Today the House impeachment managers wrapped their case against former president Donald Trump. Using the words of the insurgents themselves, the managers argued that he incited the insurrection of January 6, spurring an armed and violent mob to storm the Capitol while Congress was counting the certified electoral votes that awarded the 2020 presidential election to Democrat Joe Biden.
Even moreso than when I posted it yesterday, this quote is the perfect explanation of the Caucus of Cowards:
“It was miraculous. It was almost no trick at all, he saw, to turn vice into virtue and slander into truth, impotence into abstinence, arrogance into humility, plunder into philanthropy, thievery into honor, blasphemy into wisdom, brutality into patriotism, and sadism into justice. Anybody could do it; it required no brains at all. It merely required no character.” -- Joseph Heller "Catch 22"
That is if, and that’s a big if, the insipid clown has a library. Just think for a moment what university would want to be the host for one. The sociopathic liar will have no place in any institution dedicated to the discovery of truth. Truth was the one thing that had no place, and I mean zero, in his administration.
Come to think of it, a for profit "college" like Corinthian, Phoenix, or even the one he named after himself, something in some high rise office building with sky high rents and that's a total scam on the poor souls they entrap, might be just the place for his "university-library".
Zowie friends. I had no idea I would unleash such a can of worms. Kathleen I wasn’t aware of Theodore Geisel’s work in the WW2 department of propaganda. But I really do think that, like thinking people in situations where they can change their minds about stuff, he did. My family experienced WW2 in ways that could have soured them on all kinds of folks, and they struggled with that. My mother hated Germans and Germany and had a hard time when we all visited. As a Jew she couldn’t see the Germany of 1970 as a different place. She really freaked out when I dated a German emigrant! My father, who fought in the Pacific Theater and was stationed in Japan for a year after the war never questioned Truman’s decision to drop A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For him that is why the war ended. But my parents also headed the civil rights initiatives in the town where I grew up and were totally against the idea of internment camps—which happened to Germans in WW1 in the US not just the Japanese Americans in WW2. We all struggle with the ways in which we and our families experience the legacies of history. The point is people evolve and grow. And that has to count for something, especially in our current era when resistance to growth and evolution is so high.
Dr. Seuss was it racist. I recently looked this up after reading the book “the things she touched” about artist Ruth Asawa. His anti-Japanese cartoons in the 40s were despicable and disgusting
Yes after Pearl Harbor but it’s that kind of mob gang mentality that causes people to launch into unfettered racism. Not OK under any values or situation
Americans hated Japs during the 1940s? Maybe it was because THERE WAS A WAR GOING ON.
My uncle, whom I never met was a U.S. Marine who was killed in the Pacific War. His death notice in the St. Louis paper said that "Pvt Lynn had 26 Japs to his credit." I suppose he was racist like Dr. Seuss.
The internees were Japanese Americans, the majority US citizens. Not one was a "Jap." That term has long been acknowledged as derogatory and even racist. Justifying its use as a response to wartime circumstances is an indirect admission that it was a racist response to Pearl Harbor and Japan's aggression. It use by the StL paper was racist, but it says nothing about your uncle's views.
There is a large literature on the racial aspects of the pacific War. None of the warring nations should get a pass.
The fact that you’re taking it personally has no bearing on whether or not systemic racism is wrong. My own father and mother were involved in life-threatening activities during World War II. My mother ammunitions worker with live ammunition and my father in the Army Air Force who was sunk on a trip ship. Many of his friends were killed also. It does not matter in terms of systemic racism. Wrong is wrong and my father would be the first to say that. I said nothing about your relative it is tragedy and war is horrifying. Systemic racism towards innocent people like the Uighurs now in China is always wrong no matter what the situation
I also respectfully take issue with your use of the term “Japs.”. If you think the United States is blame free in terms of war there are many documents that would enlighten on this point. We mourn all who have been unjustly blamed or killed.
Yeah, Walt Disney was a letdown for me. But since my dad grew up during that era, albeit in Germany, I have the ability to just accept the fuller picture. Heroes aren't perfect. They are a product of their times. Who are we to judge from the vantage point of the 21st Century. In fact, we can't judge from this perspective. For their time, a certain person might have been way ahead of their time, a hero in their own time, and still appear, out of context in 2021, as lacking and lagging.
The book of Hitler’s speeches he reportedly kept at his bedside would have to be encased in a memorial front and center. Has anyone ever seen reported that he has read anything other?
probably this book. This is A EDUCATED GUESS, mind you, SPECULATION based on the Vanity Fair article which said a 1941 study of Hitler's speeches in English:
Baynes, N. (1942). The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922 – August 1939 V1. London, Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-598-75893-3
The Donald Trump section of the Library, although perhaps not as large as you would expect, can easily accommodate sub-sections including one entitled "Donald's Personal Reading Material."
Yes. The Tя☭mp Presidential Library must have TC's Joseph Heller quote chiseled into the stone facade on the front portico. The Library itself will be necessary as a repository for the incredible, gargantuan, immense volume of criminal documentation that will need to be amassed to chronicle this Administration. The sections of the library will have designated areas for each Cabinet member and Republican politician and criminal associate, including an enormously large section for Putin. Most of the presidential records will be transferred over from the files of the FBI and the Justice Dept. including contributing agencies and departments like SDNY and Fulton County D.A., Georgia. In fact, those departments will use the Presidential Library as their primary research and investigation source of information. Clearly it would be convenient to situate the library in the DC metro area as a convenience to those police agencies, since the vast majority of the library's users will be members of the law enforcement community. Why not place the Library close to the people who use it the most.
Racist. Sexist. Anti-gay, because it conflicts with the Christian Hallmark channel story of one man one woman with children. Anti-Semitic is optional, since Jesus was a Jew, but you don't lose points for being anti-Semitic. Oh, and money. You're only a true Republican if you're rich or you pretend to be. No one else matters. Don't fault me here, I have my dad as living proof that being rich with money is everything and not having money makes you 2nd class.
I must return, for a third time this week, to a question that's increasingly hard to answer: Who do Congresspeople actually represent?
"Senators were apparently shocked to see how close they came to falling into the hands of the rioters..."
Trump's presidency suggests Congressional elections are increasingly "bait and switch" transactions, where prospective constituents are sold on one vision only to be replaced by a very different approach once in office. How else can one explain the disconnect from reality that's allowed GOP senators to deny intent after seeing the video of January 6, many admitting it was soul shaking, yet concluding it was insufficient to make a case for conviction?
Despite the 74,000,000 who voted for Trump I find it difficult to believe many, let alone all, would have contemplated intentionally murderous insurrection as the appropriate path to political change in this country.
Many Congresspeople have argued a false equivalence between January 6 and the 2020 riots, in particular, but that position is specious. True, we've had protests that have turned violent - the 1965 Watts riots, resulting in 34 deaths; the 1967 Detroit riots, resulting in 16 deaths and 500 injured; the 1968 Chicago riots, resulting in 11 deaths and hundreds hurt; the Vietnam War protests, in which very few died over about six years; the Ferguson riots of 2014-2015, in which only death was that of the man whose killing sparked the protests: and most recently the 2020 protests following the police killing of George Floyd, in which at least 25 people died. However, it's important to remember that in 2020, as in all these cases, deaths and injuries arose from confrontation between protesters and law enforcement or National Guard. They were calls for change, not attempts to overthrow the government.
I can only conclude the unwillingness to justify Trump's conviction is a function of fear. Fear of losing their jobs, fear of constituents anger, fear of Trump's retribution, and perhaps most troubling, fear of the exposure of their own complicity that led to January 6, 2021. Could 50% of the Senate and nearly 75% of the House GOP truly believe Trump was the best leader for America? Why do so many Republicans noisily oppose abortion rights despite three quarters of Americans support it, although some with restrictions? Are they really representing their districts and states?
No, their fear is grounded in political expedience, well described by HCR this morning: "...Senators who were planning to let Trump off the hook might be worrying they will have to answer to constituents furious that they didn’t do their jobs..." AND "It’s unlikely that any of the senators want to acquit Trump because they want him to stay in the political scene.... they want his voters to elect them, not to reelect him or elect his chosen successor..."
They can't have their cake and eat it too. From today's letter, the "House impeachment managers have given Republican senators multiple ways to justify a vote for conviction to their constituents.... Senators could vote to convict out of a determination to protect law enforcement officers, something their constituents say is important to them."
Unfortunately, despite some feigned outrage in the days following the attack, most Republicans have walked back their earlier contention that Trump was responsible for fomenting insurrection. They still have no proof of election fraud. They're willing to overlook Trump's Twitter assaults and his undermining the statements and actions of even some of his most staunch supporters in Congress and elsewhere. They refute what their eyes and ears witnessed as rioters hammered on doors calling for the deaths - DEATHS - of Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi. The threats were equitable across party lines. Democrats pointed to prominent Republicans, including former Trump chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and Wisconsin Rep. Mike Gallagher, posting terrified tweets and making panicked on-air calls to Fox News in which they begged Trump to “call off” his mob on Jan. 6. Now Gallagher says impeaching Trump is “unconstitutional” and “accomplishes nothing.”
Beyond my dismay, nay, deep anger, at the GOP's persistent denials of the threats the US faced before and up to January 6, some Republicans have shown disrespect and contempt for the proceedings and their Congressional colleagues. On Wednesday, Senators Rubio, Hawley, Scott, and Paul were reading or doodling. Josh Hawley "kicked his feet up to watch Democrats’ opening statement from the Senate gallery instead of joining the rest of his colleagues on the floor." "Rick Scott of Florida, who called Wednesday’s wrenching videos a “complete waste of time.” On Thursday "at least 18 Republican senators were absent from their desks as the managers were making their case."
Do they really think we can forgive and forget the fact that they didn't stand up for their colleagues and their country? Do they believe their contention that the trial somehow violates president Biden's calls for unity and is thus too divisive? Do all of these lawyers think the the framers contemplated offering a free pass to treasonous behavior just because it occurred late in a president's term and because they put off a trial until Trump was out of office just days before? And do they think that Impeachment and a trial specifically enumerated by the Constitution, where they have the authority to define the terms of those actions, is truly unconstitutional?
I have to call BS on that. Their fears have totally sublimated their responsibilities to adhere to their oaths of office. That alone should render them unfit to continue to serve as representatives of the people. They represent no one but themselves and their donors who, with any luck, will withdraw supportb for those who failed to fight for our democratic principles and processes.
I have been having this very argument in my little law enforcement community here in Oregon. I have been told that there is a direct parallel between the violence of this summer's protests and the violence at the Capitol, and that the Democrats are "hypocritical" for calling out this violence and not this summer's violence. I have also been told that our national divide was created by President Obama in 2008; there was no racism before that. Another has said that a President cannot be arrested for criminal conduct, so this Impeachment Trial is a sham. These. Are. Cops. Some active, some retired. I did have two of about 10 of them acknowledge my stance, and allow how there might be some conversation there. The rest? I'd quote Jim Wright, but that profanity doesn't fly here.
I just want to say in response to the conservative comments on "this summer's violence." 93% of the summer marches were entirely peaceful. The media has only covered the rare fires and looting. NOTHING on the scale of the savagery at our Capitol is comparable to anything this summer. And yes, Democrats support peaceful protest. Do your "cops" condone the beating of the Capitol Police? If there is a position that is hypocritical it would be this one. Hang in there!
My little world has friends who are with Portland Police Bureau and National Guardsmen who were called to assist; their first hand accounts are pretty terrible on their face. There is no reflection on why there was a violent response to their own police violence, only that cops were injured doing their job.
Hi Ally, if you please, ask your colleagues: why did so many police tried to overthrow the US government on Jan 6? Also tell them that "I don't know" or "a few bad apples" are not acceptable.
Oh, that's priceless and reflective of massive ignorance of our culture and history.
I don't know many law enforcement officers, local, state, or federal. Maybe anyone who's a potential danger to the well being or life of a police officer is an enemy, even if the risk from any given individual is low.
However, my experience with others who repeat well worn but poorly substantiatiated tropes about economics and race and equality is that they frequently talk themselves into these positions even if they have no direct interactions with the subjects of their ire or disdain. It's not necessarily correct to call the stupid, but it sure does nothing to help you refrain from doing so.
Yeah, this is a common theme in law enforcement, and often accompanied by the line "I don't see color, I see crime". SMH. And I misspoke, it is not a profanity but a vulgarity, so perhaps "no more self-awareness than a dog licking its own asshole" is not profane.
The House managers more than once made the point that an impeachment trial is NOT a criminal trial. No one is arrested, no one goes to jail, etc. Too many people, including Republican senators, don't seem to get that, which is frustrating.
Hypothetically, consider a deal. Convict him and Biden agrees to pardon him for any offenses since the election. Acquit him and DOJ will pursue further investigations with the goal to prosecute and convict. It's not pretty, but it could be a way for Biden to take a road similar to that taken by Jerry Ford after Nixon's resignation. Trump's supporters would not have to endure the threat of a real trial and possible prison sentence.
But can't the DOJ pursue further investigation and prosecution anyway? Consider that Jerry Ford's pardon of Nixon enabled a lot of our current predicament.
Yes, definitely. I expect announcement of investigations within three months of Merrick Garland's confirmation. DOJ will gather evidence slowly but inexorably, then lower the boom.
Of course they blamed Obama for the divide - he's Black, silly. And you do understand that there "was no racism prior to 2008," don't you? The existence of the KKK and white supremacist militia groups were purely leftist, socialist fantasy and propaganda, right? You deserve a medal for not harming them, Ally.
They have been shoveling the 💩💩💩💩 for so long they are buried in it and have become it. There is no way out from under the 💩 for them. Eventually they will surely smother. I appreciate Biden’s focus on building better. I’m hoping our ship of justice, once righting it’s course will mete out appropriate consequences. Until then I want to help build the good.
I’m afraid not. It’s impossible to properly represent the amount of crap with a few drawings! There is much satisfaction to be had in how suffocating the depths of it will be, though.
I watched Plaskett’s brilliant presentation with 10 middle school students yesterday on Zoom. They went from disinterested and “It’s boring” before watching, to engaged-full-of-questions-and-comments citizens. One teacher, 10 students...drop in the bucket. If only we could get the country to take education and educators seriously. I garner HIGH repe t when I’m in other countries when I say I’m a teacher. Here I’m met with “those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach.”
That’s wonderful that you did this with your students. And it’s refreshing that your students became interested and engaged. I hope there is a lot more of that.
Jennifer KG, that was great teaching! How about an “add-on” for everyone who watched the proceedings: I heard my Senator (M. Warner, fine Dem. from VA), and 2 journalists (one from TX and one from WI), say that they thought few people watched. I am encouraging everyone who watched let their Senators know. We need to let them -and the rest of Congress and the Country -
Hey, Sara: Fellow constituent of Senator M. Warner here! I have responded to a number of his emails seeking my opinion. I also have replied to a few of his Tweets, though I am not on Twitter much (and don't really understand how it works). But would you agree that a twitter post to him would suffice to let him know I have been watching?
Lynell, l am not a Tweeter, but it’s worth a go! I just went to his website and used a form to submit my comment. There is no category that really fits the topic, but I chose national security and start of my note with the statement that I wasn’t sure of national security was quite the place, but I chose it anyway.
I have called his office upon occasion, but I never very confident with that method of communication.
Hi Lynell! Any kind of communication to Congresspeople is recorded by her/his staff. They are skilled in using all kinds of media even if their boss is a techno-peasant (and some are).
There is an awkward tendency to think that education would make people understand the facts as we present them and "be more like us". Those voting Trump currently will probably not follow that path but education would allow them a better access to their inner selves, better understand the world around them from their own perspective and perhaps enable them to be a little more tolerant about those who see things differently. However the key advantage of education would hopefully be to enable them to function better in the world they are living in and to feel a little less left behind. It would enable them to better define what they want out of life as opposed to what they don't want, and to find the "honest" work that they always have craved without necessarily destroying or leaving the community that they treasure. It is also in this latter matter...Jobs...that the solution can be found.
Well said! The "core curriculum," if it's still called that, is an underappreciated social institution, where the liberal arts are supported via required subjects that all majors must take. Why should a biology major have to take English Lit, or a business major have to take World History?
Because that's where the term "liberal arts" come from - history, science, literature, philosophy - those are the arts of liberty.
Wow! Dan, I feel like I’ve learned something wonderful. The arts of liberty... I’ll reflect on and share that phrase. The commentary in this LFAA community is fully a liberal arts education. I am grateful to every participant. And immensely grateful to Heather.
Employees are by definition red ink on the liability side of a company's ledger. An efficient company eliminates as many liabilities as possible, and replaces employees with machines (capital assets) or cheaper employees whenever possible. Companies benefit from general unemployment, which allows them to keep wages low: there's always someone desperate to take your job for your pay or a little less, especially since survival in the modern world requires money, which can only be obtained through a job (or some form of theft, which is a big, though invisible part of the economic structure).
There are not enough jobs, and there will never be enough jobs under any efficient form of capitalism. The structure itself creates and maintains a pool of jobless, homeless, starving people.
Education does not create jobs. It only ranks job applicants for triage. In the process, its cost to students has become a profit-center for "good schools," and this has become a form of lifetime indentured servitude for anyone who tries to gain a good educational ranking and then fails to capture one of the best-paying jobs.
I agree, Joseph. This is built in to the kind of capitalism we have, and is probably inherent to capitalism in general (which is why the original Adam Smith emphasized the need for strong regulation). and then there are the recessions, irrational economic booms, and the artificial market that is used as a highly inaccurate and misleading "measure" for the economy as a whole. There is something else to be noted: The stress on individual "success" that our culture emphasizes, and the consequences as people take on projects that they are unprepared for, under the assumption that somehow capitalism has an automatic built in feature that guarantees monetary success. I think this is where a lot of the anger from unfulfilled expectations comes from. The studies I've been reading show that a probable majority of the most active people in Trump's "movement" are self-failures who did not prepare themselves for the roles they sought to play, had poor money management skills, and tended to turn to bankruptcy to solve problems instead of learning from mistakes and rebuilding (or finding a way of earning a living more suited to their skills and temperament).
I'd like to clarify that I'm not opposed to education. But its value is social, not economic.
And I'd like to clarify that I AM opposed to capitalism, and it's the fraudulent mathematics that I object to. Nature abhors a vacuum, but it absolutely forbids limitless exponential growth. Which means that all of our capitalist "advances" are compensated by hidden losses that are now growing to the point of destroying us. Capitalism is a deadly form of fraud.
Perhaps it's my failure of imagination, but I have a hard time thinking of another economic system that uses money that isn't on a line with pure capitalism on one end and pure communism on the other. Can you think of one?
As I see it, when you move away from the pure capitalism pole, you simply have money-based activities subjected to increasing regulation from another source, such as government. (Other sources of regulation could be either social mores or religious authority.) Complimentarily, as you move away from the pure communism pole, you simply have a government-controlled economy with elements of capital investment/return, usually high government officials making financial deals unavailable to everyone else.
The "fraudulent" nature of capitalism seems to revolve around an entity's ability to dump the costs of liabilities onto someone else, either legally (like insurance), illegally (like environmental pollution, or should-be-illegal (like environmental pollution after Trump rolled back oodles of regulations.)
Sorry for the rambling muse. I'm actually responding to your comment that you are "opposed" to capitalism, when to me that's like saying that you're "opposed" to religion, or intuition. These are features in our man-made world that seem to have their uses, and liabilities. If you are "opposed" to capitalism, are you "in favor" of something else?
Nearly all modern economists write about economics as if late-stage capitalism is the only form of economy. This isn't even close to true.
The earliest and most basic human economy is familial socialism. Those who can, will hunt, gather, and cook. Those who can't (infants, small children, elders) are fed. Roles change as ability waxes (or wanes).
Larger familial and tribal groups generally us some variant of a gift economy, which is a kind of "favor" economy. I gift you a favor, now you owe me a favor in return. Wealth consists of having gifted many favors. It requires a common ethical basis (honor), a collective awareness of who owes whom (for dispute settlement), and a whole lot of trust. In its more dysfunctional forms, you can think of it as a Godfather (the movie) economy.
Barter is almost as old as the gift economy, but was generally associated with inter-tribal trade, because the trust and collective awareness isn't there. It's distinguished by a "goods-on-the-table" trade: no relationship exists away from the trading table, so you have to settle the trade then and there.
Monetary trade substitutes commonly-agreed-upon tokens for barter. The trick with money is that it must be fungible -- that is, identically interchangeable. Every ounce of 24-carat gold is equivalent to any other ounce of 24-carat gold. In a larger society with a legal structure, any coin with the emperor's visage on it could be equivalent to any other coin with the emperor's visage, regardless of age, weight, or composition. This allows you to take coin in trade, and use coin in trade for equitable value in real goods.
A credit economy eliminates the need for money to actually exist, in lieu of accurate bookkeeping. There are many ways to pay the bookkeepers: "interest" is just one such method. Flat fees work just as well, or taxes imposed by a central government. Or the banks could be run by the state directly, paid for by taxes.
All economic systems are ultimately based on human labor: even the simplest kind of living in the Garden of Eden requires that you go out and pick the fruit off the tree. You can't trade the pomegranate without picking it first.
The big question of socialism/capitalism is: who owns the labor?
In familial socialism, labor is owned collectively by the entire family, through familial obligation. A successful hunter might get a preferred cut of meat, but it's unthinkable that they would hoard the meat until it rots, while denying it to the children and elders.
In barter, labor is implicitly owned by whoever is bringing the product to market. They may bring results of their own labor, or others' labor, by some agreement outside the bounds of the trade.
In an empire, labor is owned by the Emperor, or his delegates.
In a feudal barony, labor is owned by the baron.
In a slave state, slave labor is owned by the slaveowners.
In an oligarchy labor is owned by the oligarchs.
The modern "libertarian" ideal -- to the extent that I can make any sense of it -- is that the individual owns his own labor (and only his own labor), and is entirely responsible for himself, with no help from anyone else, other than as "purchased" at a fair price through free market exchange of his labor. I wrote a rather sharply-edged short story about this you might enjoy: https://themonthebard.org/2017/05/16/a-day-in-the-life/
The irony is that Libertarians support the Republican party, which has traditionally been shackled to the oligarchy model, and is now tipping toward a more Imperial (dictatorship) model.
Modern "capitalism" and "socialism" are built around the presumption of large, modern states, using fungible money. In capitalism, labor is owned by capitalists. In "socialism," labor is (theoretically) owned by workers, workers' collectives, or the state itself acting as a representative of the workers.
In both cases, government support is required, and both systems seem to converge on oligarchy.
The core problem with capitalism is its built-in fallacy of perpetual exponential growth, which is a direct outgrowth of the core capitalist idea of "investment with proportional returns." This is a system that could not be more efficiently-designed to cut down every tree and pave every bit of arable land, and thus destroy the world.
Please don't apologize for putting in the effort to write a detailed exposition, I appreciate the "oomph."
After reading your description of the various economic "blends" used in different times and places, I get the distinct impression that different styles are useful for different purposes. A barter economy may well work better than money in a small community, where the practice would enforce close ties and intimate trust, but would be less suitable for building, say, the national electric grid.
The "Empire" economy simply looks like an old-style feudal system, where monetary policy is dictated by fiat and monetary value is based on a scarce, indestructible material (like gold), with a big dose of slavery thrown in. The split between socialism and capitalism, beyond the theoretical, seems to rest on whether the government in question merely protects property interests (pure capitalism), or arrogates all property to itself (pure socialism).
Either system works very well for cutting down all the trees and paving all the land, since both allow for the massing of huge amounts of resources and labor for particular projects ranging from the operation of government itself to the aforementioned national electric grid.
Whether any particular system wreaks havoc, in my humble opinion, lies not in the specific mechanics of the system, but in the moral and ethical development of the great majority of the people working within it. If you want to hurt your neighbor, cut down all the trees, or live in insatiable luxury while your employees starve, any of the systems you've mentioned will allow for it, unless the people within it refuse.
That's why we've been treated, for instance, to the seeming travesty of the second Trump impeachment. The Senate trial demonstrated conclusively that no amount of law can overcome a refusal to abide by and enforce those laws. That's why the Democrats were so wise to press ahead in the face of futility -- they had to shout from the rooftops that our system of government was actually just fine, but the moral character of half of the country is shockingly defective.
Sadly, this observation makes me sound, and feel, old, an old man whining about the corrupt morals of the current society. And I have no idea what we can do about it, since you can't teach morals to someone who doesn't want to learn them, someone who actually thinks it's peachy to hurt their neighbor for profit, cut all the trees, and live luxuriously while others starve.
As my grandfather used to say when he had no idea what to do about whatever confusing problem we "younguns" had inflicted on ourselves, "I wish you all the very best."
Thanks for the link to the short story, I look forward to reading it.
Exactly why governments "regulate" the economy to impose "inefficiencies" give priority to human and social necessities, to "level the play field" and to ensure that Capital pays for all the indirect costs that it would impose on society...eg pollution, public transport of workers etc.
Education is another matter and has indeed recently accepted a biase towards capital and has effectively degraded human capital to the point of practical subservience...most definitly in need of liberation from this straightjacket. If business requires special skills which are rare then they must pay for them.
Machines only replace workers after cost benefit analysis. Government weighs into this balance positively or negatively and provides the necessary training to avoid net loss of jobs and unemployment other than that generated by " friction" of job change.
I agree that jobs – good jobs – for the people who now feel disenfranchised would make a huge difference. I read that a large proportion of the Capitol rioters are behind on their taxes, in bankruptcy, or have other financial problems. But there is resistance to change in the small towns and rural areas. My daughter teachers in a public school district in a very conservative district in Iowa. Many of the parents there resist the advances suggested in education to meet a changing world because they want their children to have the same life they have had. But the economic situation just doesn't allow for these kids to find jobs in their community as they become adults. The parents are insulated and not fully aware of the larger world in their understanding and so they try to keep their children from learning about and imagining a different future for themselves. I'm not sure how to disrupt this cycle. There are ways, of course, like investing in clean energy jobs, diversifying agriculture, etc. that would create opportunities for young adults to stay in their communities but the resistance to change is strong.
The song How Ya Gonna Keep 'em Down on the Farm After They've Seen Paree? comes to mind when I hear about small rural places that want to keep their kids on the farm ( in the town...). It's a WWI song. Soldiers don't always want to go back.
The point I'm trying to make is that this is not a new problem for small towns. My parents left their small town and it still exists 3 generations later. (Some of my cousin's kids have settled there. But not all. One of kids started Autism Compassion Africa and lives in Ghana.)
Hahaha! I know the song – and I understand the sentiment. I was born on a farm in NW Iowa and I was one of the ones who escaped! But most of my cousins and their kids are still there, also. Nature vs nuture – which one holds the strongest sway seems to depend on the individual.
Then your problem becomes ...what do you do with the boys who are left in a state of irresponsibilty and seek to nonetheless maintain their dominance in the patriarchy. African women could tell you all about it!
An educated mother to sons positively affects their views of women. Not always, sadly, but I think most women would think it appropriate to educate both sons and daughters. The dynamics change.
I’m afraid it’s more complicated than just education alone. Society must elevate and protect as their own all children. Much of the vulnerability to propaganda is created by shame.
“Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who has been a staunch supporter of President Trump, vigorously defended to certify the electoral votes on the Senate floor.
Graham said he believed voting to object the results are a “uniquely bad idea to delay this election."
"Trump and I, we've had a hell of a journey. I hate it to end this way. Oh my God, I hate it. From my point of view he's been been a consequential president. But today, first thing you'll see. All I can say, is count me out, enough is enough," Graham said.
Graham defended his stance by citing a number of cases in which Trump had lost, including the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision on election results.
"We've got to end it. Vice President Pence, what they're asking you to do you won't do, because you can't," he said.
Graham ended his remarks by fully backing the election results. "It is over... [Biden] won. He's the legitimate President to the United States... Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are lawfully elected and will become the President and the Vice President of the United States on January 20," he said.”
After that statement, Lindsey Graham needed body guards to protect him from the Trump mob while in an airport:
“An angry crowd accosted Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) Friday at the airport with shouts of “Traitor!” and baseless claims of a rigged election in viral-video moments underscoring how even longtime Trump allies have become targets of a conspiracy movement promoted by the president.
“Lindsey Graham, you are a traitor to the country,” one woman yelled in a minute-long video as Graham kept walking while people followed him, shouting profanity and filming with cellphones. “You know it was rigged! … You garbage human being.”
“It’s gonna be like this forever, wherever you go for the rest of your life,” she said, repeatedly demanding an “audit” of the vote.“
Ever since January 6, there has been an at least weekly police presence on my street, near where my (R) congressman lives a few houses down from us. I don’t know whether it’s because of a credible threat, or only when he’s home, or what, but I’m sure he and his family are afraid. There was one demonstration at his home a few years ago, and I know that was deeply frightening to them. They have small children, too. I have mixed feelings. I have trouble being civil to him sometimes, and while I despise his politics and cowardice, I actually like him as a man.
I can understand your dual feelings about your rep, Kathy. The closest analogy I can come up with is being able to call on a friend when I was in need and my husband was out of town. He always came to my "rescue" whenever I called him. A REALLY NICE GUY. We never talked politics. It wasn't until I friended him on FB that I found out that he was a 45 supporter through and through. He was the organized-rallies-where- he-and-his-buddies-had-their pick-ups-parade-through-the-town-with-their-MAGA- hats-and-Trump-flags kind of supporter. He has seen my anti-45 posts, so he knows where I stand. And though it has been sometime since I have had to call him for help, I am sure that he would not hesitate to "rescue" me again if need be.
My BIL is a GOP and Trump supporter. Successful business man and one of the most kindest, generous men I’ve ever known to family and friends. But the past 4-5 years I’ve seen him in a different light. I can’t even be around him anymore.
You can't leave a father that way, not this one in any case. I suppose I could've disowned him, but that's not my way. It's what I call "the debt that can never be repaid." Sure, I can dump a sibling or other relative, but a sibling didn't bring me here and support me until I was on my own. I'm not a flake. This guy gets my love and support until he kicks it.
Sweetening the deal means a non-racist and non-sexist ancestor or perhaps you are missing the point of this horse-trade. If you're gonna give me a Trumpster (is your brother one?) and a used slavery adherent, then I'll have to up the ante by tossing in a few more racist German ancestors of my own.
I can't understand you liking him as a man. What is it about him outside of what you mentioned makes you like him?
The reason I ask is that his politics are show you what kind of man he is. Has he spoken up about the lies the con man has said about the election?
For me, it takes a lot to turn my back on someone, especially someone I have a close and long relationship with. But lie to me and I am gone. How can you trust someone who lies to you? How can you look at someone who has lied as anyone to like, especially in regards to what is going on right now?
I put a higher threshold on elected officials. If they had no problem with what the con man has done to hurt so many people, then I see nothing to like about them.
By the way, our kids are watching and listening, wonder what his kids hear behind closed doors?
This is where the divisive style of politics brings us. We shouldn't have to feel such visceral dislike toward others over political views. It's dangerous and can easily inflame into violence. I am thinking of the old advice to never discuss religion or politics in public. This is why we have the political structures we do, so hard questions can be debated and decided in appropriate forums. Another old line - I may disagree with your ideas but will defend to the death your right to speak them. That ideal is under severe strain right now, but should be our guide. It needs to be reciprocal though. It does feel like the Right uses several tactics to drown out, tune out, or just plain ignore the Left, which I feel is largely how we got here.
For me personally, I work with several people who are strong trump supporters and they're good guys, I like them. We just agree to keep political talk to a minimum. Which, to be honest, is the normal way of things. The majority of people never give two thoughts to politics, except on election day, if even that, during normal times.
In your world. Not mine. I am friends with some Republicans because they distanced themselves from Trump long ago- before the 2016 election - and consistenty challenge his policies and behavior. We talk politics quite a lot here, actually, maybe because we see the connection between it and our daily lives pretty clearly and take it seriously.
Well, yes. I guess. A year ago I moved to a new work assignment. I used to work solo doing repairs in houses in suburban areas. I transferred into a specialized construction crew that works with heavy equipment, about 30 miles further out into more rural areas. There was and is a well known Republican bent to this crew. I was and am well known to be very politically active and a fairly raging liberal/progressive. I went in looking forward to staking my turf with this rough and ready crew. I'll just say that I have. There were a few roadside shouting matches, but no one's feelings got hurt, and no one's mind seems to have changed. We learned the parameters of what is and is not worthwhile conversation. Each time we happily worked together the next day. This is a job where serious accidents causing injury or death can and do happen, and teams of 3 to 4 people have to work in concert. So it pays to get along!
Good work on the job, Syd. Work and career often depend on getting along with folks we'd otherwise avoid. Demanding or dangerous jobs especially build an esprit de corps that bonds people into a "team," who can tolerate each other.
I'm with you, Annie, in my personal life, with my wife, with a number of neighbors we like a lot, with my ex-, my sisters, my friends. But at work, I'm with Syd. Truck drivers and warehouse jocks and me don't make good politics conversationalists, although there is one big exception (out of hundreds of people I talk to). And with my next-door neighbor Charlie, lifetime firefighter whose kids are all cops, we have never talked politics. In 20 years, not once. Excellent neighbor, he considers us excellent neighbors, we would never say anything derogatory about Charlie. But it's a compartmentalized "friendship."
I respectfully disagree with you. Democracy requires active participation, understanding one another, collaborative work, civic responsibility and understanding how our communities and stated function and provide for its citizens. What else is there to talk about? Weather? Hair styles? Your new car? A vacation? Recipes?
Maybe that’s what is really really wrong in America. A loss of civic pride and talking openly and honestly about our democracy with one another.
We are such shallow people if we don’t try at least.
Fishing and weather are usually safe. I've got no argument with what you say, but at the end of the day I have a job to finish, and I can't do it alone.
Thankfully I work in a profession that does not attract the “Cult”. Just listening to a “server” vent about waiting on a table of them was very painful.
Thanks Syd, for reintroducing the immortal Voltairean maxim. Its spirit is a guiding light in sustaining any civil society. Note how uncivil US society has become. I wish we were all Voltaireans now.
Beth, I get it. Trust him? Never. I am talking about an extremely superficial neighbor relationship. I have to stop myself from shrieking at him every time I see him, and I heartily dislike living near him and having to see him at all. But he is unfailingly polite and kind, a good and thoughtful neighbor, and a good father. I am devastated that he hasn’t spoken out, precisely because I can see that there is good in him. He must know where right and truth lie, but puts party over country. I write to him at least once a month, have literally called him a coward, and he remains polite. So yes, I get it.
Yes I saw that and agree. They are afraid for their lives. The white supremist movement is strong. It’s not going away. My logic tells me that if I was one of the current lawmakers right now I’d seriously think about new employment. But I also know how completely paralyzing it is to think about leaving a secure job, a pension, medical benefits, and with a family to support. It doesn’t make what they are doing right but people do not think clearly or act responsibly when under chronic stress and anxiety.
All the Retrumplicans who will be voting to acquit are looking for cover. As Heather explains from near the end of her letter: "The senators need Trump’s lawyers to do a good enough job tomorrow to give them cover to acquit, and it seems likely those lawyers are not skilled enough to do so. Tonight, Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) visited Trump’s defense team. Cruz said they were “sharing our thoughts” about their legal strategy: it is of note that Cruz was the Solicitor General of Texas before being elected to the Senate, and Lee was an assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Utah. Also a lawyer, Graham is the former chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee."
These unprincipled, frightening creatures have no business voting AT ALL.
In what reality is it proper or ethical for sworn members of the jury to be colluding with counsel for the defense? Oh wait, we’re talking Trump’s reality, so (like his phone calls) it must be perfect.
A fair and impartial juror does not meet with the Defense team to discuss strategy. A fair and impartial juror does not absent themselves from the proceeding, either physically or mentally. They are oath breakers, every one of them.
I thought they were required to be present for the entire testimony. Are they still allowed to vote if they’ve been absent for the presentation? Do any rules or laws matter anymore? The Republicans are the ones behaving like anarchists.
IF there are fewer jurors at the final vote, then the number of senators needed for 2/3s vote is far fewer, as previously described by Dr Richardson. However, I would not bet on anything less than a full deck for the final vote. Then again, most of one-half of the deck is certainly not a full-deck to begin with - if you can follow my thinking.
I was on facebook bopping around and pressed link to a video of Hitlers maid. In her nineties she told of how the nazi army came to her small poor village for the first time. They brought goulash. She said ‘the people ate the goulash and they thought, things will be better for them with the army, with the Nazi’s.’ So, we talk about legal issues, moral values and good common sense when it comes to Republicans making a decision to impeach this former president but those things are not relevant. It is about sustenance and fear. They ate the goulash and received benefit from it. Their constituents are in the grip of a insane delusion and watching the scenes of the insurrection shows them the kind of rage they would experience if they vote the wrong way. An Anonymous vote is the only thing that will work. It’s all about the fear .... and the goulash.
Except that Trump and the Republicans have never done anything to materially improve the lives of their constituents in four years. McConnell's and Rand Paul's voters are just as poor as they were four years ago. The only thing that Trump gave them was -- for lack of a better phrase -- a renewed sense of white supremacy and white privilege.
I've brought up Heather McGhee’s book , “The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone and How We Can Prosper Together,” before. People vote against their own self-interest often…
It will be released February 16, 2021, so I haven’t read it yet. I have high hopes...
“Fear, anxiety, isolation. And it's made me rethink many of the economic problems I've been focusing on my entire career. I wondered, is it possible that our society's racism has likewise been backfiring on the very same people set up to benefit from privilege?”
“Racism leads to bad policymaking. It's making our economy worse. And not just in ways that disadvantage people of color. It turns out it's not a zero sum. Racism is bad for white people, too.”
You can also catch her podcast with Bill Moyers here.
Jan, too right! And thanks for the book title: I am pre-ordering today!! The (Anti)Republican Party has been trying for DECADES to sell the false narrative that the world we live in is run by a Zero-Sum Game: that one person getting ahead means another falls behind. They play into the fears of working-class whites that if BIPOC folks have the same opportunities to be employed, educated, and housed as white people do, then white people will lose. This patently false--and nefarious--alternative to REALITY is what drives the party and what Drumpf and his minions played into so effectively. When white people are scared they get very nasty, in ways that we have seen over and over again--and not just recently. This is a thousand-year problem. Drumpf's supporters might claim they aren't racists and misogynists but scrape below the surface and their anxieties become evident.
The Gormless Obstructionist Party members who have embraced this hells cape are themselves well educated (usually--I can't guarantee this in the MO legislature, for instance!) and wealthy . . . and white. They know exactly what they are doing. The utter decadence of their worldview, the absolute vacuum where a moral center should be is what drives them. They are soulless cynics, but clever enough to appeal to the worst instincts of just enough of their constituents to be able to win elections.
I consider our most precious natural resource and abundant form of renewable energy to be people themselves. If you think about it we are dynamos, biological machines that can turn thoughts and ideas into physical objects to improve our well being. Imagine if we harnessed all of that available energy, without negating more than half by repressing contributions from women and people of color. It seems to me we have wasted so much opportunity through history by ignoring the ability of all people to work positively toward our common good.
Oh tRump did provide his constituents with goulash and piles of it. We just don’t understand that his true constituents are the Mercers and the Murdoch’s. His mob is just fed drivel that appeals to their basic instincts: abortion, guns, civil liberties for whites only, and especially patriotism. Most of the people in tRump’s scary mob consider themselves to be patriots.
My evangelical, long-time hairdresser, someone I love, thinks her life was better bc her taxes went down. Although I know she has challenges financially, as a female small business owner, she still supports trump and the party. She seems convinced the Dems will lead us all to perdition.
In December 2019, my stylist asked my thoughts about what was going on in Washington. I gave a measured but honest response because, where I live, one assumes everybody is a Republican. The reply, "Boy, you have really drunk the Kool-Aid!" I've never been back!
My old hairdresser told me, before she moved out of state, that she had a client who asked her who she was voting her. My hairdresser said “Biden”. While she was doing the client’s hair, the client abruptly told her she would not be coming back to her. No real loss there, I told her and she agreed.
I changed my hairdresser because she was reluctant to wear a mask and said that she 'did'nt trust Fauci'. Why give my money to someone like that? You are more courageous, Marcy, to continue a dialogue with a trumper.
President Biden is working very fast to get vaccines into the arms of all Americans. He’s also working as fast as he can to get more money into the hands of struggling Americans. Let us hope this his “goulash” will be more satisfying than “Mexico will pay for it!” or “it’ll be a big, beautiful health care package”—promised-but-never-delivered by Tя☭mp.
Robin, you make an excellent point: if they could all vote anonymously, the result might well be quite different. The Republican senators do not fear the judgment of history, but the judgment of their constituents when they are next up for re-election.
It iappears that many Republican senators are more concerned with how a handful of Trumpistas will look at them in the next election than how history will look at them forever. How they can look at themselves, after all that has happened, indicates to me that there is something most of us consider essential missing in these people; a sense of personal honor and integrity.
They have put themselves beyond legal or moral argument or debate. Worse, they seem proud of the fact.
This impeachment will reverberate far past the final vote. That vote will be a defining moment for the United States, the future of democracy, and most particularly for the individual senators. donald trump has put his entire will and force of being into subverting our political system to gather all power unto himself. The evidence is overwhelmingly clear and damning that the Commander in Chief violated his oath of office. There can be no plausible defense and seems unlikely one will even be presented. Still, most prognosticators express confidence the disgraced former president will be acquitted, since none have seen a clear path for the 17 Republicans needed to convict. Those voting to acquit, I can almost hear it now, will doubtless say it is a political court, not judicial, so the evidence does not compel them.
This cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged. Those Senators who vote for trump's innocence must be made to answer in that other court, the court of public opinion. Perhaps they feel confident they can withstand the charges there, with the support of trump's rabid base. This should not be so. The court of public opinion is where the real final argument needs to be made, strenuously and consistently, that trump is a traitor, as far from a savior as can be imagined. He used tactics not seen seen Adolph Hitler in an attempt to throttle and destroy our democracy, one seen as a beacon of freedom and human rights the world over.
It's multiply unfortunate that Hitler is such an extreme example of evil that comparisons are immediately labelled hyperbole and discounted. I think in the case of donald trump it is wholly appropriate, in the face of the danger he presents to our nation. He makes me seethe, so maybe I am carried away. But until there is a widely understood acknowledgement and consensus of what, exactly, Trumpism represents, where people can then knowingly choose their side, I will not rest easily.
It is certainly valid and appropriate to use the word Fascist. Those senators, and now any Trump supporter, are clearly acting within the definition of Fascism.
What makes me seethe is the statement that these seditious jurors will not convict this psychopath! The court of public opinion that you mention will not be kind, rightfully so, but what I fear is that there will be violent retaliation against these jurors. Have you or anyone else thought about that?
18 Shameless Senators failed to do their job. Imagine you, as a citizen, are called to jury duty. You are selected. But one day of the trial, you decide you have something better to do. You decide not to attend. Would this be allowed? Absolutely not. You could be cited, get a bench warrant and / or be sent to jail. America's Hall of Shame is overflowing with Republican Opportunists. It sickens me.
This is not a legal trail. It is a constitutional, political process. There are no rules for the jury or for the presentation of evidence. The constitution provides no specific rules. It is vague, at best. The "rules" are determined by the two parties and they proceed from there.
Yet, if you are supposed to listen to evidence, then you listen to evidence and not scroll on your advice as Josh Hawley has done. A juror is still a juror. I don't know the exact rule, yet, this is a serious trial -- and yes, I state trial.
I agree. At least sit and show some respect to your fellow colleagues to present what will become horrific historical lessons to the entire world on what could very well be the beginning of the end of American democracy. The lack of respect is disgusting to me. I can’t even count how many presentations I’ve had to sit through with colleagues that I didn’t want to listen to or thought contrary toward. But I sad with respect. Gave eye contact and interested facial expressions.
Our House managers were stupendous. They prepared their rebuttal at the end, before the defense lawyers had even spoken. In the meantime, three seditious guys go to Schoen and Castor to “offer” their expert opinions as to how to proceed. Very fishy! 18 jurors were absent which according to Laurence Tribe means that they should not be allowed a vote. I believe he is an adviser to the Democrats on constitutional law so perhaps Schumer will find the courage he needs to proclaim this. Definitely, Schumer must pull a “McConnell”!
IF (and that is a huge if) Sen. Schumer is able to remove those 18 absent Senators/jurors from the trial, that would leave 82 Senators on the jury. Two-thirds of 82 is 55. And IF such a move by Schumer doesn’t alienate more that four of the remaining 38 Republican Senators, it is possible the convict.
And if conviction was obtained on that basis the legitimacy would be attacked immediately. Technical correctness isn't enough, there has to be an unarguable resolution.
For me, one of the most compelling sequences of today's impeachment hearings before the U.S. Senate was that 10-15 invaluable minutes the Jamie Raskin Congressional team devoted to the experience of the insurrectionists, in their own eyes and ears -- before, during, and following -- the breach of the Capitol.
The presentation suggested that many or most of the participants joined the storming of the Capitol because, and perhaps only because they felt that "their Savior" -- the then-President Trump -- had personally invited them to participate in this storming of the Capitol.
For me, this was significant for a couple of reasons.
First, it sheds light on the vulnerability of a disenfranchised portion of the citizenry that are exposed to an artfully composed and broadcasted "BIG LIE.," composed by a master authoritarian
Second, it indicates how an artful fascist leader in the U.S. can cleverly and ruthlessly manipulate much of the polity -- in a way that was familiar to Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, and many others.
In conclusion, I found it very insightful and moving that Congressperson Jamie Raskin pointed out, in his closing, that "democracies are extremely rare in human history." As Raskin said, most polities have been structured as aristocracies, dictatorships, or monarchies. In historical reality, it is probably highly debatable as to whether the U.S. has ever been "a democracy!" Raskin's point, however, is, for me, invaluable!
Mark, I seconded your comment and also reflected on it. America has never been a 'perfect' democracy, nor will it be. There can, however, be too much emphasis our failures (domestic and foreign) as well as our continuing inequality. We must work assiduously to correct the country's weaknesses and make structural changes in a system advantaging the wealthy as it thwarts the advancement of minorities, the working-class and rural communities. Withal, I think that we are a democracy with serious flaws. Trump, McConnell, the Koch Brothers, the Republican Party et al. and, of course, many before them have been powerful obstacles to democracy. We are beating those forces back. A majority of the American people know what we have suffered as a result of their greed, self-interest and racism. Democracy will always be a challenge to maintain and improve. The country is on edge and hurting. We know what is at stake and working in many ways to become a more democratic society.
If there we only some way to definitively remove the one shred of cover most of the Republican Senators seem to be hiding behind - that the Conviction of a President who has already left office is unconstitutional. They don't care about the vote that held it valid and they will persist in this. It is too bad, in this instance, that the Supreme Court could not issue a Declarative Judgement on the issue. Their vote to acquit needs to be shown for the fraud it is.
I disagree, the next act of violence will only make Raskin and the whole Democratic team's predictions proven to be true. The "I told you so" will echo around the world. Trump can't stop, his followers aren't finished and all the Republicans who voted to acquit on fabricated reasons with no real legal teeth will not be able to flip flop their way out of disgrace.
Not if we pursue the tyrant in court. And let us be clear the donald is a tyrant. He is ripe for action in court under the RICO act. And we must grind this hubristic traitor to our Democracy out of our collective consciousness! Or we will end up worse off than we were on the Sixth of January.
Yes, surely the criminals will still be held criminally accountable? And certainly the complicit legislators are not blind to their own involvement in the crimes committed? Are they so arrogant as to think that Teflon Don has insulated them from accountability?
I also worry about the violence if found guilty. Isn’t the mob-base going to just make more nooses for those who find their cult leader guilty? Watching and hearing “Hand Mike Pence” repeatedly chanted...is this echoing in the senators’ ears? Voting to find guilty is likely voting against one's own safety. Back to Catch-22...voting to acquit further empowers Trumpism, furthering the national threat.
That is a risk, but a necessary one. The signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their "lives, fortunes and sacred honor" to the goal of the document that led to the Constitution and the establishment of this country and did so in full awareness that they were challenging the foremost military power of the time. It would be at best a slap in the face to all of them if Senators, acting out of fear, failed to vote based on the evidence presented. Understandable perhaps but pusillanimous nonetheless.
Don’t forget that during the French Revolution the guillotine was used on the revolutionaries as well as the aristocracy. The cowards that represent 75 million people may very well reap what they sow. There is a balance to the universe, no matter what happens next week, we can trust in that.
You know when a revolution starts but are never certain whenor where and how it will end....and who will pay the price...for there is always a price to pay for someone.
"The firebrand revolutionary freedom fighter is the first to destroy the rights and even the lives of the next generation of rebels." ....John Quincy Adams
But be warned!
"I consider myself neither legally nor morally bound to obey laws made by a body in which I have no representation. Do not deceive yourselves into believing that penalties will deter men from the course they believe is right." ...Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (1927)
And
"For a revolutionary, failure is a springboard. As a source of theory it is richer than victory: it accumulates experience and knowledge." Clarence Darrow (1932)
Sorry, Jennifer, but waiting to confront this cancer only makes our chances of beating it less. If we avoid confrontation, and by that I mean formal, legal confrontation, out of fear that Trumpians will become (more) violent, our institutions for dealing with such fascism will become weaker and weaker; either we use our institutions, or we will lose them. The morals and behavior being debated and displayed by this trial will never be clearer than they are now.
Let them make nooses the FBI must start rooting out the true terrorists in our society. They will expose themselves with their own perfidies. It is imperative to make examples out of these seditionists.
They expect our young soldiers to sacrifice life for country - why shouldn't they? Because they put their interests first, their cultish leader 2nd, Republican Party 3rd, Country 4th (or maybe further down the list- behind religion, favorite restaurant, right not to wear a mask etc.)
In my view there is no Republican Party as I have known it. It is now the Trump Party, that is, a fascistic party which is anti democratic and has no intention of defending the Constitution. It is anti immigrant, anti black, anti gay, white supremacist, and a party which is more like the nationalistic party of Putin in Russia. I have some hope that the old Republicans who still believe in democracy and free and fair elections and telling the truth, a least as much as politicians in the past have told the truth will prevail. Those who do support the Constitution and the norms of our democracy are few and far between now. They are Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, Adam Kinzinger, and a handful of others, namely those who voted to impeach and then to come those who will vote to convict Donald Trump. I most fear those Trump party officials at the state level who will be in charge of elections. I fear that this new group will stop at nothing to prevent an accurate vote count and will willingly overturn the results of elections or falsify election results.
Even moreso than when I posted it yesterday, this quote is the perfect explanation of the Caucus of Cowards:
“It was miraculous. It was almost no trick at all, he saw, to turn vice into virtue and slander into truth, impotence into abstinence, arrogance into humility, plunder into philanthropy, thievery into honor, blasphemy into wisdom, brutality into patriotism, and sadism into justice. Anybody could do it; it required no brains at all. It merely required no character.” -- Joseph Heller "Catch 22"
This would be a great quote for the “library” of the former prez.
That is if, and that’s a big if, the insipid clown has a library. Just think for a moment what university would want to be the host for one. The sociopathic liar will have no place in any institution dedicated to the discovery of truth. Truth was the one thing that had no place, and I mean zero, in his administration.
I imagine some “Christian” college would be up for it.
Come to think of it, a for profit "college" like Corinthian, Phoenix, or even the one he named after himself, something in some high rise office building with sky high rents and that's a total scam on the poor souls they entrap, might be just the place for his "university-library".
maybe one associated with a "prosperity" minister?
I hope that dozens of monuments to Trumpsky are put up. It will be so much fun to destroy them.
It’s why I put quotes around the word ‘library.’
That quote should arch over the entrance to his edifice. Just as “arbeit macht frei” arched over Auschwitz.
If he had a library, it would be filled with Dr. Seuss books and "colour between the lines" books.
Nah: Dr. Seuss is too lefty for him.
Zowie friends. I had no idea I would unleash such a can of worms. Kathleen I wasn’t aware of Theodore Geisel’s work in the WW2 department of propaganda. But I really do think that, like thinking people in situations where they can change their minds about stuff, he did. My family experienced WW2 in ways that could have soured them on all kinds of folks, and they struggled with that. My mother hated Germans and Germany and had a hard time when we all visited. As a Jew she couldn’t see the Germany of 1970 as a different place. She really freaked out when I dated a German emigrant! My father, who fought in the Pacific Theater and was stationed in Japan for a year after the war never questioned Truman’s decision to drop A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For him that is why the war ended. But my parents also headed the civil rights initiatives in the town where I grew up and were totally against the idea of internment camps—which happened to Germans in WW1 in the US not just the Japanese Americans in WW2. We all struggle with the ways in which we and our families experience the legacies of history. The point is people evolve and grow. And that has to count for something, especially in our current era when resistance to growth and evolution is so high.
Please, don't feel regretful for sharing your observations. In reality, the more discussion you invite or provoke, the better.
Dr. Seuss was it racist. I recently looked this up after reading the book “the things she touched” about artist Ruth Asawa. His anti-Japanese cartoons in the 40s were despicable and disgusting
But another time, another set of values.....and it was after Pearl Harbour perhaps!
Yes after Pearl Harbor but it’s that kind of mob gang mentality that causes people to launch into unfettered racism. Not OK under any values or situation
Americans hated Japs during the 1940s? Maybe it was because THERE WAS A WAR GOING ON.
My uncle, whom I never met was a U.S. Marine who was killed in the Pacific War. His death notice in the St. Louis paper said that "Pvt Lynn had 26 Japs to his credit." I suppose he was racist like Dr. Seuss.
Rob, a couple of points to keep in mind:
The internees were Japanese Americans, the majority US citizens. Not one was a "Jap." That term has long been acknowledged as derogatory and even racist. Justifying its use as a response to wartime circumstances is an indirect admission that it was a racist response to Pearl Harbor and Japan's aggression. It use by the StL paper was racist, but it says nothing about your uncle's views.
There is a large literature on the racial aspects of the pacific War. None of the warring nations should get a pass.
J Dower, War without Mercy (best on the subject)
F Furedi, The Silent War
G Horne, Race War!
A Keith, Three Came Home
E Sledge, With the Old Breed
S Terkel, The "Good War"
The fact that you’re taking it personally has no bearing on whether or not systemic racism is wrong. My own father and mother were involved in life-threatening activities during World War II. My mother ammunitions worker with live ammunition and my father in the Army Air Force who was sunk on a trip ship. Many of his friends were killed also. It does not matter in terms of systemic racism. Wrong is wrong and my father would be the first to say that. I said nothing about your relative it is tragedy and war is horrifying. Systemic racism towards innocent people like the Uighurs now in China is always wrong no matter what the situation
Kathleen Brucejust now
I also respectfully take issue with your use of the term “Japs.”. If you think the United States is blame free in terms of war there are many documents that would enlighten on this point. We mourn all who have been unjustly blamed or killed.
Or, perhaps, just a product of wartime.
Wow, now that you say that I recall that coming up a few years ago... all my heroes have feet of clay .... : (
Yeah, Walt Disney was a letdown for me. But since my dad grew up during that era, albeit in Germany, I have the ability to just accept the fuller picture. Heroes aren't perfect. They are a product of their times. Who are we to judge from the vantage point of the 21st Century. In fact, we can't judge from this perspective. For their time, a certain person might have been way ahead of their time, a hero in their own time, and still appear, out of context in 2021, as lacking and lagging.
Surely not all, Cyn?
Unfortunately yes. My grandchildren love his books and I can barely stand to look at them
Dr. Seuss was NOT a racist. Kindly go stick your head up further.
How do you know? And is that judged by today's standards, or yesterday's?
I'm not surprised by anti-Japanese cartoons in that point of history. And I expect we might see them during that same set of circumstances today.
https://www.dartmouth.edu/~hist32/History/S31%20-%20The%20Dark%20Side%20of%20Dr.%20Seuss.htm
Perhaps you could go move to San Francisco, join the schoolboard with the rest of the lefty moron historical illiterates, and rename a school.
First time I have ever had a person be this rude in this forum. It’s too bad..
perhaps you could find a place to discuss things where they welcome your defensive posture and insults?
Must you be so cranky?
Lofty, I think, might be the proper adjective.
I was just about to say that!
Actually, I was going to say that he couldn’t read then, as now!
He reads the subtitles on foreign porn.
The book of Hitler’s speeches he reportedly kept at his bedside would have to be encased in a memorial front and center. Has anyone ever seen reported that he has read anything other?
He reads?
I’m guessing fake Time magazine, Golf Digest and porn.
Not read. Look at the pictures. His own picture on the cover. Then comes the porn part, masturbation.
probably this book. This is A EDUCATED GUESS, mind you, SPECULATION based on the Vanity Fair article which said a 1941 study of Hitler's speeches in English:
Baynes, N. (1942). The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922 – August 1939 V1. London, Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-598-75893-3
Well yes because Dr. Seuss was a raging racist. See his 1940s cartoons of Japanese internment people
The Donald Trump section of the Library, although perhaps not as large as you would expect, can easily accommodate sub-sections including one entitled "Donald's Personal Reading Material."
Yes. The Tя☭mp Presidential Library must have TC's Joseph Heller quote chiseled into the stone facade on the front portico. The Library itself will be necessary as a repository for the incredible, gargantuan, immense volume of criminal documentation that will need to be amassed to chronicle this Administration. The sections of the library will have designated areas for each Cabinet member and Republican politician and criminal associate, including an enormously large section for Putin. Most of the presidential records will be transferred over from the files of the FBI and the Justice Dept. including contributing agencies and departments like SDNY and Fulton County D.A., Georgia. In fact, those departments will use the Presidential Library as their primary research and investigation source of information. Clearly it would be convenient to situate the library in the DC metro area as a convenience to those police agencies, since the vast majority of the library's users will be members of the law enforcement community. Why not place the Library close to the people who use it the most.
Lol! Perfect.
Perhaps the best and most terrible quote of the year
The real prerequisite for being a Republican. "no character."
Racist. Sexist. Anti-gay, because it conflicts with the Christian Hallmark channel story of one man one woman with children. Anti-Semitic is optional, since Jesus was a Jew, but you don't lose points for being anti-Semitic. Oh, and money. You're only a true Republican if you're rich or you pretend to be. No one else matters. Don't fault me here, I have my dad as living proof that being rich with money is everything and not having money makes you 2nd class.
Fabulous! I must track down this passage. Is it from CATCH 22?
Yes
And in the same vein, Senator Graham is STILL chair of Judiciary because they haven’t updated the rules. Amazing.
No, he's been replaced as of last week when they did the reorganization.
You are so right. I’m giving up my subscription to the NY Post.
Oh no! How will you housebreak your next puppy??
Great and appropriate quote
Wow.
I must return, for a third time this week, to a question that's increasingly hard to answer: Who do Congresspeople actually represent?
"Senators were apparently shocked to see how close they came to falling into the hands of the rioters..."
Trump's presidency suggests Congressional elections are increasingly "bait and switch" transactions, where prospective constituents are sold on one vision only to be replaced by a very different approach once in office. How else can one explain the disconnect from reality that's allowed GOP senators to deny intent after seeing the video of January 6, many admitting it was soul shaking, yet concluding it was insufficient to make a case for conviction?
Despite the 74,000,000 who voted for Trump I find it difficult to believe many, let alone all, would have contemplated intentionally murderous insurrection as the appropriate path to political change in this country.
Many Congresspeople have argued a false equivalence between January 6 and the 2020 riots, in particular, but that position is specious. True, we've had protests that have turned violent - the 1965 Watts riots, resulting in 34 deaths; the 1967 Detroit riots, resulting in 16 deaths and 500 injured; the 1968 Chicago riots, resulting in 11 deaths and hundreds hurt; the Vietnam War protests, in which very few died over about six years; the Ferguson riots of 2014-2015, in which only death was that of the man whose killing sparked the protests: and most recently the 2020 protests following the police killing of George Floyd, in which at least 25 people died. However, it's important to remember that in 2020, as in all these cases, deaths and injuries arose from confrontation between protesters and law enforcement or National Guard. They were calls for change, not attempts to overthrow the government.
I can only conclude the unwillingness to justify Trump's conviction is a function of fear. Fear of losing their jobs, fear of constituents anger, fear of Trump's retribution, and perhaps most troubling, fear of the exposure of their own complicity that led to January 6, 2021. Could 50% of the Senate and nearly 75% of the House GOP truly believe Trump was the best leader for America? Why do so many Republicans noisily oppose abortion rights despite three quarters of Americans support it, although some with restrictions? Are they really representing their districts and states?
No, their fear is grounded in political expedience, well described by HCR this morning: "...Senators who were planning to let Trump off the hook might be worrying they will have to answer to constituents furious that they didn’t do their jobs..." AND "It’s unlikely that any of the senators want to acquit Trump because they want him to stay in the political scene.... they want his voters to elect them, not to reelect him or elect his chosen successor..."
They can't have their cake and eat it too. From today's letter, the "House impeachment managers have given Republican senators multiple ways to justify a vote for conviction to their constituents.... Senators could vote to convict out of a determination to protect law enforcement officers, something their constituents say is important to them."
Unfortunately, despite some feigned outrage in the days following the attack, most Republicans have walked back their earlier contention that Trump was responsible for fomenting insurrection. They still have no proof of election fraud. They're willing to overlook Trump's Twitter assaults and his undermining the statements and actions of even some of his most staunch supporters in Congress and elsewhere. They refute what their eyes and ears witnessed as rioters hammered on doors calling for the deaths - DEATHS - of Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi. The threats were equitable across party lines. Democrats pointed to prominent Republicans, including former Trump chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and Wisconsin Rep. Mike Gallagher, posting terrified tweets and making panicked on-air calls to Fox News in which they begged Trump to “call off” his mob on Jan. 6. Now Gallagher says impeaching Trump is “unconstitutional” and “accomplishes nothing.”
Beyond my dismay, nay, deep anger, at the GOP's persistent denials of the threats the US faced before and up to January 6, some Republicans have shown disrespect and contempt for the proceedings and their Congressional colleagues. On Wednesday, Senators Rubio, Hawley, Scott, and Paul were reading or doodling. Josh Hawley "kicked his feet up to watch Democrats’ opening statement from the Senate gallery instead of joining the rest of his colleagues on the floor." "Rick Scott of Florida, who called Wednesday’s wrenching videos a “complete waste of time.” On Thursday "at least 18 Republican senators were absent from their desks as the managers were making their case."
Do they really think we can forgive and forget the fact that they didn't stand up for their colleagues and their country? Do they believe their contention that the trial somehow violates president Biden's calls for unity and is thus too divisive? Do all of these lawyers think the the framers contemplated offering a free pass to treasonous behavior just because it occurred late in a president's term and because they put off a trial until Trump was out of office just days before? And do they think that Impeachment and a trial specifically enumerated by the Constitution, where they have the authority to define the terms of those actions, is truly unconstitutional?
I have to call BS on that. Their fears have totally sublimated their responsibilities to adhere to their oaths of office. That alone should render them unfit to continue to serve as representatives of the people. They represent no one but themselves and their donors who, with any luck, will withdraw supportb for those who failed to fight for our democratic principles and processes.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-impeachment-trial-video-means-gop-can-t-pretend-former-ncna1257559
I have been having this very argument in my little law enforcement community here in Oregon. I have been told that there is a direct parallel between the violence of this summer's protests and the violence at the Capitol, and that the Democrats are "hypocritical" for calling out this violence and not this summer's violence. I have also been told that our national divide was created by President Obama in 2008; there was no racism before that. Another has said that a President cannot be arrested for criminal conduct, so this Impeachment Trial is a sham. These. Are. Cops. Some active, some retired. I did have two of about 10 of them acknowledge my stance, and allow how there might be some conversation there. The rest? I'd quote Jim Wright, but that profanity doesn't fly here.
I just want to say in response to the conservative comments on "this summer's violence." 93% of the summer marches were entirely peaceful. The media has only covered the rare fires and looting. NOTHING on the scale of the savagery at our Capitol is comparable to anything this summer. And yes, Democrats support peaceful protest. Do your "cops" condone the beating of the Capitol Police? If there is a position that is hypocritical it would be this one. Hang in there!
My little world has friends who are with Portland Police Bureau and National Guardsmen who were called to assist; their first hand accounts are pretty terrible on their face. There is no reflection on why there was a violent response to their own police violence, only that cops were injured doing their job.
Hi Ally, if you please, ask your colleagues: why did so many police tried to overthrow the US government on Jan 6? Also tell them that "I don't know" or "a few bad apples" are not acceptable.
"2008; there was no racism before that."
Oh, that's priceless and reflective of massive ignorance of our culture and history.
I don't know many law enforcement officers, local, state, or federal. Maybe anyone who's a potential danger to the well being or life of a police officer is an enemy, even if the risk from any given individual is low.
However, my experience with others who repeat well worn but poorly substantiatiated tropes about economics and race and equality is that they frequently talk themselves into these positions even if they have no direct interactions with the subjects of their ire or disdain. It's not necessarily correct to call the stupid, but it sure does nothing to help you refrain from doing so.
And I do wish you'd quote Jim Wright!
Yeah, this is a common theme in law enforcement, and often accompanied by the line "I don't see color, I see crime". SMH. And I misspoke, it is not a profanity but a vulgarity, so perhaps "no more self-awareness than a dog licking its own asshole" is not profane.
Ally, that is funny. Those Texans say the darnedest things!!
No one minds if we write "apse-hole."
The House managers more than once made the point that an impeachment trial is NOT a criminal trial. No one is arrested, no one goes to jail, etc. Too many people, including Republican senators, don't seem to get that, which is frustrating.
Oh they get it, alright. They simply lack the honesty and integrity to say and do the right thing.
This article from the 2020 Trump Impeachment is helpful in distinguishing the four primary differences. The one that assures me that this is a political trial, not a criminal trial in in court of law, is that the "jurors" are all biased from the start. Suggesting otherwise is pretty silly. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/22/4-big-differences-between-senate-impeachment-trial-criminal-trial/
Their oath to serve as impartial jurors should negate partisan party affiliations. Apparently a Repuglycan's oath means nothing.
Hypothetically, consider a deal. Convict him and Biden agrees to pardon him for any offenses since the election. Acquit him and DOJ will pursue further investigations with the goal to prosecute and convict. It's not pretty, but it could be a way for Biden to take a road similar to that taken by Jerry Ford after Nixon's resignation. Trump's supporters would not have to endure the threat of a real trial and possible prison sentence.
But can't the DOJ pursue further investigation and prosecution anyway? Consider that Jerry Ford's pardon of Nixon enabled a lot of our current predicament.
Yes, definitely. I expect announcement of investigations within three months of Merrick Garland's confirmation. DOJ will gather evidence slowly but inexorably, then lower the boom.
Nobody in RWNJ world seems to be able to discern that difference.
Of course they blamed Obama for the divide - he's Black, silly. And you do understand that there "was no racism prior to 2008," don't you? The existence of the KKK and white supremacist militia groups were purely leftist, socialist fantasy and propaganda, right? You deserve a medal for not harming them, Ally.
Such a sad situation! Such skewed perspectives from the men and women who are meant to protect the peace!
They have been shoveling the 💩💩💩💩 for so long they are buried in it and have become it. There is no way out from under the 💩 for them. Eventually they will surely smother. I appreciate Biden’s focus on building better. I’m hoping our ship of justice, once righting it’s course will mete out appropriate consequences. Until then I want to help build the good.
100% > "Until then I want to help build the good."
PS, keep the piles coming; a few more should do the trick!
I’m afraid not. It’s impossible to properly represent the amount of crap with a few drawings! There is much satisfaction to be had in how suffocating the depths of it will be, though.
Christy, your eloquence surpasses mere words.
Haha! It took me a minute! Or two! Good one!
Until more Americans are educated, the evil openly destroying our democracy will grow.
I watched Plaskett’s brilliant presentation with 10 middle school students yesterday on Zoom. They went from disinterested and “It’s boring” before watching, to engaged-full-of-questions-and-comments citizens. One teacher, 10 students...drop in the bucket. If only we could get the country to take education and educators seriously. I garner HIGH repe t when I’m in other countries when I say I’m a teacher. Here I’m met with “those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach.”
Yes, l thought the house managers presentations were what students need to know as citizens of our country.
Good for you! Way to engage kids!! 💙
That’s wonderful that you did this with your students. And it’s refreshing that your students became interested and engaged. I hope there is a lot more of that.
Don't worry, they say exactly the same here...only they add in a line...but not about teachers. I first heard it about lawyers:
Those than are good practice in the courts
Those who have difficulty pleading a cause train the others
Those that can't do either manage the associations or go into politics
Thank you for building citizenship in your students!!
Wow! The impact you have! Yes, we must definately value (and pay) our teachers more. Many more drops in the bucket and we will have a full democracy!
Jennifer KG, that was great teaching! How about an “add-on” for everyone who watched the proceedings: I heard my Senator (M. Warner, fine Dem. from VA), and 2 journalists (one from TX and one from WI), say that they thought few people watched. I am encouraging everyone who watched let their Senators know. We need to let them -and the rest of Congress and the Country -
Hey, Sara: Fellow constituent of Senator M. Warner here! I have responded to a number of his emails seeking my opinion. I also have replied to a few of his Tweets, though I am not on Twitter much (and don't really understand how it works). But would you agree that a twitter post to him would suffice to let him know I have been watching?
Lynell, l am not a Tweeter, but it’s worth a go! I just went to his website and used a form to submit my comment. There is no category that really fits the topic, but I chose national security and start of my note with the statement that I wasn’t sure of national security was quite the place, but I chose it anyway.
I have called his office upon occasion, but I never very confident with that method of communication.
Thank you, Sara. I will go your route.
Hi Lynell! Any kind of communication to Congresspeople is recorded by her/his staff. They are skilled in using all kinds of media even if their boss is a techno-peasant (and some are).
TPJ, I am trying not to be just an electronic, nameless hashmark... 😏
You are succeeding, Sara. Thanks for your helpful comments.
TY, TPJ. I went on his website and used Twitter. Actually, Warner is very techno-savvy.
My relatives in Fairfax County think highly of Warner. A big improvement over George "Macaca" Allen!
- know that lots of us care enough to watch.
Here's a good riposte: "Teaching IS doing!!!"
Go Jennifer! Those are lucky students to share your classroom.
There is an awkward tendency to think that education would make people understand the facts as we present them and "be more like us". Those voting Trump currently will probably not follow that path but education would allow them a better access to their inner selves, better understand the world around them from their own perspective and perhaps enable them to be a little more tolerant about those who see things differently. However the key advantage of education would hopefully be to enable them to function better in the world they are living in and to feel a little less left behind. It would enable them to better define what they want out of life as opposed to what they don't want, and to find the "honest" work that they always have craved without necessarily destroying or leaving the community that they treasure. It is also in this latter matter...Jobs...that the solution can be found.
Well said! The "core curriculum," if it's still called that, is an underappreciated social institution, where the liberal arts are supported via required subjects that all majors must take. Why should a biology major have to take English Lit, or a business major have to take World History?
Because that's where the term "liberal arts" come from - history, science, literature, philosophy - those are the arts of liberty.
Education is not just about getting a job but also about understanding how the world works and your place in it.
Thank you Dan for "the arts of liberty."
Yes, that caught my eye too: a beautiful phrase that gives meaning beyond just being someone's employee- or employer.
100%
Wow! Dan, I feel like I’ve learned something wonderful. The arts of liberty... I’ll reflect on and share that phrase. The commentary in this LFAA community is fully a liberal arts education. I am grateful to every participant. And immensely grateful to Heather.
The very idea of "jobs" is problematic in the US.
Employees are by definition red ink on the liability side of a company's ledger. An efficient company eliminates as many liabilities as possible, and replaces employees with machines (capital assets) or cheaper employees whenever possible. Companies benefit from general unemployment, which allows them to keep wages low: there's always someone desperate to take your job for your pay or a little less, especially since survival in the modern world requires money, which can only be obtained through a job (or some form of theft, which is a big, though invisible part of the economic structure).
There are not enough jobs, and there will never be enough jobs under any efficient form of capitalism. The structure itself creates and maintains a pool of jobless, homeless, starving people.
Education does not create jobs. It only ranks job applicants for triage. In the process, its cost to students has become a profit-center for "good schools," and this has become a form of lifetime indentured servitude for anyone who tries to gain a good educational ranking and then fails to capture one of the best-paying jobs.
I agree, Joseph. This is built in to the kind of capitalism we have, and is probably inherent to capitalism in general (which is why the original Adam Smith emphasized the need for strong regulation). and then there are the recessions, irrational economic booms, and the artificial market that is used as a highly inaccurate and misleading "measure" for the economy as a whole. There is something else to be noted: The stress on individual "success" that our culture emphasizes, and the consequences as people take on projects that they are unprepared for, under the assumption that somehow capitalism has an automatic built in feature that guarantees monetary success. I think this is where a lot of the anger from unfulfilled expectations comes from. The studies I've been reading show that a probable majority of the most active people in Trump's "movement" are self-failures who did not prepare themselves for the roles they sought to play, had poor money management skills, and tended to turn to bankruptcy to solve problems instead of learning from mistakes and rebuilding (or finding a way of earning a living more suited to their skills and temperament).
Ouchie. That'll go over well! /s
I'd like to clarify that I'm not opposed to education. But its value is social, not economic.
And I'd like to clarify that I AM opposed to capitalism, and it's the fraudulent mathematics that I object to. Nature abhors a vacuum, but it absolutely forbids limitless exponential growth. Which means that all of our capitalist "advances" are compensated by hidden losses that are now growing to the point of destroying us. Capitalism is a deadly form of fraud.
Perhaps it's my failure of imagination, but I have a hard time thinking of another economic system that uses money that isn't on a line with pure capitalism on one end and pure communism on the other. Can you think of one?
As I see it, when you move away from the pure capitalism pole, you simply have money-based activities subjected to increasing regulation from another source, such as government. (Other sources of regulation could be either social mores or religious authority.) Complimentarily, as you move away from the pure communism pole, you simply have a government-controlled economy with elements of capital investment/return, usually high government officials making financial deals unavailable to everyone else.
The "fraudulent" nature of capitalism seems to revolve around an entity's ability to dump the costs of liabilities onto someone else, either legally (like insurance), illegally (like environmental pollution, or should-be-illegal (like environmental pollution after Trump rolled back oodles of regulations.)
Sorry for the rambling muse. I'm actually responding to your comment that you are "opposed" to capitalism, when to me that's like saying that you're "opposed" to religion, or intuition. These are features in our man-made world that seem to have their uses, and liabilities. If you are "opposed" to capitalism, are you "in favor" of something else?
Nearly all modern economists write about economics as if late-stage capitalism is the only form of economy. This isn't even close to true.
The earliest and most basic human economy is familial socialism. Those who can, will hunt, gather, and cook. Those who can't (infants, small children, elders) are fed. Roles change as ability waxes (or wanes).
Larger familial and tribal groups generally us some variant of a gift economy, which is a kind of "favor" economy. I gift you a favor, now you owe me a favor in return. Wealth consists of having gifted many favors. It requires a common ethical basis (honor), a collective awareness of who owes whom (for dispute settlement), and a whole lot of trust. In its more dysfunctional forms, you can think of it as a Godfather (the movie) economy.
Barter is almost as old as the gift economy, but was generally associated with inter-tribal trade, because the trust and collective awareness isn't there. It's distinguished by a "goods-on-the-table" trade: no relationship exists away from the trading table, so you have to settle the trade then and there.
Monetary trade substitutes commonly-agreed-upon tokens for barter. The trick with money is that it must be fungible -- that is, identically interchangeable. Every ounce of 24-carat gold is equivalent to any other ounce of 24-carat gold. In a larger society with a legal structure, any coin with the emperor's visage on it could be equivalent to any other coin with the emperor's visage, regardless of age, weight, or composition. This allows you to take coin in trade, and use coin in trade for equitable value in real goods.
A credit economy eliminates the need for money to actually exist, in lieu of accurate bookkeeping. There are many ways to pay the bookkeepers: "interest" is just one such method. Flat fees work just as well, or taxes imposed by a central government. Or the banks could be run by the state directly, paid for by taxes.
All economic systems are ultimately based on human labor: even the simplest kind of living in the Garden of Eden requires that you go out and pick the fruit off the tree. You can't trade the pomegranate without picking it first.
The big question of socialism/capitalism is: who owns the labor?
In familial socialism, labor is owned collectively by the entire family, through familial obligation. A successful hunter might get a preferred cut of meat, but it's unthinkable that they would hoard the meat until it rots, while denying it to the children and elders.
In barter, labor is implicitly owned by whoever is bringing the product to market. They may bring results of their own labor, or others' labor, by some agreement outside the bounds of the trade.
In an empire, labor is owned by the Emperor, or his delegates.
In a feudal barony, labor is owned by the baron.
In a slave state, slave labor is owned by the slaveowners.
In an oligarchy labor is owned by the oligarchs.
The modern "libertarian" ideal -- to the extent that I can make any sense of it -- is that the individual owns his own labor (and only his own labor), and is entirely responsible for himself, with no help from anyone else, other than as "purchased" at a fair price through free market exchange of his labor. I wrote a rather sharply-edged short story about this you might enjoy: https://themonthebard.org/2017/05/16/a-day-in-the-life/
The irony is that Libertarians support the Republican party, which has traditionally been shackled to the oligarchy model, and is now tipping toward a more Imperial (dictatorship) model.
Modern "capitalism" and "socialism" are built around the presumption of large, modern states, using fungible money. In capitalism, labor is owned by capitalists. In "socialism," labor is (theoretically) owned by workers, workers' collectives, or the state itself acting as a representative of the workers.
In both cases, government support is required, and both systems seem to converge on oligarchy.
The core problem with capitalism is its built-in fallacy of perpetual exponential growth, which is a direct outgrowth of the core capitalist idea of "investment with proportional returns." This is a system that could not be more efficiently-designed to cut down every tree and pave every bit of arable land, and thus destroy the world.
Apologies for the length.
Please don't apologize for putting in the effort to write a detailed exposition, I appreciate the "oomph."
After reading your description of the various economic "blends" used in different times and places, I get the distinct impression that different styles are useful for different purposes. A barter economy may well work better than money in a small community, where the practice would enforce close ties and intimate trust, but would be less suitable for building, say, the national electric grid.
The "Empire" economy simply looks like an old-style feudal system, where monetary policy is dictated by fiat and monetary value is based on a scarce, indestructible material (like gold), with a big dose of slavery thrown in. The split between socialism and capitalism, beyond the theoretical, seems to rest on whether the government in question merely protects property interests (pure capitalism), or arrogates all property to itself (pure socialism).
Either system works very well for cutting down all the trees and paving all the land, since both allow for the massing of huge amounts of resources and labor for particular projects ranging from the operation of government itself to the aforementioned national electric grid.
Whether any particular system wreaks havoc, in my humble opinion, lies not in the specific mechanics of the system, but in the moral and ethical development of the great majority of the people working within it. If you want to hurt your neighbor, cut down all the trees, or live in insatiable luxury while your employees starve, any of the systems you've mentioned will allow for it, unless the people within it refuse.
That's why we've been treated, for instance, to the seeming travesty of the second Trump impeachment. The Senate trial demonstrated conclusively that no amount of law can overcome a refusal to abide by and enforce those laws. That's why the Democrats were so wise to press ahead in the face of futility -- they had to shout from the rooftops that our system of government was actually just fine, but the moral character of half of the country is shockingly defective.
Sadly, this observation makes me sound, and feel, old, an old man whining about the corrupt morals of the current society. And I have no idea what we can do about it, since you can't teach morals to someone who doesn't want to learn them, someone who actually thinks it's peachy to hurt their neighbor for profit, cut all the trees, and live luxuriously while others starve.
As my grandfather used to say when he had no idea what to do about whatever confusing problem we "younguns" had inflicted on ourselves, "I wish you all the very best."
Thanks for the link to the short story, I look forward to reading it.
I just wrote a long response, but it might make more sense to just post a link: https://themonthebard.org/2016/02/12/capitalism/. There are several posts, linked together.
Thank you so much for the extended reply, I look forward to reading them carefully. "Themon the Bard?"
You got my vote for president.
Exactly why governments "regulate" the economy to impose "inefficiencies" give priority to human and social necessities, to "level the play field" and to ensure that Capital pays for all the indirect costs that it would impose on society...eg pollution, public transport of workers etc.
Education is another matter and has indeed recently accepted a biase towards capital and has effectively degraded human capital to the point of practical subservience...most definitly in need of liberation from this straightjacket. If business requires special skills which are rare then they must pay for them.
Machines only replace workers after cost benefit analysis. Government weighs into this balance positively or negatively and provides the necessary training to avoid net loss of jobs and unemployment other than that generated by " friction" of job change.
I agree that jobs – good jobs – for the people who now feel disenfranchised would make a huge difference. I read that a large proportion of the Capitol rioters are behind on their taxes, in bankruptcy, or have other financial problems. But there is resistance to change in the small towns and rural areas. My daughter teachers in a public school district in a very conservative district in Iowa. Many of the parents there resist the advances suggested in education to meet a changing world because they want their children to have the same life they have had. But the economic situation just doesn't allow for these kids to find jobs in their community as they become adults. The parents are insulated and not fully aware of the larger world in their understanding and so they try to keep their children from learning about and imagining a different future for themselves. I'm not sure how to disrupt this cycle. There are ways, of course, like investing in clean energy jobs, diversifying agriculture, etc. that would create opportunities for young adults to stay in their communities but the resistance to change is strong.
The song How Ya Gonna Keep 'em Down on the Farm After They've Seen Paree? comes to mind when I hear about small rural places that want to keep their kids on the farm ( in the town...). It's a WWI song. Soldiers don't always want to go back.
The point I'm trying to make is that this is not a new problem for small towns. My parents left their small town and it still exists 3 generations later. (Some of my cousin's kids have settled there. But not all. One of kids started Autism Compassion Africa and lives in Ghana.)
Hahaha! I know the song – and I understand the sentiment. I was born on a farm in NW Iowa and I was one of the ones who escaped! But most of my cousins and their kids are still there, also. Nature vs nuture – which one holds the strongest sway seems to depend on the individual.
I like "awkward tendency" and I think you are absolutely right. Well said.
If we concentrate on teaching girls the problems almost solve themselves. Sorry, boys
Then your problem becomes ...what do you do with the boys who are left in a state of irresponsibilty and seek to nonetheless maintain their dominance in the patriarchy. African women could tell you all about it!
Thanks Grace, there is much merit in what you say. Some of us boys will take our medicine like men.
Grace, I'm afraid I don't get what point you are making. Could you elucidate it a little further so I understand what you are getting at here?
An educated mother to sons positively affects their views of women. Not always, sadly, but I think most women would think it appropriate to educate both sons and daughters. The dynamics change.
Education cannot fix willful ignorance.
But exposure to it an an early age could change that attitude.
Eventually....if the opportunity is there to use it.
I’m afraid it’s more complicated than just education alone. Society must elevate and protect as their own all children. Much of the vulnerability to propaganda is created by shame.
They are afraid...not only for their political lives but for their own and lives of their families.
Lindsey Graham et al shared their thoughts with defense lawyers.
I hope he shared this one, “ ...enough is enough!”
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/congress-electoral-college-vote-count-2021/h_739f236655a4b9c880b2b13bb6a4663b
“Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who has been a staunch supporter of President Trump, vigorously defended to certify the electoral votes on the Senate floor.
Graham said he believed voting to object the results are a “uniquely bad idea to delay this election."
"Trump and I, we've had a hell of a journey. I hate it to end this way. Oh my God, I hate it. From my point of view he's been been a consequential president. But today, first thing you'll see. All I can say, is count me out, enough is enough," Graham said.
Graham defended his stance by citing a number of cases in which Trump had lost, including the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision on election results.
"We've got to end it. Vice President Pence, what they're asking you to do you won't do, because you can't," he said.
Graham ended his remarks by fully backing the election results. "It is over... [Biden] won. He's the legitimate President to the United States... Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are lawfully elected and will become the President and the Vice President of the United States on January 20," he said.”
After that statement, Lindsey Graham needed body guards to protect him from the Trump mob while in an airport:
“An angry crowd accosted Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) Friday at the airport with shouts of “Traitor!” and baseless claims of a rigged election in viral-video moments underscoring how even longtime Trump allies have become targets of a conspiracy movement promoted by the president.
“Lindsey Graham, you are a traitor to the country,” one woman yelled in a minute-long video as Graham kept walking while people followed him, shouting profanity and filming with cellphones. “You know it was rigged! … You garbage human being.”
“It’s gonna be like this forever, wherever you go for the rest of your life,” she said, repeatedly demanding an “audit” of the vote.“
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/08/lindsey-graham-airport-confrontation/
They are afraid...
Conviction takes Courage because Courage takes Conviction.
Ever since January 6, there has been an at least weekly police presence on my street, near where my (R) congressman lives a few houses down from us. I don’t know whether it’s because of a credible threat, or only when he’s home, or what, but I’m sure he and his family are afraid. There was one demonstration at his home a few years ago, and I know that was deeply frightening to them. They have small children, too. I have mixed feelings. I have trouble being civil to him sometimes, and while I despise his politics and cowardice, I actually like him as a man.
I can understand your dual feelings about your rep, Kathy. The closest analogy I can come up with is being able to call on a friend when I was in need and my husband was out of town. He always came to my "rescue" whenever I called him. A REALLY NICE GUY. We never talked politics. It wasn't until I friended him on FB that I found out that he was a 45 supporter through and through. He was the organized-rallies-where- he-and-his-buddies-had-their pick-ups-parade-through-the-town-with-their-MAGA- hats-and-Trump-flags kind of supporter. He has seen my anti-45 posts, so he knows where I stand. And though it has been sometime since I have had to call him for help, I am sure that he would not hesitate to "rescue" me again if need be.
My BIL is a GOP and Trump supporter. Successful business man and one of the most kindest, generous men I’ve ever known to family and friends. But the past 4-5 years I’ve seen him in a different light. I can’t even be around him anymore.
Oh, brother-in-law. Never Mind!
Is it possible to divorce in-laws?
Is it possible to divorce one's father?
Not sure at what age, but we can legally declare our independence from parents.
Otherwise, shall we trade your father for my brother? I'll throw in a used Confederate ancestor to sweeten the deal.
You can't leave a father that way, not this one in any case. I suppose I could've disowned him, but that's not my way. It's what I call "the debt that can never be repaid." Sure, I can dump a sibling or other relative, but a sibling didn't bring me here and support me until I was on my own. I'm not a flake. This guy gets my love and support until he kicks it.
Sweetening the deal means a non-racist and non-sexist ancestor or perhaps you are missing the point of this horse-trade. If you're gonna give me a Trumpster (is your brother one?) and a used slavery adherent, then I'll have to up the ante by tossing in a few more racist German ancestors of my own.
Tricia what's BIL? google search says 136 BILs out there
brother-in-law (just learned it myself a couple of months ago :)
I'm glad that no member of Congress lives on my street, and not just b/c it's one block.
I can't understand you liking him as a man. What is it about him outside of what you mentioned makes you like him?
The reason I ask is that his politics are show you what kind of man he is. Has he spoken up about the lies the con man has said about the election?
For me, it takes a lot to turn my back on someone, especially someone I have a close and long relationship with. But lie to me and I am gone. How can you trust someone who lies to you? How can you look at someone who has lied as anyone to like, especially in regards to what is going on right now?
I put a higher threshold on elected officials. If they had no problem with what the con man has done to hurt so many people, then I see nothing to like about them.
By the way, our kids are watching and listening, wonder what his kids hear behind closed doors?
This is where the divisive style of politics brings us. We shouldn't have to feel such visceral dislike toward others over political views. It's dangerous and can easily inflame into violence. I am thinking of the old advice to never discuss religion or politics in public. This is why we have the political structures we do, so hard questions can be debated and decided in appropriate forums. Another old line - I may disagree with your ideas but will defend to the death your right to speak them. That ideal is under severe strain right now, but should be our guide. It needs to be reciprocal though. It does feel like the Right uses several tactics to drown out, tune out, or just plain ignore the Left, which I feel is largely how we got here.
For me personally, I work with several people who are strong trump supporters and they're good guys, I like them. We just agree to keep political talk to a minimum. Which, to be honest, is the normal way of things. The majority of people never give two thoughts to politics, except on election day, if even that, during normal times.
In your world. Not mine. I am friends with some Republicans because they distanced themselves from Trump long ago- before the 2016 election - and consistenty challenge his policies and behavior. We talk politics quite a lot here, actually, maybe because we see the connection between it and our daily lives pretty clearly and take it seriously.
Well, yes. I guess. A year ago I moved to a new work assignment. I used to work solo doing repairs in houses in suburban areas. I transferred into a specialized construction crew that works with heavy equipment, about 30 miles further out into more rural areas. There was and is a well known Republican bent to this crew. I was and am well known to be very politically active and a fairly raging liberal/progressive. I went in looking forward to staking my turf with this rough and ready crew. I'll just say that I have. There were a few roadside shouting matches, but no one's feelings got hurt, and no one's mind seems to have changed. We learned the parameters of what is and is not worthwhile conversation. Each time we happily worked together the next day. This is a job where serious accidents causing injury or death can and do happen, and teams of 3 to 4 people have to work in concert. So it pays to get along!
Good work on the job, Syd. Work and career often depend on getting along with folks we'd otherwise avoid. Demanding or dangerous jobs especially build an esprit de corps that bonds people into a "team," who can tolerate each other.
I'm with you, Annie, in my personal life, with my wife, with a number of neighbors we like a lot, with my ex-, my sisters, my friends. But at work, I'm with Syd. Truck drivers and warehouse jocks and me don't make good politics conversationalists, although there is one big exception (out of hundreds of people I talk to). And with my next-door neighbor Charlie, lifetime firefighter whose kids are all cops, we have never talked politics. In 20 years, not once. Excellent neighbor, he considers us excellent neighbors, we would never say anything derogatory about Charlie. But it's a compartmentalized "friendship."
I'm actually envious. I would love to know an anti-Trump Republican.
I respectfully disagree with you. Democracy requires active participation, understanding one another, collaborative work, civic responsibility and understanding how our communities and stated function and provide for its citizens. What else is there to talk about? Weather? Hair styles? Your new car? A vacation? Recipes?
Maybe that’s what is really really wrong in America. A loss of civic pride and talking openly and honestly about our democracy with one another.
We are such shallow people if we don’t try at least.
Fishing and weather are usually safe. I've got no argument with what you say, but at the end of the day I have a job to finish, and I can't do it alone.
And I like staying alive.
I understand your work. There’s nothing wrong with having a cordial relationship with coworkers— especially when everyone’s safety depends on it.
Thankfully I work in a profession that does not attract the “Cult”. Just listening to a “server” vent about waiting on a table of them was very painful.
Thanks Syd, for reintroducing the immortal Voltairean maxim. Its spirit is a guiding light in sustaining any civil society. Note how uncivil US society has become. I wish we were all Voltaireans now.
Thanks for the citation! I'm not always willing to look up references.
It's only attributed to Voltaire, but it sounds like him and attributions are easy to find. I write mostly from memory on LFAA.
Beth, I get it. Trust him? Never. I am talking about an extremely superficial neighbor relationship. I have to stop myself from shrieking at him every time I see him, and I heartily dislike living near him and having to see him at all. But he is unfailingly polite and kind, a good and thoughtful neighbor, and a good father. I am devastated that he hasn’t spoken out, precisely because I can see that there is good in him. He must know where right and truth lie, but puts party over country. I write to him at least once a month, have literally called him a coward, and he remains polite. So yes, I get it.
Yes I saw that and agree. They are afraid for their lives. The white supremist movement is strong. It’s not going away. My logic tells me that if I was one of the current lawmakers right now I’d seriously think about new employment. But I also know how completely paralyzing it is to think about leaving a secure job, a pension, medical benefits, and with a family to support. It doesn’t make what they are doing right but people do not think clearly or act responsibly when under chronic stress and anxiety.
I suspected that he'd been drinking when he went on his "enough is enough" rant. He certainly appeared to be unhinged (more than usual).
All the Retrumplicans who will be voting to acquit are looking for cover. As Heather explains from near the end of her letter: "The senators need Trump’s lawyers to do a good enough job tomorrow to give them cover to acquit, and it seems likely those lawyers are not skilled enough to do so. Tonight, Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) visited Trump’s defense team. Cruz said they were “sharing our thoughts” about their legal strategy: it is of note that Cruz was the Solicitor General of Texas before being elected to the Senate, and Lee was an assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Utah. Also a lawyer, Graham is the former chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee."
These unprincipled, frightening creatures have no business voting AT ALL.
In what reality is it proper or ethical for sworn members of the jury to be colluding with counsel for the defense? Oh wait, we’re talking Trump’s reality, so (like his phone calls) it must be perfect.
It is such an awesomely twisted fascist reality!!
In the same reality as the first impeachment, when M McC announced there was “no daylight” between the defendant and the majority party.
So, they must be running scared. The big guns came in to school Trump's legal team.
A fair and impartial juror does not meet with the Defense team to discuss strategy. A fair and impartial juror does not absent themselves from the proceeding, either physically or mentally. They are oath breakers, every one of them.
This is not a legal trial. It is a political give and take. There are no jury rules or rules of evidence. It is a constitutional political event.
Your words "a deadly inversion of reality" sum it up so succinctly.
those are the words.... haunting me with a precision
“At one point today, at least 18 Republican senators were absent from their desks as the managers were making their case.”
Since when has it been an option for jurors to be absent for a trial’s testimony?
I thought they were required to be present for the entire testimony. Are they still allowed to vote if they’ve been absent for the presentation? Do any rules or laws matter anymore? The Republicans are the ones behaving like anarchists.
Apparently the rules about being elsewhere were loosened to allow for physical separation (if desired) due to Covid, and some took advantage of it.
It's not a criminal trial, so, different rules apply. Damn it.
It seems the delusions run deep on both both sides!
Perhaps it's their way to not have to vote for or against trump?
IF there are fewer jurors at the final vote, then the number of senators needed for 2/3s vote is far fewer, as previously described by Dr Richardson. However, I would not bet on anything less than a full deck for the final vote. Then again, most of one-half of the deck is certainly not a full-deck to begin with - if you can follow my thinking.
We can only hope that your first suggestion is correct; however, I tend to agree with your analysis of the remaining second half of the deck.
and I actually just reminded myself Nancy that we’re ALL ... in the same deck
oh yeah?, Well Sally, you don’t even know half of my thinking ?! 🤣
If we truly knew what each other was thinking, we’d either be constantly blushing or look like the subject of “The Scream.”
LOL a lot ! Humors is a tonic 😀
I was on facebook bopping around and pressed link to a video of Hitlers maid. In her nineties she told of how the nazi army came to her small poor village for the first time. They brought goulash. She said ‘the people ate the goulash and they thought, things will be better for them with the army, with the Nazi’s.’ So, we talk about legal issues, moral values and good common sense when it comes to Republicans making a decision to impeach this former president but those things are not relevant. It is about sustenance and fear. They ate the goulash and received benefit from it. Their constituents are in the grip of a insane delusion and watching the scenes of the insurrection shows them the kind of rage they would experience if they vote the wrong way. An Anonymous vote is the only thing that will work. It’s all about the fear .... and the goulash.
Except that Trump and the Republicans have never done anything to materially improve the lives of their constituents in four years. McConnell's and Rand Paul's voters are just as poor as they were four years ago. The only thing that Trump gave them was -- for lack of a better phrase -- a renewed sense of white supremacy and white privilege.
I've brought up Heather McGhee’s book , “The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone and How We Can Prosper Together,” before. People vote against their own self-interest often…
It will be released February 16, 2021, so I haven’t read it yet. I have high hopes...
Here are a couple of quotes from her Ted Talk.
https://www.ted.com/talks/heather_c_mcghee_racism_has_a_cost_for_everyone
“Fear, anxiety, isolation. And it's made me rethink many of the economic problems I've been focusing on my entire career. I wondered, is it possible that our society's racism has likewise been backfiring on the very same people set up to benefit from privilege?”
“Racism leads to bad policymaking. It's making our economy worse. And not just in ways that disadvantage people of color. It turns out it's not a zero sum. Racism is bad for white people, too.”
You can also catch her podcast with Bill Moyers here.
https://billmoyers.com/story/podcast-heather-mcghee-how-american-racism-has-a-cost-for-everyone/
Jan, too right! And thanks for the book title: I am pre-ordering today!! The (Anti)Republican Party has been trying for DECADES to sell the false narrative that the world we live in is run by a Zero-Sum Game: that one person getting ahead means another falls behind. They play into the fears of working-class whites that if BIPOC folks have the same opportunities to be employed, educated, and housed as white people do, then white people will lose. This patently false--and nefarious--alternative to REALITY is what drives the party and what Drumpf and his minions played into so effectively. When white people are scared they get very nasty, in ways that we have seen over and over again--and not just recently. This is a thousand-year problem. Drumpf's supporters might claim they aren't racists and misogynists but scrape below the surface and their anxieties become evident.
The Gormless Obstructionist Party members who have embraced this hells cape are themselves well educated (usually--I can't guarantee this in the MO legislature, for instance!) and wealthy . . . and white. They know exactly what they are doing. The utter decadence of their worldview, the absolute vacuum where a moral center should be is what drives them. They are soulless cynics, but clever enough to appeal to the worst instincts of just enough of their constituents to be able to win elections.
Good use of "gormless." Its use has skyrocketed in the last 4 years.
"A rising tide lifts all boats."
I consider our most precious natural resource and abundant form of renewable energy to be people themselves. If you think about it we are dynamos, biological machines that can turn thoughts and ideas into physical objects to improve our well being. Imagine if we harnessed all of that available energy, without negating more than half by repressing contributions from women and people of color. It seems to me we have wasted so much opportunity through history by ignoring the ability of all people to work positively toward our common good.
Thanks for the ref.
EXCELLENT!! Thank You. So True.
Oh tRump did provide his constituents with goulash and piles of it. We just don’t understand that his true constituents are the Mercers and the Murdoch’s. His mob is just fed drivel that appeals to their basic instincts: abortion, guns, civil liberties for whites only, and especially patriotism. Most of the people in tRump’s scary mob consider themselves to be patriots.
Better than goulash, he fed their rage.
My evangelical, long-time hairdresser, someone I love, thinks her life was better bc her taxes went down. Although I know she has challenges financially, as a female small business owner, she still supports trump and the party. She seems convinced the Dems will lead us all to perdition.
In December 2019, my stylist asked my thoughts about what was going on in Washington. I gave a measured but honest response because, where I live, one assumes everybody is a Republican. The reply, "Boy, you have really drunk the Kool-Aid!" I've never been back!
Good for you.
In 2020 I switched to a new barber to support a local Black-owned business. Their job is easier b/c the mountaintop is mostly deforested.
My old hairdresser told me, before she moved out of state, that she had a client who asked her who she was voting her. My hairdresser said “Biden”. While she was doing the client’s hair, the client abruptly told her she would not be coming back to her. No real loss there, I told her and she agreed.
I changed my hairdresser because she was reluctant to wear a mask and said that she 'did'nt trust Fauci'. Why give my money to someone like that? You are more courageous, Marcy, to continue a dialogue with a trumper.
Ignorance! Plenty of people are like THIS🤔😥
mine too! (minus her being evangelical)
Ugh...just as bad!
President Biden is working very fast to get vaccines into the arms of all Americans. He’s also working as fast as he can to get more money into the hands of struggling Americans. Let us hope this his “goulash” will be more satisfying than “Mexico will pay for it!” or “it’ll be a big, beautiful health care package”—promised-but-never-delivered by Tя☭mp.
Nice wishes. I fear they will take everything and still declare trump their god.
Robin, you make an excellent point: if they could all vote anonymously, the result might well be quite different. The Republican senators do not fear the judgment of history, but the judgment of their constituents when they are next up for re-election.
I gather that it requires an 80% vote to approve an anonymous conviction vote.
It iappears that many Republican senators are more concerned with how a handful of Trumpistas will look at them in the next election than how history will look at them forever. How they can look at themselves, after all that has happened, indicates to me that there is something most of us consider essential missing in these people; a sense of personal honor and integrity.
They have put themselves beyond legal or moral argument or debate. Worse, they seem proud of the fact.
Ah yes. But karma is a bitch. This is just the opening act. ...the harder they fall.
Pure unadulterated arrogance.
This impeachment will reverberate far past the final vote. That vote will be a defining moment for the United States, the future of democracy, and most particularly for the individual senators. donald trump has put his entire will and force of being into subverting our political system to gather all power unto himself. The evidence is overwhelmingly clear and damning that the Commander in Chief violated his oath of office. There can be no plausible defense and seems unlikely one will even be presented. Still, most prognosticators express confidence the disgraced former president will be acquitted, since none have seen a clear path for the 17 Republicans needed to convict. Those voting to acquit, I can almost hear it now, will doubtless say it is a political court, not judicial, so the evidence does not compel them.
This cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged. Those Senators who vote for trump's innocence must be made to answer in that other court, the court of public opinion. Perhaps they feel confident they can withstand the charges there, with the support of trump's rabid base. This should not be so. The court of public opinion is where the real final argument needs to be made, strenuously and consistently, that trump is a traitor, as far from a savior as can be imagined. He used tactics not seen seen Adolph Hitler in an attempt to throttle and destroy our democracy, one seen as a beacon of freedom and human rights the world over.
It's multiply unfortunate that Hitler is such an extreme example of evil that comparisons are immediately labelled hyperbole and discounted. I think in the case of donald trump it is wholly appropriate, in the face of the danger he presents to our nation. He makes me seethe, so maybe I am carried away. But until there is a widely understood acknowledgement and consensus of what, exactly, Trumpism represents, where people can then knowingly choose their side, I will not rest easily.
I too am seething. Great sadness, but greater outrage. We were freaking ATTACKED, yet, seems to be ho hum, that's just politics. It is NOT.
It is certainly valid and appropriate to use the word Fascist. Those senators, and now any Trump supporter, are clearly acting within the definition of Fascism.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism
* since
What makes me seethe is the statement that these seditious jurors will not convict this psychopath! The court of public opinion that you mention will not be kind, rightfully so, but what I fear is that there will be violent retaliation against these jurors. Have you or anyone else thought about that?
18 Shameless Senators failed to do their job. Imagine you, as a citizen, are called to jury duty. You are selected. But one day of the trial, you decide you have something better to do. You decide not to attend. Would this be allowed? Absolutely not. You could be cited, get a bench warrant and / or be sent to jail. America's Hall of Shame is overflowing with Republican Opportunists. It sickens me.
This is not a legal trail. It is a constitutional, political process. There are no rules for the jury or for the presentation of evidence. The constitution provides no specific rules. It is vague, at best. The "rules" are determined by the two parties and they proceed from there.
Yet, if you are supposed to listen to evidence, then you listen to evidence and not scroll on your advice as Josh Hawley has done. A juror is still a juror. I don't know the exact rule, yet, this is a serious trial -- and yes, I state trial.
I agree. At least sit and show some respect to your fellow colleagues to present what will become horrific historical lessons to the entire world on what could very well be the beginning of the end of American democracy. The lack of respect is disgusting to me. I can’t even count how many presentations I’ve had to sit through with colleagues that I didn’t want to listen to or thought contrary toward. But I sad with respect. Gave eye contact and interested facial expressions.
18 were not present... That leaves 82 senators. What's 2/3 of 82?
55. I can do math as long as it's arithmetic.
Our House managers were stupendous. They prepared their rebuttal at the end, before the defense lawyers had even spoken. In the meantime, three seditious guys go to Schoen and Castor to “offer” their expert opinions as to how to proceed. Very fishy! 18 jurors were absent which according to Laurence Tribe means that they should not be allowed a vote. I believe he is an adviser to the Democrats on constitutional law so perhaps Schumer will find the courage he needs to proclaim this. Definitely, Schumer must pull a “McConnell”!
What the House Managers have done is a Master Class in presenting a case.
Absolutely! I'm incredibly impressed with them.
Amen— they were brilliant in planning and execution.
The impeachment managers are bulwarks of the Republic. History will long remember their principled defense of democracy.
IF (and that is a huge if) Sen. Schumer is able to remove those 18 absent Senators/jurors from the trial, that would leave 82 Senators on the jury. Two-thirds of 82 is 55. And IF such a move by Schumer doesn’t alienate more that four of the remaining 38 Republican Senators, it is possible the convict.
And if conviction was obtained on that basis the legitimacy would be attacked immediately. Technical correctness isn't enough, there has to be an unarguable resolution.
Oof. Good point. I was getting excited for a moment.
Sorry about that. (Don Adams voiceover optional)
Thanks Dave, someone said "Get Smart," and you did!
The news reported that because of Covid rules, the jurors were allowed to watch on TV. So, sadly, this scenario doesn't seem possible.
Excluding the 18 jury deserters might do the trick. Make it so, Chuck.
For me, one of the most compelling sequences of today's impeachment hearings before the U.S. Senate was that 10-15 invaluable minutes the Jamie Raskin Congressional team devoted to the experience of the insurrectionists, in their own eyes and ears -- before, during, and following -- the breach of the Capitol.
The presentation suggested that many or most of the participants joined the storming of the Capitol because, and perhaps only because they felt that "their Savior" -- the then-President Trump -- had personally invited them to participate in this storming of the Capitol.
For me, this was significant for a couple of reasons.
First, it sheds light on the vulnerability of a disenfranchised portion of the citizenry that are exposed to an artfully composed and broadcasted "BIG LIE.," composed by a master authoritarian
Second, it indicates how an artful fascist leader in the U.S. can cleverly and ruthlessly manipulate much of the polity -- in a way that was familiar to Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, and many others.
In conclusion, I found it very insightful and moving that Congressperson Jamie Raskin pointed out, in his closing, that "democracies are extremely rare in human history." As Raskin said, most polities have been structured as aristocracies, dictatorships, or monarchies. In historical reality, it is probably highly debatable as to whether the U.S. has ever been "a democracy!" Raskin's point, however, is, for me, invaluable!
Mark, I seconded your comment and also reflected on it. America has never been a 'perfect' democracy, nor will it be. There can, however, be too much emphasis our failures (domestic and foreign) as well as our continuing inequality. We must work assiduously to correct the country's weaknesses and make structural changes in a system advantaging the wealthy as it thwarts the advancement of minorities, the working-class and rural communities. Withal, I think that we are a democracy with serious flaws. Trump, McConnell, the Koch Brothers, the Republican Party et al. and, of course, many before them have been powerful obstacles to democracy. We are beating those forces back. A majority of the American people know what we have suffered as a result of their greed, self-interest and racism. Democracy will always be a challenge to maintain and improve. The country is on edge and hurting. We know what is at stake and working in many ways to become a more democratic society.
As one of these rare democracies we are holding so far but ever so fragile.
If there we only some way to definitively remove the one shred of cover most of the Republican Senators seem to be hiding behind - that the Conviction of a President who has already left office is unconstitutional. They don't care about the vote that held it valid and they will persist in this. It is too bad, in this instance, that the Supreme Court could not issue a Declarative Judgement on the issue. Their vote to acquit needs to be shown for the fraud it is.
If Trump is acquitted, January 6th will just look like the dress rehearsal for March 4th.
I disagree, the next act of violence will only make Raskin and the whole Democratic team's predictions proven to be true. The "I told you so" will echo around the world. Trump can't stop, his followers aren't finished and all the Republicans who voted to acquit on fabricated reasons with no real legal teeth will not be able to flip flop their way out of disgrace.
The acts of violence on January 6th were predicted by Adam Schiff at the end of the first impeachment trial. It seems the Rs have forgotten that.
They have their fingers in their ears and are yelling la la la la la...
18 of them aren't even there for the full hearing
https://www.highfashionhome.com/products/see-no-hear-no-speak-no-evil-monkeys-gold-set-of-3#mz-expanded-view-1341591234737
Not if we pursue the tyrant in court. And let us be clear the donald is a tyrant. He is ripe for action in court under the RICO act. And we must grind this hubristic traitor to our Democracy out of our collective consciousness! Or we will end up worse off than we were on the Sixth of January.
Yes, surely the criminals will still be held criminally accountable? And certainly the complicit legislators are not blind to their own involvement in the crimes committed? Are they so arrogant as to think that Teflon Don has insulated them from accountability?
If Repug senators won't do their job, our good friend RICO will do it for them. And to them!
I also worry about the violence if found guilty. Isn’t the mob-base going to just make more nooses for those who find their cult leader guilty? Watching and hearing “Hand Mike Pence” repeatedly chanted...is this echoing in the senators’ ears? Voting to find guilty is likely voting against one's own safety. Back to Catch-22...voting to acquit further empowers Trumpism, furthering the national threat.
That is a risk, but a necessary one. The signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their "lives, fortunes and sacred honor" to the goal of the document that led to the Constitution and the establishment of this country and did so in full awareness that they were challenging the foremost military power of the time. It would be at best a slap in the face to all of them if Senators, acting out of fear, failed to vote based on the evidence presented. Understandable perhaps but pusillanimous nonetheless.
And perfidious.
Pusillanimous: What a perfect word for the Republicans.
Yes!
I see no recognition of what "sacred honor" is in the Republican senators. None whatsoever.
That’s when there were men of conscience and honor and bravery. Our founders are turning in their graves.
They have lives and fortunes but no honor, sacred or secular.
And touché.
Gotta look that word up!
Since when do we negotiate with terrorists????
Since we elected one president.
Touche, Dave.
Don’t forget that during the French Revolution the guillotine was used on the revolutionaries as well as the aristocracy. The cowards that represent 75 million people may very well reap what they sow. There is a balance to the universe, no matter what happens next week, we can trust in that.
You know when a revolution starts but are never certain whenor where and how it will end....and who will pay the price...for there is always a price to pay for someone.
"The firebrand revolutionary freedom fighter is the first to destroy the rights and even the lives of the next generation of rebels." ....John Quincy Adams
But be warned!
"I consider myself neither legally nor morally bound to obey laws made by a body in which I have no representation. Do not deceive yourselves into believing that penalties will deter men from the course they believe is right." ...Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (1927)
And
"For a revolutionary, failure is a springboard. As a source of theory it is richer than victory: it accumulates experience and knowledge." Clarence Darrow (1932)
I had to re-read these quotes several times. Bone chilling ...
Simon Bolivar's remark on Spanish America is relevant here.
"America is ungovernable. Those who serve the revolution plough the sea."
200 years ago "America" mostly referred to Spanish America. The lack of a modifier now makes Bolivar's statement highly appropriate to the US.
E Galeano, Memory of Fire, vol 2
J Lynch, Simon Bolivar
G Masur, Simon Bolivar
Sorry, Jennifer, but waiting to confront this cancer only makes our chances of beating it less. If we avoid confrontation, and by that I mean formal, legal confrontation, out of fear that Trumpians will become (more) violent, our institutions for dealing with such fascism will become weaker and weaker; either we use our institutions, or we will lose them. The morals and behavior being debated and displayed by this trial will never be clearer than they are now.
Quite right Dan. No bully or blackmailer has ever been put off or defeated by giving in to their demands.
Let them make nooses the FBI must start rooting out the true terrorists in our society. They will expose themselves with their own perfidies. It is imperative to make examples out of these seditionists.
We can’t be intimidated by the perceived threat, but be prepared!
They expect our young soldiers to sacrifice life for country - why shouldn't they? Because they put their interests first, their cultish leader 2nd, Republican Party 3rd, Country 4th (or maybe further down the list- behind religion, favorite restaurant, right not to wear a mask etc.)
I worry about this too.
In my view there is no Republican Party as I have known it. It is now the Trump Party, that is, a fascistic party which is anti democratic and has no intention of defending the Constitution. It is anti immigrant, anti black, anti gay, white supremacist, and a party which is more like the nationalistic party of Putin in Russia. I have some hope that the old Republicans who still believe in democracy and free and fair elections and telling the truth, a least as much as politicians in the past have told the truth will prevail. Those who do support the Constitution and the norms of our democracy are few and far between now. They are Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, Adam Kinzinger, and a handful of others, namely those who voted to impeach and then to come those who will vote to convict Donald Trump. I most fear those Trump party officials at the state level who will be in charge of elections. I fear that this new group will stop at nothing to prevent an accurate vote count and will willingly overturn the results of elections or falsify election results.
Unless we work to stop them.