Congress began the new year by repassing the National Defense Authorization Act over Trump’s veto, finding the two-thirds majority it needed to override one of Trump’s vetoes for the first time.
I didn't think I'd be quoting a Republican for one of the more salient comments about both Trump's and the GOP's general insanity, but Ben Sasse was on point: "Adults don’t point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government.”
However, it's distressing that they've waited until the 11th hour for him or Romney or anyone else too speak out. It suggests that, although there's fewer than 3 weeks to go, they too feared any potential effects of a Trump lashback on their tenures.
DId the dangers of Trump's actions only now dawn on them? What, after 4 years, was the last straw whereupon they now feared "an assault on our democracy that, if it succeeds, would make Trump a dictator and remove all their power?"
Forgive my cynicism but this reeks of pure opportunitism whereby some can claim to have disassociated with Trump, because it suggests that until now, they've implicitly thought Trump was on the up and up about immigration, climate change, racism, xenophobia, and cruelty to his own citizenry. Sorry, but I have to call bullshit on this. It's much too little much too late.
On another note, it appears that seditious and/or threatening attacks are de rigeur. Noted nutcase Lin Wood (who bizarrely predicted that Vice President Mike Pence could “face execution by firing squad” for “treason.”) is not the only prominent example. Steve Bannon ("put their heads on pikes"), Michael Flynn (suggesting imposing martial law), lawyer Joe diGenova (Chris Krebs should be drawn and quartered and shot at dawn), and 17 attorneys general and 126 GOP congressional representatives (who signed on to Texas's law suit attempting to nullify votes in four states where Biden won the election).
When did the US lose the will or ability to mitigate overt antidemocratic behavior? Where is the DOJ? Where is law enforcement? Where are the voices of Sasse and Romney and others condemning these actions? In the "old days" someone like Lin Wood making such statements might have been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric or penal institution for some electroshock "therapy." It was in a recent HCR column that we learned 11 or 13 Congresspeople weren't reseated after failing to condemn the South's secession prior to the Civil War.
Lastly, this Congress and this Administration have missed a textbook opportunity expressly suited to invoking the 25th Amendment. Trump has done so many things that are antidemocratic, anti-American, and outrightly criminal during his term. Suffering no consequences, he's taken a new tack: "It seems clear that, with no chance of proving this election fraudulent, Trump is now trying to incite violence."
And yet, none of this was enough to justify his removal. I'm assuming people believe it's not worth the effort with days left before January 20th. However, failing to consider this remedy brings me back to my earlier conclusion that it's just political opportunitism so that some can claim to have disassociated with Trump, but that until now, they've implicitly thought Trump was "just being Trump" or "telling it like it is."
Sorry, this just doesn't cut it. If nothing else, Trump's Administration has proven the Constitution and our model of representative government to have few, if any, teeth. If we're serious about continuing to pursue "American ideals" we need to be willing to draw the line between free speech and seditious speech, between "no person is above the law" and "being above the law is purely situational depending on how much money or power one has." We need to be more discerning about accepting "laws" that limit our Constitutional rights to vote, assemble, demand transparency, and expect the powers of Articles I, II, and III not to be used against our well being.
In short, we need to be ready and willing to say "Fuck, no, we're not going to take it."
BEAUTIFULLY said, Scott! And to see a "poster child" for political opportunism, look no further than Georgia's very own Senator (appointed, mind you, NOT elected) Kelly Loeffler. Not too long ago (plenty of evidence to back it up) she was very much a centrist and a moderate. Only after her appointment and for the subsequent run for re-election, did she feel the political winds shifting in the GOP that necessitated her to become a raving right-wing extremist. Then followed appearances with Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA's contribution to the QAnon presence in the US House) and a guy prominent in northwest GA as a white supremacist and KKK leader--and it happened twice, which she of course denied she had any knowledge of...uh-huh...). Pure opportunism, textbook, Grade-A. And hubby just last week officially became a legit billionaire. These people are astounding in their sheer effrontery and lack of ethics.
Everything else you said is spot on and it really gripes my posterior that ALL these people will more than likely walk away from this steaming pile of excrement (AKA the Trump "administration") without any of it on them. WHY do we have all these laws if we never enforce them?? If we keep letting people get away with such infractions HOW will there ever be any deterrent to them and others doing it again and again?? I think we're all ground down to mere nubs these days after 4 years of incessant and rampant corruption and the easy way out is to just let all these folks get off just as long as they will go away and leave us alone. No. This is what they want. When WHEN will we learn?!? Thank you for your excellent post!!
Bruce, thank you. I probably just started to respond sooner than others. To your point, these have been such obvious transgressions that I cannot understand why people have been willing (?) to take for so long.
Really, this is more than a matter of political disagreement. This has also become a public health hazard, and I'm not referring to the virus. It's stressful and worrisome my guy is boiling with acid at the daily onslaught of Trump and his minions doing what they're doing without any consequences.
Quickly - I was diagnosed with "incurable Stage 4 cancer" in early 2017. It's a form of Non-Hodgkins lymphoma that is statistically very likely to recur. I was in treatment while the "debate" over repeal and replace took place. I was scared shitless that my new pre-existing condition might leave me with making a decision between pursuing medical treatment and going bankrupt or dying because I couldn't afford care. At the end of the year my billed medical bills exceeded $1M. My carrier said they plan I was on had been grandfathered and they weren't offering it any longer. My new recommendation from them took my premiums from about $1500/month to over $5000/month. Only because of the ACA was I able to continue treatment beyond 2017.
It wasn't personal but I'm only one of many people in the US facing uncertainty about my health - through no fault of my own. I'm nearly finished a book about the experience but the GOP continues to try and f--- with all of us. I'm not sure how to end the book. I'm in remission. That's good. It pains me that friends who were first in line to help me at the time voted for Trump again. Did they not know the danger their friend faced from this GOP shibboleth? I'd trust them with my life but not with my country.
Wow, Scott...thanks for sharing and showing exactly why, and with good reason, you have such a stake in this. Again, the disconnect by the people supposedly representing us is absolutely staggering. They've simply lost touch with reality and their view of the world only seems to go as far as centering on their own election to return to power. That their enablers/supporters can still maintain their support of this rotten system, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, is just mind-boggling. I genuinely mean this when I tell you that my heart really does go out to you for what you've had to endure and for what you have hanging over you. The more you can keep telling your story and getting it out there, the more the chance that others will take up the fight for you. It has to be told. And don't let friends off so lightly who voted these corrupt, out-of-touch miscreants into positions of authority. I'd be rubbing their noses in their hypocrisy. I'm a Christian and therefore try to practice forgiveness, but there are limits, and I think the great God above is not going to fault us for calling out injustices when we see and experience them. Again, thank you for your openness and honesty, and your posts show you do know how to write expertly, clearly, and concisely. I always appreciate people who know how to use the language. If a book by you comes out, I'd read it! God be with you and I hope and pray you can keep on keepin' on!! We need your voice.
So sad and sorry about your situation.... you have made a significant contribution in your life, and I am so glad that you are here. Your ‘friends’...? That is so unbelievable... I am weary from shaking my head, and from trying to shake the sorrow and disillusionment that is consuming all of us. We will hang onto your hand... tight. You are one of us!
Scott, I don't have advise. I don't do that. Besides, sounds like you got yourself together.
Here's my gift, for what it is worth: my baby brother (he's 10 years, 1 month , and 2 days younger than I am) fell over in his hotel room on a business trip one night. He thought he'd tripped and bumped his head, asked his associates at breakfast to keep an eye on him. They called the boss, who came and took my brother to the hospital.
They thought maybe he had a stroke. Did a CT and found a mass in his brain. So they put hm on a plane with his scans and records and make arrangements for his wife to pick him up and take him to a highly rated cancer hospital on the west coast near where he lives. He spent the night having scans and being needle marked and all that stuff, and the next morning they did open skull surgery on him. They couldn't believe when he woke out of anesthesia that he actually talked. They didn't know what to expect. He took steps the next day.
The tumor was golf-ball size with fuzzy edges. There was a smaller tumor they couldn't get to. There were tumors in his lungs and lymph nodes. Some people will get the implications of that. So, laser surgery on head, neck, lung. Gear out of Star Wars. Next chemo. More chemo. More chemo. Immunotherapy. Experimental immunotherapy.
This is years now. And the tumors shrink, little by little. A bright spot causes a panic, but it turns out to be scar tissue. A break, then a new kind of chemo. Eventually, a clear scan. 5 years. 6 years. 7 years. He has a cancer that 5% survive 1 yr, 1% survive 3 yrs. He is the patient oncologists dream of. A survivor.
His scans are still clear. 7 and a half years now. He still gets scanxiety, but has learned to ride with it. And I still have a brother. They took the port out finally, and a few months later gave him a heart monitor. LOL. Right under the port scar. He sent me a picture (he's thoughtful that way, knows I'll fuss otherwise). He might outlive me. He turns 68 next week.
I know your journey is different. You have a different kind of cancer and they are all different. But you have something about you that is very much like my brother. My brother isn't a warrior. He's just fully alive in himself. You are too.
And he has some pretty choice thing to say about our health care system and ESPECIALLY insurance companies too. No holds barred, he does become a warrior when it comes to dealing with them!
Liz, thanks for this. I grew up in a medical family. I saw how the move towards managed care in the late 1980s affected the decision making doctors had and their earnings. I guess I hoped smarter heads would prevail but the uniquely American focus on profit over process and personal interactions has driven the industry crazy.
As to your sleeping recommendations, I'll look into them. I'm fortunate to not have many bad or lingering effects from treatment, though I have some as do many survivors - fatigue, focus, sleep, and a weird blind spot right in the middle of my right eye. I don't know if the latter was causal or coincidental and it's only an issue trying to track an object in movement!
Thanks again for taking the time to read my response.
Thanx for enumerating all the points I missed in my little rant. If they do not transfer to the rightful next president, I am ready to dust off my winter clothes, put on my mask and go to DC for one last fist in the air, hopefully surrounded by other real patriots.
Protest everyway u want, but not the way they want. I’m worried about DC streets Jan 6th. They seek not rational debate nor dialogue. They want confrontation and violence. They want the never ending Spectacle to spin their alternate dark reality. Lets not give it to them.
I agree - those who are sane & true patriots will only put themselves in danger by coming up against these nutjobs - it wont accomplish anything, but possibly give the idjt an excuse to go further than he has already.
Yes---Jan 6 is dangerous moment for this country. And now with the Senators signing on to challenge electors......... What have we come to (it does not look good ......)
Rob, you caught a lot of points. We'd be here all day if we each tried to enumerate them. Hopefully, all of our comments taken together reflect how our blood is boiling at being played for dupes. I first attended the national moratorium on Vietnam in 1969. We haven't kept up a level of public protest since then until this year. It should be a go to action more frequently, and I'd be proud to join you in DC.
Okay, guys. If you do end up in DC, please be careful. There be crazies there, and they be armed! Perhaps you might consider joining a local protest instead?
Know what, guys? Pay attention to the Black women. They know what they are doing, and the rest of us figure they are in charge. If they say stay home, stay home. If they say, ok, come and stand with us, go and stand with them. IF they say, dopes, leave anything that even could be construed a weapon at home, you do that. You don't even think about it. You just do it. If your blood is boiling, you keep yourself at home, because boiling blood makes you unfit to be on the streets. Got that? Hey, got that??? Good. Because that is the only way this can be. Lots of us been planning, training, teaching, reaching out. Don't be messing us up.
Bravo! Well said. Opportunistic indeed! There are so many opportunities for this new administration to "build back better" which must include a holding to account of all who were complicit for it is not sufficient to move on for the sake of " bringing America together". Americans need to see that no one is above the law and that money, power, and influence will not be enough to protect those who committed themselves to undermining democracy. An overhaul of all those things revealed by the incompetency of the Trump administration must also be addressed. I know Biden's got a HUGE mess to clean up, and I know he will allow his DOJ and Intelligence Community to do their job without his interference as it should be. I know this will take time.
A couple of hours ago, I posted this question. “Action items for today?” I was serious. Perhaps, your comment might be a place where suggested actions would land??
William, good point, well made. Issue is that those in the GOP who still respect democracy have had very little to say for 4 years. I'd be more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt had they spoken up at ANY time in the past, but I don't recall hearing them.
If you're familiar with the fable of the Little Red Hen. She was baking bread and needed some assistance at each stage - planting the wheat, harvesting the wheat, cutting the wheat, grinding the wheat, finally baking the bread. At each point no one stepped up to help but they all wanted a piece of the bread. Seems to be an apt analogy.
True that. Guess the simple point is--they failed us, our democracy and they are responsible for the deaths of many of our citizens. Incredible—they claim to be pro-lifers.
You cannot support trump and our democracy at the same time. That good old America cowboy sentiment-- "You are either with us or against us."
Delicate indeed because so many of them didn’t speak up when they should have—so how should we really know who cared more about democracy or just keeping their own power?
Thank you Scott; Bruce has conveyed proper sentiments. So sorry (weak words, but what we have) to hear of your medical condition. Alas. Good luck in the coming time. And may be get better national plans to cover everything.
Thank you. I'm doing well right now and that's about all I can control. Hopefully this country will come to its senses about health care.
Earlier in my career I consulted to several companies trying to figure out how "managed care" was going to affect the industry. While I could see some benefits in improving the processes to access she deliver health services, it soon became clear that enabling decisions for care to be made by insurers could lead to decisions made for motives of profit. At the time medical costs were skyrocketing in large part due to new technologies. But my own experiences with medical services and billing exposed some very distorted practices.
I'm of the opinion that not every industry should be allowed to operate under an unlimited profit model. Pharmaceuticals, medicine, and education need to move towards a capped or cost plus model so that squeezing 5000% profit on an aspirin delivered during a hospital stay isn't the norm.
Thanks for adding more Scott from a bit of an inside position.. Yes, the system is out of control and profit is a major ingredient in all the players. (of course you have to have balanced books, but....) I recommend a Time magazine article from 5 or more years ago that lays bare the pricing "practices" of hospitals---and their buying and building sprees. Best in the future!
We must be VERY careful with comments like "If we're serious about continuing to pursue "American ideals" we need to be willing to draw the line between free speech and seditious speech". Any attempt to limit free speech will hurt us all. I would rather deal with the problems we have now as a result of free speech than deal with the problems of NOT having free speech. No matter what definition you create for "seditious", it will be twisted to stop alternative views that are currently not popular.
I raised those points very reluctantly. But there must be some consequences going beyond voicing different views when those views are advocating violence against those with whom you disagree. And people far smarter than I have confirmed that many of these statements go beyond the pale and meet the definition of sedition.
The GOP has been twisting meaning for years. Any disagreement with their positions was deemed un-American or worse, anti-American. Calls for helping the less fortunate or for providing adequate health care, etc, have been labeled "socialism."
So I'm aware of the dangers but we've already been subjected to the very same perversions that you're cautioning me about making.
I am glad you bring this up, for the sake of discourse, but is there no way to give this president consequences for the violence he incited? If I called for a hate group to stand by, it would mean and cause nothing. He was hired and empowered by the people to lead our country and uphold our constitution and our democracy. When do his words become sedition?
It seems to me that if there's an implied threat of violence then that changes things. The rhetoric of some of these people, including Dear Big Orange Leader, can be interpreted as calls for violence. There is no place for that. Also, as to what constitutes "hate speech", there might be some disagreement as to whether or not it constitutes free speech, but I think we can all recognise it. It's like what CJ Warren (I think it was) of the SCOTUS said about porn...something to the effect of "I may not be able to define it, but I certainly know it when I see it..."
The SCOTUS quote was from Potter Stewart. But the context was the difficulty of defining what was "obscene." This seems to me to be akin in some ways to the problems that selecting a class of speech as "hate speech" raises. "Sedition" itself, while it would seem to be easier to define, has been flexibly legislated and judicially ruled upon over the years. Whatever the philological disputes, Trump and the supporting Repos should be repeatedly and loudly called out as the true "enemies of the people," though their fulminations are likely to be deemed legal.
Tom, it's particularly concerning that the president is leading these calls but the distinction seems to be whether force is used or not.
Per Findlaw, "Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it."
Title 18 of the U.S. Code (which includes treason, rebellion, and similar offenses), specifically 18 U.S.C. § 2384. According to the statutory definition of sedition refers to interference or obstruction by force. It says that "Simply advocating for the use of force is not the same thing and in most cases is protected as free speech under the First Amendment.
It concludes that "the goal is to prevent threats against the United States while protecting individuals' First Amendment rights, which isn't always such a clear distinction."
That said, I'm not sure why, for example, the people who were plotting to kidnap Michigan's governor shouldn't be charged with Sedition. Isn't kidnapping implicitly using force?
You're absolutely right - their fulminations will likely be deemed legal though an arrest might be a wake-up call.
I am not looking forward to January 6. I've seen more than one white supremacist on social media encourage others to turn out armed in DC and other seats of government on that day to protest the official recognition of the electoral college results by both houses of Congress.
Right now, my state senate (WA) is working on a bill to prohibit open carrying of weapons to protests - as we've already had one shooting in recent weeks in an encounter between T****ist white supremacists, anti-fascists, and police. Of course, there is no guarantee that the police - who will continue to be openly armed at all times - will not open fire.
That’s a good point that law enforcement is not the only tool in the toolbox. There is also the court of public opinion—to which trump has been taking his case that the 2020 election was “stolen” from him—and we are all free to use it to call out seditious behavior.
I am in no way agreeing with or supporting what Trump has done. He is dangerous. I am simply saying that free speech is such a valuable right that I prefer to err on the side of more free speech than less. I prefer to deal with the consequences of too much free speech, rather than the consequences of too little. But I agree, free speech has and will continue to be taken too far by some.
Bob and Linda, I do agree with you. However, I struggle with the fact that the president is leading this charge and advocating - verbally - that violence be done if that will effect his continued power. I can't recall many historical examples in this country where the alleged leadership is advocating violent acts - as I tried to point out re Bannon and DeGenova. And I don't understand why, their words aside, that no one has been held accountable to comply with the law whether it was in regard to subpoenas during impeachment, campaign finance violations, or overturning elections. This just makes it easier for the despot in waiting.
In a world where unlimited corporate contributions to political campaigns constitutes "free speech", and where the President of the United States can threaten citizens and write proven lies on Twitter, I think we do need some limits. This is why the courts have been concerned with the limits of protected speech ever since the first amendment to the Constitution was made. Libel and slander (particularly of private individuals with no public forum in which to defend themselves), child pornography, and language to incite violence (or "fighting words") have all been categorized as unprotected speech at some point.
Speaking as a far-leftist who recently stumbled into this lovely echo chamber, I'm concerned about some of what is being said here, because it appears to betray some missing historical context - and as we all know, those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
Ben Sasse's statement of "Adults don't point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government", while true, is laughably out-of-context. Readers of history will know that - whether we reach hundreds of years back to the electoral disenfranchisement of women and enslaved Africans - or a hundred years back to the takeover of the Hawaiian kingdom - or twenty years back to Bush v. Gore - or ten years back to the drone-assassinations of American citizens by the Obama administration - or four years back to the DNC/media meddling against Sanders - or anytime throughout these years, to the many ways in which people of color and those of lesser socioeconomic status have been aggressively disenfranchised by Republicans through ostensibly "legal" means - American democracy is most accurately understood as "rule between the best-organized mobs", not as "legitimate self-government [by all]".
The lines of demarcation between American mobs of power are nuanced and volatile, but have been exemplified in the recent past by groups such as unions, churches, think tanks, political parties, protest movements, and other dominant social networks. But it is ultimately the dominant social networks which decide our collective fate. The most successful American electoral mobs do not commonly assert their power through physical violence or obviously illegal means, but we regularly see them rally their power through media platforms, public relation/sentiment campaigns, finance networking, peer pressure, and other forms of persuasion and bullying. However, in far too many cases - as most Americans learn and know - the legality of activity does not equate to the ethical legitimacy of such activity. Bush's win over Gore in 2000 was legal, even as it was unethical, just as the DNC's snuffing of Sanders was legal, even as it was unethical. We therefore cannot solely examine legality when examining the legitimacy of a democracy.
It is telling to watch the nakedly hypocritical behavior of Democrats during these times. Most Democrats are currently waging a war against "secret corporate algorithms", such as those used by Facebook to peddle misinformation for clicks (advertising money), or those used by private contractors to scrub voter rolls of voters who are likely to vote Democrat. Yet, in spite of significant doubts raised over the last decade about the security and trustworthiness of voting machine code by journalists like Greg Palast - in spite, even, of months of concern that voting systems across the country had critical susceptibilities to foreign interference from actors like Russia - the integrity of electoral machines has been treated as sacrosanct ever since the outcome was solidly in favor of Biden.
Listen to whatever echoes you like, but to millennials/Berniecrats the idea that American democracy qualifies as "legitimate self-government" is a joke. Have none of the self-professed history buffs here read Gilens & Page, 2014? Their work examined public policy from 1981 onward and found that "Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence."
People feel the erosion of democracy. You must understand your context to understand your audience: given our country's awful (and modern) history of electoral suppression, the only people who have sensible reason to trust that we are engaged in "legitimate self-government" are those who have recently won control of it; the rest of us are left to sort through "big data" and piles of bad actors and then to try to convince ourselves that we prefer our hollowed-out sense of trust to the perils of sedition. But do we? If Trump had won a second term, how many of us would have questioned the legitimacy of his victory?
Again, people feel the erosion of democracy. Consequently, to far too many of us - myself and many Sanders supporters included - the known perils of sedition have indeed become preferable to the unknown perils born of untrustworthy neighbors.
I do not have much hope for a reversal of course here, since it would require that those in greatest power make the greatest sacrifices: choosing to trust, respect, and share power with those who they belittle. Instead, on the left, we watch as the next generation of political strategists are relegated to the sidelines as the septuagenarian overlords of the Democrat Party transition into octogenarian overlords, even as they regularly fumble their way out of near-certain victories.
Wake me up and ask me about "legitimate self-government" after Pelosi puts together the first-ever nonagenarian committee to kill movement on Medicare-for-All (yet again). Anyone who believes that American democracy is working for the common person is living in a bubble of extreme privilege, even as it remains rather obvious to the rest of us that survivability depends on trust - and that survivability & trust will always take precedent over popular fairy tales about self-government. (Continued...)
Do my words qualify as the sort of "anitdemocratic" behavior over which you would like the US/DOJ/law enforcement to act? Should it act to restrain people like me, who believe in the virtues of open-mindedness, diversity, fairness, reason, and freedom - yet who also believe that our Republican and Democrat contemporaries are so-abysmally failing at protecting these virtues, while simultaneously allowing so little space for alternatives - that we would rather dissolve the formerly-United States than entrust our futures to it?
Mr. Krasner, it may stun you to learn that - in spite of the rhetorical eloquence and appeals to virtue by you and your fellow posters here - our trust in your cohort as "legitimate" defenders of democracy does not extend much beyond the trust we have for Trump and his supporters, for we have watched your cohort rally to the untruths championed by your leaders just as readily as we have watched Trump supporters rally to his own lies. The collective obsequiousness to media- and political party-leadership has been just as frightening to observe in Democrats as it has been to observe in Republicans.
You'll get neither surprise nor forgiveness from me for suggesting electroshock violence against your adversaries, just as any fascist Trump supporter might. The hundred people who liked your comment, in spite of its implicit call to violence, ought to share in your shame when they look at themselves in the mirror. Instead, they will wake up fresh tomorrow, wholly unexamined, to laud their own virtue and decry Trump's "violent goons", only hours after playing with similar sentiments themselves.
All of this said, I agree with you that Republican critics of Trump are mere opportunists. And yet, we are all in danger of becoming opportunists, when presented with low-hanging-but-unearned fruits. You need only look to your own words as an example.
You want security for your democracy, but what would you trade for it? I am a family- and community-committed person who works hard as a researcher in the public sector. I attend to my societal obligations without much quarrel for myself, even as I recognize and fight against the many systemic injustices experienced by others. But I lost faith in the current manifestation of the American system many years ago and have since become a secessionist/separatist/seditionist: I want and intend to see the dissolution of the United States within my lifetime, just as one might hope to escape a toxic relationship through divorce.
You can hate me and my peers for losing faith in you and wanting to leave you - and the colonial spirit in you may compel you to try to prevent my from reclaiming my freedom from you - but in no ethical universe can you unilaterally claim state authority over myself or others who demand freedom from you. If the Trumpists want a government that is independent from yours, they ought to have it; so too should we Democratic Socialists have the freedom to develop our society, just as Native Americans and Black Americans who historically agitated for their own sovereignty should have had (and ought still have) theirs.
We should all be free, in due time and legal course and with sufficient popular support, to claim sovereignty from those who threaten us. Anything else is tyranny. And while such tyranny has often met the atrocious legal standards of atrocious times, the right to be free from untrusted authority will always be the most American of virtues, and one which we should all support.
Mr. Krasner, as you instruct us to "be more discerning about accepting 'laws' that limit our Constitutional rights", I caution you to apply this warning to the very sentence you spoke before it, for your efforts to "draw the line" between free speech and seditious speech is exactly the sort of tempting low-hanging fruit which will bring poisonous results to our society. It should not be the role of a democratic government to punish people who have lost faith in the society, any more than it should be the role of a court to punish a divorcee who has lost faith in a marriage.
As someone who genuinely wants freedom and safety for your family - while simultaneously believing that you and your peers are doing a terrible job at protecting these things for me & mine - I am afraid I must say "Fuck, no, we're not going to take that" to your authoritarian aspirations. You - and too many others - seem to much prefer the easy task of passing a few authoritarian laws to silence your opposition to the hard task of either persuading them to your side or else freeing them from the relationship.
But I suppose this is to be expected of the descendants of colonialists and monarchs, whether they wear red or blue. What little changes.
I did not call for violence. I do not object to anyone's First Amendment rights to disagree. What I object to is a president leading the charge to undermine Constitutional processes for his own benefit and to incite violence against his own citizenry.
I also object to an administration that makes no pretense to the fact that they're out for their own good and screw the rest of us, and have done so with no consequences whatsoever.
If you really read what I wrote, you'd see that i thought Trump proved the essential toothlessness of the Constitution. I'm not advocating passing authoritarian rules to punish those with whom I disagree. I am questioning why we have laws that address such behavior yet we only seem to pursue them if the targets aren't wealthy enough to fight back.
I'm not a descendant of colonialists or monarchs. My grandparents all fled authoritarian regimes and immigrated to America. I take it seriously that they sought better lives here. I'm also not a Pollyanna about the imperfections of this country.
So if you'd like to get off of your high horse and think about the fact that it shouldn't be unreasonable to demand accountability and honesty from elected representatives, I'll be happy to exchange ideas. But sanctimonious and smug insinuations that my views are informed by a privileged background is the wrong place to begin that discourse.
All who are raised in America are indoctrinated in imperialist and colonialist thought, regardless of our ancestry. Like systemic racism, it is in the very air we breathe. Even as we work to grow beyond it, it will always color our thought.
In a kinder world, Scott, you seem like a good neighbor to have. But we don't live in that world, so I will remain high horsed, smug, and sanctimonious about your vile implication that some people are deserving of electro shock "therapy". It's little surprise that you didn't (or couldn't) defend those words.
But I'm not here to insult you - just to ask for recognition of the facts. This country is deeply divided. The events of the day prove it. If Trump had succeeded in thwarting democracy, would it have been our duty to march uoon - and retake, by any means necessary - the reins of our democracy, just as Trump's supporters are attempting? If you can't answer that with a resounding YES, then you simply aren't prepared for this moment in time.
This is our crisis - and this is our reality. Americans, at large, objectively lack reason to place trust in this democracy. Until that trust is repaired - or the untrusting relationships are dissolved - we will not make forward progress as a country.
I don't believe we can restore the trust. I also don't believe we can persuade, as most suggest - or failing that, coerce, as you imply - most Republicans & Trump supporters back into a mutually trusting and respecting relationship of governance.
And when the efforts of you and your peers to persuade, marginalize, intimidate and eventually suppress recalcitrant Trumpsters only succeed in worsening the divisions, it will inevitably lead to a worsening backlash of marginalization, intimidation, and suppression aimed squarely at us.
So please, for the love of reason if nothing else: we must resist our colonialist impulse to "win" a culture and instead embrace the work of national divorce. We need to dissolve our governmental ties with ALL who can no longer share government in good faith.
The other paths lead only to stubbornness and ruin.
I won't pretend to understand all of what you've said here, Pete, but thank you for writing it. I expect I'll be reading it over and over, trying to learn and understand more each time. I too am a Bernie supporter. I still struggle to channel my rage and frustration with the DNC's betrayal, but must do more than sport a bumper sticker that reads, "Don't blame me; I voted for Bernie".
Beth, I wasn't a Bernie supporter but neither was I a Biden supporter. Pete has launched a broadside that seems to miss the central concerns of my response.
The DNC missed a great opportunity to introduce new blood into the party. I believe that had Sanders won out in the primaries he, too, would have had to deal with the restrictions of the coronavirus. It would've made it hard for him to get out and convince the skeptics of his ability to lead the country out of its current political morass.
He's an interesting guy who struck a real nerve about America's disconnect between its ideals and its reality regarding income inequality. I also think he was better at stirring up the sentiments of charge but less qualified to implement said change than Elizabeth Warren, for instance. I think she was the smartest and best candidate. She spent a lot of time and effort to develop plans to implement change. For her efforts she took a lot of crap from other candidates who hadn't taken anywhere near the same level of effort. It's easy to complain but harder to come up with they ideas.
Your last point is very important. Regardless of who we preferred we have any obligation to try and defeat Trump and all he stands for. I'm sorry your guy didn't win but Pete Lewis's screed that I'm writing out if some sense of privilege is misguided.
Scott, I hear your outrage and I am with you in that outrage. I'm not sure why you feel the need to defend yourself to me about what Pete said. The parts of Pete's post that I find interesting are not the parts where he mentions your comments, if that needed clarifying for you. I also didn't solicit your or anyone's opinion about Bernie (my support of him goes back to the 2016 election so your comments about the virus are irrelevant). You might have fallen a bit here into the trap of taking too personally what Pete said. When this happens to me, I find it helpful to take a few deep breaths, step back and re-focus on the ideas, which are not me, and which can be expanded, contracted, refined, and turned on their head sometimes by listening openly with a very capable brain and not the defensive ego.
Thank you, Beth. I was actually more of a Bernie critic than a supporter, even though I consider him far more trustworthy & desirable than most. I channel my rage by remembering how many people, just like you, are desperately trying to reason their/our way through this mess, while still holding true to our deepest values. We'll figure it out, eventually. Thank you for your efforts.
Pete, without asking you for a tome, can you explain a bit about why you were more a critic than supporter of Bernie? Trying to learn and understand. Thanks!
Here and there. Lone voices in the wind and they were ignored by their party's leadership. Doesn't really count. When push came to shove they voted with Trump. Whatever they did just wasn't sufficient.
What we've heard, over the last 4 years, have been "off the record sources" telling news reporters about Senate Republicans who were unhappy or disagreed with or were upset, astounded or, an oldie but goodie, "concerned" about the President's behavior, comments, actions, positions or whatever his daily diversion was. They knew, they enabled, they were complicit and they did nothing. You're right, what they did "wasn't sufficient" and look where we are now.
Once. In February at the impeachment hearings. But he's not built upon that as a consistent voice that calls out the daily attacks and transgressions of this administration. Once or twice is insufficient. We've been assaulted for at least 4 years.
Tell me, while we're at it - why did Romney renounce a very successful health care program he implemented as governor of Massachusetts when he ran for president in 2012? He could have been a leading compassionate conservative that Bush spoke about. But the GOP didn't support any public welfare program and he, too, feared being branded as not conservative enough or as a Socialist. Which, by the way, is a term not understood by 95% of the people who toss it around.
With passage of the NDAA, I am happy to be starting this new year with anti-corruption law passed bipartisanly and look forward to corrupt abusers being held accountable.
I am relieved to have a stronger divide between trumpists and our military.
If only the mental clarity which got the Republican Senate to support overriding Trump's veto of the NDAA had been present when that body was asked to act on his impeachment which the House had already passed.! One never can be sure what motivates Republicans. Fear of Trump's base? Generous financial support from the very wealthy and business interests? Inclusion of the TCA's money-tracking features in the bill cannot be overestimated. Let's just hope Trump and his corrupted DOD don't do anything crazy between now and January 20.
tRump has already called out his domestic terrorists to riot and shoot the bad guys (and that gal) at the Inauguration, but the military Chiefs of Staff have made clear they will treat these fanatics as the terrorists they are. Probably doesn't hurt that the DOD just got their annual allowance.
I have never understood the word Conservative as it applies to the politicians who call themselves Republican and am not excited about Romney and others call the "Republican Party to the true conservatism it abandoned a generation ago" Seems to me that over the past Century+ it's been conserve their individual wealth and power not conserve our democracy or our natural resources... Conserve the white male dominated institutions not the idea of justice for all.
You are absolutely correct! Every time I hear any of them revere Reagan and what he did for this country is nauseating. It’s what he did TO us, is what is revolting.
Baseball Hall of Famer and 20th Century philosopher Yogi Berra said “It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.” but just when will this be over. It should have been over when Pennsylvania declared Biden the winner of its electoral votes, but it wasn’t. It should have been over on December 14, when the Electoral College certified the election results, confirming Biden as the next President, 306 votes to 232. But it wasn’t. Even after a disastrous string of lawsuits seeking to overturn the election results, losing or having tossed out of court 60 of 61 challenges, it should have been over. But it wasn’t. Anyone but a masochist, or Trump, would have faced the inevitable reality that it was over. But it still isn’t. Now we face the political theater of January 6, when the ceremonial task of accepting the outcome of the Electoral College vote should declare this election over. But it probably won’t. Finally, at noon on January 20, when Biden is sworn in, it should be over. But I fear it won’t. With Trump seditiously encouraging violence by his supporters, this may not be over until Trump is locked away, either for tax fraud in New York State, or committed to a psychiatric facility as a threat the nation. I am SO looking forward to having adults back in charge of the nation.
I agree. We cannot sit back and think this is over. His tweet about January 6, see you in D.C., feels ominous. I think that, if Biden were to pardon him or fail to hold him accountable for his actions against this country, we will just be asking for more and worse in the future in much the same way that Nixon’s pardon has brought us here. There must be consequences.
Projection is the narcissists' primary bludgeon. That is why, after five years, I am sooo very tired of this abuse. And elected officials have been complicit in their silence.
Perhaps if we follow Manadork’s playbook from Ukraine. It’s possible the proud boys take up a permanent protest camp in dc until removed by force, continuing but increasing the tension, and outrage.
These guys can't hold together any kind of plan for more than 15 minutes. They eat in restaurants, sleep in hotel beds (when they are allowed in). Camp? LOL. Ever been in WaDC in January?
I hope you are right. I'm heeding the words of Tim Snyder, in The Road to Unfreedom and On Tyranny. In these two books Dr. Snyder parallels the fall of European democracy's with this administration's style, policy, and actions. So I think it is wise for everyone to start thinking of their own "unthinkable".
"Stay calm when the unthinkable arises". Everyday, a more and more unthinkable keeps arising. This is way to authoritarianism by the reality TV script. Keep escalating the spectacle to exhaust the people, turning exhaustion into apathy. Complete consolidation of power comes with some simple bureaucratic act behind the larger violent or eye candy spectacle. It has never fully happened here, so we American's mistakenly believe democracy is inevitable and eternal, but it is not and history proves this.
Yes, I agree it is possible here. It has happened here, and the remnants of it are what feed the occasional flareups that have occurred throughout our history. It started with the forcible displacement of the many Indigenous peoples to whom I am related in various degrees, and to the African-ancestored forced here, to the Japanese, and Chinese and Mexicans who came here to labor. My own family still bears the scars of their own displacement, not only geographically but culturally.
I do not believe democracy is inevitable in this country, and I especially do not believe that the USA is exceptional. But I do believe that democracy is the natural way of healthy cultures when they are allowed to thrive. Many Indigenous cultures are returning to their old ways of making decisions, here and on other continents. Perhaps, with care, it will become a movement. I think that is as much a possibility as the other way. The other way is inherently unstable, but democracy in one form or another keeps coming back. Already the Trump era is disintegrating- interesting to see it happen in real time, rather like watching road kill return to the elements.
At any rate, my response was specifically about the Proud Boys, who I have seen in action and watched as they met one prediction after another, never quite getting to where they said they were going. They seem to be morphing into a new organization now, so it's hard to tell. They still seem fragmented and essentially leaderless, despite the presence of a man who calls himself their leader, somewhat like a schoolyard set of showoffs. He has been arrested, and of course pretends it doesn't matter to him. It makes him, for a minute, the center of attention, and eventually, like the one before him, someone will replace him and the group will fragment.
You are right about Trump's escalation, but if you've ever had the misfortune to live with a mentally unstable person with narcissistic tendencies, you will know that that is predictable too. I don't think I was the only one not surprised by Sunday's phone call. What did surprise me was how very perfect it was for the concerns we have about him. He overdid it, and had no awareness that he did. Now he is trying to figure out what went wrong.
Tomorrow will be whatever it turns out to be. Portland survived; so will WaDC, and on Jan 20th we will all stop living in limbo and move on.
Jan 20th is an odd anniversary for me. On that day last year I was assaulted by the man who brings my firewood. I managed to escape but not without injury, both to my body and my psyche. My body healed, but the spirit takes longer. A month after the court date, I came down with Covid19, which took all my energy and attention. It took its own good time to let go of me, so I've had plenty of time to read and write and explore wherever my computer could take me.
I am looking forward to Jan 20th. I will celebrate survival, my own, and our country's. I might even put up an American flag, for the first time in my life. I am Quaker and do not normally do such things. But this might be a time to make that exception.
As I read your reply, Karen, it hit me that 45 would spit in the face of a pardon since he would vigorously deny he committed no crimes for which he needed to be pardoned. Just my thought.
Karen, thought you might be interested in this that I just posted above:
As a side note: Lake Superior State University just banned the use of the word "Karen" because "What began as an anti-racist critique of the behavior of white women in response to Black and Brown people has become a misogynist umbrella term for critiquing the perceived overemotional behavior of women. As one nominator said about reasons for its banishment, “I would tell you why, but I’d sound like a Karen.” Another critic observed, “Offensive to all normal people named Karen.” They also banned, "I know, right!"
I think that Trump will never give up. He is inciting violence now, as Heather points out. It is just a logical next step for him. I don't think it will be any more effective than any of his previous stunts. One day he will have spun out of politics, and I hope that the attention his antics have secured from the adults in the room will at least ensure some adult leadership now. I hope so.
HCR, it sounds like Sasse is reading your daily letters! His tactics have changed significantly in the last few months, to using source citations and academic style in order to present himself as the "rational Republican." As a resident of Missouri, I can attest that Hawley is deeply, deeply stupid and suffers excessively from Whiney White Man Syndrome as well. There are some who are trying to present him as the new "intellectual" in the Not-the-Party-of-Lincoln but, as in the attempt to cast Gingrich as anything other than a sleazeball goniff in the 1990s, he fails every test for maturity, intellect, and rationality. This is a blatant and cynical ploy to capture some of the more deranged of the Cheeto supporters. In Missouri, this population is made up of rural residents who are characterized by extreme levels of opioid addiction and death, gun violence--especially domestic violence against women and children--and extreme racism. These are the people he wants as his "base." He is a pathetic and revolting specimen of the "new" GOP.
Dems could make this really fun by challenging electoral college votes for Trump in the states where he "won." I know they won't but I don't understand why there are no pundits around who are suggesting this. They could also challenge the legitimacy of the election of "Republican" senators and congresspeople in the states where Biden-Harris won. I would enjoy that.
It’s funny (in a very ugly way). Pols like Ted Cruz (Princeton, Harvard) and Hawley (Stanford, Yale, Supreme Court clerk) are not stupid. Which makes their ignorant politics and principles doubly wrong. They know better, they’re just deeply cynical. Pols like Hawley promote stupid ideas and destructive policies because the Republican voter base is deeply stupid, and Hawley needs to play down to their level. The deep-rooted problem of the Republican party is that it’s beholden to its ignorant, bitter, racist, anti-science, religious base. That’s why we’re astonished when a Republican like Romney or Sasse says something reasonably intelligent. Trump’s voters will reject them - intelligence is elitist, after all. There are 70 million ignoramuses in the Republican party, and they aren’t going away. Hawley is doubling down on the stupid, for him it’s a winning strategy.
You beat me to this response. The Republican Right's "leaders" are mostly VERY well-educated and DEEPLY cynical. It is a mistake to dismiss them as "stupid."
I differentiate between having gone to school and being educated. These men may not be stupid. But they lack manners, are unethical, unprincipled, and unworldly. They degrade their alma maters and are, apologies for my limited vocabulary, #motherfuckers.
Perhaps it is the Ivy League schools who are to blame for letting these people have permission to use them as breeding grounds for their ideology. Just sayin’...
I don’t think ideology has anything to do with Hawley’s politics. I doubt he believes any of the MAGA drivel he spouts. For him it’s pure ambition. He’s a carnival barker who sees the Trump base as a bunch of rubes he can fleece by playing to their superstitions and bigotry. I’ll bet he looks down on his voters with contempt...
TOP RESPONSE OF THE DAY! Thank you, Linda! Oh, my, that was rich use of some colorful language. I love that good say-it-like-it-is approach (I get in trouble for it sometimes, but dang, I can keep it in just so long). I laughed too hard, now have to go throw snowballs to get rid of some of this giggly energy. You. my dear lady, made my day. After reading too many overly somber posts, I really needed this.
Although I love/rely/depend on your Letters for their invaluable perspectives, I have to admit that there have been days (or the wee small hours of the morning) that I have had to steel myself to read them. Those were the days when the exhaustion of the fight were overwhelming, and I just didn't want any more confirmation of the fact that Trump was only an evil pawn of a figurehead for an evil and constant force arrayed against the shining light of democracy that is our country. But read them I must, and read them I did.
Ah, but today, a sense of satisfaction! The action of the veto override and the acceptance of the processes of our election PROVE your underlying message that elected representatives bow to our influence as voters. And, to our influence as participants in the process of government.
I do not think this represents a wave of democratic realization. Their actions are too little, too late, and too self-serving. Our participation, for the most part, has been at the end of the game, at the ballot box, instead of at the beginnings in focus groups, party participation at the local level, and contact with our elected officials. But it is still a clear and recognizable milestone to be celebrated and built upon.
In the words of the recently published profile of you, your schedule is "unsustainable," and your gifts to us have been at great personal cost. We need to find a way to continue the information flow beyond your expected "retirement" 100 days into the Biden Administration. Perhaps a Think Tank could be established and writings prepared for your review prior to publication? Perhaps a consortium of scholars who could supplement your expertise in the Reconstruction of the South with concentration on other periods of American History? Perhaps your writings could be collected in a text book with discussion questions for local community groups and/or high schools, since our current civics education is so lacking? I, for one, would gladly join and financially support such a group and/or effort.
I want to comment on your last paragraph. Heather is a scholar who obviously loves to teach. It is wonderful that she shares her talents with us. But she does not serve us. She has shown us some ways we can think for ourselves, has directed us to some resources, has created resources. I would hate to see her try to take on the burden of being responsible for our continued education when we now know exactly what to do ourselves and can engage our own minds to continue to grow and help each other grow. I'm very happy to continue to learn from her, but I want to give back what a teacher really wants which is that I have become able to learn and develop independently.
Becky, thanks for the dialogue. I see her as a leader, and in that way, she serves us. I think it is her intention to serve us. She has stimulated our minds and created this community. I think where we differ is our respective analyses of whether or not we "know exactly what to do," our need for more perspective on the new tacks (or attacks) that the moneyed elite will try when Biden is president, and more. What I am suggesting is a way that she can do more, but in a less self-sacrificing way that provides a transition. Lev Vygotsky's educational theory of The Zone of Proximal Development applies here: We learn best when we are presented with knowledge that is close to what we already know. When information is presented that is too far from our knowledge base, we do not know how to assimilate it. There's a wonderful meme going around right now about people who said as students, "I'll never be a scientist, why do I need to study that?" and who now don't accept science. In short, I think transition from knowledge through understanding to applied action is the crowning achievement of a teacher. As an Adult Educator myself, there is nothing more satisfying than seeing my students apply the lessons in their own lives. I am suggesting that the struggle is ongoing, and that a wonderful reward to Professor Richardson could be found in seeing her work continued on in an "institutionalized" way.
KEM, I see your point and understand your wish to see Heather's work continue. It will, but on her terms. She has mentioned that she is considering several options, and I believe she wants to continue in her current position. Whatever she decides, it will be something fulfulling to her. I love her delight when she really gets on a roll! She loves history and she loves sharing it. It sparks my own desire to explore the meaning of history and is one reason I am here. I realize you do not mean "institutionalized" in a literal sense. But there is something a little patronizing in assuming that she needs advice on how to proceed. What she has created out of her own passion, insight, and delight (and her amazing network both among professionals and ordinary nerds) is proof that she is perfectly capable of envisioning her own future and making it happen. The rest? That really is up to us.
I love that we share deep respect and admiration for HCR! Thanks for raising your concern and I hope this clarifies what I meant to say. The delusions of grandeur of patronizing and advice-giving are not in my mind at all. More than once she has asked about our ideas on what we would like to see going forward so that this type of dialogue realizes her goal--that this dialogue becomes not about "her own future" but about ours. I think of it this way: I would like to see access to the relationship of history to today's politics continue. It needs to be less demanding of her, less dependent solely on her goodwill, and less hit-and-miss than the torrent of FB posts with questionable resources. That means "institutionalized" in the sense of on-going.
HCR was instrumental in opening our minds and encouraging us to continue our education and learn from each other. Too bad those still desperately clinging to Trumpism refuse to learn from reliable resources like HCR.
So some republicans found some backbone, but only because at this point they have nothing to fear from trump. They should not be applauded for doing their jobs, but questioned as to why they have refused for four years to reign in their monster and put a bit in his mouth. Sadly the republicans that have stood up in support of overturning the election will not even face even public censure let alone being denied their seats and charged with seditious acts by the democratic leadership which has shown itself to be equally toothless and cowardly.
And that really makes me angry. They should be sent packing. I imagine that almost everyone is just so sick and tired of the fighting for justice. Trump and the seditious lemmings are all like symptoms of the virus. Biden and Harris are the vaccine. But those who continue to attempt to overthrow the election are resistant to it and will feed the next strain.
I agree Pamela. They have nothing to fear except the corner they have painted themselves into. They could have impeached him easily. They just had no backbone and continue to have no backbone.
Warms the cockles of my scottish heart...and my sassenach mind. It reminds me of what Hogmenay means and should really be like. I'm getting out my kilt, sporan and dirk for 2021 as i'm officially no longer a European citizen...Brexit oblige!
Sassenach originally meant "foreign" or "alien" but was applied to the English as a derogatory linguistic deformation given their atrocious attitude and behaviour towards the Scots. My mother was from a highlander family of MacDonald, MacFie and Christie heritage.
Thank you, Ellie. I recently learned that I have an early Highland Scot ancestor who mysteriously emigrated to Leyden (Leiden) and married a Dutch woman. They emigrated to Rhode Island, then a colony. One suspects noncomformity, or rather persecution for it, but I have as yet no documentation (because I have not yet looked). He perhaps accounts for the smidgen of a smidgen over half of Gaelic that I am (the half is easily accounted for by grands and great-grands, and the rest of the incomplete half is a jumble from N Europe, western America, and Africa. I apparently have little or no English, which I am fine with. But genetics is always a crap shoot once you get a couple generations back.
I'm not suicidal. Independance for Scotland would be "difficult" ...that's the least one can say. What will be interesting will be the tug-of-war over the Northern Irish situation (being still within the EU for trade purposes) and whether the Scots will push to have similar advantages. These are the forces that will test th United Kingdom.
So, with Brexit, what happens to UK citizens who are living on the continent? Are you grandfathered in, or you a French citizen? (I made an assumption of your UK origins, but perhaps I deduced incorrectly).
Brits currently living in EU maintain existing priviledges. We just have to request an identity card or should we wish any EU citizenship just as existing EU citizens in the UK.
He keeps his British nationality nonetheless and has less trouble moving around etc. I could do likewise but i have 2 passports already and don't feel particularly French!
Possibilty but not probability! They depend legally on Boris Johnson giving permission for a binding referendum...which is extremely unlikely.Even so, their "rejoining" the EEU would be somewhat problematic as they have no land border with EEU; they would hardly be a priorty as Brussels doesn't want encourage seperatists elsewhere such as the Catalan and it would cut them off from their biggest market and source of funding...England!
Beautiful, Ellie. Thanks. No, of course we must not forget 2020; for all its horrors, it has shaped us and bonded us and shown us the critical importance of defending our democracy against enemies foreign and domestic.
The "loyal opposition" has always been essential to our democracy. The dialogue and debate, a prerequisite to confronting contested issues. We need "us" all to turn this ship around together.
I hope so too. Many of the prominent Republicans who troubled me in my younger days seem so decent, reasonable and responsible now. Perspective is an amazing thing.
Happy New Year and thank you, HCR, for a pithy distillation of the NDAA. I never could have waded through it.
'Tis a pity the Republicans now abandoning Trump couldn't have found their ethical mojo sooner. (Romney excepted, sort of.) Gotta go where the wind blows, right? Even the Conservative store window display of personal responsibility, integrity, etc. isn't worth the effort any more. Everybody knows it was only for show so what's the point.
So now we have the congressional endorsement of the Electoral College vote, the Georgia Senate election, and Inauguration with President Biden sitting in the Oval Office to get through, and it's finally done.
Years, it will take many years. I pray for the country and the world to have patience, and to keep working on it. Every day. Ther surely is a lot of garbage in the proverbial basement that we don’t even know about yet.
Why do I still have a sense of insecurity even though Romney and Sasse spoke out against their colleagues? Yes, I am very glad about the passage of NDAA but I can’t help but have a sneaking suspicion that there is something further up the GOP’s sleeves.
Why is it that I got kicked off of Twitter for saying things about Fake 45 but he incites violence and murder and gets a slap on his wrist?
Four more days until the Georgia runoff is determined. I await with bated breath.
I feel the same. Only I got kicked off Youtube for merely discussing and defining what seditious and treasonous acts are. Having our freedoms of speech thwarted after 5 years of bullying and abuse from this regime and it's followers, domestic and foreign, is ironic...and sobering in a very frightening way.
Your insecurity is probably due to the fact that Romney will turn on a dime to forward his ambitions. Sasse isn't much better. I am reading Amy Siskind's book "The List". One of the items after the 2016 election was Trump wanted Romney to apologize for his opposition to Trump's candidacy in order to be considered for Secretary of State. Romney folded like a chair and then Trump smashed him like a bug. Yet, Romney continued to pander to Trump once elected to the Senate. He would come forcefully against the President on an issue and then back down. That said I do see light at the end of the tunnel especially if Georgia goes 💙 blue.
Romney is as legit as a $3 bill.... and Sass could have spoken up a long time ago. I wouldn’t trust him to bring in the paper like a ‘good dog’. Just sayin’....
It is clear to what voters Josh Hawley is aiming his Trumpian positions. Remember, in 2019, Hawley easily defeated Missouri's Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill. And just look at the margin by which Mitch McConnell defeated Amy McGrath. It is those voters about whom Americans should be concerned. They are not going away.
you are right .They are not going away. So many parallels to how eventually Hitler and the Nazi Party gained power. Endless attacks and machinations on their constitution. A very good read is The Death of Democracy : Hitler,s Rise to Power and the downfall of the Weimar Republic. So be vigilant America.!! Strengthen your Constitution!!
I'm certainly NOT a Pence fan, but Lin Wood's twitter remark sounds like a threat against the Vice-President of the US! Is there no other reaction to that other than to be removed from twitter? Seems there should be.
Normalizing political violence first in rhetoric, later in practice. This is the way of the authoritarian and Fascist. Lin Wood should be disbarred for life.
In whatever bar(s) he is certified, it requires that other member attorneys and/or judges file complaints against him. I'd hope there are enough people disgusted by his over-the-top behavior to do this.
I didn't think I'd be quoting a Republican for one of the more salient comments about both Trump's and the GOP's general insanity, but Ben Sasse was on point: "Adults don’t point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government.”
However, it's distressing that they've waited until the 11th hour for him or Romney or anyone else too speak out. It suggests that, although there's fewer than 3 weeks to go, they too feared any potential effects of a Trump lashback on their tenures.
DId the dangers of Trump's actions only now dawn on them? What, after 4 years, was the last straw whereupon they now feared "an assault on our democracy that, if it succeeds, would make Trump a dictator and remove all their power?"
Forgive my cynicism but this reeks of pure opportunitism whereby some can claim to have disassociated with Trump, because it suggests that until now, they've implicitly thought Trump was on the up and up about immigration, climate change, racism, xenophobia, and cruelty to his own citizenry. Sorry, but I have to call bullshit on this. It's much too little much too late.
On another note, it appears that seditious and/or threatening attacks are de rigeur. Noted nutcase Lin Wood (who bizarrely predicted that Vice President Mike Pence could “face execution by firing squad” for “treason.”) is not the only prominent example. Steve Bannon ("put their heads on pikes"), Michael Flynn (suggesting imposing martial law), lawyer Joe diGenova (Chris Krebs should be drawn and quartered and shot at dawn), and 17 attorneys general and 126 GOP congressional representatives (who signed on to Texas's law suit attempting to nullify votes in four states where Biden won the election).
When did the US lose the will or ability to mitigate overt antidemocratic behavior? Where is the DOJ? Where is law enforcement? Where are the voices of Sasse and Romney and others condemning these actions? In the "old days" someone like Lin Wood making such statements might have been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric or penal institution for some electroshock "therapy." It was in a recent HCR column that we learned 11 or 13 Congresspeople weren't reseated after failing to condemn the South's secession prior to the Civil War.
Lastly, this Congress and this Administration have missed a textbook opportunity expressly suited to invoking the 25th Amendment. Trump has done so many things that are antidemocratic, anti-American, and outrightly criminal during his term. Suffering no consequences, he's taken a new tack: "It seems clear that, with no chance of proving this election fraudulent, Trump is now trying to incite violence."
And yet, none of this was enough to justify his removal. I'm assuming people believe it's not worth the effort with days left before January 20th. However, failing to consider this remedy brings me back to my earlier conclusion that it's just political opportunitism so that some can claim to have disassociated with Trump, but that until now, they've implicitly thought Trump was "just being Trump" or "telling it like it is."
Sorry, this just doesn't cut it. If nothing else, Trump's Administration has proven the Constitution and our model of representative government to have few, if any, teeth. If we're serious about continuing to pursue "American ideals" we need to be willing to draw the line between free speech and seditious speech, between "no person is above the law" and "being above the law is purely situational depending on how much money or power one has." We need to be more discerning about accepting "laws" that limit our Constitutional rights to vote, assemble, demand transparency, and expect the powers of Articles I, II, and III not to be used against our well being.
In short, we need to be ready and willing to say "Fuck, no, we're not going to take it."
BEAUTIFULLY said, Scott! And to see a "poster child" for political opportunism, look no further than Georgia's very own Senator (appointed, mind you, NOT elected) Kelly Loeffler. Not too long ago (plenty of evidence to back it up) she was very much a centrist and a moderate. Only after her appointment and for the subsequent run for re-election, did she feel the political winds shifting in the GOP that necessitated her to become a raving right-wing extremist. Then followed appearances with Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA's contribution to the QAnon presence in the US House) and a guy prominent in northwest GA as a white supremacist and KKK leader--and it happened twice, which she of course denied she had any knowledge of...uh-huh...). Pure opportunism, textbook, Grade-A. And hubby just last week officially became a legit billionaire. These people are astounding in their sheer effrontery and lack of ethics.
Everything else you said is spot on and it really gripes my posterior that ALL these people will more than likely walk away from this steaming pile of excrement (AKA the Trump "administration") without any of it on them. WHY do we have all these laws if we never enforce them?? If we keep letting people get away with such infractions HOW will there ever be any deterrent to them and others doing it again and again?? I think we're all ground down to mere nubs these days after 4 years of incessant and rampant corruption and the easy way out is to just let all these folks get off just as long as they will go away and leave us alone. No. This is what they want. When WHEN will we learn?!? Thank you for your excellent post!!
Bruce, thank you. I probably just started to respond sooner than others. To your point, these have been such obvious transgressions that I cannot understand why people have been willing (?) to take for so long.
Really, this is more than a matter of political disagreement. This has also become a public health hazard, and I'm not referring to the virus. It's stressful and worrisome my guy is boiling with acid at the daily onslaught of Trump and his minions doing what they're doing without any consequences.
Quickly - I was diagnosed with "incurable Stage 4 cancer" in early 2017. It's a form of Non-Hodgkins lymphoma that is statistically very likely to recur. I was in treatment while the "debate" over repeal and replace took place. I was scared shitless that my new pre-existing condition might leave me with making a decision between pursuing medical treatment and going bankrupt or dying because I couldn't afford care. At the end of the year my billed medical bills exceeded $1M. My carrier said they plan I was on had been grandfathered and they weren't offering it any longer. My new recommendation from them took my premiums from about $1500/month to over $5000/month. Only because of the ACA was I able to continue treatment beyond 2017.
It wasn't personal but I'm only one of many people in the US facing uncertainty about my health - through no fault of my own. I'm nearly finished a book about the experience but the GOP continues to try and f--- with all of us. I'm not sure how to end the book. I'm in remission. That's good. It pains me that friends who were first in line to help me at the time voted for Trump again. Did they not know the danger their friend faced from this GOP shibboleth? I'd trust them with my life but not with my country.
Wow, Scott...thanks for sharing and showing exactly why, and with good reason, you have such a stake in this. Again, the disconnect by the people supposedly representing us is absolutely staggering. They've simply lost touch with reality and their view of the world only seems to go as far as centering on their own election to return to power. That their enablers/supporters can still maintain their support of this rotten system, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, is just mind-boggling. I genuinely mean this when I tell you that my heart really does go out to you for what you've had to endure and for what you have hanging over you. The more you can keep telling your story and getting it out there, the more the chance that others will take up the fight for you. It has to be told. And don't let friends off so lightly who voted these corrupt, out-of-touch miscreants into positions of authority. I'd be rubbing their noses in their hypocrisy. I'm a Christian and therefore try to practice forgiveness, but there are limits, and I think the great God above is not going to fault us for calling out injustices when we see and experience them. Again, thank you for your openness and honesty, and your posts show you do know how to write expertly, clearly, and concisely. I always appreciate people who know how to use the language. If a book by you comes out, I'd read it! God be with you and I hope and pray you can keep on keepin' on!! We need your voice.
So sad and sorry about your situation.... you have made a significant contribution in your life, and I am so glad that you are here. Your ‘friends’...? That is so unbelievable... I am weary from shaking my head, and from trying to shake the sorrow and disillusionment that is consuming all of us. We will hang onto your hand... tight. You are one of us!
Scott, I don't have advise. I don't do that. Besides, sounds like you got yourself together.
Here's my gift, for what it is worth: my baby brother (he's 10 years, 1 month , and 2 days younger than I am) fell over in his hotel room on a business trip one night. He thought he'd tripped and bumped his head, asked his associates at breakfast to keep an eye on him. They called the boss, who came and took my brother to the hospital.
They thought maybe he had a stroke. Did a CT and found a mass in his brain. So they put hm on a plane with his scans and records and make arrangements for his wife to pick him up and take him to a highly rated cancer hospital on the west coast near where he lives. He spent the night having scans and being needle marked and all that stuff, and the next morning they did open skull surgery on him. They couldn't believe when he woke out of anesthesia that he actually talked. They didn't know what to expect. He took steps the next day.
The tumor was golf-ball size with fuzzy edges. There was a smaller tumor they couldn't get to. There were tumors in his lungs and lymph nodes. Some people will get the implications of that. So, laser surgery on head, neck, lung. Gear out of Star Wars. Next chemo. More chemo. More chemo. Immunotherapy. Experimental immunotherapy.
This is years now. And the tumors shrink, little by little. A bright spot causes a panic, but it turns out to be scar tissue. A break, then a new kind of chemo. Eventually, a clear scan. 5 years. 6 years. 7 years. He has a cancer that 5% survive 1 yr, 1% survive 3 yrs. He is the patient oncologists dream of. A survivor.
His scans are still clear. 7 and a half years now. He still gets scanxiety, but has learned to ride with it. And I still have a brother. They took the port out finally, and a few months later gave him a heart monitor. LOL. Right under the port scar. He sent me a picture (he's thoughtful that way, knows I'll fuss otherwise). He might outlive me. He turns 68 next week.
I know your journey is different. You have a different kind of cancer and they are all different. But you have something about you that is very much like my brother. My brother isn't a warrior. He's just fully alive in himself. You are too.
And he has some pretty choice thing to say about our health care system and ESPECIALLY insurance companies too. No holds barred, he does become a warrior when it comes to dealing with them!
Yes, my heart goes out to Scott, and thank you, Liz, for the tip about head of bed elevation.
I have the blocks with me when ever I travel as well as all beds in my place are permanently equiped.
Liz, thanks for this. I grew up in a medical family. I saw how the move towards managed care in the late 1980s affected the decision making doctors had and their earnings. I guess I hoped smarter heads would prevail but the uniquely American focus on profit over process and personal interactions has driven the industry crazy.
As to your sleeping recommendations, I'll look into them. I'm fortunate to not have many bad or lingering effects from treatment, though I have some as do many survivors - fatigue, focus, sleep, and a weird blind spot right in the middle of my right eye. I don't know if the latter was causal or coincidental and it's only an issue trying to track an object in movement!
Thanks again for taking the time to read my response.
Thanx for enumerating all the points I missed in my little rant. If they do not transfer to the rightful next president, I am ready to dust off my winter clothes, put on my mask and go to DC for one last fist in the air, hopefully surrounded by other real patriots.
Protest everyway u want, but not the way they want. I’m worried about DC streets Jan 6th. They seek not rational debate nor dialogue. They want confrontation and violence. They want the never ending Spectacle to spin their alternate dark reality. Lets not give it to them.
I agree - those who are sane & true patriots will only put themselves in danger by coming up against these nutjobs - it wont accomplish anything, but possibly give the idjt an excuse to go further than he has already.
Yes---Jan 6 is dangerous moment for this country. And now with the Senators signing on to challenge electors......... What have we come to (it does not look good ......)
Rob, you caught a lot of points. We'd be here all day if we each tried to enumerate them. Hopefully, all of our comments taken together reflect how our blood is boiling at being played for dupes. I first attended the national moratorium on Vietnam in 1969. We haven't kept up a level of public protest since then until this year. It should be a go to action more frequently, and I'd be proud to join you in DC.
Okay, guys. If you do end up in DC, please be careful. There be crazies there, and they be armed! Perhaps you might consider joining a local protest instead?
Know what, guys? Pay attention to the Black women. They know what they are doing, and the rest of us figure they are in charge. If they say stay home, stay home. If they say, ok, come and stand with us, go and stand with them. IF they say, dopes, leave anything that even could be construed a weapon at home, you do that. You don't even think about it. You just do it. If your blood is boiling, you keep yourself at home, because boiling blood makes you unfit to be on the streets. Got that? Hey, got that??? Good. Because that is the only way this can be. Lots of us been planning, training, teaching, reaching out. Don't be messing us up.
Lin Wood is auditioning to be Drumf’s next lawyer ....next A.G. He needs to be disbarred.
I think his call for violence to a sitting Veep should result in his arrest.
Bravo! Well said. Opportunistic indeed! There are so many opportunities for this new administration to "build back better" which must include a holding to account of all who were complicit for it is not sufficient to move on for the sake of " bringing America together". Americans need to see that no one is above the law and that money, power, and influence will not be enough to protect those who committed themselves to undermining democracy. An overhaul of all those things revealed by the incompetency of the Trump administration must also be addressed. I know Biden's got a HUGE mess to clean up, and I know he will allow his DOJ and Intelligence Community to do their job without his interference as it should be. I know this will take time.
A couple of hours ago, I posted this question. “Action items for today?” I was serious. Perhaps, your comment might be a place where suggested actions would land??
I'd be honored if they did.
I hope so. Obviously, my comment applies to a ton of issues. Thanks for your post.
It is a delicate balancing act to both speak out against the tyranny of Trump yet be inclusive of those in the GOP who still respect democracy.
William, good point, well made. Issue is that those in the GOP who still respect democracy have had very little to say for 4 years. I'd be more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt had they spoken up at ANY time in the past, but I don't recall hearing them.
If you're familiar with the fable of the Little Red Hen. She was baking bread and needed some assistance at each stage - planting the wheat, harvesting the wheat, cutting the wheat, grinding the wheat, finally baking the bread. At each point no one stepped up to help but they all wanted a piece of the bread. Seems to be an apt analogy.
They should have joined the Lincoln Project. Then we would know if they really respect our democracy or not.
There are simpler ways— just speaking up.
True that. Guess the simple point is--they failed us, our democracy and they are responsible for the deaths of many of our citizens. Incredible—they claim to be pro-lifers.
You cannot support trump and our democracy at the same time. That good old America cowboy sentiment-- "You are either with us or against us."
Delicate indeed because so many of them didn’t speak up when they should have—so how should we really know who cared more about democracy or just keeping their own power?
Liz, that is precisely the point. I have no idea where they really stand, bit I wouldn't put money on it being on behalf of the greater population.
Yes an understatement— I think the corruption is deep.
Thank you Scott; Bruce has conveyed proper sentiments. So sorry (weak words, but what we have) to hear of your medical condition. Alas. Good luck in the coming time. And may be get better national plans to cover everything.
Thank you. I'm doing well right now and that's about all I can control. Hopefully this country will come to its senses about health care.
Earlier in my career I consulted to several companies trying to figure out how "managed care" was going to affect the industry. While I could see some benefits in improving the processes to access she deliver health services, it soon became clear that enabling decisions for care to be made by insurers could lead to decisions made for motives of profit. At the time medical costs were skyrocketing in large part due to new technologies. But my own experiences with medical services and billing exposed some very distorted practices.
I'm of the opinion that not every industry should be allowed to operate under an unlimited profit model. Pharmaceuticals, medicine, and education need to move towards a capped or cost plus model so that squeezing 5000% profit on an aspirin delivered during a hospital stay isn't the norm.
Thanks for adding more Scott from a bit of an inside position.. Yes, the system is out of control and profit is a major ingredient in all the players. (of course you have to have balanced books, but....) I recommend a Time magazine article from 5 or more years ago that lays bare the pricing "practices" of hospitals---and their buying and building sprees. Best in the future!
We must be VERY careful with comments like "If we're serious about continuing to pursue "American ideals" we need to be willing to draw the line between free speech and seditious speech". Any attempt to limit free speech will hurt us all. I would rather deal with the problems we have now as a result of free speech than deal with the problems of NOT having free speech. No matter what definition you create for "seditious", it will be twisted to stop alternative views that are currently not popular.
I raised those points very reluctantly. But there must be some consequences going beyond voicing different views when those views are advocating violence against those with whom you disagree. And people far smarter than I have confirmed that many of these statements go beyond the pale and meet the definition of sedition.
The GOP has been twisting meaning for years. Any disagreement with their positions was deemed un-American or worse, anti-American. Calls for helping the less fortunate or for providing adequate health care, etc, have been labeled "socialism."
So I'm aware of the dangers but we've already been subjected to the very same perversions that you're cautioning me about making.
https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/page/first-amendment-timeline
I am glad you bring this up, for the sake of discourse, but is there no way to give this president consequences for the violence he incited? If I called for a hate group to stand by, it would mean and cause nothing. He was hired and empowered by the people to lead our country and uphold our constitution and our democracy. When do his words become sedition?
It seems to me that if there's an implied threat of violence then that changes things. The rhetoric of some of these people, including Dear Big Orange Leader, can be interpreted as calls for violence. There is no place for that. Also, as to what constitutes "hate speech", there might be some disagreement as to whether or not it constitutes free speech, but I think we can all recognise it. It's like what CJ Warren (I think it was) of the SCOTUS said about porn...something to the effect of "I may not be able to define it, but I certainly know it when I see it..."
Bruce--
The SCOTUS quote was from Potter Stewart. But the context was the difficulty of defining what was "obscene." This seems to me to be akin in some ways to the problems that selecting a class of speech as "hate speech" raises. "Sedition" itself, while it would seem to be easier to define, has been flexibly legislated and judicially ruled upon over the years. Whatever the philological disputes, Trump and the supporting Repos should be repeatedly and loudly called out as the true "enemies of the people," though their fulminations are likely to be deemed legal.
Tom, it's particularly concerning that the president is leading these calls but the distinction seems to be whether force is used or not.
Per Findlaw, "Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it."
Title 18 of the U.S. Code (which includes treason, rebellion, and similar offenses), specifically 18 U.S.C. § 2384. According to the statutory definition of sedition refers to interference or obstruction by force. It says that "Simply advocating for the use of force is not the same thing and in most cases is protected as free speech under the First Amendment.
It concludes that "the goal is to prevent threats against the United States while protecting individuals' First Amendment rights, which isn't always such a clear distinction."
That said, I'm not sure why, for example, the people who were plotting to kidnap Michigan's governor shouldn't be charged with Sedition. Isn't kidnapping implicitly using force?
You're absolutely right - their fulminations will likely be deemed legal though an arrest might be a wake-up call.
I am not looking forward to January 6. I've seen more than one white supremacist on social media encourage others to turn out armed in DC and other seats of government on that day to protest the official recognition of the electoral college results by both houses of Congress.
Right now, my state senate (WA) is working on a bill to prohibit open carrying of weapons to protests - as we've already had one shooting in recent weeks in an encounter between T****ist white supremacists, anti-fascists, and police. Of course, there is no guarantee that the police - who will continue to be openly armed at all times - will not open fire.
That’s a good point that law enforcement is not the only tool in the toolbox. There is also the court of public opinion—to which trump has been taking his case that the 2020 election was “stolen” from him—and we are all free to use it to call out seditious behavior.
I am in no way agreeing with or supporting what Trump has done. He is dangerous. I am simply saying that free speech is such a valuable right that I prefer to err on the side of more free speech than less. I prefer to deal with the consequences of too much free speech, rather than the consequences of too little. But I agree, free speech has and will continue to be taken too far by some.
Bob and Linda, I do agree with you. However, I struggle with the fact that the president is leading this charge and advocating - verbally - that violence be done if that will effect his continued power. I can't recall many historical examples in this country where the alleged leadership is advocating violent acts - as I tried to point out re Bannon and DeGenova. And I don't understand why, their words aside, that no one has been held accountable to comply with the law whether it was in regard to subpoenas during impeachment, campaign finance violations, or overturning elections. This just makes it easier for the despot in waiting.
I think it’s important to bring that up, as restrictions can be misinterpreted and misused as well as the freedoms.
In a world where unlimited corporate contributions to political campaigns constitutes "free speech", and where the President of the United States can threaten citizens and write proven lies on Twitter, I think we do need some limits. This is why the courts have been concerned with the limits of protected speech ever since the first amendment to the Constitution was made. Libel and slander (particularly of private individuals with no public forum in which to defend themselves), child pornography, and language to incite violence (or "fighting words") have all been categorized as unprotected speech at some point.
I agree and could not have said it half as well!
THIS!!
Hear, hear!
Speaking as a far-leftist who recently stumbled into this lovely echo chamber, I'm concerned about some of what is being said here, because it appears to betray some missing historical context - and as we all know, those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
Ben Sasse's statement of "Adults don't point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government", while true, is laughably out-of-context. Readers of history will know that - whether we reach hundreds of years back to the electoral disenfranchisement of women and enslaved Africans - or a hundred years back to the takeover of the Hawaiian kingdom - or twenty years back to Bush v. Gore - or ten years back to the drone-assassinations of American citizens by the Obama administration - or four years back to the DNC/media meddling against Sanders - or anytime throughout these years, to the many ways in which people of color and those of lesser socioeconomic status have been aggressively disenfranchised by Republicans through ostensibly "legal" means - American democracy is most accurately understood as "rule between the best-organized mobs", not as "legitimate self-government [by all]".
The lines of demarcation between American mobs of power are nuanced and volatile, but have been exemplified in the recent past by groups such as unions, churches, think tanks, political parties, protest movements, and other dominant social networks. But it is ultimately the dominant social networks which decide our collective fate. The most successful American electoral mobs do not commonly assert their power through physical violence or obviously illegal means, but we regularly see them rally their power through media platforms, public relation/sentiment campaigns, finance networking, peer pressure, and other forms of persuasion and bullying. However, in far too many cases - as most Americans learn and know - the legality of activity does not equate to the ethical legitimacy of such activity. Bush's win over Gore in 2000 was legal, even as it was unethical, just as the DNC's snuffing of Sanders was legal, even as it was unethical. We therefore cannot solely examine legality when examining the legitimacy of a democracy.
It is telling to watch the nakedly hypocritical behavior of Democrats during these times. Most Democrats are currently waging a war against "secret corporate algorithms", such as those used by Facebook to peddle misinformation for clicks (advertising money), or those used by private contractors to scrub voter rolls of voters who are likely to vote Democrat. Yet, in spite of significant doubts raised over the last decade about the security and trustworthiness of voting machine code by journalists like Greg Palast - in spite, even, of months of concern that voting systems across the country had critical susceptibilities to foreign interference from actors like Russia - the integrity of electoral machines has been treated as sacrosanct ever since the outcome was solidly in favor of Biden.
Listen to whatever echoes you like, but to millennials/Berniecrats the idea that American democracy qualifies as "legitimate self-government" is a joke. Have none of the self-professed history buffs here read Gilens & Page, 2014? Their work examined public policy from 1981 onward and found that "Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence."
People feel the erosion of democracy. You must understand your context to understand your audience: given our country's awful (and modern) history of electoral suppression, the only people who have sensible reason to trust that we are engaged in "legitimate self-government" are those who have recently won control of it; the rest of us are left to sort through "big data" and piles of bad actors and then to try to convince ourselves that we prefer our hollowed-out sense of trust to the perils of sedition. But do we? If Trump had won a second term, how many of us would have questioned the legitimacy of his victory?
Again, people feel the erosion of democracy. Consequently, to far too many of us - myself and many Sanders supporters included - the known perils of sedition have indeed become preferable to the unknown perils born of untrustworthy neighbors.
I do not have much hope for a reversal of course here, since it would require that those in greatest power make the greatest sacrifices: choosing to trust, respect, and share power with those who they belittle. Instead, on the left, we watch as the next generation of political strategists are relegated to the sidelines as the septuagenarian overlords of the Democrat Party transition into octogenarian overlords, even as they regularly fumble their way out of near-certain victories.
Wake me up and ask me about "legitimate self-government" after Pelosi puts together the first-ever nonagenarian committee to kill movement on Medicare-for-All (yet again). Anyone who believes that American democracy is working for the common person is living in a bubble of extreme privilege, even as it remains rather obvious to the rest of us that survivability depends on trust - and that survivability & trust will always take precedent over popular fairy tales about self-government. (Continued...)
Do my words qualify as the sort of "anitdemocratic" behavior over which you would like the US/DOJ/law enforcement to act? Should it act to restrain people like me, who believe in the virtues of open-mindedness, diversity, fairness, reason, and freedom - yet who also believe that our Republican and Democrat contemporaries are so-abysmally failing at protecting these virtues, while simultaneously allowing so little space for alternatives - that we would rather dissolve the formerly-United States than entrust our futures to it?
Mr. Krasner, it may stun you to learn that - in spite of the rhetorical eloquence and appeals to virtue by you and your fellow posters here - our trust in your cohort as "legitimate" defenders of democracy does not extend much beyond the trust we have for Trump and his supporters, for we have watched your cohort rally to the untruths championed by your leaders just as readily as we have watched Trump supporters rally to his own lies. The collective obsequiousness to media- and political party-leadership has been just as frightening to observe in Democrats as it has been to observe in Republicans.
You'll get neither surprise nor forgiveness from me for suggesting electroshock violence against your adversaries, just as any fascist Trump supporter might. The hundred people who liked your comment, in spite of its implicit call to violence, ought to share in your shame when they look at themselves in the mirror. Instead, they will wake up fresh tomorrow, wholly unexamined, to laud their own virtue and decry Trump's "violent goons", only hours after playing with similar sentiments themselves.
All of this said, I agree with you that Republican critics of Trump are mere opportunists. And yet, we are all in danger of becoming opportunists, when presented with low-hanging-but-unearned fruits. You need only look to your own words as an example.
You want security for your democracy, but what would you trade for it? I am a family- and community-committed person who works hard as a researcher in the public sector. I attend to my societal obligations without much quarrel for myself, even as I recognize and fight against the many systemic injustices experienced by others. But I lost faith in the current manifestation of the American system many years ago and have since become a secessionist/separatist/seditionist: I want and intend to see the dissolution of the United States within my lifetime, just as one might hope to escape a toxic relationship through divorce.
You can hate me and my peers for losing faith in you and wanting to leave you - and the colonial spirit in you may compel you to try to prevent my from reclaiming my freedom from you - but in no ethical universe can you unilaterally claim state authority over myself or others who demand freedom from you. If the Trumpists want a government that is independent from yours, they ought to have it; so too should we Democratic Socialists have the freedom to develop our society, just as Native Americans and Black Americans who historically agitated for their own sovereignty should have had (and ought still have) theirs.
We should all be free, in due time and legal course and with sufficient popular support, to claim sovereignty from those who threaten us. Anything else is tyranny. And while such tyranny has often met the atrocious legal standards of atrocious times, the right to be free from untrusted authority will always be the most American of virtues, and one which we should all support.
Mr. Krasner, as you instruct us to "be more discerning about accepting 'laws' that limit our Constitutional rights", I caution you to apply this warning to the very sentence you spoke before it, for your efforts to "draw the line" between free speech and seditious speech is exactly the sort of tempting low-hanging fruit which will bring poisonous results to our society. It should not be the role of a democratic government to punish people who have lost faith in the society, any more than it should be the role of a court to punish a divorcee who has lost faith in a marriage.
As someone who genuinely wants freedom and safety for your family - while simultaneously believing that you and your peers are doing a terrible job at protecting these things for me & mine - I am afraid I must say "Fuck, no, we're not going to take that" to your authoritarian aspirations. You - and too many others - seem to much prefer the easy task of passing a few authoritarian laws to silence your opposition to the hard task of either persuading them to your side or else freeing them from the relationship.
But I suppose this is to be expected of the descendants of colonialists and monarchs, whether they wear red or blue. What little changes.
I did not call for violence. I do not object to anyone's First Amendment rights to disagree. What I object to is a president leading the charge to undermine Constitutional processes for his own benefit and to incite violence against his own citizenry.
I also object to an administration that makes no pretense to the fact that they're out for their own good and screw the rest of us, and have done so with no consequences whatsoever.
If you really read what I wrote, you'd see that i thought Trump proved the essential toothlessness of the Constitution. I'm not advocating passing authoritarian rules to punish those with whom I disagree. I am questioning why we have laws that address such behavior yet we only seem to pursue them if the targets aren't wealthy enough to fight back.
I'm not a descendant of colonialists or monarchs. My grandparents all fled authoritarian regimes and immigrated to America. I take it seriously that they sought better lives here. I'm also not a Pollyanna about the imperfections of this country.
So if you'd like to get off of your high horse and think about the fact that it shouldn't be unreasonable to demand accountability and honesty from elected representatives, I'll be happy to exchange ideas. But sanctimonious and smug insinuations that my views are informed by a privileged background is the wrong place to begin that discourse.
All who are raised in America are indoctrinated in imperialist and colonialist thought, regardless of our ancestry. Like systemic racism, it is in the very air we breathe. Even as we work to grow beyond it, it will always color our thought.
In a kinder world, Scott, you seem like a good neighbor to have. But we don't live in that world, so I will remain high horsed, smug, and sanctimonious about your vile implication that some people are deserving of electro shock "therapy". It's little surprise that you didn't (or couldn't) defend those words.
But I'm not here to insult you - just to ask for recognition of the facts. This country is deeply divided. The events of the day prove it. If Trump had succeeded in thwarting democracy, would it have been our duty to march uoon - and retake, by any means necessary - the reins of our democracy, just as Trump's supporters are attempting? If you can't answer that with a resounding YES, then you simply aren't prepared for this moment in time.
This is our crisis - and this is our reality. Americans, at large, objectively lack reason to place trust in this democracy. Until that trust is repaired - or the untrusting relationships are dissolved - we will not make forward progress as a country.
I don't believe we can restore the trust. I also don't believe we can persuade, as most suggest - or failing that, coerce, as you imply - most Republicans & Trump supporters back into a mutually trusting and respecting relationship of governance.
And when the efforts of you and your peers to persuade, marginalize, intimidate and eventually suppress recalcitrant Trumpsters only succeed in worsening the divisions, it will inevitably lead to a worsening backlash of marginalization, intimidation, and suppression aimed squarely at us.
So please, for the love of reason if nothing else: we must resist our colonialist impulse to "win" a culture and instead embrace the work of national divorce. We need to dissolve our governmental ties with ALL who can no longer share government in good faith.
The other paths lead only to stubbornness and ruin.
I don't want to be rude, but this is a clear case - to me - of TL-DNR.
Sorry.
Guessing: Too long--do not resuscitate
Coming from nursing experience, I thot that as soon as I wrote it in caps.
But, I learned that on the Web from brash young ppl.
Too Long, Did Not Read. :)
You didn't miss anything. Somebody angry and looking for a target. Oh, well.
I have no idea what that means.
I won't pretend to understand all of what you've said here, Pete, but thank you for writing it. I expect I'll be reading it over and over, trying to learn and understand more each time. I too am a Bernie supporter. I still struggle to channel my rage and frustration with the DNC's betrayal, but must do more than sport a bumper sticker that reads, "Don't blame me; I voted for Bernie".
Beth, I wasn't a Bernie supporter but neither was I a Biden supporter. Pete has launched a broadside that seems to miss the central concerns of my response.
The DNC missed a great opportunity to introduce new blood into the party. I believe that had Sanders won out in the primaries he, too, would have had to deal with the restrictions of the coronavirus. It would've made it hard for him to get out and convince the skeptics of his ability to lead the country out of its current political morass.
He's an interesting guy who struck a real nerve about America's disconnect between its ideals and its reality regarding income inequality. I also think he was better at stirring up the sentiments of charge but less qualified to implement said change than Elizabeth Warren, for instance. I think she was the smartest and best candidate. She spent a lot of time and effort to develop plans to implement change. For her efforts she took a lot of crap from other candidates who hadn't taken anywhere near the same level of effort. It's easy to complain but harder to come up with they ideas.
Your last point is very important. Regardless of who we preferred we have any obligation to try and defeat Trump and all he stands for. I'm sorry your guy didn't win but Pete Lewis's screed that I'm writing out if some sense of privilege is misguided.
Scott, I hear your outrage and I am with you in that outrage. I'm not sure why you feel the need to defend yourself to me about what Pete said. The parts of Pete's post that I find interesting are not the parts where he mentions your comments, if that needed clarifying for you. I also didn't solicit your or anyone's opinion about Bernie (my support of him goes back to the 2016 election so your comments about the virus are irrelevant). You might have fallen a bit here into the trap of taking too personally what Pete said. When this happens to me, I find it helpful to take a few deep breaths, step back and re-focus on the ideas, which are not me, and which can be expanded, contracted, refined, and turned on their head sometimes by listening openly with a very capable brain and not the defensive ego.
Thank you, Beth. I was actually more of a Bernie critic than a supporter, even though I consider him far more trustworthy & desirable than most. I channel my rage by remembering how many people, just like you, are desperately trying to reason their/our way through this mess, while still holding true to our deepest values. We'll figure it out, eventually. Thank you for your efforts.
Pete, without asking you for a tome, can you explain a bit about why you were more a critic than supporter of Bernie? Trying to learn and understand. Thanks!
Both Romney and Sass have made comments debunking and disagreeing with Trump's behaviour, tweets, and pronouncements, in the past 4 years.
Here and there. Lone voices in the wind and they were ignored by their party's leadership. Doesn't really count. When push came to shove they voted with Trump. Whatever they did just wasn't sufficient.
What we've heard, over the last 4 years, have been "off the record sources" telling news reporters about Senate Republicans who were unhappy or disagreed with or were upset, astounded or, an oldie but goodie, "concerned" about the President's behavior, comments, actions, positions or whatever his daily diversion was. They knew, they enabled, they were complicit and they did nothing. You're right, what they did "wasn't sufficient" and look where we are now.
Yes they have largely because they’re both ambitious.
Yes thank goodness they spoke out.
What? You say Mitt Romney never spoke out against Trump until now? Really?
Once. In February at the impeachment hearings. But he's not built upon that as a consistent voice that calls out the daily attacks and transgressions of this administration. Once or twice is insufficient. We've been assaulted for at least 4 years.
Tell me, while we're at it - why did Romney renounce a very successful health care program he implemented as governor of Massachusetts when he ran for president in 2012? He could have been a leading compassionate conservative that Bush spoke about. But the GOP didn't support any public welfare program and he, too, feared being branded as not conservative enough or as a Socialist. Which, by the way, is a term not understood by 95% of the people who toss it around.
The Heritage foundation drew up the blue print that was adapted for the health plan developed by the Massachusetts legislature !
They realized that health insurance companies are actually bookies!
Bookies need bets made on both sides of the line in order to stay in business!
So too, health insurance companies need healthy people as well as insuring those with known health problems in order to stay in business!
Being a staunch pro business policy house, the developers at the Heritage foundation knew that any health care plan had to have balance!
After, the libertarians infiltrated gop policy thinking the Heritage foundation influence on healthcare policy was sabotaged!
How can we forget Senator Romney bowing and scraping at Trump's knee for a Cabinet position?
Well said. I agree with you.
My thoughts exactly!
18 days, 9 hours, 9 minutes, 9 seconds
until Wednesday, January 20, 2021 at 12:00:00 noon (Washington DC, District of Columbia time)
To me the new year 2021 starts on January 21st.
I think someone already shared this countdown link, but it is worth reposting: https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?p0=263&iso=20210120T12&msg=Time%20left%20until%20Trump%20leaves%20office&fbclid=IwAR1goUQwEKkDatxFRwb-Bjops9NjfGNHQ-XGKkUZ_1w6Luvstp0Be8j-GG0
Thank you so much for this link! ❤️🤍💙
For me too!
You saved me from this calculation. Thank you!
With passage of the NDAA, I am happy to be starting this new year with anti-corruption law passed bipartisanly and look forward to corrupt abusers being held accountable.
I am relieved to have a stronger divide between trumpists and our military.
If only the mental clarity which got the Republican Senate to support overriding Trump's veto of the NDAA had been present when that body was asked to act on his impeachment which the House had already passed.! One never can be sure what motivates Republicans. Fear of Trump's base? Generous financial support from the very wealthy and business interests? Inclusion of the TCA's money-tracking features in the bill cannot be overestimated. Let's just hope Trump and his corrupted DOD don't do anything crazy between now and January 20.
tRump has already called out his domestic terrorists to riot and shoot the bad guys (and that gal) at the Inauguration, but the military Chiefs of Staff have made clear they will treat these fanatics as the terrorists they are. Probably doesn't hurt that the DOD just got their annual allowance.
I have never understood the word Conservative as it applies to the politicians who call themselves Republican and am not excited about Romney and others call the "Republican Party to the true conservatism it abandoned a generation ago" Seems to me that over the past Century+ it's been conserve their individual wealth and power not conserve our democracy or our natural resources... Conserve the white male dominated institutions not the idea of justice for all.
You are absolutely correct! Every time I hear any of them revere Reagan and what he did for this country is nauseating. It’s what he did TO us, is what is revolting.
Baseball Hall of Famer and 20th Century philosopher Yogi Berra said “It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.” but just when will this be over. It should have been over when Pennsylvania declared Biden the winner of its electoral votes, but it wasn’t. It should have been over on December 14, when the Electoral College certified the election results, confirming Biden as the next President, 306 votes to 232. But it wasn’t. Even after a disastrous string of lawsuits seeking to overturn the election results, losing or having tossed out of court 60 of 61 challenges, it should have been over. But it wasn’t. Anyone but a masochist, or Trump, would have faced the inevitable reality that it was over. But it still isn’t. Now we face the political theater of January 6, when the ceremonial task of accepting the outcome of the Electoral College vote should declare this election over. But it probably won’t. Finally, at noon on January 20, when Biden is sworn in, it should be over. But I fear it won’t. With Trump seditiously encouraging violence by his supporters, this may not be over until Trump is locked away, either for tax fraud in New York State, or committed to a psychiatric facility as a threat the nation. I am SO looking forward to having adults back in charge of the nation.
I agree. We cannot sit back and think this is over. His tweet about January 6, see you in D.C., feels ominous. I think that, if Biden were to pardon him or fail to hold him accountable for his actions against this country, we will just be asking for more and worse in the future in much the same way that Nixon’s pardon has brought us here. There must be consequences.
It seems like the target of the “lock em up “ chant was a mirror after all 👍😎
Projection is the narcissists' primary bludgeon. That is why, after five years, I am sooo very tired of this abuse. And elected officials have been complicit in their silence.
Perhaps if we follow Manadork’s playbook from Ukraine. It’s possible the proud boys take up a permanent protest camp in dc until removed by force, continuing but increasing the tension, and outrage.
Oh, God.
“Stay calm when the unthinkable happens”
These guys can't hold together any kind of plan for more than 15 minutes. They eat in restaurants, sleep in hotel beds (when they are allowed in). Camp? LOL. Ever been in WaDC in January?
I hope you are right. I'm heeding the words of Tim Snyder, in The Road to Unfreedom and On Tyranny. In these two books Dr. Snyder parallels the fall of European democracy's with this administration's style, policy, and actions. So I think it is wise for everyone to start thinking of their own "unthinkable".
"Stay calm when the unthinkable arises". Everyday, a more and more unthinkable keeps arising. This is way to authoritarianism by the reality TV script. Keep escalating the spectacle to exhaust the people, turning exhaustion into apathy. Complete consolidation of power comes with some simple bureaucratic act behind the larger violent or eye candy spectacle. It has never fully happened here, so we American's mistakenly believe democracy is inevitable and eternal, but it is not and history proves this.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=the+road+to+unfreedom&gclid=Cj0KCQiAlsv_BRDtARIsAHMGVSZCyqXSPUIA1iNYhFkBU4ZN7ETWFTntpvLsKeiiheo-ucBDbW6IPdgaAhPwEALw_wcB&hvadid=243361508109&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9029448&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=7313471317021050413&hvtargid=kwd-410500847499&hydadcr=20584_10165242&tag=googhydr-20&ref=pd_sl_1bg0z6tzb1_e
Yes, I agree it is possible here. It has happened here, and the remnants of it are what feed the occasional flareups that have occurred throughout our history. It started with the forcible displacement of the many Indigenous peoples to whom I am related in various degrees, and to the African-ancestored forced here, to the Japanese, and Chinese and Mexicans who came here to labor. My own family still bears the scars of their own displacement, not only geographically but culturally.
I do not believe democracy is inevitable in this country, and I especially do not believe that the USA is exceptional. But I do believe that democracy is the natural way of healthy cultures when they are allowed to thrive. Many Indigenous cultures are returning to their old ways of making decisions, here and on other continents. Perhaps, with care, it will become a movement. I think that is as much a possibility as the other way. The other way is inherently unstable, but democracy in one form or another keeps coming back. Already the Trump era is disintegrating- interesting to see it happen in real time, rather like watching road kill return to the elements.
At any rate, my response was specifically about the Proud Boys, who I have seen in action and watched as they met one prediction after another, never quite getting to where they said they were going. They seem to be morphing into a new organization now, so it's hard to tell. They still seem fragmented and essentially leaderless, despite the presence of a man who calls himself their leader, somewhat like a schoolyard set of showoffs. He has been arrested, and of course pretends it doesn't matter to him. It makes him, for a minute, the center of attention, and eventually, like the one before him, someone will replace him and the group will fragment.
You are right about Trump's escalation, but if you've ever had the misfortune to live with a mentally unstable person with narcissistic tendencies, you will know that that is predictable too. I don't think I was the only one not surprised by Sunday's phone call. What did surprise me was how very perfect it was for the concerns we have about him. He overdid it, and had no awareness that he did. Now he is trying to figure out what went wrong.
Tomorrow will be whatever it turns out to be. Portland survived; so will WaDC, and on Jan 20th we will all stop living in limbo and move on.
Jan 20th is an odd anniversary for me. On that day last year I was assaulted by the man who brings my firewood. I managed to escape but not without injury, both to my body and my psyche. My body healed, but the spirit takes longer. A month after the court date, I came down with Covid19, which took all my energy and attention. It took its own good time to let go of me, so I've had plenty of time to read and write and explore wherever my computer could take me.
I am looking forward to Jan 20th. I will celebrate survival, my own, and our country's. I might even put up an American flag, for the first time in my life. I am Quaker and do not normally do such things. But this might be a time to make that exception.
Agreed.
I’m new here, not sure if this group has read this October op Ed by Dr. Tim Snyder. I feel it’s important and enforces HCR’s teachings: https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/not-normal-election
Thanks for the reference. I greatly appreciate his writings.
I have read some of Tim Snyder’s writing but had not seen this. Thank you for sharing it!
Your welcome. Dr Synder is like the HCR of European history.
Snyder. Oops!
Absolutely!
As I read your reply, Karen, it hit me that 45 would spit in the face of a pardon since he would vigorously deny he committed no crimes for which he needed to be pardoned. Just my thought.
...vigorously deny he committed any crimes
Karen, thought you might be interested in this that I just posted above:
As a side note: Lake Superior State University just banned the use of the word "Karen" because "What began as an anti-racist critique of the behavior of white women in response to Black and Brown people has become a misogynist umbrella term for critiquing the perceived overemotional behavior of women. As one nominator said about reasons for its banishment, “I would tell you why, but I’d sound like a Karen.” Another critic observed, “Offensive to all normal people named Karen.” They also banned, "I know, right!"
https://www.lssu.edu/traditions/banishedwords/
I think that Trump will never give up. He is inciting violence now, as Heather points out. It is just a logical next step for him. I don't think it will be any more effective than any of his previous stunts. One day he will have spun out of politics, and I hope that the attention his antics have secured from the adults in the room will at least ensure some adult leadership now. I hope so.
HCR, it sounds like Sasse is reading your daily letters! His tactics have changed significantly in the last few months, to using source citations and academic style in order to present himself as the "rational Republican." As a resident of Missouri, I can attest that Hawley is deeply, deeply stupid and suffers excessively from Whiney White Man Syndrome as well. There are some who are trying to present him as the new "intellectual" in the Not-the-Party-of-Lincoln but, as in the attempt to cast Gingrich as anything other than a sleazeball goniff in the 1990s, he fails every test for maturity, intellect, and rationality. This is a blatant and cynical ploy to capture some of the more deranged of the Cheeto supporters. In Missouri, this population is made up of rural residents who are characterized by extreme levels of opioid addiction and death, gun violence--especially domestic violence against women and children--and extreme racism. These are the people he wants as his "base." He is a pathetic and revolting specimen of the "new" GOP.
Dems could make this really fun by challenging electoral college votes for Trump in the states where he "won." I know they won't but I don't understand why there are no pundits around who are suggesting this. They could also challenge the legitimacy of the election of "Republican" senators and congresspeople in the states where Biden-Harris won. I would enjoy that.
It’s funny (in a very ugly way). Pols like Ted Cruz (Princeton, Harvard) and Hawley (Stanford, Yale, Supreme Court clerk) are not stupid. Which makes their ignorant politics and principles doubly wrong. They know better, they’re just deeply cynical. Pols like Hawley promote stupid ideas and destructive policies because the Republican voter base is deeply stupid, and Hawley needs to play down to their level. The deep-rooted problem of the Republican party is that it’s beholden to its ignorant, bitter, racist, anti-science, religious base. That’s why we’re astonished when a Republican like Romney or Sasse says something reasonably intelligent. Trump’s voters will reject them - intelligence is elitist, after all. There are 70 million ignoramuses in the Republican party, and they aren’t going away. Hawley is doubling down on the stupid, for him it’s a winning strategy.
You beat me to this response. The Republican Right's "leaders" are mostly VERY well-educated and DEEPLY cynical. It is a mistake to dismiss them as "stupid."
I differentiate between having gone to school and being educated. These men may not be stupid. But they lack manners, are unethical, unprincipled, and unworldly. They degrade their alma maters and are, apologies for my limited vocabulary, #motherfuckers.
Your vocabulary is just fine by me!
Perhaps it is the Ivy League schools who are to blame for letting these people have permission to use them as breeding grounds for their ideology. Just sayin’...
I don’t think ideology has anything to do with Hawley’s politics. I doubt he believes any of the MAGA drivel he spouts. For him it’s pure ambition. He’s a carnival barker who sees the Trump base as a bunch of rubes he can fleece by playing to their superstitions and bigotry. I’ll bet he looks down on his voters with contempt...
TOP RESPONSE OF THE DAY! Thank you, Linda! Oh, my, that was rich use of some colorful language. I love that good say-it-like-it-is approach (I get in trouble for it sometimes, but dang, I can keep it in just so long). I laughed too hard, now have to go throw snowballs to get rid of some of this giggly energy. You. my dear lady, made my day. After reading too many overly somber posts, I really needed this.
Although I love/rely/depend on your Letters for their invaluable perspectives, I have to admit that there have been days (or the wee small hours of the morning) that I have had to steel myself to read them. Those were the days when the exhaustion of the fight were overwhelming, and I just didn't want any more confirmation of the fact that Trump was only an evil pawn of a figurehead for an evil and constant force arrayed against the shining light of democracy that is our country. But read them I must, and read them I did.
Ah, but today, a sense of satisfaction! The action of the veto override and the acceptance of the processes of our election PROVE your underlying message that elected representatives bow to our influence as voters. And, to our influence as participants in the process of government.
I do not think this represents a wave of democratic realization. Their actions are too little, too late, and too self-serving. Our participation, for the most part, has been at the end of the game, at the ballot box, instead of at the beginnings in focus groups, party participation at the local level, and contact with our elected officials. But it is still a clear and recognizable milestone to be celebrated and built upon.
In the words of the recently published profile of you, your schedule is "unsustainable," and your gifts to us have been at great personal cost. We need to find a way to continue the information flow beyond your expected "retirement" 100 days into the Biden Administration. Perhaps a Think Tank could be established and writings prepared for your review prior to publication? Perhaps a consortium of scholars who could supplement your expertise in the Reconstruction of the South with concentration on other periods of American History? Perhaps your writings could be collected in a text book with discussion questions for local community groups and/or high schools, since our current civics education is so lacking? I, for one, would gladly join and financially support such a group and/or effort.
Thank you, again, Professor Richardson.
I want to comment on your last paragraph. Heather is a scholar who obviously loves to teach. It is wonderful that she shares her talents with us. But she does not serve us. She has shown us some ways we can think for ourselves, has directed us to some resources, has created resources. I would hate to see her try to take on the burden of being responsible for our continued education when we now know exactly what to do ourselves and can engage our own minds to continue to grow and help each other grow. I'm very happy to continue to learn from her, but I want to give back what a teacher really wants which is that I have become able to learn and develop independently.
Becky, thanks for the dialogue. I see her as a leader, and in that way, she serves us. I think it is her intention to serve us. She has stimulated our minds and created this community. I think where we differ is our respective analyses of whether or not we "know exactly what to do," our need for more perspective on the new tacks (or attacks) that the moneyed elite will try when Biden is president, and more. What I am suggesting is a way that she can do more, but in a less self-sacrificing way that provides a transition. Lev Vygotsky's educational theory of The Zone of Proximal Development applies here: We learn best when we are presented with knowledge that is close to what we already know. When information is presented that is too far from our knowledge base, we do not know how to assimilate it. There's a wonderful meme going around right now about people who said as students, "I'll never be a scientist, why do I need to study that?" and who now don't accept science. In short, I think transition from knowledge through understanding to applied action is the crowning achievement of a teacher. As an Adult Educator myself, there is nothing more satisfying than seeing my students apply the lessons in their own lives. I am suggesting that the struggle is ongoing, and that a wonderful reward to Professor Richardson could be found in seeing her work continued on in an "institutionalized" way.
KEM, I see your point and understand your wish to see Heather's work continue. It will, but on her terms. She has mentioned that she is considering several options, and I believe she wants to continue in her current position. Whatever she decides, it will be something fulfulling to her. I love her delight when she really gets on a roll! She loves history and she loves sharing it. It sparks my own desire to explore the meaning of history and is one reason I am here. I realize you do not mean "institutionalized" in a literal sense. But there is something a little patronizing in assuming that she needs advice on how to proceed. What she has created out of her own passion, insight, and delight (and her amazing network both among professionals and ordinary nerds) is proof that she is perfectly capable of envisioning her own future and making it happen. The rest? That really is up to us.
I love that we share deep respect and admiration for HCR! Thanks for raising your concern and I hope this clarifies what I meant to say. The delusions of grandeur of patronizing and advice-giving are not in my mind at all. More than once she has asked about our ideas on what we would like to see going forward so that this type of dialogue realizes her goal--that this dialogue becomes not about "her own future" but about ours. I think of it this way: I would like to see access to the relationship of history to today's politics continue. It needs to be less demanding of her, less dependent solely on her goodwill, and less hit-and-miss than the torrent of FB posts with questionable resources. That means "institutionalized" in the sense of on-going.
HCR was instrumental in opening our minds and encouraging us to continue our education and learn from each other. Too bad those still desperately clinging to Trumpism refuse to learn from reliable resources like HCR.
I'd like to see this site continue with, perhaps, a weekly observation by HCR and ongoing discussion and sharing of sources among this community.
So some republicans found some backbone, but only because at this point they have nothing to fear from trump. They should not be applauded for doing their jobs, but questioned as to why they have refused for four years to reign in their monster and put a bit in his mouth. Sadly the republicans that have stood up in support of overturning the election will not even face even public censure let alone being denied their seats and charged with seditious acts by the democratic leadership which has shown itself to be equally toothless and cowardly.
I agree. Sasse and Romney are now speaking the truth. But this does not absolve them from blame re their complicity earlier in the game.
And that really makes me angry. They should be sent packing. I imagine that almost everyone is just so sick and tired of the fighting for justice. Trump and the seditious lemmings are all like symptoms of the virus. Biden and Harris are the vaccine. But those who continue to attempt to overthrow the election are resistant to it and will feed the next strain.
Allegory is powerful.
Those who continue this attempt are the stain that will feed the strain.
I agree Pamela. They have nothing to fear except the corner they have painted themselves into. They could have impeached him easily. They just had no backbone and continue to have no backbone.
Please enjoy a touching review of 2020 by the Birmingham Choir as they sing “Auld Lang Syne:”
https://youtu.be/dCFdKpKLGxs
Warms the cockles of my scottish heart...and my sassenach mind. It reminds me of what Hogmenay means and should really be like. I'm getting out my kilt, sporan and dirk for 2021 as i'm officially no longer a European citizen...Brexit oblige!
Ever expanding vocabulary:
- sassenach (n.) (derogatory) An English person. (derogatory) A Lowland Scot.
- hogmenay (n.) "last day of December," also a refreshment given that day, 1670s, of uncertain origin.
- sporran (n.) A leather or fur pouch worn at the front of the kilt in the traditional dress of men of the Scottish Highlands.
- dirk (n.) A short dagger formerly carried by Scottish Highlanders
Tapadh leibh! (Thank you!)
Sassenach originally meant "foreign" or "alien" but was applied to the English as a derogatory linguistic deformation given their atrocious attitude and behaviour towards the Scots. My mother was from a highlander family of MacDonald, MacFie and Christie heritage.
Thanks for the translations, Ellie!
Thank you, Ellie. I recently learned that I have an early Highland Scot ancestor who mysteriously emigrated to Leyden (Leiden) and married a Dutch woman. They emigrated to Rhode Island, then a colony. One suspects noncomformity, or rather persecution for it, but I have as yet no documentation (because I have not yet looked). He perhaps accounts for the smidgen of a smidgen over half of Gaelic that I am (the half is easily accounted for by grands and great-grands, and the rest of the incomplete half is a jumble from N Europe, western America, and Africa. I apparently have little or no English, which I am fine with. But genetics is always a crap shoot once you get a couple generations back.
Are you supporting a new Scottish referendum to remove Scotland from the UK? I am hoping that Boris has his hands full in 2021 . . .
I'm not suicidal. Independance for Scotland would be "difficult" ...that's the least one can say. What will be interesting will be the tug-of-war over the Northern Irish situation (being still within the EU for trade purposes) and whether the Scots will push to have similar advantages. These are the forces that will test th United Kingdom.
So, with Brexit, what happens to UK citizens who are living on the continent? Are you grandfathered in, or you a French citizen? (I made an assumption of your UK origins, but perhaps I deduced incorrectly).
Brits currently living in EU maintain existing priviledges. We just have to request an identity card or should we wish any EU citizenship just as existing EU citizens in the UK.
I was just reading about Boris’ dad requesting to continue to be a French citizen as his mother was French.
He keeps his British nationality nonetheless and has less trouble moving around etc. I could do likewise but i have 2 passports already and don't feel particularly French!
Oh, that was well-played!
Don't hold your breath, of course, but I've read of a strong possibility that Scotland will go for independence and rejoin the EEU.
Possibilty but not probability! They depend legally on Boris Johnson giving permission for a binding referendum...which is extremely unlikely.Even so, their "rejoining" the EEU would be somewhat problematic as they have no land border with EEU; they would hardly be a priorty as Brussels doesn't want encourage seperatists elsewhere such as the Catalan and it would cut them off from their biggest market and source of funding...England!
They’ve wanted to for a while — good luck with that.
Beautiful, Ellie. Thanks. No, of course we must not forget 2020; for all its horrors, it has shaped us and bonded us and shown us the critical importance of defending our democracy against enemies foreign and domestic.
Loverly
All i want is a room somewhere
Far away from the cold night air
With one enormous chair....
And not having to look at his angry orang face.
SO beautiful. Thank you so much for sharing.
Thank you, Ellie. Simply beautiful and calming.
thank you Ellie, that was awesome, so many beautiful faces....
Goosebumps!! Beautiful, Ellie, thank you.
I am old. I am a registered Republican and shall remain so, if only to vote for the most sensible or perhaps the least looney in the primaries.
I have seen the deterioration of my party, and would love to see it return to what it was, or at least evolve to something better than it is.
Perhaps it will. I hope so.
The "loyal opposition" has always been essential to our democracy. The dialogue and debate, a prerequisite to confronting contested issues. We need "us" all to turn this ship around together.
I hope so too. Many of the prominent Republicans who troubled me in my younger days seem so decent, reasonable and responsible now. Perspective is an amazing thing.
Nobody here is old.... we’re all just getting started! Happy New Year!
Age. “Not a time of life, but a temper of the will”!
Happy New Year and thank you, HCR, for a pithy distillation of the NDAA. I never could have waded through it.
'Tis a pity the Republicans now abandoning Trump couldn't have found their ethical mojo sooner. (Romney excepted, sort of.) Gotta go where the wind blows, right? Even the Conservative store window display of personal responsibility, integrity, etc. isn't worth the effort any more. Everybody knows it was only for show so what's the point.
So now we have the congressional endorsement of the Electoral College vote, the Georgia Senate election, and Inauguration with President Biden sitting in the Oval Office to get through, and it's finally done.
We can start to clean up the mess.
Years, it will take many years. I pray for the country and the world to have patience, and to keep working on it. Every day. Ther surely is a lot of garbage in the proverbial basement that we don’t even know about yet.
Let's be clear: there's still no "ethical mojo"; they only care about their own political future.
Agreed. I was hoping my sarcasm would be apparent.
Why do I still have a sense of insecurity even though Romney and Sasse spoke out against their colleagues? Yes, I am very glad about the passage of NDAA but I can’t help but have a sneaking suspicion that there is something further up the GOP’s sleeves.
Why is it that I got kicked off of Twitter for saying things about Fake 45 but he incites violence and murder and gets a slap on his wrist?
Four more days until the Georgia runoff is determined. I await with bated breath.
I feel the same. Only I got kicked off Youtube for merely discussing and defining what seditious and treasonous acts are. Having our freedoms of speech thwarted after 5 years of bullying and abuse from this regime and it's followers, domestic and foreign, is ironic...and sobering in a very frightening way.
Your insecurity is probably due to the fact that Romney will turn on a dime to forward his ambitions. Sasse isn't much better. I am reading Amy Siskind's book "The List". One of the items after the 2016 election was Trump wanted Romney to apologize for his opposition to Trump's candidacy in order to be considered for Secretary of State. Romney folded like a chair and then Trump smashed him like a bug. Yet, Romney continued to pander to Trump once elected to the Senate. He would come forcefully against the President on an issue and then back down. That said I do see light at the end of the tunnel especially if Georgia goes 💙 blue.
Romney is as legit as a $3 bill.... and Sass could have spoken up a long time ago. I wouldn’t trust him to bring in the paper like a ‘good dog’. Just sayin’....
Yay. I’m first on the First. “Thank you, Heather,” does not begin to convey my gratitude for your intelligence and eloquence. Cheers from Texas.
It is clear to what voters Josh Hawley is aiming his Trumpian positions. Remember, in 2019, Hawley easily defeated Missouri's Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill. And just look at the margin by which Mitch McConnell defeated Amy McGrath. It is those voters about whom Americans should be concerned. They are not going away.
you are right .They are not going away. So many parallels to how eventually Hitler and the Nazi Party gained power. Endless attacks and machinations on their constitution. A very good read is The Death of Democracy : Hitler,s Rise to Power and the downfall of the Weimar Republic. So be vigilant America.!! Strengthen your Constitution!!
Agree. Citizens United deepens the pool of dark money, PACS target these states and races to dilute the will of the people.
I would like for Dems to question those KY election results.
Why doesn't trump's twitter account get suspended--permanently, for inciting violence on January 6, 2021. (and on other occasions, too).
I read that it will be suspended on January 20th.
Too little too late.
I'm certainly NOT a Pence fan, but Lin Wood's twitter remark sounds like a threat against the Vice-President of the US! Is there no other reaction to that other than to be removed from twitter? Seems there should be.
Normalizing political violence first in rhetoric, later in practice. This is the way of the authoritarian and Fascist. Lin Wood should be disbarred for life.
In whatever bar(s) he is certified, it requires that other member attorneys and/or judges file complaints against him. I'd hope there are enough people disgusted by his over-the-top behavior to do this.
He's Georgian born, bred, and educated...another in our long line of whack-jobs we've contributed to this political season. You're welcome...
Bruce, love the way you use language.... :-)
I hope so too but it appears most want to sweep it under the rug instead of facing it head on.
Amen!
I agree. He should arrested.