Last night, federal prosecutors filed a motion revealing that a leader of the paramilitary group the Oath Keepers claimed to be coordinating with the Proud Boys and another far-right group before the January 6 insurrection.
When people argue with you that election and voting rules are the prerogative of the states, states rights, and that Congress is overstepping its authority with the For the People Act, please quote them Article I Section 4 of the Constitution. "Section 4: Elections The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators." My Tea Party brother got out his copy of the Constitution and read it. He was much chagrined that he hadn't understood that second sentence. The Congress must pass the For the People Act of democracy will be a thing of the past!
Did your brother then decide that he would vote for Democrats? No, I don’t imagine he did. What he probably did, instead, is to double down on his support of Republicans to make sure Congress passes no law that would prevent states from suppressing votes in districts that lean Democratic. It is a waste of time and effort to try to make decent citizens out of Republicans. Put your time, effort, and money into projects that will help thwart Republican efforts to suppress votes. It is a monumental task and soon will get even harder with new vote suppression laws in thirty states, all designed in coordination with Republican experts in the matter, and they have world class expertise in this specialty. We have just barely enough votes to stop them, but we can’t afford to lose any of those votes.
You're right that I'm not holding my breath waiting for him to change. I am fully committed to doing what I can to help the For the People Act pass. It is critical.
They’ve said that for decades. Statewide, they would be blue now if they didn’t suppress the Latino vote so effectively, which they can do because the legislative districts (state and federal) are gerrymandered to the hilt. By the time Texas is blue, the US will be an autocratic kakistocracy or it won’t matter because several other southern states have turned blue.
That half is almost entirely made up of the 60% of white Americans whose top priority is preserving the advantages they have over people with non-European ancestors. It’s not that they don’t see it. It’s that they prefer an autocracy that preserves their advantages to a democracy that doesn’t.
Am I missing something? The "Elections Clause" (Art. 1, Sec. 4) applies to the election of Senators and Representatives, not to the President and Vice President.
Welcome to the conundrum of Constitutional Law. You may well be correct that the clause so cited permits the Federal Congress to modify State regulations regarding the election of Federal Representatives and Senators, but is silent on such a power regarding the election of either State Representatives or Federal chief executives. So, Justice Stromberg, would it therefore be Constitutional for a State to pass a law allowing only registered Republicans to vote for either State Representatives or Federal chief executives? A strict Originalist, in the absence of compelling support from apocrapha created by the Framers, would have to say "yes," thereby achieving a seemingly-principled, but nonsensical, result.
That's (one of the places) where conservative ideology breaks down. Since it was impossible for the Framers to accurately predict all the circumstances to which their work would be applied, and since it is impossible to really know what they were thinking, people interpreting the Constitution (or any law) have no choice but to do so with regard to present circumstances, social needs, and the case at hand. But conservatives have to go the extra step of essentially lying about their reasoning, embracing reason and common sense when the result suits their present desires, then claiming "strict adherence to the text" when it doesn't.
I wish we could move past originalism. The Constitution could be a living document, reflecting the changes in population, mores, and needs of the country today, rather than what we think and guess the (white, male, property-owning) Founders thought almost 250 years ago. It’s a brilliant document, but how could they possibly have predicted such a large population, technical advances, industrialization, global economics, changing immigration trends, climate change, and on and on?
Originalism is an opinion, an interpretation only. Republicans have built it up as a prima facia fact. It is not and we shouldn’t treat it as such. Their super power is creating alternative realities and getting people to agree. Resist.
Kathy, I awoke this morning with very similar questions on my mind. It strikes me that we have placed such a sheen of brilliance on the Founders and their creation that it's blinded us too the faults and flaws that have gotten us in this pickle. I'm all for honoring our Found Fathers, but my grade school memories, especially, are of a reverence and superficial understanding of exactly what was done and why. Let alone, how could we bridge the gaps between 1776 and 1956, or 2006? The Constitution MUST be seen as a living document, IMO.
Well, and the fact that white, male supremacy, not to mention slavery, were baked into the Constitution tells us how important it is that it be a living document.
Dr. Richardson, your letters are concise, they stick to the facts, and these make my blood boil. We are still on dangerous territory and we must not relent in supporting the Biden/Harris administration nor stop writing and calling our Senators and Congressional representatives.
Sorry, but it would be a hollow victory. Trump and the Republicans fed the Beast, loosed it, and rode it to power. Predictably, they've now lost control of it. Now that Trump is a loser, he'll never really lead them again. Oh, he'll still have influence, and he'll still be able to raise money for a while (keeping as much as possible for himself), but the only thing he had going for him was the illusion of strength and infallability. Now that the illusion has popped, all he has left are the more usual tools of graft, disinformation, and chicanery, which can translate to power, but not leadership.
Why else do you think he's trying to start his own social media instead of joining Parler, Gab, or 8chan? He and his handlers know that if he does the latter, he'll be a Proud Boy follower, instead of a Proud Boy leader.
Prosecuting the Unnamed Former would not be a hollow victory. Holding the guilty accountable for their crimes, with due process under the rule of law, sends a strong message and serves as a deterrent against potential future sedition and insurrection. Even the most hate-filled, wild-eyed Deplorables will think hard about ruining their lives by earning a 5, 10, 20 year sentence.
You're probably right. Unfortunately, the "hate-filled, wild-eyed Deplorables" are both the easiest to delude and the easiest to prosecute, while the ones who recruited, primed, fused, and fired them will be much harder to take. Between battling the money they possess and the roles in government they play(ed), every two cuts we inflict will be matched by one or more cuts to ourselves. A complete investigation and trial of the real insurrectionists would likely cost hundreds of millions of dollars and still may not be successful.
Furthermore, a full accounting will require the prosecution of sitting and former holders of elected office, a truly evil precedent that could actually encourage attacks on election results in the future, as losing politicians destroy everything they can to avoid revenge prosecution.
That's one of the toughest policy issues on Biden's very full plate, requiring decisions I do not envy in the slightest. We could win that war only to discover that there's nothing left but the wreckage.
Remember, the yahoos that invaded Congress last January were so incompetent that a good laugh track could have turned the whole thing into a comedy, except for the deaths and the impact on our democracy. And that's been the whole purpose of Trump and the Republicans -- they don't want take over and run our government, they simply want to cripple it so that it can't interfere with their ability to make as much money as possible by any means legal or illegal. A weak, ineffective democracy is what they want for America, one that allows business and religion to do whatever they please to whomever they please.
I hold out that hope, as well. At least we'll get to enjoy his permanent absence from Twitter and Facebook. And he and other Trumps will be spending a lot of time in depositions and court proceedings
Consequences are the only thing that deters wrongdoing in those without conscience. Reps and senators who went against the will of the people by objecting to the electoral college vote count are all guilty of wrongdoing. Sedition perhaps. Treason perhaps. Every single one of them should face significant consequences. A line has to be drawn. Lawmakers cannot lie, cheat, deceive the people. They should also be tasked with ensuring every one gets to vote. If they persist in this behaviour they should no longer be lawmakers or hold offices of public trust. Democrats have an opportunity to fix this. Fix it they must.
It actually hasn't stalled. But the leadership of the DOJ is being stymied by the fact the GOP Senators are blocking the confirmation of every single position below Attorney General in the department. And they don't want "acting" senior officers making the kind of consequential decisions that have to be made when going after treason and sedition means going after one party. Which is why the GOP senators are doing what they are doing.
Specifically, Venita Gupta for the #3 person at DOJ was discussed on TRMS. It is a segment well worth watching, and it explains why Senator John Cornyn is holding it up. (TLDR version: a single Texas drug cop ran a sting in 1999 where he arrested 15% of a Black community in a 5K town in Texas on completely false drug charges; many received 20-100 year sentences. Cornyn as Texas AG gave said narc the "Lawman of the Year" award. Subsequently, the complete lack of ANY corroborating evidence got all the cases dismissed.)
That's my state that did that!! When Gov Northam got negative news a few years back about wearing "Black Face" in a picture in his yearbook and "they" were calling for his resignation, he instead got woke and has been, to my white eyes, become a champion of a more progressive VA.
As a sometime observer of Northam and the VA political scene, I agree, Lynell. It points to a core difference between Ds and Rs. Dems can be cajoled, shamed when needed, into doing better. Today's Repugs? Deplorable, a lost cause, not to mention The Lost Cause.
It's Thursday, 3/25/21, and I actually heard that Virginia has banned the death penalty, AND that that state has put more people to death via execution that all other states except Texas. Of course, Democracy Now! mentioned it.
Neville Chamberlain had an unfortunate life after his ill-advised tourism in Munich. His fears and their projection certainly didn't stop the flow of history, they accelerated it...and thankfully the consequences were successfully dealt with. Other than that i don't see the link between the benighted Foreign Secretary and this possibly "hapless" excuse for a Democrat Govenor.
It came out at just the right time didn't it? Like a seed to remind us what leadership is in a crisis. What could have happened if not for Churchill to both stand up to Hitler and mobilize the people around a moral obligation and for survival. The speeches in The Darkest Hour and Dunkirk movies are just amazing points of light in history.
Happy Equal Pay Day! Equal Pay Day is today, Wednesday, March 24, 2021. This date symbolizes how far into the year women must work to earn what men earned in the previous year. In the same job, with the same responsibilities. That is 82 cents to the dollar a man earns. Asian-American women earned $0.85, so their equal pay day was March 5; African and Black American women earned $0.61, so their equal pay day was August 22; Native American women earned $0.58, so their equal pay day was September 23; Latinas earned $0.53, so their equal pay day was November 20. When I first started working full time in about 1972 women made $.69 to a man's dollar. When I was first promoted to engineering manager, I found out that 2/3's of my group of engineers now reporting to me made more than I did. And, yes, I was climbing the corporate ladder rather quickly. So, my company gave me 20% raises every six months for two years to get my salary in line with other engineering managers. Later, when I was a Group Engineering Manager and was asked to speak to our Human Resources staff, I did a histogram of all the people in my boss's group by job level putting women on the histogram on the left and the men on the right. It looked a little like a Rorscharch inkblot test. The men's side showed an even distribution over the job levels. The women's side clearly showed not one but two glass ceilings! The left side wasn't an even distributed but looked like two plateaus. The first glass ceiling was on the technical ladder with very few women achieving the consulting engineer level and stuck at best at the principal engineer level. The second glass ceiling was the managerial ladder as expected with fewer women promoted to senior and group managers. It was so clear that it made quite a stir through the Human Resources staff. This was a highly ethical company and I know they worked at making things more equitable for women and minorities.
One response often heard here in Europe....where the problem is similar as women are payed for the same or similar jobs by 16% less then men so no better than the US.... is that women go on strike both at home (in the kitchen and in bed!) and at work at the end of October each year as they are not paid for the final 2 months and the idea is gaining more and more traction.
It was a superb, highly ethical company. Everyone felt valued! The motto of the company was Do the Right Thing and we did lived that. The right thing by our customers, the right thing by each other.
Which is obviously why they went out of business! Sorry, I don't mean that as a joke; every time I have seen one company fail and the other succeed in any particular business, it's always been the better, more ethical, better place to work at, company that got taken over by the uglies. Every single production company I worked at in Hollywood is gone, and the replacements are uniformly the pigs.
Hey, This ethical company was the 32nd largest corporation on the Fortune 100 list and the darling of Wall Street for several decades. It wasn't the ethics that brought its down fall. It was not transisioning to a new financial model from minicomputers selling for $100,000s to PC selling for under $10,000 (a megacent) when they first came out. They were bought by Compaq to get Digital's customer support and its Fortune 500 clients. I say it isn't the size of the company its the leadership that makes a company ethical. After the Founder, who was on the cover of Fortune Magazine in 1986 as the world's most successful entrepreneur, left the company it changed from an extraordinary company where we were changing the world ... and we did ... to an ordinary one which was no joy to work for. Things like the Internet protocols and net neutrality. I will always be grateful to Ken Olsen and his ethics and vision: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6We6VDtyHY and here is my viewpoint on Ken in Forbes Magazine shortly after he died: https://www.forbes.com/sites/prospernow/2011/03/20/he-was-different-in-a-good-way-where-is-ken-olsen-when-we-need-him/?sh=62a8c1782b80
As a little bit of perspective (happy equal pay rest of year btw), the medieval historian Judith Bennett, whose work focuses on peasant women, particularly brewsters (women who brewed beer in England--which was women's work until hops were introduced in the late 15th century), wrote an article about 15-20 years ago, when the ratio was (in averages) men $1 / women 75¢, that determined that that had also been the ratio in . . . the year 1300. The discounting of women's work and the imposition of wage inequities across the board (there is a good graph in yesterday's [3/24] NYTimes) has been a perpetual problem in western culture. It will continue to persist as long as women do not reach a critical mass in legislatures and compel a change.
Thanks for the rec, Linda. I read the work of medievalist Judith M Bennett as long ago as the 1990s. Readers should not confuse her with Judith A Bennett, New Zealand historian of the Pacific. Her environmental history of the Pacific War, "Natives and Exotics," is an eye-opener. She also wrote a history of mixed-ancestry children of indigenous women and US servicemen.
Actually, they did give me the same salary as male engineers. I was named Engineering Manager after only 4 years with the company. So my salary wasn't keeping up with my career and promotions. They did correct it quite generously.
Here is a video on what this company was about. Watch the whole thing but be sure to go to just before 6 minutes. In valuing differences, Digital opened a manufacturing plant in Roxbury, Massachusetts, a majority Black part of the Boston area. One manager in our plant in Albuquerque New Mexico which had diversity up through the top managers jokingly called himself the token white. We as a company valued differences (it made us stronger as a corporation) and we lived the motto Do the Right Thing.
WOW!! How fortunate you were Cathy, and how fortunate Digital was to have you. Sounds like Ken Olsen knew it. He valued and respected every employee. This contrasts sharply with the topic of HCR's history chat just now on the plantation owners of the south interpreting the Constitution as primarily protecting a man's "property", slaves. We still have so far to go - or maybe this era is the dying breath of oligarchy in America? One can only hope.
Seems as if Powell’s lawyers have given away the store, admitting her statements were false and she knew that they were. She meets the Times v Sullivan standard. Game over. I assume she’s toast financially and can ‘t see how she avoids losing her license to practice for making false statements to the court.
I'm starting to think that ex-US attorney in DC, the Trump appointee who gave the interview on 60 Minutes Sunday night, did it to sandbag these prosecutions. Right now, the DOJ is scrambling to save their efforts against all the major seditionists because that guy went and gave the kind of an interview a prosecutor never gives. Proof you cannot trust a Republican farther than you can see him with your eyes closed. They are ALL traitors!
60 Minutes: Why broadcast? They must have realized. Even I did - immediately! Saw it and thought it very unusual. Trump appointee made me realize he was sandbagging. ❤️🤍💙
Exactly! It was obvious to everyone. CBS should be ashamed. That's not a "scoop" - that's a choice to PARTICIPATE in interfering with a DOJ investigation and prosecution.
That's what I thought too. DOJ is also struggling due to the deliberate saboteurs the former guy left behind. Sherwin was the first, but I'd bet money he will not be the last to try to sabotage the prosecutions. Responsible journalists should not buy in to this strategy; they KNOW that interviews with insiders like this one are irresponsible and verboten.
There are nuggets of truth in these Republican admissions. No reasonable person would believe the Big Lie, but then again, no reasonable person would have voted for Trump. Turns out there are a lot of dumb people out there that believe all manner of lies and conspiracies, and that voted for Trump. As Trump bragged at his rallies, “I love the poorly uneducated”. Informed democracy is for chumps, Republicans aim to win through ignorance. With their attacks on public education, and with the concerted help of disinformation purveyors like Fox News, the GOP is working hard to spread the Dumb. There’s more dumb every day - Ron Johnson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert - dumb, dumb and dumb. This is getting ugly...
While I entirely agree with your sentiments here, I don't think we can afford to dismiss all of the 74 million people who voted for Trump last year as cretins. There's something else going on there that we need to get to the root of if we want to save democracy in the U.S.
Please indulge me while I plug Kurt Anderson's "Evil Geniuses - The Unmaking of America" one more time. One example - in a footnote on page 278: "The founder of Citizens United, a right-wing political group, became Trump's deputy campaign manager in 2016 and has been credibly accused of operating a scam to rip off MAGA donors. A right-wing legal group that for a decade laid important groundwork for the Citizens United case was the James Madison Center, founded in 1997 by Mitch McConnell with funds provided by Betsy DeVos." The strands of deceit and treachery go back 40 years and are as opaque as spider silk. They are designed to ensnare and bend minds, not enlighten them. That is how, IMO, 74 million people voted for Trump - they have been spoon fed BS for 40 years. Once talk radio and cable TV came in, not to mention the 'Net and such as 4chan, etc., it was game over.
Yes, I agree entirely. The question is, is they anything to be done about this? I suspect the answer is no, but I would be interested in those of us on the left investigating that question rather than indulging in righteous indignation, which is what I mostly see. We know what the problems are; we need creative solutions.
Thanks for your mention of Kurt Anderson’s “Evil Geniuses.” I would like to read it. When you mentioned Citizen’s United, I thought of Jane Mayer’s “Dark Money: the Hidden History of the Billionaires behind the rise of the Radical Right” (2016). A good book. Frankly, I think passing HR1/S1 would go a long way towards correcting our corrupted system. Call your Senators!
Joan, Anderson's book can be read as a companion piece to "Dark Money", I think. Also, in that vein is Nancy McLean's "Democracy in Chains". They follow much the same evidence, though each is also stand alone and brings different evidence and/or aspects to the mix.
As a practical matter we must dismiss the 74 million. The time and effort required to convince just one of them to vote for a Democrat can, if applied to getting likely Democratic voters to the voting booth, produce hundreds of votes for Democrats. Efficient use of time, effort, and money in political work is essential. Democrats can’t afford to spend a moment or a dollar inefficiently.
Sadly, because we no longer live in a true democracy (well, we never have, but that's a different conversation), this strategy won't work. Because of gerrymandering and the disproportionate Senate representation they have, those 74 million will almost certainly be back in power soon unless some can be convinced to vote in their best interest instead of on the basis of lies and failed economic theories.
In that case it’s truly hopeless. Not one in a thousand of the 74 million are reachable. Besides, they already vote in their primary interest, which is to preserve their advantages over people with non-European ancestors. However, I believe that in spite of the systemic edge given them by the Senate, the Electoral College, and gerrymandering, we have just barely enough votes to defeat them if we can overcome their vote suppression efforts and get our voters to the voting booth. Requires monumental effort, though.
Yes, I should have said, "unless we pass HR1." It's becoming more evident every day that our democracy hangs in the balance. If we pass this bill, we have a chance to avert disaster.
Dumb yes, but Demagoguery is more powerful and much more complex than that. We shouldn’t boil it down to just dumb. There are tens of millions of smart DT supporters. When we accept that fact, we begin to see the seriousness of how smart and good people can be hyper misled.
If the filibuster in it’s present form is the only thing keeping this and other crucial legislation from passing, and if it only takes a simple majority to reform the filibuster, can someone explain why the democrats have not done so.
I am tired of ALL the talk about it and want them to ... JUST DO IT!
Ari Melber had a piece on his show last night. Manchin was shown insisting on “bipartisanship,” which is hilarious as we have seen how bipartisan Mitch is when repubs are in the majority. Melber goes on to talk about how politicians aren’t representing their constituents, as we were taught, bc there is 77% support nationwide for what Biden is doing right now.
That was an excellent piece of reporting by Ari on the real meaning of bipartisanship in my opinion. By describing it as it is defined on the "beltway" versus as it is when applied to everyone else OUTSIDE that bubble, he made our current dilemma clear.
In commenting on one of the professor's letters earlier this week, I predicted Manchin would come around to changing the filibuster so the sweeping voting rights bill could become law. I hereby rescind my prediction. Why? I listened last night to Rachel Maddow eviscerate Manchin for his arrogant and ultimately bungled handling of a gun reform bill after Sandy Hook.
Perhaps he will do the right thing to stop Republicans in state legislatures from essentially stealing the right to vote from millions of Americans. Perhaps he is playing hard to get to secure promises on unrelated matters. But all we know for sure is that a Democratic U.S. senator so far is standing in the way of doing everything possible to save democracy.
I agree, but he is fighting for his political life in a very conservative state. One would hope he would vote his conscience rather than his desire to be re-elected, but that has become a fond and foolish hope in today's zero sum political environment.
There are no good arguments against ending the filibuster, even though failure to do so will likely cause the end of our nation as we know it. I sometimes think that might be the best thing, but then I imagine Trump and McConnell high-fiving it in front of a crowd of their beastly followers and I want to throw up. With rare exceptions (none come to mind), Senators are not known for their courage. They are into a really good thing in terms of power, prestige and physical comfort. There is no end to the perks, and they sometimes have bridges and buildings and even streets named after them to be enjoyed in their afterlives, should they be so lucky. To have afterlives, I mean.
There are Democrats and Democrats. Almost anyone can claim to be a Democrat. West Virginia has become a very red state, so I suppose we should be content that Joe Manchin is not a Trump clone. If we had a parliamentary system in the USA (like there is in Italy where I live) the DEM leadership could read Manchin the riot act and kick him out of the party if he voted against ending the filibuster. Of course, he would just join the GOP at that point, resolving nothing. No, he will have to be bought. A trade of this for that, or else. Same with Kyrsten Sinema, I think, though I have not yet studied her excuse for wanting to keep the filibuster. Of course Arizona is a gorgeous state, but there are some really heavily armed oddballs out there among the cacti and the dry gulches, and I guess heatstroke must be a problem. Nope, not sure what to do about Kyrsten.
I have come around to this point of view, but still fear that the elimination of the filibuster will come back to haunt us, just as using the nuclear option on judicial appointees did. The Rs will return to power eventually and could use the lack of a filibuster to cram all sorts of evil down our throats.
Yes, I agree entirely that this is key. So far, Biden had been precisely on point with this strategy, unlike Obama, which I have been very gratified to see. Sadly, things get tougher for him from here on out.
Well Reid, think about the consequences of their doing that. Does the populace like what the Republicans have to offer? It is true that there will be evil served up. But for how long before they infuriate everyone so much that they are voted out again? There is only so much cultural grievance that can be turned into law and once subject to that law, will their followers really like it? For once they will have to think hard about what they are passing and how it will be received by the people who elect them.
Oh, I disagree entirely. There is a large subset of the American people who have thoroughly swallowed the "small government, government is the problem, all help is socialism, people of color are coming for your jobs" argument that they are perfectly willing to die and remain poor if it means they can see the lower castes kept in their place and the thorough vitiation of the federal government. Add to this the rabid desire to control women's reproductive health and you have the perfect formula for the self-serving populism of Trump and McConnell. This group of our fellow citizens don't mind that their leaders are in the business of enriching their cronies because they perceive the wealthy as "the job creators," despite all evidence to the contrary. Witness the Trump tax cuts, sold as an economic boost through trickle-down, which has been clearly demonstrated to have benefited almost exclusively those few who own stocks and which did almost nothing to boost employment (and about 40% of those stock dividends went to investors outside the U.S.) These tax cuts are still largely hailed on the Right as having been a great success. This is a cult, or perhaps a religion, which demands belief in certain core principles at risk of being cast out into the wilderness and left to the rapacious machinations of the socialists. Ongoing suffering has done little to nothing to change their minds.
I agree that there will be a subset that never changes. But politics boils down to the working the margins, and that is really where we disagree. I believe that there is some subset of the subset that may not be willing to trade their new financial supports, once they get them, for what they had before: worse healthcare, fewer child supports, etc. It is these margins that Democrats are chasing and I feel that if they pay attention to what polls well, they have a strong chance at peeling away many but the diehards. However, that is only to the extent that they continue to bring people what they want, hence the need to dispense with the filibuster.
Where I stand the Republicans are incredibly out of touch with the popular opinions. I really don’t know who they’re representing these days except for big money and corruption
So, it seems Trump an his lawyer Sydney Powell, pushed the Bigly Lie and brought multiple lawsuits claiming the voting was fraudulently rigged, including Dominion Voing Systems' equipment, in consequence of which Dominion sued Powell for defamation. Her defense is “no reasonable person would conclude” that her statements about a scheme to rig the election “were truly statements of fact.” No so Bigly. But at least not the "only joking" excuse Trump's followers often use.
Yes. What gets me the most is how blithely Powell dismisses her accusations as essentially harmless, a game, when her words caused Dominion, a Canadian company, to have to expend hundreds of thousands of dollars in security to protect employees who recieved death threats, AND lost contracts with states, so they are now in bankruptcy. There are no words to describe this vile creature. A life sentence is too short.
To Sen. Chuck Schumer and other Democrats in both houses of Congress:
Stop referring to Republicans as your "colleagues." You really cheapen yourselves by pretending that you consider those people allies when they openly deny Biden as President, continue to support trump's big lie, and and reject 1/6 as an insurrection. WAKE UP, Senator! Kick those people the hell out of Congress as seditious traitors. If impeaching trump twice had any legitimacy, then removing those Republicans who continue to support him is equally valid.
Schumer should not pretend that he doesn’t know why his Republican colleagues are afraid of democracy. He know why. They know why. Their voters know why. And we know why. Schumer’s top priority and ours should be to stop them from preserving minority rule.
Well, of course the Republicans are going to the voter suppression route. Until/unless the Democrats stop them, they will continue to do so. Time for a serious talk by Democratic leadership with Sinema and Manchin. Get the new Voting Right Act passed. NOW. And then, statehood for Puerto Rico and/or D.C................
The Republicans in Congress, spineless bastards that they are, have nothing to offer the American people. Their followers are just a means to fill their pockets.
No. The Republicans offer their voters the promise that they will do everything in their power to preserve the advantages that white Americans have always held over thise with non-European ancestors. So far, they have delivered.
GQP Congresspeople's faux concern for little white folks is a smoke screen at best. They main goal is to exploit them to advance the interests of the 1% and their own wealthy donors.
AJ had no problem with slaves...or with dispossessing Native Americans either...and was known to be somewhat "fast and loose" on the subject of legality and Congressional powers for that matter. There was a lot in him that 45 would of course appreciate ..if he ever read something that is.
That is putting it mildly. He is the only president who is known to have personally driven a coffle, as it was called, of enslaved persons from one place to another. He led the displacement - which included massive stealing of lands and a death march across the country - of multiple indigenous tribes from the southeast to what became Oklahoma.
Andrew Jackson was a great promoter of one kind of democracy -- herrenvolk (lordly or master-race) democracy. It didn't even encompass all whites, and Blacks and Indians were completely and permanently excluded. We can do better.
Erh Rex....Left Coast? Facing North or facing South? And this is essentially what they have always stood for only now it can nolonger be hiden from the light of day.
Heather, again and again, thank you for sorting through the stories/news and weaving it into a coherent narrative. For most of last year, I was obsessed with the news, reading/listening multiple times a day. I am now trying for better life balance, but still need to understand more than the headlines. A historical perspective on the present news is so helpful. Thank you!
Yes Heather I echo Vickie with gratitude for your clear essays framing the important events historically. Now that I’ve had my 2 doses, I’m also going to approach a better life balance toward health, lower stress and sanity. I will continue to do whatever I can do to support Biden’s efforts to preserve voting right and our democracy.
When people argue with you that election and voting rules are the prerogative of the states, states rights, and that Congress is overstepping its authority with the For the People Act, please quote them Article I Section 4 of the Constitution. "Section 4: Elections The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators." My Tea Party brother got out his copy of the Constitution and read it. He was much chagrined that he hadn't understood that second sentence. The Congress must pass the For the People Act of democracy will be a thing of the past!
Did your brother then decide that he would vote for Democrats? No, I don’t imagine he did. What he probably did, instead, is to double down on his support of Republicans to make sure Congress passes no law that would prevent states from suppressing votes in districts that lean Democratic. It is a waste of time and effort to try to make decent citizens out of Republicans. Put your time, effort, and money into projects that will help thwart Republican efforts to suppress votes. It is a monumental task and soon will get even harder with new vote suppression laws in thirty states, all designed in coordination with Republican experts in the matter, and they have world class expertise in this specialty. We have just barely enough votes to stop them, but we can’t afford to lose any of those votes.
You're right that I'm not holding my breath waiting for him to change. I am fully committed to doing what I can to help the For the People Act pass. It is critical.
CRIT I CAL!!!!
But Cathy's brother will probably "tend" now more towards any "constitutional" GOP candidates and form part of a "loyal" opposition .....eventually.
My guess is you’ve never lived in Texas.
No...Texans here tell me it is going thru purple towards blue.
They’ve said that for decades. Statewide, they would be blue now if they didn’t suppress the Latino vote so effectively, which they can do because the legislative districts (state and federal) are gerrymandered to the hilt. By the time Texas is blue, the US will be an autocratic kakistocracy or it won’t matter because several other southern states have turned blue.
A common authoritarian/fascist tactic is to take something familiar and invert it’s meaning. We are seeing this more and more.
Why is half of the country not seeing it? That’s the part that is disturbing for me. Who ARE these people!
That half is almost entirely made up of the 60% of white Americans whose top priority is preserving the advantages they have over people with non-European ancestors. It’s not that they don’t see it. It’s that they prefer an autocracy that preserves their advantages to a democracy that doesn’t.
This is, I believe, precisely correct.
Am I missing something? The "Elections Clause" (Art. 1, Sec. 4) applies to the election of Senators and Representatives, not to the President and Vice President.
Welcome to the conundrum of Constitutional Law. You may well be correct that the clause so cited permits the Federal Congress to modify State regulations regarding the election of Federal Representatives and Senators, but is silent on such a power regarding the election of either State Representatives or Federal chief executives. So, Justice Stromberg, would it therefore be Constitutional for a State to pass a law allowing only registered Republicans to vote for either State Representatives or Federal chief executives? A strict Originalist, in the absence of compelling support from apocrapha created by the Framers, would have to say "yes," thereby achieving a seemingly-principled, but nonsensical, result.
That's (one of the places) where conservative ideology breaks down. Since it was impossible for the Framers to accurately predict all the circumstances to which their work would be applied, and since it is impossible to really know what they were thinking, people interpreting the Constitution (or any law) have no choice but to do so with regard to present circumstances, social needs, and the case at hand. But conservatives have to go the extra step of essentially lying about their reasoning, embracing reason and common sense when the result suits their present desires, then claiming "strict adherence to the text" when it doesn't.
I wish we could move past originalism. The Constitution could be a living document, reflecting the changes in population, mores, and needs of the country today, rather than what we think and guess the (white, male, property-owning) Founders thought almost 250 years ago. It’s a brilliant document, but how could they possibly have predicted such a large population, technical advances, industrialization, global economics, changing immigration trends, climate change, and on and on?
Originalism is an opinion, an interpretation only. Republicans have built it up as a prima facia fact. It is not and we shouldn’t treat it as such. Their super power is creating alternative realities and getting people to agree. Resist.
Kathy, I awoke this morning with very similar questions on my mind. It strikes me that we have placed such a sheen of brilliance on the Founders and their creation that it's blinded us too the faults and flaws that have gotten us in this pickle. I'm all for honoring our Found Fathers, but my grade school memories, especially, are of a reverence and superficial understanding of exactly what was done and why. Let alone, how could we bridge the gaps between 1776 and 1956, or 2006? The Constitution MUST be seen as a living document, IMO.
Well, and the fact that white, male supremacy, not to mention slavery, were baked into the Constitution tells us how important it is that it be a living document.
Well said, Sandra, thank you. I agree!
Good question. Given a strict reading of the original text of the Constitution, state legislatures can do anything their little hearts desire.
Dr. Richardson, your letters are concise, they stick to the facts, and these make my blood boil. We are still on dangerous territory and we must not relent in supporting the Biden/Harris administration nor stop writing and calling our Senators and Congressional representatives.
I continue to hold out hope that Trump will be found guilty and held accountable.
Sorry, but it would be a hollow victory. Trump and the Republicans fed the Beast, loosed it, and rode it to power. Predictably, they've now lost control of it. Now that Trump is a loser, he'll never really lead them again. Oh, he'll still have influence, and he'll still be able to raise money for a while (keeping as much as possible for himself), but the only thing he had going for him was the illusion of strength and infallability. Now that the illusion has popped, all he has left are the more usual tools of graft, disinformation, and chicanery, which can translate to power, but not leadership.
Why else do you think he's trying to start his own social media instead of joining Parler, Gab, or 8chan? He and his handlers know that if he does the latter, he'll be a Proud Boy follower, instead of a Proud Boy leader.
Prosecuting the Unnamed Former would not be a hollow victory. Holding the guilty accountable for their crimes, with due process under the rule of law, sends a strong message and serves as a deterrent against potential future sedition and insurrection. Even the most hate-filled, wild-eyed Deplorables will think hard about ruining their lives by earning a 5, 10, 20 year sentence.
You're probably right. Unfortunately, the "hate-filled, wild-eyed Deplorables" are both the easiest to delude and the easiest to prosecute, while the ones who recruited, primed, fused, and fired them will be much harder to take. Between battling the money they possess and the roles in government they play(ed), every two cuts we inflict will be matched by one or more cuts to ourselves. A complete investigation and trial of the real insurrectionists would likely cost hundreds of millions of dollars and still may not be successful.
Furthermore, a full accounting will require the prosecution of sitting and former holders of elected office, a truly evil precedent that could actually encourage attacks on election results in the future, as losing politicians destroy everything they can to avoid revenge prosecution.
That's one of the toughest policy issues on Biden's very full plate, requiring decisions I do not envy in the slightest. We could win that war only to discover that there's nothing left but the wreckage.
Remember, the yahoos that invaded Congress last January were so incompetent that a good laugh track could have turned the whole thing into a comedy, except for the deaths and the impact on our democracy. And that's been the whole purpose of Trump and the Republicans -- they don't want take over and run our government, they simply want to cripple it so that it can't interfere with their ability to make as much money as possible by any means legal or illegal. A weak, ineffective democracy is what they want for America, one that allows business and religion to do whatever they please to whomever they please.
chicanery....I love that word. 😻
I actually got to use the word "murmuration" yesterday -- I almost cried with joy!
Cool
I hold out that hope, as well. At least we'll get to enjoy his permanent absence from Twitter and Facebook. And he and other Trumps will be spending a lot of time in depositions and court proceedings
Consequences are the only thing that deters wrongdoing in those without conscience. Reps and senators who went against the will of the people by objecting to the electoral college vote count are all guilty of wrongdoing. Sedition perhaps. Treason perhaps. Every single one of them should face significant consequences. A line has to be drawn. Lawmakers cannot lie, cheat, deceive the people. They should also be tasked with ensuring every one gets to vote. If they persist in this behaviour they should no longer be lawmakers or hold offices of public trust. Democrats have an opportunity to fix this. Fix it they must.
So why are they not being held to account? Why has the investigation into the events of Jan. 6 stalled?
It actually hasn't stalled. But the leadership of the DOJ is being stymied by the fact the GOP Senators are blocking the confirmation of every single position below Attorney General in the department. And they don't want "acting" senior officers making the kind of consequential decisions that have to be made when going after treason and sedition means going after one party. Which is why the GOP senators are doing what they are doing.
"GOP Senators are blocking the confirmation of every single position below Attorney General in the department."
This is worrisome in part because I had not heard this. I could not verify it. Is there news reporting on this? Would you please name a couple of these "PAS" positions (PAS = positions filled by presidential appointment with Senate confirmation, per Wikipedia -- see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_positions_filled_by_presidential_appointment_with_Senate_confirmation).
Thanks!
It was on MSNBC tonight. Both Rachel and Lawrence mentioned it. Rachel talked with Anthony Weissman about the problem.
All the Deputy AG department heads.
TCinLA: Thanks- I was about to post that myself!
Specifically, Venita Gupta for the #3 person at DOJ was discussed on TRMS. It is a segment well worth watching, and it explains why Senator John Cornyn is holding it up. (TLDR version: a single Texas drug cop ran a sting in 1999 where he arrested 15% of a Black community in a 5K town in Texas on completely false drug charges; many received 20-100 year sentences. Cornyn as Texas AG gave said narc the "Lawman of the Year" award. Subsequently, the complete lack of ANY corroborating evidence got all the cases dismissed.)
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/maddow-shreds-cornyn-blocking-top-doj-nominee-with-reminder-of-their-connection-to-case-of-a-cartoonishly-evil-tx-cop/
Here's the link to TRMS. I missed LO'D due to basketball.
A piece of very good news today that I found on the BBC internet site and not up front and center on CNN, Wapo, NYT or Politico.
"First Southern State bans the death penalty". Virginia's Democratic governor signed the Bill.
That's my state that did that!! When Gov Northam got negative news a few years back about wearing "Black Face" in a picture in his yearbook and "they" were calling for his resignation, he instead got woke and has been, to my white eyes, become a champion of a more progressive VA.
Thanks, Stuart, for the highlight.
As a sometime observer of Northam and the VA political scene, I agree, Lynell. It points to a core difference between Ds and Rs. Dems can be cajoled, shamed when needed, into doing better. Today's Repugs? Deplorable, a lost cause, not to mention The Lost Cause.
Purely speculating, but I got the sense he took a deep dive into history and came up with a dose of reality. Again, just my HO.
Worst Woke Governor in my lifetime. Absolutely weak and pathetic.
Why, thank you for stopping by, David! Would you like a cup of coffee with that opinion?
WAPO did yesterday. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/virginia-abolish-death-penalty/2021/03/24/8d6eda46-8bf6-11eb-9423-04079921c915_story.html
It's Thursday, 3/25/21, and I actually heard that Virginia has banned the death penalty, AND that that state has put more people to death via execution that all other states except Texas. Of course, Democracy Now! mentioned it.
Ralph. He is our Neville Chamberlain.
🤣 Oh David you are SO funny!! Hahahahahahahaha
Neville Chamberlain had an unfortunate life after his ill-advised tourism in Munich. His fears and their projection certainly didn't stop the flow of history, they accelerated it...and thankfully the consequences were successfully dealt with. Other than that i don't see the link between the benighted Foreign Secretary and this possibly "hapless" excuse for a Democrat Govenor.
Troll....
And who is our Churchill? Trump? McConnell? Ron Johnson?
Ron Johnson is our Ron Johnson. Someone please hurry up and break the mold.
Churchill was the man of the hour and a man of his day...not really appreciated by the "woke folk" .
“To the question of invasion I would observe...”
https://youtu.be/skrdyoabmgA
I much enjoyed the film.
It came out at just the right time didn't it? Like a seed to remind us what leadership is in a crisis. What could have happened if not for Churchill to both stand up to Hitler and mobilize the people around a moral obligation and for survival. The speeches in The Darkest Hour and Dunkirk movies are just amazing points of light in history.
Good one, Sandra.
Happy Equal Pay Day! Equal Pay Day is today, Wednesday, March 24, 2021. This date symbolizes how far into the year women must work to earn what men earned in the previous year. In the same job, with the same responsibilities. That is 82 cents to the dollar a man earns. Asian-American women earned $0.85, so their equal pay day was March 5; African and Black American women earned $0.61, so their equal pay day was August 22; Native American women earned $0.58, so their equal pay day was September 23; Latinas earned $0.53, so their equal pay day was November 20. When I first started working full time in about 1972 women made $.69 to a man's dollar. When I was first promoted to engineering manager, I found out that 2/3's of my group of engineers now reporting to me made more than I did. And, yes, I was climbing the corporate ladder rather quickly. So, my company gave me 20% raises every six months for two years to get my salary in line with other engineering managers. Later, when I was a Group Engineering Manager and was asked to speak to our Human Resources staff, I did a histogram of all the people in my boss's group by job level putting women on the histogram on the left and the men on the right. It looked a little like a Rorscharch inkblot test. The men's side showed an even distribution over the job levels. The women's side clearly showed not one but two glass ceilings! The left side wasn't an even distributed but looked like two plateaus. The first glass ceiling was on the technical ladder with very few women achieving the consulting engineer level and stuck at best at the principal engineer level. The second glass ceiling was the managerial ladder as expected with fewer women promoted to senior and group managers. It was so clear that it made quite a stir through the Human Resources staff. This was a highly ethical company and I know they worked at making things more equitable for women and minorities.
One response often heard here in Europe....where the problem is similar as women are payed for the same or similar jobs by 16% less then men so no better than the US.... is that women go on strike both at home (in the kitchen and in bed!) and at work at the end of October each year as they are not paid for the final 2 months and the idea is gaining more and more traction.
The "Lysistrata" method! And brilliantly adapted by Spike Lee in his movie "Chi-Raq."
You were very lucky that your company valued you.
It was a superb, highly ethical company. Everyone felt valued! The motto of the company was Do the Right Thing and we did lived that. The right thing by our customers, the right thing by each other.
Which is obviously why they went out of business! Sorry, I don't mean that as a joke; every time I have seen one company fail and the other succeed in any particular business, it's always been the better, more ethical, better place to work at, company that got taken over by the uglies. Every single production company I worked at in Hollywood is gone, and the replacements are uniformly the pigs.
And the ethics is the first think that is shown the door....to make room for the moneymen.
Hey, This ethical company was the 32nd largest corporation on the Fortune 100 list and the darling of Wall Street for several decades. It wasn't the ethics that brought its down fall. It was not transisioning to a new financial model from minicomputers selling for $100,000s to PC selling for under $10,000 (a megacent) when they first came out. They were bought by Compaq to get Digital's customer support and its Fortune 500 clients. I say it isn't the size of the company its the leadership that makes a company ethical. After the Founder, who was on the cover of Fortune Magazine in 1986 as the world's most successful entrepreneur, left the company it changed from an extraordinary company where we were changing the world ... and we did ... to an ordinary one which was no joy to work for. Things like the Internet protocols and net neutrality. I will always be grateful to Ken Olsen and his ethics and vision: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6We6VDtyHY and here is my viewpoint on Ken in Forbes Magazine shortly after he died: https://www.forbes.com/sites/prospernow/2011/03/20/he-was-different-in-a-good-way-where-is-ken-olsen-when-we-need-him/?sh=62a8c1782b80
WOW!!!
As a little bit of perspective (happy equal pay rest of year btw), the medieval historian Judith Bennett, whose work focuses on peasant women, particularly brewsters (women who brewed beer in England--which was women's work until hops were introduced in the late 15th century), wrote an article about 15-20 years ago, when the ratio was (in averages) men $1 / women 75¢, that determined that that had also been the ratio in . . . the year 1300. The discounting of women's work and the imposition of wage inequities across the board (there is a good graph in yesterday's [3/24] NYTimes) has been a perpetual problem in western culture. It will continue to persist as long as women do not reach a critical mass in legislatures and compel a change.
Thanks for the rec, Linda. I read the work of medievalist Judith M Bennett as long ago as the 1990s. Readers should not confuse her with Judith A Bennett, New Zealand historian of the Pacific. Her environmental history of the Pacific War, "Natives and Exotics," is an eye-opener. She also wrote a history of mixed-ancestry children of indigenous women and US servicemen.
OK, digression's over.
Wow! Great Work! Thank you from all women!
Thank you from all people receiving or deserving equal pay.
Good for you and all of the women at your corporation. Too bad that it is not the standard.
So did they right the inequities such that women were brought to the same level as their male counterparts?
Actually, they did give me the same salary as male engineers. I was named Engineering Manager after only 4 years with the company. So my salary wasn't keeping up with my career and promotions. They did correct it quite generously.
Here is a video on what this company was about. Watch the whole thing but be sure to go to just before 6 minutes. In valuing differences, Digital opened a manufacturing plant in Roxbury, Massachusetts, a majority Black part of the Boston area. One manager in our plant in Albuquerque New Mexico which had diversity up through the top managers jokingly called himself the token white. We as a company valued differences (it made us stronger as a corporation) and we lived the motto Do the Right Thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6We6VDtyHY The Legacy of Ken Olsen
WOW!! How fortunate you were Cathy, and how fortunate Digital was to have you. Sounds like Ken Olsen knew it. He valued and respected every employee. This contrasts sharply with the topic of HCR's history chat just now on the plantation owners of the south interpreting the Constitution as primarily protecting a man's "property", slaves. We still have so far to go - or maybe this era is the dying breath of oligarchy in America? One can only hope.
Seems as if Powell’s lawyers have given away the store, admitting her statements were false and she knew that they were. She meets the Times v Sullivan standard. Game over. I assume she’s toast financially and can ‘t see how she avoids losing her license to practice for making false statements to the court.
You realize that this is the same defense Fox News made for Tucker Carlson, saying no reasonable person takes him seriously.
But Tucker doesn't pretend to be acting as a lawyer.......just a babbling song and dance man.
Perhaps Sidney is auditioning for her own Fox spot?
I don't think that Fox is impressed by her performance
Yup
I was wrong. A lawyer friend told me damages in defamation cases generally aren’t apportioned. Powell is in for it all. Oh, well. Bye, bye!
I'm starting to think that ex-US attorney in DC, the Trump appointee who gave the interview on 60 Minutes Sunday night, did it to sandbag these prosecutions. Right now, the DOJ is scrambling to save their efforts against all the major seditionists because that guy went and gave the kind of an interview a prosecutor never gives. Proof you cannot trust a Republican farther than you can see him with your eyes closed. They are ALL traitors!
When I heard that story, that is exactly what I thought he intended to do. He knows the rules and he broke them intentionally.
He should be fired by Garland and his pay suffer quite a decrease.
Former Hr professional here: if he’s fired his pay will indeed be decreased!
He had already left the department when he gave that interview.
No, he is still a member of the DOJ. He had left that position. Not the same thing.
You smarty-pants person, you! :-)
Yes. Here's Glenn Kirschner's video on this very topic:
https://youtu.be/GOFjiyxafxE
Thank you, Bob.
60 Minutes: Why broadcast? They must have realized. Even I did - immediately! Saw it and thought it very unusual. Trump appointee made me realize he was sandbagging. ❤️🤍💙
Exactly! It was obvious to everyone. CBS should be ashamed. That's not a "scoop" - that's a choice to PARTICIPATE in interfering with a DOJ investigation and prosecution.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/23/politics/capitol-riot-michael-sherwin-60-minutes/index.html
For the same reason CNn gave Trump free air time in 2016 - good ratings. Particularly since ABC/CBS/NBC are all way down now.
That's what I thought too. DOJ is also struggling due to the deliberate saboteurs the former guy left behind. Sherwin was the first, but I'd bet money he will not be the last to try to sabotage the prosecutions. Responsible journalists should not buy in to this strategy; they KNOW that interviews with insiders like this one are irresponsible and verboten.
There are nuggets of truth in these Republican admissions. No reasonable person would believe the Big Lie, but then again, no reasonable person would have voted for Trump. Turns out there are a lot of dumb people out there that believe all manner of lies and conspiracies, and that voted for Trump. As Trump bragged at his rallies, “I love the poorly uneducated”. Informed democracy is for chumps, Republicans aim to win through ignorance. With their attacks on public education, and with the concerted help of disinformation purveyors like Fox News, the GOP is working hard to spread the Dumb. There’s more dumb every day - Ron Johnson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert - dumb, dumb and dumb. This is getting ugly...
While I entirely agree with your sentiments here, I don't think we can afford to dismiss all of the 74 million people who voted for Trump last year as cretins. There's something else going on there that we need to get to the root of if we want to save democracy in the U.S.
Please indulge me while I plug Kurt Anderson's "Evil Geniuses - The Unmaking of America" one more time. One example - in a footnote on page 278: "The founder of Citizens United, a right-wing political group, became Trump's deputy campaign manager in 2016 and has been credibly accused of operating a scam to rip off MAGA donors. A right-wing legal group that for a decade laid important groundwork for the Citizens United case was the James Madison Center, founded in 1997 by Mitch McConnell with funds provided by Betsy DeVos." The strands of deceit and treachery go back 40 years and are as opaque as spider silk. They are designed to ensnare and bend minds, not enlighten them. That is how, IMO, 74 million people voted for Trump - they have been spoon fed BS for 40 years. Once talk radio and cable TV came in, not to mention the 'Net and such as 4chan, etc., it was game over.
Yes, I agree entirely. The question is, is they anything to be done about this? I suspect the answer is no, but I would be interested in those of us on the left investigating that question rather than indulging in righteous indignation, which is what I mostly see. We know what the problems are; we need creative solutions.
Thanks for your mention of Kurt Anderson’s “Evil Geniuses.” I would like to read it. When you mentioned Citizen’s United, I thought of Jane Mayer’s “Dark Money: the Hidden History of the Billionaires behind the rise of the Radical Right” (2016). A good book. Frankly, I think passing HR1/S1 would go a long way towards correcting our corrupted system. Call your Senators!
Joan, Anderson's book can be read as a companion piece to "Dark Money", I think. Also, in that vein is Nancy McLean's "Democracy in Chains". They follow much the same evidence, though each is also stand alone and brings different evidence and/or aspects to the mix.
PS - Called and wrote my two Republican Senators. May be quite as much a fool's errand as it used to be to contact Jesse Helms................Hrmph
Well, thanks for the book recommendations and for calling!
You're welcome. 😊
100%!
As a practical matter we must dismiss the 74 million. The time and effort required to convince just one of them to vote for a Democrat can, if applied to getting likely Democratic voters to the voting booth, produce hundreds of votes for Democrats. Efficient use of time, effort, and money in political work is essential. Democrats can’t afford to spend a moment or a dollar inefficiently.
Sadly, because we no longer live in a true democracy (well, we never have, but that's a different conversation), this strategy won't work. Because of gerrymandering and the disproportionate Senate representation they have, those 74 million will almost certainly be back in power soon unless some can be convinced to vote in their best interest instead of on the basis of lies and failed economic theories.
In that case it’s truly hopeless. Not one in a thousand of the 74 million are reachable. Besides, they already vote in their primary interest, which is to preserve their advantages over people with non-European ancestors. However, I believe that in spite of the systemic edge given them by the Senate, the Electoral College, and gerrymandering, we have just barely enough votes to defeat them if we can overcome their vote suppression efforts and get our voters to the voting booth. Requires monumental effort, though.
Yes, I should have said, "unless we pass HR1." It's becoming more evident every day that our democracy hangs in the balance. If we pass this bill, we have a chance to avert disaster.
Dumb yes, but Demagoguery is more powerful and much more complex than that. We shouldn’t boil it down to just dumb. There are tens of millions of smart DT supporters. When we accept that fact, we begin to see the seriousness of how smart and good people can be hyper misled.
If the filibuster in it’s present form is the only thing keeping this and other crucial legislation from passing, and if it only takes a simple majority to reform the filibuster, can someone explain why the democrats have not done so.
I am tired of ALL the talk about it and want them to ... JUST DO IT!
Ari Melber had a piece on his show last night. Manchin was shown insisting on “bipartisanship,” which is hilarious as we have seen how bipartisan Mitch is when repubs are in the majority. Melber goes on to talk about how politicians aren’t representing their constituents, as we were taught, bc there is 77% support nationwide for what Biden is doing right now.
That was an excellent piece of reporting by Ari on the real meaning of bipartisanship in my opinion. By describing it as it is defined on the "beltway" versus as it is when applied to everyone else OUTSIDE that bubble, he made our current dilemma clear.
Democrats Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona refuse to vote to end it.
In commenting on one of the professor's letters earlier this week, I predicted Manchin would come around to changing the filibuster so the sweeping voting rights bill could become law. I hereby rescind my prediction. Why? I listened last night to Rachel Maddow eviscerate Manchin for his arrogant and ultimately bungled handling of a gun reform bill after Sandy Hook.
Perhaps he will do the right thing to stop Republicans in state legislatures from essentially stealing the right to vote from millions of Americans. Perhaps he is playing hard to get to secure promises on unrelated matters. But all we know for sure is that a Democratic U.S. senator so far is standing in the way of doing everything possible to save democracy.
Agree. Manchin is infuriating. A wolf in sheep's clothing.
I agree, but he is fighting for his political life in a very conservative state. One would hope he would vote his conscience rather than his desire to be re-elected, but that has become a fond and foolish hope in today's zero sum political environment.
Biden needs to find a solution for him.
I agree. There's got to be a deal he can accept. Unfortunately, considering his state, it may involve coal.
Well, Manchin did "move" significantly on massive infrastructure spending. There are several pieces on the board in this political game.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/manchin-calls-enormous-infrastructure-package-paid-new-taxes-n1261949
We are lucky to have Manchin. Without him we would be toast. You have to play the cards you’re dealt.
True. The alternative to Manchin would be a Repug, probably an awful one.
Yes, but this time Manchin doesn't have to orchestrate anything. He just has to get out of the way. Even a klutz can do that.
but they will slide sideways into a compromise at a price and as long as it doesn't look like they caved in.
Are they pseudo Democrats? Tired of Joe Manchin throwing his weight around
Achieving a simple majority on the filibuster is far from simple. Cf. Sinema and Manchin.
There are no good arguments against ending the filibuster, even though failure to do so will likely cause the end of our nation as we know it. I sometimes think that might be the best thing, but then I imagine Trump and McConnell high-fiving it in front of a crowd of their beastly followers and I want to throw up. With rare exceptions (none come to mind), Senators are not known for their courage. They are into a really good thing in terms of power, prestige and physical comfort. There is no end to the perks, and they sometimes have bridges and buildings and even streets named after them to be enjoyed in their afterlives, should they be so lucky. To have afterlives, I mean.
There are Democrats and Democrats. Almost anyone can claim to be a Democrat. West Virginia has become a very red state, so I suppose we should be content that Joe Manchin is not a Trump clone. If we had a parliamentary system in the USA (like there is in Italy where I live) the DEM leadership could read Manchin the riot act and kick him out of the party if he voted against ending the filibuster. Of course, he would just join the GOP at that point, resolving nothing. No, he will have to be bought. A trade of this for that, or else. Same with Kyrsten Sinema, I think, though I have not yet studied her excuse for wanting to keep the filibuster. Of course Arizona is a gorgeous state, but there are some really heavily armed oddballs out there among the cacti and the dry gulches, and I guess heatstroke must be a problem. Nope, not sure what to do about Kyrsten.
I have come around to this point of view, but still fear that the elimination of the filibuster will come back to haunt us, just as using the nuclear option on judicial appointees did. The Rs will return to power eventually and could use the lack of a filibuster to cram all sorts of evil down our throats.
It makes it totally essential that the Dems do enough between now and 2022 for them to win the elcetion by a wide margin.
Yes, I agree entirely that this is key. So far, Biden had been precisely on point with this strategy, unlike Obama, which I have been very gratified to see. Sadly, things get tougher for him from here on out.
Well Reid, think about the consequences of their doing that. Does the populace like what the Republicans have to offer? It is true that there will be evil served up. But for how long before they infuriate everyone so much that they are voted out again? There is only so much cultural grievance that can be turned into law and once subject to that law, will their followers really like it? For once they will have to think hard about what they are passing and how it will be received by the people who elect them.
Oh, I disagree entirely. There is a large subset of the American people who have thoroughly swallowed the "small government, government is the problem, all help is socialism, people of color are coming for your jobs" argument that they are perfectly willing to die and remain poor if it means they can see the lower castes kept in their place and the thorough vitiation of the federal government. Add to this the rabid desire to control women's reproductive health and you have the perfect formula for the self-serving populism of Trump and McConnell. This group of our fellow citizens don't mind that their leaders are in the business of enriching their cronies because they perceive the wealthy as "the job creators," despite all evidence to the contrary. Witness the Trump tax cuts, sold as an economic boost through trickle-down, which has been clearly demonstrated to have benefited almost exclusively those few who own stocks and which did almost nothing to boost employment (and about 40% of those stock dividends went to investors outside the U.S.) These tax cuts are still largely hailed on the Right as having been a great success. This is a cult, or perhaps a religion, which demands belief in certain core principles at risk of being cast out into the wilderness and left to the rapacious machinations of the socialists. Ongoing suffering has done little to nothing to change their minds.
I agree that there will be a subset that never changes. But politics boils down to the working the margins, and that is really where we disagree. I believe that there is some subset of the subset that may not be willing to trade their new financial supports, once they get them, for what they had before: worse healthcare, fewer child supports, etc. It is these margins that Democrats are chasing and I feel that if they pay attention to what polls well, they have a strong chance at peeling away many but the diehards. However, that is only to the extent that they continue to bring people what they want, hence the need to dispense with the filibuster.
Where I stand the Republicans are incredibly out of touch with the popular opinions. I really don’t know who they’re representing these days except for big money and corruption
So, it seems Trump an his lawyer Sydney Powell, pushed the Bigly Lie and brought multiple lawsuits claiming the voting was fraudulently rigged, including Dominion Voing Systems' equipment, in consequence of which Dominion sued Powell for defamation. Her defense is “no reasonable person would conclude” that her statements about a scheme to rig the election “were truly statements of fact.” No so Bigly. But at least not the "only joking" excuse Trump's followers often use.
Hello Truth. Goodbye Law License(s)
Your last sentence: amen.
Yes. What gets me the most is how blithely Powell dismisses her accusations as essentially harmless, a game, when her words caused Dominion, a Canadian company, to have to expend hundreds of thousands of dollars in security to protect employees who recieved death threats, AND lost contracts with states, so they are now in bankruptcy. There are no words to describe this vile creature. A life sentence is too short.
To Sen. Chuck Schumer and other Democrats in both houses of Congress:
Stop referring to Republicans as your "colleagues." You really cheapen yourselves by pretending that you consider those people allies when they openly deny Biden as President, continue to support trump's big lie, and and reject 1/6 as an insurrection. WAKE UP, Senator! Kick those people the hell out of Congress as seditious traitors. If impeaching trump twice had any legitimacy, then removing those Republicans who continue to support him is equally valid.
Loyal opposition or just 100% disloyal and in opposition to everything.
Exactly so.
Schumer should not pretend that he doesn’t know why his Republican colleagues are afraid of democracy. He know why. They know why. Their voters know why. And we know why. Schumer’s top priority and ours should be to stop them from preserving minority rule.
Well, of course the Republicans are going to the voter suppression route. Until/unless the Democrats stop them, they will continue to do so. Time for a serious talk by Democratic leadership with Sinema and Manchin. Get the new Voting Right Act passed. NOW. And then, statehood for Puerto Rico and/or D.C................
The Republicans in Congress, spineless bastards that they are, have nothing to offer the American people. Their followers are just a means to fill their pockets.
No. The Republicans offer their voters the promise that they will do everything in their power to preserve the advantages that white Americans have always held over thise with non-European ancestors. So far, they have delivered.
GQP Congresspeople's faux concern for little white folks is a smoke screen at best. They main goal is to exploit them to advance the interests of the 1% and their own wealthy donors.
That's why former-failed-45 was such a fan of Andrew Jackson - energetic, unapologetic racist.
AJ had no problem with slaves...or with dispossessing Native Americans either...and was known to be somewhat "fast and loose" on the subject of legality and Congressional powers for that matter. There was a lot in him that 45 would of course appreciate ..if he ever read something that is.
That is putting it mildly. He is the only president who is known to have personally driven a coffle, as it was called, of enslaved persons from one place to another. He led the displacement - which included massive stealing of lands and a death march across the country - of multiple indigenous tribes from the southeast to what became Oklahoma.
😣
Andrew Jackson was a great promoter of one kind of democracy -- herrenvolk (lordly or master-race) democracy. It didn't even encompass all whites, and Blacks and Indians were completely and permanently excluded. We can do better.
G Fredrickson, White Supremacy
D Roediger, The Wages of Whiteness
A Wallace, The Long, Bitter Trail
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herrenvolk_democracy
Erh Rex....Left Coast? Facing North or facing South? And this is essentially what they have always stood for only now it can nolonger be hiden from the light of day.
It's come to mean as you look at a map of the US, the Pacific Ocean is on the left.
So facing north. Thanks.
As long as the opposite of Right Coast isn't Wrong Coast!
Almost right, but they stood for something else during the Civil War and for about ten years after it. Left at a map with north at the top.
Heather, again and again, thank you for sorting through the stories/news and weaving it into a coherent narrative. For most of last year, I was obsessed with the news, reading/listening multiple times a day. I am now trying for better life balance, but still need to understand more than the headlines. A historical perspective on the present news is so helpful. Thank you!
Yes Heather I echo Vickie with gratitude for your clear essays framing the important events historically. Now that I’ve had my 2 doses, I’m also going to approach a better life balance toward health, lower stress and sanity. I will continue to do whatever I can do to support Biden’s efforts to preserve voting right and our democracy.