A poll today by the Associated Press (AP) and the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) shows that President Joe Biden’s administration is gaining positive traction. Sixty-three percent of Americans approve of how he is handling his job as president. Seventy-one percent approve of how he is handling the coronavirus pandemic; 62% percent approve of how he is handling health care. Fifty-seven percent approve of how he is handling the economy; 54% approve of how he is handling foreign affairs.
Well I expect total craziness to simply expand among the ghastly old party members. In the meantime, I would like to point out a real milestone: the Lutheran Church just appointed the first openly trans woman as bishop in the San Diego region diocese. This is huge. I might not be a. Christian and I might be unenthusiastic about religion in general but this step means something.
Sounds like you're referring to the Missouri Synod branch ... ultra conservative. Jesus could return as a trans woman and they wouldn't acknowledge her (last I knew of Missouri Synod).
Exactly! ELCA is the acronym for Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, which is not to be confused with the deservedly maligned "Evangelicals" who form the Christian Right.
From the ELCA website: "A merger of three Lutheran churches formed the ELCA in 1988. They were The American Lutheran Church, the Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches and the Lutheran Church in America."
Interesting. I only know of the Missouri and Wisconsin Synod Branches of the Lutherans; had never heard of the ELCA. Two of my music groups (a tuba ensemble and a brass quintet) rehearse at different Lutheran churches that are about 4 blocks from one another. One of them is an "open and affirming" congregation, the other is a Missouri Synod.
I think it’s great—I’m Episcopalian and our church has forged a strong bond with Lutherans. In our town we participate annually in joint services with the local Lutheran church.
That must be the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA)--a very, very different animal than the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. The two congregations are at opposite poles from each other on this issue. Not a sign of change.
Yes--but it is still an incredibly positive step. Like the fragmenting of the "United" Methodists over the issue of gay marriage and trans people, and the Episcopal church and the Anglican Synod over the same, the liberal wings of the Christian groups are important spokespeople and allies.
Thank you, Dr. Heather, for another easy to digest summary! I feel encouraged by the statistics of support for Biden. But one of your sentences jumped out at me, sadly:
"We have had an average of ten mass shootings a week in 2021, 194 in all. (A mass shooting is one in which four people were killed or wounded.)"
After the Sandy Hook shootings of very young children, I had a brief surge of hope that something would finally happen to change this country's gun laws, but instead it just seems like the situation has gotten worse since then.
I really hope the Biden administration can make a difference going forward.
With no meaningful gun reform after Sandy Hook, there were media folks asking, "If not 20 dead children, what will it take -- 20 dead Congressmen??" Well, I doubt even that would do it. Opponents of gun reform are quite clearly bought and sold by the arms-industry lobby. Their donors give marching orders, and so there is no way to change their minds or votes. They simply have to be voted out of office. Yet another good reason to pass For The People.
Yes, well, I hold out hope. Remember when smoking was regarded as a right? When cigarette ads showed doctors smoking as they examined children, and (almost) nobody complained?
By and large, across the U.S., our approach to smoking has reversed itself.
Says a lot about our collective American values. What if every media outlet released the crime scene photos of every school shooting in Our recent history? Could that create motivation for positive change? I’m thinking of Emmett Till and his mother’s courage and pain and how that birthed the civil rights movement.
I'd like to see a study on that. How about pictures of lungs diseased by tobacco-caused cigarette smoke?
"The findings indicate that including both graphic visual warnings, such as those used in Canada, and warning statements currently used in the United States can decrease the perceived attractiveness of the package and create higher levels of negative affect, such as fear or anxiety. The results also show that the addition of the specific visual warnings examined to the U.S. statements increases smokers’ perceived intentions of quitting smoking compared with warning statements alone. The authors offer implications for public policy and public health and provide suggestions for further research."
I'm getting emails from politicians asking me to check boxes on my topics of most concern. Many of them don't have a box to check that says Guns. If they have a box marked "other", I put GUNS there!
Since this is a thread on guns, I'll reply here. It's not the guns that are the problem, it's the ammunition! My ex had several guns and enjoyed going to a local firing range. But when bullets became too expensive and hard to find in stores, he stopped that hobby. He did fill his own bullet shells, but even that ended after a while. So, let the Republicans buy the guns, as long as the Democrats buy the ammunition and gunpowder. If bullets were $100.00 each I doubt the crazy gun owners world be so free with what and who they shoot. I know the black market would supply both, people that want it can get it, yada, yada, but it was just an idea that seemed to even things out a bit. Supply and demand. I'd buy a box of ammo to hoard before I'd ever buy a gun.
Congress members' websites have drop-down menus to select an issue when writing to them. I'm familiar with and approve those of my C-people (Ayanna, Markey, Warren). But a couple of months ago I compared theirs to several of the worst GQPs in Congress. Where MA officials have "Reproductive Rights" or "Gun Control," Repugs have "Gun Rights," "Adoption and Abortion" and "Traditional Values." It is quite revealing.
I completely agree and feel the same after Sandy Hook and can still tear up at the thought. It's my one angry go-to comment when people complain to me about the Democrats coming to take your guns...if 20 bullet ridden five year old children didn't create more fun safety laws what will? Then they shut up.
One thing I have missed during this Pandemic is music. I asked my boyfriend if he would go see an outdoor music show if they were allowed this summer now that we are fully vaccinated, however truth is I am more afraid of being shot by a crazed nut job than getting covid-19 or a variant.
First time posting, I live reading everyone's replies and comments as much as Heather's letters.
Greetings!! You will find that most of us rue the fact there isn't an edit function! Nothing scares me more about the US than the thought that someone I know will be gunned down; randomly, for their political or religious beliefs, their color, ethnicity, or sexual identity.
Why apologize? When you said “fun” safety I thought you were making a sarcastic dig at gun enthusiasts. Everyone here is smart and deep, so when I see a comment, I assume smart and deep. Keep posting! In my book anyway you’ll always get the benefit of the doubt.
I find it sad that the gun owners and 2nd amendment proponents always seem to interpret any attempt at gun reform to mean the extreme of taking people's guns away entirely and violating the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment has taken on a gospel quality like it is one of the 10 Commandments
I believe he means those who oppose any gun safety regulations arguing they might lead to more and more restrictions. Ergo the slippery slope. It stokes fear in gun rights advocates and they dig in their heels.
Colorado is talking about gun control. The biggest issue is that no one knows what actually would reduce killing and pass muster with the Supreme Court.
Lots of feel good ideas but no proof they will actually accomplish anything.
A few feel good laws were recently passed with a few more being considered.
No real progress but the liberal Democrats base is happy.
It depends on whether one means gun control or unlimited access to guns. It depends on which party is in control of the States. Here in NH, the R majority has been working on a bill that says guns can be allowed ANYWHERE, (including schools!) and that NH law enforcement can basically ignore ANY Federal gun control laws/measures. I haven't read/seen any info if the same is happening in other Republican majority states.
Unfortunately, what that statistic says is that the other side is getting ready to declare war on us, regardless of what anyone on our side thinks. The Republicans are talking openly of the fact that if they take the House in 2022, they can deny Biden victory if he wins in 2024. Everything they are saying and doing points to their decision to delare war. Given that situation, people on our side are going to have to rethink their attitude about guns and violence. Some things are worth defending, and I think this country as a democracy is one of them.
And in conclusion, let me say SUBSTACK NEEDS A GODDAMN EDIT FUNCTION!!!!!!!!!!
I think you are wrong about needing to arm ourselves, though. Anyone who rises up against the United States government will deal with the most lethal fighting force ever assembled. If the military remains on the side of the Constitution, the insurrectionists don't stand a chance. If they somehow go over to the insurrection, then all is lost in any case; having a 38 special or even an AK-47 will not help me in the least.
Did you know the US Navy intercepted communications coming out of Rwanda before their civil war. Someone ordered a million machetes from China before the killing began. The pattern of stockpiling weapons is a repeated one.
OTOH, it's a small minority of Americans that possess guns. I expect very few people own ONE gun, with the vast majority having either none or a small arsenal.
A minority of Americans own guns, but it's a large one.
As a lifelong nonviolent pacifist, I am proud to say that I've never owned a gun, and fired one only once, at a tree (sincere apologies to the tree). My father and uncles were issued firearms in WW2. Dad never used his; not sure about the uncles. As far as I know, that is my immediate family's entire history with guns.
I went to high school with a guy who owned guns. He took me out shooting once and I have to admit I LOVED it. I definitely understand the appeal. As a puny, weak human animal, it made me feel so powerful to be able to pull a trigger and absolutely obliterate that bottle. Which is precisely why I think most private gun ownership is a terrible idea--too much power in the hands of those with too little judgment. If all gun owners could be Ally House--well-trained, respectful, thoughtful--I would be much less concerned.
In my "framily" (5 households) there are 15 handguns, 5 shotguns, and 9+ hunting rifles. We have a retired USCG Gunners Mate (rangemaster) Deputy Sheriff (use of force expert), and 4 hunters among us.
I personally own 3; two small concealable handguns, and a large-capacity semi-automatic pistol. I can no longer fire a shoulder-fired weapon except for a rifle chambered in a .22 or a .223 (missing lymph nodes on my dominant shoulder).
Exactly! Since I don't own any, that means that someone else owns 2.4 guns! (OK, I know that's not really how statistics work, but you know what I mean). If half a dozen of us are completely unarmed, some joker has to have 7.2 guns! And for a lot of these loons, that's 7.5 too many.
As Reid says, they believe the lies. They think having quality child care available, good schools and opportunities for their kids, good roads and bridges, readily available and affordable medical services, and support so that they can retire some day and live in dignity and comfort are "taking away their freedom."
They are deeply afraid. They have been fed lies about what the opposition (us, that is) intend. They believe what TC is advocating we believe: that the other side will take away our freedom.
So much coded language. Tough on crime means reinslavement. Pro life means oppression of women. Family values means vanilla, cis, het sexuality. And so forth.
Someone asked earlier if we felt afraid. I don’t feel any fear as I go about my day, but, I’m aware it could be because of my bubble of privilege and suspect it’s a useful illusion. We humans adapt to danger and eventually normalize it.
And in the face of political unrest, the sheer number of guns in the US feels like we’re sitting on a powder keg.
That is sad, Lynn. Even here in "liberal" Cambridge, my US Out Of North America shirt is seldom worn. I also feel vulnerable wearing a BLM shirt with police around.
I was thinking this morning of designing my own, per HCR's description: a dagger inscribed with THE BIG LIE, directly through the heart of democratic America.
On the matter of voter restriction laws I am not particularly worried. What worries me is that Republicans seem determined to install vote counters who are committed to calling elections for Republican candidates regardless of the vote count. Why would party leaders and party members exchange the honest vote counters from the last election, those who would not succumb to pressure to change the vote count, for new officials? The most dangerous movement today is that one in the Republican Party which is committed to one party rule in the service of one man. Their vehicle to power is to destroy faith in the voting system and thus destroy faith in our Constitutional Democracy. If they are successful we will be living in a totalitarian state, perhaps even a theocratic totalitarian state.
I think this is a real possibility. I do think that SCOTUS, conservative as they are, will draw a line on some of the voter suppression efforts, including a full-scale takeover by a state legislature. I know they have been pretty hands-off on almost all election procedures proposed by states, but one has to think there is a line somewhere that cannot be crossed. Otherwise, we may be well and truly lost, indeed.
That indeed is my thought, that the Supreme Court will deny all attempts to purge our Democracy. And secondly, Democratic governors will veto every attempt which passes the state legislature. Therefore, we are left with only states which have trifectas of conservative leadership. Every state trump won is a trifecta, along with NH, GA, and AZ. Biden won these three states with Republican trifectas.
SOMEHOW, Dems have to learn how to win the state legislative races.
But we have never had a winning message, in my lifetime of voting (since ’72). If we had, we would be repeating that message today, yesterday and tomorrow.
I think we are dealing with a basic dichotomy: the Rs have extremely simple message; the other side wants to take away your guns, kill babies, destroy your livelihood, let godless heathens into our country, and tax you into oblivion. Whereas the Ds have a very nuanced message that is not so easily broken into appealing sound bites. Fox News is absolutely expert at taking the R talking points, adding some salacious lies to bolster them, and spewing them forth. Most left wing media is taking the high road, for which I am thankful, but that isn't nearly as eye-catching. It's a toxic situation.
“nuance message(s)” means we do not speak clearly. DO NOT be nuanced about your (our) beliefs.
“Liberty and justice for all!” Explain this. For all women, all LGBTQQ+, all minorities, all men. “No one is left behind in our American Family”
“Democracy Capitalism means Democrats guarantee that rights and civil liberties come first, and we guarantee and a fair playing field for all business and corporations!”
We’ve got to learn to speak clearly, simply - and get people angry for a reason. Now, 37% (+/-) are angry - and all we have is “nuance messages”.
Let’s give the right wing something to really get angry about, and the 37% number will start to .... decrease, because we actually have a spine, backbone and character.
I’m finally visiting St Pete on a fact finding mission, for a potential winter retreat locale. Where do you recommend in order to truly catch local flavors?
I agree with you about their essence of fear. So, can progressives address this, en masse. “We must no longer live in fear of one another. The America Family is greater than this” or SOMETHING like this .....
I don't know. I've had the discussion several times, and THEY don't think they're afraid; they call it "being prepared". The one question I've asked that gets the best reaction is a riff on "If you want the economy to grow, why don't you want everybody to participate in it?"
Not sure these folks would admit to being fearful. Clearly, there is fear, similar to the fear-based behavior of police, but not necessarily recognized or named by people in situ.
The Repubs I deal with spout the line “The Democrats want to destroy the country through socialism” or some such nonsense, all the while happy they have Medicare and their Social Security checks. They equate socialism with communism, understanding neither. Unfortunately, it’s a simple, effective message. Agree, we need something that straightforward that speaks truth.
Socialism is anything the government does that business doesn't like. American business has been pushing that message since before Karl Marx died. So Medicare is socialism, but protective tariffs and price supports aren't.
Aberrant behavior is unfortunately a characteristic of power, but not for all in power. Look at Newsom’s problems. Thankfully these are deeply blue states.
From Nixon through Bush I, Dems focused on the White House, neglecting Congress. Then when they also concentrated on Congress, they neglected state legislatures. Dems need to focus on all three, especially since the first two determine the composition of the Supreme Court and federal judiciary.
THIS, what you’ve referenced, is exactly what happens when we DO NOT speak in harmony, unison and such as a chorus. We are a group (Dems) that insist of “personalities” rather than a UNIFYING VISION.
I’m afraid I don’t share your optimism with regard to states that have democratic governors. Michigan has a republican legislature/democratic governor, and aggressive voter restrictive legislation proposed. It is a given that our governor will veto the bills when they land on her desk, but the repubs in legislature have already announced that they have a “work around” her veto, and that the bills WILL become law.
A recent theme that I’m finally starting to hear is a “call to action” for Biden, and other prominent elected officials, to start flooding the news with the facts: the election was NOT stolen, the current proposed laws are dangerous to democracy, The For The People Act must be passed, etc. I may hear you saying he is already doing that, but not really. I’m talking about a real almost ad-nauseam repetition, not the mild rebuke we hear now. We cannot wait until we lose our democracy to say, “we told you so”.
We need MORE of the corporations which have always lined their pockets to blast voter suppression laws. There aren’t enough if them standing up and pulling their support from them.
Right! So, in your state (election laws are primarily set at the state level), what is going on with election law? Does your state use risk-limited audits? If not, why not?
Does your state use BMD (ballot marking devices) that pass the voter-approved printed ballot under a print head once again, on the way to being tabulated and stored in a secure bin inside the machine?
The ES&S ExpressVote, ES&S ExpressVote XL, Dominion ICE, and Voting Solutions for All People, all of them, do this. These are VERY BAD voting machines.
I did a little experiment tonight. I keep thinking I'm still hearing DTs name too much in the news and do not hear President Biden's name enough. So, I counted how many times DTs name was used and how many times President Biden's name was used in a couple of hour long programs on MSNBC. And, yes, this is not very scientific because it does depend on what is making news each day. However, program one said DTs name 34 times and showed his picture 4 times; President Biden name was mentioned 9 times and his picture shown 3 times. The second program I only tallied for about 15 minutes. 16 DTs, 1 picture with Voice (which was obnoxious) ; Biden 7 and 1 picture. Basically it was much better than I expected and I was pleasantly surprised how many stories mentioned neither man. Maybe the media has learned its lesson not to give too much oxygen to the former president. Using former president without mentioning the name was also popular. Just to compare HCR's Letter tonight Biden is mentioned by name 8 times and Trump 14. What I liked was she led with the President and covered a wide breadth of substantive activities Biden was doing.
Biden is boring, which is not good for news, especially television news. News media is so addicted to views and clicks that they have forgotten that some kinds of boring are the best news ever.
Psaki rocks! She is going to on to great accomplishments in life. Id hire her in a heartbeat. I’d leave a company for the opportunity to work for her. But I could say that for Biden’s entire cabinet.
So happy Biden seems boring. I want him to keep his head down and continue working. We don't need to hear about the President every day. That was the last guy's shtick. No more.
OTOH, I feel Faux News is preoccupied with Biden, and would not mention dt as often. However, this is a perfect example of our “movement” having NO succinct message. MSNBC, NPR and “mainstream media” would be all over a powerful, progressvie economic vision. This reminds me of the admonition from great progressive linguist, George Lakoff:
“Say what you mean, and mean what you say.”
Simply, clearly, forcefully, w gusto and vigor. Not a laundry list of policies (zzzzzzz) - but an economic vision that packages together policies. Such as “Democracy Capitalism” or for heaven’s sake, anything else!
I like to read Bukowski to clear my brain of mushy thoughts and vapid writing. Here’s one of his thoughts: “The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don’t have to waste your time voting.”
Charles Bukowski, 1920-1994. Underground writer and poet who used direct language. Often profane, sexual, funny, provocative. Drank a lot, hence the movie “Barfly,” based on his life. A better look at him was the excellent 2003 doc “Bukowski: Born Into This.” Here’s a more relevant quote for you: “Genius might be the ability to say a profound thing in a simple way.” He’s better known for more scatalogical lines such as “Sometimes you just have to pee in the sink.” (Whoa, I’ve really taken this exchange to a new low.)
Do you watch Stephen Colbert? He's specifically avoiding saying DJT's name and hosted a contest for what moniker to use instead! Every so often he rattles through some of the submissions -- always makes me LOL!
It is heartening to see that a majority of citizens appear to be relieved the adults are back in charge, though it is disheartening that the former president has any approval at all, or ever had any for that matter.
One is glad to see Liz Cheney have her Elizabeth Warren "yet still the woman persisted" moment. Do not go quietly.
And, we are all waiting for something of substance to come out of the SDNY offices regarding the former president, his immediate family, and the former mayor of New York. Please, if indictments are forthcoming, let us know about it before the 2022 elections.
Careful with Liz, now. She's no moderate. What she wants is to lead the Post-Trump but still hard right Republicans out of the wilderness with herself as leader and Presidential contender.
Cheney's persistance is the only similarity with Warren. One might also keep in mind her father is one of the cagiest political in-fighters in Washington, who also started his career in Congress.
Orwellian times indeed. The Republicans appear to be lost at sea, grasping at their oars of voter suppression to pull against the rising tide of women voters an POC voting for Democrats. May they eat crow for their hubris in supporting their iDJT when they squandered two opportunities to kick him to the curb. “Greedy fools.”
I appreciate all the stats substantiating approval for the Biden administration agenda. Go Team Joe!
I'm also pleased to see cited the WaPo article about how tales of election fraud proliferated without any proof. Wholesale lies. Revealing to read how many people named in the story refused to comment when contacted. Roaches scatter when the lights shines.
Such factual reporting confirms what many [of us] already knew. Sadly, the truth won't matter to too many ....
Sadly, I agree. Social science research reveals that believers of a lie continue to hold on to said lie even when confronted with documented truth. So, I have no expectation that McCarthy, et al, will capitulate to the truth.
Is the best outcome that they become irrelevant as they continue to block popular legislation?
I suspect they already KNOW it is the truth, but continue to pretend it is a lie to save face... and their chances for reelection in Republican-heavy districts/states.
I think this is precisely correct. McConnell and McCarthy, to name two, both clearly indicated immediately after the insurrection (and McCarthy during it!) that Trump was to blame and that the election was not stolen. Then they cravenly read the way the wind blew and changed their tune.
Good letter, but one correction to avoid bias: Orwell wrote, repeatedly, that both fascists AND communists distort language to rewrite history (and the present as well). Orwell devoted a good part of his life to making the point that there is no difference between the Left and Right extremes -- both are mad for power and ruthless is seeking it.
"Biden’s weak spots are in immigration, where 43% approve..."
Yes, our immigration policy is a real mess, and it shows up in the low approval rating of American voters. So now, Kamala is going to talk with some U.S.-installed dictators about improving economic conditions for the masses who flee their countries in a desperate attempt to reach the U.S. Well, our country has to go deeper than that to find the real reasons for the mass exodus of their residents. We have to find out why the U.S. has overthrown democracies in Central and South America and then installed and supported military dictators ruling the countries. Both U.S. political parties are involved in the illegal overthrow of democracies, mostly using the CIA to instigate the troubles.
Three glaring examples of that overthrow policy would be the 1954 U.S. overthrow of the Guatemalan government. That one involved the United Fruit Company. As I recall, Bush Sr. benefitted greatly in financial gains from his new business interests there. A second example would be the Nixon/Kissinger 1973 overthrow of President Salvador Allende in Chile. The Chilean military was traditionally and proudly apolitical. But Nixon/Kissinger tossed some golden carrots to the military leaders and corrupted them. What resulted was a military dictatorship with General Pinochet in charge, and immense suffering by the Chilean people as thousands of people were murdered and severely tortured by that government. In his memoirs, Kissinger later tried to deny his involvement and put the blame on the U.S. Ambassador to Chile. Unfortunately for Kissinger, that Ambassador was still alive and said Kissinger was lying. Kissinger has so much blood on his hands. More recently, Hillary/Obama's State Dept. contributed to the overthrow in Honduras of another democracy.
There seems to be no end to this inhuman foreign policy. When are we going to start living by the ideals on which our country was founded? I hope Joe studies this matter deeply and commits the U.S. to true justice for these countries. At this point, there's no indication that will happen.
We also must consider the economic warfare we have waged against these countries. We have extracted resources from them and repeatedly used our military might to back up corporate interests. When we are done raping and destabilizing a country, we leave it to its own devices, then wonder why the social and political structures are so chaotic. And climate refugees are created by the rapacious consumption of resources in wealthy countries like ours. We have much to answer for.
"We also must consider the economic warfare we have waged against these countries."
Absolutely. And not only these countries but industrialized nations as well. In a fairly recent example, I think back to the U.S. State Dept. cables which Chelsea Manning released to Wikileaks. The release which seemed to get most attention was the one showing the civilians being gunned down by the U.S. helicopter. Another secret cable which caught my attention was sent in 2007 by the U.S. ambassador to France. Following a trade conference, Bush Jr.'s ambassador cabled that France should face some retribution since they were rejecting Monsanto's GMOs and their herbicides. Monsanto has a strong grip on our government. They keep their representative, Michael Taylor, well-entrenched in a high position in the FDA, regardless of which party controls the presidency.
You seem a little "light" on your third example of Clinton/Obama "contributing" to the overthrow of the Honduran government. I hadn't heard of this. Can you tell us a little more and quote a source or two? The other 2 are very well know and do back up your argument.
This little comment is important; we must use the same standards for all these administrations, also for the good guys (and gals, if they are involved).
Hello Heydon, I have thought of you several times after reading your comment hours ago. I was of aware of the country's overthrow of Allende during the early years of my active socio-political engagement. Withal, I was strongly effected by what happened in Chile. It cemented my interest in knowing more about the USA's interventions in South America, Central America and, of course, elsewhere. I agree that American History needs to be taught with much more critical understanding concerning the patterns and actions within and outside our borders. There appears to be more ignorance throughout the land today than in the last 50 years, but I don't really know. This is not the time to list the forces contributing to this. My belief is that in the near future, our job is to robustly participate and support the Bills, Plans and candidates that will serve the people and Democracy. If the country can attain a bit more stability, much more attention will be given to education, social media, economic equality, Climate Change and several more crucial issues. I am not proposing that we ignore them now, but that our priorities need to be the county's health and the legislation that can best improve the lives of Americans.
The statistics I heard recently indicate they have created a system at the southern border that’s working a lot better than the mess they inherited. Our Vp’s efforts at diplomacy down there might yield some improvement too.
Ok sure. Let’s not tax corporations and the mega rich because then how could they purchase all their yachts? Witness Jeff Bezos and his yacht with yacht accessory. Insanity. While his employees lives are just another expense in the ledger.
I am aware … how is it Republicans can get ANY support? Is that truly what they want? Low quality of life, just don’t take our guns? Also, my guess is, since they seem so enamored of fascism, those guns will be confiscated by the very folks they elect when they come into their power.
Liz Cheney can object all she wants, but it's not going to work. I see no sign that the R's are going to turn away from Trump. It's his party now, which is the dangerous reality we have to prepare for.
It's an interesting play, though, isn't it? I think she's calculating that, as Trump’s glow fades, Rs are frantically looking for an alternative. In her WaPo opinion piece (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/05/liz-cheney-republican-party-turning-point) she was very clear that she still backs all the usual conservative crap but not the insurrection. She's betting that a majority of Rs are quietly with her. She may be right.
I don't think it's going to work. The republican base is completely demented now, and worship Trump. To turn on him now would be an admission that they, and their information sources such as Tucker and Newsmax, were wrong about everything, which they're not capable of. These are not clear-headed, rational people.
So every republican running for office knows they need to bow to Trump to get elected. Cheney will probably get primaried out next time she's up, replaced by a rabid Trumper.
I agree that no amount of evidence would convince the Qanon crowd that the Big Lie is a big lie. Any reputable source you quote against will be dismissed as a liberal rag. IMO the underpinning of their belief is whatever it takes to “F*** over those liberal socialists who want to take my guns and raise my taxes and cancel my white culture”
There's a hard core of believers who will never leave him. It would be nice to pry some Republican Congress Critters away from him. The Republican Senate Caucus isn't really his as much as it belongs to McConnell and his Big Money ties.
But Trump needs successes to keep the ball rolling for which he really can't get till possibly Nov 2022. That's a long climb! I might say as well, the Trump-baseload is not the 74 million voters who didn't want Biden/Harris. The awakening of the youth-vote is a pointer in the Democrats favour but it is likely to exaccerbate divisions in that party too.
Have our resident historians any parallels to tell us about those who were crying as Nixon left office, or who were diehard followers/supporters/fans of McCarthy? Where did they take their money and allegiance next?
Second, will we learn someday of ways top GQPs were basically blackmailed into submission, not just chasing donor cash?
There are important parallels in terms of lawbreaking, but both the 1/45 admin and Jan 6 are truly unprecedented. The Nixon admin's crimes were not committed by a large swath of the GOP, just a segment of the White house staff and John Mitchell at DOJ. There was nothing like today's Sedition Caucus; the cruel GQP governors and state legislatures, and 1/45's blind, unreasoning, cult-like followers. The violence of Nixonite Hardhats (blue-collar reactionaries) is similar to the political violence of 1/45's minions, but the latter is far more extensive and serious. (A more apt comparison is to the rise of the Nazis in Germany. )
Unlike 1/45, Nixon was a rational if twisted person, who ultimately could accept clear evidence when forced on him; he was persuaded to resign, after all. He also was an American patriot, albeit later a warped one. In WW2 he served with distinction in a non-combat role, then in the House, Senate and as VP. None of these traits apply to 1/45.
By the end, Nixon lost all support even from his own party. At that time I attended Earlham College in Richmond IN, long a stronghold of the KKK. Rep David Dennis of Richmond was Tricky Dick's staunchest supporter, but when even he said he'd vote to impeach based on the "smoking gun" tapes, Nixon knew the game was up. As a whole, the GQP is far from turning against 1/45, for now at least.
(Interestingly, both Nixon and Dennis were "lapsed" Quakers. Each graduated from Quaker colleges in their respective hometowns, Whittier CA and Richmond, and Dennis's father was an Earlham president.)
Finally, Nixon's worst crime wasn't Watergate; it was prolonging and expanding the Vietnam/Indochina War, leading to countless unnecessary casualties and suffering. Yet even Nixon did not cause hundreds of thousands of avoidable US deaths by refusing to deal with a pandemic; wreck the national economy; and betray the country to its enemies.
Thank you for offering the opportunity to think through the parallels. These comparisons have reaffirmed my conviction that 1/45 is, indeed, the WORST PRESIDENT EVER!!!
She's on the right side of history, which is a much better place to be than with the nutcases, no matter what happens. If this, indeed, is a long game, she realizes she's not going to go anywhere she wants to be with the current GOP. Look at McCarthy. He's got the backbone of a jellyfish.
I don't know what she believes. I suspect there's a mix of good and bad. Somewhere in here this morning I pasted Frank Bruni's column from today about her, which was along those lines.
She's betting not. If Qanon Shaman can be successfully portrayed as the avatar of those who believe the Big Lie, many Rs will recoil from being associated with it; she is counting on being there to pick to the pieces. Look for a Cheney/Kinzinger primary challenge to Trump in 2024. I think that's her play. She may be wrong, but it's a fascinating calculation.
Way to go Liz Cheney! A true patriot who reminds me there's still a few Republicans who haven't lost their heads. She reminds of the man who oversaw the elections in Georgia this past year. Without this great woman standing up for the truth in the Senate, who would there be? My hat is off to her and anyone brave enough to back her up. And thank you Heather, for continuing to cut through the political fog out there in rumplican land.
Just remember, she "made her bones" calling Obama a "secret jihadist," she still supports torture, wants to turn the clock back on marriage (despite her sister, from whom she is now estranged). Her father Darth Cheney is actually more liberal than she is.
Great woman? She's been peddling the Republican craziness for many years now; this is just her opportunisic hoping that her party will ultimately remake itself away from Trump and she'll come out on top. But she'll probably fall to the lunatics, at least temporarily. It's as if she's forgotten that after you've thrown in your lot with the liars, there's no such thing as a lie that's too foul.
She and her father both hate Trump. It was Mary, though, who persuaded The Dick to organize the living former DefSec's to write a letter denouncing Trump.
Things may be moving in the right direction, but the real question is whether or not the other side accepts that. Right now, they don't, to the point they have actually taken up arms against us already.
I continue to hope that the "other side's not believing" will increasingly not matter, that things will move in the right direction and their ideas will become increasingly more isolated. How far this may go is anyone's guess. Opposition will never reach zero, I'm sure of that. In any case, we all need to keep working to make something good happen.
You are right, they have taken up arms, and they appear to be quite lethal, witness them parading around in their camo adorned with their assault style rifles, but they are a tiny fraction of the population, grouped together they are threatening, but do you really feel threatened by them on the street where you live, I know I don’t. The media features them, “if it bleeds it leads”, but I don’t think they represent a real threat, the capital defenders had they chosen to could have killed the lot of them. It takes a brave person to run towards a gun fight, I know, I’ve been there, they would have scattered like leaves 🍃 in the wind, the few that didn’t would have been easily dispatched into the next life. There should be no next time, it should be made abundantly clear that the gloves are now off, there will be no more fisticuffs and being attacked with American flags as Joe Scarborough likes to repeat, any attack should be seen as a mortal threat and dealt with accordingly.
The component of the "other side" that I have a front row seat to are the unabashedly pro iDJT stable of current and former cops/dispatchers/military that have been close personal and professional associates of mine for the last 35 years. I do not believe that these folks would take up arms against the US, but I do not know that.
Perhaps Biden's numbers regarding immigration would improve if our political media gave the same attention to the successes of the last two months that they gave to Republican bleating about the "Border Crisis" during February and early March. Not holding my breath that they'll get over their addiction to the headlines generated by Republican lies as opposed to publishing reality-based information.
I appreciate your timely and encouraging account. I am holding out for theTrump Republicans to collapse upon themselves soon! That said, I am not a Liz C fan, by any means.
Professor, I'm concerned that all of the results of your investigation and research you shared with us today will confirm for Democrats that the Retrumplicans are desperately imbalanced. It is , however causing us to take our eye off the ball of doing what we need to do to bring Independents and Republicans to our side and gain a safe majority so we don't have to depend on the small cadre of now so-called moderate democrats to get the presidents vision into practical existence.
But how does one do that except by pointing out the irrationality of the Trumpist position? While those dedicated to insurrection are unreachable by us, those who are uncertain where they stand vis a vis Trump are, I think, persuadable by facts like these. How else?
I think what Skip Z is saying is that we should not be lulled by these encouraging statistics. As long as a minority is making decisions on the state and federal level, we should not be calmed by this information. We need to figure out how to take back the authority that the people in the majority have. Sure, applaud the good statistics. But at the same time question how this bizarre imbalance happened. Go there. Fight there.
Yes, the statistics are applaudable but that doesn't counteract the control of too many State houses by Republican legislatures and governors. Forgive the pun, but "deplorable" trumps "applaudable." (Example: the pseudo-recount in Arizona.) They may be a national minority but such a national minority controlled eleven State governments who chose to secede in 1861 when they feared the Federal government wasn't going to let them include slavery in the nation's Westward expansion. And that brought about the Civil War. It will take years, if not generations, for the majorities which HCR applauds today to gain control of State legislatures. Until then, things will be uncomfortable if not dangerous. "All politics are local" (Tip O'Neill) and that is where Democrats fall short.
State Legislatures are indeed a place to concentrate on. We have not given them the attention that we should have and look at where we are. In FlorIda Charlie Crist (US Congressman) has announced his run for governor. Now his seat will be open and already folks are lining up. In addition to the lunatic, gun toting Anna Paulina Luna whom I’ve already mentioned, a Democrat from the state legislature (Ben Diamond) has also stepped in. Not only will that leave an open seat in the Florida Legislature, which is already dominated by Republicans, Diamond was charged with rallying support for local Dems to be elected to the state house. So now that is threatened as well.
I do wish the Dems would get organized and offer strategically sound candidate slates -- running 15 candidates for a single race merely means that none of them will ever get a majority. Splitting their constituency so mindlessly just makes each of them look selfish and blind to reality.
True, and thanks, Dan. That problem appeared in MA in a US Rep district primary last year. 9 Dem candidates, with progressive ones earning about 2/3 of all votes, but divided among several. A moderate Dem, military vet Jake Auchincloss, won, fortunately in a safe Dem district. He'll be alright, but I'd prefer another progressive firebrand like Ayanna or AOC.
And I reiterate my question: how? I am genuinely wondering. Everything we have tried has failed and, as far as I can see, have exacerbated the problem. I don't pretend to understand it, as the R positions have become increasingly bizarre and based on the grossest of untruths. Yet their message continues to resonate. I just don't think we have any answers to how one reaches those who choose to believe the lies.
All done nice and legally, in accordance with the Constitution. The 'framers' were not eager to broaden the electorate, knowing well that democracy contained the seeds of its own demise. We have to do something to rebalance our "checks and balances" which don't seem to be checking and balancing very well.
We need to fill the yawning "Civics Gap" in this country. I saw people asking here last Fall, how are we going to get rid of Trump's henchmen once we vote him out? They seemingly did not know that it is a package deal below even the cabinet level. They need to be educated about the filibuster, about divided government, Generally the mechanics of government we began learning about in Middle school and High School.
I certainly agree, but we have to be careful what we wish for. The crazies who control these conservative state legislatures also control what is taught in their schools. Even growing up in a liberal state (California) in the 50s and 60s, I was fed a passel of lies, half-truths, and sugar-coated reality by teachers and administrators who believed they were doing the right thing. Imagine those with malign intent in charge of teaching "civics" to vulnerable children.
I spent my youth in CT, which for decades in the 20C was a classic swing state. But by the late 1980s it became mostly solid blue. Same with MD and some others not recalled right now. It reflects the pattern of polarized politics that leaves us with "red" or "blue" states, when the large majority are some shade of purple.
Well I expect total craziness to simply expand among the ghastly old party members. In the meantime, I would like to point out a real milestone: the Lutheran Church just appointed the first openly trans woman as bishop in the San Diego region diocese. This is huge. I might not be a. Christian and I might be unenthusiastic about religion in general but this step means something.
Every step in the positive direction should be celebrated. Good for the Lutherans.
This is within the liberal ELCA branch of the Lutheran Church, which is in communion with Episcopals, Methodists, and maybe a few other denominations.
It sure isn't within the Lutheran Church I am aware of.
Sounds like you're referring to the Missouri Synod branch ... ultra conservative. Jesus could return as a trans woman and they wouldn't acknowledge her (last I knew of Missouri Synod).
There's also the Evangelical Lutherans.
Exactly! ELCA is the acronym for Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, which is not to be confused with the deservedly maligned "Evangelicals" who form the Christian Right.
From the ELCA website: "A merger of three Lutheran churches formed the ELCA in 1988. They were The American Lutheran Church, the Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches and the Lutheran Church in America."
Interesting. I only know of the Missouri and Wisconsin Synod Branches of the Lutherans; had never heard of the ELCA. Two of my music groups (a tuba ensemble and a brass quintet) rehearse at different Lutheran churches that are about 4 blocks from one another. One of them is an "open and affirming" congregation, the other is a Missouri Synod.
I think it’s great—I’m Episcopalian and our church has forged a strong bond with Lutherans. In our town we participate annually in joint services with the local Lutheran church.
NH's Episcopal Church installed Gene Robinson a gay priest, as Bishop in 2003 and he was consecrated in 2006. He retired in 2013. For more details, please read Wikipedia's article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Robinson#Consecration_as_bishop
Wow! I'm not into religion either, but this is a huge step. A conservative church led by a trans woman...amazing.
ELCA is progressive, not conversative. The head of the ELCA is a woman, as are many bishops and clergy. All sexual preferences accepted.
That must be the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA)--a very, very different animal than the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. The two congregations are at opposite poles from each other on this issue. Not a sign of change.
Yes--but it is still an incredibly positive step. Like the fragmenting of the "United" Methodists over the issue of gay marriage and trans people, and the Episcopal church and the Anglican Synod over the same, the liberal wings of the Christian groups are important spokespeople and allies.
🎉🎉🎉
Thank you, Dr. Heather, for another easy to digest summary! I feel encouraged by the statistics of support for Biden. But one of your sentences jumped out at me, sadly:
"We have had an average of ten mass shootings a week in 2021, 194 in all. (A mass shooting is one in which four people were killed or wounded.)"
After the Sandy Hook shootings of very young children, I had a brief surge of hope that something would finally happen to change this country's gun laws, but instead it just seems like the situation has gotten worse since then.
I really hope the Biden administration can make a difference going forward.
When nothing changed after Sandy Hook, I knew that nothing ever would.
With no meaningful gun reform after Sandy Hook, there were media folks asking, "If not 20 dead children, what will it take -- 20 dead Congressmen??" Well, I doubt even that would do it. Opponents of gun reform are quite clearly bought and sold by the arms-industry lobby. Their donors give marching orders, and so there is no way to change their minds or votes. They simply have to be voted out of office. Yet another good reason to pass For The People.
Yes, well, I hold out hope. Remember when smoking was regarded as a right? When cigarette ads showed doctors smoking as they examined children, and (almost) nobody complained?
By and large, across the U.S., our approach to smoking has reversed itself.
And seat belts.
We can change minds. Gradually.
Steam roller of change is very slowly overcoming inertia. Keep faith.
You’re so right. We had a seriously wounded congressman (Steve Scalise) and he is firmly still devoted to gun “rights”.
Who can forget the massacre during a congressional baseball game?
Twenty dead REPUBLICAN Congressmen might do it.
It also might make it easier to get guns.
Yes indeed TPJ.
😥
Says a lot about our collective American values. What if every media outlet released the crime scene photos of every school shooting in Our recent history? Could that create motivation for positive change? I’m thinking of Emmett Till and his mother’s courage and pain and how that birthed the civil rights movement.
Retraumatizing people is not an effective strategy.
I'd like to see a study on that. How about pictures of lungs diseased by tobacco-caused cigarette smoke?
"The findings indicate that including both graphic visual warnings, such as those used in Canada, and warning statements currently used in the United States can decrease the perceived attractiveness of the package and create higher levels of negative affect, such as fear or anxiety. The results also show that the addition of the specific visual warnings examined to the U.S. statements increases smokers’ perceived intentions of quitting smoking compared with warning statements alone. The authors offer implications for public policy and public health and provide suggestions for further research."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1509/jppm.25.2.212
Apparently, use of graphic images is controversial. But IMHO, some of the controversy is ginned up by the still-wealthy tobacco industry.
https://academic.oup.com/abm/article/49/5/639/4562764?login=true
Exactly.
I'm getting emails from politicians asking me to check boxes on my topics of most concern. Many of them don't have a box to check that says Guns. If they have a box marked "other", I put GUNS there!
Since this is a thread on guns, I'll reply here. It's not the guns that are the problem, it's the ammunition! My ex had several guns and enjoyed going to a local firing range. But when bullets became too expensive and hard to find in stores, he stopped that hobby. He did fill his own bullet shells, but even that ended after a while. So, let the Republicans buy the guns, as long as the Democrats buy the ammunition and gunpowder. If bullets were $100.00 each I doubt the crazy gun owners world be so free with what and who they shoot. I know the black market would supply both, people that want it can get it, yada, yada, but it was just an idea that seemed to even things out a bit. Supply and demand. I'd buy a box of ammo to hoard before I'd ever buy a gun.
Congress members' websites have drop-down menus to select an issue when writing to them. I'm familiar with and approve those of my C-people (Ayanna, Markey, Warren). But a couple of months ago I compared theirs to several of the worst GQPs in Congress. Where MA officials have "Reproductive Rights" or "Gun Control," Repugs have "Gun Rights," "Adoption and Abortion" and "Traditional Values." It is quite revealing.
WOW!
I completely agree and feel the same after Sandy Hook and can still tear up at the thought. It's my one angry go-to comment when people complain to me about the Democrats coming to take your guns...if 20 bullet ridden five year old children didn't create more fun safety laws what will? Then they shut up.
One thing I have missed during this Pandemic is music. I asked my boyfriend if he would go see an outdoor music show if they were allowed this summer now that we are fully vaccinated, however truth is I am more afraid of being shot by a crazed nut job than getting covid-19 or a variant.
First time posting, I live reading everyone's replies and comments as much as Heather's letters.
Gun safety not fun safety, ugh this is why I just enjoy reading the comments and follow the discussion.
Hey, we all saw that and (silently) made the easy correction in our heads.
Welcome aboard!
Welcome. With the most recent mass shooting in Colorado, I would say you did not err: gun safety is fun (birthday party) safety.
Greetings!! You will find that most of us rue the fact there isn't an edit function! Nothing scares me more about the US than the thought that someone I know will be gunned down; randomly, for their political or religious beliefs, their color, ethnicity, or sexual identity.
Thank you Leslie; please keep the comments coming. NB, we need fun safety laws too!
Why apologize? When you said “fun” safety I thought you were making a sarcastic dig at gun enthusiasts. Everyone here is smart and deep, so when I see a comment, I assume smart and deep. Keep posting! In my book anyway you’ll always get the benefit of the doubt.
For those who don't know, Roland actually is writing a book.
Welcome back R, you've been missed the last few days.
You’re a kind and dear man, TPJ, thank you.
welcome to the conversation!
A mentor asked. "How would we live if there were no safe space?"
Please post away! The more voices, the better!
Well said, Leslie. I feel exactly the same way about all that you wrote.
I find it sad that the gun owners and 2nd amendment proponents always seem to interpret any attempt at gun reform to mean the extreme of taking people's guns away entirely and violating the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment has taken on a gospel quality like it is one of the 10 Commandments
The reinterpretation of our 2nd Amendment is another Big Lie.
Racism and gun violence have formed an unholy alliance.
I rarely favor "slippery slope" arguments, and this may be the worst of all.
What do you mean?
Slippery slope arguments posit that any movement or concession inevitably or probably leads to drastic, often unwanted changes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
I looked this up just now; I had no idea it was so prominent in philosophy and law.
So, can you relate that to gun reform?
I believe he means those who oppose any gun safety regulations arguing they might lead to more and more restrictions. Ergo the slippery slope. It stokes fear in gun rights advocates and they dig in their heels.
Colorado is talking about gun control. The biggest issue is that no one knows what actually would reduce killing and pass muster with the Supreme Court.
Lots of feel good ideas but no proof they will actually accomplish anything.
A few feel good laws were recently passed with a few more being considered.
No real progress but the liberal Democrats base is happy.
You can't prove it will actually accomplish anything without trying.
It depends on whether one means gun control or unlimited access to guns. It depends on which party is in control of the States. Here in NH, the R majority has been working on a bill that says guns can be allowed ANYWHERE, (including schools!) and that NH law enforcement can basically ignore ANY Federal gun control laws/measures. I haven't read/seen any info if the same is happening in other Republican majority states.
No giving up.
There is more than one gun for every person in the United States (121 per every 100 residents). https://www.reuters.com/world/us/more-guns-than-people-why-tighter-us-firearms-laws-are-unlikely-2021-04-14/
40 million new gun unit sales in 2020. A record. More armed per capita than Yemen.
Unfortunately, what that statistic says is that the other side is getting ready to declare war on us, regardless of what anyone on our side thinks. The Republicans are talking openly of the fact that if they take the House in 2022, they can deny Biden victory if he wins in 2024. Everything they are saying and doing points to their decision to delare war. Given that situation, people on our side are going to have to rethink their attitude about guns and violence. Some things are worth defending, and I think this country as a democracy is one of them.
And in conclusion, let me say SUBSTACK NEEDS A GODDAMN EDIT FUNCTION!!!!!!!!!!
I certainly agree with your final point!
I think you are wrong about needing to arm ourselves, though. Anyone who rises up against the United States government will deal with the most lethal fighting force ever assembled. If the military remains on the side of the Constitution, the insurrectionists don't stand a chance. If they somehow go over to the insurrection, then all is lost in any case; having a 38 special or even an AK-47 will not help me in the least.
I frankly have more confidence in the Military than I do in local Law Enforcement.
The US armed forces cannot necessarily be depended on. Special Ops is rife with "the enemy within" as is the Air Force.
You did notice how many veterans are among those arrested? And there were probably more there.
If I lived in a Red State, I wouldn't be depending on the armed forces to protect me from the nuts down the street.
The last thing we need is another big pile of guns and another g-d shootout.
Did you know the US Navy intercepted communications coming out of Rwanda before their civil war. Someone ordered a million machetes from China before the killing began. The pattern of stockpiling weapons is a repeated one.
Yeah. And the Tutsis showed what happens when you don't take the threat seriously.
That someone should be easily identified
The war was declared on 1/06/21. Luckily about 400 of them are dealing with legal consequences
closer to 500 now
Yeah, well, it was a dress rehearsal.
This war is FAR from over.
😁
OTOH, it's a small minority of Americans that possess guns. I expect very few people own ONE gun, with the vast majority having either none or a small arsenal.
A minority of Americans own guns, but it's a large one.
As a lifelong nonviolent pacifist, I am proud to say that I've never owned a gun, and fired one only once, at a tree (sincere apologies to the tree). My father and uncles were issued firearms in WW2. Dad never used his; not sure about the uncles. As far as I know, that is my immediate family's entire history with guns.
I went to high school with a guy who owned guns. He took me out shooting once and I have to admit I LOVED it. I definitely understand the appeal. As a puny, weak human animal, it made me feel so powerful to be able to pull a trigger and absolutely obliterate that bottle. Which is precisely why I think most private gun ownership is a terrible idea--too much power in the hands of those with too little judgment. If all gun owners could be Ally House--well-trained, respectful, thoughtful--I would be much less concerned.
In my "framily" (5 households) there are 15 handguns, 5 shotguns, and 9+ hunting rifles. We have a retired USCG Gunners Mate (rangemaster) Deputy Sheriff (use of force expert), and 4 hunters among us.
I personally own 3; two small concealable handguns, and a large-capacity semi-automatic pistol. I can no longer fire a shoulder-fired weapon except for a rifle chambered in a .22 or a .223 (missing lymph nodes on my dominant shoulder).
Fortunately, we have strong evidence you are a sane person. My guess is your "framily" are, too.
Exactly! Since I don't own any, that means that someone else owns 2.4 guns! (OK, I know that's not really how statistics work, but you know what I mean). If half a dozen of us are completely unarmed, some joker has to have 7.2 guns! And for a lot of these loons, that's 7.5 too many.
Within my loose circle of say, 32 family and friends, only two own (several) guns. The rest, zero.
My circle of friends is a bit different; there are liberal former police officers/dispatchers/military. (See my post above)
Now that I think about it, I don't think I know anyone who owns a gun. Many of my cousins are conservative enough, though, so they might.
same here
According to Pew Research, 1/3 of US citizens own guns (see https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/05/11/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns). IMHO, that equals far too many!
Dreadful stats!
Other than climate change, nothing makes me sadder or more concerned.
As Reid says, they believe the lies. They think having quality child care available, good schools and opportunities for their kids, good roads and bridges, readily available and affordable medical services, and support so that they can retire some day and live in dignity and comfort are "taking away their freedom."
They are deeply afraid. They have been fed lies about what the opposition (us, that is) intend. They believe what TC is advocating we believe: that the other side will take away our freedom.
They say freedom, they mean white privilege.
So much coded language. Tough on crime means reinslavement. Pro life means oppression of women. Family values means vanilla, cis, het sexuality. And so forth.
Reportedly 400 people were shot last weekend. 100 of those died:
https://flipboard.com/article/weekend-violence-400-shot-in-us/f-3884c8affd%2Fcnn.com
Someone asked earlier if we felt afraid. I don’t feel any fear as I go about my day, but, I’m aware it could be because of my bubble of privilege and suspect it’s a useful illusion. We humans adapt to danger and eventually normalize it.
And in the face of political unrest, the sheer number of guns in the US feels like we’re sitting on a powder keg.
I carefully choose which t shirt I don each morning, fearful to wear my democratic shirts in my own neighborhood
That is sad, Lynn. Even here in "liberal" Cambridge, my US Out Of North America shirt is seldom worn. I also feel vulnerable wearing a BLM shirt with police around.
I recommend you go to www.fcnl.org and purchase a t shirt that reads WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER! You could wear that proudly every day.
I will have to look this up, ty.
I was thinking this morning of designing my own, per HCR's description: a dagger inscribed with THE BIG LIE, directly through the heart of democratic America.
Lynn, that’s just heartbreaking.
On the matter of voter restriction laws I am not particularly worried. What worries me is that Republicans seem determined to install vote counters who are committed to calling elections for Republican candidates regardless of the vote count. Why would party leaders and party members exchange the honest vote counters from the last election, those who would not succumb to pressure to change the vote count, for new officials? The most dangerous movement today is that one in the Republican Party which is committed to one party rule in the service of one man. Their vehicle to power is to destroy faith in the voting system and thus destroy faith in our Constitutional Democracy. If they are successful we will be living in a totalitarian state, perhaps even a theocratic totalitarian state.
I think this is a real possibility. I do think that SCOTUS, conservative as they are, will draw a line on some of the voter suppression efforts, including a full-scale takeover by a state legislature. I know they have been pretty hands-off on almost all election procedures proposed by states, but one has to think there is a line somewhere that cannot be crossed. Otherwise, we may be well and truly lost, indeed.
The SCOTUS, as presently constituted, cannot be counted on to save democracy.
I agree. They will put a bit of a fence around certain discrete issues, but will leave most state laws intact.
That indeed is my thought, that the Supreme Court will deny all attempts to purge our Democracy. And secondly, Democratic governors will veto every attempt which passes the state legislature. Therefore, we are left with only states which have trifectas of conservative leadership. Every state trump won is a trifecta, along with NH, GA, and AZ. Biden won these three states with Republican trifectas.
SOMEHOW, Dems have to learn how to win the state legislative races.
But we have never had a winning message, in my lifetime of voting (since ’72). If we had, we would be repeating that message today, yesterday and tomorrow.
I think we are dealing with a basic dichotomy: the Rs have extremely simple message; the other side wants to take away your guns, kill babies, destroy your livelihood, let godless heathens into our country, and tax you into oblivion. Whereas the Ds have a very nuanced message that is not so easily broken into appealing sound bites. Fox News is absolutely expert at taking the R talking points, adding some salacious lies to bolster them, and spewing them forth. Most left wing media is taking the high road, for which I am thankful, but that isn't nearly as eye-catching. It's a toxic situation.
“nuance message(s)” means we do not speak clearly. DO NOT be nuanced about your (our) beliefs.
“Liberty and justice for all!” Explain this. For all women, all LGBTQQ+, all minorities, all men. “No one is left behind in our American Family”
“Democracy Capitalism means Democrats guarantee that rights and civil liberties come first, and we guarantee and a fair playing field for all business and corporations!”
We’ve got to learn to speak clearly, simply - and get people angry for a reason. Now, 37% (+/-) are angry - and all we have is “nuance messages”.
Let’s give the right wing something to really get angry about, and the 37% number will start to .... decrease, because we actually have a spine, backbone and character.
“nuance messages” no more!
You are spot on:
Health, Education; Housing and Wealth - increase these opportunities for ALL Amercians.
Which is much of what Biden is working on.
“LGBTQQ+“
What does that mean? New terminology to this old guy.
Thank you.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and all other manifestations of gender and sexual orientation which are not cisgendered heterosexuality.
Yes!
I’m finally visiting St Pete on a fact finding mission, for a potential winter retreat locale. Where do you recommend in order to truly catch local flavors?
The R message is fear. It's that simple. And fear, justified or not, is an excellent motivator.
I agree with you about their essence of fear. So, can progressives address this, en masse. “We must no longer live in fear of one another. The America Family is greater than this” or SOMETHING like this .....
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."
-- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
I don't know. I've had the discussion several times, and THEY don't think they're afraid; they call it "being prepared". The one question I've asked that gets the best reaction is a riff on "If you want the economy to grow, why don't you want everybody to participate in it?"
Not sure these folks would admit to being fearful. Clearly, there is fear, similar to the fear-based behavior of police, but not necessarily recognized or named by people in situ.
So true. My R family members are *terrified* of Biden (taking away their privilege).
My only R family member has that same concern, which he has always had.
But only in the short term.
The Repubs I deal with spout the line “The Democrats want to destroy the country through socialism” or some such nonsense, all the while happy they have Medicare and their Social Security checks. They equate socialism with communism, understanding neither. Unfortunately, it’s a simple, effective message. Agree, we need something that straightforward that speaks truth.
Socialism is anything the government does that business doesn't like. American business has been pushing that message since before Karl Marx died. So Medicare is socialism, but protective tariffs and price supports aren't.
Hey, Not that Nick ~ welcome to the HCR economics discussion!
Reminds me of the woman a decade or so ago who famously said "Keep your government hands off my Medicare." Protect them from their ignorance .....
I think the direct quote was "Keep yo' gubmint hands offa mah Medicare!"
“My local road is “socialism” because it is provided by our government.
"And so is you local road, socialistic
“And so is your Social Security and Medicare ... socialistic or socialism"
Not to mention your electrical grid, fire and police departments, public parks, waste treatment, water supply, infrastructure...
I live in NY. I have to say that NY Democratic politicians are doing themselves no favors with their behavior (political and personal).
Aberrant behavior is unfortunately a characteristic of power, but not for all in power. Look at Newsom’s problems. Thankfully these are deeply blue states.
Though NY and CA pols do seem particularly adept at aiming at their feet and pulling the trigger.
Newsom’s recall is a desperate attempt by California Republicans to exercise some sort of power, because they have none left otherwise
From Nixon through Bush I, Dems focused on the White House, neglecting Congress. Then when they also concentrated on Congress, they neglected state legislatures. Dems need to focus on all three, especially since the first two determine the composition of the Supreme Court and federal judiciary.
THIS, what you’ve referenced, is exactly what happens when we DO NOT speak in harmony, unison and such as a chorus. We are a group (Dems) that insist of “personalities” rather than a UNIFYING VISION.
If I wasn’t already bald, I’d tear out my hair !
I’m afraid I don’t share your optimism with regard to states that have democratic governors. Michigan has a republican legislature/democratic governor, and aggressive voter restrictive legislation proposed. It is a given that our governor will veto the bills when they land on her desk, but the repubs in legislature have already announced that they have a “work around” her veto, and that the bills WILL become law.
Good point; I wonder if the “work around” could be challenged in court
A recent theme that I’m finally starting to hear is a “call to action” for Biden, and other prominent elected officials, to start flooding the news with the facts: the election was NOT stolen, the current proposed laws are dangerous to democracy, The For The People Act must be passed, etc. I may hear you saying he is already doing that, but not really. I’m talking about a real almost ad-nauseam repetition, not the mild rebuke we hear now. We cannot wait until we lose our democracy to say, “we told you so”.
We need MORE of the corporations which have always lined their pockets to blast voter suppression laws. There aren’t enough if them standing up and pulling their support from them.
Right! So, in your state (election laws are primarily set at the state level), what is going on with election law? Does your state use risk-limited audits? If not, why not?
Does your state use BMD (ballot marking devices) that pass the voter-approved printed ballot under a print head once again, on the way to being tabulated and stored in a secure bin inside the machine?
The ES&S ExpressVote, ES&S ExpressVote XL, Dominion ICE, and Voting Solutions for All People, all of them, do this. These are VERY BAD voting machines.
More on this:
https://smartelections.us/hybrid-voting-problems
Use Verified Voting's widely-praised "verifier" to find out what equipment is used in your state:
https://verifiedvoting.org/verifier/#mode/navigate/map/ppEquip/mapType/normal/year/2022
I did a little experiment tonight. I keep thinking I'm still hearing DTs name too much in the news and do not hear President Biden's name enough. So, I counted how many times DTs name was used and how many times President Biden's name was used in a couple of hour long programs on MSNBC. And, yes, this is not very scientific because it does depend on what is making news each day. However, program one said DTs name 34 times and showed his picture 4 times; President Biden name was mentioned 9 times and his picture shown 3 times. The second program I only tallied for about 15 minutes. 16 DTs, 1 picture with Voice (which was obnoxious) ; Biden 7 and 1 picture. Basically it was much better than I expected and I was pleasantly surprised how many stories mentioned neither man. Maybe the media has learned its lesson not to give too much oxygen to the former president. Using former president without mentioning the name was also popular. Just to compare HCR's Letter tonight Biden is mentioned by name 8 times and Trump 14. What I liked was she led with the President and covered a wide breadth of substantive activities Biden was doing.
Biden is boring, which is not good for news, especially television news. News media is so addicted to views and clicks that they have forgotten that some kinds of boring are the best news ever.
Biden's "boring" is riveting to us. We *listen*.
Want some excitement? Watch Jen Psaki handle dumbass questions from right-wing journalists.
Psaki is extremely knowledgeable and articulate. Her pressers are a marvel.
I absolutely agree. She is scintillating. Doesn't make for good theater, though.
It does for me. The slow burn.
100%. What is it about this cabinet that has us all leaning in?
Psaki rocks! She is going to on to great accomplishments in life. Id hire her in a heartbeat. I’d leave a company for the opportunity to work for her. But I could say that for Biden’s entire cabinet.
not boring. calming and compassionate.
I’ll take boring Biden over Halitosis Man any day.
Normal, not boring. Normal is good.
Oh, he's boring. But, as I said, I consider that a wonderful thing.
So happy Biden seems boring. I want him to keep his head down and continue working. We don't need to hear about the President every day. That was the last guy's shtick. No more.
Exactly my feeling.
OTOH, I feel Faux News is preoccupied with Biden, and would not mention dt as often. However, this is a perfect example of our “movement” having NO succinct message. MSNBC, NPR and “mainstream media” would be all over a powerful, progressvie economic vision. This reminds me of the admonition from great progressive linguist, George Lakoff:
“Say what you mean, and mean what you say.”
Simply, clearly, forcefully, w gusto and vigor. Not a laundry list of policies (zzzzzzz) - but an economic vision that packages together policies. Such as “Democracy Capitalism” or for heaven’s sake, anything else!
I like to read Bukowski to clear my brain of mushy thoughts and vapid writing. Here’s one of his thoughts: “The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don’t have to waste your time voting.”
WHO is this Bukowski? Her (his) point illustrates our conservative’s position 😟
Charles Bukowski, 1920-1994. Underground writer and poet who used direct language. Often profane, sexual, funny, provocative. Drank a lot, hence the movie “Barfly,” based on his life. A better look at him was the excellent 2003 doc “Bukowski: Born Into This.” Here’s a more relevant quote for you: “Genius might be the ability to say a profound thing in a simple way.” He’s better known for more scatalogical lines such as “Sometimes you just have to pee in the sink.” (Whoa, I’ve really taken this exchange to a new low.)
😕
Do you watch Stephen Colbert? He's specifically avoiding saying DJT's name and hosted a contest for what moniker to use instead! Every so often he rattles through some of the submissions -- always makes me LOL!
We watch Colbert—he’s very smart
Thanks Cathy. I have been deliberately muting, and changing channels, when Racism Breath shows up.
It is heartening to see that a majority of citizens appear to be relieved the adults are back in charge, though it is disheartening that the former president has any approval at all, or ever had any for that matter.
One is glad to see Liz Cheney have her Elizabeth Warren "yet still the woman persisted" moment. Do not go quietly.
And, we are all waiting for something of substance to come out of the SDNY offices regarding the former president, his immediate family, and the former mayor of New York. Please, if indictments are forthcoming, let us know about it before the 2022 elections.
Careful with Liz, now. She's no moderate. What she wants is to lead the Post-Trump but still hard right Republicans out of the wilderness with herself as leader and Presidential contender.
Cheney's persistance is the only similarity with Warren. One might also keep in mind her father is one of the cagiest political in-fighters in Washington, who also started his career in Congress.
Orwellian times indeed. The Republicans appear to be lost at sea, grasping at their oars of voter suppression to pull against the rising tide of women voters an POC voting for Democrats. May they eat crow for their hubris in supporting their iDJT when they squandered two opportunities to kick him to the curb. “Greedy fools.”
Hopefully their efforts to re-establish Jim Crow will fail in the long run...(My comment was prompted by your phrase of eating crow.)
I appreciate all the stats substantiating approval for the Biden administration agenda. Go Team Joe!
I'm also pleased to see cited the WaPo article about how tales of election fraud proliferated without any proof. Wholesale lies. Revealing to read how many people named in the story refused to comment when contacted. Roaches scatter when the lights shines.
Such factual reporting confirms what many [of us] already knew. Sadly, the truth won't matter to too many ....
How is this going to end?
How is this going to end? Probably not well, with one side being batshit insane.
Sadly, I agree. Social science research reveals that believers of a lie continue to hold on to said lie even when confronted with documented truth. So, I have no expectation that McCarthy, et al, will capitulate to the truth.
Is the best outcome that they become irrelevant as they continue to block popular legislation?
I suspect they already KNOW it is the truth, but continue to pretend it is a lie to save face... and their chances for reelection in Republican-heavy districts/states.
I think this is precisely correct. McConnell and McCarthy, to name two, both clearly indicated immediately after the insurrection (and McCarthy during it!) that Trump was to blame and that the election was not stolen. Then they cravenly read the way the wind blew and changed their tune.
One hopes. But the South committed treason 160 years ago because they saw themselves in a minority that wasn't growing.
Well, that and to preserve the right to enslave and torture other human beings.
Try to block.
TC, I agree. My theory is there will be more seditionist behavior in the not so distant future and it won't be pretty.
Good letter, but one correction to avoid bias: Orwell wrote, repeatedly, that both fascists AND communists distort language to rewrite history (and the present as well). Orwell devoted a good part of his life to making the point that there is no difference between the Left and Right extremes -- both are mad for power and ruthless is seeking it.
Fascists and Communists are both Totalitarians.
The word 'audit' is a misnomer for AZ activity. 100% has never been an audit sample size.
“Fraudit”
Yes, that's what Katie Hobbs, the AZ Sec'y of State, is calling it. She was on "The Last Word w/ Lawrence O'Donnell last night!
Really? You must be kidding. 🤭
Ted 100%!
In Arizona an audit = politically motivated publicity stunt
=Bonfire of the idiots!
Pseudo-audit
"Biden’s weak spots are in immigration, where 43% approve..."
Yes, our immigration policy is a real mess, and it shows up in the low approval rating of American voters. So now, Kamala is going to talk with some U.S.-installed dictators about improving economic conditions for the masses who flee their countries in a desperate attempt to reach the U.S. Well, our country has to go deeper than that to find the real reasons for the mass exodus of their residents. We have to find out why the U.S. has overthrown democracies in Central and South America and then installed and supported military dictators ruling the countries. Both U.S. political parties are involved in the illegal overthrow of democracies, mostly using the CIA to instigate the troubles.
Three glaring examples of that overthrow policy would be the 1954 U.S. overthrow of the Guatemalan government. That one involved the United Fruit Company. As I recall, Bush Sr. benefitted greatly in financial gains from his new business interests there. A second example would be the Nixon/Kissinger 1973 overthrow of President Salvador Allende in Chile. The Chilean military was traditionally and proudly apolitical. But Nixon/Kissinger tossed some golden carrots to the military leaders and corrupted them. What resulted was a military dictatorship with General Pinochet in charge, and immense suffering by the Chilean people as thousands of people were murdered and severely tortured by that government. In his memoirs, Kissinger later tried to deny his involvement and put the blame on the U.S. Ambassador to Chile. Unfortunately for Kissinger, that Ambassador was still alive and said Kissinger was lying. Kissinger has so much blood on his hands. More recently, Hillary/Obama's State Dept. contributed to the overthrow in Honduras of another democracy.
There seems to be no end to this inhuman foreign policy. When are we going to start living by the ideals on which our country was founded? I hope Joe studies this matter deeply and commits the U.S. to true justice for these countries. At this point, there's no indication that will happen.
We also must consider the economic warfare we have waged against these countries. We have extracted resources from them and repeatedly used our military might to back up corporate interests. When we are done raping and destabilizing a country, we leave it to its own devices, then wonder why the social and political structures are so chaotic. And climate refugees are created by the rapacious consumption of resources in wealthy countries like ours. We have much to answer for.
"We also must consider the economic warfare we have waged against these countries."
Absolutely. And not only these countries but industrialized nations as well. In a fairly recent example, I think back to the U.S. State Dept. cables which Chelsea Manning released to Wikileaks. The release which seemed to get most attention was the one showing the civilians being gunned down by the U.S. helicopter. Another secret cable which caught my attention was sent in 2007 by the U.S. ambassador to France. Following a trade conference, Bush Jr.'s ambassador cabled that France should face some retribution since they were rejecting Monsanto's GMOs and their herbicides. Monsanto has a strong grip on our government. They keep their representative, Michael Taylor, well-entrenched in a high position in the FDA, regardless of which party controls the presidency.
You seem a little "light" on your third example of Clinton/Obama "contributing" to the overthrow of the Honduran government. I hadn't heard of this. Can you tell us a little more and quote a source or two? The other 2 are very well know and do back up your argument.
This little comment is important; we must use the same standards for all these administrations, also for the good guys (and gals, if they are involved).
This has been seriously documented and can be easily researched. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/how-hillary-clinton-militarized-us-policy-in-honduras/
Many thanks
Don't forget - "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" by Perkins .. get the first edition version.
Excellent book. A great testimony.
FYI:
https://theintercept.com/2017/08/29/honduras-coup-us-defense-departmetnt-center-hemispheric-defense-studies-chds/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/07/crisis-of-honduras-democracy-has-roots-in-us-tacit-support-for-2009-coup
https://www.amazon.com/Long-Honduran-Night-Resistance-Aftermath/dp/1608469603
Hello Heydon, I have thought of you several times after reading your comment hours ago. I was of aware of the country's overthrow of Allende during the early years of my active socio-political engagement. Withal, I was strongly effected by what happened in Chile. It cemented my interest in knowing more about the USA's interventions in South America, Central America and, of course, elsewhere. I agree that American History needs to be taught with much more critical understanding concerning the patterns and actions within and outside our borders. There appears to be more ignorance throughout the land today than in the last 50 years, but I don't really know. This is not the time to list the forces contributing to this. My belief is that in the near future, our job is to robustly participate and support the Bills, Plans and candidates that will serve the people and Democracy. If the country can attain a bit more stability, much more attention will be given to education, social media, economic equality, Climate Change and several more crucial issues. I am not proposing that we ignore them now, but that our priorities need to be the county's health and the legislation that can best improve the lives of Americans.
The statistics I heard recently indicate they have created a system at the southern border that’s working a lot better than the mess they inherited. Our Vp’s efforts at diplomacy down there might yield some improvement too.
Ok sure. Let’s not tax corporations and the mega rich because then how could they purchase all their yachts? Witness Jeff Bezos and his yacht with yacht accessory. Insanity. While his employees lives are just another expense in the ledger.
Government ONLY runs on taxation. Low taxation? Low quality of life; see the American South
I am aware … how is it Republicans can get ANY support? Is that truly what they want? Low quality of life, just don’t take our guns? Also, my guess is, since they seem so enamored of fascism, those guns will be confiscated by the very folks they elect when they come into their power.
Read: Strangers in their Own Land, Arlie Russell Hochschild.
Good rec, Mary, definitely better than Hillbilly Elegy.
Liz Cheney can object all she wants, but it's not going to work. I see no sign that the R's are going to turn away from Trump. It's his party now, which is the dangerous reality we have to prepare for.
It's an interesting play, though, isn't it? I think she's calculating that, as Trump’s glow fades, Rs are frantically looking for an alternative. In her WaPo opinion piece (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/05/liz-cheney-republican-party-turning-point) she was very clear that she still backs all the usual conservative crap but not the insurrection. She's betting that a majority of Rs are quietly with her. She may be right.
I don't think it's going to work. The republican base is completely demented now, and worship Trump. To turn on him now would be an admission that they, and their information sources such as Tucker and Newsmax, were wrong about everything, which they're not capable of. These are not clear-headed, rational people.
So every republican running for office knows they need to bow to Trump to get elected. Cheney will probably get primaried out next time she's up, replaced by a rabid Trumper.
I agree that no amount of evidence would convince the Qanon crowd that the Big Lie is a big lie. Any reputable source you quote against will be dismissed as a liberal rag. IMO the underpinning of their belief is whatever it takes to “F*** over those liberal socialists who want to take my guns and raise my taxes and cancel my white culture”
Trump in jail might make the consider we are a nation of laws?
There's a hard core of believers who will never leave him. It would be nice to pry some Republican Congress Critters away from him. The Republican Senate Caucus isn't really his as much as it belongs to McConnell and his Big Money ties.
Gah! One would hope, but mightn’t it also cast him as martyr?
To hell with that argument. Chips fall where they may.
Lynn, I don't think we will see that.
WHY
https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2021/05/10/david-litt-newsmax-dominion-voting-systems-zw-orig.cnn-business/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/
About Newmax—did anyone else hear how they were punk’d yesterday?
I couldn’t possibly have enjoyed anything more than seeing that yesterday. It was epic!!!
Thanks for posting this!!! I hadn't heard, and this is great!
Thats awesome! Worth clicking.
No?
But Trump needs successes to keep the ball rolling for which he really can't get till possibly Nov 2022. That's a long climb! I might say as well, the Trump-baseload is not the 74 million voters who didn't want Biden/Harris. The awakening of the youth-vote is a pointer in the Democrats favour but it is likely to exaccerbate divisions in that party too.
I think you're probably right. But it's going to be very interesting to watch.
Have our resident historians any parallels to tell us about those who were crying as Nixon left office, or who were diehard followers/supporters/fans of McCarthy? Where did they take their money and allegiance next?
Second, will we learn someday of ways top GQPs were basically blackmailed into submission, not just chasing donor cash?
Afternoon, Cathy!! I'll take a stab at it.
There are important parallels in terms of lawbreaking, but both the 1/45 admin and Jan 6 are truly unprecedented. The Nixon admin's crimes were not committed by a large swath of the GOP, just a segment of the White house staff and John Mitchell at DOJ. There was nothing like today's Sedition Caucus; the cruel GQP governors and state legislatures, and 1/45's blind, unreasoning, cult-like followers. The violence of Nixonite Hardhats (blue-collar reactionaries) is similar to the political violence of 1/45's minions, but the latter is far more extensive and serious. (A more apt comparison is to the rise of the Nazis in Germany. )
Unlike 1/45, Nixon was a rational if twisted person, who ultimately could accept clear evidence when forced on him; he was persuaded to resign, after all. He also was an American patriot, albeit later a warped one. In WW2 he served with distinction in a non-combat role, then in the House, Senate and as VP. None of these traits apply to 1/45.
By the end, Nixon lost all support even from his own party. At that time I attended Earlham College in Richmond IN, long a stronghold of the KKK. Rep David Dennis of Richmond was Tricky Dick's staunchest supporter, but when even he said he'd vote to impeach based on the "smoking gun" tapes, Nixon knew the game was up. As a whole, the GQP is far from turning against 1/45, for now at least.
(Interestingly, both Nixon and Dennis were "lapsed" Quakers. Each graduated from Quaker colleges in their respective hometowns, Whittier CA and Richmond, and Dennis's father was an Earlham president.)
Finally, Nixon's worst crime wasn't Watergate; it was prolonging and expanding the Vietnam/Indochina War, leading to countless unnecessary casualties and suffering. Yet even Nixon did not cause hundreds of thousands of avoidable US deaths by refusing to deal with a pandemic; wreck the national economy; and betray the country to its enemies.
Thank you for offering the opportunity to think through the parallels. These comparisons have reaffirmed my conviction that 1/45 is, indeed, the WORST PRESIDENT EVER!!!
Thank you SO much. I am still a confirmed optimist. Our democracy will survive this worst.
I'm with you, Cathy. I am optimistic -- as long as decent Americans work unremittingly to preserve democracy. We have more power than we know.
If she’s playing a long game, she may eventually win. But, this Republican mess will take 5+ years to work itself out. It could get very ugly.
She's on the right side of history, which is a much better place to be than with the nutcases, no matter what happens. If this, indeed, is a long game, she realizes she's not going to go anywhere she wants to be with the current GOP. Look at McCarthy. He's got the backbone of a jellyfish.
I still don't like her policies at all (except on immigration), but she believes in the rule of law, and in our Democracy.
She believes in what best serves Liz Cheney.
I don't know what she believes. I suspect there's a mix of good and bad. Somewhere in here this morning I pasted Frank Bruni's column from today about her, which was along those lines.
She's betting not. If Qanon Shaman can be successfully portrayed as the avatar of those who believe the Big Lie, many Rs will recoil from being associated with it; she is counting on being there to pick to the pieces. Look for a Cheney/Kinzinger primary challenge to Trump in 2024. I think that's her play. She may be wrong, but it's a fascinating calculation.
to=up
Oh, for an edit button...
I know, right? Of course, I could cut and paste to do the correction, but I'm too lazy. 😁
Way to go Liz Cheney! A true patriot who reminds me there's still a few Republicans who haven't lost their heads. She reminds of the man who oversaw the elections in Georgia this past year. Without this great woman standing up for the truth in the Senate, who would there be? My hat is off to her and anyone brave enough to back her up. And thank you Heather, for continuing to cut through the political fog out there in rumplican land.
Just remember, she "made her bones" calling Obama a "secret jihadist," she still supports torture, wants to turn the clock back on marriage (despite her sister, from whom she is now estranged). Her father Darth Cheney is actually more liberal than she is.
I am cheering her on just so I can watch and eat more popcorn.
Here's what my favorite NYT columnist, Frank Bruni, says about her: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/08/opinion/sunday/liz-cheney-republicans.html?campaign_id=39&emc=edit_ty_20210510&instance_id=30534&nl=opinion-today®i_id=57299399&segment_id=57677&te=1&user_id=2622f4c35fb33d018d00f0d31784bbd2
David 100%. Frank Bruni is one of the good guys.
Great woman? She's been peddling the Republican craziness for many years now; this is just her opportunisic hoping that her party will ultimately remake itself away from Trump and she'll come out on top. But she'll probably fall to the lunatics, at least temporarily. It's as if she's forgotten that after you've thrown in your lot with the liars, there's no such thing as a lie that's too foul.
She and her father both hate Trump. It was Mary, though, who persuaded The Dick to organize the living former DefSec's to write a letter denouncing Trump.
Interesting. I had no idea of the dissention at the top of their party.
Cheney family karma— at least she’s a fighter.
Oh, no, this is a naked political play. I admire her chutzpah, but not much else.
These are positive metrics. Looks like things are beginning to move in the right direction. Let us keep it up.
Things may be moving in the right direction, but the real question is whether or not the other side accepts that. Right now, they don't, to the point they have actually taken up arms against us already.
I continue to hope that the "other side's not believing" will increasingly not matter, that things will move in the right direction and their ideas will become increasingly more isolated. How far this may go is anyone's guess. Opposition will never reach zero, I'm sure of that. In any case, we all need to keep working to make something good happen.
We could fail. Failure is always possible.
You are right, they have taken up arms, and they appear to be quite lethal, witness them parading around in their camo adorned with their assault style rifles, but they are a tiny fraction of the population, grouped together they are threatening, but do you really feel threatened by them on the street where you live, I know I don’t. The media features them, “if it bleeds it leads”, but I don’t think they represent a real threat, the capital defenders had they chosen to could have killed the lot of them. It takes a brave person to run towards a gun fight, I know, I’ve been there, they would have scattered like leaves 🍃 in the wind, the few that didn’t would have been easily dispatched into the next life. There should be no next time, it should be made abundantly clear that the gloves are now off, there will be no more fisticuffs and being attacked with American flags as Joe Scarborough likes to repeat, any attack should be seen as a mortal threat and dealt with accordingly.
The component of the "other side" that I have a front row seat to are the unabashedly pro iDJT stable of current and former cops/dispatchers/military that have been close personal and professional associates of mine for the last 35 years. I do not believe that these folks would take up arms against the US, but I do not know that.
Perhaps Biden's numbers regarding immigration would improve if our political media gave the same attention to the successes of the last two months that they gave to Republican bleating about the "Border Crisis" during February and early March. Not holding my breath that they'll get over their addiction to the headlines generated by Republican lies as opposed to publishing reality-based information.
I appreciate your timely and encouraging account. I am holding out for theTrump Republicans to collapse upon themselves soon! That said, I am not a Liz C fan, by any means.
She's actually to the right of her father.
Professor, I'm concerned that all of the results of your investigation and research you shared with us today will confirm for Democrats that the Retrumplicans are desperately imbalanced. It is , however causing us to take our eye off the ball of doing what we need to do to bring Independents and Republicans to our side and gain a safe majority so we don't have to depend on the small cadre of now so-called moderate democrats to get the presidents vision into practical existence.
But how does one do that except by pointing out the irrationality of the Trumpist position? While those dedicated to insurrection are unreachable by us, those who are uncertain where they stand vis a vis Trump are, I think, persuadable by facts like these. How else?
I think what Skip Z is saying is that we should not be lulled by these encouraging statistics. As long as a minority is making decisions on the state and federal level, we should not be calmed by this information. We need to figure out how to take back the authority that the people in the majority have. Sure, applaud the good statistics. But at the same time question how this bizarre imbalance happened. Go there. Fight there.
Yes, the statistics are applaudable but that doesn't counteract the control of too many State houses by Republican legislatures and governors. Forgive the pun, but "deplorable" trumps "applaudable." (Example: the pseudo-recount in Arizona.) They may be a national minority but such a national minority controlled eleven State governments who chose to secede in 1861 when they feared the Federal government wasn't going to let them include slavery in the nation's Westward expansion. And that brought about the Civil War. It will take years, if not generations, for the majorities which HCR applauds today to gain control of State legislatures. Until then, things will be uncomfortable if not dangerous. "All politics are local" (Tip O'Neill) and that is where Democrats fall short.
State Legislatures are indeed a place to concentrate on. We have not given them the attention that we should have and look at where we are. In FlorIda Charlie Crist (US Congressman) has announced his run for governor. Now his seat will be open and already folks are lining up. In addition to the lunatic, gun toting Anna Paulina Luna whom I’ve already mentioned, a Democrat from the state legislature (Ben Diamond) has also stepped in. Not only will that leave an open seat in the Florida Legislature, which is already dominated by Republicans, Diamond was charged with rallying support for local Dems to be elected to the state house. So now that is threatened as well.
I do wish the Dems would get organized and offer strategically sound candidate slates -- running 15 candidates for a single race merely means that none of them will ever get a majority. Splitting their constituency so mindlessly just makes each of them look selfish and blind to reality.
True, and thanks, Dan. That problem appeared in MA in a US Rep district primary last year. 9 Dem candidates, with progressive ones earning about 2/3 of all votes, but divided among several. A moderate Dem, military vet Jake Auchincloss, won, fortunately in a safe Dem district. He'll be alright, but I'd prefer another progressive firebrand like Ayanna or AOC.
And I reiterate my question: how? I am genuinely wondering. Everything we have tried has failed and, as far as I can see, have exacerbated the problem. I don't pretend to understand it, as the R positions have become increasingly bizarre and based on the grossest of untruths. Yet their message continues to resonate. I just don't think we have any answers to how one reaches those who choose to believe the lies.
50 Dems in the Senate represent 44 million more voters than the 50 Rs. Gerrymandering and the cap on size has skewed the House.
All done nice and legally, in accordance with the Constitution. The 'framers' were not eager to broaden the electorate, knowing well that democracy contained the seeds of its own demise. We have to do something to rebalance our "checks and balances" which don't seem to be checking and balancing very well.
This is an interesting article. He makes the case that combining disproportionate representation in the Senate with the filibuster, potentially persons representing only 11% of the populace could block any legislation from being passed. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/26/just-how-severe-will-americas-minority-rule-become
They don't even represent 11%, because there's always opposition. And some of them squeaked into office on narrow margins.
He takes all that into account. It's a fascinating read. Not sure I trust all his math, but it's a clever argument.
We need to fill the yawning "Civics Gap" in this country. I saw people asking here last Fall, how are we going to get rid of Trump's henchmen once we vote him out? They seemingly did not know that it is a package deal below even the cabinet level. They need to be educated about the filibuster, about divided government, Generally the mechanics of government we began learning about in Middle school and High School.
I certainly agree, but we have to be careful what we wish for. The crazies who control these conservative state legislatures also control what is taught in their schools. Even growing up in a liberal state (California) in the 50s and 60s, I was fed a passel of lies, half-truths, and sugar-coated reality by teachers and administrators who believed they were doing the right thing. Imagine those with malign intent in charge of teaching "civics" to vulnerable children.
California wasn't nearly so liberal in those days.
True enough.
I spent my youth in CT, which for decades in the 20C was a classic swing state. But by the late 1980s it became mostly solid blue. Same with MD and some others not recalled right now. It reflects the pattern of polarized politics that leaves us with "red" or "blue" states, when the large majority are some shade of purple.