression campaign. The Khashoggi assassination has ripped some of the mask off his PR-driven foreign policy, but Kagan is right to note that we have traditionally not been very forward thinking in how we support autocrats. (I can remember Bush 43 and to a lesser degree Obama being suckered in by the idea that Putin might lead to reforms that truly democratized Russia.)
In fact, the way most dictatorships fall is by revolution. Maybe it's peaceful (Eastern Europe, Mexico) but more likely it's violent. And those violent revolutions swing wildly in the other direction. The oil-fueled monarchs of the Middle East, with their pro-Washington, pro-Israel foreign policy, will collapse into Islamist regimes. So we continue to support people like Mubarak or the House of Saud, because we fear the alternative. All the while, our actions make sure that the coming alternative will be worse.
We are trapped a burning house, that we made out of kerosene soaked logs that we lit on fire ourselves.
Sunday, October 21, 2018
Where We Are
After 2016, no one wants to venture any confident guesses as to who will win control of the House and Senate. Also, whether your a Democrat or a pundit, it is easy to believe that the Democratic Party could screw up just about any advantage. As Josh Marshall notes, what makes this so fraught is the incredibly high stakes of this election. If Democrats don't win control of the House, it means two things.
First, the Republicans will feel "emboldened." They have held an election with an historically unpopular president in a divided electorate, and they suffered no adverse consequences. Why not give Trump even more latitude? Why not press even more unpopular policies.
Second, and Marshall doesn't really note this, we will continue to have a democratic legitimacy crisis. Let's say the Democrats win the "popular vote" by 6 points in the House but fail to win a majority. After losing the Presidency while winning the popular vote by millions of votes, having a clear majority that prefers their party but failing to win the House, they legitimate question is whether America is fundamentally a broken democracy.
No pressure or anything.
Please vote...
First, the Republicans will feel "emboldened." They have held an election with an historically unpopular president in a divided electorate, and they suffered no adverse consequences. Why not give Trump even more latitude? Why not press even more unpopular policies.
Second, and Marshall doesn't really note this, we will continue to have a democratic legitimacy crisis. Let's say the Democrats win the "popular vote" by 6 points in the House but fail to win a majority. After losing the Presidency while winning the popular vote by millions of votes, having a clear majority that prefers their party but failing to win the House, they legitimate question is whether America is fundamentally a broken democracy.
No pressure or anything.
Please vote...
Saturday, October 20, 2018
Tragedy
One of the slow moving tragedies of our age is the opiod epidemic that is claiming more lives than most wars. Recently, a young woman in Vermont died of an overdose and her sister wrote a moving obituary to her.
What is more interesting is the response from the Burlington Police Chief. (I'd read about this guy in my college alumni magazine, and knew I could expect something special.)
Go read it.
What he points out is so distressing about this issue is that we can make a real, clear difference. We can save thousands of lives with a few reasonable steps. This passage sticks out:
Here is the problem we face in our policing that extends beyond BLM. Here is a mindset that sees addicts for their criminality, not their humanity. The dehumanizing of people by police is partly a defense mechanism. They deal with tragedy and evil every day. Best not to think too hard about the humanity of the people you police. And from there, you are a step away from ICE agents tearing children from their parents.
We need more cops like del Pozo.
What is more interesting is the response from the Burlington Police Chief. (I'd read about this guy in my college alumni magazine, and knew I could expect something special.)
Go read it.
What he points out is so distressing about this issue is that we can make a real, clear difference. We can save thousands of lives with a few reasonable steps. This passage sticks out:
This is what I'm tired of: Arguing with sheriffs about their deputies carrying Naloxone at national conferences. Arguing with corrections officials at home about getting all inmates who need it on medication-assisted treatment early on in their sentence and keeping them on it even after they leave. Getting mocked by reactionaries because I won't arrest desperate people for using non-prescribed addiction treatment meds.
If nothing else I will be able to be sanctimonious and know for certain I was doing the right thing. But the NYPD didn't raise me that way, and it's not what a city needs in a chief of police. It raised me to win: to protect and rescue people, and to vanquish threats, not just to be smug about being right. To get the Maddies of a city home.
Here is the problem we face in our policing that extends beyond BLM. Here is a mindset that sees addicts for their criminality, not their humanity. The dehumanizing of people by police is partly a defense mechanism. They deal with tragedy and evil every day. Best not to think too hard about the humanity of the people you police. And from there, you are a step away from ICE agents tearing children from their parents.
We need more cops like del Pozo.
Perfect
A GOP Congressman from Colorado took a "brave stance" in demanding that Trump withdraw our ambassador to Saudi Arabia.
We have no ambassador to Saudi Arabia.
Incompetence married to ignorance.
Your Republican Party....
We have no ambassador to Saudi Arabia.
Incompetence married to ignorance.
Your Republican Party....
Friday, October 19, 2018
This. More Of This.
Yglesias shows why we need to re-think our relationship with Saudi Arabia. Iran is a "bad actor." Saudi is a "bad actor." So many of our "leaders" are sclerotic relics of the 1970s and '80s, that they can't see the Middle East beyond the hostage crisis. They are also so hopelessly in bed with Saudi money that they can't afford to offer alternatives.
America should be leveraging Riyadh against Tehran and vice versa. Our imagination is held hostage to an event 40 years ago, while forgetting what happened on 9/11.
America should be leveraging Riyadh against Tehran and vice versa. Our imagination is held hostage to an event 40 years ago, while forgetting what happened on 9/11.
Thursday, October 18, 2018
Chops
A few days ago, I wrote about Elizabeth Warren's decision to release her DNA test. Since then, Native American activists have weighed in, complaining about how this clouds the idea of what it means to be a tribal member - again, something Warren never claimed - and again, talking past what Warren actually said and tried to do. Warren's decision to goad Trump into paying (which he won't do) his share of the bet to a fund that protects Native women from violence was a decent play.
However, I'm willing to concede that Warren wasn't taking into consideration how this would play among Native American activists. It also stresses how difficult politics can be on the Left these days. Another example is Kristen Gillibrand. She took a very active role in forcing Al Franken to retire. I think that was a shrewd move, but there are plenty of Jewish party figures who remain incensed that Franken was forced from the stage over a relatively smaller matter than those that Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump or Roy Moore faced. Similarly, Kamala Harris is going to get ripped apart for her close work with police as a DA in California. Finally, Nancy Pelosi has spent her career as a cut-out punching bag for conservative attack media, but now she is taking shots from her own party. Shots that I don't think are warranted.
Now, if you want to get rid of Chuck Schumer, let me see how I can help you.
It is more than a little interesting that all those examples are women, but of course, Bernie Sanders is a lightning rod for his own positions. Sanders can't pop up anywhere without engendering a massive backlash from people who are still pissed at his lukewarm support for the Democratic Party over the years.
If there are shining stars in the Democratic firmament right now, they are likely Beto O'Rourke, Andrew Gillum, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Stacey Abrams. While relative youth is a big part of their appeal, they also haven't had to actually govern very much. They have had smaller roles in state legislatures and city halls. Once they get into the scrum of national Democratic politics, things will probably go much worse for them.
The wounds of 2016 are still very raw. At some point leading up to 2020, Democrats will need to rally around a candidate who can unify the various wings of the party. Whoever that is will need excellent political chops. That's what makes O'Rourke so appealing. He speaks clearly and calmly on issues that unite the party. He even looks like Bobby Kennedy.
But he's unlikely to win next month (sadly). Perhaps that allows him to focus on the Presidency, but do we really want a state legislator to jump to the White House? And who does that leave?
Can Kristin Gillibrand shore up support from those still pissed about Al Franken? Can Elizabeth Warren show better political skills than she showed this week? Can Kamala Harris translate her biography into a political message? Can Chris Murphy be more than "the white guy"? Aren't Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders too old?
The Democrats have a lot of appealing candidates. But they represent distinct wings of the party that are still smarting over 2016 and a left wing politics that incessantly cannibalizes itself.
It's going to be a bumpy road.
However, I'm willing to concede that Warren wasn't taking into consideration how this would play among Native American activists. It also stresses how difficult politics can be on the Left these days. Another example is Kristen Gillibrand. She took a very active role in forcing Al Franken to retire. I think that was a shrewd move, but there are plenty of Jewish party figures who remain incensed that Franken was forced from the stage over a relatively smaller matter than those that Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump or Roy Moore faced. Similarly, Kamala Harris is going to get ripped apart for her close work with police as a DA in California. Finally, Nancy Pelosi has spent her career as a cut-out punching bag for conservative attack media, but now she is taking shots from her own party. Shots that I don't think are warranted.
Now, if you want to get rid of Chuck Schumer, let me see how I can help you.
It is more than a little interesting that all those examples are women, but of course, Bernie Sanders is a lightning rod for his own positions. Sanders can't pop up anywhere without engendering a massive backlash from people who are still pissed at his lukewarm support for the Democratic Party over the years.
If there are shining stars in the Democratic firmament right now, they are likely Beto O'Rourke, Andrew Gillum, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Stacey Abrams. While relative youth is a big part of their appeal, they also haven't had to actually govern very much. They have had smaller roles in state legislatures and city halls. Once they get into the scrum of national Democratic politics, things will probably go much worse for them.
The wounds of 2016 are still very raw. At some point leading up to 2020, Democrats will need to rally around a candidate who can unify the various wings of the party. Whoever that is will need excellent political chops. That's what makes O'Rourke so appealing. He speaks clearly and calmly on issues that unite the party. He even looks like Bobby Kennedy.
But he's unlikely to win next month (sadly). Perhaps that allows him to focus on the Presidency, but do we really want a state legislator to jump to the White House? And who does that leave?
Can Kristin Gillibrand shore up support from those still pissed about Al Franken? Can Elizabeth Warren show better political skills than she showed this week? Can Kamala Harris translate her biography into a political message? Can Chris Murphy be more than "the white guy"? Aren't Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders too old?
The Democrats have a lot of appealing candidates. But they represent distinct wings of the party that are still smarting over 2016 and a left wing politics that incessantly cannibalizes itself.
It's going to be a bumpy road.
Wednesday, October 17, 2018
The Rot
If there is anything more symbolic of the rot at the heart of Donald Trump as both President and human being, it is his tendency to see everything through the prism of himself. A good example of this is how he views the essential nature of guilt.
From a young age, we are taught (hopefully) that wrong doings come with consequences. (Of course, the Trump family has long evaded their responsibilities and the consequences.) But "guilty" is what you are when we hold you accountable for your misdeeds.
For Trump, guilt isn't a state of being, it's a tool. And someone's "guilt" isn't a consequence of their deeds so much as a category of usefulness to Trump. Brett Kavanaugh's innocence or guilt isn't important, it's his use to Trump. Kavanaugh doesn't mean anything to Trump besides feeding his base, getting a "win" and pissing of the libtards.
Now cometh the Saudi scandal. It seems pretty clear that Saudi Arabia is funneling money to Trump and Kushner. (If Robert Mueller knows this...now would be a good time to finally spring a leak.) Saudi Arabia is a bulwark against Iran. The complexity of that relationship is a mystery to Trump. The historical accident of allying with Saudi Arabia rather than Iran is not something Trump is capable of analyzing and changing. Instead, Saudis give him money; Iran is bad. So, the apparent fact that Saudi security forces kidnapped and murdered an American resident is completely irrelevant to Trump.
What's more, it's completely irrelevant to his Deplorables. Given the presumption of guilt that Trump imposes on the press at his Volkssturm rallies, why shouldn't the Saudis kill a journalist, as long as they can get away with it? The moral bankruptcy of Trump's utilitarian calculus means that Hillary Clinton is guilty of...something (Benghazi, email something something, Pizzagate), but Wilbur Ross, Brett Kavanaugh, the Saudis, Scott Pruitt, Greg Gianforte, and so on and so on are all innocent men falsely accused.
He doesn't care about your concepts of guilt or innocence. He cares if you express loyalty to the Trump Crime Family. The Saudis did at the Glowing Orb, so they are "innocent." Who cares if they are innocent as long as they are "innocent."
Thanks, Republicans.
From a young age, we are taught (hopefully) that wrong doings come with consequences. (Of course, the Trump family has long evaded their responsibilities and the consequences.) But "guilty" is what you are when we hold you accountable for your misdeeds.
For Trump, guilt isn't a state of being, it's a tool. And someone's "guilt" isn't a consequence of their deeds so much as a category of usefulness to Trump. Brett Kavanaugh's innocence or guilt isn't important, it's his use to Trump. Kavanaugh doesn't mean anything to Trump besides feeding his base, getting a "win" and pissing of the libtards.
Now cometh the Saudi scandal. It seems pretty clear that Saudi Arabia is funneling money to Trump and Kushner. (If Robert Mueller knows this...now would be a good time to finally spring a leak.) Saudi Arabia is a bulwark against Iran. The complexity of that relationship is a mystery to Trump. The historical accident of allying with Saudi Arabia rather than Iran is not something Trump is capable of analyzing and changing. Instead, Saudis give him money; Iran is bad. So, the apparent fact that Saudi security forces kidnapped and murdered an American resident is completely irrelevant to Trump.
What's more, it's completely irrelevant to his Deplorables. Given the presumption of guilt that Trump imposes on the press at his Volkssturm rallies, why shouldn't the Saudis kill a journalist, as long as they can get away with it? The moral bankruptcy of Trump's utilitarian calculus means that Hillary Clinton is guilty of...something (Benghazi, email something something, Pizzagate), but Wilbur Ross, Brett Kavanaugh, the Saudis, Scott Pruitt, Greg Gianforte, and so on and so on are all innocent men falsely accused.
He doesn't care about your concepts of guilt or innocence. He cares if you express loyalty to the Trump Crime Family. The Saudis did at the Glowing Orb, so they are "innocent." Who cares if they are innocent as long as they are "innocent."
Thanks, Republicans.
Tuesday, October 16, 2018
Kiss My Ass
In a move that surprises no one, the GOP - having blown a massive hold in the debt - has decided to call for massive budget cuts in order to keep shoveling money at the wealthiest Americans.
This should be every Democrat's closing argument leading up to the election. Don't worry about technical niceties, either.
"The GOP wants to slash your Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for tax cuts and more tax cuts for billionaires." Say it over and over again, and screw whether Glenn Kessler gives you three Pinochios or Pants on Fires or whatever.
This should be every Democrat's closing argument leading up to the election. Don't worry about technical niceties, either.
"The GOP wants to slash your Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for tax cuts and more tax cuts for billionaires." Say it over and over again, and screw whether Glenn Kessler gives you three Pinochios or Pants on Fires or whatever.
Monday, October 15, 2018
Pochahantas
For a few years now, Trump has been deriding Elizabeth Warren as "Pochahantas" because - in Trump's fevered imagination - Warren used a mythical Native American heritage to get into grad school and become a professor. The Boston Globe proved a while ago that Warren did not benefit from whatever claims of Native American ancestry she may or may not have made. Needless to say, facts never get in Trump's way.
Today, Warren released a DNA test that proves she does have some Native American heritage somewhere back in her timeline. What was interesting was not the predictable derision from conservatives but the narrow hairsplitting from liberals and leftists. Typical was a few tweets noting that having Native ancestry does not necessarily make you part of a tribe, and where does she get off blahblahblah.
Warren, in fact, did note that she was not a tribal member. She said all the reasonably right things to say. But it didn't matter. A certain subset of holier than thou leftists felt the need to "Well, actually..." a perfectly reasonable video from Warren.
You can make an argument that you shouldn't dignify Trump's attacks with a response. But a common lament is that Congressional liberals don't fight back. Warren fought back and was criticized for how she did it.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Today, Warren released a DNA test that proves she does have some Native American heritage somewhere back in her timeline. What was interesting was not the predictable derision from conservatives but the narrow hairsplitting from liberals and leftists. Typical was a few tweets noting that having Native ancestry does not necessarily make you part of a tribe, and where does she get off blahblahblah.
Warren, in fact, did note that she was not a tribal member. She said all the reasonably right things to say. But it didn't matter. A certain subset of holier than thou leftists felt the need to "Well, actually..." a perfectly reasonable video from Warren.
You can make an argument that you shouldn't dignify Trump's attacks with a response. But a common lament is that Congressional liberals don't fight back. Warren fought back and was criticized for how she did it.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Sunday, October 14, 2018
Tearing Down The Guardrails
Jon Chait gets a lot of shit from the Left for his centrist takes on politics, but he's pretty much right when it comes to the current calls to limit the "mob." Republicans have been much more virulent and violent over the past few decades, and now we have Leftist groups like Antifa rising to meet them. Typical of this is the violence in NYC a few nights ago where a group of Proud Boys confronted heckling protestors. Some of the protestors were arrested, then the Proud Boys went around the corner and started beating the living crap out of some people. It's unclear whether any of the Proud Boys have been arrested yet. Leftists shouted; Rightists attacked. Trump and some journalists say that the Left was worse.
Rightists and Fascists need violence. So far since 1992 most of the worst violence has been by Rightists, including a few mass shootings. If and when Democrats regain control of the government, we should expect massive amounts of right wing violence. Aside from the attempted assassinations at the GOP Congressional softball practice by a "lone gunman" the Left has not engaged in direct violence to the same extent as the Alt Right. But we are one gerrymandered and voter suppression election away from that no longer become true.
It's not 1968 yet.
Yet.
Rightists and Fascists need violence. So far since 1992 most of the worst violence has been by Rightists, including a few mass shootings. If and when Democrats regain control of the government, we should expect massive amounts of right wing violence. Aside from the attempted assassinations at the GOP Congressional softball practice by a "lone gunman" the Left has not engaged in direct violence to the same extent as the Alt Right. But we are one gerrymandered and voter suppression election away from that no longer become true.
It's not 1968 yet.
Yet.
Saturday, October 13, 2018
The Gospel of Wealth
Paul Krugman makes an excellent point from the Times reporting on how the Trump family has evaded taxes for generations. While the specifics of the Trump family's illegal tax evasion are damning to the Trump family, they also speak to a dysfunction at the heart of our tax system. Rich people don't pay taxes.
The very heart of progressive taxation is that people who have more money should pay more money. Having benefited the most from a country's laws and economy, they should respond by paying more. They will also have more left over, even after paying a greater absolute dollar amount.
First, we have a political party dedicated to the idea that taxing rich people is wrong. In fact, the Republican party seems pretty opposed to the 16th Amendment in its entirety. (I doubt their voters are unhappy with progressive taxation, but you never know.) So, one of the two major parties is pretty much anti-tax, which suggests that taxes as a whole may be illegitimate. Then, you create a very complicated tax code - rather than simply collecting taxes and redistributing that money, as other countries do - which allows the very wealthy to illegally hide their money.
Meanwhile, the country racks up trillions of dollars in debt for the sole purpose of giving more money to the very rich. Part of the reason Romney lost in 2012 was because he was linked to the culture of plutocracy. The Scrooge McDuck caricature of the Republican party is real. It's also unlikely to survive close scrutiny, which is why they distract you with Colin Kaepernick and the War on Christmas. The Times' Trump Tax story is the most important story this fall, and no one is talking about it. Some of that is the 24 hour a day clown show at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Part of it is America's unfortunate reflexive worship of wealth as somehow signaling virtue. (Hello, Elon Musk.)
America needs to disenthrall itself from the idea that our richest citizens are our best people. The best of us are not best because they are rich. Some are. There are good people who are rich and good people who are poor. Wealth in itself is not a signifier of virtue. In fact, given how people apparently acquire their wealth, it could be exactly the opposite.
The very heart of progressive taxation is that people who have more money should pay more money. Having benefited the most from a country's laws and economy, they should respond by paying more. They will also have more left over, even after paying a greater absolute dollar amount.
First, we have a political party dedicated to the idea that taxing rich people is wrong. In fact, the Republican party seems pretty opposed to the 16th Amendment in its entirety. (I doubt their voters are unhappy with progressive taxation, but you never know.) So, one of the two major parties is pretty much anti-tax, which suggests that taxes as a whole may be illegitimate. Then, you create a very complicated tax code - rather than simply collecting taxes and redistributing that money, as other countries do - which allows the very wealthy to illegally hide their money.
Meanwhile, the country racks up trillions of dollars in debt for the sole purpose of giving more money to the very rich. Part of the reason Romney lost in 2012 was because he was linked to the culture of plutocracy. The Scrooge McDuck caricature of the Republican party is real. It's also unlikely to survive close scrutiny, which is why they distract you with Colin Kaepernick and the War on Christmas. The Times' Trump Tax story is the most important story this fall, and no one is talking about it. Some of that is the 24 hour a day clown show at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Part of it is America's unfortunate reflexive worship of wealth as somehow signaling virtue. (Hello, Elon Musk.)
America needs to disenthrall itself from the idea that our richest citizens are our best people. The best of us are not best because they are rich. Some are. There are good people who are rich and good people who are poor. Wealth in itself is not a signifier of virtue. In fact, given how people apparently acquire their wealth, it could be exactly the opposite.
Friday, October 12, 2018
Of Course This Is A Trump Scandal
We can be pretty sure of the following:
- The Saudis killed dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
- The Trump Administration does not care.
The question is what links those two statements. Trump has said there will be no sanction against Saudi Arabia because they buy a lot of US weapons. These US weapons are used to commit war crimes against Yemenis, but whatever. Those large and very profitable companies need to get paid.
The real reason is likely the substantial amount of financial connections between the House of Saud and the House of Trump. Of course Trump is making money off the Saudis and of course they have leverage over him because they are party to his on-going corruption. And of course Trump couldn't give two shits about a tortured, murdered and butchered journalist.
Thanks, Republicans.
UPDATE: Yglesias has more.
- The Saudis killed dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
- The Trump Administration does not care.
The question is what links those two statements. Trump has said there will be no sanction against Saudi Arabia because they buy a lot of US weapons. These US weapons are used to commit war crimes against Yemenis, but whatever. Those large and very profitable companies need to get paid.
The real reason is likely the substantial amount of financial connections between the House of Saud and the House of Trump. Of course Trump is making money off the Saudis and of course they have leverage over him because they are party to his on-going corruption. And of course Trump couldn't give two shits about a tortured, murdered and butchered journalist.
Thanks, Republicans.
UPDATE: Yglesias has more.
Thursday, October 11, 2018
War On Democracy
The Republican Party has begun to realize that they cannot win a straight up election in many areas of the country. They have benefitted from a locked-in gerrymander from 2010 to retain control of the House, despite losing the popular vote for House candidates.
Now, faced with a rising tide of Democratic voters, they are simply eroding democracy. The Supreme Court (now 11% more rape-ier) ruled that North Dakota can basically disenfranchise thousands of Native Americans. This pretty much sinks any long shot chances for Heidi Heitkamp to hold her seat. That's intentional.
The Republican gubernatorial candidate in Georgia is also the Secretary of State, and he's decided to deny voter registrations on technicalities. If your name is Cortez-Lopez but one of your state IDs says Cortez Lopez, you just lost your right to vote.
If that wasn't enough, we now have a story of a Democratic campaign operative being arrested for being a Democratic campaign operative.
The decline of the Party of Lincoln into the Party of Trump, includes a stop at the Party of McConnell. Increasingly, we are waking up to the fact that the majority of Americans do not get to determine who governs them. This is contrary to the founding ideals of the country. The Republican Party does NOT have the consent of a majority of the governed, yet they control all three branches. In an effort to preserve their control, they are actively waging war on the ballot.
These are shitty, evil, un-American people who deserve a drubbing in November and in 2020 that will leave a mark for a generation. But it probably won't happen, because Trump gives WWC voters the feels.
Now, faced with a rising tide of Democratic voters, they are simply eroding democracy. The Supreme Court (now 11% more rape-ier) ruled that North Dakota can basically disenfranchise thousands of Native Americans. This pretty much sinks any long shot chances for Heidi Heitkamp to hold her seat. That's intentional.
The Republican gubernatorial candidate in Georgia is also the Secretary of State, and he's decided to deny voter registrations on technicalities. If your name is Cortez-Lopez but one of your state IDs says Cortez Lopez, you just lost your right to vote.
If that wasn't enough, we now have a story of a Democratic campaign operative being arrested for being a Democratic campaign operative.
The decline of the Party of Lincoln into the Party of Trump, includes a stop at the Party of McConnell. Increasingly, we are waking up to the fact that the majority of Americans do not get to determine who governs them. This is contrary to the founding ideals of the country. The Republican Party does NOT have the consent of a majority of the governed, yet they control all three branches. In an effort to preserve their control, they are actively waging war on the ballot.
These are shitty, evil, un-American people who deserve a drubbing in November and in 2020 that will leave a mark for a generation. But it probably won't happen, because Trump gives WWC voters the feels.
Wednesday, October 10, 2018
Every Allegation Is A Confession
Hair Furor has been running around the country lying his ass off...like he does. Recently, he's trying to stoke the base by saying...Jesus, it pisses me off just to type this...that Democrats are a mob and Republicans are <gags> committed to the rule of law. He prattles on about due process as if he ahs any idea what that really means.
Then his mouthbreathing Volkstrum start chanting "Lock her up." They are chanting that about Diane Feinstein.
A large swath of America is broken.
Then his mouthbreathing Volkstrum start chanting "Lock her up." They are chanting that about Diane Feinstein.
A large swath of America is broken.
Tuesday, October 9, 2018
Decent People
I've spent some time deriding how awful so many elected Republicans are. They are just mean, nasty people.
Compare that to Heidi Heitkamp.
And she's probably going to lose to a real shitheel.
Until white women truly and properly abandon the party that thinks assaulting women is good for a punchline or a chance to "pwn the libtards," we are fucked as a country. (I hold out little hope for men.)
Compare that to Heidi Heitkamp.
And she's probably going to lose to a real shitheel.
Until white women truly and properly abandon the party that thinks assaulting women is good for a punchline or a chance to "pwn the libtards," we are fucked as a country. (I hold out little hope for men.)
Monday, October 8, 2018
The Long View
I vacillate these days from being a political science teacher and a history teacher. Not pedagogically, but how I look at the world.
The political science teacher looks at Trump and the GOP and sees a descent into racial hatred and demagoguery, corruption and authoritarianism. The GOP enjoys - for the moment - a demographic advantage in the Senate and series of natural and artificial gerrymanders in the House. This has allowed a minority of Americans to elect a manifestly unsuitable president, a Congress that has no consideration of the opinions of the majority of Americans and a Supreme Court that thinks the 1880s were too liberal.
The history teacher would note that America has always had racist demagogues, the politics of division and a strain of authoritarianism. I'm a fan of Edmund Morgan's thesis that racism and slavery allowed democracy to take root in America, because white Americans enjoyed a relative equality vis a vis African slaves. And for much of American history, whites have excluded minorities from political power. The election of Obama didn't end this, so much as create a virulent rearguard action to preserve white supremacy. We've done this before, walked this road. We came out the other side and we should again.
Unless... and I hate to even type these words... if Democrats have been so gerrymandered out of power that election day does not bring at least one House of Congress into Democratic control... As Josh Marshall notes, breaking all the rules worked. It worked for Trump. It worked for McConnell. It has now worked for Kavanaugh. Every branch of the federal government is under Republican control, because they broke the rules and a minority of Americans is able to force their will upon the majority.
If that doesn't change, then we are headed for a very dark place.
The political science teacher looks at Trump and the GOP and sees a descent into racial hatred and demagoguery, corruption and authoritarianism. The GOP enjoys - for the moment - a demographic advantage in the Senate and series of natural and artificial gerrymanders in the House. This has allowed a minority of Americans to elect a manifestly unsuitable president, a Congress that has no consideration of the opinions of the majority of Americans and a Supreme Court that thinks the 1880s were too liberal.
The history teacher would note that America has always had racist demagogues, the politics of division and a strain of authoritarianism. I'm a fan of Edmund Morgan's thesis that racism and slavery allowed democracy to take root in America, because white Americans enjoyed a relative equality vis a vis African slaves. And for much of American history, whites have excluded minorities from political power. The election of Obama didn't end this, so much as create a virulent rearguard action to preserve white supremacy. We've done this before, walked this road. We came out the other side and we should again.
Unless... and I hate to even type these words... if Democrats have been so gerrymandered out of power that election day does not bring at least one House of Congress into Democratic control... As Josh Marshall notes, breaking all the rules worked. It worked for Trump. It worked for McConnell. It has now worked for Kavanaugh. Every branch of the federal government is under Republican control, because they broke the rules and a minority of Americans is able to force their will upon the majority.
If that doesn't change, then we are headed for a very dark place.
Sunday, October 7, 2018
Pulaski Wasn't That Important
I got stuck in Midtown Manhattan because of a parade for Casimir Pulaski. Two hours to go fifteen blocks.
He wasn't that big a deal.
He wasn't that big a deal.
Saturday, October 6, 2018
Where We Are
Yesterday was a punch in the gut for millions of women. On a political level, it sucked for me and other men, but for women...I saw tears yesterday. Of course, millions of white women were fine with approving Kavanaugh to "own the libs," and I don't know what to say about that. It has been a striking fact that for decades, WWC men and women have voted against their economic self-interest, and now we can add basic personal self-interest.
Josh Marshall makes an important point (as usual). Kavanaugh was going down to defeat after Blassey Ford's testimony. He would be replaced by another revanchist judge from the Federalist Society and the Court would lurch further rightwards. Instead, Kavanaugh embraced the basic tenet of Trumpism: attack, attack, attack. Then, yesterday, that simpering pile of Jell-o knows as Susan Collins got up and mewled about civility and fairness. FUCK. YOU.
Trumpism - that attacking your enemies is more important than serving the public interest - is now the default position of the GOP. There is no core set of policies positions or ideological takes on limited government. That is all bullshit. The GOP serves a set of corporate donors who want to reduce the federal government to the protectors of their property and screw the rest of you. (Seriously, read Yglesias on the Court). But aside from that, the great mass of voters basically want to attack and destory the Democrats. It's difficult to say "the Left" because this isn't ideological, it's partisan.
Yes, Democrats are furious, especially Democratic women. But starting with Merrick Garland and then Donald Trump, it is apparent that the GOP will do literally anything to win and hold on to power, despite representing a minority of the population. Perhaps...please God...Democrats can win back both Houses (or even one House) of Congress and begin to swing the pendulum back in favor of democracy (not just Democrats). Perhaps Florida will re-enfranchise former felons, giving citizens who have done their time a say in their government (and turning Florida bluer).
And maybe...just maybe...the average citizen and the purer-than-thou leftist will get off their ass and open their eyes and vote as if their life depends on it. Because it very well might.
Josh Marshall makes an important point (as usual). Kavanaugh was going down to defeat after Blassey Ford's testimony. He would be replaced by another revanchist judge from the Federalist Society and the Court would lurch further rightwards. Instead, Kavanaugh embraced the basic tenet of Trumpism: attack, attack, attack. Then, yesterday, that simpering pile of Jell-o knows as Susan Collins got up and mewled about civility and fairness. FUCK. YOU.
Trumpism - that attacking your enemies is more important than serving the public interest - is now the default position of the GOP. There is no core set of policies positions or ideological takes on limited government. That is all bullshit. The GOP serves a set of corporate donors who want to reduce the federal government to the protectors of their property and screw the rest of you. (Seriously, read Yglesias on the Court). But aside from that, the great mass of voters basically want to attack and destory the Democrats. It's difficult to say "the Left" because this isn't ideological, it's partisan.
Yes, Democrats are furious, especially Democratic women. But starting with Merrick Garland and then Donald Trump, it is apparent that the GOP will do literally anything to win and hold on to power, despite representing a minority of the population. Perhaps...please God...Democrats can win back both Houses (or even one House) of Congress and begin to swing the pendulum back in favor of democracy (not just Democrats). Perhaps Florida will re-enfranchise former felons, giving citizens who have done their time a say in their government (and turning Florida bluer).
And maybe...just maybe...the average citizen and the purer-than-thou leftist will get off their ass and open their eyes and vote as if their life depends on it. Because it very well might.
Friday, October 5, 2018
It's Never About Race
Excellent piece by Spencer Akerman on how Russia exploited and exploits American racism for political benefit.
I am concerned about how online discourse is reshaping our sense of civil society. It is clear that people are crueler to each other on social media than they are in person. There is no nuance, no human connection that comes through a tweet or a Facebook post.
Russia exploits that brilliantly, because they (unlike many Americans) understand how racism underpins so much of American society. By ripping away the language of polite society, they give license to the angry, torch-bearing demons in America's dark heart.
I am concerned about how online discourse is reshaping our sense of civil society. It is clear that people are crueler to each other on social media than they are in person. There is no nuance, no human connection that comes through a tweet or a Facebook post.
Russia exploits that brilliantly, because they (unlike many Americans) understand how racism underpins so much of American society. By ripping away the language of polite society, they give license to the angry, torch-bearing demons in America's dark heart.
Franken's Monster
If you believe - for one stinking second - that Democrats are targeting Kavanaugh because of opportunism, think about Al Franken. Also, think about how Trump thinks about Al Franken.
There is a political party that cares about sexual assault to the point where they will jetison a popular Senator, and a party that has backed a pedophile for Alabama Senate, an alleged sexual assailant for the Supreme Court and is all in on a man on tape bragging about sexual assault.
There is a political party that cares about sexual assault to the point where they will jetison a popular Senator, and a party that has backed a pedophile for Alabama Senate, an alleged sexual assailant for the Supreme Court and is all in on a man on tape bragging about sexual assault.
Thursday, October 4, 2018
Surprise!
Turns out the "FBI Investigation" is a joke, but it will allow Kavanaugh to be confirmed on a largely party-line vote. I would expect Joe Manchin and Heidi Heitkamp to fall in line behind Collins, Flake and Murkowski, because they are cowards. This result could have been predicted by basically anyone who has been paying attention to the GOP and the three squishes in the middle.
The hope - and it was a forlorn one from the start - was that additional allegations against Kavanaugh would come to light in the intervening time period. What was always a sucker's game was that the FBI - limited by time and the White House - would conduct a thorough investigation as to whether A) Kavanaugh assaulted Blassey Ford and B) whether Kavanaugh perjured himself before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Despite ample evidence that Kavanaugh failed to be truthful to the SJC (far less truthful than Bill Clinton was during his deposition that led to his impeachment, championed by Kavanaugh), he will be confirmed.
The Supreme Court crisis of legitimacy is upon us.
The hope - and it was a forlorn one from the start - was that additional allegations against Kavanaugh would come to light in the intervening time period. What was always a sucker's game was that the FBI - limited by time and the White House - would conduct a thorough investigation as to whether A) Kavanaugh assaulted Blassey Ford and B) whether Kavanaugh perjured himself before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Despite ample evidence that Kavanaugh failed to be truthful to the SJC (far less truthful than Bill Clinton was during his deposition that led to his impeachment, championed by Kavanaugh), he will be confirmed.
The Supreme Court crisis of legitimacy is upon us.
Men Of Steel
This is a fascinating and fair piece about how steel workers are despairing of seeing their wages and numbers increase despite Trump's tariff supports for the steel industry. Basically, Trump's tariffs have, in fact, boosted US steel production, but for various reasons, the workers are unlikely to benefit nearly as much as they should.
This is consistent with what we are seeing across the economy. The GOP tax plan has put billions back into corporations, and they are using that money for stock buy-backs and executive bonuses, but wages remain stubbornly stagnant. This is a problem that has both political and macroeconomic roots.
Minimum wages work. Labor regulations work. Efforts by the Republican Party since 1980 to erode worker's leverage in the economy means that they are not benefiting from a robust economic expansion. Times, generally speaking, have been good since about 2011, but those "good times" have not translated into improvements in the working and living conditions of most Americans.
In the article, the steel industry points to rising health care costs as a driver in reducing worker compensation. Of course, a universal health care system would help there. In fact, increasing access to day care, elder care and post-high school education would also help improve the lot of American workers. One party is talking about doing that, the other is talking about blocking it.
Vote accordingly.
This is consistent with what we are seeing across the economy. The GOP tax plan has put billions back into corporations, and they are using that money for stock buy-backs and executive bonuses, but wages remain stubbornly stagnant. This is a problem that has both political and macroeconomic roots.
Minimum wages work. Labor regulations work. Efforts by the Republican Party since 1980 to erode worker's leverage in the economy means that they are not benefiting from a robust economic expansion. Times, generally speaking, have been good since about 2011, but those "good times" have not translated into improvements in the working and living conditions of most Americans.
In the article, the steel industry points to rising health care costs as a driver in reducing worker compensation. Of course, a universal health care system would help there. In fact, increasing access to day care, elder care and post-high school education would also help improve the lot of American workers. One party is talking about doing that, the other is talking about blocking it.
Vote accordingly.
Wednesday, October 3, 2018
Trump Is A Trust-fund Brat
I mean, I wish it mattered...
For all the criticism the Times legitimately gets, their recent expose of the Trump family finances is the sort of reporting only they can really pull off. Encouragingly, the article's first sentence - undoubtedly vetted by their lawyers - calls out the Trump family for outright fraud. Fraud is a crime.
To a certain degree, the crimes alleged here were perpetrated by Trump's father, Fred. The problems are three-fold for Trump. First, he benefited from those crimes, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Second, it completely undermines Trump's claim of being a self-made billionaire. If he's a billionaire at all, it's because his father gave him such an extraordinary head start. Third and finally, the GOP tax bill - their only significant achievement outside of packing the courts with conservatives - is an unprecedented giveaway to people exactly like Donald Trump.
The allegations in the well-documented article raise questions of criminality and would - in a sane world - puncture the rampant bullshit of Trump's self-mythologizing. He's a trust-fund brat. He has always been a trust-fund brat, hanging out with models at Studio 54, shitting on a gold toilet, squandering his family's money. (Calculations of Trump's wealth have never presumed the scope and size of his father's largess. If he's "just a billionaire," his rampant mismanagement of his father's gifts demonstrates his own fiscal incompetence.)
The idea that this will matter to the angry, 60 year old, white dude in a diner in Sixpack, Ohio is laughable. It undercuts the idea that Trump was somehow an avatar for inchoate rage about the economic conditions roiling the working class of this country. Here is evidence (which they won't believe because it's the NY Times) that demonstrates that their hero who wanted to drain the swamp is in fact a trust-fund brat with a set of purchased degrees from private educational institutions. Unless Trump's approval rating falls into the teens, this is the final proof - as if it were needed - that Trump's appeal is cultural and racist, not economic.
And here, too, is the sinew that connects Trump with Brett Kavanaugh. Trump, we now have proof, is a beneficiary of his father's riches, much of which he pissed away in Atlantic City. Kavanaugh began at Georgetown Prep and parlayed that and his family's connection into degrees from Yale. Yes, Kavanaugh worked hard. So do lots of people who aren't legacies and the product of private school educations.
The whole world of these privileged white men is based on not being questioned. There are built in assumptions that undergird the ideas of patriarchy. You don't question these men and their power. The rage that Kavanaugh showed at his hearing, the disdain with which Trump treats women, the constant news of white men using guns to shoot up public institutions...these are all of a piece.
I'm a white man, who went to private schools, inherited some money and has benefited from my whiteness and my maleness at countless points in my life. I call bullshit on the whole rotten system.
For all the criticism the Times legitimately gets, their recent expose of the Trump family finances is the sort of reporting only they can really pull off. Encouragingly, the article's first sentence - undoubtedly vetted by their lawyers - calls out the Trump family for outright fraud. Fraud is a crime.
To a certain degree, the crimes alleged here were perpetrated by Trump's father, Fred. The problems are three-fold for Trump. First, he benefited from those crimes, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Second, it completely undermines Trump's claim of being a self-made billionaire. If he's a billionaire at all, it's because his father gave him such an extraordinary head start. Third and finally, the GOP tax bill - their only significant achievement outside of packing the courts with conservatives - is an unprecedented giveaway to people exactly like Donald Trump.
The allegations in the well-documented article raise questions of criminality and would - in a sane world - puncture the rampant bullshit of Trump's self-mythologizing. He's a trust-fund brat. He has always been a trust-fund brat, hanging out with models at Studio 54, shitting on a gold toilet, squandering his family's money. (Calculations of Trump's wealth have never presumed the scope and size of his father's largess. If he's "just a billionaire," his rampant mismanagement of his father's gifts demonstrates his own fiscal incompetence.)
The idea that this will matter to the angry, 60 year old, white dude in a diner in Sixpack, Ohio is laughable. It undercuts the idea that Trump was somehow an avatar for inchoate rage about the economic conditions roiling the working class of this country. Here is evidence (which they won't believe because it's the NY Times) that demonstrates that their hero who wanted to drain the swamp is in fact a trust-fund brat with a set of purchased degrees from private educational institutions. Unless Trump's approval rating falls into the teens, this is the final proof - as if it were needed - that Trump's appeal is cultural and racist, not economic.
And here, too, is the sinew that connects Trump with Brett Kavanaugh. Trump, we now have proof, is a beneficiary of his father's riches, much of which he pissed away in Atlantic City. Kavanaugh began at Georgetown Prep and parlayed that and his family's connection into degrees from Yale. Yes, Kavanaugh worked hard. So do lots of people who aren't legacies and the product of private school educations.
The whole world of these privileged white men is based on not being questioned. There are built in assumptions that undergird the ideas of patriarchy. You don't question these men and their power. The rage that Kavanaugh showed at his hearing, the disdain with which Trump treats women, the constant news of white men using guns to shoot up public institutions...these are all of a piece.
I'm a white man, who went to private schools, inherited some money and has benefited from my whiteness and my maleness at countless points in my life. I call bullshit on the whole rotten system.
Tuesday, October 2, 2018
The Tell
The current GOP tactic for refuting the Kavanaugh charges is to say that "every man in America is a target." This is - in poker terms - a "tell." Lindsey Graham used this logic when he said that any future Democratic nominee will face these allegations. The first assumption the GOP makes is that these allegations are false, but they know they can't say that in this day and age, so they move on to "every man is potentially guilty of sexual assault."
On the one hand, this is simply a way rally their base - which is predominantly older, white men. These man did not grow up with the same sexual mores that today's kids (hopefully) do. This generation is having sex later, drinking and doing drugs less and having fewer unwanted pregnancies. Potentially, that means fewer incidents like the one alleged to happen between Blassy Ford and Kavanaugh.
But this is about power. Rape, for that matter, is about power. The ability of white men - especially from bastions of privilege like Georgetown Prep and Yale - to escape consequences for their actions is ending. You're damned right that will be scary for them.
My own feelings looking back at my time in the '80s (I'm a few years younger than Kavanaugh) makes me wonder. I am 100% certain I never pushed through a "No." I never did what Blassey Ford accuses Kavanaugh of doing. But I'm a large man. Did I make a woman uncomfortable? Just by being a large man? Perhaps. But if I want to be a better version of myself, I need to wrestle with that. If a woman accused me of making her uncomfortable at a party 30 years ago, I would want to apologize and make any gestures of restitution that she might require.
That's not what Kavanaugh even tried to do. It's not what Trump would do. Or Weinstein or Cosby or any of them.
That's the tell. This is about power, and keeping that power in the hands of white men.
On the one hand, this is simply a way rally their base - which is predominantly older, white men. These man did not grow up with the same sexual mores that today's kids (hopefully) do. This generation is having sex later, drinking and doing drugs less and having fewer unwanted pregnancies. Potentially, that means fewer incidents like the one alleged to happen between Blassy Ford and Kavanaugh.
But this is about power. Rape, for that matter, is about power. The ability of white men - especially from bastions of privilege like Georgetown Prep and Yale - to escape consequences for their actions is ending. You're damned right that will be scary for them.
My own feelings looking back at my time in the '80s (I'm a few years younger than Kavanaugh) makes me wonder. I am 100% certain I never pushed through a "No." I never did what Blassey Ford accuses Kavanaugh of doing. But I'm a large man. Did I make a woman uncomfortable? Just by being a large man? Perhaps. But if I want to be a better version of myself, I need to wrestle with that. If a woman accused me of making her uncomfortable at a party 30 years ago, I would want to apologize and make any gestures of restitution that she might require.
That's not what Kavanaugh even tried to do. It's not what Trump would do. Or Weinstein or Cosby or any of them.
That's the tell. This is about power, and keeping that power in the hands of white men.
Monday, October 1, 2018
Trump Doesn't Like Drinkers
Buried in Jon Chait's piece about Trump's casual misogyny is Trump freestyling about Kavanaugh's drinking problem. Trump's brother was an alcoholic and Trump himself never touches a drop, allegedly because of his brother's experience and early death. Trump doesn't trust people who drink or have facial hair (Exhibit 2,567,432 why I will never have a job in the Trump Administration). He wouldn't hire John Bolton at first because of the mustache. Seriously.
If Trump convinces himself that Kavanaugh is still a drunk, I could see him - fickle boy that he is - abandoning Kavanaugh well before the Federalist Society apparatchiks do.
If Trump convinces himself that Kavanaugh is still a drunk, I could see him - fickle boy that he is - abandoning Kavanaugh well before the Federalist Society apparatchiks do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)